A couple of months back, I wrote a post [german] in which I argued that the "poking" function on Facebook had been so successful at the beginning (and isn't anymore) because it is essentially a form of communication without a predefined message - which was a good thing on a new platform where people didn't know how and with whom to interact. Poking then was a way of contacting someone without revealing any intentions; the receiver could interpret the "poke" however he or she wanted. As the rules of social behaviour on platforms like Facebook became more refined, the attractiveness of this communication form declined (although in the 24 hours after I had written this, I was poked about 25 times).

Recently, however, it occurred to me that the "Like" function that Facebook had copied from FriendFeed, has very similar features. It, too, is a form of communication without any inherent message, its only difference to the "poking" being that it is not directed towards people, but rather their updates. It allows you to interact even if you don't have something specific to say; or are unsure of what you want to say; or just want to leave it open what exactly you're saying. The 80 people on Facebook that have recently "liked" a NYT story about the bombings in Indonesia were probably not supporters of terrorism;  rather, they liked the reporting and not the fact; or they wanted to raise awareness to the story; or they were just bored and clicked on something. It is impossible to know whether people who "like" something really like that thing, already because of the simple fact that there is no "dislike" button with which one could express disagreement (there is only an "unlike" button; I'm still waiting for the right situation to tell someone "I unlike you").

What the "Like" function did, essentially, is to lower the barriers for online interactions even further; a trend that is going on already for some time now. First, there was blogging, which allowed for immediate and very personal writing. Then came Twitter, and it became possible to throw out simple short lines; Facebook followed suit with its redesigned status update function. But as simple as these communication forms are, one has still to, you know, SAY something. With the "Like" function (and many similar tools on other services), even this barrier is removed. Communication is stripped down to a simple, essentially purpose-free interaction. It is, if you will, "the medium is the message" in its purest form because there is barely any message left.

Of course, this need not be a bad thing: It's not that people would replace meaningful conversations with lots of "likes". Just like blogging and tweeting, the "liking" simply adds another layer to an already rather complex system of online communications.

Die Werbeagentur «Davies Meyer» hat, aus mir unerklärlichen Gründen, beschlossen, mir Informationen zu ihrer «Pepsi I CAN be a star»-Kampagne an meine Privatadresse zu schicken. Und weil die «I CAN be a star»-Kampagne so etwas wahnsinnig konkret originelles und tolles ist, haben der Clemens Bartlome und der Markus Arnold von Davies Meyer ihr dürres Pressecommuniqué in einen Sack gepackt, eine billige Sonnenbrille dazu gelegt und dass dann alles in ein lächerliches grosses Paket verfrachtet, dass ich heute auf der Post abholen gehen musste (ich dachte, es sei was anderes).
 
Aber zurück zur tollen Kampagne, mit der «jeder ein Star werden kann». Pepsi geht nämlich mit dieser «ungewöhnlichen Kampagne einen ganz neuen Weg». Wieso? «Der Herzschlag der gesamten Aktion geht von der Website pepsi.ch aus». Oder, anders formuliert (falls es beim ersten Mal unverständlich war): «Das Internet steht im Mittelpunkt der Kampagne!» Wahnsinn! Das Internet! Als Marketinginstrument! Das! ist! völlig! neu!
 
Nun gut, die Herren von Davies Meyer haben explizit um mein Feedback zu ihrer Kampagne gebeten. Hier ist es:
 
* Schickt mir NIE mehr Presseunterlagen an meine Privatadresse. Für sowas ist die Redaktion da.
 
* Wenn ihr schon was schickt, dann packt das Zeugs um Himmels Willen in ein Couvert, das in meinen Briefkasten passt.
 
* Apropos schicken: Da eure Kampagne ja mit diesem wahnsinnig neuen Internetz-Medium arbeitet - kennt ihr schon E-Mail?
 
* Ach ja, danke auch viel mal für die Einladung zu eurer tollen VIP-Party in Lausanne am 18. Juli, zufälligerweise gerade der Tag, an dem euer Paket zugestellt wurde (ich war halt grad nicht zu Hause). Sonst hätt ich mich natürlich sofort auf den Weg gemacht.

My current main occupation is writing my master thesis. Thus, for the last six or so months, most of my days looked like this: I got up. I went to university. I read books. I wrote.

And although I was (and still am) fascinated by the topic of my thesis (propagandistic aspects of papal and royal letters during the Invesiture Contest in the late 11th century, if you must know), I realized about a month ago that I was getting exhausted. My energy level dropped to a dangerously low level, I felt exhausted, tired and not motivated at all.

So I decided to change places for a while. Instead of going to my desk at university, I left town for a week to go to the tiny village of Filzbach in the Swiss mountains. I mostly did the same things there than I did back home: I read books, I took notes. But the simple fact that I did these things in a different environment had an amazing effect: I felt energized again, eager to learn and motivated to move forward.

The same thing also works with virtual places: I've been running a personal blog for quite a while now (it's in German, called «Hundertfünfzig Worte»). But at some point, my motivation to invest time to write it started to drop. While I still had ideas on what to write, I just couldn't get myself to actually sit down and write it. The last entry on the blog is two months old and just points to stuff I did elsewhere on the web.

So I decided to change places online too: I opened this Posterous blog here. And guess what happened: All of a sudden, I want to write again. Of course, that has also to do with the fact that posting with Posterous is dead-easy. But mostly, I think, it is the excitement of having a new place, a new environment, a new playground.

«New ideas need new places», said Fabian to me recently. I couldn't agree more. If you feel stuck, try changing places. It can be as little as opening a new blog, or as big as moving to another continent. Either way, it will give you fresh energy and motivation.

I'm a huge fan of Jon Stewart's «Daily Show». And I'm not the only one: In a survey on America's favorite journalists, Jon came in fourth. And last year, the New York Times asked «Is Jon Stewart the Most Trusted Man in America?»

Why on earth would people trust a guy who does «fake news»?

The cynical answer would be that most TV viewers have just lost their faith in TV reporting and are turning to the «Daily Show», where they don't get the truth either - but at least something to laugh.

But maybe there are other, and more cheerful, explanations for this.

First, the business of news is rapidly changing: Pure information is not a scarce resource anymore - you can find out what happened in the world anytime from the internet, from thousands of sources, for free. This abundancy of information drives up the demand for a complementary good of «news»: analysis. The more people know what happened, the more they want to know why. And by making fun of public figures and media coverage while deconstructing their often manipulative and inconsisten behaviour, the Daily Show is actually providing a form of analysis.

Second, the distribution channels of information are also changing. The web enables and favors viral distribution patterns - and what is more viral than comedy? If you find an insightful and intelligent article online, you might e-mail that to a few people. But if you see a funny video on YouTube, you will blog and tweet and facebook the hell out of it - and shows like the «Daily Show» can vastly increase their reach. (Of course, all of this is only possible because the producers of the show were actually smart enought to put all of their clips online for free.)

This might even point to a bigger trend: Just as the «Daily Show» manages to combine comedy and actual insights, it seems to become more acceptable or even desirable to have fun while doing serious things - like work. Fun is no longer perceived as just recreational, but also productive: If you enjoy yourself, then you just deliver better results.

PS. As a thank you for reading until the end of this post, here are two of my favourite Daily Show clips: