Wolfram|Alpha - The Search Engine of Tomorrow?

It’s been 12 or so years since Google was introduced as the result of a Stanford University research project. In that time the world has gotten used to search results that are based on things like the relationships between multiple Web sites or the number of times a search term appears on a page - an approach that doesn’t always provide the most relevant or useful information.

Now, a company called Wolfram Research gives search users a reason to raise their expectations. Wolfram is working on a new type of search tool that they are calling a computation engine. The difference is that their tool will give users specific answers to natural language questions they submit by collecting, curating and organizing information from a variety of sources rather than directing them to other sites.

An alpha version of the tool was released last month. The illustration of a sample search results page below shows how much different computational based results will be from traditional search results. Whether this will be the next breakthrough in search technology, or just hype, remains to be seen.

http://www.wolframalpha.com/

Digital Books and the Next Era of Innovation

Popular science author Steven Johnson wrote an interesting piece in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal about digital books, how they will change what and how much people will read in the future and the impact those changes will have on innovation.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123980920727621353.html

As Johnson points out, we currently have unlimited access to terabytes of data and information courtesy of Google and other search engines. However, the nearly infinite repository of knowledge stored in the millions of books printed since the invention of the printing press are, for the most, outside the searchable Internet.

Game Changers - E-Books and Google’s Book Search Service
That’s about to change. The recent success of Amazon’s Kindle e-book reader, and the progress Google is making with their Book Search Service, are providing the tools and content needed to begin the next phase of the great migration of the written word to the digital format. This next phase, however, will be substantially more profound than earlier phases both in terms of the volume and, in many ways, the quality of the content being digitized.

Based on these developments, Johnson makes some excellent points (all of which I agree with) about the future of book reading:

• Book content (like all searchable content) will be indexed, ranked and commented on by readers
• Authors will likely write chapters (and even passages) in a way that are optimized for search engines
• Books will be un-bundled and many will be sold by the chapter (much the same way people consume songs rather than full albums as a result of iTunes and file sharing)
• Book reading will become social – book content will be tagged and annotated. As a result, people will share comments and insights on book passages (a chapter, a page or even a quote) much like they comment and dialogue on a blog post or newspaper article

Digital Books and the Innovation Revolution
But, to me, by far the most powerful outcome of these developments will be the influence over how people will learn and innovate in the future.

If you believe, like I do, that our economy and culture are becoming more idea and innovation driven, then a world where such an enormous amount of knowledge (book based and otherwise) is indexed, annotated and searchable is truly an exciting development.

So much was argued in Daniel Pink’s 2005 book “A Whole New Mind.” His premise: we are moving away from the information age into a conceptual age where ideas and innovation will be among the most valued currencies. This is a result of the abundance and commoditization of many products and services, the ability to outsource work to the lowest common denominator and the growth of automation. In this new conceptual age, according to Pink, creative right brain thinkers, as opposed to linear left brain thinkers, will be the heroes.

I have no doubt that creativity and innovation are going to be more highly valued as the U.S. and global economies evolve and become more competitive. The wide adoption of e-book readers and initiatives like Google’s Book Search Service, I think, will be very important enablers of that trend. Think of them as force multipliers.

Universal Music / YouTube Deal Could Help Save the Music Industry

Wired magazine reported this week that Google’s YouTube and the Universal Music Group confirmed the launch of their music video collaboration, Vevo.com, for later this year. Think of it as a Hulu for music videos (which, it appears, was the inspiration for Vevo). Revenues will be shared between YouTube and Universal.

The service will be advertising based and will serve up Universal’s music video assets (including artist interviews and concert footage) that will be of higher quality than the standard YouTube fare that is currently available. In addition, it’s likely that YouTube, and eventually AOL and Yahoo, will also have access to Vevo’s video library. Ultimately, the goal is to add other labels to the service as well.

