Associate Professor of Practice
USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism
@webjournalist
Wearable Technology and the News:
A Q&A with Robert Hernandez
Robert Hernandez is a self-described “mad scientist for journalism,” primarily focused on exploring and developing the intersection of technology and journalism. He developed one of the first courses on Google Glass app development.
UF: Wearable technology, as we think about it today, revolves mostly around devices like Google Glass, health and fitness trackers and smart watches. What other types of wearable devices are likely to emerge over the next 3 - 5 years?
RH: The world of wearables (which sounds like a Disney show) is still evolving, but there are two major formats that have emerged. The first one is on your wrist, as we’ve seen with the FitBit, Nike Fuel band and smartwatches and the second is on your face, like Google Glass. For me, I think the one on your face is the ideal, except for the looking-like-a-dork feature.
There are other form factors being tested like the Myo, which is a gesture-control device on your forearm, and some smart rings. I’ve ordered both and am excited to explore these devices.
Lastly, there is the contact lenses that Google has developed… although I highly recommend waiting for the second or third generation of that wearable. Don’t beta test that one!
UF: Do you have a sense of which of these technologies might be best suited for news consumption?
RH: The way that I look at it, wearables will potentially disrupt journalism in both content creation and content consumption. I believe that the consumption part is a deeper well that we should focus most of our energy on. While we know that moving from phone to either your wrist or face requires moving to a smaller screen, both interfaces are having very different user experiences/behaviors.
Personally, I am leaning toward something like Glass, where it is always on, always aware and always offering you access to knowledge and information when you are ready. The question there is what will an article, a video piece and audio segment sound/feel/look like on that kind of device.
But for me, I’ve been exploring the new kind of storytelling format that this enables. That’s why I’ve been exploring augmented reality for the last four plus years. With this type of format, we need to invent “micro stories” that can inform our user/reader/viewer/etc. with a glance… but allow them to go deeper if they choose too.
We can’t just use the existing content types and shovel them onto these new devices. We did that with newspaper-to-radio… radio-to-TV… newspaper-to-Web… Web-to-mobile. We know by now — or should know — that we have to optimize our content for the device and experience. Shovelware won’t work.
These type of stories will be truly contextual because they know where you are and your environment… for better or worse.
UF: What do you think will drive user acceptance of this technology? What are the biggest obstacles?
RH: It’s hard to say for sure, but my sense is that the key here is wide adoption… Google and others need to flood the market with these devices so society can start embracing them faster.
If you recall the narrative of mobile phones, in the 80s it was rich yuppies with cell phones in their BMWs. We hated and judged them and swore we’d never own one of those devices.
Then came along devices like Nokia phones and the convenience was undeniable. Then cameras on phones, then smarter phones. Once the devices were in people’s hands, there was no denying the value.
Without putting devices in people’s hands, those without the devices start to project a narrative that tends to not be factual: Glass is spying on you, constantly recording you… or it’s fully immersive and is too much of a distraction so you can’t wear while driving.
Honestly, if I were Google, I’d give these away for cheap or even free and have an advertising-based model. Imagine the contextual — and actually useful — ads you could get while with the device. They should take a page out of Amazon’s playbook and take a short-term hit on hardware for the long-term gain on their services.
UF: So at some point the smartphone stopped being a phone and was used mostly for texting, social and pictures/video. Are there particular applications you think will define wearables?
RH: Sure, hands down the best feature, currently, is the hands-free photography. You can take a photo faster on these devices than on your phone. You can simply say “OK Glass, take a photo,” click on a button on the side of the device, or wink… which is kinda creepy. These are faster than pulling out your phone from your purse or pocket, unlocking the device, launching app, framing and shooting.
The other thing here, which is pretty impressive, is the speed to which you can get your questions answered. I can say, “OK Glass, how do you say hello in Italian” and not only do you instantly see the text results, but it plays audio for you.
The truth, though, is that there aren’t that many apps on there so the opportunity to find and define the “killer app” is still up for grabs. A great opportunity for anyone, including journalism.
UF: How are you seeing these devices impact the craft of storytelling? How are they likely to make stories more compelling?
RH: Again, it’s still early but clearly these devices are on a smaller screen, so we’ll need to develop “micro stories” or “glance” interactions for our storytelling. There is something called Spritz that is really interesting that I want to test out for long-form journalism on these small screens. You should go to the site and test it out… it’s quite amazing! Speed reading, one word at a time.
But, as of yet, there isn’t a defining story format. It’s early. In my Glass Journalism course, we’re developing a few things: one that is around instant access to knowledge and information and the other focused on storytelling through cards, since cards is Glass’ interface. We’re also looking at exploring the obvious POV storytelling, but overall I think that’ll quickly turn into a gimmick. Not every story could/should be told through the POV format.
