Decode

Unplug for a day, go crazy

Saturday, April 24th, 2010

200 students at the University of Maryland when media free for 24 hours. According to survey authors, people felt alone, depressed, disconnected. Students described being disconnected in similar terms that addicts use when withdrawing from drugs.

Why do people use Social Networks?

Thursday, September 17th, 2009

Harvard Business School professor asked this question and came up with a painfully banal answer: To look at pictures.

“I just wondered why people spend so much time on these sites; what do they do?”

The biggest discovery: pictures. “People just love to look at pictures,” says Piskorski. “That’s the killer app of all online social networks. Seventy percent of all actions are related to viewing pictures or viewing other people’s profiles.”

Why the popularity of photos? Piskorski hypothesizes that people who post pictures of themselves can show they are having fun and are popular without having to boast.

Another draw of photos (and of SN sites in general) is that they enable a form of voyeurism.

Given that the primary interest people have in social networking sites is voyeurism, it is difficult for organizations looking to leverage social networking tools for their own purposes. Few people click on advertising on social networks, or visit corporate organizational zones.

Rather, people look to communicate. If you have something to engage in a two-way conversation about, well, that’s a start – but it is hardly the transformational tool that will help you attract young people to your cause or buy more of your knick knacks.

Decoding teenage media trends

Thursday, July 16th, 2009

Hats off to Morgan Stanley and Matthew Robson. With more than 90% of all coverage about teenagers and youth negative, it’s refreshing to see a global firm put a very young, smart intern front and centre. Well done. My company was born the same year as Matthew and we have spent the better part of the past fifteen years decoding young people in various parts of the world. We recently completed a study of 1000 British young people attitudes toward media and the Internet. Based on this knowledge I would like to offer these eight additional points of context to Mr. Robson’s excellent report.

1. The concept of understanding ‘teenagers’ from is flawed the start. 13-19 year olds as a group cross over a few levels of schooling and as most 13 and 19 year olds will tell you there is a big gap in life experience. Key transitions like driving, legal drinking, jobs and voting often split this group into at least two realities. Each transition has an impact on media behavior.

2. Don’t underestimate the significance gender plays at this stage of life. Years ago Calvin Klein launched CK1 cologne to meet the growing trend of androgyny among young people. The pendulum has definitely swung back especially in media use.

3. Advertising does work. It just has to be thoughtful, disruptive (usually means funny, but not always) and well positioned. Rarely do advertisers get all three of these right, so the generation born with the remote finds it natural to look for a better option. Young people have always been skeptical towards advertising, because they are the group most often manipulated.

4. Bravo BBC. You are proof that traditional brands can learn new tricks. Public networks worldwide take note. The iPlayer was a brilliant move to bring in the next generation on their terms. It also positioned the BBC second, just behind Google in DECODE’s youth brand rankings in the UK.

5. “Free for all” is certainly a youth rallying cry. To some degree it always has been, but now it’s more the expected norm. Perception and reality are worth noting. Bolt-ons, surprises, access, are a starting point not a value added service. Television and the Internet are rarely free. Someone else pays for it. Even free wi-fi at McDonalds comes with a side of chips.

6. I  don’t believe the DJ is dead. They filter content for the masses and alleviate the tyranny of choice that many young people face.

7. Newspapers aren’t dead yet either, but they should hire more DJs. Last year at a global conference of newspaper execs hosted by the World Association of Newspapers, I revealed that young people feel TV is a more credible news source than newspapers. This was part of a study on youth news media trends called Youth Media DNA. The fact is young people probably consume a lot of newspaper content without knowing it. Newspapers need to create their own version of the BBC iPlayer (I don’t mean a video player specifically) to show young people what value they get from newspaper content. Oh, and they need to provide it free for a while, change editorial to focus on issues that are more interesting to young people, use parents as allies and build relevant relationships with schools. I’m just getting started.

