Tuesday, January 31, 2012

The Creative Team

What do engineers, product managers, entrepreneurs who started with a few ideas, a few tools, and a few dollars have in common in generating a tremendous amount of value for their companies. Simply said, all of them started by identifying exciting problems, and then relentlessly working to solve them by challenging common assumptions with, in most cases, very scare resources.

Innovation starts first with observation. Business and technology problems are abundant for those willing to investigate them. Defining the right problem to solve is often more difficult than solving it.

Second, innovation grows in places where people can share their thoughts. Creativity requires trading ideas. That is the reason why students at Universities or engineers in Silicon Valley can innovate: there are many venues around them to explore their ideas.

Third, innovators challenge existing assumptions. Innovators will foresee if common solutions can be improved, common solutions are not addressing the right problem, or if the problem is not properly defined.

Fourth, space and time are critical for teams to innovate. Surroundings need to accommodate team interactions. And, deadlines pressure the team to come up with a working plan.

Sixth, with well defined and tight rules, teams work harder to achieve their goals. Teams that have loose working rules, lose over time their senses of purpose. Innovative teams need to balance in their work enjoyment with discipline.

Seventh, innovative teams experiment a lot of options, willing to learn from their mistakes in the process, until they find the only path that will result in the best solution.

But in the end (eighth), the most innovative teams are the ones that always carry the attitude to endlessly overcome any barriers toward a successful outcome. That is very often how you can recognize if you have a creative team or not, and if you should invest or not in that team

The Creative Mind

 
 

Creativity in arts, science and technology is about bringing change. Painters reveal new colors to our eyes, musicians new harmonies to our ears, scientists explain us why, and engineers design new tools. But it is only over time that we will be able to assess how creative or innovative a new art, theory or design will be, what will be its impact, and how valuable it will become to our culture.

The creative mind is unique by his ability to adapt to new situations and to leverage whatever is at hand to reach his goals.

He obviously shares a great amount of wonder and interests to develop what he should work on, and a great amount of openness and sensitivity to feel what could be changed.

In order to create, the creative mind develops a wild imagination with a sense of reality to come up with the next big thing. When working at his art, he generally combines playfulness (because of the enjoyment for his art) with discipline (because of his dedication to his art). And, he is at best performing in an harmonious and helpful surrounding and environment.

The creative mind is generally perceived by society as rebellious and independent. He often exposes himself to pain and suffering because of his deep sensitivity. How not to be devastated if no one cares about a new book or a new formula?

All major creative breakthroughs never come in one day, but after many years of perseverance. It is the enjoyment of producing his arts or discoveries that stimulates the passion and the dedications of the creative mind to pursue his own muse.

The Real Value of Social Networks

A few years ago, a friend of mine told me that he was using LinkedIn instead of scaning people business cards. Keeping business cards of people that we met in business meetings has always been a challenge. And, I know very few people who have ever taken the time to scan business cards that were given to them. LinkedIn for your professional network and Facebook for your social network both solve that problem: keeping the contact information of your network updated. That was probably the initial value of the first generation of social networks which is to keep, update and organize your contacts, and to faciliate your communication, through e-mails, chats and now video calls, with our network.

But the real value of social networks, and what is driving their growths is undoubtly in sharing. No one has probably better describes it than Kevin Kelly, co-founder of Wired Magazine:

“Everything that can be shared will be shared. We are just at the beginning of this movement. Sharing can enhance the value of whatever we share. We are now sharing things, we never thought we would, like information about our friends, locations, investments, health, memories, expectations, and activities. Privacy is a concern, but most people don’t mind sharing this information in the right context.”

Think about it - “sharing can enhance the value of whatever we share” - how many types of social networks we have already and could have, and how many usages from those networks we have already and could have based on the benefits of sharing - we are just at the beginning of that trend:

  1. Creating a Facebook page to start a revolution: “We are all Khaled Said
  2. Buying clothes, according to your lifestyle or your community, through ModCloth instead of going to Macy’s
  3. Using Facebook and Twitter to find an organ transplant that is most likely to match the donor and save a life - The Dragonfly Effect from Professor Aaker
  4. Discovering, experiencing and sharing paintings that you love, and new ones that you will love with Artfinder
  5. Getting local restaurant recommendations from your friends through Foursquare when travelling to a new city or a new country
  6. Buying technology stocks with other technology investors through StockTwits
  7. Finding new products and stores that you might want to buy with Svpply
  8. Sharing your hobbies so that you know what’s going on through Facebook groups or Google + Circles
  9. Creating a personal brand or marketing a small business with Twitter
  10. Finding victims of natural disasters, eathquakes or tsunami - with Google’s Person Finder - or finding victimes of wars and genocides - such as the Remember Me Project from the US Holocaust Memorial Museum
  11. Sharing your private memories and good times with close friends and family using Path
  12. Using Facebook as the worldwide white pages phone book to reconnect with people from  your past
  13. Using LinkedIn to post a resume and find a new job

