The Network Garden - Mark Sigal's Blog

Rhetoric: Why it matters

Listen to Obama’s acceptance speech.  It was brilliant in terms of its clarity of essential truths.  “This campaign has never been about me.  It’s about you.” 

It’s a very optimistic and direct concept of the rules of engagement.  Change.  It’s a more bottom up vision that speaks directly to the individual and articulates the role that government can and should play within people's lives.

It’s the promise of education, health care, job creation and a ten year plan to get us off our dependence on oil.   

“We can not turn back.”   It is very evangelical, but at the same time, it’s a very sincere perspective.

He defined himself, and his vision for the country very clearly, and drew a sharp contrast with McCain, Bush and the current politics of status quo.

David Gergen put it best, “It was less a speech than a symphony.”  Amen.  Please watch it.

UPDATE #1: Among the many commentators who analyzed the speech, one noted that the portion of Obama's speech where he stated, "It’s time for them (the Republicans) to own their failure.  It’s time for us to change America," is a 10 second sound bite that you can win on.  Worth watching how the narrative evolves over the remaining couple of months of the race, as we do live in the age of YouTubing, tweets and easy-to-consume info nuggets.  Hence, the ability to encapsulate the race down to the sound bite is no small accomplishment.

Related Posts:

1. Base motivations: The Matter of McCain v. Obama
2. Pit bull Politics - How Bush Stacks Up
3. Obama, Clinton and the 'Winner Take All'

Takeover Robberies: Memetic Crime Wave

It’s the hot new trend, and that means ‘everybody’ is doing it.  By everybody, I mean, criminals, and by it, I mean takeover robberies.  Here’s the backdrop.

You are enjoying a tasty Italian meal with your sweetheart, in some tony Oakland neighborhood, like Rockridge, Oakland Hills, Dimond or North Oakland, when suddenly, masked and armed gunmen burst into the restaurant. 

They tell you to lay on the ground, and then proceed to steal your money, jewelry and other valuables. 

Don’t forget to tip the waitress for an evening that you most assuredly never will forget! (Oh, you can’t tip the waitress since you don’t have any money anymore.)

This terrifying scourge is playing out right now throughout Bay Area cities, like Oakland, Castro Valley, Vallejo and San Leandro.  And while logic suggests that there is some linkage between the criminals perpetrating these crimes, just as likely true is that this crime wave is memetically driven; namely, the sheer vividness of this type of crime is inspiring imitators, spreading a criminal schema as ruthlessly efficient as a contagious virus.

Memetics?  Memetics is a neo-darwinian theory of how information or thoughts spread and propagate from one person to another by means of imitation. These elements, known as memes, include thoughts, ideas, theories, gestures, practices, fashions, habits, songs and dances, and can move through the societal realm in a manner similar to the contagious behavior of a virus.

The first four bars of the Fifth of Beethoven is a meme.  You can already hear it playing in your head.  The axiom that Knowledge is Power is a meme.  Don’t Talk to Strangers is a meme.  What is the American Dream? Owning a home, right. That is a meme.  Memes are efficient, memorable and move from person to person in a friction-free manner.

Hopefully, sooner than later, the Take-over Robbery meme is inoculated with the Spend Life Behind Bars anti-crime virus, and a quiet night out for dinner can mean just that once again.

If you want to learn move about memes, a great, highly readable book on the topic is ‘Virus of the Mind’ by Richard Brodie.

Base motivations: The Matter of McCain v. Obama

Socio-economics. It’s no longer about sex, race or nationality.  It’s about the generational, cultural or economic lens that shapes your view of the world.

Whether you are young, affluent, educated and sitting in the middle of new economy industries or aging, poor, uneducated and nested in the belly of old economy industries is more likely to shape your biases and perspectives than whether you are black or white, Jewish or Christian.

I am struck by this reality every day I walk down the block of my (somewhat) yuppified, upwardly neighborhood.  Namely, how totally foreign San Francisco, CA sentiment is from Charleston, SC.  Heck, how totally different SF Marina mindset is from Bakersfield.

