The Internet vs Fluffy Jumpers

There is so much talk at the moment about 'the cloud', using online storage and utilising it for our benefit.

This got me thinking... The internet has become this all purpose location where all various aspects of your life are stored.

A place where your friends, activities, thoughts, actions and interests intertwine and tangle up on a daily basis.

It feels like the'internet' is such an old style name for a modern thing. Like looking at the millions of things your desktop can do, and still calling it a 'computer'. A name that even predates the warehouse sized leviathons of the 1940s.

'The internet' (or 'Teh Interwebz') implies linked networks and computers in a way that no longer happens.

I want to start a campaign to change the name to something more appropriate. A name that describes the intertwined nature of our online prescence.

The Beard

Or, more specifically.

Noel Edmunds' Beard

Think about it: "I'm browsing the Edmunds" "Surfing the NEB"... what's not to like?

Does Internet Browsing Still Exist?

I've been thinking about this a bit recently. Does anyone still use the internet for browsing?

I talked about it a while ago, but have noticed the topic going around a bit recently.



I cannot remember the last time I browsed the internet. I go on for Facebook, for twitter, for news and so on. I never randomly explore, I just type it into google or Wikipedia and go. The curation and filtering gives me most of the stuff I would want to see anyway...

Perhaps it's a little strange we still call our internet software Browsers, or that we refer to browsing the web, which is now the last refuge of the bored user. What we do now is watch channels, or check our social content lists.



I think my analogy from two years ago still seems to ring true:



You remember having 4/5 tv channels, you always found something to watch. Then multi channel tv came along, and it was a realm of choice, every possible subject and whim catered for through the wonders of satellite technology.


There is infinite knowledge and content out there for us to explore. Accessing it has never been easier.

Then we got settled, then we chose favourites, then we flicked... we flicked some more... then we never stopped flicking. Our standards became so high that suddenly that half interesting documentary or obscure Indian film became wastage instead of the only thing on. We said 'there's nothing on!' even though there clearly was lots of things on.

Yet the more there is too see, the more fussy we get.


Well that's what is happening to the net. Facebook, twitter, blip, blogger, your news site... thats it. You are done. No time left to random surf, and even then you do it on wikipedia.

We use our filters to flick for us. The cloud searches en-mass, and we get everything handed to us, which just makes us more fussy. I used to read for hours about random topics because it was amazing to see so much detail. But when you can learn anything, what do you choose? Too much choice is no choice at all.


You could say the only browsing we do is flicking channels...

Blunt Contentious Statement No1

The internet has been around for more than a decade, it is not New Media* anymore.

*This is not a critique of New Media Age! That refers to a time period...

Why Newspapers Will Survive and Planning Will Change

Note: This is theory in progress, it may be flawed!!

People are still decrying the death of tv, the death of magazines, the death of newspapers. That they are history in our instant worlwide 247 internet world. But for the same reasons that social media is a pain, I expect that they will survive and that my job might change a lot as we go forward.

Here's why:

Now I can chat to everyone I have ever met. Hang on a minute, you were a tosser... I don't want to speak to you. Who is that? Social media burnout anyone (Marcus got there first btw)

I don't want everyone I know contacting me.

As I discussed at a social media panel a few months ago... the key word for the internet has become and will remain Filtration. Seperating the millions of pages of guff and giving us the bits we like. It's already taking over via feeds and selective grouping.

It's what we use search engines for. But increasingly we have to do it with our viewing of the sites we then find.

So.

Newspapers and magazines will survive because as well as liking tangible things, when there is too much data to read, we need filters. We need editing and selection. Print media can become these things.

I already do it, I read videogames blogs and news sites; but I trust Edge magazine to select the important bits and look at them critically. Just like I trust NME to do so with music.

Publications that become the critical filter instead of the news breaker might thrive.

So how does this change my job?

Well. Traditionally planning has involved lots of finding data, analysing it and interpreting it. Yet as we move onwards in web technology, we are finding more and more data from more and more sources. If this carries on then filtration of data will become a more prevalent part of our daily work. Web researching means its already easier for brands to commision research and provide more data.

Like I said, this is thought in progress. Feel free to shoot it down if you disagree.

Terrorvision

If the rough definition of terrorism is:

"Using fear to manipulate people's actions."

Then there are plenty of things that we really should start counting as terror:

• Tony Blair's lies about Iraq having weapons of mass destruction in order to gain support for invasion
• George W Bush's use of terror and terrorism in order to change laws and create havoc throughout the world
  
• "The medium of TV is dying... use our web agency!" Invest now or your company will fail! Faillll!!
  
• If you don't dye your hair you will look old and that 25 year old receptionist won't take you home tonight.

