Faster Future: Publishing possibilities now and beyond

Alan Moore on the 'the toxic tail end of the industrial age'

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 16:16:00 +0000

On November 17 I will be speaking at Monitoring Social Media in central London. Which is nice. If you're in London or anywhere close-ish, you should come.

So will the author of Communities Dominate Brands Alan Moore.

Alan, a very good friend of mine, and a collaborator over at 90:10, is also speaking at London's MIT Enterprise Forum on the same day, following in the footsteps of Guy Kawasaki, among others. There you go - two good reasons to be in London that day.

For the detail, go here.

But for a taste of the thinking... here's Alan:

We are witnesses to a structural and transformational change in society, what many describe as the toxic tail end of our industrial, mass consumer, mass media era. The tragic legacy of the last 150 years is that humanity has been thin sliced and deconstructed almost to the point of destruction. Human beings have become little more than individual units of capitalism – pawns of economists and unfettered capitalism.

But the fact is, “I needs we, to truly be I,” wrote Carl Jung, and this is why we as a species are at the barricades of a communications revolution, in which humanity is renegotiating the power relationships between; people, organisations, and even governments. As social philosopher Richard Sennett argues, we want to, “recover something of the spirit of the Enlightenment on terms appropriate to our time”.

The tools of the revolution are digital communication technologies, but the drivers are about human connection and human identity. Technology does not come out of nowhere, it is indeed a human invention in the first place, and these technologies succeed to the extent they meet fundamental human needs. The rise of the networked society is no accident, and a new philosophy is needed now to enable individuals and organisations adapt to a new way of doing, trading, educating, living.

Therefore, our imperative is to de-school ourselves in a philosophy and a way of thinking and acting that has delivered us into a cultural, ideological and economic cul-de-sac. We need to liberate ourselves from how we were once taught to think and live our lives, stemming from the ethos of industrialisation and the mass consumer society.
Don't miss him.

90:10 - Open For Business

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 13:15:00 +0000

Today I can finally announce I've embarked on a new journey - as Managing Director and co-founder of a new business: 90:10.

It's a journey that emphasises a meme close observers will have seen emerging in my work for quite some time (it's described in my Communities of Purpose paper written in March 08).

That is, that in order to truly benefit from the power of the network we must think less about media (social or otherwise) and more about how and why people organise to get things done.

90:10 takes that to its logical business-oriented change-empowering conclusion. 90:10 is aimed at enabling efficiency, innovation and transformation through social technologies.

Efficiency - the big why

Efficiency is important to us not just for the obvious reason (the payback to the benefitting business's bottom line) but for the same kind of reason that quality is important to outdoor clothing maker Howies.

Howies believes in quality (read Mark Earls' Herd for the full story) because it makes their stuff last longer. If it needs replacing less often less resources are required to keep Howies fans clothed. It's better for the environment, better for all.

Efficiency is important to 90:10 because when people connect to wikifix or co-create something new we do so because we want that thing to exist. We want the outcome.

This closes the gap between supply and demand. In its final iteration, as a planet, we will only create what we need - with zero waste and zero need to 'create' demand.

In a world of limited resource plundering the things we have in abundance, to make the most of the things we don't, has to be the right thing to do.

Our creativity, our desire and ability to connect, to be social beings, these we have in abundance. Tapping them is both exciting in its potential and wise as a strategy for success. It is what 90:10 does.

It ultimately means there will be more of what all of us need. All of us.

Efficiency that is better for all.
Efficiency for a bigger reason.
That's why we believe in efficiency. Driven by innovation - leading to transformation.

It's not about the tech, it's about the people

We understand the tech doesn't perform the magic. People do.

The tech is simply the tools through which the business of new business (and new organisation) is done. It is the tools the crowd, this we species of ours, the edglings, us, are using to build our self-organised tomorrow.

I don't want to build the next Twitter, Facebook or Google (though I'll happily consult on how they could and should monetise) - I'm interested in what emerges from them and what comes after them - what communities of purpose can and will do with these tools.

Connecting people who care about the same stuff gets that stuff done better. It innovates best-fit solutions and gets to those best-fit solutions faster and cheaper.

It's Wikifixing. It's global. And it's because people give a damn - if only you'll let them.

As I detailed in Social + Media = Change, I believe the real RoI of social media is unleashed by the way it enables adhoc communities of purpose to form; This is what the money has been waiting to follow.

These communities exist. They want to make stuff better. They want to join in creating the things that matter to them.