The Web is clearly moving from web pages and e-mails to being rebuilt around people. As very well explained by Paul Adams, User Experience Manager at Facebook, we all live in networks of small connected groups, and we are influenced by the people around us, mostly the strong ties in our networks.

While the Facebook, LinkedIn and new Google + of the world are going to compete by providing new applications for their users leveraging their existing massive data or by being the social platform for third-party applications such as Facebook for Zynga social gaming, a large number of social start-ups such as Etsy, Tumblr, Path, Quora, Namesake, StockTwits, Artfinder, Svpply, Foursquare, ModCloth...are emerging.

And between one dominant social platform such as Facebook, and the new social start-ups, users will have to decide if they want to have only one social graph (which is probaly what both Facebook and Google want) or a “portable” social graph, such as a phone number, that they can carry and use over many social apps and services

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

A Tale Of Two Cities: Silicon Valley And Hollywood

Image (1) hollywoodsign.jpg for post 102542
Image (1) hollywoodsign.jpg for post 102542
Silicon Valley and Hollywood: so close geographically, yet so distant digitally and philosophically. You would think we’d understand each other better. In the Valley, we circulate pitch decks. In Hollywood, they shop around scripts. We strive for exits, while they sell distribution rights. They have record labels, we have venture capitalists. They have agents, we have recruiters. People on Sunset Blvd. obsess over the next “hit” that will draw viewers, ears, or butts in seats. On Sand Hill Road, we toast to market disruptions and business model innovations.  Ultimately, both are working towards bringing transformative experiences (content and apps) to market.
Yet for all the apparent ecosystem similarities, our two worlds are surprisingly at odds. I know first hand. When I was in college at USC, up-and-coming actors, directors, and musicians were just a dorm room away generating art while I was glued to my laptop building sites. And I’ve found myself at the intersection yet again with my company, Box, as a large number Hollywood studios and labels are now moving their information and collaboration to the cloud.
Hollywood’s creators and the Valley’s innovators could achieve so much together.  Instead, we’re clashing, and neither viewpoint is wrong. Of course content creators should be able to get paid for their works, and of course those works should be free to move across any device, platform, or service. When Steve Jobs was here to mediate – or rather monetize – we were somewhat pacified because the experience was so robust for the producers and so great for the consumers. Even then, though, we only got so far: iTunes was continually blocked out of important content deals, and lawsuits came up frequently. But now, within just a few months of Jobs’s passing, we’re back to our early 2000’s ways: a wild west, pre-iPod world, where no one quite knows what equilibrium looks like, and justice is pursued through legislation and lawsuits that only widen the divide.
Where did we go wrong?
In his usual zen-like manner, Jobs explained the dichotomy of the Valley and Hollywood: “…people from technology don’t understand the creative process that these companies go through to make their products, and they don’t appreciate how hard it is. And the creative companies don’t appreciate how creative technology is.”
Hollywood is a special kind of beast: it’s as insular as the Valley, but success relies far more on the connections between individuals than the decisions of markets, making it more complicated, slow, and inflexible. In a world where middle-men have their own middle-men, the Valley’s egalitarian, direct-to-customer, democracy-rules-all ethos does not apply. In Silicon Valley, we don’t think to ask for permission or support before introducing hopefully world-changing products. That simply doesn’t happen in entertainment. You fundamentally need support from others, many others in fact, and paradoxically that collaboration tends to be hard in LA.
These differences have created a digital divide. In the Valley, we demand more from our southern neighbors, wondering why content is priced at uncompetitive rates, why it’s so hard to get a deal done, and why lobbyists are hired to block innovation.
Paul Graham’s answer to Hollywood’s modus operandi and slow pace is just to disrupt the entire business model. How? By usurping the power of ‘entertainment’ from those in 90210 altogether. Basically, what Atari and EA kicked off in the 70’s and 80’s, but modernized: moving far beyond traditional forms of entertainment, where the Valley builds the creation and consumption platforms, and owns the rights to the content. This future state, where people entertain themselves (either through shared status messages, photos, or virtual worlds) is far easier to grok, “simpler” to monetize, and seemingly more in our control.
