5 unstoppable trends from the Web 2.0 Summit stage, personified

The theme of this year’s Web 2.0 Summit 2011 officially was “The Data Frame.” But take it from me — the unofficially real themes are these five unstoppable trends that, were they a person (taking a cue from Genevieve Bell’s talk “The secret life of data” — “Who is data and if it were a person what would it be like?”) would look exactly like: “You, as a Platform, Friending Your Social Car and its Music, and Thereby Completely Transforming How We Buy Things.” I will explain … in this fully subjective list of five of the top tech trends that are unstoppable disruptions at the Web 2.0 Summit 2011.

facebook business

facebook business by Sean MacEntee, on Flickr


Trend One.  It’s nothing new.  But Facebook continues to be a top trend at the Web 2.0 Summit. Chatter about being “friends” with Facebook was in the background of many of the sessions – and *everybody* – except maybe Google – is friends with Facebook (and now Facebook doesn’t even have to friend you back).  This is not a surprise — as KPCB’s Mary Meeker put it in her always fabulous Internet Trends report, “There are as many people using social networking sites now as there were Internet users in 2006.” From what I could tell from my seat in the third row back at the Palace Hotel, at least in the US, Facebook is still winning the social game — despite Google taking pains to talk about how great Google+ is doing and even trotting Sergey Brin out in a surprise appearance together with Vic Gundotra to say so.

The balance of power in social seems to be between the “caution to the wind” nature of existing social tell-alls, and Google — which is taking a specifically cautious approach to social — contending that this is what people want. Google is not only trying to win on these more conservative terms (“There’s a reason why every thought in your head does not come out of your mouth,” said Vic Gundotra, and maintaining somewhat vehemently that Google is “taking a cautious approach to releasing an API”) but also could be preparing to bet the farm on tying Google’s offerings together with Google+, at least by later in the year, if I caught the hints.

But the Facebook party is full-swing. Everyone from Microsoft (“Facebook defines the word social and we work with them closely — combined with Bing” — Steve Ballmer) to eBay (“We’re bringing the open graph into the eBay experience, and bring the eBay experience into the Facebook environment” — John Donahoe) to Salesforce (“Facebook is eating the Web. People are spending much more time on Facebook than on the Internet.  It’s a social revolution” — Marc Benioff) to beyond reports that Facebook is hot.

For Facebook’s part, Bret Taylor, Chief Technology Officer, didn’t just rest there: “Google+ to me is validating to what we at Facebook have convinced the world of: Products are better when they’re social,” he said.

It continues to be a virtual Facebook lovefest.

Saving the world one email at a time

Saving the world one email at a time by Ryan Vaarsi, on Flickr


But “the problem is that my data is somewhere else…” was a common refrain during the data frame discussions, and Facebook and Google got no free pass here.

“When are you guys and Google gonna get over it and start sharing,” sparred John Battelle to Bret Taylor, to audience applause. “Why can’t I use Facebook Connect to populate my circles or lists? Isn’t that data that is ours and should be simple to move?”  Although Battelle meant this as a serious question, there was no serious response to be heard. The fact is, data — our data, data about us and from us — is still what’s worth the bank to social companies.

Many speakers however echoed a fresh refrain about data and your personal identity — and whether your personal data belongs to you or at a minimum can be portable to whatever (social) network you want.  Chris Poole of 4chan/Canvas kicked off this identity crisis with an excellent talk, concluding that as far as online identity goes, “Facebook & Google do it wrong; Twitter does it better; I want to think about a world that does it right.”

Beyond straight social networking technology, personal identity took a stunning turn with Anne Wojcicki’s talk about 23andMe — the “retail DNA testing service providing information and tools for consumers to learn about and explore their DNA.” 23andMe straddles biotech and Web 2.0 with the powers of a huge genetic dataset that can, in combination with its growing passionate community, go beyond straight ancestry queries to help identify individuals that have variants and prevent disease or identify genes that look like modifiers – just for a couple of examples. “The community has been so successful that in such a short time we found something that could be a modifier that leads to a druggable target,” said Wojcicki.

