PR FROM THE BEACH

Knowledge Engines inch us closer to Wikipedia immersion

Google's announcements today of its latest projects - the Knowledge Graph - sounds fascinating but takes us closer to a world history written according to Wikipedia. Google admits that much of the 'knowledge' powering their new search results - see their video below - is sourced from Freebase, bought by them in 2010, who in turn got heaps of data from Wikipedia and other data bases around the web.

My question is, if the source information is pulled out of areas such as Wikipedia - which is, despite their best efforts - still prone to inaccuracy, 'editing-out' and edit wars - how long before our history and the things we are 'allowed' to find are either rewritten, rubbed out or removed from actual experience or alternatively distorted by indiviual perspectives that can manipulate the systems?

It all sounds very useful and I am sure it will be. But - and it is a big but - the Knowledge Graph is filled with bear-traps and Orwellian group-think. It might seem that our knowledge is 'extended' by this -  I fear wisdom is being left behind.

 

2012 - Work it from Anywhere

If you are looking for the latest technology developments to dazzle your friends - or yourself - then look no further than the International Consumer Electronics Show which has just kicked off in Vegas.

One thing's for sure - the interconnectedness of the technologies now available means that we have moved right into a year where we can work anything from anywhere. I can switch on my aircon in NZ - even if I was in Vegas - or turn on the home monitoring micro-camera from the office to see the faces of those who have just triggered my house alarm. I can tap my credit card on my ultrabook to pay for stuff and turn my phone into a gaming console for a quick play while I wait. 

Here are my top five 'most excited about' announcements so far:

1. Intel is to bring gesture based computing to its new ultrabook technology (think Minority Report)
2. Acer unveiled the world's thinnest laptop
3. Huawei reveals its ultra-thin smart phone
4. TV shifts to OLED technology
5. Tobii Technology's eye tracking system that allows users to scroll, play and navigate using their eyes alone

If you like checking out the new and you can't get across to Vegas in the next couple of days (I wish) then you can follow the updates and breaking news on CESweb.org/news or check out the YouTube channel from CES Unveiled. 

Here's some honourable mentions, including 'print your own objects' now available for the consumer.

 

A neat scanner mouse that will cause more copyright havoc no doubt...

 

And for a general round up of things green, comfort-inducing 'work it from anywhere' innovations, here's their taster:

 

 

Cri-du-coeur for real communication as Cloud outage crashes confidence

Last week - and this weekend - saw major outages at Amazon and Sony. Gamers hoping to get down to some serious wins over Easter were struck by the fail - highlighted here on the Playstation blog, while Amazon's super fail affected sites far and wide, most notably, Quora, Hootsuite and Reddit.

Amazon's latest health reports show that things have improved since the problem occurred and, realisitically, this kind of thing is bound to happen as increasing numbers take to the Cloud as a means to manage server demand. Mistakes happen, sites get attacked, someone unplugs the wrong connection. What counts is the ability to keep customers, users and other stakeholders informed, up-to-date and confident that you can fix the problem as quickly as possible.

If your web presence is your main communication channel and you are rendered invisible by someone else's crash, what can you do?  Hidden among the acres of copy written in the last few days, probably the most useful is over at ZDNet, where Phil Wainewright has some salutary lessons for the user.

But what of the providers themselves?  What lessons should they learn? The greatest cri-du-coeur has been that Amazon failed to communicate clearly and effectively with its customers during the crisis. Personally, I'm not surprised.  Without exception, today's web giants are, I believe, appallingly bad at communicating with their users. For many years they were able to shield themselves behind remote access walls, responding only to emails (eventually), with very little human contact (if at all) and, in latter years, using minimal statements on blogs and webwalls to update users in a crisis. But believe me boys, (as mostly boys you are)  a blog post does not mean you have 'communicated', created trust, understanding or cemented the necessary forgiveness to maintain your licence to operate.

Anyone who has ever tried to communicate directly with Facebook, Google, Amazon or other large web corporates will know exactly the level of frustration I am talking about. In a world where instant two-way communication is the lifeblood of a system that champions trust, engagement, transparency and the user as the vital ingredients of the service mix, our web giants are lacking in their ability to generate and maintain the kind of real relationships they tout so readily on the global stage but which they spectacularly fail to deliver at a user level. 

Their technology may be great but the business model - as far as their public relations and communications is concerned - is more akin to the impenetrable walls of corporate non-communication circa 1950. And we all know how that turned out.

