Dear Reader,
It's been a delightful week without travel for me and lots of stories and catching up as I prep for next Tuesday's big announcement of the winners of the Non-Obvious Book Awards. To start, Australia's ban on social media for kids under 16 went into effect this week to mixed reactions. I share three reasons why I think it's definitely not "pointless," as some are suggesting. On driverless cars, the data shows roads are much safer when humans are NOT driving ... but there are a few factors the experts seem to be missing.
It's also the season of "year in review" recaps, when professional journalists and storytellers review their beats and spotlight the best and most fascinating things they have seen all year. I'll be doing the same next week when I share my top ten trends from ALL business books published over the past year. Finally, we'll take a look at a useful storytelling lesson you can take away from Chanel's recent unapproachably luxurious fashion show in an abandoned NY Subway station.
Enjoy the stories and stay curious!
Rohit
Did you get this email forwarded to you? Subscribe here »
This Week's New Videos ...
Why Australia's Ban on Social Media For Kids Under 16 Isn't Pointless
Tech-savvy kids born in the mobile generation have lots of ways of circumventing just about any rule you put in front of them. This week as Australia's ground-breaking law banning the use of social media by kids under the age of 16 took effect, there were lots of reactions both within the country and around the world. One teen was quoted as saying, "“It’s kind of pointless, we’re just going to create new ways to get on these platforms.” That's probably true - but I can think of three big reasons why this isn't at all pointless, and instead might just offer a much needed salvation for people of all ages from the ills of social media addiction.
- Platforms need to rethink their approach. When social media is officially banned, it means that all platforms must stop ideating on how they can more effectively get kids addicted to their services, and focus more on what sort of experience users actually want. This, in an ideal world, could make these platforms better and less toxic for everyone.
- Parents have support for keeping kids off social media. It can be hard to set boundaries for your kids, and that's particularly true when you hear that common argument about how "everyone else has it." By removing this option, Australia has essentially made it easier for parents (particularly less disciplined ones) to stick to their rules and maintain the ban.
- New habits can be formed by even younger kids. The toughest time will be the next 2-3 years when kids who used to have social media had it taken away from them. No one likes to lose something they previously had. But the upside is that kids who are 13 and younger will reach their teen years knowing that social media is banned and therefore not have the expectation to use it.
What do you think? Will Australia's bold move lead to a more global adoption of this sort of legislation - or is that unlikely to happen?
The Data on Driverless Cars Says They Reduce Crashes, So What's Missing?
There's a compelling article that came out this week written by a trauma surgeon who has had to deal with the aftermath of bodies shattered from car crashes. In it, he argues that the data we have so far on driverless cars is clearly in their favor. Crashes in automated vehicles are reduced by over 90%, fatal crashes are rare and the record when considered against miles driven is excellent. Based on the data, the argument for hastening more driverless cars onto the road is clear. What's missing from this data are the other factors that will impact whether driverless cars do indeed offer the intended benefits.
First is the reality that at least for the next decade and likely beyond, any future that includes significant driverless vehicles will also include vehicles on the road driven by humans. This means the most important data will not compare humans to automation, but rather measure the overall safety on the roads when both are ubiquitous. The second, and more concerning, is what freedoms and controls we might all be giving up in a world filled with only driverless vehicles. Aside from the obvious privacy concerns of continually tracked and always-connected cars that monitor our every movement, there is the future dystopian problem of automated cars susceptibility to being hacked by evildoers for kidnapping or worse.
The point here isn't to refute the data on the safety of automated cars, when taken in isolation or to stop wider innovation. For example, one of the more innovative uses of automation in driving I came across recently was by a company called QTPIE that is using automation for real world driving evaluations. Rather, it seems that the better way to really assess how to accelerate the adoption of automation is by finding better solutions to some of the unasked questions on the potential dangers. Or at least starting to gather some data on those scenarios too.
The Season of Curated Recaps Is Here, With CES Around the Corner
Imagine eye drops that temporarily correct your vision. Or ear buds that transform how you sleep. Or a new type of wood that has the same strength as steel. These are just a few of the ideas featured on this year's top innovations list from Popular Science magazine. The entire list features an evolution of tech that has been around for some time along with a useful lens on how innovation on everything from solar roof panels to delivery ziplines might be on their way to becoming commonplace.
In less than a month, I'll be reporting from the trade show floor at CES on the latest consumer technology and what sort of tech to watch for in the coming year and beyond too. (Let me know if you're planning to attend too!) Back when I was writing my annual trend report, this was a time when my content collection would get even more active—and yours should too. End of the year recaps like this one are great ways to get caught up on what's trending, learn from collections curated by journalists and get inspired by the things that professional idea-spotters bring to light.
The Recent Chanel Subway Show Is Typically Unapproachable, But Masterful Storytelling
The theatricality was on full display for Chanel's annual Métiers d’Art show as they took over a decommissioned New York Subway station subway station beneath Bowery on the Lower East Side. The show opened with an Indian model who had first been discovered by Chanel creative director Matthieu Blazy while waiting for a Subway train. The models in the show arrived by train to show off their looks. Among the invited guests was Bernie Wagenblast, one of the voices of the MTA’s announcements. Even the invitations evoked a sense of the exclusiveness of the event:
Rumors about a subway set spread after the invitations arrived, each with a necklace featuring two tiny silver Chanel-branded subway cars, a vintage subway-map poster of the city, and a “Chanel Gazette” newspaper in which Blazy romanticizes the subway as a place where students and world leaders sit side by side. Would any of them actually be wearing Chanel? Given the current absurdity of the prices — $7,000 for a bag, $2,000 for a pair of shoes, $22,000 for a jacket — that’s unlikely. But in Chanel’s universe, the subway is a cinematic fantasy ...
The quotes from attendees are laughably revealing. One commented on how they couldn't believe Chanel constructed an entire Subway station for the show (not realizing it was an actual station at one time). Another admitted she hadn't been on the Subway in "quite a while" as she put on the hand warmers supplied to attendees by the brand. Despite these elite vibes, I imagine if any of the rest of us had received an invitation like this, we would be the first to accept and show up. Which in itself is a great reminder that no matter what you're selling, if you can create a powerful story of exclusivity and the sense that an event will really be a once-in-a-lifetime experience, people will show up. Even if they have to wear hand warmers to enjoy it.
