Case in point - Sony’s new range of TVs have a user interface which will be very familiar to anyone with a PSP or PS3, and an ethernet plug right there in the back of the TV itself.

Connect them up, and using the XMB (as the interface is known) you can get content from Yahoo! right there on top of the TV image, or watch IPTV content from the likes of YouTube, CNN and so forth instead of anything being “broadcast”.

The name Sony like’s to call their people who work in this field (Convergineers) says it all.

Convergence isn’t something that’s “coming soon” any more.

It’s now.

Howard

–

Brands have been on twitter for quite some time now, as well all know, some having good success, and others not doing it quite as well as they could, but what we’ve not fully seen are brands using it as a direct communications channel to clients in relation to a competiton or game, with differing end goals by the look of it.

Only last week, my attention was drawn to a competition being run by Asus computers, producers of the well loved EeePC series, for the launch of a new model they have created (known as the Asus SeaShell for reasons that I can’t fathom aside from it, like all laptops, looks a bit like a clamshell). For your chance to win one of these machines you simply had to follow the brand on twitter (@asusuk) and in turn, they would select a user at random, once a week, to be the lucky winner of the machine.  When I chose to follow them they had about 40 followers.  Now, they have 1472 - not massive by anyone’s measure, but not too shabby either.  All I can think of was that this was an attempt to grow their follower-base to hit the right kind of people who might, in turn, spread the word to others interested in netbooks and so on - so, actually, in terms of “hitting the right people” this is probably quite an interesting exercise for them.

So, one week later, and I come across an email from another technology company, Novatech, a tech and PC retailer which you might not have heard from (but for those of us tech-inclined on the south-coast of the UK trust me, they’re a god-send at times!)  Novatech are running a similar competittion to Asus, but it, for me, fails at the first hurdle due to the barrier to entry.

Again it’s to win a netbook (this time from MSI) and all you have to do is follow BOTH MSI and Novatech on twitter (@msitweets and @novatechltd) - so not one, but two - and then you have to tweet on your own profile that you’re following them, AND then…  you have to register on the novatech forum and post a link on that to your twitter page.

*PHEW*

got that?  couldn’t be simpler right?  erm… well, perhaps it could.  I think this is a bad example of how to use the channels around twitter for a promotion.

And finally, although by no means the last “brand” on twitter doing so, everyone’s favourite mockney chef, Jamie Oliver (@jamie_oliver), is running a regular competition each Friday called “Jamie’s Twitchen” (see what he did there?) where by he asks a question, and the first person from around the twitterverse to reply with the correct answer and the hashtag #jamiestwitchen wins a prize which changes each week.

This is, for me, a great example of how to use the channel in a positive, respectful way that actually makes use of the unique nature of twitter itself, rather than trying to make it into something it’s not intended to be for the sake of a few thousand email addresses you can bombard.

What I think these illustrates is a couple of things.

1) brands (large and small, world famous and not) are waking up to twitter as a very immediate here-and-now channel to run competitions in - and the power of communicating directly to your core audience and what that can give you.

2) sometimes, social media usage can be taken to far (not mentioning any names Novatech!) in your quest to grab user details and build up a pool of “followers” to spread the word to (less is often more)

Twitter is, as I pointed out to a senior client I work with via a linkedin conversation last night, simply another channel within which we can conduct digital marketing.  It’s not the answer to everything, but it’s emerging quite rapidly, that using twitter as part of a sales promotion strategy, or a games/comps strategy, really does seem to work - but as with everything, treat it with respect and don’t abuse the power it can give you.

Overall, I like this trend, I like that we, the users of twitter, are coming up with a plethora of new ways to work it.

It’s evolving!

Howard

–

I see it in retail stores, on tube media, online and more recently I’ve been exposed to lots of situations where in the process of proposing digital content people (non-digital mind) instantly default to “hey, we could use the TV ad on there”.

Why do people insist on seeing the moving images of TV as being suitable for any and all screens someone might be exposed to?

Tube screen? TV ad.

Instore plasma? TV ad.

Interactive kiosk. Use the TV ad.

Plasma screen. What about (hey you guessed it) TV ad.

