Not everyone is a Facebook fan

Skye adds new feature

Skype is planning to release a beta version of a new group video chat feature. With the new group video chat, up to five people will be able to participate in conference calls. When the group video function is launched it will be provided for free for all Skype users. However, Skype plans to charge for the call feature eventually. Currently, Skype offers free voice and video calls through the Internet, along with instant messages to other Skype users. If users would like to make calls from a PC to a landline or cell phone, they can pay a subscription fee. Within the next week Skype is expected to announce new subscription plans that allow users to choose which countries they want to call and whether or not to call landlines, cell phones or both.

Twitter & The Library of Congress

Check out this article from CNN.com, "Who said tweets are trivial?" by Gina Trapani. The Library of Congress announced last week that it will archive billions of tweets that have been posted on the popular social networking site, Twitter. Although a majority of tweets may seem meaningless, there are a great number that reflect our culture and society. Since most tweets are public, and are only allowed to be up to 140 characters, they can be easily stored for future generations.

Case Study: Mobile Marketing

Have you ever heard music playing in the background of a loud restaurant or bar and found yourself wondering what song it is? Thanks to the Shazam mobile application, this is no longer a problem. Shazam Entertainment Ltd. introduced the mobile application in order to utilize its music recognition technology. Shazam allows users to identify any song that is playing, even in a noisy setting.

Consumers simply have to hold up their cell phone towards the source of the music. The audio clip is then run through the Shazam database, which is made up of over 8 million songs, to find an exact match. Shazam provides information such as the song title, artist, album and record label information. Consumers can then tag the song on their phone in order to save the information if they would like to purchase it through iTunes at a later time. They may also share song tags with friends via Twitter or Facebook updates. Tags are another way for users to collect songs and create lists of their favorite music.

Additional Shazam features include music recommendations based on the users tagged songs. Once a song has been identified, Shazam also offers users a link to the song’s YouTube video, if available. Shazam constantly updates music charts of top rated songs to keep users informed about new and popular music.

Shazam is available through iPhone, BlackBerry and Android, in 22 countries around the world. The mobile application is free to download but new users are limited to five tags per month. If users want to upgrade to Shazam Encore they will have to pay $4.99 for the service. Shazam Encore is described as a premium application with faster performance, extra features and unlimited tagging.

Shazam is targeted toward a wide audience of anyone who enjoys music. People across a wide variety of demographics and psychographics use the mobile application to identify music. Shazam is a popular service because music is something almost everyone takes an interest in, despite age, gender, and lifestyle differences.

After browsing consumer reviews, I believe Shazam is effectively marketing itself to its audience. Consumers give the mobile application mostly positive reviews and high ratings overall. Shazam is free, easy to use and can correctly identify a song for the majority of the time. Some consumers remarked that songs from smaller, independent artists were sometimes unable to be recognized. However, this was a rare occurrence and most consumers still recommended Shazam to others. One review even called Shazam, “a must have for music enthusiasts.” I believe Shazam will continue to attract consumers with its appealing features and easy to use technology. What’s not to like?

Case Study: Ethical & Legal Issues

With new technology come fresh concerns surrounding legal and ethical implications. Privacy is an especially hot topic due to the extraordinary amount of information sharing taking place on the Internet.

In late 2008, Google found itself in the midst of a lawsuit due to the website’s Street View technology. Street View is a feature of Google Maps, which uses satellite technology to offer directions. Google Maps gives users a birds eye view of specific locations, and is available in many locations around the globe. The Street View tool has taken this technology to the next level with 360-degree, panoramic photographs of the given address. The photographs are viewed as if the user was standing directly in front of the given location, hence the label Street View. Google lists the various ways users have benefited from the use of Street View, including exploring famous landmarks, previewing vacation accommodations and checking parking availability. Businesses are encouraged to use Street View to show real estate listings, scout event locations, and conduct virtual field trips.

One couple, Aaron and Christine Boring of Pennsylvania, felt that Street View’s image of their home was an invasion of privacy. The residence in question was located on a street marked with “private road” signs. The Borings filed a lawsuit against Google, citing privacy violation, negligence, unjust enrichment and trespassing. They claimed that the photographic images of their house of the Internet caused them “mental suffering” and diluted their home value.

The couple sought over $25,000 in compensation and damages. Judge Amy Hay dismissed the Boring’s lawsuit when the case was brought to trial in February 2009. Judge Hay stated that the couple had no proof that they had suffered as a result of their home being photographed for Street View. In addition, the Borings never contacted Google to ask for the removal of the images.



