Marshall McLuhan: The Great Prognosticator

Marshall McLuhan, scholar, writer and social theorist
Marshall McLuhan: The Great Prognosticator
I’ve been reading a new biography on Marshall McLuhan, the Canadian educator, scholar and social theorist who is notable for having predicted the rise of the Internet years before Al Gore or anyone else took credit for inventing it.

The succinct biography, Marshall McLuhan: You Know Nothing of My Work! by Douglas Coupland [ISBN-10: 1935633163 … also available in a Kindle edition], is quite interesting and I definitely recommend it for anyone interested in mass communications and popular culture.

Reading this biography, one gets the impression that McLuhan was a man who correctly predicted a good deal of the world of communications in which we live today. Not only did he forecast the rise of the web 30 years before it came about, he was the one who coined the expression “the medium is the message” … and who spoke about the “global village” long before Hilary Clinton came on the scene.

It turns out that this extraordinary thinker led a pretty conventional life, actually. Born in Edmonton, AB, he spent the better part of his career in Canada, although it was as a visiting professor at St. Louis University where he met his future wife, with whom he would have six children. (Born an Anglican, McLuhan was influenced by the writings of G. K. Chesterton and had converted to Roman Catholicism by his late 20s.)

Although trained as an academician in Canada and at Cambridge – and being on the faculty at prestigious educational institutions like the University of Toronto where he eventually had his own research center – the demands of raising a large family drove McLuhan to more financially lucrative work in the advertising field as well. He also had consulting stints at large corporations like AT&T and IBM.

Although passionate about and partial to his teaching and academic work, it was as an ad industry personality that McLuhan probably made his biggest mark.

As early as 1951, McLuhan published a book of essays called The Mechanical Bride, which analyzed various examples of “persuasion” in contemporary popular culture.

In his 1964 book Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man, McLuhan coined the phrase “the medium is the message” as he wrote of the influence of communications media independent of their content. He contended that media affect society in which they play a role not by the content they deliver, but by the characteristics of the media themselves. True enough.

And how did McLuhan come to predict the rise of the Internet? It was right there in his 1962 book The Gutenberg Galaxy, which attempted to reveal how communications technology – alphabetic writing, printing presses, electronic media — affects cognitive organization and, in turn, social organization. Here’s what he had to say:

“The next medium, whatever it is – it may be the extension of consciousness – will include television as its environment, and it will transform television into an art form. A computer as a research and communication instrument could enhance retrieval, obsolesce mass library organization, retrieve the individual’s encyclopedic function and flip into a private line to speedily tailored data of a saleable kind.”

Remember, this was written in 1962!

McLuhan also used the term “surfing” in a way that seems uncannily similar to its meaning today – in his case, using the word “surfing” to refer to rapid, irregular and multidimensional movement through a body of knowledge.

More books would come from McLuhan’s pen in subsequent years, including:

 The Medium is the Massage: An Inventory of Effects (McLuhan’s best seller)
War and Peace in the Global Village
From Cliché to Archetype

All of these volumes sound pretty fascinating – definitely ones to explore in the future, although the biography provides good synopses of their contents.

It is difficult to think of someone that has had more influence over the world of media and advertising than Marshall McLuhan. Sure, there are people like David Ogilvy, but his influence has been confined almost exclusively to the advertising industry alone.

By contrast, the McLuhan’s biographer contends that McLuhan influenced scads of writers and critical thinkers – I was pleased to see Camille Paglia among them – along with politicians like Pierre Elliott Trudeau and Jerry Brown. McLuhan was even named a “patron saint” of Wired Magazine, and a quote of his appeared on the publication’s masthead during the first decade of its publication.

And finally, it’s nice to discover that McLuhan’s years in academia have been given their due as well: The University of Toronto has continued his work by running a center at the school named, appropriately, the McLuhan Program in Culture and Technology.

Facebook’s Hidden Bombshells

Facebook's hidden bombshellsAs Facebook has been busily turning itself into a web powerhouse – challenging even the likes of Google for dominance – some people are beginning to question the fundamental aspects of how Facebook treats users and the content they post.

Last week I came across an interesting article by Douglas Karr, a social media consultant and author, who has spent thousands of dollars advertising on Facebook for himself and his clients. Karr summarized recent experiences he’s had with Facebook accounts that now make him extremely leery of using it as a central rather than an ancillary platform for promoting companies and their brands.

