8. â120k blogs are created daily â most of them with an audience of one.
Over half of them are created by people under the age of nineteen.
In the US, nearly 40 percent of Internet users upload videos, and
globally over fifteen hours of video are uploaded to YouTube every
minute.
The web is very social too: about one of every six minutes that people
spend online is spent in a social network of some type.â
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/02/from-height-of-this-place.html
11. INTANGIBLES
IMMEDIACY priority access, immediate delivery
PERSONALIZATION tailored just for you
INTERPRETATION support and guidance
AUTHENTICITY how can you be sure it is the real thing?
ACCESSIBILITY wherever, whenever
EMBODIMENT books, live music
PATRONAGE "paying simply because it feels good", e.g. Radiohead
Kevin FINDABILITY "When there are millions of books, millions of songs,
Kelly
millions of films, millions of applications, millions of everything requesting our attention
â and most of it free â being found is valuable."
12. !
More Internet-enabled
I work with technology.
I spend most days in front of my computer
screen, connected to the internet.
phones will be sold
Skype is always open. and activated in 2009
My mobile phone sits on my desk beside than personal computers
the computer, receiving SMS messages and
calls while I work.
18. Extending the Experience
In the Store Around Store At home and on the move
Item Level RFID Smart Fixtures NFC BrandPoints
Consumer-facing Applications Store Locations SMS Social Networking
NFC Payment NFC Product Alerts Micro Payments
8
18
19. Todays Consumer is:
ï§Increasingly connected and technology-savvy
ï§Peer groups play a more important role in decision making
ï§Consumer Choice: multiple and networked âbrandpointsâ
Multiple âBrandPointsâ, Single Experience
Connected and dynamic networks allow
access to information and opinions in
interactive and collaborative ways
Social
Interactive, emotional and Ubiquitous and pervasive
sensorial; The true physical Physical Virtual solutions, always on, always
manifestation of the brand connected, anywhere
Personal
Personalized and context-aware,
non-intrusive and relevant
19
20. WEB 1.0 < 2001 1. Pages connected by links
âInstitutional web sitesâ
âUsers had no voice, no identityâ 2. First e-commerce sites
âVideos played slowlyâ 3. Advertising banners
âThere was no PayPalâ 4. Mobile text messages
5. Personal web sites
6. Six degrees of separation
21. WEB 2.0
âIdentityâ
< 2007 1. Social network
âBlogsâ 2. The client reads and writes
âViralâ 3. Google Adsense
âWiki 95â 4. Viral tools
âconnecting people with common 5. Paid blogs
interestsâ 6. Customer voice
ârich mediaâ 7. E-commerce overtakes place commerce
8. Collaborative branding
9. One degree of separation
22. WEB 3.0 > 2007
âThe customer customizesâ 1. Semantic Web
âsoftware that learns by looking at on-line 2. Web its a database
content, analyzes the popularity of that 3. Geospatial Web
content and draws conclusions. Instead of 4. Web 3D
people refining information and opinion, 5. Shopping in community
intelligent software would do the same 6. Shopping from IPOD
thingâ 7. Social shopping
8. Shopping in-store/online
9. Share the purchase
32. We Feel Fine, Jonathan Harris
An exploration of human emotion in six parts
Collective/
Since August 2005, We Feel Fine has been harvesting human feelings from a
large number of weblogs. Every few minutes, the system searches the world's
newly posted blog entries for occurrences of the phrases "I feel" and "I am
Participatory/
feeling". When it finds such a phrase, it records the full sentence, up to the
period, and identifies the "feeling" expressed in that sentence (e.g. sad, happy,
depressed, etc.). Because blogs are structured in largely standard ways, the
Live
age, gender, and geographical location of the author can often be extracted
and saved along with the sentence, as can the local weather conditions at the
time the sentence was written. All of this information is saved.
33. Customers can feel like they are part of the
brandâs extended family, and therefore the
brand itself, while the interactive element
further deepens that relationship,
These characteristics address and satisfy that
âtribalâ part of the fashion consumer â the
way in which people identify themselves by the
brands they buy.â
Alex Bolen,
chief executive officer, Oscar de la Renta
34. A key component of social media
âis real-time feedback â an ability to
accurately measure marketing
results,While this aspect of the Internetâs
promise has yet to be fully realized, one can
adjust, fairly quickly, to emphasize those
initiatives that are working best.â
Alex Bolen,
chief executive officer, Oscar de la Renta
35. Facebook offers its users the ability to
âfanâ a firm or brand â a component that
sets it apart from a standard company Web
site. Once a user has âfannedâ a brand,
the business has direct access to them and
is able to send messages and updates via a
constant news feed on the userâs home
page.
