If you’re a Flipboard user, you may have noticed some mobile app changes introduced in their 3.0 update last week. While Flipboard always given users the ability to customize their news feeds to some degree, their latest release really highlights the granularity to which this can be done. Their recent acquisition of Zite (and with it, a powerful machine learning engine) is largely to thank for this.

‍

Fire up Flipboard after your update, and you’ll be walked through the process of customizing your content with a simple tap-and-pick topic list with nearly 1000 choices to choose from. This large list represents only a fraction of the topics available to users though, so content can be much more finely customized for those inclined to do so.

I applaud the company on their smart acquisition and their forward-thinking enhancements to differentiate itself from the crowded media consumption app space.

While this latest update represents a lovely execution of content personalization though, I feel it also exposes another missed opportunity with how we use customer data. Imagine how this simple data could be put to much better use outside of their bubble. The potential for absurdly targeted advertising…to broadening the recommendations far beyond the curated articles to virtually any consumable content – digital or otherwise.

Instead, any time a user invests in fine-tuning their news feed (which can be a relatively time-consuming exercise) does little else than improve their Flipboard experience. The rest of their inputs - and the many correlations they may reveal – are mostly wasted.

Looking beyond the articles

The superficial applications such as books, movies, television programs are apparent. But data inputs like these, particularly when combined with consumption habits, could provide incredible insight into much more profound aspects of our lives. Hobbies, aptitudes, career paths, relationships, choosing a city to live… the opportunities are endless.

Flipboard can’t be faulted for this of course. They’re introducing a feature to make their service more useful. They’re a business, and they’re evolving to keep themselves relevant. And it’s most definitely not the company’s responsibility to lead a change like this.

This line of thinking inevitably leads to a classic diagram like this:

‍

In other words, it’s easy to dismiss this ideal state as science fiction and far too complicated to be practical. But it doesn’t feel like that much of a stretch with the technology we have available today. It seems to me that what’s really required here is a concerted effort among a few parties:

• Input – Customer facing properties to funnel data actively or passively
• Collection – Arranging and organizing data inputs
• Storage - Consolidated, scalable store of all inputs
• Analysis – Powerful machine learning and recommendations engines
• Output – Customer-facing fulfillment applications

The incentive issue

Facebook has clearly been gunning for this position for years, but I firmly believe they’re the wrong contender. Who then should lead the charge? In my view, doing this correctly – that is, delivering a service that is accurate, accessible and unbiased – cannot be monetized. The moment incentives are added to the outputs, we end up with little more than “sponsored” content, tainting the entire concept and ruining the party for everyone.

If executed correctly, a service like this should function more along the lines of an unbiased web search as opposed to being influenced by any specific corporation. The responsibility then falls on the providers (merchants, organizations, etc.) to ensure their data align with everyone else’s and can be turned into meaningful outputs.

In the search world, we’ve become accustomed to optimizing our content to be “findable”. A shift like this urges organizations to make their offerings more “recommendable” by adding a different dimension to the characteristics of their offerings.

While I’m not holding my breath, I’m hopeful that an alliance like the one explained above isn’t merely wishful thinking. With the greater good of consumers as the driver, it feels like both sides win using this approach. Products and services find the consumer instead of brands attempting to find receptive ears. Meanwhile, utility and accuracy increase trust and willingness to spend on the part of consumers.

What do you think about this shift in how we reach our customers? As a marketer, is this a good or a bad thing? And as a consumer, would you participate?