Never be lonely again: Digital humans

I spend a fair amount of time in my book chapter talking about intelligent (AI) bots / artificial humans and how brands can use them to create more meaningful relationships with customers. Fascinating stuff. And as AI and natural language processing improves (eg, real conversation) continues to improve in parallel with improving graphics and streaming, we\’ll be able to interact in ways that will be indistinguishable from \”real\”.

\"\"

This New Zealand based company is one of a handful working on developing that dream.

UneeQ (previously FaceMe) has taken in $10 million in funding so far to develop digital representations of humans that interact with you in much the same way as a real person would to drive emotional connection, loyalty, and trust between a business and its customers. And while this is a business application, I have no doubts that we will \”have\” digital humans as friends, companions, advisors – whatever we need. Interacting with computing through natural language, and with something that looks, sounds and \”feels\” completely human is the ultimate goal of spatial computer.

Competitios to Uneeq include Neon, Didimo, Soul Machines (love that name), and others; and while many currently think the uncanny valley a barrier, I believe that as time progresses we\’ll *expect* our technology to seem natural.

Turning AI Chatbots Into Digital Humans

Going to be a published author!

So my first professional book chapter\’s been officially submitted, \”Immersive Media and Branding: How being a brand will change and expand in the age of true immersion\” (could still be changed) for all those curious. It is about virtual and augmented reality, and what it will mean for brands.

Among other things, I talk a lot about how artificial intelligence and how it will inform digital avatars, which are fully fleshed out 3D interactive brand ambassadors. Fascinating thing to think about; literally fleshing out what your brand is, and what that will mean for interacting with consumers.

A shout out to the Cortney Harding of Friends with Holograms, Samantha Wolfe of We are Phase 2, Alejandro Mainetto of EY, Alan Smithson of XR Ignite Community Hub and Virtual Accelerator and Robert Spierenburg of All Things Media for their contributions! And to Jacki Morie of All These Worlds LLC for both accepting my proposal for inclusion, and being very kind for putting up with my questions throughout. She is very patient.

It still need to go though peer review, but should be in the January publication of the tentatively titled,\”Global Impacts and Roles of Immersive Media.\”

Announcement time

\"o-MEGAPHONE-facebook\"

Been kind of quiet here lately…as I\’ve been really busy IRL. Two big pieces of news:

First: I\’ve officially started looking to join a company after 10 years of self employment. Lots of reasons, the biggest being I\’ve realized that it\’s nearly impossible to drive any sort of advancement in the emerging tech world by yourself – you need to align with a larger team that is doing amazing things.

And I would so love to do that…so, for anyone listening: I\’d love to be part of your senior team, driving forward advancements in Immersive Media (AR, VR), Digital or AI. I can help you figure out what to do, where to go, who to do it with and who to sell it to – and then get it done.

My professional experience includes working with global companies (mostly large, but many small / startups too) over the past 20+ years. I\’ve help them understand, evaluate and develop business and marketing strategies in industries where digital + emerging tech is creating opportunities (and threats). An innovation focus, as it were…with deep roots in consulting, management and entrepreneurship – my goal is to help whichever company I join grow and thrive.

Second: I\’m going to be a published author!!

Excited to have been chosen to contribute a chapter (working title: \”Immersive Media and Branding: Invasive, Enriching or Annoying? How Being A Brand Will Change and Expand In The Age Of Immersion\”) for a soon-to-be-published book by IGI Global. Thrilled with the opportunity.

And finally….been reading a lot as well. The advancements taking place in technology are truly mind boggling. A few subjects are consistently drawing my attention lately because they are, well, just so damn interesting.

Spatial computing:
Tom Emrich\’s article \”Advertising Enters the Next Dimension: 7 Ways Spatial Computing is Evolving Advertising & Marketing\” caught my attention while researching info for my chapter submission. He discusses all the ways that the future of advertising and marketing is going to be immersive; I\’m going to be discussing something similar in my book chapter, Artificial Intelligence-fueled avatars and all. He\’s more about exploring the advertising angle than I will (I\’m focusing on what it means to be a *brand* in a world with 360 immersiveness). Well worth a read, with great examples.

Brain-Machine interface:
Although a few months old, I\’m intrigued by the work CTRL-Labs is doing with brain-machine interface. Electrical impulses from the brain are translated )(with training) into computing motions without needing to actually move…in the future you\’ll only have to think it, and it\’ll get typed, designed, communicated – all of it.

