FreedomLab Future Studies http://www.freedomlab.org Empowered by creativity Thu, 04 Sep 2008 17:26:22 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2 en The Black Death of TV http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/09/04/the-black-death-of-tv/ http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/09/04/the-black-death-of-tv/#comments Thu, 04 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0000 jorgen@freedomlab.org Wzzupcontenteuropeexperiencefuturehitlifelivingmediapeopletechnology http://santiago.freedomlab.org/2008/09/04/22495/ Recently a friend talked to me about the 'renaissance of relationships in the media environment'. He argued that it was the Black Death that sparked the Renaissance in the 16th century in Europe. Why? Because after the Black Death people focused more on the quality of their present day lives instead of that in the afterlife. In his view the status quo of the way we are doing business these days is a new form of the Black Death that will lead to a Renaissance of Relationships: interactive, true experiences, really listening, etc. As one of our studies focuses on the future of media, I think that Black Death takes another form.]]> A focus on quality of life I do think that people today want better quality of life. Just yesterday I was asked quite an interesting question. What if you didn%u2019t spend any money on any products having to do with fashion or technology, or basically on stuff you don%u2019t really need, to put it in a broader sense, then what would you spend your money on? Just living of the bare necessities and nothing more. Where does your disposable income go? Take a couple of minutes to think about that question, before you read on%u2026and I'm sure you'll come up with stuff that is about improving the quality of your life: educate yourself, work on your health, travel? The Black Death of TV So, if we take my friend's premise for granted and we do experience a focus on the quality of life and suppose that it was caused by a new kind of Media Black Death. Then what was that Black Death, the disease that infected us all? Well, not really all of us. The Black Death of TV was caused by the industry itself. As 'airtime' has become less and less scarce, anything can go these days. We've got more than 10 TV channels in the Netherlands, I won't even count the ones that are present in the US. Not only did audiences shatter and become fragmented all over these channels, making the business models less and less profitable, every single channel was chasing after the same TV hit (going for the head of Anderson's Longtail). Did reality TV even exist a decade ago? Now every channel I flick to is reality TV. It is this hit-factory attitude that caused a disease to grow. A disease that has killed innovation (not in technological terms, but more importantly in storytelling terms). Maybe that is what my friend was trying to get across with 'the status quo of doing business'. The revival of TV as a business Can TV survive? Sure they can, if they find that focus on the quality of my life and are able to help me in filling that in. That doesn't have to do with the box or the content, but rather with the business. And I know TV execs want clear cut answers (or rather still: "give me that TV hit"), but that will not get them better. Ask yourself: would your life be qualitatively better if it looked just like your friend's, if you continuously looked for the maximizing effect?]]> http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/09/04/the-black-death-of-tv/feed/ US TV networks getting a tough beating, but why? http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/09/04/us-tv-networks-getting-a-tough-beating-but-why/ http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/09/04/us-tv-networks-getting-a-tough-beating-but-why/#comments Thu, 04 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0000 arjan@freedomlab.org Wzzupconsumerinternetmarketmedianetworkpeoplepowerproductstorytechnology http://santiago.freedomlab.org/2008/09/04/us-tv-networks-getting-a-tough-beating-but-why/ This weekend in the USA, "TV Networks getting a beating: Survivor hitshow -20% ratings". Wauw that sounds serious especially since it is not just Survivor, the downturn is industry wide even worsened by advertisers who stop spending due to the credit crunch. I asked a few members of our Board of Inspiration who have close ties to the media-industry: What is going on?  One replied:" It's hard to judge the reason. It looks like a of perfect storm. On the one hand, there is no question that there has been a steady erosion of the network's position since the 80s, initially and for a long time because of cable TV.   Certainly, the HDD is changing habits - storing all episodes to watch in one go, not feeling that you have to see thing when it's broadcast (and certainly this is true for fiction).   The opening up of the web(-video) and games has shifted audiences dramatically - even though one might argue that on an annual basis the average 'tv viewing hours' total is up - that's not entirely true.   The tv is merely on, but most dramatically younger men are disappearing, critically, while the population is ageing.  