If it works, Vevo would be a significant win for both parties. For YouTube it would mean the end of Universal’s licensing violation claims. And, as a premium YouTube property, Vevo would likely generate premium fees from advertisers. For Universal it would be a solution to their repeated efforts to monetize their music video business.

Music videos have been licensed to YouTube for several years now. But they have not generated the level of advertising revenues that either YouTube or the music companies had hoped for. This is most likely a result of the motley nature of music videos available on YouTube.

Ultimately, Universal (and the whole music industry for that matter) has nothing to lose by this venture. After years of declining record sales and profits caused by the rise of file-sharing, to say the music business is in dire need of new revenue streams is putting it mildly.

Will the Internet Surpass TV Next Year?

So predicts a research report just published by Microsoft. The study projects that time spent on the Internet by consumers will surpass traditional TV by June 2010. The report was based on research conducted in Europe but definitely has application to the US market.

Specifically, the study projects that by next summer Europeans on average will spend 14.2 hours per week on the Internet versus 11.5 hours on TV.

Other predictions include:

• Over the next five years Internet use on PCs will decline from 95% to 50% as other Web enabled devices such as Smartphones and IPTVs become more widely adopted


• Video capable mobile devices will grow from 31% today to 76% by 2013


• "Connected entertainment” and time shifting will become the norm as three-screen (PC, mobile device and IPTV) integration improves allowing people to watch what they want, whenever and wherever they choose


• Social connectivity will become commercialized and will enable more personalized and relevant online advertising and marketing


• Mobile devices will become the primary point of access to the Internet

Some of these predictions are similar to those reported in a major research initiative by the Pew Internet Project that I posted about in February:

http://marketingmemes.blogspot.com/2009/02/what-will-internet-look-like-in-2020.html

Of course, a good dose of skepticism is warranted with any report that predicts the future, especially one sponsored by a private enterprise like Microsoft that has a lot to gain if these predictions come true.

That said, I see little reason to doubt that most, if not all, of these projections won’t come to pass.

Yahoo! TV Widgets – is Web/TV Integration Finally Becoming a Reality?

Several months ago Yahoo announced that it was developing widgets that will allow viewers to integrate Web services into their TV experience. Now it looks like those widgets will finally come to market.

Samsung is now selling the first TV that I am aware of that supports Yahoo’s widgets. The Samsung 7000 will come pre-loaded with four widgets: Flickr, Yahoo News, Weather and Finance and plans to offer up to 30 more widgets within the next few months and up to 100 by the end of the year. Sony, LG and Vizio are also working on widget ready models.

You can see how the widgets will work on Yahoo’s Connected TV site – while not a demo it’s somewhat illustrative:

http://connectedtv.yahoo.com/

The widgets look a lot like iPhone apps and will be readily available for free download. And like Apple’s approach, the Yahoo Widget Engine will be an open platform that anyone can develop on so the sky will be the limit in terms of the number and types of applications that can be created.

Samsung's 7000 and Yahoo Widget Engine will provide access to Web services like Flickr

Time is Running Out for Newspapers

The next year or two (if it takes that long) will most likely be the beginning of the end for many newspapers if they don’t figure out a way to make money on the Internet.

For instance, last week after 146 years in publication, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer ceased operations as a print newspaper, reduced its staff by over 80% and converted to a slimmed down, online only publication.

And the P-I is not the only one. Last month Denver’s Rocky Mountain News shut down completely. And there are a host of other newspapers on the ropes, including the Chicago Sun Times, the Boston Globe and the San Francisco Chronicle to name a few.

Even the mighty New York Times recently had to sell part of its company and seek a $250 million loan from a private investor to help address its financial problems.

Of course, all of these newspapers are grabbling with the same challenge: how do they monetize their content online as more readers move to the Web and information becomes more of a commodity.

