Some Observers - Emerging Futures + Technologies + Consumers
Filed under

culture

 

What New Metaphors Will Emerge from Developing Markets?

PSFK today pointed to a brief essay on Mashable by Xerox's Venkatesh Rao regarding the evolving metaphors we use in innovation, specifically around technology. Rao's article, "How Conceptual Metaphors are Stunting Web Innovation" looks at how, like armies fighting the last war in this one, we tend to let metaphors around design and usage linger long after the platform from which we got the metaphor has moved from leading edge to baggage. 

As a Xerox researcher, information formats and functions are close to his heart, and he cites the way we've clung to ideas such as "open and close" for digital documents in the age of dynamic, collaborative content such as we find on the Web, often more of a fleeting collection of information than a closed-ended container. As progress, he cites Google Wave as at least moving on to the "stop and start" metaphor of recorded media, but suggests there are more interesting metaphors to be had and resulting innovations in our understanding and use of technology. 

What jumped out at me reading his essay is how, despite our grudging migration, we still rely on metaphors of experiences of the high-tech developed world. The folder, the desktop, the document—all artifacts of centuries of bureaucracy. Or, like clicking an imaginary shutter release, we mimic use of a modern technological artifact like a camera. I wonder, though, as cultures that weren't core to the initial phase of development of Western IT gain influence, what new functional or interaction metaphors will come to the for in the next, say, twenty years? How might content, communication, or digital socialization undergo new evolution based on metaphors that didn't come out of Chicago, Paris or Heidelberg in the last few centuries, but have been embedded in Jakarta or Sao Paolo instead, or from street subcultures or networks that aren't yet evident?

A lot of this work is happening now: the fantastic Younghee Jung, for example, has been working with colleagues for some time to better understand gestural languages and how they may impact interaction design, as have other teams at various device makers and academic centers worldwide. We are only just starting to see the earliest fruit of some of this work—interaction modes that will become common in years to come but which western consumers and designers haven't even considered yet. As we move into the era of touch and motion-based interaction, this gets even more interesting. Stay tuned.

Filed under  //   culture   gesture   information   interaction  
Posted by Scott Smith 

Comments [0]

Food for Thought from an Essay by Keith Hart

Keith Hart, best known for his work on "informal economy", defining the vitality of the urban entreprenuerial spirit he encountered as a young anthropologist in Ghana in the early 1970s has just posted an essay called The Digital Revolution and me. While enthusiasts should certainly read the whole, here are a few snippets that I found thoughtful observations that relate to the explorations on this blog.

We are living through the first stages of a world revolution as profound, in my view, as the invention of agriculture. It is a machine revolution, of course: the convergence of telephones, television and computers in a digital system whose most visible symbol is the internet. It is a social revolution, the formation of a world society with means of communication adequate at last to expressing universal ideas. It is a financial revolution, the detachment of the virtual money circuit from production, linked to the West’s loss of control over the world economy. It is an existential revolution, transforming what it means to be human and how each of us relates to the rest of humanity. It is therefore also a revolution in anthropology that will make everything we have done so far seem like the prehistory of our discipline.
...

At about this time, in the mid-90s, the World Wide Web was making the internet more visual, personal and interactive. For two years I headed a Cambridge committee to explore the uses of audio-visual aids and information technology for teaching and research in the humanities and social sciences. People said there was no point in Cambridge University entering this brave new world; we were too old-fashioned and places like Middlesex Polytechnic had much more experience with online techniques. But I argued that over the centuries we had accumulated lots of beautiful stuff that could become a rich internet resource. In any case the digital revolution is not a linear development. Everyone enters it with their own bundle of specific advantages and drawbacks at a particular moment in time. The technology evolves, so that early users may be too adapted to older techniques, while latecomers can make more creative use of software that requires less specialist knowledge than before. The society made by the machine revolution is a river and you can never step into the same river twice.
...

And so to the last few years, to the social networking revolution and Web 2.0: Google, Myspace, Facebook, Digg, Flickr, Twitter, Stumbleupon, Flock, Wave and all the rest. This is the heart of the revolution I want to join. I love Twitter for the chance to project myself as an editor of sorts, sending the best economic journalism from Europe to American traders, gold bugs and currency freaks. I meet an interesting class of anthropologists there. And I hone my subediting skills on the 140-space limit. Social bookmarking really turns me on. Classification of knowledge was hitherto done by experts and every piece of information had its unique place in a folder somewhere. Now tagging makes it possible for anyone to leave a mark on something they like or consider useful and you can find their guidance with increasingly sophisticated software. The people are generating the categories; and even a search engine like Google is becoming obsolete because its millions of hits are impersonal, less attuned to the user’s own profile.
...

People ask me how I find time for my work with all this stuff. But, since exchanging Cambridge University for a Paris chambre de bonne 12 years ago, I have doubled my rate of publication over that of the previous three decades. My productivity as a writer benefits enormously from being online 12 hours a day. I can check anything in a fraction of the time. I stay at my work station longer when I can answer an email message there, keep an eye on a football match, surf the OAC for the latest developments. Sometimes the speed and diversity of my online connections generates a wave motion that carries my writing into unexpected regions of discovery. If this is the virtual social life, it will do for me. Bring on the revolution!
...

