Showing posts with label industry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label industry. Show all posts

The End of an Era?

Insider technology news - with its detailed web-trend tracking and analysis - can be responsible for somewhat misleading predictions about fundamental changes in the very fabric of Internet space and time, such as the designation of Web 2.0 and the social web as "new eras" in communication. Such grandiose terminology suggests a drastic break with the past, rather than emphasizing continuity or overlap in the shape or form of new media and related trends. At the same time, however, insider tech blogs are great venues for putting new web start-ups into perspective, at times paradoxically free of the idealism inherent in both popular media (Twitter, case in point, ad nauseam), and social research.

In the end, the so-called "social web", web-of-the-people, etc., is still subject to industry swings and financial roundabouts, which inevitably outweigh both permanence and innovation in equal measure. User-generated content and social networking are popular buzz words that highlight egocentricity in every day Internet use, thus enticing swarms of anthropologists, but user behavior is only one side of the Web 2.0 coin. I venture to say that changes in techie reality happen at a pace much faster than those in the social sciences, and, as we try to get a handle on new media as they blow up, the industry has moved on. For instance, while MySpace has become a prolific stomping ground for Internet anthropologists, the techies seem ready to wipe their hands and turn up their noses: "Like an ’80s rock band, MySpace’s time has come and gone" (see below) and "MySpace is dead - the Internet is growing up" (RWW).

For anthropologists, new media is about socialization, communication, bonding, age-relative culture or sub-cultures, networking and interpersonal relationships. For insiders, the social web is a marketplace. The new prediction therein is that the only market left for massive social networking sites is divided into niches or designated corners in which they can sustain a profit:
"Folks, what we are seeing is an end of general purpose, broad social networking. Finally, after nearly two years of us saying so, social is now simply part of the web fabric".
The funny thing is, anthropologists came to the same conclusion, but by mostly different means ... and over a decade ago.


Full article from GigaOM:

With MySpace Changes, a Social Networking Era Ends

The legendary New York Yankees catcher Yogi Berra is rumored to have said about a restaurant: “Nobody goes there anymore because it’s too crowded.” That is precisely how I feel about MySpace, which apparently has a lot of visitors, especially in the U.S., where it is marginally ahead of Facebook, but no one I know actually uses it.

Things are only going to get tougher — Google’s deal with News Corp is going to end soon, and with it a steady spigot of cash will be turned off for a service that is struggling to grow revenues. Like an ’80s rock band, MySpace’s time has come and gone. And nothing reflects that more than the exits of MySpace CEO Chris DeWolfe and his long-time cohort, President Tom Anderson. DeWolfe ran the company from 2003, helped sell it to News Corp for $580 million in 2005 and later helped negotiate a $900 million advertising deal with Google. Since then, MySpace has lost its buzz to Facebook (which is in turn losing that buzz to Twitter). It attempted to become an app platform, but that hasn’t worked out as well. Being a media entrepreneur, I have religiously studied Rupert Murdoch’s career. At the first sign of diminishing returns, Murdoch puts a media entity up for sale, and tries to swap his tin mine for one producing gold. He tried to do that when he attempted to pawn off MySpace to Yahoo.

The clock has been ticking on MySpace and its executives. Earlier this year, COO Amit Kapur and two other long-time MySpace employees left the company because they couldn’t get the contracts they wanted. Their exit was spun by News Corp. After reading various accounts of DeWolfe’s exit, you can see they left Chris out to dry — something I find particularly distasteful.

Regardless of his exit, there is a strategy in place that could turn MySpace into a decent enough money maker: MySpace Music. By looking to social network’s musical roots, MySpace executives realized that they could build the MTV of the broadband generation. Combining text, audio, video, and social abilities with its audience, MySpace can thrive as a niche yet lucrative musical destination. A lot has to go right for that to happen, though. I have outlined a long list of reservations about MySpace Music.