One big question this begs is whose data is this genetic information? Is this owned by the pharmaceutical companies? The community itself? Individuals – in so far as you “own” pieces of yourself?

It was Mitchell Baker (Mozilla Foundation) that took the next step that started to put a finger on the actual idea of person as platform:

We create data online but we have little control. We can turn privacy up and down but that’s it. We have essentially giant data factories — it is at heart an industrial era process. The core process of my data footprint lives as part of the data factory’s process. The customization all lives within a single model. Let’s think differently about data for a moment – what could data be? In that world, I am the platform for my data, and you are the platform for your data.

Baker’s bottom line: “If I become the platform, that allows the big data providers to continue to operate at scale (provide experiences we like with customization at edges but not core) and allows economic generation.”

Do we have this yet? “We don’t have all this infrastructure today but at Mozilla we’re building blocks of where I can be the center of my life.” Brilliant future, with Baker as our guide and person at the center.

Buy More Stuff, Black Friday 2009

Buy More Stuff, Black Friday 2009 by Michael Holden, on Flickr


We’re still buying.  People can log on to 23andme.com and start exploring their DNA today, for example. We keep buying more and more stuff — but the message was clear at the Summit: the way we buy is undergoing massive disruption.  Analogous to what was happening outside a few blocks away with the Occupy Wall Street movement hitting San Francisco streets with #OccupySF, and referenced obliquely by Benioff as the “Corporate Spring,” I think it’s the disruption of the way we buy, right down to the very the payment itself.

During the conference, John Battelle made sure to ask most speakers what they thought of the Occupy movement. For their part, Visa president John Partridge and American Express group president Dan Schulman echoed that there’s “a concern for what’s transpired around the world economically… and significant pent-up anger about how did we end up in this situation” — but seemed eager to allocate blame towards the federal government or elsewhere for the debt crisis, rather than, of course, looking inward. And to John Battelle’s question whether Visa and AMEX are afraid of eBay now that merchants, frustrated with transaction fees, are is implementing direct payments, we of course heard non-answers.

But there were dramatic backdrops to that perspective, with not only eBay (and the demonstrations themselves), but with  Alex Rampell’s TrialPay — which makes the excellent point that there is so much to be gained from the data in online payments that it makes no sense whatsoever to charge consumers a transaction fee just to pay. “At TrialPay, we think payments should be free” — because the underlying data that happens in a transaction is worth more, is the disruptive point behind the service.

It makes it look like credit card companies, despite their protesting otherwise, have to be worried about going the way of the record industry.

Mary Meeker also echoed an impression of Occupy that was equally affirming yet implicated:

I think people are angry — everybody’s angry and deserves to be angry. Finger-pointing is not good. I look at it in a holistic way. Over last 40 years, government has been pretty loose with spending and interest rates have been at low-level, so people were looking for places to invest and went to houses. Credit was easy.  Government sets up a situation where it’s easy to borrow. Wall Street was giving instruments to trade and they traded it like crazy.    … The way out? We all have a problem and we all have to sacrifice.

(Spending five minutes a day on (the hugely hyped) One Kings Lane five days a week, as Meeker admitted to doing, seems a bit like a strange sacrifice.)

If you are making sacrifices, you can look forward to what can be known in the future as “Web 3.0” — and we don’t mean the Semantic Web.   As Tim O’Reilly said in the conference introduction, “Now we know what Web 3 will be — Web 3 will be whatever pulls us out of the economy now” (since Web 2.0 is what pulled us out before).

Tenha medo

Tenha medo by jampa, on Flickr


This leads me to two more fairly unconventional top tech trends to personify. Did you know Sound is the Next Big Thing? “Sound is going to be bigger than video. Record is bigger than QWERTY,” said Mary Meeker, quoting Alexander Ljung from SoundCloud, and then she rattled off a number of sound technologies from bluetooth devices, headsets, SoundCloud, Spotify (“which changed way I listen to music”), connected car audio, sound recognition — all ready for and undergoing massive disruption.

