The mission statement of our blog notes that one of our objectives is to cut through the increasingly chaotic din of contemporary communications. This is no mean feat. Thanks to infinite outlets and myriad voices, we live in history’s most cacophonous culture. To stand out, to be heard, we advocate a well-crafted combination of intelligence, eloquence, and—above all—clarity.

You can take another tack, however: outright volume.

Today pundits put forth screeds at such ear-splitting volume that an audience scarcely has time to call on their critical thinking skills. Of course, that’s the idea. When your point is weak and your logic is flawed, being able to bluster, bloviate, and bellow is an unfortunately persuasive substitute for substance. What’s worse is that those messages have no staying power. Like an annoying advertising jingle that sticks in your head long after the product is forgotten, volume-driven communications works in all the wrong ways. We don’t remember the message; we remember the messenger.

Short story writer and essayist George Saunders describes the inception and aftermath of this trend in his latest book, The Braindead Megaphone. In an Amazon blog post, he encapsulates the idea driving the title essay:

Our cultural discourse is being dumbed-down by mass-media prose that is written too quickly, and therefore fails to due justice to the complexity of the world. On the other hand, prose that is revised and that the writer lives with awhile can go deeper and deeper and become more nuanced and truthful.

I’m a huge fan of Saunders’ surreal fiction, and his essays have redoubled my admiration. They succeed as provocative cultural commentary, and perhaps as an optimistic indication that today’s overwhelmed audiences are regaining their sentience. Here’s hoping we’re rediscovering the importance of evaluating messages based on value, not volume.

Click here to check out a two-minute Braindead video breakdown.

I am one of those people who loves to research my family’s history. And while the Internet has been a boon to genealogy—you can find nearly anything you want—the genealogical data available online is hard to verify. So while the Internet is a great place to start for genealogy, it’s not yet the place to finish if you’re doing more in-depth research into your family history.

Living in the DC area, I do have several local spots that will give me good info. The National Archives has all the census data. The Library of Congress has a huge genealogy section. The National Genealogical Society is also good. Best of all is the Daughters of the American Revolution Library, which has a plethora of self-published books.

But for really good concrete evidence I’d have to spend a ton of money, fly out to Salt Lake City, and spend time at the Latter Day Saints (LDS) library. Unless someone out there wants to donate some cash…I ain’t going.

I could go to a local LDS Family Research Center and order microfilm and microfiche from Salt Lake City. But like a lot of people, I have fallen under the Internet age’s spell of instant gratification when it comes to finding information. A week or more of waiting: not gonna do it. And while the LDS is working on getting everything they have online, there’s only so much time in the day, and they can’t scan everything at once.

But soon there will be another way to get reliable genealogical evidence over the Web. Sorenson Companies (of video compression fame) is launching a new website called GeneTree. GeneTree is designed to help you to perform one of the most difficult genealogical tasks, which is to find other living members of your family tree (difficult because privacy considerations mean that often records on living relatives are not available—online or offline).

And how are they going to match family members? By, among other things, DNA.

Of course, this raises even more questions when it comes to privacy. Will anyone be willing to store DNA information online, where it could be hacked? The banking industry still has problems keeping our financial information away from prying eyes.

I am all for complete openess on the Internet…but is there a line everyone agrees shouldn’t be crossed? How far is too far when it comes to putting our lives online?

NextStage Evolution/Global founder Joseph Carrabis blogs a lot about website usability and design. In his latest post he drops the lowdown about how our brains are wired to point our eyes wherever other folks are pointing theirs. Here’s the explanation why:

The reason this little game works is because human beings started off as herd and prey animals. Not only that, we were secretive little creatures for several million years of evolutionary history and all of this makes itself known in how our brains are wired to respond to, internalize and use information in our environment.

Our ancestors had to be constantly on guard for lions, tigers and bears. If Og the caveman was talking with me and suddenly looked over my shoulder, he might be seeing a predator. That was extremely useful information to our ancestors, so following Og’s gaze and looking where he looked was a good survival skill.

The point of his article was to explain how selection and placement of photos on a webpage (or in any media) can affect the user’s experience and actions. If you include a photo of people on your site, our eyes follow theirs! So where are they looking? I think good designers are aware of that, whether they know it or not. They can just feel the way the page is working.

Now that Mind & Media is setting up content management systems (CMS) for clients, I couldn’t help but draw a connection between Joseph’s article and the ease of editing a CMS. Certainly a huge advantage of a CMS is that any layperson, with almost zero training, can add or edit website content. It’s a tremendous way to speed site development!

However, while that may be great for dissemination of information, it could be detrimental to promoting message or inspiring action. What you see as snapshots of the latest networking event could actually be steering users away from your “Join Now!” button. The ability to easily edit a page does not equate to the ability to effectively design a page. So think about your purpose.

If your purpose is to quickly spread information, particularly to an audience that is eager to get to it, then a blog or other CMS may be great for you. If your purpose is to convince, persuade, sell, or motivate, then a properly composed page, or precisly cropped and placed photo, could be the difference between your audience’s eyes being drawn to your call to action or away from your site entirely.

