Licence to Roam

The news comes through, originally uploaded by RachelC.

Five years ago, a colleague and I ran down to Trafalgar Square in our lunch break to join the crowds waiting to see if we had been awarded the Olympics. And we had! Here’s the crowd just after the announcement.

You may have noticed a stream of blog posts live-blogging the F1 FOTA Fan Forum last Thursday. This was the first event of its kind for the sport, coming out of blog comments on James Allen’s website. It was first come, first served for places and 150 of them were taken up within 24 hours. I saw a lot of tweets about people travelling from UK and further to attend, but for me, it was just an 10 minute tube ride (and an understanding boss to grab an extra long lunch). Santander, the sponsors, has obviously put a lot of effort into the day, with a good lunch, I assume covering the venue and the recording and then a couple of freebies for all attending.

The day was tweeted out by many of the teams and recorded for later release on YouTube, so all available for those who could not attend. There were plenty of press there as well and it was fun watching statements made as answers to questions being turned into news articles across sports sites. I even got nabbed by the BBC to do a quick sentence into a mike (not sure what for) as did others, with a write up on Andrew Benson’s blog.

There’s been a lot of response to this through blogs and comments; given my line of work, I was probably most interested in the responses about increasing fan access through social media and the web, increasing data and behind the scenes information. That’s definitely been an influence in my liking for the sport, as it makes it far easier to understand what it going on. It’s good to see the teams will continue on this path and there is pressure to increase what is being released.

The afternoon was a bit like a typical tech event I attend, mainly male with a handful of females and had the same sort of vibe, with lots of waiting to talk to the speakers and associated F1 team members. Although I’ve never seen autographs been signed at tech events Overall, it was an enjoyable event, one I’d like to see repeated although maybe at a slightly more job friendly time – the speakers apparently hung around after to chat, by which time I was back off to work.

This is live blogged at the Santander F1 FOTA Fan Forum. It will possibly contain errors and missed sentences. For the full story, make sure you catch the videos later.

Updated 4/7: added video

Luca Coliani
Tony Fernandes
James Allen
Martin Whitmarsh
Jock Clear
Paul Di Resta

?? How are the new teams?
TF: we are pleased, we got there late, building 5 months, remarkable job. every race we have improved. we deserve to be there, we are closing gap. it has made a little bit of excitement, a few dreams come to. FOTA tries very hard to help new teams, we don’t have the resources, we may one day, but important that teams have time to build, it is good to encourage them, I fully support more testing for drivers, to get new drivers….we have been treated well.

Matt Clifford: should new teams have been buddied?
PDR: the way relationship btw force india, mclaren..when Vijay came, we could get car developed, get product form mclaren, to give best possibility to maximise this. they have had good stability, it can only improve as they go forward.

Lee Cripps: In light of passing opps the slower teams create..should there be a 2 tier championship?
MW: No. you mention Le Mans, we’re considering going back…get people enthused about the different levels…that they win the level..who caress, we are interesting in an outright win…F1 should be a meritocracy, it should not be easy. since mclaren, 106 teams went. we should accept teams can fail but create an environment in which they can succeed. Lotus are doing well…Tony will make it a success,s will develop that team. HRT and Virgin, what they are doing, to there, is fantastic, people work hard in those teams, they are trying like hell, if it was effort alone..they need to build the infrastructure..it is not easy.

Ben Dixon: as tracks are redesigned for safety, so larger run off areas, penalty is not as big over tarmac rather than gravel…what can be done?
PDR: there are arguments..at the weekend, it was a street circuit,large runoff. the new tracks have carpet, and it does incapacitate. in grass, you become a passenger..they are looking for solutions that will not compromise driver. Tarmac run off gives driver a chance to slow down

Ian Spencer: there are debates about hard driving, where line has drawn. So drivers that are pushed off the road, they are not penalised. in terms of balance, should we not properly enforce the code?
PDR: i think it is difficult, it has come up in briefings, the drivers do push it other. the rules need clarifying, especially with new wings etc. Montreal, saw drivers not penalise for actions on track….

Nick Loan: would it be fair to say it is boring as less emphasis on skill..or has it always been tech?
JC: an argument that frustrates me..there is no substance to that comment. all sport has technology involved, look at skiing, tennis etc. we have a tech heavy sport, the fact is, to use the equipment takes a huge amount of skill..the guy with higher skill level drives it better. the car is much harder to drive these days…talking to Damon in 94, when driving the latest car..he says the car are so sharp you have to be even better now. skilful drivers win championships…

This is live blogged at the Santander F1 FOTA Fan Forum. It will possibly contain errors and missed sentences. For the full story, make sure you catch the videos later.

Updated 3/7 with video

Luca Coliani
Tony Fernandes
James Allen
Martin Whitmarsh
Jock Clear
Paul Di Resta

JA: FOTA announced about cut in carbon emissions, new engine formula

Martin: Fuel allowances? reduce on year, making engines more efficient?
TF: Danger is too much testing, then costs go up, and emissions go up. Not sure how to police it…ideas that should be considered. It needs to be from tech, the tech should be relevant. should an duct be used in cars, no, but kers will. they should be hand in hand, but should not make too complicated.

Frankie Dewer: talk about environmental engine formula, but concorde finished in 2012…is there a chance for change given last negotiations.
MW: there is…this ones a good idea. The teams, manufacturers etc, we are all aligned. we did a study of our carbon footprint. the cars going round the circuit is 0.1% of emissions, it;s the other stuff. the car is a tech showcase, used to deliver tech that is relevant. it is a great test bed and accelerator to tech. as a sport, we have to look at where we are spending resource, and that is why we did a cross sport body, first body to take the analysis, publish it, commit to check it. what we have done is encouraging so far, demonstrate what we have done to date, more effort needed…a new engine, lower capacity, direct injection etc, all appropriate tech we should be showcasing, we all want to do it and need to finalise it.

Daniel Clegg: Why does f1 have this obligation, surely should do best for sport?
JC: there is a responsibility to all of us to perform tasks in green/efficient way. From engineers view, it does not matter what the ergs are, we will make the car fast..there is no downside..we have clever engineers who will develop whatever tech you point them at and seems a pop to use that dev to knock onto the car in the road, the smallest improvement in a road car will outweigh f1 savings…we are here to improve product to make it available as every day tech..the rule makers have to present engineers with genuine challenge in making car faster more efficiently. starting with less fuel is better for speed..so give incentive, they will come up with the tech
TF: it is important, there are brilliant people. if they can use brains in a way to make planet better, then they should. Everyone has to play their part, it is easy to whack industry..they should be together to make tech better.

This is live blogged at the Santander F1 FOTA Fan Forum. It will possibly contain errors and missed sentences. For the full story, make sure you catch the videos later.

Update 2/7: Video added

Luca Coliani
Tony Fernandes
James Allen
Martin Whitmarsh
Jock Clear
Paul Di Resta

Joe Cardoza: So McLaren with Fduct, then copied, then FIA ban it..does this make sense.
MW: not a good example, there’s a broader story. I fought for tech, without regard for cost when starting as engineer. F1 has to be at forefront of technology, but we have to keep and sustain all the teams and it should not just be pure spending fest, there are examples where team spent and did not get results, so not just money. As an engineer, then developing things got bands, then angry. We need to keep innovative..we’ll never get it right, but we need to keep innovating, balancing cost. we need to make sure new teams, they are important to the sport, it is tough coming into sport. FOTA has achieved a few things and there is more to achieve but there are teams here that would not be there if not for cost saving drive of FOTA.
TF: down to the people who drive it, being clever and not too expensive. the sport needs new teams and innovations. FOTA is good at the balance…there is a lot of give and take and F1 is going through aperiodic of discovering of how we can work together and win together…we are finding a way of where the balance.
LC: for us, it is fundamental to keep F1 at pinnacle of technology, and transfer from track to road cars, it is important that the transfer is constant. at the moment, we have more tech on road cars than on f1. eg electronics. For Ferrari and possibility of third car..we want an option to have more teams in f1 is to have a third car for a new team, they could have a competitive car without doing an investment in tech and resources to do competitive car. this is something that should be put on the table and discussed..

James Walton: is it right that the people who design cars also design rules?
JA: info about crash tests?
JC: the rules took a step change in 1994, that brought safety to front of mind. it is impressive how much development has taken place. it never ceases to amaze people, even in industry, what the cars go through…the rules are pretty hard to meet within remit of making a lightweight car that races…a serious amount of development time is taken up with optimising the structure, you have to test and test. there is a lot of investment into this area and what you saw on Sunday is a direct testament to that work. the next level is to control speed and weight..it is impossible to make it completely safe..we are getting to point where the crash structures keep the forces down and car says safe..but forces on body still there…need to reduce weight, keep less energy..it is the big picture we need to keep control of.
MW: I think it is right, as there is not a viable alternative, F1 designers are motivated, clever and it would be impossible to find a body that would outthink their ingenuity, their design to find loopholes and boundaries. The double diffuser was not an intended piece of design, it was a loophole and that is what f1 is about to some extent. the teams do a responsible job with FIA to work in regulations. they are the only body who can sensible work out ergs
LC: the whole F1 community should thank FIA about safety job

James Bernado: the role of test driver is restricted, is this frustrating, or will it develop?
PDR: the teams are as frustrated as the drivers, they want to bring young guys though, bump older guys out (laughter). there’s not a lot of testing involved, the system i have, (Friday) is the best one there. We need more time in seat during winter; for dev it is a harder process, not knowing what the component will do, eg from safety.
JC: lack of testing is same for everyone…the reliability over the last few years is remarkable.. Putting emphasis back in design office, at thinking. but lack of pop for young drivers is terrible. it is refreezing to see guys coming through and see them test. that is the talent of future and the driver pool we have at the moment is in danger. the talent is there, button time in the car is lacking, you will not be in the pace. It has taken Michael time to get up to speed, how difficult for the guys next year. the guys making diver decision are not very patient with young talent, they get 6 months, not enough….when Alonso arrived he had had a few years in a F1 car.
MW: cutting testing was right at time, we need to ease back now. teams don’t what others to get more time then. we need to change approach and find ways to test more…
LC: It’s like a football team, frustrating if told you cannot train more than once a week, everyone wants to train as much. we were too emotional cutting the testing, (personal view) we need to rethink the situation, an opportunity to make F1 closer to you…as only opportunity is race weekend, then problems with ticket prices, so an option is testing sessions eg in Silverstone, Monza. JOck would love to have testing, Michael himself..

This is live blogged at the Santander F1 FOTA Fan Forum. It will possibly contain errors and missed sentences. For the full story, make sure you catch the videos later.

Update 2/7: I’ve added the video

Luca Coliani
Tony Fernandes
James Allen
Martin Whitmarsh
Jock Clear
Paul Di Resta

Christopher Nolan: F1 has reached a turning point, FOTA has won concessions, FIA under new management. Circumstance, luck and tech. is it diff to find solutions to overtaking. Can the rules be relaxed to allow this?
MW: A popularise view that we should have more overtaking..in first few races we did 39 takes, largely due to the fact we made a hash of qualifying if too much overtaking, then intrigue goes away, quickest guy at front etc. Media has a little too much of a fetish about overtaking..we are doing some things, rear wing next year, the regulation that accompany it are critical and not enough through yet, eg proximity sensor seems sensible to work with. we need to try and be prepared to say we are wrong and pull bank, not what we do traditionally, we run into them, heave to experiment, people want F1 to be meritocracy , what quickest driver,/car, wants a little unexpected to happen, we’ve had fanatics races, a good championship fight.
PdR: the drivers are keen to overtake, but the safety involved; they don’t want to see what happens in US, where all slip stream. you want to see people taking after mistakes. FOTA have come up with some good ideas, but we need to address it…

Q: It used to be about braking, now it’s about slipstream..why not make braking harder.
JC: Understand, but the level of driving is so good that these guys do not make mistakes, there is still a distance…they will hit it on the nail every lap, and there is only one racing line and unless you are on it, you can’ go faster enough. It’s not tech, brakes etc, it’s the drivers. We have to come up with ways of circumnavigating the skill level, without going away form the skill. we don’t want situation where it is pointless to defend..I like a 15 lap dinging when they never overtake then a simple overtake, Watching CH defending himself is fantastic. We have to be careful not to lose what we have this season.

