The 463: Inside Tech

Advanced Energy Economy Unveils New Report: Economic Impacts of Advanced Energy

Advanced Energy Economy (AEE), a national organization representing the advanced energy industry, has just released a new report, Economic Impacts of Advanced Energy.

Commissioned by the Advanced Energy Economy Institute, AEE’s educational and charitable affiliate, and produced by Pike Research, this report marks the first time both a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the advanced energy markets in the U.S. and globally has been conducted.

One of the report’s most surprising findings was the magnitude of the advanced energy industry. Advanced energy makes up more than a $1.1 trillion global market, larger than the pharmaceutical manufacturing worldwide.  Domestically it’s bigger than the trucking industry!

You may be wondering, what is advanced energy? AEE defines advanced energy as the best available commercial technologies for meeting energy needs today and tomorrow. It’s not just clean and renewable energy; it’s a broader category that includes categories like nuclear and natural gas turbines that are not generally included. In short, advanced energy is what happens when energy meets 21^st century technology. IT and the Internet, advanced materials, electronics and “big data” are all transforming the way we make and use energy, and driving innovation across the entire energy landscape.

Here are some other key findings from the report:

• The U.S. advanced energy market represented $132 billion of economic activity in 2011, with market growth of more than 15% year over year.
• The share of the U.S. global advanced energy market will rise from 12 percent to 15 percent in just one year, from 2011 to 2012.

Click here to download the report. 

Connecting for the Sandy Hook Promise

One month after the tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut and the nation still grapples for a way to deal with the senseless violence committed on innocent victims.  Sensationalistic storylines and outsized personalities continue to drive headlines, but underneath all the noise and flash something good is happening.

 Families at the center of the tragedy are leading the call for moderate conversations and solutions that can help prevent similar tragedies in the future.  Their effort, the Sandy Hook Promise is a good place to start.

There will be no easy answers, but agreeing to have a civil dialogue is a positive first step on this and other important national issues. Taking the pledge is free and cathartic, but most importantly it connects participants to a much larger community of people interested in considering new ideas, not just talking points.

Gadgets: Your Digital Fix and Mental Detriment All in One

(Krista Strum) Does your “crackberry” really get you high? And, can you become addicted to a phone anyway? Sources say yes.  According to a recent New York Times report about Americans’ growing reliance on gadgets, and the constant need to be “plugged in,” frequent use of a digital device can stimulate brain activity in small bursts…giving somewhat of a mental high.  
 
Problem is: being too reliant on digital devices can actually re-pattern the way people think.  Instead of organically processing thoughts, “crackberry addicts” and the likes, have a hard time fully thinking things through.  According to researchers quoted in the article, “our ability to focus is being undermined by bursts of information;” a pattern that hinders linear thinking and sometimes makes it hard to finish tasks.  
 
Aside from altering the way people think, devices can be tough on relationships as well. We all know that texting, or surfing the Internet, while interacting with spouses, children, and pets can: A) land you on the couch for a night, and/or B) make your loved ones feel unimportant and overlooked. Who wants to play second best to an iPhone?  
 
So, why should you make it a priority to draw strict boundaries between your personal space and your laptop (or other digital device)?  Well first, no one should want to inadvertently re-pattern a God given way of thinking. Second, too many people have already lost their lives due to quick urges to text or surf the Internet while driving.
 
In all, I don’t know any human who wishes they could process information like Google; so let’s recognize that we’re not wired to do so and develop strict boundaries between digital devices and our personal lives. You can start by repeating after me: “I will not sleep with my phone next to my pillow tonight,” —or any other night for that matter!  

Will Coca-Cola’s World Cup Campaign be a Win for U.S. Soccer?

(Devon Rosenberry) Gone are the days when companies spoon fed their marketing jingles to consumers via television—instead, they’ve gotten really smart about how to engage consumers via personalized social media advertising. Just think of all the things, or people who, in part, owe their fame to Facebook or Twitter—American Idol (Susan Boyle), Zappos, Barack Obama, Grey’s Anatomy, Lost, Perez Hilton, Lady Gaga, Tila Tequila, Lindsay Lohan…and the list goes on.

