Business Communicators of Second Life®

Near London/Something Virtually Interesting

As a much-needed antidote to the avalanche of kid virtual world launches, Near London launched to private beta yesterday.

What is new and rather interesting about Near London is that the U.K. company Near,™ will be launching a series of these virtual worlds, specifically geared as a platform for business, each world meticulously detailing an actual city the businesses already operate in. 

The virtual cities are social networks, of course, but if executed well, with virtually limitless opportunities to replicate and augment concerts, events, shopping and meet ups - all within the virtual environment of actual world-class cities.  Built upon the Qube Q plug-in based game engine, the client is essentially universal because Q can interface with any server backend. This means users can jump from virtual city to virtual city seamlessly.

Near is creating these cities as “virtual gateways” as well so retailers, artists, galleries, events, civic organizations can have the ability to click visitors through to their own virtual world or game environment.  Currently businesses can window-dress their existing virtual windows, embed information within the 3D environment or can tag windows to other online information. 

Near London is currently available for PCs only.  Mac, Linux, Wii, Xbox360, PS3 and mobile is planned for 2009. 

Near considers itself a media platform, offering marketing, e-commerce and research services.  All 'round an interesting initiative to watch.

See their promo video at the Near website.

June 18, 2008

Weighing in On VMK Closing

A couple of weeks ago, the Orange County Register (my home town newspaper) asked me to weigh in on the closing of Disney's Virtual Magic Kingdom on May 21.  I'm just now getting around to posting my answers here, in case anyone is interested. Here's the full rticle by the Register's Disney beat reporter, Sonya Smith:

Disney’s VirtualMagicKingdom.com will be shut down at 10 p.m. May 21.

The free social gaming site , also called VMK, lets players choose and style avatars, chat with other players and play games. In a statement, Disney officials said the site’s performance exceeded expectations, but the time had come to shut it down.

We invited Linda Zimmer to explain why fans are so upset about the ending of VMK and to suggest what should be next for Disney’s virtual worlds. She is an Orange-based consultant at MarCom:Interactive who advises corporations about virtual worlds. Here are her responses to the Register’s questions.

Do you play Virtual Magic Kingdom? If so, describe your experiences.

I’m a not what I consider a very active or “regular” user of VMK. I’m more of a casual user, but an avid observer of the activities and behaviors of virtual world users of all kinds - in VMK and elsewhere.

Why do you think Walt Disney Co. is ending VMK? Do you agree that the site should end or do you think Disney should keep it going?

I believe VMK is being closed for a variety of reasons, although this is my professional conjecture. VMK represented an early entrant into virtual social worlds. Technology has advanced, as have business models, user expectations and “mainstream” acceptance. Disney is in the process of launching several new worlds in which they can capitalize on these new market conditions and realities.

VMK seems to have had about 15,000 people as active daily users at the time of its closing. With constant quests and activities, this represents a cost which is likely unsustainable at that level of use - especially since there is dedicated staff (cast members) who are in world at all times it is open for users.

Also, because VMK was originally conceived as a 50th anniversary promotion, there was likely no long-term strategy in place beyond an early “experiment” in these kinds of multi-user environments.

Disney’s decision to close VMK was a business decision - so it is difficult for me to assign a “should” factor to it. However, I do think it is enormously - enormously - unfortunate that Disney has provided such little support for this hugely engaged community in the closing. Disney has a perfect opportunity here to have strategically communicated with this community, helping them transition into one of the new Disney worlds perhaps or providing some way to somehow archive some of the personal artifacts - not the least of which are the avatars, assets and personal environments which users have spent untold hours building - maybe that would be simply a digital VMK memory scrapbook - something that communicated Disney was tuned into the angst of the community being disbanded.

I do think any organization that actively builds a community has some responsibility to manage the dismantling of that community if it should be necessary. But, in the long view, any company that builds a community should be doing so as a long term commitment and ought to be considering at the outset what the “exit strategy” is.

Why do you think people are so passionate about VMK and especially about it ending?