Recently, inspired by Clay Shirky, I wrote: Media that publishes without a comment box, publishes broken

That is, publishing without being open to contribution, is the wrong model for the networked world.

There is a version for business - in fact for all organisations:

'A business that operates without a comment box, operates broken'.

That is, a business that fails to open up to the riches it could share in through the feedback loops, real-time co-creation and wikifixing of the power of the network is a business that is in peril - at risk of being disrupted and defeated by those that are.

Next to those from the self-organised, open future, it is broken.

90:10 is all about fixing that - becoming truly and effectively Open For Business.

Look how busy WE are

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:11:00 +0000

The data that drives this was compiled at the end of September 09. Gary is promising to keep it up to date.

Go ahead - scare an old mediapologist :-) We Media before their very eyes.

Media that publishes without a comment box, publishes broken

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 07:25:00 +0000

To corrupt a Clay Shirky phrase (a screen that ships without a mouse, ships broken):

Media that publishes without a comment box, publishes broken

That is to say I am somewhat amazed that there are still publishers, (even those who profess an open approach), who publish content without allowing the reader to publish back at them - to comment on their story.

It's an extraordinary attitude that says:

There, I'm done.
That's all you need to know.
All your questions have been answered - because I say so.
This is as good as it gets.
Me producer, you consumer.
Me expert, you little man/woman.
Nothing to be challenged here. Move along
Your opinion counts for zip

And it misses out on a great deal of crowd wisdom and value creation too. The social object that is the article still exists - the value of that gets removed to where the conversation flows.

And the originators would like a little of that value, right?
(image courtesy frangipani)

Companies that harness the power of the network will win

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 09:10:00 +0000

Very interesting deck from Sean Parker - one of the driving forces behind Facebook - in which he argues:

"The companies that harness the power of the networks will dominate the internet"

Regulars here will find that rings very familiar (hence my book, The Power of the Network).

Here's his deck (hat-tip to @msamayoa ) which has been sparking comments galore at Techcrunch

Sean Parker's Web 2.0 Summit Presentation

I agree with all the sentiment. Couple of points though. I didn't see a slide on Reed's law (the 2n formula which explains the exponential value growth in large networks - particularly ones with humans involved and which also explains the dominance of niche groups over lowest common denominator hits in a networked world).

Here's one of my more recent decks which includes the Reed's law explanations:

Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About Social Media

View more presentations from david cushman.

Also, you can make the case for Google being a people-powered connector all of its own - getting connections beyond the silo is what really counts (when one extra node on the network doubles its value) so search is still very very important in that regard - which I blogged about here.

Leave peer-to-peer interaction to the humans, please

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 07:06:00 +0000

I mentioned the word 'public domain' in a tweet at the weekend.
This was the automated response I received:

I guess he thought I wanted a Domain?

No he didn't. His algorithm did. I'm sure HenryKhan (should he be a real live human being) could spot the difference - and avoid spamming me.

Doesn't that kind of illustrate the point about what's wrong with those who auto-message, auto-follow or auto-dm on twitter. Try as you might, you keyword matching and alogorithms are just no match for peer-to-peer humanity.

Give it up - leave it to us humans.

The significance of Twitter in search

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:01:00 +0000

The fact that search (Google/Bing) is opening up to Twitter is very significant. Why? because group forming is all about opening up the silo.
Blogs have remained the least silo'd form of user publishing up until now. You don't have to be a member of 'blogger.com' to read this blog, find it's outpourings or (crucially) respond to it (me).

User-publishing = expression of our metadata.
Expression of our metadata = ways in which others who share the same issues/concerns/passions as us can find us. This is critical for group forming.

Remember each extra node on a network doubles its value.

So being able to find one more person expressing, through their metadata, the same stuff you are expressing means one extra node on your network - with the doubling of opportunity to solve your shared problem that (potentially) equates to.

The realtime nature of twitter amplifies the potential for action -and therefore value. (connecting with those who care enough about the same thing you do right now, enough to drop everything to help you fix it, has great value).

But Twitter is/was a silo. You had to be participating to find each other. But if search can fix that - the tweets escape the silo. You can attract even more connections because your metadata escapes the silo. More nodes can be added to more networks.

Search can add a lot of value still - something Facebook should pay a little attention. Use its internal search and you get the impression of getting a scant view of silos within silos within silos. So much metadata trapped - so many connections failing to be made.

Believe in open.

