Anthony J. Pennings, PhD

WRITINGS ON DIGITAL ECONOMICS, ENERGY STRATEGIES, AND GLOBAL COMMUNICATIONS

Drone Journalism and Remote Sensing

Posted on | June 16, 2014 | No Comments

After 9/11, I developed and often taught a course at New York University called Remote Sensing and Surveillance. It was designed to study the promises and perils of technologies such as aerial photography, closed circuit cameras, multiple orbit-earth satellites, and a number of IP-based web surveillance systems. The course combined a social science approach with an in-depth look at the electromagnetic radiation utilized by a variety of cameras and other sensors. Concerns for individual privacy and national sovereignty were addressed, especially after the passage of the Patriot Act.

The attention to a relatively new endeavor called drone journalism had me thinking about the class lately. The use of small unmanned aerial systems (sUAS) has been touted as supportive in the future of a variety of investigative reporting needs. These drones collect audio, photographs, video, and other types of data that can be useful for covering news-worthy conditions and events related to criminal forensics, disaster management, environmental damage, adverse weather, traffic reporting and sports coverage. Drone journalism received attention recently for its aerial drone “coverage” of the riots in the Istanbul and the political unrest in the Ukraine.

Legal action by the major media organizations to protect drone journalism is especially noteworthy. By referring to the First Amendment, the New York Times and other media organizations are calling drone surveillance for news purposes a constitutionally protected right. A fine imposed on Raphael Pirker by the FAA Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for reckless flying of a drone has brought the issue to Federal court. If given constitutional protection, drone journalism is likely to become a daily practice in the media business.

In light of this development I thought it might be useful to revisit the objectives and content of the class and to see what it has to offer in terms of insights and/or criticism of this emerging aspect of the news business.

Tech-wise, the course taught the fundamentals of electromagnetic radiation and how these energies interact with Earth materials such as vegetation, water, soil and rock, as well as humans and human artifacts. It also covered how the energy reflected or emitted from these materials is detected and recorded using a variety of remote sensing instruments such as digital cameras, multispectral scanners, hyperspectral instruments, and RADAR, etc. The course also touched on the principles of visual photo-interpretation, although this is a particularly complex topic that has both denotative and connotative considerations.

electromagneticspectrum

Satellites provide a useful historical reference that can indicate potential directions for drone journalism. As I point out in Seeing from Space: Cold War Origins to Google Earth, satellites were initially used for spying and military photo reconnaissance. Improvements in visual acuity have increased to the point where they have recently developed the capacity to detect sub-pixel targets less than 9% the size of one single pixel. They can also take advantage of infra-red and other electromagnetic wavelengths to see at night and under other adverse conditions.

Many news viewers are becoming more environmentally and scientifically literate in the types of news drones can provide. Climate change and attention to other types of pollution will be a fruitful area for drone journalism. Satellites equipped for remote sensing have been used to monitor environmental conditions such as forest resources, fish migration, oil reserves, soil composition, radiation contamination, river flows, food harvests, as well as to forecast disasters due to natural causes such as flooding or droughts. Some of this will be picked up by drone facilitated aerial photography.

It is no secret that drone technology has developed precise methods for defining locations. With the introduction of the Global Positioning System (GPS) satellites were used in warfare for guiding missiles to their targets, routing convoys through unknown territories, and locating lost soldiers and equipment. GPS, combined with geo-location technologies such as cell towers and Wi-Fi hotspots, provide remarkable accuracy in identifying the positions of objects, places and people and are now used in a wide variety of commercial activities, including mobile phone apps. For news operations, geo-location can help recover classified advertising and other revenue sources by providing location specific news items, weather reports and reviews of nearby establishments.

While drone technology conjures up thoughts of paparazzi buzzing stars and and peeps looking into bedroom windows, it could also be used for more socially responsive journalism. Among other choices, it can be a deterrent for environmentally dangerous companies and crowd abusing police teams. I’m not advocating drone technology for journalism at this time as I think it has a number of safety and privacy issues to resolve. However, as the decision is not up to me, I thought the least I could do is outline some of the issues from my perspective.

Share

© ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

AnthonybwAnthony J. Pennings, PhD is Professor at the Department of Technology and Society at the State University of New York (SUNY) in South Korea. Previously, he taught at St. Edwards University in Austin, Texas and was on the faculty of New York University from 2002-2012. He taught at Victoria University in Wellington, New Zealand and was a Fellow at the East-West Center in Hawaii.

Technologies of Democracy

Posted on | June 12, 2014 | No Comments

I’m rereading a book, Technologies of Power: Information Machines and Democratic Prospects by one of my mentors from graduate school. Majid Tehranian was a Professor of International Communications at the University of Hawaii and Founding Director of the Toda Institute for Global Peace and Policy Research. I do believe that it Technologies of Power: Information Machines and Democratic Prospects is one of the best books of the 20th century on the topic of media technology and democracy.[1] OK, I’m biased, as a graduate assistant, I actually did the index for the book. But looking back at the book, I’m pleased to have played a small role in its birth.

At the time, we were debating Ithiel de Sola Pool‘s Technologies of Freedom. The MIT professor did a lot of the research on his book at the University of Hawaii Law Library a few years before and put forward a strong libertarian thesis about communications technologies and how technical change in this dynamic area should be treated by the legal/regulatory system.

