Rosling Defeats Big Data

In Hans Rosling's TED talk – delivered February 2006 (and often on similar themes since) – Rosling seems to recognize that, within complex data, there exists a need to display those data graphically and understandably. He attempts that while presenting in a “... hyperactive presentation style, something akin to Peter O’Sullevan commentating on the Grand National” according to Edwin Smith in a November 2013 Telegraph UK article.

Despite his enthusiasm and charm, we must ask the question: is Rosling presenting meaningful and understandable information and using the graphic elements to support his statistical thesis, or are the data used as the “... foundation for explorations of visual excess and irrelevance” as Joel Katz discusses in Designing Information?

In a struggle to present ideas sensitive to both audience and context, while supporting an agenda-driven position, Rosling does manage to provide clarity within a complex dataset – a difficult feat when considering the immensity of data he’s working with. And, certainly, Rosling does have an agenda and even states that: “the improvement of the world must be highly contextualized.”

It may even be, within that agenda, that he finds a nexus with Katz’s position that the audience may be unable to understand those data for several reasons, including lack of interest or lack of visual literacy. Those data, in the end, stand up better graphically than as pure numbers, and that is where Rosling finds his Rosetta Stone.

I believe Rosling finds a context within this medium to avoid those gaps articulated by Katz and successfully explains complex ideas in his highly graphical presentation.

New content for the modern brain

Oded Ilan presenting at Lavacon 2016

In his informative presentation at Lavacon 2016 titled Overcoming the Forgetting Curve: New Content Creation Paradigms, Oded Ilan posited an interesting concept. In a nutshell, Ilan's believes that the human mind didn't make Google, but rather, that Google made the new human mind. He wraps this concept up with the concept of learning curves and, regrettably, forgetting curves and presents data that show that both are real. But if you break it down, none of this is necessarily bad but should be viewed as a shift instead of a regression.

When we think about learning and thinking 20 or 30 years ago, the focus was on memorization and that single task of memorizing was, in fact, a skill. Fast forward to today and the forgetting curve - the speed at which we forget things after learning them - and we see that we are memorizing far less. That skill has been replaced by searching for information digitally, learning to sift and sort information, and then recognizing the information we were looking for. For this skill to be a natural component of our thought process required a three-step evolution, according to Ilan: searching for large datasets and still memorizing small items; then searching for all information we required including simple items; finally using the cloud to store all information - in essence offloading our personal memories to the cloud. It is a bit simplistic but, at the same time, informs the discussion.

So we need to understand the new human brain when we're discussing content models and strategies because, at the very least, we need to recognize that our consuming habits of content must be very different than they were prior to the turn of the century. Whether you're talking about mobile devices, e-books or desktop computer scenarios, the always-searching new human brain must be able to find the information within the content provided: it must be able to search, find, sift, and recognize what it is looking for. And that means every time content is provided, even content that the user has already seen. That content must serve as both the information to, and the memory for, the user.

In a succinct summary, Ilan uses the following phrase: "Content creation should support the human thought process." This is exactly the point of content, adaptive or not. We think, we find data, we learn, we forget - rinse and repeat. Content needs to be more than a collection of words, it must be structured for our new human brains.

The medium is not the message

With apologies to the late, great Marshall McLuhan, it seems as though we continually try to cram communications vehicles into media packages regardless of whether they fit there or not, hoping against hope that modern media will carry the weight on their own. I suppose, in a broader sense, that reinforces what McLuhan said, but in an odd way because if we force a message into a "digital" package for a demographic who won't read it, then the message is a failure because of the medium.

I'm reminded of a Paul Newman movie called Cool Hand Luke where the central theme is pronounced through a single sentence, uttered twice in the film; "What we have here is failure to communicate." This was, indeed, a communications failure, and since it was recognized as such, all that the warden had to do is change the medium he was using. Clearly physical, mental and psychological abuse was not working. He did not change and, as a predictable result, it did not end well for anyone. Still, what we learn from that is if your medium does not deliver your message, change media.

When I lived in Calgary I was part of a writing group of brilliant artists, one of whom was writing a story about her one-year personal trial preparing for an ironman distance triathlon - something she had never done before. Eventually, the printed word took a back seat to readings before the story actually began to make sense. Even that wasn't enough to convey her message of endurance, obsession, loss of resilience and hope, so she produced "Endure - A Run Woman show" that combines elements of recorded sound, dance and theatre in a 5km long trail as the stage. These media became the package that worked for her message, and it's an amazing show.

So I guess in the end Mr. McLuhan was right in that the medium truly does influence the message. But more importantly, when your communications do not work as planned - if you have a failure to communicate - go back to your communications strategy, check the tactics and how they align with your target audience, and see if you need to find a different medium, or media, for your message to be a success. If you don't, then you're doomed to failure like the Luke's warden.

I'd love to hear your feedback, please take a moment to tell me what you think.

Communicating the positively negative

There is an old expression in the communications world that there is no such thing as bad publicity. This, of course, is not true and we've seen this time and again with social media missteps by politicians, celebs, athletes and corporate executives. Still, it's an interesting question, especially in light of a recent move by a major clothing brand. And it brings to the surface an interesting question: Can you create a positive outcome from a negative statement that you made purposefully and that you attempt to control?

In a nutshell, I'm talking about an unusual intersection betewen reality pop culture and fashion branding. Specifically, the somewhat niche reality programming from MTV titled "Jersey Shore" and the clothing brand Abercrombie & Fitch. One of the most visible cast members of the show, who calls himself "The Situation" appeared on the show wearing A&F branded clothing. A&F, in an unprecedented move, publicly offered to pay The Situation to NOT wear their clothing. This is the negative that was mentioned at the beginning of this post.

But when you look at this move, it is an extremely clever, if audacious, move for A&F to make. Their market niche is clearly upscale casual clothing for a youthful and fashion-conscious market. MTV audiences fit into that demographic and are a large part of the A&F target market, so are they risking alienation of their prime market? The answer is no because the watchers of Jersey Shore, along with most other reality shows that are similar in nature, are purely voyeuristic, and viewers are more likely to see themselves as apart from the cast rather than associating themselves with those lifestyles.

In fact, A&F Chief Executive Mike Jeffries was even quoted as saying “We’re having a lot of fun with it” when asked about the offer to pay The Situation. And it is fun. If they alienate anyone, it will be those who are not truly aligned with their brand anyway. And those who feel themselves above the cast of Jersey Shore will feel more comfortable with the differentiation that they receive from wearing A&F clothing. And, when all is said and done, back-to-school sales for A&F have been just fine, even in this uncertain economy.

This is smart marketing and well executed communication by a company who really knows who is loyal to their brand. Ironically, it was never about being negative.

I'd love to hear your feedback, please take a moment to tell me what you think.

Welcome to Everything is Communications

Welcome to my new blog.

Just as an introduction, this blog is based on communications. Specifically, as a professional communications advisor, I have always found it difficult to state, with specificity, what it is that communicators do other than "communicate." the more I thought about it, the more I realized that everything is communications.

So all the public relations and media relations, writing, and editing functions fit into this category, but so does web content, internal communications and change management. How about the visual arts, music, photography, and dance? Of course they're included. Sports? Absolutely. Everything we do communicates something to those around us, even down to what we wear and where we eat.

So from the strictly academic pillars and applications of rhetoric to the loose and fast flowing idea storm found in social media, we communicate to those around us in many ways, every day.

So this blog will investigate those myriad aspects of communications, and if you have anything that strikes you as salient to this conversation, let me know. I'd love to explore your ideas as much (or more) than my own. And I'd love to hear from you, so don't be shy - communicate with me.