Micro-blogging website Twitter has managed to secure a "significant round of funding" from five investment firms, as was revealed through the blog post of its co-founder Evan Williams.
The new funding has reportedly come from two new investors Insight Venture Partners and T R Price, as well as its existing funders Institutional Venture Partners, Spark Capital and Benchmark Capital.
There are two problems to start with. First is that Williams was not as candid about the exact amount of investment because the investors want the deal to be a private affair. Isn't web 2.0 all about sharing information and encouraging transparent and candid conversations? Internet has liberated information and has always preached professionals to provide information. Shouldn't it apply the same rules to itself?.
Unless social media companies including Facebook - which is also known for shying away from sharing plans, projections and security measures - come out in the open, it is hard for information professionals who want to capitalise on these tools to chart out their plan or realise the potential.
Amid tight budgets, it's extremely important for marketers too to define the return on investment and unless there is more information, it is hard to define ROI. The lack of information also hinders discussion on whether the amount of investment was right in the first place. And it does not set a basis to evaluate other social media technologies.
Also presumably, Twitter has secured the funds and valued itself on the basis of its whopping 45 million users in its three-year history and expecting this to grow exponentially.
Twitter is planning to roll out adverts and even provide companies with initial insight and market reaction. But the second problem is that because information on web2.0 applications are user-generated, scattered across multiple platforms and at different times, professionals and advertisers would find it difficult to target the right information for the right set of audience.
There has to be more collaboration of content in the social media technologies before any plans to leverage on them take to the sky. And there definitely needs to be more engagement between users and social media companies.
Friday, 16 October 2009
Friday, 2 October 2009
Drop the silo approach
Two research reports on the impact of social networking and Web 2.0 tools in the workplace highlight the anxiety among experts over these issues. Suggesting identical outcomes, both reports - one from Economist Intelligence Unit on managing technology democracy in the workplace and the other study by Recommind on the use and implications of Web 2.0 tools in businesses - urge businesses to "act now and manage Web2.0, it's already late".
The reports found that even today, over 40% of senior executives in organisations said they restrict the use of such applications and have no training in place to manage the uptake of these tools by staff in the near future.
The concerns these executives raised were about security, lack of productivity, loss of information, data breaches, difficulty in preserving and accessing information and legal implications.
The moot point of discussion at both the events were about "Who takes responsibility for implementing and enforcing the company policy on Web2.0 use?"
Companies are finding it increasingly difficult to tackle the tricky issues of Web 2.0 because they acknowledge and identify its benefits in this internet age. Meanwhile, staff insist on "technology democracy".
People may be techno-savvy but they lack digital awareness and history shows that we pay a huge price for this lack of awareness. Young staff have been sacked for posting negative comments about employers or customers; public sector organisations have lost and misplaced highly sensitive information and personal data has been used for vetting future staff.
The question of responsibility is a tough and dodgy one. And the Recommind survey suggested that 70% respondents think it is IT department's responsibility, 17% said it was the legal department and the others were divided between dedicated Web 2.0 specialists in offices, team leaders and individual members of staff.
It's time to drop the silo approach. Not only does the IT department, legal team and staff need to work together, it is time individual users, application providers and regulatory services take responsibility too. Until now, the legislation and public awareness has always been catching up with technology. It is time to stop playing catch up and get even with technology.
The reports found that even today, over 40% of senior executives in organisations said they restrict the use of such applications and have no training in place to manage the uptake of these tools by staff in the near future.
The concerns these executives raised were about security, lack of productivity, loss of information, data breaches, difficulty in preserving and accessing information and legal implications.
The moot point of discussion at both the events were about "Who takes responsibility for implementing and enforcing the company policy on Web2.0 use?"
Companies are finding it increasingly difficult to tackle the tricky issues of Web 2.0 because they acknowledge and identify its benefits in this internet age. Meanwhile, staff insist on "technology democracy".
People may be techno-savvy but they lack digital awareness and history shows that we pay a huge price for this lack of awareness. Young staff have been sacked for posting negative comments about employers or customers; public sector organisations have lost and misplaced highly sensitive information and personal data has been used for vetting future staff.