Time short for MSM09 earlybird tickets

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 10:44:00 +0000

What promises to be a seminal event in its field, Monitoring Social Media 09, has just two days left before the earlybird pricing runs out.
So if measuring and monitoring the conversation is important/interesting to you, best move fast or pay more money.
The event is on in central London at the Cavendish Conference Centre, London - W1G 9DT on November 17, 2009.
I'll be there on one of the panels.

Mobile: My Remote Control for Life

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 08:22:00 +0000

Need a lesson in mobile marketing and communications? I can't think of a better place to start than this training day run by people I know, admire and respect; Alan Moore, Jonathan Macdonald and Alex Meisl.
It's on October 28 at London's Hospital club. More about why you should take my word for it, here.

Radio, music, curation and social objects

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 08:29:00 +0000

I have a lot of time for the guys at One Golden Square Labs as they try to adapt Absolute Radio's broadcast model to the networked world.
The latest example is Compare My Radio. Absolute's Dan Thornton pointed me at it (here's his take) - and I want to thank him for making me think a little about radio, music, curation and social objects. Which is what follows.

Anyways, to start at the beginning, Compare My Radio requires a little data from you about musical tastes before attempting to match you with the most appropriate broadcast channel.

Bravely, users get directed to rival properties as well as Absolute's own.

No doubt the payback for Absolute is the data they receive from users which could, for example, be used to hone Absolute's broadcast output: ie they learn more people want more Britpop, so they play more Britpop.

So, I muse, what may the outcomes be if you include not only the output from mainstream broadcast radio in the search returns, but also the narrowcasting shows of podcasts and the likes of Mixcloud (touted as The YouTube of radio). Tough to do. And I'm not criticising that this is not included in CompareMyRadio - I'm simply indulging in the thought experiment of assuming it could and should.

A model like CompareMyRadio could surface the single largest group by revealing the lowest common denominators (ie, the most searched-for artists).

And that is useful for honing broadcast.

And in a broadcast way, it will also point you at the mainstream channel which is the best fit for your expressed tastes.

But that can't be as good a fit as is available from the long tail (think last.fm and spotify for starters).

Imagine if CompareMyRadio could point you at the channel most fit for you? The outcomes would certainly point you at the long tail more often than they would the mainstream broadcasters. That's because your own itunes playlists are a better fit for you than anything Absolute, Capital, Heart or Radio 1-6 etc can come up with. In a long tail world there are bound to be niche shows that are closer to your itunes playlists than the big broadcasters can ever provide. It's a simple matter of too many niches - and those niches being better provided for by narrowcasting (a tautology of course - if it's niche it must be narrow).

Of course, the mainstream broadcasters may still account for the largest single groups (with viable numbers), but that, in a long tail world, is the minority - and significantly so.

Add peer to peer recommendation to the long tail model and you also add discovery - a role previously retained by the broadcast playlist creators.

When I shared CompareMyRadio with peers on Twitter, one point raised was that in a world of spotify etc, access to a best fit of music selection is less of a differentiator than placing value on the human voice content - does the presenter make you laugh/talk about stuff that interests you? Do your peers trust her and her playlists?

Valuing the presenter; their curation of taste and their human voice, is what Mixcloud does.
In the podcast world (see blogtalkradio for example) we are all potentially radio show hosts now (just as, through YouTube, we are TV hosts and through blogs and other social media we are publishers). And that means there will always be a show with a list of content which is a great match for you.

But we want that to be more than a playlist. We want the show to be the social object around which the community of purpose gathers.

So where does broadcast play it's part?

For many of us, it acts as The Great Reminder.

Two examples:
1. BBC4 broadcasts Synth Britannia on Friday night, I download Tubeway Army's Replicas.
I didn't see the show. But it became a social object around which conversation happened on Twitter. I joined in the conversation on Twitter. It's the conversation, not the show, that inspired the purchase. But the conversation needed the show (the social object).

I also got reminded about Bill Nelson in conversation about the show. He wasn't even featured. But I'll likely be searching iTunes for Art, Empire, Industry later today. Where is the broadcaster's revenue share?

The broadcaster created the social object, inspired the conversation, triggered no end of purchase downloads - but gets nothing.

At the very least, in a YouTube-of-radio model, the creators of the shows (the social objects in this instance) should make one-click iTunes purchases (tickets, dvds, merchandise etc) easy and get a good share of the profit. But that's before the peer to peer interaction has even started - and that's where the greater value for all lays. There's the conundrum - how to track conversations inspired by social objects.

