Automobile sales are down among the nation's teens and twenty-something year olds. While I do not think this should come as a surprise I do find it surprising that some would blame the internet. There was an article recently published on msnbc's website that tried to figure out the reason why members of Generation Y are so reluctant to purchase cars. The article places some of the blame on the internet and social media websites because it says that people can now communicate and even go to school online. This means there is less of a need to drive places and thus own a car.
I don't agree with this article because I think the reason Generation Y is less likely to use a car is because of the bad rep that cars have gotten everywhere. Cars are viewed as being a major contributor to global warming and I think the youth take it more seriously than older generations. In addition to that I think Generation Y views the car as not only contributing pollution to the environment but also taking a large chunk out of their pocket. Gas is expensive, car insurance is expensive, car maintenance is expensive. I think the car has been demonized in a way or at least the ones we currently have that run on oil.
This article doesn't surprise me because I am one of those Generation Y people that doesn't want a car anymore. I plan to move to a large city where I could use public transportation. I hate having to pay so much money for gas, insurance, maintenance, I don't want to contribute to pollution, and I wish I could walk more everywhere. How great it would be to save lots of money, have less of a carbon footprint, and get more exercise by walking more wherever I need to go. Plus I'd prefer walking among people in a city than constantly being isolated in a car everywhere I go.
Having said that, the internet has nothing to do with me not wanting a car or driving less. If I want to meet someone or go somewhere I never hesitate to get in my car. To learn more about what a carbon footprint is and to calculate you carbon footprint visit this site.
Saturday, November 13, 2010
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Government's Internet Presence
The government has been having a greater online presence lately. There are now many government services online such as online tax filing and WhiteHouse.gov. This increase in online government services has led to many questions about the privacy of citizens. Since so much information can be stored, how will this information be used and processed? Also, there will be less in person contact between government agencies and the citizens that they serve. How will the government use information stored from social media websites? What role will the government play in providing content and service in the development of e-commerce?
The issue that worries me the most is increased government regulation and censorship of the internet. With so many issues concerning piracy of copyrighted goods over the internet I wonder if the government will step up regulation of it. There was recently a bill proposed in the Senate called the "Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act" that would allow the government to block sites they believe are guilty of copyright infringement. For more on this bill visit here. I believe this is just the beginning of the government possibly trying to regulate and censor the internet. Youtube has been having problems as well with what is considered copyright infringement of music, films, and other entertainment posted on their website and shared for free. This or other bills could easily then regulate a site like Youtube where most people go to get and share free content much of which is copyrighted. My hope is that the internet stay as free as possible but overtime I believe it will be more of a "compliment to real life" and so it would only be a matter of time before the government starts to meddle more in it.
The issue that worries me the most is increased government regulation and censorship of the internet. With so many issues concerning piracy of copyrighted goods over the internet I wonder if the government will step up regulation of it. There was recently a bill proposed in the Senate called the "Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act" that would allow the government to block sites they believe are guilty of copyright infringement. For more on this bill visit here. I believe this is just the beginning of the government possibly trying to regulate and censor the internet. Youtube has been having problems as well with what is considered copyright infringement of music, films, and other entertainment posted on their website and shared for free. This or other bills could easily then regulate a site like Youtube where most people go to get and share free content much of which is copyrighted. My hope is that the internet stay as free as possible but overtime I believe it will be more of a "compliment to real life" and so it would only be a matter of time before the government starts to meddle more in it.
Saturday, October 30, 2010
The Importance of an E-Commerce Business Model
An article came out on Knowledge@Wharton talking about how important it is to have a business model in addition to just having a revenue model. Some go and start their online business quickly thinking they'll just start making money but forget the importance of having a business model in order to stay in business long term.
One particular thing the article talks about is something called the "eValue framework" which was created by Professor Amit and Zott. This framework consists of four "key value drivers" which are elements that should be included in every e-business model.
These are the four key value drivers:
Efficiency- using the internet to simplify and accelerate the buying process. Finding more efficient was to reduce search costs, transaction speed, reduce distribution costs, and reduce inventory costs.