There are two reasons - both equally important. One is the massive investment the active users have made in terms of their time, creativity and emotional involvement - as well as gaining points and personal artifacts based on achievements in the in-world games. Second is the personal connections users have made within the environment - think of suddenly being pulled out of your school in which you are on the sports team, in the drama program, are class president and where some of your most important relationships and memories take place. It’s like pulling a social foundation from these kids. Plus, many families are also using the environment to interact much like families used to play game boards in the evenings.

Explain how VMK is similar and different in comparison to other virtual worlds.

When first launched VMK was fairly unique in that it is a bit of a “hybrid” virtual world - that is, it is a mix of an online game environment and a social world. Most virtual worlds up to that point were either primarily a game environment or a social environment. Today, most virtual worlds, especially those aimed at this “tween” audience, include both.

Probably the most differentiating factor is that VMK was built to “bridge” the physical environment of Disneyland with a place to engage with that same environment virtually.

What is good and bad about VMK?

The good: A familiar and/or desirable environment brought into an online representation where members can socialize and continue (or have) a “Disneyland” experience. Great games and activities that many kids found to be addictive fun in a very safe online environment. Disney went to great lengths to provide for a safe, friendly environment, such as filtering chat for inappropriate language or activity, cast members clearly identified and always present (world only open when cast members were present), and any personally identifiable information was never allowed to be passed through the world.

Probably the biggest negative for most people is that VMK encourages “buying” as a major activity, even though access is free - and its billboards and product placement make it an extremely commercial environment for very impressionable youngsters.

Also, emotional connections develop very quickly in these virtual spaces - much more so than in the “actual world”- and that is something parents should be aware of and should be monitoring in any virtual space.

Describe for people who do not use virtual worlds why you think people use virtual worlds? What do virtual worlds offer?

What virtual worlds offer is as individual as the person. But for nearly everyone it is the social life. To some degree these virtual spaces are today’s community commons, where people drop in and out, see what’s happening, stay and visit, play a game together and of course gossip.

These spaces can also be a creative outlet in that they allow self-expression through digital representations, creations and art - and collaboration with others on these creative endeavors.

Also the games usually are tied to some kind of achievement either for points, recognition or assets. You can compete against yourself or others - and what you “own” often says much about your level of skill or length of participation - translating to your virtual reputation. That is just fun - like any other game - Monopoly comes to mind as an analogy for the type of motivation these games often represent. It often can give kids a type of “celebrity” or acceptance they might not be able to get at school, on the sports field, or in the neighborhood.

What do you think of the other Disney virtual worlds the company is suggesting people join once VMK ends?

Disney is riding the wave of interest in these kinds of environments and extending their various “franchises” into them. I think they just might have a trust issue at the moment with those from VMK joining a new Disney world. Those users may have the attitude of “why put in all the time and energy just to have it close at some point?”

I generally think these are interesting places for kids and families to explore in various ways - exploring places or activities they possibly can’t do in the “actual world” or exploring social skills or creative talents. These environments can also be valuable ways for parents to interact with their children in an environment that is slightly less intense in terms of intimacy and therefore might provide opportunities for parents to learn new things about their child - you know, maybe akin to talking while in the car - little direct eye contact and therefore a little “easier” to have some kinds of conversations.

I am very concerned about the highly commercial aspects of these worlds, however, and the general overall trend of creating such immersive commercial environments where the emphasis is necessarily on some type of transaction. We all know kids are highly influenced and this is an age group where values are being tested and engrained.

Do you think online and real world protests, letters and petitions will save VMK? Why?

I would be very surprised if Disney reversed their decision. This is a business decision - and a brand decision. New technology, new brand properties, new models, new goals. The truth is they will close VMK at some point and going through this twice would be even worse for everyone.

What do you suggest VMK people do when VMK ends? Why?

Many will be migrating to Virtual Family Kingdom which is a site created to attract the VMK “homeless.” This seems to be a place where people can at least gather and decide where to take their virtual socializing next. Groups do tend to migrate and bring a bit of the old world into the new. Parents should help kids with a plan to migrate to another safe, moderated online environment. But they shouldn’t have children connect with virtual friends via email addresses or other personally identifiable information unless the parent is actively involved in making these connections “outside” the world.

