Musings on the Information Economy

Information Efficiency vs. the Boogyman

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Tue, 21 May 2013 20:47:00 +0000

I hate when writers use the boogyman to scare people. Michael Carney does just that with his article on personal data, "You Are Your Data: the Scary Future of the Quantified Self Movement".

I don't negate the fact that a small minority will "do evil" with the growing exposure of personal data. My point is that someone of Michael's stature and position should not focus on what will undoubtedly be a small faction, at the expense of the larger, more bountiful majority. The quantified self (and an exponentially increasing other sets of data) are and will continue to deliver value, much of which we are only beginning to see.

From Michael,

For those of us who don’t measure up compared to the rest of the population, the outcome won’t be pretty.

But what about those that are unnecessarily penalized, given today's information inefficiencies? The truth is that the industries he cites become more efficient with more (personal) data. Insurance is at it's heart based on information - the more information available, the more effectively and efficiently risk can be priced. The more risky clients pay more. Market dynamics at work.

Health insurance, even home mortgages, are quantified bets given the information made available. Yes, people will have to pay more, but others will have to pay less.

He finishes with an acknowledgement that he is not focused on the value. Rather, he bases his argument on the need for user awareness. I agree that privacy policies and terms of service documents need more transparency and less legalese. Using the boogyman to make the point is wrong.

Calling Bullshit on Big Data

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Thu, 02 May 2013 18:20:00 +0000

This article has a decent list of ways to call bullshit on data-driven analyses. Click the link for context, but here are the top points:

Focus on how robust a finding is, meaning that different ways of looking at the evidence point to the same conclusion.
Data mavens often make a big deal of their results being statistically significant, which is a statement that it’s unlikely their findings simply reflect chance. Don’t confuse this with something actually mattering.
Be wary of scholars using high-powered statistical techniques as a bludgeon to silence critics who are not specialists.
Don’t fall into the trap of thinking about an empirical finding as “right” or “wrong.”
Don’t mistake correlation for causation.
Always ask “so what?”

As often occurs with an emerging technology theme, the glitz and glam of the shiny new thing that is big data often overshadows the real value. The above list is a great start in being sure that the data product or opportunity being pitched truly can add value to your mission.

#3 is an interesting one - I see a trend in the emerging big data space that vendors and others seeking to exploit big data too often move to high end, overly complex mathematics, when more basic, easier to understand models would suffice. This is especially true when building out new applications on top of large datasets. You will often get to the productive answer faster by building simple prototypes before investing more expensive resources. Data modeling is no different.

#5 above is a particularly important point. My sense is that it is difficult for most to logically separate the concepts of correlation and causation. I find myself jumping too far too often, by inferring to much import on a basic correlation that lacks any evidence of causation.

At the end of the day, high end mathematics do not negate basic economic theory. Be smart - don't forget your whits when digging in to big data...

Munging Moore's Law and Gay Rights

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 17:28:00 +0000

Moore's law states that computer processing power will double every 18 months or so. There has been all sorts of extrapolations as to what this may mean to us as a society, the Singularity being one. I've got another: Gay Rights.

I did a paper back in college (late 90s) on gay marriage - I still remember the feeling of astonishment that, by that time, no state had yet allowed same-sex couples to marry. If I recall correctly, only a few allowed civil unions. As of this writing, 9 states now allow same-sex marriages, and several others are well on their way. That is a major cultural pivot in just 15 years.

My take is that the speed of the pivot has a lot to do with Moore's Law, or rather, the infrastructure it has enabled. As computer processing has grown exponentially, so too has the speed of communication. We have moved from The Pony Express to the Daily Paper to the 24-hour News Cycle to now near instant delivery, with each leap coming faster than the last. In a similar vein, social networking has expedited the sharing of opinions and thoughts among friends. What used to happen periodically on the front porch is now a constant stream. Communication is exponentially faster, and so too are its persuasive properties.

