11th Feb 2007

Attention economics

…in an information-rich world, the wealth of information means a dearth of something else: a scarcity of whatever it is that information consumes. What information consumes is rather obvious: it consumes the attention of its recipients. Hence a wealth of information creates a poverty of attention and a need to allocate that attention efficiently among the overabundance of information sources that might consume it

(Simon 1971, p. 40-41).

Our attention span is a resource that can be measured in terms of scarcity. That is, the less attention we can spare, the higher we need to price it. It would be good to note that although most of us do not price our attention, there are businesses out there that price it for us.

Whenever we watch a TV commercial we are paying the owners of that channel with our attention in exchange for content. The channel owners then sell our attention to the advertisers which pay them “real” money in return. If you think about it, you’ll see that this example is valid across the board. Everyone wants a piece of our attention (usually in order to sell us something).

So, if attention is worth money, why go through a middle-man? Why not sell our attention directly?

This is what Root markets does. It’s a start up founded in 2005 by Entrepreneur Seth Goldstein. It allows us to track our own browsing habits (our click-stream) in a secure and accurate fashion and then posts it to a vault. We can then let advertisers/businesses buy our attention from us on the attention exchange market.

Instead of trying to lure us into clicking on an ad which advertises real-estate the advertiser will buy the identity of people that are browsing on real-estate sites, and the rights to offer them a business deal. They call this kind of technology MyWare (as opposed to SpyWare).

Or, as Mr. Goldestein put it:

Everybody else is spying on me, so I want to spy on myself.

Kudos! to that.

The model proposed by Mr. Goldstein will make it hard for businesses to bid for a person’s attention if they don’t know how much the attention of a single person is worth. It’s safe to assume that a student conducting research is worth less than a multi millionaire looking to buy land for his winter lodge. This problem will prevent us from actually trading with our attention because the buyer (the advertiser) won’t know the true value of our attention.

To solve this, Goldstein suggests that we can make other bits of information available along with our click-stream in order to become attractive to the advertisers. We can add our credit rating to our surf habits in order to raise our attention’s worth. I’d assume we can also add other bits of info such as our academic achievements, current employment status etc.

I’m guessing that companies like VeriSign could make big money selling user-certificates that validate our “attention rating”.

Regardless of whether an attention market will catch on or not, ideas such as this one provide a glimpse into the possiblities of the future web. And while true there is room to oppose the notion of selling our credit rating to the highest bidder, we need to remember that someone out there is already using this information whether we like it or not.

Personally speaking, I’d rather have control over what kind of information is made available, and I would certainly want to be paid for it.

3 תגובות לפוסט “Attention economics”

  1. מאת Andy:

    Well … Mr. Goldstein certainly had a brilliant idea but in my opinion it is more suitable for an academic project rather than a commercial one. That is, there is no money in it. The information is out there, an advertiser has a simpler and hence a cheaper way to collect whatever information he wants. Take Google for example, it collects data from your inbox and advertises to you according to the content of your emails. So, can you say that Google is spying on you? I don’t think so; they just sell you storage in exchange for information about you. There are all kinds of information, some of them worth money and some worth information which is with all the respect (and I do respect it since I am in the IT industry) is not valid in my local grocery.
    Which leads me to a thought that Root markets and Mr. Goldstein made just half of the way, the other one is how to find a link one kind of information to another so that eventually you will get to something worth any money.
    Having tones of fun reading your blog :-)

  2. מאת shamshins:

    Andy,

    Well, yeah, Google can charge advertisers for targeted ads on my Gmail inbox. Cool.

    But my point is, that once you offer your click-stream for sale, Google’s offer might not be as attractive as it once was. Advertisers will have an alternative to Google’s extrapolated view of what is interesting to a user: The user’s actual behaviour.

    Google will keep selling Ads both on it’s search results page as well as on Gmail, but some funds will be funneled towards buying click-streams from the users themselves rather than to Google.

    Incidently, ‘Root Markets’ plans to have a share of those new funds as the operator of the click-stream vault so what we’re basically talking about is just another man-in-the-middle (in that sense I totaly agree with you that there is nothing new here).

  3. מאת andy:

    But is it cost effective to buy the browsing info from each user at a time? Commercials worth the money only if you target a large population of viewers….
    So instead of dealing with one supplier such as Google, Amazon etc. the advertiser now needs to contact each user and negotiate the price for his information. Sure you can build all sorts of systems to help him with the task but still is it worth the effort?
    I guess only time will show us