Showing posts with label Future. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Future. Show all posts

Monday, July 26, 2010

Tomorrow's Buzzword: Media Design


Faithful followers know I have a soft spot for buzzwords. While some people loathe them for their overuse and inability to really say anything, I heart them for their ability to give us a common language and describe (even if generically) emerging concepts.

One phrase that hasn't gotten much attention to date is "Media Design." Why? Well, quite simply it hasn't been really introduced. One man is out to change that, though.

Saneel Radia (not pictured above), formerly of Improv Olympic Chicago fame, is the recently appointed Director of Media Innovation at BBH Labs. His role there? Essentially, bringing the idea of "Media Design" to fruition after incubating it for the past few years at Denuo.

So what is Media Design? I have to admit, it took me a while to grasp the concept. Not because it's invalid or unimportant, but because it's a true paradigm-shifter. Yikes, there I go with the buzzwords again!

As Saneel puts it, Media Design represents "the missing skills within the advertising agency creative departments." In fact, that's the subtitle of Saneel's thesis completed in July of '09 for his MBA in Creative Leadership at the Berlin School.

The 70+ page paper -- which Saneel was kind enough to share with me -- makes the case (successfully, I might add) for the importance of Media Design as a discipline and the Media Designer as a critical role within creative shops.

With Saneel's permission, I'm posting the excerpts from his thesis that most resonated with me. As you read these, you can see how Saneel's thoughtfulness and ability to produce punchy soundbytes may have been shaped by his mentor and Denuo founder, Rishad Tobaccowala.

---

On the connectedness of today's consumers:

"When the world was dominated by a traditional media model, advertisers had two major advantages when engaging consumers. First, the vast majority of media consumption occurred from a single source: the content creator. In other words, as television networks broadcasted content, most people who consumed this content were receiving the broadcast, rather than receiving it from a third party. Thus, brand messages needed only to be placed within content moving linearly from a single origin to engage the vast majority of users. In fact, the relationship between the content itself and the ad message placed within it was a secondary or tertiary consideration, with the primary concern being what demographic audience was consuming the content. Of course, a relationship has always existed; audiences tend to follow loose patterns (e.g., sports content is consumed primarily by male viewers), but the content itself rarely prevented brand message insertion."

On the social media model:

"First, it means brands are actually competing for attention with the very consumers they are attempting to engage. Second, in a new media model, consumers are clearly in control. They create the content, decide who and what they connect with, and generally outline the rules of those engagements."

"If a brand’s message or experience isn’t easily portable, doesn’t provide any natural reason for consumers to share it amongst themselves, or doesn’t live organically within the new social media model, the brand is drastically handicapping its messaging potential."

On the need for non-standard creative ideation:

"The experience can simply not be standardized as it was in traditional media. Thus, it does not exist in most ad agencies because they are built to deliver creative ideas in standardized environments."

On the need for new media creative ideas to evolve:

"When crafting creative ideas limited to traditional environments, agencies rarely had to think about the experience as anything other than a message; it was up to the client to provide service and responses, in many cases, not even the same individual responsible for marketing."

On the misprioritization of technology:

"The issue though is that technologies are downstream in the creative process and primarily impact how an idea manifests or how users experience it; they rarely determine if the creative idea itself is an effective platform to engage a brand’s target consumers."

Quoting Hashem Bawja, former New Media Director at Goodby Silverstein:

"Regardless of how the engagement has changed, the best creative ideas are still the ones built from a true and compelling insight into people's lives."

On why creative agencies employ antiquated models:

"The answer can of course be found by following the profits. As traditional creative departments have become less profitable over the last fifteen years, they’ve relied more and more heavily on marking up production to drive profits. As the FTE model has continued to yield lower blended hourly retainer rates while agency compensation for employees has increased, the profit margin has eroded significantly. In other words, clients are spending a smaller percentage of budgets on retaining Creatives in relation to their investment in media and digital production. As stated above, digital creative departments integrate production into their process; this has allowed agencies to establish profit by producing executions in house."

"Any client that listens to an agency attempt to sell a creative idea that requires in-house production at the agency should immediately consider the validity of the recommendation. Is the agency truly attempting to help drive the brand’s business forward, or is it attempting to drive its own?"

On the shift from branded micro-sites to social media:

"The reason is clear: consumers are spending more time in these environments and they tend to be in exploratory mindsets as they surf profiles and updates. It’s much easier to engage a consumer looking for something to do than one in the middle of an objective that must be lured to a micro-site via a banner ad."

On understanding the Media Design concept:

"First, a new frame of reference is needed about the output of creative departments, specifically differentiating ideas vs. their executions. Next, the lines around what constitutes advertising must be redrawn and blurred to some degree as the traditional lines between product, advertising and experience are simply not clear within most new media."

On the role of creative agencies:

"Creative departments are in the ideas business."

"Today’s creative ideas must be broader, more flexible, more modular, utilitarian, and more diverse."

