If content is still king, its crown is definitely losing it’s luster. The King’s reign is presiding over more interactive, engaging and measurable media. Content is being forced to be richer and in some cases, it’s evolving into applications.
Users are drawn to the most engaging screen – in the past that has been a TV or cinema screen. Today it’s more likely to be a PC or mobile screen. Even in a location where there’s less competition from other big screens, a captive audience is not enough to win attention. A boring screen (of any size) will simply inspire the user to seek a less boring screen, for example their ever present mobile screen.
As far as the digital out of home opportunity is concerned, the solution is not to throw commoditized weather icons or event listings on to a screen and claim the experience is hyper local. It’s also not good enough bolting Bluetooth downloads, mobile marketing short codes or 3D bar codes to passive media in a vain attempt to share some of mobile’s limelight. Disconnected, siloed content doesn’t allow the user to be part of the conversation and cannot therefore pretend to be king for much longer.
We’ve moved from impressions to expressions, so media has to be a more localized and connected experience. The user must be given the chance to feel included. That means that the location experience needs to be tuned to the context of the user – not simply re-purposed TV or web content.
Place based social media is a solution to this problem, but it cannot be treated in the same way as passive content. It needs to be part of a network’s strategy – not an afterthought. It’s closer to an application than pure content.
For a few years now, I’ve been telling a story that starts with the phrase “suspend disbelief”. The story is intended to help illustrate the power of having a dialogue rather than a monologue with customers. These days there’s really little belief to suspend, as the story is unfolding for real, yet surprisingly, I meet people who think its lesson doesn’t apply to them. I of course think they’re wrong. So here goes…
Suspend disbelief. Imagine two politicians waiting to engage with a gathering crowd, a majority with cell phones. The first politician stands up on a soapbox and addressing the crowd says, “In an effort to be completely transparent, please text, tweet or email your comments, ideas or questions to the screen behind me and I’ll do my best to address you all. Of course we have to moderate messages to ensure nothing defamatory or illegal is displayed, but other than that, let it rip. Let’s start a dialogue…” Several minutes later, after a passionate dialogue with the crowd, the first politician sits down, and the second politician walks over to the screen, turns it off, then faces the crowd and starts his monologue.
Whatever we think about the first politician’s potential exposure to “negative voices” our knee-jerk reaction to the second politician is “He must be hiding something. Why doesn’t he want hear us. What’s he afraid of?”
I’m surprised that today, so many businesses will say they understand the importance of a dialogue with their customers but they still insist on metaphorically turning their screens off. In a society where increasingly, every screen is connected, every screen is a channel and an opportunity for a two way conversation. User generated content – negative or positive – can be an opportunity to learn from, retain or acquire customers.
Some good examples of companies using multiple channels to have a dialogue with their customers and encourage user generated feedback include Whole Foods’ Twitter page and Ford’s TheFordStory.
With some excellent and simple moderation and curation tools and services, (some purpose built real time moderation and curation tools are provided by LocaModa here) there is no excuse for any company not to engage in a dialogue with their customers via multiple screens – those screens can be Facebook, Twitter, blogs and yes, digital out of home screens in locations such as bars, cafes, colleges, stadiums, restaurants.
I’ll keep saying this until I’m red in the face, Minority Report is not the future of outdoor advertising.
Some writers and presenters are prone to cut and paste Hollywood’s visionary concepts into their blogs or presentations without a basic understanding of user experience, business models, or the strategic imperatives that drive or block market-wide innovation. There was such a post on a new DOOH blog this week but I’ll spare linking to it, as the writer is clearly well intentioned and passionate about our industry and I don’t want to dissipate his positive energy. (I did post a response to his post, but at the time of writing, that hadn’t been accepted.)
In the classic Minority Report scene (linked below), as Tom Cruise’s character, John Anderson walks through a shopping mall, camera’s scan his retinas and trigger targeted advertisements displayed on public screens for brands including Guinness (“John Anderton you could use a Guinness right now…”) and American Express (John Anderton, member since 2037). This scene either rallies digital out of home scaremongers or beguiles media technology junkies. In reality it should not interest either camp.
Does anyone really think this Minority Report user scenario is a future that consumers would embrace?
Today, the USER has the remote control NOT the brand. The connection between brand and consumer is a multi-way DIALOGUE not a one-way MONOLOGUE. (Sorry for the shouting caps – but actually this kind of thing fires me up!)
The CAN-SPAM act, which would probably encompass the user scenarios in Minority Report, makes it illegal to send any message to a consumer without their explicit permission – often requiring a double opt-in.