Some day soon, the big guys are going to have to wake up to the fact that they can no longer hide behind nerdy geekdom when it comes to good communications practice. If they don't, then some day soon, they'll suddenly find their licence to operate withdrawn by the users, customers and stakeholders they fail.

Fabulous - if fixable - code is not enough. You have to talk, respond and act and engage - just like the rest of us.

Earthquake changes communications landscape

If there is an organisation left in New Zealand that has, post-February 22 - failed to appreciate the power and potential of online and social media then seriously - we need to talk.

The ferocity and scale of the second Christchurch earthquake meant that organisations were forced to leave 'old' communications processes behind and venture in to uncharted waters as the urgent need to communicate outweighed entrenched opinions of how 'communication' should be undertaken. 

I take my hat off to all those involved in the post-quake communication, many of whom were having to deal with both the professional and personal aftermath of the quake. 

For some, that meant learning to use 140 characters or less while under great stress, for others, it was simply about saying 'I don't know - but I'm finding out'. 

I would particularly salute Christchurch City Council's communications team and the many volunteer techies who built valuable and vital web platforms - sometimes in hours - so that people could access information that helped them towards the basic necessities of life.

Lots of people will, in the months to come, pontificate on what was good and what was bad, the lessons to be learned and so on.  As for me, I think that unless you have lived through such an experience, you can't legislate one way or another. Those involved have done the best possible job in extreme circumstances with what was to hand. 

Post-quake communications will continue to be vital for the Canterbury region for many years ahead, long after the world at large has switched its gaze elsewhere.  Christchurch communicators - and all of us involved  in this line of work - are in this for the long haul. So Kia kaha. And well done.

More Power to the Neighbourhood

We should never underestimate the power of the neighbourhood and how simple community actions can change disaster to hope, dictatorship to democracy, isolation to engagement.

These last few weeks we have seen the power of local action resonate around the world but it has to be said that for many people, involvement with their local neighbourhood is, well, far from what it should be.  A cuppa and a chat next door is, in many places, a thing of the past with next-door-neighbours simply strangers who share the same postcode. The excuse? Mostly the excuses are reasons for not going round - that we're busy, we work odd hours, there's a lot going on, they're not around when we are and so on. Often what we need is an excuse to go round in the first place and break the ice.

An inspired 'excuse' that helps us to reconnect with our neighbours in New Zealand will be running this weekend. Neighbours' Day, an initiative by Lifewise, has gained remarkable traction and hopefully, this coming Saturday and Sunday will see people popping in and out of neighbouring houses, enjoying street parties and other events designed to stimulate local community engagement.  

In times of trouble - and I can't help but think of Christchurch and its suburbs here - our neighbours are the first people we will need to both help and depend on. Surely though we should be involved in untroubled times as well?

In our uber-connected lifestyles, we are often better friends with people we have never met on Twitter or Facebook than we are with the people next door.  I know that I for one will switch off the net next weekend and head down the road armed with muffins and a determination to get to know the whole street that little bit better.  If you want to do the same, then you'll find a raft of ideas and suggestions here. You never know, we might just bump into each other en route.

Beware Geeks Bearing Gifts

It's that time of year when people dress up and pretend to be something else. The trend begins around Halloween, then on towards Christmas there is almost a perpetual parade of cowboys, pirates, fairies, elves and magical creatures that - in fiction - can provide all manner of blessings and benefits but in reality, well, they're just pretend.

So a word to the wise as we approach the season of giving. Beware geeks bearing gifts, particularly in the realms of social media and you truly will have yourself that merry little Christmas.

Over the last few months I've stumbled over several sites promising all sorts of miracles for those who buy their social media wares. If you are thinking of using social media and expanding what you do online, good on you. But,  if you are one of the small to medium sized businesses that these sites seem to be aiming at, my Christmas wish would be that you think very carefully and consider the points below before you load up a shopping cart full of exciting looking goodies and click 'send':

1. Social media is not about numbers. It is about people communicating with each other, building relationships and working together. If someone promises you 'thousands' of Facebook or Twitter followers they don't understand the environment and are likely to lead you astray. Expensively. This is not a popularity contest and 'follower' numbers don't buy results.
2. Social media takes time. Yes, you can get a 'message' out there quickly, but, in the long term, the relationships you forge will be the measure of your success, not how speedily something went 'viral'.
3. Look carefully at any site that purports to be run by 'social media gurus' or 'experts' or 'specialists' but features blog posts from 'admin' and has no real people associated with the site.  These are signs that you need to be very, very careful before you part with your hard earned cash.
4. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. That's been my message to, well, thousands of people now over the last ten years or more. Understand what you want to achieve, who you want to build a relationship with and why and how you are going to sustain and build that relationship - then start thinking about your strategy and then the tools you might use. Don't start with tactics first and work backwards. That's another Trojan Horse.
5. There are lots of genuine people out there who have solid experience in this area. If you are setting out to buy in help, be careful. Talk to real people. Hear some real stories. Don't buy 'off the shelf' - it won't work because your needs are very different to anyone else's - as are the needs of the communities you will serve.  And serving and service is a vital component of this space.