YouTube is another social marketing craze and Coca-Cola is now using it to unite the world for the 2010 FIFA World Cup.  Through their “Longest Celebration” campaign, Coca-Cola encourages people from around the world to upload videos of their “goal celebration” dances (the dance fans make when their team scores a goal) to YouTube.  The campaign was inspired by a memorable celebration dance preformed over 20 years ago by footballer Roger Milla during the 1990 World Cup.  

In terms of U.S. audiences, Obama may have convinced via Twitter that “yes we can,” however, Coca-Cola has a much more daunting task at hand.  As an American born company, Coca-Cola must convince American’s that soccer—one of the least popular U.S. sports—is cool.  What’s so hard about that? While football is just as important as a morning cup of coffee to people in other countries, it is usually considered the overlooked sport in the U.S.  Case in point: Americans completely changed the name of the sport to soccer and created a new one in its place.

To get around this issue, instead of simply telling American’s to watch the games, Coca-Cola has decided to approach their initiative in a new way through contests and prizes.  The grand prize isn’t half bad either.  The winners of “The Longest Celebration” will win World Cup themed prizes, including tickets to attend a match in South Africa.  So who will dance their way to South Africa?  And will Coca-Cola be able to make the 2010 World Cup a memorable moment in social media history?  Tune into the Coca-Cola YouTube channel to find out.

A Brilliant Use of Communications: Heineken

(Jim Hock) Public relations and the communications oftentimes gets a bad "rap" from many, but not long ago in Europe Heineken launched a brilliant multifaceted PR event on the same night as a championship football (OK, as we call soccer) match on the continent.  They brilliantly put together a "fake" string concert and were able to get roughly 1,000 people to attend.  This video captures the effect well.

Well done.  

Lessons in Coalition Building: Balancing the Rider and the Elephant

Katie Hallen -- As a first-year undergraduate at the University of Virginia, I took a psychology class from a young professor named Jonathan Haidt.  Haidt, whose research interests largely focus on morality, was memorable in more ways than one. Being that he was easy on the eyes and ears largely forgave him for wearing the same green tweed jacket every single day of class.  Thanks also to him, I still mimic his shorthand for “morality” by circling the letter “m.”

Recently, I have been revisiting Haidt’s research via his new book The Happiness Hypothesis, which contains important lessons for us Washington policy and communications types interested in coalition building and campaign management.

In building in an army of supporters, we must grapple with the issues and messages that motivate them to join a cause.  If we are looking to change their behavior in some way, we must look beyond the politics of reason to the politics of emotion.  This is no easy task. 

Haidt uses a wonderful metaphor to describe how our brains are often torn between reason and emotion: the Rider and the Elephant.  The Rider, representing the rational side, has the reigns of the Elephant and is controlling his path.  But the Elephant is very large and from time to time easily overpowers the Rider and takes him down a different route.

Why is it that the rational side of the brain knows that we should not eat the second cookie but we almost always give in to the emotional craving?  Why is it that a white paper packed with compelling data persuades our logical selves to support a piece of legislation but our emotional side keeps thinking of our one friend Chip whose job could be impacted?  That’s the Elephant overpowering the Rider. 

“To understand most important ideas in psychology, you need to understand how the mind is divided into parts that sometimes conflict,” Haidt writes. “We assume that there is one person in each body, but in some ways we are each more like a committee whose members have been thrown together to do a job, but who often find themselves working at cross purposes.”

It’s an important lesson for coalition building and campaign management.  If we want people to join our cause, and if we are asking them to make a commitment, take action or even change their behavior – buy energy-efficient light bulbs, fasten the seat belt, vote for the first time, whatever it may be – we must be aware of the brain’s competing demands.

Brothers Chip and Dan Heath further explain the competing brain in their new book Switch, which I’ll discuss in greater detail in a future post.  For now, take a look at Haidt’s book and let us know what you think.

Is a Tweet Equal to a Round of Golf?

(David Mack) The Washington Post’s Cecilia Kang wrote an interesting piece in Sunday’s paper that explores both the growing role of social networking tools in policy work and a perceived lack of transparency from those doing the posting.

The story includes several examples of company representatives who mix personal and professional information in their private data streams.  The question Kang seems to be asking is whether or not policy oriented posts should be regulated.

Lobbying activity is relatively well defined and regulated.  If you are communicating directly with elected members or regulators your actions (and the specific topics of conversation) are supposed to be captured by lobbying disclosure forms.  Similarly, paying for events (like a round of golf) that provide exclusive personal access to the same officials are closely watched and reportable.