As opinions change, the impact of that change radiates with rapid speed. As one friend openly seeks to understand marriage equality, all connected friends are exposed to this shift. Even as a lone NBA player comes out as being gay, the rapid dissemination (and exploration) of this story takes over like never before. As with Moore's Law, change is happening exponentially faster.

David Brooks, Your Premise is Off!

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 15:23:00 +0000

I've already blogged about some of David Brooks' writing on big data. Though it is admirable that he is taking the time to delve in to the emerging world of data, he needs to apply some differential thinking to the information he is collecting. In this piece, his premise is again off:

The theory of big data is to have no theory, at least about human nature. You just gather huge amounts of information, observe the patterns and estimate probabilities about how people will act in the future.

This is not the theory of big data - this is a small sliver of what is and can be done with the explosion of structured data that is popping around us. To diminish the power of big data to just what can be gleaned through "estimated probabilities" is to focus on the tree and not the forest.

The power of data is in the information it contains, not the method by which it is extracted. And the limit is our imagination.

The Philosophy of Data

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Thu, 25 Apr 2013 21:53:00 +0000

In this article titled, "The Philosophy of Data", auther David Brooks asks:

What kinds of events are predictable using statistical analysis and what sorts of events are not?

Now, I know an editor likely created the title, but his article limits the value of data to insights derived from statistical analysis - as if that is the only means to extract information from (big) data.

I think this is the wrong question to ask. This may be a bit optimistic, but my belief is that data analyses can answer most any question. The problem (and opportunity) lies in ensuring the data contains the necessary information to answer the question - a problem we have only begun to explore.

In the same article:

...we tend to get carried away in our desire to reduce everything to the quantifiable.

Data is not just about quantification; it's about information. We are only at the beginning of collecting, structuring, and even analyzing data. My belief is that we will see great advances in this processing, which will in turn unlock new possibilities for data-driven insights. Such innovation will enable analyses and insights never before possible. Data will inform questions we don't even yet know to ask.

Big Data and Hiring

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Wed, 24 Apr 2013 15:39:00 +0000

I came across this interesting delineation of the reasons for Ron Johnson's failure at JC Penney. Hiring is another interesting bastion of opportunity to leverage data for improvement...

I spent some time at PeopleAnswers in it's early days (I was employ #3!) - a business that has scaled behavioral testing to improve hiring and recruitment. They have (very effectively) attacked part of the problem - exposing our innate selves that drive behavior to potential hiring managers. This innateness is the foundation of our potential succes. But it is not our whole selves - our experience, our passions, and other variables also play a role in determining our career success.

I wonder what a systemic understanding of JC Penney, Target and Apple's characteristics, culture, products, etc., might have told the JC Penney board, when coupled with Ron Johnson's behavioral profile and experience? Might they have seen the mismatch sooner?

Big Data and a Portfolio Approach

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Fri, 19 Apr 2013 16:50:00 +0000

Given the sharp decline of the cost of data storage and the emergence of scalable tools to explore and mine this data, more and more data is becoming systemically accessible every day. We are just at the beginning of applying the information available among the growing data sets around us.

Big data is, well, big. It is new. And the tools emerging to access and harvest the information it contains are also new. Therefore, getting to real, useful information when exploring big data is a difficult task.

Many of the applications of big data have to been big as well. And complex. This complexity of application on top of what is already a complex myriad of nascent tools makes for a very brittle system.

I've been thinking about this differently. My take is that we need to focus engineering lift on the complex methods and tools to extract information from data, and streamline and simplify the application. Simple applications are easier and faster to build. Faster builds allow for a quicker return on effort. Product designers should therefore focus on thin web apps that leverage these vast, complex datasets. Think of your initial applications as prototypes for your big data system...

How can we use big data in small, focused ways to improve our lives? What "little" things can be extracted from available datasets and applied quickly? How can the burdens of complexity be pushed down the stack, to simplify the application, and lessen the investment required before reaping any value?