The result is a âpowerful brand
advantageâŠ.The company is now in the
middle of two-way communication with
their consumer,â Arrix said.
36. To join Twitter, a user creates a free user
name and password and then sifts through
a search function to find friends and
companies the user would like to âfollow.â
Once a user is following a company, the
userâs home page is refreshed with every
update that company sends. For instance,
if LouisVuitton_US tweets âLouis Vuittonâs
new Core Values campaign profiled in
todayâs @nytimes,â all 10,492 of its
followers will see this message on their
home pages.
37. Club Couture..The technology allows
consumers to put together looks from the
collection and share the outfits with friends
who can then rate the outfit and create their
own.
This social interaction has resulted in a
conversion rate 162 percent higher than any
other part of the site â meaning a user who
happens upon the Club Couture page on the
companyâs Web site is 1.62 times more likely
to purchase an outfit on the site than if she
had been browsing any other page on
juicycouture.com.
42. The worldâs best performing brands recognize superior customer experiences is:
Competitive differentiation
Fostering customer loyalty
Commanding a brand premium
Brands must communicate with shoppers in a way that is
personal,
Emotional,
context-aware
Todayâs consumer base is increasingly diverse and demands high levels of intimacy
Consumer is able to choose how, when, where, and even if connections
are made with the brand
Unprecedented access to information
More comfortable with digital technology than ever before
âThe magicmirror is the most powerful in-store
interactive experience for shoppers I have ever seenâ
www.thebigspace.com Business Week October 5, 2007
43. Enhancing the Customer Experience
Experiences form deeper bonds with customers Itâs no longer just about sales-per-square-foot,
Emotions-per-square-foot commands a brand premium for retailers today
Make a point-of-difference at the true point-of-purchase
Better activate consumers, turning them into shoppers, and from shoppers into buyers
âThe magicmirror was the most high-profile
43 technology featured in the store of the future display
this yearâ
Retail Week October 19, 2007
44. RFID Consumer Facing Solutions
One of only a few practical means for retailers to:
ï§ Engage the consumer at a point of relevance in their
shopping experience
ï§ Transform the shopping experience it into
something that is intuitive, emotional, and leaves a
lasting impression
magicmirrorâą provides retailers the means to reach
customers on an emotional level and positively
influence purchase decisions at the moment of choice
magicmirrorâą communicates the story behind each
tagged product and facilitates a highly innovative and
personal means of product discovery
âFortunately for the market, innovation rather than
44 cost is becoming a key driver for adoptionâ
Gartner Inc. Report, February 25, 2007
45. Levi-Strauss Mexico
Levi-Strauss Mexico were searching for ways to
differentiate the store experience and better manage
costs through the supply chain.
They believed that item-level RFID could offer
significant value in the way of supply chain visibility.
Thebigspace teamed up with Leviâs Mexico to pilot a
consumer-oriented application of item-level RFID.
48. Levi-Strauss Mexico
The PRL brand is a lifestyle brand that draws heavily on their own legacy, as
well as classic designs from the early 1920s through the late 1960s
They begin the design process with physical garments from the past and then
go to sketches. For this reason, they rely on a well-stocked archive, and
inquisitive design staff who can source unique vintage pieces.
Finding specific garments took too long, as designers were forced to rummage
through boxes, closets, secret stashes and dark rooms. There was no way to
track one-offs and uniquely valuable items, or know who was in possession of
what. Company history left when designers moved on.
48
49. Levi-Strauss Mexico
As sole creative partner, tbs designed and delivered a full digital archive
solution to complement their physical library of garments.
Designers are now abe to source items from their desktop using simple search
Strings and browsing functionality using the custom interface.
Once in the physical archive, designers can interact with
the virtual library simply placing garments of
Interest on a smart surface, triggering a retrieval of
Item detail and related content.
49
When I was little, I remember my father reading the newspaper while I ate breakfast. Not long ago, millions waited through entire newscasts just to learn who won a game or what tomorrowâs weather would be. This was ideal for advertisers. They had a captive audience. The customerâs position was clearly defined..the age of the passive audience
Today I hardly ever buy a newspaper, if I need news I look for it on the internet. Why should I spend money buying a newspaper when I can find all the informatin free on-line? Now weâre swimming in information. The value of information has collapsed to zero. The audience is no longer passive but participatory. There is something for everyone, all just a click away.
