Social Media

June 15, 2009

The Use Of Social Media In Real Time Events

12517450 If there was ever any doubt about how game changing social media would be in societal communication, it's been put to bed.  Not trying to sound like a broken record but what's going on right now in Tehran is maybe the most demonstrative example of social media's influence and far reaching impact to date.

As I'm writing this, the Iranian government has for the most part blocked and censored the traditional media's coverage of protests in Tehran and people are turning to the internet and specifically Twitter, despite government efforts to stop it.  Even more impressive, than the tweets, pictures, and video's being sent in is the what's going on with proxy servers.  The protesters are winning the numbers game and the rest of the world is lending a hand!

By that I mean, people on Twitter all over the world are out setting up proxy servers specifically for Iran IP addresses in an effort to keep the information from Iran proliferated and flowing.  The beauty of this is the power of collectivism.  Everyday people are working together, taking 5-10 minutes of their time and creating new proxy addresses faster than the Iran government can shut down the current ones.  True power will always lie in the hands of numbers, especially when those numbers are mobilized and connected.  Here are some great links:

Proxy address posts on Twitter: here

Internet brings events in Iran to life: here

Also, my favorite.  San Fransisco based Twazzup has built this Twitter tool to compile/aggregate tweets, pictures, video's coming in from live events.  Check out the Iran page.  The real time pictures and videos coming in from tweeters and bloggers in Iran are pretty incredible.

Mark my word, this will be text book Communication/PR material down the road.

February 14, 2008

The Long-Tail of Social Networks

Zach_wings_facebook_friend_wheel2 I was flying through my Google Reader and this post from Pete Blackshaw over at ConsumerGeneratedMedia caught my attention and I'd like to expand on it. I was surprised when I went to check my facebook friend count I was sitting at 465, and naturally someone one just added me so now I'm at 466, approaching the 500 friend count in essence.  So in adding my two cents, Pete raises a great question in: how much is too much?  Do you believe there is  a point of diminishing returns when it comes to the size of our social networks on sites like facebook, myspace, and others alike.  At what point are conversation and traditional efforts of staying connected being sacrificed by the ease of access to the many aspects of our lives which we are living out and making public on a daily basis? What are the implications are all this information proliferation having on social norms and are ability to communicate at large?  These are important questions to be asking. 

Here's my dilemma, I see  people on campus everyday, people who I've had class with before, or met once or twice at some point over the last 4 years, and sometimes I realize: Hey I'm facebook friends with that person.  Very often nothing ends up happening, we can be sitting across each other in the same computer lab, or go as far as making eye contact but no one speaks.  I can't tell you how many times this has happened to me.  While this might not seem like that big of deal, does the fact that I can't always remember someones name in one of these situations and it's only later that I go home, log onto facebook and confirm that I am friends with person because they just posted new photo's, or are attending this event, or are now dating this person, or wrote on this persons wall (Thanks NewsFeed).

Point being, as all our social networks continue to grow, at some point does it become reasonable to nullify online friendships by canceling friends we haven't talked to in years?  I'm not saying I can't handle 500 online friends, but I think it's reasonable to believe I would still be a member of facebook in 10 years.  At that point, how many friends will I have...a 1000...2000?  Is there any value in viewing newsfeed photo's from someone you knew for a short time but haven't talked to in over a decade?  These are questions we will all surely be asking ourselves at some point.  Last fall I wrote a post on why I came to the decision to cancel my myspace account because I didn't see enough long term value to being a member anymore.  Now, I am in no way saying this will eventually become consensus with facebook, but like Howard Zinn talked about: "you can't be neutral on a moving train".   Or this blogs on theme: change is the only constant.  This reality will be imperative for social networks to understand.

Here's my prediction, as our social networks continue to expand, the overwhelming flood of information available will eventually result in diminishing value.  In general, social networks will need to take on a format in which the information overload can be managed.  User controls will have to be put in place so as to continue filtration.  We've seen facebook adjust their format but what will need to be implemented eventually is the ability to manage and filter are networks in a long-tail sort of way.  I checked some of facebook's newsfeed settings and while a lot can be managed, for those out there who already have more than 1000 friends, it doesn't seem to be enough. 

