A Brief Note

This is a brief note to let you know that I've now posted the last of the write-ups for TOC2009 below. They are Narrative is Changing, Youth and Creativity and Reasons to be Cheerful. I've also tweaked a few with addenda or a couple of extra links. And rather than write up Sarah Lloyd's presentation on Tues 10th, I thought I'd just give you a link to the article it was based on here and below. And here is the full text of a speech delivered by Jason Epstein on Technology and Human Nature, Tues 10th Feb, 2009, 5.30--6.00pm. It is an interesting counterpoint to much of what I've summarised. Enjoy.

TOC2009: Goodbye New York

Curiosa atop the Empire State, 2008

Well, the Tools of Change for Publishing Conference is now over. 'Already?!' I keep thinking. But also not soon enough -- I am pretty knackered.

Not so long ago it was Sunday, I was settling in to an armchair on the 38th floor, watching the busy circuit glow of the avenues of Manhattan, the dark Hudson, New Jersey flickering beyond, looking ahead to a busy few days. There's a lot to say about the conference generally; it could do with a full write up somewhere, as there were some interesting main threads to it all.

It seems too soon to be leaving NY again. I love this place. Watching the sun rise over New Jersey on Monday morning, The Hudson revealed in peach, a full first day ahead, felt easy; homely even -- perhaps it is to do with the fame of the place; the familiarity. It has been hectic -- 14-hour days of learning, thinking, writing, rethinking, tweeting -- but very relaxed, too; oddly peaceful in the middle of such a busy place in a busy city at the centre of many busy worlds.

Again, I've learned a lot, and thought a lot, at this conference. There are a few more interesting sessions and ideas to write up (those that don't re-iterate what I've already posted, that is) and I'll drop them in to the blog tomorrow, or soon after [now done - CH]. In the meantime, OReilly are posting many of the presentations here. Also, rather than write up Sarah Lloyd's presentation on Tues 10th, I thought I'd just give you a link to the article it was based on here.

But just one more thing, ma'am, before I go. A number of thoughts have been asserted, sometimes glibly, about human beings and communication at this conference. And about the 'global community.' I have had to try to hold my tweeting tongue on occasion, as it may surprise you to learn that I have been wanting to make a wry observation. I overheard this conversation:


Person One: are you Australian?

Person Two [Chinese features]: Canadian.

Person One: Oh, I don't speak Canadian.

[pause]

Person One: Ni hao

Person Two: [looks puzzled]

Person One: I'm speaking Chinese.

Person Two [confused, but friendly]: Oh, you speak Chinese?

Person One: No.

Person Two [confused, annoyed] walks away.


Perhaps this speaks for itself. Now, to bed. But, before that, I think I'll watch this again. It is a demonstration of how Jason Epstein's Espresso Book Machine V 2.0 prints a single book. There has been one working here in the exhibitors' lobby. It is curious. I like watching this for some reason. The tidy process of it: boringly tender. It should help me get to sleep. To sleep, perchance to defrag.

TOC2009: The Narrative is Changing

TOC2009: The Narrative is Changing: Sensors, Social Editors and the New Storytelling: Nick Bilton, Weds 11th 9:15--9:45am

Notes from the above session, with the usual disclaimer that is has probably been distorted through my own brain-prism since.

In the context of allaying fears that longer form content will die out altogether, Nick started off with a couple of amusing examples of over-reactions towards new technology from the NYTimes (where he works on the tech side of things). The example was taken from the March 22nd issue of 1876. The writer was concerned that the telephone might 'change the way we live our lives. Given the ease of communication afforded by this new technology, it will destroy the need for people to ever have to leave their homes again. They will never go to church or the park or...' etc...

Then, not much longer after this article, another one appeared and, while it accepted that the predicted cultural impact of the telephone may not have been as severe as was first thought, the advent of the phonograph would soon 'destroy the need for people to ever have to leave their homes; they will fail to attend concerts, or recitals, or the theatre...'

Ergo, these things keep happening. The increase of online activity won't necessarily mean a destruction to life and literature as we know it.

The problem now is that we are online nomads; nomads who want shelter from the blizzard of information. Based on personal research, Nick estimated that he probably comes across approximately 162000 links a day through surfing webpages. That is a bewildering array of choices -- and a lot of it is repetition.

Our brains are changing to cope with this inundation... our brain activity when web searching is different and increased when compared to reading; the ways in which we process data and interact is changing through social media. We are starting to cull our information through these networks and are becoming a swarm intelligence, of sorts, in so doing; we have created esoteric colonies to help navigate effectively.

A service which would help in this (esp. re. news delivery) would be a form of smart content; content that can properly sense when you have read it and which will therefore not present itself in irrelevant or noisy situations -- it will help you navigate content flow. An example (among other things) of what the NYTimes R & D dept. is looking into is a customisable Times. A print-to-order vending machine where you can select and build your own copy based on what you want to know -- rather than have you buy a whole copy and then waste the paper the stuff you don't want to know about is printed on. (A couple of tweets about spoiling serendipity here, but I don't agree -- there will still be an element of surprise possible in the options presented, and I am forever 'stumbling upon' interesting titbits when surfing.)

Nick then cites his young son Luca who he describes as opportunistic, omnivorous, hungry for content, and who is growing up in an information age that facilitates this. When encountering, for the first time, the fact that sometimes photos had to be developed, instead of viewable instantly, he was incredulous; it is what people will expect, and those who don't provide it will fail.

Nick also disagrees that IM & SMS are degrading our language; he sees it rather as a hybrid form of communication, using and creating acronyms, as we have always done (OK, bus, snafu); it is not a deterioration.

Before the alphabet we had cave drawings, then we had illuminated mss., the printing press, then broadcast... things have changed again, and we need a new form of narrative and storytelling to cope. We are at the birth of a new form; a way in which everyone can contribute; everyone can become a storyteller. And publishers and media providers need to experiment and engage to find and provide these new forms.