Ambient computing and Digital twins
A term I\’d heard, but not really latched onto, until I listened to this podcast, \”Ambient Science and Digital Twins with Katalin Bártfai-Walcott\” about the ubiquitous, invisible computing that will be our future – and our \”digital twin\” which will represent us in that dimension.

I think I\’d prefer the term \”Digital Concierge\” – but the end result is the same: a parallel entity that is powered by AI to learn about our individual preferences and personality, and have the authority to make decisions on our behalf. Instead of us interacting 1:1 with each device as we currently do, giving each our attention when needed – on/off, play this, turn this on, etc – our Digital Twin (concierge) will co-navigate our day with us, managing our experiences without us needing to consciously do anything.

The legal ramifications alone are staggering; regardless to what degree this eventually plays out, I think we can all agree that computing will move towards being ambient, meaning ubiquitous – and invisible. If any of this sounds at all interesting, listen to the podcast!

Opportunity Lost: NikeFuel, Gamification & Making a Difference

Nike+ & NikeFuel are beautiful examples of a brand living their values (Just Do It!) via technology and community. A new campaign by one of the biggest consumer brands in the world brings those elements into sharp focus by combining user\’s NikeFuel points with love for their favorite college basketball teams.

But they missed an opportunity to create something really special.

\"Nike

A good friend posted on Facebook today, requesting his friends who were fellow alumni of his college to \”pledge their Nike+ Fuel and get on board!\”. As someone who has been working with Quantified Self ideas / technology, is a fan of Nike\’s marketing efforts, and pays way too much attention to the use of game mechanics in digital experiences, this was definitely worth a look.

NikeFuel (part of the Nike+ ecosystem) is a line of products including wristbands, apps, and watches that all collect data on movement (calories burned, steps taken), let you set goals, provide insights and convert all of this to points for personal optimization and social sharing. It is a great example of Quantified Self, a movement where users are collecting, analyzing and learning from the their data (via mobile, wearable and pen-and-paper techniques). The Fuel Your Team campaign allows owners of NikeFuel products to \”claim their team\” from a list of US college basketball teams. As each person claim\’s their team (you can claim any team, whether you are alumni or just a huge fan) they can pledge their NikeFuel points to that team, which raises their standings on the leaderboard.

\"Screenshot

Quantified Self?
Absolutely.
Social?
Very sharable (don\’t ever underestimate the power of school pride) and Nike has real brand love, and the resulting message amplification to make this take off
Gamification?
Personal earning of points AND seeing my points result in my team\’s standings change = YES. Nike has foreshadowed that as the program rolls forward more achievements will be unlocked (presumably for the team)

All in all, it\’s a pretty simple, yet compelling effort. Users of NikeFuel are advocates and LOVE to talk about their FuelBand and how it helps them. For fans of College Basketball this is the \”most wonderful time of the year\” (you can blame me later for having that song stuck in your head). For all intents and purposes, this program is a win as it stands (will it drive sales of FuelBand? Probably). But there is one thing in the whole program missing, especially all these years after Social Media went from being an experiment to an expectation.

Where is the social-good moment in the program? How is the world\’s biggest sneaker company/iconic brand / driver of sport-as-lifestyle around the world paying it forward/giving it back/starting a movement of people beyond adding points? They have the \”megaphone\” of brand awareness, channel and spend. They have a product their users love (and have racked up over 4 billion points since it\’s launch a little over a year ago). What if they did something different?

  • Every College in the Fuel Your Team program decided to \”adopt\” a cause they and their fans could rally behind:
    • Gonzaga decided to join the fight against Juvenile Diabetes
    • Michigan State fans took on Pancreatic Cancer
    • Syracuse rallied it\’s fans to support the Wounded Warrior Fund
  • Nike and select partners pledge to donate money to the individual causes based on the Fuel points earned.
  • Each school organizes to raise Fuel points from students, alumni and fans AND works on fundraising drives for their \”adopted cause\”.

To get there would take a considerable amount of work, but the concept of Social Good (ht to Drew Olanoff) isn\’t a new one. The effort would require choosing the participating causes, negotiating the minimum contribution they could receive, matching the cause to the individual schools in a way that is fair, getting the budget together for the donations, organizing the fundraising infrastructure that would properly allocate and credit the schools for the donation, digital and mobile efforts, PR and Marketing, the privacy policy and a lot more – but none of these things compares to the work that goes into launching a sneaker, and NIKE literally wrote the playbook for that.