Both Pandora and Spotify were there to speak at the Summit, though “Pandora doesn’t compete with Spotify,” Tim Westergren insisted, “It competes with radio — and radio is where people just want to turn it on and play.”

Sound will be big not only on our devices but in our cars.  Says Westergren, “One half of radio listening happens in the car. The smartphone is your modem, bringing it into car. The car hijacks controls of Pandora into the dashboard.”

Driving into the Andes

Driving into the Andes by Stuck in Customs, on Flickr


Which leads me to the last big trend to notice.  Cars — clean fuel cars, electric cars, social cars, apps for cars, connected cars — Google cars.  Cars are big.

On the apps side, from Waze — with which 7 million users in Israel beat traffic — to Pandora to many other apps, lots of lonely commuters driving solo in cars aren’t so much a plague for sustainability, but create in fact a huge whitespace.

Part of the reason cars are such a rich whitespace for applications right now is because of this Data Frame. We’re realizing that there is much data to be harvested from cars themselves in the Big Data Frame view.  From David Hornik at August Capital:

We figured out about six years ago there lots of systems creating data exhaust. If we harness it, that’s big value… Cars are reporting a lot of things — from how fast the car is going, to the temperature outside (is the road about to ice over?), to exactly where they go (so maps can be way more accurate), to whether the windshield wipers are on – are they high or low? This allows our cars of the future to say “here’s the right driving route for you today based on all this factual data.”

It seems to me that one of the biggest future disruptors of the Data Frame just might be the coming of broadband in cars.

On the side of the cars as platforms themselves, we see a trend towards both social cars — as Marc Benioff wants a car he can friend — to electric vehicles with ventures such as Fisker, Tesla, and GE building factories here in the US.

As if that’s not enough going on, Sergey Brin said Google is building an “autonomous car” – a self-driving car that he says will be cool. “There is a tremendous opportunity to improve the world with advanced research projects like this,” said Sir Google.

This led Battelle to say: “I’m going to start a conference about cars.”  I believe it, too. And if he does, I hope to be there to write way too much about it yet again.

Maybe I’ll ride there in my all-electric Tesla while listening to Pandora, connecting with friends online, and talking with my car (let’s call her “Sira”), about the latest deals on One Kings Lane.  Or maybe, like the fact that we predicted the flying car but not the Internet, the future will look a lot different than any of us know now.

Because trends may be unstoppable, but data is feral, says Genevieve Bell. “Data keeps it real — physical objects resist being digitized. There’s something about data that will resist being incessantly digitized.”

The wildcard is the person in the platform.

From Web 2.0 to World Wide EveryWhere

Thoughts on Sir Tim Berners-Lee, mobility and beyond at the Web 2.0 Summit 2009

Tim Berners-Lee at the Web 2.0 Summit - "We didn't call it World-Wide Web for nothing"

Tim Berners-Lee at the Web 2.0 Summit - "We didn't call it 'World-Wide' Web for nothing"

London schoolboy Tim Berners-Lee was just 14 when two computers talked to each other for the very first time 40 years ago via ARPANET, the predecessor to the Internet. It’s safe to say this turned out to be a bigger deal than anyone knew at the time (except maybe young Tim).

When he first conceived of the World Wide Web 20 years later (in 1989), Berners-Lee knew it had to be a fully open, public-domain platform. As he explained in conversation with Tim O’Reilly at the Web 2.0 Summit last week in San Francisco, “otherwise it would not have worked.” The system had to be really flexible, without proprietary formats and constraints, “a very creative read-write space, like a sandbox — a group collaborative thing,” to enable it to spread its usefulness across the whole world as he had conceived it.  “It had to be — we didn’t call it ‘World-Wide’ Web for nothing.”

One score, the change of a millennium, and the “versioning” of WWW to “Web 2.0” later, the Web is still trying to fulfill that promise. Berners-Lee acknowledges that Web platforms and blogs and wikis have approached that collaborative vision, but in an awesome perspective in his session which closed the conference, he reminded us that “only 20-25 percent of humanity actually uses the Web at all.”