Once upon a time, the societal fault lines were more clearly delineated along simple polarities like sex, race, nationality, sexual orientation and religious affiliation.

But today, it is more about HAVING – money, youth, economic prospects, education (and the cultural depth, sense of life options it bears) – or NOT HAVING.

I would argue that this is what the next presidential election is truly about.  What societal viewpoint drives the next four years.  It’s not even so pat as to say Republican versus Democrat, as the choice is muddier than that.  Otherwise, eight years of the Bush presidency and the havoc it’s wrought (economically, global reputation, civil liberties, partisan politics, etc.) would point to a landslide victory for Obama and the Dems.  As of yet, it doesn’t.  The race is very close.

In simple terms, it comes down to which candidate can put forth the narrative that speaks to the biggest base, socio-economically speaking.  In Obama’s case, his ‘home advantage’ is having the most fervent base of politically engaged Obama-tons, and a message of real change when the present doesn’t look so hot. 

By contrast, McCain has the advantage of consistently riding above the Republican brand, as Mr. Straight Talk Express, experienced war hero in scary times.

It’s Age and Experience versus (as David Brooks of The New York Times put it) The 21st-Century Man.  In an excellent Op-Ed piece, Brooks, commenting on Obama’s stalled position in the presidential polls, and what he must do to re-engage the populace, notes:

Of course, the Obama campaign has been here before. Just about a year ago, Obama was stagnant in the polls. His supporters were nervous and full of advice. And in the crowning moment of his whole race, Obama shut them out. He turned his back on the universe of geniuses and stayed true to his core identity.

At the core, Obama’s best message has always been this: He is unconnected with the tired old fights that constrict our politics. He is in tune with a new era. He has very little experience but a lot of potential. He does not have big achievements, but he is authentically the sort of person who emerges in a multicultural, globalized age. He is therefore naturally in step with the problems that will confront us in the years to come.

Pretty sound analysis, I think, and it will be interesting, no gripping, to see which view of the world prevails. 

A final note.  Watching John McCain last night on Jay Leno, what I saw was a candidate that seems to have found his footing.  McCain is playing the populist.  He is the underdog – like the American people. 

Deftly sidestepping the truth about having seven homes, and living a truly wealthy life, and eight years of Bush brown-nosing that leave the Straight Talk moniker smelling a bit foul, McCain was incredibly scripted, yet nonetheless, very solid.

The choice is not simply a black and white matter anymore.

Related Posts:

1. Pit bull Politics - How Bush Stacks Up
2. Obama, Clinton and the 'Winner Take All'
3. Hillary's Assassination-gate Dissected: Watch this Video!

Con Men, Confidence Games and Trustworthy Faces

'The Confidence Game' is a fascinating article in The Boston Globe that spotlights how and why we trust, and the indelible nature of first impressions.

It's a must read for would-be con men, and skeptics looking to refine their bullshit detectors.

Two key takeaways from the article are:  1) That having the right type of face (high inner eyebrows, shallow brow line indentation, pronounced cheekbones and a wide chin) makes others subconsciously perceive you as trustworthy; AND 2) Mimickry, even to the point of overtly imitating another's actions and tonality, puts others at ease, which again, imbues you with a sense of trustworthiness.

Here is an excerpt:

But recently, behavioral scientists have also begun to unravel the inner workings of trust. Their aim is to decode the subtle signals that we send out and pick up, the cues that, often without our knowledge, shape our sense of someone's reliability. Researchers have discovered that surprisingly small factors - where we meet someone, whether their posture mimics ours, even the slope of their eyebrows or the thickness of their chin - can matter as much or more than what they say about themselves. We size up someone's trustworthiness within milliseconds of meeting them, and while we can revise our first impression, there are powerful psychological tendencies that often prevent us from doing so - tendencies that apply even more strongly if we've grown close.