The question of responsibility is a tough and dodgy one. And the Recommind survey suggested that 70% respondents think it is IT department's responsibility, 17% said it was the legal department and the others were divided between dedicated Web 2.0 specialists in offices, team leaders and individual members of staff.
It's time to drop the silo approach. Not only does the IT department, legal team and staff need to work together, it is time individual users, application providers and regulatory services take responsibility too. Until now, the legislation and public awareness has always been catching up with technology. It is time to stop playing catch up and get even with technology.
Friday, 25 September 2009
Will technology spark the next economic crisis?
In previous decades it was the stock market crisis that brought the economy to its knees. More recently we had the sub prime mortgage doing the same to the economy. It may well be the technology in the next two decades that could spur a recession.
The social media space, internet, digitisation, virtual conferences and many more innovations are spreading at a breakneck pace. We are so smitten by latest applications that its uptake seems almost reckless. We are just as hopelessly enthusiastic as we were when there was first the widespread opportunity of dealing in stocks and shares and later on with irresistible lines credit for housing from banks.
While individuals like innovation there seems to be some caution regarding allowing "technology democracy" within companies as the research by Economist Intelligence Unit suggests. The fear is that too much of technology freedom will descend into chaos. And experts acknowledge these risks and advice companies to adopt measures for preventing the chaos.
But web stands for integrating everything. What is professional can be deemed personal and vice-versa in the social networking space. Human resource professionals are vetting people after browsing through their digital personality, professionals are finding business sensitive information on Twitter pages and journalists can find scoops and leads from inadvertent comments and feedbacks on the social media websites.
The technology stocks are going bullish and each day, the companies are unveiling massive plans of digitisation and launching online solutions, video-on-demand, state of art file-sharing, personal communication devices and applications that will empower you with real-time information updates.
While web-conferencing helps us cut our carbon footprint and mobile devices are useful to "connect on the move", too much technology dependence not just means greater information sharing, it also reassures technology providers into supplying us with the services to cater to our demands. We don't seem to give a moment's thought to the possibility of a shocking revelation of some technology gone terribly wrong. What would happen if we were told one Monday morning that all the information on Google's cloud has been corrupted or stolen?
by Archana Venkatraman
The social media space, internet, digitisation, virtual conferences and many more innovations are spreading at a breakneck pace. We are so smitten by latest applications that its uptake seems almost reckless. We are just as hopelessly enthusiastic as we were when there was first the widespread opportunity of dealing in stocks and shares and later on with irresistible lines credit for housing from banks.
While individuals like innovation there seems to be some caution regarding allowing "technology democracy" within companies as the research by Economist Intelligence Unit suggests. The fear is that too much of technology freedom will descend into chaos. And experts acknowledge these risks and advice companies to adopt measures for preventing the chaos.
But web stands for integrating everything. What is professional can be deemed personal and vice-versa in the social networking space. Human resource professionals are vetting people after browsing through their digital personality, professionals are finding business sensitive information on Twitter pages and journalists can find scoops and leads from inadvertent comments and feedbacks on the social media websites.
The technology stocks are going bullish and each day, the companies are unveiling massive plans of digitisation and launching online solutions, video-on-demand, state of art file-sharing, personal communication devices and applications that will empower you with real-time information updates.
While web-conferencing helps us cut our carbon footprint and mobile devices are useful to "connect on the move", too much technology dependence not just means greater information sharing, it also reassures technology providers into supplying us with the services to cater to our demands. We don't seem to give a moment's thought to the possibility of a shocking revelation of some technology gone terribly wrong. What would happen if we were told one Monday morning that all the information on Google's cloud has been corrupted or stolen?
by Archana Venkatraman
Friday, 4 September 2009
Publishers showing spine in the ebook battle
Credit where credit is due. The publishing sector deserves a pat on its back for steering the future of the books.
Acknowledging the role that ebooks and ebook readers would play within the sector, the industry is not just keeping pace with the latest technology but is, in fact, a step ahead- forming alliances, consolidating and providing users a peek into the future.
Unlike the music industry, which was forced to evolve following innovations such as the MP3s, iPods and even Spotify that changed the consumption of music, publishers are bracing themselves with new technologies and organisations such as British Library is enabling consumers "to get to grips" with the hi-tech devices that could change the way we read.
