ZDNet reports: At the Web 2.0 Summit in San Francisco, Twitter CEO Evan Williams explains to Federated Media CEO John Battelle his rationale for turning down Facebook in October of 2008. He says, “he didn’t see a reason to sell…the point is really what we can build.”
Friday, October 30, 2009
Who Is The Ultimate Game Changer In Media?
HuffPo reports: HuffPost's Game Changers celebrates 100 innovators, visionaries, and leaders in 10 categories who are harnessing the power of new media to reshape their fields and change the world. They've picked 10 people who are changing the game in media.
1. Katie Couric - CBS News
2. Jason Kilar - Hulu
3. Henry Louis Gates, Jr. - The Root
4. James Bennet + Bob Cohn - The Atlantic
5. Tina Brown - The Daily Beast
6. Alberto Ibargüen - The Knight Foundation
7. Charlie Tillinghast - MSNBC.MSN.COM
8. Sue Gardner - Wikimedia Foundation
9. Andrew Donahue - Voices of San Diego
10. Tim Westergren - Pandora
1. Katie Couric - CBS News
2. Jason Kilar - Hulu
3. Henry Louis Gates, Jr. - The Root
4. James Bennet + Bob Cohn - The Atlantic
5. Tina Brown - The Daily Beast
6. Alberto Ibargüen - The Knight Foundation
7. Charlie Tillinghast - MSNBC.MSN.COM
8. Sue Gardner - Wikimedia Foundation
9. Andrew Donahue - Voices of San Diego
10. Tim Westergren - Pandora
Google's Eric Schmidt on What the Web Will Look Like in 5 Years
ReadWriteWeb reports: Google CEO Eric Schmidt envisions a radically changed internet five years from now: dominated by Chinese-language and social media content, delivered over super-fast bandwidth in real time. Figuring out how to rank real-time social content is "the great challenge of the age," Schmidt said in an interview in front of thousands of CIOs and IT Directors at last week's Gartner Symposium/ITxpo Orlando 2009.
Gartner is the largest and most respected analyst firm in the world and much of what Schmidt said in his 45 minute interview was directed specifically at business leaders, but we've excerpted 6 minutes that we believe is of interest to anyone who's touched by the web.
Highlighted comments include:
•Five years from now the internet will be dominated by Chinese-language content.
•Today's teenagers are the model of how the web will work in five years - they jump from app to app to app seamlessly.
•Five years is a factor of ten in Moore's Law, meaning that computers will be capable of far more by that time than they are today.
•Within five years there will be broadband well above 100MB in performance - and distribution distinctions between TV, radio and the web will go away.
•"We're starting to make signifigant money off of Youtube", content will move towards more video.
•"Real time information is just as valuable as all the other information, we want it included in our search results."
•There are many companies beyond Twitter and Facebook doing real time.
•"We can index real-time info now - but how do we rank it?"
•It's because of this fundamental shift towards user-generated information that people will listen more to other people than to traditional sources. Learning how to rank that "is the great challenge of the age." Schmidt believes Google can solve that problem.
That's the roadmap, though, that's guiding much of what Google is doing today. From Chrome OS to Google Social Search.
Does that sound like a compelling vision of the future? Not discussed were distributed social networking, structured data, recommendations, presence data and other factors that could complicate Google's plans. What do you think the web will look like in five years?
Gartner is the largest and most respected analyst firm in the world and much of what Schmidt said in his 45 minute interview was directed specifically at business leaders, but we've excerpted 6 minutes that we believe is of interest to anyone who's touched by the web.
Highlighted comments include:
•Five years from now the internet will be dominated by Chinese-language content.
•Today's teenagers are the model of how the web will work in five years - they jump from app to app to app seamlessly.
•Five years is a factor of ten in Moore's Law, meaning that computers will be capable of far more by that time than they are today.
•Within five years there will be broadband well above 100MB in performance - and distribution distinctions between TV, radio and the web will go away.
•"We're starting to make signifigant money off of Youtube", content will move towards more video.
•"Real time information is just as valuable as all the other information, we want it included in our search results."
•There are many companies beyond Twitter and Facebook doing real time.
•"We can index real-time info now - but how do we rank it?"
•It's because of this fundamental shift towards user-generated information that people will listen more to other people than to traditional sources. Learning how to rank that "is the great challenge of the age." Schmidt believes Google can solve that problem.
That's the roadmap, though, that's guiding much of what Google is doing today. From Chrome OS to Google Social Search.
Does that sound like a compelling vision of the future? Not discussed were distributed social networking, structured data, recommendations, presence data and other factors that could complicate Google's plans. What do you think the web will look like in five years?
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Google Voice
Just secured and opened an account today - I am excited to have this new communication tool at my disposal.