There are many ideas floating around about how newspapers can become viable businesses again. Here are a few:

• Make newspaper sites a channel for social media – for example, many papers are using Twitter headline feeds on their sites that are grouped by the sections of their paper to keep readers up to date and engaged with their content
• Publish APIs for independent software developers – the New York Times and a few other papers have taken the lead in publishing application programming interfaces (APIs) that allow software developers to create social media apps using New York Time’s content – for example, here’s a Gmail gadget built using one of the NYT’s APIs:

• Jump on the electronic newsreader wagon by bundling content with the purchase of a reader device – for example, Newsweek Magazine might try to get new Kindle owners hooked on Newsweek's electronic version by giving them a free yearly subscription
• Become more deeply integrated into the communities they serve – for example, the Austin Chronicle has thrived despite being a free weekly by becoming active participants in the Austin music and art scene. For instance, the paper started the South by Southwest Conference in 1987, which has grown into one of the world’s premier music and film festivals

Whatever the strategy, I hope newspapers figure this out; and soon. In my opinion, the role of newspapers in investigative reporting , local news coverage and editorial journalism is too important to leave to the anything goes ethos of the Internet. Sadly, they have had 15 years to figure this out so the prognosis is not too good.

What Would Nokia Do?

I just picked up Jeff Jarvis’ new book, “What Would Google Do?” In the book Jarvis deconstructs Google to determine how other companies can think the way Google does as a means to replicate their incredible success. His premise being that our economy and society have been so altered by the Internet that the old ways of thinking are not only outmoded but counter-productive. To Jarvis what’s needed is a new way; the Google way.

After reading the first chapter I believe Jarvis may be on to something. However, I think there’s another company that has a story that is just as, if not more, compelling and relevant for businesses that are trying to find their way in the current environment. That company is Nokia. Here’s what I mean.

The New York Times reported today that an astonishing 2.6 million jobs disappeared in the last four months – a rate unseen during the post-war era. This dramatic decline led the Times to speculate that the growing job loss “may reflect a wrenching restructuring of the American economy…and that many companies [appear to be]…abandoning whole areas of business.” A depressing assessment, but probably not too far from reality.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/07/business/economy/07jobs.html?em

This reminded me of a case history I read awhile ago about Nokia and how it evolved over the years in response to changing conditions.

Nokia was not always the mobile communications giant it is today. It actually started out as a wood-pulp mill in 1865 and eventually, through acquisition, became part of the Finnish Rubber Company in the early 20th century.

By the 1980s, Nokia was a conglomerate that manufactured an array of wares including, among other things: paper products, tires, footwear, personal computers, televisions and telecommunications equipment. It wasn’t until 1992 that it decided to divest from most of its lines of business and focus exclusively on mobile communications. This was in response to a steep decline in paper prices caused by the deep 1990–1993 recession.

Today, 17 years later, Nokia is the undisputed mobile phone leader with 40% market share, and was ranked last year by Business Week as the fifth most valuable brand in the world (Google was number 10, but closing fast).

If there’s any silver lining to the current gloom it’s that companies and industries can turn adversity into opportunity. I’m sure it won't be easy, but Nokia is proof that with a little bit of foresight and some good timing it can be done.

Look to Web 2.0 Tools for the Next Evolution in Employee Productivity

Some companies are finally realizing that Web 2.0 is more than just friends re-connecting on Facebook or people Tweeting that their plane just touched down. One day, and it’s coming sooner than you think, Web 2.0 apps (wikis, blogs, podcasts, etc) will also be used by many organizations to improve worker morale, collaboration and productivity.

In fact quite a few innovative companies have been using Web 2.0 tools for several years now for those very purposes. As much was confirmed from a recent survey fielded by McKinsey of 50+ companies. Analysis of the survey can be found on their Quarterly magazine Web site.

http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Six_ways_to_make_Web_20_work_2294

Most of the surveyed companies are still figuring out how to integrate Web 2.0 into their organizations. This is to be expected with any disruptive technology. A few adventurous innovators get the ball rolling; they in turn influence the early adopters who validate the innovators and so on. Eventually, the new technologies and the myriad applications they hatch become widely adopted. Thus goes the technology adoption lifecycle.

