Technology

1. Curious questions for a new decade

   Published on Monday, January 25th, 2010

   1. Where did the man on the street go?

   Web 2.0 where? We wondered if the exuberance around the democratising power of the all-access-internet we saw mid-decade hasn’t become a bit deflated in the past year or so. Could the man on the online street have been shouted out by the noisier and better resourced?

   With a host of new web tools and loads of corporates, newsmakers, brands, politicians and NGO’s joining in the discussions, there is real concern over authenticity of content.

   We need the man on the street to speak out to ensure the balance of power remains fair.  We need genuine two-way conversations, or this fantastic medium will become another advertising forum with one-sided conversations.  Certainly the economic downturn has redirected people’s focus, but we are predicting a comeback of the everyday opinionated. And what a comeback it will be!

   2. Will the media make it? 

   Of course they will, but in what form? They have copped it with both barrels and boy it shows.  Barrel one – technological change has seen news content migrate online without a viable commercial model. Second barrel – audiences largely want their news ‘without’ advertising at a time, place and in digital format of their choice. Add in the reduced effectiveness of traditional advertising, which bankrolls most media, and ouch.

   Some outfits will no doubt falter, but by the decades end we are likely to be paying for quality news one way or another, and we won’t mind or probably even notice. Check out the New York Times who are on the brink of making it pay and they need to, because let’s face it, delivering real news real well costs a packet.

   3. Why are we more interested in the fallen mighty than the mighty issues?
    
   Despite the scary state of the world (think world peace, climate change and economic upheavals), celebrity news will always win the day.  The value in seeing the private foibles of the mighty such as our media stars, politicians, business leaders and sports stars played out in public is immense.  We think it might have something to do with the fact that it makes people feel better about their own lives, knowing that even the rich and famous don’t get it right all of the time.

   To err is human and to recover is clearly seriously divine. Unfortunately the message to the impressionable is that professional success allows for serious personal failures – providing we apologise.  All it takes for those in the public eye who have been caught out is to make a heartfelt mea culpa, fall on their sword or better still, check in to rehab, and all is forgiven – eventually.  While it might take our mind off the real issues at hand, it prompts real concerns for the impact it might have on younger generations.  Do some media not have a responsibility to truly hold these people to account in the people’s court?

   4. Is there a journalist in the house?

   The principles of the 4th estate are to hold the powerful accountable, to scrutinise and to provide transparent information on behalf of the citizenship so we can all choose how to vote, work, or shop.  This scrutiny requires experienced, thoughtful people working in an environment free of hefty commercial imperatives.  That’s a big ask given an environment where newsrooms are stretched to their limit, and media owners are screaming for more efficiencies to drive profit they now can no longer raise from advertisers.

   But never fear, journalists are a nuggety lot, and while it will take some time, we predict the next decade will see the rise and rise of the individual journalist.  Once the true value of their content is understood, and we have a workable way to pay for it, the face of news is set to change for the good.  This new breed will be real life crusaders with massive spheres of influence standing clear of news organisations to become brands in their own right, and they will cover the gamut of political viewpoints, single handed.

   5. To Blog or not to Blog?

   Our final question is an easy one really and the answer is an emphatic yes! While we may be a tiny drop in the Blog Ocean of billions, we are determined to shine in our own way.  We hope you keep following us and using your people power to ask the questions and pose new issues.

   

2. Fair Game – what’s thought in the real world can now be posted online

   Published on Wednesday, November 18th, 2009

   Google’s Sidewiki, an application that appears as a browser sidebar where you can read and write entries along the side of a webpage, could become the ultimate platform for those who like to share their views and opinions. Brands and business had better sit up and take notice of this development.

   Sidewiki is a new way of allowing anyone to contribute information, comments, observations and criticisms right there on a webpage. Think about this for a second, with Sidewiki, any web based article can be transformed into a public space of unedited thoughts ranging from super insightful, through helpful and witty, to downright malicious.

   Many of us who are comfortable with the free-for-all of social networking spheres may not see this as a big deal because currently blogs, micro and otherwise, are the open forums in which people discuss all manner of things, including the performance of brands. 