When deciding who to trust, the research suggests, people use shortcuts. For example, they look at faces. According to recent work by Nikolaas Oosterhof and Alexander Todorov of Princeton's psychology department, we form our first opinions of someone's trustworthiness through a quick physiognomic snapshot. By studying people's reactions to a range of artificially-generated faces, Oosterhof and Todorov were able to identify a set of features that seemed to engender trust. Working from those findings, they were able to create a continuum: faces with high inner eyebrows and pronounced cheekbones struck people as trustworthy, faces with low inner eyebrows and shallow cheekbones untrustworthy.

Read the full article by clicking HERE.

Apple, TV and the Smart Connected Living Room

When Apple CFO Peter Oppenheimer said that margins were great for the last quarter, but warned about a "future product transition" adversely impacting Apple’s margins in the quarter ahead, the fundamental question suddenly became, “What’s Apple Brewing?” (For some excellent analysis, check out ‘What's Apple's Big Mystery Product?’)

Look at it this way.  Taking down margin puts some of the Apple magic ‘mojo’ on the line since it immediately leads to increased volatility of the stock. 

Apple is only going to do that for a solid bet that delivers knockout margins and market share over the long haul.

Theory One: Apple TV Upgrade
Initially, I had a theory about Apple TV getting a major upgrade, with the iPhone/iPod touch having a solid remote control application for managing it.

The application case I saw was reinventing the set-top box experience in the same way that Apple re-invented the mobile phone. 

Would Comcast want to be their partner?  How about DISH?  ATT?…..iPhone exclusive US partner, ATT.  Hmm! 

Apple has already got iTunes infrastructure set up, right, and have decided to focus on the rental market, but with a rev, maybe they could have a front end that literally overlays on top of the TV screen.

Think about it.  That would be a logical upgrade path for the Apple TV and it leverages their media and carrier relationships nicely.

Finally, the mass adoption price point feels like something that might take down margins in exchange for securing a major foothold in the living room. 

They could market it as ‘Web TV That Actually Works’ (dig at Microsoft intended).

Theory Two: Form Factor #3
It makes more sense that Apple is going to grow the iPhone 2.0 Platform into Form Factor #3 (iPod, iPhone, ??). 

My guess is that Apple builds a device targeted as the interactive TV, gaming and video services player for a wireless broadband living room; aka The Smart, Connected Living Room.

This theory ties in with the video chipset rumors and some pretty sage analysis by Robert X. Cringely beginning a full year ago (see 'The Eyes Have It: Last week's Apple mystery is all about video chips (I think)') that explains the video chipset imperative.

In this scenario, Apple needs to support media playback that runs in its own modal, concurrent sandbox so it can support overlays for things like dynamic ad units, in-line messaging, information feeds and other interactivity capabilities on top of video, gaming functions.

Why?  Media rich applications suck a lot of CPU power. If they do not have a dedicated path to get the job done, system performance degradation can occur.  One sees this with regularity if you attempt to multi-task (e.g., listen to music, surf the internet at the same time) on the iPod touch/iPhone.

Theory 2.5: Pursue the Universal Remote market
If Apple wants to think like Sony, they could delver further into the consumer electronics area and launch this new device as a true Universal Remote Control, and position it as a living room companion since it also does all of the familiar stuff that the touch and iPhone does. 

Side note: since it’s just a replicated version of their iPhone or iPod touch, this is another case that showcases where the integral-ness of Mobile Me lies -- synchronization and replication for owners of multiple iPhone 2.0 powered devices.

Again, I am guessing that the Universal Remote market is a relatively lower margin business, consistent with the announcement, but it is also a segment that probably could support its own form factor given potential market size.

Basically, pursuing the Universal Remote segment gets everyone to give the platform another “category” of regular usage, and ironically, where Universal Remotes suck these days – battery life – that is a strong suit of Apple’s platform. 

Netting it Out
With iPod, Apple secured the position as market leader for the “media player + media marketplace 1.0” segment.  With iPhone, they extended it with a mobile Internet experience which effective re-invented the mobile phone.  Now, with iPhone 2.0 Software they are converging and extending these capabilities with the first caveat-free mobile platform and marketplace 2.0 functions.

