Last week’s unfittingly named MITX event “To Check In or Not To Check In?” provided some insight as it featured representatives from three location based services working their way through the LBS ecosystem. I say the event wasn’t properly named only because the question being answered wasn’t “should I check in?” or even “should I use an LBS as a marketer?” Rather, the discussion focused on which services were best and how to leverage them effectively.

The panelists themselves were informative, and Allen & Gerritsen’s Mike Schneider did a good job directing the conversation (though, with the exception of Yelp’s Leighann Farrelly, everyone was tweeting while sitting on stage – rather distracting). Perhaps the most poignant thing said, however, came from an audience member (whose name I do not remember, unfortunately). The discussion was revolving around how venues or brands can use an LBS to engage their consumer base when this gentleman pointed out that “nothing beats face to face engagement.” Seems rather obvious. But then again, here we were, talking about how to leverage digital visitors to real stores.

Phil Thomas DiGiulio from Pegshot noted that every brand has a story to tell, and telling that story is what brings brands and venues face to face with customers. But I’d argue that the beauty behind the location based service is that it provides the complete opposite: now consumers can tell the story the way they see it. Here’s another way we can start to build brand advocates or tap into the insight our consumers are providing.

At the beginning of the session I tweeted, saying that I had yet to see any sort of true differentiation between most location based services. But by the end, there were obvious stand outs: Pegshot lets users tell their story via photos, Yelp lets users tell their story via text reviews, and – as Mike pointed out – Foursquare lets marketers decide how consumers will tell their story via the API (I’m sorry to say, but the fourth panelist, Wayne Sutton from TriOut, has yet to convince me of its unique value).

Afterwards, I approached Pegshot’s Phil (who, it turns out, is a die hard Philly sports fan – win!). I told him that I’m taking my iPhone out when I walk into the restaurant, but I’m only going to open one– maybe two apps. How does he make sure one of them is his? He responded that they need to have a good answer for that question, but that he hoped his user experience trumped what others could do. We’ll see. I really like Pegshot, so I hope he wins.

In the months since my first LBS blog post, I’ve slowed my Foursquare use significantly. I still use it at venues where mayorship may provide value (discounts at Starbucks and WholeFoods). But for the most part, I’ve turned to other services (Whrrl, Foodspotting, Pegshot) because they let me share more than just “I’m here!” They let me tell a story.

Of particular note in the not-so-excellent column was the first session I caught featuring reps from a couple of Boston’s biggest ad shops, sitting on stage with their large financial clients (the companies are large…not the clients themselves). I had an overall positive experience that day, so I’m not going to harp on the negative too much here, but let’s briefly review why this panel was brutal:

Did anyone learn anything here? How can we trust anything either of these parties say? Clients gush over the agency, agencies gush over the clients.

Financial clients. Behind car accounts, these are the cornerstone of the traditional agency model. And if not for some amazing fumbling by a large British oil company right now, they’d still be the target of some serious public ire. But there they are, sitting, smiling, pretending like they could do no wrong, as long as their trusty agency partner sits by their sides.

We got to watch a bunch of TV spots. And who doesn’t love TV spots? Especially when discussing this town’s ability to innovate. To be fair, they did show a few iPad screenshots. iPads are hip and innovative, right?

Ok, so I’ve gone on a bit longer than I hoped. And please don’t get me wrong: while I don’t work for a big shop, I can’t say I never will again (some of them know what’s up). But these guys were pretty rough to sit through.

In stark contrast was the small agency panel featuring founders from PJA, Pod Design, Small Army, and Beam: this one falls under the excellent category. The four guys up on stage were smart and – most importantly – candid about their shops, their clients, and their industry. My only disappointment was where the panel was scheduled: right after a brutally out of place session on socially responsible architectural design and right before a coffee break that those who hadn’t left yet couldn’t wait to take.

The juxtaposition between this and the big agency panel was made even more evident by a couple quotes I thought were quite poignant. First, David Batista of Beam pointed out that “it’s easy to please clients…what’s hard is to make something that humans actually want to use.” Can’t say that when your client is sitting right next to you. Secondly, Jeff Freedman of Small Army pointed out that “the traditional model is dead, traditional media is not.” And he’s right.