Oh, and one more thing - there is another benefit to pushing as much of the engineering and complexity to the data processing layer. This also enables a portfolio approach, whereby tens, hundreds or even thousands of apps can be built on a single data stack. Why use a shot gun or even a sniper, when you can use an army to mine for value...

UPDATE: I just started playing with a new app that munges this thinking, Osito. (Good overview from The Verge here.) Basically, it's a single iOS app that leverages the portfolio approach to provide lighter, thin alerts given your personal data. The product focus is triggers based on user location. Interesting play - we'll see if it works...

Data Science vs. Data Intelligence

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Thu, 18 Apr 2013 12:30:00 +0000

Sean Gourley gave a very interesting talk at GigaOm's Structure Data conference last month. I have repeated his ideas around data science vs. data intelligence in several conversations. (Stacey Higginbotham does a great job distilling the talk here - the full talk is embedded below.)

He lays out the idea in one simple chart:

He also provides a few rules of the road about data:

Data needs to be designed for human interaction
Understand limits of human processing
Data is messy, incomplete, and biased
Data needs theory
Data needs stories... Stories need data

I have seen first hand bubble-like aspirations for what "big data" plus "data science" can offer. Because the technologies are new, and so many are now becoming aware of the power of high-end statistics and machine learning, data science is perceived to be larger than it actually is for may.

It is a tool, a method to solve problems big and small. It isn't an answer.

Dusting it off...

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Wed, 17 Apr 2013 18:50:00 +0000

After a multi-year hiatus, I am dusting off the blog. Since my last note, my company (Nico Networks) was purchased by The Washington Post Company. My partner and I joined what became WaPo Labs. This move afforded me the opportunity to operationalize my thoughts and ideas faster than I could document them (how's that for an excuse?).

Through this experience, we were able to iterate and expand upon many of the ideas discussed to date in this blog. However, instead of being limited to political campaigning, we were afforded the resources of one of the largest media organizations in the world. As opportunity expanded, so too did the ideas...

Reflecting back, a common thread throughout has been the application of information culled from data. The earliest applications we did on behalf of our largest client, Catalist, were built upon their voter file data. At Labs, the team continues to expand and iterate on the application of information extracted from past activity streams, and from deep text analytics happening on the company's vast corpus of content built over decades. We accomplished a great deal, and I am excited to see what continues to come from what is an amazing and very talented group of innovators.

We are only at the beginning of what has already been coined as the information economy. The technology and expertise to efficiently extract usable information from the growing data sets that are emerging around the world is just being discovered. As more data becomes structured, more interesting and never-before-seen deductions and associations can be made. As new technologies and capabilities are applied, new stories can be told.

The brave new world is emerging, and I am excited to be a part of it, to continue to explore how information from data can change the world. More to come...

I Want My Twitter TV!!!

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:40:00 +0000

I have been an occasional user of Twitter for a couple years now. I have enjoyed reading the conversations. I have enjoyed the links, pics, and other media shared among the 100 + people I follow. But I am not yet satisfied. I am aware of the whole hashtag thing, but come on, is that the easiest solution out there?

I have eclectic tastes. I love politics. I am a news junkie. I am in to this whole social media thing. And I'm a new dad. But, I am not in to each of these things at the same time all the time. I want channels through which I can view the respective tweets of those I follow in each of these groups.

Better yet, don't make me build my own list of who to follow - I'm lazy. There are organizations associated with each of the topics of interest to me that I already trust. Given the openness of the Twitter API, why don't organizations start creating their own channels? Washington Post, CNN, etc - one of you should own the political Twitter channel, providing a widget of the more prominent political tweeters. A VC, TechCrunch, where's my VC / startup channel?

At the least, blog aggregation sites like HuffPo and Gawker should provide Twitter streams of their authors...

Social Media and US Diplomacy

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 18:35:00 +0000

Foreign policy is, “a set of goals outlining how the country will interact with other countries economically, politically, socially and militarily, and to a lesser extent, how the country will interact with non-state actors.”

