Quote:
Originally Posted by phormwatch
feesch-
Welcome back feesch. Any chance you could answer my questions regarding Phorm's conduct in my post #12996?
|
Hi Phormwatch. Think the number maybe wrong there, but assuming you mean the questions around:
was 'PeopleonPage' ethical and did I agree that videoed discussion should have been censored/unreleased?
POP - I think this is a difficult one, and I cite Facebook Aps to this avail. They are doing the same thing - but becuase users have chosen to install the aps, does that mean they should be tracked? Yet it seems to defy all boundaries of saying you can have this but at a price that is unrealistic - in this case human privacy. Surely we should see virtual commodities relating to privacy as a value equal to application. By this I mean if you want to know I have downloaded software to what I am saying, there should be somekind on grading as to what is being traded between the user and developer, and not a dictatorial decision by some over-eager marketing exec who wants data for the sake of it to justify his job. We are dealing with people at the end of the day.
I would need to read more about POP to make a complete value judgement on this. Feel free to clarify.
Ok, the second issue something I often discuss in my presentations. What web 2.0 has done (starting with ratings/reviews by Amazon) is given the consumer a voice-back to the advertiser. No longer is advertsing a single-way. If advertisers expect two-way interaction, then they alos have to be preapred for negative fall-out. This is new and most do not know how to handle effectively I agree. The only ensible option, to remain credible, is to show the problems and then offer solutions and to embrace any comments as constructive criticsm and feed into product development. Obvious statements like "don't buy this car" in reference to Chevy Tahoe fiasco, are taken at merit, and would expect "ban Phorm" to same degree. Chevy are not going to stop making cars, but will have to find ways to make better cars.
---------- Post added at 21:10 ---------- Previous post was at 21:04 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter N
You keep claiming to know what people want but you provide no evidence. This is exactly what BT have done and it flies in the face of the facts.
|
Peter, would you not see the number of PVRs and people searching YouTube content, video iPods and Archos and slingbox flying off shelves, and browsing capabilities of webTV/IPTV as evidence that todays consumer wants choice and control over their content in a way that is different form braodcast schedules. They want to watch it when they want, on a device that may be other than their TV set, and in a location that suits them.
So therefore people want more relevant content. But to this I would also add "control".
But this is anecodotal from observation as opposed to me having any study to hand right now.