I’d like to emphasize to parents of children who have been very active in VMK to keep close tabs on their child’s emotional state in the months after VMK closes. These worlds are very immersive and very, very “real” to those who participate. Emotional connections develop quickly and deeply and disruption can cause real, actual grief in a child. Plus something the child has invested heavily in, something that may represent a type of personal identity, is suddenly unavailable. This is an emotional loss, especially if important friendships have been disrupted.

What do you think Disney should do next in its virtual world Web sites? Why?

Really think through the commitment they are making to a the new community that they will be working hard to recruit and spending millions to promote. At least 15,000 people will be asking them that question before they sign on again.

Original OC Register article is online here.

June 9 2008

Cultures of Virtual Worlds

Over the last two days I’ve had the real pleasure of being back in the classroom, straining at times to hear over the noise of the construction of the engineering building next door.  But it was worth it being able to hear 30 ethnographic researchers gathered at UC Irvine to present their studies of just what we avatars are doing inside virtual worlds.  The theme for the gathering was Cultures of Virtual Worlds, organized by the Center for Ethnography in the Department of Anthropology and sponsored by Intel’s People and Practices Research Group.

Ethnographic research is a first person study of the observed behaviors of others.  These were indeed the tales from the road, observations organized and structured into what we already understand about human behavior.  But, mostly the tales raised questions and many mysteries yet to be understood about virtuality.

Dr. Celia Pearce of Georgia Tech, traversed worlds for us as she reported on the forced migration of Uru (Myst Online) players, as they became refugees in the “new” worlds of There.com and Second Life due to the closing of their game.  She showed us how the artifacts from one world ported over to another through recreation of the old world in the new, transforming both the place and the narrative of the new, joined community.  Her experiences highlight how a true community, once created, does not die easily – indeed another world often becomes the beneficiary.

My thoughts:  This phenomenon is as true in the actual world as in the virtual.   I’ve been watching a similar migration in process at this very moment with the closing of Virtual Magic Kingdom as that community is creating a new Virtual Family Kingdom and preparing its [heartbreaking] move from VMK.   Both these instances raise a fascinating question of just what is a community.  Do we use the word too loosely today in social networking since we move and migrate so easily among networks?  When does “affiliation” or “networked communication” become community – or does it?  Do commercial entities have responsibilities to the communities they create?

Graduate student Lilly Irani coined a phrase in the title of her presentation I suspect I will be using in the future, as it captures our modern communication habits so well:  Assemblages of Communication.  She documented her travels inside Second Life focusing on the fluid communications habits of activist avatars who seamlessly weave IRC, blogs, web forums, Facebook, Café Press, SLProfiles, and photo sharing to communicate.  Her conclusion: the immersive nature of communication inside virtual worlds is just one type of communication and that “collectives” keep in touch through assemblages of communications that are unique to them and that serve their individual community.

My thoughts: Lilly’s focused observations of a small group of activists operating inside a virtual world validate my own theories of the fluidity of what we still call “media.”  We tend to think of media as a “thing.” But media in practice is in fact very ephemeral.   We describe it as “distributed,” but it goes way fuzzier than that. Media  “in practice” isn’t a channel, but an activity.

Dr. Rebecca Black plunged us into the virtual literary world at FanFiction.net where she chronicled the shifting online identity of a young Chinese girl as she published her fiction while learning English.  Through her observations Dr. Black concludes that over time our identities shift and evolve – are never static - because we construct them in diverse ways, influenced by the media, pop culture, our ethnicity and our own “actual” identity.  In a focused study of the language used within the space, she also contrasted the support and encouragement given to her subject by this virtual community versus that she might receive within our traditional educational environment.

My thoughts:  Every virtual space has its own reason for being along with its own rules, norms, culture, and communication methods – often its own language.  The richness of the connections in virtual worlds does often trump the interactions we receive in the actual world.  There is a realness to them that transcends the physical.  Reciprocity is central to the growth of a true community.  What troubles me is that we have constructed our “real” institutions, organizations, and expectations in ways that often dehumanizes and that removes reciprocity – possibly encouraging (forcing?) us to escape into the virtual to find the real.

