This weekend was a strange one for me, as I’ve been haunted by my reaction to a gum commercial. Seriously.
The commercial in question was for chewing gum that comes in a cup. If we are to believe the commercial, since the advent of the automobile, people have struggled with a problem. That problem is: there are no convenient ways to store our chewing gum while driving. Is that really a problem?
Bam.
Then it hit me. A question that challenged my entire outlook on web 2.0 (or whatever you want to call it): Are we creating solutions to problems that do not exist?
On Friday, Yahoo announced Yahoo Live, a service that allows people to easily “lifecast” via webcam. Like a good little lemming, I checked it out. I even signed up to try it before realizing: I had nothing to say. I then looked around at people that were broadcasting and found a guy playing jenga, and someone simply working while having a cam on him.
Do most of the new services and sites actually start by solving a problem that people actually experience? Or do they exist as a solution before a problem?
I’m reminded of the acting in nearly every infomercial. The producers of these gems are experts in convincing consumers that things are much harder than they actually are, and therefore, their lives would be so much simpler if they’d just fork over $19.95. A few of my favorite examples:
So are there too many “it’s like ____ but it also does ____” ideas out there? Or will natural selection get rid of things that exist for sake of existing?