Tehranian felt compelled to respond with his own book in which he used a “technostructuralist” approach emphasizing that new technologies are guided in their development and deployment along existing lines of corporate, governmental, and military power. However, he proposed a “dual-effects hypothesis” for studying the historical influence of new “information machines” as they have often “played a dual role in the service of centralization and the dispersion of power.” These potentially disrupting effects led him to focus on the importance and promises of information technologies for democratic processes.[2]

Originally from Iran, Tehranian was not Islamic, so returning home was problematic after the revolution in 1979. But he was mindful of its lessons, particularly the role of small media, including cassettes and photocopying. Both were used effectively in the overthrow of the Shah. Cassettes were often made by the Ayatollah Khomeini who, while exiled in France, sent recorded messages to mosques throughout Iran, stirring revolt. Tehranian sometimes referred to the impact of small media in Iran as the reign of Xeroxcracy.

Tehranian was influenced in part by University of Hawaii colleagues Ted Becker, Chair of the Political Science Department at the time, and his wife Christa D. Slaton. teledemocracyTheir The Future of Teledemocracy offered a compelling vision for the use of computers to enhance democratic efforts. In a benchmark study that was part of the futures movement at the University of Hawaii, in collaboration with Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand, they charted a path towards a more deliberative direct democracy. Using interactive TV, televoting, and other digital initiatives, they proposed technology could be designed to engage the public and bring them back into political affairs. They particularly stressed the development of collaborative designs for scientific deliberative polling in electronic town meetings. Later they would embrace the Internet as a tool to facilitate this process.[3]

Tehranian was not prone to simple definitions, but he also saw the value of conceptualizing ideas for the sake of argument. He framed one definition of democracy in terms of the contributions by technology. Thus he provided this rather technocratic perspective on the conditions for democracy. “If we view democracy as a cybernetic social system of networks in which there are many autonomous and decentralized nodes of power and information with their multiple channels of communication, the new media are increasingly providing the technological conditions for such a system.” (p.6)

Tehranian identified six cybernetic conditions for democracy: interactivity; universality; channel capacity; content variety; speedy transmission; and, low noise.

Interactivity recognizes the value of horizontal communications – people talking to each other, sharing information, engaging in social discourse. Tehranian grew up in a world where media was primarily one-way and vertically oriented from top to bottom. So he was intrigued with the emerging capabilities of media technologies to provide “multiple feedback systems” and allow autonomous centers of power to engage with each other in a pluralistic system of checks and balances.

Universality is another important condition for teledemocracy. This refers to access to the technological devices needed to participate in tele-democratic deliberations. Lower costs for mobile phones and computers mean increased penetration and participation in the political process. Higher rates of literacy and education also increase the population who can follow civic activities and participate in public discussions. Social media is now seen as a potential new “networked public sphere” for political debate and sharing relevant information.

Content Variety refers to the increasing diversity of professional and user-generated programming. Tehranian was disappointed in the global diet of television programs such as Dallas and Days of our Lives that were scheduled at the expense of more cultural and educational programs. He contrasted official messaging associated with more authoritarian political systems with the “symbolic variety” needed for democratic communications systems. Access and active participation mean little if the content available is limited in accuracy, relevance, scope and quality. In the age of Youtube and social media, the variety of ideas and messages have increased dramatically, although concerns have been raised about the statistics and surveillance of who watches what.

Channel Capacity involves the ability to transmit and receive high fidelity and high resolution professionally produced or “user-generated” information. While broadband and wifi speeds have increased regularly, the results are distributed unevenly. I’m writing this in South Korea, which, at an average connection of 63.6 megabits per second, is second only to Hong Kong for the highest broadband rates in the world. I have a house in Austin, Texas that is one of the Google Fiber cities beginning to offer 1 gigabit per second transmission to homes and businesses.

Low Noise is an interesting concept that has both a technical and political dimension. Technically, noise is a long-recognized impediment to message delivery. Politically, Tehranian pointed to the need for democratic rules and procedures that facilitate rational discourse. I lived a block from Washington Square Park in New York City when the Occupy Wall Street movement would meet there. The protesters gathered and utilized an interesting set of protocols to amplify messages and to communicate silently. The crowd who could hear the speaker would repeat their words like a “human mic” so people in the back could hear. They would also use hand signals to agree, disagree, or morally oppose anything being proposed. CNN reporter Jeanne Moos had this satirical piece on the Occupy Wall Street’s communication protocols.

Teledemocratic systems will need to develop their own rules of political communication to develop a unique public sphere concept of citizen participation, protest, and voting.

Speedy Transmission is a related concept that also has technical and political conditions. Faster communications has been a major motivator for information technology development from the telegraph to the ARPANET. He applies it also to level in which the public communicates concerns and demands to the political system and vice-versa, official responses are returned to public and actions through initiatives such as the Internet domain level .gov and .us.

The capabilities of digital media have accelerated and I plan to look at additional characteristics that might provide insights into the possibilities of teledemocracy. This list would probably include mobility, search, capture, representation, storage, and viral or spreadable media.

Notes

[1] Tehranian received a PhD in Political Economy from Harvard University and did his PhD dissertation on the global politics of oil cartels.
[2] Dual-effects hypothesis from Technologies of Power, p. 53.
[3] Ted Becker is the Alumni Professor of Political Science at Auburn University.
[4] Conditions for democracy can be found in Technologies of Power in Chapter 1 primarily pp. 6-9, and at the conclusion of Chapter 2, pp. 52-53.

Share

© ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


AnthonybwAnthony J. Pennings, PhD is a professor of global media at Hannam University in South Korea. Previously, he taught at St. Edwards University in Austin, Texas and was on the faculty of New York University from 2002-2012. He taught at Victoria University in Wellington, New Zealand and was a Fellow at the East-West Center in Hawaii.

Revisiting Huxley and Orwell on Technology and Democracy

Posted on | June 1, 2014 | No Comments

One of the faces I miss most from my days on the NYU campus is that of Neil Postman, a professor of media ecology at the Steinhardt school. Professor Postman died a few years ago but not without leaving behind a legacy, including one of my favorite books, Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business (1985).