It’s an aggressive response to Hollywood’s perceived unwillingness to participate in the new environments technology is creating and powering. But as Sarah Lacy points out, “disposable content isn’t bad, it’s just not everything. And as long as that’s all that the Valley is putting out, we won’t kill Hollywood.”
Can we create a better future together?
Can there exist a world in which Hollywood leverages more efficient channels to reach a broader audience? Where they reduce the release windows to reach more consumers, faster? Where the Valley can introduce more seamless monetization platforms, helping artists make more money? Where content quality is enriched through different mediums or interactive experiences, and the creative and cultural influences of LA are amplified by the innovations of SF?
I actually don’t think we’re as far off as we think, or as recent legislation proposals would suggest.  In fact, there are plenty of people and examples that have made this work, however painstakingly, in recent years.
On both sides of the fence, Daniel Ek, Steve Jobs, Jason Kilar, Jeff Bezos, Reed Hastings, Jeffrey Katzenberg and others have brokered adequate and attractive solutions to these challenges.  If you compare the world today to the world of 10 years ago, it’s obvious that we’ve come pretty damn far: I can stream nearly any song instantly from my iPhone; I can watch a growing number of movies and TV shows on demand from my computer or TV; and I can read almost any book from a Kindle or Android device after waiting just a few seconds.  Entrepreneurs, lawyers, venture capitalists, and entertainers climbed mountains to make this happen; none of this was possible, or even legal, in the 90’s.  Cars, finance, education, healthcare, and even enterprise software have all changed considerably more slowly than the entertainment world in response to this technology revolution known as the internet.
But we want more speed and openness, and without an easy “API” into Hollywood, the rest of the Valley remains dumbfounded. The opaque and murky process of getting things done isn’t in our nature; we don’t like worlds that require connections, contracts, or consent. We like elastic consumables, whether it’s computing resources or maps data, that are easy to understand and priced fairly.
The primary methods the entertainment industry uses to protect its value include locking it behind closed doors or aggressively penalizing those that take it. This is magnified in part by the fact that the digital files holding Hollywood’s value are already so free-flowing, no one knows how much they should be monetizing, and most contracts are so convoluted you wouldn’t even know who to pay if you could. But, just to put this environment in context, Google won’t let you freely build a search engine with unfettered access to its information, nor does Facebook allow data to flow freely out of its service. The Silicon Valley approach is different, but the motivation is the same.
I’m going to choose to believe that Hollywood wants to change, and they’ve clearly shown they can and have. Responding to disruption at the same pace that we cause it is no small feat, and failure to do so does not necessarily signal distrust of technology. Most people simply don’t respond well to their industry turning upside down every five years.
Yes, SOPA sucked. Like, it was a really bad idea. When people think their backs are up against a wall, sometimes they do weird things.  But consumers, the Valley, even many in Hollywood took a stance, and the proprietors backed down. In the aftermath of this ‘victory’, we should try harder than ever to fuse these two worlds, particularly before SOPA II is attempted. We need more cooperation, less antagonism.
Perhaps I’m just empathizing with my former film school roommates, or maybe I’ve just read one too many books on the film business. But it could also be that there’s something so powerful – magical, even – about clicking a button and instantly watching The Dark Knight. We need far more of this, not less.
Hollywood needs to understand that every hour Americans spend tending to a virtual farm is an hour they’re not watching Family Guy. Now is the time for reinvention and innovation, on both sides. Some things might be painful at first, some margins will decrease, and powers may shift a little. But the responsibility for creating a viable resolution belongs to both industries.
Oh, and one last thing.  Hollywood, Please stop making Jersey Shore. It’s ruining America.

Was Megaupload Targeted Because Of Its Upcoming Megabox Digital Jukebox Service?