\"We

I love what NikeFuel is doing with this program (simple, direct, crowd-driven and based on love for their product AND College Basketball AND the individual schools). NikeFuel + Gonzaga is a fun idea, but NikeFuel+Gonzaga+Cystic Fibrosis is full of awesome. Considering how often Brand-Cause partnerships are looked at with distrust, this is a tough sell, but think about much real change in the lives of real people that Nike, the Colleges and their fans could create with a program like this?

Love it? Hate it? How would you hack this idea?

Leave a comment below and tell me what you think.

Authentic belongingness: Community, context and culture in a digital world

Belongingness: The human emotional need to be an accepted member of a group. Whether it is family, friends, co-workers, or a sports team, humans have an inherent desire to belong and be an important part of something greater than themselves. The motive to belong is the need for \”strong, stable relationships with other people.\”  

Birds flock, fish school, humans….? What do humans do? It\’s something I\’m always thinking about. What are we hardwired for? It\’s relevant to technology opportunities since to tap into them requires understanding what the human animal needs/wants at a primal level and then servicing those needs.

And my conclusion is that – of all the animals in the kingdom we are most like (get ready for it): wolves.

The similarities are interesting. We are both pack animals, with defined groups we belong to. Groups that have internal social heirarchies (alpha dogs, literally or metaphorically) and a constant struggle for some individuals to be that \”alpha\”. Groups that can be vicious to outsiders, or to those members who violate the \”rules\”.  Rules that are for the most part, completely (in the wolves\’ case, totally) unwritten.

\"\"These rules and group norms are called \”culture\”. And although we don\’t typically bite, both groups punish members who transgress those rules.

So I find it fascinating to watch how these hardwired behaviors impact on the evolution of virtual communities. Are the behaviors shown there really so different?

We seek out like minded people, with whom we share interests or values. On Facebook – are you \”friends\” similar to you? I always think of it as various circles I\’m in. I have my techie friends, my political friends, etc etc. And within a few shades of gray, they align reasonably closely with my own interests, thinking and/or philosophy.

But occasionally someone will meander into a conversation, a friend of a friend from another circle, who doesn\’t know the inherent \”rules\” (everyone here is an atheist, and a conservative christian with wander in, for example), and proceed to disagree. Wham! The group typically shuts down the conversation. They didn\’t know the rules. How dare they enter. Tempers flare, words are written. It never ends up pretty. I regularly hear from a wide variety of people that the vitriol is  \”getting\” to them.

So let\’s be honest, there\’s not a huge amount of open minded learning-type discussions on Facebook. For the most part it\’s either you\’re \”hanging out\” with people who already have a fair amount of overlap with your own ideas (or you knew them in junior high and couldn\’t turn down their friend request). Which contradicts what you probably THOUGHT a social place like Facebook would  (should?) be.

I wish it were a place of learning and expanding. Instead it\’s interestingly becoming the opposite. Because human nature congregates and puts up walls, creating outsiders. The medium might champion (apparent) transparency, but human nature is doing exactly the opposite.

I use my own progression of involvement in social networking to illustrate.

Initially, like many, I friended lots of people outside my comfort zone. I figured that – a  la a traditional cocktail party – I\’d mix with lots of different types. After all, I consider myself fairly open minded; I might not agree with you, but I\’m interested in why you think what you think, and thought I might learn something, hear a different point of view, expand my horizons, kumbayah kumbayah. I think many exuberantly flocked with the same excitement; even my dad (the original Mr. Magoo himself) had heard, and was curious to try, Facebook.

I hesitantly dipped my toes in the social water, tentatively, politely, diplomatically, in well-brought-up style not reacting, contradicting, or challenging – but found instead is that it\’s virtually impossible to stay on the fence and be \”myself\”. As time went on (and one pugnacious twat interaction too many), I started culling the pack, so to speak. And have been left with circles (groups) of people who\’s values – within a few shades of gray – fairly closely already align with my own.

Which is a cop out, at least in my theoretical head. I\’ve migrated to what is by my own definition being a bit close minded and occasionally (and I hate to admit it, but fair is fair) slightly (ok, I can\’t admit to more) adversarial….and contradicts the way I *actually* like to think about myself. Perhaps it\’s the subjects; social networking does seem to easily stray into subjects that were nary discussed with strangers until its advent (sex? politics? money? religion? how about all of the above?) – the transparency of the medium disallowing non engagement, perhaps. But for whatever reason, I\’m clearly \”there\”.

