In the coming months, a wave of government initiatives could start making such high-tech methods of identification commonplace — beginning with the replacement this fall of federal employee IDs. Similar cards are planned for transportation workers, first responders and visitors to the United States.
Packed with biometric data such as fingerprints and containing a computer chip with room to expand the amount of information stored, the new IDs represent a potential boon to technology companies eyeing an estimated $8 billion in identity-related contracts. Firms such as BearingPoint Inc. and Lockheed Martin Corp. have set up showcase identity labs, pulling technology from different companies into turnkey operations. Hundreds of smaller companies, down to manufacturers of plastic cards, are vying for part of the market.
The biggest business opportunity still looms: Driver’s licenses, which are due for a retooling under new federal laws.
[…] In an era of chronic concern over terrorism and anxiety over immigration, the business of determining who is who has become increasingly urgent. But it is not without controversy. Americans have long resisted the idea of a national ID card, for example. The growing sophistication of computer databases and networks has heightened privacy concerns — as have data breaches, from the theft or loss of government computers to AOL’s online posting of 36 million keyword searches conducted by hundreds of thousands of subscribers. If the pool of government programs using the new identity technology gets large enough and the amount of information collected gets detailed enough, “there will be a lot of pressure for these programs to converge,” creating a de facto national identity system, said Barry Steinhardt, director of the technology and liberty project at the American Civil Liberties Union.
Use of a new government standard may prompt the private sector to follow. The banking, retailing and health-care industries are monitoring the federal initiatives, ready to apply stricter identity standards when dealing with their employees and customers. In an online world, the technology could also be used to establish that two people who never meet in person really are who they say they are.
That’s the plan, it appears. That old “first sale” doctrine in textbooks is upsetting a lot of folks, so how to transition to electronic texts becomes the $64 question: Words of Wisdom vs. Words From Our Sponsor
Writers have written lovingly of the tactile pleasures provided by printed books and newspapers, but no one has paid particular tribute to the voluptuous four-color, four-pound textbook. Now being replaced by weightless electronic versions, the bound artifact remains forlorn and unloved. In any ceremony marking its demise, college students may want to throw a fusillade of stones at its coffin. Expensive texts, after all, have broken many student budgets.
A $4 billion-a-year business cannot change fundamentally overnight; the shift from printed to electronic textbook will take years. In the meantime, a small publisher of college textbooks, Freeload Press of St. Paul, seeks to take advantage of this flux with a new concept: providing free e-textbooks to students. The catch? Ads are inserted within the text.
[…] Asked to select a textbook on the basis of price over quality, professors will resist, as they properly should. Professors, however, are not blind to the shocking prices of new textbooks. Nor are they deaf to the complaining voices of their students. They know that students increasingly buy used textbooks, and that this in turn affects the prices on new texts that sit unsold on the shelves.
J. Bruce Hildebrand, executive director for higher education at the Association of American Publishers, said publishers report that sales of a new textbook edition evaporate almost completely after one year, when used copies flood the market.
Authors say that this drives publishers to shorten the intervals between revisions and to raise prices to try to recoup development costs from a shrinking base of new-book buyers â€” then the cycle repeats.
The system is broken. Its replacement, however, should not entail a hasty embrace of advertising and substandard contents, but rather adoption of electronic versions of the best textbooks in their field, at much-reduced prices and free of advertising.
I’m trying to remember if I’ve ever sold a textbook that I bought; maybe it’s a question of making textbooks something one wants to keep? I’m not sure exactly what’s “broken,” but I doubt that the answer is going to be found in e-texts alone….
Even the NYTimes is not happy about the expected outcome of the current spectrum auctions — less competition: Wireless Providers Poised to Win Spectrum Licenses
When the governmentâ€™s multibillion-dollar auction of radio spectrum licenses began two weeks ago, it looked as if newcomers might get the chance to buy their way into the mobile phone business, leading to more choices for consumers.
But now the countryâ€™s biggest cellular providers appear poised to win many of the 1,122 licenses up for auction, allowing them to expand their reach and reducing the chance that a new entrant might bring down prices.
[…] Of the $13.3 billion in bids registered thus far, $2.2 billion has come from the cable providers, bidding together in a consortium with Sprint, the third-largest cellular carrier. But about 60 percent of the total bids have come from Cingular, Verizon Wireless and T-Mobile, the first-, second- and fourth-largest cellphone companies. T-Mobile has bid nearly $4 billion, mostly for licenses in major metropolitan areas, while Cingular and Verizon have sought licenses that cover broader regions.
In throwing their financial weight around, the cellphone companies may have scared off DirecTV and EchoStar, the two largest satellite television providers, which were expected to make a charge into the wireless arena but withdrew from the auction last week.