John Elvey: How can you use tyre supplier to enhance racing?
LC: the combination of Montreal was special, normal choice of tyres, (same as Bahrain), we had a different surface. it is difficult to say more difference, as we have to keep in mind safety, don’t need to push random. it depends on Pirelli what they what to do and will look with engineers to go this direction but not too far.
JA: one safe tyre and one edgy tyre.
TF: threes should be a real difference…more strategy. i hope they are different and have an impact on race.

Josh Piggot. Not the amount, but the opportunity, Reducing grip and increasing mechanical grip is seen as best way..what is the best way to follow through corners.
PdR: Canada was quite special, bit were close on performance…but degraded differently. as a driver, you lose downforce, as they close up, when things work, you can follow closely..what they did last year has improved and it will improve next year.

Q:Frank Durney: Have to agree we have had a great year,..we should not change too much,,we should use tech and knowledge to do this. never seen that more mechanical grip gives more overtaking. If so, then worst races in wet..sims show that grippier tyres would have lot of overtaking

Zachary: Surely it would be unfair to give on;y the following driver the ability to adjust wing, better with all
JC: don’t have a strong opinion. we need to think to understand the implications. what we tend to do, we tend to pose a change on the format we see at the moment, we need ot look beyond that, to where they will all develop, what are the engineers going to go. what the implications are. I don’t know if that is the solution. we have to be careful how we go about this, I would have said lets try this..but with season we have it would be a shame to go the wrong way and give us another problem, we need to think and let brains think about,
MW: we give our drivers a variable rear wing and other teams don’t like it. We need to option, we can’;t design in last minute and we have to be careful of how to deploy it.

This is live blogged at the Santander F1 FOTA Fan Forum. It will possibly contain errors and missed sentences. For the full story, make sure you catch the videos later.

Update 2/7: I’ve added the video from the event

Luca Coliani
Tony Fernandes
James Allen
Martin Whitmarsh
Jock Clear
Paul Di Resta

Q: Daniel Hughes. What are FOTA doing to reduce cost of GP? YOu did say 12 months ago (I think) that you were doing something to reduce costs but they are no less this year.
MW: Don;t recall making statement; but may have! regrettably the teams have no control, in a direct sense, but clearly cost of tickets..is high and prohibitive…there are GP that we go to that aren;t fully attended. is an issue. t do with traditional model of F1 and will come up as a recurring theme. as a business model, sold as expensively and venue as expensive as can. the money has been prong into teams and parts of sport..we need to be more engaged and today is a small example, we need to consider show and that there is ale, we need tt do something different and engage in new media in a way that has not been done. a lot of pop to improve, don;t n=know who to do quickly. the concorde agreement, comma agreement, we the tams have to re-negotiate and I hope her eis emphasis on reinvesting, to a greater extent in past.

Alex Hurley: In recent tines, F1 has been about improving the show in fans. but how do you bring new people, lack on continuity make it difficult. for people new
TF: new rule can befit as everything starts form beginning,t here could be too many. there are lots of fiddling around with many things and complicating. a good start to season, lot of exciting thing.s right direction, there are too many and it could be complicated for plan. the aviation does it’s best to complicate and F1 does the same. it would be good to simplify and get it down to racing and there is an effort on FOTA to make it fun

Robin Martin: Distribution of rich real time data evolving?
JC: From engineering, it is all about data, dev, making it faster. From a geeky POV I’d be all for this data, there are lot of people out there who would love this, when I watch a race, i have it all evolving, info you can pick out a glance, it would enhance their viewing. Ir timing pages, telemetry (a subset) it can be looked into. you don’t have to use it, you can just watch what is going on. there are a lot of who appreciate tech and viewing enhanced greatly. it would add a level of understanding for those who would want to. Like my Mom, who understands it, can’t see why SCH is stuck t red light. It’s not that diff and we should push it
LC: we should ask for the media, to them to explain to the fans, to explain what is going on. my own experience, in Valencia, following it,listening to Italian TV commentator, btw lap 9 and 10, assumed they did not understand, I had to explain why and what was happening. It is important that the media have more access and later on, explain what is the reasoning. so need to put pressure on .

EM: Can you see F1/FOTA extend social networking to get fans involved.
TF: Got t2 devices, one for red bull and one for lotus. It’s already started, I felt it was inclusive, so myth more that could be shared. I could listen to radio via Skype, wouldn’t it be good for fans to follow. the more open we are the better, more transparency, explain it better..I still don’t understand the safety car rules. All in favour of it. All teams have twitter and all embrace it. Teams follow each other, we need to get more out. there is more tech that will make it more interactive, fun, make it more interactive.
LC: it is not that the teams don’t want. we have to consider agreements that put limitson usage of info that have available, we would love to put radio on sites, we are limited on this. We need to keep this in mind, for 2015, for new F1
MW: long way to go, only a few years ago we spent 100sk encrypting radio so they could not listen. we said they had to stop and share. now it is available to FOM, they get it all, they can get it all and broadcast, if juicy and salacious they generally do.. we are in a commercial relationship, FOM is the commercial arm. we get wrapped knuckles occasionally for being too open. no lack of will, we need to evolve and it will, but may be not as quickly as you like

Q: Regarding Fan experience, with penalties after race, it changes results is this detrimental?
JC: very frustrating, from coal face, my everyday work is shortsighted, looking at what it does on next lap…it is frustrating form my point and I don’t know full situation. we need to get hold of, too many instances when tv goes off and it changes…that can only detract from the experience. On subject of info flow, the media have argued..they say that if this much available, it sort of detract form how exciting and spontaneous. Having the info available, you can see what people are doing, eg canada with Red bull on wrong time and say if that is there the fans will switch off. the fans like to have an in-depth knowledge…if info available you can make own judgements, if you are proved right then you are engaged.

John Porter: Views on expansion on calendar..will it be adverse if more than 20 races. Is there a balance in races?
MW: 20 races is a lot, should not go more than that. that’s 60 days..don’t think product is one you need greater exposure,. we should not grow, we need to respond to commercial pressures though. for new markets, the US is clear and obvious, we have not conquered. a huge market, they have an particular outlook on sport not ness shared. F1 has made a hash of it, not consistent venue. not developed/marketed outer there We need to be there, east and west, 5 year programme, there is an pop and there is room for both. with Europe, we must hold on to the British, Italian, Monaco,
TF: 20 is fine and we have to work them. too often, they re just thrown on there and we don’t put enough effort..all have to contribute..Turkey could be huge if we put effort there. It needs to be global. there needs ot be proper marketing, form all, we should be working US early, to get the anticipation. there has to be a lot of marketing and lot of hard work

I think STV wins on this, far fewer clicks to get to the content

STV (as recommended by Ewan)

• Go to STV home page
• Click on ‘live now’ in programme listing
• Go to page, watch some ads. Start the football

The BBC

• Go to BBC home page
• Click on ‘what’s playing now’ in programme listing
• Click on ‘Live on BBC one now’
• Click to start the football (or one more click to have popup video player(my preference)

ITV

• Go to the ITV home page
• Click on bottom nav home page link in main banner. Go nowhere. Click on text link.
• Stare at page trying to work out where link is
• Click on ‘live’ link. Go to ‘live page’
• Click on ‘Join now’ Go to a page full of texts, facts, chat topics, video replays, live stats
• Try and work out which link to click
• Find link. Click. Get to page with live chat. Ads start running
• Start the football, on a page made slower by running lots of social elements and scripts that threaten to kill the browser.

I like F1, a fandom that has crept up on me over the last few years, but my experience of in-person car events has been limited to work related trips, the Paris Motor Show (which was far more shiney than any tech show) and a McLaren F1 test day at Silverstone (the benefit of working for a sponsor at the time).

However, this past weekend, there was an opportunity to change that, with Motorsport at the Palace, a sprint event being held for the first time in Crystal Palace for the first time in 10 years. It’s a timed event, run over a short course open to cars of all kinds, from a 107 year old Humber through to this year’s Tesla, an all electric car. The crowd in general skewed older than the average tech event I’d usually go to, but perhaps with a similar gender ratio. There were a lot more families though, many of them Dads passing on their passion. I had a great time, so looking forward to my next trip to something similar.

The Humber, built in 1903. Definitely a case of sitting ‘on’ the car.

The Tesla, 2010. Many, many comments overhead in the crowd about this, mostly astonishment at its acceleration without any noise at all, except wheel spin.

With all the political shenanigans, I thought I’d wander down to Westminster to take a look at the media circus and see what was going on. All the news groups have mini studios set up and lots of politicians, ex-politicians and other commenters were coming and going. I was busy just taking in the atmosphere and grabbing the odd photo.

Loving this one of Alastair Campbell who got grabbed by a bunch of Glaswegian schoolgirls for a photo op.

Then two old political adversaries, Tony Benn and Douglas Hurd, called in to do a round of interviews.

Extending your Brand, there’s an App for that.
For many, brand extension into the digital realm means a Web site, a banner add, a viral campaign. But applications can extend conversations and perceptions of a brand, as well as add to discussions and ideas in compelling new ways. How can applications help your brand and idea be more authentic,…
Rob Girling, Adrian Ho, Shiv Singh, Brian Morrissey

SS: Social Media lead at Razorfish, we currently have reduction in form size, but no reduction in functionality, we are developing mobile solutions for almost all the clients. we are not the 3rd gen of mobiles design, where the core interface is buttons, and streaming and a pulse interface.
RG: Co-Founder of artefact. being working on apps for the last 20 years. come at this from the tech and UI perspective. thinking about how to make a grate app is what we do, which is diff to how marketing has developed things from the past. One thing recently is Seesmic Look, Twitter for neophytes. It’s a branded channel, so brands can build content on top of their tags that are happening. It’s not about building an app, it could be about reaching through an app to get to your audience.
AH: 3 yo company, founders were all ad people, we are reformed. It is around the idea you can take the same money that you spent on commas and spend it on doing things for people and have the same success. My background is strategy. We try and solve business problems by doing things, so for Nordstrom, teen girls, when they want to spend lots of money, they would take pictures and send pictures to their parents – OR would dress up and take photos for touchscreens. So we created something that could take photos, edit them and let them be sent out.

BM: we are going to be talking about the future. what do you see going on right now?
AH: the biggest change, it’s about the information, about how people use the products. Less of the brand perception is not about the imagery and commas but about what they do.
SS; I would extend that further, the biggest change in last 3 years, is trust in big brands has dropped dramatically, thanks to financial crisis and consumer empowerment. Brands are not defined by what they do (marketing, PR, launches) and more by how consumers talk and relate to them. A lot of questions about fundamentals of marketing, advertising etc

BM; so where do apps fit in there?
RG: the days of brands trying to get your attention and hold it with traditional methods are gone. if you are not trying to actively engage your customers, provide utility, you are not going to have a lasting relationship. you have to understand them, their pain, look for opps to delight the. It’s not another channel to push out the message, you have to provide them.
SS: Only partially agree. I like toothpaste, I use it everyday, but I don’t want to have a 2 way conversation with colgate. I care about that I have a memory point when I next buy it. It is important to see the type of brand and if it is high or low consideration.