With that as a backdrop, it is easy to see where this type of living room ‘land grab’ would be harmonious with iPhone, iPod, AppleTV and Mac universe, while setting the stage for Apple to roll out increasingly specialized variants of the software and form factor over time.

Heck, they’ve got Apple Store capacity and they are building out strong channel partnerships, like Best Buy, so distribution and reach via-a-vis a highly trained sales organization is not a problem.

Finally, such a strategy has the potential to avoid carriers where it makes sense, embrace carriers where it makes sense and do ala carte deals where it makes sense (e.g., HBO to disrupt Comcast);

And, as a fixed broadband wireless play, it overcomes both battery and broadband limitations.

UPDATE 1: Union Square Ventures (Fred Wilson's fund) announces investment in Boxee, what he dubs as the Firefox of the media center software (i.e., derived from an open source software project).  Boxee also has a variant that runs on top of Apple TV, which is encouraging, since in the short term at least, it seems that Apple is not going to push Apple TV line as more than a hobby (I remain skeptical that this isn't head fake, but you never know).  Also, SGN releases iFun, which turns iPhone/iPod touch into Wii-like gaming controller of PC games.

Related Links:

1. What it Means to be a "Social" Media Center: Boxee, Apple TV and Square Connect
2. iPhone 2.0 - What it Means to be Mobile: a detailed summary of my experience to date with the iPhone 2.0 platform.
3. iPhone SDK - Mobile Reasons for Optimism: why the iPhone Universe is a big deal.
4. iPhone 2.0 - Swinging for the Fences: an analysis of the WWDC Keynote by Steve Jobs.

Ambition is a Kind of Vampirism

Once bitten by it, there is no return to your former life.  It’s a form of blood lust, an insatiable hunger that can only be temporarily sated, its host never again fully satisfied. 

It consumes the spirit and envelops the flesh.  With a single-mindedness; of thoughts of prey, and conquests far and wide. 

It carries elements of the supernatural.  Its powers can carry you to unfathomable, sometimes terrifying, yet exhilarating, heights. 

But it is also the lonely road in that few understand the pain, the hunger and the never-ending pursuit that comes with being infected by it.

It is scary and threatening to others, and they keep their distance lest they succumb to it, too.

Pity those who pursue it but fail to realize it; for they are destined to walk the earth for a seeming eternity.  They are the fallen ones, wandering in an undead state, not truly dead. But no longer among the living.

iPhone Universe: Network Borders, Kill Switches and the Core Location

This is fascinating.  In ‘It’s a Core Location Blacklist,’ John Gruber of Daring Fireball provides some crisp analysis on the recent chatter that Apple has a backdoor 'kill switch' to shut down apps running within the iPhone 2.0 Universe if it deems it fit to do so.

Says Gruber:

"So there may well be some sort of kill switch that Apple can deploy to remotely disable an app that’s already installed. But this list is not it.

Apple has no reason to hide such a configuration in a sneaky place. If it’s “tucked away in a configuration file deep inside” the Core Location framework, doesn’t it seem more likely that this list has something to do with, say, Core Location? Even the URL of the file in question hints at this:

https://iphone-services.apple.com/clbl/unauthorizedApps

An informed source at Apple confirmed to me that the “clbl” in the URL stands for “Core Location Blacklist”, and that it does just that. It is not a blacklist for disabling apps completely, but rather specifically for preventing any listed apps from accessing Core Location — an API which, for obvious privacy reasons, is covered by very strict rules in the iPhone SDK guidelines."

Personally, what Gruber is putting forth makes total sense.  I would build upon his logic and throw two thoughts out there.  One is that if it’s going to realize its potential for commerce and enterprise adoption, the iPhone Universe needs to be a safe and secure place.  It just does.  You don’t want your phone, your data and/or your wallet exposed to be readily hacked.

Thus, kill switches (total application shutdown) and core location blocks make perfect sense.  Think of it as the cable descrambler box.  Apple is implementing a service layer that requires a special key to access certain core functions.  These are either functions internal to the device and/or those that connect to network functions.

It’s their form of Border Control, and as I believe that governance is part of the equation, I say hurrah!