I hesitate (nay, reject! don\’t worry) to say that it\’s possible to generalize entire humanity\’s hardwiring based on looking only at myself as a petrie dish and am aware of the pitfalls in even mentioning myself as an example.

But I use it to illustrate what I\’ve noticed going on all around me: from Facebook comments to online communities around a wide variety of interest / subjects / philosophies, people self form into groups where their own behaviors / morals / values are reflected, create a set of \”rules\” around behaviors there as naturally (and unthinkingly) as breathing, and gravitate towards situations where they do not feel their own inherent values are challenged.

We know the rules, the culture – the unwritten language – and drift to where we are comfortable. And I do think we are hardwired to do this; throughout history, humans have clumped together into (wolf like) communities, either physically or interest-based (or both), and are now adding virtually to the list of ways to connect.

So if each virtual group is creating it\’s own \”culture\”, and we humans tend to reject what isn\’t part of our \”group\”, how do you get your brand message heard? Or more to the point, how do you get people to interact with you?

Particularly if (as I believe) traditional \”push\” advertising as we currently know it will increasingly fail in this new world, as people become more and more spoiled used to streaming whatever they want on demand, sitting through enforced messaging will become less and less palatable – plus technology will enable them to choose what they want, when they want it, not on a predetermined schedule.

So they\’ll be ignoring your messaging, if done the traditional way. No more commercial break during your regularly scheduled programming. Other than, perhaps, live sports events.

It means that brands will have to become \”friends\” so to speak. They have to be responsive. They have to have 3D personalities, much like taking a brand and creating a restaurant \”experience\” requires re-imagining what the brands feels like, and translating that to interior decor.

But it will have to feel \”authentic\” to the person who\’s group you\’re trying to woo; you\’ll have to use their language, their timing, their norms, their rhythms; you\’ll have create the kind of interaction they expect, and to do that requires constant learning and feedback loops.

Because otherwise, just like wolves, you\’ll be snapped at and kicked out. Which will require a new way to analyze and learn the nuances of how we\’re talking to each other (along with how we talked (channel), where, when, etc – see my previous entry The Borogoves are a\’ Mimsying for a deeper explanation).

Traditional database analysis – where columns and rows are predetermined and the data fits neatly into the categories you set up – won\’t work anymore. Because the data will be people talking, using their own, private jargon with their own, group context/frame of reference (culture). The things that go unspoken that everyone just knows – a common frame of reference. These things lubricate our every interaction, seamlessly, without even a moment\’s notice for the most part. Even when you interact with someone from a really different culture – because you\’re both so trained to only think from your own frame of reference, that usually you don\’t even think to ask what their assumptions are (even if they could articulate them). It\’s the water we swim in, either unknowingly, or by choice.

And as each group has their own jargon and context, it become impossible to standardize…and add even another layer on top, language itself is so imprecise, imagine trying to explain to a logical, linear computer how to identify sarcasm (you look GREAT!) or indeed, slang \”fat!\” – at least, I think that\’s slang lol. But my own peeps grok me fine.

Our new gadgets create so much information as to make analysis fruitless, and indeed, back to that linear model – these need to be set up properly in the beginning, so if it\’s structured around apples and pears, what do you do when a kumquat walks in? We need ways to have computers that learn from experience and apply that intelligently to a new situation, because programming by anticipating precisely each potential variation when there\’s so much data, is impossible.

Starting to understand just how complex this all is?? Particularly since people are member of multiple groups, both real and virtual, and you\’ll have to get the timing right too. No good talking sports appropriate language when your customer is in helping his kids with homework mode.

I\’m hearing all over the place that this kind of insight analysis (based on learning algorithms – some call it \”artificial intelligence\”, or heuristic learning) vs linear analysis is indeed the next frontier; the limits of how far we can push the way data and analytics has always been done. And many are trying; there are fortunes to be made here.

So Skynet, here we come. Although I\’d argue sentience is a far cry from learning abilities (I know not all agree…that\’s for another day). So I wouldn\’t be worried about those computer overlords just yet (Geek humor! – my group will \”get\” it!).

