Tuesday, December 26, 2006

Second Life Activities: First Life Cash

Today the Washington Post had an interesting article on the many questions surrounding the selling of virtual goods and services on a site like Second Life. Click here for the article. Highlighted was the online lingerie business of Veronica Brown (online alter ego Simone Stern), which sells virtual garments to virtual people in this popular online community. Veronica is one of the lucky (or perhaps enterprising) online entrepreneurs who make a real world living in this somewhat unorthodox manner.

She is also in the midst of a range of copyright, ownership, tax, patent and trademark issues surrounding this unique community. For those who aren’t aware, Second Life rocked the online boat by allowing users to maintain control and ownership of any content they create on the site, opening the flood gates to this kind of business development. Recently, some equally enterprising souls have created an online “copybot” that can be used to quickly and easily reproduce the products of business people like Veronica. In the real world, copying another’s work word for word (or stitch for stitch) might land one in court. At a minimum, knock offs, like the fake Rolex’s and Kate Spade bags being sold by street vendors from DC to LA, can be recognized as off inferior quality – as irritating as it is for the creators, the knock offs might actually drive the desire of those who can afford it to obtain the “real thing.” Imitation is, in fact, the sincerest form of flattery.

But in the virtual world, different questions arise. These items aren’t being “knocked off” in an inferior way: they are being copied or even cloned, if you will. One couldn’t tell the difference between the original and a copy with a magnifying glass. That seems to argue for protection of intellectual property. On the other hand, both the shop owners in Second Life and the copybot creators have basically created a software service, not a real world product. Do the shop owners have more right to their software service than the copybot creators?

The issues in Second Life and similar online venues are complex, which may be why District Court Judge Richard Posner appeared in Second Life talking about the issue of property rights in virtual reality. He foresees the development of a new line of law for the virtual world – along the lines of the special set of rules known as maritime law.

Congress is getting into the act, not surprisingly. And it’s also not surprising that the main focus is on the tax implications of Second Life – expect hearings early in the year on whether people like Veronica should pay taxes on the income generated from their online activities.

Friday, December 22, 2006

The Digital Future is Here

The University of Southern California's Annenberg School for Communication released the latest installment in its "Digital Future Project," a comprehensive annual examination of the impact of online technology on America. You can read the highlights as a PDF here.

This report has a wealth of information for anyone seeking to operate in the digital world, from businesses to associations to citizens. To set some context, 43% of Internet users who are members of online communities say that they "feel as strongly" about their virtual community as they do about their real life. Now, this statistic may be scary to some. But to me it highlights the fact that people are connecting to the world around them in whole new ways. As Jeffrey Cole, the director of the project indicated ". . . we are now beginning to. . . discover new directions for the Internet as a comprehensive tool that Americans are using to touch the world."

A fundamental shift has occured -- the Internet is no longer a simple tool for information, entertainment and communication, it's becoming an integral part of how we live our lives -- and not just for the "elite few." According to the report, approximately 77% of Americans now spend some time online and the numbers continue to increase. More than 2/3rd of Americans have access at home. For those who consider the Internet to be the provenance of the elite, the rapid increases can be compared to the market penetration of the television set, which is now in 98% of homes.

What's happening when they go online? While much of it is still looking up information and sending e-mail, the increase in the creation of User Generated Content (UGC) is astonishing. Almost 1/4 of users post photos online. The number of Internet users who have a blog has doubled in three years. Over 12% of Internet users have their own website.

Perhaps more important for those who argue that the Internet is "disconnecting" and "isolating", the report shows that Internet users are finding growing numbers of friends online -- and that this often translates into in-person friends (no, I don't mean stalkers). In fact, indications are that the use of the Internet may increase communications with family and friends and does not significantly reduce the "in-person" time spent with these individuals.

One last point -- the report shows that people in online communities take offline action. "More than 1/5th . . . of online community members took actions offline at least once a a year that were related to their online community." Furthermore, ". . . almost 2/3rds of online community members who participate in social causes through the Internet . . . say they are involved in causes that were new to them when they began participating on the Internet. And more than 40% . . . participate more in social activism since they started partitipating in online communities. "

Associations and businesses are you listening? People will buy a product or take an action based on their participation in an online community. What are you doing to facilitate that?

