<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Banapana &#187; Chris Anderson</title>
	<atom:link href="http://banapana.com/tag/chris-anderson/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://banapana.com</link>
	<description>This is your mind on media.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 17:34:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>My Contribution to the Infosphere Today? Jell-O.</title>
		<link>http://banapana.com/the-hivemind/my-contribution-to-the-infosphere-today-jell-o</link>
		<comments>http://banapana.com/the-hivemind/my-contribution-to-the-infosphere-today-jell-o#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2008 14:26:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Flash Essay]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Hivemind]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chris Anderson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[free]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Genesee Pure Food Company]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jell-O]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[neoinstitutional economics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.banapana.com/economics/my-contribution-to-the-infosphere-today-jell-o</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Okay, I didn&#8217;t contribute actual Jell-O to the infosphere1, but weirdly enough, after reading Chris Anderson&#8217;s &#8220;The Big Lie About Free&#8221; I got to thinking that what&#8217;s really silly about all these complaints about the seeming decline in value of media is that the idea of the promotional giveaway is so old! How old, you [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Okay, I didn&#8217;t contribute <em>actual Jell-O</em> to the infosphere<sup id="fnref:1"><a href="#fn:1" rel="footnote">1</a></sup>, but weirdly enough, after reading Chris Anderson&#8217;s &#8220;<a href="http://www.longtail.com/the_long_tail/2008/01/the-big-lie-abo.html">The Big Lie About Free</a>&#8221; I got to thinking that what&#8217;s really silly about all <a href="http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/01/all-ip-should-be-free-dont-be-ridiculous.html">these complaints</a> about the seeming decline in value of media is that the idea of the promotional giveaway is so old!  How old, you say?<span id="more-353"></span>  Well, as I recently added to the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jell-O">Jell-O article</a> over at Wikipedia (referenced by way of the <a href="http://www.jellomuseum.com/#History">Jell-O Musuem</a>) that the promotional giveaway is at least as old as 1904, when the Genesee Pure Food Company sent out hoards of salesmen to distribute free Jell-O recipe books.  Those same salesmen, after shoving books in mail slots, would then drop by the local grocers and inform them, essentially, &#8220;I&#8217;ve just told all these people about this new product—maybe you&#8217;d like to stock some?&#8221;</p>

<p>Chris Anderson makes the excellent point that the people complaining about intellectual property being treated as free are missing the fact that free does not equal valueless.  I&#8217;ll agree with him there.  But a simple economic fact that IP-based companies and industries are going to have to wake up to is that markets operate because of scarce resources.  According to most <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_analysis">neoinstitutional economic</a> thought, people trade because what the other person has is of more value.  In a nutshell, If I farm celery and you farm tomatoes, we&#8217;ll trade because each of our goods is more valuable to the other person.  But there are two things under the sun that I can think of that are not (effectively) scarce resources on this planet.  One is sunlight and the other is brains (and with them, ideas).</p>

<div class="footnotes">
<hr />
<ol>

<li id="fn:1">
<p>Though I must confess that the idea of somehow shoehorning actual Jell-O into the infosphere is a highly attractive idea.&#160;<a href="#fnref:1" rev="footnote">&#8617;</a></p>
</li>

</ol>
</div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://banapana.com/the-hivemind/my-contribution-to-the-infosphere-today-jell-o/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Lifting of the Veil of Brand</title>
		<link>http://banapana.com/uncategorized/the-lifting-of-the-veil-of-brand</link>
		<comments>http://banapana.com/uncategorized/the-lifting-of-the-veil-of-brand#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jul 2005 13:57:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Apple]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BMW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bob Vila]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chris Anderson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[commodity products]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IBM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[make designer products]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Martha Stewart]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paris Hilton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[quality product]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://banapana.troped.com/?p=110</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I found this entry from Chris Anderson over at The Long Tail regarding how he sees an explosion in market space (read: used-to-be-shelf-space) online causing a lot of trouble for brands. I don&#8217;t disagree with his conclusion that tastemakers (i.e. Oprah, Martha Stewart, Paris Hilton) will be more important or that many companies will decline [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I found <a href="http://longtail.typepad.com/the_long_tail/2005/07/brands_in_the_l.html">this entry</a> from Chris Anderson over at <a href="http://longtail.typepad.com">The Long Tail</a> regarding how he sees an explosion in market space (read: used-to-be-shelf-space) online causing a lot of trouble for brands.  I don&#8217;t disagree with his conclusion that tastemakers (i.e. Oprah, Martha Stewart, Paris Hilton) will be more important or that many companies will decline in marketshare as information in the market increases and the number of competitors increases but I disagree that they all will.</p>