Emerging new media channels are proliferating rapidly throughout the world. The catalyst of conversation is evolving, as the people are interacting in new and innovative ways given this emergence. Anyone can be a journalist by posting on a blog. Anyone can be a photojournalist by posting on Flickr, or other photo-sharing site. And user-generated video delivers breaking news. Even the microblogging site Twitter has had an impact in world affairs, with its coverage of the recent Mumbai attacks. The power of new media channels in shaping the grassroots conversation continues to grow with each instance of its effectiveness.

The image established of a particular policy initiative has always been determined in large part by the interactions that take place among the people. Historically, government officials have enjoyed the bully pulpit from which to drive these conversations. Television, and news agencies in particular, have had a strangle hold on driving these conversations, providing a relatively secure channel through which government officials can communicate their message. Few other resources for information or perspective were available outside this channel.

This is no longer the case. Even in more controlled nations, new media continues to penetrate and burrow holes in whatever veil of control the respective government seeks to establish. Thus, new media is an emerging channel that drives the conversation among the people.

Given this paradigm shift in the manner in which the conversation is shaped, a new opportunity has emerged through which diplomacy and foreign policy initiatives can be supported. New media is now a pivotal channel through which foreign policy is executed, whether or not a particular government shapes it. It is time the United States invested in leveraging this new channel to deliver upon its foreign policy.

I am not alone in this thinking - Victoria Esser's article on social media in the Politico provides additional support behind the idea of enlisting social media in US diplomatic efforts.

(T)he U.S. cannot afford to wait while these channels are perfected in order to direct them in service of President Barack Obama’s priority of renewing America’s global leadership. Indeed, Mr. Obama can use the themes and technologies that helped him generate huge grass-roots support in his presidential campaign to build support for America on the world stage.

As Clinton discovered and Obama exploited, social media is far more than just a new channel to communicate to your target audience. The interactive conversation that can be fostered allows for listening as well as talking, providing a wealth of opportunity with the right message and mix of tools to develop and move a community.

Control of the message is still paramount, but the control cannot come from restricting the tools or even the speakers. The control comes from having a solid, heartfelt message that lives and breaths in every dimension. Bill Clinton emulated his adoration for doing good by the American people despite his personal transgressions by drinking every opportunity he could to interact with and connect to everyday voters, carrying his image over those rough patches. Obama emulates his drive towards objectivity and constructive debate in everything he does, from not only allowing but enabling the conversation to continue far beyond his control. This is providing the cover necessary to thrive despite a few missteps in recent weeks.

Given Obama's positioning as being transparent and open, a strong social media strategy supporting these basic tenants could go along way in reparing the damange done in recent years to the US image abroad...

From Tech to Disney to Obama: Theory on Leveraging the Organization

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 21:25:00 +0000

I am fascinated by the evolving interplay of entities, and how this interplay is enabling more productivity (often mirroring natural patterns). In this vein, I see parallels between the emerging methods of improving effectiveness of web-based software, Bob Iger's strategy that is driving recent successes at Disney, and Obama's "West Wing on steroids". Each is leveraging organizational structure in new and different ways in order to improve overall productivity.

Today web-based software must employ resources for others to build upon, enhance, tweak, and/or embed to allow the collective intelligence to grow the idea beyond what one person or one compay can do. I have written about this idea before.

In a story in the most recent Fortune (not yet online), Bob Iger's strategy at Disney to invest in brands that span across Disney's many businesses is chronicled. Take movies - family films under the Disney banner have a strong likelyhood of transferring from film to tv to merchandising and so on. However, even the larger hits fromDisney's Miramax and Touchstone production houses rarely grow revenue outside the division. Thus, he focuses on opportunities that can be amplified throughout the business. He is driving execution across the organization, greatly enhancing the profitability of single ideas / brands.