2. I go to see The Pixies with a friend I haven't seen for a while.
The Pixies gig is the social object. My friend and I are brought together (again) by our common interest. We talk about (guess what at a gig?) music. He tells me about another gig we should see together (ker-ching) and I end up buying some of the band's work as downloads (ker-ching, ker-ching)

In short social objects and peer-to-peer interactions are fabulous reminders of what you already knew. The 'value' of that knowledge may be enhanced, of course, by the context. And 'the show' is very much about context.

So what about discovery? Well, discovery all depends on silos and silo walls.
If the community of purpose surrounding a social object has a hard edge, nothing much new is going to arrive.

But if the community is more like most networks of peers, the edges are fuzzy. More people can be attracted to join by the social object (or by their interactions with their peers) but with a different take on the social object. They bring with them different ideas for content (for example) from their peer to peer interactions in their other communities of purpose.

Provided the show host employs feedback loops which constantly remind her that it's their show, not hers, then the new discoveries can be passed on through the show content.
Even without this, the p2p interactions around the show will share (or not) and rate (or score down) the latest collective community discoveries. The most apt will flourish, the least die out.

So, in summary.

Broadcast is The Great Reminder. It has real potential to be the social object around which peer-to-peer interaction happens. And the real magic of this happens in the peer to peer interactions. This is where the purchase reminders and recommendations happen in the main. It is therefore where the greater revenue opportunities lay. Your click-to-buy model (or it's equivalent) therefore has to be portable so peers can take it with them on their journeys.

Narrowcasting serves a greater number of people. All those tiny niches are bigger in total than the largest of your lowest-common-denominator single groups. So if you're really about scale - you know what to do.

Discovery = community created playlists ONLY where communities are fuzzy edged. Bear that in mind when you consider whose communities we are talking about - and where they reside.

New Technorati rules encourage you to blog well and blog often

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 12:41:00 +0000

Stumbled on the latest update to Technorati today (the site that ranks blogs and their authority) and was somewhat shocked to discover FasterFuture's 'authority' had jumped by around 1000% to 423.

Its rank in the blogosphere has leaped by a similar order (13,896 of all blogs - where I recall it languishing around where you could pretty much could add a zero to that.

I had put a slow decline (the authority was once 120 and the ranking 70K ish) over the last year or so down to me blogging less and tweeting more.

The big change now is that Technorati is only gathering its data over the last couple of weeks or so - not the last six months as was it's methodology.

Which means if you've got a decent rank and authority - and want to maintain it - you'd best blog often as much as you blog well. It's helpful to those of us seeking individuals with particular interests AND authority, too - because the results are much closer to real time (as Stowe points out on /Message)

Technorati needed to cut its costs, this method not only does that (less intensive number crunching to do) but it also encourages a reverse in the decline in blogging - something very much inline with Technorati's needs, too.

And since blogs remain the single least silo'd way in which we express metadata and connect one to another in communities of purpose (the only silos in blogging are being online - or not - and language) I'd have to give that my blessing.

Well, that and the nice high ranking FasterFuture has acquired.

UPDATE: Oct 19, 2009 I'm going to keep track of this: Since time of first writing the rise has continued. And then some.
Today's stats show fasterfuture as 8312 highest rank blog on't planet (though I note this is of 825,402 indexed, as opposed to the 300m thought to exist). Guess these are those worthy of indexing in the past few weeks, as opposed to those created ever), Authority has risen to 464 (for context it would need an authority of 760-odd to make the top 100).

Update: Oct 27, 2009:

Today the authority is 485 and the rank is ???,??? - honestly, couldn't find a way to get that number today. I notice though that a little green badge has been apended: 'Top 100 (small business)'. It is of course nice to be in the top 100 of anything - but I'm a little baffled as to why the Technorati algorithm selected this blog for that category?

Update: Oct 29, 2009.

Today we have an authority of 506 and a ranking in the top 5000 (4965) - and that's after a fall! Gulp. The small business Top 100 badge still lives on some views on Technorati, too.

Update November 3, 2009:
Despite the red down arrow (which indicates we've been even higher since I last checked) FasterFuture is now has a ranking of 4214 and an authority of 522.

Internet marketing is not a specialism

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 08:00:00 +0000

Twitter has made me accutely aware of how many 'internet marketers' there are out there.
That I have 'social' + 'media' in my bio seems to attract a steady flow to follow my Twitter account. In that respect Twitter has surfaced the volume of people in this game to me.
I was not looking for Linda... (for Pat Kane fans).

It strikes me as more than a little odd that Internet Marketing is regarded as a specialism - a career even.
I appreciate you can become adept in the mechanics of some tools.