Complementaries- Joining with other suppliers to bundle your product offerings with theirs. This increases your exposure and gives you a business partner who can help you business grow and succeed.
Lock-In- Finding a way to lock customers to wanting or needing your products and increasing repeat purchase.
Novelty- Offering new and interesting products to spark customer interest which will keep them wanting more.
One e-business plan factor that I think is important is using social networking sites to get the word out about your company and products and using it to increase traffic to your site. This would probably fall under the complementaries key value driver since it would involve collaborating with a site that offers their own particular services. Here is a website with real life success stories of businesses that have grown using social networking sites. With so many sites to choose from it can be a great way to increase visibility and online traffic and all at little to no cost.
One particular thing the article talks about is something called the "eValue framework" which was created by Professor Amit and Zott. This framework consists of four "key value drivers" which are elements that should be included in every e-business model.
These are the four key value drivers:
Efficiency- using the internet to simplify and accelerate the buying process. Finding more efficient was to reduce search costs, transaction speed, reduce distribution costs, and reduce inventory costs.
Complementaries- Joining with other suppliers to bundle your product offerings with theirs. This increases your exposure and gives you a business partner who can help you business grow and succeed.
Lock-In- Finding a way to lock customers to wanting or needing your products and increasing repeat purchase.
Novelty- Offering new and interesting products to spark customer interest which will keep them wanting more.
One e-business plan factor that I think is important is using social networking sites to get the word out about your company and products and using it to increase traffic to your site. This would probably fall under the complementaries key value driver since it would involve collaborating with a site that offers their own particular services. Here is a website with real life success stories of businesses that have grown using social networking sites. With so many sites to choose from it can be a great way to increase visibility and online traffic and all at little to no cost.
Friday, October 15, 2010
Advertisers tracking your online data?
Have you ever noticed while browsing through websites that you happen to get advertisements related to things you had recently Googled? You're not seeing things. Online companies can now use consumer data such as your demographic and socioeconomic info. and also what you click on and purchase through your browser to cater their advertisements to you. This is called "Behavioral advertising." For more on behavioral advertising I recommend the site ClickZ. Some may view this as an invasion of their private information but it could also be viewed as a way to see more advertisements that fit you as a consumer. Well now there is a new program that would place an "Advertising Option Icon" (seen on the right) next to advertisements or the parts of a website that collect personal data. This image would link to a webpage where people can learn more about how their personal data is collected by marketers, what behavioral advertising is, and how to choose not to allow their data to be collected. This program was driven by the same industry doing the marketing and advertising in order to prevent the government from passing laws that would be even more restrictive of their methods of collecting data.I don't think that consumers at the beginning would know what this icon means but with time they will catch on like anything else that is new at first. I don't think consumers would click on the icon unless they were explained beforehand what the icon is and to click on it. I believe this is smart on the industry's part because if someone complains or files a lawsuit they can say the icon was there. But it is so ambiguous that the consumer may not pay attention to it and then not opt out of their data being collected which is favorable to the industry. In other words, I feel the industry is purposely making the icon and hyperlink contained within it ambiguous so it's harder for consumers to figure out what it is.
I think that companies would sign up for this program in order to prevent future lawsuits or complaints. The icon serves as an ambiguous disclaimer. I don't believe that the sponsoring organizations will oversee if the companies that sign up for the program are actually complying with it. I say this because the program is driven by an industry which favors deregulation and since it's a non-governmental organization I don't think they would feel pressure to govern strongly. I don't think the "Advertising Option Icon" will be prominent in the future. It looks so vague and the letter I to me stands for information and that could mean any type of information. I think overtime people will complain more and more and I don't think the government will trust that the organization is doing it's job so government legislation will follow.
I personally have been annoyed by the collection of my data. I did just one Google search about graffiti laws in Miami, FL because I have a friend in the art program at FIU that was thinking of becoming a street artist. And all of the sudden I would see the same advertisements on Youtube and forums saying "Need Legal Help in Miami?" and "Looking for a Lawyer?" And of course I had already found the info. I needed and the ad made me laugh because it made me feel like I was the one in legal trouble needing an attorney when that was not the case.