8. The size of youth social networks may be overblown. Most people are surprised at how few online friends young people have. On average teenagers have 90 online friends. But while that seems low to some, it is also a bit misleading. More than half of teenagers have less than 20 online friends – meaning that while a minority have tonnes of friends, most have a few.

All fuller response to the original Morgan Stanley report written by DECODE intern Ben Doherty is available for download here.

Teenage Scribbles

Monday, July 13th, 2009

These article pops up every once in a while….the familiar storyline…”hey, youth are pretty smart” .

This one is of particular interest given its media and tech focus. Amazing on one hand that Morgan Stanley would release this with no regard to back-up stats.  On the other its also cool that the kid has a lot of it right simply based on observation. A global media hit that none of their other analysts could dream of. Where will this 15 year old summer student go from here?

We have seen the they won’t pay for content and they think advertising is dumb lines before, but I like the nuance around mid range phones and wifi vs 3G. And I love the knock against Twitter…Still it is slated to be the superstar at this year’s Sundance Media conference. How is that second life thing going these days anyway…

Ownership Versus Subscription

Saturday, June 6th, 2009

The future of software is online; home computing is rapidly losing relevance.  For one thing, software that connects us to each other can provide dramatic benefits (just ask Scott about Twitter, or consider Wikipedia). Additionally, software is increasingly providing enhanced usefulness by connecting us with enormous databases.

The Internet itself is a database, which predominantly served as reference source for some time. By storing enormous amounts of information in a distributed fashion, the ‘database’ is accessible, but not personally own-able. With the advent of Web 2.0, new means of interaction with databases necessitate supercomputers (as opposed to PCs) to process queries and responses: consider “Wolfram|Alpha“, a multi-disciplinary computing machine, and “Shazam,” an iPhone application that takes a short recorded clip of music and determines the title in about 30 seconds total.  The processor and storage capacity required for these applications to function will likely not be available on our increasingly miniaturized computers without some dramatic technological breakthrough.

Our devices are progressing towards connected, human-computer interfaces, relying on remote servers for full functionality.  They are no longer complete by themselves.  Their identities are invisibly intertwined with society as a whole, now more tangibly than ever… one might even go so far as to call the term “iPhone” a synecdoche. Besides sounding cool, why is this important?

Ownership versus subscription

As an individual, and even as a larger organization, it is becoming impossible to “own” the infrastructure required for participation in the modern world.  Buying temporary rights to participate is the only feasible option.  Generational values may either clash or embrace this fact; few would dispute that there is variation between generations in how they react to this.  However, willingness to purchase a subscription may not be as simplistic as being savvy and grownup digital [yes, that was intended to be a jab at Tascott being uncool].   In fact, younger generations often expect free content*.  Youtube’s popularity despite lack of financial success with ad-supported content is a testament to this fact, and a testament to the elephant in the room: something has to give.

If accepting subscriptions is akin to accepting dependence upon society, then individualism and entitlement and other deep-seated psychological traits play a role in the solution. Understanding these ideas may be the key to targeting the right customers for these pioneer services of the new subscription paradigm, and may be essential for effective marketing to those who are resistant to this paradigm shift.

*Contradictory to this particular generational bias, younger generations are also perhaps more willing to view experiences as possessions, and are perhaps more willing to spend for temporary access – if it is framed correctly.