What I liked best about the book was his discussion of differences between authors Aldous Huxley and George Orwell, whose classic novels Brave New World (1932) and 1984 (1984) helped shape the American debate on dictatorship, democracy, surveillance, and propaganda. Both addressed these issues but with different perspectives.

Our engagement with these narratives has had significant implications for how we view computerization and the media, and how these technologies shape our society. Stuart McMillan drew up the contrast as specified by Postman in this cartoon series (that was recently taken down).

Huxley vs. Orwell

As Postman pointed out, while many people think the two authors had similar ideas about the characteristics and dangers of a totalitarian political system, a closer reading suggests otherwise. He stressed that Orwell’s vision was one of a government using violent oppression to crush the spirit of its populations while Huxley’s story was about a government that used distraction and pleasure to rule.

    “What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy.”[1]

While repressive dictatorships around the world continue to lend credence to Orwell’s vision, Postman was more concerned with Huxley’s idea of a regime of amusement and triviality, thus the title of his book.[2] The brutal crackdowns in the Middle East associated with the Arab Spring were chilling reminders of the use of force and surveillance by repressive governments. But what are the dangers when a political system such as the US, which draws its legitimacy from its heritage of democratic citizen participation, is subjected to a barrage of emotional trivia? Even our election system, the epitome of democratic practice has been reduced to a “race” between personalities, rather than a discussion of relevant issues and related policies.

Postman’s Amusing Ourselves to Death was published in the wake of 1984 as the Western world breathed a sigh of relief. For the most part, Orwell’s nightmare had not come true, despite Ronald Reagan’s tirades on the intrusion of government into our lives. In fact, Reagan’s turn to supply side economics unleashed a new media philosophy articulated by his choice to head the FCC, Chairman Mark S. Fowler, whose attitude was the public interest is what the “public is interested in.” Public TV was cut back, and private sector forces unleashed, particularly on children’s programming that consequently saw more and more commercial advertisements.

Luckily, it was also a time of technological choice and many parents began to switch their kids to VHS tapes and programming that was less violent and intrusive. Also, more channels emerged as the age of network television was being replaced by the multi-channel universe of cable television. Content variety is a important component of democratic participation.

Postman, who was a self-professed Luddite, was not a fan of the computer nor the Internet because of the parade of individualized amusements and distractions it offers. He rarely used computers and by extension email. A pioneer of the media ecology approach, he saw the introduction of a new technology as something that changes and disrupts our lives. Media is more than machines, but rather shape entire environments; structuring what we can see and say, assigning us roles and the extent of our participation in them, specifying what we are permitted to do and say, and what is dangerous and forbidden.

In Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology (1992) he saw the computer, as other media technologies, as a Faustian bargain in which something is a gained, but much is also taken away. The computer gives us home shopping and lots of data at one’s fingertips, but with a trade-off. His primary concern was that the computer would lead to a new era where people were isolated in their world of infotainment fantasies and would reduce their connections with their community.

Notes

[1] From the Introduction to Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business
[2] 1980 movie of Brave New World and 1956 version of 1984.

Share

© ALL RIGHTS RESERVED



AnthonybwAnthony J. Pennings, PhD is Professor and Associate Chair of the Department of Technology and Society, State University of New York, Korea. Before joining SUNY, he taught at Hannam University in South Korea and for fifteen years was on the faculty of New York University. Previously, he taught at St. Edwards University in Austin, Texas, Marist College in New York, and Victoria University in New Zealand. He has also spent time as a Fellow at the East-West Center in Honolulu, Hawaii.

Google You Can Fly My Car

Posted on | May 28, 2014 | No Comments

“We were promised flying cars. Instead we got 140 characters,” – Peter Thiel

Google’s driverless car prototype is now being shown on YouTube; its network TV alternative. The car has no steering wheel, no mirrors, and no brakes. All you do is search, search, and watch Google TV while the car gets you to your destination. Don’t get me wrong; I like the idea. However, as I pointed out in a previous post, Google sees an opportunity to monetize the road. Here I want to ask the question: What about clouds? Not “the cloud,” but doesn’t Google want to monetize the skies? (update 2019: Larry Page started a company called Kitty Hawk to build flying cars)

This post is a follow-up to my essays “Monetizing the Automatrix” and “Google You Can Drive My Car” about the advertising and search strategies helping to motivate the search giant’s innovations in driverless vehicles. After all, if we can create a safe environment and technologies for the driverless car, would it not be relatively easy to apply those technologies to vehicles that fly?

Wired’s investigation of driverless cars identified some challenges, such as small animals and signaling cyclists. Still, we can expect many safety innovations that will be part of both driver-less and people-driven cars.

Extrapolating from the driverless car, can we expect a flying car? I was recently intrigued by the work of MIT’s Mary Cummings and particularly an article in Scientific American called “The Flying Car Will Finally Fly—and DriveFuture.” It was a special edition called “The Science Of The Next 150 Years: 50 Years in the Future.” It raises the question, will we bypass the Automatrix and go right to the Aeromatrix?

A former Naval aviator, Prof. Cummings has been working primarily on drones, but she makes a connection to the pilot-less flying plane. She cites Internet-inventor ARPA’s support for both driverless cars and drones as being influential. Still, much of her reasoning comes from being a Navy pilot rather than her work as an academic.

Being a fighter pilot, she realized her job was quickly being replaced by automation. Not only did computers fly jets better, but they bombed better. The Tomahawk missile, for example, could hit the tip of a needle from a thousand miles away.