To me what makes the report so useful was the identification of two factors that can make or break a corporate Web 2.0 initiative (the report actually identifies six factors but I think these two are the most important):

1. The best Web 2.0 initiatives originate with users, not management - for anyone who has designed a Web site this makes complete sense. It’s hard for even the best designer to know what users want without an in depth understanding of their needs. In the context of Web 2.0, it appears this input best comes in the form of the types of grass roots apps front-line employees develop on their own
2. "What’s in the workflow is what gets used” – the survey revealed that employees will not adopt new tools if they are outside of the work processes they are used to using and will view these tools as increasing, not decreasing, their workload

These findings validate Forrester’s highly practical POST approach to planning social technology programs which I highly recommend:

Most companies still don’t know what to do with this new Web 2.0 phenomenon. As a result, they either do nothing out of fear of doing it wrong, or they plan big, management led initiatives that have little chance of success. Hopefully McKinsey’s report will help companies avoid both scenarios.

Personally, I can’t wait for the day when I don’t have to wade through endless emails and convoluted shared network folders to get my work done.

Skittles.com’s Social Media Experiment - Generating Buzz But Not Without Risks

If you haven’t seen it already check out the new Skittles.com homepage - it’s a bold experiment in how to integrate social media into a brand site.

What’s so unique about the page is that the experience is almost completely based on social media content from other sources. User generated messages, videos and other content are pulled to the site from various social media sources such as Facebook, YouTube, etc.

The only “traditional” element on the page is an expandable navigation bar that, among other things, takes visitors to various social media sites based on whether they want to see pictures (Flickr) or chat (Twitter) about Skittles, etc.

http://www.skittles.com/default.htm

Of course this type of strategy is not without its risks. And it certainly places a lot of control over how people will experience the brand into the hands of the unruly masses. But what a way to generate buzz and engagement.

“Startups, Not Bailouts”

Author and columnist Thomas Friedman wrote a persuasive op-ed column in today’s New York Times about the folly of using billions of dollars of taxpayer money to bailout G.M. and Chrysler. Meanwhile high-tech startups, our best hope for future growth, are finding it more-and-more difficult to find venture capital in the current environment.

Stated otherwise - why we are throwing good money after bad when we should be doing everything we can to bankroll the risk takers who are trying to bring the new technologies to market that represent our best chance for a prosperous future?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/22/opinion/22friedman.html?_r=1

After reading Friedman’s piece I did some research and learned the following:

• 2008 marked the first yearly decline in venture capital (VC) spending since the post dotcom bubble year of 2003
• What’s worse - VC investments in Q4 2008 dropped precipitously from the prior quarter (26%) as well against the two year trailing average
• What’s even more worse (at least for someone like me who works in an Internet related industry) - Internet-specific VC investments in Q4 also dropped by 26%

U.S. Venture Capital Investments 2001 - 2008

See PriceWaterhouseCoopers “MoneyTree Report:”

https://www.pwcmoneytree.com/MTPublic/ns/moneytree/filesource/exhibits/National_MoneyTree_full_year_Q4_2008_Final.pdf

So basically the story goes something like this:

During the past 30 years G.M. and Chrysler have been steadily losing market share and have lost hundreds of billions of dollars. So what does the government do? It gives them billions of dollars more (the latest installment $25 billion) to prop them up because they are “too big to fail.”

Meanwhile, during the same 30 year period it was high-tech companies (many of them startups) that were among the most powerful driving forces of economic growth. But sadly in this climate of limited resources it’s likely that the next Amgen, Google or Microsoft will have to get in line behind the down and out from Detroit before it will get government funds to invest in new innovations. Seems like folly to me.