On the role of the Media Designer:

"Philosophically, Media Designers do not approach media as containers for the placement of uniform executions of ideas, as was highly efficient in a traditional media model. Instead, Media Designers view media as a canvas upon which are ideas are placed. More accurately, media is a collection of unique canvases, each of which has a dramatic and distinct impact on the creative manifestation itself."

"The Media Designer's primary tool is 'media' itself, of all types and formats... 'Media' is defined as any environment, virtual or physical, in which consumers may engage brands."

"Media Designers understand channel impact on content."

"Media Designers leverage media as a consumer lens... One key skill set of the Media Designer is the ability to use media as an input as adeptly as he or she uses it as an output."

"Media Designers craft media-scalable ideas. One clear distinction when approaching media as a canvas vs. as a container is understanding the striations of users across a medium and engaging them differently to maximize a creative idea’s potential. For example, YouTube receives about 89 million unique users a month [as of May 2009]. A 'container' philosophy sees this as the total possible universe reachable via advertising on YouTube. However, the audience itself can be cut an infinite number of ways, many of which will yield different outcomes based on variations on the same creative idea."

On Burger King's Whopper Sacrifice Facebook App:

"The creative idea's relationship with its medium was circular."

On why Media Design is such a foreign concept to creative shops:

"The issue currently though is that not enough relevant skills exist in most creative departments to ensure relevant conception, primarily because of the void resulting from an absence in media sensibility."

On why the industry is ripe for Media Design:

"The model is appropriate for agencies now that brand engagement has been so dramatically impacted by the new media revolution. It weaves media into the fabric of the original idea, the key reason most work is rejected by consumers today."

On managing expectations:

"Media Design is not intended as a panacea for any agency, but it certainly provides a tangible and achievable set of expertise that must be secured, then deployed as appropriate in the environment of that particular agency. In order to be successful, most agencies will require some form of reinvention. Media Design is proposed as a key step in that reinvention process for the majority of agencies around the globe."

---

Can you imagine Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce employing Media Designers? Me neither. That's one of the many reasons why SCDP would not be flourishing in today's ad world. (I'd imagine health care and HR costs would be among the others).

Media Design is both revolutionary and evolutionary. It's an approach built to manage the complexities of today's digital world while paying homage to the tried and true principles of successful advertising that have proven to work over the years across shifts in media, technology, and culture.

It will be very interesting to see how long it takes for the Media Design concept to catch on in creative agencies. I do believe it's a matter of "when" not "if" though. And, "if" it doesn't happen at Bartle Bogle Hegarty, look for Radia Goldman coming soon to a mad ave near you.

Wednesday, May 5, 2010

I am Siri-ous and Don’t Call Me Shirley!

Leslie Nielsen AirplaneImage Source

As promised, in today’s Search Insider column, I cover Apple’s acquisition of Siri in the context of its ambitions to change the way we think of mobile and search marketing.

I asked my Twitter followers to weigh in with other good Siri puns and @telerob inspired the title to this post. Here are some others I like:

1. Siri-al (Google) Killer
2. Mis-Siri Loves Company
3. A-Siri-an Nation
4. World Siri-es Champ
5. Look out Siri-han Siri-han
6. Siri-sucker Suit
7. Montes-Siri Education
8. Siri-ndipitous Turn of Events
9. The Sooth-Siri Sees All
10. Healthy Does of Triglyc-Siri-ide

In my next Search Insider column, I’ll share highlights from my interview with Siri CEO, Dag Kittlaus. Meantime, I need to Siri-ously get a life.

Here's the blurb...

Apple Is Siri-ous About Search

Nearly one year ago, fellow Search Insider Gord Hotchkiss declared, "Search needs an iPhone." With this "mobile Web and computing device.... [Apple] intended to vault over the competition, changing the rules and opening a new marketplace. Apple strategists had nothing short of revolution on their minds."

Two recent events make it pretty clear that Apple feels the same way about search as it does/did about the phone.
» 5 Comments

Friday, November 6, 2009

Eternal Questions

ThinkerImage Source

Check out the Connectual blog for my musings on 2 eternal questions recently posed by MediaPost...

Where Are We Going? (What will the future of media look like?)

You Asking Me? (Who will buy Ask.com?)

Wednesday, April 1, 2009

Does the Carpet Match the Drapes?

As I hinted at in my Hunch review, today's Search Insider builds on the topic of why people search to explore why search marketing is so prolific -- and how important it is that the point of both search and search marketing match. In that framework, I ponder what it would take for a new platform (ala Hunch) to leapfrog Google.

Here's the blurb...

What's The Point Of Search Marketing?

In my last column, I tried to put some context around future search innovation by asking, "What's the point of search?" Cribbing from Wikipedia's definition for matching theory, I landed on solving problems by using math or science to remove friction and create economically favorable outcomes for all. If this, indeed, is the point of search, then what's the point of search marketing?

Google Mind is Here... sorta.

I told you this day would come!

Today, Google revealed CADIE -- "the world's first Cognitive Autoheuristic Distributed-Intelligence Entity."

CADIE

Here's an excerpt from the CADIE tech specs: "We started this project as a continuation of mankind's perpetual quest to learn the nature of reason and what defines us as humans."