Google Books, Google's online library has agreed to add one million books for free to Coolerbooks.com, for Interead's ebook reader Cool-ER.
The search giant, along with Sony, is also supporting the open EPUB- publishing format that can conform to any e-reader, liberating the market and challenging Amazon's model of ebooks compatible only with its own reader Kindle.
While on one hand, content-access is becoming sophisticated, Harry Potter publisher has given content too, a 21st century makeover. Bloomsbury Library Online has virtual bookshelves that allows one to access books via public libraries or through internet enabled mobile phones.
However, a lot still needs to be tackled- getting more publishers publish books in ebook-friendly formats, making the devices more affordable and user-friendly, digitising old books in ebook compatible formats and even collaborating with communication devices manufacturers.
Typical problems that challenge the music industry today are online piracy and file sharing issues. The issues are so deep-rooted that it requires government intervention and severe clampdown to restrict the damage.
We need due diligence process to combat similar file-sharing issues, legal compliances and piracy within the ebook market, its impact on book-sellers and physical newspapers, otherwise well-begun would remain half done.
By Archana Venkatraman
Acknowledging the role that ebooks and ebook readers would play within the sector, the industry is not just keeping pace with the latest technology but is, in fact, a step ahead- forming alliances, consolidating and providing users a peek into the future.
Unlike the music industry, which was forced to evolve following innovations such as the MP3s, iPods and even Spotify that changed the consumption of music, publishers are bracing themselves with new technologies and organisations such as British Library is enabling consumers "to get to grips" with the hi-tech devices that could change the way we read.
Google Books, Google's online library has agreed to add one million books for free to Coolerbooks.com, for Interead's ebook reader Cool-ER.
The search giant, along with Sony, is also supporting the open EPUB- publishing format that can conform to any e-reader, liberating the market and challenging Amazon's model of ebooks compatible only with its own reader Kindle.
While on one hand, content-access is becoming sophisticated, Harry Potter publisher has given content too, a 21st century makeover. Bloomsbury Library Online has virtual bookshelves that allows one to access books via public libraries or through internet enabled mobile phones.
However, a lot still needs to be tackled- getting more publishers publish books in ebook-friendly formats, making the devices more affordable and user-friendly, digitising old books in ebook compatible formats and even collaborating with communication devices manufacturers.
Typical problems that challenge the music industry today are online piracy and file sharing issues. The issues are so deep-rooted that it requires government intervention and severe clampdown to restrict the damage.
We need due diligence process to combat similar file-sharing issues, legal compliances and piracy within the ebook market, its impact on book-sellers and physical newspapers, otherwise well-begun would remain half done.
By Archana Venkatraman
Friday, 28 August 2009
Internet's evasive ways
Within most businesses crisis drives innovation. Within technology, business innovation leads to crisis.
Privacy crisis, IP crisis, security crisis and financial crisis are just a few conflicts to name.
Let us take the newspaper business. All was fairly well for the newspaper business until a time when consumers believed that news could be free- thanks to the internet. The feeds on Twitter page themediaisdying unfolds the turmoil in the industry in a "drip-drip" format. Newspaper publishers are seeking to revive themselves by retreating free content online.
However, such a retreat comes too late after the information explosion on the internet. The proliferating information on the internet is not easily controllable.
Newspapers that currently charge for some of its content find that the articles are accessible via Google news.
The online business model is not as simple as the selling of physical newspapers is. Some subscribers are likely to share the log-in details and the number would be too less for detection. Others would post the news stories they read online on to their Facebook and Twitter accounts to share and discuss it with friends.
The world wide web is just that - a world, wide, web that caches, tags, stores, crawls, spreads, reproduces and displays the information once it lands there.
In the world of technology, free and open source have always triumphed over pay-for and proprietary software. And the internet users think it could be the same for every business.
Ailing newspapers must simply join the bandwagon and perhaps begin to nudge the likes of Google (or broadband providers), who are gaining from consumers' free-content campaign, for support.
Meanwhile, benign consumers hope such a plan won't backfire at them.
But, by the time, a solution is devised, technology would have moved one-step ahead where consumers would prefer mobile computing and e-readers and its providers will offer complementary news services, leading to a new crisis.
