Here at Econsultancy we try to write about Google Glass when we can, because we know it’s of great interest to marketers, and indeed the rest of humanity.
On Friday some of Econsultancy’s Content team tried Google Glass at Somo’s incredible gadget room in its London HQ, where they develop new tech uses for clients (thanks, Somo).
It was fun, but also revealing, so I thought I’d share some of what we saw and felt.
For the complete run down on Glass functions, you can visit Google’s help centre.
Google Glass for the majority is a long way off. In fact, if you go to the ‘MyGlass’ app page on Google Play, you’ll see, for those without Glass:
..there's a picture of a puppy in pyjamas. So not a total waste of time after all.
Puppies aside, Google professes Glass (like all G products) was built to break down barriers. The idea is to make things easier and more seamless; to free up hands and time.
Here at Econsultancy, the high-falutin’ Editorial team has some philosophical concerns. Our Head of Social, Matt, was quick to point out that Glass will essentially create a simulacrum of the world, a sort of 1:1 map that is neither real nor artifice (I direct you to Borges’ On Exactitude in Science).
Whilst we’re fans of Google, we’re sceptical about just what third party developers will come up with for Glass.
There’s arguably never been such a product; a piece of hardware that fundamentally alters perception and interaction with the world. Even smartphones are a false precedent for Glass, but perhaps do offer a dirty window on our increased device reliance (dare I smush these words together and create ‘deviance’?).
Even with well-intentioned developers, might third party apps add unwanted lustre to our already homogenous cityscapes?
In this post I make some philosophical predictions, as seen through some nascent apps. Of course, it’s a lot more fun to cast concerns with a negative spin; forgive the hack approach!
Here’s what Google Glass will destroy…..
The next big (read: nine-figure) consumer internet acquisition may involve an unexpected buyer - CNN.
According to Reuters' Felix Salmon, the Time Warner-owned cable news network could announce as early as Tuesday that it is acquiring Mashable, one of the most popular tech/social media blogs for a figure that could be north of $200m.
Are cable customers ditching their cords, or shaving them? While the debate over what cable customers are doing and planning to do with their cords continues, one thing is clear: cable players are concerned.
So in an effort to prevent cord cutting, they're increasing looking to find ways to embrace the channel cord cutting is blamed on the internet.
Executives are frequently encouraged to adopt a multichannel approach to business because, they’re told, doing so will produce a result that’s greater than the sum of its parts. but is this really the case?
If any industry can prove that you can put two channels together in interesting ways and produce powerful results, it’s the television industry, which is increasingly finding a variety of ways to embrace an ever-social internet.
Back when social media first burst into the mainstream in a big way and
popular Web 2.0 services like Digg and Flickr were the subject of
articles touting phrases such as "the wisdom of crowds" and buzzwords
like "democratization," it might have seemed that the web was truly
changing the fundamental dynamics of information distribution.
But a new CNN study hints that some of the hype around this notion has been overblown.
Craigslist is an internet icon, and it's a unique one. Despite the
rapid evolution of the internet over the past decade, Craigslist in
2010 still looks like Craigslist in 2000. The fact that Craigslist has
managed to thrive largely its original form is a testament to the value
But Craigslist is under assault. And it's not competitors who are
attacking. It's politicians and the media. The reason: adult service
ads which many say are frequently used in the illegal trafficking of
women and children. And which many argue Craigslist continues to allow
because they're a lucrative source of revenue.
CNN has a big problem: its ratings are dropping. Big time. A New York
Times article this week pointed out that CNN's main hosts have lost
almost 50% of their viewers over the past year.
And while CNN's viewership is plummeting, its competitors are gaining
viewers. Several FOX News hosts have registered year-over-year
viewership gains in the range of 25-50%. And lest you think the drop in
CNN's viewership is primarily the result of demographics or political
preferences, CNN is even being beat out at certain hours by MSNBC and
CNN's lightweight news channel, HLN.
It's not unusual to hear someone from a television network that's not in first place to claim that ratings don't matter. And CNN's Jonathan Klein is no different.
Speaking at the 2010 Media Summit in New York, the president of CNN said that television ratings don't paint an accurate picture of his network's strengths. But his reasoning is interesting — it's not because FOX is beating them there, but due to competition from online sources that aren't being tracked by the Nielsen ratings.
Tis the season to redesign. CNN recently launched a new look for CNN.com, and now news service Reuters has launched a new look for Reuters.com.
But while CNN.com's redesign was all about the content, Reuters' redesign is all about the focus. The new Reuters.com design is all about one thing: making the website a much more attractive destination for consumers.