The only scarce resource is attention...The Attention Economy, Bernardo A. Huberman, Director of the information Dyinamics Laboratory at Hewlett-Packard. Herbert Simon was perhaps the first person to articulate the concept of attention economics when he wrote: "...in an information-rich world, the wealth of information means a dearth of something else: a scarcity of whatever it is that information consumes. What information consumes is rather obvious: it consumes the attention of its recipients. Hence a wealth of information creates a poverty of attention and a need to allocate that attention efficiently among the overabundance of information sources that might consume it" ( Simon 1971 , p. 40-41) . He noted that many designers of information systems incorrectly represented their design problem as information scarcity rather than attention scarcity, and as a result they built systems that excelled at providing more and more information to people, when what was really needed were systems that excelled at filtering out unimportant or irrelevant information ( Simon 1996 , p. 143-144) . In recent years, Simon's characterization of the problem of information overload as an economic one has become more popular. Business strategists have adopted the term "attention economy" ( Davenport & Beck 2001 ) , and some writers have even speculated that "attention transactions" will replace financial transactions as the focus of our economic system ( Goldhaber 1997 , Franck 1999). Information systems researchers have also adopted the idea, and are beginning to investigate mechanism designs which build on the idea of creating property rights in attention
Traditional media advertising worked on the AIDA model..the customerâs attention was more or less taken for granted since the above-the-line/below-the-line model was unambiguous. Today, customers have a myriad of options where to get their information. Media agencies need to work harder in not only winning the attention of the consumer but choosing the best communication channel to use.
According to digital culture expert Kevin Kelly, the modern attention economy is increasingly one where the consumer product costs nothing to reproduce and the problem facing the supplier of the product lies in adding valuable intangibles that can not be reproduced at any cost. He identifies these intangibles as: [1]
Antonio Damasio is a neuroscientist who has focussed on trying to explain the relationship between our rational behaviour/decision-making and our feelings/emotions. DamĂĄsio's books deal with the relationship between emotions and feelings, and what their bases are in the brain The Feeling of What Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness
Web 1.0 (the information Web), the one we all know and love, is straightforward. It's full of content that we can surround with ads, mainly in the form of banners. Many marketers look at this as an extension of offline media -- print and television. Sadly, they tend to use it the same way.
Web 2.0 (the social Web) is a little less "ad friendly." Social networking, live chat, folksonomies, mash-ups, virtual worlds, even mobile are part of 2.0. It's about people communicating, contributing, collaborating. Results come from the wisdom of crowds -- for better or worse. This collaboration and sharing break down the traditional media model, and marketers lose control of their brands, even while they gain powerful new ways to engage their audience. (Type your brand's name into Topsy, the Twitter search engine, to get a little taste of market reality.)
The key is that information is presented and labeled so it makes sense to machines. This means Web content needs to be presented in a language that software can understand; programming languages such as OWL and SWRL that can be "read" by software. The more Web content written in these languages, the more effective the software will be gathering information and making recommendations for users. The TiVo model helps to understand how Web 3.0 might work. Express interest in, say, George Clooney, and TiVo's "agent" searches for and records any of his movies airing on TV. But it also finds and records content related to Clooney, such as films he directed or produced, reruns of ER, The Facts of Life and other credited work, interviews and gossip items about him, even the "Tears of a Clooney" episode of American Dad that mocked his persona. Now substitute your brand for "Clooney" and "the entire Web" for "TV," and you get some idea of Web 3.0's potential reach. Today, search engines gather and classify their listings through a simpler version of "intelligent" software. For marketers to understand how they might operate in a Web 3.0 world, they should look to their current organic search programs and what's needed to do well with conventional search engines. Berners-Lee refers to Web 3.0 as the semantic Web because software can learn, intuit and decide. This means people will have "intelligent agent" software filtering information and making decisions for them (e.g., "best," "lowest priced"). For marketers, this means the potential for unprecedented targeting and data-mining-but advertising would be less effective. Marketers would stand on their merits, not their claims. After all, how do you convince software? There will still be a need to tell stories and build brands, but there will be a new constituency to persuade. This will require a very different approach than most marketers use today. This approach will involve data-based understanding of how software will intuit and clear "tagging" as a form of communication. There's no guarantee that 3.0 intelligent agents will be any less biased or inaccurate than 2.0 people are today. Â Why worry about Web 3.0 when only a handful of hyper-geek sites are even designed for it? Well, most marketers lag behind consumers when it comes to media adoption. (How many of us understand enterprise search today?) But consider the fact Google was founded in 1998, it sold its first ads in 2000 and within five years it dominated the search market. Also mull the fact that social media was an oddity, an add-on for marketers through 2005; four years later, social sites, blogs and Twitter are shaping public opinion and marketers' efforts more than any single media trend. Some marketers and agencies will understand that Web 3.0 represents an important evolution in how they can (or can't) interface with consumers looking for information and solutions. They'll start playing with these new programming languages and look at how they can evolve the principles of search marketing (a good proxy for how to interface with intelligent agents). Â Still, most marketers have time before Web 3.0 matters. Don't they?
