Online Behavior Isn't Always Enough to Answer "Why?"

Jian Shuo Wang, who lives in Shanghai, can "recite 85 digits of pi after the decimal", and works in the technology industry, has a popular blog that I first noticed shortly before moving to Shanghai years ago.  He comments on a mix of topics, ranging from daily life in Shanghai to his experiences working in the technology domain.  In a recent post he mentions that Facebook was initially surprised that its photos application was such a success, and they desired to know why.  In reference to the value of "knowing why" he writes [note: English is not his native language and I have kept his writings "as is"]:

Soul searching means the deep trace of the reason why something worked. It is easy to be happy about a great feature, and a successful campaign, but it is way to easy to just stop tracing the deeper reason of the product. Just like the photos application of Facebook. It is a simple application without most of the features other photo sites have, but it is soon becoming the most successful photo application on the Internet. What is the driver for that? Why is that? Why, Why and Why?

... If something happens, and it is a good one, don't let it go. Push ourselves to do a deep soul searching and understand the deeper reason behind it.

I certainly agree that when a design is unexpectedly successful there is often much to be gained from understanding why and that it may not be wise to simply bask in glory.  A deeper understanding could lead to even more successful designs and/or guard against later problems.

However, I don't entirely agree with his comments on where the answers to such questions can be found [emphasis mine]:

Thank God we are in Internet space, and we have all the data needed to understand the reason. Just like Facebook can dig into the data and understand every photo change leads to 25 new page views, there must be some link between the reason and the result.

It is the section in bold that particularly concerns me.  I assume he is referencing the data that can be collected by an online service's server logs (in short, server logs can potentially provide details of many, but not all, of people's actions on a web site such as pages visited, buttons clicked, text submitted, etc).  I think it's worth addressing this claim in a blog post as I've heard people I've worked with make similar comments, and I've found it can be invaluable to provide a fuller picture of how research can best approach seeking answers to questions about people's behavior.

I'll focus on two reasons in particular for why the data found in server logs aren't always sufficient for answering why something online is or isn't a success.  I could write chapters on each and delve into some deep issues, but for now I'll keep things relatively brief and make use of some simple analogies.

1.  Observing what people do doesn't always tell you why they do it.

Imagine if you spent a week only watching people as they purchased ice cream at an ice cream store offering 10 different flavors.  At the end of the week you may be able to say with confidence that chocolate ice cream was the most popular choice during that period of time.  However, you probably couldn't say why.  Maybe people naturally preferred its taste.  Maybe there were effective TV advertisements for chocolate ice cream.  Maybe news of chocolate's health benefits had a large impact.  You could continue observing ice cream purchases in the store for a year and still not get much closer to an answer for why chocolate is purchased the most.

Similar issues can hold true for understanding online behavior.  In fact, only looking at server logs might not just mean you can't answer any deep "why's" but that you can't even be sure whether something is truly a success.  For example, server logs may indicate that people were far more likely to click the "correct" link A than the "incorrect" link B.  But the logs won't tell you if people were clueless about the purpose of link A and only clicked it because they knew link B was not what they wanted and saw no other option (yes, I've seen this happen).  In some cases, that might be good enough to be considered a "success", but in many others it won't be.

2.  People's online behavior isn't only driven by online factors.

The online world is just a part of people's lives.  While the online world can be wonderful and vast, the offline world still matters (really!) and plays a key role in determining how people behave online (the reverse can also be also true).  Without any data regarding the offline world, one could be left in the dark about key issues impacting behavior online.  Continuing with the ice cream example, if you only observed behavior inside the store you would not likely discover potentially key information such as whether people who preferred chocolate were more likely to have seen TV advertisements for chocolate.

For the online world consider social networking.  Imagine you're concerned that certain types of experiences people have aren't being shared with others online and you want to know why.  It could be that those experiences are in fact only being shared when people are face-to-face offline.  This insight may be key to an explanation for the online behavior and innovating a new online feature/service yet it wouldn't likely be discovered by only viewing data from a server log. 

Sometimes, it's not only important to understand what is occurring in the offline world before and/or after an online experience, but during as well.  The following webcomic from xkcd helps illustrate this point:

If you place your mouse pointer over the image, you may be able to see this additional commentary:

This reminds me of that video where ... no?  How have you not seen that?  Oh man, let me find it.  No, it's ok, we can go back to your video later.

There are several key issues directly or indirectly implied in the scene above such as multiple people watching the video together, different levels of interest in the video, different ideas about what should be watched next, etc.  Yet again, these issues in the offline world could be critical not only for understanding the success of various online features and how they're being used but also for providing inspiration for potential innovations (on the side, I think there are some intriguing designs that could be based on this single webcomic).  However, if YouTube only analyzed their server logs they may never discover the degree to which these or similar issues are occurring.

To be clear, I'm not saying that server logs aren't valuable.  Knowing how people actually behave is important and there is much that can be learned about it through proper analysis of data from server logs (even if the data doesn't show the full story).  With the caveats mentioned above, server logs can play a particularly valuable role in measuring the success of various features/services -- for example which of two or more designs leads to more page views, more time spent on the site, more purchases, etc. 

However, no matter how many "why's" you ask, there are limitations to what can be uncovered solely by analyzing data in server logs.  For some questions, other sources of data will be required -- whether from observations of people in their natural environment, experiments under controlled conditions measuring any of a variety of factors (such as eye movements, body language, and spoken comments), in-depth interviews, etc.  Knowing which method(s) could best answer a particular question is one of the main challenges in conducting meaningful research.  Sometimes, research methods themselves need a bit of innovation.

Someday later I may discuss how factors such as business goals, the resources required to conduct certain types of research, and the current state of knowledge about human behavior/cognition (there is much we don't know) can add pragmatic constraints to which "why's" can or should be tackled.  Whether in the corporate world or the academic world, often you need to address why it's worth trying to answer "why".

In the Eye of the Beholder

In my post about some Coca-Cola tents in Shanghai I commented on a device with a design that led me to misinterpret how it was intended to be used -- with nearly destructive consequences.  At the historic Wenchang Pavilion site in Guiyang, Guizhou, I saw another example of a design that also suggested to some people an unintended use.

Kids sliding down a ramp

The ramp in the photo above is on a high wall overlooking the pavilion.  I suspect that the designer(s) weren't intending it to be interpreted as a kiddie slide.  Furthermore, the ramp's potential use as a slide may not have occurred to me had I not seen the kids using it that way.  But if I were still a kid I suspect I may have been similarly inspired.

It's a simple example highlighting that not only may people interpret the use of something in unexpected ways but that perceived uses can vary for different subgroups of people.  This is a key issue in designing useful and usable technology -- whether it's online services, software, hardware, etc.

Like the ramp above, unexpected interpretations of a design aren't necessarily always problematic.  In fact, sometimes they prove to be invaluable.  Regardless, identifying any such issues early in a design process is often the most opportune time to resolve or capitalize on them.  This may mean leveraging available knowledge of human behavior & cognition and/or conducting novel research.

The better and earlier that intended users can understood, the lower the risk of an undesired hit or slide when it's too late.

Coca-Cola Tents in Shanghai: More of a "Hit"

I apologize for the recent lack of posts and blame a range of unexpected cosmic forces.  I'm back.

I'll start with something light to get the ball rolling again.  A few months ago, I commented on the curious Coca-Cola sponsored police tents in Kunming, Yunnan.  I also shared that Coca-Cola marketing can be found in less potentially controversial settings such as on umbrellas for street vendors in Zhaotong, Yunnan.

