Blogs
Multi-Channel Messaging
Bill Wagner EVP of Business Operations
January 14, 2008
The Demise Resurrection of Email
Have you read any of the recent articles regarding the inevitable demise of email? If not, here's a favorite of mine ... The Death of E-Mail.
The cause of death is often listed as “lack of interest from the younger generation” given their widespread use of text and instant messaging. The funny thing is, this same generation also represents nearly half of all Facebook users, and guess what messaging tool they’re using in Facebook? Email.
Of course email isn’t the only tool Facebook users have to communicate. They can post messages to each other on “the wall”, they can broadcast their current status, they can “poke” (even “super poke”) each other, and they can even send each other anonymous messages via the “honesty box”. And yet the good ‘ol email “Inbox” is placed prominently in the Facebook UI.
Granted, there is no IM capability in Facebook (yet), so users have no choice but to use the native email capability for communicating with their friends, right? Guess again. My teenage son (an authority on Facebook protocol) confirmed that he (AOL) IM’s (and text messages) with his Facebook friends at the same time that they’re sending email messages within the application. Why? Because some of the unique attributes of email (e.g., time to contemplate a well thought-out response to someone) serve a purpose that even upcoming generations with little or no email heritage can relate to.
The Facebook example provides an interesting (if not ironic) illustration of how existing messaging channels can be applied to new applications, and that in the end, people will always need different messaging tools for different purposes.
Posted by: Bill Wagner at 8:34 AM
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: The Demise Resurrection of Email.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.strongmail.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/61
I have a theory that continues to hold some water. No I don't have a organizational behavior degree, but here it goes. You email when you "don't" want to talk to a person. You IM when you'd rather talk but "can't" for some reason. So hear's the question. Is email becoming more or less a one way "outbound" communication channel? I'd like to hear your thoughts on that one.
Comment by Jim Judge – January 23, 2008 8:50 AM
There’s no doubt that people use email, and IM for that matter, to avoid live conversations. And as you said, there are times when you’d prefer to talk to someone but can’t – like when you’re communication multi-tasking (“communitasking”?) - such as IM’ing with someone while on the phone with someone else.
In reality, I think three key considerations come into play when people choose a channel to communicate:
- Latency – do I need a quick (low latency) response, or can I wait?
- “Overhead” – Can I afford the “overhead” of a live conversation (e.g., “hello”, “how’s it going?”, “how are you?”, blah, blah, blah).
- “Depth” of topic – Is the communication topic “shallow”, or does it require a lengthy setup/description and exchange between parties?
Recent generations have had enough saddle time with digital messaging channels to become proficient at subconsciously processing these three considerations at sub-second speeds to arrive at a communication choice.
Examples:
1. I have a shallow topic that needs a quick response and can’t afford the overhead of a live conversation: I choose IM.
2. I have a shallow topic that needs a quick response, but I’m feeling guilty that I haven’t had a “real conversation” with the person for a while: I choose the phone.
3. I have “deep” topic that doesn’t require an immediate response, but I anticipate a series of exchanges on the topic and I don’t have the time (or desire) to deal with the overhead of a live conversation: I choose email.
So to answer your question, “is email becoming more or less a one-way outbound communication channel?” – I don’t think so by virtue of #3.
Comment by Bill Wagner – January 24, 2008 9:55 AM
Good stuff, but I don't agree with your conclusion based on example 3 alone. I mean aren't you describing why we use a blog?
Comment by Jim Judge – February 11, 2008 3:08 PM
True ... blogs and email share a common trait of providing a forum for individuals to exchange thoughts on "deep" topics, but the obvious difference is scope of audience. Email can facilitate a 1:1 exchange (or 1:many if you like), while blogs are inherently 1:many (unless the blog is incredibly bad).
So in the context of individuals making personal communication channel decisions amongst email, phone, SMS, IM, etc (and who may not have a blog), I'm sticking with my former response.
Comment by Bill Wagner – February 17, 2008 8:25 PM