View more presentations from Marco Derksen.
View more presentations from Marco Derksen.
Peter Spellman is a friend and long-time colleague who works at my Alma Mater, Berklee College if Music, in Boston, and also runs his own company, Music Business Solution. He has written a couple of really powerful and highly recommended books geared towards musicians that want to use the web to propel their career (see below). Peter just send me a PDF with his latest work, a 'psycho-spiritual-musical manifesto' (see image on the left) and I really liked it so I figured I should pass it on to everyone, via this blog: Download Musician 2.0, 3.0, 4.0...Spellman (PDF, 2MB)
Enjoy!
Peter Spellman, M.A. M.Ed., helps musicians apply their entrepreneurial instincts to create success. He is Director of the Career Development Center at Berklee College of Music, and founder of Music Business Solutions (mbsolutions.com), a training resource for music entrepreneurs. He has worked as a booking agent, label director, music editor, artist manager and producer, and performs as percussionist with the ambient-jazz ensemble, Underwater Airport. His newest book, INDIE BUSINESS POWER: A Step-By-Step Guide for 21st Century Music Entrepreneurs, and his other business-building books, are used in over a dozen colleges and universities across the U.S and Canada. More at www.mbsolutions.com/books
PS: another great source of "Music / Musician 2.0" information is the blog of my co-writer David Kusek, here, as well as the BerkleeShares.com site, and the amazing online education platform, BerkleeMusic.com. And then there is my own book, Music 2.0, of course - read the free mobile version here.
Another brilliant post by Umair Haque via the Harvard Business Review - he spells out a lot of stuff that keeps coming up in my presentations, as well; so here's a bit of a remix of this juicy post, my comments are [...]
"On one side is the old high ground of the industrial era capitalism; on the other, the new high(er) ground of next-generation capitalism. The yawning chasm in between them is the gap between the 20th century and the 21st" [I call this the EGOSystem vs the ECOsystem, see more here and here]
"Currency intervention, breaking Copenhagen, crackdowns , collusion, corruption, coercion, and censorship: China's ongoing bad behavior as global citizen is, when we connect the dots, the gigantic elephant in the world's boardroom. What's driving it? The quest for monopoly, monopsony, and control" [I wrote about something quite similar in my 2007/2008 blog-book "The End of Control", check out the free online chapters here, and a related presentation, here]
"That's yesterday's high ground, and China's focused like a laser beam on it. China's moves are the textbook stuff of b-school's blackest arts. Through larger distribution, fiercer litigation, greater exclusivity, cheaper and faster production, a bigger cash pile, advantage is gained. But the high ground has shifted. The new high ground is an ethical edge. It's not about having more; it's about doing better. It's not about protecting exports, pressuring buyers and suppliers, price discriminating against the powerless, and programming consumers to buy, buy, buy — it's about making people, communities, and society authentically better off. It's not about caring less — but caring more. It's not about ruthlessness. It's about mindfulness" [Couldn't have said it better, myself; here are just a few things I would add: in this new ecosystem that Umair is describing, we will need to develop web-native economic models and entirely new metrics for evaluating them, friction will indeed be fiction (to a very large degree) and the importance of control will be utterly eroded by the steadily increasing power of trust, engagement and transparency]
"The old high ground was built for 20th century economics: sell more junk, earn more profit, "grow" — and then crash. An ethical edge operates at a higher economic level. It is concerned with what we sell, how profits are earned, and which authentic, human benefits "grow." It's a concept built for the economics of an interdependent world" [A key term, imo: an interdependent world, i.e. not a broadcast world but a connected and networked world]
"An ethical edge just might be the ultimate cause of advantage. It's how better distribution, production, marketing, and pricing — all just proximate causes of advantage — ultimately happen. Jim Chanos's investment thesis says: without an ethical edge, new value cannot be created — old value can only be shuffled around (hi, Wall Street)....So here's the single question everyone should be asking. The old high ground is the new low ground. Yesterday's mountain is today's valley. Are you ascending to the new high ground?"
via blogs.hbr.org
Fellow mobilist and DotOpen Founder Rudy de Waele has drummed up some great predictions, bottom-lines and other assorted wisdoms from 20+ really great people (including myself...for some odd reason; in any case I am really delighted to be asked to contribute - thanks Rudy!), asking us to provide input on out top 5 mobile trends for the next decade.