â€œThe kings of the hill defended the hill,â€ said Roger Entner, a wireless industry analyst at Ovum, a telecommunications consulting firm. â€œThe dream of another wave of new entrants has died.â€
[…] â€œI donâ€™t think cable is going to get into mobile voice because itâ€™s overgrazed, but theyâ€™ve drunk the 3G Kool-Aid and believe that a lot of nomadic people that they canâ€™t reach are signing up for wireless services,â€ said Edward Snyder, a telecommunications analyst at Charter Equity Research. Mr. Snyder questioned this strategy, asking, â€œWhy go head-to-head with something thatâ€™s been around for years?â€
The magazine business is going through serious heartache in the face of the Google advertising juggernaut. Here’s what happens when traffic becomes the metric of performance for a content provider: At Forbes.com, Lots of Glitter but Maybe Not So Many Visitors
Its own ads proclaim that â€œmore people get their business news from Forbes.com than any other source in the world,â€ saying that its sites drew about 15 million unique visitors in a single month earlier this year. It was a well-heeled crowd, according to Forbes.com, which says that the average household income of its users is $149,601.
Forbesâ€™s Web prowess is a big reason Elevation Partners, a private equity firm that counts Bono of U2 as a managing director, agreed on Aug. 4 to buy a minority stake in Forbesâ€™s publishing business. â€œForbes has already won the first roundâ€ in the battle for Internet supremacy, an Elevation founder, Roger McNamee, said then.
But a closer look at the numbers raises questions about Forbes.comâ€™s industry-leading success. For its claim of a worldwide audience of nearly 15.3 million, it has been citing February data from comScore Media Metrix, one of the two leading providers of third-party Web traffic data.
[…] Forbes.com is hardly the only site to present traffic figures that are higher than those reported by the third-party companies. And because they rely on sampling and extrapolation, even the independent companies often present vastly different results for the same site.
Faith in such data has also suffered as a result of recent restatements by the large Web-tracking businesses. […]
[…] The debate is more than just a numbers game. According to Nielsen/NetRatings, the Forbes site attracted almost $55 million in revenue in 2005, the most among business publications, including The Wall Street Journal, BusinessWeek and the business pages of The New York Times.
Some competitors argue that Forbes.comâ€™s popularity derives in part from racy, provocative or wealth-obsessed lifestyle features that have little to do with traditional business news â€” examples from this year include â€œThe Hottest Billionaire Heiresses,â€ â€œTop Topless Beachesâ€ and â€œAmericaâ€™s Drunkest Cities.â€ Those kinds of articles, unlikely to appear in Forbes magazine, may be a small fraction of those that Forbes.com posts each day, but they are often featured on mass-market Web portals.
Most financial publications cover the softer side of money, hoping to cast a wide net and attract different types of advertisers. And like Forbes.com, many Web sites link up with portals to increase their traffic. Forbes.com may simply do these things better, or more aggressively, than most.
[…] Still, some competitors say that while eye-catching lifestyle stories may attract lots of readers, those readers are more transient and less likely to be the kind of high-powered professionals that advertisers pay more to reach.
To make fun of Barney! Purple, the Color of a Legal Conniption
But the owners of the Barney character have only themselves to blame if Barney-bashing experiences a renaissance â€” particularly among denizens of the Internet, for whom the character has been an object of gleefully malevolent parody, off and on, since the early days of the Web.
On Wednesday, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights group based in San Francisco, filed a lawsuit in Federal District Court in New York against Lyons Partnership of Allen, Tex., which owns the Barney brand.
The groupâ€™s aim is to bring an end to what it characterizes as the partnershipâ€™s relentless harassment of Web site owners who parody the Barney character, chiefly through threatening cease-and-desist letters from Lyonsâ€™s law firm in New York, Gibney, Anthony & Flaherty.
The EFF case site
Bound to be at least as good as the official sequel to Gone With The Wind, I’m sure: Whats Peter Pan Up to Now? All Will Soon Be Revealed
On Oct. 5 Simon & Schuster, with great fanfare and much promotion, is planning to publish “Peter Pan in Scarlet,” the first “officially sanctioned” sequel to J. M. Barrie’s childhood classic. The Oxford University Press, which is bringing out the book in Britain, is scheduled to release it with a gala party at Kensington Palace. The publishers have even gone so far as to impose a prepublication embargo on the book, whose author, Geraldine McCaughrean, was chosen in a vigorously publicized 2004 international competition held by Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children in London, which holds the British literary rights to the Peter Pan characters.
[…] But the Peter story has already been the subject of scores of editions, comic books, motion pictures, stage plays and animations, as well as two best-selling prequels written by Dave Barry and Ridley Pearson. The second of these, “Peter and the Shadow Thieves,” has sold 350,000 copies since its publication in July. Is there room for yet another version?
[…] “Peter Pan in Scarlet” is a kind of last-gasp attempt to cash in on Great Ormond Street’s copyright, which runs out in 2007. “We thought we would make the most of it while we can,” Ms. De Poortere said. “After 2007 it will have so many sequels. At least this is commissioned with our approval, and we will benefit from the income.”
[…] Because of differences in the copyright laws of the United States and Britain, the rights to the Peter character are not copyrighted here, hence the prequels by Mr. Barry and Mr. Pearson.
My, isn’t this a terribly friendly recapping of what has been, in fact, quite the nasty little fight between the Great Ormond Street Hospital and the writers of these “unofficial” stories. See these earlier Furdlog entries for more.
Starting today, Google will offer Google Apps for Your Domain, a free package of programs for businesses, universities, and other organizations.