But that's not the only explanation, the issue currently is in part the conservatism and fear of the current generation of executives (who only want lookalikes) and the economy is preventing any marketing - so they market on the networks, but nobody's watching the network so nobody knows to watch the network. When will we see the Twin Tower moment for television? Any ideas?" ]]> I will give you some flashes from a long long conversation.... these are quotes -- sorry for some faul language! TOP 10 QUOTES: #1 Massive audience doesn't equal massive content! Mass Media is a medium used by the masses not to be mistaken as a medium filled with a mass of indestinctive content. So problem number one is that Mass media is different than Media Mass! #2 TV is going down; is it really going bad or is it just normalizing the big years? I wonder wether TV is loosing or whetter  this is a correction of the TV-media monopoly. So is the 20% going down and down even further or is there a bottom of the 'natural' TV audience-share within the media/ time consumption mix. It will not go down to zero, my guess is that the frenzy is over now they will need to find the real plateau. #3 The audience has a choice NOT to be couch-patato I think one of the reasons is that people are watching more 'targeted' is the fact that we  live more hybrid, arythmic, asynchronic lives. What I mean is, 'they' don't use TV anymore to be bored all evening... the time that TV was almost the only entertainer and that the content was 'magic' is over. Big Brother (or reality TV more broadly), broke the spell. People have choice, like the web & gaming which still do have the X-factor. The audience is more selective in what they watch (they deal with their spare time as if they run a micro-economy; Behavioural economics!) and therefor use more & more tools like Tivo to support their lifestyle. #4 Big Brother (and others) broke the Magic-spell of TV If you would make a graph of attention divided by time watched TV, television should be up enormously: less quantity more quality (they have chosen to watch the show which in marketing terms is extremely valuable: shopping good vs impuls buyt!). The question rises: is TV really loosing?! I think not. TV is in a phase of re-adjustment, not going down the drain. Big Brother (and others) brought normal people doing normal stuff on prime-time TV, every f*cking evening (twice) and putting normal people in control (they thought) via tele-voting. BB was not even a TV format anymore it blurred all boundaries of the mediascape. So BB (and others) broke down the elite walls of TV entertainment... it moved from mass audience to mass content. mass and more mass production. Nowadays an average TV programming consists of  10% of TV-programming in the offense and 90% of fill-me-up, low quality defensive programming. TV is therefor fading out as a HOT-medium and becoming a COLD-medium. Cold, meaning you decide when to watch what on TV (like the web is pull), while TV used to be hot, meaning you turn it on and than something appears which you digest (PUSH). Quantity is killing tv. Was Big Brothe/ Reality TV the Twin Tower effect of TV? #5 Screw DRM, make it easy not difficult to stop illegal downloads The viewers have other means and that is not about making things cheap or even free (illegal copying) it is about not wanting to be patronized by the network. I don't want to wait a year to watch Lost series 5... I even need to be carefull on the web not te see/ hear any spoilers, therefor I download (since Amazon refuses to sell me the DVD before the EU release-date). Peer to peer illegal music sharing has decreased dramatically since Itunes made it so easy, because belief me, downloading movies is a freaking nightmare if you are not an expert (either it is low quality, or the end is missing, or no subtitles, or it is in spanish, or it appears to be porn). People want the stuff, yes even TV stuff. They go as far as, going illegal, all the hassle to get the content they want. That is amazing!!! That is loyalty, that is engagement! #6 TV is fucking it up themselves TV tends to blaim a zillion externalities for the downfall. It is not technology, it is not a brand new generation. The TV downturn is a human created disaster to be compared with the Dutch disease or Resource Curse. The industry copied and copied and copied whatever was making the big money and did not use the money to diversify the product offering. TV turned from mass-audience in mass-uniform-offering. TV-producers complaint that people don't like TV anymore because they have new toys which are better, which can do more, offer more choice. I think that statement is false, people discovered via the new toys how bad television had become. The downfall is mainly an internal industry problem not taking the viewer and the role of creativity seriously. The whole media-elite took the easy-money and left the industry as billionairs, leaving am industry which marginalized itself. The industry created a mass of look-alike programs scaring away the viewers. TV bored the hell out of them. But hey, look on the bright side. If it is not 'them' (outside TV business), but 'us' (inside TV business) it means that there should be ways out of this mess =))) #7 TV-networks are making it impossible for me to watch TV: A. due to regional discrimination in release-dates, B. By airing so much bullshit around good programs... making it impossible to watch for an entire evening C. By breaking a good show on average (in NL) 6 times for commercials... interrupting my engagement. #8 TV station are positioning themselves as a network as a place. The web/ digital has eroded the phenomena of 'place and space'. I don't give a shit WHERE it is... it is aboit WHAT it is. I want people to help me in getting good entertainment. A tv station is a navigator. It helps me to select the best content for me from all the bad stuff which is out there... do they really think that I like YouTubing for my entertainment. 