As a brief experiment, Nick called a number of publishing houses and asked to be put through to their R & D department. He was met with silence or incomprehension in nearly all cases. Where is the R & D? This needs to change. People will still pay for content, to think otherwise is incorrect. It's faster, it's easier. It just needs to make sense. And the talented editor and taste maker is pivotal in this. (Regular readers will know that Curiosa agreed with Nick a great deal on a lot of these things.)

Nick Bilton speaks at OReilly TOC2009

For more OReilly photos, go here. You may even be able to spot the back of my slouched head in some of them. And here is a brief and tantalising tour of the New York Times R & D lab, where Nick works.

TOC2009: Reasons to be Cheerful

TOC2009: Reasons to be Cheerful: Keynote: Tim O'Reilly Weds 11th Feb 9.45--10.15am

I didn't quite get all of Tim O'Reilly's presentation because I was pretty dazed and confused on Weds morning. It was a good motivational piece, though, and I've teased out a few bits here, while again probably conflating.

Tim O Reilly observed that while we are in the middle of a financial crisis, and a time of instability, the birth of the Gutenberg Bible was at a similarly bad time of significant disruption and chaos. Good things come out of these times, so don't be glum.

He also recalled Victor Hugo's lament for the lost story-telling form of cathedrals [in The Hunchback of Notre Dame? Do let me know if you know -- I can't remember], and pointed out that in some ways the Gutenberg press could, tentatively, be seen to have killed this. Echoing Nick Bilton and others, he pointed out that we are at a similar period of transition now, and this needn't be bad (the 'things are changing, get over it and get on with it' line...)

We live in an amazing time. Billions of people are slowly coming out of poverty and are gaining access to the internet. It is like a huge supercomputer with previously unused processors coming online (I missed whose this analogy was originally, sorry).

We are creating a global intelligence network, one we can't imagine the end result of now anymore than could Gutenberg have imagined James Joyce or universal literacy. Already the internet has created more pages than exist in all the books printed in all of human history. Sure, there are issues to do with quality here, but they will pan out.

We are in a time where the Stimulus Bill can be up online and open to comments, line by line, from the population it affects and the lawmakers passing it, within hours -- that is the benchmark. It is potentially hugely empowering and democratic; that should be cause for a big celebration, not fear. Another fact, and an intriguing one, is that 'phones are everywhere. 50% of Africa owns a mobile, and in some cases they spend 70% of their disposable income on them. This is how important this is.

O'Reilly recalls a discussion with his wife in which one of them admitted 'I just don't know the answer to that' in the middle of an argument or discussion. A four year old present said simply 'but daddy, where's your phone?' This was the moment, describes O'Reilly, that he realised the future was in online information.

People are still reading a lot. Most of the pages viewed online are based around text -- people are working with words. Publishers should be relieved by, and happy about, this! And book communities are readily establishing themselves online -- with GoodReads as an example. And the second most followed person on Twitter is Stephen Fry -- an author and entertainer.

So, get serious about being useful for your authors, and their readers. Experiment properly with new media and content delivery with a view towards this, and you will be fine. Curators still matter, and will continue to -- digital networks still operate in systems of status conferral. Publishers confer status on authors; they are at the head of the long tail; they can look ahead, but they also need to direct -- but what can publishers do for writers who are better at the web than them? This is the potentially sobering thought that many may need to address.

And the notion that people are not willing to pay for content, that the internet is 'free', is shaky.
Consider how much people are paying for access to information, it's not just advertising:

• access fees (to internet) industry: 25.8 billion
• music industry: 2.3 billion
• [do please double-check these figures, I'm not 100% certain...]
  

Don't get caught in the idea that nobody will pay. Content ubiquity is the key. Make your content available in any format, and wherever your readers want to find it. And share what you learn with each other -- blog about what you are doing, confer, work together, publish research.

O'Reilly says they are near 50% of direct sales in eBooks. They are learning from their web activity that collaboration matters. Involve your readers ... to build your product. When users are given early access to books under development, revenue in Safari more than doubles ... involving users and customers, as well as authors, in the process increases sales dramatically. It is the power of the open process. Experiment with pricing and be confident -- people need what we do. Remember:

• we are members of a great profession
• people are coming online wanting to be taught, informed and entertained
• the best way to predict the future is to invent it
  

At this point I might have whooped and punched the air, had I not been in severe need of a coffee...

Addendum: and in the Twitter feed today, Tim O'Reilly flagged up this entry at The Digitalist. But Curiosa coverage is better.

Tim O'Reilly speaks at TOC2009

TOC2009: Youth Creativity

TOC2009: Youth Creativity: Emerging Trends in Self-expression and Publishing. Evangeline Haughney and Bill Westerman, Weds 11th Feb 3.40--4.25pm

Only a few points to summarize from this one, but here is another post. Between us we catch most of it. I was surprised about how empty this session was. It was information that should have been of interest to publishers. The test age range was 13--18 (I think).

Youth are increasingly creating, sharing and remixing content online. Mashing and hacking (in a good way). And the majority of teens actively seek out and get feedback for stuff they have posted -- they expect the process to be social. They are using Photoshop to make content without, necessarily, having a long time goal in mind -- it is for its own sake.

Girl1 is creating a persona online -- information about what she likes and who she is to communicate and connect. She has been making websites since 13, largely as a social thing to 'play' and 'hang out' with friends. Typically, she demonstrated a generally more transient use of software and did not have an element of fear attached to 'not knowing Photoshop fully' as demonstrated by adults. So, they are generally more tech savvy (not so much of a surprise).

Girl1, and many others, would confidently assert 'yeah, I know Photoshop' because they could make the creations they wanted -- and they did not care about whether there was 'a better way of doing it'. Their approach to finding things out was ends driven, rather than means driven. They would not inquire about 'how do I use the X tool' but rather 'how do I create an effect for falling snow'; or 'how do I make it look more like...'

This is in contrast to the typical contemporary adult approach of treating 'learning a new piece of software' as a life event, involving courses and the like.

Contrary to popular belief, Girl1 also has an early understanding of licenses -- she would share a CD with a friend as they only had one -- rather than simply copying it and proliferating. (Note a potential vested interest on part of the Adobe involvement in the study here, though.)

The other thing worth noting is that, while much of what was created was built on an existing image or starting point, the outcomes were, importantly, highly individual. Girl1 would paint and experiment with physical media such as wood and would then scan and use these for her own brushes, as she wanted something that no-one else had -- she wanted something unique and personalized.

Further studies will involve working with teenagers with an expressed desire to go into areas such as graphic design or media generally, as this was a noted, and potentially useful, missing perspective.

TOC2009: Lunch

the lunch depicted may be different to the lunch consumed

Today, during lunch at TOC2009, and no doubt because of lunch, I caught myself thinking that perhaps the change that is underway in publishing -- relating back to the "Tribalization of Business" idea mentioned in yesterday's post -- is more like a reversion. It harks back to the pre-farming days of the hunter/gather.

Before we had farming, there was less of a notion of ownership. No-one owned the land, they followed the seasons and the herds. And this accounts for over 3/4 of our existence as a species; this is how we are hard-wired. We became sedentary when someone stuck a fence around a field, as environmental factors changed, declared ownership of the land and food, and then controlled the supply for their own wealth. Then notions of status shifted to fit these new social circumstances.

The advent of the internet brings a whole new free landscape, harking back to our roots, and throws into sharp relief, against our better instincts, efforts to enforce control. Cf. what Cory Doctorow has been tweeting and banging on about all along re. DRM. This is obviously just an analogy -- and we must be careful with analogies, as, although compelling, they tend not to get us very far (and there have been lots of analogies here) -- but it struck me as a half-decent thought worth sharing. Please do help bring it forth, if you feel so inclined...

TOC2009: The Rise of eBooks: Panel

TOC2009: The Rise of eBooks panel. Joe Wicker, April Hamilton, David Rothman, Russ Wilcox, Mark Coker, Tuesday, Feb 10th 1:40-2:25pm

what will the future look like?

eBook sales have increased as print sales have declined. Over the last year (I think it was) there has been a 60-80% increase for eBook sales and a 10-20% decline for print. Amazon says 10% of unit sales are now in eBook form. The eBook explosion is just around the corner (which we have heard before).

Why is it different now? Why did they fail in the past?

People were not enchanted by paying more or the same amount as for a printed book for what was a cheaper-to-make-and-distribue product. Also, DRM has been an irritation and a curse. It is getting better but has a long way to go.

We're at the beginning of a wedge. Technology is going to make the reading experience better and better: more sizes (smaller and larger screens); new countries adopting; the advent of touch and other interfaces.

The predictions are that, by the end of 2009, we're going to start seeing flexible screens. 2010 is when we'll see flexible screens expand in production (this will allow advertising driven models such as newspapers) -- then we will see the gradual introduction of colour, until we achieve magazine quality in about 10 years from now.

The potential is huge. Consider: a digital bird watchers' book that can record and identify bird sounds from a central database and present you with the relevant information (the iPhone can already do something similar with music and iTunes). Amazon's proprietary fixation with the Kindle could put them at a significant disadvantage. They need to learn from Apple and open up.

A single product is needed which can be calibrated by user demands. What do publishers need to do? They need to be investigating and using the technology as much as possible -- to engage properly and develop content away from print to enhance reader experience. And eBooks need to move beyond the ported print-book concept.

As a corollary to this, the indie author is someone who decides, for whatever reason, that mainstream publishers are not providing or useful for them in some way. They have 'chosen' to do so, not 'resorted' to it. With access to more eBook reading devices, through the marketing potential of the internet, book markets will become more like that of films, with more and more indie authors operating like indie filmakers, auters, or indie musicians/bands (indeed, some already are). The difficulty for authors is the tarnished legacy of the term 'vanity publishing' for books -- but this will fade; is fading.

It is not, or does not have to be, an 'e' vs 'print' equation -- they can be complementary. Russ Wilcox (E-ink) is predicting eBooks will be 6-8% of total market in 12-18 months. It is spurious, but he has behind-the-scenes insight.

And this was demo-ed at the 'Lightning Demos' session on Tuesday evening. It is the new (to be released later this year into early next) PlasticLogic reader device. These are exciting times.

Amusing to cf. myself (if you'll forgive me this particular vanity), a good few months back now, prattling on here.

**Addendum re. statistics**

"Today, more than 10 percent of the units we sell are Kindle books."

CNN reported: "Its texts account for 10 percent of Amazon's book sales despite the fact that 200,000 titles -- a tiny fraction of the books offered on the site -- are available in digital form."

This has all since been revised to:

"Kindle sales make up more than 10 percent of sales of books that are available in both traditional and e-book form."

TOC2009: Scott Meyers: Authoring Challenges in a MultiPlatform world.

Scott Meyers, Authoring Challenges in a MultiPlatform World, Tuesday 11th Feb, 2009, NY 10:45--11:30am

Curiosas: meet Scott Myers.

If what we want to do is publish things for people to consume on multiple platforms, then there are considerations in authoring. Publishers need to educate their authors about all of the various platforms on which their work could exist, and help them write with these in mind: paper, web, portable devices (future proofed), and also audio devices.

Assuming that the traditional printed page is the only, or even primary, form might not work in the long term. Although tactile, it is generally a limited output device -- so don't target it solely, as it may shut doors or make conversions more laborious and costly than they have to be.