 Matt is currently working as a writer for TechCrunch. Matt Burns is a family man first and attempts to be a writer second. Born and raised in the heart of the automotive world, only cars eclipse his love of gadgets. He previously wrote for Engadget and EngadgetHD before moving into the party house that is TechCrunch. He learned the retail... → Learn More
megabox
 
Last Thursday the US Justice Department came down hard on Megaupload and its mega founder, Kim Dotcom. In the days since, there has been a shake-up of sorts in the digital storage realm. Several smaller sites have drastically changed their business models. Others, like MediaFire, reached out to me after I published this post attempting to distance themselves from Megaupload.
However, yesterday, a new theory surfaced that indicates Megaupload’s demise had less to do with piracy than previously thought. This theory stems from a 2011 article detailing Megaupload’s upcoming Megabox music store and DIY artist distribution service that would have completely disrupted the music industry.
TorrentFreak first reported about the service in early December 2011. Megabox was just in beta at that time with listed partners of 7digital, Gracenote, Rovi, and Amazon. Megaupload was in a heated marketing battle with the RIAA and MPAA who featured Kim Dotcom in an anti-piracy movie (5:10 mark). The site had just sued Universal Music Group for wrongly blocking Megaupload’s recent star-studded YouTube campaign. Things were getting vicious in December but the quiet launch of Megabox might have been the straw that broke the millionaire’s back.
Dotcom described Megabox as Megaupload’s iTunes competitor, which would even eventually offer free premium movies via Megamovie, a site set to launch in 2012. This service would take Megaupload from being just a digital locker site to a full-fledged player in the digital content game.
The kicker was Megabox would cater to unsigned artists and allow anyone to sell their creations while allowing the artist to retain 90% of the earnings. Or, artists could even giveaway their songs and would be paid through a service called Megakey. “Yes that’s right, we will pay artists even for free downloads. The Megakey business model has been tested with over a million users and it works,” Kim Dotcom told TorrentFreak in December. Megabox was planning on bypassing the labels, RIAA, and the entire music establishment.
Megaupload was likely large enough to actually find success. Other services have tried what Megabox was set to do, but Megaupload was massive. Prior to its closure last week, the site was estimated to be the 13th most visited site on the Internet, accounting for 4% of all worldwide Internet traffic. It boasted 180 million registered users with over 50 million visiting the site daily. Megaupload was already a seemingly trusted service for artists to distribute their work. Megabox would have a monetized that popularity by passing on the bulk of the earnings back to the artists.
“You can expect several Megabox announcements next year including exclusive deals with artists who are eager to depart from outdated business models,” said Dotcom late last year. But that’s probably not going to happen. Kim Dotcom and several other Megaupload executives are now awaiting trial on various charges including racketeering, money laundering, and various counts of piracy. It seems they flew too close to the sun. High on success and a half a world away in New Zealand and Hong Kong, they attempted to take on the music industry head-on. Now they’re in jail.

Friday, January 20, 2012

The State Of Online Music [Stats & Analysis]

 

Screen shot 2012-01-19 at 1.07.53 AMNext Big Sound, the music analytics website that continuously tracks the number of plays, views, fans, comments, mentions, and other key metrics across the major web properties, yesterday released their 2011 State of Online Music – and the numbers are quite staggering: 64 billion new plays, 16 billion profile views, and 3.5 billion new fan connections.
Metrics include data taken from SoundCloud, Twitter, Vevo, Facebook, YouTube, MySpace, and Wikipedia. Interestingly enough, the largest percentage growth came from SoundCloud at 231% (which might have something to do with their recent funding of $50 million). Also interesting was how the top ranking artists varied between a fan's choice of media consumption. Generally lesser “known” (and even unsigned) artists like The Weeknd, DJ Bl3nd, and The White Panda topped the ranks on SoundCloud, while the majors’ usual suspects (Bieber, Gaga, Rihanna, Perry, and so on) topped the rest of the major properties.Another notable finding from the report is how each network displays its own characteristics around the most popular day of the week and the top artists on the site. From looking at the data, the biggest day for artists on Facebook and Vevo seem to be Thursday, while YouTube’s music activity is highest on Fridays and Saturdays, and SoundCloud on Tuesdays and Thursdays.
NBS’s “Social 50” metrics summarizes the top artists across all social music networks. While Justin Bieber easily claimed the #1 spot (which he held for roughly the entire year), several artists also made the jump from Next Big Sound’s chart for up-and-coming artists to their “Social 50”. Skrillex, for instance, made his debut on the Social 50 on June 16th but was on the NBS chart November 11th - a full seven months earlier.
According to Next Big Sound, SoundCloud and Twitter showed triple digit growth compared to 2010 (although they were starting from a much smaller base). Sites like Vevo, Facebook and YouTube all experienced massive music growth and sites like Rdio, Spotify and Pandora were added to their system in the middle of last year.
What’s important to keep in mind when viewing the infographic is that each of these numbers represents a unique interaction between an artist and a single fan. With no shortage of artists across dozens of music sites, and no end site for dwindling music sales, the real challenge for artists and industry personnel lay in gaining attention and rising above all the clutter, in order to generate a genuine “buzz" in which to capitalize upon.