BM: what can brands learn from popular apps, that are not brand apps.
AH: the lessons that brands can learn from 4sq is not the one they think they are learning. SO people want to connect with friends and they should not get away form that. there are times you can help..but they should not go through you. Typically brands would say this is fantastic it is another place we can connect but it is not a great place for brands to be playing.
SS: so how many of you consider yourself experts in social media (a quarter). (More in mobile). You can’t be into social media if you are not into mobile as well.
RG: I want to add a diff point, what we should be learning is about incentivised behaviour and social status. there is a lot of buzz about reward systems for behaviour. they get something back for checking in, for changing behaviour. that is the beginning of a massive trend, that will snowball in the next few years.

BM: so I want to go into your favourites. A lot of apps are serving the same place as microsites, they are disposable, So what is the role for the campaign like, ephemeral apps.
SS: if you have an app that is a microsiste, it is a total failure, an app coming from a brand has to be entertainment driver – without eh brand as a sponsor or it has to be utilitarian, like the food ordering apps. For it to play role of microsite is a waste of time and money
BM: Adrian are you seeing this> It was the facebook app, now the iphone app.
AH: I would agree on microsite thing, also, I think the entertainment model of using apps is flawed for brands, it does not do the behaviour change, A lot of advertising is about trickery, about changing behaviour. Apps in general, they reward change, that may be useful for brand. A utility based app is much more direct, allows you to behave in a new way. an entertainment app is different, it is about you making you feel different about eh brand, so not a great use for apps,

AudQ: is the brand manager of the future technologist or marketer?
RG: if what I said about apps is true, the technology component cannot be ignored. it’s maintenance and shipping cycle and complexity that the marketing industry is not used to yet. I still think the brand expertise to have the insights and empathy with customer will still rule the day however.
SS: Knowing customers is getting harder by the day and that is of paramount importance. With mobile apps it should get a lot quicker and easier to build and the tech should be commoditised.
AH: the debate about who controls is interesting. from tech, an app is designed to allow you to do things so there is research about making that possible, Marketers come at it about telling you things about the brand that is good to know. they often collide. It is in the middle it will come together, if you allow technologist to do anything, you get usable apps that are not differentiated, so you need the marketing that flavours it with the brand.

BM: so apps you like?
SS: Bundle helps you understand how people spend money. you can info about how other people just like you spend money, the app does not translate the website. The app is Vice Tracker is about changing the spend behaviour. allowing people to be more mindful of how they are spending, against their friends. I can track behaviour, see friends, comment on their behaviour, gives a leadership ranking, on who has the most vices. the idea is that apps can serve a strong educational purpose, in this case managing our vices in a fun game like fashion, it has a social piece, a game like interface, game mechanics, that is what makes it powerful. There are incentives, tied into cause marketing as well.
BM: are the points are what are driving people on 4sq? is it changing behaviour.
SS: there are more to life than incentives and points. it is a shortcut….it is not just about incentives, they do help, there are successful that are pure entertainment or utility, it does depend.

BM: so now into the sucky part.
SS: New York Times. I’m a big fan of the NYT. I feel the app misses things. the content is amazing and great to have it on the phone. I wish they would ask me for money for it. It has no location aware functionality, can’t understand why it doesn’t, so news has a local component. It does not have social features, cannot comment, share, cannot see top rated articles, can’t mash them up, it is a glorified news reader, take tout he content and it is nothing. It does not let me filter by my social graph. it could be better.

RG: . the zippo lighter is about what I don’t like about apps, but I’m using it as a good example. It’s very cheap/simple, and has 3m downloads. Not doing very much, but understanding the platform, early and quickly to get something there. My real good example is Shop Savvy. It is a barcode scanner. you can go into a store, and you can find the cheapest price in the web to get it, also if there is a shop nearby where you can buy it cheaper. `so incentive to get it. save money. they understood the customer, they are wanting to purchase it something, we know where they are, then sell that info to advertisers, so they can discount or offer something.
SS: you talk about shop savvy being a platform for brands? is this an pop for target etc to build their own. So AUDQ about if brands should build or sponsor?
RG: I tend to believe that the loyal Best Buy shopper, is not really a real scenario (i.e. once a month or more for this) is not real. Being part of the ecosystem is better than owning every part of it.
SS: the criteria I use, is it a passionate brand, there is a lot of passion around it. does it have great content or a lot of utilitarian use, does it change on a frequent basis. if it meets these 3, then it is a good reason to build one.
RG: the Merc AMG is an example of what I don’t like. The luxury brands are putting out the microsites as apps. They are links…a video, sound effects and some photos and that is all. There are a tonne of these, brands that have spent years building classy momentum around brand and then they offer you this. It’s is nothing. You may use this once. It is less rich than the site. it is lame. There is nothing to it.
BM: what could they do to make it useful?
RG: this is a passion brand, where the lust is high, but what I don’t see anything about social integration , no community of users, no attempt to connect them, no attempt to say Merc is listening or cares. If I was going to buy one, I may want to talk to other owners, look at second hand market, understand the brand.
AH: Apps like this are advertising – potential owners. With apps you can actually target owners as well. the biggest sales go to existing owners, so an app that makes driving Mercs even better would be good, tap into data etc. this is what happens when advertising people take on app design.

BM: Your example is different?
AH: amazon.com. they don’t run advertising, they created an app that allows you to take pictures when hopping, save it to your cart to get later. it’s a direct relation to sales, we know business impact. My bad app is the GTI driving game. as a tool for branding, it goes against an impressions based model. Of those who downloaded, the idea is that some portion will remember and then take some action and eventually test drive. It is a waste as most who use it will never do anything with it related to the brand, except maybe a good feeling.

BM: so the biggest challenge is campaign vs software development? The budgets may not change soon?
SS: it will change when it proven to have value. A single brand app gets little traction, the ROI is questionable. it is easy to slam marketers for not doing this, but it comes down to metrics, there is not enough education or decision but there are not enough metrics either.
RG: the metrics today are a lot more like PR metrics than traditional marketing etc, I do think that new metrics will be required. e.g. engagement with app in a month. and the tracking of that. When they do use it, you have an engaged user. those metrics don’t properly show up with this yet, and they need to do this.
SS: the biggest metric is not CPMS, CPC, but Cost per BUZZ, and that is not enough.
BM: is that what success looks like (refers to a flurry graph)
AH: we are measuring a lot with advertising metrics, we expect apps to delver scale that advertising does. they will not do this. the reach is limited. we need to figure out new ways to measure ha they are delivering, then you will start to see things do look better. Apps are designed to look good but offer no value, a lot of stuff on that, so if you offer something that allows someone to do business with you easier, then it has a longer lifestyle.

BM: we are talking a lot about iphone as a platform, a few years ago, it would have been facebook.
SS: it is mobility does not mean a sacrifice in functionality. the facebook app is one of the most popular on the iphone. the apps are being downplayed by facebook as well, so not getting as much traction.
RG: a lot of the apps have screwed the privacy issues, with a rogue app stealing info, left me not happy in the platform. Not the best for developers, a lot of things difficult about the facebook universe. the mobile apps universe is more mature and the idea of it being with you all the time is the most compelling thing, it’s powerful;. facebook is still one foot int he desktop experience and not with me all the time.

AUDQ: how will the iPad impact it?
SS: there will be an impact, a lot to do with your posture. you will have more space, different posture and gestures. Not used to it yet.
RG: just the larger canvas, is something.

AUDQ: What steps to increase stickiness of apps?
RG: there’s no lipstick answer, there is no small thing. you have to do your homework. What is the opportunity. It’s the user-centric design, try and figure out a way to make some utility. Charmin did one…an app to find toilets and to review them. for moms with kids, a good app. it is relevant.
SS: don’t frontload all the advertising PR push etc, that is when you see a reverse hockey stick. think different marketing and PR levers.

It’s the start of my 3rd full day at SXSW and again it’s a completely different experience from all the others. Friday was spent at an off-site event, Tweethouse. Saturday was spent in panels and today there’s going to be a mixture of panels and parties, at least when I get started on the day.

At the BBC Digital Planet panel, which was actually a recording for the radio/web programme, it was mentioned that this year for the first time, interactive has outsold music, with nearly 15,000 attendees. It feels like it! The conference has spread over 4 venues, the halls feel more crowded and from what I’ve seen there are far more first-timers here than I’ve ever spoken to before. Despite the financial woes of the last year, this is obviously the place to be for anyone involved in digital in any form. And there are all sorts, I’ve met coders (the guys keeping foursquare up and running), publishers, freelance web designers, consultants, social media people (there are a lot of them, there always has been), advertising and marketers, and just general web folk.

I’m on track to meet my objectives for the conference, which are simple – meet at least one new person (for a long chat that is likely to be followed up with further connections) and learn at least one new thing. I’m half way there with 3 days to go, so looking promising. I’m luckier than many I believe, in that I pay for this myself so there is no external pressure to justify the ROI. to me, this is definitely geek spring break! No conclusions yet though on how this is all working out, who will win the location app battle or whether At&T will keep the mobile network going, although they seem to be doing well so far. but it is on track for being another successful and enjoyable event for me.

LIVEBLOGGED: taken during talk, so any mistakes are mine.

Andrea Phillips
ARGS and Women

A freelance game designer and writer, involved since they started. Also Chair if IGDA SIG ARG argology.org One of community moderators of Cloudmakers, one of the key moments in ARGS, when we recognised that something had happened. One of the ingredients of the community experience was the Hot Brunette, Laia Salla, the one who had a problem. Her friend, she thought was murdered. She needed your help! In context, 2001, Buffy was on air, last season of Xena, then Alias and dark Angel, with Tomb Raider. Our cultural experience led to the hot brunette. She was influenced by culture, and bin turn influenced on. Also, this year, internet use by gender was equal. In 2001, the internet did not feel completely safe, it was common to hide your agenda. In Cloudmakers, however, it was not long before we saw there were a lot of women. We wondered why there were the women, was it the format, the role, the community. Only statistic I had was 28% of the voters for a final vote were women in this fame. As the AI game was widely known and successful, it came the model for future projects; who tried to unravel that review and repeat the experience. And in marched the hot brunettes. They were young, attractive, smart, funny. The kind of girl a geek may fall a little in love in.

A difference btw the video game and a ARG, you are not the star of the show, you are not the main character. The star is usually an attractive brunette. She is not the one doing stuff, you still are, she is something between a role to achieve and someone to help. In the 2012 experience, the 2 white guys were very unusual in this genre. There is a trend, we have made a new archetype, so we need to understand who she is and what she means. So let’s tale a look at the history?

Do girls play games? Yes, of course they do, why are we even discussion. 40% of all gamers are female, 52% of PSP owners are female. Women over 25 play more games than any other group. (Neilson figures)

So why are games ‘for boys’.. why do we still have this idea that games are a boy thing. Was there something about Pong that was hypermasculine? was it the marketing. (see 1976 ad for Pong) But there are girl and boy games – lots of the over 25 games, are casual games, or social games. They are not really the big AAA titles, which are what ‘press’ call games, When we think of video games those err the games that comes to mind. Farmville with its 100m users is not what you think of when you come to a gam, not what a gamer plays.

Games are marketed towards men…straight men. The Sin to Win campaign…for Dante’s Inferno. So if you committed an act of lust at (E3) you could win an evening with 2 hot girls in a limo. There was a protest over this campaign, and the winner rejected the prize. Look at Evony -marketed with boobs. There are no girls (or characters) in the game. (Video of E3 09, lots of girls). You could say it was bad this year – and that was toned down. As a women, what E3 is telling me is that the game people don’t like me, that they don’t want my money, that I am not a real human being.

