March 2007 Archive

The Coolness of Pandora for Advertisers

Thursday, March 15th, 2007

I may be a little slow on the uptake, but I just got why Pandora is such a powerful ad platform for advertisers.

Pandora has done a great job in making the application interactive. If it plays a song I don’t like, I give it a thumbs down; if I like it, thumbs up. That becomes quite a powerful semaphore in determining which ads to show because songs are delivered in the context of channels.

So, on my Pandora, I have a Tristania channel and an Iron & Wine channel. Both of those specific bands become mapped to larger symbolic channels in my own mind (eg. Tristania = dark fantastic adrenaline-pumping capital ‘R’ Romantic Byronic gothic symphony vs. Iron & Wine = chill guitar-strumming melancholy pensive relaxing americana).

My interaction in each of these spaces gets pumped in the form of very sophisticated demographics data to their advertisers. When Tristania is playing, I get Absolut Vodka, shrouded in dark shadows, and when it’s Iron & Wine, I get relaxing images of people taking long baths or going on vacation.

Brilliant, if you ask me.

Why mobile lags in the U.S.

Friday, March 9th, 2007

I was speaking with some colleagues yesterday about the differences in adoption rates of advanced mobile technology in the U.S. vs. other industrialized nations, specifically Japan.

To me, it comes down to this: it’s not about data prices, network speed, hardware, or killer apps (or the lack thereof). It’s a mindset. In the U.S., no matter how many gadgets we attach to our phones, at the end of the day, we view phones as either just phones or as smaller computers.

In Japan, it’s different. First of all, a camera on a phone is not a camera. It’s a third eye. It’s not just used to take crappy pictures. It can be used as a bar code reader, a text translation tool (really!), a scanner, and whatever else somebody comes up with as an application for the firmware in the device. GPS? Yeah, they’ve had that, oh, for about five years now. Paying for stuff with your phone? At least three years, maybe four.

But it’s not about the apps in Japan either. Mobile techonology is perceived differently. It’s part of the social fabric.

The point is not that Japan comes up with better applications. It’s that the Japanese think of mobiles differently. It’s not a phone, or even a computer. It’s an interface, a fetish in the anthropological sense, in which the web becomes an ambient, context-aware, spirit guide through the world in which the Japanese people have constructed for themselves.

Until Americans move beyond the idea of technology, and especially computers, as just machines that we to whiche we tie ourselves the kind of paradigm-busting adoption (and the apps that follow that adoption) we see in Japan and elsewhere will never happen here. What we have now is just not inspiring to enough people.

Jean Baudrillard

Wednesday, March 7th, 2007

I know it’s a sad statement when I discover an author because they have died, but this is the case with Jean Baudrillard, who passed away at the age of 77.

Timing aside, ideas and books do seem to fall into my lap at a time that is almost always relevant to my current interests. As I research the work of this man, I’ve been fascinated by the connection between his philosophy and how closely it relates to my own research topics (although he obviously got there first and is way smarter.)

What is intriguing is how much cross-disciplinary applicability there is between his work and those industries that are dominating the headlines in the high-tech world: virtual reality, web 2.0 and social networking. Alongside the ubiquitous optimism that comes with these fields are the revolutionary changes that are occurring in journalism, entertainment, and the academy.

His followers would find it ironic that I learned the most about him via Wikipedia, at least biographically. However, I felt that the description of his arguments and the following criticism was not so helpful. Indeed, the short bio on the BBC story managed in a few short sentences to capture the more interesting nuances of his philosophy, namely that:

He gained notoriety for his 1991 book The Gulf War Did Not Take Place and again a decade later for describing the 9/11 attacks as a “dark fantasy”.

Baudrillard focused his work on how our consciousness interacts with reality and fantasy, creating from them a copy world he called hyper-reality.

He said that mass media led to hyper-reality becoming a dominant force in today’s world - an argument taken to a provocative extreme in his statement that the 1991 Gulf War primarily took place on a symbolic level.

If this is an accurate portrayal (I should be writing this after I’ve read the man’s books but, what the hell, I’m probably proving his point by not), then his ideas are worth discussion.

There is little doubt that the controversy surrounding his statements that the first Gulf War did not exist and that 9/11 was the culmination of America’s dark fantasy gained him notoriety, but it seems clear that he was not denying the historical reality of those events.

It is their significance that he is interested in, and he seems to claim that the mythological significance that these events have in our society is a constructed one, and it is weaker than what used to pass for significance. The reason for this is because our society, so heavily saturated with the layered interlinking references of mass media and pop culture, that the images these sources evoke have lost their own original meaning without mass media and pop culture to prop that meaning up. How much meaning these elements originally had, according to Baudrillard, would be interesting to discern because the answer could potentially place him more in the camp of conservatives than in the camp of post-modernism. My guess, however, is that he would not have allowed that sort of inconsistency to survive in his work.

Hyperreality is probably the prevailing psychological phenomenon of our society and times and, boy, is it a gold mine. Coming back to my original reason for interest in his work, and some of the things I alluded to in my previous post, is that we are a culture comfortable with obsessed with our constructed realities and the mythology that comes with those fantasies because it’s the closest thing we have to meaning. How else do you survive, mentally and emotionally, in a Wal-Martian, flickering-fluorescent-lit landscape such as ours?

To use his example of 9/11 (this is not intended as a rant - it just happens to be a very convenient and potent case), if one reads the literature of those most galvanized by those attacks, it should come as no surprise that they immediately called for what has come to be known as the War on Terror.

Works like those of Tom Clancy were prophetic in a way that we may not understand until we at least acknowledge the possibility of 9/11 being a self-fulfilling prophecy. Politics aside, this would be a tremendous development in the study of both political science and history.

So, in 9/11 all of the building blocks were there to develop a leviathan political fantasy into a dynamic policy and war machine that continues to consume resources and divide the nation. This political fantasy is a narrative that asserts itself against those who deny its existence. Powerful stuff.

Daniel Rourke had some interesting things to say about all this just over a year ago.

On Worlds

Monday, March 5th, 2007

We think of worlds that we create to be directionally below us because that is how our minds work, if we try to fathom entering those worlds. We assume ourselves to live in a created world and so we imagine the creator of our world to live in a wider context, which must, of course, be above us.

Incarnate. Animate your avatar. Zoom in, zoom out. Zoom in for greater detail, less context, less complexity. But the minute details of the part affect the complexity of the whole.

Heaven is moved by the particles of earth and our world is moved by ideas chasing currents of the objects that travel between us. But now all is moved by bits traveling on the grid that we have created in the image of our mind.

Virtualization has been the mechanism of human evolution for the last 35,000 or so years, and what is language but the most advanced virtualization to date? But we are now living in the beginning of the next stage.

the mind the internet and the universe