Lastly, while we've seen even middle aged working professionals embrace platforms like facebook.  The greater question at large remains: how will facebook and other social networks continue to bridge generational gaps as it's original patrons age and pressures to grow force them to attract younger users?  Can many or any of these social networks become  multi-generational brands 10-20-30 years down the road?  One thing is for sure, the choice in segmentation for users will be key moving  forward as our friend counts reach new heights.


Note: the picture at the beginning of this post is a graphical representation of all 466 0f my facebook friends.  This is an application called the friend wheel and is available on facebook.

October 16, 2007

Goodbye MySpace

Myspace_cancel I was pensive to do it, but I'm happy to report that I'm no longer a MySpace member.  That's right, I just canceled my MySpace account.  Not sure how I'll feel about it a week from now, but right now it's pretty liberating.  I was on MySpace at least since freshmen year of college.  Actually, I think I joined Facebook and MySpace at about the same time. 

I've always preferred Facebook for it's aesthetics, design, and overall how information is laid out and navigable.  I never really understood MySpace.  You'd think with billions of dollars behind them, they could develop a better overall product.  It's unfortunate that too much customization has taken away from the overall experience.  I've never liked the major inconsistencies from page to page.

Furthermore, not many of my friends use MySpace any more.  Fortunately, most everyone is on Facebook at this point.  The spam is what pushed me over the edge, I must have been receiving at least 10 spam friend invitations per week.  On top of that, there's been the consistent spam posts on the wall.  It's just ridiculous, when I was going through the cancellation steps, the spam issue was addressed on the site, as if they knew that's why I was canceling. 

Unlike many other web brands that I associate with (Flickr, Technorati, Typepad, Ebay, Facebook, and of course Forums...Forums...Forums), I finally realized that for me, there is no long term value to remaining a MySpace member.  Here’s my reasoning:

  • It’s hard to do most anything
  • All the services MySpace provides are available elsewhere (e.g. Facebook)
  • I don’t need to be a member to take advantage of their media (i.e. music)
  • Almost all the friends in my network I can communicate with using other means

So I guess that's it. Goodbye MySpace, its been fun, I just wish it could have been more.

July 20, 2007

If you build it...they might not come

I'm pretty pissed off right now, I just spent over an hour typing a long post on social networking. I was doing some formatting when I hit a link in my post and it was gone, everything was gone. This happened to Fred a few months ago and at least now if it ever happens to him again I can tell him that I know how he feels. Typepad needs to implement some sort of automated saving feature within their software. This sucks, I'm drained and unmotivated to redo everything. But I guess I'll write the gist of what I wanted to share.

I ran across some interesting statistics on web traffic for social networking sites. According to Hitwise, market share in the U.S. for Internet traffic on the top 20 social networking sites grew 11.5 percent from January to February 2007. In addition, this accounted for around 6.5 percent of all Internet traffic in February 2007. What's amazing is how dominant MySpace, with it's 80% share is to it's competitors. On paper, even Facebook's 10% seems amateur when it comes to MySpace. 

 

Market    Share of US Internet Visits to Top 20 Social Networking Sites

February 2007*

   Rank Name Domain Market Share
   1 MySpace www.myspace.com 80.74%
2 Facebook www.facebook.com 10.32%
3 Bebo www.bebo.com 1.18%
4 BlackPlanet.com www.blackplanet.com 0.88%
5 Xanga www.xanga.com 0.87%
6 iMeem www.imeem.com 0.73%
7 Yahoo! 360 360.yahoo.com 0.72%
8 Classmates www.classmates.com 0.72%
9 hi5 www.hi5.com 0.69%
10 Tagged www.tagged.com 0.67%
11 LiveJournal www.livejournal.com 0.49%
12 Gaiaonline.com www.gaiaonline.com 0.48%
13 Friendster www.friendster.com 0.34%
14 Orkut www.orkut.com 0.26%
15 Live Spaces spaces.live.com 0.18%
16 HoverSpot www.hoverspot.com 0.18%
17 Buzznet www.buzznet.com 0.18%
18 Sconex www.sconex.com 0.14%
19 MiGente.com www.migente.com 0.11%
20 myYearbook www.myyearbook.com 0.11%
Note    - data is based on custom category of 20 of the leading social networking    websites ranked by market share of visits, which is the percentage of    traffic to the site, based on Hitwise sample of 10 million US Internet    users. The percentages represent the market share of visits among the    websites within the custom category.
Source:    Hitwise