Facebook somehow became suspicious of entries posted by one of Karr’s clients. Facebook then proceeded to disable every administrator’s account that was associated with this client’s Facebook page. Because Karr was one of the administrators, this action disabled all of his Facebook pages and applications as well.

It then took a Herculean effort to repair the damage, during which time Karr learned quite a bit more about the customer service side of Facebook – if you could even call it “customer service.” Here’s how he summarizes it:

Facebook lacks a meaningful customer service process. There’s no phone number to call … or dedicated e-mail address specifically for support. So good luck trying to get any sort of satisfaction. Karr was asked to submit a form in order for his account to be turned back on. But that communication only resulted in an automated reply message to verify his identity.

In the meantime, with his accounts disabled, there was no way for Karr to log in and retrieve any of the now-hidden content.

What Karr learned is when all of what makes a Facebook presence so valuable – postings, photos, video and other content, fans, applications, etc. – goes by the boards, there’s essentially no recourse for a business.

Luckily for Karr, his account was re-enabled after a few days – with no notification from Facebook. But then he still had to republish all of the pages.

[It turns out that Karr’s client had a “friend of a friend of a friend” at Facebook who was able to pull a few strings to set things right … but how many of us should be so fortunate?]

This experience revealed another distasteful reality: The content you post on Facebook may be yours, but Facebook owns the access to it.

Yep. If you look closely at Facebook’s fine print, this is what you’ll find: “You grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook.”

So much for keeping proprietary control over anything that may go viral and ends up on Facebook.

Karr’s word of advice for companies considering employing Facebook as their primary means of generating online traffic and revenue: “Don’t.”

Instead, he suggests adopting other tactics such as developing a blog, investing in search engine optimization and search engine marketing, using Twitter … and owning all of your content on your own domain.

That’s pretty smart advice from someone who speaks from experience.

3D Printing: Will it “change everything” in manufacturing?

Objects and components made using 3D printingThe Economist magazine published an article earlier this month about an increasingly popular technology that may irretrievably alter the world of manufacturing. Known as “three-dimensional printing” or “additive manufacturing technology,” it’s expected to dramatically impact manufacturing industries.

The technology makes it possible to “print” three-dimensional objects, components or assemblies from a digital file, utilizing several different materials with differing mechanical and physical properties in a single-build process.

The way this is done is by building up the object gradually by depositing material from a nozzle, or by solidifying thin layers of plastic or metal particles using glue droplets or focused beam technology.

[If you’re having some difficulty wrapping your head around the concept, this short tutorial/demonstration using a Z Corporation 3D printer will serve as a good introduction.]

At present, the 3D process is possible using certain materials such as plastics, resins and metals, a precisions of ~0.1 millimeter. And while it’s been primarily the preserve of academicians and laboratories up until now, experts believe the technology is now poised for commercial success as 3D printing capabilities continue to improve and costs decline.

In fact, significant growth has already been observed over the past seven or eight years — and now a “race to the bottom” with pricing is beginning to pick up steam. To wit: A basic 3D printer-fabricator costs less today than a laser printer did in 1985.

With the manner in which this technology is developing, there’s really no end to the possible products that can be made. Small components, automotive parts and a host of other products will all be fair game in the coming years.

3D printing technology is even being studied by biotechnology companies for use in computer-aided tissue engineering applications wherein organs and body parts are created using 3D inkjet techniques. Living cells are deposited onto a gel and slowly built up to form 3D structures.

And what also makes all of this potentially revolutionary is that harnessing the technology does not have to happen only in a conventional “factory.”

Think about it. Small parts can be made by a machine that’s the size of a desktop printer. With such equipment available, no longer will manufacturers need to rely on OEM suppliers here or offshore to supply parts and accessories. And they can make as many or as few as they need, so the old notion of a large production line starts looking increasingly irrelevant.

There are additional benefits of this technology that industry watchers note. Product prototyping is expected to become easier, faster and cheaper than ever. Companies can “test and tweak” components with their best customers, making adjustments to the design until things are perfected – all in a finely controlled environment where there’s no such thing as wasted inventory or “wish and wait for” parts coming from outside or offshore.

Waste and scrap materials are slated to be far less, too, as 3D technology uses only just the amount of material needed to construct each part.