Saturday, October 9, 2010
Beware the prying eyes of the internet
A firm called Internet Eyes from the UK is allowing people to watch customers and employees through a real-time webcam. If they see something suspicious they push an alert button and if a crime ends up being prevented the person gets paid.
A prospective spy needs to register with the company and of course sit monitoring for who knows how long until they find something worthy of pushing the alert button for.
I think this is smart on the part of the business because they only have to pay someone when a crime occurs. Hiring 24/7 security watchers can get expensive but having anyone play security for as long as they want and only pay them when something goes down is a good deal to me.
Now from the perspective of the customers and employees I find this a bit of an invasion of privacy. If a business wants to monitor you then you can trust their intentions are professional. On the internet, however, anyone can register for any reason to watch anyone. You cannot control who would want to register for this and for what reason. And I doubt anyone would freely monitor a webcam for free for long periods of time thinking there is money to be made off of this. I personally feel this would attract voyeurs in addition to people who truly just want to "work" for free.
I also think it could be used to stalk someone. If you know someone who works in or frequents the store that is being monitored you can see what they are doing while they are there at all times. And you could screen capture the live feed or record it and spread it to anyone anywhere via the internet. The site makes the user agree to the following:
"I will not attempt to copy or use images seen on Internet Eyes for any other purpose. I understand that misuse of personal data may be a crime under Data Protection laws." For more on Data Protection laws in the UK visit http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/29/contents.
If only people were to not improperly use images or video knowing they could be charged for it. Most people feel the internet is so free and unregulated they can get away with anything. I can think of a recent case involving improper streaming video which led to a suicide that is now leading to the responsible parties being charged with a crime.
In my opinion, businesses should hire their own professional security personnel. At least they screen them through the application process. Either that or pay the person monitoring the webcam some rate and/or have a strong application procedure in order to better screen who is wanting to join.
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Child "schools" Boeing
They say there is power in numbers.
The New York Times reported on May 10, 2010 that an eight year old boy mailed his drawing of an airplane design to Boeing corporation in the hopes that they would consider it and create it. Instead, the child received a form letter saying that Boeing does not accept unsolicited ideas because the time, cost, and risk involved in paying attention to them aren't worth the benefit gained. Basically, this sent the message that they are too large a corporation to pay attention to some child's drawing and they responded with their one-size-fits-all formal letter that clearly is not a proper response to a child. The child's father happened to be a CEO of an advertising agency that uses crowdsourcing and decided to post the incident on his Twitter and blog. After feeling the pressure from public perception of the incident, Boeing decided to give a sweeter response to the child and decided that they would find a new way to respond to children.
I think that Boeing's response was a bit harsh and considering that effective marketing starts with consumer satisfaction it is important that they realize their adult consumer can be dissatisfied by how their child is treated. And if that dissatisfaction turns into negative word-of-mouth that spreads like wildfire over the internet it can tarnish the way the corporation is viewed. Especially if the one spreading the negative word-of-mouth is the CEO of an ad agency that uses crowdsourcing.
However, I do not think this incident was such a big deal and I don't think that it could have had the potential to keep the public from flying on Boeing airplanes. The only other option I'm aware of is Airbus and I doubt people would go through the effort to not fly on a Boeing airplane just because of a little boy not receiving a more "sweet" response.
Having said that I think Boeing made the smart move and cleaned up the problem. After all, it doesn't take that much effort to call the young boy, e-mail the father, and create a new form letter to reply to children with. And since most unsolicited mail is from adults it wouldn't be so inconvenient to have an employee occasionally use a child form letter.
The lesson learned from this is the importance of using social media by a corporation and not underestimating the power of crowdsourcing. Crowdsourcing is outsourcing a task usually performed by one person by gathering a large crowd of people through an open call. To learn more about crowdsourcing I recommend visiting the blog http://crowdsourcing.typepad.com/. The child's father used his Twitter account and blog to crowdsource which is how eventually a Boeing employee overseeing their Twitter account found out about the incident. I find it very exciting how social media can allow crowdsourcing to put corporations in check and remind them that their ultimate interest is in the consumer.