MySpace's success would at this point seem to have little to do with the sites features and overall usability. Let's face it, the site itself is crap. From spam, to hacking, and of course how could we forget that ad clutter. These are all huge reasons why I never spend any time on the site. None the less, MySpace seems to transcend it's reputation for poor user experience. There's a plethora of alternative social networking sites out:

Social_networking_sites

As a platform for social networking, it wouldn't be hard to offer features, tools, and settings better than the those available on MySpace. Your overall level of usability might result in a better user experience than that offered by MySpace, but at the end of the day, social networking is about the network. The reality is that most people won't join a network that their friends are not a part of. For example, I'm a member on Virb. I think it's one of the better designed social networking sites out there. But I almost never spend any time on Virb because I hardly know anyone who networks there. It just goes to show you that social networking will always be about the people. You can have all the tricks and trinkets in the business, but that doesn't mean people will show up. Facilitating the interaction is hard enough. But even though MySpace is sitting pretty right now, as they continually show that they have little taste for user experience, their market share will eventually start declining. It's inevitable, MySpace will lose favor over time!   

June 18, 2007

"Dude...Don't Get A Dell"

375473327_a5c63c5ae3 Some lessons in life have to be learned the hard way. There's an old saying I've always liked that goes "if your knowledge were your wealth then it would be well earned." It's always better to learn from the mistakes of others, yet it always amazes me that companies make the same mistakes over and over, especially in the digital space. Big companies will still try and throw their weight around and it will most likely back fire. A recent example of this was a couple of months ago when the AACS Licensing Authority, reacted to an internet posting of the “Processing Key" that unlocks the every Blu-Ray and HD-DVD disk that has been published to date. The AACS sent out threats to those who managed websites, most notably Digg. There's a good story that The Times did on the incident: In Web Uproar, Antipiracy Code Spreads Wildly.

To make a point, here is the processing key: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88. Now, being someone that doesn't own anything Blu-Ray or HD-DVD, it's very unlikely I would have known this number exists if it weren't for the AACS poor practices. But, because they acted out of what they assumed to be "best practices", they added fuel to the fire and were burned badly. This incident drew national headlines and worst of all for the AACS, the key now widely available on the Internet. I would say this was quite the opposite of keeping things quiet.

Back to what I was orginally posting about, Dell has been an interesting case study over the last week. What's been going on is a former Dell sales manager wrote an article for the Consumerist blog: 22 Confessions Of A Former Dell Sales Manager. In the article, the author discussed tips and tricks to get the best deal out of Dell. Dell responded by sending the cosumerist a legal threat and demanded the story be taken down immediately. Of course, this backfired! The Consumerist replied by telling Dell that they had come by the story legally and voluntarily from a third party. They made it clear to Dell that they did not solicit any Dell employee's to breach contractual agreements in providing this information. Even worse, after those running the Consumerist became pissed off at Dell's demanding and overbearing requests, they posted the email trail on the Consumerist website. It's interesting to read the communication between the two organizations. I'd like to highlight the end of one email sent by Gaby at the Consumerist to the Dell counsel. She really put them in their place:

"In addition, as I am sure you must realise - and there is certainly a history of this with Dell already - consumers tend to react far better when a company responds collaboratively to criticism, than when they act heavy-handedly or dismissively. Removing this story would be far far more damaging to Dell, I assure you, than responding to it on the Dell blog or elsewhere, since in telling our readers that Dell shut down our reporting, we would unleash a chaos of fury and acres of criticism in the press. Forget any legal position you may want to take, meritorious or not, I am deadly serious when I say that I simply cannot recommend this as a course of action. I've seen it happen before and it is really not pretty and I have no doubt that you will regret it. Of course, it is your decision whether you want to pursue this matter, but I advise you to talk to the team that had to deal with the falllout from the Jeff Jarvis affair before you decide to try and silence your critics. Work for the customer, not against them. Best regards, Gaby"

The original story has recieved almost 200,000 views in just 4 days and the follow up story with the emails has recieved close to 120,000 views. Now, things got really interesting when just last night, Dell posted an apology on their Direct2Dell blog. I'm thinking they were humbled to say the least. This is how they opened:

"Now's not the time to mince words, so let me just say it... we blew it."