I will update you in a few weeks after I have had a chance to utilize this Google service.
Here is a video for those of you who are not familiar with this service.
I will update you in a few weeks after I have had a chance to utilize this Google service.
Here is a video for those of you who are not familiar with this service.
High hopes for new GOP app
House Republican leaders have introduced a colorful BlackBerry app called WhipCast that lets members and their aides check talking points and bill facts, follow votes, plan floor action and even keep up with rumors, polls and late-night comedy.
Starting Thursday, the GOP is making WhipCast available to the public for free as a way to show that the party is regaining the technical edge that has been lost to Democrats in recent years.
“I think it’ll go viral,” said Rep. Kevin McCarthy of California, the minority’s chief deputy whip, who is the app’s chief evangelist. “They can be anywhere in the world and see at their fingertips what’s happening in Congress and what the arguments are.”
McCarthy compared the application — which can be downloaded at http://republicanwhip.house.gov/WhipCast — with the use of text messaging by Barack Obama’s successful presidential campaign.
“You can use video and text to motivate a base faster; you can inform a base faster,” McCarthy said. “In a meeting, when someone brings up an article or a report, instead of saying, ‘Will your office send it to me?’ it’s sent to everybody — boom!”
Starting Thursday, the GOP is making WhipCast available to the public for free as a way to show that the party is regaining the technical edge that has been lost to Democrats in recent years.
“I think it’ll go viral,” said Rep. Kevin McCarthy of California, the minority’s chief deputy whip, who is the app’s chief evangelist. “They can be anywhere in the world and see at their fingertips what’s happening in Congress and what the arguments are.”
McCarthy compared the application — which can be downloaded at http://republicanwhip.house.gov/WhipCast — with the use of text messaging by Barack Obama’s successful presidential campaign.
“You can use video and text to motivate a base faster; you can inform a base faster,” McCarthy said. “In a meeting, when someone brings up an article or a report, instead of saying, ‘Will your office send it to me?’ it’s sent to everybody — boom!”
Lufthansa auto-tweets passengers' midair location
Springwise Newsletter reports: Through Lufthansa's free MySkyStatus service, fliers can sign up for flight status updates to be posted automatically to their Facebook or Twitter profiles. Available for flights on any airline.
"This marked a fundamental change in political coverage and message consumption"
"As was the case throughout the campaign, most people did not watch the speech on TV. It was delivered on a Tuesday morning, when just about everyone was at work. Instead, people watched it online, most of them on YouTube, either as it was happening or at their leisure later that day or in the days to come. Eventually, tens of millions of voters saw the speech through various outlets.
This marked a fundamental change in political coverage and message consumption, and one that will only continue as technology rolls forward: big moments, political or otherwise, will no longer be remembered by people as times when everyone gathered around TVs to watch a speech, press conference or other event. Increasingly, most of us will recall firing up the computer, searching for a video and watching it at home or at the office — or even on our cell phones." - David Plouffe regarding Barack Obama's speech regarding Rev. Wright.
Excerpt from The Audacity to Win: The Inside Story and Lessons of Barack Obama's Historic Victory by David Plouffe. Click here to read more.
This marked a fundamental change in political coverage and message consumption, and one that will only continue as technology rolls forward: big moments, political or otherwise, will no longer be remembered by people as times when everyone gathered around TVs to watch a speech, press conference or other event. Increasingly, most of us will recall firing up the computer, searching for a video and watching it at home or at the office — or even on our cell phones." - David Plouffe regarding Barack Obama's speech regarding Rev. Wright.
Excerpt from The Audacity to Win: The Inside Story and Lessons of Barack Obama's Historic Victory by David Plouffe. Click here to read more.
Pandora tunes in to social Web
Vator.tv reports: Music-streaming service Pandora has incorporated social-media tools onto its Web site, so users can share songs with their Facebook and Twitter network. The Facebook sharing tool goes one step further by embedding the song within the status update, so users can listen to it without leaving the social-networking site. Pandora users can also gift playlists to users via e-mail, in what the company bills as "a modern version of the mixtape."
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Twitter user list favors Dems in CA Gov Race
AP reports: When people sign up for Twitter, the popular social-networking site presents a list of suggested users to follow, driving significant traffic to sports figures, celebrities, politicians and other prominent posters.
In California, the list has attracted the attention of political watchdogs because it apparently favors Democrats over Republicans in next year's race for governor. That raises questions about whether Twitter should change its policy at a time when the site is catching on as a popular recruiting tool for candidates.
San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom is on the suggested user list and has 1.2 million followers. His likely opponent for the Democratic nomination, Attorney General Jerry Brown, also made the list and has 960,000 followers, even though he is not a declared candidate and has posted the fewest tweets of all the gubernatorial hopefuls.