Wednesday, December 20, 2006

Television Embracing Audience Choice

Imagine a world where we weren't subjected to derivative game shows (Show Me the Money? Identity?), bad made-for-TV movies about natural or man-made disasters (anyone remember 10.5?), or tired, poorly paced sit coms (too many to mention). A world where TV executives were able to weed out the awful shows before wasting our valuable viewing time. A world where the Ugly Betty's of the world move to the top of the que.

PBS is trying to bring us that world in January, when it will premiere three science series pilots on New Years Day via streaming video on pbs.org. Stations will run the shows a few days later and viewers will be asked to vote on which should be developed into a full 10 week series.

I know the sceptics will say "yeah, people say they want this kind of choice, but who is really going to do this?" The answer is -- the kinds of people that will actually watch the show. Sure, it probably won't be millions of people. But it may be that critical 1% whose commitment to PBS will be reinforced (or even forged) by this interactive experience. And then they'll tell two people and so on and so on...

Essentially, PBS is building brand loyalty before their offerings even hit the airwaves. And they're doing it without all the expense of a traditional advertising campaign. As an added bonus, their efforts to engage the viewers early and often may well generate increased good will -- along with contrbutions.

Check out PBS' Science Page for more information.

Tuesday, December 19, 2006

YOU are the person of the year

The amount of ire and angst being generated in the "web 2.0" world over Time magazine's recent "person of the year" cover story is a little amusing. For those who haven't been paying attention, Time basically named anyone who participated in the act of creating user generated content on the web as the "person of the year." We have seen the enemy and it is us. Read the Time cover story and decide for yourself.

Many have responded in anger and with some snippiness at what they view as Time's patronizing approach (see Nora Ehpron's funny article on this, as well as some general responses.) Much of the criticism has been along the lines of "I don't need a corporate behemoth to tell me I'm cool." In some cases, people feel that Time was a bit smug and disingenuous in celebrating how ordinary people have "[seized] the reins of the global media . . . and beating the pros at their own game." Who would those pros be? Time magazine? And of course, everyone is incensed that Time didn't pick someone involved with the war in Iraq or Iran or Afghanistan or Korea or Somalia or Darfur or...

Frankly, I really think all this hue and cry is a bit much.

First of all, people, calm down -- it's Time magazine. It's not like the Dalai Lama or God or your mother said this. Some editors at the magazine thought "hey, we don't want to pick and choose between all the good and bad people in the world. There's too many. We'll piss someone off whoever we choose - let's make it easy." Maybe it's not the height of journalistic valour, but then again, it's not like they chose Hitler or his modern day equivalent (fill in your most feared dictator here).

Second, the selection of "you" as the Time person of the year certainly has achieved one goal. It's gotten us all talking about who the person of the year should be. Sure, it's lame. But it reminds me of a story someone told me once about their teenager who was outraged at a piece of modern art he saw. He thought it was terrible, anyone could have done it, why did people think that was art, etc. He went on about it for days. Maybe it was terrible art -- who knows? But it started a discussion and a consideration that might not have happened otherwise.

Finally, and perhaps more important, Time is simply recognizing what we've all been talking about for a while. The power of the Internet, combined with the mobility and multi-purpose nature of consumer electronics, has brought heretofore unseen levels of engagement. Whether it's a "new" level of engagement or a "heightened" level of engagement (as the Pew Trust's recent report suggests) the truth is that this level of engagement (or e-scapism if you will) has profoundly impacted how we work, play and live.

By way of analogy, consider the automobile. For years it was "around," something some people enjoyed, but society didn't really organize itself around the car. But then we hit a "tipping point" in Gladwell's terms, and now we can't imagine building a community that couldn't accomodate a car. Society has been profoundly and fundamentally changed by this invention. It didn't happen overnight, but it did happen. We're in the midst of seeing that happen with user engagement...

Monday, December 04, 2006

Newspaper Without the Paper

The newspaper is dead -- long live the newspaper. If you haven't run into stories written by "mojo's", you will soon. No, mojo's aren't Austin Powers wanna be's. It's short for mobile journalists, and Gannett news, one of the media behemoths of the world, is bringing them on board. Armed with nothing more than a laptop, digital camera and power source (such as their car), these mobile journalists write stories and upload them in the blink of an eye. You may not read these stories in USA Today, but the millions of Americans who get their news online see them daily, or even hourly.