<p><span id="more-110"></span></p>

<p>As I&#8217;ve <a href="http://www.banapana.com/banapana/good-design-is-profitable">argued before</a> there are two different types of product companies: commodity products and designer products.  Designer products don&#8217;t tend to hold large marketshares but they do command higher prices.  Up to this point, commodity products have been able to largely inflate their prices due to the proxy of brand as quality.  As Chris Anderson points out in his article, when consumers are faced with a large variety of choices, they go with what they know. (Nobody ever got fired buying/hiring IBM, right?)  And to further his point, as consumers are gaining more information from the market and becoming more informed, the effect of brand as a sign of quality is going to wear off.  However, here he makes the leap and says that the tastemakers will become the stand-in for a symbol of quality.</p>

<p>But how do tastemakers choose their tastes?  There are some that will take the money and wear whatever you give them.  There are others that really do have a reputation for knowing what is the best quality product.  I&#8217;m sure there are a lot of people who would take Bob Vila&#8217;s word on tools and materials without a second thought.  And if you&#8217;re a tool company like <a href="http://www.makita.com/">Makita</a> that comes highly recommended from many tastemakers then I&#8217;m not sure what you have to worry about.  Designer product companies built themselves on reputation.  Companies like Apple, BMW and Google don&#8217;t just have consumers&emdash;they have rabid enthusiasts ((Apple called their most vocal followers evangelists, which strikes a pretty good tone)) and NOT due to their brand but due to the quality of their products and the consumer experience.  These companies, that make designer products, never needed a brand so much as a name to re-enforce their great reputation.  Companies who have previously been concerned with their image are going to be forced to contend with their customer&#8217;s satisfaction.</p>

<p>The phony tastemakers will get eaten up by the information surrounding them.  If they get paid to wear it, people will know.  That might not even matter.  But tastemakers who have an investment in being listened to by a market will make their choices carefully and they will do it based on quality and design.  Those companies that make designer products will continue to survive just fine alongside everybody else and they&#8217;ll continue to retain their marketshare while everyone else&#8217;s fractions into a hundred little ones.</p>