Of course, CADIE has her own blog. I think my daughter's blog is much cooler, though -- granted, Eliara is a year and 3 days older than Cadie.

Will be interesting to see what Google does next! Still waiting for Google Home.

P.S. yes, I know this was a Google April Fool's Day gag.

Friday, March 27, 2009

Is There a Google Killer Out There? I Have a Hunch.

Longtime readers of my Search Insider column will know I'm always on the lookout for Google Killers. If you need to catch up, here are the links:

Not-So-Natural-Born Google Killers

More Not-So-Natural-Born Google Killers

Even More Not-So-Natural-Born Google Killers

Still More Not-So-Natural-Born Google Killers

This series focused on what I called "not-so-natural-born" Google killers -- companies, individuals, and institutions (e.g. Wall Street, the Government, Amazon, eBay, end-users, etc.) that stood in the way of Google taking its perch atop the $500 billion global ad world.

You see, I had already dismissed the notion that a "natural-born" Google killer -- aka fancy new search engine -- would emerge. I've long held the belief that the Google habit is too well-formed.

Well, folks, we just may have a true contender in our midsts. And no, I'm not talking about Twitter (which, you'd have known if you read my last Search Insider piece -- What's the Point of Search?) As I said in my column, the point of search is to solve problems by using math or science to remove friction and create economically favorable outcomes for all.

Cue Caterina Fake, co-founder of Flickr. Today, she previewed her new project, Hunch, on her blog. What's the point of Hunch? In Caterina's words...

"Look. Decision-making is difficult, and decisions have to be made constantly. What should I be for Halloween? Do I need a Porsche? Does my hipster facial hair make me look stupid? Is Phoenix a good place to retire? Whom should I vote for? What toe ring should I buy?

It's dark and lonely work. Coin-flipping, I Ching consultation, closing your eyes and jumping, postponing the inevitable, Rock-Paper-Scissors, and asking your sister are all time-honored means of coming to a decision [Aaron here: Wonder why she didn't include Googling in this list of ways people make decisions?] -- and yet we think there's room for one more: Hunch.

Hunch is a decision-making site, customized for you. Which means Hunch gets to know you, then asks you 10 questions about a topic (usually fewer!), and provides a result -- a Hunch, if you will. It gives you results it wouldn't give other people."

Now we're talking! Caterina found the words I couldn't to describe the point of search. It's not about solving problems using math, science, or magic. It's not about economically favorable outcomes, yadda yadda. OK, it is about all those things. But all those things are encapsulated in this one simple concept -- decision making. That's what search is all about. And by recognizing this and building an entire platform around it, I have a hunch Caterina may have a shot at slaying the beast.

Update 3/30: Ok, I just got my invite to join Hunch today. Here's what I've found in my 30 minutes poking around...

First, to compile your profile and get a feel for who you are, Hunch asks you a series of questions ranging from fashion style to views on political issues to lettuce preferences.

Romaine or Iceberg?

I took about 10 minutes to answer no less than 143 questions about myself -- although they told me I only had to answer 10. From there, I finished filling out my profile, adding a pic and some basic personal info.

Then I toggled back to the homepage and saw my customized layout.

Click image for larger view
Hunch.com Homepage

The first thing I noticed was the "query bar" at the top was unlike any search box I've seen before. Here I'm told not to input some dumb keywords, rather describe what decision I need to make...

Hunch Decision Bar

When you put a "decision" into the bar, you get a drop down (ala query refinement) showing other "decisions" similar to yours that already have results. I found the relevance here to be spotty at best. (But c'mon, the site's only been live for a few months and admittedly will get smarter over time with more usage.)

Mortgage Refinance query

The next thing that caught my eye was the feed of topics in the middle of the page. Here are actual "decisions" being made/posed by other "decision-makers." (Is that the right verbiage? These aren't "searchers" and you know how I feel about the term "users!")

There are tabs showing Featured, Random, Newest, and For You. So this is the basically the browse function. Again, I'm sure it will get more relevant and useful over time but I do like the Twitter aspect here to see real-time "decisions" (and the accompanying conversations) going on out there. Reminds me of YouTube as both a destination and a search engine...

Hunch Topics

Given my interest in Hunch as the potential Google killer, I decided to post my first topic on Google vs. Hunch and see what type of response I get...

Hunch vs. Google

I'll report back as the crowd (and algorithm) goes to town on my query and as I dig in further to the application. So far though, my hunch seems to be correct.

Update 3/30 #2: Been thinking about how Hunch will monetize. After all, you can't kill Google with good looks alone, right? Seems to me the answer here goes beyond standard sponsored listings -- although they could certainly backfill with AdWords/AdSense to get some immediate revenue.

There's no question that brands play a role in the decisions people make. Whether it be where to travel, what movie to see or even, per my example earlier today, how to make a good salad. The one thing that unites all good brands is they know there target audience. Based on the 134 questions I answered today (and that's before I quit -- there were plenty more!) Hunch knows me pretty well too.

Perhaps brands could pay for "product placement" in the algorthimic results -- a little paid inclusion, if you will.