Since then, I've seen more Coca-Cola umbrellas in a variety of cities in China, such as here at a beach in Qingdao, Shandong:

However, I have yet to see any more Coca-Cola police tents.  But, a few weeks ago in Shanghai next to a large shopping center I did see some Coca-Cola tents that weren't for police:

Upon entering the tents visitors were greeted by very friendly staff and given a free bottle of Coke:

While sipping some Coke one could learn more about Coca-Cola's history:

Or play a variety of Coca-Cola themed games:

I didn't play the one above.  But when I saw this:

I thought it was a high striker (strength tester) and decided to give it a try.

I can say with pride that I hit it with quite a bit of force.

I can also say that upon hitting it I wondered if I had broken the device, realized something was amiss, and noticed that the girl seen in the photo above was a bit shocked.  As she composed herself and checked the machine she explained that you're supposed to gently press down the round button, not hit it as if you're Thor.

At least on this occasion, the device could be considered a usability or affordance fail -- my interpretation of the design caused me to act in a way not at all desired by the designer(s).  I'm happy to point out that many in the user experience field would say you should never blame the user when evaluating a design.  In this case I certainly wouldn't argue with that.

The real intended purpose of the device was to simply indicate the recommended temperature (in degrees Celsius) for an enjoyable Coca-Cola drink.  That's rather interesting since cultures can differ on preferences for drink temperature.  In China it isn't uncommon for drinks such as Coke to be available cold in the summer but room temperature during the winter - though I've seen signs that is changing in at least some parts of China.

Overall, I'm not sure whether to say the tents were effective & worthwhile from a marketing perspective.  I thought it was curious there wasn't more of crowd, especially given there was free Coke available.  I also suspected other nearby locations would have been more ideal due to higher amounts of foot traffic.  Regardless, it was probably a positive sign that a number of the people who came into the tents became engaged with the various activities available.

Anyways, personally the experience left me a more positive impression of Coca-Cola than the police tents.

I'll just make sure to ask before I hit anything next time.

Researching Behavior: A Tale of Cats and Dogs

An experience of mine from quite a few years ago is relevant to the challenges in understanding how people think and behave in another culture.  It's not about China, but instead involves a different culture that was foreign to me in many ways at the time -- the US Marines.

My first job after graduate school was at a consulting company which focused on the development of PC-based training system prototypes for the United States Armed Forces.  My work wasn't only conducting research to guide the design of useful and useable systems but also designing the intelligent agents that would mimic human behavior in a virtual environment and interact with real humans.  In short, I had to detail both typical and ideal decision-making at a fine level in very complex environments.  The projects covered domains ranging from the Air Force Space Command to Navy air wing strike teams.

One project brought me to Camp Lejeune, a Marine Corps base in North Carolina.  While sitting next to a large table used for tactical planning, an experienced Marine who was assisting the project and considered to be an expert in his domain suddenly began screaming at me.  The short (and cleansed) version was that he wanted to know how it was that I, fresh out of college and without a shred of military experience, could be playing such a key role in mapping out the decision-making in their activities.  Didn't they already know how they did things much better than I possibly could?

I simply wrote down a word and asked him to read it.

He was a bit surprised by my response.  After a brief moment of stunned silence he correctly said "cats".

I then wrote down another word and asked him to read it as well.  He correctly said "dogs".

I pointed out that they both ended with the written letter "s".  He didn't appear to be impressed by that insight, but I still had his attention.

I then pointed out that despite both ending with the written letter "s" he said the word "dogs" ending with a z sound and "cats" ending with an s sound.

I asked him how he decided which sound to use.

He thought for a while before saying he had no idea how he made the decision.

I used this example to show how being an expert in something doesn't mean you know how you do it.  Despite him probably being able to correctly pronounce the final sound in words such as "dogs" and "cats" nearly 100% of the time, he had no explicit awareness of the decisions he was making.  In fact, this was likely advantageous as "thinking about it" while speaking would probably interfere with performance.  As he could well appreciate in the military where the quickness of decisions could mean life or death, much of the value in gaining certain types of expertise is in reducing the need for conscious decision making so choices can be made more expediently and automatically.  This can hold true for a variety of activities, whether it's speaking a language, riding a bike, or playing a video game.

Figuring out how people think and behave is not at all simple.  In my work I need to apply a variety of methods borrowed from fields ranging from cognitive psychology to anthropology to ensure I best address various research questions.  I made it clear to the Marine that the skills I possessed in researching human cognition that better enabled me to ascertain how he was making certain decisions didn't necessarily mean I could effectively make those decisions myself in a "real world" situation.  My expertise was in figuring out how and why he did certain things.  His expertise was in doing them.

He appreciated my explanation and there were no further issues.  It helped him to better understand our respective roles, and he proved to be an invaluable member of the project.

While my research since that first job, and certainly in China, has not at all been military oriented, I continue to work with people who in their own way are experts in a particular field or activity.  Often, it is a part of their daily lives -- whether it's how to use their mobile phone to organize a gathering of friends, how to purchase an item that's not fake online, how to communicate differently with work colleagues and friends, or how to be unique without being too different.  Occasionally in China, people have posed questions similar those of the Marine (though in a far less aggressive fashion).  Like my conversation with the Marine, I've sought appropriate ways to explain that their "expertise" doesn't necessarily translate to fully understanding how they behave and why they behave that way.

The Different Languages of China

My previous post touched on the immense variety one can find in China's places & people and how that can impact research.

One of the more obvious of China's variations can be found in language.  The official spoken language in China, Standard Chinese, is based on dialect found in the Beijing area and is commonly referred to as Mandarin or Putonghua.  While Mandarin is becoming more widespread in China, in many regions other local dialects are still commonly spoken.  These local dialects can be completely unintelligible to speakers of other dialects, including Mandarin.

One of the many examples I've seen in how this can matter for research involved a previous colleague of mine who is fluent in Mandarin.  Regardless of her native Chinese speaking skills, when we conducted a project several years ago in Wuhan, Hubei province we ran into significant language issues.  While the participants could speak Mandarin, some were far more comfortable speaking in the local Wuhan dialect.  Sometimes this lead to participants expressing frustration with the need to speak in Mandarin.  Other times it meant that people would frequently slip into the Wuhan dialect.  While the Wuhan dialect is more similar to Mandarin than many other dialects, it was not always comprehensible to my colleague -- obviously a problem for research purposes.

It's not only an issue of whether someone can speak Mandarin at an acceptable level.  If a person doesn't feel genuinely comfortable using Mandarin they may be less likely to open up and share details that could be extremely important. Choosing a dialect for an interview in China may be as simple as determining which dialect people use most.  However, for people who speak multiple dialects it may be more important to identify when they use each dialect.  If the research is focused on work-related issues, it may be better for interviews to be conducted using whatever dialect is most commonly used at work, and not what is used at home with family and friends.  Previous research has indicated that memory can be dependent both upon context and language.  Furthermore, research suggests that people who are fluent in multiple languages can exhibit different personalities and provide different answers to questions depending on the language being used.  In other words, the choice of language used in interviews could impact research results even when people are fluent in both languages.   

In a city such as Shanghai there are many people from a variety of regions, so for any research studies conducted there it may not be practical to conduct each interview in a different dialect if research participants are diverse.  For a number of research purposes it can be appropriate to only use Mandarin given that it is commonly used at work places and in social settings in Shanghai.  Such decisions depend on who and what is being researched.  However, particularly when conducting research in other cities in China which may be more homogenous and where Mandarin is less often used, including an interpreter or researcher who can speak the local dialect can be crucial.  For example, one large project I conducted at Microsoft included 5 different interpreters -- one for each of the cities we were exploring.  Although this may mean sacrificing in terms of the quality of the interpretation (finding a top-notch translator for some local dialects can be much more challenging than finding one for Mandarin), for some types of research allowing people to speak in the most appropriate language is paramount.

