Whatever...

Targeted advertising – but at what price?

By Kasia Murphy

This week, Green Party MP Caroline Lucas appeared in Parliament wearing a bold white t-shirt displaying the slogan "No More Page Three" in large capital lettering ahead of a Commons debate on media sexism. She was quickly told to observe the Commons’ dress code (put her jacket on) and culture minister Ed Vaizey responded by stating that there were no plans to regulate the content of the press, reminding us that “we as a government are committed to maintaining a media that commands respect from the public through high standards..." In a matter of moments the story traversed my Twitter feed.

It’s only a few short weeks since Facebook caved to, eh, social media pressure, when women’s rights campaigners launched an online campaign calling on it to recognise content that trivialises or glorifies violence against girls and women as hate speech. Up until May 29^th, Facebook policy considered messages that broadcasted anti-Semitic, racist or homophobic content as hate speech and removed them from the network, but this didn’t extend to sexist hate speech. In just three days, an online storm of 22,000 tweets and almost 2,000 e-mails was whipped up in support of the campaign. More than 100 advocacy groups joined the protest and demanded Facebook train moderators to remove it.

While the action of this online campaign is a testament to the power of social media to influence, what I find most interesting is that campaigners targeted their efforts by putting sustained pressure on Facebook’s most valuable asset – its advertisers. Campaigners alerted advertisers by posting screengrabs of misogynistic (and often violently graphic) images juxtaposed to their products. Uh-oh. Within days of the campaign beginning, a total of 15 companies moved to protect their brand reputation and withdrew advertising pending resolution of the situation. Brands included Japanese carmaker Nissan, the UK’s largest building society Nationwide and Dove from Unilever. Of course, it’s hard to name one other advertising medium where this sort of positioning would go without reproach.

Targeted advertising is upheld as new frontier of modern day advertising and it’s really of no surprise. It offers advertisers the technological means to gather unprecedented information on potential customers and in turn the means to intelligently place ads for a product that is reflective of that user’s interests. Bingo. It’s worthwhile to note that Facebook recorded a whopping $3.2 billion in advertising revenue in 2011, 85 percent of its total revenue.

While an initial defence of letting the content go uncensored was mounted, branding the campaign an encroachment on freedom of speech, the price was ultimately too high. A mere seven days since the campaign began, the social network admitted its procedures for dealing with such harmful content were inadequate and promised to ‘do better’. 

Apple vs. Samsung: Let battle commence...again

By Gemma White

This week, the BBC reported that ‘Apple has lost a ruling by a US trade panel in a patent dispute with its rival Samsung,’ and yet again we are reminded of the ongoing battle between the two - this time, the clash relates to the use of 3G wireless technology.

It has become the ultimate tech-battle which the world cannot escape, not even the US President, with the FT reporting that Barack Obama himself has been plunged into the dispute, noting that he could use his powers to overturn the ruling.  Which will he favour? 

I’ve also been sucked into the ongoing mobile debate with friends – which is better, iPhone or otherwise?  It’s a debate that sparks up often, and I’m losing count of the amount of people who threaten to give up on their current brand and move to the ‘other side’, but never actually follow through. 

There are horror stories of those who do take the plunge and soon realise they have made a mistake, spending the remaining months of their contracts disappointed until their next upgrade.  We have become a nation that craves the latest technology and, if we are not satisfied, the whole world knows about it.  Is the grass ever greener on the other side?

The Apple iPhone 5 and Samsung Galaxy S4 are undoubtedly the most successful phones in the world right now.  Mobiles have become a necessity in our everyday lives; enhancing communication and keeping us all connected in ways that we never thought possible.  In my opinion, the latest generation of handsets are all equally impressive and, however much you try to convince someone that the iPhone might be the best (did I say that out loud?), the continuous cycle of upgrades means that the debate is ultimately futile and looks set to continue forever more.

So, whose side of the battle are you on? 

Does it surprise you that we share 500 million photos a day?