So, to recap. Think about what you want to achieve first, don't think it is about numbers and popularity  because this is the real world, not high school. Talk to real people, hear some real stories. Scrutinise all geeks bearing gifts. Remember at all times that just because someone is dressed up as Father Christmas, it doesn't mean you'll definitely find Santa underneath - it might just be a pirate or a cowboy looking to take you on a ride to nowhere.

It's NOT ok to feed the oglers

Long story short, the ladette website nzgirl has launched a 'campaign' purporting to 'raise awareness' for breast cancer, paying $1000 dollars per 50 photos of readers' breasts uploaded to their site.

Over the years we've had astroturfing, greenwashing, pinkwashing - and now we have boobwashing. The site claims it's all in a good cause. The site fails to say exactly which breast cancer charity they will be paying the money to. They also trumpet the fact, via Twitter and elsewhere, they have 'removed' advertising around the publication page. Yeah right. Big deal. It is still a cynical and distorted means to drive traffic to the site - the only 'awareness' raising being done here is for nzgirl, its website and the long-term ad rate it will be able to charge on the strength of distorted visitor numbers.

I've lost several nearest-and-dearest to breast cancer and currently count among my closest friends two survivors and one mid-fight.  I asked them - and those around them - what they thought of this slapstick and juvenile enterprise, thinking maybe it was just me, maybe I'd got a bit set in my ways. Their unanimous verdict was the same as mine - it is unethical, undignified and unacceptable.  

nzgirl has accused detractors and critics of being 'PC' - well yes, I am - Perfectly Cynical in my view of the means, motives and outcomes for this pathetically purile publicity promotion.

To me, it is sadly proof that the young and the bright among us can still manage to stoop to the nasty, tawdry 20th (even 19th) century Phineas T Barnum stunt school of cheap publicity.

nzgirl has succeeded in creating a circus today with the media as ringmaster and the unwitting - and probably well-meaning -  supporters the dancing bares.

In many ways, it's a sad indictment of our society. Long after the circus has left town, the oglers (probably the same ones who line the streets for the Boobs on Bikes debacle every year) will still be pushing up the visitor numbers at NZ Girl, which has effectively bought itself a peepshow for a few grand. New Zealand girls and women deserve better than this, as do all those who have and continue to battle this disease.

 

PS: I've come back to this post this evening, having read two other blog posts on the same subject. First from Lance Wiggs and second, via @CateOwen's tweet, some great observations from Boganette. Both well worth a read.

Beware the cloudy crisis

After a bit of a blogging break on here, it is quite amazing looking back over all that has happened in the last few weeks. Probably the event with the most impact on the majority of ordinary folk was the Icelandic volcano eruption - and it is one close to my heart at the moment as my young 'uns are off on their first solo to Europe.

My worry isn't for delays and cancellations. No. My concern lies with the decisions taken to fly through the ash cloud. I fully understand the commercial imperative and also the significant personal difficulty travel delays and disruptions cause (having been on the end of them many, many times in life).  However I think most would agree that a delay is better than a disaster. Wouldn't you? Yet this situation presents passengers - and society - with a real trust dilemma and that should be of concern to us all.

The aviation authorities suggest dangerous flying conditions still exist but are now frequently contradicted by the airlines who say no, it is all just fine. In this situation, who should we, as users, trust? Whose word carries more weight?  As a complete layperson in the science of it all, but a frequent traveller, my concern isn't the 'St Elmo's Fire' scenario, but the 'wear and tear' that will result from persistent ash cloud fly through.  I know how gravel roads, dust and grit affect my car, so, as a layperson, I guess that similar or greater damage will result on aircraft exposed to the volcanic ash over time.  Nobody seems to be commenting on this possibility, yet to me, it is a serious potential risk.