While this begs the question how and whether the Web should extend to blanket the other three-quarters of the world, if you turn it around you can see that Web 2.0, now a kindergartner at five years old, is ready to be and continues to be itself disrupted through its reach — and hopefully by those who will need it the most.

The most recent, most potent disruptions are happening in the mobile, realtime, and local spaces and hence into the “everywheres and everyones” through the corners of the Earth. This year’s Summit did not disappoint along those lines both in terms of real news, cutting-edge developments, and a little bit of whimsey along the way.

On the local, realtime front, with a big kick in the pants by Twitter, the major search players are paying a lot of attention to the “everywhere, everyone, AND all at once” phenomenon (read Jeremiah Owyang’s good wrap from a business perspective on the related Google / Microsoft announcements). But one thing that was almost lost in the hype — almost buried in Marissa Mayer’s surprise announcement of  Google Social Search — is the local aspect.  Through the years we’ve witnessed the evolution of “finding things” from Browse (Yahoo) –> to Search (Google) –> to Share (Facebook) — and now we approach the next phase: all of the above, then add “Where” — and then EveryWhere.

Take a good look at the demo: first the Twitter-dare-I-say-Google-open-social-graph announcement has to do with bringing the particular GeoLocation of New Zealand closer to home, via your social circle.  But toward the end of the demo Google solidifies the geo/local aspect. Says Mayer, “You can see how analyzing these social networks can really improve the overall relevance, comprehensiveness, and quality of the results. And one of the biggest pockets we’ve seen where this can really enhance your search experience is on local information. Has one of your friends already seen that play? Have they been to that restaurant or have they been to that hotel?”

This is important because local may literally be “the last mile”  (thanks @donambridge…) of the three-quarters-of-the-rest-of-the-world for Web search, which starts to look more and more “old-school” the more people’s blogs are visited because of Twitter instead of because of Google.

Add the mobile component to realtime+local, and you have the game-changing combination.  Mobile is the “incremental driver of Internet user / usage growth” according to the always-excellent Morgan Stanley’s Mary Meeker session (PDF). “Next generation platforms (social networking + mobile) are driving unprecedented change in communications and commerce.”

Via mobile, the native intelligence of your (social) presence is flipping the “reaching beyond 25% of the world” question sideways — so that it’s not (just) about the fact that mobile reaches further, but mobile allows us to change the reach entirely.

Path Intelligence: Mapping the audience

Path Intelligence: Mapping the audience

Cell phone signals render humans as sensors (watch the amazing inventions on this panel), via multiple sensors in your iPhones, via where you are when, and via what you are sharing — explicitly or implicitly — about it when you are there.  From the “implicit crowdsourcing” that provides traffic and route information via maps and real-time feeds of Waze, to the entertaining audience statistics (and more) that Path Intelligence could glean by our (cell-phone-enabled) presence, to tagged, geocoded images that help you find invasive plants, to the incredible concept of “telemicroscopy for disease disease diagnosis” (CellScope), to the portal ultrasound gadget that GE’s Jeff Immelt brought with him to more… Needless to say, there is a huge wealth of innovation happening in the realtime mobile sphere.

Beyond mobile (since mobile infrastructure is not yet everywhere), we also saw some amazing satellite innovations at the Summit. Walter Scott of DigitalGlobe stopped by to give us a demo and some intriguing ideas about satellite imagery that we can now refresh two to three times a day. Perhaps Arthur C. Clarke did not even visualize this!

Aaron Koblin -- Visualizing Amsterdam SMS messages

Aaron Koblin -- Visualizing Amsterdam SMS messages

And speaking of visualization, some of the innovations coming out of the piles of data we get through all these mobile, real-time, world-wide sensors can be very, very beautiful.   Aaron Koblin, an artist specializing in data visualization who introduced  GAFFTA (Grey Area Foundation for the Arts) while at the Summit, has an amazing sandbox of visualizations.

So while only one in four people have ever touched the World Wide Web at all, both the Web and these people are going further than ever before. Tim Berners-Lee advises us to concentrate on the emergent trends of GeoLocation and a move from Web pages to mobile and apps, as well as the upcoming standard of HTML5. And one key takeaway from him is that we need to “make sure the Web is designed appropriately for other cultures as well.”

