Comments on: Two Questions re: The Internet

By: New Condos

New Condos — Mon, 11 May 2009 05:46:48 +0000

Today we are feeling in the world of advanced technology, with the internet all professional like internet tool it is not surprising that there is an online service available in the Internet , Internet service incredibly popular all around the world, now a day most people want to jump on the internet.

By: scott crawford

scott crawford — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 02:38:43 +0000

1. Agreed.
2. If the question revolves around big fee potential, then I'd look at strategic services ahead of execution. Analytics+Insight+Guidance to help make the silos coalesce effectively. CMOs don't want brilliant digital vs brilliant TV. They want brilliant. Oh, and giddy as fuck customers.
3. Have fun.

By: Rob Sandie

Rob Sandie — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 21:37:38 +0000

#1 - IMO - Internet is such a given nowadays in any discussion, there is no reason to specifically mention it in any economic discussions.

#2 - SXSW Interactive, Panels is the competitiveness, SXSW Sponsors are the commercials, Parties each night are the parades. And it happens everyday for four days in a row. Where do I watch in online? http://sxswvideos.com

By: giolicious

giolicious — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 23:12:34 +0000

2. well lots of bloggers loved the superbowl. you know why? i know one friend who earned $2500 Adsense earning in just 1 day. i think bloggers/internet marketers were very happy because of high traffic of searches that the superbowl 43 halftime show made.

By: Gabe

Gabe — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 03:29:43 +0000

just came across this today, from the wilson quarterly
granted, not strictly about the Internet – but IT in general

http://www.wilsoncenter.org/index.cfm?fuseactio...

“Pouring more concrete will not by itself answer our infrastructure prayers. Look instead to the transformative power of information technology.”

By: Gabe

Gabe — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 12:13:31 +0000

New York Times: "Internet Money in Fiscal Plan: Wise or Waste?"
http://is.gd/icZY

"At first glance, perhaps no line item in the nearly $900 billion stimulus program under consideration on Capitol Hill would seem to offer a more perfect way to jump-start the economy than the billions pegged to expand broadband Internet service to rural and underserved areas."

Also:
New York Times: Technology Gets a Piece of Stimulus
http://is.gd/id0k

Also:
Philadelphia Inquirer: "Stimulus Boosts Electronic Health Records"
http://snurl.com/b7tpe

Also:
Roll Call: "Health Care IT a Major Step Toward Reform, Smarter Ecosystem"
http://www.rollcall.com/news/31878-1.html

"By investing in health care IT, we will also create new jobs at a time when our economy needs them. The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation estimates that a one-year investment of $10 billion in health care IT would create as many as 212,000 new jobs in the U.S."

By: jehutson

jehutson — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 15:16:36 +0000

RE Question 1: The internet has become a valuable tool to just about everyone in the professional world. Non early adopters need to realize that the internet isn't just a tool, but its a platform to make business processes (and our lives) run more efficiently and smoother, in a similar way that the assembly line made business processes smoother. (eg Saas) One barrier to this realization is that the businesses most hurt/threatened by the internet, are often the mediums and businesses responsible for influencing the late majority over.

As for the Super Bowl, I don't think there will be an equivalent. The Super Bowl will always be the Super Bowl. I just see the buzz and eventually broadcast of it transitioning to the web. Look at how integrated the web world was this year. Your Wikipedia example of Mike Tomlin's entry is a perfect example. Twitter had a dozen # groups just for discussion of the ads.

By: falicon

falicon — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 13:28:39 +0000

#1. I saw that post a few days back as well and wasn't sure of my own reaction, but I guess I would say that at the moment the internet is nothing more than a valuable utility to the majority of the public…but I think that's primarily because the average person still doesn't have the knowledge/skill to do much with the internet beyond using the basic utilities (like doing a google search, posting a facebook status, etc.). I think we are still a generation off from the average person knowing enough to really be able to 'use' the internet as a business application (ie. not only use basic utilities, but improve, tweak, and also build them)

#2. To me, things are flipped a bit. With the Superbowl, it's mostly about physical-world companies (ie. Coke) spending a lot for impact in a non-physical environment (ie Superbowl Ad). With digital-world companies, it's the various trade shows and doing things in the physical world. Right now it seems like CES or SXSW are the two biggest. As such large parties, big budgets, high production costs go into these shows and the related events/sites…very much like the SuperBowl ads, it becomes all the buzz leading up to, and for a bit after, about what companies spent what and who did what at the show…at least that's my opinion.

By: jon

jon — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 12:36:26 +0000

There is no digital equivalent. We don't like digital lives. We live lives augmented and at times powered by, digital. We live cross platform lives. The superbowl is the superbowl. It is the brand/agency/marketer responsibility to activate the awareness generated in digital and possibly even social channels.

By: Taylor Davidson

Taylor Davidson — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 04:21:15 +0000

#1 It's like debating over whether someone is underrated or overrated, or whether IT matters: once everyone realizes the importance and devotes their attention to it, is the value gone? Maybe nobody is considering the Internet as part of the solution to economic conditions is because nobody has the answer to start with

#2 Good question: is there a way to aggregate online audiences in ways that will attract similar budgets and attention? With an alternative just a click away (and the tab is probably already open), can interruption-based advertising ever succeed on the Internet the way it “succeeds” on the TV?

I know we're not limiting the thought of digital equivalents to video and TV, but can the internet even support delivering content simultaneously at that scale? Consider Cuban's thoughts on the difficulty in scaling video distribution on the Internet.