In addition, what follows is a list of Dell's own confessions (23 for good measure) that highlight many of Dell's services as well as explanations in how to get the best deals on Dell Products.

Side Note: I happen to own a Dell laptop, I've been relatively satisfied with Dell's product, but a few years ago, I had a horrible experience with Dell's customer service when I sent in my computer to get fixed. As a result, I don't think I'll be purchasing a Dell for my next computer. I guess I'm just looking for a reason to post this, but it's one more example as to why companies have to deliver on the experiences they promise. This is a letter I wrote to Dell's customer service about my experience: Download Hi

Aside from my possible bias and the as-of-late overall criticism towards Dell, damage control efforts were smart and necessary following the consumerist incident. It's clear the animosity was growing. The story circulated rapidly through the blogosphere and was all over the front page of Digg. WiseBread even went as far as running a poll where 54% out of 1937 respondents said they would boycott Dell if they continued the takedown efforts. For Dell, it hurts to admit you were wrong, but being open and transparent about the incident is what had to be done. On the plus side, this shows that the company is paying attention to it's consumers. Of course, avoiding the entire situation would have been ideal, but for Dell, or any other company going through a similar ordeal, it's important to embrace the failure. With the current state of the internet, organizational mistakes will be made. It's a given! What's more important is what can be learned as a result of these mistakes and more importantly, how can we turn this mistake into an opportunity? Dell seized the opportunity by creating and executing the 23 confessions list. At the end of the day, consumers appreciate this creativity. Dell's efforts demonstrate engagement through conversing with what happened. They should realize they are better off having dealt with these kinds of crisis. Lesson learned: let's engage with our customers, not fight them.

June 03, 2007

The End Is Near

I just ran across a short film called Epic 2014. This short flash piece was made by Robin Sloan and Matt Thompson for the Museum of Media History in 2004. The movie its self takes place in of course the year 2014. Charting the Internet's history, the evolving mediascape, and how traditional news was affected by the growth in online news, EPIC 2014 offers an interesting perspective into what a future of consumer empowerment might look like. While some parts of the film seem far fetched (Google and Amazon merge to from "Googlezon", and the creation of "Google grid"), the principles behind the piece are not that far off from the progressions we will continue to see in proliferated media consumption. There is also an updated film called 2015. This covers many other new media variables (podcasting/GPS etc.) that are/will affect our world as we know it.

It's been over a year since Adam Curry was quoted saying that “in five years, 50% of the media content consumed by consumers will be produced by consumers.” This is an amazing statistic, and an alarming one at that, especially if you have a big media concern. The reality is that right now, Google is unstopable, they are swallowing up new media tool companies at an unprecendented rate of one aquisition every two or three days. I just read today that Rupert Murdoch is trying to buy The Wall Street Journal. What about Microsoft's purchase of aQuantive, Google's Feedburner acquisition. This modern day Gold Rush will only continue to accelerate until we consumers are left with platform of integrated and consolidated media tools. Side note: there was a great article concerning Google in the Times this morning: Inside the black box. Being the epidemy of the anti-brand, we should at some point start seeing government intervention into Google's empire, I just don't see how this can continue for much longer. As a marketer, my career as well as yours could be at stake. The internet is commoditizing the 4 P's. Consumer's know what to buy, where to buy it, and how much to pay for it. A paradigm shift in the philosophies and practives of marketing and communication will have to take place. As a brand, you have very little control over your own message. If new media is about consumer empowerment, then new marketing needs to be about participation. Companies should come out from behind their brand guises and join this participation age. In this day and age, for marketers it doesn't have to be about creation. You don't have to start the conversation, you just need to join one that's already there. Even though EPIC 2014 and EPIC 2015 might be "fictional", the inevitable will happen and the film's underlying message to big media is inherent.