And while we’re at it, let’s make sure we’re listening to those other cultures and watching for the beauty in the great big pile of data, because “the other 75%” of everywhere has at least as big a chance of disrupting the Web as the Web has of disrupting it.

Wardrobe Wrap of the Web 2.0 Summit

Seconds away from writing a serious post on the Web 2.0 Summit last week in San Francisco, my head aches, I have a meeting in way less than an hour and a different project or three to manage, several other writing assignments, and I decide what’s important for the moment is to instead cover the wild whimsical wacky wardrobe world that was this year’s Web 2.0 Summit. Why do I feel compelled to do this? I have no idea. (If I don’t get that serious post up by the end of today, I’m probably abducted by aliens). And yet here I go.

Erin McKean's Tetris Dress

Erin McKean's Tetris Dress

First and foremost in any wardrobe wrap has to be a gigantic shout out to Wordnik’s smart and sassy CEO and co-founder Erin McKean who pitched a great high-order bit on the excellent Wordnik as well as their newly launched API for the English Language, ALL in her hand-made Tetris dress.

Then there’s John Battelle, who always looks particularly natty in his blue jeans, dangling this teaser of a surprise Google spot and entreating us to guess who it is based on the shoes alone. To which my handy Twitter-mate @UberShoeDiva (who does indeed have the UberShoes) responded thusly: “What is he *wearing* on his feet?? Those can’t be shoes. I hope not. I really hope those are just some edgy socks.”
(Those by the way are Sergey Brin’s Vibram Five Fingers )

And actually I’d have to say John Battelle came in tied for first place for best jeans this year – and you’ll just have to scroll through this really excellent session on Humans as Sensors to see why (catch Mobilizy’s Markus Tripp in his excellent jeans – or you can just get a hint of them here).

Brady and UberShoeDiva (AKA Jaimee Clements)

Brady and UberShoeDiva (AKA Jaimee Clements) cut it up

In the same video, know that no wardrobe wrap would ever be complete without a mention of @brady’s gorgeous purple shirt, green plaid pants, and blue shoes. Once again this goes not unnoticed by UberShoeDiva.

One out-of-character note for himself and for the summit was Mr. Tim O’Reilly — who was constantly seen sporting a SUIT, making you wonder if he or we all had been abducted by aliens.

Contrast this with the baggy-jeaned teens – at least the one who uses Blackle instead of Google (to save energy) – from the excellent What Do Teens Want? panel – and you get an idea of why I really love the Web 2.0 Summit among all other conferences.

"the Zappos guys"

"the Zappos guys"

And I simply cannot ever forget @lwaldal’s commentary of the “Zappos guys:”I’m sitting in the 3rd row and pretty sure that josh, liam, maynard and john onstage right now are all wearing the same shoes.” This observation even made Industry-Standard fame.

And finally, though what it has to do with wardrobe or what wardrobe has to do with anything I’m not sure, thanks to @lwaldal for pointing out “a chandelier for balloon boy” in this shot of how the Ballroom was decked out:

"A Chandelier for Balloon Boy"

"A Chandelier for Balloon Boy" - @lwaldal

The conference was jam-packed and a lot of fun but tiring, so this shot perked me up just when I needed it.

And now with that off my chest…

Web Meets Politics: Web 2.0 Summit’s a Wrap

You could say that last week’s Web 2.0 Summit lived handily up to its theme “Web Meets World.” You could also say that although I was present in the audience, never more than five rows back from the stage, I was in a major post-election daze throughout and, well, missed some things. Undeniably through this watery filter, as I sit this week and try to wrap up my thoughts on the event, what’s clearly in focus is that what the Web really met last week at the Summit was Politics. I might even try to tell you that’s the only thing — and the most important thing — it met.

Would you blame me? The day after Obama was elected President of the United States, the top-three trending topics on Twitter (say that three-times-fast!) were, in this order: Prop 8, web2summit, and Obama — and they stayed that way throughout nearly the entire conference.

