The world of television and online news is going to get some of the ol’ newspaper restructuring medicine soon. A couple of days ago, I watched the live feed of the Space Shuttle Atlantis blasting off. Besides learning that it takes the shuttle only eight-and-a-half minutes to get into orbit (zero to four-thousand miles per hour in eight-and-a-half minutes!), I realized that I was watching on LiveStream. I didn’t watch any of the concert on YouTube a week or so ago, but there again, you had many people watching live from the web.

We are already applying this technology for clients, and when we find a visionary client who will couple this with social media channels, it will really explode. Our first case study was arranging for a live stream of an event announcing agreements and arrangements with people in several countries around the world. We invited interested journalists to attend the event live from the comfort of their computer. Dozens of journalists attended, and the audience lasted throughout the hour-and-half-long event.

Here are just two implications to consider:

• How will this development affect what gets covered and when? As we’ve seen, power to the people results in big changes, overnight sensations and user-generated content that may or may not be favorable to a brand. I predict that live recordings will follow this trend.
• What impact will this have on television news as video broadcasting is pried away from executives and put in the hands of the group on the ground? I predict that this will have a pretty polarizing effect on content, since, well, who cares what the advertisers think.

If you’re thinking that I’m clueless because webcams have been around forever, you’re right. I mean, let’s watch a fish tank for a while. The point now is that high-definition live streaming is simple, inexpensive, and useful. The official NASA announcer during the launch said, “Space shuttle Atlantis is headed straight onto Highway 129 and into orbit.” Of course, he was referring to the mission name, STS-129. This official digital evolution geek is announcing that live streams are on the freeway of love in a pink Cadillac.

The problem with all us digital people these days is ignorance of the scientific method.

Here’s a great blog post on the ROI of social media that is generating a lot of currency these days. I take heart in the following points about the fears that keep managers from updating the way they approach measurement based on how social media is changing the way companies connect with customers:

1. Afraid metrics will reveal the program isn’t working.

• If it’s not working, why keep doing it?

2. Afraid of what you will hear.

• If you’re deaf to the conversation, only your enemies will hear it.

3. Afraid I won’t be able to justify my program/existence.

• It’s not about justifying; it’s about improving.

4. Afraid I’ll be fired for not showing the right numbers.

• You should be fired for not showing any.

Right on! Metrics are for learning, not for lying. We are in the nascent stages of something that has huge numbers attached to it but no standardization for measurement. What do we do in this situation? What we have always done: define a metric of success and measure to it. If you fail (and, by the way, who hasn’t?), you owe yourself and your client some learning. If you succeed, just consider it a control effort for the next time so you can try to beat it.

This reminds me of the college students and first-time job seekers whose uncle or brother was a client and to whom I was asked to speak about their future. Many of them say, “I’m going to take some time and try to figure out what I want to do.” My advice is that this is a terrible idea. Try something, learn what you like and don’t like about it, and adjust accordingly. After all, nothing’s cast in stone.

Let me recommend an article in The Wall Street Journal, A Hint of Hype, A Taste of Illusion. The subhead says it all: “They pour, sip and, with passion and snobbery, glorify or doom wines. But studies say the wine-rating system is badly flawed. How the experts fare against a coin toss.” It discussed how even the best “flavor-trained” professionals have been scientifically shown to be remarkably inconsistent. A 1996 study proved that humans can reliably identify only three to four components in a mixture, but wine ratings have descriptions such as this one with eight: “Dusty, chalky scents followed by mint, plum, tobacco, and leather. Tasty cherry with smoky oak accents.”

The title of this post is attributed to Julia Child, and I think it has a lesson for the digital world today. In the absence of standard measurements, define a metric, aim for it, and learn from the experience. The landscape right now is full of people saying things like, “You don’t own your brand, your customers do.” Admit it, you’ve read that at least 47 times. Nice platitude, but what does this have to do with anything?

At the other end of the spectrum, there are some really smart people working on this problem. You owe it to yourself to check on Don Bartholmew’s blog to see what measurement really should be. (Disclosure: Don works with me at Fleishman-Hillard.)

I’m in the middle until Don takes over the world. If you want a great glass of wine, develop your guide to wine attributes and get to greater awareness about what you want and like. If you want great results from digital media campaigns, let the business results drive the ranking system.

Cigar, anyone?