From the How Hunch Works page: "Hunch's question selection algorithm tries to do two things. First, it tries to find a question which will discriminate well among the remaining possible decision outcomes for you - thus filtering the remaining choices from "many" to "fewer". Second, the algorithm looks for a question which can help optimize and rank the remaining decision results to present you with the ones you'll like the most. It's trying to ensure that you'll like outcome #1 better than outcome #5."

If brands go thru and answer the 100+ question diagnostic about their target audience, Hunch will be able to match their products and services to the right people for the right decisions. What brand wouldn't pay for that type of placement? And what decision-maker wouldn't be happy to receive brand-laden results? (As long as they were relevant.)

Here's more about How Hunch Works: "When a user clicks "Yes" or "No" to indicate whether or not they like a decision result, Hunch incrementally strengthens or weakens the mathematical correlation between that result and any 'Teach Hunch About You' questions that have been answered so far. So over time, Hunch might learn that people living in cities tend to prefer diet sodas, or that SCUBA divers tend to like bicycles with lots of gears. (we just made those examples ups, but you get the idea.) The academic name for this sort of algorithm is machine learning."

This takes the concept for the crowd-sourced search engine I outlined 5 months ago on the RM blog (which allows you to toggle results based on the preferences of various audience segments) one step further. Rather than just show you web assets that might be useful, Hunch actually shows you decisions (or outcomes) that might be useful.

Back to monetization -- so we have a sponsored listings model and a paid inclusion model. I can also see a Mint.com-like model where "decision-makers" can upload their personal finance information to Hunch for the algo to make specific decisions around how to invest their money. Like Mint, Hunch could get paid on a lead gen basis by all the providers.

Or perhaps this could be a subscription-service with no advertising. Once they get people hooked on the service and knowing their ins-and-outs, it shouldn't be too hard to port them over to paying a monthly fee. After all, if people have invested time into Hunch getting to know them, and Hunch is saving them time when making decisions, it would follow that people would be happy to pay for some advanced service.

OK, that's enough fawning over Hunch for one day. Stay tuned for my Search Insider column on Wed. which will pick up where I left off 2 weeks ago with, "What's the Point of Search?" and, yep, your hunch was right, bring it back full circle to this thread.

Update 3/31: Interesting thread unfolding in the comments... Chris Dixon from Hunch stopped by to weigh in, suggesting that Hunch is not a Google-killer, rather a complement to Google. I appreciate the humility and that got me thinking about how smart with their go-to-market strategy is -- which spawned my Are you Hunch-worthy? post.

As for Hunch's Google-killer potential, I stand by my claim. As I said in my response to Chris, searching for results, answers, facts, etc. is just one small step in the decision-making process. If Hunch can get to know us so well that we can skip all those steps and get right to the decision, we'll have forgotten all about the Big G and be all about the Heady H.

Update 6/11: According to the Hunch fact sheet the monetization plan is as follows...

"Some of the decision result pages on Hunch link to external sites where users can purchase the product or service that Hunch proposed. If they do, Hunch may earn a referral fee from the merchant."

The FAQ goes on to state that this sort of affiliate relationship will have no bearing on the results it provides. So I guess I was right with my guess about paid inclusion. Only seems right that Fake's Yahoo blood (recall she sold Flickr to Y!) has her blurring the church and state lines with Hunch.

Wednesday, March 18, 2009

Pointing to the Point

In today's Search Insider column, I try to put all the buzz around Twitter and it's application to search in context. Rather than annoint the "real-time search engine" as the Google killer, we need to really think about what the point of search is. I don't think it's about finding results or even answers (regardless of if they're "real-time") -- it's about solving problems. And I don't think that can be done in 140 characaters.

Here's the blurb...

What's the Point Of Search?

I've tackled some heady questions over the years as a Search Insider -- "Why Can't Everything Be Searchable?" "Will Search Personalization Create Self-Fulfilling Prophecies?" "Should We Fear Ambient Findability?" "Is MyLifeBits the Future of Personalized Search?" And who could forget, "Is Search Rocket Science?" Today, I'll go for the jugular: What's the point of search?

Thursday, March 12, 2009

Google Voice: What's Next... Google Home? Google Mind?

Future of Google Search

Today Google announced the rebranding of GrandCentral (a company it acquired in 2007) as Google Voice. The NY Times has a thorough (and effusive, I might add) write-up of the platform and features.

In a nutshell, Google Voice consolidates all your phone numbers into one master line and allows you to do things like control which phone rings when certain people call, which outgoing voicemail message is played for certain people, transfer calls from one line to another, etc... all for free!

The feature that caught my eye as a recovering search marketer is this one (as reported by the NYT)...

"FREE VOICE MAIL TRANSCRIPTIONS. From now on, you don’t have to listen to your messages in order; you don’t have to listen to them at all. In seconds, these recordings are converted into typed text. They show up as e-mail messages or text messages on your cellphone. This is huge. It means that you can search, sort, save, forward, copy and paste voice mail messages."

They day has come... Google has now made your phone searchable. I suppose it was only a matter of time. At Resolution Media, we'd been predicting that for years -- witness the graphic above that's been part of our general presentation quite some time.