Is there really that much news out there? Well, yes there is, if you focus on covering the most local of events. Previously considered to be the banal chore of newsroom interns, mojos are covering everything that happens in the community -- from the opening of a local grocery store to the neighborhood cat show. Some people may argue that "no one reads those stories." But the point is that the committed few DO read these stories. And, if you have enough of these microstories on your site, you can increase cummulative readership while capturing the hearts and minds of people who feel passionately about the issues and events of their community.

Just ask Gannett, where traffic from August to October on their sites has increased 146% over the previous year.

These mojos and their micro stories strike at the heart of engagism. By posting articles of significance to the community, and even hiring community members to write those articles, Gannett is recognizing that "top down" journalism won't work any more.

You can learn more about this in the article "A Newspaper Chain Sees Its Future..." in the Washington Post.

Friday, December 01, 2006

Finding a New Identity

My husband, a dear soul, is somewhat of a ludite. He just got a cell phone last year, and only at my insistence. When I traded up on my iPod I gave him my old one, but he still prefers to carry around a CD player. The only reason we have a flat screen TV is because I went out and bought it (of course, he does enjoy watching it).

He has always been a little leery of technology. I remember when ATMs became all the rage (yes, I am that old), he never liked to use them. What if they gave him the wrong amount? What if there was a malfunction? And he wouldn't even consider using them for deposits. Imagine if the deposit got lost in their system. No, he prefered to go directly to real live people.

Well, he's finally adapted to the ATM, his paychecks are electronically deposited and he has a cellphone and iPod, so one might say he's a full-fledged citizen of the digital world.

Clearly, though, he's just on the periphery. And as much as I like to think I'm all down with the technology, it's clear I'm on the periphery as well. You see, I hate to admit this but I don't have a MySpace page (or Facebook or Squidoo or any of those social networking kinds of things). I hate IM'ing (or texting or whatever we're calling it these days). I've never posted a video on YouTube. I've also never played a video game on the web (I do, of course, have a Nintendo DS -- doesn't every 40-year old woman?).

All that's about to change. As I'm writing this book about e-scapism I realize I need to dabble in all those escapist activities -- videos online, social networking and, yes, even chatting. It's a tough job, but someone's got to do it.

To get started, I logged on to secondlife.com yesterday and set up an account. Now I'm one of those neophytes entering this Brave New World through what looks like an outdoor park in Northern California. A few initial thoughts:

First of all, when you first enter the game you're surrounded by a lot of other newbies who are floating around, experimenting with chat, and figuring out how to alter their appearance. It feels a little like an incubation room. I had selected a somewhat outlandish avatar (hey, this is supposed to be fantasy, right?) and was surprised to see that most of the other newbies went with the most "human-esque" of the options.

It's weird how you can't ever see your face without turning all the way around using the arrow keys. I kept wanting to see what I look like. But then I realized -- when I'm walking around the real world, I can't see my face. That's a little strange to think about. I think I know what I look like to the rest of the world, but maybe I don't...

Almost immediately upon entering, people started coming up to me and saying "hello." Oddly enough, that made me really uncomfortable. See, I'm actually not a big people person. I realy wanted to spend some time alone trying to figure out how to make myself look a certain way, figure out how to move smoothly, etc. before talking to people. Even in cyberspace the typical woman's body image issues come home to plague her. In general, I was suspicious of the initial hellos. But I realize that I'll need to loosen up a little and really, what's the harm? (she asked, before she fell victim to a cyberstalker).

I'm looking forward to playing around more in this alternative universe, but I don't think I'll get hooked. I'm pretty contented in this Universe. However, I did think it funny that in contemplating my future in Second Life, my initial thoughts were to find a city, get a job and an apartment, get a dog, etc. And then I thought "why do all that? why live an ordinary life?" Secondlife is, after all, a Second Life. I'm thinking I'm going to approach it as a place to live out absolutely crazy hopes and dreams -- who knows? If I try them out online and I'm successful, maybe they'll work in the real world as well!