Back in November 2008, Kevin Kelleher noted, “Social networks spent too much time trying to build audiences without building a solid business model.” With a recession raging and the advertising market in a slump, the social networks have to figure out business models — fast. For MySpace it could mean capturing music industry dollars. MySpace wouldn’t be the first social network looking for niche riches. Hi5, a San Francisco-based social network that’s popular outside of the U.S., recently cut half of its workforce and is said to be pivoting into becoming a social gaming destination. Others are going to soon follow. Folks, what we are seeing is an end of general purpose, broad social networking.

Finally, after nearly two years of us saying so, social is now simply part of the web fabric. Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg recognized that and since then has been pushing hard on Facebook Connect, which is a simple authentication method that also allows granular social interactions to be embedded in non-Facebook services. With over 200 million Facebookers, Mark has somewhat of a future.

DeWolfe should take this unceremonious exit as a blessing in disguise. Or as Yogi would say, “It gets late early around here…”

[emphasis added]

[Edit: Yet another end of an era ...]

Coca-Cola sets up mobile social network

Coca-Cola Co. is creating a virtual teenager hangout like MySpace and Facebook, only on cell phones, to lure more youngsters to its sodas and flavored drinks, starting in the United States and China. Eyeing the success of mostly desktop computer-bound teen social sites run by media companies, like News Corp's MySpace, the world biggest soft drink maker said on Wednesday it was creating a cell-phone network under its Sprite brand where members can set up profiles, post pictures and meet new friends.

Coke, part of a growing group of advertisers putting ad campaigns on cell phones, will make the U.S. site available to Web-ready phones on June 22. It launched in China last week and is eyeing other markets in regions like Latin America.

"The Coca-Cola Company needs to continue to recruit future generations of consumers," said Mark Greatrex, senior vice president of marketing for Coca-Cola. "Mobile marketing is absolutely where it's at for us going forward." [more]


. Digg!
Add to del.icio.us


Mobile phone use in Sub-Saharan Africa

My research into Internet use in Cameroon in 2004 led me to predict that, if financial barriers could be overcome, mobile phones might be suited to the entrepreneurial expansion and development of small, local businesses in the area. This is because SMS text messaging could be a more effective alternative to the then prevalent use of small ads on the web. The problem appeared to be a lack of appropriate Internet access for conducting full-scale business online. Mobile phones appeared to present a viable solution if personal ownership could rise. I've just read that a Accra-based company, TradeNet, is pioneering an experimental text messaging-based service for local business development:

Buy, cell, hold
A plan is afoot to create a pan-African market based on mobile phones

THE technology revolution may be coming to poor countries via the mobile phone, not the personal computer, as it did in rich ones. And just as the internet encouraged an entrepreneurial ethos, and with it the creation of a few too many dotcom firms, Africa's surge in mobile-phone use may unleash the same sort of business energy, but tailored to local needs.

One such initiative is about to begin. TradeNet, a software company based in Accra, Ghana, will unveil a simple sort of eBay for agricultural products across a dozen countries in west Africa. It lets buyers and sellers indicate what they are after and their contact information, which is sent to all relevant subscribers as an SMS text message in one of four languages. Interested parties can then reach others directly to do a deal.

Listing offers is free, as is receiving the texts. TradeNet plans to earn revenue by putting advertisements in the messages, though it hopes the service will become so useful that recipients will eventually want to pay. For the moment, though, the company is busy signing up users and swallowing the cost of sending the messages.

Mobile-phone use in sub-Saharan Africa is soaring (see chart). Whereas only 10% of the population had network coverage in 1999, today more than 60% have it, a figure expected to exceed 85% in 2010, according to the GSM Association, an industry trade group. This provides the infrastructure for businesses like TradeNet to function.

TradeNet is the brainchild of Mark Davies, a British dotcom tycoon who gave up the rat race and went to Africa in 2000. In 2005, he started the prototype for TradeNet using around $600,000 of his own money and about $200,000 from aid agencies. An early set of trials last year generated a plethora of trades, such as a sale of organic fertiliser between a person in Yemen and another in Nigeria.