'This program is brought to you by Heineken'.... what a rubbish and foolish act... NO IT IS THE BRILLIANT SERVICE OF THE NETWORK/ BROADCASTER THAT BROUGHT YOU SURVIVOR NOT HEINEKEN... the network is selling out on its service-perception since it is viewing itself as a station. That was maybe true when 0-10 on the TV set were scarce and a wave in the ether was like media-real-estate. Making television is a service and should be rewarded as a service. I would even PAY for a good network (!) if it does less advertising and less rubbish. So please let me pay for Quality of Service! T #9 Social Value vs Economic Value The balance between the social value and the economic value of (TV) entertainment is ridiculous. TV is still agenda setting in a nation and it is driving other media (even the web for a large part) but to monetize it over 13x6 advertising slots is economically almost impossible. Therefor TV producers should get rid of Multi-media (airing your show on every possible medium, that is diluting the effect of the show), they should start focussing on cross-media (each medium has its role in the layers of the story) and in the end it should start to work on its creative DNA, what we call integrated media. #10 Young people are always leaving? Is that because they are young and is it a generational thing which we can extrapolate? Or will new generations adjust when they get a job, a wife, kids etc. It will remain question to be seen. I think kids don't turn away from TV as such, they turn away from waste since they have the power and alternatives to choose... the have the energy to 'be zappy'. TV has a solution.. we keep the content as such be we edit it down like MTV, every shot lasts a few seconds. While my kid is even bored with that. The form is nit the issue here! It remains strange that if one clicks on a 'puking girl-clip' on YouTube it is rewarding (you choose, you got it... you won!) in comparison to watching tv, sitting on the couch, not really wanting anything and than suddenly getting a puking girl in one of the reality shows. Same content but you didn't ask for it so it can never be rewarding, never. Only the 'good' stuff is rewarding because that is like shopping. You walk by all the shopping-windows and than you find something. Tthat is rewarding to find something you like after a long lasting search. TV by definition is only rewarding if we talk quality, not quantity. We like to tell the next day what we saw, what touched us in one way or the other... we don't share how much we have been behind the tube? Internet in its turn,  is rewarding if it does what you say. Being surprised/ finding something on the web is less satisfying if you did not command it to, that is luck - no skills. So now we enter a dangerous area: What is quality TV? I don't know... Is indeed the only measure of quality, popularity? What I do know is, that if a core idea which could be told in 5 minutes is extended to 10 minutes we might call it storytelling, suspense, drama, whatever... but when it is spun out over 50 minutes or even worse... it is more about quantity than quality. Than YOU (Mr. Network) are manipulating me and stealing my valuable time! So quality for me has more to do if I, as consumer, feel rewarded for having watched the television. Popularity makes it easy, but there are probably other options as well to define quality (not high-brow but low-brow quality!). TV can play a crucial role in the digital -paradigm. Both the screen, the content AND even the industry. But only if they leave the ivory tower and join the emerging market for broad video-entertainment.]]> http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/09/04/us-tv-networks-getting-a-tough-beating-but-why/feed/ Conditions for accelerated growth: absorptive capacity http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/09/03/conditions-for-accelerated-growth-absorptive-capacity/ http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/09/03/conditions-for-accelerated-growth-absorptive-capacity/#comments Wed, 03 Sep 2008 16:57:45 +0000 stefan@freedomlab.org Not on home Board of inspiration http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/09/03/conditions-for-accelerated-growth-absorptive-capacity/ Adam Szirmai"Absorptive capacity [...] also means having simple thing like education. Having a reservoir of highly educated people, which China had for a long time. It means the type of education which shouldn't be too abstract and oriented towards classical literature or history, but more towards technology, towards business, towards practical applications. For instance, this is typical for the United States, which was a catch-up economy in the nineteenth century which had more technical agriculture oriented education compared to the hybrid classical education in the United Kingdom." Adam Szirmai, Professor of Technology and Development Studies.]]