trends for 2009

I've just started getting emails about predictions for next year. With all the usual caveats that come with this sort of thing, here's my first theme for 2009.

"Intelligent Participation"

This will manifest itself in:

1. TV drama with interactive storylines will be big. British soap opera Emmerdale ran an interactive murder mystery storyline last year. I think we're going to get much more of this sort of thing, with a move towards incorporating meaningful audience participation into 'serious' drama too.

2. Curator as expert (rebirth of the expert?) As a reaction against the 'anything goes' culture of youtube (and 2.0 generally??), the quality of curatorship will be under closer scrutiny than ever before. We don't have time to wade through all the clutter.

3. Old media will secure the brightest talent from new media (promise of better job security, bigger budgets and unprecedented creative freedom). This will result in more diverse, niche and courageous programming/editorial that understands (and is therefore less intimidated by) its audience.

4. Dull stuff will be easier to ignore. With more intelligent interaction we'll be able to discriminate between turkeys and guilty pleasures.

5. We'll all be less guilty about our guilty pleasures and more independent in our choices.

6. Economic uncertainty and fear of terrorism will be balanced by a cultural optimism and an outpouring of creativity.

You know times are strange when 'evil' global banks seem more concerned with political freedom and social democracy than the politicians...

Interesting new ad here


Cleverly HSBC don't take sides, although at first sight it appears they're endorsing the activists against the heavy-handed authorities(!) By presenting the protesters as human beings with complicated lives full of betrayals and anger and reconciliations and all the things that make up the human condition, the ad gives the bank's 'we understand diversity' message some real depth. You can't get further away from the world of global financial services than this, yet the domestic story here has a kind of universal truth that I think elevates this ad above mere sentimentality.

Maybe I'm just relieved that in a world where Sarah Palin can turn around the fortunes of a very shaky Republican campaign by playing to people's basest prejudices, fears, and black and white thinking, that one of the world's biggest financial institutions - amid all the fears of recession - will take the time to tell human stories in a non-judgmental, non-partisan way.

"We recognise how people value things differently. So what we learn from one customer helps us better serve another."

It's easy to be cynical about such sentiment, but right now I'm quite glad someone is saying it - all the more so because it's an evil corporate bank saying it.

Lead India

Brand strategy as an agent of social change? Maybe. JWT India just picked up a Cannes Lion for this. A massive, massive idea.

a new viral for Cadbury?

Office Worker Goes Absolutely Insane - Watch more free videos

Nokia evolves

Microsite for Nokia Evolve, Nokia's new low impact handset. Lovely mix of video and animation, good interviews, pleasing to navigate, and the tone of voice is spot on. The interactive 'domino rally' metaphor edges on the corny but it's so neat, and so pleasing, that it wins me over. I might buy one.

Laurie Anderson / Only An Expert / Maybe if I Fall

how to make boring products fun

http://producten.hema.nl/
I particularly like the lamp/mirror/kettle combination

er....

In defense of Web 2.0

Here's an interesting argument which appeared on the excellent MisEntropy blog recently. Obviously it is right because it references chess and chess has a solution for everything apart from the genuinely important things in life (Bobby Fischer RIP).

It's a strong defense of the Web 2.0 project, although I doubt it can hold out against the bubble. Well, I suppose there are a lot of people playing chess who aren't very good at it......


I quote in full...


To monetise or not : lessons from chess

In a recent column for Campaign, Russell Davies writes that the difference between the previous dotcom boom and the current one is the seeming indifference of current digital media startup brands towards monetisation. Which is why, he concludes, the incumbent media owners will have to figure out how to compete with someone who's happy working for free - or for comparatively little.

In line with Russell's point that people who are talking about monetisation now are those that don't get it, this current fashionable point of view holds that we may have finally reversed capitalism. The new 'with-it' breed of companies are willingly embracing the small is beautiful outlook - small payroll, small profits, small VC funding, etc.

I think something a little more complicated than that is happening. And to illustrate it, I will draw upon the game of chess.

There are two kinds of advantages you can hold in a game of chess - material or positional. Material advantage is holding more pieces than your opponent (having captured more pieces or lost fewer due to blunders.) And material advantage will almost always lead to a win (ie., in the hands of a competent player.)

Positional advantage is a bit more tricky. It's an advantage gained out of the relative positions of pieces on the board. Though positional advantage is ultimately intangible, in the hands of an expert player any positional advantage will eventually convert into a material advantage (which will lead to a win.) Which is why the better chess players play gambits - willingly sacrificing material pieces to gain much more positional influence.

Playing with positional advantage is tricky also because the lead you hold is vaporous. If the player who holds it doesn't continue to play the right moves, it vanishes into thin air - it is less persistent than material advantage. Which is why, the common advice for average chess players is to convert any positional advantage they have to a material one as soon as possible.

But the better, and truly great, chess players often ignore that rule. Secure and confident that they will play only the right moves in the game ahead, they carry and build on this intangible advantage and press ahead - and chase victory and greatness.

Needless to say, when chess began in its modern avatar, all players played for material advantage - in a swashbuckling style reminiscent of the time. It's only later that chess theorists and players figured out the concept of positional influence. But positional thinking didn't mean that the object of the game had changed. It merely recognised that when the other player is also competent enough to keep an eye on material gained and lost, other kinds of advantage have to be sought.

I think what's happening in the digital media marketplace is similar. The early players were the swashbuckling types - playing without any knowledge of the reputation economy (the corresponding equivalent of positional influence.) But as the market matured, the better players have taken the game forward and begun to play for positional advantage, knowing fully well that 'monetise and run' tactics will not work as well - or will not take them to their goals.

And what of those guys who don't get it and who are speaking of monetisation currently? These are the not so experienced players who have eked out a positional advantage but aren't quite sure they are skilled enough to hold it. They are taking the advice given to an average chess player - convert your reputation into money soon, because it may not last.

To conclude, just because the digital media marketplace is mature enough to told more than one form of interchangeable currency - money and reputation - it doesn't quite mean the object of the game has changed. On the contrary it has only become more strategic, layered and finally interesting to watch.

Here Comes Another Bubble v1.1 - The Richter Scales

Thank you for finding this, Jack

not another social networking startup!

I was involved with a successful pitch for the UK launch of social networking start-up MOLI moli.com at my last agency about a year ago. They were quite an interesting client but there were quite a few problems, not least the fact that the market was already saturated - could we really convince people that myspace and facebook are over and now it's all about moli? Budgets got cut and it all looked like it was never really going to get off the ground - that they'd missed the boat. A few months after winning the business, very little was happening. When I left the agency in July I assumed that I would never hear about the start-up again (a shame because we'd pitched some quite interesting ideas which they made all the right noises at).

So I was most surprised by this

$29m secured. Will be very interesting to see what they do with it.

Athens artists

My friend Harrie alerted me to the creative community he's a part of.



Here's one of his pictures:

Pulp Fiction in Typography