Medicine Mandates

According to an online article in The Almagest, the FDA is issuing penalties to Indian drug manufacturers for adulterated and fake medicines.  The penalties have ranged in severity from large fines to outright bans.  Because 40% of U.S. consumer drugs are supplied by India, these penalties can have a major impact on the American marketplace.  Conversely, pharmaceutical manufacturing is a key sector in the Indian economy and any disruption can have major implications for the Indian workforce, as well (Francescangeli, 2014).

As discussed in class, the collapse of cultural, economic and political barrier is in evidence.  It is cultural in terms of social responsibility, economic in terms of the implications for both the American consumer and Indian manufacturers, and political in the FDA’s role in regulating Indian manufacturers.

There is a sovereignty question present here.  Traditionally, international relations were based upon sovereign interests, but in transnational social spaces the lines are blurred and unilateral policy across traditional national boundaries is no longer possible (Barber, 2002).  The regulatory power of the FDA is an assertion of American sovereignty, but such policy has a significant effect on the Indian labor force.  And in a world economy, the leverage of labor to protest policy is diminished as the labor market now competes globally (Sklair, 1999).

This is a manifestation of the idea of Glocalization, where the impact of the local must be understood in terms of its effect on the global and vice-versa (Beck, 2000).  In this case, the effects are two-way.  American values and consumer needs are legitimate in terms of safety and should be understood, as well as the impact of unilateral bans and resulting resent from India.  The two economies are tied closely together and issues of globalization need to be addressed in order to navigate the conflict described in the article.

References

Francescangeli, C. (2014, February). Medicines imported from India not safe: FDA. Retrieved from http://www.thealmagest.com/medicines-imported-india-safe-fda/10222.

Barber, B. (2002, January 3). Beyond Jihad vs. McWorld. The Nation. Retrieved from http://www.thenation.com/article/beyond-jihad-vs-mcworld

Beck, U. (2000). The world horizon opens up: On the sociology of globalization. In What is globalization? (pp. 17-30). Cambridge: Polity Press.

Sklair, L. (1999). Competing conceptions of globalization. Journal of World-System Research, 2, 143-163.

Data Mining and Me

This week the FDA warned a google-backed company called 23andMe to stop sales of its DNA testing services.  23andMe provides a self-administered DNA test that customers send back to 23andMe and receive detailed genetic reports, ancestral information and health recommendations.  The FDA’s concern is focused on customers opting for unnecessary treatments and surgeries based upon information received from 23andMe. 

This, of course, is a legitimate concern.  But when I heard it was google-backed, my thoughts went to data.  And, as expected, the privacy statement on 23andMe’s website has a large section devoted to the sharing of “Aggregated Genetic and Self-Reported Information.”  The aggregated genetic data, stripped of individual identification, could be used in peer-reviewed research studies.  Such assurances that individual identification will not be linked to shared data may seem adequate on the surface, and sufficient to satisfy many considering signing up for their services.

However, the deeper implication is in what the aggregate data is being used for.  Who is doing the study and for what purpose?  Is it going to insurance companies?  Can they be searching for health trends and adjusting policy accordingly?  Might it be food, alcohol, or tobacco companies looking for ways to combat criticism of their industries?

This might seem to be a very cynical point of view.  I do recognize that there are those who would take this data and use it to help society.  But, this story demonstrates again the need for people to understand the implications of data mining, and to think more critically about how their data is used whether or not their names are attached to it. 

Beyond Just A Cool Ad

It's likely that in the last week you have seen this video.  After watching the video, I'm sure that most would agree that it is a great advertisement.  But there are two points in Volvo's handling of this that go beyond just a great ad.

1. TRANSPARENCY

My initial reaction to this video was that it couldn't have been exactly as it appears.  That there had to be some sort of trickery.  Volvo, for their part, said that the stunt was real, but there were plenty of safety lines that could not be seen in the finished ad to protect Van Damme.  By revealing this safety precaution, Volvo manages to make sure nobody feels that they are trying to pull one over of their audience and does not take anything away from the impact of the stunt.

2. DRIVING VIEWERS TO THE WEBSITE

The advertisement is about Volvo technology: Volvo Dynamic Steering.  But Volvo has taken advantage of YouTube to create a video that went viral on social media, yet gave no detail about the specifics of the technology.  Instead, they created awareness and curiosity that would presumably drive viewers to the Volvo website or dealerships for more information.  In all, a great use of social media for technological innovation.