A 'platform-agnostic' manuscript should be aware of new expository tools of colour (without cost restrictions), video/animations, and audio.

Authors need to learn:

• what works, where, and why.
• what doesn't work, and why not.
• to use restraint and only use new expository tools as just that: to describe something that would otherwise be difficult to explain, or enhance something fruitfully.
  

Generally, authors and publishers want to be working towards 'capability dependent content' -- an awareness of how information will render in different formats; to prepare or be aware of alternatives in case of difficulty, and therefore keep the manuscript open to platform proliferation.

The crux is that the role of the publisher is experimentation; they need to help authors get the broader view. Find out what's effective then give guidelines, templates, and help your authors in the production of a relevant ms, as it will help you in the long-run.

There are similarities to the mindset in screenplay conception, but this shouldn't be taken too far, as there are different targets. For more, and to make more sense of what is probably a pretty dry-seeming and error-prone summary here, visit The Fastware Project. The post about XML, DocBook, etc is pretty interesting, and nicely summarizes a number of things I learned about it all last year, too.

TOC2009: Tues Feb 10th 2009: Keynotes

Morning Keynotes, TOC09, Tuesday 10th Feb, 2009, NY 8:45--10:15am

Today was the beginning of the conference element of TOC09, and the numbers have increased dramatically. There must be around double the number of attendees compared to last year, which is an interesting fact given the current climate. First off this morning were the shorter Keynote Sessions. Here are a few quotes or points from each. Forgive reductive paraphrasing -- there are only so many hours in the day... I'll break these up into separate posts, eventually. Usefully, here are some notes for cross-referencing and gap-filling, from another fellow attendee. Our powers combined...


'A Book is a Place', Bob Stein @ The Institute for the Future of the Book

Bob explains CommentPress (released '07) in terms of an evolutionary process (it is a very useful bit of open source). He says they have built a transactional book environment so it can be taken to the commercial environment.

Now the conversation that the book engenders is part of the book itself. Books are now social experiences. They are a place of congregation, with authors leading communities of inquiry -- or perhaps a common quest.

Publishing now is about nurturing vibrant communities. Publishers should be about curating an environment around their authors and readers; they will differentiate themselves on their ability to do this.

New technologies mean human inquiry and knowledge can become a collaborative effort in ways that they could never have been before. And the problems we have are so complicated that they need a coordinated effort.

It took 70 years of the 15th/16th century to realise that page numbers might be useful. Things have been moving slowly and much of the most interesting stuff has happened in the last 5 years or so. We are still at an early stage in the evolutionary process. We have to learn how to collaborate, many minds, many hands, on the same problem... congregate and collaborate is the way forward.

Eventually we won't call these things books anymore -- but for now it is still a useful term.

Twitter: a dissenting tweeter points out that "Bob Stein does not differentiate between a community and fandom"

Twitter: another tweet points out "hasn't it always been a social experience? Was it not always? It was also a social act, but the network gives that new, powerful, implications."


'Literature as a Web Service': Peter Brantley, Digital Library Federation

The book has been relatively primitive, in terms of similar proportions, and a very limited conception, for a long time. Numbers of pages, size of page, layout of text have all changed little...

The book is a social construct. We have worked together as a society do decide what a book is. (It is... cf. "a machine to think with" L. A. Richards. Principles of Literary Criticism, 1924).

But books have never really been static. We READ books -- and this is an intense engagement. It is an attempt to engage thought. They are a commodity in concert with language and a concept of personal space.

Our analog culture is being uplifted to digital -- digitised and uploaded to the network. And what wasn't analog historically is being born digital. A 'book' is being redefined.

Books are now networked commodities, not physical commodities. Reading therefore becomes redefined. Reading has been a largely solitary act -- now it is becoming social. (A few dissenting tweets to this -- pointing out that, on the contrary, books and reading have always been social, but technology makes them potentially more so -- liberates, accelerates, and gels this potentiality with the network.)

We are now reading many things in the context of other people and things. It is becoming embedded in the network. What is published will be less about the book than about the people who read them. The focus has to be on people who engage with them. Moving mentally from books to people requires us to engage what's important in a book: the words that mean and engage. Digital words can be described by other words, joined across books, and linked with data.

Gesellschaft book becomes Gemeinschaft book. An environment of participatory engagement is emerging across books. Any book can be a passage into a world of thought. Bookscans means the words of books can be fully associated with each other -- and literature can become a web service.

Twitter (#toc): andrewspong: Did anyone raise this as a question? RT @mdash: [Isn't] any sufficiently advanced ebook [...] indistinguishable from 'the Internet'?

Twitter (#toc): modernevil: Brantley is a proponent of the semantic web. Use it to fulfil the potential of hyperlinks we've been missing, integrate all information...


'Digital Distribution and the Whip Hand: Don't Get iTunesed with your eBooks': Cory Doctorow

Publishing is not the worst offender in rights protection and management (and therefore does not encourage as MUCH anti-feeling supporting piracy) and it should perhaps play this card more often.

DRM is a futile area. BBC iPlayer -- why DRM when you're already broadcasting, un DRM-ed, for free?! The result: lots of Doctor Who (hmmm... have you ever seen them in the same... ) for free on YouTube.

DRM on books is every bit as futile -- they can be re-typed and scanned anyway. Deadly Hallows was copied, translated and proofed into German within 24 hours.

Never underestimate what the time rich and cash poor are willing to do. It is always cracked -- through the front and back door. The more you DRM the more it is cracked -- for the challenge/revenge. In 2008, the game with most draconian DRM was Spore. The most pirated game in 2008 was Spore.