By Purdey Miles

A recent report by analyst Mary Meeker has shown that on average more than 500 million photos are shared every single day. With the unprecedented growth of Snapchat, the recent acquisition of Flickr by Yahoo and forever evolving social platforms like LinkedIn adding photo sharing capabilities, are we really that surprised? How often do you find yourself at a social event where there is someone (or many people!!) with the incessant urge to take a photo? Which results in you making the swift and unnatural progression from having fun to awkwardly posing while the smart device struggles to take a photo?  Quite often is likely to be the resounding answer!

The forever increasing choice and abilities of social platforms allow us to feed our obsession with picture sharing. Facebook still accounts for the majority of photos being shared, however, platforms like Instagram and, most recently, Snapchat are following closely behind. We are also increasingly seeing other competitors step up their game in order join the race. Earlier this month, LinkedIn added features that allow users to share photos, presentations and documents through their homepage. As the number of these applications grows so do their complexity, which offers users something more and increases their usage alike.

The significance of these photo sharing platforms is being widely recognised. As their popularity has flourished, so have opportunities for companies to cash in. Earlier this month we saw Yahoo purchase Flickr for an almighty sum, and one of the first things they did was undergo a complete make-over of the site. Not only have they re-vamped the site but they’re also offering complimentary storage space in an attempt to differentiate themselves from their competitors.

But why is there such an obsession for people to digitally document their lives? Does it mean that messages can be spread faster and easier with just a photo? Do we do it because we want to outdo our friends? Or is it purely because of vanity - we like looking at ourselves and why not have a photo to do this that we can forever see and instantly access? Perhaps it’s a combination of all three.  Nonetheless, it would appear that, upon contemplation, it doesn’t come as such a surprise that we are sharing so many pictures when an abundance of photo sharing applications exist.  

Woolwich attack shows Twitter’s extremes

By Mike King

After the dreadful machete attack on a British soldier in Woolwich on Wednesday, we’ve seen the real extremes of Twitter.  While live TV news outlets struggled to come up with specific details in the immediate aftermath, twitter feeds from people who had witnessed events first hand provided immediate, raw insight into what had happened and were far more informative.  One of the most graphic accounts was from eye witness Boya Dee. 

Of course, it wasn’t only written accounts on Twitter that provided live, on the ground information, there were also photographs of the crime scene being distributed as events unfolded.  As shocking as much of this information is, it clearly provided unrivalled insight into what was going on with a level of detail that simply wouldn’t have been possible even a few years ago.  

However, as always with Twitter, there’s another side to providing people with the ability to instantly communicate their thoughts and opinions, as was seen by the arrests of two men in Bristol for allegedly racist Tweets about the attack.  The stupidity of some people on Twitter seems to know no bounds.

‘We promise not to screw it up’ and other words of wisdom

By Claire Ayles

For me, the most interesting bit of Yahoo’s mega-bucks acquisition of Tumblr isn’t the size of the deal, it’s the language used to communicate it. 

Marissa Mayer’s line ‘we promise not to screw it up’ is all over my Twitter feed like a rash today, and no wonder.  It’s completely refreshing to hear a corporate spokesperson use plain English. 

In our jobs, we come across more than our fair share of marketing spiel, ‘world’s leading’ phrases and meaningless jargon, and while Mayer’s statement does drop the odd clanger (e.g. ‘seamless experience’), it gives us hope that phrases like ‘brand synergy’ and ‘shared goals’ are at last on their way out.

Milk or cream?

By Ingrid Daschner

Bluetooth, Android and Blackberry apps, instruction DVDs – with features like these, there’s no two ways about it, I’ve got to have this coffee machine! Plus, as the sales assistant kindly explained, for a piece of high-tech wizardry like this, the price means it’s a  ridiculous steal – made by a ‘prestigious international manufacturer’ employing an ‘aggressive pricing policy’ to ease its entry to the German market.

But within just a couple of hours of giving our new acquisition pride of place in the Johnson King kitchen, doubts start to creep in. A super-modern coffee machine with twenty helpful programs for every possible variety of caffeinated pleasure is one thing, but its apparent inability to produce anything other than hot water is quite another.