Of course 3 of the other tabs on this mock-up have already come to (and, in some cases, gone from) fruition -- TV, Radio, and Print.

I like to think that it's inevitable that Google will one day be able to make your house searchable and even your (and other people's) mind searchable. I got at this a bit in my 2006 Search Insider column -- Why Can't Everything Be Searchable?

Another interesting thread around Google Voice is that of the Voice Search Optimization practice that it's bound to spawn. If voice mails and text messages are now stored in the cloud and accessible on demand via query, you can bet that marketers will figure out ways to make sure their messages pop up atop an individual's phone index.

"Hello, Aaron. This is Shelly from the March for Dimes. Would you consider making a $20 donation today? Your mom would be proud of you."

So when I search my phone messages for "Aaron," "Shelley," or "Mom," the March of Dimes voicemail transcript would come up.

SEO's, start your engines!

CIMA Survey #6: Trends in Interactive Marketing

Tonight I'll be moderating a panel at the first CIMA byte of the year. We'll be kicking it off with the release of the results of CIMA's 6th bi-annual survey on the state of the interactive marketing industry.

Troy Mastin, analyst to the stars, er... CIMA will be presenting the research and has given me a sneak preview. Here are the 5 key insights he's pulled out of the data (along with my comments.)

1. A sharp decline in the health of the industry noted. (No surprise here.)

2. Economic conditions and industry dynamics impacting vertical categories. (CPG up, auto/finance down... again no surprise.)

3. Rich media and search seen as strongest established tactics; Mobile and social represent the most interesting areas of growth. (The fact that rich media outscored search suprised me. I've seen display budgets getting cut faster than search but maybe all the buzz around Hulu skewed people's responses.)

4. Google and Facebook seen as the Industry leaders but “up and coming” solutions continue to fragment the landscape. (Interesting that Facebook is seen as a leader despite very poor monetization.)

5. Direct marketing viewed as better insulated than advertising for the first time. (When in Rome, er... Recession...)

After Troy presents the research, I'll lead a discussion with this esteemed panel:

-Brian Mandelbaum, Vice President, Interactive Group Media Director, Cramer-Krasselt
-Michael Kahn, SVP, Marketing, Performics\VivaKi Nerve Center
-Julie Wainwright, CEO, SmartNow.com
-Joe Laszlo, Director of Research, Interactive Advertising Bureau

If you weren't able to pre-register for this event, unfortunately we're not taking walk-ups. But I'm pretty sure we'll be recording the event and posting to the CIMA site so you can catch up on the dialogue and what color shirt I was wearing. (Hint: some might call it lavender.)

UPDATE 3/25: Troy's presentation has been posted to the CIMA site and event pics are up on Picasa. Here's one of me getting cozy with the panelists:


CIMA March Event Panel

Yes it was a good discussion...

Can you hear me in the back? Good!

Thursday, January 8, 2009

2009 Outlook for Search: 95 Characters at a Time

In yesterday's Search Insider I busted out a little search Haiku. If Haiku 1.0 was 5, 7, 5 syllables, Haiku 2.0 is 25, 35, 35 characters.

Click Here To Read
The Full Post; Methinks You'll Get
A Kick Out of It But I Won't Boast.

Thursday, December 25, 2008

Reviewing My 2008 Predictions

On Tuesday, I linked to my post on the RM Blog outlining 10 predictions for search marketing in 2009.

Today, I thought it would be fun to review my predictions for 2008 to see how I did. At the end of 2007, I used my Search Insider Buzz-o-Meter column to lay out the following predictions:

1. "Google to bow display ads on SERPs after the DoubleClick deal closes."

2. "More consolidation in the [agency] space, with large shops scooping up specialized search firms as they acknowledge how critical search is to all aspects of marketing and realize how hard it is to build search expertise in-house."

3. "More and more search firms [will] stick a flag in the sand regarding their core expertise -- some will embrace all forms of performance-based media, others will develop full-service digital marketing capabilities led by 'search-think,' and still others will remain true to query-based marketing only."

4. "Facebook to have a major impact on the search marketing landscape in '08, whether it be incorporating Web search (via MSN?), reacting to news feed optimization or spawning regulation around data portability."

5. "A[n economic] pullback could actually be good for search -- when times are tough, marketers load up on platforms with proven ROI -- I also think it could stunt innovation, with the Big 4 unwilling to take chances and upstarts unable to get funding."

6. "Search marketers to figure out how to leverage widgets beyond the mere link-popularity benefits."

7. "The next wave of opportunity is likely in the torso -- after all, as the tail gets longer, the belly gets fatter."

8. "[Microsoft's KSP platform aka AdIntelligence] will make search marketers smarter in '08, and hopefully it will push Google and Yahoo towards becoming more transparent with their data (although I'm not betting on that.)"

Now, to steal a page from Paul Harvey, "for the rest of the story..."