More than any marketing medium, including print, where advertising is suffering, social media give brands a chance to be a part of a dialogue about their own companies. In this new and evolving framework, everyone is a participant. According to Forrester Research, Facebook, with an estimated 200 million users, classifies two-thirds of its users as being of post-college age, with 35-plus the fastest-growing demographic. Twitter, a platform for messages of 140 characters or less that had 20 million unique visitors in May, has 42 percent of its users in the 35-to-49 age range and 20 percent ages 25 to 34. Brands including Gap, Victoriaâs Secret, Ralph Lauren, Calvin Klein, Nike and Adidas also have tapped into YouTube, MySpace and other sites, where their videos, commercials, behind-the-scenes footage and fashion shows are posted. Vitrue created a Social Media Index to measure what people are talking about online. The index is generated from an algorithm that scours the Internet for a specific term on searches and social media networks and produces a score. The higher the score, the more frequently that term has been mentioned on the Web. Vitrue looked at 35 major fashion brands and retailers from May 26 to June 1. The five most-talked-about brands were Gucci, Target, Gap, American Apparel and Urban Outfitters. These brands are, not coincidentally, active on social platforms. They âleverage their presence on social networks, have great content [updated frequently] and tools for engagement and conversation,â Bradford said. âFashion brands are emblematic of a personâs personality and how they want to be perceived; itâs woven into [her] identity,â he said. âEverybody loves brands â whether theyâre generic or Gucci. Itâs a statement.â
The key is that information is presented and labeled so it makes sense to machines. This means Web content needs to be presented in a language that software can understand; programming languages such as OWL and SWRL that can be "read" by software. The more Web content written in these languages, the more effective the software will be gathering information and making recommendations for users. The TiVo model helps to understand how Web 3.0 might work. Express interest in, say, George Clooney, and TiVo's "agent" searches for and records any of his movies airing on TV. But it also finds and records content related to Clooney, such as films he directed or produced, reruns of ER, The Facts of Life and other credited work, interviews and gossip items about him, even the "Tears of a Clooney" episode of American Dad that mocked his persona. Now substitute your brand for "Clooney" and "the entire Web" for "TV," and you get some idea of Web 3.0's potential reach. Today, search engines gather and classify their listings through a simpler version of "intelligent" software. For marketers to understand how they might operate in a Web 3.0 world, they should look to their current organic search programs and what's needed to do well with conventional search engines. Berners-Lee refers to Web 3.0 as the semantic Web because software can learn, intuit and decide. This means people will have "intelligent agent" software filtering information and making decisions for them (e.g., "best," "lowest priced"). For marketers, this means the potential for unprecedented targeting and data-mining-but advertising would be less effective. Marketers would stand on their merits, not their claims. After all, how do you convince software? There will still be a need to tell stories and build brands, but there will be a new constituency to persuade. This will require a very different approach than most marketers use today. This approach will involve data-based understanding of how software will intuit and clear "tagging" as a form of communication. There's no guarantee that 3.0 intelligent agents will be any less biased or inaccurate than 2.0 people are today. Â Why worry about Web 3.0 when only a handful of hyper-geek sites are even designed for it? Well, most marketers lag behind consumers when it comes to media adoption. (How many of us understand enterprise search today?) But consider the fact Google was founded in 1998, it sold its first ads in 2000 and within five years it dominated the search market. Also mull the fact that social media was an oddity, an add-on for marketers through 2005; four years later, social sites, blogs and Twitter are shaping public opinion and marketers' efforts more than any single media trend. Some marketers and agencies will understand that Web 3.0 represents an important evolution in how they can (or can't) interface with consumers looking for information and solutions. They'll start playing with these new programming languages and look at how they can evolve the principles of search marketing (a good proxy for how to interface with intelligent agents). Â Still, most marketers have time before Web 3.0 matters. Don't they?