If this extreme wear and tear does take its toll, I wonder how the first airline to hit the ground will react? Without wishing to be a doom-monger, it is very scary stuff. A European plane falling out of the sky is more likely to land on a populated area which means we are not just looking at the loss of life on the plane, but on the ground as well. Surely gainsaying aviation authority advice is a gamble not just with an airline's reputation but with people's lives? Me, I'm with the aviation authorities - stay on the ground and eliminate the risk - no commercial profit is worth a single life lost or endangered. Let's hope the airlines keep thinking this one through with the public interest uppermost in their minds and stop downsizing the optimum particle size in order to upsize their profits.

NASA's New Year Shuttle Sale - a bargain at $28.2m

I have always known that if I ever won one of those huge lottery jackpots - you know the ones, they send everyone into a ticket buying frenzy - I would give most of the winnings away once the mortgage was paid and the kids looked after. After all, what would one do with all that cash?  But seeing the latest 'bargain' available from NASA, in the shape of the space shuttle, I would be sorely tempted to blow the whole lot. Trouble is, I would never get it on the drive.

The bitter taste of chocolate coated influence

This is not a whine brought on by lack of chocolate. But it is a worry about the way 'influence' is being trumpeted and overly paraded in the social media sphere to the extent I am once again reminded of the Emperor's New Clothes.

Earlier this week, in a bad mood caused by other matters, I grumbled when I read a tweet from the local branch of a global confectioner on Twitter to a blogger who had benefited from some free chocolate, apparently sent following her commentary on the palm oil debacle and the company's subsequent 'recovery' in social media channels. I was delighted for her that she had received the chocolate and hope much 'nom. nom, noming' was going on at her base. I would also add that she conveyed surprise in her blog at the arrival of the goodies. I was, however, intrigued.

Supply of freebies in the blogosphere is dependent on the supplier's perception of the recipient's 'influence'.  In the US, restrictions have now been placed on bob-a-blogs, elsewhere I suspect they may materialise soon.  But what I find interesting is not the supply of freebies, but the perception of influence. You see, in my house, I am the primary chocolate buyer. The filler of supermarket trollies who lumps in those palm-oiled bars for my confectionery-loving crew. I also have an extensive network - not on Twitter - of fellow trolley-fillers, who in turn perform outreach 'within a tightly formulated purchasing tribe' (to add the sparkle of some current corporate blather-speak).  But which do you think is potentially of greatest influence? A person who blogs about how well a company has done in the social media sphere or a person who actually buys the products? 

At this end of the week (having cheered myself up with some purchased chocolate) I have been playing with Klout, another Twitter analytics tool that, along with many others, advises users as to their influence on the network. Apart from the fact it doesn't seem terribly accurate and doesn't correlate terribly well with other similar analytics tools, it makes great play of the 'influencer' numbers, telling you how you should try harder, do this, retweet that, ask this question and so on.  A couple of weeks ago I was playing with Twitter lists - a seemingly benign mechanism for organising groups of people - that was almost immediately tainted by a feverish outbreak of a seemingly high school mentality of popularity.

I know that many of those 'influencers' in the social media sphere will probably baulk at this, but my worry is that all this talk of influence takes social media down a wrong turning and into a dark alley.  The biggest bonus awarded to us all by online interaction was the removal of filtered communication. We had been stuck with commercial mainstream media models - well, for centuries  - and over the last fifteen years we have seen the gradual erosion of their control. (Which is one of the reasons Rupert Murdoch is so mad, but that's another post entirely).  There is a real and present danger that the benefits of social media, the open channels, the acceptance of newcomers and the willingness to actually listen to someone else (and I mean properly listen) will diminish and content, instead of having the power to change things will become another platform for marketing spam.

Statistics show us the millions of people who are engaged online, using all sorts of tools to connect with each other but there are still millions more who have no access to the tools, technology or concerns of those intent on filtering who says what to whom and when, but who may well end up permanently out of the loop.

I've been working in this space for many years now (despite Klout's assessment of me!) and I know that if your intention is to genuinely build community, you don't put barriers in front of people - you make them welcome. You make them feel they are part of the team, rather than the one who never gets picked. 

Introducing pop charts, lists, influencer ratings, most popular this, most fantastic that simply replaces the old filters with new ones, removing individuals from the conversation. Voices that should be heard won't be heard - or considered important - because they haven't made this week's list or carry last week's Klout.

Much is going on online to make people feel unwelcome, unwanted and unnecessary, which is very sad indeed. If it continues as it is at present then countries who do much to block internet access and content won't have too much to worry about as the egos, seekers-of-influence and experts will put sizeable numbers off joining in in the first place.

Influence is subjective. A relationship has action. Build a real relationship with real people that have real 'reach' in the real world. That'll build the chocolate sales and keep the jobs alive far more effectively than seeking social media plaudits.