This effort produced a very nice slideshow that really packs a punch, see below. It includes some serious nuggets of wisdom from people such as Howard Rheingold, Douglas Rushkoff, Marshall Kirkpatrick, Gerd Leonhard, Timo Arnall, Carlo Longino, Katrin Verclas, Atau Tanaka, Alan Moore, Marek Pawloski, Ajit Jaokar, Nicolas Nova, Inma Martinez, Tony Fish, Jonathan MacDonald, Willem Boijens, Carlos Domingo, Russ McGuire, Raimo van der Klein, Michael Breidenbruecker, Robert Rice, Steve O’Hear, Ted Morgan, Martin Duval, Andreas Constantinou, Fabien Girardin, Matthäus Krzykowski, Rich Wong, Andy Abramson, Ilja Laurs, David Wood, Stefan Constantinescu, Henri Moissinac, Kevin C. Tofel, Enrique C. Ortiz, Felix Petersen, Tom Hume...
Here is my stuff, excerpted (from slide #9)
1. Mobile advertising will surpass the decidedly outmoded Web1.0 & computer-centric advertising - and ads will become content, almost entirely. Advertisers will, within 2-5 years, massively convert to mobile, location-aware, targeted, opt-ed-in, social and user-distributed 'ads'; from 1% of their their budgets to at least 1/3 of their total advertising budget. Advertising becomes 'ContVertising' - and Google's revenues will be 10x of what they are today, in 5 years, driven by mobile, and by video.
2. Tablet devices will become the way many of us will 'read' magazines, books, newspapers and even 'attend' live concerts, conferences and events. The much-speculated Apple iPad will kick this off but every major device maker will copy their new tablet within 18 months. In addition, tablets will kick off the era of mobile augmented reality. This will be a huge boon to the content industries, worldwide - but only if they can drop their mad content protection schemes, and slash the prices in return for a much larger user base.
3. Many makers of simple smart phones - probably starting with Nokia- will make their devices available for free - but will take a small cut (similar to the current credit-cards) from all transactions that are done through the devices, e.g. banking, small purchases, on-demand content etc. Mobile phones become wallets, banks and ATMs.
4. Quite a few mobile phones will not run on any particular networks, i.e. without [I mean unlocked] SIM cards. The likes of Google (Nexus), and maybe Skype, LG or Amazon will offer mobile phones that [may eventually] will work only on Wifi / WiMax, LTE or mashed-access networks, and will offer more or less free calls. This will finally wake up the mobile network operators, and force them to really move up the food-chain - into content and the provision of 'experiences'
5. Content will be bundled into mobile service contracts, starting with music, i.e. once your mobile phone / computer is online, much of the use of the content (downloaded or streamed) will be included. Bundles and flat-rates - many of them Advertising 2.0-supported - will become the primary way of consuming, and interacting with content. First music, then books, new and magazines, then film & TV.
Image via Wikipedia
Back in October 09, Tim O'Reilly ( someone that I really admire for his cutting-edge and very wise thinking on the future of content and technology) published a very important piece on ebook publishing, on the occasion of the Safari eBook portal relaunch.
I think that most of us working in the content industries can learn a lot from this post, no matter if it's about books, magazines, news, music, film or software. I will therefore summarize his most important bottom lines, below, and provide some comments and context where needed.
And from Tim's 1995 (!) piece Publishing Models for Internet Commerce, here are some more morsels:
"Some of the characteristics of the print publishing market:
Barriers to entry are low. Especially with the advent of desktop publishing, almost anyone can produce a book, a magazine, a newsletter.
