Branding

Wilken and Sinclair’s 2009 article opened my eyes to the both exciting and formidable possibility that cell providers could quite possibly become the new equivalent to the broadcast networks in the near future. Already since their article was published, the mobile phone industry has taken huge leaps and bounds. 3G is a widespread technology and is quickly becoming a thing of the past as 4G enters the picture. Smartphones have developed beyond our wildest imaginations. The “zero-one-two-three” approach that Wilken and Sinclair discuss. Advertisers predict that mobile advertising messages and campaigns will take off when the situation is that there are “zero manuals, one point of entry to the service, no more than a two-second response time and content that is no more than three clicks away” (p. 438).

Certainly we are at the point where this technology exists and is becoming more and more widespread. Still there are many who lack access to smartphones (1 in 5 adult Americans own a smartphone, according to a report by Forrester Research), but the use of text messaging is on the rise, especially in teens. A survey conducted by Pew reveals that nearly 90% of all teens in America now send and receive text messages. So the scenario presented by Wilkens and Sinclair certainly has the potential to be reality. If it does come to fruition that cell service providers become the new broadcast networks, what are the pros and cons that we need to consider?

The positive aspects involved here is that this is a total game changer in many ways. Certainly it offers many perks to advertisers and public relations practitioners as described in Kelleher’s article in that this technology will allow organizations to build relationships with consumers. Also, advertisers will be able to provide individualized content and to take advantage of the GPS technology that is built in to most smartphones to provide advertising at the point of purchase. One benefit for the consumer and/or citizen is that it is becoming easier and easier to access information that one might be interested in almost anywhere at any time with just the touch of a button. A person can use this technology to stand in the mall and research the pros and cons of a specific product right there. Certainly, there are positive implications for this technology that allows for such high individualization.

Yet, there may be negative implications as well. For example, one problem that I see is in the privacy aspects that lie in behavioral targeting. While individuals do seem to enjoy personalization (Sundar & Marathe, 2010), the spying and tracking by corporations that goes into personalized content is a bit scary. Also, if advertising companies will begin to make thousands of different versions of an ad to target individuals more efficiently, who will and how will they decide who gets to see what ad? If advertising companies target specific groups, there could be a chance that the differences between these groups are accentuated which could have grave consequences if the differences lie in socioeconomic status.

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, I am worried about the amount of power that cell providers could hold if they do become the new broadcast networks. We already grapple with issues of press responsibility because the majority of media products come from a few, giant corporations who are 100% concerned with turning a profit. If the cell companies continue to attempt to retain exclusive control over their customers, they could end up wielding more power than the networks ever thought about having. It’s scary to think that a handful of companies (ATT, Verizon, Sprint, T-Mobile) could control not only the media content that we consume and the advertisements that are directed our way, but they would also have a stronghold on how we manage our personal relationships as well. Current technology certainly allows for these companies to have a scary amount of information and control over us. As more and more people depend on smartphones for all of their information and entertainment needs, the idea of a Big Brother effect only gets stronger.

References:

Forrester, accessed at: http://forrester.com/rb/Research/state_of_consumers_and_technology_benchmark_2010,/q/id/57526/t/2

Pew, accessed at: http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/Cell-Phones-and-American-Adults.aspx