Deborah Fields' projects lead us through a study of race and gender via Whyville, where 68% of the participants are girls. Deborah is studying how children develop connections and identities in social worlds and how it might inform “real life” learning. She shared a fascinating case study of “Zoë” who grapples with her ethnicity through an evolutionary process of trading “face parts.”  (In Whyville you have very limited abilities in avatar creation.)  Zoë in real life is black.  However while she could approximate a “black” face – it was difficult to find black “bodies” (“bodies” are actually part of Whyville clothing).  She began looking to trade for Latina representations and she even went through a period of scamming other Whyville avatars. Through this case study Deborah  illustrated that children (all of us, actually) go through phases of participation, developing multiple identities and that we continually evolve them.

My thoughts:  Wow, many thoughts hit me on this one:  children’s game designers have enormous responsibilities and need to consider children's identity formation in their products- let’s start by making it possible to represent more than “white.” Teachers and parents need to keep tabs on the identity formation/experimentation that their children and students are doing – create safety, freedom and encouragement to do so, while gathering insight as children go about it. The shifting “demographic” implications of the transitory nature of online identity and how we will adapt to two very different “states” of identity – one where we are the “same” person all the time due to the melding of our work, social and personal lives online (you are your Google results); and two, the liquidness with which we morph and evolve our identities.

This is by no means even a close approximation of all the stimulating and insightful presentations – just a few of the many highlights.

Dr. Dean Terry of University of Texas, Dallas provided a fun and thought provoking talk on the work his Virtual Worlds Lab and Mobile Lab is doing.  He wrapped up with a demonstration of an augmented reality via a mobile phone project that his students will be unveiling soon.

Post-graduate students, Paolo Ruffino introduced some fascinating concepts of our collective evolving worldview (virtual and actual) through mapping; Bianca Ahmadi presented machinima as an art and education form; and Lindsay Todres explored “self spectatorship” online and how it relates to/changes our use of media, especially cinema.

All in all, there is much to be understood about we avatars.  But it is clear our ideas of reality, community, intimacy, identity and space must evolve in step with virtuality.  This research is just a beginning, and from all the encouragement and collaboration I saw going on we have some interesting research to look forward to.

Kudos to Tom Boellstorff and Maria Bezaitis of UCI’s Anthropology Department for organizing the event.  Tom’s book, Coming of Age in Second Life is due to be released in a couple of days.

April 27, 2008

Revisiting the Media's Second Life Hype Cycle

Now that 2007 has passed, we may be stepping into the “slope of enlightenment” on the Gartner Hype Cycle as far as Second Life – indeed virtual worlds – is concerned. 

As we entered Q3 of last year, the media launched into their predictable backlash against Second Life after they had wrung their fun out of hyping it. But as we turn our calendars into 2008, it seems the self-replicating media echoes of the much-touted “marketing failures” is losing its attraction.  Even the silly references in massive media reports to all things provocateur are fairly limited these days. 

Of course, it helps that the activity in and around virtual worlds as an “industry” is accelerating ever more rapidly.  In addition, enterprise experimentation with them has reached a point where some of those high-profile, cutting edge enterprises are now going more public with their otherwise quiet initiatives.  And, the technological commitments by the likes of IBM, Sun, Cisco and other large technology, entertainment and media companies fuels the “let’s get serious” attitude that is almost palatable now. 

In just the past week, I’ve found several rather sensible media stories in my news reader that hopefully reflect a coming media era of more widespread knowledge and discussion of the applications of virtual worlds.  There is plenty of deep discussion going on in sectors other than the press, but let’s face it, mainstream perceptions are [still] largely influenced by mainstream media.  So, here’s a sampling in case you’d like to peruse:

Virtual World Workforce, Part 1: Promising the World
Virtual World Workforce Part 2: Real-Life Pitfalls

By the way, TechNews World has a very nice ongoing series on virtual worlds of which these two articles above are a part.   

Businesses look to online world Second Life to create virtual enterprise.

Asperger’s Therapy Hit Second Life

Pixelanthropy: Charities tap into Second Life

NASA investigates virtual space

On a related note,  Shel Holtz in the Hobson and Holtz For Immediate Release podcast interviewed Forrester’s Erica Driver, Principal Analyst and co-author of the recently released Forrester report, Getting Real Work Done In Virtual Worlds.  Nothing new and pretty fundamental for those of you already familiar with virtual worlds, but the interview provides a nice overview of what Forrester’s report covers relative to “real work” being done in immersive 3D spaces.  You can listen to the 30-minute podcast here.