Obama seeks to enable strong leaders to manage issues that span across the various agencies of the Executive branch. "(P)roblems like global warming sprawl across several agencies, often requiring a sort of uber-Cabinet member – a czar – to confront them." Similar to Iger, he expects to tackle issues by attacking them head-on and across various agencies, holistically, instead of piece-by-piece.

Time will tell if Obama's efforts will be successful. But, given natural references, recent tech trends and Iger's success at Disney, the model has legs...

Bureaucracy Kills Innovation: WH Friends, Fight the Process!

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 16:32:00 +0000

Anne Kornblut's article on what the Obama staff is encountering as they arrive to work is a little too kitchy, and misses a critical fundamental problem with our government bureaucracy - it is not designed to keep up with technological innovation.

David Almacy, former Internet Director under Bush laments:

"The White House itself is an institution that transitions regardless of who the president is," he said. "The White House is not starting from scratch. Processes are already in place."

With all due respect to David, it is precisely these processes that must be killed. This type of bureaucracy is in direct conflict with the continued expedience of technological innovation. As the speed with which innovations arise increases, more pressure is placed upon this conflict. Either the innovation will be stifled, or the bureaucracy must fall.

White House staff members must be able to use Facebook, as 80 million constiuents are there. They must be able to use their personal email accounts, as the personal continues to intertwine with the professional. And they must remain mobile and not be tied to desktop PCs.

Allowing this institutional b.s. to bar White House staff from the tools that have become the mainstay of the young urban professional will undoubtedly stifle the innovation and enthusiasm the campaign generated, and reduce the Executive Office of the President to little more than a democratic version of the Bush administration - surely not what the country needs right now...

NYT Misses the Ball: Brand Advertising in SocNets

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 16:26:00 +0000

In yesterday's NYTimes, an article was published specifically about Procter & Gamble's use of Facebook advertising, but more generally about how traditional brand advertising is failing within social networking. Duh.

P & G is arguably one of the most sophisticated marketing operations out there, and yet their attempts thus far to advertise their brands within social networks are still rooted in traditional impression-based brand advertising.

And when they try to take advantage of new “social advertising,” extending their commercial message to a member’s friends, their ads will be noticed, all right, but not necessarily favorably. Members are understandably reluctant to become shills. IDC, the technology research firm, published a study last month that reported that just 3 percent of Internet users in the United States would willingly let publishers use their friends for advertising. The report described social advertising as “stillborn.”

The opportunity is not about "shilling", its about creating a relationship with the customer. In the previous world, attention could be attained by simply getting your logo in front of the user. Over the years, more channels were offered, but the strategy was still the same - the more impressions the more attention. However, as attention continues to fragment and channels proliferate, this "impression-based" approach is losing its effectiveness, especially within a social networking environment.

The opportunity of cultivating a brand within social networking lies in fostering an emotional relationship with your customer. This has long been a powerful yet overlooked strategy available to the average marketer. Creating an emotional bond is difficult, and can be costly given the few tactics available to drive such a strategy (prior to social networks). The power and effectiveness of impression-based advertising coupled with the high cost of generating this emotional bond pushed a relationship-based strategy off the budget. However, with the connected nature of social networks, such a strategy has become much less costly, once a chord is struck. Given the diminishing power of impression-based advertising, striving for an emotional relationship with the customer is how brands of the future must connect.

To illustrate this point, let's look at a couple brands that arguably have done a great job of creating an emotional bond with their customer, and what has happened specifically within their Facebook Page presence.

Apple has roughly 180,000+ fans throughout various Pages within Facebook, most of which appear to be fan-created (i.e. free to Apple, or rather a result of their other relationship-driven marketing tactics).
Five Guys Burgers, a Mid-Atlantic "fast casual" burger joint, the 300-location chain, garnered over 16,000 fans to date, presumably at no cost to the company.

Don't just show yourself to your customer, connect with them...

