The Long tail and me

Good article by Nicolas Kristof in the New York Times (hat tip to Alan Wolk). He says that, with the unlimited choice made available by the internet, people naturally gravitate towards ideas and behaviour that reinforces existingly held beliefs. People claim that they prefer open and challenging debate, but when choosing to seek out debate and information they go to those spaces/ideas that mirror their current thinking.

This set me off thinking about The Long Tail. In the book of the same name, Chris Anderson argues that the infite space and advanced filtering (search, user recommendations, dynamic recommendation engines etc) that the internet brings is allowing people to connect and explore niches and break the monopoly of a corporation-determined hit machine.

What Anderson argues is that The Long Tail allows us to easily find and indulge in those things that really interest us, in all the myriad ways that human beings are interested in different things.

If Kristof is right in his view on human behaviour, and The Long Tail reaches the logical conclusion of Anderson’s argument, then we’re in for some very different times. People will be able to completely satisfy their own diverse interests and will then be engaged in a positive feedback loop where their interests are mutually reinforced. If people move away from “real” life then they will miss interaction with views and opinions that contradict their own.

What will we see? Increased cultural and social fragmentation with universal social mores and cultural norms finding it increasingly difficult to take hold.

So what’s the implication for charity marketing?

Well, I think charities (over the next 10 to 20 years) will find it increasingly difficult to build a national “hit”. But, smaller charities and niche interests will find that their support grows as people find it easier to filter and discover those causes that resonate.

But if it’s easier to find a cause, it’ll be easier to find another one that better meets your interests. Charities, bigger ones especially, must start being more and more tailored to people’s interests. They have to stretch themselves down the long tail to survive in the fragmenting world. If they don’t, they’ll be beaten by small charities or those charities that do react to the changing landscape.

The good news is that the technology is there to allow this. The bad news is that this will require internal investment from charities in that technology and in content creation. Those that do invest will reap the rewards.

Straight to digital

Found this (via brand republic). It’s a campaign run by an India women’s group who are mobilising on Facebook against a male religious group who beat and assualt women for visiting bars. They’re getting support to a group and then asking the group members to send a pair of pink pants to the Male organisation that is involved in the attacks.

It’s really interesting to see civil society in developing countries really latch on to new technologies, and in particular social networking. Much has been written about mobile use in Africa and how this has by-passed fixed line use. I think the same will happen with campaigning and development practice in developing countries.

I’m waiting for the first digitally-led development organisation that uses social networking tools, technologies and principles to drive its work to spring up soon (if one hasn’t already?). My guess is that this will happen first in India as adoption of social networking and digital is already quite advanced (see the twittering of the Mumbai attacks).

Anyone know if any charities like this exist already?

A digital obituary

Following the death of Tony Hart recently there has been a lot of condolences and remembering going on in the media and online. An outpouring of grief probably isn’t the right phrase, but a fond remembering is probably better. He obviously touched a lot of people’s lives.

The Guardian’s coverage - a selection of videos from Youtube and setting up a flickr photo gallery - got me thinking about obituaries in the digital age and how people will start to remember you when you’re gone.

People leave their foot print everywhere online, in increasingly media-rich ways. Tony Hart has benefited from a (crudely executed) video obituary because he was on TV.

However, as more and more people create content in various places, they are leaving more evidence of their history and contribution to the digital world every day. In the future, as platform convergance becomes the norm and your content is gathered together into one place it will be easier for people to see your personality – your life – in just one place.

There may even be a move for people to rewrite history, by editing their life online before their death, so that they can have the obiturary they want.

But – how static is this content? What happens when someone presses delete?