The Scientific American article refers to the Aerocar. Initially built in 1949 and approved by the now-defunct Civil Aeronautics Administration (CAA), it was a vehicle that could be converted into an airplane in a matter of minutes. In many ways, it is easier for computers to fly an airplane than it is to drive a car. Granted, the consequences of mistakes can be more extreme.

Every kid from my generation was inspired by the flying cars in The Jetsons, the cartoon show about the family of the future.

My contention is that people don’t want to drive all the time if they have another option. While driving can be relaxing and a respite from the day’s grind, they may want to text, surf the Internet, or relax, meditate, or even sleep. Google plans to monetize the road by cashing in on these trends.

A note about my fanciful optimism: I recently taught a couple of MBA courses on innovation, which helped me discern some characteristics that might make the driverless car, and perhaps the flying car, a reality. Whether the driverless car or driverless flying car “takes off” depends on several factors, including government regulation and some tricky safety issues.

But Cummings points out that the trends towards substantially increased safety are significant. What is crucial is if car manufacturers can identify the relevant customer groups. For example, will it attract new customers who opted for public transportation in the past? This market looks limited in the US but might be attractive internationally. How about customers who find cars too expensive to maintain and would rather just use a
Zip Car now? Or Uber? Perhaps subscribing to a car service for a certain amount of hours a week/month? Probably most important group are the frustrated consumers who are willing to pay for the added convenience of having a car drive them to the market, to work, and maybe even send the car to pick up the kids from school.

Share

© ALL RIGHTS RESERVED



AnthonybwAnthony J. Pennings, PhD is Professor at the Department of Technology and Society, State University of New York, Korea. Before joining SUNY, he taught at Hannam University in South Korea and from 2002-2012 was on the faculty of New York University. Previously, he taught at St. Edwards University in Austin, Texas and Victoria University in New Zealand. He has also spent time as a Fellow at the East-West Center in Honolulu, Hawaii.


The Surveilling Eye of Global Financial News

Posted on | May 20, 2014 | No Comments

Abbreviated notes from a recent talk to the Korean International Studies Association at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies in Seoul, South Korea, May 17, 2014.

This summer I’m starting an inquiry into global financial news that will combine a formalistic look at the meaning-making processes that constitute television news while also incorporating the importance of surveillance, a long recognized mass media function. Both deserve additional scrutiny in an age of sophisticated digital media and telecommunications capabilities that have changed the dynamics of global finance and its impact on countries around the world.

I elaborated on 3 points that tie a formal analysis of television financial news with a political economy of global money and the mass media function of surveillance.

  1. Global news is part of a global surveillance apparatus that uses increasingly sophisticated forms of digital techniques to mediate the events, processes and people of the world in a variety of representational forms such as live statistical feeds and price information, info-graphics, live split-screen guest interviews from remote locations, etc.
  2. Countries exist within an “information standard” that replaced the gold/dollar standard created at Bretton Woods with a global system of high tech financial trading reacting in various ways to information and news flows.
  3. This information standard disciplines government policy as the amounts of money in global circulation seriously challenge the capability of any individual country to effectively control key aspects of their economic and financial policy.

Surveillance of the world plays a unique role in the financial industry by providing a wide variety of mediated economic and financial news related to geopolitical risk and opportunity. Furthermore, it is important to place the analysis of financial news within the political context of a larger techno-structural environment of global financial trading that works to discipline countries, companies and people around the world. The implications of this global web have been amplified by the extraordinary volume and velocity of the system that sees tens of trillions of dollars of trades transacted every day.

Share

© ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

AnthonybwAnthony J. Pennings, PhD is the Professor of Global Media at Hannam University in South Korea. Previously, he taught at St. Edwards University in Austin, Texas and was on the faculty of New York University from 2002-2012. He also taught at Victoria University in Wellington, New Zealand and was a Fellow at the East-West Center in Hawaii in the 1990s.

E-Commerce with Chinese Characteristics

Posted on | April 22, 2014 | No Comments

dengWhen Deng Xiaoping, the Communist leader who transformed China into state-centric capitalism had his famous economic realization, “I can distribute poverty or I can distribute wealth,” he probably could not have imagined the power of the Internet and its e-commerce capabilities.

Deng and other post-Mao Communist leaders pursued “Socialism with Chinese Characteristics” with the argument that China had mistakenly entered into Communism during its feudal stage instead of waiting until advanced capitalism, as Marx had theorized. Private ownership and a market economy were suddenly embraced as solutions, not problems. This allowed the Chinese Communist Party to legitimize both its turn to market capitalism and the continuance of its political control over the country through Marxist ideology.

So now, China has propelled itself into a major economic power. While this transformation has been accomplished primarily through a low-cost labor strategy in special export-oriented economic zones, they have also embraced the Internet and it’s e-commerce capabilities. President Xi Jinping recently said, “Efforts should be made to build our country into a cyber power,” He is even heading an Internet security and informatization leading group, and stressed that the Internet is central to China’s security and development as well as people’s life and work. A case in point, the number of its Internet users has risen to nearly 600 million, twice as many as in the U.S.

alibabaOne of the earliest Chinese startups was the Alibaba Group, now considered its most dominant e-commerce player and a major force facilitating its international trade. Along with rivals Tencent and Baidu, Alibaba has taken China into the frontiers of net-centric commerce and communication. Forget the smog and traffic and overcharging hawkers, e-commerce is transforming Chinese consumer culture.

China will take another step in its “socialist” journey as Alibaba tenders its IPO (Initial Public Offering) in the United States. It started recently with US$1 billion to gauge the registration process. China’s largest e-commerce group may worth in excess of $160 billion. Granted a lot of this may be public relations hype dreamed up by Yahoo, which currently owns 24% of Alibaba and stands to make some $10 billion in a successful IPO. But let’s take a closer look at e-commerce in China.