Don’t get me wrong, the recent stimulus legislation will do a lot of good for high-tech industries. For example, funds were set aside for rural broadband and the digitization of health care records which is a start. And while the Obama economic team has made some good moves in their first 30 days there is so much more that can and must be done if we’re going to have a vibrant, innovation-led economy in the coming years. In this zero-sum environment giving G.M. and Chrysler $25 billion was not one of them.

U2 CD Leak – Blunder or PR Stunt?

The release of U2’s new CD, “No Line on the Horizon,” is planned for February 27. But it appears they have run into a bit of a SNAFU.

Someone at Universal Music, U2’s music publisher, accidentally put the CD up for sale on getmusic.com.au (the Australian site for Universal’s Get Music online music service) almost two weeks before the official release date. Not surprisingly someone purchased the CD before it was taken down and it wasn’t long before it appeared on peer-to-peer file sharing sites where people are now downloading it for free.

The fact is that most CDs are leaked before official release dates. Which raises the question: was this a blunder or a stunt by U2’s management to generate buzz and pre-empt other leaks to better control publicity around the release?

It’s more than a little suspect that U2’s music publisher “accidentally” posted the CD for sale two weeks before launch. And it has been five years since U2’s last CD (for many artists a dangerously long hiatus). On the other hand, U2 is one of the most recognizable and respected brands in the music business so they’re certainly not suffering from low awareness.

If a stunt, it was nowhere near as sophisticated as Radiohead’s pay-as-you-choose release of “In Rainbows” on its own Web site. Unsophisticated is very un-U2 and considering their strong stance against music piracy it’s likely that this was simply a mistake.

But the fact that it’s a week before the release and buzz is building and people are listening begs the question: when will music labels and publishers accept the future of music distribution and figure out a way to become relevant again?

The Online Ad Industry Needs to Get Serious About Privacy

In a previous post I discussed dynamically generated display ads and how they represent the next wave of innovation in online advertising.

http://marketingmemes.blogspot.com/2009/02/now-appearing-at-browser-near-you.html

Unfortunately, this next round of innovation is potentially in jeopardy. A critical component of this evolving online ad model is a technique known as behavioral targeting (BT). BT involves making assumptions about a person’s interests based on things like the Web sites they visit, their profiles on social networking sites and the types of things they search and then serving them customized ads based on those assumptions.

FTC's 2007 Guidelines
While the data used by BT methods is anonymous, there is still quite a bit of controversy around the technique. Privacy groups criticize it as intrusive (if not creepy). And the Federal Trade Commission has been keeping an eye on BT since December 2007 when they issued voluntary guidelines to Web sites delivering targeted ads in an effort to protect consumer privacy.

Apparently, no one was listening. Last week the FTC issued a follow up report on the issue. The report reinforced the FTC’s commitment to industry self-regulation (i.e., voluntary compliance) but this time added tough words for the online ad industry which it claimed is not moving fast enough to address the privacy issues. They also commented that if the industry does not make substantive efforts to address these concerns regulations or even legislation might be required.

http://www.ftc.gov/os/2009/02/P085400behavadreport.pdf

Concerns with Current Privacy Practices
Privacy groups and the FTC have a host of grievances with current targeted-ad practices:

• They don’t clearly explain what information is being collected and how it is being used
• The explanations are not easily accessible and are normally buried deep in lengthy privacy policies
• They are not convinced that the data collected is completely anonymous
• They are concerned that Web sites are combining personally identifiable data (addresses, birth dates, etc) with anonymous data captured through BT methods

What the FTC is Requesting
The FTC report laid out guiding principles for Web site privacy practices including provisions for:

• Clear, accessible and plain language statements about the behavioral data they’re collecting and how it will be used
• An easy way for consumers to opt-in or out
• Security policies for collected data
• The length of time data will be retained considering legitimate business needs

The report was not specific regarding the types of notice Web sites should provide to consumers. Some have proposed links on banners that lead to an explanation of the data collected, how it will be used and opt-in and opt-out features.