The one device that is also emerging is the Oculus Rift, and we are seeing truly immersive storytelling happening there. The Des Moines Register did a VR piece using the Rift. Lots of experimentation happening, which makes this all quite exciting.
UF: What are some of the most interesting news or advertising applications for wearable technology that you’ve seen, either from the start-up world or from your own students?
RH: Well, not to sound negative or harsh, I haven’t seen anything innovative yet on Glass and smartwatches. I do think The Des Moines Register’s VR piece is pretty impressive. It is loosely connected to Nonny de la Peña’s stuff with VR and Second Life.
Now, what we are working on in my classroom — and others I am sure are experimenting with, too, in other places — are things we hope advance this more. Again, we’re in still in the beta phase testing out the limitations of these emerging devices.
But, no offense to my colleagues that I fully respect, but the news apps created on Glass have been pretty awful. Shovelware. But I fully understand it because how can a news organization invest serious R&D into a wearable format that is not mainstream? That’s where my — and other’s — course comes in. We’ll develop the first draft of wearable journalism, testing out things like AR, VR and other new formats.
That said, outside of journalism, I like Spritz and something called Word Lens Translator which is an AR real-time translation app: Cool things are happening, but they haven’t come into the journalism world just yet.
UF: Is there any research or evidence that suggests content created for wearable devices increases user engagement with that content?
RH: First, I must disclose that I consider myself more of a “hackademic” than an academic. I have not heard of research about wearables, content and engagement, but I am sure there is or will be soon.
There is lots of research that shows that mobile phones are globally adopted and are, perhaps, the most intimate device ever created. There is a stat that says more than 90 percent of us have the cell phone within arm’s length 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The first thing we look at when we wake up, the last thing we look at when we go to sleep.
These devices know us better than our spouses or partners. There is a strong relationship there… for better or worse.
And wearables, for me, seem to be the next evolutionary step that builds upon that relationship. That is, if we find one that makes it socially acceptable like the phone has become.
UF: Do you expect that wearable and immersive technology will overlap?
RH: Yes, I do believe that. That’s why I have been focusing on augmented reality (AR) so much. It’s a natural step. VR, for me, has always been a tougher sell, but with the Oculus and the development of other emerging technology, I can see us going into that field as well.
But yes, the acceptance of wearables unlocks the potential of immersive storytelling.
UF: Each new iteration of technology seems to bring along new storytelling techniques or consumption patterns. At some point, I would think, some current method of information consumption will get completely displaced. Or will people continue to read the newspaper, and check breaking news on Twitter and read summaries on Circa, and check Vox for more context….?
RH: I agree with you. It is likely that the printed product, for example, will phase out and be more like vinyl records, but the content will always be around. It’s just evolution. You know, that whole “adapt or die” thing.
UF: You said in a video on USA Today College that you teach students how to hack and hijack technology. What have you learned in inventing curriculum around wearables that has worked or hasn’t worked?
RH: Thanks for asking that. For me, the most exciting part of my classes isn’t Glass or the technology like AR. It’s how the students and I try to come up with experimental solutions based on imagined experiences.
Meaning, when I develop these courses, I have a starting line (let’s develop apps for Glass + Journalism) and have a finish line (let’s launch an app for Glass + Journalism), but the in-between is up to us. Not me the professor, but us as a team working together and trying to figure it out.
No class format really does that. I am bored and over the I-speak-you-listen-and-there-will-be-a-quiz format of a class. Let’s go into the unknown and build something together.
The lessons in creative thinking, problem solving and collaboration are the skills we need in a modern organization, especially a newsroom. Let’s demystify the technology and mess with it… for journalism!
And the students — who have opted in and signed up — have really responded. They know it’s not about the grade, it’s about the learning and journey. I’ve been fortunate to get great responses and more students want to participate in this format.
Not only students, but people outside of the university. That’s why my class incorporates a public site and meetup events. What’s the point of discovering knowledge if we don’t share it with others? Why limit to me and my twelve students? The goal is to advance the entire journalism industry. No pressure.
Robert Hernandez, aka WebJournalist, has made a name for himself as a journalist of the Web, not just on the Web. His primary focus is exploring and developing the intersection of technology and journalism – to empower people, inform reporting and storytelling, engage community, improve distribution and, whenever possible, enhance revenue. He is an Associate Professor of Professional Practice at USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism. He has worked for seattletimes.com, SFGate.com, eXaminer.com, La Prensa Gráfica, among others. Hernandez is also the co-founder of #wjchat and creator of Learn Code for Journalism with Me project. He is currently serving on the Online News Association board and a lifetime member of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists. He has Glass, but is not a Glasshole.
Next: Creating a Richer Storytelling Experience by Mark Potts, founder, Newspeg.com
