Facing up to troubles.

Certain things are ingrained into the public consciousness to such an extent it is hard to imagine life without them. Tea, football, roast dinners, Google have all had significant influence on British culture. So has Facebook, emerging from being a small private network created in a Harvard dorm it has become a bastion of the digital world. With over one billion members Facebook has become the most popular social network in a number of countries. However, like Myspace and Bebo before it cracks are starting to appear in what was the seemingly impenetrable userbase.

A comprehensive survey released this week analysing Facebook has found that teenagers are deserting the site at an alarming rate. Teenagers were largely responsible for the initial growth of Facebook and as such the effects of this demographic leaving could have a significant impact on the long term viability of the site. The increasing use of Facebook amongst adults and the inevitable friend requests to their children has been a hammer blow. Social networks have served as a private utopia for teenagers, free from the prying eyes of parents but this has been severely threatened. High profile cases of drunken antics posted being used against people by police and employers. Coupled with evidence of mass public spying from the NSA and GCHQ there is definite evidence that individuals are being more careful about what they post. Facebook looks to be moving towards a so called 'contacts book' a place to keep in touch with people but the free expression of posting and sharing faces an inevitable decline.

The implications of the fleeing of the masses from Facebook could be enormous. Obviously less people using it would have a negative impact on companies ability to reach consumers, but many Facebook pages serve as so called proxy websites that one can visit without an account. The real damage will be decline in exposure for a post to be shared and liked. People spending less time on the site means less exposure, period - as the Americans would say. The trouble is that the research shows people are not moving to alternative, but instead more private networks such as whatsapp and snapchat. The potential for integrated advertising into these networks is extremely limited compared to Facebook and Twitter.

Facebook itself may be forced to further integrate advertising to counter a falling userbase. Upon being floated in the stock market the share price dropped significantly after studies showed very few members clicked through adverts. Whether this leads to sponsored photos showing up, more prominent adverts or something else is not yet apparent. What is sure is that with such a huge base and unprecedented data on those users lives and online habits it will not be going anywhere just yet.

Drop it like it's hot.

The record industry is a strange oddity. Constantly chastised for not keeping with times, yet still chucking out artists with huge fanbases who generate vast sums of money and are admired. Artists can no longer expect to sell the same amount of records as old, but tours are bigger, longer and more profitable than ever. Access to artists is more profligate than ever, social media gives an insight into their lives and allows them to engage with fans like never before. While record sales are tumbling, this is not a reflection of apathy towards the music - people choose to find it online via streaming sites or donwload it for free from dubious websites.

Record companies have taken different approaches to stop declining sales but have generally kept to the same formula. Release a number of singles with music videos and promote relentlessly across media channels. Following this then release a physical format album after sufficient 'hype' has deemed to be built up. The problem with this method is two fold. It is hard to maintain interest over such a long period outside the core fanbase and leaks. Physical releases are leaked onto the internet without fail, through distribution centres, shops or reviewers someone will put it on the internet. RnB singer Beyonce this week released a new album out of the blue, no promotion or press release - it just appeared on itunes. Could this be the future?

These waters have been tested. Radiohead released their superb album 'In Rainbows' without a physical release and let fans buy it for whatever price they so desired. The album sold well and was critically acclaimed, being the first innovative release by a 'big artist' in the internet age but was far less popular than previous albums. Earlier this year Kanye West released Yeezus, an album marked by minimalism. Kanye did very little promotion besides a few tweets here and there and an ambitious array of projections around the world. It was his worst selling album out of his six releases so far. Would these example be a good way to build the new industry? It's highly unlikely, it may work for established artists with huge fanbases that can take the risk but for smaller and unsigned artists the benefits of this method would be muted.

Three days of sales saw Beyonce sell over 800,000 albums in the States making it the fastest selling record this year, beating out Lady Gaga, Katy Perry, One Direction and Mrs Beyonce. Is this proof the success and rise of minimal marketing? It is hard to say, Beyonce is renowned for having an extremely loyal fanbase from a wide demographic. Excitement driven from the shock announcement spread with vigour, with no teasers or singles to go off fans were eager to listen to the new record. Shock release have been proven to work for big stars in the music industry, but how would new artists do this. A post chillwave proto-punk band may see now benefit. It relies on an established fanbase and substantial hype. As such it probably will not be the future of the record industry, at least not for the majority of releases.

The selfish selfie.

The term 'selfie' has sprung into the popular lexicon in recent times, with the grey haired men who run the establishment seemingly obsessed with the term. Even the broadsheets have been unable to resist jumping on the bandwagon, culminating in probably the most famous selfie yet. Danish leader Helle Thorning-Schmidt was photographed taking a selfie along with David Cameron and Barack Obama at Nelson Mandela's memorial.