Games are Made by Men. Another cog in the machine that keeps games a boy things. there are 3 % in programming. Women in game make less money. On (Andrea) ARG teams, there have been more women on them than men. Recent results from an IGDA survey, a third of ARG builders are female.

Female Characters in games suck: classic role for female is the damsel in distress. You are supposed to rescue girlfriend wife, sister, princess etc. Often for some unknown reason. In Zelda, she knows everything, she disguises herself as a ninja – why does she need rescuing. Why isn’t Zleda a playable character. Even when playable, it does not go well. SO Super Princess Peach. Her superpower – MOOD SWINGS!!! When she is happy she flies, she drowns enemies with her tears. Bayonetta is in a category all by itself for its depiction of girls. The art director has talked at length at getting her arse correct. The ‘wins’ are ‘climaxes’. Her costume is made from her hair, that needs concentration..which falls when she is doing something. So her superpower is getting naked. One on 5 characters on a game box is female. In an industry fixated on realism, in light on water, in the action of dust. If they are after realism, they are not really getting there.

So What?? Why does this matter, why is it that girls play games, boys play games, It is not an academic question, it is a real problem. I could give you pages on sexual harassment stats. instead I’d give you info on my first brush of sexism. At 13, I moved schools; in my old schools I was studying literature, in my new one, I was in a class that had to underlined verbs. I approached the teacher to ask for more advanced work…the teacher replied that I had the most beautiful blue eyes. I learnt that being pretty would not help me. So i learnt to remove the markers of being feminine, I considered myself not a real girl…they like shopping and gossiping etc. At some point, you have to ask yourself where i got the idea about. So I had to ask what was wrong was me? My daughter likes girly things, and pink etc. I had internalised the message that girl things suck, so challenged my daughters choices. She was better than that. We have stigmatised femininity. We are cool with a women surgeon, but don’t like a man that collects unicorns. Girl stuff, means soft, pretty, in a culture…Girl Stuff sucks! the message in ads often convey this. If you repeat it, it becomes the norm.

A study has said if you consume a message, even if you disagree with it) you will end up adopting it. this is about the THE SLEEPER EFFECT. once info is in your brain, even if from a distrusted source, it becomes part of your world view.

PRIMING – behaviour and performance can be affected by situation and environmental cues. If you remind a girl that she is female before she takes a maths test, her scores are worse (as girls are ‘worse’ at maths). So who are responsible. the media. But WE ARE THE MEDIA. We are the media just as much as they are. As the media, we make culture, we put ideas into peoples heads. We have to think about what we are adding to the collective consciousness. So with our collection of brunettes in the ARG, we are saying women, even smart, competent women, need help to solve their problems. But why do we use them? What makes them useful. A lot of them come from the point of wanting to put in strong characters? So why young, brown hair. Writers are very lazy, building complex characters are hard. A mass market game want smart, funny, and vulnerable, Female means vulnerable, brown hair means smart (it’s a short hand)

When you start a character, you have a neutral human. But even so, there are defaults for a human – male, white, young etc. Look at a stick character, then most people will assume male, I’d be surprised if you look at a stick figure and not think of a gender at all. We think in genders..parents can get really angry if you misjudge the gender of a 2 month infant, even though it does not really matter until puberty.

We look at stock characters. they are easy. when you want to make a mad scientists, you take an actor and put him in a white coat and mess his hair. It’s easy, but simple, predictable and very boring, ad you can get offensive very quickly. so what is a writer to do? You can’t leave it at a stock character. You end up offensive and boring and which one is worse depends who you are talking to. So to make interesting, you pick an archetype and give them atypical traits. Mix and match. You need to avoid obvious, easy and predictable.

So, there’s nothing wrong with casting cute brunette as lead. But if it just for people to look at and there is no control, that is slipping into bad territory. So here’s a list of things to think about.

1. pass the Bechdale test. 2 or more women who talk to each other about something other than men. There are few that pass this test.
2. Give her agency. Give her the power to change the world. Lack of agency is one of the places ARGS fall down; although if there is two much, the players are short changed. If you give her free will, you can drive the story. make her unreliable, keep info to herself.
3. Diversify. add other dimensions. however, if you are not careful, then you get a cast of white people with different colours of skin.

The brunette is often a guide to the game world. You could skip this, let the players decide and explore.

There are a lot of bad characters, but lets look at what works. Faith from Mirrors Edge. She is conceived a human being first, who happens to be female. The female hero in Fable 2 – although he story is the same regardless which character you play. I though they used the same body model, so the female was strong and muscular. And in Fable, when you die, you scar. and there is no way to get rid of it. I liked that remaining pretty was not one of the rules. Then you have Shel in Portal you can argue that she is not really a character, as there is little about here. But it was cool that she was a girl and it was no big deal.

STORIES ARE TRUTHS: the truths we tell ourselves as a society, crime does not pay, love conquers all. Also girls like shopping…etc. the deep truth about ARGs is not hot brunettes need help but that there is someone on the web who will help you when you need it. This culture of helping people is the one that I want to build. you need to build the culture you want to be living in.

LIVEBLOGGED – so pretty much as said

Google Data Liberation – most excited to be part of this team

Ingeneral, interested in generative systems and structures, rhizomatic structures, built into the fabric of how they work. Start spill with constructs that grow into the systems. Thats how it all started, hashtags etc.

As in The Future of the Internet, (Zitrain) those sort of systems, paints a picture of things we need to think about as internists. So all that I have been doing based on these generative systems, those with transparent DNA.

An activity stream – facebook newsfeed, we are going somewhere with this, a lot more interesting. In 1999, Fight Club presented us something that gives us something to think about. YOu get a picture of someone through material objects. so imagine going shopping you get an activity stream as a receipt of what you have purchased. YOu get this on paper now, so how do you get it to something that is usable. When you purchase things with cards, the bank does all the collection and analysis. Card becomes a digital identity and you have no idea what the digital life is like. We end up with a stack of receipts that you can’t get anything from. Ther is an unbalance, where those that provide the cards can get the info and make use of it and they do not give us anything back. The bank provides data (he asked for bank info) but they provided it as pdf data. The pdf is a digital version of the paper they used to send you.

Today, the newsfeed is the best activity stream there is, one of the only ones we can have. (History of Feeds) IN 1999, they took RSS and piped data form one place to another. RSS was title + link + description. this was when people were afraid of giving data away, so this was the most you could do. So go forward 5-6 years, then there was a series of battles, so in 2005, there was a new format, called Atom. Still similar, till about syndication, innovation was author, unique id and update date. So very slow to get there. now we know who wrote it and when it was published. Moving forward but not about powering social web, still based on media consumption, the syndication. So now, we take the articles, will still have the same idea. We have a news feeds, which is still a portal types thing. So even with the most advanced browser/feed you still get the news feed. We are trying to pump all these rich info throughout he formats that were designed to publish news articles. So everything looks the same, it is all RSS (etc). There are all these rich activities but the formats we have are all stuck in 1999. The social web needs to have better, richer formats to allow us to express, why, when, how.

This is the friendfeed problem. There idea was to bring them all together, to make sense of it all. It was a metalled, representative of your actual identity online. Then friendfeed got acquired by facebook, now the service has languished. it still supports services that do not exist, it does not list all the services. (So no work). Int he world of social web and startups, there are a lot of casualties. Friendfeed put a lot of effort into stuff that goes away (as would anyone). So the solution could be a universal format (to minimise effort).

So this is where activity streams format comes from.

So to start, let’s go back to the Soviets. They proposed a theory called Activity theory…a structure about making workers more productive, a system to create divisions of labour. You wool have a subject with Tools with an object to produce and outcome. Then the theory got expanded, so broaden it out to the individual operating in a community structure, with rules and roles and mediating artefacts. This allows us to think about activity streams beyond point a to be syndication. It allows us to create meaning. (Engestrom 1967)

one of things you can think of is Social Objects. Jyri took his Dad’s research and started working on social objects. You can’tt just do a social network that allows friending, you have to create these shared objects that people can gather around and have some interesting interactions. Those social objects are the pivot points for connections, which allows them to derive meaning and make sense of the connection.

You Tube – the social object is the video. Instead of a list, you can modify it, with comments, favourites etc, all this social residue provides meaning, adds value to the object, that was created once and then gets built up over time. Look at Flickr, go back to our activity theory, they have understood how the different things they have used these rules to generate interesting interaction models. Focus on the pieces, you create a vibrant community, different roles, create, comment, curation,. Flickr does a good job of expanding the roles of non-producers, the actions adds richness and dynamism to Flickr than found on other sites. Also, on rules, they have made it possible for an individual to finely tune the system, the rules. So if I were private, I can control public searches. When I get a comment from someone I don’t know, then there would be a connection as that is the only way to find. If I was public , then another set of reason for people to find them. So the way I set up attracts the activities that are meaningful.

Useful when talking abut lifestreams. Lifestreams and activity streams are not completely interchangeable. The lifestream concept came from David Gelernter. Wrote Mirror Worlds. A decade later 2000, wrote The Second COming, A Manifesto. He talked about lifestreams. He said a lifestream organises info as a mind, not a file system. He talked about the idea of hashtags, connecting elements. (HTtp://j.mp/gelernter) This is all like Donnie Darko – we have these threads that play out to past and future and we can modify, but we do not have great tools for doing so. As we start to move towards experiencing the now, the next and the next next.

As we start to produce all these digital objects, we start to snack on it. Today may feel like overload, we don’t have the tools to consume it. We are constantly compressing, microcontent goodness. You would write a book, long, you were paid on words. Then we went to articles in publication, now we do tweets. So what are we giving up? We go from a slow consume and digest, lingering on content to one where info is disposable as there is so much of it. What is interesting is the data trail that can come from these experiences.
The info can lead to a mapping of behaviour. We are scratching the surface of this, with systems about where and what we are doing in the world. Still not good systems. Being able to build a profile over time, this social data, social residue and be able to make sense of it is fascinating. We can make little of it now.

Social signifiers can be useful in training computers to serve us better; it is very valuable, and bite size chunks make it more accessible to computers. One example is a pedometer I use, that hooks to a website, so I can track the trend. You need to accrue data over time. So I can track have a slowed down, am I more lazy than my peers. Look at the Feltron annual reports. He collects all of the data over a year. and publishes. He tracks where he goes, so why can’t google maps provide this? Food consumption, how does he track it? There’s an app called Last History…looks over the Last.fm scrobbling. This is your data, so you can do something with it. It takes your habits, combines ical, iphoto, imovie etc and shows you the soundtrack of your life.

Now Tufte has been horrid by Obama, to track and visualise where our tax dollars are going. So why don’t they make it compulsory for the data to be released so we can build stuff….we’ll end up with pdfs from most of them.

The solution to data overload is more data – actually more metadata, data about data. So we need to start generating this and this is what we are doing with activity streams. We presume there is an actor, that did something and modified an object, with some output/target. Actor Verb Object Target. this model allows me to do this.

So what does the code look like? So add verb, object-type and target to the atom definition. so you have an activity stream data model. The new bits are added. You can start to substitute verbs and object types, mix and match and build more interesting experiences. Now we have a list of verbs and object types, from review of friendfeed and others. So all of this is in v0.8, moving towards 1. the idea is not to have a million verbs on day 2, but to start with something that can be added to.

We are not really inventing this, we are being inspired by the microformats process, for the expansion of the model. So ask why, do your homework, then propose the new verb/targets etc. Then iterate. Then interoperate. We want to grow this slowly so we know what we are getting into

http://activitystrea.ms

January is over, we’re 1/12 of the way through the year, so time for a monthly update.

Gym: I’ve finally activated my corporate gym membership, going consistently through the month, so much so that I’ve unlocked the Gym Rat badge on Foursqure . I’ve been doing a combination of classes and running on treadmills.

