« Why You Do, What You Do | Main | Sign Painter »
Value From Appreciation of the Process
The walls around Parco Shibuya are updated every two weeks or so with a newly painted mural. You often see the mural crew working late on a friday night, presumably on a deadline to get the material up in time for the saturday shoppers. The last part of the painting process is the detail in the faces - so in adverts containing lots of people you become witness to ghostly versions of what appears in print. The images are quite compelling. Tokyo is full of big screen outdoor displays, garish neon and bright lights which makes hiring mural painters all the more peculiar. What additional value does commissioning advertising in this way bring? There are undoubtedly cheaper and more efficient alternatives in this area of prime real estate and premium advertising space.
My guess that part of the equation of choosing mural painters over JumboTrons is that the audience - in this case the passing shoppers of Shibuya will be at least somewhat interested by the process. Seeing a mural unfold over a period of time like a work of art taking shape, and seeing the end result - close replicas of the print advertising and appreciating the effort that went into the process.
In a world where things seem to be forever becoming faster, smaller, cheaper, and mass produced one thing we can (mostly) all appreciate is the perceived time and effort it takes to do something. Skill is another factor, but it is more subjective. Effort is admittedly a little fuzzy. But time is absolute.
Have you ever received an E-Card? What was the value of that card to you? Now compare it to the value of a digital photo or a hand-written postcard. Receiving an e-card, digital photo or physical postcard you may or may not like the design but can appreciated the time, effort, and sometimes skill that goes into the process of sending it to you. In the case of an E-Card the value is mostly close to zero because that card is available for just about anyone to send.
In the distant future it may be possible to measure the level of sensory engagement that is involved in creating and consuming content and media*. I know you liked that birthday card because it told me how much time you spent handling it, gazing at it and displaying it in your home. Part of the reason you like it so much is that you know I put so much effort into obtaining its composite parts, how long ago I first thought of the idea - 'six months!', and the number of design iterations it went through before it reached you. You know because it told you so. Or at least it told you about the aspects that I let it tell you.
* Of course the way this plays out is that we create agents to simulate the level of sensory engagement on our behalf - to make it appear that we appreciated your gift to me, to make it appear that I spent sleepless months working on my gift to you. Whole side-industries beavering away to create the perception of underlying value. Which sounds like extrapolations of what happens already.
Writing from Shibuya | September 11, 2005 | Permalink
Comments
Certainly there are "cheaper and more efficient" ways to catch eyes...but not all eye-catching is equal. Professional marketers may disagree, but for myself, the two mediums serve different purposes.
Humans are neurologically wired to look at moving (e.g. JumboTron) images--whether they want to or not--but I wonder if in some small subconscious way we don't also resent that level of manipulation (particularly in public, somewhat different than watching TV). For me, moving images are iconic: music videos at Shibuya crossing--and awareness-enhancing: informing me of new fast food products, upcoming events, or branding. However, they aren't terribly influential. That is to say if I see an advert for sunglasses or a car, it might pique my interest but I won't have a crush on the item until I see it in person.
By contrast, print ads are more representational. This probably comes down to two factors: image quality, and persistence. A good print ad is pleasurable to look at and can absolutely sell me an item before I ever see it in person. Moving ads can't do that. Am I a marketing anomaly? The questions of quality and effort certainly come into play here, but those attributes mean different things in advertising than they do for interpersonal relations.
As for the sense-measuring cards: a bit scary. I'd rather see effort put toward developing realtime peripheral/ambient awareness technologies that allow us to let people know (more) directly what we're doing when we're actually doing it. In the terms you frame: which has more value--the card talking to you about me, or me talking to you about the card?
Posted by: Andrew at September 12, 2005 2:09 AM
Thoughtful comments.
> As for the sense-measuring cards: a bit scary.
Whilst I believe that perceived value is associated with perceived cost, the complete equation if one exists, is that this is too complex to be measured. So hypothesizing about where this could go rather than suggesting its a good topic to research.
No wait... fishes in bag and triumphantly pulls out glistening proto of sensory engagement prototype, aligns tractor beams and plugs in...
// HAL computer voice...
[Subject: Andrew, S.]
[Location: {deleted}]
[7 minutes 42 seconds to write last comment]
[270 words]
[4 x use of online dictionary {site name deleted}]
[7 major iterations] +4
[Multi-tasked 2 tasks]
[[MTask 1: Radio listening {station deleted}]] -1
[[MTask 2: Scanning newspaper {name deleted}]] -2
[White lies used to buy time to complete posting: 1] value +6
[Peak heart rate 107] +12
[Pupil dilation: average] +/- 0
[Palms: slightly perspiring] +3
[2 trips to the toilet] +/- 0
[Hands washed once] - 4
[End report]
[Sensory engagement rating]
[Suggested appropriate reciprocal gift: handy wipes]
[End report]
[End report]
With apologies
Posted by: Jan at September 12, 2005 8:27 PM
2 trips to the toilet in under 8 minutes...shouldn't I get some extra points for posting under "difficult" circumstances?
Multitasking is an interesting topic of its own, but the value component isn't clear. In recent years we've certainly seen a shift in the social acceptability of multitasking--the mobile phone is a prime example. But who is to say whether the newspaper-reading is detracting from the post, or the post is detracting from valuable newspaper time?
I fear that a more popular use of this tech would be girlfriends getting detailed reports of where their boyfriends' senses are engaged while in public...Divorce lawyers will subsidize the the product, sending one free to every newlywed couple.
Posted by: Andrew at September 13, 2005 1:21 AM
> In recent years we've certainly seen a shift in the social acceptability of multitasking
Absolutely. Perhaps to the point where its difficult to introduce media or tools to watch/listen/smell/touch/taste media that require the user's total sensory engagement.
Maybe things will become so extreme that society will swing the other way? Or maybe we will look back fondly at our inefficient use of human bandwidth.
> Divorce lawyers will subsidize the the product, sending one free to every newlywed couple.
The future will be perfect for someone.
Posted by: Jan at September 13, 2005 9:55 AM