The Borogoves are a\’ Mimsying: Marketing in a hyper-connected world

I’ve been thinking a lot about the long term impact an ”instantaneous, on demand” life. Imagine that from birth, you never had to wait for anything, and had everything you wanted delivered immediately. News, entertainment, connecting with your \”group\” – everything.  Never getting lost. The collective knowledge of the human race there for you at all times. How would this shape your assumptions and expectations?

\"\"

Because this is what\’s happening to the generation being born. My nephew is almost 2. What struck me is how – without any real language skills yet (my sister would disagree) he tells her what he wants to watch, and when.  He \”requests\” Blue Clues over, and over (and over) again. The concept of watching something on schedule – and waiting for it, and not choosing which episode, is completely unfamiliar to him. If it\’s not on when he wants it, he gets very, very angry.

So clearly, his brain is being trained to work differently than yours or mine. It reminds me of the 1943 short story \”Mimsy Were the Borogoves\” by Lewis Padgett, where an alien toy from the future is found by children and in the course of playing with them, they become \”re-educated\” to think differently.

Reality for him is a world where he will be completely connected to everyone he\’s ever known, and (personalized) information, interaction, engagement, and entertainment will be fed to him how he likes it, and never more than a few seconds away.

What assumptions will he develop – as inherent to his interaction with the world as breathing? How will this quintessentially change the relationship he has with products and brands? And from a business point of view, how do you make sure your products and services are the \”right\” ones so that your company can successfully deliver what he will not just demand, but expect without thinking?

Well, for one: immediate gratification is a given. Patience will no longer be a virtue, when waiting is never necessary. So everything must be available immediately, and immediately relevant. This means devices that are never off, always connected to a information delivery infrastructure (10G?) with enough bandwidth (no doubt, an antiquated term by then) to deliver immediately.

It also means that accessing masses of data and instantaneously extrapolating what he likes, then projecting what he should like. Ultimately, continuing to learn who he is, then fine tuning that knowledge at an algorithmic rate will be a requirement, not an option.

Brands / companies will need to mine/model all the data they have about your preferences and past interactions to instantaneously tailor on-the-fly experiences for you. And woe betide the brand that guesses wrong – it will feel as inauthentic to him as a \”real\” inauthentic interaction does to you today.

And my guess is, he\’ll have short patience for a brand interaction that doesn\’t feel right. So branding in the future will be about creating entire experiences – including real time interactions (suggestions, whimsy, connections) just like a real friend would. A virtual concierge, as it were.

It will require a conflux of inputs, working together (and seamlessly) to create the experience he expects, and demands. So to hijack the traditional \”Who, What, Where, When, Why, How\” model, this is what the brave new world of branding and marketing will have to master:

\"\"

Becoming interactive with him will require that your brand becomes a \”friend\”, someone who knows what you and your friends like, what you\’re talking about, and how to be there in the right manner. You\’ll need to deliver the information you want him to see and engage with in a manner that he wants:

  • Does he prefer text? Voice? Articles? RSS feeds? Audio? Something else? A mix of these? What are his preferences? When does he interact the most?
  • Snippets of info throughout the day? Is he an information snacker, grabbing bits in between other activities, or does he prefer to set aside a stretch of time to catch up on everything?
  • Does this behavior change depending on whether it\’s a week day or weekend? Is he more receptive in the morning, or night? Can you ensure that you\’re there at the right time?
  • Where is he? Close by? Is the message immediately relevant (is he nearby)? How close? Half an hour? Half a week?
  • Has he done something relevant in the past? Can you discern a pattern and overlay it on the present?
  • Who are his friends? Influencers? Who does he rely on for information? Opinion? Does he listen to different groups of friends depending on the situation, or product (fashion friends, tech friends, etc)?
  • What communities is he a part of? Active? Passive? Are these relevant to your brand? Who is he connected to there? This is the social networking part of the equation, where you mine his activity and network for insights an influence.

The friends/connection influencer role will increasingly be critical, as the only way for a brand to reach a consumer in the future will be through engagement with them AND the people they listen to. I personally believe the \”push\” model of advertising that we\’ve all grown up with (billboards, print ads, television) will continue to atrophy in influence as people who\’ve only ever, in the face of overwhelming messaging / branding, listen to \”trusted advisors\” – their own connections.

The list can go on, but obviously things are increasingly difficult as a marketer. It\’s no longer about your brand, your market, your positioning, your message, and placing your message – it\’s all about creating *true* context, meaning, authenticity. On your customer\’s terms. I\’m calling it Six Dimension Marketing. Marshall McLuhen said the medium is the message – in this case, the time, place, and context are too.