But EVERYONE is an expert Internet marketer. It's a peer to peer realm. My peers are those best placed and equipped to market most effectively to me. That's true for you, and everyone else, too.

Perhaps ALL our Twitter bios and Linkedin profiles should read: Internet marketer, web publisher, online advertising expert, distribution doyen.

And as we understand the power we have wrested from traditional media, we'll add new areas of 'expertise':
Team building (as leader and participant), R&D, new product and service development, self organiser etc

Perhaps, instead, we should start telling people the more specific value we all add?

Update: After discussion below perhaps that question can be couched as "What can you do better than my friend?"

Internet marketers are going to have to become much clearer about what they can do that all of us can't. And fast.

Update: They aren't alone - any mediator faces the same challenge.

Social + Media = Change

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 11:03:00 +0000

Let's deconstruct the phrase 'social media' and try social + media instead.

It helps me understand where the focus should be: 90% on the social, 10% on media.

That doesn't mean there's no role for the media side. It plays a critical one, without which the social doesn't get to happen - but it does reflect where the value lays, who creates it and how.

Social =

The social technologies that connect us
People
Groups
Hands and feet
Action
What we choose to do together

Media =

That which flows through social technologies
Content
Distribution
Mouths and ears
Conversation
What they would seek to do to us/get us to do

The media side is where we pass on messages from one to another, do the viral thing, create content and publish it - in social networks and on blogs and in tweets.

It is where we fulfil those mutliple roles that once were the sole domain of the media industry - we publish, we advertise and market (to our peers). We provide the distribution through peer-to-peer pass on. We do it all in networks rather than channels, in real-time rather than their time and many-to-many rather than broadcast from one-to-many, with the one at the centre.

It is a CRITICAL part of the mix. You don't get the social without the media. The Eighth Mass Media. Us.

To recap on The Eight Mass Media:

We are the distribution
We are the content
We are the user journey
We are how messages are transmitted
We are the medium and the media carried within it
We are the connections AND how the connections are made

In this Eighth Mass Media element we find each other - we discover those we didn't know we needed to know, we come together to serve a common purpose. We become communities of purpose.

And there is a great deal of value in this. We recommend stuff - our friends buy it or buy into it.

But the greater value lies in the new, fast, user-centric, efficiencies of the 'social' part of the phrase.

That is, that all our media-like activity brings us together with people seeking to solve the same problem or improve the same experience

And this is where the efficiencies happen.

A very small-scale example:

A social technology (Twitter) is created (social)
I (social) tweet a complaint about a brand (media)
A person (social) representing the brand uses social technology to discover this (social)
The person (social) contacts me (media)
We engage in conversation (media)
My problem is resolved (social)
The person representing the brand (social) discovers a way to improve their current system - making it more efficient for brand and consumer (social)
I (social) tweet my peers to say how pleased I am with the outcome (media)
I (social) recommend the brand representative to my peers (social)

How does that scale?

Remember: The people who can make most difference to your organisation don't work for it. Adapting to the network means that they can.

So broadening the listening for what's wrong with your brand, as experienced by end-users, effectively delivers crowd-sourced improvements - R&D and NPD - in rapid iteration and at small cost.

Make no mistake - there is much more to this than reputation management.

Social + Media generates low-cost NPD, R&D, P2P Marketing, Advertising, Recruitment and all that reputation management warmth, too.

The process adapts the org to the expressed needs of the network (people) - it transforms your organisation into one in which the greater part of its energy is generated from beyond the organisation - and one in which that increased energy nourishes a growing, changing and responding org.

Catch-up: Causing a stir on BlogTalk Radio

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 08:38:00 +0000

Jon Hansen was kind enough to invite me to be his guest on his BlogTalk Radio show yesterday. It was broadcast live at 5:30-6:15pm UK time on October 8.

I very much enjoyed and - and Jon's invited me back to do another show in the near future - which I'm going to take him up on.

Apparently, yesterday's caused a bit of a stir:

This from Jon's blog:

"...today’s show regarding the differences between traditional media such as newspapers and the emerging social media world, delivered an incredibly insightful and powerful message in terms the future of these paradoxical mediums.
"Unexpected . . . certainly not given guest David Cushman’s level of expertise regarding the subject matter. "What was surprising is the level of interaction within the confines of the show’s on-line chat room which even had one listener post a note asking me to take callers earlier in the show.
"While there have been segments in which I have had 19 or 20 people in the live chat room at the same time, the activity was noticeably brisk during today’s segment.
"It was also considerably more active than it was during the 90-Minute Buy American Special that featured a brief interview with Canada’s Trade Minister. Perhaps Dave should run for public office."