Jack Ma founded Alibaba.com in 1999 with 17 partners and quickly raised money from Softbank, Goldman Sachs, and other institutions to build the Alibaba.com site and brand. In a classic Internet rags-to-riches drama, Ma learned English by listening to the radio and created the company after he discovered the Internet while on a business trip to the US during the 1990s.

The former English teacher and interpreter named the company after the main character in one of his favorite stories, the Arabic classic Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves. For Jack Ma, Ali Baba was the kind son of a merchant who helped his village. It didn’t hurt that the name was easy to spell and a provocative name.

Since then, they have built an array of companies under the Alibaba banner, starting with Alibaba.com that was set up as a B2B (Business to Business) trading platform for small manufacturers to sell their products to each other. It has since expanded to offer a wide range of online services operating globally.

Taobao.com is its “online mall” with some 300 million customers that operates like a combination of Amazon and eBay, allowing approved sellers to auction or sell their goods outright. On November 11, Singles Day, Taobao and Tmall, Alibaba’s two main platforms, set an amazing record. They sold some 35 billion yuan (US$5.75 billion) in the 24-hour period, surpassing last year’s sales of 19.1 billion yuan.

taobaoFounded and owned by the Alibaba Group, Taoboa’s revenues reached 29 billion yuan in 2009 and have been growing significantly the last few years. It deals in China’s currency, the yuan, and uses Alipay as the preferred payment platform. Alipay is an escrow-based online payment system which is owned by the Alibaba Group. Although China’s Central Bank is placing renewed attention on payment systems, the payment solution site has nearly 500,000 C2C, B2C and B2B merchants using its services, not including those on Taobao and Alibaba.

Based in Hangzhou, just inland from eastern China’s Shang Hai metropolis, the company focuses on three online opportunities:

  • The China marketplace
  • – Using the www.1688.com site, the domestic business-to-business trade in China has been Alibaba’s financial base. Alibaba connected 1688 with Taobao to form a supply chain of manufacturing businesses, distribution businesses and consumers. Taobao is China’s largest online shopping site and has a very popular mobile app. The video below provides insight into the Chinese online consumer. Alternative link to CNBC video on Alibaba.

  • The English language international marketplace
  • – The purchase of Vendio Services Inc. with funding from George Soros, brought together importers and exporters from more than 240 countries and regions with substantial English-literate populations. It was combined with AliExpress, an Amazon-like factory-direct platform for retail purchasing, complete with incredible bargains and the occasional ripoff.

  • The Japanese marketplace
  • – Alibaba.com Japan is a subsidiary of SOFTBANK Corp. (alibaba.co.jp)and conducts business-to-business trade between small and medium enterprises in Japan with buyers and suppliers, including some from China. Yahoo Japan and Alibaba’s Taobao have connected e-commerce platforms to provide B2C services both ways. Yahoo Japan has opened a section in Chinese in its shopping section, carrying millions of products from China (in Japanese language) while Alibaba’s Taobao is offering wares from Japan-based companies on “TaoJapan”, a Chinese-language section on Taobao’s frontpage. Japanese telecom/media giant Softbank has a major financial interest in both Alibaba and Yahoo Japan and stands to benefit handsomely from the IPO.

    As the economic momentum continues to move to Asia, e-commerce will increasingly be at the center of the new social dynamic. While China follows the world trend of rising inequality between the rich and the rest, Chinese leaders seemed to have learned the lesson of USSR Communism – workers need material rewards to stay motivated. The proletariat needs incentives to keep up the long hours on the mobile phone production line. E-commerce provides the lure and the fulfillment of those consumer desires. They can see what they want online, pay for what they want online, and have it delivered in the physical world (Maybe soon with Amazon-style drones?-). Socialism with Chinese characteristics takes an electronic turn.

    Ⓒ ALL RIGHTS RESERVED



    AnthonybwAnthony J. Pennings, PhD is Professor at the Department of Technology and Society, State University of New York, Korea. Originally from New York, he started his academic career Victoria University in Wellington, New Zealand before returning to New York to teach at Marist College and spending most of his career at New York University. He has also spent time at the East-West Center in Honolulu, Hawaii. When not in the Republic of Korea, he lives in Austin, Texas.

    Determining Competitive Advantages for Digital Firms, Part 2

    Posted on | April 18, 2014 | No Comments

    In a previous post on competitive advantages, I discussed some structural characteristics for digital media firms. Using the framework laid out in Curse of the Mogul: What’s Wrong with the World’s Leading Media Companies as a point of departure, I was able to extend their analysis of traditional media companies to the more dynamic realm of digital media firms. To be successful, these new companies need to understand how to shore up barriers to entry to solidify their positions and become profitable. Within the competitive environment of the Internet, it is important to be aware of how companies can ward off other companies looking to capture their market share.

    The authors critique media moguls for not paying adequate attention to four general categories of competitive advantages: economies of scale; customer captivity; cost; and government protection. Previously, I covered economies of scale and customer captivity. I paid particular attention to network effects that are one of the most critical determiners of success for net-centric firms. Customer captivity in terms of habits, search costs, and switching costs are also important determinants of success for companies dealing with digital media programming, products, and applications.

    In this post, I focus on innovation, cost, and government protection. Media companies need to proactively develop and protect new technologies as well as instill a culture of rapid learning and implementation. They also need access to vital resources, whether raw minerals or refined human knowledge and skills. Lastly, government support can help a firm develop a competitive advantage.

    Innovation involves developing, utilizing, and protecting technologies, implementing a climate of learning, and applying new knowledge to fundamental production and work processes. While the book puts these under the category of cost, I thought it might be more beneficial to examine these processes through the lens of innovation. This rationale is partially due to the changes in GDP measurement that now include many aspects of research and development – as well as media production – as capital expenditures and not expenses.