New Cities: None this month. However, I’ve decided to extend that ambition to new things. To that extent, I’ve visited Chiswick House for the first time, which, considering it’s just round the corner from me is pretty sad. I also took part in the Walk London walks. They had a special weekend promotion, with lots of guided walks happening, so I did the Wimbledon to Richmond one, all 7.5 miles of it.

Other activities include attending a talk on Taking Video Games Seriously, organised by Tom Watson and attending a Quest TV pub quiz, particularly beneficial as I won a Wii (for doing some really embarrassing pub dancing).

Finally, I attended the gathering of photographers in Trafalgar Square, protesting that we’re photographers, not terrorists. All in all, a good month.

A discussion panel held 25 Jan 2010, Westminster Hall

(WARNING – Liveblogged at the time, so may not make 100% sense)

Chair: Tom Watson; Tom Chatfield, Philip Oliver, Sam Leith

Each panellist gave a talk about their position on games, it them moved into a series of statements from floor combined with some questions.

Tom Chatfield: Taking Games seriously. a difficult things to do well, how do you have a discussion about a medium that is all about fun; so there are lots of serious things you can learn, politics, training, education, but at the same time it is dangerous if they are only worth talking about serious things, no other art form has to bow down to this idea, that it has to be serious. A challenge is you want to talk serious things about fun, about why they play. There are serious tools out there, there are some awful ones as well. A lot of issues when people think they are a kind of voodoo. So if you have a boring meeting held in 2nd life, then it will be not be fun (because it is held in a ‘game’). This is not the way these things work. we have to get away from idea of magic, games which have a magical bewitching effect on users. that we can’t analyse, just fun. So what is a mature debate about games? We need a new or different language for talking about fun and play.
We can’t use the language from around other media and expect it will be useful. I think of it as Wing Commander 3 syndrome…so if you have a boring game with a series of cut-scenes based on Star Wars, the thought that it would be fun is wrong. The assumption that this makes it good; this is a woeful misconception about games. This is one reason why difficult (to have serious conversations), they reach for the language of film. (Lots of other art elements) play their part in one of best games, e.g. Portal, stunning vocal, art style, etc, it is wonderful because the elements of other media are subservient to dynamic of game and it is those dynamics we need to nail to have a good discussion. Another problem, debaters assume that games have a magical seductive effect, it is about switching off; reason why Wii has been useful, is that it is giving the lie to the notion that games are only ever brighter graphics and louder sounds and realism. These games are for fun and entertainment, a Wii is very good at entertaining and engaging. To get to fundamental point, when you are playing a game you are engaged in an experience and this makes it understandable that there is a divide between those who play games and those who don’t. if I try to explain WOW to my mother, who is not a gamer, I have to tell her about the story and tell her about a whole other set of rules and conventions that I participate in. She sees me playing this game, not moving much, shouting abuse over a microphone and this is misleading; we need to be aware of how misleading this is to those outside, that we are not sitting there getting an unsophisticated, mindless experience. It is hard to convey the experience and you are interacting with imaginative modelling of the world, a symbolic imagining, figuring out the rules, a new set of rules to work out with other people, they are experimental as well as engaging. we learning all the time, in the company of other people. It is not good or bad, not moral, but is about engaging, learning the use of social faculties, it is a category error to assume games are magical, flat, passive and we have to find way to talk about this as an active experience, it is hard to get right. (According to media) you would think that sinister people in a gaming company just do things to addict 9 year old..this puts games in same mental bracket as heroin. They don’t realise it is very difficult to make a hit game, the great titles are rare due to the highly active component. The power comes because of the investment people are willing to make in the game role, which leads to games as tools for learning and training. If people want a discussion then you need to get serious about what is happening, the social aspect, the modelling, the testing, the compelling and elaborate experience that is difficult to get right, they are a new refinement of play and you need to look back at human fundamentals about why people want to play games.

Philip Oliver: I’m the expert a the coal face; will start with background. I’ve known nothing but games. I have twin, Andrew, fairly competitive, loved tech and creative. At about 12, 1980, had apple 2e, played Pong, Pacman, then had zx81, worked out we could program our own games,,,,this was a fascinating challenge, when we only 2 TV channels to distract us. We tried to outdo each other, we published from 1984, as listings in magazines and then on cassette tapes. We were expected to follow our siblings to uni, but we made decision to make games, which most people needed explaining to them. We could not see that uni would give us much, there were no courses, this was new, we needed to get on and do this in the new industry. Our dad gave us a challenge to earn more than him in the first year and if they did, then no need to go to uni. We met Darling brothers, worked a lot of hours developing games for them and Codemasters. We did not really get to socialise a lot – 20 hrs/days, 7 days/wk. we were schoolkids earning 10-20k/month. In 1990 we decided we need to form teams of people, bring creatives etc, we decided to start hiring people, We hoped to find creative, passionate people. We got lucky with some of our early games, we were trying to even it all out, create a stable environment, allowing people to pursue careers without roller coaster of finances. Blitz is now big, outsources, 10mil turnover, 200+ people. We’ve done it all, all consoles, iPhone to PS3 and everything in between,, we cover all genres, many studios specialises, we took a diverse strategy. so no matter what the fashion, we can do. we do a lot of family games….we have a lot of licences. We released Biggest Loser – sold 500k copies in 12 weeks, we do mature games as well, we are proud of this. newspapers keep latching in to this, that all games are violent shooters. but they are not. The next game, 18 certificate, it targets audience correctly (with labelling). We do casual games, a market that is really growing. lots of individuals can now get into market, with causal games, iphones etc, there are plenty of ways in. Then there are serious games, training games, education. e.g. MOD to train doctors and nurses., e.g. triage after a bomb. A game is a lot cheaper to deliver than traditional triage. (the people have come out with high scores) The entertainment industry is US and Japan, all the big stuff we do is US client in dollars. They did not take games seriously when I started and they still don’t. I am convinced that games are the Hollywood of 21st century. We thing MW2 took more money than Avatar in first weekend (not sourced fact, opinion)) who is taking it seriously? There are a lot of governments, the British gov is starting to do it. (But in other countries) US etc, there is a lot of go support, they see it as a future industry, in UK, there is not. Businesses need to do it. there are a lot of visualisation tools, e.g. I have on iphone Westminster Hall visualisation – good for stuff you have not yet built as well. for training, there are so many areas that are expensive to do in real world..police, fire, army, navy, etc In a game you can make mistakes and learn from them. For advertising…we made the Burger King Games…12 weeks sold 3.8million copies of the 3 games…was a massive advertising success, profits went up 40% as a direct results of that. Education, can be used more, far more fun. people retain more if fun. It is quite poor at moment, as no joined up budgets commissioning games. it is a lot of research for teachers to do, we need centralised budgets to commission great games for use in classroom. If kids are interested in video games, to become a designer for many is dream job, but teachers say it is not a proper career. NO. It is a growing industry and these skills are useful for this and for many others. The drop off in people doing programming is horrendous, the business needs people programming, ITC is boring..the hook is games and they are not getting encouragement. Parents need to encourage the kids, get them to learn the skills, to get them in the industry. if we all took seriously then we in UK can be leaders in an exciting growing industry, part of knowledge economy, creative, is green and growing and exciting. we need all engaged and taking seriously and make sure we keep value and jobs in UK.

Sam Leith: when I was…interviewing Wil Wright, an interesting and strange guy, he told us about the medieval description, of someone who walked into a room, saw someone bent over an object, physically there but mentally absent, transfixed by an object..they were reading a book, this was the first time the onlooker had seen this and concluded their soul had been taken by devil. Something very similar seems to be the reaction to games to those who don’t play. it seems weird….they make the funny faces…it feeds into the fear and apprehension in the media. It is new..and for a long time, 2 things going on…there is only one story (in media) – the violence in videogames, that it makes kids sociopaths, violent etc, that sort of hysteria of creating what it effects to deplore. it feeds into marketing in a weird way, as there is only one story….so something that has a launch weekend as big as MW2, there would be wall-to-wall coverage if this was a film. but MW2 would have had almost no mainstream media if it had not contained the scene of shooting in the airport….you can’t but suspect that was in there to get attention There is childishness in some of the ways they are marketing which is a response to some of the ways they are understood. the 2nd things is their invisibility. so something as big as MW2 should be part of mainstream culture and conversation, but there is a strange relationship between mainstream an games. So Jonathan Wendell, formally the No1/ biggest gameplayer in the world, he played Quake with all the blood and guts turned off, he turned it into something simpler as it runs faster, you could beat people better if it runs faster. There was a game called Carmageddon, you drove around and got points for killing pedestrians. It was agreed in parliament that this was not a good thing. So they changed the blood colour to green – and said it was zombies, so this was OK. It’s OK to shoot Nazis, but no-one else. so there is concern over moral content of the game…in most cases it is not the game that forces you down one way, but allowing you to choose one without constraints and that becomes more so as they get sophisticated. So Eve Online, huge teams of people play, so one gang infiltrated a corporation, killed their leader, stole all their good (worth real money) and there was nothing in the game that encouraged this or stopped this…so the games are do what you will. Grand Theft Auto 4, you can play for 100s of hours without attracting police…there is a huge amount there about how people behaviour..and the moral questions, and the ownership of items, real world value…interesting from behaviour, economics, etc. There is work-play thing, a lot of things we do in games looks like work…eg levelling up in WOW. We see them as terms of other art forms, not all comparisons are entirely misleading, but leans you look for things in games that would be better somewhere else. Eg films, games being classified by the BBFC…if you consider games as work of art…of cultural artefacts, so recognise what they are like and what they have in common and talk about them formerly. My background in literary crit, makes me think about how we think about games….if you think of WOW as a film, you miss a lot. if you think of it as a cathedral, then different perspective. When you are talking about games, it is not one thing, one type of thing.. there are dozens….now games are diversifying, with wii, with casual, we are at a moment when gaming is moving into mainstream, diversifying.

Tom Watsom: Interesting comments about the things PR have to do to get it into the mainstream. As an aside, Guido Fawkes emailed said he was the UK champion at Asteroid in 1980!!!! The Palace of Westminster would be a brilliant place as a shoot-them-up setting..a 1000 rooms… a gothic palace……all these people discussing good and evil.

(Ed Vaisey joined panel)

TC calls on Derek Robertson: In Scotland, we have Consolarium..Scottish games-based learning, working in it for 3 years. I don’t agree there is a poor choice of games, we’ve been using off-the-shelf games….Nintendogs, Spore etc, there are plenty for children’s frameworks, we’ve had success nursery to secondary school. We are running a national contest for game design…serious games misses fun and entertainment

PO: you are using games that are accidenta;…..I think there is better to be done. e.g. age of empires is used, fantastic…..but they are side effects.

Nick Palmer: (an MP who had published Their Finest Hour game) I had published commercial games….(in a meeting last week I saw) each country has their own hangups that are different and moralshow they look at games. In US, fundamentalists worry about sex – shooting is fine. In Russia..the Duma is considering banning games in schools as some are about WW2 and you can play as a German. We should not attempt to occupy position that all games are OK..we are engaging in opponents’ arguments, they say all games the same, they are not….there are games I would not play or defend..we do need to get industry accepted as serious medium. Take a position about how de games don’t have to be boring and dull. So where politicians can help without spending money is in giving it an esteem it does not currently have. The effect of popularity is most people have played a game..but many trivial games, they have spread that is reinforcing the idea that games are trivial….we are looking at games Olympiads, ways of reminding people that games are all sorts.

(Next speaker works for Welcome Trust): Sneeze is a game we did recently….about viral mechanism..I share about serious games concerns…you need to be in spaces that are controlled by audience..entrainment games….e.g in GTA you pick up about NY. We did a very successful about viral spread.