Regulation and Innovation – Rarely a Good Combination
eMarketer is projecting a 300% spending increase in targeted online advertising in the next three years – strong growth in a down economy. A lot of this growth will depend on investments Web sites make in new technologies to enable more sophisticated ad-targeting.

The last thing we need is for the government to dampen that growth by imposing a set of onerous regulations. The online ad industry has a clear choice: figure out a way to improve online consumer privacy notifications or the Federal government will figure it out for us.

What Will the Internet Look Like in 2020?

The nonpartisan Pew Internet and American Life Project recently posed that question to over one thousand members of the digital elite (analysts, policy-makers, academics, technologists and other Internet experts).

Pew asked them if they agreed or disagreed with various scenarios regarding the social, political and economic impact of the Internet ten years hence. The scenarios spanned everything from the effect of the Internet on social tolerance, to the impact social computing will have on individual transparency and responsibility, to the blurring of boundaries between professional and personal lives.

http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/270/report_display.asp

1. More powerful and better designed smartphones will be the primary means of Internet access for a majority of people across the world

The good news: Greater access for all - more people (especially the poor and those in remote locations) will have access to the Web through affordable, readily available mobile devices.

A big unknown: Will governments, regulatory bodies and wireless carriers align behind one universal standard for connectivity? Not likely if the current CDMA versus GMS situation in the U.S. cellphone market is any indication.

2. The ability of digital communications and social networks to rapidly spread information will result in a less socially tolerant global community

What this means: More tribes, more fragmentation, more polarization and more people using the Internet to spread hate, dogmatism and even fanaticism.

On the other hand: Increased access to information can mean more government, corporate and individual transparency and the potential for greater cross-cultural understanding.

Let’s hope this trend appeals to the better side of human nature.

3. Copyright and intellectual property protection will still be elusive

The good: More free online content (is it possible that the Wall Street Journal online will one day abandon its paid subscription model?)

The bad: More regulation and complex IP-control technologies and even more entangled workarounds to circumvent them.

4. As social media grows individual transparency (if not responsibility) will increase and privacy will become an even scarcer commodity

The new creed: “Never trust anyone who doesn’t have embarrassing stuff online.”

But people will still set boundaries: As one respondent commented – “Although society will seem more transparent, most people will guard many…aspects of their lives with great tenacity.”

5. The growth of artificial worlds and augmented reality means that some people will spend just as much time in virtual reality as they do in “real life”

The upside: More realistic virtual environments will be used to drive advancements in education, engineering, medicine and science.

The downside: For some people it will mean increased isolation, alienation and even violence and more sedentary lifestyles.

6. Ubiquitous computing will make it harder for some workers to separate their professional and personal lives

The positive: An always-on culture will have benefits such as time shifting and more employers may finally start measuring results (i.e., completed work) versus activity (i.e., time in the office). And to paraphrase one respondent, it’s not hard to argue that the 9-to-5 workday was an industrial era creation that doesn’t apply in idea driven economies.

The negative: This hyper-connected lifestyle will be bad for familial and social stability, and will increase stress levels and the likelihood that businesses and governments will use technology to intrude into people’s private lives.

For many, especially those in Internet related industries, this is already a reality so as one respondent said: “get over it.”

7. The basic architecture and technology of the Internet will not change but will evolve; a less secure Internet will cause some to create gated communities

Don’t expect a new “clean slate” Internet, it will take too long and cost too much: Improvements will occur gradually as security and performance requirements demand a more advanced platform. Incremental enhancements such as Internet Protocol v6 and the Semantic Web (allowing easier access to online content) will slowly improve performance.

Do expect more “walled gardens” and other restricted areas of the Internet: In response to the increasing frequency and scope of security breaches, large entities and other online communities will create secure environments where members will give up some control and privacy in exchange for added protection and utility.

Bottom line - the Internet will evolve dramatically over the next decade. And for better or worse many of the economic, cultural and social trends that it instigated will become more pronounced and prevalent in our lives. Let's just hope we don't lose control over it against our collective best intentions.