Coverage of Mandela's life was at times fascinating and others tedious. When the sad news broke apparently it was necessary for all five main bbc channels to switch to constant coverage. In his life Mandela was a bastion of many great things, culminating in the ending of apartheid and subsequent attempts at rebuilding. Mandela the man was a different story, a serial womaniser and organiser of terrorist bombings. When compared to remove the chains of a racist regime these pale in comparison but were largely ignored anyway. Mandela was the public figure of the ANC, many other individuals played key roles in his success but he was the public face of the movement.

Despite the memorial being a time of joy and rememberance for most in attendance a minor furore arose, many commentators calling the selfie between world leaders disrispectful. In reality it was a private moment between politicians, who presumably had to do something to kill the time. Looking back it is difficult to see how this selfie was so controversial, it is symptamatic of the wider malaise of the media. Here we had one the most important politcal icons of the past century who played a key role in the emanicaption of a people and yet column after column was written baiting the cheery triumverate. That is not to say there was insufficient coverage of Mandela the man, indeed it was suffocating at times, but it was still rather trivial.

Perhaps it is evidence of the defining cultural gap of our age, technology. Whereas previous generations rallied against their elders through rock and roll or punk, the fast moving tech world has driven a chasm that is being chased after by the establishment. To the young generation the selfie is no big deal. Personally I am not often a selfie taker, though I wholeheartedly support ones right to take them without discrimination.

For the Players?

It's console season. That time every few years when the latest and greatest games consoles are released to a frenzy of passionate fans. Video games have undoubtedly gone mainstream, earlier this year GTA V was released and became the most successful entertainment release of all time. Sony have released the ps4 and Microsoft the Xbox one, two similar looking black boxes that will provide a wide range of services; from cheap and effective babysitting to hours of Red Bull fuelled fun amongst friends. 

These releases are the first to be marketed as a complete entertainment system suited not only to playing games but music, television, films and the internet. Recent tv ads for the ps4 attempt to encapsulate just that. Running at over two minutes and showing the development of the playstation along with its owner, Sony is here attempting to position the console as the focus of its owners lives. It seems unlikely that this will attract more users, most prospective owners are interested mainly in the console's performance and ability to attract developers with the best games. The Xbox one has focused more on social features and has paid a heavy price amongst gamers, losing out to the ps4 by 4 to 1 in early sales. The main factor in this has been a dearth of release titles and poor performance compared to the ps4. These social features are a nice addition, but are just that, an addition.

Although the television ad for the ps4 was a tad wishy washy and failed to directly engage with consumers a press advert was much more direct. Sony knocked off the knockers from page 3 of the Sun newspaper for the first time in forty years, becoming the first company to do so. This alone would have made a number of people take note, even if they were pissed off not to be getting their usual morning greeting. Backing up this audacious move was the superb line “Apologies to Rosie, 22, from Middlesex. Today’s page 3 is for the players”. Cheeky, direct and funny. Sony no doubt paid a fairly hefty sum, perhaps paving the way for demise of page 3, which has recently been the subject of a fierce campaign to get it banned. David Cameron has resisted the pressure to ban it, though professional Murdoch hater and future Prime Minister in waiting Ed Miliband may have other ideas.

The crucial part in the advert is the line '... for the players', whilst this is at first glance a rather crude pun it links into the notion that the ps4 is the superior gaming device. Many Sun readers will have little to no interest in video games and so this will be lost on them, although they would still probably take notice of the advert due to its positioning. However those readers who are interested and will likely have read up on both consoles, will again see confirmation that for players the ps4 is the best choice. Its clear, the ps4 is not designed for young kids or families with 2.14 children it is 'for the players'. Positioning itself as the superior device has been very effective, and this advert backed that up. The emphasis in the Xbox marketing on it's other more peripheral features has only accentuated this feeling further, with serious gamers questioning the commitment to games. This direct adver

Sony is more in tune with the current market, knowing what gamers want and and making the ps4 to suit. Their looser tv advert for the ps4 may have little appeal now but it will pave the way for where the market looks set to go. The ever Increasing integration of technology in our lives points to having one device that performs all tasks, being a tv, pc, tablet, stereo and games console. Perhaps the public is not willing to embrace this yet, but the Xbox is hedging its bets that they will soon enough. Sony has won this battle for now, but may well lose the war.

Twits on Twitter

The proliferation of social media into our lives has presented new opportunities for politicians across the globe. Much like their counterparts in the business world the political classes seem equal parts scared and obsessed by facebook and twitter. It has never been so easy to connect with voters, removing the necessity to deal with that murky profession journalism, and speak directly whilst appearing vaguely human. At the same time not all responses will be positive. Look at a tweet from David Cameron or George Osborne and the majority of responses range from pithy observations to crass insults. The potential advantages of social media are clear for politicians, but an already cynical electorate is clearly very suspicious of their use and its ability to really influence has not yet become clear.

