Epilogue to the DearMedia study on youth and TV

After the publication of the full report I mentioned in my previous post (which, in academic terms would not be considered a full report) and the comment by one of the authors (Jo Caudron) you'll find below that post, it is my duty to get back to the results and discuss them. 

Approach - Avoidance: deep traces of attitudes towards media devices and their contents

Why is it that interactive TV is not really a success whereas second screen applications seem to be doing OK? This question has puzzled me for a while and the answer is not an easy one, I think. In this post I will try to shed some light on an answer that only accounts for a very small proportion of the total findings. It just deals with cool and unconscious processes, things that get extra credit in my own view on things. This partial answer has to do with very deep behavioral processes: approach and avoidance. 

Wanted: Persuasive design research

A recent column (in Dutch) by Tim Driesen (@mrtimp; creative at Famous, Brussels) got me thinking - something the author should be credited for. Tim wrote down a desperate cry for help: advertising (at least in Belgium) is in desperate need of intelligent creatives. In recent years, he observed intelligent talent entering the business, but mostly in the strategic departement. At one point I did feel a strong relevance of his post for my own work in academics. His diagnosis of the problem revolved around two key issues, I believe:

• Students from an arts education are of course pretty creative but, on average, less intelligent
• Students having an academic background have lost their creative talent and ability to think outside the box