Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category
Google’s Pirates vs Viacom’s Snoops
July 4th, 2008
No, i’m not talking about a sponsorship-crazed football match; I’m referring to the Google v Viacom lawsuit in the U.S., which, as I’m sure you’ve noticed, has stirred up a whole load of privacy and data issues for us all to argue about over the coming weeks and months.
However, for me, the issue is why request this data in the first place? What is Viacom trying to prove? According to the ruling, Viacom apparently needs access to the personal data of more than 100 million people to build a case against Google’s (YouTube) alleged piracy of various Viacom content, originating from the likes of MTV and Nickelodeon.
No matter how outrageous getting access to all that personal data to fight a court case is, do we really think Viacom has done this to conduct a detailed examination of the viewing habits of millions of people around the world, as some have suggested? Personally I doubt Viacom would be that obvious, but in the cold light of day, i’m struggling with the alternatives.
What can they do? Review all that data, win the case and disrupt the movement of content on the web just because they are fighting a losing battle against content sharing in the long term? Or, somehow use that data to gain advantage.
Seems very odd, especially when the data required to prove YouTube’s piracy, or not, is most likely available via other means.
Maybe Viacom is taking some sort of reverse privacy stand and showing us all how much data large web-based content providers hold on us all, and in fact succeeding where the U.S. Government failed in getting Google to hand over its data.
Maybe it’s just getting one over on Google.
Either way, Google is fighting to be allowed to clean the data of personal information. So we shall see.
Bobbie Johnson offers a good write-up of the story in the Guardian.
Metallica learn to love their web community
June 13th, 2008
It’s been one of the longest running sagas in digital communications. The story of a brand so unwilling to accept the thought of digital communications being at the heart of it’s future, that it has taken unusually harsh steps to avoid any sort of web involvement, especially in relation to its music.
The brand in question is Metallica - the world-famous metal band, and as i’m sure you know their hate-hate relationship with the web started in 2000 by taking legal action against Napster, accusing it of violating copyrights and instigating piracy, a course of action which other artists, namely Dr Dre, also pursued.
However, where as other artists have not only embraced the web but flourished on it, Metallica’s uneasy relationship with the web has continued with a seemingly unending stream of ill-advised decisions when it comes to utilising, or in fact doing everything possible not to utilise, the web.
Fast forward to this week and Metallica were at it again, or so it seemed. The story goes that Metallica set up a listening party of their new album with music bloggers in London. Seems like a good idea to me..and a step in the right direction. But then, of course, the bloggers dared to post their opinions and reviews of the new album and consequently the Metallica web police took over.
Metallica’s management company requested that the reviews were taken down because the listening party heard an early mix of the album, which seems very strange considering they were invited to listen to it, and the vast majority of reviews were actually good!
This whole process seemed to be very much in keeping with the script, leaving bloggers and fans frustrated and spawning such headlines as: Metallica goes diva on the Internet…again, Internet ignorance leaves Metallica looking like cyber bullies… again, Metallica: A Tale of Lost Fans and those were the nice ones! UK music blog The Quietus takes up the story.
But then, in a move straight out of the social media crisis communications book, Metallica stopped what they were doing, and quickly communicated with their community via their website , saying it was all a mistake by their management team, they had been out of the country touring when it happened and immediately reinstated all the reviews, even posting them on Metallica’s site. Simple, honest, friendly and open!
Suddenly, we see Metallica in a whole new light, either they’ve finally taken some advice, or they are actually mellowing to the power of the web, which they should seeing working only too clearly with headlines such as: Metallica apologise for demanding bloggers remove reviews, Metallica “ear spanks” management, reinstates online reviews, Metallica allows fans to read about new album.
In one quick and simple move Metallica have gone a long way to rebuilding the bridges that they’ve burnt over the years, and although they need to work at it, the new site and new found attitude show they are on the right track.
Well done Metallica and a nice social media case study as well!
May 20th, 2008
Reading Jeff Jarvis’ story in the Guardian yesterday shows how pivotal Twitter has become, not just in the digital media sector, we knew that, but in the media sector as a whole. He reveals that developers at the BBC and Reuters are working on applications to monitor Twitter and other social media services such as Facebook and YouTube for news catchwords such as ‘earthquake’ and ‘evacuation’ in the hope of both getting an early tip off on breaking news, and also locating content and potential interviewees on the issue.
This was illustrated perfectly by the Chinese earthquake last week, which according to Robert Scoble was broken on Twitter before the US Geological Survey posted the tremor and an hour before mainstream news sites reported it. Suddenly the BBC and Reuter’s investment makes sense.
Another example of the never ending brilliance of social applications. However, this isn’t the main point of this post…and you thought It was over…short post from Gofton - never!