Location based services (sometimes also referred to as location based applications) are just restarting to get off the ground after several attempts in the past decade before the infrastructure and mobile devices were mature enough to provide compelling experiences. The best location based services are still being hotly debated by users as either being the start of a new media revolution (I take this side) or trivial games. The difference between user adoption of the successful location based services is that they are designed around what USESR want, not what brands want.
When a user subscribes to location-based services, they need ways to toggle those services on and off and/or control public and private modes as their mood and the context dictates. This is something software cannot determine automatically and get right all the time. Get it wrong once, and the user will turn off their service, or throw their phone through the digital screen!
For example, with Google Latitude, Google states before any application, website, or feature you’ve chosen to use can access your Latitude data, you must specifically grant access to the app developer and will see exactly what access or data they’re requesting.
Similarly with applications such as Foursquare, which encourage people to explore their neighborhoods and then reward them for “checking in” and telling their friends where they are, every check in can be set to private or public. On their website, Foursquare’s approach to the user’s privacy is spelled out very clearly and sensibly: “We take your privacy very seriously. That’s why every time you checkin we ask you whether you want to share your location with your friends, whether you want to push it to Twitter, whether you want to push it to Facebook.”
So the next time someone suggests that interactive digital out of home media or place based social media is in some way similar to or inspired by Minority Report, remind them that the plot of that movie was all about predicting a future crime and preventing it from happening. The crime of public spam will be prevented before it happens – even if my name isn’t Tom Cruise.
On the 13th February, 2006, “Critical Fluff” a local, irreverent blog raved about LocaModa and awarded us “Unlimited Pineapples”. Clearly, “Unlimited Pineapples” was a measure that by the blog’s standards was about as great as anyone or anything could achieve. I commented on that blog, thanking the writer.
And that’s how we met Jayne Karolow, the blogger and voice behind “Critical Fluff”.
It is with sadness but also some pride that I announce that after four years with us, Jayne is leaving LocaModa to manage the marketing for a group of uber trendy local restaurants. (We’re confident that those restaurants will soon be sporting LocaModa enabled place based social media screens, so every cloud has a silver lining, but I digress.)
Jayne built and managed and was the principal voice of The Web Outside. Today, The Web Outside is one of the most respected and informative blogs in our industry. For her work on The Web Outside, I award Jayne unlimited pineapples. (Jayne will continue posting from time to time but will now have the unique view from the venue’s side of the experience.)
Jayne also project managed (or project wrangled) some of the most chaotic, innovative, award winning, cross channel, place based social media for the biggest clients in our industry including Calvin Klein, Captain Morgan, Stride, Sprint, VH1, AT&T, GM, Vans and Verizon. For her project management skills, I also award Jayne unlimited pineapples.
As a serial entrepreneur, I recognize that as a startup evolves, it attracts different people at different stages of their careers. A colleague once described startups as “leggy” meaning that they are like Bambie when he tried to stand for the first time. Jayne regularly and diplomatically dealt with our legginess. She calmed chaotic Mad Man and was a bridge between what sales people promise and what engineers have to deliver. All part of a typical day dealing with media agencies, digital out of home networks, creative directors (and their egos), lawyers and tech teams.
As startups grow up, they (hopefully) get less leggy, but they unfortunately can lose great people – especially those accustomed to legginess.
We wish Jayne the very best of luck and, if ANYONE wants a reference for Jayne from me – I can honestly and unequivocally give her unlimited pineapples.
A poll on Experiate last week questioned the designation of ‘industry’ for the digital out of home ideaspace. I quote:
Do we see ourselves as a unique and growing industry with a specific architecture (rules, regulations, trade shows, organizations) that works in tandem with other forms of communication, like our TV at home, computers, and iPhones?
Or do we see ourselves as an application inside a multi-channel communication culture with standards and practices that we should adopt?
The results thus far (from a fairly limited sample set of 47 votes) favor the latter, but only marginally.
David Weinfeld offers his insight on the close tallies: “Digital signage is an industry, in and of itself; and digital signage is not an industry… Approaching digital signage from the technology side of the equation, it most certainly is an independent sector. [Yet]… When framing digital signage within the world of media, it is but a piece of a much larger ecosystem. In the same way that the word “mobile” will cease to have meaning in an increasingly untethered world, so too will digital signage meld into a world of free flowing media.”
I have to agree with David here… a “yes to both” is really the only way to make sure the relationship among media in the current climate (DS included) is properly represented. The main takeaway here is far less about the semantic designation and far more about developing an evolving set of best practices that both define DS conceptually within the mediascape, while also respecting the unique technical and UX demands required for successful deployment.
Cast your vote here.
It may be time to rally for a write-in option…