The key is that information is presented and labeled so it makes sense to machines. This means Web content needs to be presented in a language that software can understand; programming languages such as OWL and SWRL that can be "read" by software. The more Web content written in these languages, the more effective the software will be gathering information and making recommendations for users. The TiVo model helps to understand how Web 3.0 might work. Express interest in, say, George Clooney, and TiVo's "agent" searches for and records any of his movies airing on TV. But it also finds and records content related to Clooney, such as films he directed or produced, reruns of ER, The Facts of Life and other credited work, interviews and gossip items about him, even the "Tears of a Clooney" episode of American Dad that mocked his persona. Now substitute your brand for "Clooney" and "the entire Web" for "TV," and you get some idea of Web 3.0's potential reach. Today, search engines gather and classify their listings through a simpler version of "intelligent" software. For marketers to understand how they might operate in a Web 3.0 world, they should look to their current organic search programs and what's needed to do well with conventional search engines. Berners-Lee refers to Web 3.0 as the semantic Web because software can learn, intuit and decide. This means people will have "intelligent agent" software filtering information and making decisions for them (e.g., "best," "lowest priced"). For marketers, this means the potential for unprecedented targeting and data-mining-but advertising would be less effective. Marketers would stand on their merits, not their claims. After all, how do you convince software? There will still be a need to tell stories and build brands, but there will be a new constituency to persuade. This will require a very different approach than most marketers use today. This approach will involve data-based understanding of how software will intuit and clear "tagging" as a form of communication. There's no guarantee that 3.0 intelligent agents will be any less biased or inaccurate than 2.0 people are today. Â Why worry about Web 3.0 when only a handful of hyper-geek sites are even designed for it? Well, most marketers lag behind consumers when it comes to media adoption. (How many of us understand enterprise search today?) But consider the fact Google was founded in 1998, it sold its first ads in 2000 and within five years it dominated the search market. Also mull the fact that social media was an oddity, an add-on for marketers through 2005; four years later, social sites, blogs and Twitter are shaping public opinion and marketers' efforts more than any single media trend. Some marketers and agencies will understand that Web 3.0 represents an important evolution in how they can (or can't) interface with consumers looking for information and solutions. They'll start playing with these new programming languages and look at how they can evolve the principles of search marketing (a good proxy for how to interface with intelligent agents). Â Still, most marketers have time before Web 3.0 matters. Don't they?
The key is that information is presented and labeled so it makes sense to machines. This means Web content needs to be presented in a language that software can understand; programming languages such as OWL and SWRL that can be "read" by software. The more Web content written in these languages, the more effective the software will be gathering information and making recommendations for users. The TiVo model helps to understand how Web 3.0 might work. Express interest in, say, George Clooney, and TiVo's "agent" searches for and records any of his movies airing on TV. But it also finds and records content related to Clooney, such as films he directed or produced, reruns of ER, The Facts of Life and other credited work, interviews and gossip items about him, even the "Tears of a Clooney" episode of American Dad that mocked his persona. Now substitute your brand for "Clooney" and "the entire Web" for "TV," and you get some idea of Web 3.0's potential reach. Today, search engines gather and classify their listings through a simpler version of "intelligent" software. For marketers to understand how they might operate in a Web 3.0 world, they should look to their current organic search programs and what's needed to do well with conventional search engines. Berners-Lee refers to Web 3.0 as the semantic Web because software can learn, intuit and decide. This means people will have "intelligent agent" software filtering information and making decisions for them (e.g., "best," "lowest priced"). For marketers, this means the potential for unprecedented targeting and data-mining-but advertising would be less effective. Marketers would stand on their merits, not their claims. After all, how do you convince software? There will still be a need to tell stories and build brands, but there will be a new constituency to persuade. This will require a very different approach than most marketers use today. This approach will involve data-based understanding of how software will intuit and clear "tagging" as a form of communication. There's no guarantee that 3.0 intelligent agents will be any less biased or inaccurate than 2.0 people are today. Â Why worry about Web 3.0 when only a handful of hyper-geek sites are even designed for it? Well, most marketers lag behind consumers when it comes to media adoption. (How many of us understand enterprise search today?) But consider the fact Google was founded in 1998, it sold its first ads in 2000 and within five years it dominated the search market. Also mull the fact that social media was an oddity, an add-on for marketers through 2005; four years later, social sites, blogs and Twitter are shaping public opinion and marketers' efforts more than any single media trend. Some marketers and agencies will understand that Web 3.0 represents an important evolution in how they can (or can't) interface with consumers looking for information and solutions. They'll start playing with these new programming languages and look at how they can evolve the principles of search marketing (a good proxy for how to interface with intelligent agents). Â Still, most marketers have time before Web 3.0 matters. Don't they?
