Month: July 2009

  • Reading beyond the obvious

    As a regular user of Google Reader, I was happy to see that a couple of weeks back, Google deemed it important enough to carry out a few changes – a ‘like’ button, the ability to follow specific people (using Reader Search), and friend groups (with customisation options of who sees what content). The public nature of the ‘Like’ button meant that sharing on reader got a lot more social, though it had its share of detractors too.  Many complained about not wanting to see “likes from the unwashed masses”, Google corrected it by adding an option in the Settings, so that if you so desired, you could only see the ‘Likes’ by people you followed.

    As a regular user, I’d say that people who give only partial feeds stand to lose out a bit on the ‘Like’ part. It would also be great if the time lag between publishing and the post appearing on Reader could be reduced. As a publisher, I wish Google would tie these social features in Reader with Google Analytics, so that I can know who shared/liked my posts. One way to know the number of ‘like’ is to subscribe to your own blog, but I’m sure that Google can make it easier if they want. Then maybe a plugin that can show these details on my post (at the site). Much like the Tweetmeme plugin I have installed on my other blog.  Speaking of Tweetmeme, according to Venture Beat, the button is now shown more than 50 million times a day across the web. It has its share of competitors, and is even threatening to sue one.

    That number gives a rough idea of why Google want a piece of the sharing pie. In fact, this chart, created by AddtoAny (the same guys who gave us that awesome widget at the bottom of my posts) shows how sharing happens on the web. Facebook leads, followed by email and Twitter. Google, though dominant in search, would be looking closely at specific competition – the Yahoo-MS deal and how Bing’s interesting games shape up. But more importantly, it also has to keep an eye on how generic search and sharing (social) are changing and shaping each others’ future. Twitter just got itself a new homepage, and ““Share and discover what’s happening right now, anywhere in the world”  clearly shows the intent. I thought it even answered, to a certain extent, the oft heard question – “But what do i do on Twitter”. Call it discovery/recommendation/trend, but it is just a different perspective on search. And its not just Twitter, Friendfeed recently added a feature – ‘recommend friends’. No, silly, not the Orkut/LinkedIn type, if you feel your subscriber would also like the feed of someone you subscribe to, you can share it easily. Though its nothing radical, its helpful for new folk.

    The Nielsen Global Online Consumer Survey shows recommendations (from known people) as the most trusted source of advertising, at 90% and consumer opinions posted online at 70% next. Among Indian audience, recommendations top, but editorial is placed second. A post on Six Pixels of Separation blog talks about how the next ‘Google’ will be a referral engine, which ranks website not basis text optimisation, but basis what people have said and done there, and how the information there has been used by people. But there are challenges there too as such a system needs to incorporate relevance, immediacy, trustworthiness and have an interface that will display it in the most intuitive, easy manner possible. This post on RWW discusses the concept of Social Relevancy Rank, with five layers, where search results on streams (like Twitter, which already have real time) will be arranged basis relevance to your social graph. Friendfeed does this and provides more options in Advanced Search. The post also suggests ‘friends of friends’ as the next layer of results, and a concept of ‘taste neighbours’ (a mining of ‘people who liked this also liked’) after that. The last two layers are made of influencers and the crowd aggregate. In fact, I thought, maybe a possible visualisation would be to actually have all five layers arranged vertically side-by-side and a thumbs up/down button by the side of each search result, so that each user can contribute to filtering. Is this a perfect method? No, but then neither is Google’s Page Rank, as the author says. Which perhaps is why Google, while it is master of the algorithmic search, needs to experiment with Reader and see if it can create a social layer on top of its Page Rank search system. A new system that also incorporates the data from likes and shares beyond the optimised keywords, and is able to operate in real time too. Possible? That would be fun, and would even take Ad Sense to a whole new level. 🙂