Niches abound. Over 50,000 books are published each year in the U.S. alone. A major bookselling chain such as Borders keeps literally hundreds of thousands of unique titles in inventory. And despite major industry consolidation,and focus on a small number of bestsellers, there are still thousands of publishers, ranging in size from those who publish only a single book to those who publish thousands. What's more, there are about 3500 general circulation magazines and tens of thousands of newsletters and other limited circulation publications.
So do business models. Books are sold "by the piece." They are also available for free in the library, though in limited circulation. Magazines and newspapers may be had for free (perhaps subsidized by advertising or membership), for a single-copy newsstand price, or for a recurring subscription fee. Prices range from a few dollars to hundreds or even thousands of dollars for specialized newsletters.
No one "owns" the market, or needs to. A bestselling book might sell a million copies or so. The largest circulation magazine in the country, the AARP's membership magazine, has a circulation of about 7 million, Reader's Digest about 5 million. No one else comes close. It's possible to have a successful book selling only a few thousand copies, a newsletter a few hundred, and a four color magazine a few tens of thousands.
The same technology is available to everyone...
There is a rich ecology of mutually successful players. Authors sell to publishers. Publishers screen material, edit and produce it to add value, develop a marketing campaign, and build a network of distribution relationships to get the book to the ultimate consumer. Publishers may sell books directly to the consumer, through major retailers, and through wholesalers to smaller retailers whom they don't serve directly....
Access is universal and non-exclusive..."
If you are in the content business, be sure to read his entire post, and watch his 2009 Web2.0 video, here. There sure is a ton of stuff to chew on. Enjoy.
I have been very busy compiling my best essays, blog posts and other writings from the past 3 years, and have finally uploaded the most recent version to Lulu (my favorite print-on-demand book store). The new book is now called 'Friction is Fiction' and is available in 3 versions: 1) 158 pages, 6x9 inches / U.S. trade format, full-color, for $60.40, here (yes, it's quite pricey because of the cost of printing 4-color, on-demand) 2) the same dead-tree version, but in black & white only, for $19.98, here (much cheaper but a lot less cool;) 3) as a PDF, for a token price of $7.50, here.
I would be delighted if you would consider buying whatever works best for you - what better Christmas present could you possibly think of! Please note that this book will be updated every 3 months, to include my latest writings. If you want to share the book page please just send people to www.frictionisfiction.com - thanks.
As to giving away the free PDF, here is the deal: you can contact me anytime (via email, Facebook or Twitter) to request a free copy of the PDF if you just don't want to (or can't) spend the $7.50, and I will send you the download link. In return, what I ask from you is to pay me with attention, i.e. to write a review on Lulu, a blog-post, or a tweet about my book, with a link (all 3 is best;). Deal?
As to the title: I used to simply call this compilation 'The Best of Media Futurist' but while looking through all those posts - and spending a lot more time revising them - I found an important thread that goes through almost all of it and which therefore has become the new title: Friction is Fiction. So what does that mean? It means that if you are currently basing your success on maintaining or even constructing hurdles, difficulties or other bottlenecks somewhere in the system - i.e. if there is something that impedes the flow of information, or a transaction or purchase so that a higher price point or some other form of control over the can be obtained - then you are very likely to face diminishing revenues in the next few years. Building obstacles for users (fka consumers) used to work just fine but... no longer. Building walls is the fastest road to suicide in the digital economy.
The web has been utterly ruthless about finding these glaring points of friction, such as paying for eMail (remember that?), paying a ton of money for long-distance phone calls (remember those pre-skype days?), or consumers not having any access to travel booking systems, flight information or seating. These hurdles are being removed, one-by-one, and those 'people formerly known as consumers' are getting more powerful every single day. Banking on friction to increase your revenues has become like throwing matches into the river and asking it to stop - it's useless.
