« Invitation to Blog: VON Europe Spring 2006 | Main | Reminder: Only 7 Days Remain to File Comments on our Post-Disaster Communications Petition »
April 19, 2006
VIRAL MARKETING CONTEST TO SAVE THE INTERNET:
Ok, I am officially putting my money where my mouth is. I am initiating a Viral Video "Save the Net" Marketing Contest.
I am fed up with the current wave of soundbites, platitudes, ads and marketing flooding the airwaves that profess to speak for the advancement of the Internet and communications. These ads are influencing the U.S. Congress and governments around the World as they write the rules that will shape the future of the Internet and communications.
But, where is the voice and message of the Internet community -- the Internet innovators, entrepreneurs and enthusiasts -- in this world-changing discussion? We are primarily sitting out the battle, or perhaps comfortably blogging and Monday-morning quarterbacking on the sidelines. Sure, we'll be able to point to our blogs and do a big "I-told-you-so" if the rules ultimately prove to undermine the promise of the Internet. But, we will not be justified in our criticism if we don't at least try to affect a positive result.
Rules have to be written to enable us. If we do not participate in the debate, if we do not transform the messaging, the rules will not be written with our best interests at heart. And, frankly, we will have no one to blame but ourselves. We have to take over the messaging, both within the corridors of power and within the public zeitgeist.
We need soundbites of our own, messaging of our own. We are allegedly the revolutionaries of the Internet and communications. Shouldn't we be the ones revolutionizing the way advocacy is done and communicated in the 21st Century? Shouldn't we be the creative forces verifying that the medium is the message? Who better than us to harness the enabling power of the Internet to bring our message to legislators, to policymakers, to the public? Let's throw away the old rulebook and try to think outside the box to send a message to Congress from the global community of Internet innovators and enthusiasts.
We might not have the lobbying muscle, money, resources, or connections of the entrenched players in the communications debate, but we surely have the individual and collective will and creativity to transform the debate.
Here is my pitch:
We need to harness your individual genius and our collective genius (for isn't it the collective power of the Internet that makes it so remarkable?) to save the Internet, and we are willing to pay and give you eternal glory (or at least glory for as long as the Internet lasts).
Send us short, creative ideas -- videos, flash ads, other Internet-based gimmicks -- that you think might effectively communicate to government that they must write rules to enable us the Internet innovators to transform the Internet and communications experience.
I send out this call to arms to all you next-generation Internet-based Scorseses. I even send it out to all you potential Ed Woods of the Internet. (Who knows where genius will strike?)
The prize and glory goes to whoever comes up with the message (viral video ad or other creative marketing tool) that we use to spread the word and save the Internet. In order to be eligible for the prize (and also to ensure maximum impact during the great policy debate, both in DC and around the globe), entries must be submitted by June 6, 2006. Please refer to the Save the Net Contest Rules to enter.
The contest starts today and will run until June 6, 2006.
Let the battle to save the Internet begin!
Tags: Save the Net, Net Neutrality, Congress, Internet Marketing Contest, Jeff Pulver
(c) 2006 Jeff Pulver. All Rights Reserved.
(This blog posting is copyright protected by Jeff Pulver. Portions of this blog posting may be quoted or abstracted if attributed.)
Share this post:
Digg |
del.icio.us |
Reddit |
Newsvine |
Google Bookmark |
Yahoo MyWeb |
StumbleUpon
Posted by jeff on April 19, 2006 07:40 AM | Permalink
Additional resources: Watch PrimeTime TV Shows | Watch the Jeff Pulver Show | Jeff's Qik Videos
Comments
Readers of this comment thread should know that "John Rice" and pkp646 look to be part of a tag-team of industry shills who invade blog comments on net neutrality to argue against any government regulation of the Internet. (Google "pkp646 and 'John Rice'" and you'll see what I mean)
What they fail to point out is that Net Neutrality has been the rule that has governed access to the Internet since its inception. It's the reason that the Internet has become such a dynamic force for new ideas, economic innovation and free speech. What they really want is for Congress to radically re-write our telecommunications laws so that companies like AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth can swoop in and become gatekeepers to Internet content -- in a way that benefits no one except the largest ISPs.
I'd like pkp646 and "John Rice" to tell us how it is that they appear together (usually one after the other) spouting identical industry talking points across the blogosphere.
What gives fellas? Are you being paid?
Posted by: sagecast at May 21, 2006 07:27 AM
To regulate in the USA is to hand economic advantage to foreign enterprise untouchable by US regulations.
