Brave New WorldTechCrunch alerted me to a very interesting YouTube video created by Davide Casaleggio that appeared first on Read/Write Web. The video talks about the future of the Internet in a 1984 / Brave New World style. A bit creepy where everyone is connected online via avatars or as the video puts it Agav, an agent avatar. Second Life, Amazon, and Google are the short term winners but Google eventually rules the world in 2050. The Agav's have five senses built in so that you can trade experiences with anyone (i.e. Joe's European vacation can be yours too!)
The video is definitely creepy and I hope that avatar interaction never replaces real life interaction (although for some MMORPG's this is already reality). However, it really gets you to think about where the Web is going and how much more we can exploit by making the World "flat." Thomas Friedman's book, The World is Flat, already discusses how small the world is when you can pick up your VoIP and call around the world or email or IM someone in India for example. With Agav's this will give you the feel of knowing someone without knowing someone. However, the video also brings up an interesting point that "No one on the Internet knows that you're a dog." I think that if this is the main way that we begin to do business, there will be ways to assure folks that you are who you say you are. Stronger security and identity measures will need to be in place.
And then finally we run into this cultural problem. The root of all of our problems right now. (I don't want to get political here but...) Online culture will be dominated by who has the most dollars. At this point, its the USA. Will US culture be the dominant one online? And if so, what are the repercussions? With information and culture so available, will other cultures be completely forgotten, destroyed, or wiped out?
Interesting points here but I think one thing remains is that one mile is one mile and that local news will always be of interest to the users. I spoke about local and the big market opportunity that this is. I think that overall the Web will be used for understanding of culture (hopefully) but the ability to broadcast your culture online and for others to respect and learn about other people. After all, like the movie Babel, misunderstanding is the root of most problems. Could the Web be that next Tower of Babel? Remains to be seen....
Video Ad Overview So the big question of Web 2.0 is how to monetize the online video. Revver has tried to embed an add at the end of the video, Metacafe serves pre-roll, and VideoEgg has an ad overlay that plays during the life of the video. Recently served up are Adap.tv which provides some type of contextual ad placement in the bottom of its player as the video is streaming (via Mashable), ScanScout (via TechCrunch) offers contextual text overlays on the video, and more recently YouTube announced their inline and post roll advertising method. (via Mashable). Are video overlays the way to go? Possibly they could be. However, YouTube's demo doesn't make too much sense. As Michael Arrington notes, the ads served up via YouTube are not relevant to the video at hand and its way too easy to ignore them, while Mashable has the opposite view point. I'm not agreeing with either since I still feel that video ad models are interesting but as a user they are still ads. I'm a true believer that content is king and integration of the advert with content is the best way to go. Remember when Alias was sponsored by Nokia? Or the obvious product placement at BMW Films? I think that advertiser sponsored shows really build goodwill with audiences AND if an element of product placement is involved, great recall of products. However, while I am writing this I know that many are citing the huge bust of Bud.tv. Some products are definitely trickier than others.
However the question if video overlays work remains. And only time will tell. I think though that video overlays are a step in the right direction toward interactivity. As I previously mentioned, video games are the most interactive of movies where you make a decision nearly every second (or several times per second). As TV watchers, an extremely passive activity, we are not used to interacting with anything, whether it's ads or any other type of clickable. Video overlays are bringing us one step closer to that next generation.
Juiced! Joost (pronounced Juiced) has been signing deals left and right with everyone from Viacom to CBS to independent filmmakers to now Heavy.com (via Mashable). It's being billed as "a new way to watch TV" bringing the best parts of the Internet (social networking, time shifting, etc), together with the best parts of TV (high production quality and quality content). Joost created by the founders of Kazaa and Skype (in other words pretty smart guys), could be the next YouTube killer? While Joost doesn't support user generated content (yet?) most of YouTube's traffic or at least a consistent portion of it comes from YouTube partners like CBS, NBA, and other established brands and Joost could be taking a large portion of those eyeballs away especially since YouTube's quality has been criticized as of late. I think that as an audience we seek a more interactive user experience. On one hand we have traditional television where we simply watch. The most interactivity we have is by flipping channels. On the other hand we have video games where we are essentially watching a movie but one in which we are making a decision every fraction of a second. The trend appears to be toward the latter, as we see an explosive upward trend in video games and a gradual downward slope in TV. However, to graduate everything to a video game would be much to extreme and I think that Joost will do a great job in letting people understand that if they are interested in the t-shirt that Matt Fox from Lost is wearing, they can pause the show and purchase it in real time and then go back to watching. Further the social aspect of TV watching will have content creators spinning even more elaborate webs than the ones in 24 or Lost, which will engage audiences. Ad model here? I'm not sure, I think that Joost will probably provide some type of interactive commercial as opposed to the traditional 30 second ad spot. Perhaps Joost can even provide some more power to the almost dead Bud.tv?
Keep an eye on this space as I can't wait to download my Joost trial now!
The Final Frontier? There's been a lot of speculation about Web 3.0 and what that will mean in the coming months and years. A quick recap - Web 1.0 was simply push technology, technology similar to a newspaper where a central editor pushed out content to you. Web 2.0 (where we are now) combined Ajax (pages reload with hitting refresh, similar to Google Maps) with an interactivity feature like a blog, social network, or rating system with the first Web 2.0 properties being Amazon.com, eBay, and Craigslist. Web 2.0 has definitely made an impact on the current web with nearly all sites offering these features and valuations skyrocketing into the billions (see YouTube). The most important aspect of Web 2.0 though is the fact that it is so engaging that Web 2.0 sites are one of the stickiest sites on the Web and one of the most visited (behind search engines). Now if you think about where the majority of us spend our time it is on video games. Yes, even older women spend time playing video games online, since games include not just Grand Theft Auto but Sudoku and FreeCell.
So what's the point of this recap? Well, its definitely to figure out where the Web is going. There's been a lot of hype over Second Life (kind of a Sims like game where there really is no point). There's also been a lot of hype over video games including Sony's Virtual World for PS3 users. What about the combination? Hitwise came out with a report yesterday about how quickly virtual worlds have been growing and Runescape is #1 with 44% of marketshare to online worlds with Webkinz coming in a distant second with 14%. This, of course, does not include downloaded virtual worlds like Second Life, or the ever popular World of Warcraft, although I think at some point Web based games may overtake these downloaded versions.
The virtual worlds cannot be ignored. I think that we all like the aspect of the interface coupled with the Web 2.0 characteristics of real people that we can interact with. Brands now will have that intricate product placement opportunity ever so prevalent with video games, an ability to monitor dialogues, and a chance to see what people will create and do with their brands given a blank slate. Is this Web 3.0? Many think so. Many think that its simply a way of representing Web 2.0 in 3D space. I think that if its not Web 3.0 at least it will be Web 2.5.
Video Game Spending Up In today's eMarketer, the report stated how video game spending pegged at about a billion dollars for 07 will nearly double in four years. I think marketers are realizing the potential of video games and the power of product placement, especially interactive product placement. A few months ago, Microsoft bought Massive, an advertising company specializing in billboards for video games. We've seen the success of Burger King's XBox Games. I attended the King Kong premiere last year and instead of a goodie bag they asked me if I wanted a Playstation or XBox Game of King Kong. We've seen the launch of PS3's take on Second Life. And speaking of Second Life, we've seen the massive (no pun here!) press that it has gotten for being an interactive world where real money is transacted.
All of this points to a slow integration of products and services into the content that we consume. Interactivity is the key to building a strong brand. While celebrity and character endorsement is powerful, nothing is more powerful than experiencing something first hand, even if that is through YOUR avatar or video game character (or even yourself through Wii's new interface). I don't think as marketers we give people enough credit. I think they would very much like to be engaged with your brand, if your brand has something compelling to engage with. For example, watching ABC's prime time shows online, some of the commercials that are shown are simply TV commercials repurposed for the web. I can't wait to click on that Continue button. However, commercials that have a story line, or allow you to click to play a game or something that engages you with the brand during that mandatory thirty second break are more likely to be successful. You are actually interacting with that brand as opposed to mindlessly watching a 30 second countdown. In Second Life, you experience (or at least your Avatar experiences) the difference between regular shoes and Nikes. Likewise in video games (which if you think about it, Second Life is one big video game). Point here: keep your eye on this space and begin to develop your own branded content and allow consumers to use your content on their avatars or characters and they eventually may use them in real life.
Mobile and Gaming Lagging Search and E-mail A recent Forrester research report as reported by Adage notes that interactive budgets are skewed toward measurable means like email marketing and search marketing. The report notes that mobile and gaming are falling behind while social media advertising has risen 40%. Mobile is claimed to fall behind because of the lack of any proof of performance and gaming is skewed to younger sophisticated crowds.
It's so strange that the study notes that mobile is having a tough time growing roots. All around us are examples of successful mobile campaigns. Text messaging your favorite Idol in, guessing which briefcase has all of the Deal or No Deal money, and so on. The key with mobile is point of purchase. The phone is with you at ALL times, more so than even your wallet and/or keys. (And if you forget your wallet you can PAY with your phone via PayPal Mobile). So there it is marketers, your examples of successful campaigns. Then comes the second argument of cost. Well the great thing is that you don't need a graphic designer, a brand name director, or recognizable faces. It's TEXT! It's simple, it's cheap, it's 160 characters including spaces. Once you've decided what your campaign is, whether its polling, driving to web, or simple message push, you just need to rent space on a short code and there you have it - your own text messaging campaign.
Sure, you're going to need to promote it. After all how are people going to find out about your keyword and short code, but if you have a consumer facing brand you have tons of real estate to do so. I think that all marketers should be in the mobile space because its cheap, easy, and quick to roll out. You'll be able to collect the king of all data points, the cell phone number, the most sacred closely kept piece of information guarded by all consumers. (Maybe second to your credit card number, but definitely ahead of your social since you can find that online already).
, already discusses how small the world is when you can pick up your VoIP and call around the world or email or IM someone in India for example. With Agav's this will give you the feel of knowing someone without knowing someone. However, the video also brings up an interesting point that "No one on the Internet knows that you're a dog." 