> ]]> http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/09/03/conditions-for-accelerated-growth-absorptive-capacity/feed/ Making room for experiences http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/09/03/making-room-for-experiences/ http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/09/03/making-room-for-experiences/#comments Wed, 03 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0000 stefan@freedomlab.org Wzzupexperiencefacthumaninformationpeopleproductspacesystemwebworld http://santiago.freedomlab.org/2008/09/03/making-room-for-experiences/ vending machineSometimes you grab a book that you've already read, and the moment its in your hands again, it triggers all sorts of new thoughts. I had picked up the book "Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience " by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi and somehow connected it to the need of vending machines...]]> Limitation of human processing capacity: from an abundance of choice to attention Our consciousness, the distribution center where different events are described and compared by different sensory organs, is not a shapeless mess. The force that organizes information in our consciousness, could be called 'intention'. Intentions appear on the stage of the consciousness the moment someone realizes that he want to have or achieve something. They function as magnetic fields that focuses our attention, making sure we concentrate on certain stimuli. Unfortunately the nerve system has only a limited capacity of processing information within a certain time. The 'events' in the consciousness soon start to push each other aside: only a few can be recognized and processed. In fact only a few things can occur simultaneously and are limited to things like chewing a bubble gum while walking. The information we permit to our consciousness is therefore very important. Information only enters the consciousness when we are willing to focus our attention on it. Our attention selects the most relevant information units from maybe millions of possible option. Attention is key: where do you engage in? You could say that in todays digital world with all its abundance of information, the only scarcity left is "attention". People have so many stimuli to choose from that it it have become of the utmost importance for everything to scream for you attention in order to get noticed. The enormous amount of choice in the physical world is much the same. Whether it is the twenty toothpastes you can choose from, the twenty insurance policies available, or the millions of web pages that might be interesting to visit, choice is ubiquitous. But what is not unlimited is the amount of information that we're able to process. In the selective process that then occurs, attention is key. But where do you focus you attention on? Business got it all figured out. In the digital sphere content is king. Content needs to be informative and easy to digest. Additionally a whole ecosystem of companies has arisen that takes care of the so called stickiness of your website, by which we are to spend more time on the site in order to fight the urge to check out the million of other web pages. On top of that every product or services in the physical world tends to turn itself into an experience with the goal to have a profound impact on every day's activity. Whether the experience is a visit to Disney World or the roller-coaster gum ball machine that takes 60 seconds before it delivers the candy, everything tends to become an experience. And most experiences take time. Dividing time The amount of disposable time we are able  to spend in a day however stays the same. So choices have to be made. What experience do you engage in, and what not. So if there is such a thing as the Experience Economy (or Attention Economy for that matter), what is the counter force that saves time in order to engage in the 'experiences' of your preference. I think one of the counter forces that can be seen as 'not-experiences' nowadays, is expressed in the increased consumption of on-the-go food. Also very easy to digest. Producers of such food have paid much attention to delivering balanced meals that you can put in the micro-wave or eat from the hand. But you still have to go to the store and cue in line. So... that made me think about vending machines. Vending machines are probably one of the most unpersonal ways to get a product. But its fast and the amount of choice is dramatically decreased. Of course not every product is suitable for such a speedy transaction, but most small products that well known, preservable and don't need a reciept could be on display. The machines take up little space and with today's connectivity they can be placed practically everywhere. And most importantly, they save a lot of time for transactions that don't need any engagement. So while an experience consumes most of our attention and time, a vending machine just facilitates a small transaction, creating time for all those other products and services that scream for attention...]]