The Seesaw of Internet Freedom and Regulation

Author Jeff Jarvis is torn. In his most recent book, Public Parts: How Sharing in the Digital Age Improves the Way We Work and Live, Jarvis argues against internet regulation.  At the same time, he advocates government enforcement of net neutrality, itself a form of regulation.  It’s not only Jarvis who struggles with what level of regulation, if any, is needed and for what purpose.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton delivered a speech in 2010 defending internet freedom.  She called for “a single internet where all of humanity has equal access to knowledge and ideas.” The following year she delivered another speech which simultaneously condemned censorship and attacked WikiLeaks for its release of government data.

On his blog, Jarvis looks at the tension between freedom and regulation, the need for open exchange and the right to privacy and protection. In a recent post, “We Are the Lobbyists,” Jarvis further explores the consequence of these frictions:

The proposed SOPA-PIPA bill is designed to fight online trafficking of copyrighted intellectual property. The proposed bill, and resulting protest, brought many issues to the fore including the dramatically changing natures of media business models, the evolution in the value of content, the undermining of institutions’ previous unchallenged power.

It also created an environment where millions of consumers became lobbyists, using the net to defend internet freedom. The internet provided a platform in which users could make an impact without using “influence peddlers” or political commercials.  The movement only “needed citizens who give a shit. Democracy.” It is up to the internet public to protect the “tool of publicness.”

See Jeff Jarvis speak about the balance of internet privacy and publicness at the BRITE ’12 Conference (March 5-6, NYC).

REGISTER NOW!

BY KIM SHIFRIN

 

Disruptive Innovation [VIDEO]

Socrates taught us to question every assumption. And when it comes to innovation, nothing could be closer to the truth. But Luke Williams, professor of Innovation & Design at NYU Stern School of Business and author of DISRUPT, takes this notion a step further—”disruptive innovation.”

Speaking at the BRITE ’11 conference, Williams explained that companies today tend to have a myopic vision when using new technologies to build their brands. Digital magazines, for example, may offer more features, but they’re still giving consumers what they expect in ways that they expect. “As a result, a lot of our brand-building around these new technologies has taken on some pretty predictable trajectories.”

Disruptive innovation, however, is not about technological change. According to Williams, it’s about a revolution in behavior and “changing the way you think about a category.” Brands need to move beyond focusing on what the latest technology can do for their company or product. Williams challenged the audience to break free from conventional assumptions about a category to see from a new perspective. To do so, he reminds us to be careful of cultural influence and to pay attention to context, not just the foreground. As consumers and the marketplace evolve, it is increasingly important to embrace disruptive innovation before it is forcibly imposed by a new competitor or shifting consumer landscape. To quote Harvard Law School professor, Roberto Unger, “the task of the imagination is to do the work of crisis without crisis.”

BY ALLIE ABODEELY

To gTLD or to Not gTLD?

If you haven’t already heard, there’s a new word in town. It’s called “dotBrand” and it’s about to crack the dotcom world wide open.

In January 2012, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the non-profit organization that governs the internet’s naming system, is opening the opportunity for global businesses, communities, governments, and even geographical locations, to apply for generic top-level domain names (gTLDs)—such as .canon, .wine, and .nyc. Many are now weighing the pros and cons of “dotBranding” themselves.

The news surrounding ICANN’s new gTLD program, has stimulated a broad discussion raising questions such as “How could my business benefit from this?” to “Do I need to protect my brand?”

Like all things, there are a wide range of considerations to factor in when deciding whether to apply, among them trademark protection, brand equity, and cost. To help business leaders evaluate the benefits of investing in a gTLD, Columbia Business School’s Center on Global Brand Leadership hosted a video webinar, “Who Should Invest in a dotBrand?” this fall. The event brought together branding and internet experts to discuss the strategic questions decision-makers are facing. To view this free webinar, click here.

First, it should be clarified that ICANN isn’t simply handing out gTLDs to the first person or organization that applies. Just because Jane in Arizona is applying for .madonna doesn’t mean that she’ll get it. There are “checks and balances” in place including a trademark clearinghouse providing authentication of trademark information, and an objection-based process enabling rights holders to demonstrate that a proposed gTLD would infringe their legal rights. Of course there are valid concerns for businesses, organizations, and communities who do have common or even similar names. A company like Patagonia may be legitimately concerned about securing the same domain name as the region of Patagonia. ICANN has created a dispute resolution program, and even auction procedures, to handle such issues.