    So what does this mean for brand and marketing? Beyond mastering the algorithm, optimising all the queries, mining all the data and connecting it, how does differentiation happen, other than the obvious product possibilities? This very interesting article (via @vijaysankaran) discusses the battle between art and algorithm. Amidst the quest for perfect targeting, and the smoothing out of our search experience, we might be losing out on serendipity. The  author goes on to say that in this ‘end of surprise’ is the opportunity for marketing – to deliver revelation along with relevance. The perfect  of left brain analytics and right brained creativity and emotions, which seemed to have been lost somewhere in between.

    until next time, search and socialise 🙂

  • Bridge over troubled water

    In ‘Tin Fish‘, there is a wonderful speech given by the school captain, which goes (edited a bit)

    …..I am not what I’d have liked to be. The school is aiming to prepare me for others. I want to be for myself. But it is growing increasingly difficult for me to prepare myself for myself as my expectations grow greater. A reformed, open-hearted school can help me. Till then, I shall stand on the beaches, look towards the sea and wait for a solution to be washed ashore.

    The novel is set in a boarding school in Rajasthan, deals with peer and parental pressure, and has the chaotic politics of the 70s as the backdrop. As a late 70s born, I could identify with the book because though the cultural icons had changed (rock bands/actresses etc) societal changes seemed to have moved at a much slower pace. The value and belief systems as well as the prejudices – caste, religion, income are a part of the 80s too.

    I could also identify with the above excerpt on two counts. ‘Preparing me for others’ ..the pressure to conform – on the kind of education one should have, the kind of career one chose, the kind of person one could get married to, one’s conduct with family, boss, and one’s behaviour in society in general, all had their own sets of conformity. ‘Prepare myself for myself’..when I wrote this post sometime back, I had mentioned the conformity that the blog imposes on the blogger, it is something that happens in real life too – we create an image of ourselves, consciously or more likely, sub consciously, and try to stick to it. In either case, more often than not, objectivity will be lost.

    Sometime back, I also came across this wonderful piece in the New York magazine, titled ‘Say Everything’. It talks about how as the young population gets increasingly used to the net, there are many among them, for whom, sharing their ‘stuff’ online is the natural way to be, and for whom, privacy has an entirely different definition. In fact they consider the extreme caution of the earlier net generation to be narcissistic and are prepared for the implications that the shared stuff might have on their lives decades later. The author sees this as the biggest generation gap in a long time, perhaps since the hippie generation. She even wonders whether in this era of surveillance cameras and tracked card transactions, their belief that privacy is an illusion might be the sane approach. The article outlines a series of changes that are happening with this generation –  “they think of themselves as having an audience, they have archived their adolescence, their skin is thicker than ours”

    Now, one could say that they are conforming to an online audience (like my blog example), but as the author points out, over a period of time, will this generation, which has been growing up with the net, move towards such degrees of comfort that they are totally un-self conscious? And perhaps, to quote the extreme example used by the author, a Paris Hilton level where what could have been the worst humiliation possible, was used as a stepping stone for fame? A generation so transparent that any ‘forced’ conformity would be easily detected and would be undesired. And moving on, to use the words I had seen in a totally different context (link), would transparency be (or subsume) objectivity?

    At this stage, we are of course, smack in the middle of these changes, but unlike the above generation, technology (more specifically, the web) entered our lives relatively much later. We perhaps have the baggage of not just peers/parents/society but also the ones we have created for ourselves earlier on in our lives. We might struggle to adjust, but yet we are perhaps the bridge generation, across the cultural changes wrought by the www or even liberalisation (in India). Did every generation have to play similar roles? 🙂

    until next time, stage fright

  • Popsies

    Popsies had been figuring a lot in conversations these days, so when we got in the mood for some Chinese food for lunch, we decided to ditch our incumbent favourite – China Pearl, and try out Popsies, which it seems, has been around in Koramangala, since forever. (hangs head down in shame, loss of face at not discovering joint in own backyard). Here’s a map that will tell you exactly how to get there. Its just off the one way leading from the Intermediate Ring Road towards Empire, JNC, William Penn etc. On that road, take a left after Empire (opp Chung Wah), and you’ll find Popsies on your right. Parking on that road is iffy, so you can use the parking lot right next to Empire.