Eye/Robot

As technology develops at an increasingly rapid pace, from smartphones to wearable devices to biotechnology, the implications of our dependency on technology becomes an even greater concern.  The implications not only apply to the effect on culture, but literally upon who and what we are.  Will we become cyborgs?  Will technology replicate us and become indistinguishable from humanity or will it surpass and dominate us?

While scientists, physicists and science fiction authors prognosticate on the inevitable technological takeover, the real answer may be: "not so fast."   A CBS News story describes how London police have identified “super-recognizers” to help in facial recognition of known criminals.  It turns out that certain people, using only their eyes, have the ability to perform facial recognition far better than any machine or software program.

It may be, then, that there are processes integrated between the brain, the eyes and all the things that make us human, over eons of evolution, that cannot be replicated with a computer -- that until we until we understand the very essence of the nature of the universe (which may be unknowable), we can never fully understand the depths of biological processes.

Or it may be that the study of “super-recognizers” becomes another step towards understanding how to replicate biology and “The Matrix” really is not so far away.

Data Speedometer

The conversations that surround social media and data mining generally focus on how organizations gather information on consumers.  In this model, consumers are considered at the bottom of a top down power hierarchy.  However, social media allows for this power structure to be turned around.

I read an article this week about how the FCC plans to release a "Speed Test App" the crowdsources mobile users to report on data speeds to measure the extent to which wireless providers are able to deliver on their data speed claims.

There still seems to be some skepticism on the app's ability to accurately measure actual data speed delivery, but the larger picture is an illustration on how crowdsourcing via social media can democratize the power of data mining.  In this example, consumers have a very real ability to monitor and hold organizations to the services they promise.  As a result, organizations are forced to operate more transparently.  As transparency necessitates communication, a two-way relationship in formed reinforcing the democratization process.

While this power cycle may be a somewhat utopian vision of social media's affect on the relationship between organizations and publics, it is a very real demonstration on how social media technology can drive the process of democratization.

Flea Market Online

Recently, IKEA ran a campaign that allowed customers to sell their used furniture via an online flea market through IKEA’s Facebook page.  The used furniture was also marketed by IKEA’s ad agency, SMFB, via broadcast, print and outdoor billboards.  The aim of the campaign was to encourage customers to sell their old furniture to be more sustainable rather than simply discarding them. 

The campaign was a great example of how organizations can use social media to achieve multiple goals simultaneously.  By launching a campaign aimed at sustainability, they improved their reputation in the community.  They built trust with their customers by involving and engaging with them, and helping them sell their items while taking no fee for themselves.  Finally, the reputation and trust they built might have resulted in additional sales for those who sold their furniture and might be in the market for new items.

Any organization can learn from this example and it’s employment of the triple bottom line: people, planet, profit.

Mean 'Ween

Last week, residents of Boerum Hill, Brooklyn, woke to find a Halloween display like no other – an extreme pumpkin display depicting mutilated baby dolls and a centerpiece of a ghoulish pumpkin surgeon operating on one of them.  The person responsible has been doing an extreme pumpkin display for many years with residents looking forward to it each year.  But this year’s display ignited some controversy as it became fodder for local television news and newspapers.

It also, so happens, that the person responsible is a friend of mine, someone I used to work for many years ago.  So, I’ve had the privilege of following her experience via my connection to her on Facebook.  What has been most interesting to me throughout has been how comments seek to understand the “meaning” of the display.  She has alternately been accused of hating kids, being satanic, being Banksy and “revealed” as an anti-abortion soap opera actress all in an attempt to figure out the rationale behind the display.

For organizations, there is a lesson to be learned in this controversy.  There is an inherent drive in the viral nature of social media to make meaning out of things that catch our attention.  Messages will be interpreted, re-interpreted and misinterpreted across potentially thousands of people sometimes in as short a time as a few hours.  This illustrates the crucial nature of communication strategy and communication expertise within organizations.

The controversy also demonstrates the continuing power of television.  As discussed in class, social media can be instrumental in the delivery and interpretation of messages, and in having an impact across culture as a result.  But here, as in many other instances, television is the catalyst, acting as a gatekeeper in deciding what will be covered and what will not.  Once the coverage happens, then social media expands the story for good or ill.  But organizations should not lose sight of television’s power to shape and influence public attention and opinion.