But sometimes just walking the showfloor can uncover interesting technology gems and surprises, and I came across some cool stuff at Broadcast Asia 2009, a sister event to Communic Asia held concurrently at Expo. At the Singapore pavilion at Broadcast Asia in Hall 8, I came across the 3M Vikuiti rear projection film technology being distributed by Singaporean firm GG Alliance.

What you’re seeing is a video being projected on a glass panel that has the 3M Vikuiti film stuck to it, a thin film layer (about 0.3mm) that can be cut to any shape and stuck to any glass panel from the inside. The projection is behind the glass panel (not in front as I originally thought), and the film is easy to both apply (self-adhesive) and remove.

According to the salesperson I spoke to, any normal projector will do. The quality of the display and the contrast is excellent, and it makes transforming any glass wall into a display showcase a snap as the film can be easily put up and taken down. The applications of this technology are endless, and were it not the price point — 10m x 1.2m of the 3M Vikuiti film costs about S$10,000 — it would have even more potential.

Just next door was LivingLife Concepts, another Singaporean distributor, showcasing smart film, also another kind of special film applied to glass. The film has two modes, an “off” opaque mode, and an “on” transparent mode that is activated when a current is switched on. Basically, any glass wall can become an opaque screen for privacy. It’s easier to see the effect in the YouTube video below:

What’s more, the smart film also allows images to be projected on it via back projection. By combining it with another kind of touch sensitive film on the front of the glass panel, the whole glass screen can be used as an interactive glass display.

For example, on display at the booth was this Google earth map application that could be manipulated and used as a giant touch interactive LCD screen — using your fingers you can zoom in and rotate out. The sales manger also switched to a powerpoint presentation and showed how you use your fingers to move the slides.

However, it’s not a LCD screen; it’s a glass panel that could also become opaque or transparent according to the needs required. The possibilities for advertising use are enormous, but again, the price point is still a little high — about US$12,000 for the entire smart film, touch sensitive film and projection system.

When the price point comes down a little, perhaps minority report styled screens (minus the hologram projection part) won’t be such a thing of the future.

On display at Broadcast Asia were a host of other interesting display technologies like 3D display panels, and thin LCD displays that could be wrapped around pillars and attached to curved walls. In my opinion, this year’s Broadcast Asia is pretty good compared to previous years. It has more booths and brand names (like Panasonic, who decided to set up a booth here rather than in Communic Asia) and is worth a look.

Techgoondu had the chance to be at unConference 2009 held yesterday at the Biopolis, thanks to the kind folks at e27 who had put together an excellent program that brought together some of the top forward-thinkers in the region. Here’s a recap of what I felt were the highlights of the event:

Panel discussion: Innovation in Asia and where is it heading?

The panel was chaired by Benjamin Joffe, founder and CEO of +8* (Plus Eight Star). Participants included Scott Rafer, CEO at Lookery, Dr Gang Lu, co-founder of OpenWeb Asia, Dr Lai Kok Fung, co-founder and CEO of Buzzcity, and Wong Hoong Ann, founder of HungryGoWhere.com.

Each panelist was asked to share how he spotted the opportunity that led them to start their companies. Scott, who started MyBlogLog and sold it Yahoo later, noted that his venture was “almost accidental”, while Hoong Ann of HungryGoWhere identified the need for a marketing channel catered to F&B establishments, particularly among small restaurants. His business and ad model was changed many times, because “you need the flexibility to start a business.”

Dr Lai of Buzzcity, which started as as dotcom company specializing in WAP mobile communications, said his company did not plan for the company’s current successes in South Africa and Indonesia. It was only after the rapid rise in the number of users accessing the Web on the cellphone some time later that spearheaded Buzzcity’s business in the two countries.

Dr Gang Lu, shared his experience with start-ups in China, which comprises three groups. The first are the copycats who will copy successful products and business models, but “the problem is everyone else will be doing the same thing”. It will be hard for copycats to stand out from the pack. He noted that at one point, there were over 150 YouTube clones in China, but only 10 are surviving today.

The second group will take successful products and localize them accordingly in their target markets – an example would be Xiaonei.com, which is now more popular than Facebook in China. Finally, the last group of entrepreneurs would chart their own path through innovation that would eventually lead to their own unique products.

The panelists largely agreed that selling to businesses is always more profitable than selling to consumers, since consumers are typically unwilling to pay for Internet services – advertising is thus the most common way of monetizing their services. In some market segments, selling virtual goods has proven to be a viable as exemplified by Xiaonei.com and Kaixin001.com.

Panelists were also quizzed on what they were doing to mitigate the dependency on search engines, particularly Google, for their site traffic. Hoong Ann of HungryGoWhere.com shared his company’s brush with Google which reduced his business by half in a single day after his website was placed on page 945 in the search results. Dr Lai suggested that start-ups should grow their organic traffic, while Dr Gang added that they try to grow traffic from social media platforms, which allow them to seed communities and build their brands without Google.