Successful companies are those that make sure all the people willing to give them money do. 'It doesn't matter taking stuff from jerks' -- so don't be jerks. The record companies were jerks, and look what happens there -- people are motivated to take their stuff. Publishers have a better, more transparent royalty system, and less exploitative generally -- sell this message to the would-be pirates.

Using time-limited DRM on eBooks just encourages contrary thinking: if I break the DRM, I can keep it forever!

And, if somebody else (Amazon) puts a lock on something you own and doesn't give you the key, it's not to your benefit.

So abandon DRM and just have a simple, short EULA that simply says, "Don't Break Copyright Law." Don't ask 12-yr-olds to comprehend complicated licensing agreements when signing up; they will likely grow up inspired to rip you off, or generally negatively motivated towards you when they are old enough to understand.

Publishers should not license any more content to Amazon UNLESS Amazon give the option to allow or not allow DRM -- to have Amazon controlling the DRM is a terrible business model for future. Publishers should decide themselves if/when to implement DRM (which they shouldn't anyway) and not be dictated to by platform owners. Publishers the world over should all call Amazon tomorrow morning and remind them who dictates the terms about how their materials are sold.

on Twitter (#toc): walkley: Doctorow good, polemical, thousand mile an hour stuff - as expected.

More tomorrow -- bedtime for Curiosa.

TOC2009: Francois Gossieaux: Building Communities Around Content

tweet tweet

I picked this up in the Twitter Feed this morning. It is another summary of Chris Brogan's session from yesterday -- it should help fill in any gaps I missed through slightly jet-lagged inattention.

And following is a useful summary from a fellow attendee of a session which sounded interesting this afternoon, but which I missed, due to being in a different one: Scott Berken: How Progress Happens: Leading the Human Side of Change.

But this post is about the second session I attended on Monday afternoon, led by Francois Gossieaux and Ed Moran concerned with Building Communities Around Content.

It orbited a key concept, based on an interesting report the speakers authored, of 'The Tribalisation of Business' (well worth clicking through properly to flesh all this out). Very generally, thoughts in the session (from speakers and attendees alike) ran as follows (I'd advise reading the report and clicking through from the links thoroughly).

Building Communities Around Content

The key is letting people (employers, employees, customers) behave the way they have been hard-wired to behave: humanly; tribally. People want to connect with other people; our essence is sociability. People want to be helped and want to help others -- an important factor of any community is this feeling of reciprocity.

People generally evaluate what they are doing in one of two frameworks:

1. a market framework -- which tends to be cold, calculated, and contract driven.
2. a social framework -- more neighbourly, based on favours and friendships.
   

Generally speaking, the social framework is a greater motivator and it is vital to access this in your community -- do so and your community will do a lot more of your work for you (including policing, quality control, 'etiquetting', micro-communities).

So, while the technology infrastructure is important, it is not the driving force -- the social infrastructure is. Keep it simple, relevant, intuitive, and based on the fundamentals. The key question to ask is: what is the value I/we have that I/we can engage people with and what will they get out of it? It may seem obvious, but many companies forget this. There is a social element or value embedded in everything -- find it, unless you only want to engage customers for the few minutes/day they're in a commercial mode.

Think also: where are the people already? Where can we find them? But NOT in order to capture and isolate -- the key instead is affiliation. Do you HAVE a community somewhere already, or do you need to BUILD a community? A useful example here is Tivo -- they did not build this, their customers did. They identified where it was happening and then co-operated fully on the customers' terms.

Problems discussed

Central to the community working is the role of the community manager. However, it is often compromised.

Most communities are set up or run in some way as a tack-on to marketing departments -- but if a community is to be successful, it will and should eventually touch on every area of the business.

If distracted by other responsibilities, or if added to a list of existing responsibilities, it will not work effectively. The key is reliable information flow... does it reach and involve the right people? Or does it bottle neck and stagnate in the marketing department?

Through these communities, publishers (but it might as well apply to other producers) shouldn't just 'sell' a book -- rather 'share' and 'build' an enthusiasm around your common interest, in author or subject.

The 'community' needs its 'community manager' with a team of cross-functional, well-connected support curating and creating. This team needs to have the power to be able to 'get things done' . The 'community manager' is a special and rare skillset -- it is not a job for a marginalized intern.

The community needs investment and engagement from all levels from those with the best knowledge and expertise within the company. The more someone knows, the faster they can help, and the more valuable, and more quickly valuable, the community information will and can be. And the investment will be mostly in human capital, rather than equipment or technology. The most successful models see a human capital weighting of around 80%. So invest in the right people and talent.

And, when assessing your community, don't assess the success on different data (like web visits or time online engaging), assess it on the same criteria as other projects or departments: revenue, ideas, impact on sales etc. Make sure you are analyzing it the correct way. And don't disregard the 'lurkers' -- while they don't 'engage', they may well be getting value out of it.

Be sure to plan effectively with a pilot that will scale well, and from which you can learn what you need.

Takeaways to think about or remember:

• communities can increase revenue per customer by 50%
• communities will increase product introduction success ratios
• amplify everything you do
• increase effectiveness and decrease costs (marketing)
• a strong physical world component is important
  

Final facts/predictions:

• many will continue to fail because people forget the basics
• communities will eventually transform the role of the Community Manager
  
• the early adopters who do it right will force industry-wide changes
• companies will find out how to build predictable community models
• new product development and advertising strategies will be and are necessary to engage with the social framework understanding (cf. yesterday's blogpost)

**Addendum: this is interesting in this context**

TOC2009: Chris Brogan: Blogging and Social Media

I should have brought a camera with me.

After a lovely day spent hanging out in Brooklyn, eating bagels and drinking beer with up-and-coming young NY literary agent friend, SF, I install myself in the conference hotel and, before I know it, I'm eating breakfast, the Tools of Change Conference is underway, and I'm twittering and tweeting away.