February 1, 2011, 9:17 PM.How Much Does A Facebook Fan Cost? $1.07


Money can buy you friends on Facebook, if you’re a marketer. But the price is going up.
A whitepaper by social marketing and analytics firm Webtrends, which studied 11,000 Facebook ad campaigns in the U.S., found that the cost of advertising on Facebook that encourages a user to become a “fan” on the brand’s Facebook page is $1.07.
Marketers are increasingly spending money on Facebook fan-acquisition ads. Why? Becoming a fan gives brands permission to market directly to a user, both through (free) messages sent to the user’s homepage news feed and through ads that specifically target fans on Facebook.com. It’s arguably better than the old-fashioned style of permission-based digital marketing, which involves gathering customer emails and then blasting them with messages that they might not ever open.
But the rates at which U.S. users are clicking on Facebook ads designed to generate fans are starting to decline, according to Webtrends. In 2009, the so-called click-through rate on such ads was .063%. In 2010, the rate declined to .051%.
At the same time, ads are getting more expensive, rising from 17 cents per thousand in 2009, to 25 cents in 2010. (By comparison, display ads can range from $2 to $8 per thousand on other sites, depending on the site and the type of advertiser.)
What could be causing Facebook advertisers to get fewer clicks for more money? Justin Kistner, Webtrends’ senior manager of product marketing for social had a few theories. One possibility is that the ads aren’t as effective these days at attracting users, either because the ad creative design is growing boring or because Facebook users are learning to ignore the ads. And ads could be growing more expensive because many of them are sold through an auction system that’s getting increasing competition as more advertisers turn to Facebook.
The lesson, Kistner said, is that the companies that have a head start now, with double-digit millions of fans, are going to end up spending much less money than others. “There is a competitive advantage to starting now,” he said.
Facebook spokesman Brandon McCormick declined to comment on the specific results of the Webtrends study, which the company didn’t participate in.
But he did say that acquiring a fan is “just the beginning” of how marketers can use Facebook. “On Facebook, the magic of marketing happens when brands activate their fans in ways that inspire people to share those messages with their friends,” he said.
Webtrends’ Kistner agreed that the campaigns that actually drive return on investment ads are usually built on top of a good fan base.
“There are a lot of studies trying to say how much is a fan worth,” Kistner said, “but the answer depends on the kinds of campaigns you are driving at that fan base.” His firm is currently working on a study about the effectiveness of different kinds of campaigns directed at a fan base, known as “fan nurturing.”

How Warner Music Turns Social Media Fans Into Customers

 

   

Execs from Warner's Atlantic Records describe at Web 2.0 Summit the strategy and metrics they use to convert music fans into music buyers.