Thinking beyond the production-centric aspects, other implications for manufacturing businesses are big. Reducing barriers to entry for manufacturing, 3D printing may well promote more innovation than ever before. The ability to produce items without needing the full force of a factory behind them will be a huge benefit to inventors, entrepreneurs and start-up operations, because product development, beta testing and first-run production will cost less and present lower risks.

Will the flexibility to design and produce components that the 3D technology allows mean that there’ll be less need to look to offshore suppliers for cheaply manufactured products? We can’t know for sure, but the prospects that a shift in manufacturing activity from the Far East back home is certainly tantalizing.

As with any new innovation, there are potential downsides and possible “unintended consequences.” For one, intellectual property may become much harder to protect … after all, when an object can be described in a digital file, it becomes much easier to copy and distribute.

But one thing is definite: 3D printing is a topic that’ll be front-and-center in the coming years as we sort through the opportunities and the implications.

End-Game for Borders and Blockbuster?

Blockbuster logoBorders logoTwo items reported this past week are yet more bad news for one of the most beleaguered sectors of the retail industry. Borders Books & Music will be filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy and Blockbuster is preparing itself for sale.

Does this mean we’ve now reached the end-game for these iconic brands – and for the entire retail book/movie store segment?

Actually, we’ve seen this play out before. Less than 15 years ago, Tower Records and Sam Goody were two vibrant national chain store operations selling CDs and other recorded music. But these and most other music merchants are now history.

In fact, the only bricks-and-mortar music retail segment remaining is made up of used record and CD stores – typically one or two shoestring operations operating in major urban markets that manage to eke out a hand-to-mouth existence.

It appears that the same thing may now be happening to books. Consider Borders. It’s tried all sorts of ways to branch into other revenue-producing endeavors to make up for the consumers’ shift to buying books online or downloading to e-readers. Those endeavors have included coffee and juice bars, greeting card kiosks, giving customers the ability to download books and music, and even to explore genealogy and family history. Despite all that, Borders has been unable to stem the decline of its business.

Mike Shatzkin of consulting firm Idea Logical Company contends that the problem is bigger than Borders. He believes bookstores are going the way of music stores. “I think that there will be a 50% reduction in bricks-and-mortar shelf space for books within five years, and 90% within ten years,” he predicts.

The immediate question is whether Borders will be able to restructure its business, or in the end will be forced to liquidate. Borders’ debt is so high (it’s expected to report nearly $1 billion in liabilities when it files), the company is already committing to closing about a third of its ~675 Borders and Waldenbooks store outlets.

It’s possible that book superstore rival Barnes & Noble will see at least a short-term gain from Borders’ travails. It’s a larger entity and is doing better financially. Gary Balter, an analyst with Credit Suisse, believes Barnes & Noble could add as much as $1 billion in sales if Borders ultimately goes out of business.

But that kind of benefit may well turn out to be temporary. After all, Tower Records benefited from the closure of Sam Goody – for a time. But ultimately, Amazon and online sales were the big winners, and there’s every indication that they will be the main beneficiaries now as well.

In the movie rental business, things aren’t any better. I’ve blogged before about the challenges faced by Blockbuster, the nation’s leading movie-rental chain that went into Chapter 11 bankruptcy in September 2010. The company is now preparing itself for sale, but there are ominous signs that the initiative may be stillborn.

Some bondholders, led by investor Carl Icahn, are concerned that the company’s value is eroding in bankruptcy court, which has made it more difficult to take the steps necessary to compete with Netflix and other rivals that aren’t hobbled by the cost of running retail storefront operations.

According to business news reports, that is what’s behind the drive to try to sell the company now. Blockbuster’s holiday sales were lackluster at best, and the cost estimates for effecting a successful turnaround are going ever higher. The bondholders have essentially lost their appetite for plowing more money into the enterprise.

So who’s actually going to be interested in buying Blockbuster? That’s a very interesting question, because the company’s business model and financial situation don’t look like strong ingredients for business success. So if a buyer emerges, it may be from among the ranks of those who already have a financial stake in the business – like Mr. Icahn.

Will we look back on this week a few years from now and say that it was the beginning of a turnaround – or the final nails in the coffin? If you’re a betting person – or an investor – where would you place your money?

Valentine’s Day Spending: All Hearts and Flowers?