Update: It appears the Wall Street Journal made my argument in today's paper, albeit in a much more eloquent, in-depth manner...

What If...

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 14:29:00 +0000

What if the conversation among the Pakistani people turned in support of a thorough investigation and strong government response to the Mumbai attacks?

What if Pakistani Americans urged their friends and family still living in Pakistan to enter the conversation?

What if the Obama folks cut a list of Pakistani-Americans from their 11 million-strong supporter list, and asked them to reach out to their friends and family, and provided them a few resources to pass along to help seed the conversation?

New media can drive more than just a money and vote machine....

The New CTO: Fostering Innovation

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 04:34:00 +0000

One of the many discussions going on about President-Elect Obama's transition is that of his promise to designate a new cabinet-level CTO. While the "beltway" is focused on Secretary of State and the like, Silicon Valley and the rest of the internet / technology crowd is curious to see if Obama makes good on his promise, and what the agenda of this new entity might develop. My hope is that this new era of unconstrained innovation (led by Facebook's application platform, Apples iPhone Application environment, among others) is brought to government.

President Obama has a tremendous opportunity to tap the grassroots energy developed throughout his campaign to foster innovation within government by leveraging technology. Activate the community to innovate. Provide APIs to government data and information to enable interested parties to create applications, gadgets, etc., that improve transparency and enhance the citizens' experience with government.

If you wonder what could happen with such openness, so do I. But recent examples prove such a model unleashes a cornucopia of innovation that is beyond what a single mind can fathom. Just take the new iPhone application, Ocarina. Launched just over a week ago, the application allows you to create a flute-like melody by blowing into the iPhone microphone. You can also listen to the melodies created by others. Silly, yes. Valuable? Maybe not. But already, users have listened to over 3 million melodies.

An open innovation platform provides the opportunity for the people to go beyond their vote, in influencing government. They can have a direct hand in precisely how government executes its mision and services.

Obselete Advance Tactics

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 21:46:00 +0000

I did advance for President Clinton (event logistics management). One of the first keys you learn is to make sure the space was smaller than your crowd. If it wasn't smaller, make it at least look smaller by funneling the crowd to where the press is aiming their cameras.

All sorts of tactics can be used to help "shrink" a room, from riser placement to blocking empty areas with large flags, etc. Unfortunately, now that every attendee has a camera and the ability to post their photo on Flickr or worse, many of those tactics are not quite as effective.

Case in point: Marc Ambinder just posted this photo from a McCain rally today:

Ouch.

Social Media and the Butterfly Effect

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 15:48:00 +0000

I came across this article in the New York Times - another example of the paradigm shift in the fundamentals of communication. Johnny Lee posted a video on YouTube of his ideas on how to bring a virtual reality feel to consumers, using existing technology available via Nintendo's Wii console.

That video, together with others that Mr. Lee, now 28, posted on YouTube, have drawn people to the innovator as well as his innovations. Video game companies have contacted him and, in September, M.I.T.’s Technology Review named him as one of its top innovators under 35...

Contrast this with what might have followed from other options Mr. Lee considered for communicating his ideas. He might have published a paper that only a few dozen specialists would have read. A talk at a conference would have brought a slightly larger audience. In either case, it would have taken months for his ideas to reach others.

We are just now seeing few, isolated examples of how social media is radically changing the manner in which communication is conducted. Bring to this the Butterfly Effect, and just think how such a paradigm shift is radically changing our world...

Ideas

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 19:58:00 +0000

So, I have not posted my ideas here in a while. Truth be told, people have started paying me for them, so sharing them here might diffuse their price / effectiveness.

Nonetheless, I do have a few in production now that are kind of interesting. The first is the Rock the Vote Action Center. Readers may recognize a few theories I have thrown about on this blog. The idea with this one is to allow users to make phone calls on the campaign's behalf, from within Facebook. Of course, all activity is communicated to your friends... Things have been going great with this one - Marc Ambinder of The Atlantic wrote a pi ece on it.