Image via Wikipedia

January 21, 2008

Roo Reynolds' Enterprise 3D Presentation

IBM Metaverse Evangelist, Roo Reyonlds, has posted his excellent presentation, Enterprise 3D: Living and Working in Virtual Worlds, delivered this week at Online Information 2007 in London.

Roo discusses the internal virtual world IBM is building for its eventual use by 300,000 employees in the context of the importance of social networking in the enterprise.

Favorite concept:  WoW (and virtual worlds) is the new golf, with structured rules, funny clothes, and almost entirely for socializing and conducting and brokering business.

His remarks harken back to my previous post... here is a snapshot of Roo’s desktop (from his presentation) that beautifully illustrates my point about distributed virtuality: 

Case in point:  The "avatar" is the most valuable asset in the cosmos.

December 8, 2007

Gartner Sees Virtual Worlds As A Growing Shopping Experience

Yesterday Gartner Finland released their predictions to retailers about emerging shopping habits and venues.  These are actually not so much predictions as a “heads-up display” of what is already happening.

By 2010, says Gartner, 20% of global Tier 1 retailers will have some kind of marketing presence in virtual worlds and online games.  This isn’t surprising considering Gartner’s 2007 Emerging Trends report from their April Symposium predicted 80% of active Internet users and Fortune 500 enterprises will have virtual world presences by 2011.  And, with virtual worlds on track with Moore’s law of doubling every 24 months, it is no big stretch of the imagination that retailers are riding the wave.

Networks are a Channel and a Place

No matter what lens you look through, 2007 saw an enormous embrace by organizations of “virtuality,” from social networks to Second Life.  The various different types of virtuality (2D and 3D) which organizations are trying to get their heads around are simply mashing up into an information and social space.  Soon we won’t be making distinctions among the technologies used to facilitate these spaces. 

And shopping certainly isn’t waiting around.

Brookstone launched their Kinset store for this year's holiday shopping season.

Social shopping networks like Kaboodle, ThisNext and Stylehive were built as ‘visual’ social sites, socially bookmarking through images rather than text.  Stylehive is now offering “Nectar Hives” allowing  retailers to "snap in" social shopping communities around their brands.

H&M set up shop in SimCity (video link), and have launched their initiative at My Virtual Model, also distributing it to Facebook.

Of course, Sears and Circuit City are experimenting with virtual-to-real retail via IBM in Second Life; and in-game advertising and product placement is old news.

Gartner encourages retailers to expand their definition of customer touchpoints to online games and virtual worlds – and cites the mobile shopping web as a big growth opportunity, as well.

The important point in all this is this:   it is not about the virtual “place.”  Like everything else today, the shopping opportunity lies with the avatar. 

See Gartner’s press release here.

See Kinset’s 3D shoppping videos here.

December 8, 2007

Book Review: Exodus of the Virtual World; How Online Fun is Changing Reality

Life is a game.  Edward Castronova brings us face to face with a new twist on the concept in his newest ‘speculative non-fiction’ book, Exodus to the Virtual World; How Online Fun is Changing Reality.

Thumbing through it, you might guess this is a book about a generation of gamers addicted to seeking unending fun, opting out of the real in favor of the virtual.  Or, you might think it is a sociological warning about the weird and scary world of gaming cultures, whose millions of inhabitants have entered the mainstream work world and are bringing with them their geeky scary view of society.  Or, if you happen to land dead center in the book, you might think Castronova himself is living in a fantasy world where he’s mistaken game society and real world public policy as one. 

Well, kind of…but No.

Grasp this book between your two hands, and before you open it, repeat three times: “this is a book of speculative non-fiction.”

And then read every word of it seriously.

The three underlying themes within this book are happening.  They may be under the radar, but that doesn’t make them any less real or less disruptive to your near future. If you are in business, pay attention – it has implications for you.  If you are a marketer, be aware that you have to get in the game (pun intended).  If you are a public official, at least consider the possibilities.

Theme 1:  Virtual economies cannot help but affect real world economies.  Castronova walks us through how so.  The ‘virtual economy’ as a whole is already the size of a small country.  Even if people are spending only a small percentage of their time producing, buying, selling virtual goods, it is taking money/production out of the real world economy.  As millions of people start doing it and migrating “there” (China is betting on it) and on a growth curve following Moore’s Law, it will make a very big difference to all of us. 