Atlantic Records digital media leader Eric Snowden remembers excitedly promoting the fact that one of the label's artists had just topped 4 million fans and getting a pithy reply from his CEO: "What is this doing for us?"
That was a reminder that getting the fans was only half the battle, said Snowden, who is vice president for digital creative and technology at Atlantic, a division of Warner Music Group. "Over time, we've become really focused on figuring out what do we do all these people we've sort of corralled?"
Snowden and Carmen Sutter, the senior director of data services at Warner, spoke Tuesday about the progress they've made establishing strategies and metrics to answer that question. The two appeared along with Tim Waddell, director of product marketing for Adobe, Web 2.0 Summit, which is produced by Federated Media and O'Reilly Media in partnership with UBM Techweb. Warner uses Adobe Social Analytics, part of Adobe's Omniture Web analytics product line, for social media measurement.
10 Cool Social Media Monitoring Tools
Slideshow: 10 Cool Social Media Monitoring Tools
(click image for larger view and for slideshow)
Waddell said businesses of all sorts are "spending a bunch on social media" and increasingly are under pressure to prove that it delivers real results.
[ Get more news and videos from the Web 2.0 Summit. ]
Sutter said she used the website and social media of Atlantic artist Bruno Mars as the test case for her participation in Adobe's beta program for the product, and it turned out to be a good choice. She was able to see when particular Tweets that he published himself from his phone drove spikes in traffic to his website. An example was his promotion of the Liquor Store Blues video just posted to his site. Even more dramatically, she could see the way his Video Music Awards tribute to Amy Winehouse drove 170,000 social media mentions. Then she could chart how that social media spike was echoed, the following day with 159% increase in visit to the artist's website and a 302% increase in orders, she said.
She can see patterns like that much more easily by having a social media tool that is tightly linked with her website and e-commerce analytics, she said. "If I didn't have that, I'd have to match it all up in Excel somehow."
Snowden said he thinks of fans acquired through a Facebook page or Twitter profile as being at the beginning of the process. Ultimately, he wants to bring those people to the artist's website, get them to join a community there, and become a customer who buys CDs or digital downloads. Sutter's team has created a corresponding set of metrics to track each conversion from one stage to the next. She also tracks things like the number of fans posting comments, divided by the total number of fans, as a measure of engagement, and seeks to separate the more influential fans from the rest.
The promotional strategy is also different for new artists than for established ones, Snowden said. "At the beginning of an artist's career, we want to keep the barrier to entry very low," he said, and that may mean publishing more free content and sharing it more widely. As an artist becomes more popular, "we ask a little bit more from fans and try to drive them to our own wholly owned properties more."
Artists are encouraged to tweet and post on their own, rather than having someone do it for them, Snowden said. "We have to be careful that everything stays in their voice," he said. This presents challenges because recording artists are "imperfect marketers" and don't always understand the impact their posts will have.
Marketing an artist as a brand is also different than marketing a product, Snowden said. "Our brands are people. They get upset, they get angry, they feel neglected. It's different than, you know--Dr. Pepper is not a person."
The emphasis on personal marketing also means matching social media campaigns to the style of the artist, so they publish what comes naturally to them, Snowden said. When his team first sat down to coach Rob Thomas, lead singer for Matchbox 20, he initially rejected all their selections. But once they found out that he did a lot of texting to friends and family, they were able to sell him on Twitter as being like "texting to all your fans." Initially skeptical, Thomas wound up tweeting 70 times the first day and building a huge following (more than 250,000 followers as of today).
Sutter said one of her challenges is that artists won't necessarily cooperate in including the tracking code she would like to see in every post. However, Snowden's team has been clever about getting artists like Bruno Mars to use smartphone apps that include that code automatically. "Bruno doesn't know it's there, but I do," she said.

Tipsheet Email Oct 3, 2011 — The Return of Mixtapes / Rise of Citizen DJs

 

Sitting here, just laughing – headlines jumping all over the place about users howling that 1) new Spotify subscribers MUST use their Facebook profile to sign up, and 2) current users want to disable the automatic sharing — while Spotify usage has shot up over 60% in a single week.

Wait, users DON’T want to share their listening habits with their friends? You’re kidding, right? When I was growing up, we DEFINED ourselves by what we listened to. I can understand that seamless sharing can gnaw on the privacy concerns of some folks, and that’s fine – there are a half dozen other streaming solutions out there, and you can turn off autoshare. And for me personally, outside of music, I ain’t sharing nothing seamlessly unless I want to – not my viewing habits, not my reading habits, just music. Besides, 98% of the stuff that posts in the new Facebook ticker flies past without me ever noticing anyway.
I think the biggest challenge with sharing music moving forward is getting that info OFF the ticker and onto the wall – trust me, we’re about to enter a whole new era of mix tapes, where little girls can express their love by playing Justin Bieber nonstop, or guys can show off their deep knowledge of obscure death metal to their friends – especially since there ain’t a commercial radio station on the planet that’s going to turn you on to Carcass, Deicide, or Morbid Angel (or Grant Green, Charlie Parker, Dzihan & Kamien, LTJ Bukem, Japancakes, Edith Piaf, or Juliette Commagere).
Turntable.fm was just the start of the mainstreaming of citizen DJ’ing, what we’re going to need is a better way to highlight / like / promote those superstar curators, now that creating and sharing digital mixtapes just got a lot more seamless. I seriously believe that Fan Pages will soon be enabled to have accounts from Spotify (or some other service) – and when they do, using pages with 25 million followers to promote music will be a healthy boost to artist careers, in light of the challenges (and cost) it takes to get a mainstream hit these days.
And as for Timeline? I know I’m in the minority when I say this, but I don’t think Facebook went audacious enough with it! Go bigger, I say — rather than darting your eyes back & forth to follow events in chronological order, why not blow up pictures and stretch text posts across the entire field, so your own timeline starts to resemble some huge tumblr blog over time, especially as the world migrates towards tablet use. Regardless, congratulations Dather, you just got a proof of concept!