Privacy crisis, IP crisis, security crisis and financial crisis are just a few conflicts to name.
Let us take the newspaper business. All was fairly well for the newspaper business until a time when consumers believed that news could be free- thanks to the internet. The feeds on Twitter page themediaisdying unfolds the turmoil in the industry in a "drip-drip" format. Newspaper publishers are seeking to revive themselves by retreating free content online.
However, such a retreat comes too late after the information explosion on the internet. The proliferating information on the internet is not easily controllable.
Newspapers that currently charge for some of its content find that the articles are accessible via Google news.
The online business model is not as simple as the selling of physical newspapers is. Some subscribers are likely to share the log-in details and the number would be too less for detection. Others would post the news stories they read online on to their Facebook and Twitter accounts to share and discuss it with friends.
The world wide web is just that - a world, wide, web that caches, tags, stores, crawls, spreads, reproduces and displays the information once it lands there.
In the world of technology, free and open source have always triumphed over pay-for and proprietary software. And the internet users think it could be the same for every business.
Ailing newspapers must simply join the bandwagon and perhaps begin to nudge the likes of Google (or broadband providers), who are gaining from consumers' free-content campaign, for support.
Meanwhile, benign consumers hope such a plan won't backfire at them.
But, by the time, a solution is devised, technology would have moved one-step ahead where consumers would prefer mobile computing and e-readers and its providers will offer complementary news services, leading to a new crisis.
Friday, 21 August 2009
Give us a newspaper revolution
And another newspaper [thelondonpaper] closes down because of falling advertising revenue. Archana Venkatraman
The scene will only get grimmer now on.
The fight for winning adverts turns bitter not just between the newspapers but also between newspapers and other consumer-facing companies and websites. Ailing airline company British Airways announced it was to sell advertising space on online boarding cards (presumably with some care- life insurance ads just before you get on a flight may not be quite the ticket). Meanwhile, property website Rightmove reported buoyant results citing its share of property advertising "grew substantially" even as advertising in traditional print media declined.
It is clear that advertisers operating on a shoe-string budget are swayed by a slew of companies with online presence that claim they can target users "more directly" than newspapers can. Companies such as British Airways step on the toes of traditional media institutions to rescue their business amid worsening economic climate.
Almost at the same time, consumers are increasingly considering news and information as something of a free-commodity and are not willing to pay for it.
So what seemed like a straight-forward and obvious business model for newspapers is turned upside down with the world wide web bringing along a slew of avenues for the advertisers and heralding a permanent gloom for the newspapers.
In case of BA and other brands, advertising will be complementary to their core revenue. Are newspapers too naïve to continue believing in advertising as the only and major source of income?
Arguably, the newspapers, with their compelling content have battled bravely with radio, television and even online news-sites and have continued to survive. But as the internet-savvy consumers crowd specific websites for booking tickets, shopping, viewing properties, and even investing their money and buying insurance, the newspapers must find an alternative to traditional advertising.
It may be hard to visualise a new revenue-earner different from advertising, but who would have thought of a "search engine" or "penicillin" in the early 1600s. Because, most times, identifying the problem is the first step for resolving a crisis.
The scene will only get grimmer now on.
The fight for winning adverts turns bitter not just between the newspapers but also between newspapers and other consumer-facing companies and websites. Ailing airline company British Airways announced it was to sell advertising space on online boarding cards (presumably with some care- life insurance ads just before you get on a flight may not be quite the ticket). Meanwhile, property website Rightmove reported buoyant results citing its share of property advertising "grew substantially" even as advertising in traditional print media declined.
It is clear that advertisers operating on a shoe-string budget are swayed by a slew of companies with online presence that claim they can target users "more directly" than newspapers can. Companies such as British Airways step on the toes of traditional media institutions to rescue their business amid worsening economic climate.
Almost at the same time, consumers are increasingly considering news and information as something of a free-commodity and are not willing to pay for it.
So what seemed like a straight-forward and obvious business model for newspapers is turned upside down with the world wide web bringing along a slew of avenues for the advertisers and heralding a permanent gloom for the newspapers.
