There’s lots of news today about a possible recession. The Federal Reserve made the biggest rate cut in 24 years today to head a recession off at the pass but the stock market isn’t really responding well so far. While a recession (or even the hint of one) will increase fears in many traditional sectors of media and marketing, I think new media marketers will benefit from this and here’s why….

• Blogs don’t cost anything to start.
• Online video is free. So is creating your own video channel on YouTube.
• Creating a Facebook group doesn’t cost anything.
• Recording a podcast costs next to nothing.
• A basic Flickr account to engage your customers is free.
• Twitter doesn’t charge to message the people most interested in what you are doing.
• AdWords only cost you something when someone clicks your ad (and you determine the cost per click.)

There will still be marketing in a recessed economy. There will still be marketers spending money in a recessed economy, even if there’s not as much of it. What marketers will be paying for, however, is not the use of the technology, the air time to broadcast it’s message, or the placement for ads. What they’ll pay for is help to use the new media well. When in the face of decreased marketing budgets new media will emerge as the cheaper option because companies will pay consultants (i.e. digital coaches) a few thousand dollars to teach them how to fish the new way. This may be the tipping point for new media marketing as marketers and advertisers give it a shot out of financial necessity rather than being convinced that it’s the right thing to do. Whatever the case, a recession is going to be good news for new media marketing. It’s bad news for traditional advertising and marketing, but Google was already telling us that.

I’m working on a project and had to do a little digging into Flickr. One thing led to another and I discovered this photo by photographer Kris Kros. I don’t know what it is about this picture but it totally captivates me. There’s a story to it on the Flickr page too. It was a great find.

Thanks to Kris for allowing me to post the image on this blog. There’s more from Kris on his Flickr page.

What if all the pictures of any location or landmark on a site like Flickr were pulled together to form an interactive, three dimensional composite of the image. Microsoft has acquired the technology to do that and you can see a demo below. You can also play with it yourself on the Microsoft Photosynth website. This is quite fascinating and a great new use for social media.

Link for feed readers:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-DqZ8jAmv0

In my daily work I have a chance to interact with a lot of graphic designers. Our company has three designers on staff…two for print design and one for web design. Add to that a full arsenal of freelance print, web, and video design specialists along with an occasional art director and I’ve got a world of creativity around me on a regular basis.

I don’t know if I’m simply more aware of good design (and bad design too) now more than ever or if it’s just becoming so pervasive (it’s probably both or these) but design for everything these days is HUGE! Look at how important design is to so many of the products we have. Every coffee company in the world has adopted the Starbucks style of coffee packaging. It was a design that’s come to symbolize high quality coffee and now even the old school coffee companies like Folgers are on board with this…they call it their gourmet coffee. Here’s another example…look at Apple computers, they’re a combination of both good form (visual design) and function (ease of use).

This trend toward high quality design is inherent in many things web 2.0. Yes, there are certainly some exceptions like MySpace, but for many sites it seems clear there is specific attention given toward and open, intuitive design. That design is often combined with a plain-talking, straight-forward tone. There are four things I’m seeing regularly in many of these sites:

• An attention to the use of white space - The attention to using white space is most noticeable at Google, but I’m seeing it all the time like at eBible and myChurch. One great thing about a lot of white space is that it leaves little room for doubt as to what is most important on your site…and that’s a good thing.
• Predominant graphics - Many of the good web 2.0 sites focus on showing a few predominant images rather than multiple (and often smaller) images. Compare Flickr to Kodak to get the idea. Again, the focus is on directing people down a very specific road rather than the “shock and awe” approach where you overwhelm them with information or options.
• Straight-forward information - The straight-forward information an approach that communicates “mean what you say, say what you mean” kind of attitude. It is also a non-corporate approach…which is also fitting for most web 2.0 organizations. I love the way FeedBurner uses this tone on their site.
• Simplicity - It’s all about ease of use and accessibility. If the person can quickly find what they’re looking for then the site is sufficiently simple.

The distinctions are becoming so stark that the very design of any organization’s website communicates a lot about it. Does your site say you’re accessible and personable or rigid and corporate? Does it communicate with clarity or confusion? Does it show that you’re clunky or nimble?

With the trend on an every growing importance on good design, it would be worth a little extra consideration toward your next project..particularly if that next project is a website. It will say more about you than you can anticipate…so will that be a good thing or a bad thing?