Did you ever stop to think about what we are leaving behind in the way of tangible communication? Egyptian hieroglyphs, cuneiform on ancient clay tablets, the Rosetta Stone, and even Paleolithic cave paintings preserved information from past eons thanks to their rocky media. Today, however, we bombard each other with PowerPoint presentations, emails, text messages, and vlogs that live only in the electronic ether.

It seems only our past is worthy of imprinting on long-lasting material like monument stones. Why aren’t people chiseling Snoop Dogg lyrics onto bricks or blasting the word “McLovin” on the side of a quarry face?

If they knew about Harold Innis, they may start doing just that. Harold was a well-respected political economist from Toronto via the University of Chicago, who in the later, more cynical years of his life took a stab at mass media analysis. He probably hung around with people like Marshall McLuhan, drinking Latrobes, soul searching at Wrigley Field, and dreaming up fun titles for their dry books like The Gutenberg Galaxy.

Nevertheless, Harold made an interesting assumption: When communication is conveyed using durable materials like tablets of stone, they will be preserved over time and disseminated through an intimate if not respectful community that has access to view the information first hand. This is “time-biased” or “time-binding” media. Paper and electronic media, conversely, are light and fast, meant to be distributed over a larger community more quickly; this gives way to the theory of “space-biased” or “space-binding” media.

Harold went on to propose that space-biased media is the media that builds empires because the institutions of politics, religion, and commerce are influenced by the organization and vast distribution of information and hence create a social bias of the time-space continuum. In other galactic terms, time=no space, space-time=power, and power=a two-dollar hot dog at Wrigley Field.

What does this mean? I am not sure, but I think when something is written in stone, we trust it’s wiser than the moment in which it lives. We think it needs to be preserved in hard media, but it’s really only a sign for the times. Today, we let the legion electronic personal devices convey and capture every scrap of information so that everyone knows everything about anything. This numbs us to the authorities and institutions that bind us to their will. Depressed yet? Just wait…realize tombstones are a time-binding media, and make sure your epitaph inspires anyone who comes to visit. Oh, and don’t worry about launching empires.

I recently found this question on Linkedin:

Right now social networks and blogs dominate the web landscape. What do you think people will be utilizing online 8–10 years from now? Are there advancements in software or web development that you think will become as pervasive as social networks/blogs/etc.?

 

I took a stab at answering, but soon realized what a truly difficult question this was—and how lame my response really was (something about real-time virtual reality and that we’ll all be immersed in virtual worlds, but that technology is already here).

The truth is, who knows what the Web will look like in 8 or 10 years? A decade ago we were excited by email. AOL had the only visual Web interface and tons of people were using it. HTML was the language of the Web, and video had to be small to be seen well.

I did appreciate the creative analogy in this response:

I don’t see this Internet thing keeping people’s attention that much longer. Remember Beanie Babies? Oh, the Internet will be around but it won’t be top-of-mind. People will be used to just like they are use to TV, Radio, and the Telephone. I mean, do you really get excited to watch TV or talk on the telephone? And who even owns a working radio these days. The online world will go the way of the automobile. A necessary evil. Of course, the automobile will be online in a decade or so, which means there won’t be any need to step into the offline. I just hope virtual scent will be created by then because I’d really miss the smell of gasoline when I filled my tank.

I’m not sure I agree, but I sure hadn’t thought of that.

Ten years ago, we had maybe an inkling of how the use of applications would evolve. While the technology itself has remained pretty steady, how we’ve used it has expanded exponentially. What was once a home for static websites is now an infinite realm for interactive social networks, blogs, and wikis. Who would have guessed?

So, how will the Internet landscape look in 2017? Your guess is certainly as good as mine. Take a crack at answering. I’m interested to see what you think the Web will be.

No need to pay those pesky late book fees: introducing the World Digital Library.

Kudos to the Library of Congress for exponentially expanding the Web’s cultural depth and breadth. The WDL initiative definitely makes the Internet feel a little more global. It
gives users the ability to search for information in seven different languages and narrow searches by parameters such as geographic area, historical era, and type of media.

If I needed to do a book report on the history of commodes, I can tell you what kind of “throne” a Roman might be sitting on and show you the blueprints in the original Latin. Brilliant bathroom reading!

The recent layoffs at Avid Technology, as well as the departure of CEO David Krall, have brought about speculation as to the future of Avid itself. There’s been a lot of debate as to whether or not Avid should discontinue their lower-end systems and instead focus on what it’s really known for: high-end editing solutions and media management.

I’ve been singing Avid’s praises for years and have had many heated “Avid vs. Final Cut Pro” debates with fellow editors. Recently, however, my singing has become more of a low hum.

I was disappointed in Avid’s showing at this year’s NAB convention. I didn’t actually attend, but I did sit anxiously at my computer following news and unveilings from the trade show floor of the Las Vegas Convention Center. Sadly, the announcement that caught my eye was from the Final Cut Pro booth. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t hate the Final Cut Pro system, but I don’t really take it seriously either. When I use the Final Cut system I remap all the settings to make it an Avid, mainly because I spend most of my time editing on the Avid. It’s what I’m more comfortable with.