In case of BA and other brands, advertising will be complementary to their core revenue. Are newspapers too naïve to continue believing in advertising as the only and major source of income?
Arguably, the newspapers, with their compelling content have battled bravely with radio, television and even online news-sites and have continued to survive. But as the internet-savvy consumers crowd specific websites for booking tickets, shopping, viewing properties, and even investing their money and buying insurance, the newspapers must find an alternative to traditional advertising.
It may be hard to visualise a new revenue-earner different from advertising, but who would have thought of a "search engine" or "penicillin" in the early 1600s. Because, most times, identifying the problem is the first step for resolving a crisis.
Friday, 14 August 2009
What do you prefer: Artificial intelligence or natural stupidity?
Technology is amazing and we all love it. Only when it works and only when we have it.
When it doesn't work it is more than useless and redundant. It makes life and task more painful than it would have been without the help of "the damn thing in the first place".
Why do we loathe it so much when it goes wrong? Surely the answer is our dependence on it. For most of us it would be a "terrible day" if we forgot our mobile phones before venturing out. Make it a "dreadful day" if it was a smart-phone and one was "on the move" the whole day.
Making technology work is all equations and mathematics. A software works only if the code is right, a site is accessed only if the password is accurate. Our brains have become administrators and house-keepers. Today, we do not know the information per se, but we know where to find that information from.
It is a mobile phone's task to remember the number of our loved ones. It is the sat-nav's task to remind us where to take the next right and it is Microsoft Calendar's task to remember our appointments and "alert" us.
Let's take it a bit further- we don't really have to remember all the spellings- there is an inbuilt auto-correction tool; while searching for a phrase, we do not really need to type the whole phrase, artificial intelligence prompts us to "drag and drop", we do not need to rewrite or reword an article, there is "copy and paste".
It is all good- real time communication, blurring geographical boundaries, liberating information, empowering humankind and creating, managing and organising intellectual property and so on.
The newer and more novel the innovation, the harder we fall for it. Second-gen devices and applications are very attractive and addictive.
I am not patronising life without technology, but it would be interesting to pause and think how much we have started depending on even secondary technological devices and innovations such as faster broadband, plastic money, wi-fi, catch-up television, text-to-voice transcriber, file-sharing, social networking, digital radio, Skype, Second Life, communication devices.
It feels wiser to take pain in remembering (and forgetting) the birthdays of our loved ones genuinely than rendering information technology a more charismatic personality.
Because, sometimes, natural stupidity is more charming than artificial intelligence.
When it doesn't work it is more than useless and redundant. It makes life and task more painful than it would have been without the help of "the damn thing in the first place".
Why do we loathe it so much when it goes wrong? Surely the answer is our dependence on it. For most of us it would be a "terrible day" if we forgot our mobile phones before venturing out. Make it a "dreadful day" if it was a smart-phone and one was "on the move" the whole day.
Making technology work is all equations and mathematics. A software works only if the code is right, a site is accessed only if the password is accurate. Our brains have become administrators and house-keepers. Today, we do not know the information per se, but we know where to find that information from.
It is a mobile phone's task to remember the number of our loved ones. It is the sat-nav's task to remind us where to take the next right and it is Microsoft Calendar's task to remember our appointments and "alert" us.
Let's take it a bit further- we don't really have to remember all the spellings- there is an inbuilt auto-correction tool; while searching for a phrase, we do not really need to type the whole phrase, artificial intelligence prompts us to "drag and drop", we do not need to rewrite or reword an article, there is "copy and paste".
It is all good- real time communication, blurring geographical boundaries, liberating information, empowering humankind and creating, managing and organising intellectual property and so on.
The newer and more novel the innovation, the harder we fall for it. Second-gen devices and applications are very attractive and addictive.
I am not patronising life without technology, but it would be interesting to pause and think how much we have started depending on even secondary technological devices and innovations such as faster broadband, plastic money, wi-fi, catch-up television, text-to-voice transcriber, file-sharing, social networking, digital radio, Skype, Second Life, communication devices.
It feels wiser to take pain in remembering (and forgetting) the birthdays of our loved ones genuinely than rendering information technology a more charismatic personality.
Because, sometimes, natural stupidity is more charming than artificial intelligence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)