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.

Today, we typically think of campaign relevance in terms of:
1. who is the recipient (i.e. audience/segment)?
2. what impression do we create for the recipient (e.g. personalization)?
3. where is the recipient in the relationship life cycle?
4. why are we communicating with the recipient (i.e. context, such as past purchases)?
5. when are we communicating to the recipient (e.g. in response to some action taken by the recipient)

In an evolved state of customer communication that leverages multiple digital communication channels, a new dimension of relevance emerges, based on an expanded definition of “where” and “when”. “Where” will no longer refer simply to the recipient's place within the lifecycle, but will also refer to the recipient's physical location at a particular moment in time. Similarly “when” will no longer be dictated by the business – it will dictated by where you are physically, and the opportunity associated with your physical location at a point in time. In other words, where will (in part) dictate when.

For example, imagine walking past a bookstore and receiving a text message containing a coupon for 25% off of a new book written by the same author as other books you’ve purchased. While this may resemble the scene from the futuristic movie Minority Report, where Tom Cruise’s character walks into a GAP store and is welcomed by a holographic image of a sales person that knows his purchase history, the pieces are nearly all in place to support this type of presence-based targeting (less the holographic sales person).

What’s in it for business? For starters, survival. In a recent Forrester Research report titled "Experienced-Based Differentiation," there are two statements in particular that underscore the eventuality of what I’m suggesting:

“Consumers increasingly use more digital channels to connect with companies.”

“When customers interact with companies across a number of different touch points, they view these interactions as part of a continuous relationship that occurs over time.”

And while reaching consumers with specific messages based on their location may result in some incremental improvement in your conversion rates, there is still risk in overloading the recipient with messages and alienating them. Not surprisingly, marketing's golden rule of relevance still applies in a multi digital messaging channel world: Sending tailored messages based on a customer's stated preferences, past purchases and other pertinent data helps establish long term profitable relationships.