Another interesting app is our Voter Registration tool. The idea here is to check whether or not you (and your Facebook friends) are registered to vote without having to enter your information (it all comes via Facebook). In the background we run a match of the user and their friend's to a national voter file. If the user is not found, we guide them through the voter registration process. We also display the user's friends into three groups - registered, not registered (i.e. found on the voter file but not registered to vote) and missing info.

I like this one a lot, but it did nothing like what Facebook's own campaign produced... We shall see what a few tweaks for next cycle might bring!

More to come (I hope)...

Sides of the House: Understanding the Change

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 22:29:00 +0000

Have you seen this or this or this? It is bubbling in to something big and nasty, and "we" are on the wrong side (assuming this letter truly reflects toe Democratic position)...

The following chart compares the adoption rates of the internet from 1995 - 97 versus the recent rise of MySpace and Facebook. The starting point for both was around 2 million users.
Social media is bringing upon the constituency a rapid evolution. Understanding of where it is heading and what it means is lagging. Few understand the opportunity, let alone the consequences. And even fewer of those folks are in decision-making roles, whether it be government, corporate or otherwise.

Issues such as this are going to bubble up fast and furious over the next few months and years. Societal change is so fun to watch!

Social Media as a Fractal

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 12:14:00 +0000

I have been thinking about this social media phenomena, as it matures and crosses the chasm from the early-adopter / tech geek crowd to mainstream. The idea that I am wrestling with is that the primary behaviors being exhibited thus far are just the top layer of a much more deep and complex evolution currently underway.

I have written before about Charlene Li and Josh Bernoff's social technolgraphics ladder. Many others are trying to define frameworks to explain what we are seeing. However, my theory is that these frameworks are too simple to explain what is happening, especially as such behaviors expand into the mainstream. And, in order to meet the needs of the ever-expanding social media user base requires a more complex model. And yet, such complex models already exist - in nature.

My thesis is that, as these tools proliferate and organization forms on its own, social media mimics more existing biological structures (i.e. fractals) than such simple structures as a ladder or even a pyramid. Just with biology, such self-organizing structures allow the sum to be better / smarter / stronger than the parts. This framework association is not limited to a particular part or behavior of social media. It reflects the entire social media landscape currently emerging.

This premise is supported by the success thus far of recent API's, such as Facebook and (dare I say) Twitter. Build the core infrastructure of your idea, and then offer integration points for others to permeate from your original idea, making the sum much more valuable than the part.

Wikipedia's strength also supports this idea. The sum of thousands of wonks / writers / editers / and even readers has self-organized in a manner that the sum of all the artciles created is much more valuable than the individual writings.

Obama is another loose example, as he attempts to cede control to his supporters, allowing them to self-organize.

So, as entrepreneurs, investors, corporate decision-makers, political strategists etc., evaluate opportunities within this space, ask this one fundamental question: "Does it enable the sum to be more valuable than the parts."

I am not the first to discuss this (for others, go here or here), nor do I claim to have a strong understanding of bio-structures. I just sense a connection here...

Upon the Shoulders of Giants

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 21:31:00 +0000

Nick Carr asks in the most recent Atlantic, "Is Google making us stupid?" (not yet available on the web). Carr writes:

The Internet promises to have particularly far-reaching effects on cognition...The Internet, an immeasurably powerful computing system, is subsuming most of our other intellectual technologies. It's becoming our map and our clock, our printing press and our typewriter, our calculator and our telephone, and our radio and TV.

It is a brave new world as the singularity nears. Matt Asay over at CNET thinks this is not a good thing. My take? Bring it on. Using the same tenants of Anderson's "Free" argument, offloading aspects of our brain processes to technology allows us to focus on other activities, still uniquely accomplished by the human brain. Just as when something becomes free, such a newfound freedom opens up a whole host of yet unforeseen opportunities. We won't know what it means until it happens, as our ability to predict and comprehend beyond is limited.