U.S. Shutters Megaupload. Founder Kim Dotcom, Others Arrested In New Zealand

 

image from www.google.com
In what is being described at the largest such case in U.S. history, 7 individuals and 2 corporations have been charged in the United States with "running an international organized criminal enterprise" responsible for massive worldwide piracy of copyrighted works, through Megaupload.com and related sites. Founder Kim Dotcom and to other Megaupload executives have been detained in New Zealand. The sites were taken offline
The unsealed indictment alleges that the operation generated more than $175 million in criminal proceeds and caused more than half a billion dollars in damage to copyright owners, according to the U.S. Justice Department and FBI.More than 20 search warrants were executed today in the U.S. and eight other countries and approximately $50 million in assets siezed. Targeted sites taken offline where Megaupload has servers in Ashburn, Va., Washington, D.C., the Netherlands and Canada. In addition, the U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Va., ordered the seizure of 18 domain names associated with Megaupload.
Alleged members of the "Mega conspiracy" charged in the indictment include
  • Finn Batato, 38, a citizen and resident of Germany, who is the chief marketing officer;
  • Julius Bencko, 35, a citizen and resident of Slovakia, who is the graphic designer;
  • Sven Echternach, 39, a citizen and resident of Germany, who is the head of business development;
  • Mathias Ortmann, 40, a citizen of Germany and resident of both Germany and Hong Kong, who is the chief technical officer, co-founder and director;
  • Andrus Nomm, 32, a citizen of Estonia and resident of both Turkey and Estonia, who is a software programmer and head of the development software division;
  • Bram van der Kolk, aka Bramos, 29, a Dutch citizen and resident of both the Netherlands and New Zealand, who oversees programming and the underlying network structure for the Mega conspiracy websites.
According to the filing, "by actively supporting the use of third-party linking sites to publicize infringing content, the conspirators did not need to publicize such content on the Megaupload site. Instead, the indictment alleges that the conspirators manipulated the perception of content available on their servers by not providing a public search function on the Megaupload site and by not including popular infringing content on the publicly available lists of top content downloaded by its users."

Friday, December 16, 2011

Megaupload Video Back On YouTube, After UMG Offers 'We Yanked It Because We Could' Defense

image from www.google.comMegaupload's controversial music video is back on YouTube after Universal Music Group lawyers failed to offer a federal court judge  justification for its removal. Publicly, Universal had argued that Megaopload had no legal right to include musical endorsements from P Diddy, Will.i.am, Alicia Keys, Kanye West, Snoop Dogg, Chris Brown and other A-list performers, some of whom have contracts with UMG. But in court filings late yesterday, Universal offered a different defense.
“On December 9, UMG utilized YouTube’s CMS system to effect the removal of a posting of the video on YouTube,” Universal attorney Kelly Klaus wrote in yesterday's filing, but did not offer a single argument as to why. Universal never stated that Megaupload was in violation of the DMCA which requires takedowns of unauthorized material, argued the lawyers. Rather, UMG was simply using a removal system that Google provided them:
"What actually transpired was UMG’s use of YouTube’s Content Management System, which UMG is contractually authorized to use pursuant to its written agreement with YouTube. That is a matter of contract between two private companies—UMG and YouTube–not a notice sent pursuant to the DMCA
In other words, Universal's deal with YouTube allows it to pull down - at least for a time - whatever it wants to. In this instance, however, Google eventually sided with Megaupload; and UMG had thrown in the towel even prior to yesterday's court filings. According to Universal :
YouTube advised UMG Recordings, Inc. (“UMG”) that it would restore full access to all instances of the Video on YouTube as of this past Tuesday (as apparently has happened), and UMG has told YouTube that it will take no further action regarding the Video pending the resolution of this litigation.
In addition to making the technical argument that they had just taken advantage of an agreement with YouTube that enables takedowns, Universal also argued that because the video was restored within days, Megaupload has suffered no harm and no damages should be awarded.
“Our legal battle with UMG is ongoing and we are going to reveal the whole truth about this censorship and the illegal take down,” retorted Meaupload CEO Kim Dotcom in a statement. “Lets join together against Internet dictatorship by corporations.”