This whole story definitely brought more attention to the father's ad agency and this shows the importance of using social media to enhance public perception. Not only did the father get payback from Boeing he also got the word out about his agency and looked like a savior and a good father in the process. That equals positive public perception of him and his agency.
I know firsthand what a great tool social media can be to get a response from someone in a company. I once tried sending a letter to the editor in chief of Russian Vogue and never got a reply because I believed her assistant didn't feel it was important enough and discarded it or just didn't forward it. That angered me since I had taken the effort to write a nice letter and hoped to get some kind of response. But eventually I found out she had a facebook and sent the same letter as a message and got not only a reply to my original letter but a reply too when I asked for career advice. So although somewhat different to the Boeing case I think social media can be a way to get a response from someone in a company and surpass the horrible bureaucracy of corporations.
-Alex G
The New York Times reported on May 10, 2010 that an eight year old boy mailed his drawing of an airplane design to Boeing corporation in the hopes that they would consider it and create it. Instead, the child received a form letter saying that Boeing does not accept unsolicited ideas because the time, cost, and risk involved in paying attention to them aren't worth the benefit gained. Basically, this sent the message that they are too large a corporation to pay attention to some child's drawing and they responded with their one-size-fits-all formal letter that clearly is not a proper response to a child. The child's father happened to be a CEO of an advertising agency that uses crowdsourcing and decided to post the incident on his Twitter and blog. After feeling the pressure from public perception of the incident, Boeing decided to give a sweeter response to the child and decided that they would find a new way to respond to children.
I think that Boeing's response was a bit harsh and considering that effective marketing starts with consumer satisfaction it is important that they realize their adult consumer can be dissatisfied by how their child is treated. And if that dissatisfaction turns into negative word-of-mouth that spreads like wildfire over the internet it can tarnish the way the corporation is viewed. Especially if the one spreading the negative word-of-mouth is the CEO of an ad agency that uses crowdsourcing.
However, I do not think this incident was such a big deal and I don't think that it could have had the potential to keep the public from flying on Boeing airplanes. The only other option I'm aware of is Airbus and I doubt people would go through the effort to not fly on a Boeing airplane just because of a little boy not receiving a more "sweet" response.
Having said that I think Boeing made the smart move and cleaned up the problem. After all, it doesn't take that much effort to call the young boy, e-mail the father, and create a new form letter to reply to children with. And since most unsolicited mail is from adults it wouldn't be so inconvenient to have an employee occasionally use a child form letter.
The lesson learned from this is the importance of using social media by a corporation and not underestimating the power of crowdsourcing. Crowdsourcing is outsourcing a task usually performed by one person by gathering a large crowd of people through an open call. To learn more about crowdsourcing I recommend visiting the blog http://crowdsourcing.typepad.com/. The child's father used his Twitter account and blog to crowdsource which is how eventually a Boeing employee overseeing their Twitter account found out about the incident. I find it very exciting how social media can allow crowdsourcing to put corporations in check and remind them that their ultimate interest is in the consumer.
This whole story definitely brought more attention to the father's ad agency and this shows the importance of using social media to enhance public perception. Not only did the father get payback from Boeing he also got the word out about his agency and looked like a savior and a good father in the process. That equals positive public perception of him and his agency.
I know firsthand what a great tool social media can be to get a response from someone in a company. I once tried sending a letter to the editor in chief of Russian Vogue and never got a reply because I believed her assistant didn't feel it was important enough and discarded it or just didn't forward it. That angered me since I had taken the effort to write a nice letter and hoped to get some kind of response. But eventually I found out she had a facebook and sent the same letter as a message and got not only a reply to my original letter but a reply too when I asked for career advice. So although somewhat different to the Boeing case I think social media can be a way to get a response from someone in a company and surpass the horrible bureaucracy of corporations.
-Alex G
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)