Valentine's Day is hearts and dollarsWith the recession finally receding, are we now seeing an uptick in spending for Valentine’s Day — arguably the most romantic day on the calendar?

According to a January Consumer Intentions & Actions questionnaire conducted among ~8,900 participants for the National Retail Federation by survey firm BIGresearch, American adults over age 18 will spend an average of ~$115 on traditional Valentine’s Day merchandise this year. That’s up more than 11% over 2010, and collectively represents spending of nearly $17 billion.

But we have yet to return to the levels of Valentine’s Day spending that were reached in 2007 and 2008 – the highest on record.

Jewelry appears to be the big item on the Valentine’s Day shopping list. Approximately $3.5 billion is expected to be spent in this segment this year, which is up more than 15% from the ~$3.0 billion spent in 2010.

Dining out is another popular category, but its growth is not expected to be nearly as big as jewelry’s – just 3%. The six most popular categories as determined in the NRF study include:

 Jewelry: $3.5 billion
 Dining out: $3.3 billion
 Flowers: $1.7 billion
 Clothing: $1.6 billion
 Candy: $1.5 billion
 Greeting cards: $1.1 billion

[I was surprised at the greeting cards figure. True, cards are a lower-price item compared to the other categories, but the number still seemed pretty meager. It turns out that only about half of the consumers surveyed reported that they planned on purchasing a Valentine’s card, which was lower than I thought would be the case.]

Not surprisingly, younger adults (age 25-34) are expected to spend significantly more than their older counterparts. They’re projected to spend an average of nearly $190 on Valentine’s Day merchandise compared to only about $60 spent by adults over 65.

But it’s not just because of “sweet, fresh young love” versus “tired, worn-out old love.” It’s because young couples and young parents are often buying not only for each other, but also for their co-workers … their children … their children’s friends … and their children’s teachers as well.

And here’s another statistic that won’t surprise very many people: Women will receive Valentine’s Day gifts averaging around $160, which is double the value of gifts for men.

Now, that’s a dynamic that’s likely never changed … and probably never will!

Taking the Buzz-Saw to Corporate Buzzwords

No buzzwordsBuzzwords – those stock words or phrases that have effectively become nonsense through their endless repetition – tend to find their penultimate manifestation in forgettable corporate vision and mission statements.

If you look online, you’ll find that the “about us” pages on corporate web sites are littered with the detritus of high-mannered phrases. We all know them — terms like:

 Best-in-class
 Best practices
 Commitment
 Customer-focused
 Cutting-edge
 Delighting customers
 Exceeding expectations
 Expertise
 Green
 Innovation
 Integrity
 Out-of-the-box thinking
 Proactive
 Quality
 Solutions
 Sustainability
 Synergy
 Trust
 Worldclass

Considering how frequently these terms show up in company positioning statements, is it any wonder they’ve become nothing but meaningless pablum?

Here’s an interesting exercise: Try to find a published corporate vision, mission or positioning statement that doesn’t contain any of the terms above. I spent the better part of an hour looking, only to come up empty handed.

This is not to denigrate the aims of businesses. We all want our companies to embody the laudable qualities these terms describe. And why not? They’re good principles that are worthy goals in how to interact with customers, with communities, and with the larger world.

But companies also want differentiation, not sameness.

Unfortunately, you’ll find none of that with these terms here. Just mealy-mouthed nothings and “yesterday’s vision for tomorrow” … conveyed with all the pizzazz of a cold mashed potato sandwich.

So it’s back to the drawing board, or it should be. But considering the birth pangs most of these mission / vision statements must have endured in the first place — committee assignments and all — that’s probably not going to happen.

“The Photo”

Mother and soldier son at a checkpoint in Cairo, Egypt.  (European Pressphoto Agency)
The European Pressphoto Agency image that has captivated the world: A mother kisses her soldier son at a Cairo checkpoint in early February 2011.
The world has watched events in Egypt unfold this past week with rapt attention as a 30-year regime stumbles to its inevitable end.

But a picture from the European Pressphoto Agency that appeared on the front page of The Wall Street Journal this past Tuesday transcends the political aspects of the events and speaks to us on a far more fundamental level.

The story told by the photo is simple enough: A mother kisses her soldier son at a Cairo checkpoint on a day when protesters are gearing up for a huge march on the Egyptian capital city.

But it’s an image that’s “gone viral” and has bounded about the worldwide web.