Listen to it for yourself using the player, below.

Resources: Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About Social Media...

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 20:23:00 +0000

As promised to those attending Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About Social Media But Were Afraid to Ask, here's the slidedeck I spoke to. Listed below the slides are some of my white papers which you may be interested in for further reading.

In both the case of the whitepapers and of my book (The Power of the Network) you'll find references to further reading you may enjoy.

There's a video of me speaking on similar themes at a previous event, too.

I mentioned GoogleWave on Friday. To learn more about that in 7 mins - watch the relevant video below.

I really enjoyed the session and appreciate all feedback and suggestions on what we may focus on next time around?

And finally, the Amazon widget I've also included (the carousel thingy) shows my current 10 books I'm recommending.

Dive in and enjoy!

UPDATE: 12:15pm Oct 05, 09. Slideshare just dropped me an email to tell me the deck below is "being tweeted more than any other document on SlideShare right now. So we've put it on the homepage of SlideShare.net (in the "Hot on Twitter" section)." Cool!

Everything You Ever Wanted To Know Aboout Social Media

View more presentations from david cushman.

More of my slidedecks:
http://www.slideshare.net/davidcushman

My White Papers:

Speaking at Winning With Social Media

David Cushman - "Setting the social media scene & Adapting brands to the networked world" from Brando Social on Vimeo.

Googlewave explained - by the people who made it:

Great further reading:

Hope that offers a little to be going on with :-)

Vote for the nation's digital heroes

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 07:24:00 +0000

Disclosure: I'm a Trustee of Citizens Online - which is the charity running the search for the UK's Digital Heroes.

These aren't the usual suspects, the teenage millionnaires behind the next major platform or similar, these are heroes who use digital technology to bring about important social change - often helping people who need the most help.

We've now got 36 worthy candidates for you to choose from - nominated from all around the UK.

With the backing of TalkTalk, they now go head to head to win technology grants to help further their cause.

The vote is in your hands - find out more, and cast your vote at: www.talktalk.co.uk/digitalheroes.

The individuals with the most votes from each of the 12 regions will be awarded a £5,000 grant and honoured at a ceremony at the House of Lords presided over by UK Digital Champion Martha Lane Fox. An overall winner determined by Martha and her expert panel will receive a grand prize of £10,000.

Voting ends Friday October 23, 2009.

Wave : Real-time Collaboration Google-style

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 16:12:00 +0000

You've heard the buzz, you've watched it trend - and you've given up on the hour long video... well here's the 7 min version.
Google Wave really is worth at least that much of your time :-)

Afraid to ask about social media? See you Friday

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 08:01:00 +0000

On Friday this week (October 2, 2009) I'm speaking in my home town (Huntingdon, Cambs) for the first time.

My seminar 'Everything you ever wanted to know about social media but were afraid to ask' will cover the basics of the 'media' part of the label - messaging; transmission; how content is created and distributed etc.

But it will also open a door on the 'social' side of the label - how the formation of groups, communities of purpose, has the potential to disrupt and reconfigure everything we do - from processes within organisations to politics, education, economics and beyond.

Really quite chuffed to say it's all-but a sell out with people attending from my local authority, business organisations, retail, training, a local engineering firm, marketing and pr teams, seo specialists and a global mobile tech company.

There's a handful of tickets still available so if you know someone who may benefit, please point them at http://everythingfaster.eventbrite.com

Tell them to use the discount code 'fastercommunity' and you earn them 33% off.

Tickets with that code are limited to just 6, so... well you know the drill.

Two mass media mistakes Twitter is making

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 08:02:00 +0000

Twitter is a great environment for adhoc communities to form around common purposes. Groups form for every niche. So why does it remain fascinated with mass media-style editorialising?

Here's two mistakes I think it's making:

1. Trends.
Showing what is most talked about by everyone isn't 'taking the pulse of the planet' - it's just broadcasting spam at the majority of us (and I don't just mean the spammers who take advantage of our interest in the trending topics to spam us).

The effect of seeing what is 'most talked about' is to surface the lowest common denominator and that, by definition in a world in which we can organise around things we care about, is spam for the vast majority (think of the long tail, folks).

It's not even a tyranny-of-the-majority model. It's an imposition by the biggest single group on all the rest of the smaller groups (which collectively make up the true majority). Tyranny by a small elite.