Friction was, of course, the main money-maker in the media, entertainment and content business, for a long time: certain CDs were only available in certain stores at certain times in certain countries, DVDs with those movies you really wanted were only available in certain countries and within certain 'windows', books had to be printed and shipped, and ring-tones could only be purchased from your operator. Basically, at every turn the consumer encountered have-to's and must's which essentially allowed a substantial level of control by the media and content companies - and thus, higher prices. In many cases, the more friction the higher the price you could ask for.
No longer. Read the book!
Related: my blog-book "The End of Control": download the first 6 chapters here. Also: My Music 2.0 book is available via Lulu, here
Many of you may have already downloaded my free Music 2.0 book as a PDF, or read it on the iPhone using Instapaper via my very basic mobile page, or even purchased the dead-tree version (note that Amazon is sold out now, all future orders should be done only via Lulu.com)
Today, I am delighted to announce that a much better mobile-optimized version of the book is finally available here - and yes, it's still free. However, I really don't mind if you make a payment for the free PDF via Lulu.com;)
As you can see, below, this includes all of the chapters in an easy-to-read, mobile-native format, and all kinds of ways to share it via eMail, Twitter and Facebook. The best thing is, however, that you can now add all of the chapters of the book to your Instapaper app (iPhone only, I think) with just one click, and then read the whole thing offline, as well. Way cool! We are also working on a 'real' iPhone app.
Note: Instapaper was covered on the new Indicatr site, yesterday, as well). Please spread the word - and don't forget: if you are entirely and utterly mobile-only you can track most of my tweets and shared items here.
I will be speaking at Lee Dryburgh's Emerging Communications (eComm) Europe conference in Amsterdam on October 28-30. Prior to this date, and to preview what I will be talking about in my presentation (last year's video is here, btw), Lee conducted an interview with me which turned out to be quite informative (if I may so so, myself). I have pasted some of the 'best' snippets below, and added the MP3 version if you want to just listen to it. A big part of this interview is about what I call 'The Politics of Content' i.e. the 3 Strikes debate. The full version can be found on the eComm Europe blog. Lastly, if you want a discount code for this event... please ping me.
Play MP3:
Futurist Gerd Leonhard eComm 2009 blog interview
Lee: ...there is this political push in the U.K. for three strikes, and you're cut off by your ISP or slowed down if you've been caught by your ISP for downloading "illegal" files. Have you got any comments to make there in this sudden ISP liability for content, which seems very crazy?
Gerd: I think there are a lot of more or less unfortunate things coming together on this. Basically, the content industry starting with music is rightfully worried about distribution becoming free. This is a global phenomenon. The more broadband we have the better devices, the more the push towards sharing and trading stuff without payment is clearly there. On the other hand, the content industry has, to a very large degree, refused to license the content in so many new ways that are being asked for, starting with imeem and YouTube, and MySpace originally. The refusal to license has essentially created a vacuum to where everyone rightly then also says if we can't actually do it legally, we have two choices which is to quit or to do it without permission. Then you have companies like imeem and MySpace and YouTube initially doing it without permission.
That in return has created a need for the content industry to lobby the governments and industry organizations around the world to get the ISP to pick up the responsibility, which of course, is a rather ludicrous thought, given you could easily expand that to PDFs and JPEGs and what have you. That thought of deep package inspection for the sake of shoring up a specific business model is obviously not going to happen in Europe... I think that anybody who believes that technology exists, that you can solve this problem, is mistaken on this. It's basically not a technology problem. It's a structural and licensing problem. It's basically a business problem. Whenever you try to solve a business problem with technology, like we have with DVD region coding, and those kinds of things, you end up really going against the consumer and sacrificing things that otherwise the consumer will hate you for.
Lee: So you feel that this motion, this three strikes push to have your ISP do policing is actually pulling value out of the system instead of adding value to the system as a whole?