Across the pond social media has already had a very real and tangible impact. Barack Obama was swept into office in 2008 on the back of unprecedented enthusiasm founded on a completely new and innovative election campaign. Obama's popularity soared on the back of a clear message of hope and change which spread like wildfire across facebook and twitter. They encouraged lots of small scale donations and a large volunteer team to give a real sense of community to supporters. Obviously the fact that the alternative was John McCain, an elderly war veteran with limited appeal to younger voters and Obama was seen as a fairly 'with it' and cool for a politician helped greatly to make this the first election where social media played a pivotal role.

Obama employed a raft of so called digital gurus that hepled garner this impressive web presence. High flyers from the large technology companies were drafted in to provide advice and build an extremely complex system of recognising potential voters and tailoring prospective campaigns to individual areas to maximise effectiveness. By all accounts this was very successful and signalled what appeared to a sticking point of future elections. In spite of this, by 2012 enthusiasm for Obama had waned after the hope had dissipated and there was limited evidence of actual change, aside from landmark healthcare reforms. A new generation to politics had now become as disillusioned as their forebearers and the impact of social media was limited compared to 2008.

The never ending desire to maintain the special relationship in Britain has meant politicians are eager to follow suit in the battle to utilise social media. Both Labour and the Conservatives failed to garner a significant web presence at the 2010 elections, other than being derided, but they are persevering anyway. David Cameron hired key Obama tech adviser Jim Messina to help with the forthcoming election. Messina has been tasked with cultivating a web presence, obtaining donations and building a voter database. Given the average age of prospective Tory voters it may difficult to build a following that has a significant effect on the next election. The increasingly widespread use of social media in adults may offer a glimpse of hope but other forms of media are likely to have a more significant impact. A recent study illuminated that Cameron dominated the social media space during conference season which will encourage his camp, especially as most commentators thought Ed Miliband gave the more assured performance. Perhaps the area with most potential is building a database to analyse voters and then deliver specific campaigns, the public may not conciously engage with campaigns via social media but the they will certainly be analysed.

Whether social media will yet play a role in the next election is unclear, but the main parties will be doing their utmost to gain influence through these channels. The increasing use of social media amongst older users may provide an outlet that can be exploited and could well be the focus of Labour and the Tories efforts. Younger voters, the most virulent users of social media will likely remain skeptical of politicians attempts to seduce them. Even the student focused Lib Dems have failed in this regard, with their only impact of note being the viral video of Nick Clegg autotuned and apologising for raising tuition fees. Regardless of the limited impact of social media so far, party election broadcasts and billboard advertisements seem an outdated method of keeping control of an election campaign and cultivating a clear message to voters. The focus towards social media from politicians will become stronger as time goes on as it increasingly permeates our lives.

Attack of the Drones

The future is here. Although this may seem paradoxical, the next generation of the great human experiment has arrived with aplomb. From a small scale insular network created by Tim Berners-Lee, the internet has blossomed into the defining aspect of our age. The consequences of this so called 'teach invasion' have been much praised and derided but one things for sure is that it is not slowing down.

The big technology companies have not always been key to innovation but are certainly at the forefront of developing new frontiers. These tech behemoths; Apple, Google, Amazon, Microsoft and the like have such large cash reserves they are able to embark on an ambitious array of new and futuristic products. Google, now effectively the richest company in the world, has led the way with projects such as self driving cars and display wearable glasses in an attempt to make technology's impact on our lives seamless. Many have called these vanity products with little real world application, but it the fast moving world of technology it is naiive to cast dispersions especially considering the increasing integration of technology into all aspects of our lives.

Next to join the future parade is book seller come all conquering retailer Amazon. Another very rich company with dubious tax and employment practices that has launched a new proposal seemingly more in keeping with science fiction films than reality. Their new initiative has been dubbed Amazon prime air, a pilotless drone system for delivering packages to customers within 30 minutes. Small propellor propelled drones with nimbly navigate the skies, avoiding pigeons and light aircraft, and drop of the packages to the gleaming smiles of awaiting customers. What's not to like? Amazon has risen to the top by its hyper fast service and delivery and surely this the logical next step. Regulations look to be the biggest obstacle in the way with domestic drones being banned in the US until 2019 when they come up for review. A further possible issue is the implementation, dropping packages in Brixton may be slightly less practical than the middle class suburban residences shown in the promotional video released by Amazon.

Whether this new service will come to fruition or not is not yet clear, but what has emerged is that silicon valley will be the likely driver of innovation. One thing that is certain is that President Obama will no doubt be happy to have some drone spotlight taken away from him, search for Drones on google and his dubious practices in the Middle East have moved down a couple of notches.