More valuable would be trends among friends: ie what is being talked about among the group of people you follow.

The things you consider useful and good would still be surfaced - the irrelevant (to you) avoided. This would work for everyone - not just those in the small elite.

2. The suggested user list:
A further expression of the mass media thinking at Twitter HQ is the Suggested User List, brought to my attention by a Twitter tirade by Robert Scoble this morning.

That's editorialising by the team - them making lowest common denominator suggestions for people to be broadcast at by (a lot of the SUs are not particularly conversational).

I would much rather be on my followers' suggested user lists than Twitter's.

You will make the intros and connections that are most relevant and therfore of most value to all parties because we know what matters to each other.

Twitter (no centralised authority) knows me like my peers.

The image used here is from the National Library of Scotland's Flickr account. I'm shocked to say it's there without a creative commons licence. I took a screengrab anyway. A National Library that doesn't share?

Lessons from the mass media wars

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 08:04:00 +0000

There are those in print media - newspapers/mags etc - who cling to the idea that they can 'do a cinema'.

When TV arrived as the latest mass media many predicted the demise of cinema.

They didn't count on its:

Ability to adapt with experience-enhancing technology (colour, stereo, Dolby, 3d etc)
The power of that experience being shared.

If I was in a media company right now I'd be looking at how what cinema did could translate to shore up my properties. To start with. (image courtesy rivalee)

And then there's the elements that kept radio in the game when first cinema and then radio rocked up:

Convenience

Portability

Currency.

Print shares convenience and portability - but scores zip for currency against anything post radio. It's ability to enhance shared experience ain't the greatest, either (though this can be enhanced through events and digital communities, of course)..

Media properties need to adapt. And the obsession with print has to be questioned long and hard.

Those cinematic and radio survivors of the mass media wars give a guide.

Cinema uses technology to enhance shared experiences, radio is convenient, portable and current.

Combine all these and you have a proposition to take you into the age of the eighth mass media - us.

From (We are the eighth mass media)

I don't just mean that we create the content in a UGC vs Professional Content Creators kind of way. I mean WE are the distribution, the content, the 'user journey', how messages are transmitted... WE are the medium and the media carried within it.

We are the connections. We are also how the connections are made.

In the age of the eighth mass media, organisations must understand that serving multiple and ever increasing numbers of niches is the route to sustainable scale.

Those who wish to remain part of our lives must provide value to the adhoc self-forming communities of purpose our digital selves can't help but participate in.

We have already adapted. We are creating a new landscape. Are you fit for it? Are you prepared to become so? I wonder how this 'Twitter: The newspaper of tomorrow? matches up.

Mixcloud goes public

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 11:59:00 +0000

The London-based outfit who have been working on a 'YouTube of radio' for the past long time have moved out of invitation-only to everybody-welcome.

Yes folks, welcome Mixcloud to the big scary world.

I've been talking to co-founder Nikhil Shah about the model, and how it could be developed, for what seems the best part of a year now.

We shared BETA invites on this blog back in March, too.

So I'm hoping you enjoy how it's shaping up and recommend you give it a go if you haven't already.
Nikhil says: "Mixcloud is democratic – anyone can upload to the site and the listeners decide who get exposed. It is social – with lots of great features to share and discover radio through friends. Finally it is personal – the team are busy in the lab working on cool radio recommendation algorithms that help users find shows they love."

Mixcloud places value on the quality of expert curation individual people (presenters) can bring - a role the media industry is desperate to continue to play.

20 per cent of tweets are brand-related

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 09:30:00 +0000

Brands play a huge part in our everyday conversations, we are always querying each other about the products and services we buy or should consider buying.

So it should come as little surprise that 20% of tweets are brand-related. That's what the academics at PennState discovered and reveal in this report.

Twenty per cent of the tweets contain requests for product information or responses to the requests, according to Jim Jansen, associate professor of information science and technology in the College of Information Sciences and Technology (IST) at Penn State.

"Tweets are about as close as one can get to the customer point of purchase for products and services," adds Jansen.

So true. And my best bet is that both the volume and percentage of this will only rise and rise.

Send an email to a company and it's usually a long wait before you get a response. Shout out load on twitter and wise brands get back to you real fast.

It's because it's an open network. The fact that no email comes back for hours is between you and the company. When you follow up the email, when your expressions of angst deepen and colour, it all remains between you and the company.

But when no one answers your cries on twitter, all your followers (and anyone else who conducts a relevant search) gets to see your increasing anger and frustration - the negative customer experience transmits so much faster.