Alex (Hide an Seek): I want ask panel that if you could nominate 1 game that in sophistication, nuances, intent, that you think is worth taking seriously?

PO: Wii FIT. business sold enormous number and made people thinks games are not just shooting….20mill in a space than many thought did not have a purpoise

EdVaisey: only has a Wii..so Wii Fit

TC: Flower.. on PS3. based on flow. move controller in space, direct wind to blow petal round landscape. it is a new vision in games, something anyone can pick up and interact at own speed artistic without being hi brow, they get immersive experience, very beautiful…no hurdles…like ii fit..people can get it instantly.

SL: for richness, WOW. or Elite, fantastically good

TW: don’t play this a lot..Rolando on iphone….physics. motion etc, allows you to graph. Sam, you can’t say Elite, that was 20 years ago!

(Talker from West Mids Regional Dev team, I think): Games as an industry, we punch over our weight in what we provide to business, we want make sure we can back winners..on serious games, about disengagement we need to find more ways to do this

Audience Comment: There is a map of parliament in Countrerstrike (fan made)…….I’ve written about Little Big Planet, Portal, Braid etc..but what games used to be very good at is telling a story, and less so. so Grim Fandango, my wife can watch. so today we have MW2, better to attack for story line….people bring up Bioshoock which is not the most complex

SL: FPS have some story to tell..the way games tell stories, there may be a drop in popularity, in films and books there is more a sense of times arrow, but games about iteration etc,,,stories are more modular….like choose your own, different paths…they tell stories in a different ways. Eg final fantasy series tell stories effectively. Therr is a MA in writing in Edinburgh Napier that has just started,,,,about different ways of narratives, looks at game writing as well. There is more games writing talent in the long run..initially games were written by the programmers, who were not writers.

TC: Grim Fandango was a miniature apex in game tradition..in the idea that it is growing up with its audience. the first games were text games, they lead to point and click,,,,to new games, grim fandango, 20 years of tradition. there is always a year xero stuff, when you change tech, go to 3d etc, you build up to next apex etc, you see new stuff now….you are starting to see this younger train of games building up to peaks..it takes time to build up tradition

Graham (??): In seriousness about games….I go to a game-based learning conference….when we look at use of games in learning, schools, it seems that gov or their agencies are queasy about this. we have seen negligible support…the home access programme, ignored the fact that many homes had consoles (which access web). given the reaction. of papers like the Metro about gaming platforms, so would go use consoles to get online. A DS costs 100£….so there are ways….it is not about creating games for learning, it is about getting in the hands….

TW: I agree with a lot of your analysis and some of them are missing opportunities to generate new ideas etc

EV: What is encouraging…..people are coalescing around games in a non-partisan fashion…I don’t play games very often, Defender was the last game I played until I got the wii a few months ago. Too often I hear questions about politicians not admitting they play games, as if they are embarrassed. the games industry are getting out and engaging and this is changing the political environment. The games industry are getting out and telling us – future industry, regional, still just one of the leaders, so is what not to like. There is a cultural gap, that echoed about rant of games based leaning, I’m 41,one of last gen where games was not part of the early experience. a lot of officials are the same, so they do not understand how games relate across a whole range of policy areas. People need to get in front of people and bang the drum, there is a consensus of principles involved in supporting games industries, their is no money, but about giving games a voice at top table,,,so extend film council? (setting up new quango is difficult and where is the money). Look at extending the financial support, tax credits, etc, VC support, a matter of debate….there are practical obstacles, getting a uniform voice and still getting it through the treasury, which is always difficult. 3rd element people are talking about is about skills and the right courses, and make sure people are those the industry want to employ, need to get right course accredited…the climate has changed,,,,and will continue to do so.

TW:so Dawn, captures imagination of kids with video games (she’s an educationalist)..so how do you manage this?

Dawn: use common sense, it is lacking from media and politicians…so use common sense. we would not take games (like that) into classroom, even if my kids play them. In England, move to more games in classroom, is being self funded, Ofsted love it..I asked the kids what hey would say they relate to them it is realm, gives them a social connection, they all know it is my way of getting to secretly learn….using a game of the shelf, is good, kids see through an educational game. so we use mario cart to do physics and friction….

Michael??: PEGI…it is with you (the politicians) protecting games, by giving an appropriate age system for games, for playing online etc, ….it is great to have discussion…for me and for ELSPA it is about having confidence that games are a serious part of culture, learning,entertainment etc. it is one of our challenges that we new to this world, so many different things we need to touch on and evangelise and convince people….we need time, we are doing our bit. they are making huge strides, the number of negative stories has declined
. wee need to stop being hurt games, be normal gamers doing a normal things.

Aud Q: So about licences and age limits, we have, so it is not recognised that parents buy it the games..where is the rebuttal for that kind of action….

TW: the debate in parliament, is about the rating system right and what responsibility the industry has to promote that. so the change will happen and then we need to get the system there, the idea there about the ratings…

EV: it’s all part of the mix, that there are games you would not want you games to play….Ian (Duncan Smith) said about bad parenting to play or watch inappropriate things..games was the one that was reported

TW: wrap up time

TC: I was fascinated to see how the coubtries games act as a mirror to their fears, games are youngest and much divisive of media. I look to when we can say more than games are bad or good, and wait for people to discuss them properly. The pace of tech change brings us face to face with this issues regularly, games are 40-50 years, print took 500. it is difficult,,,,but valuable. If 1484 people would argue about how not learning the stories and information, damages conversation and society, there is plenty to lean about things. Already the boundaries between gaming and non-gaming is much more permeable than is given….most people don’t connect Farmville and scrabble as video games. If they see things on a spectrum then they can stop seeing them as their worst fears, They can start to appreciate games. We can measure and learn about from games…In US 8-18 yr. olds, 7.5 hrs a day on entertainment system..future looks like this and games are one of the best ways to use this, to be part of the world…having a proper discussion with out falling back on cliches is absolutely needed to make games apart of the world.

This year, I’m not making any New Year’s resolutions, but am stating some ambitions for the year. I’m only starting with 2, although more may be added later.

1. Be able to run 5k. It’s been a long time since I could do this comfortably, so the ambition is to get back into shape to be able to make this target. It involves eating better and doing more exercise, but it is all tied into a achievable goal instead of more nebulous aims of ‘exercising more’ or ‘eating less’.

2. To visit 10 new cities this year. Some of these are already planned in, I’m planning to see Melbourne and Adelaide in my trip to Australia so will count these. Following on from last year’s cathedral trips, I’m planning on going to Canterbury and Ely. Everything else is up in the air, so any suggestions would be welcome. The only condition is they need to be low cost to get to by public transport (or a cheap flight) and be doable in a day or 2 at a weekend.

How about you, are you doing resolutions this year?

I like this video – I should do as it came from the agency I work at. It’s been fun watching the development process, the highs and lows of defining the scenarios, the legwork in getting the games. I think it turned out well.

WARNING: Liveblogged and not checked

While the industry discussion has meandered from questions surrounding the validity of the ‘Long Tail’ to a debate about the notion of “free” and the generation of value itself – viable business models have begun to emerge. In these models, fan communities continue to figure prominently, as do monetized value networks and innovative advertising exchanges. Questions remain: How are these models different for the artist, band, brand, media text or transmedia property (print, film, tv, music, etc.)? How are meaningful relationships forged in an online culture that values non-monetary exchanges? How do these relationships benefit people and how do they benefit brands? How have fan communities responded when companies and brands try to participate in their communities? What is being sold? Content? Access? Authenticity? Notions of community itself? And how are fans and audiences being engaged to conceive of, launch, and contribute to the growth of these new business models?

Moderator: Nancy Baym- University of Kansas; Panelists include: Lara Lee – Principal, Jump Associates; Mark Zagorski – Chief Revenue Officer, eXelate Media; Seth Arenstein – Editorial Director/Assistant Vice President, Cable Fax; Paul Dalen – Owner, Reverse Thread; David Spitz, WPP