    Digital media firms need to develop key proprietary technologies that they can use and protect. This increasingly involves software enhancements to core products and technological innovations such as recommendation engines and other “big data” solutions. Guarding the firm against cyber-espionage and techniques like reverse engineering has become a high priority.

    Utilizing intellectual property protections such as copyrights, trademarks and the use of patents, including the business method patent can provide legal protection for a product and protect against encroaching companies. Patents, for example, give the owner the exclusive use of a technology for 14-20 years.

    Digital media firms should strive for constant improvements in production and efficiencies to separate themselves from the “pack” through organizational learning. They should also be cognizant of the opportunities inherent in disruptive innovations that may initially offer poorer performance, but that may improve or reach new audiences over time.[2]

    As digital media companies traffic in various types of communication and content, it is crucial that they find new ways to produce, package and monetize media. The authors are wary of business models based on content “hits” and stress instead the importance of producing continuous content. This may require innovations in digital media production, programming, and ways to utilize user-generated content.

    Cost issues involve ensuring access to essential resources or what economists call “factors of production” (land, labor, capital, entrepreneurship). These might be cheap energy and other natural resources, talented labor, sources of investment as well as expertise in startups. Google’s Finland data center and the Green Mountain Data Center in Norway are good examples of attempts to use the cold waters in those areas to cool thousands of servers and reduce energy costs.

    Raw materials may not be considered critical for digital media sectors directly, but to the extent that they rely on other high tech sectors, they may be indirectly reliant on a number of raw minerals including indium niobium, platinum, and titanium. Indium, for instance, is used in touchscreens, liquid crystal displays, and to manufacture microprocessors. Africa and China are major supplies of critical raw materials for the high-tech sector.

    Access to skilled labor and a climate of intellectual discussion and sharing that facilitates innovation are also important factors to consider. I’ve written previously about five digital media “archetypes”: design; technology/programming; business management; communications; and analytics. Richard Florida’s thesis that these types of talent congregate around creative clusters is instructive. He encourages areas interested in developing their creative economies to support their universities, particularly faculties that do science and technology; cultivate new industries that capitalize on creativity; prepare people for a creative global economy, and foster openness and tolerance to attract the creative class.”

    Government protection can also impart benefits to a digital media business or be a deterrent to its competitors.[3] From the perspective of an individual digital firm, it can benefit from outright subsidies, grants or guaranteed loans. The Small Business Administration (SBA) and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) are two of the most supportive US agencies for digital enterprises.

    Preferential purchase policies for companies can provide an edge. Governments often list specific advantages they are willing to provide smaller to medium sized enterprises (SMEs) especially dealing with specific sustainability, or gender/minority diversification programs. Often these are advertised as support for specific products or services.

    Exclusive licenses have been a historical reality in the media business, primarily due to the importance of a scarce resource – the electromagnetic spectrum. This key media resource has gone primarily to television and radio operators, but the interest in mobile services and Wi-Fi has opened up new frequencies for use. When we created PenBC (Pennings Broadcasting Corp. – seriously), the prime asset was the FCC license for microwave transmission from the satellite dishes to high rise buildings throughout Honolulu.

    The 2015 FCC auction of low-frequency spectrum was interesting to watch as incumbents AT&T and Verizon fought off other mobile carriers such as T-Mobile and satellite TV provider Dish Network that have garnered US Justice Department support to achieve a more level playing field. Verizon was the only wireless operator to win a nationwide license in the 700MHz auction in 2008. The new spectrum it won with US$ 20 billion in the 2015 auction allowed it to offer faster speeds on its 4G LTE network, so customers to do more bandwidth-intensive like watching video on their smartphones and tablets.

    A government may also erect barriers to entry in favor of domestic industries to support local media content and may utilize import tariffs and/or quotas. Movies, games, and search engines are some of the areas that have experienced difficulties in breaking into certain markets. Google service in China is extremely limited. Google Maps operates under restrictions in South Korea which refused to export the country’s detailed mapping data to Google due to national security concerns.

    Whether environmental, safety-related, procedural, or otherwise, regulations typically impose stricter burdens on some organizations than others. Regulations are often written up by specific companies or related trade associations beholden to specific companies. They are often aided by employees who formerly worked with related government agencies. They often write policy prescriptions and may lobby for government administrative support or legislation. The authors are somewhat glib about government intervention and recommend hiring very good lobbyists.

    In “Determining Competitive Advantages for Digital Media Firms, Part 1,” I discussed barriers to entry related to economies of scale such as fixed costs and network effects. I also discussed how different forms of customer captivity can be beneficial for a digital firm. Above, I looked at innovation, cost, and government regulation. It is also important to understand that two or more competitive advantages may be operating at the same time. Recognizing the potential of reinforcing multiple barriers to entry and planning strategies that involve several competitive advantages will increase a company’s odds of success.

    Citation APA (7th Edition)

    Pennings, A.J. (2014, Apr 18). Determining Competitive Advantages for Digital Media Companies, Part 2. apennings.com https://apennings.com/global-e-commerce/determining-competitive-advantages-for-digital-media-firms-part-2/

    Notes

    [1] Jonathan A. Knee, Bruce C. Greenwald, and Ava Seave, The Curse of the Mogul: What Wrong with the World’s Leading Media Companies. 2014.
    [2] Christensen, Clayton M. The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School, 1997.
    [3] The history of early digital innovation and development is a case study in government involvement. IBM got its start with the national census and social security tabulation. The microprocessor and the PC industry emerged through the Space Race and MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) and the Internet can be said to have taken off after the Strategic Defense Initiative or “Star Wars” required supercomputers at different universities to use the NSFNET. National defense/security spending and other policies can help a company shore up its own defenses against competition.

