This week has been a busy week in Bredemarket-land, including work on some of the following client projects:
Creating the first deliverable as part of a three-part series of deliverables.
Reworking that first deliverable for more precision.
Preparing to start work on the second deliverable.
Drafting a blog post for a client.
Gathering information for an email newsletter for a client.
Following up on a couple of consulting opportunities that take advantage of my identity/biometric expertise.
Creating a promotional reel based upon the grapes in my backyard. (Yet another reel. I plan to reveal it next week.)
Engaging in other promotional activities on Bredemarket’s key social media channels.
Plus I’ve been working on some non-Bredemarket deliverables and meetings with a significant time commitment.
But there’s one more Bredemarket deliverable that I haven’t mentioned—because I’m about to discuss it now.
The task
Without going into detail, a client required me to repurpose a piece of third-party government-authored (i.e. non-copyrighted) text, originally written for a particular market.
Shorten the text so it would be more attractive to the new market.
Simplify the presentation of the text to make it even more attractive to the new market.
The request was clear, and I’ve already completed the first draft of the text and am working on the second draft.
But I wanted to dive into the three steps above—not regarding this particular client writing project, but in a more general way.
Step 1: Rewrite
When you’ve worked in a lot of different industries, you learn that each industry has its own language, including things you say—and things you don’t say.
I’ll give you an example that doesn’t reflect the particular project I was working on, but does reflect why rewriting is often necessary.
When I started in biometrics, the first two industries that I wrote about were law enforcement and benefits administration.
Law enforcement’s primary purpose is to catch bad people, although sometimes it can exonerate good people. So when you’re talking about law enforcement applications, you frequently use a lot of terms that are negative in nature, such as “surveillance,” “suspect,” and “mugshot.”
Benefits administration’s primary purpose is to help good people, although sometimes it can catch bad people who steal benefits from good people. So when you’re talking about benefits administration applications, you tend toward more positive terms such as “beneficiary.” And if you take a picture of a beneficiary’s face, for heaven’s sake DON’T REFER TO THE FACIAL IMAGE AS A “MUGSHOT.”
These two examples illustrate why something originally written for “market 1” must often be rewritten for “market 2.”
But sometimes a simple rewrite isn’t enough.
Step 2: Shorten
Now I don’t play in the B2C market in which crisp text is extremely necessary. But it’s needed in the various B2G and B2B markets also—some more than others.
If you are writing for more scientific markets, your readers are more accustomed to reading long, academic, “Sage”-like blocks of text.
But if you are writing for other markets, such as hospitality, your readers not only don’t want to read long blocks of text, but actively despise it.
You need to “get to the point.”
Tim Conway (Sr.), as repeatedly played during Jim Healy’s old radio show. Sourced from the Jim Healy Tribute Site.
In my particular project, “market 1” was one of those markets that valued long-windedness, while “market 2” clearly didn’t. So I had to cut the text down significantly, using the same techniques that I use when rewriting my “draft 0.5” (which a client NEVER sees) to my “draft 1” (which I turn over to the client).
But sometimes a simple shorten isn’t enough.
Step 3: Simplify
If you know me, you know I’m not graphically inclined.
Someday I will reach this level of graphic creativity. Originally created by Jleedev using Inkscape and GIMP. Redrawn as SVG by Ben Liblit using Inkscape. – Own work, Public Domain, link.
But I still pay attention to the presentation of my words.
Remember those long blocks of text that I mentioned earlier? One way to break them up is to use bullets.
Bullets break up long blocks of text into manageable chunks.
Bullets are easier to read.
So your reader will be very happy.
But as I was editing this particular piece of content, sometimes I ran into long lists of bullets, which weren’t really conducive to the reading experience.
Question
Answer
What does this mean?
Why are long lists of bullets bad?
Because with enough repetition, they’re just as bad as long blocks of text.
Your readers will tune you out.
How can you format long lists of bullets into something easier to read?
One way is to convert the bullets into a table with separate entries.
Your readers will enjoy a more attractive presentation.
What do tables do for your reader?
They arrange the content in two dimensions rather than one.
The readers’ eyes move in two directions, rather than just one.
Hey, wait a minute…
Yeah, I just plugged my seven questions again by intentionally using the first three: why, how, and what.
You can go here to download the e-book “Seven Questions Your Content Creator Should Ask You.”