• NB: our mandate was to think about business models. We have people who are cultural studies people who are suspicious of making money as a goal, of companies, creative people who want to be paid but don’t want to be boxed in and then in business who want to pay their employees.  In listening to what has been happening, we have heard about disruption to business models…all over..there’s no model that worked in 75 that is just great.
• PD: a manager in the music business, a boutique firm, with 5 solo artists, plus a few record producers.  There have been profound changes, particularly on the recording side. The only thing my artists have in common is that they are unique voices. I offered to come on the place of one of my clients, who is touring..she launched a plan on the web to raise for money raised $89k to make her next record (Jill…) she would point out that this is not a new model, but as she is good on camera, she is articulate, she is fun, the mainstream media latched on to this. On this we made the decision to use a third party to help distribute – Red – but part of Sony. Jill has an older demographic so we needed the record to be available in physical form in shops.
• DS: I work in Strategy in WPP, ads is less than a quarter that we do. 50% is in consumer insight, the rest is digital. My job is to expand the digital space.   If you are an aggregator that needs large audience, then it is difficult. for us, free represents a huge opportunity on the demand side. There are free and low cost alternatives across all our areas.  We are not just responsible for ads on tv, we have to work on earned and owned media, huge complexity for clients to that creates a role for us Also natural search. there are free models for consumer insight. There are also premium produts, such as Omniture, which we have an investment. But why pay when you have Google analytics, but people do use it.
• MZ: a start up in the targeting space, looking at market place for online targeting data. creating extensions for publishers that go beyond traditional advertising. we have to get down to the reality in the market place. the concept of free online is rapidly using relevance, especially with content being created.  So traditional media companies that fund free online are collapsing, you cannot do funding if no revenues. There is a credit crisis, so ability to fund content has dried up. VCs has become extremely aggressive, they are not waiting for start-ups to make money, you need to have a plan to make money tomorrow.   they are all coming together, there is perfect storm to create a really bland, corporate funded environment without innovation. I look at ways for publishers to take audience interactions and use them to sell online. There are two main models – advertising and subscriptions. Ads are still sold as content as proxy for audience, but we’re talking about audience as proxy for audience.  We look at finding other indicators on users, so advertisors can reach the users beyond content.
• SA: i’m a trade journalist. I have two strikes…I write abut the cable tv industry and I write for a publication that costs a lot of money to get.   We have not changed our model, the daily I write for costs about $1000/yr, they are still buying. Showing highly specialised content is king. we are not growing much  but we have a good base. Cable is the bad guy and does not want to give away programmes for free and worried about the next gens used to getting content for free.  the cable industry is working on a model where you could get programming on your laptop and trial of that tech and use are going on, it is the business model that will reward the cable co and the creators..eg TV anywhere -if I buy cable I can get it on any device.
• LL: I work in a growth and innovation strategy firm, we work with companies (Nike, GE, HP ) connect their capabilities with unmet needs with people in the world. We bring together social science, design and strategy.  Eg you are a tech co and want to own digital entertainment, or you want to know how to create content that connects with a new audience etc. we develop strat, new business models, products, platforms etc.  I used to work at Harley Davidson, where I built a division based on experiences. think a lot about fandom, about passion . I look at brands and their communities, plus business models and using cultural change to make them sustainable.
• SA: can you tell us what Jill did?
• PD: there was a multilevel donations. $10 got a copy the month before, there were tshirts, you could sing on the record, get a free concert etc. There were many models. About 50% were in the 15-20$ range.  It engaged the core fan base but brought in other people. Someone did take up the $10k offer (to sing on the record), form the UK, she came and sang on the song. 
• NB: one of the things that got people excited was the cleverness…the words used were creative…why did she decide to take this approach?
• PD: she had been dropped 4 times over the years, there were power shifts, her advocate was fired and left at  labels who did not care.  lables were happy ot give you money in advance, but then drop it. not do any more.  She had enough at that, she is a career artist and looked for a better way.   for a long time Jill had been communicating directly with her fans. She was putting up mixes, getting opinions.
• SA: she could not have done this if she had signed to a label (put up rough cut)
• PD; some of the smaller ones are OK, most of the larger aren’t. The artist now has many different ways to make a living, but a label can only do it by selling records.
• NB: the labels are not as necessary anymore, so that is the crisis. Is that the same for cable channels?
• SA: you made a statement and that is correct.  Looking at the experiment of TV anywhere, a conumdrum is that if stream Mad Men to my computer how do I keep my brand (AMC) in front of you..it is a marketing question. But read tht if they do not get their act together in 18mnths it will fall apart.  
• MZ: they do play a role. They are aggregators, filters and distribution. The web takes away distribution, but there is lots of stuff out there, to filter and aggregate. For Jill to make a living, she still needs to aggregate an audience and that could be the role for these companies. Now they are just a part of that, but it is a smaller piece of the business.
• LL: this links back..previous panel asking about if you have the guts to re-invent, before that it was about leveraging your assets, so how can they repurpose their assets. So HD had factory tours, it was a gift before.. If you start changing money for it, then it makes them angry, but they love to buy things, so if you offer them merchandise, or offer them space to get married, if you offer them value added opps you take assets that are costs and creating values. So instead of cliging to old models how can they repurpose.
• DS: if I wanted to create something cool, I could hire someone here who would be cheaper…so agencies need to remodel – new cost models, agencies need to get out the way, so can produce at lower cost. Let agencies programme manage, creates the whole thing, not just the app etc. Agencies take a wider role, instead of creating and building.
• MZ: media has thrived on fat and inefficiency, either in ratings (which are mushy) or how media is transacted, which has been by handshakes and now we have exchanged. tech has started to eliminate the fat and it scares them.
• DS: it is a spectrum, none of the stuff is free. If you want it to stand out in the pack you need to invest in marketing. So we take a model, gave 2 directors their own shop. They create YouTube videos, it stands out on YT as high production value. but lower cost to produce.
• NB: so this term free?  You said it was really free, it was ad supported…
• LL: it is back to changing business models, where is the value delivered. A lot of what we talk about free it is marketing, it could be content, entertainment, experience. you don’t monetise by charging..so if you read the book free you would be hard pressed to find something that is free, even Google…
• MZ: the concept only works for the person getting it, not the producer. The artists don’t want to give away stuff as they need to eat. They may do some as marketing and promotion, but access for free does not work, there needs to be some exchange of something. it can be knowledge, services. We live in a society where everything has a value, the web you can see it instantly, value stuff gets traffic.  Someone has to pay somewhere. 
• LL you pay somewhere, taxes, a markup etc
• SA:  I play trumpet, in cafes etc, and I pay for free. or do i? i get tips, I can take an opportunity away from someone.
• NB: but you are receiving some kind of reward, so not all rewards are monetary.  there are other kinds of rewards. Sometimes I get worried that the feeling that anything other than money is not a model….
• SA: but if i needed that job to pay be bills then I could not do it…
• PD: but aren’t you playing because you are compelled to play music….
• SA: but the small cafe was called by the BMI wanting payment for the band playing in the cafe…
• PD: the people I work with, free is a promotional device not a business model. The audiences I work with are in the position that they own everything (or they will be shortly) so we can collectively do what we want. free is a component of a larger business plan. Yo give me your email address, age and zipcode and that is a great tool for use. We are trying to build genuine and authentic relationships with fans,…but there is a pushback on the 1000 true fans so you can’t ignore the casual fans.
• DS: sometimes the exchange is explicit…Facebook is not free etc.it is abut content and distribution…we are launching the Ford Fiesta..we gave cars out to 100 people, who were creating content around it. they rewarded with vehicle, but we get the content. There is 60% awareness with no advertising and it does not launch until next week.  
• MZ: the assumption that content is free, an assumption that everyone is writing on blogs because they are interested in them, but there is a lot of product placement out there and now the FTC is changing this. It has not been free and it will ot so lets get the rules out there.
• LL: we do not live entirely   in the world in economics, but we have been so long a consumer we are expected to put things through economics, but it is not always this, we are not always looking for a transaction. But if you are a visit there is a problem unless you can make money
• NB: what is the role in the audience/fan/customer in new business models, how do you work that line between validating them as humans and using them to make money.
• LL" from the world of Harley, peopel are passionate about brand, it is central part of lives.  the relationship was nurtured with a deep sense of respect. if you think about this as relationships, over a long time, how to understand signals. eg they had an open house and hot dogs were free. at one point in time, the dealers wanted to run this and the dealers decided to charge for the hot dogs…the riders now had to pay for this..it changed the relationship. you have to think it as a relationship..with mutual respect, people know you are a business, Harley riders know they pay a premium but they know they get listened to,
• SA: I’m torn. we are all in the business world, we have gone through a recession, You see people laid off, it hardens you quickly, it makes you realise that brand loyalty and respect, it sounds really good but i feel at the end of the day, even with journalism, it is a bottom line business and if you look at the channels, that carry news, it was supposed to be a public service, but I would say that beyond Jim Lehrer every news operation is ruled by ratings. and ratings equals dollars.
• MZ: if you start talking a out community and fan bases and the line between exploiting and engagement. A lot has to do with communication.   There are lots of comms  and great ways to connect, but you have to respect the,. Beacon was a failure as it did not respect their users. You have to communicate… if there had been a sign explaining why they were charging for hotdogs, then it would have gone better.  You have to be transparent in what you are doing. 
•  DS: facebook is no 1 site by time spent, their revenue is <25 of googles. they do not monetise as aggressively as they Google. Google are not linking as much as their data as they could be..people are learning lesson about how to treat audiences.
• AUDQ: often face the problem of distributing public media, public networks. It is easy to go to the question about should content be free or not. I’d like to hear about the process models…if everyone agrees that creators should be renumerated, then what are the areas of friction that could be looked at. Also rights, what if people did not challenge the rights to get compensated, may be the rules are so onerous that the payment can not be done easily.
• PD: I would like to answer his..the people I work with, they own everything, It is about art meets commerce. Part of my job is to help them understand the financial implications, it becomes a non issue when you are the owner.
• LL: there is not one answer. it is who are you, what are your assets, what is your value.  So about moving Monday night football to Sunday night, we looked at new audience, a different set of behaviours. We turned it in to an event, it was more accessible for a wider audience, more accessible for more casual users, they cross promoted on Bravo, Top Chef…they took the same property and did more with it. they thought about value, but still an ad supported model.
• MZ:  a major friction point, beyond the laws. It is truely bout tracking a piece of content and where it goes. So if you could fully trackable and then there’s micropayments, how many people would give stuff away to this
• NB: but as a consumer I’m giving up a lot of data..as some point people figure out about this., why should you monitor my use of it. Isn’t there pushback
• DS:  it cuts both ways, on FB, it is a platform, there is a lot of money on this, a closed architecture etc. But the same value equation can be captured by content creator, you can use tools to monetise that audience, more and more tools to track influence etc. If your audience is connected and a content creator you can track this and that gives you value.
• SA: going back to the question; one of the things my company does is give out awards. We were going to have a big lunch, we were going to give out an award. We wanted to use a clip of the show, you would not believe how many lawyers i needed to deal with to get a 30′ clip
• AUDQ: the key question is not a out becoming free or not..but which types of content is suitable for free? So advertising is one model, the gift economy is another, and a third is a benefit relationship – give away one and money from another. Do you have a theory of which content most suitable for different models.?
• SA: You see that all the time. less valuable content is free. eg the older stuff is free on site, there are things you can pay for on the site
• MZ: in the Office, wikipedia – "anything can write anything they want and it is all true"..so what is information and what is opinion. Factual stuff is being seen as the commodity, you can get any where. The opinion stuff is what you pay for. You can charge for opinion, not for fact. I think that is scary.
• LL: to me, I find the idea of content somewhat problematic. But if you think as it all as experience, then the lines blur.
• MZ: so what is content, if I write a book on my friends facebook content, where is the value,. what is content and who owns. it
• PD ;it can be dynamic and changes over time.  Artists are free, they are no longer bound by construct of a record, artists can release in many forms.  even the same content can change costs. Custom bundling is a big thing for music at the moment.
• AUDQ: people who provide content for free have been demonised…can you address this tension?
• SA: I don’t agree with it. If you can put your product on line for free and it ‘sells’ better then more power to you.  In the cafe, it is unlikely to be able to pay for a band, I play for free.
• MZ: an area where this is being done..design and graphics, eg a company asking their fans to design a logo, no longer paying companies… it undermines designers.
• DS: we own companies that do both…the value in the logo contest is all the checking and everything…
• SA: what about quiznos…they are getting commercial from fans…why wouldn’t they vet?
• NB: we also have writers giving away stuff for free and still selling loads of stuff…

WARNING: Liveblogged and not checked

What counts as “radio” when it comes via podcast rather than over the air? How do we create “television” as the limitations of spectrum scarcity slip away and content is delivered online? Media is determined by conventions that emerge from both technological constraints and cultural practices – the technologies of content delivery shape the industrial and the creative modes that define something like “television.” In a world of convergence, the basis for many of the conventions that define media are in flux. How can we come to understand and redefine the industrial, consumption and creative practices of media as convergence works to erode some of the distinctions between them? How is radio affected once it moves from the Hertzian waves to the podcast? What happens to the comic once it moves from the page to a Playstation? How are audiences responding to and shaping these shifts? And how are business models adapting to these changes?

Joshua Green – Research Manager, Convergence Culture Consortium; Panelists include: Dan Goldman – Illustrator of Shooting War (Grand Central Publishing [US] and Weidenfeld & Nicolson [UK]); Jennifer Holt – UC Santa Barbara, co-editor of Media Industries (Wiley-Blackwell); Brian Larkin – Milbank Barnard College; Avner Ronen – CEO & Co-founder, Boxee

