Look at the uproar over Napster. This wonderful online tool allowed you to download any piece of music you could think of for FREE. This became quite the controversy due to the violation of copyright on all the songs being downloaded. We, the people, felt we should be able to share music with the world and not worry about the IP implications, the music industry was livid at the concept of free music being downloaded. Some mainstream bands got involved in the debate and it really hurt their reputation to be perceived as the rich rock stars whining about needing more money.

This video is mocking Metallica for being anti-Napster (Warning: adult content):
httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIuR5TNyL8Y

This battle will only continue, even though the laws are coming along with the development of more IP on the Internet. As long as there is an Internet there will be people who are illegally sharing content. New tools are coming out that will also foster this behavior, such as the Kindle.  If you haven’t heard of this it’s a new gadget that allows you to dowload books and the screen is much better than reading on a computer. These are becoming quite popular and with that comes the hackers that can break into the technology and illegally share the books purchased versus paying for each copy.

Here is the official page on Amazon for the Kindle:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0015T963C/?tag=googhydr-20&hvadid=4566159445&ref=pd_sl_19calxq4k4_e

The Internet is a sophisticated platform that is now critical in our personal and professional lives, but just because we CAN share content illegally doesn’t mean we should.

What do you think about this… should Intellectual Property laws be more or less strict online?

I’m not sure how many people realize the depth of tracking done on Web sites. I personally was aware that when I visit Web sites I’m being tracked. I’m also aware that when I visit a site that participates in any number of advertising networks I am then flagged and when I visit another site in that network the ads on that page will be relevant to what I visited before. For example, I visited lillianvernon.com then a week later I visit MSNBC.com. I will most likely see a Lillian Vernon ad while I’m on the MSNBC site.

What the Network Advertising Initiative is doing is allowing you to opt-out of that kind of customization of ads. Its not saying you won’t get cookied or tracked on these sites, but you won’t be getting ads based on your history.

The disturbing part of this NIA site for me was a fun little tool that allows you to see how many networks you are being tracked on.  Of the almost 40 networks that are participating in the NIA opt-out system, I was only NOT being tracked by 2… 2!!

Check out how many networks are tracking you:
http://www.networkadvertising.org/managing/opt_out.asp

It’s coming, and coming soon.  In an interview with Twitter CEO Evan Williams he flat out said it’s coming, they just haven’t defined how quite yet (or they’re just not saying). The general tidbits were around advertising and corporate paid accounts. The real focus now, according to Williams, is on product development. His philosophy appears to be “make the product better and the money will come.”

While I think this is great and the longer we can have Twitter without ads on it the better, but how long can this last? Facebook already tried to buy them, with it’s growing popularity I’m sure there are others out there waiting in the wings to take a shot at it. There is a lot of potential out there for Twitter to make money, but there is also room for us to make money as marketers. We know Google ads and Facebook ads work, so its not a long-shot to believe Twitter advertising will work as well. How long do we have to wait?

(I do realize I’m contradicting myself in this post. On one hand I want a clean Twitter experience, but on the other I know we can make money on Twitter!)

The full interview with Evan Williams from October 2009:
http://www.businessinsider.com/live-twitter-ceo-evan-williams-at-web-20-summit-2009-10

This video portrays the perception of Twitter out there (from those that don’t use it):

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PN2HAroA12w

If you do Twitter you know there is some truth to this video. A great deal of Tweets are useless, yet mostly entertaining, comments from people you may or may not know. Another large percentage of Tweets seem to relate to the use of Twitter itself… again, not overly useful. So the big question for those not using this tool is “what is the point?”

The point is, in my humble opinion, that you can quickly and easily communicate, build and maintain relationships and provide some insight into your personality.  From the standpoint of an individual this may not seem that interesting, but if you are a company or organization this can be extremely powerful. Companies are showing success story after success story pertaining to their use of Twitter, to not only communicate but to provide actual customer service. The customer now has a new way to reach out to a company and it finally feels like you’re reaching out to someone not an empty corporation. Some of the power of Twitter lies in its ability to show the fun side of a company, and the human side of a company. You can’t put a price on this, and shouldn’t miss the chance to do this. Marketing is no longer a company pushing out messages to customers, it now includes 2-way communication, where you can actually listen to and respond to your customers in a way nobody dreamed of 5 years ago. If you’re a skeptic you need to stop doubting and start Tweeting.

While this seems futuristic in the movies, we aren’t that far from being able to do this. This is already happening online. Based on buying behavior or past sites you have visited banner ads can change on a Web page to something that may reflect your interests. You may not even realize this is happening to you… but it is. Everywhere you go on the Internet has the potential of identifying you, tracking you and changing content based on who you are.

Why not extend this to offline. The technology exists.  Check out this video of Bill Gates home. Merely wear a pin and the house identifies you and alters your surroundings based on preferences. It can even select which phone in the house rings based on where you are.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9738CIiY41k

All the pieces already exist to make the Minority Report shopping experience a reality. We just need to allow it to happen.  Is this really something we want?  Will our phones start to identify us instead of a pin?  Where will this go and how soon will it start to happen?