Related Links:

1. iPhone 2.0 - What it Means to be Mobile: a detailed summary of my experience to date with the iPhone 2.0 platform.
2. iPhone SDK - Mobile Reasons for Optimism: why the iPhone Universe is a big deal.
3. iPhone 2.0 - Swinging for the Fences: an analysis of the WWDC Keynote by Steve Jobs.

Pursue the Highest Common Denominator

Here’s a riddle.  Is the strategic ideal to pursue ubiquity by serving the lowest common denominator (LCD)? 

Or, should you aspire to push the envelope on what is possible, and elevate the definition of the situation to a whole new level?

This latter realm is the Highest Common Denominator (HCD).  And, whereas LCD is all about simplicity, openness and an assumption of fairly loose couplings, HCD is about deep integration and more formal orchestration of use cases and workflows to serve a specific form-factor.

The iPhone/iPod, for example, delivers an HCD experience (bugs, notwithstanding) for communications, media, gaming and information services.

Paradoxically, being HCD also means being proprietary in that the hardware, software and service layers must be delivered as a unified, tightly integrated and co-dependent package to accomplish all of this goodness.

In the yin-yang scheme of things, if Apple is all about delivering HCD, then Google is all about LCD.  Its search and advertising cornerstones are simple, spartan and just work.  But they don’t get the heart pounding in the same way iPhones and Macs inspire the Cult of Apple.

Yet, both companies are pretty much are without peers in terms of their ability to play the disruptor role across the entirety of the media, mobile, PC and Internet segments; industry segments which once were impenetrably different, but no more.

So it’s not an EITHER/OR, but I would argue that Google-style LCD sensibility has taken hold more so than Apple-style HCD mindset, and that's a shame.

Why is this so? HCD is hard; it is complex; it is fraught with execution risk; and it takes real vision.  But we need more vision and we need more aspiration to be a game-changer if we are not only to disrupt and race industries to the bottom but rather, to re-invent them, and reach new plateaus.

Which brings me to local media and local advertisers.  Talk about delivering an LCD experience.  I am talking the local newspaper, local TV stations and yellow page-style listing guides.

They need to get on an HCD track if they are going to regain relevance, and thus have high value real estate to sell.

Currently, the newspaper is selling something that less and less people are buying – and to a predominantly  aging populace, no less. The local TV station is similarly squeezed.  And don’t get me started on yellow pages.

Revenue and/or margin contraction has driven these operators to shrink reporting, creative and editorial staffs.  This has ossified their product, creating a vicious cycle.  (Or maybe just not having a monopoly anymore has irrevocably changed the game, and they haven’t shown the resolve or vision to adjust in a value added fashion).

But things need not play out linearly.  Think about it this way.  Thanks to Google AdSense sensibility, brands now see the logic of paying different amounts for different access and engagement/performance levels.

In an HCD approach, a local media operator might give brands access to richer tools to express their uniqueness or to craft highly specific call-to-action campaigns that are nonetheless tightly integrated with the media property.

This would yield ad units that could be customized and interactive enough to facilitate finely honed brand engagement or lead generation activities.  Media units could be set up to systematically maximize audience reach and engagement levels.  And be priced accordingly.

This implies a quicker read format, more akin to the newsletter, that blurs the line for subscribers between the print and online portion of their accounts, can be chopped up into specialized, media-rich topics, easily customized, updated throughout the day, and which is organize-able and share-able to meet the whims of the subscriber.  It's about engagement, shelf-life and context, something that today's local paper is missing.

Learning to excel at delivering such high value integrated media and advertising units will not be easy, and it implies not only shedding a lot of legacy skin, but a more formal coordination of the media and advertising creation process than currently exists.

But it’s the HCD experience that AdSense can't deliver, and sometimes, necessity is the mother of invention.

Related Links

1. The Chess Masters: Apple versus Google: an assessment of why Google and Apple are without peer.
2. The Programmable Fan Site: a new media/ad unit model.
3. Comcast Buys DailyCandy For $125 Million*: snapshot of a newsletter success.