> http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/09/03/making-room-for-experiences/feed/ No water no Coca-Cola http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/09/02/no-water-no-coca-cola/ http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/09/02/no-water-no-coca-cola/#comments Tue, 02 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0000 jurg@freedomlab.org Wzzupbusinesschangecitycommunitycultureeraglobalhistoryoilpeople http://santiago.freedomlab.org/2008/08/28/no-water-no-coca-cola/ Coca-Cola hoards water?!Coca-Cola's believe is that for sustainable business it needs sustainable communities. That is their bottom line. And after several years of effort to 'do good' for the communities they are part of they clearly gravitate towards water. This is not illogical for a non-diversified company with water the most prominent feedstock of their products. We are waiting for the 'beyond oil' era, but Coca-Cola will never be a 'beyond water'! The UN PRI organized a webinar around water, and they invited Coca-Cola to talk...]]> Lake Chad has always fluctuated dramatically. This shallow lake is very sensitive to its environment. With 4 bordering countries nearly 20 million people are directly dependent on this resource. A study done in 2001 concluded that the decrease in size over the previous 40 years of nearly 90% has nothing to do with climate change, but mainly with overgrazing. Another example of how intertwined investment and water is can be found on the border of Argentina and Uruguay. For Uruguay this paper mill was by far the most considerably funded project in the its history. With environmental concerns playing a not inconsiderable part in this dispute the development has been halted for now. This clearly shows that water issues are of influence to investors and the investment community. The UN PRI community always talks about ESG issues, where the E stands for environment. Water is part of the environment but carbon emissions are higher on the agenda. One of the notable projects is the Carbon Disclosure Project. There is no yet a similar initiative for water. An interesting development is the use of the concept of Water Footprint. This footprint indicates both the direct and indirect use, consumed (evaporated) and polluted. Coca-Cola's culture and behavior is changing. Though it has taken time and effort to 'move beyond the  walls of the plant' in their thinking they have redefined how they want to use a resource such as water. Water is too elemental in this company. It is non-diversified and uses the equivalent of 1/3 of Mexica City's water consumption, annually. Coca-Cola has defined its goal to become water-neutral. For Coca-Cola water use has 3 perspectives: reduce, recycle and replenish. Reduce is clear, they will set and publish their targets the end of this year. Recycle means that all their plants only output water that is clean. Now 84% of their water output meet these standards. The end of 2010 it will be 100%. And replenish is that they work for and finance projects to increase quality and quantity of water in the communities they operate.]]> http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/09/02/no-water-no-coca-cola/feed/ Endgame, Vol. 1: The Problem of Civilization http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/09/01/endgame-vol-1-the-problem-of-civilization/ http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/09/01/endgame-vol-1-the-problem-of-civilization/#comments Mon, 01 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0000 rob@freedomlab.org Book of the week Not on homechangecultureglobalhomeinformationlifelivingmarketpeopleworld http://santiago.freedomlab.org/2008/05/08/endgame-vol-1-the-problem-of-civilization-2/ Endgame, Vol. 1: The Problem of Civilization by Derrick Jensen 22 customers reviewed this article averaging 4.0 Isbn-13: 9781583227305 "Derrick Jensen is a rare and original voice of sanity in a chaotic world. He has wisdom and wit, grace and style, and is a wonderful guide to a good life beautifully lived."-Howard ZinnThe companion piece to Derrick Jensen's immensely popular and highly acclaimed works A Language Older Than Words and The Culture of Make Believe, Endgame stands to become Jensen's most influential book. Building on a series of simple but increasingly provocative premises, Jensen leaves us hoping for what may be inevitable:...]]> See this book in Amazon "Derrick Jensen is a rare and original voice of sanity in a chaotic world. He has wisdom and wit, grace and style, and is a wonderful guide to a good life beautifully lived."-Howard Zinn The companion piece to Derrick Jensen's immensely popular and highly acclaimed works A Language Older Than Words and The Culture of Make Believe, Endgame stands to become Jensen's most influential book. Building on a series of simple but increasingly provocative premises, Jensen leaves us hoping for what may be inevitable: a return to agrarian communal life via the disintegration of civilization itself.

Customer Reviews

But, you've never had a gun.:

J.W.K. you wrote, "Fits Like a Gun in Your Hand" How would you know? I'm not just being flipent. I'm pointing out that Greens are (compared to say, rednecks) passive in temperment and ideology. They talk and talk.... Which is good, because there actions would be (like blowing up a dam) would be quite evil.

