CompuServe trademarked the word 'email' in 1983
Just when I thought Cyber land grew old – it became new again. Like the ad: Flash Frozen? When it thaws it’s like it’s fresh again. Thaw times: when I moved from my handy dandy Compuserve aps to web forums, to web pages, to email lists, reading lists. Then there was Twitter which I embraced whole-heartedly and simultaneously dismantled Barb McMillen’s Site for Sore Eyes and replaced it with Just Sayin’.
I’ve been reading about Social Media and Branding and all the new language on the web – Facebook, Twitter, Linked In, And it suddenly struck me, really, that what I was reading was familiar – very familiar. And I started thinking back to the early days of Desktop Publishing.
The first publishing software for the PC was in ~1986. Xerox Ventura Publisher operating under the GEM desktop (Jim Hart’s and Eric Weber’s <wave> ) History of VP http://www.dtp-service.com/ventura/ueber_vp/chronicle.html). At the time, this was the NEW media, the new frontier and conversations grew up about how companies had to get their acts together about it. Not only were they going to save money through in-house publication BUT outreach would be facilitated in ways it had not been before.
Rules regarding the new software began to coalesce. Companies were told by consultants (who popped out of the ether) to
1) Consolidate their logo – don’t let branches and departments within the company design their own logo or alter the corporate logo.
2) Create a look and feel that’s identifiable for your company. Learn to use the proper typeface – proper justification for formal or informal looks, and
3) keep your target audience in mind.
Companies were able to extend themselves to clients in ways they hadn’t before.
Eventually all of these publishing rules were gathered together into the development of a company (or corporate) Style Sheet which included information establishing the use of the company logo (brand)
As publishing moved to the web via web pages, the developing rules for the use of this ‘new media’ were similar. Similarly, the movement happened because there was an economy available in the move. Suddenly pages, newsletter, postage were rendered defunct. Yet, though the web as a corporate communications device was new, the questions were not. Brand consistency, diligence in brand protection, corporate look-feel were all still the issue.
But once out there – another element defined itself. That was an ‘active’ and living viewership. Companies sought to decrease their money in areas that bore no income – tech support, for example, and soon found that a living population can hammer the heck out of a brand whose corporate headquarters were on the web via their user group portals. Control over the appearance of the company’s professionalism was difficult when things went wrong.
Of course this was also the case back in the BBS days of CompuServe when companies decided to use the portals for user support. But be that as it may – the question soon included damage control and the hiring of ‘nice people’ to represent of what some felt to front for companies to minimize brand damage.
As I recall, the “Company” suddenly developed in-house publishing department that eliminated the so called out-source and developed departments and employees who could establish publishing policy. And once publishing went to the web (thereby eliminating the need for paper altogether) companies added onto their publishing organizations folks with web expertise. In both fields – image and damage control.
The development of Social Media does have a certain deja vu. Each element redefines itself as new yet repeats the steps of recent media movement. Interesting, for example, is watching people’s use of Twitter and Twitter requisites as similar to how BBS software, particularly Compuserve software developed over time. Users felt the need for grouping interests, a need for threading, a need for search and libraries.
I don’t know what this means. Except, I think it’s important to remember Social Media is not new. And some of what has been learned as we have taken steps through an electronic channel of communication can represent utility and guidance today. What we need is a group memory.
(PS: Did you know CompuServe trademarked the word ‘email’?)
Just when I thought Cyberland grew old – it became new again. Like the ad: Flash Frozen? ‘When it thaws it’s like it’s fresh again’. Thaw times: when I moved from my handy dandy Compuserve aps to web forums, to web pages, to email lists, reading lists. Then there was Twitter which I embraced whole-heartedly and simultaneously dismantled Barb McMillen’s Site for Sore Eyes and replaced it with Just Sayin’.
I’ve been reading about Social Media and Branding and all the new language on the web via – Facebook, Twitter, Linked In, …. And it suddenly struck me, really, that what I was reading regarding the use of Social Media was familiar – very familiar. And I started thinking back to the early days of Desktop Publishing.
The first publishing software for the PC was in ~1986. Xerox Ventura Publisher operating under the GEM desktop (Jim Hart’s and Eric Weber’s <wave> ) History of VP ). At the time, this was the NEW media, the new frontier and conversations grew up about how companies had to get their acts together about it. Not only were they going to save money through in-house publication BUT outreach would be facilitated in ways it had not been before.
Rules regarding the new software began to coalesce. Companies were told by consultants (who popped out of the ether) to
1) Consolidate their logo – don’t let branches and departments within the company design their own logo or alter the corporate logo. Require uniform presentation.
2) Create a look and feel that’s identifiable for your company. Learn to use the proper typeface – proper justification for formal or informal looks, and
3) Keep your target audience in mind.
Companies were able to extend themselves to clients in ways they hadn’t before.
Eventually all of these publishing rules were gathered together into the development of a company (or corporate) Style Sheet which included information establishing the use of the company logo (or, brand).
As publishing moved to the web via web pages, the developing rules for the use of this ‘new media’ were similar. Similarly, the movement happened because there was an economy available in the move. Suddenly pages, newsletter, postage were rendered defunct. Yet, though the web as a corporate communications device was new, the questions were not. Brand consistency, diligence in brand protection, corporate look-feel were all still the issue.
But once out there – another element defined itself. That was an ‘active’ and living viewership. Companies sought to decrease their money in areas that bore no income – tech support, for example, and soon found that a living population can hammer the heck out of a brand whose corporate headquarters were on the web via their user group portals. Control over the appearance of the company’s professionalism was difficult when things went wrong. Because tools available to ‘Corporate’ were also available to users who could band together, politick, and publish.
Of course this was also the case back in the BBS days of CompuServe when companies decided to use the portals for user support. But be that as it may – the question soon included damage control and the hiring of ‘nice people’ to represent them (or what some felt to front for) to minimize brand damage.
As I recall, companies suddenly developed in-house publishing departments that eliminated the so called need to out-source and developed departments and employees who could establish publishing policy. And once publishing went to the web (thereby eliminating the need for paper altogether) companies added onto their publishing organizations folks with web expertise. In both fields – image and damage control.
The development of Social Media does have a certain deja vu. Each element redefines itself as new yet repeats the steps of recent media movement. Interesting, for example, is watching people’s use of Twitter and Twitter requisites as similar to how BBS software, particularly Compuserve software developed over time. Users felt the need for grouping interests, a need for threading, a need for search and libraries.
I don’t know what this means. Except, I think it’s important to remember Social Media is not new. Like thawed fish, it isn’t fresh, either. And some of what has been learned as we have taken steps through an electronic channel of communication can represent utility and guidance today. What we need is a group memory.
Would love shared memories from you. 