1. Wrong. Didn't happen outside a tiny pocket of experimentation with banners on Google Image results.

2. Sorta. iProspect gobbled up Range Online Media. Publicis snapped up Performics. That was about it though. Instead of acquisitions, we saw a trend towards large agency holding companies infusing resources from their search specialist shops into individual agency brands (eg, WPP creating Group M Search and infusing search talent into Mindshare, Mediaedge, and MediaCom).

3. Right. Search agencies definitely chose sides this past year. As I pointed out in yesterday's Search Insider column, Didit is positioning itself as a "company providing bid management services." 360i kept its "Search-Informed Marketing" approach but acquired creative shop i33 to deliver full-service solutions. Meanwhile, Resolution Media stuck with its laser-focus on Query Marketing (although per prediction #9, look to see expansion here). There were more examples but these 3 check each of the boxes I outlined in my prediction so we'll move along.

4. Sorta. As I suspected, Facebook finally launched web search in tandem with Microsoft but it didn't exactly set the search world on fire. Data portability was a hot topic with the launch of Google Friend Connect but regulation in the space came not from the government as I expected but self-imposed practices from folks like Yahoo shortening the duration of personal data storage to 90 days.

5. Wrong. The recession might not have been bad for search (after all, flat is the new up, right?), but it wasn't good for it either. And innovation among the Big 4 may have slowed but it certainly wasn't stunted. Google rolled out SearchWiki, Microsoft rolled out a number of cool features like Farecast integration and more (see my comments on this post), and Yahoo, despite being battered the most, still managed to roll out Search Monkey as part of its open initiative. Meanwhile, the search for the Google killer continued as startups like Cuil raised cash and launched to very little acclaim.

6. Wrong. 2008 was a big year for widgets, although they're now more commonly referred to as applications thanks to Facebook and the iPhone. Not much application for search marketers though.

7. Wrong. The power of the long tail shone mightier than ever in '08, helping Obama take the White House. There was much debate at the recent Search Insider Summit over the relevance of the long tail to search marketers with no clear consensus. The torso did emerge in a big way this year, just not from a search standpoint. Rather the torso reared its ugly, er, head as vertical ad networks become the "it" thing in online display media.

8. Right. MSFT AdIntel made Resolution Media much smarter search marketers this year. And, sure enough, Google followed suit becoming more transparent with absolute search volume data and a nifty Insights for Search tool.

If I take half-credit for the sorta's, the tally puts me at 38% accuracy. I certainly went out on a few more limbs with my '09 predictions so it will be interesting to see how I fare this coming year. One thing we can all bank on (sorry, bad word choice) for '09 -- it ain't gonna be pretty.

Tuesday, December 23, 2008

What a Difference a Year Will Make

Today I peered into my crystal ball (not to be confused with my Magic Obama 8 Ball) to see what 2009 would bring for the search marketing community.

Below are my 10 predictions. Check out the full post on the Resolution Media blog.

1. Yahoo will be broken up and sold off.

2. Google will offer DART Search for free.

3. Omniture will acquire Covario and incorporate it into its Genesis suite.

4. One of the Big 4 search engines will bow display ads on SERPs.

5. Microsoft will enhance its search results by incorporating the social graph.

6. Google will have a major privacy slip-up and experience serious consumer backlash.

7. Mobile will become a staple of search marketing programs.

8. Search marketers will focus more on post-click activity.

9. Search agencies will expand their offerings beyond “pure” search.

10. I will finally get around to launching GoodSEMBadSEM.com, GoodPPCBadPPC.com, and GoodSEOBadSEO.com.

Friday, October 3, 2008

Better Late Than Never

It turns out the piece I wrote for Federated Media's Future of Search site -- The Path to Ambient Findability -- was published today. If you'll recall, I posted the full version as the inagural entry on this blog since I had written it nearly 6 months ago and wanted to make sure it saw the light of day.

It was not easy editing that sucker down to meet their specs but hopefully you'll agree the integrity of the post remains intact. I'm honored to be in the company of John Battelle and Danny Sullivan as the 3rd "expert" to opine on the future of search. Now, let's see who turns out to be right! :)

Wednesday, October 1, 2008

The Future is Googley

In today's Search Insider column, I look into the crystal ball at what the search track at future OMMA conferences might look like. Had a lot of fun writing this one. Even managed to squeeze in an Office reference -- both the BBC and NBC versions, mind you.

Here's the excerpt...

An OMMA Journey: Search Future
Posted October 1st, 2008 by Aaron Goldman
At Friday’s keynote during the OMMA conference, Nigel Morris of Isobar relayed this quote from a conversation he had with Google’s country manager in Belgium: “All agencies are [the] middleman and we want to destroy you.” Now I’d like to think I know good British humor when I see it — I’ll take David Brent over Michael Scott any day — but I couldn’t tell if Mr. Morris was joking here. Regardless, it got me thinking about the context in which we’ll be talking about Google — and search — at future OMMA shows. So here’s a glimpse of what select Search Insider track sessions might look like over the next 10 years.

Thursday, August 28, 2008

Behold the Promise of the Semantic Web

The Semantic Web is topic I’ve been fascinated with for some time. And it’s part of the reason I decided to get into the search space. After all, searching is the first step towards finding and acting. And it’s the combination of these 3 elements that make the promise of the Semantic Web so appealing.