A careful study of the DVD instructions leaves me none the wiser. The multimedia presentation is delivered by carefully chosen ‘eye candy’ of both genders, but their main occupation is to look pretty, rather than  telling me how this blasted machine (a Golaccia Sellectione 2005Px if you’re interested) actually works! Hope is rekindled when a service phone number flashes up on screen. I grab the phone.

"Good morning! My name is Claire Miller. What can I help you with today?”

“Hi, this is Ingrid Daschner. I’m calling about …”

“Hold on, I’ll put you through.”

"Good morning! My name is Mike Smith. What can I help you with today?”

“Hi, this is Ingrid Daschner. I’m calling about …”

“Let me stop you there. Can you please give me your customer number.”

“What customer number? I bought my Golaccia on Frida..."

"Ah, Golaccia. Hold on, I’ll put you through.”

"Good morning! My name is Flora Gonzales. What can I help you with today?”

“As I said, I’m calling about my Golaccia Espressoma…”

“Let me stop you there. Can you please give me your customer number.”

“As I told your colleague, I don’t have a customer num…”

“Hold on, I’ll put you through.”

 Some hours later, I put down the phone. I’ve called the service hotline four times in the hope of getting hold of someone both competent and friendly – alas, in vain. I have, however, learnt that my call is being diverted to Ireland, but that it will still cost me just 12 Euro cents per minute. I’ve learnt that the service provider places the customer ‘at the centre of everything we do’. And I’ve been reassured that the Sellectione 2005Px really is the very latest device – so new, in fact, that neither Claire, Mike nor Flora on the helpdesk have had any training from the manufacturer. But have I consulted the specially prepared multimedia instruction manual…?

In view of all this I was particularly impressed that, for a meeting the next day, my colleague Oliver success fully managed to produce three steaming cups of frothy, aromatic coffee. That’s until I saw some empty sachets of ‘Instant Cappuccino Premium’ disappear into his jacket pocket.

Photo credit: MiskiSanko

Twitter bids a fitting farewell to Sir Alex Ferguson

By Charlotte Martin 

Sir Alex Ferguson has retired from his 27-year tenure as manager of Manchester United Football Club.  Who knew?  Well, everyone on the planet, so it seems.  I must confess I’m not exactly the world’s greatest fan of the beautiful game, but even I couldn’t help but take notice of the sheer strength of reaction and the outpouring of grief when the news broke midweek. 

Confirmation of the departure came in the form of a tweet from Manchester United’s press office at 9:17am on Wednesday 8^th May, which simply said: “Sir Alex Ferguson retires. #thankyousiralex.”  The 43 character long statement prompted a deluge of tributes from fans, colleagues and even politicians.  Real Madrid striker and former Manchester United player Cristiano Ronaldo took to Twitter simply to say: “Thanks for everything, Boss.”  Even PM David Cameron commented on the news of the football legend’s departure, by tweeting: ‘Sir Alex Ferguson’s achievement at #MUFC has been exceptional. Hopefully his retirement will make life a little easier for my team #AVFC’. 

As was to be expected, the news immediately dominated the traditional news channels and also proved a wider hit on Twitter.  The initial tweet was re-tweeted and ‘favourited’ 18,000 times within the first hour* and the story accounted for eight of the top ten trending topics on twitter and four worldwide – all of which bore the #ThankYouSirAlex hashtag.

The Twitter response to major news stories has become a key indication of public opinion and the extent of national or global interest.  With regards to Sir Alex’s recent announcement, his departure prompted a greater number of Tweets that were posted in response to Lady Thatcher’s death, but less that the number around the announcement of Jorge Mario Bergogolio as the new Pope in March.  Indeed, according to data collected by Twitter, the hour after Thatcher’s death, a million tweets were posted in the first four hours, whereas Sir Alex’s news saw over 1.4m mentions on Twitter within the first hour alone. 

There can be no doubt that Twitter has become a powerful and immediate tool and as a result, it has been used to deliver some of the most significant news stories to the world.  Take the now famous ‘four more years’ tweet from President Obama, which became the ‘most popular tweet of all time’, on US election night. 