Has demand for e-books finally reached a tipping point?

Yesterday’s post was about a new digital publishing format, v-books. Today’s post is about e-book readers, a not so new digital publishing delivery platform that may finally be taking off in the U.S.

It was reported yesterday that sales of Amazon’s Kindle may have reached 500K units in 2008. This, according to analysts, may put it ahead of early sales volume levels for Apple’s iPod. It has been a long time coming. I don’t know exactly when e-book readers became commercially available in the U.S., but I know it was at least as early as 2001. In the eight or so years since, consumer demand and adoption have been tepid at best - until now.

I have been a Kindle owner for about five months and am more than pleased with the usability of the product and Amazon’s content delivery platform. However, one disappointment has been the amount of book, and to a lesser extent magazine, titles that are available for download (it would also be nice if it had a color monitor and touch screen capability but maybe that’s asking too much for a product that sells for $359 considering all the other things it does).

That’s why I was happy to hear that Kindle sales topped 500K units last year. As the number of Kindle owners increase the demand for more titles will also increase. For example, about four months ago I did a search in Amazon.com's Kindle store for Philip Roth’s American Pastoral (a modern classic & Pulitzer Prize winner). The book was not available and if I recall correctly there was only one or two Roth titles on hand – a bit of a letdown. Today the book is there along with seven other Roth titles.

Right now, Kindle and digital book downloads are a small percentage of Amazon’s overall sales. But as demand increases that will change. Now I wish someone (Amazon, Apple or mail-a-movie giant Netflix) would offer a viable arrangement for delivering digital movie downloads to box-top sets. There is certainly consumer demand for that innovation.

Kindle 2.0 to be unveiled soon

V-books - YouTube like videos for a fee?

HarperCollins is now offering downloads of v-books on Amazon.com’s digital download store wsj.com is reporting today.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123362056606541549.html

The first book that I’m aware of is Jeff Jarvis’ “What Would Google Do?” The book costs $9.99, is 23 minutes long and is available for download to PCs and mobile devices. Based on the two minute sample on Amazon it appears this v-book is little more than Jarvis speaking into the camera for the full video duration.

Personally, I like the idea especially as relates to business books. Many times I’ll by a business book for $25+ get half way through and put it down. Sometimes I just don’t have the time to read a full business book and let’s face it they can be quite dry. If publishers can synthesize the key points of a business book into 20 or so engaging minutes then they may be on to something.

Of course some business books you just have to read in full format, especially when there are detailed case studies that are critical to understanding the author’s conclusions. And not sure I would be interested in a fiction v-book (there’s something about reading a good piece of fiction that I’m sure would be lost in the translation).

Another alternative for the time challenged business reader is Soundview’s Executive Book Summaries. Annual subscriptions run from $119 - $169. For that you get 30 six to eight page summaries of the top business books published in a given year.

I have subscribed and like the service. While 30 summaries a year is a manageable number, the downside is that it’s likely that quite a few of the titles may not interest you since they span all business categories (marketing, finance, HR, manufacturing, etc).

From what I saw on the Amazon.com demo, the production quality of these v-books’ may not be much better than the average video you see on YouTube but that's not really the point. Worth a try even though $9.99 seems a bit pricey.

Now appearing at a browser near you - online advertising 3.0

Despite all the advances in digital marketing, the process by which online ads are produced is still manual for the most part. And, once these ads are placed they are largely static; if updates are needed (e.g., if the ads are not performing well) some level of human involvement is required.

This situation is changing thanks to process and technical innovations that now allow advertisers to serve and update their online ads dynamically (i.e., automatically) by leveraging a combination of predefined business rules, real-time data, algorithms and pre-developed creative assets. The financial and strategic benefits from these innovations, while not yet fully realized, will be huge for the $28+ billion U.S. online ad market.