Why?

What is it about this picture that is so compelling? After all, it portrays a pretty mundane occurrence in the world of political events and regime change. But there’s something about the image that strikes right at the heart of our shared existence as human beings and our connections to family.

We don’t know these people at all. The location may be exotic … the culture and dress “foreign.” But the photo is about something much deeper – and it’s a connection that binds us all.

In this case, it’s a picture that’s worth a million words.

The Enduring Ant Farm

Uncle Milton's Ant Farm Advert

Milton Levine
Milton Levine of Ant Farm fame.
If you read last month about the death of businessman Milton Levine (1913-2011), you might not recognize the name at first. But those of us “of a certain age” remember well when ant farms were quite the craze in elementary and junior high school. Uncle Milton’s Ant Farm® was the target of keen interest, and most teachers willingly went along, allowing kids to bring them to school for “show and tell.”

From the vantage point of 50+ years, it’s also safe to claim that the Ant Farm was arguably one of the first toys that captured the imagination of boys and girls alike. It’s unlikely you’ll ever meet someone who owned one of these Ant Farms who doesn’t have vivid memories of the experience … and who wouldn’t also tell you how much their friends and fellow students were interested.

The “Uncle Milton” of Uncle Milton’s Ant Farm was Milton Levine, a business entrepreneur who died last month at age 97. It was he and his brother-in-law who introduced the wildly successful toy to the American market in the mid-1950s.

Levine was a mail-order merchant, having already built a successful business selling items like plastic toy soldiers, spud guns and toy shrunken heads via “back-of-the-book” advertising in comic books and children’s magazines. But it was his decision to design a durable plastic formicarium (the fancy Latin term for homes for ants) that propelled Levine into the mail order major leagues.

As he would later recall, the idea of merchandising an ant farm came to Levine from remembering his boyhood exploits constructing crude terrariums in Mason jars while visiting his uncle’s farm in Western Pennsylvania. He liked to quote the Bible as inspiration, too – specifically the verse: “Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways and be wise.” (Proverbs 6:6)

Levine’s ant farm creation sold an eyebrow-raising two million units in 1957-58 alone. As sales boomed, the product began to be stocked in retail stores as well. Those who purchased ant farms sent in a coupon packaged with their product to receive a vial of 25 pogonomyrmex californicus ants – a species found in the southwestern desert regions of Arizona and New Mexico.

Levine’s company paid workers a penny per ant to harvest the ants in the desert; shovels and vacuums were the tools of choice in these endeavors, with some workers reportedly making ~$3,000 weekly in what has to be one of the most unusual U.S. farm labor jobs ever.

Whenever he spoke about the success of his creation, Levine expressed surprise: “Most novelties, if they last one season, it’s a lot,” he remarked in 1991. “If they last two seasons, it’s a phenomenon. To last 35 years is unheard of.”

And in fact, the Ant Farm is still doing quite well, more than 50 years after its introduction. The latest cumulative estimates of unit sales are upwards of 20 million. In a time when today’s popular toy is in tomorrow’s junk pile, that’s quite an accomplishment.

So as we salute the memory of Milton Levine, we can marvel at the fact that his signature product has outlasted even his own very long life. It’s an impressive legacy by any measure.

Witnessing the Birth of a Nation

Sudan's political regions
Sudan's southern region (in blue) votes 98%+ for secession and is slated to become Africa's newest nation in July 2011.
Is Africa poised to be the home of a brand new country? It would seem so, as the results of a January referendum held in Sudan’s southern region were announced earlier this week.

And the results couldn’t be more definitive: More than 98% of the nearly 3.9 million ballots cast were in favor of separation.

While there were indications of voter irregularity – some provinces have fewer registered voters than votes cast – this is no sham election à la Iran or Cuba. International monitoring groups have determined that the overwhelming sentiment for separation and independence makes the pro-secession vote a valid result.

The final results will be certified in a few weeks, following which the wheels will start turning toward the formal creation of an independent state on a predetermined date of July 9, 2011. The new country will likely be called the Nile Republic or Azania.

If events continue as they are going, July 9 will be the culmination of a decades-long struggle that has produced more than its share of misery for the primarily Christian inhabitants of Sudan’s southern region. In this case, religious and tribal differences trumped the impractical and ultimately unworkable colonial-imposed boundaries set down by Britain in the late 1800s.