The little guy in the USA needs to compete successfully in the global marketplace, unfettered by chains and shackles of regulation.
Throughout history, average people made this country great -- and always will -- thanks to a principle called freedom.
Send out a warning cry of "economic slowdown," and everyone in the USA will comprehend the meaning.
Sincerely,
Robert Devine (webmaster)
Posted by: Robert Devine at April 24, 2006 07:38 PM
Brian Smith at Copyblogger and I discussed your contest yesterday. His words were, "We should have thought of that."
We have no where the reach you do and still I wonder what I can do to make it work. I have a stretchable, creative mind, and I can't get my head around how to channel the energy that is the blogosphere into action on this issue.
I'm no crusader, but I believe Doc Searls and my own reasoning. Both tell me that if the only ones talking to the government are the media and the telcos, then the path is going against where I want it to go.
The problem is that the media is fighting for their way of life and some gigantic $$$, while we're exploring what it's like to be creative and have community online in uptopia--seems like there's something like that in human history before.
It's scary how most bloggers don't hear the patronizing tone that the now euphemism "citizen journalist" has taken on.
It's even scarier that some say that the media is starting to "get" what blogging is about. It's not that they, the media, think good things or bad things about bloggers--those in the media with significant power really don't think about us at all. I believe that we just make a convenient smoke screen to draw attention away from the real issue--what they are doing to gain more control of the Internet.
Hey, my big brother used to do the same to me all of the time. Get me all hot about defending myself so that I would look in the wrong direction. Then he would have free sailing to do whatever he wanted with my stuff.
Thank you, Jeff, for this contest. I live in Chicago. I write for a living, whenever people will pay me. :) Let me know what I can do to help.
Liz
Posted by: Liz Strauss at April 24, 2006 10:19 AM
The question is not whether or not there will be government regulation of the Internet. It is whether that regulation will be in the interests of the large cable and telecom companies or in the interests of citizens and consumers, competition and democracy.
Posted by: Neil Ellingson at April 21, 2006 11:53 AM
I for onw am wary of asking for new regulations. Those things are very easily hijacked - a little twist to the proposed text and the situation from bad goes to disastrous.
To me it would seem best to have as *little* regulation as possible, so if we ask for something it should go in the direction of less rules and less control.
Ultimately however, I think we are fighting a losing battle. The owners of the lines (controlling access to make money) together with the various government agencies intent on controlling people, will in time figure out a way of making the internet less free.
We should "overgrow" them, and I would suggest we best start by getting in early on the "shared connections - wireless access" meme, and constructing a parallel internet that works like a backup and that could - in case it's needed - serve to substitute today's lines that are destined to soon be under complete commercial and government control.
I have proposed this some time ago in a short article:
Mesh Networks And City Wireless Will Transform The Internet
Posted by: Sepp Hasslberger at April 21, 2006 04:05 AM
Jeff your plea for help is noble and you are correct, more people should be involved in shaping public policies. However, true Internet enthusiasts were drawn to the medium because of the freedom that it provides to users. Advocating for greater government regulation and the stifling of competition is out-of-step with much of what those enthusiasts believe. The debate should not be one about how many new regulations can be created, but rather, one that looks at how to remover existing regulations that are protecting Internet providers’ and telecom companies’ monopolies. It is time the monopolies be regulated by fair competition standards used everywhere else in the economy.
Posted by: John Rice at April 20, 2006 04:21 PM
Regardless of whether you think Jeff is right or wrong or whether you think legislation is right or wrong, not weighing-in to the debate IS wrong. And that means the REAL legislative debate, not sitting on the sidelines.
So Jeff, if you would like us to help promote this and point people your way, we are happy to do it. Let me know.
Posted by: Owen Linderholm at April 20, 2006 02:26 PM
I'm among the other half, apparently. I don't support net neutrality legislation. I think consumers are protected by the market and by current FCC regulations. I also don't see the coming crisis that warrants gov't regulation.
Posted by: Noodle at April 20, 2006 06:45 AM
Has anybody been following politics lately? How many things has the government done right in the last year? And now we want to trust them with the Internet? I really hope that there is as much opposition as PKP suggests because I just don't see 'government' being the answer for a system that's done so well for so long without it.
Posted by: The Decider at April 19, 2006 09:01 PM
Jeff- I like your initiative, but I have the feeling that your efforts are going to be pretty one-sided. From what I can tell in the blogoshphere is that your opinion is only half the story and a large portion of the internet community is actually opposed to government regulation. I hope you will take this into account.
Posted by: pkp646 at April 19, 2006 02:45 PM