The brand challenge is/will be to facilitate meaningful engagements, and keep it going. Because by continuous listening and learning, the opportunity exists for a long and fruitful relationship. The barriers to creating a meaningful relationship with customers will be higher, but so will the barriers to exit.

So once again, technology will have the opposite effect many expected; instead of being a a great equalizer of opportunity, it will take more money/savvy / strategic creativity than ever to stay competitive….although I welcome seeing some of the \”In Culture Marketing\” (grassroots) that will emerge, that smaller brands can take advantage of (as well as some of the savvier larger brands). We\’re just at the beginning of truly disruptive times for how business is \”done\” – all the things we \”know\” and grew up with are changing, and while it scares some, I personally find it exhilarating. Strap in for the ride!

The Borogoves are a\’ Mimsying: Marketing in a hyper-connected world

I’ve been thinking a lot about the long term impact an ”instantaneous, on demand” life. Imagine that from birth, you never had to wait for anything, and had everything you wanted delivered immediately. News, entertainment, connecting with your \”group\” – everything.  Never getting lost. The collective knowledge of the human race there for you at all times. How would this shape your assumptions and expectations?

\"\"

Because this is what\’s happening to the generation being born. My nephew is almost 2. What struck me is how – without any real language skills yet (my sister would disagree) he tells her what he wants to watch, and when.  He \”requests\” Blue Clues over, and over (and over) again. The concept of watching something on schedule – and waiting for it, and not choosing which episode, is completely unfamiliar to him. If it\’s not on when he wants it, he gets very, very angry.

So clearly, his brain is being trained to work differently than yours or mine. It reminds me of the 1943 short story \”Mimsy Were the Borogoves\” by Lewis Padgett, where an alien toy from the future is found by children and in the course of playing with them, they become \”re-educated\” to think differently.

Reality for him is a world where he will be completely connected to everyone he\’s ever known, and (personalized) information, interaction, engagement, and entertainment will be fed to him how he likes it, and never more than a few seconds away.

What assumptions will he develop – as inherent to his interaction with the world as breathing? How will this quintessentially change the relationship he has with products and brands? And from a business point of view, how do you make sure your products and services are the \”right\” ones so that your company can successfully deliver what he will not just demand, but expect without thinking?

Well, for one: immediate gratification is a given. Patience will no longer be a virtue, when waiting is never necessary. So everything must be available immediately, and immediately relevant. This means devices that are never off, always connected to a information delivery infrastructure (10G?) with enough bandwidth (no doubt, an antiquated term by then) to deliver immediately.

It also means that accessing masses of data and instantaneously extrapolating what he likes, then projecting what he should like. Ultimately, continuing to learn who he is, then fine tuning that knowledge at an algorithmic rate will be a requirement, not an option.

Brands / companies will need to mine/model all the data they have about your preferences and past interactions to instantaneously tailor on-the-fly experiences for you. And woe betide the brand that guesses wrong – it will feel as inauthentic to him as a \”real\” inauthentic interaction does to you today.

And my guess is, he\’ll have short patience for a brand interaction that doesn\’t feel right. So branding in the future will be about creating entire experiences – including real time interactions (suggestions, whimsy, connections) just like a real friend would. A virtual concierge, as it were.

It will require a conflux of inputs, working together (and seamlessly) to create the experience he expects, and demands. So to hijack the traditional \”Who, What, Where, When, Why, How\” model, this is what the brave new world of branding and marketing will have to master:

\"\"

Becoming interactive with him will require that your brand becomes a \”friend\”, someone who knows what you and your friends like, what you\’re talking about, and how to be there in the right manner. You\’ll need to deliver the information you want him to see and engage with in a manner that he wants:

  • Does he prefer text? Voice? Articles? RSS feeds? Audio? Something else? A mix of these? What are his preferences? When does he interact the most?
  • Snippets of info throughout the day? Is he an information snacker, grabbing bits in between other activities, or does he prefer to set aside a stretch of time to catch up on everything?
  • Does this behavior change depending on whether it\’s a week day or weekend? Is he more receptive in the morning, or night? Can you ensure that you\’re there at the right time?
  • Where is he? Close by? Is the message immediately relevant (is he nearby)? How close? Half an hour? Half a week?
  • Has he done something relevant in the past? Can you discern a pattern and overlay it on the present?
  • Who are his friends? Influencers? Who does he rely on for information? Opinion? Does he listen to different groups of friends depending on the situation, or product (fashion friends, tech friends, etc)?
  • What communities is he a part of? Active? Passive? Are these relevant to your brand? Who is he connected to there? This is the social networking part of the equation, where you mine his activity and network for insights an influence.