While Mandarin is certainly becoming more widespread in China, particularly in younger people, it may not only be a barrier for research, but prove to be entirely unusable.  Companies can't necessarily do away with needing interpreters for research work simply because they have a single Chinese-speaking researcher.  It may mean some extra-challenges in managing and conducting research projects, but it also means a better chance of making meaningful discoveries in a country that is diverse in many ways.

Language matters, a lot.

The Different Colors of China

Last year while raveling with a friend in remote Mingshi, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region in China we came across this scene:

Neither of us had seen these "streamers on a stick" before.

Especially since my friend is Hong Kong Chinese, very well traveled, and experienced in professionally writing about China, I was curious to hear her impressions.  She strongly believed that they were for wedding ceremonies.  When I shared my very different suspicion that they were for graves she disagreed and said colors like the ones seen here would never be used this way on items related to death.

Although I recognized that my friend possessed much knowledge about China, from a research perspective I wasn't convinced she really knew the answer, particularly since she was not from this part of China.  So, when we later saw someone who appeared to be a local we asked him about the streamers on sticks.  He said they were for graves.  My friend was surprised and as we walked onwards I had the sense she wasn't entirely convinced.

Not far from there we came across another site that proved to be more compelling.  Here you can see her soaking it in:

Not only are the streamers even more brightly colored, but there are more obvious (well, more obvious to an American and Hongkonger) markers for the graves.  She was now completely convinced.

This is one of the many examples of China's diversity.   Often, what you find in Shanghai or Hong Kong will not apply in other places in China -- even when you're looking at something so seemingly fundamental as associations for colors.  This has an immense impact on how to best conduct research in China -- whether for driving the design of technology or developing effective marketing campaigns.  For example, if business goals aren't limited to a specific region in China, conducting research in multiple regions can be critical to ensuring any results will apply to the range of people being targeted.  It doesn't necessarily mean the resulting product, marketing campaign, etc. will need to be tailored to each region, but it could mean finding the best single solution that can apply to multiple regions.

It's not only just about what differs.  In some of my research, I've seen unifying threads across China and its people.  But depending on what you're looking at it may be related to factors such as region, size of the city, prosperity of the city, income level, personal interests, age, etc.  For example, I've seen some surprising similarities in people living in very different parts of China -- such as Changsha, Hunan province and Changchun, Jilin province.  However, there were other ways in which they differed that were largely related to regional issues.  Identifying these patterns and understanding them can be key to applying any findings in an effective and meaningful manner.

Finally, in the experience with the graves in Guangxi my friend had a more difficult time than I did in questioning her initial beliefs.  In part, this is likely because her cultural associations with the colors were very strong and she assumed they would apply elsewhere in China.  As an outsider I had fewer (or at least different) biases that made it easier for me to question whether I really knew the answer and also made it more likely I'd seek additional input.

This leads to another topic I'll address in an upcoming post:  How being an outsider to a culture can be advantageous for certain types of research.  In many ways it holds true for all cultures, but I have found it to be especially true in China.

Different Obstacles in China for Google and Facebook

In my post "Facebook in China: A Chance to Connect and Understand" I highlighted that Facebook stands apart from Chinese social-networking sites in its ability to meet a key need & desire for many in China: connecting with the world.  I felt that Facebook could serve a positive role, both for China and the world, even given the fact that it would likely have to censor material on its site as required by the Chinese government.

So this clearly means that I think Google Search made a mistake in not keeping a censored version of its service in China, right?

Not necessarily.

On the issue of needing to self-censor Facebook and Google Search are different.

Last year, Google decided to redirect its search service in Mainland China to its servers in Hong Kong so that it would no longer be required to censor per the rules of the Chinese government (although it does presumably now "censor" according to the far less strict requirements in Hong Kong).  At that point China essentially took over the active duties of censoring the site.  China can block individual search requests or block individual pages of results depending on the content.  The experience one can having using Google Search in China can vary depending on the Great Firewall's apparent mood of the day, but essentially a user in China can go to Google Search, enter a "bad" search term, be "blocked", return to the search page (sometimes there may be a delay before the page is accessible), and then do something else.

In short, it is possible for China's Great Firewall to block "bad" things on Google Search without entirely stopping someone from using it.

However, if Facebook takes a stand to not censor material according to the rules of the Chinese government then there's no way for them to operate in a similar fashion.  Imagine if China reviews every incoming page from Facebook and only blocks pages that include "bad" material.  What if the news feed on a person's homepage includes a "bad" link that has been posted by a friend? China would block the page and that's it.  The person can't use Facebook at all.

As Facebook is currently designed there is likely now no way for it to be practically available in China unless Facebook itself censors material.  However, there may be hope that any censorship requirements for Facebook may not be as draconian as some may imagine.  A recent article by Loretta Chao in the Wall Street Journal that provides an overview of the competition between various Chinese social-networking sites (see here) touches on this:

"Chinese websites, including Sina, are required to police themselves to keep their government-issued operational licenses, a costly task involving dozens of employees who monitor the sites around the clock.

Although Sina is known for its heated discussions, at times over controversial issues such as local government corruption and soaring property prices, most talk on the site isn't political. When sensitive topics arise, the company can be creative in limiting conversation without cutting it off altogether—for example, by blocking searches of sensitive keywords but not stopping people from publishing them on their own microblogs."

Facebook may be able to allow similar "freedoms".  Although, it should be noted that as a foreign company they may be held to stricter standards than local companies for a variety of reasons.  As I've noted before regarding Google (see here), life is not always "fair" in China.

The only way for Facebook to take Google Search's route of not censoring themselves would be for Facebook to massively redesign its service.  Since China would still attempt to censor parts of the site, Facebook would have to ask itself whether it would be worth it.  For Google Search it was more simple.  Not censoring only meant less, not more, work for them since no fundamental changes to the design of the service were required (whether taking this route has led to more "interference" for Google's services in China is another issue).

This is why holding Google Search and Facebook to different expectations for self-censorship in China can be reasonable.  If China completely blocked Google Search then I would hope it would self-censor for reasons similar to those I've outlined for Facebook.  [Added note: Yes, I realize Google tried this once before and decided that it wasn't working for them.  Whether they should try again (if it's the only option) partly depends on the exact issues that previously caused them to stop self-censoring per China's rules.  My point is simply that a censored Google would be better for people in China than no Google.  Whether it is practical for Google to do so (China may not apply censorship rules consistently or fairly to Google) is another issue.]

The impact of the different situations faced by Google Search and Facebook relates to another issue Google is now facing: maintaining the operation of Google Maps in China.  As I previously discussed in my comparison of Google Maps and Baidu Map (see here), I think there are signs that Google Maps is strongly positioned in China and this may be why they're reportedly willing to form a joint venture with a Chinese company to meet new regulations.  In this case, there is presumably no option to offer Google Maps in China by redirecting traffic to servers in Hong Kong -- China would simply block the entire site.

There is also much talk about Google's new offerings in Google+.  See here for an in-depth overview by Steven Levy on Wired.com and here for a piece by Ben Parr on Mashable.  Earlier today, I noted (see here) that at the time the entry portal to the service appeared to be blocked in China due to DNS issues that could be easily "fixed".  Later, the Shanghaiist reported (see here) that the service could be accessed in China but was very slow.  Regardless, Google+ will likely face it's own particular challenges if it wants to operate in China.

I feel that Facebook, Google, and other companies who can help Chinese people connect with the world all should do their best to have a presence in China.  They can all offer something special for people in China, each in their own way.  Depending on their services they may have to make different sacrifices to do so, but in many cases they will be worth it for the companies, their customers, and their users.

Facebook in China: A Chance to Connect and Understand

Recently, there's been much speculation about Facebook possibly entering or, depending on how you look at it, re-entering China.  Facebook was once available in China but for the past year it has been blocked and inaccessible through normal means.  It can be accessed by breaking through China's Great Firewall, but many in China don't make such efforts for a variety of reasons (for more on how the Great Firewall works see here).  In short, being blocked is still very bad for an online business in China.  Now, Facebook is reportedly considering creating a China-specific version of its services, possibly in partnership with a Chinese company, that would meet local regulations and therefore be more available to Chinese citizens (for one earlier overview of the speculation see here).

It's a complex topic with many angles to consider.  Much has already been written.  I'd like to contribute some of my own perspectives, at least some of which I haven't seen presented elsewhere, that in part stem from my work as a user experience researcher in the technology domain in China.

In short, I strongly believe Facebook should come to China.  Not only do I think Facebook has much to gain from it, but so do the Chinese people.

I'll cover how Facebook can uniquely meet some key needs and desires in China, discuss why having to build a China-specific version of Facebook could be a blessing-in-disguise, and share some thoughts on the impact a China-specific service could have for Facebook in the US.  Much of what I write may in one way or another pertain to companies such as Microsoft or Google as well, but I will couch it specifically in terms of Facebook given the possibility of them making a "fresh" start in China.

But first, I'd like to introduce you to four young Chinese I met in very different parts of China.  The names are made-up.  The stories are very real.  And they matter.

Four Youth in China

Looking for a way out.

I met Zhao Yu at a basketball court in a university in Zigong, Sichuan province, the same city featured in my recent piece comparing Google Maps and Baidu Map in China (see here).

Zhao Yu is frustrated.  Very frustrated.  He feels that he is caught in a system that has already judged and labeled him for life.

He had little choice over his college or his major and he is satisfied with neither.  He would like to switch to another major but doing so would be extremely difficult -- not uncommon in universities in China.  He feels his school is not providing him an education that will help him succeed in life.  Furthermore, he doesn't believe it is very well regarded and is concerned that he'll be forever labeled by his college degree, regardless of his abilities.

In his own words, he feels "crushed" by the system around him.  Yes, he believes China has made great strides.  Yes, his life is probably better than his parents at his age.  But he's not satisfied with his lot -- it doesn't feel fair.  To him, the only hope he has is to break out.  His dream is to study abroad. Whether it is education or work experience, he believes that other countries offer him the opportunity to achieve his dreams.

What do the foreigners really think?

I met Zhang Li at a university in Tianjin after I noticed an student recruitment event held by Kaixin, one of the leading social network sites in China.  We talked about a variety of issues and eventually I broached the topic of Liu Xiaobo, the human rights activist and winner of last year's Nobel Peace Prize who is now held in China as a political prisoner.  She vaguely knew about him, although she only knew part of his name and some very general facts about the Peace Prize.

While I was very interested to hear her thoughts on Liu Xiaobo, what most caught my attention was her strong interest to hear my own views.  When I expressed some thoughts on freedom of speech she said she sympathized with speech being restricted in China because "Chinese are too emotional and people say irrational things" -- something I've heard said by a number of college students across China.  When I asked her why people in Hong Kong are able to enjoy such freedoms with no apparent problem she became puzzled.  She had never thought about it before and had no reply.

There was another fascinating moment while we were discussing how she learned about Liu Xiaobo.  In the middle of the conversation she paused for a while.  Then, as she gazed into the distance she thoughtfully said, "if this guy is in jail, there must be others."

I have something to tell you.

I met Fan Suhong on a nearly 3 hour train ride from Laibin to Nanning in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region.  I was standing in the aisle because there were no seats available.  Initially, she and her friends were standing in another section of the rail car, but I later noticed she was standing just to my side.  I was very confident she wanted to speak to me.  However, I just stood there to see if her desire to speak was strong enough to initiate the conversation herself.

It was.  And soon I was asking her about her life at a college in Nanning, where she was returning after a trip to visit her family during a short holiday.  During a pause in the conversation, she conspicuously flipped though pictures on her mobile phone.  It was clear she hoped I would ask her about the photos.  Again, I patiently waited to see if she would take the first step.

She did.  As we looked though her photos she was particularly interested in showing me some from her dormitory room including her roommates.  Very quickly, I noticed something special.  In China, it can be very typical to see girls walking arm in arm, holding hands, or interacting in other ways that would seem a bit too close or physical for friends in places such as the US.  But the photos of one of her roommates in particular suggested something much more than a simple friendship.  I looked at Fan Suhong and had no doubt she was hoping I would ask her a question.  Again, I waited to see if she would broach the topic herself.

She did.  She finally said very matter-of-factly, "I'm lesbian."  We then had a deep discussion of her current situation.  For example, she found her friends supportive, and even some teachers, but she didn't dare tell her parents.  What would she do about her relationship in the future?  She didn't know (see here for an article written by Chinese college students about lesbians in China "seeking refuge" in other countries).

This wasn't the first time for a young lady to proactively tell me she was a lesbian.  I've spoken to an American female who does some research similar to mine who has also noted that several females opened up to her in a very similar fashion.  Why?

Feeling safe to share.

Huang Beiping lives and works in Xian, Shaanxi province.  Near the end of an extensive discussion I had with him he shared some of his personal views about relationships in China.  He told me I was the first person to hear these thoughts of his.  He had never told his best friends, his close brother, or his parents.  I asked him why he told me.  Very emphatically while pointing his finger at me with every word he said, "You won't judge me."  As he described it, he couldn't share certain views that were atypical in China without fear of negative consequences for being labeled as "different".  However, he felt that foreigners were, in his own words, more open-minded and accepting of different viewpoints.  For this reason, he enjoyed opportunities in his work when he was able to interact with people from abroad.

A Common Theme

The four Chinese I've introduced are very different people from very different parts of China.  Each with their own dreams, yet all in their own way treasuring the opportunity or desiring to connect with the world outside of China.  These are just snapshots of the many youth in China, all with their own stories to tell.

While there are many differences that can be found in youth in China, there are many who share the desire to connect with the world outside.  However, what is exactly being sought after and why it's being sought may not be identical.  For some youth it is related to their growing personal connections to the international world, whether due to their studies or work.  For others it may be about connecting with people who are "outside" of their community and about whom they needn't worry or care about being judged.  For some it is about feeling like they are part of a global community, that they can see their passions and dreams are shared by others -- whether that means expressing a viewpoint or knowing that their favorite brand is also beloved by Americans.

Meeting these needs and desires isn't likely going to be achieved by a single design solution in a social networking service.  It will take careful efforts to discover the right combination of features and services.  And Facebook is in a unique position to better create and provide them.

A Unique Offering

I pointed out in a recent post that one of the areas where Google Maps was clearly stronger than Baidu Map was in its coverage of the world outside of China (see here).

There is another aspect where Chinese companies are lacking in their coverage of the world.  Currently, no Chinese company with a social networking service has a significant number of active users globally.  Renren doesn't.  Kaixin doesn't.  Sina Weibo doesn't.

However, of course Facebook does.  This matters for two reasons in particular.

One, as I've already discussed there is a desire by many Chinese to connect with the outside world. Facebook can offer this in a way no Chinese company can now match.

The second reason has a lot to do with how things work in China.

If Facebook opens a China-dedicated service, whatever innovative things they may do there is a good chance one of their main competitors will try to copy it.  In that case, why would people switch to Facebook if it doesn't offer anything different and people are already connected to friends on other services?  However, no company in China can copy Facebook's global reach.  Of course, Facebook will benefit from designs that meet purely "local" Chinese needs.  But it is in finding innovative ways to connect people to the outside world that Facebook will be extremely distinct from local Chinese services and provide a reason for people in China to adopt it.

Some say there is already too much competition in China's market for online social networking for Facebook to now jump in.  I believe this actually works to Facebook's advantage as their competitors will be competing with each other with their China-specific offerings while Facebook will be alone in offering a China-plus-world network to join.

A Service Special to China

Much has been written about the "sacrifices" Facebook would presumably have to make because of the possible need to create a separate China-specific version of Facebook.  However, I believe this is in fact an immense opportunity for several reasons.

1.  Successful localized design

Many foreign companies in the online services or software domain have either failed or significantly struggled in China.  Competition may not always be "fair" in China (for example, see here for a Chinese person's take on Google's recent struggles), but foreign companies should be well aware of how the Chinese market works before entering.

However, "fairness" isn't the only problem.  In some cases, foreign companies' desire to maintain "global standards" has prevented them from competing with Chinese companies who provide more locally tailored solutions.  I know of teams in China who conducted research in China and had design solutions for the local market, only to be rebuffed by senior leaders abroad who didn't want to do things differently than normal.  Now, some of those companies are effectively gone.

Needing to develop a China-specific version will provide a better opportunity for a local team to have the freedom to be different and to do it right for China.

2.  Driving Global Innovation

Facebook is entering a critical period for its growth and future.  Obviously, it has found much success and is the envy of many other companies.  But, this is also a time where some companies become so successful or large that further innovation becomes stilted, sometimes due to fearing changing what has worked in the past.

Having a distinct site that focuses on China will allow a new breed of innovation to appear with less risk to Facebook globally.  Often, very successful design localized for a particular market will find uses in other markets, even if used in a different manner or for different reasons.

In short, come to China.  Innovate and experiment.  Inspire the rest of your company.

3.  Respect

For many Chinese, gaining respect is very important.  And many Chinese feel that the world doesn't respect China.

A China-specific Facebook, if designed and marketed correctly, could indicate that Facebook has an immense amount of respect for China and create a strong bond with many Chinese users.  It will show Facebook cares.

4.  Good for China

Some Chinese have no problems buying fake international products in part because they don't see any need to spend what little money they have to buy the real version just so some already rich foreigner can add to their bank account.  Yes, Facebook is largely free for its users, but there is no doubt that it is providing the service to make profits.  Some Chinese simply want to use something "Made in China".

By having a China-specific version that's made in China, Facebook can better communicate that its profits and success will be benefiting China, whether through new jobs created, supporting local causes, etc.  It would be more challenging to convince people of this if Facebook was using a generic version controlled by far away California.

Censorship & Public Opinion Elsewhere

Many have written about the PR problems and resistance Facebook could face in places such as the US if they enter China, particularly regarding censorship and surveillance (for one example, see here).  I'm not going to get deeply into how Facebook could manage its global PR, but I'll cover a couple of issues.

For one, Facebook already censors in other markets.  So does Google.  So does Microsoft.  See here for an in-depth perspective by The Brookings Institution on the impact companies such as Facebook and Google and the rules of various countries have on free speech around the world.  It highlights how challenging it can be to define what is truly free and uncensored.  Of course, the censorship may not be to the extent that occurs in China and people may prefer giving it a different name but there is material that is blocked in many countries around the world.

Companies such as Facebook, Google, Microsoft, etc. probably don't think it's always to their advantage to highlight that they censor, whether it is in Germany, Italy, Turkey, or yes, even in the US.  But, presented in the right way, it may be possible for Facebook to make an important point to potential critics.  Regardless of some degree of censorship, many countries still have a flourishing online community.  The same is true in its own way in China.

While Facebook may not want to highlight this as it approaches the Chinese government for a license, it is simply impossible to completely censor the internet.  Certainly censorship in China has had an impact, yet many Chinese are very savvy in finding creative ways to work around censorship, whether it is using new names for blocked phrases or through other forms of indirect communication.  Facebook can completely follow Chinese regulations and people can still find ways to share any ideas they want.

In part, Facebook needs to try to make the case to concerned people that a) operating in China without censorship is not at all an option and b) Chinese are better off with a censored Facebook than no Facebook at all.  It's easy for Americans to say Facebook should stay out of China when it in no way is a sacrifice for them.  Would they feel otherwise if they moved to China and had to operate behind the Great Firewall?  Unless they're happy to give up Facebook, I suspect many would change their minds.  And don't forget the stories of Chinese like the ones I've shared.  Facebook could play an important part in their lives.  Do people in the US really want to deny them of it just because the rules of the Chinese government are seen as too restrictive?  I'm not suggesting that Facebook should necessarily raise these points in such a direct fashion.  However, the ideas behind them could be useful in formulating a campaign to convince more people that it's a net positive for Facebook to operate in China, even if it must follow Chinese laws on censorship.

Regardless, making a case like this to the public isn't easy and some public backlash in places such as America is probably inevitable.  In fact, there may even be push back from the US Government (see here for a perspective from the Wall Street Journal).  As long as it doesn't significantly impact their global operations, I have one word if that occurs:  Good!

Having a few tussles with the US Government could be played by Facebook to its advantage in China.  As I discussed in an earlier post (see here), some youth in China with a very positive perception of Google had a drastic change of opinion after a speech by Hillary Clinton that referenced Google while also condemning censorship in China.  In a single stroke, it became easy for Chinese to believe that Google was simply an arm of the US government.  This was not at all to Google's benefit in China.  A public dispute between Facebook and the US government would help prevent such perceptions of Facebook taking hold.

I'm definitely not saying Facebook should deliberately try to generate a negative reaction in the US.  If they can successfully make their case, then fantastic.  I'm just pointing out that if there are lemons in the US, there's lemonade they can sell in China.

And to be clear, I dream of the day when censorship is drastically reduced in China.  I would be absolutely thrilled to see China's Great Firewall vanish.  But Facebook can't come into China and change everything.  I simply believe that Facebook connecting Chinese to the outside world can be such a good thing, both for China and the world, that accepting censorship is worth it.

Conclusion

There are certainly many other issues for Facebook to consider before entering China.  For some other possibilities see a series of posts by Silicon Hutong here, here and here and another post by Steven Levy here.  I may address several of the issues raised by those posts and some others as well later.

Yes, I think Facebook should come to China.  Yes, I think it will be challenging.  Yes, there are risks, but the potential rewards are huge.

Facebook has something to offer that if designed and packaged correctly will be embraced by many Chinese.  This will be good for Facebook.  But more importantly this will be good for China and the rest of the world -- so they can better connect and understand each other.

I've certainly found in my own experiences in China that listening to people and respecting what they have to say can lead to some wondrous things.  But it can't happen without a way to communicate.

_______________________________________________________

Added notes for clarification:

1.  Regardless of any opportunity that exists, it may not be feasible for Facebook to operate in China for a variety of reasons.  For example, the Chinese government may not be willing to allow Facebook to operate even if it agrees to censor or other concessions from Facebook may be required.  Again, see the links provided above for a number of issues not discussed in this post.

2.  The potential benefits of localized design do not necessarily mean a China-based version of Facebook would need to be very different.  For example, sometimes small changes can have a significant impact (whether in usability or perceived "localness"), and some localizations may be more focused on associated applications or services.  The nature of any potential localizations is a topic for another day.  Of course, there are also benefits to Facebook in trying to keep as universal a design as possible.

3.  I don't believe localization of services is the only way Facebook can show "respect" and that it is "good for China".  As briefly mentioned above, I believe there are other efforts that could also have an impact in these areas.

[The section "Censorship & Public Relations Elsewhere" was edited on June 6.  The edits primarily involved shifting several sentences and adding some content for clarity.  In the spirit of openness the original is here.  Also, the world "possibly" was added to the first sentence in "A Service Special to China".]

Google Maps and Baidu Map in China

A couple of months ago there were reports that Google was "in talks with the Chinese government about its online map product" after Google had missed one deadline to apply for the newly required state license to operate an online mapping service in China.  Reportedly, the new license was to ensure maps did not reveal information that was considered sensitive to China's national security.  While some of Google's services in China, such as search, now redirect to servers in Hong Kong, Google Maps currently remains "in China".

Since those initial reports, I've noticed some curious patterns in my research on Chinese youth (those approxiately 18-25 years old) that made me wonder if there is something more to the story, as there often is in China.  I'll provide an overview of what I noticed in my research, some comparisons of Google's and Baidu's online map services, and a few comments on what I think this all may say regarding the above mentioned and more recent news about Google Maps in China.

In short, I've seen some indications that younger people across a number of regions in China (2nd tier cities and smaller) prefer Google Maps over the online map service offered by Google's main competitor in China, Baidu.

There are four things in what I've heard from younger people that particularly stand out.  One, a strong preference for Google Maps can be expressed even when the person rarely or never uses any of Google's other services.  Two, some were very animated when talking about Google Maps -- it seems to have really connected with them.  Three, I have heard the same thing from people in a variety of regions ranging from Shandong in the east to Sichuan in the southwest.  Four, it has been uncommon for someone to express an overall preference for Baidu Map.

Given the nature of the interviews (very exploratory in nature and no observation of people actually using online maps), I can't be sure of "why" this may be.  Some youth commented that Google Maps was easier to use while others mentioned the richer visual imagery available.  I'd want to do more in-depth research before commenting further.

To provide a sense on some of the reasons youth may prefer Google Maps over Baidu Map I'll make some comparisons.

To start, Baidu has a relatively new view for its map service that has even caught some attention in the US.

Baidu Map's 3D view of the Xujiahui District in Shanghai

This hand-drawn 3D view includes quite a bit of detail.  Above is a part of Shanghai were I've lived and worked.  The 3D view received some positive comments in the US such as "the maps are pretty rad" by Nicholas Jackson of The Atlantic. VisualJournalism.com titled a post "Baidu beats Google when it comes to mapping" and Jason Chen at Gizmodo expressed hope that Google would create similar maps.

So, should Google be jealous or concerned?  While I appreciate the appeal and possible applications of Baidu's 3D view, overall I don't believe Google has much to worry about at the moment.

Baidu's 3D view is lacking in several important aspects.  One, even in a major city such as Shanghai, only the very central districts are covered.  See here for what is found just next to the region shown above:

I can say with great confidence that those blank regions are very urban regions and not fields or beach front.  IKEA must be disappointed that its building so narrowly missed being included -- it's located just to the left of the highway intersection in the center of the image.

Another limitation can be seen in the details. It appears that not all of the buildings are up-to-date.  For example, one area shows an "under-construction" building that was completed a number of years ago.  I'd be curious to know what Baidu uses as a source to guide visual design of the map.  Given the vast amount of construction and rebuilding in China, regularly updating the map would be all the more important.

Another issue is that the 3D view is not aligned with the regular map view.  When toggling between the two views the scene is rotated by about 20-30 degrees -- a somewhat disorienting experience both due to the change and to the resulting unusual orientation of the map (north is no longer straight up).

Even with these limitations, Shanghai is "lucky".  Another key issue is that the 3D view is not available at all for most cities in China.

So, how do Google Maps and Baidu Map compare in the majority of cases where Baidu Map does not offer 3D view?

For one example, take a look at Zigong in Sichuan province -- a city where I heard some youth express their preference for Google Maps.  Here is a map of a section of Zigong as seen through Google Maps China-based service:

Zigong in Google Maps

Here is a map at a similar zoom in Baidu Map:

Zigong in Baidu Map

As you can see, there are some significant differences, but you may notice something particularly different -- the river.  On Baidu Map it abruptly stops at either end and extends to a region in the east where Google Maps shows no river.  Maybe Baidu Map is correct and it's really a narrow lake or the river travels underground in parts.

How to know for sure?  Well, there's no obvious way on Baidu Map, but on Google Maps one can easily switch to the satellite view (I should note it now appears to be well aligned with the map view, which wasn't the case earlier for Google's maps of China):

Zigong in Google Maps' Satellite View

Unless Google is manipulating the satellite imagery, it's readily apparent their map of the river is far more accurate.

There are a variety of comparisons one could make between Google's and Baidu's online maps and Google Maps doesn't always come out on top.  For example, when I was in Dunhua, Jilin province (see here for some scenes of Dunhua) I noticed several differences because Google Maps was missing a street I needed to find and it appeared on Baidu Map.  I further noticed they didn't agree on some street names and I walked around to see who was correct -- based on the street signs it was Baidu Map.  However, Google Maps had identified some landmarks such as a park that were not identified on Baidu Map.

What about maps for outside of China?  Well, Baidu of course has maps of other locations, such as North America.  However, the level of detail may surprise you:

All the detail you need for North America

The above map in Baidu is as detailed as it gets.  Zoom in any more and all you will see is a screen of grayness.  Too bad, I was really looking forward to seeing if the Mississippi River remained intact.  Other non-Chinese parts of the world have a similar amount of detail.  Seeing Baidu Map's different levels of detail for China and elsewhere reminded me of famous map of a New Yorker's view of the world.  You can explore Google Maps' view of North America yourself if you question whether it provides any more detail than above.

It would be complex to do a full comparison of Google Maps and Baidu Maps coverage of China in terms of streets, places, services available, etc.  However, while neither is perfect, typically any missing or mistaken information I've noticed on Google Maps does not involve large scale errors so obvious as missing large sections of a river.   Furthermore, the coverage of China by the satellite view of Google Maps, even if only including detailed views, readily appears to be far greater than that of Baidu Map's 3D view.

Google clearly offers an experience on online maps that in some respects Baidu simply can't match right now.  This plus what I've heard from Chinese youth makes me strongly suspect that Google is noticing Google Maps is receiving significant attention in China.  In fact, they may not be the only ones in China aware of this.

I think these points are key for two main reasons.

One, the relative strength of Google Maps may be another reason why Google is reportedly being asked to jump through new hurdles to maintain the service in China.  As discussed in an earlier post about Google's problems in China (see here), any success Google finds in China may motivate others to make life more difficult for it because better connected Chinese companies will be "losing out".

Two, it may explain why Google is now reportedly planning to partner with a Chinese company to ensure they can keep their obtain the map license in order to meet new requirements Google has reportedly been willing to partner with a Chinese company in its recently submitted application for an online map license.  Google may believe that they have something special with Google Maps in China and are willing to make a pragmatic choice in order to keep it as fully operational as possible in China.  Creating a partnership with the right company in China would not only help Google Maps meet China's new rules but also possibly help better protect Google Maps in the future since a more local (and possibly better connected) company would be involved.  If this is true it may be an important hint about Google's outlook & strategy for moving ahead in China.

Finally, regardless of the motivations behind the new rules for online maps in China and how Google is responding, the difference in what Google Maps can offer in comparison to Baidu Map is both vast and important.  In an upcoming post I'll write about another company that would like to establish a strong online presence in China and who can also provide something desired by many Chinese yet not currently available through any Chinese company.  In their own way, like Google they don't have blank maps for most of the world.

Added Note:  For more details see the post: Google and the New Rules for Online Map Services in China

2nd Added Note:  For how Bing Maps compares as well plus additional analysis of Google Maps and Baidu Map see: Maps in (and of) China: Baidu, Bing, and Google

Seeing the Signs

Recently I asked for thoughts on the intended meaning of the signs and the purpose of the ramps on a bridge in Chengdu, China (if you missed out on the post, you may find it helpful to read it here before continuing).  To refresh, here is one of the photos:

I'll share a sampling that captures most of the responses.

A reader in the US wrote:

"maybe you're only supposed to bike one-way since there's an arrow??"

Another reader in the US had a suggestion I had not previously considered:

 "No riding across the bridge without a cat."

A reader in Taiwan wondered:

"Maybe that means no riding bikes but other vehicles are allowed."

A reader in India provided several possibilities but was not satisfied with any of them:

"all these guesses don't make sense for various different reasons, but:
1. No bicycles allowed (only motorbikes, etc)
2. No riding in the direction indicated by the arrow
3. No parking your bike on the bridge
4. No sitting on your bike and using your hands while riding... only ride standing and no hands"

A Belorussian-Mexican residing in Switzerland (really) provided a particularly in-depth and colorful analysis:

"On the first photo I thought the sign referred to one-way Chinese bikers street.  Since this is definitely not the case, I see now only two possibility.... The most likely one is that this sign means "This will NOT be a smooth ride ahead", with bumps and all...  The second possibility is that this is an invitation to not ride towards the left during the course of this ride, for you'll crash against other riders or fall off the bridge... not too good....

Well, there's actually a 3rd possibility, and that's how I would in all seriousness interpret the sign. It probably means "Don't speed up! This is a fucking bridge for Heaven's sake, and perhaps you don't know it, but there's a fucking ramp ahead!"...(and at the bottom of the ramp the sign means "Don't speed up!  This is a fucking ramp for Heaven's sake, and you never know when it will become a straight bridge".  Since the sign was perhaps not self-explanatory enough, and a handful of Chinese individuals fell off the bridge/ramp, the authorities had to put some bumps to sort of control the chaos - yet, the sign shall just sit there for eternities... That's my explanation in all seriousness...."

[*note at the end of the post about my views on quotes involving colorful language.]

In a second attempt, the Taiwanese reader was the only person who submitted the "correct" answer.  Based on this, the varied responses, and the lack of confidence many expressed it seems clear that the signs are not effective in communicating their intended meaning -- at least to readers of this blog.

Before revealing the intended meaning of the signs, I'll share a few scenes from a similar bridge:

In this case, the stairs had a sign as well.  Since it seems that the stairs and their purpose are readily apparent it may not be clear why such a sign would be posted.  However, there is more context to provide.

Further down the sidewalk there was a ramp up the bridge.  But this ramp had a couple more signs than the ramps on the other bridge:

The sign with Chinese text asks pedestrians to use the stairs.

So, now what do you think?  Even with the additional signs you may still be unsure.

OK.  Now for the answer.  See here:

Aha!

The sign indicates that it is not permissible to ride a bike on the ramp.  Instead, people are expected to walk their bikes.  However, the ramps are not intended for pedestrians.  The sign near the stairs is likely to further emphasize that they, and not the ramp, should be used by pedestrians.

The small hint I referred to in the earlier post was a partially obstructed view of a person walking their bike up the curved ramp.  And why did those ramps have what appear to be speed bumps?  I suspect it was a pragmatic response to manage the speed of bikers since the signs were not being observed.  Somehow, it feels poetic to simply quote the Belorussian-Mexican reader again and say, "yet, the sign shall just sit there for eternities."

There are host of issues one could explore regarding this example, for example the merits of "do" and "do not" signs in various contexts and whether people continuing to ride their bikes on the ramps is more due to the signs being ignored, the signs not being understood, or something else.  For now, I'd like to just briefly focus on one of the challenges in appreciating how others may interpret designs such as signs.

When I presented the photographs of the signs to a few people in Chengdu who had not seen them before their responses were similar to some of the responses I received from readers (none mentioned anything about cats, though).  However, when I asked some people sitting nearby the bridge about the meaning of the sign they responded with the "correct" answer as if it was obvious and they seemed incredulous that it wasn't the same for others.

In many cases, after one learns the meaning of such a sign it can seem to be "common sense" and be difficult to appreciate how others see it.  For related reasons, it can be challenging for a designer to appreciate how others will perceive and interpret what they've designed, whether it's a sign, a piece of software, an online service, a mobile phone, etc.  This is a large part of why an understanding of human psychology and how to conduct meaningful research can be crucial for successful design.

The impact of familiarity also relates to why for some types of research, it can be particularly advantageous to study a culture different from your own -- whether you're an American in China or a Chinese in the US.  Sometimes, having a "fresh" viewpoint will better enable you identify certain issues.  I'll be writing more about this in the future.

In the meantime, I'll make sure to keep an eye out for any Americans riding their bikes across bridges with their cats.

______________________________________________________________

[*Note on how I quote: I generally will not edit/censor "bad words" when they are part of a relevant portion of a quote and when they are not used in a threatening manner.  If I error, I will do so on the side of allowing people to present their ideas in the manner they choose, whether to emphasize a point, add humor, express emotions, etc.  Others are free to interpret them how they want.  I think it's worth keeping in mind what can be easily and freely seen on someone's jacket while one walks down a street in the US.]

Faces of China: Chengdu Youth

I think it's useful to put a face to the many stories you may hear about "youth" in China.  Here are just a few from Chengdu, Sichuan that I saw at the large and central Tianfu Square and at a nearby popular shopping street.

I can't resist pointing out that in several of the photos you'll see people holding their mobile phones.  As I've mentioned before (such as here), it is not uncommon for Chinese to have their mobile "out", even when they're not using them.

However, I think the photos express something much deeper.  In conducting my research and explorations across China, I am continually amazed by both the commonalities and uniqueness of the various youth I meet  -- whether it is in how they use the Internet, what they think about their government, or how they express themselves.  I think these photos help capture some of that.

Look at the fashion.  Look at the body language.  Look at the expressions.

In some cases you may immediately think of "stories" for the photos below.  Some of what you're thinking may be accurate.  Some of what you're thinking likely more reflects your own biases and assumptions.

Regardless, looking can help inspire questions you may not have thought to ask otherwise.

The answers to those questions won't just tell you more about other people, but yourself as well.

Friend visiting another from afar

College student with her photography tutor

Irresistible photo opportunity 

Snack time

Matching

Taking a break to chat

Chinese Menu Innovation

It isn't uncommon in China for restaurants to have a very large number of dishes available in their menu.  When pictures are included this can mean the menu will also have a large number of pages.

Additionally, typically in China one person will order all of the dishes, which are shared, for the whole table.