I don’t have the skill to make WordPress tables look as attractive as Microsoft Word tables. But even this table breaks up the monotony of paragraphs and lists, don’t you think?
So what happened?
After I had moved through the three steps of rewriting, shortening, and simplifying the original content, I had a repurposed piece of content that was much more attractive to the “hungry people” (target audience) who were going to read it.
These people wouldn’t fall asleep while reading the content, and they wouldn’t be offended by some word that didn’t apply to them (such as “mugshot”).
So don’t be afraid to repurpose—even for a completely different market.
I do it all the time.
Look at two of my recent reels. Note the differences. But note the similarities.
The identity/biometrics version of the reel.
The Inland Empire version of the same reel.
So which of Bredemarket’s markets do you think will receive the “grapes” reel?
I wanted to share the latter on NextDoor, but that service wouldn’t accept the video.
Thinking the 45 second length was the issue, I decided to create a 15 second version of the Inland Empire video…and a 15 second version of the (50 second) identity/biometrics video while I was at it.
For those of you who would like to”a nice surprise…every once in a while.”
Identity/biometric.
Inland Empire.
By the way, I’m considering creating a new Inland Empire video…with an agricultural theme. (Fruits, not cows.)
As Identity and biometrics solution providers know, their applications are found in a variety of vertical markets.
A LARGE variety of vertical markets.
Seven of these markets include financial services, travel and hospitality, government services, education, health, criminal applications, and venues. (Among others.)
Which three vertical markets does the Prism Project examine?
To start this post, I’m going to cheat and “appropriate” the work already performed by the Prism Project.
This effort is managed by Maxine Most’s Acuity Market Intelligence and supported by a variety of partners (including industry partners).
The Prism Project has identified 3 (so far) critical vertical markets for identity and biometrics. While this doesn’t pretend to be a comprehensive list, it’s a good starting point to illustrate the breadth of markets that benefit from identity and biometrics.
The Prism Project has already released its report for financial services, which businesses can download here.
The Prism Project has started to develop its report for travel and hospitality. You can preview the report here.
Finally, the Prism Project plans to release a report addressing government services later in the year. For the latest status of this report, visit the Prism Project home page.
As you can see, identity and biometrics apply in wildly diverging vertical markets. You can use identity verification to open a bank account, enter your hotel room, or pay your taxes.
But those aren’t the only markets that use identity and biometrics.
Let me school you on two other markets, education and health
Let’s look at two markets that the Prism Project hasn’t covered…yet.
Education
Chaffey High School, Ontario, California.
Another example of a market that uses identity and biometrics is the education market.
Who is allowed on a physical campus? Students? Teachers? Staff? Parents and guardians?
Who is NOT allowed on a physical campus? Expelled students? Fired faculty and staff?
Who is taking that remotely-administered online test?
Bredemarket has written several posts about educational applications for identity and biometrics. You can read all my education writing on Bredemarket’s “Educational Identity” information page.
Health
What, did you expect me to post a Marcus Welby picture here? I’m sharing a real medical professional: Jonas Salk administering the polio vaccine. By Yousuf Karsh, photographer – Wisdom Magazine, Aug. 1956 (Vol 1, No. 8), PD-US, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=27746788.
Similarly Bredemarket has written several posts about healthcare applications for identity and biometrics, including some that dwell on the unique privacy legislation that covers healthcare. You can read all my health writing on Bredemarket’s “Health” information page. (It’s not called “Health Identity” because healthcare has both identity and technology aspects.)
Another source on finance
By the way, Bredemarket also has a page on “Financial Identity,” but the Prism Project’s content is more comprehensive.
But wait…there’s more!
So this is the point where Ed McMahon intones, “So Acuity Market Intelligence and Bredemarket have identified all five of the markets that benefit from the use of identity and biometrics!”
So let’s look at two more markets that benefit from the use of identity and biometrics-two markets that I know very well from the beginning and end of my time at Printrak/Motorola/MorphoTrak/IDEMIA.
Criminal applications
There are government services, and then there are government services.
I started my biometric journey over 29 years ago when I wrote proposals addressed to law enforcement agencies who wanted to find out who left their fingerprints on a crime scene, and whether the person being arrested was who they said they were.
I don’t know if Maxine Most is going to classify criminal applications as a subset of government services, but there are clear reasons that she may not want to do this.
When you pay your taxes or apply for unemployment benefits, you WANT the biometric system to identify you correctly.