Chris Brogan starts the first session (Blogging and Social Media -- specifically how to use them both effectively in marketing) by telling us we're already ahead of the curve just by being here. This is reassuring. He says we're starting with a free-form tutorial that promises to be neither normal nor typical. He says I can leave and he won't weep. Cory Doctorow is in the front row to my left. I am feeling slightly out of my depth.

As a result of this free-form presentation, these notes -- inaccurate as they are because filtered, paraphrased and distanced in time -- are also likely to be quite 'free form'. I hope you get something from them nevertheless. If you are interested in more 'real time' coverage, search Twitter with the '#toc' label.

Much of the talk is taken up with familiar arguments for being more human (a good thing) on the web these days. And being more honest in your interactions. Most compelling of the early points is: there is a growth, online, of a 'new currency' of attention and trust -- and it is one that is difficult to become rich in. What organizations should be doing is generating trust and interest online through more direct relationships around content and products; they should be, for example, making 'platforms' of books, or thinking about 'books as ecosystems'.

With a brief mafia analogy, CB outlines that books are currently, essentially, as well we know, distribution problems (ones which DRM exacerbates) and that, rather than thinking of themselves as book traffickers, publishers, and organizations generally, should think of themselves instead as 'trusted information brokers.' And they should be engaged properly with media that changes the way people interact in order to effect this.

Publishers must go beyond the page -- they should be interested in augmenting the content they want to sell through a number of media. Make it more useful: consider availability in different formats for different occasions (driving, jogging, traveling by train or plane...) "I want the paper book, I want a web version, I want an audio version, and I want a way to self-sync that." "All the other media are bundling products-you guys aren't moving fast enough." CB

At the heart of his argument is the familiar conviction that publishers/companies should always be looking to 'interact' rather than just 'deliver'. Social media like Twitter and more conventional 'blogs' are there to be used to help develop an intimate cafe feel to interactions with customers. Might it be a good idea to find your 1,000 most interested and loyal customers for a product, and talk more directly to them, rather than attempting to blanket market millions (of evermore inured) consumers with a tight corporate ad that, although polished, doesn't quite hit the mark, or even irritates *because* of its effort to seem polished?

That is, might it be better to try to please some of the people more fully, rather than everyone a little, or not at all? It is a way back, in a more crowded, over-produced world, to a sense of community, relevance and importance; of a feeling of a valued and relevant relationship with the provider. Make your Twitters or Blogs like a bat-signal that goes out to the genuinely interested.

So, tend always towards the more human, less 'processed' interaction; rather than a 'tight message' that too often seems cheesy or mis-aligned, make an effort to relate or entertain. But, importantly, let people contribute, and make your information easy to find and use. People want to communicate and want to help each other and be helped -- make your comms and marketing reflect this.

Here are some examples, sites and products mentioned along the way which may help with all of this (how they might should be self-evident!) And the crux is that they are free, cheap, and relatively easy:

• TweetDeck
• Twitterfall
• CHIPIN
• Ning
• Blip.tv
• Viddler.com
• UStreamTV
• Upcoming
• Winelibrary
• FlipMino
• BlogTalkRadio
• BlogTV
• BatchBlue
• Twestival
  

Here are a couple of don'ts:

"Just because you *can* use Twitter doesn't mean that *you* should on behalf of your organization" - CB. That is: communicating well, and selling without appearing to sell, is a skill that not all possess. (More about this tomorrow.)

Don't over-sell or inundate once someone has 'opted in'. (This is particularly relevant for those populating the growing Temple of Spam that is Facebook.) "Just because I've held out my hand to you doesn't mean I want you to stick your tongue in my mouth." CB

And a few general points:

• how much time should I spend? an experimental answer: two hours a day? but don't spend it talking about beer.
• segregate your lists...
• ... or make pools.
  
• don't just apologise for cross-posting, put the time in. "You Live or Die by Your Database."
• being helpful is better than being on message
• let people find your stuff and do stuff with it
• it is all about connecting and bringing people together

Plus, via a Twitter from Brogan this evening, here is an interesting take on current trends.

And, finally, Chris Brogan also claims to have invented 'C4', which consists of Canadian Club and Cherry Coke.

More tomorrow, including notes from the second session from today (it is quite late, and your intrepid Curiosa is knackered, with an inhumanely early start...)

TOC2009: Pigeon Smuggling Death Wish

I dare you...

Today is my last day in blighty before I head to NY, NY, for the O'Reilly (yes, reilly!) Tools of Change Conference, 2009, 9--11 Feb, from which I intend to Twitter and Blog -- so expect a few blog posts over the next few days. Of course, I may get ill again and contract about three different viral and bacterial infections in the throat, chest, and lungs (which is what happened last time) but I may also survive the biological threat of the transatlantic flight's recycled air to bring you news of a digital and webby sort from a leading publishing conference. Keep in touch and find out. This may also be potentially my last full day in Britain ever (more about this later).

The imminent trip stateside has reminded me of something I forgot to blog about before:

Last year, while in New York, I got approached twice by Scientologists in Time Square. One time was on my way to the conference -- ill -- and another was on the way to inadvertently make myself feel ill at the appalling Bubba Gump Shrimp Co.

The first time, on my way to Bubba Gump, a guy handed me a leaflet and attempted to engage me in conversation. He was friendly, wore a light blue rain mac (it was raining) and wanted me to come watch a film with him. 'Odd.' I thought. 'We hardly know each other.' He seemed nice, if a little too smiley, but I was in a hurry so I declined and said I'd be on my way.

Sat in Bubba's, I read the leaflet, over limp, sugary shrimp, and realised he'd been trying to tell me about the informational film described therein (the leaflet that is, not the shrimp) -- to be sure to stop in and watch it. It was about the Church of Scientology. It listed three separate showings, two of which co-incided with my trip. Given what I've read of Scientology, I took the approach as a compliment and, as the depressing dessert arrived, thought I might actually try it out, in the interests of investigative citizen-blog-journalism (I mean the film, not the dessert -- that was a step too far). I didn't. I now regret this.