The real reason for this post is to make a confession…here goes: I’m not the biggest fan of Twitter. Actually, before the great and good of the social media world beat me down with vicious reasoning, let me rephrase that: I’m not the biggest Tweeter. There I said it and for anyone that cares to check, it’s quite an obvious statement! I don’t tweet, post, write comments…that much. However, I am a fan of Twitter and I do regularly monitor and learn from the conversations that i follow, but in truth rarely dip my bill in…sorry bad joke.
I’ve often thought about the whys and wherefores of my apparent lack of willingness to get ‘involved’ and spread my own brand of commentary on Twitter. But that’s exactly the reason I don’t do it. I am put off by the life commentary from the Twitter nation, as so many others are.
Now to be fair not everyone does it, but those that feel the need to share their experience of being on a train, or a bus, or standing in the rain blah, blah, blah has never encouraged me to say: You know what, today is the day when I tell people I’m running late for a meeting.
However, although I am being facetious, in all seriousness a ray of light hit me from Jeff Jarvis’ article, or in fact from a quote he used from UK blogger Leisa Reichelt at disambiguity.com. Lisa has defined this practise as ‘Ambient intimacy’, which she explains as “being able to keep in touch with people with a level of regularity and intimacy that you wouldn’t usually have access to.” She continues: “There are a lot of us, though, who find great value in ongoing noise. It helps us to get to know people who would otherwise be just acquaintances.”
Hmmm, that kind of makes sense, it’s the most sense that anyone has made of what I thought was previously inane drivel. It does help to bring through the personality of an individual and it does help me to understand their point of view. Some of it is even amusing.
So has this taught me something? Am I going to change my ways and get involved? No - I won’t be telling you what I had for lunch, but you will be seeing a new vigour in what I classify as useful ‘Tweeting’.
Newspaper editors show the way forward
May 7th, 2008
The second Newsroom Barometer, which is the largest survey of the worldwide news industry compiled by the World Editors Forum , has been published and it shows a continued change in the way newspaper editors are viewing the web.
Here is a quick rundown of the highlights:
- 86% of editors believe that integrated print and online newsrooms will become the norm
- 83% of editors believe journalists will be expected to be able to produce content for all media within five years
- 58% of editors think the decline in young readership is the biggest threat for the future of newspapers
- 44% of editors believe online will be the most common platform for reading news in the future. 31% voted for print, 12% mobile, 7% e-paper and the rest were not sure
- 35% of editors said training journalists with new media skills would be their first action if they were given resources to invest in editorial quality
- 31% of editors said their priority was recruiting more journalists
These results show that the newspaper industry, or editors at least, have woken up to the reality of the revolution in the way we consume news. Putting new media training as a top priority for journalists is a clear sign of the need to adapt, and understanding that future readers are falling away at an alarming rate, although a very obvious indicator of impending doom, shows an awareness of the issues at hand.
These figures show that the newspaper industry does have a good chance of surviving and perhaps even prospering, if it can act now and evolve its offering to suit readership trends. Focusing on opinion/analysis-led journalism is not a new idea, but implementation of these ideas, along with the acceptance of news for free, is a major step forward considering where we were a few years ago.
Checkout the Editor’s weblog for a full run down of the results available to date.
Should PR fight its corner? Or just evolve…
April 18th, 2008
Danny Rogers’ leader article in PR Week raised a common and often debated subject this week. In Danny’s words: ‘Since the beginning of the year there have been several diatribes against the PR industry in the national media, equating it to a malevolent force’.
Nothing new there then eh!
Two quotes from the piece stand out in particular:
Exhibit A: Nick Davies’ book: Flat Earth News, argues PR’s raison d’etre is ‘… that the masses are a political threat whose thinking must be controlled by the techniques of PR’.
and
Exhibit B: A quote from this week’s Independent: ‘The aim (of PR) is to undermine or marginalise independent journalism, control decision-making, and lastly, mystify and misinform the public.’
PR gets a rough ride from the media as it is the media on the receiving end of much of what is wrong with the industry. To be fair their experiences have probably led them to these assumptions/conclusions, and after more than 10 years in the industry i can see why. I have met an assortment of PR professionals over this time, some that i am proud to say are the most intelligent, creative and real people I’ve met, and others well, are not.
So am i here to defend PR? No. Am i here to slate it? Nah. Do i have a point? I hope so…
The point is that as with all industries and stages of evolution, the strongest, or in fact the most suited to their environment, survive. PR’s evolution is based on moving away from the controlling instincts that the quotes accuse us of. Those that persist in employing these outdated models in a new environment will be found out and go the way of the famous flightless bird from Mauritius (featured above).
I think many of us, especially in the digital space, have already moved away from controlling the message/audience/issue. I feel a great many agencies and individuals have changed inline with their environment and as a result they are flourishing.
For what it’s worth, I don’t think PR needs another slagging match, or even defend itself to these allegations. What PR needs to do is understand how communications has changed, not just on the web but in all walks of life.
So, should PR fight its corner as Danny says? Or just get on with it, shed this archaic image and prove the doubters wrong.