But the same logic is invariably not applied to all other consumer touchpoints. Do we see a poster site and say, hey lets take stills of the TV ad and print that!

Or an advertorial and take the TV script. No we don’t and why?

Cause it’s not relevant message for that media at that stage of the consumer journey.

TV has an ever growing tenous role with the growth of digital, but if we do see it as relevant then only at a single  point (hey on TV!), and assuming that it’s universally relevant and pertinent content for an audience to be rolled out at all screens a brand owns is surely flawed?

Lets take, oh i don’t know a plasma at retail. TV won’t provided enhanced perceived value at that point of purchase. That push to buy.

Medium and moment should decide the message and content.

Screen does not = TV!

Paul

uber-trendy microblogging platform of choice, twitter, is making a reality TV show featuring both "real users" and celebs.

So, this is an interesting one.

Reuters is reporting that Twitter, golden child of the internet new world order, home of the Twitterati, is making moves towards one of of the very media channels which many of us in the “new media” world see as on it’s way to the grave (certainly in it’s current look and feel)…

TV

No, not IPTV, not Apple TV, not dodgy shows you’ve downloaded via torrent from a site i couldn’t possibly list or guide you towards, plain old broadcast medium of choice, Television.

Yes, your favourite microblogging platform and mine is to create it’s own TV series, where “real life” twitter users get to interact on an unscripted show with celebrity twitterers.  Quite how this will happen isn’t clear right now, but it’s being created in collaboration with production companies who seem to be pretty big hitters - one of them being Reveille who are behind “The Office” (presumably the US version?  I dunno?)

I’ll be interested to see how this plays out.  The juxtaposition of such a contemporary, not-quite-worked-out-yet medium like Twitter choosing the traditional, we get it already (or we thought we did) medium of TV is, for me at least, very interesting.

I look forward to the first episode hitting the torrents soon!

Howard

–

The competition is live right now on YouTube , the client is Oxfam and it is meant to encourage you to sign a petition to be presented at the UN Climate Change Conference this December. The brief was picked up and completed inside 48hours. We made it deliberately lo-fi by taking over 300 pictures and putting them in an animation.

Check out the video here and be sure to pass it on to your friends for such a worthy cause and to help Adam win!

Howard

–

As someone who works in both digital and heavily in sales promotion right now, I find this particularly interesting, and whilst the content isn’t necessarily going to blow anyones mind in a big way, it’s put together very nicely and I think many of us could well use it as a starting point for our own presentations somewhere down the line.

Unperturbed Microsoft returned to FOWD 09 with a slot entitled Watchmen, having been demoing Microsoft Surface in the lobby I was intrigued to see how they would showcase Surface with the comic property.

Now before I go any further, I love Watchmen. Moore’s graphic novel is a classic piece of English literature for me, as complex a narrative as any classic novel. So yes, maybe my heckles were up.

Microsoft gave a half hour long diorama like version of the book, dragging cut-out versions of the characters onscreen, making them a little bigger, shrinking them down. Jiggling them a little. Then dragging them off screen.

For 30 long mins we saw the same weak visual gag recycled. Now aside from massacring the complex plot of the novel, it was the least flattering demo of what should be an exciting product proposition I’ve seen. No mention of Surface’s capability to … take a breath:

• Create applications to recognise and interact with products when placed on screen
• Upload content (video and photo) direct from devices to screen simply by dropping it on the surface
• Allow custom GUIs to fit your creative execution
• Apply a library of texture effects — water / sand — to interations
• Navigation around maps in realtime
• Handwriting recognition
• Sharing content direct from screen with others

No. All we get is scaling cardboard cut-outs. Truly cutting edge, thank you.

I’d sooner have watched this far more informative (yet slightly corporate) Microsoft demo and reclaimed those 30 mins of my life.

Recently I saw an example of gesture based interactivity in the Orange Store on Carnaby Street. You were invited to interact with Orange’s Mobile portal Orange World through an i-tunes coverflow like interface at the front of store. Now I can’t say if that was  Surface, but we all could have been more enriched about how to adapt this technology had we seen some real world examples?

Thanks again Windows for another great demo, hey there’s always 2010.

And (more importantly) where was the Tales of the Black Freighter?

