Modern Marketing - Blog by Collaborate PR & Marketing

The Joy Of A Gated Community

A couple of years ago, I heard Sir Tim Berners-Lee describe the muddled state of his splendid creation in  this way : ‘If your sink is blocked for a few weeks and you remove the plug to dig out the obstruction, the offending mangled mess of soap, fish bones, human hair and other horrible gunk in which bacteria has set up home, is exactly like the World Wide Web’.  Now, for many tech-heads, geeks, tinkerers, everyone in Silicon Valley and other early-adopters it didn’t get much better than this organic mush.  And the gooey paradise remained intact for a long time.  However, for the mainstream (aka Everyone Else In The World) the web remained a mysterious, slightly sad place where only-the-lonely gathered.  But the online social revolution has blown away this view.  In part, by throwing up some gated communities, such as AppStores and Social Networks, where regular folk can talk to each other without fear of their Gucci loafers getting sullied by geek-grime.  In fact, for many, it even became rather exciting to mix with the technorati and let some of their magic coding dust rub off.  But not too much.  And certainly none of the whiffy stuff.  Personally speaking, gated communities where the comfortably-off huddle from the excrutiating ravages of real life, such as potholes and unmown lawns, always sound pretty dull to me.  However, there are times when we’d all like to withdraw into sanctuaries of expert topiary and poo-free paving, away from the open clutter of the real world.  In such harbours of tranquillity there are no worries about unsightly neighbours or anti-social viruses.  The no-nonsense management are constantly poised, ready to pulverise any shady individual who dares to disturb the peace.  For some, such walled gardens become claustrophobic as they tire of the same faces and fences.  The security guards start to look like prison screws and the disorderly streets where the everyday folk dwell begin to look enticingly vibrant.  (Not that I’ve ever spent anytime in a gated community you understand.  Although I did once spend two weeks at Centre Parcs and was very relieved to escape, er, I mean depart).  However, for many these well-ordered suburban enclaves that consist of friends, family and neighbours is exactly what’s required.  All the time.  And this is what the early-adopters, geeks and webnorati struggle to understand.  The gurus who rail against the vice-like grip of Steve Jobs brighter, lighter, whiter Appstore, or Zuckerberg’s perfectly manicured Facebook empire, overlook that most people don’t want to see what’s blocking their sinks.  And they don't mind if that hardwired convenience means the management is watching over them.  They just want to get on with their happy, gunk-free lives.

New Money

A couple of months ago I had the good fortune to hear Douglas Rushkoff expound his ideas about the changing nature of money and how private currencies could shift the way in which society organises its resources, loosening the grip of MegaCorps and even BigGov.  It was inspirational stuff and all very timely coming fresh on the heels of a financial meltdown driven by tricky derivatives traders and faceless ratings agencies plundering the goodwill of widows and orphans.  However, at the end of the talk Rushkoff, maybe suspecting his sober Swiss audience weren’t entirely convinced, found himself pressing that these ideas weren’t just pie-in-the-sky.  Now, while I don’t expect the world’s currency exchanges and the pound in your pocket to go anywhere soon, I was very happy to raise my hand and offer the room a few examples of where I thought Rushkoff’s private currencies were in action – albeit at a micro-level.  Firstly, I mentioned the Chinese Q coin, which is used by the 300 million users of the QQ instant messaging site to buy virtual goods.  Tencent, the owners of QQ recently revealed that 'internet value-added services,' or virtual goods, made up 78% of the company’s total revenue at the end of last year.  Enough to raise the company's international ambitions, including buying a stake in DST, the Russian company that owns a chunk of Facebook.  And Q Coins are now being accepted in exchange for ‘real’ goods on 3rd party sites, sufficiently broadly to raise the concern of the Chinese government.  I also highlighted the Second Life economy wrap-up that reads like a surreal corporate annual report, including tracking Linden Dollars and their transformation into ‘real money’ through the exchanges, LindeX or the Xstreet SL Exchange.  And, while not operating private currencies, I pointed to Etsy, Zopa and Betfair as examples of private marketplaces that are challenging the traditional corporate structures that Rushkoff believes will come under pressure.  These marketplaces range wildly in scale and nature.  Etsy is a giant P2P flea market where people sell each other about $22m of (often beautiful) homemade items, such as soaps they’ve made in their garden sheds.  Betfair is a vast £300m peer-to-peer gambling exchange.  Whereas Zopa is a P2P lending service.  All tiny in comparison to the industries in which they operate.  However, all very successful and growing like topsy.  And now we have Facebook Credits, the attempt by Mark Zuckerberg to create a currency in his world, that as it approaches 500m users is more populus than most countries.  Once again it’s all very early days.  At its outset, Facebook Credits is a way to unify...

'He Did Not Sell The News'

It's always a pleasure when a provocative comment appears on this blog.  And the splendid Brad Bell has left this response to my thoughts about the changing nature of anonymity online.  Here it is: "While I don't question the trend toward increasingly valuable (to everyone) real world identities, I don't see any possible reason anonymity is going away. 'On the internet, no one knows you are so many people.' (Anyone who wants to rid the network of anonymity, implicitly desires tyranny.) The ideal is a mix of multiple identities based on roles (professional, personal, familial, consumer, etc) and anonymity - as well as simply having the spectrum of choices. On the topic of 'free': despite crazy Rupert, it seems cultural belief systems have much less impact than real economic factors. Rupert seems to think there is a culture of 'free,' which can be changed with PR and leadership. Of course, that ignores the actual technological value of the global network: it radically lowers transaction costs. *That's* were the culture of free comes from. The costs of sharing information drop to the point where it resembles a glass of water in a restaurant. Secondly - it's *digital* information. People like Rupert and Mandelson seem to struggle to see that digital media implies the end of the analog business of selling content. (In the analog world, selling content worked because copies of copies introduced noise, whereas copies of digital media are clones of the original.) Like 'free', this is often presented as a cultural belief, like a kind of negative consumer demand. This kind of thinking leads to attempts to legislate digital devices in an attempt to stop them from acting like digital devices, and legislating people into a digital panopticon, relying on dataveillance to solve problems ranging from outmoded business models to terrorism. In fact, we are being asked to buy into a technological fairy tale in order to preserve the status quo - and the costs to us are simply staggering. It's easy to forget Rupert sold paper with news printed on it. He did not sell the news."  Certainly got me thinking.