Archive for the ‘Marketing with Context’ Category

How I was wrong, and why I was right.

In October 2007 I wrote a short bit about how using Twitter detracts from one’s “real” life. In short, I was wrong; at the time I had barely tried Twitter, I knew nobody using the service and I drew artificial line between my online and offline lives; but by now I use the tool daily to access and connect with people and information online and offline.

The continued convergence of our online and offline lives into one single “real” life points out an enormous opportunity; web-enabled tools can help us capture and structure the data we created through our offline lives to help us understand and change our behavior. Realtime data about our “real lives” will shape real decisions.

October 2007, me, On Twitter: How using Twitter detracts from being social:

I tested twitter this past weekend in SF. Having been staunchly against using it, and without any of my friends using it, there never seemed to be the need to use it.

But since I love to test things out, I decided to give it a whirl.

In short, I still don’t care for it.

How I was wrong.

Why? Using Twitter, shooting short notes into the void, detracts from just enjoying the moment, from enjoying the face-to-face interaction, to enjoying the world in front of your eyes. Why do we feel the need to always connect to the network? Can we exist offline anymore? Am I just hopelessly out-of-touch?

… Perhaps my negative viewpoint is caused by the low utility the service offers to me: since none of my friends use it, I only contribute to the cacophony of ideas chucked into the void, without getting any feedback.

Suffice it to say, times have changed. I was wrong; I hadn’t learn how to use Twitter, I hadn’t engaged with other people using Twitter, I hadn’t paid attention to the community and modes of conversation.

But my main contention to using Twitter is that it detracts from being social. Instead of just enjoying it in the moment, we are thinking of what we saw and how we can interpret it in a 140-character note.

… A bit of our mind is thinking about the void, and less of it is focusing on the moment, the people in front of us, and it just shows a bit of disrespect to who we are with to be distracted by the void.

This thinking reflects a shortsighted focus on just one use case; I was only considering using Twitter as a status update (to a faceless, non-existent audience, talking to “nobody and everybody”) rather than a communication tool; granted many of the applications and interfaces to Twitter were not available, but the basic ability to find, follow and communicate with people was right there, and I missed it by not paying attention, failing to explore and rushing to judgement.

Why I was right.

By constantly sharing little thoughts with others, we are taken out of the moment, and fail to piece together these micro-chunks of thought into cohesive, weighty ruminations that span multiple experiences.

… technology is changing the way we converse, share, even think, and not all for the better. Only by working to understand how it is changing how we interact can we truly leverage the new potential. I still have hope. We’re still in the beginning.

A year-and-a-half later, and we’re still just beginning.

Our conversations have indeed become more fractured, our communications shorter, our thoughts scattered, our minds challenged by multi-tasking, our attention challenged by the incessant beeps, vibrations, blinking lights and pop-up reminders of our multiplicative communication tools; our asynchronous tools and processes are being challenged by the increasing availability and use of realtime data.

But that’s nothing new, of course; we’re just continuing to slide down the scale in the same way since we first learned to communicate and exchange information.

Our strategies have yet to catch up to our tools; even as we spend an inordinate amount of time “talking about talking”, we’ve spent little time thinking about how the tools change our lives, online and offline.

Why this is important.
The one recurring theme: all of our tools and for communicating and organizing people have changed over time. To think that how we use Twitter right now is how we will always use Twitter is to neglect the lessons of history, the Internet, the shifting nature of communication and basic, fundamental human needs.

Instead of focusing on what technology does, let’s focus on how it can be used; how will technology change our behavior? What incentives do new technologies create, reinforce or eliminate? What’s the biggest user needs? Yes, we spend more of our time online, but we still exist in a physical offline environment; how can we use online tools to improve our offline lives?

The real opportunity: structuring the offline data created through our online and offline lives by capturing, storing, aggregating, filtering, threading, analyzing, sharing, promoting and getting relevant, personalized feedback.

Realtime data about our “real lives” will shape real decisions.

That is something I can get excited about.

Unrelated: How would you explain the web to Thomas Jefferson?

Hashtags are useless until threads are meaningful.

Enjoying a rich offline life, continuing a couple thoughts about online conversations; in short, instead of creating new tools to publish knowledge, we need to focus on better tools for creating wisdom…

Michael Lewkowitz, Dead of Alive – the future of hashtags:

A couple of weeks ago, Scoble had a epiphany that ‘hashtags are dead…’. That epiphany was really more about realtime search than the future of hashtags. If anything, inline tags (hashtags) are going to be an increasingly important aspect of the realtime web.

… Hashtags are just the beginning of in-line tagging in public micro-messages. They will enable explicit threading and permissionless participation in the realtime web in a natural and extensible way. Chris Messina’s original post had some great details, some of which which I believe will be part of the core infrastructure of the realtime web. And as public micro-messaging services proliferate, inline tags will help enable cross-platform threading with the potential to weave the web and even our offline data.

My comment:

I wouldn’t really call Scoble’s proclamation an “epiphany”; I don’t think we’ve ever used #hashtags terribly well.

The openness of hashtags is its greatest strength and its greatest weakness; I believe using #hashtags will only be popular and well-understood when it makes economic sense for a person to use it; i.e. only when using a hashtags helps someone (promote themselves, be understood better, quicker, easier, help participate in a conversation) will people use them regularly with any rigor.

Meaning:
1) Given that the ability to understand the context of messages (micro- and macro-) through natural language search and contextual analysis (or through semantic web-type architecture) is difficult…
2) … we depend on users to use hashtags to self-identify important parts of messages….
3) … but there isn’t any real meaningful need for people to use hashtags until people can privately capture the externalities behind free public metadata.

Until threads are meaningful (e.g. public, searchable, indexed, promotable), #hashtags are useless.

What is the point of using tags to supply metadata around a conversation until we can use them to improve the conversation? The real value in data isn’t the data itself but in structuring it to help us understand and improve our lives.

Meaning: hashtags are a start, but what we really need are threads.

Information and “knowledge” is easy to find, but where is the wisdom?

Of course, these aren’t new topics of mine; digging into the archives to highlight a couple related thoughts:

  • Splintering Conversations, May 2008:

    Instead of helping to solve the natural problem of communication that is called “being human”, online communication tools have only added to the complexity. Discontinuous. Fractured. Lack of context. Asynchronous communications scatter across our various inboxes, comments litter the web, incomplete conversations are lost amid the noise. Group conversations evolve, devolve, tune people out as the meanings and topics change, change from private to public to private.

    … Social media has provided us a plethora of tools, devices, methods and new standards for communicating. We know these tools: they have infiltrated our personal and professional lives, changed the ways we live and interact. But we are still at the very early stages of learning how to use them.

  • Are “Online Conversations really conversations”, Dec 2008:

    Where is the tool that extracts meaning and not just knowledge?

    We’re a knowledge culture; in our race to create and acquire knowledge we’ve forgotten the meaning and power of wisdom.

    Perhaps it’s impossible to create a web service to extract meaning and create wisdom; perhaps that’s why we need people and not just algorithms. Perhaps that’s why we still need to connect with individuals…

So, what do we do about it?

MORE: Financial Models for Entrepreneurs