Workers will be able to send e-mail with Gmail, Google’s two-year-old Web-based mail service, but messages will carry their company’s domain name. The package also includes Google’s online calendar, instant-messaging service, and Page Creator, a Web-page builder.
[…] The free edition of Apps for Your Domain is, like Google’s main site, supported with ads. By the end of the year, the company also plans to launch a paid version that will offer more storage, some degree of support, and likely, no ads. A price for this edition hasn’t been set.
Providing e-mail and other applications for businesses moves Google closer into what has traditionally been turf occupied by Microsoft Corp. Earlier this year, Google released a program that builds simple Excel-type spreadsheets but lets users access them on the Web.
Now, with e-mail, Google appears to be targeting Microsoft’s Outlook and Exchange franchises — although the company plays down any such views.
The terms of service will be key to this, as well as how Microsoft decides to compete. From their “Learn More” page:
What about privacy? Will Google share my organization’s information?
Google takes our users’ privacy very seriously. We won’t share your users’ information with anyone, except under the limited circumstances described in our privacy policies (please refer to the “Information sharing” section for more details).
The NYTimes coverage: Google to Offer Services for Businesses
Critics say the patent claims nothing less than Blackboard’s ownership of the very idea of e-learning. If allowed to stand, they say, it could quash the cooperation between academia and the private sector that has characterized e-learning for years and explains why virtual classrooms are better than they used to be.
The patent is “is antithetical to the way that academia makes progress,” said Michael Feldstein, assistant director of the State University of New York’s online learning network and one of the bloggers who has criticized the company.
Blackboard, which recently became the dominant company in the field by acquiring rival WebCT, says the critics misunderstand what the patent claims. But the company does say it must protect its $100 million investment in the technology. The day the patent was announced, Blackboard sued rival Desire2Learn, alleging infringement, and is seeking royalties.
Earlier Furdlog posting with links to other sites in the controversy: Educational Software Patent Fight: Blackboard
A spooky summary of what
may will be a book added to my reading list — and a prime example of how this emerging technology is slipping into the real world without much notice by policymakers or the public: Hidden messages – pdf
Meanwhile, marketers are also honing their ability to follow consumers wherever they go, using another method made more powerful by the changing media landscape — a method they call “behaviorial targeting.” If you have been looking up information about cars on the web, you may well start receiving car ads even when you’re not on auto sites, as ad companies can now track and deliver ads to you across hundreds of sites.
What’s more, the ads you see on the Web are increasingly tailored to what marketers perceive as your demographic — based on your age, where you live, your education, and your movements online and off. The latest technology, not yet implemented but coming soon, enables websites to customize the selection of articles and videos that reach you depending on what they know about you from your registration data, your movements on their site, and even information about you that they’ve purchased from a third party.
For now, such targeting is the province of the Web, but it won’t be long before it migrates to television and even to offline stores. […]
[…] “We are not in control anymore, but that’s OK,” Benjamin Palmer, president of a hot Internet ad firm called The Barbarian Group, was recently quoted in Advertising Age. “If we do this right, we can actually have a good relationship with ‘the consumer’ for once.”
That’s the current line of many marketing and media practitioners. The problem is, from a consumer standpoint, they are not doing it right. Media firms are creating a new world order in marketing communication to make sure that their messages get through to us — and in ways that make it increasingly difficult for us to know who the messenger is, whether the message is trustworthy, and whether we’re getting the same offer as everyone else.
Music industry watchers can learn from OK Go’s experience, which shows that Web users can catapult a band to fame, challenging the popular assumption that videos need to cost thousands of dollars or be directed by Hollywood film directors.
The industry is undergoing a slow, at times painful change from the old way of marketing CDs and TV music videos to going digital with music distribution and online videos, which fans view on the Internet or via media players like Apple Computer Inc.’s popular iPod.
Sites such as YouTube, MySpace, PureVolume and others allow aspiring artists to post videos, usually grainy lo-fi productions, at little or no cost.
[…] The success of OK Go and other bands’ on YouTube has encouraged the start-up to open a dedicated musicians channel for up-and-coming artists. YouTube says 120,000 acts have signed up since its June launch.
Michael Powers, senior product manager at YouTube, says the company took the lead from bands that were already using the site to promote themselves.
Los Angeles-based singer/songwriter Terra Naomi is the ‘most subscribed’ act on the new YouTube channel. Naomi’s YouTube page says she’s currently unsigned but YouTube told Reuters she is already attracting the attention of major record companies.
While OK Go and Terra Naomi try to engage fans using Internet music videos, along with clips from live gigs, blogs that invite comment, and pictures, established names are also getting in on the act.
[…] “We see the social video environment that YouTube has created and the category of user-generated content as being extremely important,” says Michael Nash, senior vice president of Digital Strategy and Business Development at Warner Music.
Nash believes that the next stage is for fans to be able to influence or interact with mainstream music videos.
“Inviting fans into the creative process of making videos could really deepen the relationship with the artist,” says Nash.
And the OK, Go “treadmill video” is worth a look if you’re like me and never seen it!
Counterpoint: The Pitchfork Effect