Defining Content in a Digital World

Much discussion has been centered around the burgeoning landscape that is media convergence. The careful alignment of medium and message is undoubtedly one sign of the rapid advancement of how we tell brand stories. In my ongoing discussions with transmedia advocates and thought leaders such as Jeff Gomez (@Jeff_Gomez), Jesse Albert (@jessalbert) and Conn Fishburn (@connfishburn), it dawned upon me that technology, as vital as it is for delivery, is really sort of an afterthought when you consider what content ideation can really be or really become.

So let's forget about technologies for a moment.

Let's look at the nature of content itself. There may be an important and delicate wrinkle within content development that may lead to leaving stronger and more indelible impressions on our mindshare. Let's also make this a more theoretical examination of where content development can go, something more expansive than mere (albeit innovative) case studies we've seen from the likes of Coke, Audi, BMW or EA.

First, let's redefine what content is. Wikipedia defines it as "information and experiences created for an audience". We can this step further and define it as: "anything that can be shared."

See, what we share with each other via of word of mouth is content, and arguably the most powerful form of it. The ethereal elements, the intangibles, are indelible and everlasting. The ideas we associate with them are the most shareable and scalable. Which is precisely why we must try not to confine them within ad or media units and inhibit their ability to scale.

Let's look at some hypotheticals.

Movies as user-generated mash-ups.

TV shows as multi-channel annotations.

Books as ongoing topical forums.

Periodicals as user-suggested news repositories.

Music channels as user-created set lists.

Clearly you see a common theme here: user-generation. While this is far from being a new concept, there is an element of reverse engineering at play here. 

For one, the guesswork that goes into what content providers think what people want is somewhat buffered by merely giving them what they want. For another, once this content is reproduced and redelivered through a qualitative creative process, the new ideas that are generated start to proliferate. What evolves become phenomena. 

All phenomena formalize as ideas that are exchanged and transformed through circumstance and lore.

So we can even ascribe a simple formula for 'good' content development:

CONCEPT (C) + ADOPTION (A) = PHENOMENON (P)

The concept represents the initial idea. Adoption materializes in the form of scalable ideation - people talking and developing new currency around the initial idea. The new ideas that are generated and owned and proliferated by people within their social graphs make this into a phenomenon.

The ultimate takeaway here is that we should probably look at content as something that takes on its own personality, and does so by virtue of what it represents in and of itself. Just as brands are owned by people, content also thrives on the construct of mindshare. The associations we make are potentially the stuff of legend.

Now back to the technologies that will facilitate this new movement... ;)

The Psychology of Circumstance (The End of Campaigns As We Know Them?)

In looking back at some of the great forms of iconic media content created during my youth - everything from Life cereal's "Mikey", to SmithBarney's "We make money the old-fashioned way: we earn it", to Seinfeld's oddball scenarios (loved the "Frogger" episode) - the beauty of circumstance unfolds in such a way that challenges us to imagine how we can put ourselves in situations where even subtle things can produce extraordinary shifts in perception. It also calls into the question the means for engaging people in increments of time, as in the case of network programming or campaign constructs.

Media has created a pathology for us, and the content we identify with is the blueprint. After all, we do live vicariously through our favorite show characters, movie mavens and sports stars. What's changing now is not only the relationships we have with those icons, but the people behind them. Further, myriad new communications tools are leaving us to chance, so that our interactions are not so much scripted, but inspired and truly collaborative in nature.

When you examine the concept of an ad campaign - in which there are distinct in-points and end-points - this seems counterintuitive, and in many ways counterproductive to the idea that a brand should not be bound to a lifecycle, but rather built around affinities that give it immortality, or, a shared legacy. If we borrow from Heidegger for a moment and look at this from a metaphysical perspective, in which we accept that time is merely a manufactured device to establish intervals between events, then we can also assert that a brand's legacy is at great risk.  

Granted, we live in a world of convention, so compromise is important as well as something to be valued. So, we can't do away with time per se, but we can extend it and make it feel indefinite. Regarding content, as Faris Yakob recently stated, this function goes beyond a viral capacity and into a "spread" scenario. Which means that as marcom agents, we need to think about the legacy mechanisms of a brand in every piece of code we develop, every design we craft and every byline or storyline of copy we write. And we also need to think big picture: that these assets live in perpetuity as dynamic representations of the brand. There are a number of great agencies like AKQA, Razorfish and Tribal DDB who have built successful initiatives by paying close attention to this.

So let's stop thinking about media in terms of silos, and think about them in terms of scalability and adoption. Campaigns have been designed, in large part, to compartmentalize messaging. But when the functions of that messaging can live outside of time parameters and provide real utility and personalization, then we are creating a whole new world of possibility.

Nike/Livestrong's recent Hope Rides Again initiative is a great example of this. The effort is described as "building a grassroots movement to help raise awareness, fund research and end the stigma that many cancer survivors face". People are then inspired to show their commitment to this cause by "filling sidewalks, driveways" and other places within our everyday physical environment to show a statement of intent, in turn making the overall message individualistic and personal. The point here is that long after the little yellow boxes of chalk are distributed and the brand ambassadors are tasked with new jobs, the brand legacy will continue to develop and live on...or in this case, live strong. 

As for the psychological component of everyday circumstance, we need to remember that purchases, as well as the commitments we make to brand initiatives, are emotionally driven. The emotional self is loud and colorful, while the spiritual self is quiet and not rooted in language or rhetoric. This leaves us with an interesting quandary, which is to try to be in the moment so that the two parts of the self can communicate, and thus bring us into a state of enlightenment, where we are fulfilled in the choices we make. The key here is to examine behavior in such a way that we can identify some sort of context for "enlightened action".

It's time (pun intended) that we embraced this principle and deferred to human truth to lead the way, whether we are creating ads or simply going about our lives. So go out there and spread your message!