“The thought of a new community, society or state emerging on its own territory should give us pause.”

Theme 2:  Virtual worlds are fun; the real world is not and people like fun more than “not fun.”  What’s not to love?  Of course what ‘fun’ actually means here is the key to the title of the book.  The case Castronova makes is that people are finding meaning/satisfaction in collaborative game spaces and virtuality that real world structures/systems don’t allow or support.  It is the why of virtual world fun-ness that is key here and that may be an imperative for the real world.  Fun in Castronova's sense is not ‘meaningless play’ it is challenge, mastery, learning, testing without serious consequences, survival, fairness and the ability for everyone to succeed (if eventually).

But herein lies one of the sticking points I have with Exodus to the Virtual World.  Castronova seems to equate virtual worlds, video games and ‘practical virtual reality’ as one and the same, interchangeable, seemingly painting them with the same cultural and structural ‘fun’ brush.  They aren’t the same.  Motivations, activities and structures are different – but I forgive because this is a book about trends and possibilities – and that is the really important place he takes the reader in his discussion.

Theme 3: Game designers are designers of societies, with the goals of making people happy and improving well-being.  Successful public policy might learn from game design.  Here’s where you might think “okay – gone too far.  I was with you for a while, but time to close the book now.”

Hang in.  Of course Castronova, economist that he is, knows life is not ‘the game.’ Not everyone finds these games ‘fun’ or are ‘technographically’ aligned with them (a point Castronova doesn’t make).   People do operate in the real world.  But he does run the concepts of game design and public policy in parallel with the reader, just asking the question, “can we learn something about human happiness by listening to the multi-disciplinary arena of game design?”   If millions of people are migrating into virtual reality, it might be worth at least considering the question (not to mention the reasons). 

These are radical and sometimes very impractical ideas.  But I have to admit I marked this passage:

“Perhaps the most striking difference between fun policy and real-world policy is in the process of policymaking.  Game designers deliberate briefly, then implement policies in test environments and tinker with them for a very long time.  Real-world policymakers deliberate for a long time, then implement policies in the real world without any tests at all.  Those who have experienced policy effects in both worlds cannot help being impressed by the difference in the policy quality that results.”

Virtual worlds do give us the ability to test real world scenarios – doing that alone could save a lot of real world human pain and distress.

A final point of digression I have with Castronova that I'll note here is that he states no other online experiences allow for these kinds of societal disruptive environments.  I disagree – and in fact think by focusing only on 3D virtual worlds as where this is happening is shortsighted.  Two-dimensional social networks/social media share many of the characteristics – and implications – of which Castronova speaks in his book.

So, you might think all this isn’t happening, or it is a long way off, or it is far-fetched, or it has no real implications for you or your real world…

Well, early in the year I was in conversation discussing the state of an enormous public institution with a high-ranking government official (of baby boomer age) and she said to me as we discussed solutions, “there must be a way to make it work more like World of Warcraft – how can we make it so people are encouraged and motivated that way?”   I swear.  It happened – in the "real” world.

Thanks to St. Martin's press for a review copy of Mr. Castronova's book.

December 3, 2007
   

Telemedicine Conference In Second Life: October 22-23

The Center for Connected Health will be bringing their upcoming telemedicine symposium, “Building the Connected Health Economy” into Second Life.  The symposium, being held at the RL Harvard Medical Conference Center, begins on Monday, October 22nd and continues through Tuesday the 23rd.  The sessions will be streamed into SL at Connected Health Island auditorium.  The SL audience will be able to ask questions during the live sessions.

A key panel session on Monday will be simulcast in Second Life and RL.  At 7:00 - 8:00 a.m. SLT Monday the RL/SL panel, Second Life: Healthcare Enters the Virtual World, will explore the potential of virtual worlds in the delivery of medicine.   The panelists include:

•    Joseph C. Kvedar, MD, . Director, Center for Connected Health, Partners HealthCare
•    John Lester (Pathfinder Linden), Boston Operations Director, Linden Lab
•    Daniel Hoch, MD, PhD, Assistant Professor, Harvard Medical School
•    Roger Edwards, ScD, Managing Consultant, PA Consulting Group
•    Karen Gans, PhD, patient advocate

The full conference schedule is available here.

