Emerging Medium: From Utopian Ideals to the Focus on Monetizing

Historically, advertising has responded to changing business demands, media technologies, and cultural contexts. Advertising agencies, formerly in the business of peddling advertising space in local newspapers and a limited range of magazines, have become servants of the new national advertisers, designing copy and artwork and placing advertisements in the places most likely to attract buyer attention. In this era of diminishing revenues – and audiences – from traditional publishing channels like newspapers and magazines, email monetization provides publishers, advertisers and audiences with a modern method of driving revenue, new customer growth and knowledge of new products previously only available via print ads and television. Furthermore, every website has a bunch of web pages which get more search traffic than others. These pages are constantly visited daily by new visitors, people who have never seen the site in question before. I call these ‘money pages’ because they are a reliable source of immediate and future income. But they’re not just ‘money’ because they bring in revenue: they are one of the easiest ways to grow your audience without much work. If you learn how to optimize these money pages (its not hard to do), you’ll really improve your website in so many ways. More revenue, more members, more influence and authority.
The faster technology develops, the more it can be used to target consumers with personalised messaging and drive sales.
Digital media -- from Web 2.0 to 3G mobile to Bluetooth, wi-fi and new generation outdoor and point of sale communications -- will redefine the retail landscape by giving marketers the ability to make their messages more personal to consumers and therefore more relevant. The right technology used in the right way at the right time in the right place for the right people works.

The internet, mobile telephony, digital outdoor advertising and digital point of sale are, or can be, all connected to one another. This makes monetization a single media with many tools and routes to the consumer. Treated as such, brands can seek out customers accurately and engagingly and makes it easy for brands that want to deliver engaging, relevant, well-targeted and powerfully persuasive marketing at the moment consumers will be most interested. This makes advertising and monetization very personal and in your face.

Digital Technology Transformed By Its Users/Audience

If you were reading these words "back in the day", chances are you would have read it on paper -- with a printed newspaper or magazine in your hands. Today, you are probably reading it on a desktop computer, a laptop (or as a printout from either of these), or perhaps even on your Blackberry or iPhone. These transformations are fueled by innovations that meet the needs of their users and/or audiences. Innovation is something new that creates new opportunities for growth and development. Cellular technology is a prime example, despite the few "Cell Refusenicks", there are if I remember correctly, close to three-and-a-half-billion people who have a mobile device and are connected to each other.

Almost all product design is in fact innovation, but the converse is not true. Many successful innovations begin with a user need. Some innovations occur because of some serendipitous event or some scientific discovery. The innovator goes and looks for the user and looks for an application of the technology. Winston asks and answers, "Why for example, are some prototypes abandoned while others are not?...The protoype can be accepted because the early and incomplete operation of a supervening necessity has created a partial need with which the prototype partially fills." Basically digital technology is transformed by its users and audiences when the audience looks at a particular invention and says, "We need this! We want this! Improve on this"!

As a result of digital technology being transformed by it's users it has empowered them, particularly when they function as consumers. They can say exactly what they think of brands in an instant to a wide audience, check prices online before buying in store, check price comparison websites for the best deals, circulate vouchers and news of special offers -- all through social media and other online methods. Brands can no longer dictate the relationship between themselves and consumers. Instead, they must find ways to connect with people in respectful, relevant, timely and non-intrusive ways. Brands that break these rules will find it very difficult to bounce back.

"Intellectual Technologies" - Is Google Making Us Stupid?

The topic being discussed in the article, "is Google Making Us Stupid" is how Internet use affects human cognition. Nicholas Carr argues in his most recent article in the Atlantic that the Internet is beginning to have a profound impact on reading skills which has an accompanying negative consequence for deep thinking and cognition. The explosion of online information has lead to an almost obsessive compulsion among many users to try to keep on top of all new information within a given subject area. Since so much information is being produced it leads to a very shallow type of "skimming" necessary to cover the breadth of data produced on a daily basis. Carr's article notes a University College London five-year study of user online behavior which concludes "It is clear that users are not reading online in the traditional sense; indeed there are signs that new forms of “reading” are emerging as users “power browse” horizontally through titles, contents pages and abstracts going for quick wins. It almost seems that they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense." The problem with power browsing is that it does not promote deep or critical thinking about the subject matter. While there is not yet strong empirical evidence to support the claim that we are 're-wiring" our brains this is a critical time for reflection on how the tools we may be relying on may be altering our perception.