Gerd: It's a fig leaf discussion. It's as simple as that. The discussion about solving this problem with technology is nothing but a fig leaf because it will never work. In a democracy, it's not actually technically feasible. If you imagine this, then I get disconnected from the web for downloading and I go to my neighbor and use his Wi-Fi. He also gets disconnected. Where do we go? We go to the Internet café and we'll do the same thing. It goes on from there and sooner or later, somebody will ask for his JPEGs to be prevented, and Murdock is going to ask for people who copy and paste from the Financial Times or The Wall Street Journal to also be disconnected. It's a whole chain reaction of issues. That is just not going to happen in Europe. That could happen in China and it is happening in China, but not in Europe.
Lee: So you don't see policing of every file format?
Gerd: The key question really is this; does any of this make any money for anyone? Does kicking people off the web because they have downloaded without permission make any money for anyone? The whole idea behind this is to say, "Well, we've got legal offerings that you should be using rather than downloading for free." If the legal offerings are so technology stupid, like using DRM, or they are so far priced out that kids can't afford it, like iTunes, then where are you going to point them to? In other words, if there is no commercial possibility to be legal, why am I being forced into those channels that I don't want to use? That is against every possible logic, if there ever was one...
You have numerous efforts around the world of creating what I call a private license, like Virgin Media and Universal, like Orange in France and the record labels, and so on. Most of that doesn't work because it's too expensive and it has technology problems. Therefore, if you think about this, think ultimately; we have roughly two billion users on mobile and regular Internets. All of these users have providers. What if two billion people were able to have legal access to music and pay $1 a week, and if that payment was bundled, i.e. hidden with advertising, with subsidies like the cell phone hardware and so on; that would be a fantastic solution to everyone. I think telecoms are thinking, "Well, if we can make this happen, we don't just solve a huge problem which is content liability; we also create a next generation platform for the generation of new businesses, including virtual venues, virtual goods, and premium products." It's not really rocket science to think that far; that's why I was alluding earlier to imagination.
Lee: Great, and I am really happy that we got in contact last year and you've been pushing, not just pushing, but highlighting what is taking place. You did so at the last conference and you'll be speaking again next month. I think you're doing a 20 minute keynote. Do you want to finish this off, since we've been on this call for some time, by giving some idea of how you see the future of advertising? We've covered content, policies, where money is, but do you really think that advertising is going to "pay" for everything? What is the future role of advertising?
Gerd: I think Fred Wilson from Union Square Ventures said that the age of one-way communication from an unwanted or uncertified brand is over. That is what advertising used to be. You get one-way stuff dumped on you from somebody where you don't like them or don't know who they are and you don't care. The business of advertising as disruption, interruption, or a nuisance that is unavoidable is over. On the web, we're not going to take anything like this. We're completely going to punish people that do this to us. For example email, any PR company that emails me with their pitch goes into the black list. I dump them. I punish them. Any PR company that follows me on Twitter and gets involved in a conversation and looks at what I read and what I like, and then sends me a meaningful link; they go on the white list.
...read more here.
Image by gleonhard via Flickr
Once again, the power of networked communities on the web has been a great benefit for me: Carolina Botero from Columbia ran cross my 2007 "Open Letter to the Independent Music Industry" and I guess she liked it so much that she decided to translate it into Spanish, which must have been quite a serious undertaking given the convoluted English I sometimes lapsed into;). I have pasted some excerpts below, to read the whole thing please go to Carolina's blog. Download the English version (Pdf). Check out the French version. Try a bit of Portuguese. Related: my Music 2.0 book: Lulu store (for dead tree version), or download the free PDF.
Basilea, Suiza, 1 de julio 2007
El 29 de junio de 2007, mientras estaba en London Calling, fui invitado a hablar a un pequeño grupo de líderes de sellos independientes en su reunión anual AIM / WIN en Londres. Aproveché esta oportunidad para dar un vistazo a lo que debe suceder para que las compañías de música independiente realmente puedan sacar provecho de la nueva economía de la música que se está desarrollando en estos momentos. Así que … algunos de mis pensamientos se comparten a continuación.