When you steal a car or rob a bank, you do NOT want the biometric system to identify you correctly.
Big difference.
Stadiums, concert halls, and other venues
If someone asked me in late 2019 what my career five year plan was, I would have had a great story to tell.
As I was wrapping up over 24 years in identity and biometrics, I was about to help my then-employer IDEMIA enter a new market, the venue market. This market, which CLEAR was already exploring at the time, replaced the cumbersome ticketing process with the use of frictionless biometrics to enter sports stadiums, concert halls, trade shows, and related venues. Imagine using your face or IDEMIA’s contactless fingerprint solution MorphoWave to enter a venue, enter secure restricted areas, or even order food and beverages.
Imagine the convenience that benefit consumer and venue operator alike.
What could go wrong? I mean, the market was robust, and we certainly would NEVER face a situation in which all the stadiums and all the concert halls and all the trade shows would suddenly close down.
Since early 2020 when a worldwide pandemic DID shut down a lot of things, many identity/biometric firms have entered the venue market with a slew of solutions to benefit fans, teams, and venues alike.
And still more
There are many more vertical markets than these seven, ranging from agriculture to automobile access to computer physical/logical access to construction to customer service (mainly voice) to critical infrastructure to gaming (computer gaming) to gaming (gambling) to the gig economy to manufacturing to real estate to retail to telecommunications to transportation (planes, trains, buses, taxis, and cruise ships).
And all these markets have a biometric story to tell.
Can Bredemarket help you describe how your identity/biometric solution addresses one or more of these markets?
Who are the competitors in the market for my product?
Which features do competitive products offer? How do they compare to the features my product offers?
Which industries do competitors target? How do they compare with the industries my company targets?
Which contracts have the competitors won? How do they compare with the contracts my company has won?
How effective is my company’s product marketing? My website? My social media? My key employees’ social media?
Bredemarket can help you answer these questions.
Types of analyses Bredemarket performs
For those who don’t know, or who missed my previous discussion on the topic, Bredemarket performs analyses that contain one or more of the following:
Analysis of one or more markets/industries for a particular product or product line.
Analysis of one or more (perhaps tens or hundreds) of competitors and/or competitive products for a particular product or product line.
Analysis of a firm’s own product or product line, including how it is marketed.
How Bredemarket conducts its analyses
Bredemarket analyses only use publicly available data.
I’m not hacking websites to get competitor prices or plans.
I’m not asking past employees to violate their non-disclosure agreements.
How Bredemarket packages its analyses
These analyses can range in size from very small to very large. On the very small side, I briefly analyzed the markets of three prospect firms in advance of calls with them. On the large side, I’ve performed analyses that take between one and six weeks to complete.
For the small self-analyses (excluding the very small quick freebies before a prospect call), I deliver these under my Bredemarket 404 Web/Social Media Checkup banner. When I first offered this service in 2020, I had a complex price calculation mechanism that depended upon the number of pages I had to analyze. Now I’ve simplified it and charge one of two flat rates.
Because the larger analyses are of undetermined length, I offer these at an hourly rate under my Bredemarket 4000 Long Writing Service banner. These reports can number 40 pages or more in length, sometimes accompanied by a workbook describing 700 or more competitor products or contracts.
Obviously I can’t provide specifics upon the analyses I’ve already performed since those are confidential to my customers, but I always discuss the customers’ needs before launching the analysis to ensure that the final product is what you want. I also provide drafts along the way in case we need to perform a course correction.
Do you need a market, competitor, or self analysis? Contact me. Or book a meeting with me at calendly.com/bredemarket to talk about your needs (and check the “Market/competitor analysis” check box).
If you book a free 30 minute meeting with Bredemarket, you’ll now find an additional option in the “What Type of Content Do You Need?” section: Market/competitor analysis. I’ve done these for years, but never added the option to the form.
My analyses ONLY use publicly available information that is NOT subject to NDA. So you won’t get access to the analyses I’ve performed for other clients, and they won’t get access to the analysis I prepare for you.
While I primarily provide these analyses in the identity/biometrics industry, I’m open to discussing analysis needs in other industries.
The Prism Project’s home page at https://www.the-prism-project.com/, illustrating the Biometric Digital Identity Prism as of March 2024. From Acuity Market Intelligence and FindBiometrics.
With over 100 firms in the biometric industry, their offerings are going to naturally differ—even if all the firms are TRYING to copy each other and offer “me too” solutions.