Yesterday, I was tipped off to a new product being rolled out by Mozilla that represents a huge advancement towards realizing that promise. Dubbed Ubiquity, the tool allows you to click control-space (or whatever command you choose) and type in natural language to act on whatever web content you’re viewing.

For example, if you’re looking at an address, you can highlight it and type “map-this” and a Google map will pop up. Then you can type “email this to jimmy” and it will scrape your address book for people named Jimmy and compose a new email to that person.

What I like most about this product is that it’s out there. I mean that in both ways. It’s “out there” in terms of futuristic artificially intelligent web functionality. And it’s “out there” in terms of actually being up and running today. Rather than wait for the technology to get good enough to decipher intent from our activity, here’s a tool that learns as it goes and has some easy, practical things you can do with it immediately.

Kuods to Mozilla Labs for pushing the envelope here and creating an exciting and innovative product. I encourage everyone with a stake in the future of digital marketing and content to view the demo and start playing around with the product. The applications truly are limitless.

Friday, August 22, 2008

Are Cameras the New Cookies?

I just came across a New York Times article about billboards with cameras that track passersby.

These cameras are trained to detect when people are front of the billboard and analyze their facial features to determine age, gender, even race. In turn, the ad can be tailored to the audience.

Profile Me Not

Somehow the Times manages to find some average Joe consumers willing to go on record saying they don't mind -- "Someone down the street can watch you looking at it -- why not a camera?"

But the vast majority of those polled are creeped out by this practice.

Nonetheless, the fact that some people out there are ok with it will only give hope to companies like the one rolling out these boards. It won't be long before we reach Minority Report state -- remember when Tom Cruise is walking through the mall and the ads are calling out to him by name?

Now, I'm all for making traditional media more accountable but this seems to be crossing the line. I'd much rather see consumer-initiated out-of-home ads where people can interact with the screen and self-profile.

I wonder if people would find this practice more acceptable if the cameras weren't being used to profile people but solely to count traffic?

Tracking vs. Targeting

There's lots of discussion right now about how the ISP's and portals use data collected on the web, especially after the House Committee on Energy and Commerce (can someone please explain to me why those 2 are grouped together?) ordered 33 companies, including Google and Comcast, to provide details about how they are collecting and using personal (and non-personally identifiable) data.

Once again, the Times has good coverage of these developments. It points to a company called NebuAd which is working with the ISPs to gather intelligence on their users and behaviorally target ads to them.

In the early days of the web, tracking software was used solely to measure ad effectiveness (ie, counting impressions, clicks, and sales.) Again, like these new billboards, I wonder if people (and Congress) would be all up in arms with privacy concerns if the technology was only being used to track and not target?

Power to the People

At the end of the day, I don't think it matters how companies use the data they collect -- tracking, targeting, whatever. What matters is if and how they obtain consent from consumers to do it.

Most people today are not creeped out by the fact that a company might know something intimate about them. Heck, everyone and their mother (including mine as of last week) has a Facebook or MySpace profile telling the world their most intimate secrets, er... status updates.

It only becomes creepy when they don't know or aren't asked about how that information is being used. As evidence, look no further than Facebook's debacles rolling out the news feed (which everyone loves now) and Beacon (which will take some time to catch on).

I'm not sure how companies like Quividi (which is behind the billboard cameras) will be able to inform and consent passersby -- something tells me a footnote at the bottom of each board isn't going to cut it. That said, since they're a relatively small company with very few boards, they may be able to get away with it. You can bet the minute Clear Channel rolls something like this out, though, the general public (and Congress) will be all over it like stink on a monkey.

As far as the online ad world goes, most of the behavioral targeting companies have very clear opt-outs and stated privacy policies. And I think consumers are starting to realize the value in having ads that are relevant to them (we can all thank Google for that) as opposed to what they had before -- punch the monkey, smiley central, etc.

However, I staunchly believe the best (and only) policy is a true opt-in. And I'll take it one step further -- it's not enough to get people to opt-in, we have to cut them in. That's right, we have to give them a cut of the action. They know someone's getting rich off these ads -- whether it be the website they're visiting or the advertiser they're seeing, they know someone's making money at their expense.

My solution? Stay tuned...

Monday, August 18, 2008

The Path to Ambient Findability

Note: I penned this piece for Federated Media's Future of Search site a few months ago but they haven't published it yet so I'll use it as the debut post for this blog. What better framework by which to speculate on what the digital sea change will bring about than by analyzing the platform that irreversably changed the marketing model from push to pull?

The best way to prepare for the future is to look at -- and learn from -- the past. Danny Sullivan demonstrated that as he took us through Search 1.0 and 2.0 as a framework by which we can think about Search 3.0 today and 4.0 tomorrow.

I’m going to take a different approach -- let’s call it the next best way to prepare for the future. To get a sense for what search might look like in five to ten years, I suggest we probe far beyond that and work our way backwards.

Join me on the path to ambient findability.

Them’s Big Words

A phrase coined by Peter Morville and the topic of his fascinating book, ambient findability refers to the all-encompassing ability to be locatable or navigable.

