branding, cinema, connecting, futuregazing, internet, IPA|ED:one, opinionating, thinking

An opportunity not to be missed: what Tiffany Shlain’s ‘Connected’ means for brands as the internet transforms us and our world

so last night, thanks to Disco Davo (thanks Disco), I was lucky enough to be amongst a cinema of people gathered to watch an Aussie-first and unique screening of a movie called Connected: An Autoblogography about Love, Death & Technology.

organised through social media club sydney in conjunction with AMP's AmplifyFestival, Tiffany Shlain's (@tiffanyshlain) film is a narrative on how the internet is fundamentally changing us, interspersed with a personal account of a year in her life.  the result is a fascinating polemic on the nature of our interconnectedness as a species.

much was well-trodden territory for this blog … but there were two aspects I hadn't heard before that I found particularly interesting.  I hope that Shlain won't object to me sharing here…

one, Shlain described how in her father's book 'The Alphabet Versus the Goddess: The Conflict Between Word and Image' he made the connection between how the invention of the written / printed word had coincided with the rise of men in social, political and commercial circles.  he argued that this was because the written word is processed by the left side of the brain, which is more male.

last century's 'iconic revolution' (Shlain's term) – which saw imagery and images became a more predominant form of communication – coincided with increased predominance of females in society.  images are processed by the right side of the brain which is … more female.

the interesting conclusion is that the internet, with it's heady mix of words and images, is processed more of less equally by both sides of the brain, and is therefore a mass-communication channel that isn't biased towards one gender or the other…

the other aspect I found fascinating is how the brain and our body chemistry is predisposed to both connectedness and the pleasure hit we get from the stream of information on the internet.  when we connect, we release oxytocin – which evokes feelings of contentment, reductions in anxiety, and feelings of calmness and security.  Wikipedia notes that 'many studies have already shown a correlation of oxytocin with human bonding, increases in trust, and decreases in fear' … so the more we connect, the less anxious we are, and the internet allows us to feel more connected than ever before…

dopamine is released when we experience something pleasurable, and encourages us to keep performing the action ad-infinitum (as there's no diminishing return from dopamine).  Shlain's interesting observation is that – as dopamine is released when we get a 'hit' of new information … we are becoming addicted to the internet (or more specifically the infinite content that it gives us access to)

if you get a chance to catch the movie I urge you to do so … it's a fascinating and beautiful experience.  and it left me thinking about the role of brands and advertising in Shlain's interconnected and interdependent world.  from one perspective advertising and media fuelled the worst of the excessive consumption society that is now placing sustained pressure on our environment…

…but on the other I can't help but think that Shlain's hypothesis presents us with a clear opportunity, an opportunity defined by a simple question that I can't shake.  in an inter-dependent world where billions of people increasingly connect, communicate and coordinate as communities, why do we continue to so readily seek to engage with individuals?

in an inter-dependent world, the only thing that matters is shared agendas and communities of interest.  and more specifically, what matters most is an opportunity for brands to fuel – rather than interrupt – their interconnectedness and interdependence.

its utility, but its more than that … its potentially brands becoming a key and fundamental part of a dopamine and oxytocin-fuelled revolution in how we live on earth…  it's tantalising enough to warrant asking what you would want of the brands with which you work?  …  for them to be part of humanity's next giant leap, or reconciled to history as part of the iconic revolution that for a while so influenced our culture and behaviour?

Standard
content creating, engaging, IPA|ED:one, social networking, user-generating

I Loved it So Much I Bought (Into) The Company: the rise of the crowdmanaged brand

Beer_bankroll_2
so those observant people at Springwise have spotted the latest brand to cede control to its potential consumers.  hot on the heels of crowdmanaged eco clothing company nvohk and MyFootballClub's purchase of Ebbsfleet United comes BeerBankroll.com.

for just $50 you get to join an online community for beer lovers where you can not only share your passion for beer but at the same time help create a brewing company.  as Springwise reports, the site:

"…is currently recruiting a minimum of 50,000 members, each of whom
will contribute USD 50 in exchange for voting rights on ideas such as
the company name, logo, product design, product mix, marketing plan,
advertising and sponsorship … Assuming the concept goes well, profits
will be divided three ways: one part to members in the form of reward
points redeemable for products from the Beer Bankroll store; one part
back to the company; and one part to charity"

this potentially potent project is feasible because of tho things: (1) access to information and (2) the ability to share and manipulate that information within the context of a networked community.  and it of course relies on Surowiecki's three requirements for Wisdom in a Crowd: diversity of opinion, decentralisation and independence.

I used to work with a small brewery brand and I acutely recall conversations about how they could, and should, more effectively and transparantely engage with those consumers who (we knew) loved their brand.  but the old habits of deployment of planned branded communications won out (and still does – I observe – to this day).

that brewery and many other brands should be paying close attention to this space.  how long before we all have a couple of side-interests in brands…?  brands that will not only occupy a small – very engaged – part of our mind, but a considerable share of our wallet too.  after all, if the brand was so good that you bought and continue to buy into it, why – when you get to the shelf – would you buy anything else?!

Standard