Author Archives: Content in Context

Unknown's avatar

About Content in Context

Content in Context helps companies to define the market for their products and services, to identify customers and build the business pipeline, and to develop their content marketing strategies. By working with our clients to design, build and grow their business, our primary focus is to extract commercial value from unique assets, including knowledge, data, know-how, processes and transactional information.

Doctrine vs Doctrinaire

Posted on by
Reply

The recent “debate” surrounding the Federal Government’s proposed Religious Discrimination Bill was a staggering example of political overreach combined with poor policy management. It was also a stark reminder that although we live in a secular, pluralistic and liberal democracy, some politicians cannot refrain from bringing religion into the Parliament and on to the Statute Books, even where there was neither a strong mandate nor an overbearing need to change the existing law in the way the Government attempted.

As far as I can tell, the Bill was originally intended to give people of faith additional protection against discrimination on the basis of their religion. But when linked to related Sex Discrimination legislation, it would likely have given religious institutions some degree of protection against claims of discrimination in the areas of gender and sexual orientation, particularly in respect of children’s access to education and in relation to employment by faith-based organisations.

If that wasn’t worrying enough, the Bill was underpinned by a controversial “statements of belief” provision. As drafted, this would have granted a person immunity from prosecution for the consequences of their words or actions if such deeds were based on a “genuine” religious belief. I find this particularly troublesome, not because I think people should be vulnerable to persecution for their faith; rather, it sets a dangerous precedent for what religiously-motivated people may feel emboldened to do in the name of their particular faith, especially where their actions cause actual or genuine apprehension of harm (the “God told me to do it” defence).

The shift from doctrine to doctrinaire is all too palpable. It’s one thing to believe in Transubstination, yet another to use a public platform (including social media) to proclaim that “gays will burn in hell”  unless they renounce their ways. The problem with a very literal application of ancient religious texts (most of which are open to wide and sometimes contradictory interpretation) is that this approach does not allow for any concept of progress (scientific, cultural, societal). It also gives rise to extreme forms of fundamentalism, such as banning music or refusing to ordain women priests. History has also shown us that people purportedly adhering to the same religion frequently disagree, leading to turbulent schisms, violent sectarianism and untold bloodshed. Then there are the religious death cults that kill themselves and their children for the sake of achieving their own “beliefs” (in which their offspring surely couldn’t have been compliant or willing participants).

As Luke Beck wrote recently in The Conversation, “There is broad agreement a person should not be discriminated against on the basis of their faith or lack of faith. However, the extent to which religion should be a licence to discriminate against others remains enormously contentious.”

This putative “license” may be an unintended consequence of the Bill, but the implications, should it be enacted, could be far-reaching: archeologists being sacked for saying the earth is older than 6,000 years; anthropologists for saying that the first humans were living 2 million years ago; astronomers for saying the earth orbits around the sun…. And that’s just in the area of science.

I understand that a person of faith may have a deep-seated belief against birth control, or pre-marital sex, or alcohol, or tattoos, or marriage equality – but that doesn’t mean their faith should impose their choices on the rest of the population. (Just as people of faith aren’t being forced to consume booze or get inked against their will.) As it is, religious institutions enjoy significant tax benefits, public funding and legal exemptions, and this current “debate” is bringing some of these discrepancies into sharp focus.

The last time I looked, here in Australia we aren’t living in a theocracy, people of faith aren’t being fired from their jobs because of their religion, and secularists, agnostics and atheists aren’t calling for places of worship to be demolished. What the latter do expect is people of faith not to use their beliefs either as a pretext to justify any form of discriminatory, pejorative or harmful acts or statements, or as a protection against being accountable for their words and deeds.

Next week: When is a print not a print?

How digital brands are advertising

Posted on by
Reply

During a recent visit to the cinema, I was surprised to see adverts for major digital brands on the big screen, ahead of the main feature.