Is Rob, I hear you (possibly) ask... comparing the illegal invasion of Iraq to an ad for hair dye and hyped up Web 2.0 speeches? No. Well actually yes. Yes I am. Sort of. They all use fear to manipulate people, of course this fear is on different scales; but the principle is essentially the same.

Whilst sometimes there is room for comedic/artistic licence in dealing with some silly/consumerite fears; or where good evidence backs it up: "Don't miss out on this deal", "Only this cleaner kills all bacteria" etc ... The playing of real fears in such an unsensitive way is frankly insulting. If the consumer is your wife, then she is going to be pissssed off with you for being that rude and patronising.

What I would like to say here is this: Manipulative hard sell should be dead. Stone cold dead. Cremated and thrown into the dead sea. There is no use, no excuse, and no need for it in this day and age. This internet age means people will talk about it and appearing manipulative will start to bring your brand down, no matter how big you are. I suggest a War on Ad Terror...

Virgin Media Part One (possibly of many)

"Lunchtime is Rant-time!"

Me. Just Now

Long ago, in the dark days before iPlayer, when the internet was the preserve of geeks and just a few normal people, when non-cable broadband connections of over 512k were extortionate and limited to London and a few other selected dignitaries; there was a company called NTL.

Despite its great product, it apppeared that their customer service was managed by a brain damaged chimp with no arms and legs. They made BT look good.

Then they became Virgin Media, and suddenly (you hoped) that things would get better. Richard Branson would VA the company, take on SKY and win better media service for us, the cheering loving public.

Sadly not quite.

Having just moved I need internet, phone and tv services. Looking at SKY and VM, it appears that VM have the best deal. Then I notice the little * that says "When you take a phone line for £11 a month". Luckily it was still cheaper.

So I called them up, and got a few bits of info from a helpful guy named Dan.

Then...

I called again to ask about installation and found:

1) Though my street is cabled, its not on their database so I need to get an engineer out to look at it.

2) Get given a phone number for the engineers that doesnt wrk

3) Call back, person seems unable to comprehend what I want

4) Call again, get given an alternative number which works

5) Leave a message asking for them to look at it, having been told only that "should be done within days". Clearly VM don't realise that most people are lost without the internet, I dont wish to spend weeks waiting!

6) Waited

That was Thursday, still no reply. Asked someone yesterday to look into it, and nothing...

I shall keep you posted. You'd think Virgin Media would like to help new customers... they have about a week before I go back to Sky.

100 Channels and there is nothing on

I have been wondering for a while about my lack of desire on some days to 'surf' the web in that 1999 style of old. Googling random topics to see where I go. Spending hours looking at random sites in fascination.

All that has gone, and I think I have worked out why.

You remember having 4/5 tv channels, you always found something to watch. Then multi channel tv came along, and it was a realm of choice, every possible subject and whim catered for through the wonders of satellite technology.

Then we got settled, then we chose favourites, then we flicked... we flicked some more... then we never stopped flicking. Our standards became so high that suddenly that half interesting documentary or obscure Indian film became wastage instead of the only thing on. We said 'there's nothing on!' even though there clearly was lots of things on.

Well that's what is happening to the net. Facebook, twitter, blip, blogger, your news site... thats it. You are done. No time left to random surf, and even then you do it on wikipedia.

iGoogle makes it worse, you don't even need to go looking for stuff. It's all right there.

Web 2.0 has become multi channel tv. Suffering from our RSS favourite comfort zones.

Web 6.0? Oh no....

"Ever feel like the online world is leaving you behind?"

No quite frankly, but I am sure a lot of people do. Which is why I severely dislike the new radio ads for government backed training schemes.

The ads are basic and reasonable enough, but using those annoying alienation tactics I loathe so much. "Mum who is jealous that her daughter gets online tips from her friends mum" and "Grandad who feels silly not being able to get in touch with his family" are among two ideas that just sound patronising when they should be inspiring.

Win back your kids love by knowing some good URLs! No. A better understanding of what your kid enjoys and gets up to? Yes.

Yes, tell over 50's that they can keep in better touch with their families using the internet; but don't insult their intelligence whilst doing it.

Future Marketing Summit Day Two - Part 2

Mike Mathieson and the other guy whose name is not in my booklet – the founders of Cake talking about entertainment insights.

Firstly, I absolutely love the fact that Cake was names after the Cake episode of Brass Eye. They also showed some interesting examples of their work.

They talked about the Internet as a social transformer, about entertainment as an ice breaker; and about how focus is moving towards shared experiences.

They showed some good examples, including work for Motorola and Nintendo Wii (hurrah!). They seem to be very good at creating attention and press coverage gaining events… but the question for me is, how good are they outside their safety zone, which appears to be mostly music?

and finally...

I have the bloody internet at home!

Nearly two months of Sky's shocking technical support, and now I have a working connection. Now it's a great value package, shame the support isnt as good as the rest of the package.

More regular updates are coming- starting...