Techgoondu also checked out some promising products and start-ups, and these caught our eye.

iTwin was born out of Singapore’s Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*Star) and will be commercialized by Exploit Technologies, A*Star’s marketing and commercialization arm. Essentially, it is a device that can be split into two halves. By plugging each half via a USB port into a home and remote PC respectively, a secured communication channel is established to allow the remote PC to access files on the home PC. In fact, the solution is so elegant that no password is required. The communication is encrypted and authentication is provided through a random key generated by the home PC’s device.

The folks behind iTwin expect the device to be launched by Fall 2009 at a price of between US$40 and US$50. Work is for the device’s software for Windows XP is almost completed, and there are plans to support Windows Vista and Mac OS X. The product roadmap also includes video conferencing applications and even mobile device file transfer.

Fusion Garage was founded by R. Chandrasekar, a familiar face in the Singapore tech circle. Chandra was the founder of Radixs, which previously developed the Motion Experience Interface (MXI) operating system and the Velvet Puffin integrated online service that marries social networking and instant messaging.

The company is currently developing the software for the CrunchPad, a web tablet hardware device conceived by the folks at Techcrunch:

The idea is to get a new type of device into people’s hands for as cheap as possible (we were aiming for $200, it looks like $299 is more realistic). It fits perfectly on your lap while you are sitting in front of the TV, so you can look up stuff on Wikipedia or IMDB as you channel surf. It plays Flash video flawlessly so you can watch movies and TV shows on Hulu or Joost or wherever. Or listen to music on MySpace Music. Or use TokBox to have a video chat with your parents. Then check email and call it a day. Facebook, MySpace, YouTube, Hulu, Wikipedia, Google Docs and Gmail are the killer apps for this device.

Because the device skips the resource-sucking parts of the operating system and focuses on one application – the browser – very low end hardware can be used and still give users a desktop-like Internet browsing experience.

The team from Fusion Garage did not show off any working prototypes of the Crunchpad at the event. For more information, check out this video:

Think of SuperModelMe.tv as another “America’s Next Top Model” type of show.

Except that it is set in Asia, the episodes of this reality series are available only online, and it is a homegrown experiment by Singapore-based multimedia production agency Refinery Media and Exploit Technologies (subsidiary of government linked company A*STAR).

Set to debut about a month from now on 16th June 2009, SuperModelme.tv is a twice-weekly, 20-episode online model search that will document the trials of ten aspiring models from Singapore, Malaysia, Korea, Thailand, Philippines and India. They will compete for a grand prize of S$10,000, with first and second runner up getting S$5,000 and S$4,000 respectively.

Hosted by top local Singapore model Charmaine Harn, the show doesn’t veer from established reality show formats. The models need to impress the resident judges or get voted out, and some judges name-dropped at the swanky announcement event today include fashion photographer Geoff Ang, fashion designer Frederick Lee and celebrity hairstylist David Gan.

The first question a fellow hack at the event said to me when I asked him for his opinion was: “Is this going to be like another S-factor?”

If you’re not familiar with S-factor, a female friend of mine once described it as a “sleazy, trashy skin-flick reality show”. I think that description is reasonably apt, but in fairness the show was designed for the FHM male audience, not for ladies.

My thoughts? SuperModelMe.tv doesn’t feel it’s going to be that to be that low-brow. The show is backed by many brand names, and Refinery Media, who seems to be well connected in the nightlife and entertainment circles, have forged quite a few tie-ups. Hyundai, EZ-Link, Mastercard, JetStar, The Ascott and Tiger are a few examples of companies that are lending their brand presence for the show. StarHub is a partner, and will release exclusive content via StarHub mobile on the show.

The number of supporters and partners for this program — from government agencies like A*STAR to well-known brands — seem quite substantial. The show may not be an expensive production but at least it doesn’t feel cheap. As for the content, I’ll reserve comments till it airs.

Hyperspot: interactive advertising

The part I found really interesting, however, was in the business model and technology.

The first question on my mind was “how the hell is Refinery Media going to make money?” When they mentioned web advertising I was a little dubious — lots of companies have tried to monetize the web and failed. But then Refinery Media showcased their Hyperspot technology, which I found pretty interesting.

The show’s video clips are not only static videos, they’re interactive. When you mouse over and click, for example, on a model’s dress, a sidebar will pop-up and display information about it. And during the short live demo, they showed how clicking a model’s face brings up details of the makeup saloon. Clicking on the background (the video was shot at one of the Ascott hotels) brought up a webpage of the hotel.