Thus, upon the shoulders of giants we again will stand...

Anderson's "FREE" & Social Media

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Tue, 27 May 2008 13:11:00 +0000

Chris Anderson is right. Again. The Long Tail author is publishing another seminal tome on the theory that costs are dramatically reduced given the efficiencies of the websphere, promulgating a whole new economy of "free". From Wired in February:

Once a marketing gimmick, free has emerged as a full-fledged economy. Offering free music proved successful for Radiohead, Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails, and a swarm of other bands on MySpace that grasped the audience-building merits of zero. The fastest-growing parts of the gaming industry are ad-supported casual games online and free-to-try massively multiplayer online games. Virtually everything Google does is free to consumers, from Gmail to Picasa to GOOG-411.

Another example: Social Media integration. A year ago this month, Facebook launched its API platform, allowing third-party developers to create applications that can easily be integrated into existing tools and features of the Facebook community. This opportunity has spawned over 26 thousand applications, generating over 1 billion downloads by Facebook users. It is free to use. However, the API is a "walled garden", providing no interoperability with other social media networks, creating a cost to the developer (e.g. their time).

This idea of providing an API to enable interoperability between your website / web service and others is taking off. Even the New York Times is jumping on the band wagon - they are working on an API to allow developers to import NYT content into new and yet-to-be-thought-of applications for disseminating content.

Earlier this year Google launched its Open Social product, with MySpace, LinkedIn and most others (except Facebook) on board. Their intent is to provide the infrastructure to allow developers to code their applications once, and then provide the tools and resources necessary to support the interoperability among the various social networks, websites, etc., current and future.

Facebook had attempted to license (i.e. charge) other social networks to take advantage of their platform. Bebo bit, licensing the platform last December. However, given Google's move, Facebook has been forced to go a step further, "open sourcing" their platform for anyone to use. Thus, like Google's Open Social, use of Facebook's API platform is now free for other social networks to integrate. The only cost is their time.

Facebook's obvious expectation is that other social networks will take the time to integrate, therefore offering Facebook's growing developer community more value for time spent developing within the their API platform.

The efficiencies of the internet continue to shrink even non-monetary costs (in this case, a developer's time). Interesting times...

Beyond Blogs

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Fri, 23 May 2008 15:50:00 +0000

In an effort to keep up on what is going on in the social media space, I read. Lots sometimes, less others. There are a couple articles I found interesting recently.

First, this one by Heather Green and Stephen Baker. The key point I take from it is that social media has crossed over to the mainstream. Though only a quarter of the US online population reads blogs once a month or more, the continued proliferation of tools and services to connect are dominating attention and dramatically evolving online behavior.

While only a small slice of the population wants to blog, a far larger swath of humanity is eager to make friends and contacts, to exchange pictures and music, to share activities and ideas.

And this shift in online behavior is overflowing into the off-line. I am a neophyte within this space, as compared to my younger colleagues, and yet even I do not walk in to a meeting without first looking attendees up on LinkedIn and/or Facebook. It is a rare event where the guest list isn't published online beforehand. I have been in a bank a handful of times, only to cash the random check that was not direct deposited. And, I have not bough a newspaper in years.

This article by Jackie Peters, further summarizes the impact of these behavior changes on marketing and communications:

Our job now is two-fold: make sure the fakers who claim they get it, but really don’t, don’t screw things up, and educate clients, potential clients and our peers so they are able to make intelligent decisions in selecting an agency and implementing a social media strategy.

The fundamentals of this space are crystallizing, separating the effective from the ineffective. More is certainly to come. So now what?

August 29, 1936

noreply@blogger.com (Brandon Thomas) — Fri, 16 May 2008 13:22:00 +0000

In another installment of how control is lost in American politics, we have this gem:

I am curious has to how the McCain camp will defend against a birthday. John McCain turns 72 on August 29th - less than 10 weeks before election day.