The key is that information is presented and labeled so it makes sense to machines. This means Web content needs to be presented in a language that software can understand; programming languages such as OWL and SWRL that can be "read" by software. The more Web content written in these languages, the more effective the software will be gathering information and making recommendations for users. The TiVo model helps to understand how Web 3.0 might work. Express interest in, say, George Clooney, and TiVo's "agent" searches for and records any of his movies airing on TV. But it also finds and records content related to Clooney, such as films he directed or produced, reruns of ER, The Facts of Life and other credited work, interviews and gossip items about him, even the "Tears of a Clooney" episode of American Dad that mocked his persona. Now substitute your brand for "Clooney" and "the entire Web" for "TV," and you get some idea of Web 3.0's potential reach. Today, search engines gather and classify their listings through a simpler version of "intelligent" software. For marketers to understand how they might operate in a Web 3.0 world, they should look to their current organic search programs and what's needed to do well with conventional search engines. Berners-Lee refers to Web 3.0 as the semantic Web because software can learn, intuit and decide. This means people will have "intelligent agent" software filtering information and making decisions for them (e.g., "best," "lowest priced"). For marketers, this means the potential for unprecedented targeting and data-mining-but advertising would be less effective. Marketers would stand on their merits, not their claims. After all, how do you convince software? There will still be a need to tell stories and build brands, but there will be a new constituency to persuade. This will require a very different approach than most marketers use today. This approach will involve data-based understanding of how software will intuit and clear "tagging" as a form of communication. There's no guarantee that 3.0 intelligent agents will be any less biased or inaccurate than 2.0 people are today. Â Why worry about Web 3.0 when only a handful of hyper-geek sites are even designed for it? Well, most marketers lag behind consumers when it comes to media adoption. (How many of us understand enterprise search today?) But consider the fact Google was founded in 1998, it sold its first ads in 2000 and within five years it dominated the search market. Also mull the fact that social media was an oddity, an add-on for marketers through 2005; four years later, social sites, blogs and Twitter are shaping public opinion and marketers' efforts more than any single media trend. Some marketers and agencies will understand that Web 3.0 represents an important evolution in how they can (or can't) interface with consumers looking for information and solutions. They'll start playing with these new programming languages and look at how they can evolve the principles of search marketing (a good proxy for how to interface with intelligent agents). Â Still, most marketers have time before Web 3.0 matters. Don't they?
The key is that information is presented and labeled so it makes sense to machines. This means Web content needs to be presented in a language that software can understand; programming languages such as OWL and SWRL that can be "read" by software. The more Web content written in these languages, the more effective the software will be gathering information and making recommendations for users. The TiVo model helps to understand how Web 3.0 might work. Express interest in, say, George Clooney, and TiVo's "agent" searches for and records any of his movies airing on TV. But it also finds and records content related to Clooney, such as films he directed or produced, reruns of ER, The Facts of Life and other credited work, interviews and gossip items about him, even the "Tears of a Clooney" episode of American Dad that mocked his persona. Now substitute your brand for "Clooney" and "the entire Web" for "TV," and you get some idea of Web 3.0's potential reach. Today, search engines gather and classify their listings through a simpler version of "intelligent" software. For marketers to understand how they might operate in a Web 3.0 world, they should look to their current organic search programs and what's needed to do well with conventional search engines. Berners-Lee refers to Web 3.0 as the semantic Web because software can learn, intuit and decide. This means people will have "intelligent agent" software filtering information and making decisions for them (e.g., "best," "lowest priced"). For marketers, this means the potential for unprecedented targeting and data-mining-but advertising would be less effective. Marketers would stand on their merits, not their claims. After all, how do you convince software? There will still be a need to tell stories and build brands, but there will be a new constituency to persuade. This will require a very different approach than most marketers use today. This approach will involve data-based understanding of how software will intuit and clear "tagging" as a form of communication. There's no guarantee that 3.0 intelligent agents will be any less biased or inaccurate than 2.0 people are today. Â Why worry about Web 3.0 when only a handful of hyper-geek sites are even designed for it? Well, most marketers lag behind consumers when it comes to media adoption. (How many of us understand enterprise search today?) But consider the fact Google was founded in 1998, it sold its first ads in 2000 and within five years it dominated the search market. Also mull the fact that social media was an oddity, an add-on for marketers through 2005; four years later, social sites, blogs and Twitter are shaping public opinion and marketers' efforts more than any single media trend. Some marketers and agencies will understand that Web 3.0 represents an important evolution in how they can (or can't) interface with consumers looking for information and solutions. They'll start playing with these new programming languages and look at how they can evolve the principles of search marketing (a good proxy for how to interface with intelligent agents). Â Still, most marketers have time before Web 3.0 matters. Don't they?