I’ve always thought of cinema advertising as falling into one or more of the following categories:

  • ads you don’t see on TV (often longer than their small screen counterparts)
  • luxury names and aspirational brands (travel, spirits, fashion, financial services)
  • local businesses (the pizzeria “just a short walk from this theatre…”)
  • movie tie-ins (highlighting the product placement in the film you are about to see)
  • seasonal themes (especially Christmas)

What struck me on this occasion were the ads by three DNBs (digitally native brands), featuring LinkedIn, Tik Tok and Audible. Despite the disparate nature of their businesses, I realised that there was a common element.

As the above-linked McKinsey report states, successful DNBs are really good at connecting with (and understanding) their audience, identifying and fulfilling very specific needs with unique solutions, and leveraging the very technology they are built on to promote their services and engage with their customers. Witness the well-timed “alerts” from food-delivery platforms in the early evening, the viral campaigns designed to enforce brand awareness, and the social media feeds designed to build customer engagement and loyalty. (Note that the report features Peleton as a poster child for its thesis, before the personal exercise brand ran into recent difficulties.)

If you look at most DNB campaigns, they are primarily generating demand via very specific human drivers:

1. Aspirational – the pure FOMO element (not unique to DNBs, of course, but they do it more subtly than many consumer brands)
2. Experiential – highlighting the tangible benefits (of mostly intangible products)
3. Socialisation – the paradox of building a trusted relationship through hyper-personalisation and constant sharing…

These three cinema ads each contained implicit “story-telling“. LinkedIn positioned itself as a platform for establishing our own narrative (telling our own truth?); Audible promoted its audio content (books and podcasts) as a means to find authentic stories that resonate with us (and this was long before the recent shenanigans over at Spotify); and Tik Tok used a well-known viral video as the basis for building community around shared stories.

Of course, story-telling is hardly a new concept in brand marketing, and has been eagerly adopted by digital brands (think of campaigns during the pandemic which have featured on-line connectivity and remote working). However, it has become an over-used technique, and is often cynically exploited in the service of corporate green-washing, jumping on social bandwagons, and blatant virtue signalling.

Call me jaded, but I’m old enough to remember the fad of consulting firms pitching their clients on building a “corporate narrative“, drawing on employee stories and customer experiences, as the foundation for those anodyne mission/vision “statements” – but they typically ended up as exercises in damage control in case the truth got out.

These particular cinema ads managed to use story-telling to create a human dimension (authenticity, connectivity, community, sharing, etc.) that is more than simply “buy our product” or “use our tech” (although obviously that’s the ultimate goal). It would be very interesting to read the briefs given to their creative agencies, given that the ads were all in the service of corporate branding.

Next week: Doctrine vs Doctrinaire

 

 

 

Startupbootcamp Virtual Demo Day – Decarbonize

Posted on by
Reply

This week, another shout out to the team at Startupbootcamp (SBC), for not only nurturing some of the most interesting startups emerging in key tech sectors, but also for managing to co-ordinate accelerator programmes and virtual demo-days in the very challenging circumstances of the past two years. The most recent virtual demo day I attended was Decarbonize last December, which was backed by corporate partners Mitsubishi Corporation and NYK Line.

Here is a summary of the ten participating projects (links are in the project names):

Electro-Active Technologies

According to the presenters, more than a third of all food is wasted – and all that food ending up in landfill is generating tonnes of methane. Using a biological-electrochemical process, this team is developing the use of electron-generating bacteria to convert food waste into hydrogen, powered by renewable energy. The bacteria-powered system can be installed onsite for commercial applications (which reduces transportation costs), and can contribute to the decarbonisation of food and waste transportation and associated industrial processes. As a further bonus, this waste management solution is also a source of carbon credits.

Urchinomics

Sea urchins are responsible for devastating swathes of kelp forests. This project is designed to re-home the echinoderms in land-based farms (“ranches”) with natural feed, and re-position them as a premium sea-food (especially sushi restaurants, who are willing to pay above-average prices). In doing so, vital kelp stocks will be replenished.