• JG: (Reads the intro above – asks the panel to respond). We used to have clear understanding of what media were; is convergence eroding the differences? What implications are there?
• AR: from Boxee; a NY start-up, started from personal frustration, using digital media in living rooms and no good solution to bring stuff to TV. We wanted to create a new kind of experience on the TV, to access to all the content that they like. When we started we did not know we would generate so much unease for the industry. We found ourselves in the middle of a big sea change – freaking out abut the TV being a screen connecting to the internet.  Reaction from most is to resist change; even though history of change in TV is that it is for better.  to answer the thesis, we think everything changes once connected and maybe the biggest change is around the creative process. It is a huge industry and it is all based around the existing model; it is around the platform and once the platform changes, then everything needs to be considered. We are where Tv was in 50s – when T was radio with a screen. We need to take advantage of the medium, there is a disconnect between creative and technology; the new gen of creators will have a different world. franchises will be built will be bigger than anything we have on content; the future of content producers is bright. The size of the industry will grow. the content will grown and the money will grow
• BL: (Shows images from Indian films, Nigerian film industry, African film distribution).  Do research in Nollywood.  Nigerian and Ghana have pioneered the video film process; a practice of traveling theater,  there was a rise in cheap tape technology, at the time of structural adjustment. TV industry was at bottom. There was a confluence of events, so you got dramas on video. The rise of armed robbery reduced cinemas in the south (which were taken over by Pentacostal churches – who had a lot of editing and filming expertise).   In mid-90s there were about 50 films..at height 2k films.year, now about 1500/year. Nigeria sees itself as a major media content producer, would like to see itself as a regional dominator. All very cheaply, in about 2wks, released a week later. There is no canon. Because of piracy, you have to get it out quickly and make money on 2 weeks.  It has an enormous domestic market.  It is powerful in anglophone africa and moving into francophone. The Nigerian film industry is aware of this, but has problems monetising the industry. It has created 2 things in convergence culture. It has a form unlike any others, it is about domestic consumption – videos in the home. It has  anew form of viewing practice – the video parlour, a space that can be anything from a space with a roof where 20 people may watch, or a room in a house, It sits in between the private of house and the public anonymity of the cinema. In places, women are banned from cinema, but can watch this.   In my work, if you build a media model, how might that be if look at Nigeria. for instance, in many parts of Africa, there is little distinction between religious and secular media, they converge. In west, there is a big christian media, but we segregate it when talking media, no matter the size or the models of monetising.  In Nogeria it is difficult to make that separation; they came from Nigeria, in a world not tutored in Afircan film aesthetics. The issues about witchcraft etc have become prominent. Most of the criticism in Nollywood have come from people trained in Film schools, they see it as cheap, bad, too much about witchcraft etc. One of the reasons witchcraft is so prominent is one of the ways to save yourself is to give your self to Jesus Christ – the savor is the pastor. the aesthetic link to Christianity and the distribution links are all connected.  The expansion of church and the video distribution over laps.
• JH: my interest is looking at convergency and transmedia through the lens of legal issues and policy.  Look at how cable and broadcast and film, and telecommunications, have come together through a particular set of legal and regulatory pathways. So what has allowed the tyrannical transmedia nightmare that is Hannah Montana..why are we subject to it on so many different levels. I came interested about how the same proportions of studios that owned cinema in the 40s when they were forced to divest was the same in the 80s.  I’m thinking about the implications of TV that is giving us this transmedia, tv is what is keeping these companies afloat. Domestic film is only about 3% of their annual earnings. So for NBC Universal , the most profitable bit is USA. regulation has been protecting cable companies at the expense of film and broadcast.  To me, I’m interested in looking at the impulses of TV business models, the importance of transmedia, plus the history of cable through lens of regulation and policy.
• DG: I write and draw comic book. My interest with this place, is about the changes, from music, to film/.tv to comics. I think the tsunami of digital distribution has not hit yet.   Been a professional comic creator for a number of years, a self publisher, gone onto the web. Something called Shooting War has gone from web to a major publisher.  the elephant of the change that is happening, I’ve circled. The contrast is so clear. With Shooting War I published from ??(96), i posted weekly and could watch direct when people watched it and that beat the distribution of hard copy comics. The web comics that succeed the most are strip based and gag based, not long form. The internet had been used in a simple way to replace the Sunday funnies; the cartoon syndicates has crumbled, and now the political cartoonists are losing work. As the delivery method changes, the business models follow suit and the landscape changes.  I’ve been doing long form things. I did a project called 08, (about election),I covered the whole election, went on the road a little.  During this, I was begging publisher to get it printed, but they were slow. After election, I’d been working to get the comic as an iPhone app, but publisher won’t wake up to this being viable. The contrast to digital vs brick and mortar,..they promoted it a little, with a front of table buy, but you had to go into the store – and only in the US..to see it. It did it OK. It was a stronger than Shooting War, but it was slow and flawed with the marketing.    I’m fully digital and portable.   So how is the change manifesting?  the change to the audience and the work?  It is easy to take the stuff and slap it into a new container but where is the fun in that?  this thing that is happening now, this is our time to change things, our time to shine. It is a missed opportunity, and I’m not going to do this. I look to format my work for digital devices and it is almost a responsibility to jump into this new water. So I’m launching a new series…will show artwork that shows a digital version and how it will work across both. It makes sense to figure out the multimedium workflow before you start . red Light Properties – the story of a family run realty offices. they sell haunted houses.  The art is in illustrator (lineart), photoshop (colour), Miai 3d modeling (Background) all bought together in photoshop. On digital, you can do microreveals and the page can build..in print it will look like the final page. Motion Comics….look like cheap animation…would take the pictures and move them around etc. this pisses me off. If the comics are done well, the reader will hear the voices and music, not the same for everyone, so don’t like the Motion comics.  They are clips, which means you are not in control of time you take to move through the piece, you are not passive, you can’t take time.
• JG: the first consoles frightened the TV people, as you could do different things with the TC. Brain Clark asks if anything is new? Is this new, or is this a different set of circumstances?
• DG: I don’t see this as a collapse. There are opportunities. Beyond replacing one structure with another, at least in terms of my stuff, the media is old and we’re adding twists. There are no new ideas here
• JH: the problems are not new, nor the crises in business models. If you take the long view there are clear cycles of expansion and contraction, They have had to contend with that and with business models in desperate need of regeneration. Issues of convergence are not new. There have been cross over as far back as you can think of. They are just another burst in the cycle,
• AR: but when tech comes about it is usually disruptive. And now we have a critical mass of screens in different sizes, connected to the same network. The content is digital and change is inevitable, you have to adjust. So animated comics may be poorly made but there is space for it.   All the traditional boundaries are artificial; what tech is great at is taking out inefficiences in a model. And that is what has happened in the music business – eg albums vs a single track . Newspapers are inefficient. I’m traditionalist as I get a weekend paper, but news is digital.  Tech and users are ahead of the industry. It will catch up, but not sure if good and bad.
• BL: with rise of ska and rocksteady/reggae, that was about sound systems…you would use the record to attract people to your sound system; the cheaper sound systems could not go to US all the time to copy US songs, they asked the Jamiacan people to copy the sounds. they made records with no vocal, so DJs could make their own (which birthed hiphop). then the industry changed. We are now in a crisis of reproduction…in jamiaca, the event driven sounds system has driven a lot. we have gone back to a point where the production of music is driving people back to live events, as that is not copyable….Technology does change it, we have to understand how tech pushes and how it intersects with cultural practices…
• AR: so there are users. Users care about it big time – they care about the content, not the channel, the time. then there is innovation about the creative side; if everything is connected and on demand and it is cheaper to produce you will see the creative embracing the tech. Tech provides different environments..so in eastern europe a better connection as developed later. In africa will it be cable or mobile 4G? IN asia the change will be very quick and very significant?
• JG: if there is continuity here, if these changes are driven by cultural practices, so why is the industry constantly employing this discourse of crisis, so why do tech shifts set everyone running around like hair on fire
• JH: some lost 70% of revenue..that is a crisis. new ways of delivering content, they do not seem eager to embrace. Fear of cannibilising other revenue streams is not a visionary strategy…so how do they come up with a digital distribution strategy.
• AR: the issue is money. Cable is average $65/onth from video subscription,. no one wants to disrupt it…as public companies living quarterly, no one wants a dip…so can’t live with investors. this is why it is hard to incumbents to adjust.  The best thing we have as users is there is not much they can do to delay this. the internet is hear to say.
• JH: looking at 2008 reports, they had to prepare shareholders for their losses and there will be more.
• JG: you describe boxee as a disrupter…
• AR: we are not trying to be disruptive to a business model. we say what we think, which upsets them. We are just saying they need to be where the users are.  You as a content owner can describe what business model you can use. the lack of content online is not a tech issue, but a business model issue. So take existing model and put it on the internet. Consumers are going to just want to pay for what they want. If you are an incumbent, then you have to adjust your mindset and get on the offensive.  If you are a content creator, and you think about subscription is better than advertising, then do it. create more.  Change your thinking..with the internet you can go anywhere, you can go globally and build a brand there.
• DG: there has been a perception that web content is free…but with phones there is not that same pushback about spending money.
• AUDQ: how about national boundaries to content? (eg hulu, iplayer)
• AR: the web breaks down the barriers. if you don’t show it, then the watcher goes to torrents.  People go around the blocks.  the best way to fight is too offer content in an easy way and people will pay.
• Dg:  torrent is practically a free platform, so give it tom them and you can have premium tiers. So if you give people something for free they will help you keep it going, make it clear that i will go away and you can get involvement.
• JH: we have to learn the lessons of the music industry..we have to have some faith in the long term. The music industry and others have not learnt it.
• BL: written about how piracy has been central to the Nigerian film industrian..when the film industry produced it, the only people who could distribute were pirates.    Piracy created the infrastructure that allowed the film industry..but they still don’t know how to deal with it yet, eg piracy of western tv vs local films. you can buy stuff online in NY/London but no idea if any of the money goes back to source. If the film industry can get a cable channel in London, then they can get some revenue
• JG: you rise a point of a flow out and back from regions….could Nigerian video parlour suggest a new way of showing in the west.?
• BL: there were lots of Indian cinemas when I grew up; with videos they all died. Now multiplexes have screens just for bollywood films, there is something about film going, I’m surprised it has not taken off, especially for niche films.  When Nigeria went to video projection, they could show far more. 
• JG/AUDQ: isn’t content just content? What is the relationship between content and media?
• DG: having things traveling with you is a great idea – the ability to dial into boxee. As you move between devices, having your network across all the platforms means you can vary the experience depending on where you access it. you can experiment..
• JG/AUDQ: what held them back?
• JH: fear held them back…it’s not the biggest companies that are the innovators…it is the smaller ones. It is usually smaller companies that do innovation…
• DG: when a system fails…new things come up.. Solutions are tried and then dropped…
• AR: they do experiement…eg Disney put content on ipods, pout shows on line….it may seem too small or too late, but it is major move. not sure if we would have made same or different decisions with billions of dollars at stake.  
• AUDQ: 3 strikes rules?
• AR: there are still ways to take it away…, net neutrality, etc, with bad government decision, would not want to live in place with good internet.  you will see people moving.
• JH: Net neutrality is a regulatory miracle at the moment at the moment…it is so important to be aware of how fragile this is.
• Ar: we don’t have net neutrality properly today, there are companies that shape traffic.
• AUDQ: this panic about new tech disrupting businesses. has been used strategically to get copyright protection etc, is that part of the discourse now?
• JH: Yes, I see it as part of protecting America..
• AUDQ: perspective on relationship of artists with companies?
• DG: it is probably in artists best interest to try both and see what works best. There’s no reason if you can’t get someone to pay you, then it is easier
• AR: there is not one model that will win. the web opens up more opportunities though, you can monetise without a major label. It depends however on the scale of what you want to make. But low cost end, then take a stab at goign direct to consumer.  Infrastructure is going to get better.
• BL: many artists are in the same positions as companies; they are in the same position of giving up money. You need the balls to try something new. If you put a lot of time and effort, the returns are small, do you want to get money, it is not about ust giving it away for free. No one know what the future will bring. In Nigeria, the film makers are in a big battle with distributors, the money is normally put up by them..the film makers are triyng to wrest it back, the gov trying to regulate it with distribution licences.
• JG: .what do you think about policy? (also a round up)
• Ar: I do think about it, for net neutrality and the impact of satellite. I have no plan in working through regulation, it is not something we could contemplate. I’ve spoken with FCC(??) occasionally,  the team there lives in the same world we live in. we don’t have resources to fight a battle but think we have a team that speaks our language.   We have a business in boxee that is difficult to scale internationally, the content is geolocked, if we don’t have local content then we can’t move. I’m fascinated by social aspects of media distribution…what will happen it will be global, we will become smaller more connected world.
• BL: Nigeria does not have a lot of media regulation? Key issue is about censorship, eg about northern states that adopted sharia law. the industry was based on the north, but it was banned…it is an issue of control, they don’t know how it will play out. they may pack up and move, but not very easy there. the ways in which the industry will go will depend on these legal dynamics
• JH: legislation impacts different to technology. Follow the money – more important than any philosophical view of the government…it is part of our mission to equate things like web access to phone calls etc….it has limited some of the big ticket productions but there are a lot of opportunities