The key is that information is presented and labeled so it makes sense to machines. This means Web content needs to be presented in a language that software can understand; programming languages such as OWL and SWRL that can be "read" by software. The more Web content written in these languages, the more effective the software will be gathering information and making recommendations for users. The TiVo model helps to understand how Web 3.0 might work. Express interest in, say, George Clooney, and TiVo's "agent" searches for and records any of his movies airing on TV. But it also finds and records content related to Clooney, such as films he directed or produced, reruns of ER, The Facts of Life and other credited work, interviews and gossip items about him, even the "Tears of a Clooney" episode of American Dad that mocked his persona. Now substitute your brand for "Clooney" and "the entire Web" for "TV," and you get some idea of Web 3.0's potential reach. Today, search engines gather and classify their listings through a simpler version of "intelligent" software. For marketers to understand how they might operate in a Web 3.0 world, they should look to their current organic search programs and what's needed to do well with conventional search engines. Berners-Lee refers to Web 3.0 as the semantic Web because software can learn, intuit and decide. This means people will have "intelligent agent" software filtering information and making decisions for them (e.g., "best," "lowest priced"). For marketers, this means the potential for unprecedented targeting and data-mining-but advertising would be less effective. Marketers would stand on their merits, not their claims. After all, how do you convince software? There will still be a need to tell stories and build brands, but there will be a new constituency to persuade. This will require a very different approach than most marketers use today. This approach will involve data-based understanding of how software will intuit and clear "tagging" as a form of communication. There's no guarantee that 3.0 intelligent agents will be any less biased or inaccurate than 2.0 people are today. Â Why worry about Web 3.0 when only a handful of hyper-geek sites are even designed for it? Well, most marketers lag behind consumers when it comes to media adoption. (How many of us understand enterprise search today?) But consider the fact Google was founded in 1998, it sold its first ads in 2000 and within five years it dominated the search market. Also mull the fact that social media was an oddity, an add-on for marketers through 2005; four years later, social sites, blogs and Twitter are shaping public opinion and marketers' efforts more than any single media trend. Some marketers and agencies will understand that Web 3.0 represents an important evolution in how they can (or can't) interface with consumers looking for information and solutions. They'll start playing with these new programming languages and look at how they can evolve the principles of search marketing (a good proxy for how to interface with intelligent agents). Â Still, most marketers have time before Web 3.0 matters. Don't they?
The key is that information is presented and labeled so it makes sense to machines. This means Web content needs to be presented in a language that software can understand; programming languages such as OWL and SWRL that can be "read" by software. The more Web content written in these languages, the more effective the software will be gathering information and making recommendations for users. The TiVo model helps to understand how Web 3.0 might work. Express interest in, say, George Clooney, and TiVo's "agent" searches for and records any of his movies airing on TV. But it also finds and records content related to Clooney, such as films he directed or produced, reruns of ER, The Facts of Life and other credited work, interviews and gossip items about him, even the "Tears of a Clooney" episode of American Dad that mocked his persona. Now substitute your brand for "Clooney" and "the entire Web" for "TV," and you get some idea of Web 3.0's potential reach. Today, search engines gather and classify their listings through a simpler version of "intelligent" software. For marketers to understand how they might operate in a Web 3.0 world, they should look to their current organic search programs and what's needed to do well with conventional search engines. Berners-Lee refers to Web 3.0 as the semantic Web because software can learn, intuit and decide. This means people will have "intelligent agent" software filtering information and making decisions for them (e.g., "best," "lowest priced"). For marketers, this means the potential for unprecedented targeting and data-mining-but advertising would be less effective. Marketers would stand on their merits, not their claims. After all, how do you convince software? There will still be a need to tell stories and build brands, but there will be a new constituency to persuade. This will require a very different approach than most marketers use today. This approach will involve data-based understanding of how software will intuit and clear "tagging" as a form of communication. There's no guarantee that 3.0 intelligent agents will be any less biased or inaccurate than 2.0 people are today. Â Why worry about Web 3.0 when only a handful of hyper-geek sites are even designed for it? Well, most marketers lag behind consumers when it comes to media adoption. (How many of us understand enterprise search today?) But consider the fact Google was founded in 1998, it sold its first ads in 2000 and within five years it dominated the search market. Also mull the fact that social media was an oddity, an add-on for marketers through 2005; four years later, social sites, blogs and Twitter are shaping public opinion and marketers' efforts more than any single media trend. Some marketers and agencies will understand that Web 3.0 represents an important evolution in how they can (or can't) interface with consumers looking for information and solutions. They'll start playing with these new programming languages and look at how they can evolve the principles of search marketing (a good proxy for how to interface with intelligent agents). Â Still, most marketers have time before Web 3.0 matters. Don't they?