The second occasion, again in Time Square, on the way to the conference at this point, a different guy (at least, I think it was a different guy) handed me another leaflet. I was getting ill by now and I can't remember what words or noises were exchanged, but do I remember he seemed offended or at least perturbed. I wondered again about attending. Again I didn't. I still have one of the leaflets somewhere. If it happens this time, I'll go and watch it I think. Then, hopefully, this will become a more interesting blog post.

So, I am about to head to NY on a jet plane. In honour of this, and all the confused and frustrated herding and prodding and paperwork and associated worry this brings, I thought I'd highlight this story. This is mainly because it allows me the opportunity to feel like Ronnie Barker as I describe the following: a man was recently arrested and detained by Australian customs for smuggling pigeons in his trousers. Further inspection revealed eggs in his vitamin pot, seeds in his belt, and an ‘undeclared aubergine’.

The picture illustrating this villain as he no-doubt, out of frame, shame-facedly presents his ‘undeclared aubergine’ is priceless… go on, have another look.

What do you think gave him away? Embarrassing coo-ing from the ankles? A few seeds trailed behind him as he waddled warily down the off-ramp? Or could it have been -- oh, please, let it have been -- the rather-too-vaingloriously-stashed aubergine that alerted the wandering eyes and hands of the camp Aussie customs guard…

Imagine the tentative, penguin two-step he would have had to perform as he tried to smuggle it all discreetly through Melbourne airport; perhaps an attempt to read a magazine, unfazed and aloof; maybe the occasional nonchalant look askance over large sunglasses and big moustache; or maybe he risked a more confrontational smirk of wry pride at the contents of his trousers.

John Cleese should play this guy in a film...

So, this might be my last full day in blighty, I say? Yes. The explanation? Well, barring falling foul of horrific illness, or virulent TB caught from a tramp, or getting shot, or getting stopped at border control for having forgotten to fill in a further form I didn't even know about, or joining a cult, or hanging it all as too much trouble and absconding to join my brother in Mexico, I have noticed something about my flight details. Something that should have occured to me when I booked them as the cheapest option among a lot of more expensive options...

I am flying out of NY. This is on Thursday 12th. In the evening. So, yes... my plane lands, in London, on the 13th. That's right, Curiosas: I've booked myself onto a plane, traveling between the two top targets of international Islamic-extremist terrorism, in the middle of a period of adverse weather conditions, and my return flight is due to land back in London, in time for the rush hour, on the morning of Friday the 13th.

And that's not all. Friday 13th happens also to be my birthday. What was I thinking? Having now spotted this, I am hoping that the fates can resist the reckless taunt (equivalent to, say, running manically around a hilltop with a copper pole in the middle of a lightning storm yelling 'I dare you! I fucking dare you' at the simmering clouds) and instead might see fit to spare me this particular cruel irony. But I also admit it could be, potentially, hilarious. We'll see.

Mind you, given how it's all going, there might not be a blighty to return to. I heard a majority of the country is already dead from snow...

I mean, honestly, did you know that Canada has had six feet of the stuff in some areas? And a good deal of other places have had it a lot worse than us. And here we have school closures, traffic stranded in need of rescue, public services infrastructure grinding to a standstill, after, again, a couple to a few inches of the stuff? And, what's more, we've had similar for decades (60s, 70s, 80s, 90s...). This is nothing new.

What is new is the increasing shrillness of our media response. The headline shouldn't be 'weather crisis', 'doom' -- I'm sick of this kind of infantile catastrophism -- it should read 'Britain ready to stop at first sign of slight draft' or 'British incapable of managing anything effectively' or 'Britain so desperate to appear to be triumphing through adversity like it once did in the middle of a real crisis that we'll invent a crisis out of nothing, no matter how childish, just so we can appear to be triumphing over it and despite it'.

But that might be a bit long. But, really, please, just shut up and get on with it. Or, as we once might have said, Keep Calm And Carry On. Surely there's something more interesting happening somewhere for you gits to report on?

This is a nicely illustrative juxtaposition. Well done, R4.

And now we're back to planes crashing into rivers and things. Oh dear. Wish me luck... I dare you, I fucking dare you...

Publishing, 20 years on... ?

I was catching up on some TV viewing through the BBC's iPlayer recently, during my time off, and happened across 'Doctors To Be: Twenty Years On'. I only just remember (honest) the first programmes, I think (or repeats of them, perhaps). These follow-ups, charting 20 years of serious change in the National Health Service and looking at how the group of young med students ended up, got me wondering, idle... what will publishing look like, 20 years on... ?

So, remembering back to all I learnt at the TOC08 conference that I sent myself to, through Egg Box, as part of the Escalator Leadership Scheme run by Arts Council England, East (and which I'll be off to again next year, because it was great) I tried to work it out and... guess what: I'm not sure! I don't think anyone is. Many things are a-foot and a-changing... here's some wild speculation...

(And before I get going, here are some good places to look for what's going on, although many of you will know of them. And there are many more things to click through to from them...

future of the book
tools of change for publishing
publishing talk

now, onwards... )

With the decline in book reading, despite resilient sales figures for now, and the behaviours of the more screen-burned, less book-interested younger generation, what is likely to happen? And as the older business models start to crumble, or at least show their age, what will a future publishing house look like -- anything like they do today?

Well, I'm not an expert, but don't completely buy in to the doomsday 'complete death of the book as we know it' theory -- I doubt many do, deep down. Although forms of eBook do seem set to take over, or already have taken over, wherever convenience is a key factor in a purchase decision (e.g. one handy book reader device with multiple digital book files versus a sack full of a tonne of text books to take to school = no-brainer), I think there will always be a market for the 'traditional book'. Especially while the digital equipment set to replace it does not measure up in terms of reading pleasure...

