Jun
13
Getting into the Info-Drug Argument
Filed Under B2B, Blog, eBook, Industry Analysis, internet, mobile content, news media, STM | Leave a Comment
It was an argumentative week in New York last week . Not that I found myself arguing with the publishing and information community , of course . As ever they were gentle and sapient beings who could see all three sides of every question . Yet more than on a number of recent trips I found that the relationships of suppliers , intermediaries and hooked users in the info drugs trade were strained , and this was not , and wouldn’t be in this sector , about users being threatened with cold turkey after a reduction of supply . In fact , we are flooded with the stuff and users often beg for less , or better ways of monitoring the flow . And it is about price . And the arguments of last week were being played out against the backdrop of BP’s overflow , the movement of world oil prices , and BP’s share price and dividend decision. Indeed with Presidents and Prime Ministers in phone meetings to ensure that we understood that the raging argument was not a raging argument , the scene was set for the media classes to fall to bickering on their own .
First off the blocks were the New York Times , Apple Inc and Alphonso Labs Inc . Who ? You may be forgiven for not knowing that the last-named are a brand new , boys -in- their- early- twenties -working -in -a-Palo-Alto -garage set-up . We shall no doubt hear more of Akshay Kothari and Ankit Gupta , not least because their first product , the Pulse News Reader App for the iPad, was specifically mentioned last week in his WWDC speech by Steve Jobs , first in line of great Palo Alto garage graduates , as a great example of how Apps could focus usage and intensify reader experience .
So it was a great surprize when Pulse was withdrawn mid-week , apparently at the request of the New York Times . Was it because the Pulse advert featured the NYT in its frame ? Was it because the Pulse application was better than the NYT’s own reader app ( while it was up in its original state the app was downloaded in a few days 35,000 times at £2.39 each ) ? Or was it because , although as yet it has no paywall policy , the NYT objects in principle to being framed by anyone ( are we really going to get back to that tired old internet argument ) ? Or did the NYT simply want a cut of the action and didn’t know whom to ask ?
The iPad is the latest ace hookah from which we take our info-drugs . The Pulse App is simply a smarter way of collecting RSS feeds , for which individuals could register for free , and playing them on the new hookah through a software called Safari , which everyone , including NYT , have to use if they are to have access to the new habit . The boys from the garage just gave the NYT 35,000 new subscribers to a service they already offer , and featured the NYT in their advertisements . Seems to me that editors with bouquets should attend their garage doors , not lawyers with writs . And Apple , far from removing the kids ( who won a Stanford Institute of Design award for this ) should give them a job . But Apple , having moved from hardware/software supplier to access controller and owner of the user profile on the Web , must now play a different game with content suppliers . And this one is a dangerous one .Apple , like Google in a similar role , would be too powerful in this position to make life comfortable for either growers or smokers .
( PS I understand that Pulse has now gone back up – with the NYT amputated . Who does that help ? )
At the same time in California a noisy spat was taking place between the University of California and Nature Publishing Group . Nature has been renegotiating its deal with the California Digital Library . Talks surrounded the depth of discount that the library should enjoy : Nature says it currently gives California an 88% discount on its list prices , and wants this to be close to the average of 50% that it gives other users , while California stigmatizes this as a 400% price increase . California wrote an open letter to faculty representatives on its ten campuses , thus “outing ” the argument in an attempt to put public pressure on Nature . , who point out that they have capped list prices at 7%, and are the major publisher most compliant with the so-called ” green agenda ” of open access .
No one is going to win this one either . Nature’s output is “must-have ” to an outfit of California’s standing , but not beyond price . As a major buyer the university authorities could imagine that by making an example of a medium-sized player they will soften up the negotiations with the larger lists of Elsevier , Wiley-Blackwell or Springer . Both parties are in a recession , and both will plead poverty and the need to guarantee survival . It is however as unthinkable that California will not supply its students and researchers with Nature magazine at an average download price , under Nature’s proposed pricing , of $0.56 per download , as it is that Nature will walk away from an institution where its authors litter every street corner . So who blinks first , and who blows smoke in the faces of addicts and users everywhere ?