Paul

Ok, caveat - I heard a LOT of things yesterday that I have trouble buying into, but this one is the only one that’s interesting and challenges my way of thinking (the other one seems just plain stupid and whilst it may have had some good points, the way it was delivered and “sold” just alienated me and made me feel like I was being told off by a grumpy school teacher).

A presentation was given on the topic of Graphic Design and how it’s actually a solid “Web Standard” with which we can create online experiences for users that will work for all.

This in itself is controversial, as when we often talk about web standard we’re obviously talking about a technical aspect of some kind, such as the way to code HTML or CSS etc.,  but this isn’t the part I am picking up on - in fact, I can see the point that’s being made here (I think).

During the same presentation, however, a lot of comparison was made between the digital design process and the print design process, and how that digital designers can learn from the history, previous and current work being done in the print world - and this is again true - there is some great print work out there and some amazing print designers from the past and working today.

But for me, the comparison went a little too far at times.

It almost seemed to me that in some way’s we were being told that desiging from a digital perspective alone, and treating it as a new medium, with which there are new rules, isn’t good enough, and that unless you truly work with digital in a direct relation to what is and has happened in the print world, you’re missing a trick.

At times, we were even told that as a good way to check if your digital designs are working, you could take them, print them out in a physical format, and see if it works as a printed piece, to check if it’s working as a digital one.

erm….

I’m sorry?  But, why?

What possible good could this do you? aside from reassuring you as a designer that you’ve managed to create a good looking digital design that happens to print out well therefore rendering it almost useless as a piece of solid digital design: catch-22.

I think I know what the problem is with this thinking.

Art.

Design in this context is being judged as art, as an expression of visual design devoid of meaning or purpose or a role in what it’s trying to do.

It’s design in the print context where once it’s put down on the page, or the screen, and then sent to the printers, the involvement by the end user, as well as the people creating it, ends - the job of the designer is the be-all and end-all, and all anyone else does is either bring it to life by activating a machine, or passively consume it.

Digital design is different.

For a start, the designer doesn’t visualise the end product.  they may think they do, and they may work side-by-side other people like IAs and developers as part of a creative team, but they don’t control the end product in anything like the same way a print designer does.  It’s more like the relationship a director has with a good editior - the director has the vision, but it’s the editor who crafts the end result from what is effectively raw materials (can you tell I wanted to be an editor whilst I was studying my degree?)

Because of this interconnected relationship a visual creative has with the other creatives on a digital team (the “interface” creative - or IA, or the “technical” creative - or coder, for example), they can’t produce a single piece of art which they then pass on.

Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, the end user, the consumer in my world, of a piece of design (a website for example) does not passively consume the work - they interact with it, normally, it’s designed to move, to take input, to show video, to play games, to be interactive by it’s very nature.  Print is not.

Printing out your web pages to see how they look is for me a truly amateur thing to say - I don’t know any serious digital creative who would do such a thing (I know plenty of account handlers who do it on a regular basis to present to clients but let’s not go there!).

You’re not even working in a good DPI for print are you? 72 dpi on the page?  come on - i don’t have to explain this one.

I suspect, hope, that the comment was a mistake, that he made it off-the-cuff in mid-flow during a presenstation - and like i say a presenation which was pretty good to look at (if very printy).

Designing for the digital environment is something that exists in it’s own right.  It’s a medium (well, a collection of mediums) which are so intrinsically different to anything that has come before it that you need to treat it as it’s own beast.

Having said that, can we learn from print? From TV? From Radio?  From Games?  of course we can - we’re multi-media - we can take any of these other design environments and learn from that they’ve been doing in them for a lot longer than we have with pixels and flash - take as much as you want and create something beautiful with it - but don’t confuse the mediums.

Don’t think that you need to prove yourself n a job-by-job basis in the print world in order to rule the digital one.

They’re different things with very different ways of executing for both the consumer and the creator, and whilst they do cross over, and have similarities, they really aren’t the same.

Learn from them.

Don’t wish you were working in them if you’re not.

@howard_scott

ps - I still don’t get CMYK for colours.  How can there be FOUR?  4 colour ffs. there’s only three! RGB. and why isn’t it CMYB?
–