A number of other mobile-phone market-places taking shape also started as aid projects. For example, Trade at Hand, a project funded by the UN's International Trade Centre in Geneva, provides daily price information for fruit and vegetable exports in Burkina Faso and Mali, with plans to add more countries. And Manobi, a telecoms firmbased in Senegal, providing real-time agricultural and fish prices to fee-paying subscribers, is also backed by aid money. But TradeNet's approach is unique so far because it collects valuable economic data—names, locations, business interests and telephone numbers—and then sells them to advertisers. The price of economic development may be junk mail by mobile phone. [source]

Let's try this one again?

Apparently, I am not the only one who thinks that the more the Internet and mobile technologies are said to "progress", the less effectively any one task seems to work. Still, for some reason I am skeptical that better performance for average users is the reasoning behind this proposal.

Time to scrap the Internet?
Although it has already taken nearly four decades to get this far in building the Internet, some university researchers with the federal government's blessing want to scrap all that and start over. The idea may seem unthinkable, even absurd, but many believe a "clean slate" approach is the only way to truly address security, mobility and other challenges that have cropped up since UCLA professor Leonard Kleinrock helped supervise the first exchange of meaningless test data between two machines on September 2, 1969. The Internet "works well in many situations but was designed for completely different assumptions," said Dipankar Raychaudhuri, a Rutgers University professor overseeing three clean-slate projects. "It's sort of a miracle that it continues to work well today."

Even Vinton Cerf, one of the Internet's founding fathers as co-developer of the key communications techniques, said the exercise was "generally healthy" because the current technology "does not satisfy all needs." One challenge in any reconstruction, though, will be balancing the interests of various constituencies. The first time around, researchers were able to toil away in their labs quietly. Industry is playing a bigger role this time, and law enforcement is bound to make its needs for wiretapping known .....

A new network could run parallel with the current Internet and eventually replace it, or perhaps aspects of the research could go into a major overhaul of the existing architecture. ... And it could take billions of dollars to replace all the software and hardware deep in the legacy systems. Clean-slate advocates say the cozy world of researchers in the 1970s and 1980s doesn't necessarily mesh with the realities and needs of the commercial Internet ....

The Internet's early architects built the system on the principle of trust. Researchers largely knew one another, so they kept the shared network open and flexible - qualities that proved key to its rapid growth. But spammers and hackers arrived as the network expanded and could roam freely because the Internet doesn't have built-in mechanisms for knowing with certainty who sent what. The network's designers also assumed that computers are in fixed locations and always connected. That is no longer the case with the proliferation of laptops, personal digital assistants and other mobile devices, all hopping from one wireless access point to another, losing their signals here and there. [source]

There is something nostalgic about the early development of the Internet and the WWW - probably that it wasn't sponsored by McDonald's and Coca-Cola. (That came later.) I find similarities between early Internet development and the Open Source movement.

I am not disagreeing, of course, that malicious and illegal activities take place via the Internet which would ideally be avoided with a better system of policing. However, what I envision happening here is a further commercialization and corporate exploitation of the Internet, not just in its content, but in the actual technological infrastructure. Couple this with enhanced Patriot-Act-esque policing tactics, and what's the result? A hyper-secure network closer to the ideals of sharing and trust that the original 'Internet' sought to construct? A perfectly executed system capable of connecting and exchanging information quickly, easily and safely? Will we finally achieve the utopian expectations that the Internet has long since promised to fulfil?

Or will billions upon billions of dollars be spent setting up a new playground for pre-teen hackers and nameless, faceless criminals?

I am genuinely interested in seeing if this plan works. Of course, if its future depends on (US?) governmental funds as this article suggests, I'll never get the chance.


Digg!
Add to del.icio.us

top