This is a pretty powerful form of non-intrusive advertising. My guess is that the technology was supplied by Exploit. The show’s content could be total fluff, but a vehicle was needed to test out how the technology works with a real-life business model, and I guess SuperModelMe.tv was the concept they hung it on.

My interest is piqued by the number of brands/partners involved in the show, and the technology/business model. Plus, it’s a Singaporean start-up. Worth keeping an eye on to see how this develops.

Or to be more precise, old-school newspapers and traditional media is dying. Venerable newspapers like the Chicago Tribune have filed for bankruptcy protection, and even the New York Times is under threat.

I was reading this recent interesting commentary by Walter Isaacson — former TIME editor and CNN board member — on how to save journalism using the “old’ idea of charging for content instead of giving it for free online.

This, he says, will pay for good journalism. If good journalism goes the way of the dodo, it will be a loss to society.

I’m not entirely convinced that some newspapers failing is a bad thing. Old media business models will die, but good journalism will survive in some form.

Although I believe that many traditional media practice good journalism, good journalism — with qualities like timeliness, fact checking, and quality writing — is not the exclusive domain of traditional media. Alfred, my fellow Techgoondu and ex-journalist alum, argued this eloquently and cogently in a previous post and I’m not going to rehash the same talking points.

I’m going to address Walter’s analysis about media business models, which I do agree with. Specifically, he lampoons the traditional model where journalists write for the readers, but the work is paid by advertisers.

A perfect storm is ripping the old media business model to shreds:

• Many traditional media, being stock listed corporations, have to maximize profit for shareholders. Thus, even though many media organizations claim to have a clear editorial/sales divide, it is difficult for traditional media not to be co-opted by big business advertisers. I’m not talking about individuals here, but about the nature of the businesses.
• In the past, the media players had firm control over the mediums — print, radio or TV — by which they could reach their audience. With the advent of the Internet, anybody who wanted to post content to reach a large audience could do so. The Internet destroyed barriers to entry, which paved a path for new social media experiments.
• On the Internet, end users now have a multitude of information sources like online news sites, blogs and wikis to choose from. Media’s authenticity, already suspect due to its conflicted nature, is now awash in a sea of lookalikes, many offering the content for free.
• The savvy Internet generation, intuitively understanding that any singular voice could be suspect, tends to read multiple sites to get a barometer of what is happening. Also, besides bookmarking sites they like, they use search engines to find content they want to read, rather than the other way around. Conclusion: aggregators win.
• Traditional media, hurt by loss of ad revenue, does what any money-driven corporation would be expected to do. Cut costs (read:good journalism) and pander more to advertisers. This diminishes the authenticity and brand of the publication, which leads to a vicious downward cycle as readers flee.

Note that this problem of authenticity applies not just to traditional media, but also to other content like analyst reports and blogs. Any time an analyst, journalist or blogger crafts content for an audience but is beholden to vendors or advertising, this problem exists.

The solution? Charge for content via micro-payment for slices of content, as Walter has suggested in the article. I agree that this makes sense, as it is a way to solve the fundamental problem of authenticity.

However, I’d like to extend that argument. You can go creative commons and offer the content for free, and still make money from it, as Nine Inch Nail’s online Ghost I-IV album has proven.

A freemium model works because content is valued differently by different people. Some will value convenience, customization or other perceived difference and will pay for this. Even if the majority takes the content for free (who wouldn’t otherwise pay for it anyway!), a small cadre of paying folks can float a business.

This model might have seem far fetched a few years ago, but with successful games companies trailblazing freemium models — e.g. “free” MMORPGs like Maple Story and Cabal — I don’t see why traditional media can’t remake itself.

The trick is to find out how to sufficiently differentiate the premium vs. free content. In this, media can take a leaf from the software product industry, which is rife with different charging models that cater to different crowds. Or experiment, like the Spot.US folks in journalism via crowdfunding.

In any case, I believe that one-fits-all publications that rely solely on ad revenue will be made obsolete. Death won’t come immediately, but sticking their head in the ground won’t stop the bell tolling for traditional media.

According to this insightful December 9th 2008 press release by market research firm ZenithOptimedia, ad spend on the Internet is scheduled to rise from 10.3% in 2008 to 15.6% in 2011.

Now, if there is an increase in the pie for the internet slice, something else must go down. And this comes mostly at the newspapers expense: from 25.4% in 2008 to 21.2% in 2011.

In terms of numbers, the Internet ad market will rise from around US$50 billion in 2008 to US$84.3 billion in 2011, whilst the newspapers ad market will decrease from US$123 billion in 2008 to about US$115 billion in 2011.

Another piece of interesting news is that, due to the credit crisis, the global ad market will contract (-0.2%) in 2009, with most of the decline in US (-6.7%) and Europe (-1.0%).