But will it always be so? Will people always want to stock up their ever-smaller houses with piles and piles of old fashioned, pleasantly paper-and-glue-smelling books? Whether decorative, or as a testament (or reassurance for the less secure) of learning and accrued knowledge -- or aspirations towards it, at least -- will anyone see the point in bothering in the future... and what of environmental/waste concerns?

Perhaps books will become a more occasional, luxury, even antique/decorative buy -- people may cling on to their very favourites, or bibles, say, as special purchases or lavish gifts, delicately put together for the mantlepiece, bookcase, other, but with newer purchases made digitally, as a tester? Or maybe books will feature more as commemorative purchases for content you enjoyed, or interacted with first, online... whichever way I look at it, a decline, in various ways, seems likely, but a retro 'real thing' fanbase seems likely to continue, as it has done elsewhere.

But will books be replaced by, say, the Kindle or Sony Reader? I actually think this is very unlikely. These devices seem attached to the, for me, rather quaint notion that there needs to be a 'separate' device through which to consume a digital version of the traditional 'book' -- that is, I see the Kindle and Sony Reader as rather too linear an idea; rather than a likely replacement, they feel like an almost nostalgic dead end.

What I mean is, in the long term, a barrier for these devices is the fact that they are 'one more device' -- it is far more likely that people are going to own more and more powerful, and smaller, portable PCs (or mobile 'phones?); single devices on which they will download and view all sorts of content: portable multi-media devices for journeying around with that will allow games, emailing, video phoning, music, books, films -- everything. Why, therefore, in the long run, would you want separate devices for each? So, the eBook as a digital software format, becoming more and more versatile and cross-media, yes, but hardware 'replacement' digital e-readers in their current imagining? No. They remind me of the older electronic word-processor machines: inevitably subsumed into a comparatively more versatile device -- the home computer. And look what is happening with mobile phones: the trend is towards further integrated single devices, not proliferation.

Is it more likely that digital book software -- rather than hardware -- will develop instead into some form of narrative gaming hybrid artform, with ARGs becoming the dominant form of entertainment and way of consuming narrative... something akin to the books imagined in the Harry Potter universe, and on from there... ? Could be, I think...

But what will publishers become in the meantime?

I'm still not sure. No doubt there will remain book-publishing departments, but they may begin to look a little like the vestigial wings on an ostrich, or perhaps decorative plumage, or ceremonial uniform; or penguin wings -- still useful (for swimming, balance...), maybe even relevant, but not in the ways they used to be. Either way, I think publishing houses will likely shift severely in their focus and emphasis. I can see a decline in simply 'book publishers'; a decline in companies selling solely, or predominantly, traditional 'books' as deliverers of content/narrative...

Instead, perhaps they may morph as producers, merging along the way with a new breed of literary agency, into variants of 'creative narrative content' companies (or departments within companies), or more general 'intellectual property' companies, or some such -- producers and providers, with writers/authors, of quality narrative/characters for cross-platform, genre-bending, cross-media delivery, with perhaps small, remnant book 'wings'... using and trading their historical legacies -- popular books, familiar stories, characters -- and strong brands -- and therefore good search ratings -- and positioning themselves as a beacon or stamp of authority and quality in an otherwise confusing, murky fog of web-based content...

That is, I can see publishers and agencies moving forever closer... and also computer games manufacturers, book publishers, film/TV production companies, perhaps even advertising agencies -- anything that requires narrative, believable characterisation, or creative words in some form -- merging; that demands for decent words, narrative, story-telling, what have you, will increase in ever-more web-focussed gaming, TV, film, publishing/production companies, while consumption of books as a form of entertainment declines.

Consider film -- more and more, authors don't get the big pay day until a book is made into one, and many are perhaps even writing with this as a hoped-for end product. I can see the 'book writing' phase of this process reducing further and it becoming, more and more, a matter of writers or authors, attached to, say, 'X production companies' or departments as a new form of staff writer, perhaps, producing the stories and characters to feed a multi-media machine... but this is a long way down the line yet, I think...

But is this flight of fancy a positive or bleak outlook for writers/publishers? This is difficult to call, but, given that the web offers the opportunity to reach a huge number of people almost immediately, given the right idea -- one that captures the imagination in the right way -- then there's every likelihood of the former. There'll always be a demand for good content; for good, well-crafted literature, narrative, characters -- and in potentially many different new forms. And there'll likely always be a need for all the various tools and people in place at the moment in terms of crafting it. And, with demand, there will naturally be a lucrative way to supply. The trick will be not to get stuck in primordial delivery mud; the trick will be new ideas and experimentation; protectionism is likely to induce failure -- as many wise sorts have said.

So, what of us small independent publishers? Well, perhaps lapsing again into a hackneyed analogy might be OK, in the interests of keeping this 'readably' short... Consider the destruction of the big, old, and slow to adapt dinosaurs: after the metorite hit, it was the smaller, wiley, rat-like, warm-blooded mammals, or the birds, or the tiny insects or even single-celled life-forms -- those better suited to a new world -- that survived, adapted, diversified and now dominate... if we forget certain sea-dwellers... but, if they were in the depths of the dark sea, we could argue that this was a different environment -- say... law?

Anyway, good news or bad news? Potentially both. But, 20 years down the line, it seems likely, even given our conservative tendencies in this country, that books, or consumption of what books currently offer, is likely, in large part, to have significantly altered, but not dwindled... but I may be wrong.

Oh, and if we're to make the back to the future deadline, we need hoverboards and hovercars within the next 7 years... and we've missed time travel by 23 years...

Anyway, back to telly-watching and time off...