2009 the year of Firsts

Friday, June 5th, 2009

A Few years ago I had the unique pleasure of creating a role in a sort of amorphous multimedia project which explored the concept of Firsts entitled Orange Clouds. As a culture, a society and perhaps even as a species we are obsessed with Firsts. My experience illuminated quite a few challenges and some outstanding rewards associated with that oft sought position, First. From our historical vantage point we usually elevate the achievement and relegate the all important journey to the footnotes. In tracing the journeys of the pioneers featured in Orange clouds I was struck by the phenomenal risks they took. It seems that road of a trailblazer is necessarily fraught with risk and therefore often connected with youth. My greatest learning was that being first is always a journey defined by fear.
In reading A conversation with Lowell Bryan and Richard Rumelt I found myself constantly nodding in agreement and again contemplating the miraculous series of firsts that seems to have defined 2009. Management in this environment is unprecedented. Everything in this environment is unprecedented. Earlier this week Samir pointed out that Brian Deese is heading up the monolithic dismantling of GM. Hummer was purchased by a Chinese heavy machinery manufacturer. A development which North American auto industries are watching with the baited breath of an adolescent virgin about to experience his first kiss. One can almost hear Lewenza and his friends giggling as they whisper “Do you think that this means we get to sell our cars there?”
We have allowed ourselves to float along comfortably taking modest liberties thinking someone else is looking out for our best interest, but why should they? In fact often one should question how could they? As I have been known to say you get what you pay for. People always assume that this means that quality costs more and while effectively that is oft true it is not a natural conclusion that cheap is bad. You see antiquated though it may be I am a huge proponent of an apprentice based model of hierarchy. While you may not be most proficient at jobs you hire other people to complete you really need to know how those jobs are accomplished to truly assess if they’re being completed well. I still think that the knowledge garnered from consistent daily practice is invaluable. Translation: if management doesn’t really know how what the make/sell/do gets done they cannot replicate performance in changing environments. Well it seems the economic climate has drastically changed and the pervasive messages for me are elemental. First what an extraordinary time for all of us but young people in particular. We are become like that proverbial phoenix watching the ebb of the flames and preparing to rise from the ashes.The truth is that no one knows what comes next; we’ve shattered our own economic theory models and now we’re faced with that most dreaded of all economic and political woes – instability. The most interesting thing is that the volatility that created this mess is exactly and the fear it spurs is likely what we need to get out of it. From the 31 year old currently effectuating the largest bankruptcy in American history to fledgling chefs walking out on Canadian chef David Adjay over his refusal to source equitable trade coffee the marketplace is being redefined.
Next is the message I hear time and again and it is as old as the hills Keep It Simple Silly. We’re all afraid. Fear is life affirming. The upside of this economic situation is a levelling of the playing field where the experts may well be those people who see the problem and simply have the courage to offer a simple solution to a problem we are all afraid to face. Seems to me those cocky head strong whipper-snappers may have a leg up on that one.

Teen Text Anxiety

Saturday, May 30th, 2009

Slate’s resident journalism grump Jack Shafer regularly makes mincemeat of trend fad journalism , so I’d be curious about what he’d say about a recent New York Times article on teens addicted to text messaging. Spurred on by unlimited text cell phone plans, American teens are now sending almost 80 messages a day, more than double that of the average user.

This is naturally psychologists some concern about the impact on grade, sleep patterns, and attention spans. Sherry Turkle of MIT worries:

“Among the jobs of adolescence are to separate from your parents, and to find the peace and quiet to become the person you decide you want to be,” she said. “Texting hits directly at both those jobs.”

And fair enough. Undoubtedly technology changes behaviour. We have been worrying about the impact of technology on youth development for years now. The telephone was once described as an psychologically isolating device, as was television, the Internet, instant messaging, birth control… the list goes on. At some point the ballpoint pen was described as being destructive to handwriting, allowing people to write faster (without thinking carefully)…

The question in my mind is not about the specifics about how technology is enabling teenaged distraction. The worry here is that kids are hiding their phones under their tests, texting gossip when they should be learning algebra.

And that may be a real concern… But articles like these piece together anxieties and bits of data without really engaging with the issue. But if this is an epidemic, then let’s see some real data that there’s a cause and effect. And then let’s have a real conversation about the root of this desire to always be in touch…

Also, where are the articles about Baby Boomers and their addiction to Blackberrys?

Updated:  The New York Times also recent ran an article on the epidemic of teenaged hugging.  No joke.