Though it appears that in this digital age and the plethora if information it entails, we would increase our cognitive value, the fact of the matter is that Google is feeding us instead of us feeding Google. "MacLuhan calls this externalizing our inside capabilities", quotes internet strategist Jesse Hirsch in the YouTube video posted above. As MacLuhan's Medium theory notes, technology itself is changing individuals and society. In my observation we no longer use our brains and mental capacities to filter sense from nonsense; instead we act as passive sponges, utilizing our portals to absorb every piece of information available with little to no time devoted to an evaluation of or comparison to what we are ingesting. In this wave of mass communication little effort is put forth in writing or reading with objectivity from subjectivity.

Privacy in the age of Google

"At Google, we are keenly aware of the trust you place in us and our responsibility to protect your privacy. As part of this responsibility, we let you know what information we collect when you use our products and services, why we collect it and how we use it to improve your experience." This quote comes directly from the google site that provides the teaching video provided above. While Google claims to be concerned about the privacy of it's viewers, in the "Age of Google" in which we live, privacy is hard to come by. I write this with a bit of cynicism, with a numb sense of "isn't it obvious by now that privacy was lost with the invention of the Internet?"; however, as I read the article from the August 3 2008 edition of the New York Times entitled "The Trolls Among Us.", my smug cynicism transformed into a righteous indignation at the audacity of anyone to invade another's privacy and worse use it to harm them. The article tells of a seventh grader who committed suicide. In his goodbye note, he randomly mentioned his ipod that had recently been stolen. Some hackers got wind of this and hacked his MySpace page, placed an i-pod on his grave, took a superimposed picture of it (see above) and posted it on a random board of 4chan.org. As if that wasn't enough, the hackers took it a step further and posted a dramatic re-enactment of Henderson's suicide on YouTUbe. This incited numerous prank calls to the home of this youngsters grieving parents which as you can imagine thoroughly upset them, especially his mother. Has the Google Age brought with it a lack of respect? Unfortunately, I think the answer to that question is "yes." You see, it's not about privacy as it is about respect. That's what has been lost in the transition from old media to new media. Media is now a free for all of some members of the all just don't respect others and their privacy.

I used to think that when it comes to privacy, it all boils down to, just like most anything else, money! Just like there are two types of justices - one for the rich and one for the poor, there are two kinds of privacy, also: the kind of privacy you and I should expect, and the kind of privacy the rich and affluent should expect. Then, the Tiger scandal broke and I began to revise that frame of thought. Monetization of media is real but, aach of us is fair game, regardless of socio-economic status. Privacy doesn't make any difference to Google's bottom line - but your privacy does, just as it does with Facebook. The more you share the more data can be mined; the more adverts can be targeted; the more money can be made. That's why Facebook's nudging you towards sharing more, and it's why Google is now personalising search for everybody whether they want it or not. It's not that they're evil; it's that they simply don't see why anybody would worry - and because they don't get it, they're going to continue to attack your privacy for no other reason than because they can.

What they don't seem to understand is that online privacy is like curtains: you don't block the windows because you're running a meth lab or a brothel in your house; you block them because you don't want weirdoes peering through the window when you're watching TV and sharing personal, private time with those who really matter in your life.

From Mary Dyck to Twitter followers: Electronically Mediated Relationships

The arrival of radio meant that for the first time,news and information, sports and religion, music and comedy – all were available with the twist of a dial, even in America’s remotest corners. "It brought a common culture to individuals living in vastly different environments , and opened up new possibilities for people living beyond the easy reach of much of the popular culture of the day" (Riney-Kehrberg 1). Radio brought formerly isolated homes into close daily contact with the rest of the
nation. This led many of radio’s developers to believe that the new medium’s greatest promise would be realized in serving rural listeners. Specifically, for rural farm women like Mary Dyck, the radio not only provided entertaining programming but, more importantly, a parasocial relationship with program characters that substituted for the human interaction that was inaccessible. While radio still exists, it is, in my observation, still an old medium that no longer provides members of society with the parasocial relationships so prevalent in Mary Dyck's time. Nowadays, Twitter has become the new "poster technology" for parasocial relationships and our society's insatiable need for an ambient awareness of all that goes on in the lives of our friends and "friends in our head."