While some brands perceive gTLDs as a risk and may be considering applying for trademark protection, others envision possibilities involving brand extension and brand architecture. For example, a parent company like Unilever with multiple sub-brands could employ “dove.unilever.” B2C businesses like Citibank could create a more personalized consumer experience through their websites with url’s such as “www.michael.citibank.” But this also begs the question about the appearance of a brand’s homepage—is it “home.bmw” or “bmw.bmw”? Brand consultants seem to still be hashing this out.

And many opponents to the new gTLD program feel the financial commitment is a hefty price to pay for a top-level domain system that they feel works fine with its 22 existing TLDs (.com, .gov, .jobs, etc.). The application costs US$185,000 as well as a reported US$25,000 annual fee. Then there are the additional expenses such as technical, administration, and maintenance fees. For big name brands, this could be worth the investment. When compared to the cost of a single, 30-second television spot, it’s not a huge chunk of change. For small to mid-size companies, however, it is an expensive endeavor that may take deeper consideration.

“The kinds of benefits we see from a brand-building perspective are things like controlling your brand and your content,” explained Karl Isaac, Executive Director of Landor’s digital branding practice, during the Center’s webinar. “If you are a business that transacts with your customers or that protects very private and confidential information for your customer, the increased security benefits alone may outweigh the risks of doing this.”

The application process may be preempted, however, as the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation has called for a hearing this month to discuss the merits, implications and concerns surrounding ICANN’s new program. If the gTLD application process does move forward as planned, businesses and organizations will need to do due diligence if thinking about applying.

BY ALLIE ABODEELY

The Value of Great Social Customer Service

Called “the most famous customer service manager in the U.S., possibly in the world” by Businessweek.com, Frank Eliason (a BRITE ’11 speaker) is a social media pioneer. Frank, formerly the well-known voice behind @ComcastCares, is now SVP of Social Media at Citi where he and his team are using social media to humanize the brand and build a dialogue and rapport with customers.  While at Comcast, Frank built an incredible amount of customer loyalty and industry admiration through customer service work using social media.

The changes Frank has found through social customer service go beyond just answering a few complaints via Twitter.  ”Many people don’t realize that ‘social’ will really change the dynamics of your whole company,” Frank told cms wire.  He noted, for example, an occasion a few years back where the NHL playoffs blacked-out and customer calls and complaints started coming in.  Through searching Twitter posts, Comcast realized within just a few minutes that the problem was caused by a lightning strike affecting the sports network. Frank estimates that because this allowed Comcast to make a quick adjustment to its automated call center message, the company saved around $1.2 million by avoiding what would have been extended customer service calls.

And just this month at our Sobel-BRITE “The Network Is Your Customer” panel discussion (video below), Frank spoke about the importance of the people behind corporate social media initiatives. “I don’t connect with a logo.  I connect with people.  If you look at the most successful [companies] in social media, you know the people behind it.”

Hear Frank Eliason speak at our BRITE ’11 conference (March 2-3, 2011). Register now!

BY MATTHEW QUINT

Building the Emerging Ad Platforms of Google

In his role as director of emerging platforms, Mike Steib (BRITE 11 speaker) is working on a range of products and services offered by Google, from TV to mobile to e-commerce platforms.

Talking at a mobile technology panel session at paidContent Mobile, he reflected on how consumers will use mobile devices. "Apps are a bridge technology. The idea that in the early days of the internet that I would have downloaded Weather.com and then would have to upgrade each time, seems like an unnecessary step for a consumer. In the end, it all goes back to the singular web." On the mobile front he also told Mobilemarketer that, "The Holy Grail for local advertising is location-targeted coupons, and we’re building Google Offers to enable that, as well as click-to-call functionality for nearby businesses."  

Steib is also championing Google TV Ads. By establishing a large cable and satellite partner-base, Google can now let users upload their own ad spots and bid on TV placements in the same way marketers have grown accustomed to creating search ads through AdWords. As Steib reported to Fast Company, "In the traditional model of TV ad sales, you make buying commitments months in advance. With our system, you can bid on spots up to the day before. We’ve also just introduced a feature that uses search. We’re only going to give you content contextually relevant to your brand. And all that takes minutes. The next day, you get a report back that tells you what spots ran, what audience was delivered, and how much of your budget was spent. You’re getting almost real-time data."

Hear Mike Steib speak at our BRITE ’11 Conference (March 2-3, 2011). Register now!

BY MATTHEW QUINT