The rise of the internet as a popular media form is unprecedented in human history.



Statistics put the amount of people of engaged with this form of media in some fashion at over 1.2 Billion.

Whatever the parameters you choose to focus on for your analysis the Internet’s behavior within that parameter is virtually uncontested by other media types. Never before has a form of mass media gained such visibility, following, adherence and loyalty in such a short period of time.

This stunning success often makes us forget that the Internet, as we know it, has been around for less than fifteen years. Many of us feel that the Web was always there, and that we were always using it, but I still remember discussions I witnessed in the mid 90’s where some people where discounting the Internet as a fad soon to be forgotten, like Teletext, Betamax, Boy-Bands and the Macarena. I guess those people are lucky I can’t remember their names…

The cost of rapid development is low standards

The rapid rise of the Internet as a media form is not without its problems. This is natural and should be expected from a media that, more than any other media, empowers each and every individual engaged with it, to become a creative agent, who is not only experiencing content but also providing it.

One of the major difficulties the Internet faces as a media form is the low level of standardization of the content. Internet content comes in all shapes and sizes - websites, Email, forums, wiki’s, social networking platforms, etc. These are all Internet based forms of content. Each one of them is constantly being created and edited by a mind boggling amount of people who each have their own insights and beliefs regarding what would be the ideal format for their content contribution.

Expectation vs. standardization - an exponentially growing gap

To further complicate matters these creative contributors are all vying for the attention of an unprecedented number of online consumers. These consumers hunger for innovation, a hunger that is fueled by the IT industry’s constant advertising of new and exciting methods for and experiencing and creating content.

Since the computing power fueling these developments is continuing to increase at an exponential rate, this problem will only become more acute in the future. A day will come when consumers will expect their technology fantasies to be delivered by the industry in real time.

The standardization of Painting - a case study

To give a different perspective to this issue I offer that we reflect on a much older form of media, and consider the process by which it became standardized.

Let’s take the evolution of painting as a case study. What in fact is a “Painting"? What do we consider consists a painting? For this we need first to examine our definition of a what a painting is.

Here’s my feeble attempt at this task -

A painting can be defined as:

“A two dimensional rendering made with paint, ink, pencil or another form of marking substance, of an artistic or creative idea, onto a two dimensional format often made of canvas or paper".

This flawed definition is my own but I hope that you would consider it an acceptable basis for dialog from which a better final definition could be hammered out together at some other opportunity. Defining paintings is not the purpose of this article…

Let’s consider the history of painting to see how long it took for humanity to work out what consists a “Painting".

The earliest examples of cave painting are over 40,000 years old and they hardly conform to the definition I offered earlier. The canvas paintings that my definition covers more adequately were popularized in Italy around the 14-15 century.

It took our collective effort as a species and nearly 39,000 years, to reach the level of standardization required to allow me to define what consists a “Painting" in the fashion that I did. That’s a lot of effort for a 32 word definition…

Back to the future …of the Internet

I hope the process of standardization takes less time for the Internet because it has been around for just 15 years and 39 millennia is a long time to wait… When we consider that standardization is not only a technological process but also a social one it should come to no one as a surprise that standardization is a major plight for the Internet at the moment.

Technological processes vs. social processes

It is far easier for a technology company to come up with a new product than it is for it to agree with another technology company on how this product should behave and to what standards it must comply. The first process is a technological or development process. Its progress is dependent mainly on access to the funding required. The second process is a social process requiring a group of human beings, with what are often conflicting interests, to sit down and reach an agreement that they not only can live with, but will be also be committed to uphold over a long period of time. I think you’ll agree that throwing money at a problem is a much easier method of solving it.

I personally feel that this gap between development and social processes was the main reason for the bursting of the Internet bubble in 2000. Simply put, technology companies were delivering products at the rate computers could churn them out, to a market that was developing at the rate that humans can comprehend…

Good news on the Internet standardization front

The good news is that much work has, and is constantly being done, in order to reach a level of standardization that will improve the way the World Wide Web is experienced as a media. Projects like the WC3, the IETF, are well received by major Internet stakeholders who are mostly collaborating with the standardization attempts.

Old cousin email got left behind

Regrettably while the World Wide Web’s attempts at standardization are moving along nicely and are being well received, the Internet’s earlier application, Email, has been left behind with regard to standardization. This is a problem we all encounter so often that we have been desensitized to its existence, but it is responsible for phenomenon we are all familiar with. For example, different appearances of the same email message on different email clients (Outlook, Yahoo, Gmail, Thunderbird and all the rest….) are due to the fact that what consists of an “Email" has never been properly ratified by all the stakeholders in the Email game.

The Email Standards Project

But it seems that even in the Email arena things are finally beginning to change. Recently I have become aware of a praiseworthy initiative called the “Email Standards Project" that is working with email client developers and the design community in order to improve web standards support and accessibility in email. The goal of the Email Standards Project is to help stakeholders understand why standards are so important for email, and to ensure that emails display consistently on all email clients.

The Email Standards Project is a community effort aimed at improving the email experience for both designers and readers alike, and that alone is a good enough reason for me to endorse it.

* For more information on the Email Standards Project visit :

http://www.email-standards.org/.

* For more information on email as a marketing tool for business and non profit organizations go to:

http://www.readerimpact.com/readerimpact-email-marketing-tips.html

-

Mike Darnell

Creative Director

Oleh Technology and Communications