Hoy quiero presentar mis opiniones sobre lo que me gusta llamar “Música 2.0″ – la próxima generación de la industria de la música que se está creando en estos momentos. Este nuevo modelo es radicalmente diferente. Muchos de las viejas formas de hacer las cosas, muchas de las relaciones anteriores y muchas de las viejas tradiciones no pueden y no van a sobrevivir.
Quiero seducirlos, a ustedes los líderes de la industria de la música independiente, a recorrer este nuevo camino conmigo, para dar un salto, para dejar algunas de sus presunciones y sus ‘religiones’ a un lado, y hacer jugadas audaces – porque esto es lo que se necesita para darle la vuelta a este barco. Scott Fitzgerald, el famoso novelista, dijo: “La prueba de una inteligencia de primer orden es la capacidad de tener dos ideas opuestas en la mente al mismo tiempo, y todavía tener la capacidad de funcionar”. Este claramente es el desafío de la industria de la música para avanzar!
Las innovaciones técnicas y económicas durante los últimos 10 años han despojado de muchas tradiciones, jerarquías sociales y económicas y monopolios a la industria de la música, y si hubiera una cosa que pudieramos decir con seguridad creo que sería que ahora es tiempo del show, que finalmente la industria de la música ha llegando a un punto de inflexión importante: 10 años después de que la primera empresas .com sacudió la tierra. Le tomó mucho más tiempo de lo que todos pensamos pero la está golpeando mucho más duro ahora: las ventas de CD han caído entre un 20 – 40% en lo que va del año, y las ventas digitales no están haciendo la diferencia en el corto plazo – y la carrera de un solo caballo que es iTunes claramente está en un callejón sin salida.
Nos estamos acercando rápidamente a un punto donde nos vemos obligados a sumergirnos en lo que me gusta llamar “Music2.0″ – un nuevo ecosistema que no se basa en la música como un producto, sino en la música como un servicio: primero se vende el acceso, y sólo entonces se produce la venta de copias. Se trata de un ecosistema basado en la ubicuidad de la música, no la escasez. Un ecosistema basado en la confianza mutua, no el miedo.Como dice Don Tapscott, en su gran libro “Wikinomics”, podemos pensar en Web 1.0 – la “antigua” web – como una especie de periódico digital, mientras que Web 2.0 es un lienzo que permite que la información sea presentada, compartida , modificada, y remezclada. Se trata de la interactividad, las opciones de envío y recepción lo que la hacen útil y «especial». Y sobre todo en la música, que siempre, desde el principio, ha sido acerca de interactividad, de compartir, de participar – no de vender-vender-vender...
A while ago, I was interviewed by the people from Ericsson Editorial Services, on the topic of "The Future of Content and Telecom". The interview was just published, today, and I am quoting it, below, while adding some relevant links and images. Ericsson has also added a pretty cool video called "Generation Gap" which I am embedding for your additional enlightenment;). Beyond this, you may also want to watch the video from my speech at eComm 2009: The Future of Content & Telecoms: Flat Rate Content Bundles and Social Media, embedded below, as well (you can download this and other videos via my Blip.tv channel)
Leonhard says there are two main obstacles facing the new media business. One is that operators don’t understand how the media world works and what it takes to make media content popular on handsets. The other is that media companies are unwilling to change their old ways of working. “Operators need to start to think of themselves as providers of content, entertainment and general communication that goes beyond messaging,” he says. “Content providers are also hopelessly stuck with a model of selling that no one wants. For example, very few people buy music online. People download music for free, and the same is true for films and TV shows.”
