Marketing frozen in time

Fun, smart mobby, full of impact (via Media Influencer) but...
At 1:39-1:42... why did they look? That's marketing, right there.

Burma: A problem shared is a problem defeated

My good friend Alan Moore has posted about the UGC that's opening the world's eyes to what's going on in Burma. Go and check it out, it's powerful stuff.
I've often raised the question of whether or not Tianenman Square could happen again in today's world of constantly connected communities. Like the Phillipines protests referred to in Smart Mobs (where the people organised against the government via viral text messaging), now it's possible to disrupt the usual media controls that the centre would otherwise impose. Now the media (the power to move minds) is in everyone's hands - Literally with a mobile phone.
So, as the Burmese people shoot video of what's happening - and share it with each other and the world - does this bring true power to the people?
Knowledge is power - information shared is power growing exponentially. Surely Stowe Boyd's Edglings, Alan Moore's We Species, has to win in a battle with the centre, given the tools available?
The Burmese are sharing their problem with the world. But, like all communities of purpose, if we aren't prepared to respond, in real time, then all their sharing is for nothing.

Share the problem. Defeat it.

When the vanguard becomes the frontline (the network comes with them)

There were some brilliant minds in London and all at the same time last week.

Ajit Jaoker organised a dinner for ForumOxford members to hook up with Howard Rheingold.
Stowe Boyd, JP Rangaswami, Euan Semple and Doc Searls all got together in various combinations.

If you don't know who these people are - or about their work - it's time you got yourself up to speed. Really. Not next week. Today.

I'm not listing all this for the sake of name-dropping.

The point is these people have been at the vanguard of thought about the seismic changes we are all undergoing - in social, economic, political and business fields.

They have represented the bleeding edge. And as Alan Moore likes to warn, people with a message from the future don't often get a warm welcome from the status quo. "Pioneers often get shot," as he puts it.

But I get the feeling the bleeding edge, the pioneers, are increasingly becoming the frontline.
They aren't out on their own anymore. The status quo is finally learning to embrace them and what they represent.

These guys all do work with bluechip companies. The bluechips aren't shooting them any more.

And if your organisation still thinks their thinking is all a bit "out there", it's time for a serious reappraisal of what you consider the norms.

I met Stowe a fortnight back. I met Euan last week. I hope I'll catch up with the others in person soon. I'm aiming to introduce Alan to Euan very soon. The connections have all come through blogging first. We are an example of a self-forming community of interest in action.

This community understands the power of the network. It lives by it.

I'm reading Systems Thinking (Creative Holism for Managers) by Michael C Jackson at the moment. It's a hard slog. But here's a gem that's kept me going:

• "Everyone can talk to everyone and should"
• "Everyone is responsible"
• "Network extensively"

I'll just corrupt that last one, if I may (sprinkle in a bit of co-creation...)

• Network extensively - with purpose
  

Social consumers - and what ratings are for

The emergence of TheGorb.com raises questions about the best way for communities to rate.

Most site builders insist on registration and have a preference for IDs etc.

This is based on protecting the site owner and our drive to 'own' user data. These factors gain priority over the altogether simpler imperative - helping a community to accurately share its assessment of things it regards as important. In short - we forget what ratings are for.

The approach of The Gorb may seem a little extreme for some tastes. It takes the no-barrier route. No need to register, and you get to remain anonymous.

There are controls on this. The ratings are weighted (though god, and gorb math alone knows how...)
"This is a sophisticated mathematical algorithm that detects and eliminates ratings that have a high likelihood of being biased. It also uses an innovative rater scoring scheme to provide people with incentives to rate truthfully, as well as to recognize frequent and thoughtful raters."

In essence there is a community control which scores you down if you appear to be dissing for no good reason. If you misuse the tool you'll lose respect in the eyes of TheGorb. Reingold's 'shadow of the future' is cast across every user the moment they begin to interact with the site.

It seems to me they've done a great job of putting the value of ratings first - and doing all they can to remove bias. TheGorb argues, for example, that linkedin is positively skewed by the simple fact that you aren't anonymous. You say nice things in the hope that the receipient will say nice things back. TheGorb aims to get closer to the truth.

Its whole big idea is to raise up the quiet, good, people and modify the behaviour of the bad. To make the world a better place (eg: Take greater incentive to do the right thing, encourage others to do so, and celebrate those opportunities together. ).

Seems vague and tree-hugging, doesn't it? But consider google's mission statement for a moment (...to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful). - and you might recognise the potential TheGorb really has.

But I do wonder how it'll cope with the potentional for ruinous litigation - ie Defamation cases (since it's entirely about personal reputations). There would be a certain irony in the 'losers' finding themselves a great lawyer using it.

And anyone who's read The Tipping Point is going to struggle with the notion of reducing personality to a non-contextual abstract... but that's another story altogether.