What have I learned from all this? I could quote from the introduction to this website:

The two great memory banks are language and money. Exchange of meanings through language and of goods through money are now converging in a single network of communications, the internet. We must discover how to use this digital revolution to advance the human conversation about a better world. Our common task is to make a world society fit for all humanity.

Filed under  //   anthropology   culture   Internet   society   technology  
Posted by Niti Bhan 

Comments [0]

Questioning the Global Mobile Apparatgeist

The Economist recently put forth an argument strongly reminiscent of Theodore Levitt's 1983 HBR classic "The globalization of markets" (PDF) where he first framed the concept that global consumer preferences were converging, thus companies could develop, launch and market the same product across the globe - “Different cultural preferences, national tastes and standards, and business institutions are vestiges of the past." We know where that argument went however, so lets take a closer look at the venerable Economist's thesis. A few key snippets:

A few years ago such questions provoked academic controversy. Not everybody agrees with Ms Ito’s argument that techno logy is always socially constructed. James Katz, a professor of communication at Rutgers University in New Jersey, argues that there is an Apparatgeist (German for “spirit of the machine”). For personal communication technologies, he argues, people react in pretty much the same way, a few national variations notwithstanding. “Regardless of culture,” he suggests, “when people interact with personal communication technologies, they tend to standardise infrastructure and gravitate towards consistent tastes and universal features.”


and even more reminiscent of Levitt's words:

In the long run most national differences will disappear, predicts Scott Campbell of the University of Michigan, author of several papers on mobile-phone usage. But he expects some persistence of variations that go back to economics. In poorer countries subscribers will handle their mobile phones differently simply because they lack money. Nearly all airtime in Africa is pre-paid. Practices such as “beeping” are likely to continue for quite a while: when callers lack credit, they hang up after just one ring, a signal that they want to be called back.

Curiosity made me seek out Campbell's studies, one of which (PDF) looked at cross cultural usage patterns - from its abstract, we learn these cultures are "A sample of participants from the U.S. Mainland, Hawaii, Japan, Taiwan, and Sweden was surveyed for social acceptability assessments of talking on a mobile phone in each of these locations." Quite.

One fears The Economist has been a tad slapdash in constructing their thesis of an emerging global mobile Apparatgeist for their own data chart above shows that we are now close to 4 and half billion mobile phone users in the world. Even a cursory glance at the numbers would inform us that not more than the first billion and a half were members of such well off and well connected nations such as those studied above or the OECD.

Can the converging practices and habits of a quarter of the total user base influence the rest strongly enough to give rise to such a singular global mobile culture or will the other 75% of mobile phone users continue on with their workarounds and innovations, overlooked and unnoticed by the "world" until their influence bursts forth as a "surprise"? Or will the global media's apparatchiks finally unblinker their vision to consider the mobile majority and its own growing influence? These differences posed by the mobile majority  are those that stand poised to influence global convergence in their own particular way (as has been discussed in previous posts on the BoPNet and the DevNet).

Certainly, it can be said that Levitt's prediction of a global marketplace ruled by standardized products sold at low prices (1) has come true for the global mobile phone market, but it is one thing to build standard hardware for the world and entirely another to minimize the immense challenges posed by economics, not to mention culture and language, literacy and contextual knowledge as The Economist does:

Only a few countries, mainly in Africa and Asia, still need special cultural attention when designing a phone (which is why some models in India double as torches).

That's right, only a few countries that happen to constitute a market of  2 or 3 billion people btw, a fact that neither manufacturers nor service providers overlook as they consider how best to serve these markets.

It is this article's implication that only the converging social or cultural behaviour of the first world masses constitute any kind of global trend - future or otherwise - that diminishes the importance of the wireless platform, its impact and influence on the daily lives, the wellbeing and the income of the rest. It also underlines the blinkered perspective of the (not even mainstream anymore really) media and analysis that tends to skew perception of the global mobile market and its attendant potential, challenges and opportunities for innovation.

Filed under  //   culture   design   globalization   innovation   markets   mobile  
Posted by Niti Bhan 

Comments [0]

Twitter in Two Cultures

Twitter launched two new initiatives in two very important countries for communications this week: a deal with Bharti Airtel to enable Twitter via SMS in India, and a new mobile version of the service in Japan. Both countries already have active Twitter users, but each brings something different to the global communications picture. 

Japan has been seen as a pioneer in mobile communications for the past decade, but has often been a literal as well as physical island technologically, with most of its innovations home-grown and consumed locally, particularly in the mobile space. India is very much seen as representative of the future of mobile, and maybe communications in general. It will be interesting to see how these two markets use, or don't use, a tool like Twitter differently, based on their potentially very different trajectories.

Filed under  //   culture   India   Japan   mobile   SMS   Twitter  
Posted by Scott Smith 

Comments [0]



Site Meter