Nozama

With its origins as a solution to defining and achieving “measurable sustainability”, Nozama is designed to track the amounts of carbon dioxide emitted, reduced and extracted from the environment. This particular presentation focused on single-use plastics, which makes sense given we all need to do a better job of reducing/removing these items from the environment, and at every stage in the manufacturing, packaging, distribution, consumption and disposal life-cycle. However, they have chosen to complicate the process. As part of the tracking solution, the project has decoded to introduce blockchain technology, in the form of smart contracts and non-fungible tokens (NFTs). They aim to do this by capturing the data associated with waste collection and processing, to demonstrate that no waste has gone into landfill or the environment, and that it has been repurposed or recycled. So far, so good, but then it gets even trickier. This recycling data is converted into an NFT, and sold via the “Plastiks” marketplace, which acts as a form of recycling guarantee, and a “proof of capture”. The NFT minting occurs at the point of invoice to the waste customer, by uploading the recycling data and issuing a certificate. from waste collection and processing. Further, the NFT is combined with art, to “create an emotional engagement with recycling”. The re-cyler selects art to be associated with the NFT, or the artist selects the re-cycler. Finally, the plastics producers need to buy the NFT (certificate plus the linked artwork?) and offset it against appropriate waste/carbon/energy credits. What wasn’t clear is whether the re-cycler has to keep the art, as continued proof of certification…

Clean Hydrogen Technologies

This is a project that produces hydrogen without using water, and by using less energy, and at less cost. Natural gas is a stop-gap solution for hydrogen production, and current solutions create too many carbon dioxide emissions, or they are energy hungry or they are too expensive. Instead, the process “extracts” hydrogen from natural gas – not by burning it, but using a patented catalyst to produce “turquoise” hydrogen, along with conductive carbon (which can be used to build batteries).

Handprint

With a tagline of “Grow with the Planet”, Handprint have an ambitious goal to turn 30% of the world’s land and oceans into natural reserves by 2030. They plan to achieve this by connecting companies to regeneration projects like planting mangrove swamps, and then divert part of their customer revenue towards funding of those projects. The founders believe that this combines company values with market credibility and customer engagement. Further, they claim that consumer transactions (at the point of purchase) in themselves generate regeneration actions (and repeat transactions).

Primary Ocean

The premise for this project is that seaweed is better at absorbing carbon dioxide than trees. And once harvested from the ocean, seaweed can be added to the soil as a natural fertiliser. In this way, giant kelp plants become offshore seaweed farms, and also contribute to decarbonising transportation (from the production of bio-fertiliser and bio-fuel). The combined effect is also carbon negative.

Aerial

Positioning their product as “Fitbit for carbon”, the founders want to remove the “guilt” associated with measuring, tracking and reducing our carbon footprint. The resulting data analytics (from enterprise customers as well as individual consumers) can help change behaviours. Initially launched as a solution for business (to track the carbon footprints of companies and their employees), the analysis is designed to not only track carbon emissions but also provide tips for footprint management and offset. Then there’s “Aerial for Crypto”, which seems to be a way for NFT creators (musicians, artists and designers) to “reduce the environmental impact of their work”.

SungreenH2

This project deploys nano technology to produce hydrogen via water electrolysis, but at a lower production cost by using low-cost and earth-abundant materials as electrolytes. Under this patented solution, the founders expect to reduce the cost of green hydrogen from #2 per kg to less than $1 per kg.