The friends/connection influencer role will increasingly be critical, as the only way for a brand to reach a consumer in the future will be through engagement with them AND the people they listen to. I personally believe the \”push\” model of advertising that we\’ve all grown up with (billboards, print ads, television) will continue to atrophy in influence as people who\’ve only ever, in the face of overwhelming messaging / branding, listen to \”trusted advisors\” – their own connections.

The list can go on, but obviously things are increasingly difficult as a marketer. It\’s no longer about your brand, your market, your positioning, your message, and placing your message – it\’s all about creating *true* context, meaning, authenticity. On your customer\’s terms. I\’m calling it Six Dimension Marketing. Marshall McLuhen said the medium is the message – in this case, the time, place, and context are too.

The brand challenge is/will be to facilitate meaningful engagements, and keep it going. Because by continuous listening and learning, the opportunity exists for a long and fruitful relationship. The barriers to creating a meaningful relationship with customers will be higher, but so will the barriers to exit.

So once again, technology will have the opposite effect many expected; instead of being a a great equalizer of opportunity, it will take more money/savvy / strategic creativity than ever to stay competitive….although I welcome seeing some of the \”In Culture Marketing\” (grassroots) that will emerge, that smaller brands can take advantage of (as well as some of the savvier larger brands). We\’re just at the beginning of truly disruptive times for how business is \”done\” – all the things we \”know\” and grew up with are changing, and while it scares some, I personally find it exhilarating. Strap in for the ride!

My way? Branding in a personalized world

I follow comments on articles and posts with not-so-always-as-unattached-as-it-should-be bemusement; quite often the article/post is more of a catalyst than an actual source of information.

I\’m struck by a thought tonight though, after a particularly vitriolic back-and-forth session on a Daily Show post: what will \”authenticity\” look like in the future, and how will we recognize it?

There used to be \”trusted\” authoritarian figures – Cronkite, Brokaw, those types. But with the advent of \”social media\”, our trusted advisers are friends, or others in our community (digital or otherwise). Fine. But as the noise goes up digitally (increasingly everyone has a loud opinion), will it perversely create closer \”real life\” ties as a \”safe\” refuge from the melee?

And if brands are currently scrambling to take advantage of the current channels/technologies and create relationships with customers, instead of pushing messages (a paradigm shift that very few have managed to successfully understand yet), how will they deal with this change?

Some say \”branding\” will be more important than ever, and in the short term perhaps they are right. But there is a whole generation of people who will not have brand relationship as we did for the first part of their life, and are developing their own \”digital communities\” from the beginning, growing up swimming in a sea of constant, instant communication. How will they find and become loyal to brands if the communities are formed – and distrustful of \”outsiders\” – from the start?

For that matter, how will be be exposed to alternate ideas & philosophies, something critical to maturity and intellectual growth?

I was thinking about this a while back, because of services like Pandora. So neat, really, to just start it with a few artists/songs you like, and then (theoretically) never have to hear another song you don\’t like. Personalization at it\’s best.

The problem with that is, there are whole genres of music I\’ve never even heard of, and end up liking when someone makes me aware of them. How is this going to happen if from the beginning of my life I\’ve had it only served up \”my way\”? How will I know what \”my way\” is? Particularly if I only interact with groups (virtual and otherwise) I already know, and \”trust\”.  

A lot to ponder.

Just a thought.

Update 11/16/10: Ted Koppel wrote an article for the Washington Post today titled \”Olbermann, O\’Reilly and the death of real news\” where he discusses the lack of \”trusted authority\” in a fragmented, 24 hour media world. Here\’s my favorite quote:

Broadcast news has been outflanked and will soon be overtaken by scores of other media options. The need for clear, objective reporting in a world of rising religious fundamentalism, economic interdependence and global ecological problems is probably greater than it has ever been. But we are no longer a national audience receiving news from a handful of trusted gatekeepers; we\’re now a million or more clusters of consumers, harvesting information from like-minded providers.

I love it when famous people agree with me 😉

Scroll to Top