At the end , these are power plays . Is the University a big enough power block to make its will felt , and can the newspaper use its ownership any more to control how the end-user views its content ? These struggles used to take place behind closed doors . Then the golden rules were – never push your power too far , for in the exercise of using it you are losing it . NYT is clearly some way down that track : if the University of California forces its students to subscribe seperately to Nature then it too begins to lose control of the argument . How much do you need it and can you kick the habit are still powerful questions in the world of commoditized information .
Apr
7
Genetics just got Personal
Filed Under Blog, healthcare, Industry Analysis, internet, mobile content, Publishing, STM, Uncategorized | 1 Comment
Everyday , like the janitor of an apartment building sweeping the hallways , I protect my readers from posted comments inviting them to sample special car insurance offers , free animal sex movies , or cheap supplies of drugs from Canadian pharmacies . This last area has now turned into a torrent. I deleted nine today. And having watched the crowds last night during a five hour wait for treatment in a Parisian hospital I see and feel just how compulsive a business health is : the workflow of life itself . So small wonder that web life mirrors real life , and that consumer healthcare is a rapidly growing area . And given the size of the topics , and what you need to know to begin to explore the muttered hints given by your doctor or specialist , it is small wonder that a great deal of current content flatters to deceive , or is found too opaque or too dense for effective consumer use . What the field needs is a coherent way for consumers to understand themselves and their conditions in a context which is their property , and which forms a part of their self-knowledge which they bring into play when they have consultations with experts . In fact , an analysis of their starting point on life’s workflow which contextualizes everything else that happens to them .
Well , anyway , it passed the time , did this thought . And recalled a splendid conversation with my daughter , who is planning to set out on a medical education , which took place some days ago . I had alluded to www.23andMe.com , the very interesting start-up site which should be known because it is bringing a new look to genetic analysis ( and is known because its founder , Anne Wojcicki, is the wife of Sergey Brin ). This service , for a price of between $399 and $599 , sends you a saliva test , analyses your sample , finds your relatives out as far as fourth cousins , and then gives you guidance on conditions that may be inherent in your genetic make-up . All fairly crude , of course , but enough to be compulsive -or dangerous.
My daughter opted for the latter . Donning the mantle of an aspiring professional , she could see only too clearly the dangers of knowing enough to be frightened and not enough to be fully informed . And what about employer discrimination , and insurance company refusals to insure known risks ? Clearly it was a minefield and it was best if amateurs ( I qualify here ) kept clear . But I still wonder. I see citizens of the future carrying and trading this type of information as part of a restoration of the balance in their relationships with the medical profession . I feel certain that the avoidance of risk will become a powerful factor in decisions about having children , and I have little confidence left in doctors or politicians when they know best .
And if there is any value in this thought , then it points a finger directly at medical publishing and medical informatics in regard to the communication job that they carry out at present . We all laughed at the very idea in the early days of Open Access that the woman on the Idaho omnibus would be able to make sense of a research article on her child’s cancer . www.23andMe.com has the same problem . Fine graphics , videos and cartoons got us over the ealy explanatory stages ( I loved the English English voice over – an American voice in this context suggests marketing ? ). Then we are in citation country , and gene-talk is very hard to follow . For example , I would need to be paid $599 to understand this :
“Although a variety of factors influence a patient’s ideal dose of warfarin, the genetic variations in the CYP2C9 and VKORC1 genes reported by 23andMe play an important part. In January 2010 the FDA updated warfarin’s label to say that information on these variants can assist physicians in selecting a starting dose of the drug. The agency also provided initial dosage recommendations for patients with different variant combinations. The FDA does not, however, require that genetic testing be done before prescribing warfarin.
Versions of the CYP2C9 gene known as *2 and *3 can slow down the body’s ability to break down warfarin. This causes the drug’s concentration in the bloodstream to decrease more slowly, so the patient needs a lower dose to begin with. Each T at rs1799853 indicates a copy of CYP2C9*2. Each C at rs1057910 indicates a copy of CYP2C9*3.
The normally functioning version of CYP2C9 is called *1.”
But this will change . Our genetic heritage may well be the health equivalent of internet banking . If it is , then medical publishers will need to explain themselves to a much wider readership – or maybe , in instances like Nature Publishing taking on the management of Scientific American , this is already happening . As I walked out of Hotel Dieu into a Spring evening in the square outside of Notre Dame I could already imagine the disintegration and re-integration of medical publishing as we know it , all built around lifetime alerting services updating us on knowledge about research into the subject that most concerns us – ourselves .
« go back — keep looking »