What follows is my wrap, therefore, of the Web 2.0 Summit 2008: Web Meets Politics.

Intro: Web meets world

Fifteen years after television’s birth, the contours of the new medium were just emerging. The idea that this revolutionary new phenomenon — one busily reshaping the very fabric of society — might one day become just another application on a vast web of computers, well that idea wasn’t exactly in vogue …

So begins O’Reilly’s Web 2.0 Summit site on the overall conference theme. “Web meets world” to me means that even things you don’t think have anything to do with the Web have to do with the Web. From the “Transforming the Network to an Enterprise for the Warfighter” session delivered by fatigues-clad LTG Jeff Sorenson, to disaster-management tactics from Jesse Robbins — “many kinds of disasters mean many kinds of opportunities” — to disease and global warming and financial catastrophes and other “Really Big Problems” — the resounding question levied by “meeting the world” was an implied “can we fix it?” to which Tim O’Reilly, in the opening conference salvo, invoked Obama with the “Yes we can” as the collective Web 2 response. From the outset, politics set the stage.

Web meets the president

Arianna Huffington

Arianna Huffington

“Were it not for the Internet, Obama would not have been elected President,” said Arianna Huffington in Friday’s great panel, The Web and Politics (with John Heilemann, Arianna Huffington, Gavin Newsom, and Joe Trippi). “It wasn’t the age of the candidate that mattered in this election,” she continued, “It was the age of the ideas.”

Throughout the conference there was a lot of talk about how well Obama used online channels (most specifically Facebook) while campaigning (it was during this week that he also launched change.gov). Earlier in the Summit, Mark Zuckerberg had mentioned the tremendous success of Facebook Causes in particular during the election — growing “hundreds of thousands of people a day.” Gavin Newsom added that he was “proud to say I have more Facebook friends than any other politician outside of presidential candidates.” Clearly a sea-change has washed upon the country.

“Just as in the 60’s,” people compared, “a new medium became the dominant medium in this election.” Whereas TV was the “new” one-way broadcast medium when JFK used it so adeptly during his debate with Nixon, the Internet brings interactivity, dialog, and conversation to the mix, and voila: as Huffington said, “the truth intrudes into people’s living rooms.”

Web meets (dirty) politics

But there’s a flipside to the truth coming into our living rooms.

While acknowledging the sea-change, Newsom pondered, “how does this manifest itself in terms of shaping public policy?” I was glad to hear Newsom mention the need to address the “digital divide, saying that though Web 2.0 is meaningful, it’s “utterly meaningless to those who need this type of influence and engagement the most” – to those who aren’t online.

Then he indirectly referred to California’s Prop 8 when he mentioned he had his own “Howard Dean” moment broadcast all over YouTube (the “whether you like it or not” ad from the Yes campaign). He said, “The YouTube-ification of the world – I’m desperate to get it to go away and I can’t get it to go away.” Regarding the “always-on” internet-effect, tweeters wildly twittered his sound-bite “Authenticity – we’re all for it unless it’s the kind of authenticity we don’t like,” and he wondered “Are we more or less authentic if we’re always on the record?” Trippi replied that “No one can fake it 24 hours a day.”

I liked that Newsom’s bottom-line was that we should embrace it — and become more forgiving of mistakes — but thinks there will be a lot of collateral damage.

Speaking of collateral damage, at 44:10 in the above video, commencing the Q&A period, I got up shakingly and raised following, coming directly from my experience on the No On Prop 8 campaign (and here I quote myself self-consciously):

We’ve just experienced the terrible flipside of “truth into our living rooms,” which is that the Internet can also be used, with devastating effectiveness, to spread attacks and lies into our living rooms. Here are some specific examples from the fight against Proposition 8 — all true:

  • Videos propagated on YouTube in which the official “Yes” campaign equated gays with Hitler
  • No On Prop 8’s Web site attacked by denial-of-service (which we overcame mightily, thanks to our Web techs)
  • Personal attacks from people in the blogosphere throughout open, unmoderated threads (when another side might have had closed threads)
  • Videos propagated by the official “Yes” campaign using children without their parents’ agreement or permission
  • Gay people (and straight alike) getting anti-gay “Yes” ads served on their site because the yes campaign invested heavily in Google AdWords

In this era of Web-meets-Politics, the No On Prop 8 campaign indeed built a strong community — http://www.noonprop8.com/action/engage-online/social-networking — and yes it had power — that’s why we were so attacked — but the discussion of the “truth and democratization” of the Internet needs to be moderated with acknowledgement and protection against and attacks and lies, or else those with money and power (and fear) will continue to wield more influence over those with less.