The next wave – more efficient production = reduced costs for marketers
The amount of time and money that will be saved by these innovations cannot be underestimated: web designers and developers no longer have to build by hand every online ad unit to every size; and agency media managers no longer need to send scores or even hundreds of ad units to web site publishers.

In terms of marketing effectiveness the impact of these innovations will change the game for online advertising. Advertisers can now do complex, multivariate testing and deliver custom, just-in-time creative that is more relevant and targeted to specific marketing situations.

Automating multivariate testing
Advertisers can now test a conceivably unlimited number (easily into the hundreds) of banner creative configurations to identify the combinations of elements (messaging, imagery, call-to-action, etc) that deliver the best results. Previously, this level of testing was highly impractical since the effort needed to create the number of banner versions to generate statistically relevant test results made it cost prohibitive; in most instances costs simply out-weighed benefits.

More relevant, effective and efficient online ads
This is where things get interesting. Marketers can now deliver much more relevant and targeted ads to consumers by combining customized, just-in-time banner creative with a variety of data about their target consumers, including:

• Geography
• Prior online behavior
• Their stage in a multi-step shopping/purchase decision process
• The editorial focus of the web site where the ads will be placed

Here are some examples of how these innovations are being used to deliver more relevant online advertising:

Sequential messaging – banner ad messages change based on where a consumer is in a multi-step shopping/purchase decision process (this is especially useful for highly considered purchases like automobiles, health insurance, etc)

Contextual messaging – banner imagery and messaging change based on the editorial theme of the site where an ad is running (e.g., personal finance, sports, travel, etc) to increase contextual relevance

Geographic targeting – here ads are customized with messaging or imagery that is relevant to a specific state or region of the country

Real-time targeting – ads can also be updated with real-time information (e.g., sports scores, time of day, weather) using live data feeds to create timeliness or a sense of urgency

While many of these online targeting approaches were previously available the ability do it dynamically wasn’t. So the next time you see an online add that is uncannily relevant to your unique situation it probably isn’t a coincidence. Some people may think this level of targeting is spooky. Personally, I prefer this over the alternative – like seeing ads for Brilliant Blonde Shine Shock hair treatment on my Yahoo! Mail sign in page.

What can the Obama administration do to jump start digital innovation? Be a catalyst

There's no doubt the U.S. is one of the most creative and innovative cultures in the world. One needs to look no further than the role we played in creating and nurturing the growth of the Internet.

That said, it's amazing how we as a country have fallen behind the rest of the developed world on some of the basics. For example, our decline in broadband penetration, speed and price has been well documented. And we all know about the sorry state of our infrastructure.

Is the U.S. falling behind in digital innovation?
Another example is how far we are behind both Japan and some European countries in the integration of credit card technology in cellphones that allows consumers to pass through the checkout counter with nothing more than a swipe of of their device over an electronic reader.

The enabling technology exists and is in wide use in several countries. And, all the key U.S. stakeholders have an interest in making this happen:

• Consumers get convenience
• The credit card companies and wireless carriers get transaction fees
• Merchants have the potential to get a greater share of U.S. consumers' collective wallet

With so much to be gained by so many you would think there would be momentum behind making this a reality. Think again. The fact is that because there are so many stakeholders, and because this is such a complex undertaking, the coordination needed to bring this to market is daunting.

Sometimes innovation needs a nudge
To me what's needed is some supra-like entity to intervene and provide the leadership needed to cut through the morass of regulations and technical standards that makes this such a vexing problem as there are just some things the proverbial invisible hand of the free market can't do. Who better to play this role than the federal government.

While rolling out this technology on a national scale won't come close to solving all of our economic problems, it certainly will have some positive impact as this will be a considerable undertaking. And the cost to the treasury, as far as I can tell, should be minimal.

Not a bad way for the feds to help stimulate the economy: no bailout funds, no deficit spending, just being a catalyst for a bunch of industry groups that haven't been able to crack the code on their own. Now that's the kind of activist government I can live with.