Our culture has become, more and more, celebrity obsessed. Additional exposure from new media technology and increased number of media channels has likely intensified this effect. From television to radio to film to print to the internet, fans can easily obtain more than a glimpse into the lives of the famous faces. Mass media increasingly give the illusion of a face-to-face relationship between a spectator and a performer. Today’s media frenzy and explosion of paparazzi includes non-stop exposure to celebrities’ on-screen as well as off-screen lives. The addition of reality television shows, which claim to showcase the “real” lives of these famous individuals, and celebrity news programs has perhaps increased obsession with celebrity personae. The mainstream press offers minute by minute details which one can follow his or her favorite celebrity. Current Websites such as “gawker.com” allows fans to post real-time sightings of celebrities on the streets of Manhattan. The site even provides maps to show fans celebrities’ exact locations. Various celebrities have become incorporated into the daily routines of their spectator’s lives.

The New York magazine article entitled "How Tweet It Is" poses a question that eloquently investigates the above-mentioned: Are we really becoming a nation of people who reflexively share information with everyone the minute we have it? I believe the answer to that question is "yes". The article speaks of the Hudson River airplane crash and how the "Tweet" of a passerby reported this breaking news hours before even the New York Times. This is a positive example of how being on the pulse of what is taking place provides meaningful and important information. While all information disseminated on Twitter and other social network agencies is not of this magnitude of importance, this has, like it or not, become the way in which most of us mediate our various relationships electronically.

Tabloids and Celebrities

December 1, 2009 - ENQUIRER EXCLUSIVE / WORLD EXCLUSIVE: WOMAN AT CENTER OF TOGER WOODS CHEATING SCANDAL EXPOSED!!

In this article, Ashley Simpson, friend of Rachel Uchitel, the woman accused of having an extra-marital affair with Tiger Woods speaks as the sole source of information about this supossed relationship. Although this story does constitute news (other reputable sources i.e. Good Morning America, The New York Post, etc. are covering this story), this story has a gossipy edge to it's delivery that renders it unreputable. The headline, with the use of "WORLD EXCLUSIVE" in capital and bolded letters, gives it a grandiose, larger-than-life feel that, quite frankly, the meager substance of the article does not substantiate; furthermore, punctuality, adverbs, and adjectives seem to purposefully used to add hype and emphasis and sensationalism to the story. Three times the story cites that this "blockbuster cover story was verified with polygraphs"; however, I question the reliability of lie-detector tests, especially when this is the only method used to verify sources. The entire story is based on the hearsay of Ashley Simpson, a woman who claims to be the friend of Rachel Uchital, the woman Tiger allegedly cheated on his family with. Photographs are used to comment on Rachel's lifestyle (raunchy, lewd, "party-girl"). It is interesting that the pictures features Ashley and were supplied by Ashley, as well. One might conclude that Ashley is seeking her own fifteen minutes of the spotlight.
In a highly regarded newspaper like the New York Times or Washington Post, the facts in a news story are meticulously checked and confirmed with multiple sources (when everything goes as it should). Editors and writers conform to journalistic standards and work hard to maintain an overall sense of objectivity. Tabloids don't seem to follow any of these rules. The key to tabloid story writing is that something doesn't have to be true to print -- someone just has to have said that it was true. Writers can bring in sources and experts to confirm just about anything. They will use leading questions to get a "money quote" from a source, or offer up the quote themselves and use it as long as the source agrees with them.
As the video clip states,a symbiotic relationship exists between tabloids and celebrities. A large proportion of tabloid celebrity news comes from celebrities themselves, often by way of their publicists. Some stars build a working relationship with a tabloid, offering inside stories in exchange for the free publicity. At other times, the tabloid will accept inside stories while agreeing to avoid running harsh or negative stories about a certain star. The studios even leak information about upcoming movies or the scripts for the new season of a TV show to get publicity for the show. We buy these tabloids and read these stories because we want to have an ambient awareness of and para-social relationship with celebrities. For more "info" on this story see:http://www.nationalenquirer.com/tiger_woods_cheating_rachel_uchitel_exposed_source/celebrity/67747#