    Share

    © ALL RIGHTS RESERVED



    AnthonybwAnthony J. Pennings, PhD is Professor and Associate Chair of the Department of Technology and Society, State University of New York, Korea. Before joining SUNY, he taught at Hannam University in South Korea and from 2002-2012 was on the faculty of New York University. Previously, he taught at St. Edwards University in Austin, Texas, Marist College in New York, and Victoria University in New Zealand. He has also spent time as a Fellow at the East-West Center in Honolulu, Hawaii.

    Determining Competitive Advantages for Digital Media Firms, Part 1

    Posted on | March 30, 2014 | No Comments

    In the Curse of the Mogul: What’s Wrong with the World’s Leading Media Companies, Jonathan A. Knee, Bruce C. Greenwald, and Ava Seave provide a general critique of upper media management. The authors argue these moguls are preoccupied with “fantastical factors” that do little to provide high returns on capital, market share stability or shareholder value in a time when they are direly needed. The mogul’s preoccupation with “sham” competitive advantages: deep pockets, brands, talent (creative, managerial), a global footprint, and first-mover benefits; obscure other business factors that would likely facilitate better results.[1]

    The authors argue that these managerial strategies must be more consistent with the historical performances and economic realities that have created and defined the modern (digital?) mediascape. Instead, they point out that media companies should focus on developing and reinforcing more serious competitive advantages and/or operational efficiencies. Successful media companies must define and protect more structural barriers to entry or adopt strict cost control procedures and operational efficiencies to enhance productivity.

    In this post and the next, I review some of the major sources of competitive advantages according to The Curse of the Mogul and reference how they might apply to digital media firms. The book refers primarily to traditional big media firms. In light of the rapid development and convergence of these areas, however, it is worth exploring how these categories of competitive advantage apply to a wider group of digital firms.[2] The authors distinguish four categories:

    Due to space constraints, I will cover economies of scale and customer captivity in this post and cost, innovation, and government protection in a future one.

    Economies of Scale may involve both or either fixed costs and network effects. Fixed costs refer to both the traditional sense of decreasing costs per unit produced as well as to the barriers created by a company like Google with the ability to spend lavishly on equipment, knowledge attainment and other factors that make it prohibitive for other firms to match. Large firms can spread their fixed costs over greater volumes of production and operate more profitably than their competitors. Web sites, for example, can benefit by localizing their content and expanding their reach to other countries.

    In fact, one of the characteristics of digital media is that although initial production costs may run high, the costs for additional viewers to experience the resulting movie, television show, song, or video game are negligible. Digital goods can experience near-zero marginal costs.

    Economies of scale for book publishers have always meant they needed to cover their fixed costs such as editors and author royalties before they can achieve profits. However, if they have a bestseller, it can be quite profitable as they spread their costs over a larger production run. Digital distribution through Amazon’s Kindle or Apple’s iBooks not only reduces the costs of production, but as no ink or paper is involved it significantly reduces the costs of delivery as well. Microsoft Office for example, which contains Access, Word, Excel, and PowerPoint can be distributed over the Internet with little expense. But that that is not necessary a competitive advantage. Digital assets also need to be protected and utilize network effects.

    Network effects refer to the increasing value of a product or service that occurs when additional customers or users start to use them. Many communications technologies such as telephones, fax machines, and text applications exhibit direct network effects. The telephone system became more valuable to each individual telephone subscriber as more people connected to the phone system. When more mobile phone users started to take advantage of Short Message Service (SMS) or “texting,” it attracted even more users. When I got my first text from my sister, for example, who was not known at the time for her technological prowess, I knew that texting had arrived.

    Network effects are complicated and may not always be positive, as MySpace discovered after 2008 when members abandoned it for Facebook. MySpace was a social media site that allowed users to create their own “spaces” with pictures, blogs, music, and videos. The darling of early “social networking,” it was sold to Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation for US$580 million dollars in 2005. Two years later, with 185 million registered users, it had a valuation of $65 billion. By early 2011 MySpace was down to about 63 million, and Facebook had jumped ahead with over 500 million members. Tired of pumping money into the sinking ship, News Corp. sold MySpace to Specific Media, an advertising network for $35 million, just 6% of its purchase price.[4]

    Digital firms need to consider multiple repercussions such as cross-network and indirect network effects. The authors use the example of eBay, an online auction company that benefits from cross-network effects. eBay, Uber, Airbnb, and many other “platforms” such as dating or recruiting sites are also known as two-sided networks because they bring two distinct groups together. As the number of the eBay’s customers increased, it became increasingly attractive for others to sell their wares on the site. Conversely, as more products were displayed, it attracted more customers. A major success for Microsoft Office is that files produced on Word or Excel often need to shared and read by others.

    Network effects makes a site or product more valuable as it includes more people and those additional people make it more attractive for another group. Credit cards, for example, are another good example of cross-network effects. They rely on a large base of individual card holders for profitability and this large customer base than attracts merchants who want their business and are willing to pay the extra costs to the credit card company. This raises questions about who you charge and if a proprietary platform is needed.

    Over-the-top (OTT) services that use the Internet as a distribution system, like Amazon Prime, Netflix, and YouTube, connect consumers with content makers. While Prime and Netflix produce considerable content, they draw on outside content producers to keep their viewers engaged. YouTube has drawn heavily on user-generated content (UGC) as does Instagram and TikTok. In each case, the platform’s success depends on its direct network effects – its ability to connect a large number of viewers with a large number of producers.