The wisest people always were the best listeners...

First ever Mobile App Stores conference (?)

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 07:57:00 +0000

My friend Ajit Jaokar is running what he believes is the first ever Mobile App Stores Conference, at CTIA in San Diego on October 8.

Great timing, since Apple just announced its billionth AppStore download.

The Mobile Application Stores, Strategy and Deployment conference is a
partner seminar of International CTIA WIRELESS I.T. and Entertainment.

Ajit reckons (and he should know) it is the only conference to focus exclusively
on the business of mobile applications - the opportunities in the mobile apps stores ecosystem.

Featured speakers include:

• Dr. Jin-Sung Choi Ph.D, Senior Vice President, Head MC Global
Product Planning Team, LG Electronics Korea
• George Linardos Vice President, Product Management, Media, Nokia
• Ilja Laurs Founder & CEO, GetJar.
• Tim Haysom, Chief Marketing Officer,OMTP
• Mike Merril, CEO-Smart Phone Technologies
• Ajit Jaokar, President-futuretext
• Chetan Sharma, CEO, Chetan Sharma Consulting
• Jouko Ahvenainen, Founder, Grow VC International
• William Volk, CEO, PlayScreen
• Sena Gbeckor-Kove, Chief Technology Officer, imKon

Tickets and details here.

It's easy to think it's all about Apple, but everyone and their mother is busily setting up mobile appstores.
Recent additions include LG’s Applications Store and Windows
Marketplace for Mobile as well as Android and the Blackberry App World.

It's all come a long way since the likes of Nokia's Widsets blazed a trail.

Bored of Twitter

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 07:33:00 +0000

So, what if we get bored of Twitter?
What if the stream of interesting nuggets from people you didn't know you needed to know start to lose their shine?
To be honest you have no one to blame but yourself. Your Twitter stream is, after all, a collection of thoughts from, and interactions with, people YOU selected for their relevance.

No one is ever bored by a lack of quality. They are bored by a lack of relevance.

So, you can't blame Twitter for your boredom. You chose how bored to be.

Bored of Twitter = there's not enough really relevant stuff in my stream.

One reason is that your interests form and reform. You may have moved on. Twitter is good at enabling adhoc self-forming groups of purpose.

It's low requirement for personal-data sharing means introduction to people you didn't know you needed to know is relatively easy. But what if your thinking has moved on but that of many people in your stream has not? Drop them?

What if their thinking is about to change, that they may say something unique and inspirational which may change the way you think or solve a key problem for you?

But this problem goes beyond retaining previously relevant connections on the off-chance they come good.

The tension is that for the evolution of ideas you need diversity but for our engagement we need relevance.

So, if we're wise, we strive to find relevant diversity. Eg I may follow a 'social media expert' (field i'm in) from Shanghai and a bookkeeper from Huntingdon (where I live).

But I probably won't follow a bookkeeper from Shanghai.

So we'll never know the moment when we could have helped each other solve a problem we share.

And unless and until everyone on Twitter can follow everyone on Twitter, and everyone is on Twitter (and we can all understand and communicate in all languages) the tension between relevance and diversity will remain.

How bored we are with Twitter depends on our personal solutions to that dilemma.

Tools which help us will shape the answer to the question: what comes after Twitter?

What comes when we can connect with anyone anywhere right now who wants to solve the same problem/serve the same purpose we do.
What is relevant, and therefore engaging is a moving feast. Discovery of one another requires open-ness (never ending diversity). But we have to remain engaged and committed, which requires ever-focusing relevance.

What seems likely is that solid state tools will not serve this. Fluidity and flexibility are key - which is why Twitter is our best stab yet.

How could we make Twitter even more able to manage the relevance/diversity tension?
Let's start with a better interface to help us judge each follower's relevance to the area we wish to engage in right now - and a set of tools to help measure that relevance and some temporary Off switches to take some less relevant folk out of your stream for short periods.
Note: it will need to be able to cope with AplusK levels of followers but let's start with 10,000.

Moon on a stick or vital next step? Your thoughts, as ever, very welcome.

Your mother was right

davidpcushman@gmail.com (David Cushman) — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 09:26:00 +0000

A short video from Red Hat (via Chris Brogan) which makes some well worn points in an elegant way. You may find it helpful if you are one of the many working hard to convince others of the need to adapt to the networked world.

It explains how a billion dollar company became what it is, by giving things away. That is - by contributing to and participating in communities.

Red Hat lived a line I like to use: "The people who can make the biggest difference to your business don't work for it."