A simple example to understand is: you are walking down the street and looking for a place to eat in a city you are visiting. You pull your iPhone out of your pocket and hold it up to the view of the street. Your iPhone starts pulling up data about the buildings and gives you information on the restaurants within them.

This quick video shows an example of an iPhone app:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2uH-jrsSxs

Imagine the possibilities here. I work at a University so a great example I heard at a conference I attended this week was a campus tour. Mom, dad and prospective student decide to swing into campus and start walking around instead of scheduling a formal tour. Soon-to-be-student holds out his/her iPhone and starts telling Mom and Dad about the history of Dempsey Hall.

Some of the iPhone apps discussed in the Mashable article are a bit silly, such as the satellite finder for those with a dish on their roof for TV channels. There is also a car finder app, which is a cute idea, to help you find your car in a parking lot. There are endless ways to use this.

This is a cool technology that will really take off this year, mark my words.

The article has a lot of interesting points, but I’d like to focus on the prediction that more companies will remove their content from large search engines like Google and start charging for their content to be indexed. According to the article, News Corp has plans to remove their content from Google and give exclusive rights to Bing for a cost.

I find this whole concept counterintuitive. My whole career has been focused on Web and Internet Marketing, which includes no small focus on search engine optimization. The goal all SEO enthusiasts have is to get good rankings in Google. It’s a bold move to intentionally pull content from THE search engine, which accounts for over 60% off all daily searches, and begin to charge for your content. It seems arrogant to me to decide that your content is worth more to the engine than the company. Most companies would pay almost anything to get better rankings on Google. This “being paid for content” model also seems to remove the focus on the customer and puts in back on the big, bad company trying to make a profit.

What I’ve always found appealing about Google’s approach to ranking content is that it has put the focus of their algorithms purely centered on making their results as relevant as possible for the user. It concerns me a lot if our trust in search engine results now needs to waver because Google may or may not be allowed to index certain sites.

I tend to agree having seen both the Droid and the iPhone that I still lean toward the iPhone, although its clear Apple finally has some competition. What I find is the bigger issue here is the discussion on networks. I am a Blackberry owner, and I love it so don’t take this wrong, but I really wanted an iPhone. I was not willing to pay the money to get out of my US Cellular contract, and quite frankly I don’t have an issue with US Cellular. I’ve bounced back and forth between them over the last ten years and always seem to come back.

I understand the business side of limiting what phones can be used on the big networks, but I fear its slowing the adoption of mobile devices. I’ve blogged before that the adoption is low at my University for mobile Internet users, which comes through in our analytics. I do think the adoption of more advanced mobile devices would be further along if we weren’t so limited in the options we have within the networks we choose. If I could use an iPhone on US Cellular I would have had one a long time ago and I imagine I’m not the only one that feels this way. I have iPhone envy and I’m not ashamed to admit it (just don’t tell my Blackberry).

Again, the theory is great. A low cost computer that merely needs a network connection. There is no software so the computer is insanely fast. Life is a happy place. I’m just not entirely sold. It’s reminiscent of the eMachines that could really do nothing but get on the Internet. That was a flop because we all need software.

Here is an article that discusses this issue a bit more. http://www.webmetricsguru.com/archives/2009/12/google-chrome-os-and-the-cloud/

Here is a brief summary that is optimistic of the future of Chrome OS… I’m still not entirely sold.

“At the end of the day, will Chrome OS do major damage to Microsoft or Apple? It well may. Remember, it [Google] succeeded with organic and paid search because it understands what people want – and that’s the whole pitch for Chrome OS – a different model of computing, lean and mean, running web applications really, really fast and costing next to nothing.”

More than four in 10 US consumers said they were skipping ads on TV and the radio as well as avoiding Websites with intrusive ads more in 2009 than they were the year before.

This is important to know when deciding where to put your marketing resources (dollars and people). We are now a sophisticed bunch that does not want to be bothered with ads that don’t have anything to do with what I care about. I can now pick the companies I want information from by following them on Twitter, signing up for their emails, becoming a fan on Facebook. We, as marketers, now have no excuse to not turn those consumers into buyers.They have proactively asked us to send them promotions. As marketers we should focus on them, not on throwing darts at a wall. Unless you’re doing targeted banners ads, don’t waste the money. Unless you’re doing targeted emails to opted-in customers, don’t send them. Consumers are becoming more and more savy so lets put information in front of them they care about.

If you do want to reach out to prospects there are a lot of creative ways to do this. I recently researched the world of short films as an advertising tool. There are some really clever ads out there with a fantastic viral following that puts products in front of prospects in an entertaining way. I’m not suggesting we all need to hire award-winning directors to create our commercials, but lets put more thought into our advertising and marketing so we can be clever and relevant.

Here is a good example of a short film/commercial:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofLH2ZzLtvU