    Another phenomenon is indirect network effects. This occurs when the increasing use of one product or service increases the demand for complementary goods. The standardization of the Windows platform in the 1990s, for example, and its nearly ubiquitous installed user base among PC users allowed many other software producers to thrive as they built their applications to run on the Microsoft operating system. Both Apple and Android-based smartphones have allowed thousands of apps to be added to their functionality. So the network effects attributed to the popularity of these PCs and smartphones carry over to applications that run on them.

    Customer captivity is often vital to a product’s success and is reinforced through habit, switching costs and search costs. Successfully introducing customer practices and reinforcing habitual use is a crucial strategy for retaining customers. Mobile apps lock users into a much more narrow range of options than surfing the Web on their PCs. Also, Amazon’s One-click purchase option makes it quick and easy to complete the deal without dragging out the credit card and inputting all the numbers and other information.

    One new digital tool that is proving effective is the recommendation engine. Netflix uses a recommendation engine to keep customers engaged. It constantly suggests titles the viewer might be interested in watching based on their previous viewing. Amazon destroyed the Borders bookstore with its recommendation engine and an effective email system that targeted customers with what they wanted. Borders could only offer pictures of loosely associated books with dubious links to the customer’s interests. I, for example, was not interested in their fine collection of Harlequin-like romance novels. Borders did not recommend the books I wanted, so I bought them from Amazon.

    It is also important to keep customers from switching to competitors. Switching barriers can involve exit fees, learning effort, equipment costs, emotional stress, start-up costs, as well as various types of risk: financial, psychological, and social. Cable and home security companies are notorious for trying to keep customers in long-term contracts to keep them from switching.

    Making it easy to learn new products is helpful as is reducing any stresses associated with understanding new features or upgrading. One way to keep customers is to make the payment system easy. Automatic payments work for subscription-based services like Netflix and other deliverers of online content that tie in customers through credit cards and other continuous payment systems.

    Search costs encourage consumers to stay with a particular product or entice them to go with your brand if the information provided is convincing enough to cause them to give up their search. Rational consumers will tend to search until the perceived benefits outweigh the costs. Testimonials and good reviews will help alleviate their concerns. Big ticket items like cars, homes, or major appliances tend to require more search time than smaller items. But any search requires a calculation of the opportunity costs involved. What are they giving up to spend this time searching?

    In the passages above, I reviewed competitive advantages as specified by the authors of The Mogul’s Curse and applied them to digital media firms. Their focus on moguls doesn’t hold as much interest for me as their discussion about competitive advantages for smaller companies.[4] Being technologically dynamic, the digital media field is still investigating and exploring its ability to create competitive advantages and erect barriers to entry.

    It is also important to understand that two or more competitive advantages may be operating at the same time. Recognizing the potential of reinforcing multiple barriers to entry and planning strategies that involve several competitive advantages will increase the odds for success. In “Determining Competitive Advantages for Digital Media Firms, Part 2,” I will discuss competitive advantages related to costs and government protection.

    Citation APA (7th Edition)

    Pennings, A.J. (2014, Mar 30). Determining Competitive Advantages for Digital Media Companies, Part I. apennings.com https://apennings.com/media-strategies/determining-competitive-advantages-for-digital-media-firms-part-1/

    Notes

    [1] “Reviews: The_Curse_of_The_Mogul.” Quantum Media: Links_Reviews. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Mar. 2014.
    [2] Greenwald, Bruce C. “The Moguls’ New Clothes.” The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 01 Oct. 2009. Web. 30 Mar. 2014.
    [3] Jonathan A. Knee, Bruce C. Greenwald, and Ava Seave, The Curse of the Mogul: What Wrong with the World’s Leading Media Companies. 2014.
    [4] Jackson, Nicholas. “As MySpace Sells for $35 Million, a History of the Network’s Valuation.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 29 June 2011.
    [5] I finally found the hard copy of this book at a Borders near Wall Street in New York City.

    Share

    © ALL RIGHTS RESERVED



    AnthonybwAnthony J. Pennings, PhD is Professor and Associate Chair of the Department of Technology and Society, State University of New York, Korea. Before joining SUNY, he taught at Hannam University in South Korea and from 2002-2012 was on the faculty of New York University. Previously, he taught at St. Edwards University in Austin, Texas, Marist College in New York, and Victoria University in New Zealand. He has also spent time as a Fellow at the East-West Center in Honolulu, Hawaii.

    « go backkeep looking »
  • Referencing this Material

    Copyrights apply to all materials on this blog but fair use conditions allow limited use of ideas and quotations. Please cite the permalinks of the articles/posts.
    Citing a post in APA style would look like:
    Pennings, A. (2015, April 17). Diffusion and the Five Characteristics of Innovation Adoption. Retrieved from https://apennings.com/characteristics-of-digital-media/diffusion-and-the-five-characteristics-of-innovation-adoption/
    MLA style citation would look like: "Diffusion and the Five Characteristics of Innovation Adoption." Anthony J. Pennings, PhD. Web. 18 June 2015. The date would be the day you accessed the information. View the Writing Criteria link at the top of this page to link to an online APA reference manual.

  • About Me

    Professor at State University of New York (SUNY) Korea since 2016. Moved to Austin, Texas in August 2012 to join the Digital Media Management program at St. Edwards University. Spent the previous decade on the faculty at New York University teaching and researching information systems, digital economics, and strategic communications.

    You can reach me at:

    apennings70@gmail.com
    anthony.pennings@sunykorea.ac.kr

    Follow apennings on Twitter

  • About me

  • Writings by Category

  • Flag Counter
  • Pages

  • Calendar

    April 2024
    M T W T F S S
    1234567
    891011121314
    15161718192021
    22232425262728
    2930  
  • Disclaimer

    The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect the views of my employers, past or present.