   But Sidewiki will make these conversations mainstream. 

   It will now be impossible for brands to broadcast a message or to communicate in a one-way traffic style and not potentially be called to account.

   This new tool makes two- way communication the only communication option for brands as people now have the ultimate soapbox to express their views, right out there for all to see.

   For corporations, the Sidewiki forum drives home the importance of being able to stand up to scrutiny and being prepared to engage in robust discussion, with the added bonus of being able to defend your position too. Bring it on!

   

3. Will New Zealander’s need to rethink their stance on GE foods and Nuclear Power so we can keep up with the rest of the world?

   Published on Tuesday, November 10th, 2009

   First off, I need to state that I am a complete fence sitter when it comes to GMOs and Nuclear power. The way I see it is that in an ideal world, we would enjoy the potential benefits while we fully manage the risks. But reality is always less simple.

   It has occurred to me of late that in the not too distant future, New Zealanders are going to have to think quite seriously about the potential of GMOs, nuclear power and other technologies that will enable us to meet our carbon emission targets, growing power demands and attempts to stay in the game, let alone keeping ahead of it.

   British scientist Dr Robert Winston has said that we need to be more open to new technologies so we can keep pace globally. He’s not wrong. Last week at the annual Food and Grocery Council conference, two of the keynote speakers highlighted changes that may need to take place if we are to feed the world and ensure human intelligence keeps pace with computers. 

   If GMOs are the only means of preventing billions of people starving to death, it will be pretty hard to keep it in the box. Then on the flip side, movies like Food Inc paint the food industry as giant manipulators of the world in order to reap the profits. Are we equipped to reconcile these positions and at the same time solve these very real problems?

   Honest and transparent communication will become even more critical, but often the truth is too boring. We truly need a media who report, not sensationalise the realities of these positions. With shrinking newsrooms under increasing commercial pressures and the more experienced journalists often being let go, this is sadly less likely to happen. Perhaps the emerging social media sphere will evolve into a forum based on true expertise?

   New technologies always raise new questions. Would a science that enabled a paraplegic to walk be halted because it breached our moral ethics? Currently there is already a scientist in Europe who uses himself as a human guinea pig – or should I say android, to test mind driven robotic implants. 

   The reality of new technologies being able to solve some very serious and imminent problems is upon us. And as clean, green nuclear free New Zealand, how well are we informed to be able to manage these dilemmas?

   As the Hon Maurice Williamson pointed out, had we invented Viagra we would be sitting very pretty economically. But we didn’t! So what’s next? Which companies will have the intestinal fortitude to take on people power for causes that they believe are for the good of the people? This is an interesting dilemma but who is debating it?

   

4. No nonsence nanoscience

   Published on Friday, September 25th, 2009

   What a week when we’ve just witnessed the miracle of our very own John Key on Letterman , and a scientist tells us that immortality is only 20 years away.

   The 61-year-old American, who’s been right before, says that at the rate our understanding of genes and computer technology is accelerating, new nanotechnologies will be capable of replacing worn out organs inside a couple of decades.

   If that’s not tempting enough, nanotechnology is also being attributed with the ability to extend our mental capabilities to such an extent that humans will be capable of superhuman wonders like being able to write whole books in a matter of minutes.

   But wait, at a recent liability symposium  nanotechnology was highlighted as an emerging risk, despite the fact material and particles on a molecular or atomic scale are already in daily use in consumer products. 

   So nanotechnology, where small appears to be the new big, heralds in exciting new boons, but also signals some potential and as yet not-even-imagined pitfalls. 

   For example haven’t we been down this road before is with asbestos. This former wonder product has a fatal legacy and has delivered a hefty bill to the insurance industry because of mesothelia disease. This illness was unknown when the product was released for use.

   So while some scientists may look forward to a world where humans have cyborg limbs thanks to nanobots, our suggestion is to tread wearily when claims of immortality are bandied about. Imagine going to hospitals to have a new liver dropped in like some car part….wait there could be something to this.