The fact that Twitter was used to announce the long dreaded news of Sir Alex’s retirement has even prompted some speculation that it is due to the notoriously love-hate relationship between news organisations and football clubs and players.  Whatever the reasoning, the overwhelming response seems somewhat ironic given Sir Alex’s previous comments that Twitter is a “waste of time”.  I can’t help but wonder what he makes of the Twitter storm created by his retirement!

The virtual fitting room - genius or superfluous?

By Lindsey Challis

Online shopping has revolutionised my frantic weekend shop for a Saturday night garment.  First, I know I won't be emptying my bank account only to find a similar item carpeting the floors of H&M, and second, I won't have spent hours of my life clamouring across parents desperately trying to dress their 10-part family for a particular wedding or christening.  That’s not even mentioning the fact that it is no longer contained to a weekend, the ease, speed and convenience of online shopping means that I could even do it in my lunch-break.  Surfing the web for clothes is the only way, in my view, to get a complete picture of what's out there and what price is reasonable.  Google is a wonderful thing. 

The dilemma when it comes to online shopping however, is whether the hours saved in the shopping process are substituted by hours spent returning unwanted or misfitting items.  This would be true, if I hadn't already been put off the fitting room by the gaggle of teenage girls and the overly attentive shop assistant.  Even if you do have the patience for the fitting room, Virtusize, which claims to offer a virtual fitting room and has recently been introduced by ASOS in the UK, could pack the final punch for traditional shopping.  

Not yet able to show how a garment appears on a virtual you – that would be true genius – Virtusize comes close, by comparing the fit of a garment to one you already have.  Laying the garments over each other, a shopper can see what parts may be tight and where they can afford a bit of ‘breathing room’.  With impressive results, such as fit-related returns being reduced by as much as 50 percent, it’s hard to deny the potential of the virtual fitting room. 

For the hardy shopper, the virtual fitting room may still not match up to the real thing, and may indeed be considered superfluous to the shopping experience.   For an online-enthusiast like me however, online shopping just got a whole lot more accurate! 

When the tech industry does music...

By Claire Ayles

It’s the Friday after InfoSec and frankly we’re frazzled, so for some end-of-the-week relaxation, why don’t you take a look at CIO Magazine’s five favourite IT songs?

The standout performance comes from this guy for his version of John Lennon’s ‘Imagine’, including the immortal line ‘I hope one day you’ll join DevOps so our world will live as one’.   Yes, really.

 

 

 

The choir of programmers singing along to the tune of ‘Every Breath You Take’ from The Police comes a close second though.  Sting, cover your ears...

 

Time to exterminate automated sales calls

By Mike King

Unsolicited sales calls have long been a source of irritation, but the problem has got a lot worse over the past few years with an increase in the use of automated telephone systems that call and ‘speak’ at you in a voice that makes a Dalek sound warm and friendly.  

Yesterday’s news that UK telecoms firm TalkTalk has been fined for making too many silent and abandoned marketing calls using an automated system is welcome news.

Using such systems for outgoing calls has got to be top of the list of pointless uses of technology. Obviously, these automated systems must be a cheaper way to call thousands of people than the almost equally irritating human telesales call but, surely, the success rate for robotic calls must be close to zero?  

At best, hearing a robotic voice on the end of the line is so hugely irritating that no rational person would do anything other than simply hang-up. At worst, the automated system fails to do anything when you pick up the phone (as in the TalkTalk case) and you’re left with the silent treatment. Either way, nothing has been achieved other than annoying the recipient of the call. 

The web is full of people complaining about this issue and it is clearly a big problem. The UK government has called for a crackdown and, in November last year, the ICO published a list of the worst offenders. All of which begs the question, why do these systems even exist?

It has to be the perception of cost savings - machines are cheaper to run than people, so the telesales effort costs less. There’s some sort of logic there. If the starting point is that the old school, human telesales call was pretty ineffective, the thinking behind automating the process could be that it is a cheaper way to achieve nothing. Chucking the systems out altogether would be even cheaper.