The key is that information is presented and labeled so it makes sense to machines. This means Web content needs to be presented in a language that software can understand; programming languages such as OWL and SWRL that can be "read" by software. The more Web content written in these languages, the more effective the software will be gathering information and making recommendations for users. The TiVo model helps to understand how Web 3.0 might work. Express interest in, say, George Clooney, and TiVo's "agent" searches for and records any of his movies airing on TV. But it also finds and records content related to Clooney, such as films he directed or produced, reruns of ER, The Facts of Life and other credited work, interviews and gossip items about him, even the "Tears of a Clooney" episode of American Dad that mocked his persona. Now substitute your brand for "Clooney" and "the entire Web" for "TV," and you get some idea of Web 3.0's potential reach. Today, search engines gather and classify their listings through a simpler version of "intelligent" software. For marketers to understand how they might operate in a Web 3.0 world, they should look to their current organic search programs and what's needed to do well with conventional search engines. Berners-Lee refers to Web 3.0 as the semantic Web because software can learn, intuit and decide. This means people will have "intelligent agent" software filtering information and making decisions for them (e.g., "best," "lowest priced"). For marketers, this means the potential for unprecedented targeting and data-mining-but advertising would be less effective. Marketers would stand on their merits, not their claims. After all, how do you convince software? There will still be a need to tell stories and build brands, but there will be a new constituency to persuade. This will require a very different approach than most marketers use today. This approach will involve data-based understanding of how software will intuit and clear "tagging" as a form of communication. There's no guarantee that 3.0 intelligent agents will be any less biased or inaccurate than 2.0 people are today. Â Why worry about Web 3.0 when only a handful of hyper-geek sites are even designed for it? Well, most marketers lag behind consumers when it comes to media adoption. (How many of us understand enterprise search today?) But consider the fact Google was founded in 1998, it sold its first ads in 2000 and within five years it dominated the search market. Also mull the fact that social media was an oddity, an add-on for marketers through 2005; four years later, social sites, blogs and Twitter are shaping public opinion and marketers' efforts more than any single media trend. Some marketers and agencies will understand that Web 3.0 represents an important evolution in how they can (or can't) interface with consumers looking for information and solutions. They'll start playing with these new programming languages and look at how they can evolve the principles of search marketing (a good proxy for how to interface with intelligent agents). Â Still, most marketers have time before Web 3.0 matters. Don't they?
The key is that information is presented and labeled so it makes sense to machines. This means Web content needs to be presented in a language that software can understand; programming languages such as OWL and SWRL that can be "read" by software. The more Web content written in these languages, the more effective the software will be gathering information and making recommendations for users. The TiVo model helps to understand how Web 3.0 might work. Express interest in, say, George Clooney, and TiVo's "agent" searches for and records any of his movies airing on TV. But it also finds and records content related to Clooney, such as films he directed or produced, reruns of ER, The Facts of Life and other credited work, interviews and gossip items about him, even the "Tears of a Clooney" episode of American Dad that mocked his persona. Now substitute your brand for "Clooney" and "the entire Web" for "TV," and you get some idea of Web 3.0's potential reach. Today, search engines gather and classify their listings through a simpler version of "intelligent" software. For marketers to understand how they might operate in a Web 3.0 world, they should look to their current organic search programs and what's needed to do well with conventional search engines. Berners-Lee refers to Web 3.0 as the semantic Web because software can learn, intuit and decide. This means people will have "intelligent agent" software filtering information and making decisions for them (e.g., "best," "lowest priced"). For marketers, this means the potential for unprecedented targeting and data-mining-but advertising would be less effective. Marketers would stand on their merits, not their claims. After all, how do you convince software? There will still be a need to tell stories and build brands, but there will be a new constituency to persuade. This will require a very different approach than most marketers use today. This approach will involve data-based understanding of how software will intuit and clear "tagging" as a form of communication. There's no guarantee that 3.0 intelligent agents will be any less biased or inaccurate than 2.0 people are today. Â Why worry about Web 3.0 when only a handful of hyper-geek sites are even designed for it? Well, most marketers lag behind consumers when it comes to media adoption. (How many of us understand enterprise search today?) But consider the fact Google was founded in 1998, it sold its first ads in 2000 and within five years it dominated the search market. Also mull the fact that social media was an oddity, an add-on for marketers through 2005; four years later, social sites, blogs and Twitter are shaping public opinion and marketers' efforts more than any single media trend. Some marketers and agencies will understand that Web 3.0 represents an important evolution in how they can (or can't) interface with consumers looking for information and solutions. They'll start playing with these new programming languages and look at how they can evolve the principles of search marketing (a good proxy for how to interface with intelligent agents). Â Still, most marketers have time before Web 3.0 matters. Don't they?
Gucci first became involved with Facebook in November 2008 after noticing that about 50,000 fans had signed up for a Gucci page started by a person unaffiliated with the fashion label. So Gucci decided to launch a company page, raising the fan count to its current total of 402,502. The weekly updated page contains original video uploaded to the site, photos from events and new product announcements. The Gucci by Gucci label launched its Twitter page â twitter.com/GuccibyGucci â in March and has 2,840 followers. The âcurrency of the Internet is such that if youâre not updating on a timely basis, individuals are disappointed,â said Robert Triefus, worldwide marketing and communications director for Gucci. âIn fact, it can end up backfiring.â