Carbon Asset Solutions

The task of soil carbon sequestration needs accurate measurement, and is currently uneconomic. This project has developed a patented digital system, using high-precision soil carbon measurement technology. By connecting this measurement process to advanced software, the team can offer instant tracking, and they are currently seeking ISO certification. Serving both the supply-side (via carbon farming) and the buy-side (financial institutions and carbon markets) they can support trading of carbon credits (with plans to use blockchain technology to track the credits?). Essentially “Carbon as a Service”, the founders believe their solution is also attractive to investors, who want access to reliable carbon credits (without necessarily having to be part of the supply chain). However, some regulatory hurdles remain, particularly licensing laws in respect of financial products and market places. But, it seems that the emerging voluntary carbon market could be one of the fastest-growing financial markets, so no doubt smart capital will find a way to overcome these regulatory barriers.

Teraloop

Finally, a project looking at renewables storage, still one of the major challenges to renewable energy, thanks to the cost and (in)efficiency of existing battery technology. This team is looking beyond their current kinetic storage technology, to achieve “rapid response power on demand”. This will have the the combined benefits of prolonged life on energy distribution assets (and therefore, greater ROI), electric vehicle fast-charge points, and a path towards scalable manufacturing and deployment.

 

Overall, each of these projects has a clear value proposition, although some are more developed or were better articulated than others. Also, it was evident that most of these startups are working in complementary technologies and solutions, such that the combination of two or more of these projects could create some significant development progress and enhanced decarbonization outcomes. It also felt that much of this work is being done in spite of (rather than thanks to) government policy and public sector efforts in this area. Let’s hope the founders manage to raise the capital they need to bring their solutions to a wider (and willing) audience.

Next week: How digital brands are advertising

Gratitude and the Great Recharge

Posted on by
2

As I ease myself back into regular blogging following a summer hiatus, I’d like to begin by expressing an enormous sense of gratitude.

Last November, when I mentioned I was taking a break from blogging, I was pleasantly surprised by the number of readers who contacted me to check I was OK, several of whom let me know how much they appreciate reading my posts. To each of them (and they know who they are) I am extremely grateful. It’s that level of connection and feedback that helps to make the effort worthwhile.

One of my objectives in going offline for a few weeks was to take stock after nearly two years of disruption, and come back refreshed and re-energised. Like many other people, I was feeling drained and demoralised after multiple lockdowns, extended social disconnection, pitiful political failures, and increasing verbal (and physical) assaults on our notions of liberal democracy. I badly needed a change of perspective.

I was trying to come up with a suitable tag to summarise this goal, and realised that so many terms I thought of have come to be associated with pejorative meanings: the Great Reset, the Great Awakening (or Awokening, depending on your viewpoint), and the Great Resignation were among them.

So instead, I landed upon the Great Recharge.

For me, it evokes a physical energy boost, as well as a mental reframing on how to reflect on the past two years, and identify a way forward. The latter is about more than developing a coping mechanism. It is about retuning my responses to the information we are bombarded with – daily news, social media, advertising, propaganda, mis- and dis-information – and not letting it annoy me or provoke me. Because that is the reaction that the protagonists are looking for, and many of them are not being honest about their agenda, their vested interests, or their sponsors and backers.

As a result, I am trying to block out what is unimportant (not worth the effort of engagement), and not worry about those things I don’t have any immediate control over. By prioritising what really interests me, I feel I can be more creative, positive, enthusiastic and energising. Hopefully, I can be more connected to what really matters (and in the end, focus on what gives me joy). That way, I believe I can create less stress and inflict less emotional damage by not perpetuating the negative energy generated by protagonists who only want their audience to rise to the bait.

If I don’t like something, and as long as I’m not being forced to watch, read or listen to it, then I can simply choose not to give it air time. (“If you can’t say something constructive, it’s better to say nothing.”)

It’s not always easy  – look at all the trash talk, sledging and character assassination that permeates politics, sport, academia, culture and media. It’s pervasive, corrosive, and debilitating – and what makes it worse is that most times, the perpetrators are being paid to bad mouth the targets of their bile. Perhaps we can take a lead from Rafael Nadal, and let the ball do the talking….

Next week: Startupbootcamp Virtual Demo Day – Decarbonize