Free content and licenses
Leonhard believes operators have to make the first move. He says they have to be willing to subsidize the use of content until mobile advertising becomes mainstream, or until there are other profitable ways of supporting media content.“For instance, in terms of music, operators should integrate legal music services into their networks for free. If they do that, they can become powerful providers of music ‘experiences’ and this makes it easier for them to sell other things to get a return on their investments.
“The music business is essentially a ‘freenium business,’ which means
that the first step should be free, but then the other 10 to 50 steps
should be what operators charge for. Ultimately, Leonhard envisions a licensing system for digital media,
just like the TV and radio license system that exists in most European
countries.
“In Germany,
you pay EUR 150 per year for using the TV, and I believe digital music
could be wrapped into this fee,” he says. “A license system can also be
created solely for the purpose of digital media.“Let’s say the fee would be about EUR 1 per week; I think most people
would be happy to pay that amount. It would generate revenues and, even
if tax-payers refuse to pay it themselves, the money could come from
sponsors, marketing and advertising.”
Leonhard says that a “digital media” licensing system will not be
achievable without the support of telecom operators. “Telecom has the
economic power to create a licensing system because they have the
users,” he says. “If the pressure is strong enough, the content owners
will agree to public licenses and the telecom industry will agree to
pay them.” Leonhard says splitting the earnings from such a licensing system would
mirror that of a radio license. “The streaming or downloading of music
could be monitored, providing a digital footprint. And, at the end of
every month, you can see how many times a song has been downloaded and
that will decide what percentage of the pool of money the song gets in
that particular country. The more your song gets played, the more money
you get.”
I think you may have noticed by now - I really like Twitter. Twitter and my tweeps have been a huge influence on my work.
One of the most important realizations that has recently transpired via my Twitter pipeline is how much I am gaining from the ever increasing Sharism i.e. by what others are sharing with me. I am indeed very, very lucky to be connected to so many brilliant and like-minded people that are publishing their thoughts freely and openly, using platforms such as Twitter, Friendfeed, Facebook, Slideshare and of course, their blogs. All of you deserve a big THANK YOU.
The increasing scope of the 'Proudly Found Elsewhere' approach (PFE) has become a very important component of my work; and vice versa I am hoping that my output is also PFE'd by others; the social web's "give and you will receive" approach has indeed worked out great for me.
So I figured it's time to give some more explicit credit to all those great people that have influenced me, and I maybe a good way to do that is to list them on a special, Twitter-API-based site such as Futerati; and maybe send some attention their way, in return. Futerati went online a few days ago, and much like Electric Artists' cool TrackingTwitter site (but a lot more personal) Futerati is presenting 6 constantly updated categories (Futurists, Thought Leaders Authors, Activists, StartUps and Others) with people that I follow, their latest tweets, the current number of followers, and with some brief comments on why I like them. With each featured twitter user, you can click straight through to their tweets or their profiles and easily connect with them, as well.
Please note that Futerati is a constant work in progress and therefore not complete at this time; I will be adding a lot more people as I dig through my 7400 network connections, during the next 4-6 weeks. So, if I should have listed you but have not done so yet please post something on Twitter (use @gleonhard) or use the hashtag #futerati or DM me via Twitter, or email, or comment on this blog. If we haven't 'met' yet but if you still want to be listed please ping me with your details so that I can take a look at you; in any case please note that every single connection I list on Futerati is personally selected by me. Enjoy - and RT!
Jeff Jarvis rocks - no doubt about it. I have been reading his new book "What would Google do" and in my view it's at least as important as Wikinomics or the LongTail. Check out Jeff's slideshow and video below (yes, you can fast-forward thru the first 8 mins of German intro;) - no matter what business you are in, this will give you some serious food for thought; if you're in the content business - well... watch it 5 times!
Some of his key points:
Keynote Speaker, Think-Tank Leader, Futurist, Author & Strategist, Idea Curator, some say Iconoclast | Heretic, CEO TheFuturesAgency, Visiting Prof FDC Brazil, Green Futurist
Recent Comments