But what both of those quotes really bring to light is the fact that small shops get it: this isn’t about just trying harder at what has been done for years. This is about doing what’s been done for years in a different way.

Last night I attended an event co-sponsored by MITX and MassDOT featuring the Massachusetts Open Data Initiative, MA government’s effort to make its data available to the public in a meaningful, secure way. We heard from a number (a large number, in fact) of members of the MA government from the Secretary of Transportation (the first real part of the initiative is live MBTA bus feeds) to the GM of the MBTA to a gentleman named Tim Vaverchak from the Mass IT department.

Mr. Vaverchak’s talk was last and, as there were so many speakers, each presentation was relatively rushed. But I felt that what Vaverchak was able to outline in the short time he had was intriguing. He spoke of the goals of the MA Open Data Initiative: move beyond just transportation, focus on business & constituent needs, don’t just provide data for data’s sake, allow users (constituents and developers) to rate the value of a data set. These goals were extremely reasonable – even surprisingly so: one doesn’t necessarily expect that from government.

But what the entire evening had me thinking about was an extension on the question of how government can provide data to the public and do it well: how can they do so in a manner that scales? By scale I mean both across departments within a state/local government, but also on a pure numbers basis: how can what MA does here be a model for nationwide data feeds?

In advertising we constantly struggle with producing something that is both ground breaking and results producing. An out-of-home installation or 2 week online stunt could certainly garner buzz. But what does it do to move the needle? What does it do to return the investment of those who paid for it? So sitting at the event last night I kept thinking about the usefulness of it, but also its limitations in terms of scale Sure, I can produce an iPhone app that shows me how late the 39 bus is going to be and that’s great for tinkerers or proofs-of-concept. But I want to use this data and provide my users with real value – and do so efficiently. I want more bus routes (we’re getting that by end of the summer), I want trains (that’s a much harder problem to solve), I want to be able to tie it in to road closings, weather and historical data. And – I want to build this so it can be used by anyone in the country.

A few of those problems aren’t too hard to fix. And some of it is already available. But that last point – true scale – is going to be much further down the line. The National Weather Service came together in 1870 to help the military. It wasn’t until 1890 that it was identified as useful to civilians. I’d like to see the MA Open  Data Initiative move to a national model a bit quicker than that.

I spoke with one of the gentlemen who helped run the MassDOT Real Time Data Developer Challenge about this, Chris Dempsey. He mentioned that there are currently two private organizations that are running different metro transportation data sets (the first was NextBus, the organization providing the MA data set…I admit I can’t remember the second). He said that other states are working on this, but certainly not too many (according to data.gov, only a handful of states and municipalities are providing “machine readable” data sets to the public). He also mentioned – and rightfully so – that MA wants to get it right at home first. Then they’ll work on a model for other states.

Internally, I struggle with one more question: SHOULD scale be provided here? Scale leads to commercial interests and sponsorships. Clearly I’m ok with that from a professional standpoint. And this is certainly nothing like a corporation sponsoring a presidential candidate. But should I look up at a screen in a bar and see “You have 45 minutes until the next bus arrives…enough time for a Bud Light!”? I’m not sure.

Thoughts?

I admit that the term “app store” is quickly making its way onto Buzzword Bingo boards across the country. But sometimes, a buzzword is worthy of just that – buzz.

In truth, the term sells itself short. When referring to app store, we’re not just talking about a commercial market for applications (although that’s certainly a primary focus). Instead, this is a place for a software company to show how extensible all of its engineers’ hard work really is. And, of course, it’s also a showcase for the platform extensions themselves – letting the independent developers shine.

From a marketing perspective, launching an app store can be smart. But you really need to be a first mover in an industry. Otherwise, you become more noise than signal.

All of this is why I’m proud to have been part of LocaModa’s recent DOOH App Store launch – the first of its kind for digital out of home.

Loca’s move (with design help from StudioNumberNine & Daly Creative) continues what the company has already worked very hard to do to standardize a rather splintered industry. The company’s platform extends across multiple media to bring client content together with user interaction. And now it has a great showcase to explain what that actually means.

So that’s nice.

Agency Spy does a superb job of laying into this ridiculously unnecessary, too-much-but-too-little-too-late move, so I’ll leave the ranting to them.

But come on. Really? Forget about being about ten years behind the curve in the ad business…what a poor business move in general. AIG much?