But should communications that speak to a non-targeted, broad audience be treated in the same fashion?  I’d suggest we tread very carefully here.

There are really three flavors of posts to consider; individuals posting about news or opinion, organizations (i.e coalitions, companies) posting news or opinion, and organizations mobilizing followers (i.e. sign a petition on net neutrality).

I doubt the latter two options would be in danger of confusing an audience.  If you’ve subscribed to an organization’s twitter stream, you proactively decided to receive information from that source and will know what their agenda is.

In the case of individuals, if anything, a permanent (and searchable) record of tweets provides a welcome new layer of transparency that would have been unimaginable ten years ago.  I’m in the “more information is good” camp and having the ability to search through an individual’s musings on a given topic is a welcome way to familiarize myself with their background and motivating principles. 

While it’s good to ask hard questions about how folks try to pull the levers of power, I think we can let our social networking friends off the hook for now.  After all, those tweets have a long and public shelf life.  Certainly a lot longer than comments made in a closed meeting or over cocktails at the 19^th hole. 

 

 

Vloggers & Candidates: New Rules?

I fired off a post last night after, frankly, being jaw-droppingly shocked by the cozy interactions between the well-respected and popular vlog-team at Rocketboom and the John Edwards campaign.

But, then I got to thinking about where my surprise came from.  It's pretty simple.  I write a blog, but deep down I'm old-school when it comes to my thoughts about journalism is and, most especially, when it's journalism that touches public policy and politics.  (Not many kids want to be a press secretary when they grow up, but I did -- in 1976).

So maybe my gut-instinct response was unfair.

Maybe Everything Has Changed like we're told over and over again.

But, if the old, long-established rules don't work, what are the new rules?  Are there any?

And, if not, how does a vlog viewer appropriately filter for bias (if any)?  Or, should the viewers of vlogs have such a personal affinity and connection to their video purveyors of choice that they should just know and understand where their daily dose of information is coming from without any added context?

This is serious stuff.  Similar conversations generations ago eventually led to the creation of the Fairness Doctrine, personal attack and political editorial rules (all since done away with).

Anyway, it should be allowed that this is genuinely new ground and debate (and even mistakes) should be encouraged to help in finding our way in the next generation of political communications.

To this end, I posted an open-letter of sorts to Rocketboom's founder and producer Andrew Baron on a vlogger list-serv to drive the conversation.  It's after the jump. 

To his great credit, Baron took time from what has to be a very busy day to respond.  His response follows my note.

Feel free to tell me that I'm wrong or barking up the wrong tree.  I think we all want to learn at this interesting moment in time....

-S. Garrett

2008: And, So It Begins... On YouTube...

John Edwards' presidential campaign enlisted (micro) celebrity vloggers like Robert Scoble and the Rocketboom crew to help him with his official announcement of his candidacy in New Orleans.   The big day was supposed to be tomorrow, but, ironically, his campaign made a boo boo and launched his campaign Web site a day early.  Whoops.  Live by HTML, die....

So, Edwards didn't wait for Scoble to make his connecting flight from California and announced his intentions to launch the "Tomorrow Begins Today" campaign a day earlier than planned.  (Today Begins What Was Going to Be Tomorrow Beginning Tomorrow Begins Today?)

Anyway, Rocketboom was there and Andrew Baron penned the note after the jump and sent it to a big vlogger email list...   I ask some questions about it....Others do, too....

Can You Read Me Now?

Verizon launched their tech/telecom policy blog this week.  According to the site, PoliBlog seeks to:

"to encourage intelligent discussion of public p olicy issues affecting the telecommunications industry and Verizon in particular. We will do this by posting our own points of view regularly, engaging in conversation with other posters who offer fact-based comments and reacting to the relevant ongoing blogosphere conversation. While no telecommunications subject is considered off-limits, we will focus on policy issues that have implications for the greatest number of companies and consumers."

Interestingly, no mention yet on their views on where net neutrality stands, for that matter, any comment on this wistful piece from Salon that has a subhead that reads:

"In the Capitol Hill battle over Net neutrality, a ragtag army of grass-roots Internet groups, armed with low-budget videos, music parodies and petitions, have the corporate telecoms, and their allies in Congress, on the run."

Our old (but relevant) take on net advocasy and net neutrality is here.