Despite the original dismissal of the lawsuit, the Boring’s have continued their fight against Google. The couple has appealed the case and the lawsuit is currently reinstated in the Pennsylvania federal appeals court. If the Boring’s fail to prove that Google’s “trespass” caused them actual harm or damage, the courts say the most they are entitled to is exactly one dollar. For a couple so concerned with privacy the Borings have gained a fair amount of public attention due to the lawsuit, which included court documents containing their home address.

The Boring’s lawsuit isn’t the first complaint the public has made concerning the privacy issues surrounding Google’s Street View. When Street View was first launched in May 2007, many criticized Google’s decision to display photographs that included images of people’s faces, car license plates and other identifying features. Google has since utilized face-blurring technology in order to avoid privacy issues. In a separate case, residents of Humboldt County in California had previously complained that Google’s hired photographers were ignoring private property signs. In response, Google stated that it is legal to photograph “private” residential roads because such privacy no longer exists due to advancements in technology, such as satellite and aerial imagery.

Google maintains that it respects individual privacy and offers several privacy options for those concerned about images of their residence on Street View. A tool on the Street View website is available for those who wish to request the removal of specific images. Google plans to continue to photograph areas around the United States and has Street View projects set to take place globally as well.


Sources:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/feb/19/google-wins-street-view-privacy-case
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10166532-93.html
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10444755-38.html

Google's Superbowl Commercial

Google found a creative way to tell a love story through the use of their own search engine. This was one of my favorite Superbowl commercials and reminded me of one of my roommates who actually met her current boyfriend while studying abroad in France! The commercial already has over a million hits on YouTube. View the video here.

Case Study: Mass Customization

NikeID vs. Puma Mongolian Shoe BBQ

In an ever-changing digital world, companies must compete to grab consumers’ attention while they shop online. Websites are now an integral part of the consumers’ shopping experience and are expected to be informative and engaging at the same time. The arrival of mass customization allows consumers to personalize the products they intend to buy. Customers generally appreciate the personal attention they receive when selecting products and it is in a company’s best interest to strategize accordingly. Two competitors in the athletic shoe market, Nike and Puma, use mass customization to provide consumers with the opportunity to design their own shoes.

The NikeID website is specifically dedicated to the personal customization of Nike’s athletic footwear. The site is visually intriguing with bright colors and graphics to catch the eye of potential customers. Customers who are ready to design their own shoe can begin by choosing a style or color scheme to begin the process. Customers are prompted to choose a color for each area of the shoe, including the base, heel, Nike’s symbolic “swoosh”, and the shoelaces. Certain areas of the shoe, such as the base, also offer the option of a graphic design on top of the chosen color.


The customer can also personalize their shoe to the point of adding text on the collar of the shoe, with a maximum of two characters. This ID is perfect for the use of a customer’s initials, which helps to give the shoe a personal feel. A graphic on the collar may be used in place of text and various team mascot images are available to choose from. There is an additional ID located on the inside tongue of the shoe. This particular ID is text only, with a maximum of six characters. Overall there are twelve steps in the custom design process.

The Puma Mongolian Shoe BBQ has a similar concept to the NikeID website, with a few key differences. The website has a restaurant theme including a chef that welcomes visitors to the site and a menu to choose shoe styles from. Even the shopping cart at the top of the page where consumers can put products before they purchase them is called the doggie bag.


Puma allows customers to choose from three selected styles of athletic shoes. Customers can begin designing their customized shoe or browse previously designed shoes for inspiration. Puma offers a wide variety of colors and materials for the sides, front and back of the shoe. In addition, the Puma logo and inside of the shoe can be personally designed. Optional colors go beyond the expected scope of the rainbow and include shades such as “burnt olive” and “silver metallic”. The available materials range from suede to leather to canvas.

While each website was easy to navigate and entertaining, certain qualities offered a different customer experience. I found that the NikeID website was captivating from the start, with eye catching images and many styles of athletic footwear to choose from. In contrast, the restaurant theme of the Puma website was creative but had little to do with shoes. Each website offered a variety of options in regard to colors and details to personalize each pair of shoes. The NikeID offered a text and mascot graphic option, which is lacking on Puma’s side. However, Puma’s website appeared to offer more variety in materials and a different range of colors than the NikeID. I also found that the Puma website had a better overall view of the shoe, from every possible angle. This would be helpful as a potential customer in order to feel assured that the shoe was going to appear as you had intended. My only complaint would be that the Puma website was sometimes slow to upload during the design process. This was frustrating and might have deterred me from purchasing shoes if I had actually been shopping. I had a smoother experience when designing a pair of NikeID shoes, although it was difficult to get started. The NikeID website offers more styles to custom design, which is positive if you already know which type of shoe you are searching for. In the end, I believe I had a better custom designing experience with the NikeID website. The NikeID was more visually appealing and offered a variety of styles to choose from.