I’ve worked for over a dozen biometric firms as an employee or independent contractor, and I’ve analyzed over 80 biometric firms in competitive intelligence exercises, so I’m well aware of the vast implementation differences between the biometric offerings.
Some of the implementation differences provoke vehement disagreements between biometric firms regarding which choice is correct. Yes, we FIGHT.
Let’s look at three (out of many) of these implementation differences and see how they affect YOUR company’s content marketing efforts—whether you’re engaging in identity blog post writing, or some other content marketing activity.
The three biometric implementation choices
Firms that develop biometric solutions make (or should make) the following choices when implementing their solutions.
Presentation attack detection. Assuming the solution incorporates presentation attack detection (liveness detection), or a way of detecting whether the presented biometric is real or a spoof, the firm must decide whether to use active or passive liveness detection.
Age assurance. When choosing age assurance solutions that determine whether a person is old enough to access a product or service, the firm must decide whether or not age estimation is acceptable.
Biometric modality. Finally, the firm must choose which biometric modalities to support. While there are a number of modality wars involving all the biometric modalities, this post is going to limit itself to the question of whether or not voice biometrics are acceptable.
I will address each of these questions in turn, highlighting the pros and cons of each implementation choice. After that, we’ll see how this affects your firm’s content marketing.
(I)nstead of capturing a true biometric from a person, the biometric sensor is fooled into capturing a fake biometric: an artificial finger, a face with a mask on it, or a face on a video screen (rather than a face of a live person).
This tomfoolery is called a “presentation attack” (becuase you’re attacking security with a fake presentation).
And an organization called iBeta is one of the testing facilities authorized to test in accordance with the standard and to determine whether a biometric reader can detect the “liveness” of a biometric sample.
(Friends, I’m not going to get into passive liveness and active liveness. That’s best saved for another day.)
Now I could cite a firm using active liveness detection to say why it’s great, or I could cite a firm using passive liveness detection to say why it’s great. But perhaps the most balanced assessment comes from facia, which offers both types of liveness detection. How does facia define the two types of liveness detection?
Active liveness detection, as the name suggests, requires some sort of activity from the user. If a system is unable to detect liveness, it will ask the user to perform some specific actions such as nodding, blinking or any other facial movement. This allows the system to detect natural movements and separate it from a system trying to mimic a human being….
Passive liveness detection operates discreetly in the background, requiring no explicit action from the user. The system’s artificial intelligence continuously analyses facial movements, depth, texture, and other biometric indicators to detect an individual’s liveness.
Pros and cons
Briefly, the pros and cons of the two methods are as follows:
While active liveness detection offers robust protection, requires clear consent, and acts as a deterrent, it is hard to use, complex, and slow.
Passive liveness detection offers an enhanced user experience via ease of use and speed and is easier to integrate with other solutions, but it incorporates privacy concerns (passive liveness detection can be implemented without the user’s knowledge) and may not be used in high-risk situations.
So in truth the choice is up to each firm. I’ve worked with firms that used both liveness detection methods, and while I’ve spent most of my time with passive implementations, the active ones can work also.
A perfect wishy-washy statement that will get BOTH sides angry at me. (Except perhaps for companies like facia that use both.)
If you need to know a person’s age, you can ask them. Because people never lie.
Well, maybe they do. There are two better age assurance methods:
Age verification, where you obtain a person’s government-issued identity document with a confirmed birthdate, confirm that the identity document truly belongs to the person, and then simply check the date of birth on the identity document and determine whether the person is old enough to access the product or service.
Age estimation, where you don’t use a government-issued identity document and instead examine the face and estimate the person’s age.
I changed my mind on age estimation
I’ve gone back and forth on this. As I previously mentioned, my employment history includes time with a firm produces driver’s licenses for the majority of U.S. states. And back when that firm was providing my paycheck, I was financially incentivized to champion age verification based upon the driver’s licenses that my company (or occasionally some inferior company) produced.
But as age assurance applications moved into other areas such as social media use, a problem occurred since 13 year olds usually don’t have government IDs. A few of them may have passports or other government IDs, but none of them have driver’s licenses.
But does age estimation work? I’m not sure if ANYONE has posted a non-biased view, so I’ll try to do so myself.
The pros of age estimation include its applicability to all ages including young people, its protection of privacy since it requires no information about the individual identity, and its ease of use since you don’t have to dig for your physical driver’s license or your mobile driver’s license—your face is already there.
The huge con of age estimation is that it is by definition an estimate. If I show a bartender my driver’s license before buying a beer, they will know whether I am 20 years and 364 days old and ineligible to purchase alcohol, or whether I am 21 years and 0 days old and eligible. Estimates aren’t that precise.
Fingerprints, palm prints, faces, irises, and everything up to gait. (And behavioral biometrics.) There are a lot of biometric modalities out there, and one that has been around for years is the voice biometric.
I’ve discussed this topic before, and the partial title of the post (“We’ll Survive Voice Spoofing”) gives away how I feel about the matter, but I’ll present both sides of the issue.
No one can deny that voice spoofing exists and is effective, but many of the examples cited by the popular press are cases in which a HUMAN (rather than an ALGORITHM) was fooled by a deepfake voice. But voice recognition software can also be fooled.
Take a study from the University of Waterloo, summarized here, that proclaims: “Computer scientists at the University of Waterloo have discovered a method of attack that can successfully bypass voice authentication security systems with up to a 99% success rate after only six tries.”
If you re-read that sentence, you will notice that it includes the words “up to.” Those words are significant if you actually read the article.
In a recent test against Amazon Connect’s voice authentication system, they achieved a 10 per cent success rate in one four-second attack, with this rate rising to over 40 per cent in less than thirty seconds. With some of the less sophisticated voice authentication systems they targeted, they achieved a 99 per cent success rate after six attempts.
Other voice spoofing studies
Similar to Gender Shades, the University of Waterloo study does not appear to have tested hundreds of voice recognition algorithms. But there are other studies.
The 2021 NIST Speaker Recognition Evaluation (PDF here) tested results from 15 teams, but this test was not specific to spoofing.
A test that was specific to spoofing was the ASVspoof 2021 test with 54 team participants, but the ASVspoof 2021 results are only accessible in abstract form, with no detailed results.
Another test, this one with results, is the SASV2022 challenge, with 23 valid submissions. Here are the top 10 performers and their error rates.
You’ll note that the top performers don’t have error rates anywhere near the University of Waterloo’s 99 percent.
So some firms will argue that voice recognition can be spoofed and thus cannot be trusted, while other firms will argue that the best voice recognition algorithms are rarely fooled.
What does this mean for your company?
Obviously, different firms are going to respond to the three questions above in different ways.
For example, a firm that offers face biometrics but not voice biometrics will convey how voice is not a secure modality due to the ease of spoofing. “Do you want to lose tens of millions of dollars?”
A firm that offers voice biometrics but not face biometrics will emphasize its spoof detection capabilities (and cast shade on face spoofing). “We tested our algorithm against that voice fake that was in the news, and we detected the voice as a deepfake!”
There is no universal truth here, and the message your firm conveys depends upon your firm’s unique characteristics.
And those characteristics can change.
Once when I was working for a client, this firm had made a particular choice with one of these three questions. Therefore, when I was writing for the client, I wrote in a way that argued the client’s position.
After I stopped working for this particular client, the client’s position changed and the firm adopted the opposite view of the question.
Therefore I had to message the client and say, “Hey, remember that piece I wrote for you that said this? Well, you’d better edit it, now that you’ve changed your mind on the question…”
Bear this in mind as you create your blog, white paper, case study, or other identity/biometric content, or have someone like the biometric content marketing expert Bredemarket work with you to create your content. There are people who sincerely hold the opposite belief of your firm…but your firm needs to argue that those people are, um, misinformed.
The identity/biometric company never formally learned how its references to renamed companies and non-existent companies were repelling those very companies…and the prospects who knew the website information was inaccurate.
It could have learned…if it had met with me. But it chose not to do so.
NOTE TO SELF: INSERT STRONG FEAR UNCERTAINTY AND DOUBT PARAGRAPH HERE. TAKE OUT THESE TWO SENTENCES BEFORE POSTING THE FINAL VERSION!!!
(By the way…while the identity/biometric company never received this information formally, it did receive it informally…because such information is presumably critically important to the company.)
How many other companies are in the same situation, with:
My mini-survey shows that of the 40+ identity firms with blogs, about one-third of them HAVEN’T SAID A SINGLE THING to their prospects and customers in the last two months.
Is there a 29-year veteran of the identity industry, an identity content marketing expert who can help the companies fix these gaps?
Bredemarket 