Newsom acknowledged that the “forces on many sides are still at play,” but said he has “tremendous optimism” for the new era of Web-meets-Politics.

Web meets TV

Consuming new media, Huffington said, means that you are engaged — it’s like galloping on horse, not just watching from the couch in the living room. Further abstracting the television, there was also an engaging panel that amounted to a handbook of sorts for hacking the conventional understanding of it. In the session The Media Business: New Approaches, Ken Auletta talked with Joel Hyatt (Current TV) and Evan Williams (Twitter) about how they set about to unlock our televisions for the debates and for the election.

“TV is the biggest medium in America that hasn’t been democratized yet,” said @ev. “Twitter changes how people connect with people – if you expand that to a very large user base, it can change culture.” Pointing out that it’s not just social, Evan continued, “it has potential to see aggregate real-time information, like during the election.” Add Current TV to the mix and what happens?

“With Twitter and this broadcast model together, what happens is that you can get alternate viewpoints WHILE they’re being broadcast” -@ev

“Opening up these closed systems, empowering people to tell these stories — is very important. Citizen journalism has already proven that,” said Current TV’s Joel Hyatt. Not to worry about the expected monetization question, either: “Toyota’s doubled their money in ads on Current in the last year,” he continued. The goal of Current TV is nothing less than to “take the magic of the Internet and move that magic to TV.”

The political ramifications of this — beyond Palin bingo or Nixon-debates — are riper now than they have ever been before.

Green is the new Web

Al GoreThe Internet’s favorite color, green, also made a strong showing at the Summit. The importance of sustainability covered the gamut in talks about food (Michael Pollan), cars (Shai “cars-as-a-service” Agassi), “microenergy” credits, and of course global warming.

Calling himself a “recovering politician,” Al Gore took stage late at the summit to a standing ovation, saying that the “redeeming quality of the election” was that “all humans are created equal” and that this “would not have been possible without the Internet.”

Heralding “World 2.0” with a powerful, inspiring keynote, he also earned praise for introducing a Unified Smart Grid’ vision for repowering the USA.

Tim O’Reilly had an interesting dialog with Shai Agassi — from A Better Place — talking about the need for cars to be independent from their fuel models — aaaaaaaand, he also invoked Joe the Plumber! Said Shai in closing to Hummer: “Stop making tanks, start making cars!”Shai Agassi

(Read the CNet story on that here: Electric cars of the future at the Web 2.0 Summit).

Web meets the iPhone

My last overarching (political, of course) theme is about the device-driven world. I call it “Web meets the iPhone” because — what, there are other devices? Pandora made a thankful showing on the iPhone early on, the first workshop I attended had to do with iPhone applications, and it just seemed like everything (except Qik and me) was on the iPhone, including @lwaldal (“so tired of the lousy iPhone, safari crashes, stupid autocorrect, no copycutpaste, but at least it has service”).

Morgan Stanley’s Mary Meeker brought us a little perspective on this, merrily calling us to mind that innovation in wireless products and services is accelerating — and “changes should create + destroy significant wealth.” See her – as always – great presentation (PDF).

What in the world makes devices a politics-driven theme, you ask? Aside from my aforementioned filtering and exhaustion? Witness:

SF Civic Center on November 5 - Courtesty Chris Burwell

SF Civic Center on November 5 - Courtesy Chris Burwell

Yes, many of the lights are candles, but count (on) the devices.

In closing, I conclude (and beseech), for the Web 2.0 Summit 2008:

WEB MEETS POLITICS: Be a device-driven world — Not a divisive world!