Incredibly insightful book!:

Civilization is killing the planet. This culture will not--can not--voluntarily transform into one that is sustainable. The inevitable conclusion of an unsustainable and ever-expanding way of life is omnicide. In Endgame, Derrick Jensen asks what we are going to do about that. There is no more important question we can ask ourselves, ever. There is nothing more important to think about and to figure out. Unless we stop it, and it may already be too late, civilization (and global industrial capitalism in particular), will continue chewing up this planet until it has destroyed everything. The stakes really are that high. It really is that urgent. In Endgame, Jensen brings to bear irrefutable logic, total honesty, his generous spirit, and incredible insight about how this culture works, to help the reader snap out of denial and face reality with strength and courage. I don't know another book that is more important to read and absorb... and, of course, to act upon.

Where Were You Derrick?:

Derrick Jensen is a brilliant thinker. "A Language Older Than Words" is essential reading, a truly brilliant book. If you have ever felt caught between the desire to spike a tree and the belief that violence only begets violence, then like me you may well have looked forward to the release of "Endgame," Jensen's exploration of whether violence can be justified in response to our dark and destructive culture. Gandhi, Edward Abbey, Martin Luther King, Thoreau, all examined this question. While Jensen may well be original enough to belong in this list, he failed with the first volume of "Endgame." The book is self-indulgent, rambling, unfocused and full of vitriol. Deep thought? Don't look for it here.

a bit silly:

I have read most of derrick jensen's books, and he makes good arguments but they are handpicked.....he pulls down civilisation with all its ills and injustices, but offers no better solution.....He himself eats salmon but bemoans its demise....he himself likes to gamble....eat meat.....travel by car and plane etc.....yet criticises a society and its people for doing the same thing.....no example is set or put into practice.....it is easy to pull apart something, but alot harder to replace or rebuild.....in the end the feeling is; whats his point and it all seems abit silly to rage against the machine that he himself embraces and benefits from.....a good read but shallow at the same time.....walk the talk jensen and you'll add some meat to the words written....rod simpson...australia

Always welcome discourse:

Another thought-provoking book from Derrick Jensen. He keeps us honest, or at least thinking about being honest, as the floods of consumerism and "free market" shenanigans threaten to drown us. He writes lucidly and passionately and one can't help but come away changed. And guilty about whether that change translates into action. Thanks, Derrick.]]> http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/09/01/endgame-vol-1-the-problem-of-civilization/feed/ Keens gatekeepers are story tellers http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/09/01/keens-gatekeepers-are-story-tellers/ http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/09/01/keens-gatekeepers-are-story-tellers/#comments Mon, 01 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0000 joachim@freedomlab.org Wzzupbusinesschangecontentculturalexperiencehitmediapeopleradiostory http://santiago.freedomlab.org/2008/09/01/keens-gatekeepers-are-story-tellers/ 'De Goude Kooi' aimed just to generate shock effectsBroadcast yourself! Sure, why not, everybody does it nowadays. Youtube, Myspace and all the other platforms are for some friends already the favourite 'station' to 'watch tv' and 'listen to the radio'. I think the idea is great, but when I see what they are watching and listening I can't share their enthousiasm. But what surprises me even more is how fast they seem to agree with me and abandon their new born stars. And why is that? The key words in this matter are probably story and effect.]]> Andrew Keen. He pleas for gatekeepers to protect the cultural business and he is right about that in my opinion. We need people with taste to protect us from our own need for shocks. We need people like Joop van de Ende is referring to, people that can tell stories.]]> http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/09/01/keens-gatekeepers-are-story-tellers/feed/ Cult of the amateur will lead to an unsustainable media economy http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/08/29/cult-of-the-amateur-will-lead-to-an-unsustainable-media-economy/ http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/08/29/cult-of-the-amateur-will-lead-to-an-unsustainable-media-economy/#comments Fri, 29 Aug 2008 13:21:19 +0000 stefan@freedomlab.org Not on home Board of inspiration http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/08/29/cult-of-the-amateur-will-lead-to-an-unsustainable-media-economy/ Andrew Keen"A company like Facebook is valued at 15 billion dollars. But why is it valued on that? They still haven't discovered a coherent business model. Facebook became very popular, because it was a clean, well led site, which wasn't as dominated by advertising. But now they've become more popular and are trying to integrate advertising into their content as a way of cashing out on their traffic and the size of their community their community rebels against them. It's hard to see where the money comes from in the Web 2.0 economy. And the crisis, in moral, cultural terms is that the people who are getting screwed are the content people. The writers, the musicians, the film makers, the journalists. They're the ones who ultimately are not realizing revenue from their creative work. They're the ones who are having to take jobs as waiters or lawyers or postmen during the day to sustain their creative habit." Andrew Keen, entrepreneur and author.]]> ]]> http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/08/29/cult-of-the-amateur-will-lead-to-an-unsustainable-media-economy/feed/ Upcoming ‘land’rush seeking digital dividend! http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/08/29/upcoming-landrush-seeking-digital-dividend/ http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/08/29/upcoming-landrush-seeking-digital-dividend/#comments Fri, 29 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0000 arjan@freedomlab.org Wzzupchoicecommunicationdigitalfuturemediamobileradiotechnologytelevisionworld http://santiago.freedomlab.org/2008/08/29/upcoming-landrush/ I'm talking about the upcoming great spectrum land-rush. This is something I learned very recently during my research into the Future of Media. The "digital dividend" is the radio spectrum left up for grabs when the first wave of digital television channels are allocated and analogue switch-off commences. . Like we learned in our Africa Online study, ether might be usefull to extend the reack and bandwith of WiMax etc. Unfortunately the frequencies it can use are limited since it will interfere with radio, tv or communication devices. We always tend to look ahead, what is TV going to look like, but it sometimes also interesting to look behind. What is the impact of a plainfield of Ether, ready to be used.... for what?