Is The Future Of Concert Ticketing On Facebook? Ticketfly Thinks So

image from northsocial.comSeveral studies have shown the power of Facebook to promote ticket sales.  Friends want to be where their other friends are and fans want to commune with fans. But what about Facebook as a place to actually sell tickets? Existing Facebook ticketing solutions have required users to leave the social network and log in to an external system to complete the transaction.  Yesterday, Ticketfly launched app that eliminates that complexity.
Ticketfly's Facebook Purchase enables promoters to sell tickets directly from their Facebook Fan Pages creating a purchasing experience that encourages social discovery and sharing. Key features:
  • Single sign-on with Facebook Connect allows fans to buy tickets using their Facebook identity, without leaving Facebook
  • Quick installation process allows promoters to start selling tickets on Facebook within minutes
  • Integration with Ticketfly's Facebook RSVP and Share features promotes social discovery
  • Real-time analytics reporting provides integrated Facebook sales performance data
  • Social graph integration lets Facebook users see what events their friends are attending

Bands Want Facebook Likes, But Should They Be Chasing YouTube Views?

image from www.google.comA recent survey undertaken by Reverb Nation suggests that Facebook likes are by far the most sought after thing on a bands agenda. I wrote about the reach of Facebook posts here suggesting only 10% of people see your facebook post and only 1% like it. It seems that bands are more worried about being seen with a fan base, hence the importance on the visible “like”, than actually building a database of their own with an email list.
When you build you fan base through a third party site, you are at their mercy. If they decide they no longer want to support music, then you just lost everything. We saw this with Myspace - bands with 200,000 fans were left starting again, switching priorities to Facebook and trying to build numbers from the ground up.
Now this is not to dismiss the importance of being able to demonstrate the strength of your fan base. Potential fans, promoters, and what’s left of A&R will certainly take an interest in the capacity of your following. The thing with Facebook is that it is now so integrated with people, that if you are creating a buzz elsewhere it will reflect on your Facebook page.
A More Accurate Barometer
A far more accurate barometer of your engagement, is not how many likes you have, but the number of interactions your posts get. I come across many acts that have invested money into campaigns to acquire likes, and Facebook advertising can be very effective in increasing doing this. However, when you study how many interactions they get with their posts, it demonstrates how little those new followers actually engage. This is why for bands to simply chase likes, doesn’t mean you are actually creating fans.
The trouble with Facebook is that it isn’t primarily a content provider. People don’t go there to necessarily watch or listen. The Internet has made us a very visual society. Ever since the new Facebook has been introduced, those photos with an amusing caption have become extremely popular, but this is pretty benign for bands. However the audio/visual medium of Youtube is ideal. You see and hear the band, and if a band has good product, then the potential reach is endless.
YouTube has a similar advertising platform as facebook. You can pay to have you video featured in much the same manner as ads are featured on Facebook. “Promoted Videos” uses the Googles Adwords system, so you can target your ads to reach a suitable audience.
If you can engage the watcher with your video, you are then exposing them to the possibility of not only subscribing on Youtube, but also following through with a share and a like. More importantly you will increase your plays, and this is something that potential investors will hold in high regard. You are creating fans and strengthening your communication with them through your actual music, this means a lot more than a simple facebook like.
Keeping an email list of your fans is essential. However, if you worry that it doesn’t showcase your fan base enough, then building a sturdy Youtube community instead of a Facebook one, might prove to be a little more beneficial to your career.

Black Keys First-Week Album Sales: 207,086...

by  paul

These are the first-week sales numbers for El Camino, according to Nielsen Soundscan stats. The preliminary figures were shared with Digital Music News on Wednesday morning by a label executive.  The album was first released on December 6th.              
Total sales, US: 207,086
Total Album Downloads: 113,780
Total LP (vinyl): 8,841
The total is nearly triple the first-week performance of the band's previous release, Brothers, which sold roughly 73,000 in its debut period.  That album, released in March of 2010, is the most successful for the band to date.  It has since gone gold in the US (500,000 units) and is currently approaching 900,000 cumulative sales.
On El Camino, both downloads and vinyl sales are subsets of the broader 207,086 grand total.  Downloads were available on iTunes, Amazon MP3, and the band's website.

Sunday, December 4, 2011

Facebook By The Numbers

Add caption

Widget By Tutorial for Bloggers
x

Get Our Latest Posts Via Email - It's Free

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner