Trends And Truisms Day Nine: The Importance Of Being Open
(image compliments of Schweers’ 3rd Grade Class Blog. I wish we had blog’s when I was in third grade. Anyhow, to Mr./ Mrs. Shweers and class, keep up the good work!)
A couple of weeks ago I gave the openness award to Google. I did not do so because I felt that Google necessarily embodies the essence of open source and transparency more than any other group, I did so because I feel that Google has pushed the boundaries for large walled garden companies to adopt a more open mindset.
Google’s introduction of Android changed the future of the Mobile industry nearly overnight. After making this announcement, the walled gardens of Verizon and AT&T came crumbling down (or so they would like us to believe). Google also had a major impact on the future of the mobile industry (and the communications industry at large) when its lobbyists fought and won their goal of keeping the 700 MHz spectrum open to everyone.
We witnessed the same type of mass openness when Google announced Open Social. Suddenly, private social networks were adopting open API’s and standards conducive to interoperability in order for social network users to create one identity across many platforms.
Google’s actions were certainly not the only signs that openness would become an important factor in interactive media marketing. Here are a few more:
- Facebook Open API for application developers
- Murdoch explores opening up Wall Street Journal content (well, at least we think so)
- Verizon Opens It’s Network
- AT&T Opens it’s network more than Verizon
- Apple finally opens the iPhone for developers
- Ubuntu launches
More recently, we have been hearing speculation that the most walled industry of all is making moves towards openness; the cable industry.
Is the future really open, are we already there or is this all just a farce?
There are certainly many more examples of openness. I would love to hear more examples for you!
Tags: Openness, Google, Android, 700MHz, mobile, open social, facebook, API, Murdoch, cable, comcast, open cable, verizon, att, apple, ubuntu, walled garden
Jan 14, 2008
Adam,
I felt that the New York Times really positioned themselves in the vanguard of openness when they removed their subscription wall. If I gave an award they would have gotten it (perhaps a Herbie)…
That being said, industries are recognizing the need to become available to users across multiple platforms. The time is now for organizations such as the NY Times to open themselves up to outside influences.
I believe it would be much more influential to have Facebook post which articles I have been reading than what size T-shirt I just bought. Social is based on openness and transparency. Opinions are formed when knowledge combines with experience. Successful companies will recognize how to harness this new openness to effectively exert influence.
I look forward to watching how the industry tackles the the demise of the wall.
Jan 14, 2008
Eric
I totally agree that is was a sign of openness when the Times removed the wall around Times Select, however I am not sure which was more noteworthy, the fact that they removed the wall, or the fact that they thought they could get away with putting it up in the first place
A
Jan 14, 2008
Adam,
While being open is the future, the real question is how open you want to be. In the case of cell phones, the networks are open but the phones themselves are not. A better example would be, say, Windows vs. Ubuntu. Windows is a very closed but has a great amount of open source software, Ubuntu is very open but still runs on a platform that is more complex than any Windows platform created. Everyone also runs Windows, Ubuntu on the other hand is a different story.
There’s also the question of privacy in a completely open, online, social world. While, being open is great, yes, Facebook’s app’s (say Beacon) attached to Google’s open social network can lead to a lot of leaked personal information.
Now, being more open does provide additional opportunities, primarily in advertising, the reason they the New York Times took down its wall. Open systems are great, but there still has to be money to be made.
- Nexeus Fatale
Jan 14, 2008
Nexeus
You raise some good questions!
At what point does open hinder privacy?
How do we monetize open?
I would love to hear what people think
Jan 14, 2008
Adam,
There has been a lot of discussion surrounding the WSJ online and why it will take some time for it to drop its subscription fee. Specifically, Henry Blodget on SAI talked about how much revenue WSJ currently makes from its subscription fees and how they would have to offset that. His discussion can be found here http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/01/guess-what-wsj-may-not-go.html (sorry dont know how to hyperlink in a reply). I tend to fall on the side of being ok to pay for something like the WSJ so long as it provides real value that I cant find anywhere else. If dropping hte subscription results in lower quality content (including less intelligent comments) then i would rather pay.
As for privacy – there is one service that I use that totally freaks me out. Have you tried spokeo.com? I upload my contacts and it crawls the web to see what kind of activity they are partaking in. Unlike friendfeed, you dont ask permission from your friends, it just happens. Before i was officially following you on twitter, for example, spokeo was giving me your twitter updates. Thats kinda weird as I imagine you had no idea. Another really freaky example is the Amazon wish list. If someone in my contact list adds something to the amazon wish list and hasnt opted for wish list privacy….lets just say it was interesting to see that a girl i know from law school put a rather risque book in her wish list. Considering I havent spoken with her in 5 years, I bet she wouldnt be too happy that I have this info.
I think both the financial viability of open and the privacy concerns surrounding open will play themselves out rather rapidly. The privacy issue especially will snowball as people realize how public their lives have become. Someone once said that everything should be in moderation – does that include openness?
Jeremy Beyda
Jan 14, 2008
[...] Broitman, I think you’re right on with giving Google the openness award. Your importance of being open article is spot on, but I just wanted to step back a bit to how they got to this new openness. [...]
Jan 14, 2008
Jeremy
You bring up a good post (the Blodget post) and a good, timely question; should the Wall Street Journal lower it’s wall’s?
I have seen the numbers and read the commentary and still have not yet formulated an opinion to go to market with, but my gut tells me opening up the Journal is the way to go. WSJ has been one of the few online content providers that has been able to sustain a paid model, but is it really sustainable in the long run?
As for spokeo, I have not yet tried it, but you can bet I will!
Adam
Jan 14, 2008
Adam,
WSJ is in a really tough spot which the Blodget post highlights. If they open up, they face the risk of diluting the quality of their brand. If they attract less quality readers, they wont be able to charge as high a CPM and risk losing the A readers they already have.
I agree, however, that opening up is the way to go. Once open, however, WSJ should make sure that their communication strategy to their readers is such that the non A crowd wont want to spend time on the site. I dont have a good answer on exactly how thats done but do think they need to do something to preserve the quality of their brand.
And prepare to be both amazed and creeped out with spokeo at the same time
Jeremy Beyda
Jan 15, 2008
Jeremy,
That spokeo does scare the hell out of me, but with these new social networks, we put that much information about ourselves out there. You don’t even have to use spokeo, do a google search to find out what is out there about you, and I’m quite sure that you’ll see open networks in a possibly different light.
As far as the WSJ – I’m quite sure that in advertising alone, they could make up the costs. It sounds like to me WSJ is making the argument that the Wall Street Journal is “privileged”.
- Nexeus Fatale
Jan 22, 2008
nice …but the question arises that how much the participants of mobile ecosystem can benefit from this openess
Jan 22, 2008
Laila
I think there are a few ways to address your question.
1. Participants will benefit from having the choice of which phone they want to use and it will not be network dependent
2. It has been proven that Open Source developmental environments stir innovation (i.e. Wordpress)
3. Carriers will no longer be able to compete on the types of phones that they have; they will have to compete on price or value added services.
I think all of these benefit participants of the Mobile Ecosystem.
Thanks so much for the question!
May 11, 2008
[...] about DataPortability and the importance of being “open” in the modern web economy. While I am very excited about what all of this openness means for [...]