But despite the grim and grueling history of the conflict, the resolution of this struggle provides a happier ending compared to similar struggles on the continent – the secession attempt of Biafra from Nigeria being perhaps the best-known. That struggle had similar shades of tribal and religious differences, but the end result was reunification by force.

Contrast that with Sudan’s actions today. President Omar al-Bashir declared that the southern region had a right to choose whether to secede, and stated that his government would respect the outcome of the vote.

This is not to say that Sudan will not continue to keep a close eye on its southern border. “The stability of the south is very important because any instability in the south will have an impact on the north,” al-Bashir says. “The south suffers from many problems. It’s been at war since 1959.”

One can only imagine the Herculean challenges the new Nile Republic will face – ranging from citizenship qualification to finances, infrastructure and security issues.

But to have come so far while suffering so much in the process, those are issues most people are probably looking forward to facing and solving. And those of us lucky enough to have been born into societies where self-determination is already an accepted ideal wish them nothing but success.

Online healthcare and virtual doctor visits: Are we there yet?

Online Physician ConsultationsThe harsh realities of cost are driving healthcare providers, insurance carriers and government agencies to implement policies designed to encourage consumers to take better control over their own health.

More healthcare plans and programs than ever before are including incentives for making lifestyle changes, undergoing preventive care routines, “do-it-yourself” testing as well as online consultations with physicians.

In this regard, it seems everyone is completely on the bandwagon … except perhaps the consumer.

Why is that the case? One reason might be because of what we’ve trained people to expect in the delivery of healthcare services.

For decades, American consumers weren’t given any meaningful incentives for engaging in preventive care or in making lifestyle adjustments. Several generations of Americans were acclimatized to seek out healthcare services when they needed it – and that was when something was wrong. And the billing for those services was sent directly to the insurance company for payment.

In such an environment, preventive health or cost control was the last thing on people’s minds.

I recall being hospitalized for six days back in the early 1980s, along with being given a battery of medical tests conducted by health specialists of every stripe. I’m sure the invoicing associated with my hospitalization and treatment was astronomical … but I never saw a copy of the bill to really know.

My only out-of-pocket expense for the entire week? Thirty dollars for using the television set in the hospital room.

What was surprising to me, even at the time, was that I was kept in hospitalization far longer than I felt I needed to be – my symptoms of infection were gone after just a day or two. If I had been responsible for paying for even a portion of my hospitalization, I’m sure I would have been talking with anyone I could find about how quickly I could be discharged!

Today of course, people are far more aware of skyrocketing healthcare costs – not to mention their concerns about ever-rising health insurance premiums, higher deductibles, and bigger co-pays. Still, when asked about adopting new ways of interfacing with healthcare providers, American consumers seem somewhat ambivalent about them.

A recent online survey of ~1,000 Americans age 18 and over conducted by marketing and research firm Euro RSCG Worldwide found that only ~42% of respondents are comfortable with the idea of having online consultations in lieu of personal visits with their doctors.

[Men are more receptive to this idea (~58%) than women are (~37%) … but women are the ones more apt to make healthcare decisions for their families.]

On the other hand, here’s an interesting additional insight from the survey: When told that having an online consultation with their physician might result in lower expenses, ~77% of those same respondents reported that they’d be open to trying it.

What about the concept of “do-it-yourself” testing? Close to half of the respondents in the survey (~48%) reported that they’re receptive to the idea of using mobile apps to run their own tests and checkups at home. Checking blood pressure was the most popular DIY test, along with tracking and reporting on symptoms.

Of course, as time moves forward, technology is no longer the big obstacle it once was for turning “virtual visits” and “remote care” into a reality. Instead, it’s consumer attitudes and a willingness to adapt. And to accomplish that, the purveyors of modern healthcare must try to undo several generations of “learned” behavior that’s nearly the polar opposite.

Denise Murtagh, a planning director at Euro RSCG, mentions another factor as well: the doctors themselves. “A lot will depend on how facile physicians are with the technology, and how comfortable they are with it.”

And let’s not forget age demographics, too. The survey underscores that Gen-X and Gen-Y consumers are far more comfortable with the idea of physician remote care (47% – 52% positive) than Baby Boomers and those born earlier are (only 33% – 39% positive).

It looks like we’ll need to give this trend a bit more time to come into full flower.