I explored this topic in depth across three Search Insider columns, ruminating on what it means for personalization, the potential downside, and select quotes from the book in the context of search marketing.

The Cliff Notes version is that ambient findability speaks to a world in which everything and everyone can be indexed and found anywhere at any time.

Heady stuff, aye? You might say Morville’s got his head in the clouds. The real question, though, is if it’s the Google cloud -- more on that later.

Work With Me Here

For now, let’s put aside all the challenges associated with reaching the point of pervasive computing that would activate ambient findability. Morville devotes the first couple chapters of his book to addressing these hurdles and, while they are not small leaps, they are certainly not insurmountable -- especially if we pause and look back at how far we’ve come since Al Gore invented the Internet some thirty-odd years ago.

In fact, there are tangible examples of corporations harnessing the power of ambient findability today. One great example is the MyLifeBits project being conducted by Microsoft. I’ve written three columns about MyLifeBits focusing on its impact on personalization, ability to succeed, and application to search marketing.

In a nutshell, MyLifeBits is a memex (memory extender) created by digitizing and indexing an individual’s entire life -- online/phone chats, media consumed, pictures of people/objects encountered, etc. -- and, of course, making it all searchable.

You can view the demo for yourself but, suffice it to say, the technology needed to achieve ambient findability is here today. The only question is when it will become ubiquitous.

Finding’s Just the Half of It

The implications of ambient findability are profound. Per Gordon Bell and Jim Gemmell, the brains behind MyLifeBits, the ultimate goal of the project is
"complementary computing, where the computer understands human limitations and fills in the gaps." In other words, once they’ve built a massive index of everything in a person’s life, they can create "a machine that can act like a personal assistant, anticipating its user's needs."

What they’re getting at here is essentially Tim Berners-Lee’s vision for the Semantic Web -- a platform whereby objects are not only findable but can communicate with each other. To envision how this plays out, consider Berners-Lee’s scenario in which a guy gets a call from his sister about their mom’s recent health issues. The man’s Web “agent” then looks up a treatment, identifies a local specialist, cross-references the doctor’s ratings and acceptable insurance plans, and books an appointment.

Show Me The Money

Jerry Maguire, this “agent” is not. We’re not even talking about Deep Blue here. This is artificial intelligence at its finest. This is Google search meets Amazon recommendations meets eBay ratings meets Microsoft Outlook Calendar meets Facebook news feed. And layer it over a Powerset platform -- or even better, IBM WebFountain -- so it can be done using natural language.

Clearly, all these companies aren’t joining forces anytime soon -- although Microsoft did just buy Powerset. And clearly, Steve Ballmer can’t fund a MyLifeBits project for everyone in the world. Or can it? Google has proven that investing in cloud-computing technologies that help people digitize their lives -- Gmail, Book Search, Google Earth, Blogger, Picasa, YouTube, etc. -- leads to more search queries which leads to more ad revenue.

So is search advertising a sustainable model for a world of ambient findability? Maybe. As long as we define search advertising not as keyword textlinks but as query marketing.

No Longer in the Minority

We are already beginning to see brands woven into the fabric of our digital lives just like any other asset we own -- or hope to own. Marketing in a world of ambient findability takes this to the next level, manifesting in two potential outcomes.

One is that marketing messages are presented in a relevant, non-interruptive manner based on our stated intent through queries or implied intent through our past behavior and that of our peers. In this case, advertising actually adds value to our daily activities. Back to Berners-Lee’s scenario -- after that doctor appointment, picture your Web “agent” scanning offers from pharma advertisers and querying your friend’s and family’s experiences before filling the prescription with the brand that’s the best fit for you.

The other outcome conjures up images of Minority Report, where Tom Cruise walks through a mall and is bombarded by “personalized” offers -- “John Anderton, you could use a Guinness right about now.” It’s also reminiscent of the Dave Chappelle skit where he’s walking around the “Internet” only to get stopped every couple feet by pop-ups for porn and other spam.

There’s no doubt which is the preferred scenario and Google’s success to date with consumer-initiated advertising gives me confidence that the model can scale.

The Here and Now

It’s anyone’s guess how long it will take until Morville’s dream of ambient findability is realized but I think we can all agree it’s not a matter of if, it’s a matter of when.

And it also seems assured that search will play a key role in helping us navigate a world in which everything and everyone can be found.

So what can those of us with a stake in search marketing do today to prepare for that eventuality?

I think the first step is to embrace John Battelle’s words from his inaugural post on the Future of Search site. We have to truly consider “how flexible and powerful search can become when it is unhinged from the standard approach to which we’ve all become accustomed.”

Seek and Ye Shall Find

Whichever direction you head, remember that the path to ambient findability is not linear. As Danny emphasized, you have to know where you’re from to know where you’re going. But don’t spend too much time looking in the rear-view mirror or you’ll miss the many forks in the road ahead.

And, if you ever need a little inspiration, go fly a kite.

Update 10/3: Federated Media finally published my post. It had to be edited it down for space but the key points remain intact.

Related Posts with Thumbnails