May 19, 2007

Protecting Community Content

Rebekka_blog The Flickr community has been on the radar screen as some interesting things have happened over the past week. One of Flickr's most talented photographers, Rebekka Gudleifsdottir, is an art student and single mom living in Iceland. It's hard to find words that fit in describing Rebekka's work. Being a Flickr member, I stumbled across her work more then a year ago and have been following her photostream ever since. The landscapes and self-portraits she produces are moody, dark, eccentric, and nothing short of some of the most amazing photography I've ever seen. Indeed, her pictures keep me coming back to the Flickr community, check out Rebekka's photo stream. Her talent has attracted more than three million views on the photo sharing site. So, why does it seem inevitable that her success has led to some poor behavior on someone else's behalf. Basically what happened is Rebekka found out that a company in England, who will remain nameless for the time being (if you really want to know you can figure it out), was selling copies of the images she uploaded on Flickr, without her permission. To date, they've sold thousands of dollars worth of her images. Rebekka confronted them about it, and the store owners claimed that they'd bought the photo's from someone claiming to be the photographer, they wouldn't reveal this alleged crook's name, and they weren't going to offer her any sort of compensation. Now she doesn't have the means to pursue this matter in court, especially because it's an international incident. So, amidst her frustration, like anyone with a large community would do, she posted about her experience on Flickr. The flickr community responded, her story has been all over the front page of digg, and the particular photograph that was ripped off has had hundreds of thousands of views and supportive comments left. What's also happened is the infringing company has got some nasty messages from Rebekka's supporters. This is were it gets really interesting, the company apparently contacted Flickr and Rebekka's post, along with all the community's comments were without any explanation, deleted. Rebekka posted Flickr's reponse to her, on her blog.

From Flickr:

"Flickr is not a venue for to you harass, abuse, impersonate, or intimidate others. If we receive a valid complaint about your conduct, we will send you a warning or terminate your account."

The Flickr community, like the Digg community a few weeks ago, went into an uproar. It wasn't until Rebekka hinted that she might leave the site when Flickr realized that they had really fucked up. This prompted Stewart Butterfield, one of the co-founders of Flickr to respond. This was the gist of it:

"... I have a pretty good idea that we screwed up -- and for that I take full responsibility (actually, several team members are fighting to take responsibility).

There are several policies which will be changing as a direct result of this incident and the goal is that nothing like this ever happens again. Any errors from now on should be on the side of caution.

It's important to be clear why the photo was deleted: it had nothing to do with a desire to silence Rebekka from calling attention to the outfit which had reportedly sold copies of her photos without knowledge or permission and without compensating her...

So, to Rebekka: Our apologies. I'm sure you did not intend to bring on the firestorm to the extent it developed, you were not in the wrong and it was our fault to suggest that you were."

This incident in it's entirety raises many questions surrounding the censorship of content in the social media and networking space. Who's content is it anyway? Yahoo, who owns Flickr, needs to ask themselves this question. This was not a good move, they alienated an entire community. Why would Yahoo make the entire situation even more personal by deleting the community's comments that succeed Rebekka's ripped off photo. The post had over 450 comments about why selling other people'€™s stuff for profit is criminal. In addition, these posts included suggestions and advice on how to deal with the incident. Guess what Yahoo, now everyone feels ripped off! What a surprise, they clearly didn't think this one through. A prime example of an old school best practice of protectionism and censorship that will not work with web 2.0. Did someone say ripple effects? Bottom line: don't alienate your community, Yahoo should have known this by now. Also, companies/organizations need to realize that censorship will not work, it only makes things worse and accomplishes the exact opposite of what it's supposed to do.

(Photo by Rebekka Guðleifsdóttir)

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

zwing's twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    June 2009

    Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4 5 6
    7 8 9 10 11 12 13
    14 15 16 17 18 19 20
    21 22 23 24 25 26 27
    28 29 30