    An inconspicuous door leads you into the lively place that, I think, would always be teeming with the college crowd. It was, when we went in, but thankfully, we just about managed to get a table. The seating is quite comfortable, though, on a neatness scale, the place would only be just above average. There’s a whole lot of bamboo in the decor, and the arrangements are such that each table is quite unobtrusive.

    The menu has quite a lot of options – appetizers (only chicken and fish though), soups (veg and chicken mostly), rolls and wanton, momos; veg, chicken and seafood (fish, crab, prawn) options for the main course and a flood of chopsuey, rice and noodles.

    A lazy, cool Sunday afternoon, so we had to start with a soup. We asked for a thick soup and the Manchow was suggested. It turned out to be piping hot and extremely good. The place is best known for the momos, so we asked for a  portion of Steamed Szechwan Chicken Momos. Once again, luckily, a good choice, though D liked it more than i did. One portion has 10 large pieces, so might want to finish this before you order the main course. 🙂

    For the main course, we ordered a Chilly fish (with gravy), Chicken butter garlic fried noodles, and influenced by the decor, a Chicken mixed veg mushroom and bamboo shoot gravy. Though the portions were really XL, the quality of food was not that great. The best of the lot was definitely the chilly fish. I wouldn’t recommend the chicken gravy, unless you’re a fan of blandness. The experiment I did with the chillies in vinegar worked moderately well, though. The fried noodles didn’t have that liberal dose of butter that we’re normally used to.

    All of the above cost us just less than Rs.400. In terms of quantity – value for money, its difficult to beat this place. The soup, the momos and the chilly fish were quite good, but the other two dishes didn’t really deliver.

    Popsies, No: 11, Industrial Layout, Koramangala. Ph: 65659336

  • Brands – Maturity, Transparency, Objectivity

    On the day that gay sex was made legal in India, I had wondered aloud on Twitter, whether condom brands like KS, Moods or even a deo brand like Axe – whose communication is all about attracting people (the female gender so far, since its a deo for men) – would use the occasion to provide a bit of a twist in their standard advertisements. As expected, none of them did. Which led me to wonder on the maturity of audiences and those of brands. (‘maturity’ for the lack of a better word, a more elaborate description follows)

    From an experience in an earlier place of work, when we had played on the visuals of Sai Baba and Jimi Hendrix and talked about music and religion, I have seen the fear that marketers have about how the consumer will react to a communication that could be taken as offbeat. In the case above, one could argue about hurting sentiments of followers (Sai Baba’s, according to the client, Hendrix’, worried the copywriter 😀 ), but there really wasn’t anything derogatory. Now that may be a subjective reaction, so let’s go back to the initial example. I’m reasonably sure that even if KS/Moods/Axe had thought of this, they might have decided not to pursue it.

    Is that because of a simple positioning mismatch that they perceive, or is it a fear to push the boundaries, of what they perceive as acceptable to their audience? Something that goes against the image they have created. But, as we keep discussing here, consumers are moving on. They talk to each other, and share their experiences about the brand, which may or may not work in advantage of the brand.

    Meanwhile, I recently read an article in the New York magazine, which got me thinking quite a bit on this subject. The article was titled ‘Say Everything‘, and talked about what the author perceived to be the largest generation gap since the hippie generation. While the extreme scenarios outlined in the article- of the kind of photos and complete transparency, of thinking of themselves as having an audience, of archiving their adolescence, of having a thicker skin than earlier generations- may not be what the average youth indulges in in his community, it does point to a generation which is growing increasingly uninhibited with sharing more and more of themselves with others on the net. The author points out that with surveillance cameras, transaction tracking etc becoming the norm, this complete transparency approach might be a saner route.