The Center for Connected Health tapped Involve, Inc. to develop the Connected Health Island sim and to provide in-world production services.

To attend the conference sessions, teleport to Connected Health Island.

October 18, 2007

CSI New York in SL: Information Week 10/16 Gridtalk

Mitch Wagner/Ziggy Figaro of Information Week is hosting Electric Sheep Company tomorrow, October 16th at the regularly scheduled GridTalk at 8:00 a.m. SLT to discuss the ESC and CBS initiative that will bring the CSI: New York TV show into Second Life.  Dr Dobbs Island is the place to be.

The news of this particular move into SL by CBS has been widely reported in both the SL and mainstream press, but in case you haven’t gotten the skinny, here’s the news:  In an episode to air on October 24, CSI: NY detective Mac Taylor enters Second Life to chase an avatar suspect.  In the episode the virtual world is not renamed to protect its identity.  The story line seeks to meld the virtual and the real, with a RL victim who is a wildly popular avatar in SL, and a killer who attempts to assume her virtual identity.  Taylor (and you, should you decide to accept this mission) goes in world to track down the killer.

We’re seeing with this the logical evolution of the 7 million-dollar investment in Electric Sheep Company in which CBS participated in February of this year; the acquisition around the same time of machimists, ILL Clan; and the success CBS/Showtime experienced with The L Word in SL.

CBS plans to air two 30-second spots that will direct viewers to experience SL for themselves.  The uninitiated will be able to choose from 12 avatars – smart move – and the promise is CSI creator, Anthony Zuiker’s avatar will greet the newly virtual viewers. For the occasion, ESC will provide a customized version of their new browser-like Second Life viewer to make SL easier to navigate and to join in on the planned CSI activities.

The SL CSI environment will reportedly include CSI forensic lab activities, clues left at the virtual murder scene and a field kit of tools for those who want to become a virtual CSI agent.  The aim is to provide various levels of participation.

The “episode” will continue until February during which time Zuiker hopes to draw the connected crowd back to television by integrating show content with the immersive and interactive.

Although not unexpected, I’m delighted to see this move by CBS and I sincerely hope CBS and ESC will share the ups and downs they experience with their initiative. Dare I say this is an important milestone for TV.  This is the future of television in one form or another - from both a content and advertising perspective.  This is one to watch and learn.

Various details at the Virtual Worlds News, the Scotsman and the SF Chronicle.   But be at GridTalk on Tuesday as that promises to be the best bet for up-to-the-minute info.

Here’s the CSI:NY promotional machinima:

October 15, 2007

USC Center on Public Diplomacy Simulcasting Virtual Worlds Panel in Second Life

Join in on September 10, from 10:15 am – 11:45 am SLT for USC's Center on Public Diplomacy panel discussion, From Global to Local: Virtual Worlds, Immigration, and Linguistic Diaspora while the RL version will hail from Mexico City.   According to USC's press release, the topic is meant to explore how virtual worlds can have an impact on making global issues local; and how immersive and digital environments are playing a role in cultural dialogue and interaction.

This panel is actually part of the larger event, Interdependance Day V, that brings together civic leaders, artists and thinkers for a series of discussisons on "the realities and possibilities of forging constructive interdependence in our troubled and divided world." 

The entire event will be simulcast in Second Life and will feature a mix of panelists participating physically in Mexico and virtually in Second Life.  USC's participation is supported by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation.

The USC panelists include:

• Peter Marx, Former Chief Technology Officer for Vivendi Universal Games;
• Jose Murilo, Manager of Strategic Information, Ministry of Culture (Brazil);
• Mark Wallace, virtual worlds journalist;
• François Bar, Associate Professor, USC Annenberg School for Communication;
• Gilson Schwartz, Academic Director of the City of Knowledge, Universidade de São Paulo (Brazil).

Join the group in Second Life "MacArthur Foundation SL Events" for detailed updates.

Get the complete event schedule for Interdependence Day V and details on the USC panel here.

And the PDF of the conference schedule is here.

September 4, 2007