<p>All in all, what Chris Anderson is spelling out in his article is Economics 101.  (Though I mean no offense to him &#8212; his observations have been remarkable.)  In a capitalist market (we are told) prices will work towards a market equilbrium <i>provided that consumers have perfect information and there are a large number of competitors</i>.  That last quid pro quo hasn&#8217;t been true for the last few decades.  It would appear that as the market-space begins to increase the capacity to contain a larger number of competitors and as consumers gain more information, we are well on our way towards a more perfect capitalism.</p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://banapana.com/uncategorized/the-lifting-of-the-veil-of-brand/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>RSS, the Long Tail and iTunes</title>
		<link>http://banapana.com/uncategorized/rss-the-long-tail-and-itunes</link>
		<comments>http://banapana.com/uncategorized/rss-the-long-tail-and-itunes#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Feb 2005 20:50:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barnes & Noble]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chris Anderson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[content aggregation systems]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conventional media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[iTunes software]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kevin Laws]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Long Tail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Online commerce]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steven Johnson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the New York Times]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://banapana.troped.com/?p=31</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Chris Anderson of the Long Tail blog identified a trend in commerce that he calls the Long Tail some issues ago in Wired Magazine. To summarize his observation, most (offline) stores have a limitation of physical capacity that keeps them from selling everything under the sun to you. The problem is, you didn&#8217;t know that [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Chris Anderson of the <a href="http://longtail.typepad.com">Long Tail</a> blog identified a trend in commerce that he calls the Long Tail some issues ago in <a href="http://www.wired.com">Wired Magazine</a>.  To summarize his observation, most (offline) stores have a limitation of physical capacity that keeps them from selling everything under the sun to you.  The problem is, you didn&#8217;t know that some of the more &#8220;nichy&#8221; things out there under the sun were things that you wanted.  Online commerce is allowing this situation to change. Netflix is giving you access to movies that Blockbuster can&#8217;t store on its shelves. Amazon.com is getting you books that Barnes &amp; Noble can&#8217;t store on its shelves.  And ebay getting you stuff that your neighbors can&#8217;t store in their garages.
<span id="more-31"></span>
With some help from his friend <a href="http://www.ventureblog.com/articles/indiv/2005/001187.html">Kevin Laws</a> over at <a href="http://www.ventureblog.com">VentureBlog</a>, Chris Anderson has tied the concept of the <a href="http://longtail.typepad.com/the_long_tail/2005/02/briefly_noted.html">Long Tail to RSS</a> now .  The general comparison made concerning the two of them is that RSS is &#8220;Tivo for the Web&#8221; &#8212; an insightful comparison.  (I would say that RSS is the TV schedule that the Tivo downloads and <a href="http://www.bloglines.com">Bloglines</a> and <a href="http://ranchero.com/netnewswire/">NetNewsWire</a> are the Tivo for the web, but let&#8217;s not mince metaphors.)  RSS, for me, changed the way that I read the web.  Until the advent of <a href="http://ranchero.com/netnewswire/">NetNewsWire</a> reading on the web had become a hunt and gather kind of task where I would hit the big sites, <a href="http://www.plastic.com">Plastic</a>, <a href="http://slashdot.org">Slashdot</a>, <a href="http://www.salon.com">Salon</a> and hope to find something I was interested in.  Nowadays I read the web like I would the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com">New York Times</a> (the paper version) &#8212; fishing through a lot of headlines looking for the articles that peak my interest, but all in one place.  And as Steven Johnson pointed out in a slightly related article <a href="http://www.stevenberlinjohnson.com/movabletype/archives/000230.html">&#8220;Tool for Thought&#8221;</a> content aggregation systems like his <a href="http://www.devon-technologies.com/products/devonthink/overview.php">DevonThink</a> or NetNewsWire work is because you&#8217;re doing 90% of the filtering.  This might seem to point to the fact that the more &#8220;atomitized&#8221; RSS feeds become, the more useful they&#8217;ll be [1]</p>

<p>RSS services have <i>also</i> given us the ability to keep up with the ongoings of the niche markets and suppliers of the Long Tail.  As Chris Anderson puts it:</p>

<blockquote>The reason this is so important to driving demand down the Tail is that RSS feeds can provide a constant stream of links and suggestions for products and media that you otherwise wouldn&#8217;t have heard of. Best of all, they don&#8217;t have to be from conventional media and blogs; they can simply be notifications of availability or updates on what&#8217;s selling where.</blockquote>

<p>Chris mentions netflix specifically and I just wanted to point out another one: <a href="http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZSearch.woa/wa/MRSS/rssGenerator">iTunes</a> [note: this link only works with the Apple iTunes software].  So now, while I&#8217;m browsing RSS feeds, looking for articles of note, I can get the latest updates on the iTunes music store.  What I would rather have is updates on the bands that I like, but I figure we&#8217;ll eventually get there as well.</p>

<p>[1] By &#8220;atomitized&#8221; I don&#8217;t mean the Atom feed service, but just breaking-down-into-smallest-component.  And obviously there are limits.</p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://banapana.com/uncategorized/rss-the-long-tail-and-itunes/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