    In fact aren’t FB/Twitter status updates, and even online journals that many in my generation indulge in, also cases of living for an audience? The details of what they share might vary when compared to a younger user set, but this seems to be a trend that may not be scaled back, and in all possibilities, would increase. With the social tools that keep improving the ways to communicate, and share, can brands afford to cling to the kind of communication that they are used to delivering to the audience?

    In another article I read, YouTube blogger Kristina Horner, who was criticised for working with Ford Fiesta, makes a wonderfully simple, yet passionate argument that for “both bloggers and brands to be successful they need to accept that traditional advertising is not-effective (and even rejected) and that publishers like Kristina can find a win-win situation where a brand supports their work without compromise.”

    Would being completely transparent (yes, that is a bit of a redundancy, i guess) ensure that brands get a fair deal from the people they communicate to? Like I read in another context, would transparency fulfill the function that objectivity is supposed to?  But as always, transparency is not something that can operate only in communication, it moves to product, and many other functions within the organisation. So, as more and more consumers realise what Kristina has articulated so well, shouldn’t brands also take some initiative in changing themselves, and collaborating with their consumers?  That would take some maturity, i guess. 🙂

    until next time, audible audiences

    PS. For those missing the Tool Aid that is the blog’s staple diet, here are a few interesting reads

    The Sysomos in depth Twitter study that places India in the top 10 countries in which Twitter has been growing.

    The Razorfish Social Influence Marketing report.

    The Wetpaint/ Altimeter list of the world’s most engaging brands, and how there might be a link between engagement and financial performance

  • A bridge across time

    As I sat in the cafe, I occasionally turned around to watch the Metro construction. Vehicles and pedestrians jostled for space on the ever declining width of MG Road. Just before I got into the cafe, I was part of the crowd – most of which was cursing the mess that the construction was creating, not just then, but in many people’s daily routines, thanks to the regular traffic blocks and detours required.

    Detours. I had had a conversation with a friend a couple of days back on how, if I had the perspectives I had now, 5 years back, I might have done things differently then. I might have re-prioritised – things that I wanted to do, goals I set for myself, person I wanted to be,and so on. I said that blessed are those who can turn back, take a look and say that they wouldn’t have done things differently. I honestly can’t. Specific regrets I may not have, but a different set of perspectives, I wouldn’t have minded.

    The friend maintains that whatever path one takes, it would be impossible not to have some regret or the other. I can’t say I disagree. But i do maintain that it is possible to minimise. Does that mean that I am not happy now? Of course I am. But to paraphrase the tee that I keep mentioning says, it ain’t about the destination, its about the journey. The possibility of regret minimisation comes from a belief that if you are doing what you are meant to do, then everything else would fall into place. A faith.

    Faith. The book that I finished later that day had a theme that mixed faith, quantum physics and parallel universes. It had people with different levels of abilities regarding the different universes. One could sense it, one could travel through it, observing, without being able to alter anything, one could transfer objects through it without knowing where they went, and finally one who could travel through it and control it far better than all the above. It talks about every day being a momentous day when we make choices, which creates ripples across other people’s lives (like a butterfly effect on human destinies). It talks about destiny giving you a chance to set it right again. It takes the analogy of an oak tree for a human life. Too many right choices and you’ll have a trunk with a few branches, risks never taken, adventures never had, a life less lived. Too many wrong choices and you’ll have a gnarled tree, fruits never enjoyed, an existence too scarred, a life too consumed to be enjoyed.

    We would like a balance. The friend has made peace with the self on this matter. I need to work on it a bit more, and ensure that I don’t read this post years a few years later and say Oops, I did it again.

    Maybe years later, a new generation would thank the decision maker for the metro. Or perhaps they would curse it for being built for a lesser capacity than it should have been. Time, and context, that would form the perspective. Perhaps its too much to wish for the perspective and the destination before the time has been traveled through, step by step, baggage by baggage.

    until next time, step up 🙂