When Apple announced Final Cut Pro’s new ability to mix frame rates within a single project on the same timeline, I was shocked. How could Final Cut Pro come out with this before my precious Avid? This feature is not offered on any Avid system—not even my super-fancy Avid Symphony Nitris can achieve this task. Sure, there are things that can be done—cross converting, etc.—but it’s just not the same.

The Symphony Nitris is a great system and I love it, but like any editor, I want it all. I shouldn’t even be comparing a Symphony Nitris to a Final Cut Pro since I could get a row of Final Cut systems for the price of one Symphony Nitris! Therefore, I must have that feature. Avid owes me that feature!

I assumed that Avid was scrambling to add this function following the NAB event, but I was wrong. Instead there were major layoffs in July. Now it’s October and I’m. Still. Waiting.

What I would like to see from Avid is the introduction of a better lower-end, affordable, user-friendly editing system that can really compete with the Final Cut Pro. Some serious upgrades and advances for the higher-end systems wouldn’t hurt either.

Avid is a great system, but it has received plenty of criticism because of its cost; now, more and more, performance is entering the picture. It would be a mistake for Avid to ignore the lower-end editing market. If I had to buy a personal editing system today, I’d have to choose Final Cut Pro, on a shiny new MacBookPro. What if I really started liking Final Cut Pro, then did the unthinkable and converted? How frightening!

Come on, Avid, get your act together!

Comcast’s “Televisiphonernet” is a great spot that works on various advertising levels (humor, message, target audience). Comcast, however, has missed the digital forest for the trees. When searching for this ad online, I was frustrated and confused. Despite my best televisiphonernetting skills, I could not locate this ad in any of the usual places—YouTube, Google, or even Comcast’s own website (for shame, Comcast!). Finally I located the ad on the website of a Bruno publication called Boards.

Comcast should dial up AT&T, who also threw their hat into the buzzword ring with their “Your Seamless World” commercials, otherwise known as Virgicolementoflaggantonio.

They have all of the commercials from this service easily accessible on YouTube. For example:

My suggestion to Comcast is that they stop multitasking and spend some time focusing on their Internet presence. True, message is important, but so is making it accessible to as many people as possible.

I recently read about the legal action taken by the National Federation of the Blind against Target for having an inaccessible website. Web accessibility refers to the practice of making webpages understandable to people with disabilities. They have to use a wide range of user agent devices instead of standard Web browsers. This case has been with the California District Court for more than a year, and was recently granted class-action status.

The World Wide Web revolutionized how people get information—but it doesn’t always work well for everyone. As Communication Architects, we need to be sensitive to the needs of those with disabilities—and respond with various techniques that make our websites more accessible.

With our government clients, Web accessibility isn’t just an option—it’s the law.

In 1973, Congress passed the Rehabilitation Act, which guarantees:

No qualified individual with a disability in the United States…shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance or under any program or activity conducted by any Executive agency or by the United States Postal Service.

Section 508 is a 1998 amendment to the Workforce Rehabilitation Act of 1973 requiring electronic and information technology developed or purchased by the federal government be accessible by people with disabilities. This amendment created binding, enforceable standards that were incorporated into the Federal Procurement procedures complete with compliancy procedure and reporting requirements.

While accessibility tends to get attention in the government world—via Section 508—it should be on every organization’s mind.

The ruling by the California District Court has made it painfully obvious for Target! Making sites accessible takes more time and effort, effort that is often not seen in the final site, but is still important for all audiences.

What remains to be seen is how this case will affect the future of Web accessibility. Will accessibility get the attention it deserves in the corporate world, or will it go into settlement without a final court decision?

Let me know where you think this will go and what you think needs to be done to bring more attention to the world of Web accessibility and 508 compliancy.

Friday I spent most of the day at User Focus, the UPA DC metro chapter’s second annual conference. In their words, the conference was:

A one day exchange of ideas and experiences that demonstrate the value of usability in successful design.

It was that indeed. I really liked it. Small, close to home, and full of attendees working in the area. Understandably, it was good for networking, but it was also notable for the focus of the presentations.

Unlike national events in which you might hear top-tier media firms brag about pushing the limits of Web design and interactivity, the attendees and presenters were talking about issues facing organizations in this area, namely federal government and nonprofits.

How, for example, do you make the two-million-page Census.gov site easy to navigate? Can nonprofits better serve their members via well-designed online social networks? Topics maybe not have been sexy, but they are real and applicable to the folks I work with and the clients we serve.

I also have to give a shout to Ovo Studios, one of the few vendors set up at User Focus. Their usability testing suite was cool for sure. What impressed me is that they offer their software on a lease-to-own basis, Ovo by the Pound. That means small Web design/development companies can offer some pretty high-end usability testing and reporting without having to drop huge dollars up front on software and training. For those of us working fee-for-service, that’s awesome. We can write those services into our proposals and afford to execute them no matter how infrequently they’re purchased.