]]>
And it is a tough call. Take your pick between many options: standard television, high definition, handhelds and mobiles, wireless broadband, or something more revolutionary like "cognitive radio". The UK is one of the first regions and is creating several packages for auction:

*National digital terrestrial TV in high or standard definition
*Cognitive radio - a new wireless technology which can deliver broadband
*High-speed mobile broadband and mobile TV
*Local television - 25 new local TV stations across the UK
]]> http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/08/29/upcoming-landrush-seeking-digital-dividend/feed/ The rise and rise of micro-economies http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/08/28/the-rise-and-rise-of-micro-economies/ http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/08/28/the-rise-and-rise-of-micro-economies/#comments Thu, 28 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0000 jorgen@freedomlab.org Wzzupchangechinaconsumerfutureglobalinformationoilpowerwarworld http://santiago.freedomlab.org/2008/08/28/the-rise-and-rise-of-micro-economies/ In several of our Future Studies a strong driver for change is the rise of micro-economies. Whereas we see an increasing rise of international treaties and co-operation several regions are striving for independence on a smaller level. Fueled by the rising prices of natural resources (like oil and gas), these regions see an opportunity to be independent from their original 'motherlands'. Ever since the independence of Kosovo this movement is speeding up. And with the recent recognition of South-Ossetia and Abkhazia by Russia, a new step has been taken.]]> A decentralized world Ever since the Second World War the Western world especially has created a world of control. The more information was available about production processes, consumer needs (or is it wants?), bottlenecks in the networks, etc. the better it seemed to be. It allowed us to organize our world in the most efficient ways imaginable. Or so it seemed. The decentralization and transparency created a world that seemed to grow more complex everyday, although that might just be perception. The availability of information created a shift in power on every level (producer-consumer, government-citizen, teacher-student, core-periphery). Why? Because we could now see what somebody else has, pays, or gets. We are now in power. On the level of nation-states it has created an interesting dynamic. Today it is much more visible for everybody what regions are wealthy or are in unique geographical positions. Some of these regions see more opportunities to be independent. In the regions that are not merely united on economical terms, but also on cultural terms, the drive to become independent is ever more present. Kosovo for one might have started a transformation that will sweep over the world. The domino-effect It is not just the possibility to be 'self sustaining' to a certain extend that allows for these regions to want to be independent from their original countries. Throughout the world a mentality has to arise for it to succeed. Without any international backing these regions are doomed in their fate. Until recently, it seemed unlikely for such a mentality to occur on a large scale. And although every region has to be judged separately, the recent move of the Russian government to accept the independence of the two regions in Georgia, proves that global dynamics can change quick and create new opportunities for more and more smaller regions. The first stone has been cast and most likely the domino-effect is already happening. Can it be stopped? Not as easily as one might think. The decentralization of our world has only just started. Keep your eye out for other regions in the Kaukasus, China, and maybe even the United States...?]]> http://www.freedomlab.org/2008/08/28/the-rise-and-rise-of-micro-economies/feed/