So...

Keeping track of all the dishes you may want to order can be problematic.  One way to deal with this is to simply pick dishes as you page through the menu.  In China, waitresses and waiters will usually stand at the table waiting while you decide what to order.

But maybe you want to decide on the full selection before announcing any choices.  In such cases I've found myself using my fingers to keep track of the pages with the most delicious looking items so I don't have to page through the whole menu again.  However, if ordering for many people I may quickly run out of fingers.

In Chengdu, Sichuan province I ate at this vegetarian restaurant:

Lotus on the Water -- a vegetarian restaurant in Chengdu

They had a rather extensive menu, but they also provided something else when they brought it to the table:

Colored clips and fake-meat dishes in the menu

The small clips were a simple and very useful method for remembering your selections.  It also helped to ensure that your order was properly communicated.  Sometimes low-tech innovation is all you need.

And here's more proof that it worked:

Spicy vegetarian beef and tea tree mushrooms

Car Bombs and No-Smoking Ashtrays

James Fallows recently shared two photos of signs in Beijing and asked his readers to guess their meanings (see here for post).

Here is the first sign:

And here is the second sign:

The first sign confused me at first, but when I thought "China" the meaning was immediately obvious to me: "no firecrackers".  In China, I've seen firecrackers lit just about anywhere, including on sidewalks as people are walking by.  I've also seen signs forbidding them in a variety of places such as subway stations.

In a later post James Fallows shared some other responses from his readers to the "no firecrackers" sign.  Here are just a few:

• "No Fishboning Permitted!!!"
• "Don't pull the martial arts weapons off the pine trees"
• The sign must mean: "Don't step on the fishbones lying on the ground, because it will make a funny noise."
• My guess - "cutting down trees and/or removing tree branches is prohibited."
• Beware of falling Douglas fir twigs?

For a fuller list of interesting guesses by Fallows' readers see the post here.

The second sign, which James Fallows initially labeled "no car bombers", left me more baffled.  In his post, Fallows shared some of my thoughts including that it was "no loudspeaker announcements from cars", "no sirens", or "no giant sponge monsters on top of car".  As the last guess may indicate, none of my answers had left me convinced I had really figured it out.

Later, Fallows added the following two contributions from readers on the meaning of the sign:

• My wife (from China) says the second one means "no transporting loads on top of cars."  (btw, she knew no firecrackers instantly).
• [Reader who once lived in China] As for the second sign, I have seen it many times before and never figured it out. But the firecracker sign gave me an idea: could it mean "no setting off fireworks on top of your car?" I have seen people in a Chinese wedding motorcade dropping fireworks onto the road, so perhaps in the past they affixed them to the roof of the car.

The first explanation seems questionable to me because I am unclear why this rule would be applied to such a specific area.  I also am not sold on the second explanation.  I've seen some pretty raucous wedding motorcades but have never seen anyone lighting firecrackers on their car roof (yet).

If Greece has anything to say about the sign they may actually support something similar to Fallows' original suggestion.  For example this sign in Greece:

according to Wickipedia means "No vehicles carrying explosive or flammable goods".  All I can say is I guess Greece doesn't have a giant sponge monster problem.

I was now curious to hear from some more people in China.  Not having time to do a rigorous experiment in Beijing, I informally showed the Beijing "no car bombers" sign to a waitress and waiter at a cafe (where I am writing this piece) in Chengdu, Sichuan province.  Here's a summary of their responses (they both easily recognized the first sign as "no fireworks"):

Waitress (who had last year passed her driving test):

• She was clueless at first.  She said she had never seen a sign like that in any of her preparation for the Chinese driving test.
• She first suggested it might be about not carrying fireworks.
• She then wondered if it was about not making noise.
• Her final answer was that it was a warning not to stop because something could fall from above.

Waiter:

• He too had never seen such a sign.
• His first guess was that it was about objects falling from above.  He stuck to that.

I shared the suggestion that it was "no transporting loads on top of cars."  Neither thought that was a possibility.

So, with the little evidence available to me it doesn't appear the sign has a consistent interpretation, even to Chinese.  However, maybe it's a Beijing thing.  With any luck, Fallows will later share more (which looks like will happen soon).

The signs brought to mind another moment when I had been confused by a symbol in China.  This is what I saw in a supposedly no-smoking hotel room in Dunhua, Jilin (for some earlier posted photos of scenes in Jilin see here):

While the symbol seemed readily clear to me, "no smoking", its placement on an ashtray seemed to be rather contradictory.  I wondered if there was an explanation other than someone having a strong sense of humor.

Numerous times in China I've seen evidence that would suggest the ashtray may be a response to hotel guests' behavior.  No-smoking rules are not regularly enforced in many parts of China.  It's not uncommon to find people smoking in designated non-smoking areas, whether it is a hotel room, elevator, stairwell, etc.  I've also seen the effects of people smoking in a no-smoking hotel room -- for example, glasses intended for drinking filled with cigarette butts.

The ashtray may be a pragmatic design in that it both informs people (where else is a smoker more likely to notice a non-smoking symbol?) and it reduces the chances of other undesired consequences if people ignore its message.

Also, in many cities in China no-smoking rooms are only available in more upscale hotels.  It is possible this hotel merely wanted to "act" upscale but had no real concern about guests smoking.

When I showed the ashtray photo to the same Chinese waitress she said it meant "You shouldn't smoke because it's bad for your health, but here's an ashtray in case you still want to".  Her interpretation would be consistent with the idea that the "do not" slash is more of a suggestion than a rule.  Maybe fitting since in China there are many "rules" which are in fact rather flexible.  Another waitress believed the symbol meant "no smoking" but was confused about the purpose of the object.  Her only guess was that it was a pencil holder.  When I suggested the possibility it was an ashtray she dismissed the idea as ridiculous since the no-smoking symbol was obvious.

So, like the car-bombing sign, the true intentions behind the no-smoking ashtray (or whatever you want to think it is) remains unclear.

I share the above because it highlights the challenges in creating symbols that convey a clear and consistent meaning without using any words AND the challenges in fully interpreting symbols in other cultures where you may not be aware of key contextual information.

This is an issue I've faced in my work when evaluating/creating icons for software, online services, etc.  Even a button for a seemingly simple function can provide a difficult challenge.  What at first may seem to be an obvious solution could be found to be ineffective after observing how numerous potential users interpret it.  It can take several cycles of design and testing to find the best symbol.

Furthermore, you may need to either localize symbols for particular groups of people or find a symbol that is interpreted consistently regardless of culture (which can be challenging depending on the cultures involved).   Even if a symbol is understood, it may still need to be localized to feel more "home-like".

And possibly, like the "no fireworks" sign, sometimes it might not be a problem if a symbol is only understood by some people.  The people who don't understand the symbol may not be the people you're trying to reach.  The "no fireworks" sign may be clear enough to fireworks-loving Chinese.  The fact that non-fireworks wielding foreigners don't understand it is not critical (assuming they don't cause a fish bone incident due to a misinterpretation).

So, next time you see a symbol being used you can ponder the challenges in finding the "right" symbol and whether the way you see it is the same as people from other cultures.

Finally, the waiter and waitress I questioned about the Beijing sign didn't feel satisfied with their answers.  They very much wanted me to tell them the answer and I had to say I was unsure myself.  When I explained that I thought the confusion was possibly indicative of poor design or that the meanings of some symbols need to be taught to be understood the waitress responded, "Well, this is the government making mistakes.  Don't blame the people."

I definitely won't.