None of the three Republican candidates is on the list, and each has fewer than 5,000 followers.
'It's a dumb move,' said Bob Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies, an independent nonpartisan think tank in Los Angeles. 'Somebody should have been thinking that it's pretty obvious you don't put just the Democrats on it.'
Such apparent favoritism does not violate any California campaign regulations, but it has caught the attention of the state's watchdog agency. The California Fair Political Practices Commission has formed a committee to examine how campaigns intersect with social media and to determine whether additional regulations are necessary."
In California, the list has attracted the attention of political watchdogs because it apparently favors Democrats over Republicans in next year's race for governor. That raises questions about whether Twitter should change its policy at a time when the site is catching on as a popular recruiting tool for candidates.
San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom is on the suggested user list and has 1.2 million followers. His likely opponent for the Democratic nomination, Attorney General Jerry Brown, also made the list and has 960,000 followers, even though he is not a declared candidate and has posted the fewest tweets of all the gubernatorial hopefuls.
None of the three Republican candidates is on the list, and each has fewer than 5,000 followers.
'It's a dumb move,' said Bob Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies, an independent nonpartisan think tank in Los Angeles. 'Somebody should have been thinking that it's pretty obvious you don't put just the Democrats on it.'
Such apparent favoritism does not violate any California campaign regulations, but it has caught the attention of the state's watchdog agency. The California Fair Political Practices Commission has formed a committee to examine how campaigns intersect with social media and to determine whether additional regulations are necessary."
Hot Startup, Cool Office: Meet Blue State Digital
SAI visits Blue State Digital's office in NYC's Flatiron District. For photos click here.
Monday, October 26, 2009
Did location-based social media arrive before its time?
VentureBeat reports: Location-based social networks, such as Loopt and Foursquare, are having trouble accumulating a critical mass, Saad Fazil writes. These networks are meant to help users know where their friends are, so many people are reluctant to join unless their friends are already members. Fazil predicts the sites will become more popular as they begin to offer more features, better incentives and more robust technology.
Friday, October 16, 2009
DC Social Media Survey Touches a Nerve
TechPresident reports: Yesterday's post about a new study by Marc Ross, Christine Steineman and Chris Lisi ranking more than a hundred Washington organizations based on how many social media tools they are using is spawning an interesting conversation. Critics like Matt Browner-Hamlin, the SEIU's deputy director of new media, and Michael Cornfield, a political scientist and longtime analyst of online politics, have chimed in to dismiss the study's import, arguing that simply counting the presence of social media tools being deployed by an organization means little, or nothing. It's how you use those tools to engage the public that matters, they argue.
Adding flesh to that argument, Ken Deutsch of Morningside Analytics did a quick look to see if groups that ranked high in the study were indeed having a greater impact with one high-value audience, bloggers. Here's a bit of what he found, using a 4000 blog dataset that Morningside developed to look at the health and energy debates:
Compared to the other organizations that were included in the social media tools study, the Sierra Club (the organization that used the most social media tools - ten ), was also the organization that was most cited as a source from the blogs most focused on energy policy.
Looking at the same organizations, SEIU (second in the social media tools study using nine social media tools), was the organization that was most cited as a source within the blogs focused on health policy.
However, after the Sierra Club and SEIU the correlations between tools used and links trail off. Two of the four organizations that used eight social media tools and three of the four of the organizations that used seven were not within the top sources used by bloggers discussing energy or health policy.
The American Medical Association, which used only one social media tool, was cited as a source by bloggers engaged in health policy more then any other group in that study with the exception of SEIU and the Human Rights Campaign.
Deutch notes that several DC policy shops that were not included in the study, like the Center for American Progress and the Heritage Foundation are cited much more often by bloggers than any of the groups in the Ross/Stineman/Lisi study. This isn't surprising, given that these big think tanks have actually invested a lot of energy in engaging online, and they have a huge stake in influencing (and being seen as influencing) the health and energy debates. By contrast, several of other groups in the Ross/Stineman/Lisi study aren't really trying to be players on those topics.
There's no question that, as a community, tech-pol practitioners need to do more research on how usage of social media produces tangible value for political and advocacy organizations. I'm not disagreeing with the points Browner-Hamlin and Cornfield make; mere presence proves little.
But I still think the Ross/Stineman/Lisi study shows something else that is also important to think about: Many name-brand trade associations still have pretty traditional media operations, and they're taking a pretty cautious, "you-first" approach to embracing new media tools. If you're the American Medical Association in the middle of the country's biggest health care debate in a long time, obviously you are going to be in the middle of the fight whether or not you're on Twitter (which they are, and which suggests that Ross et. al. may have erred in scoring the AMA as low as they did). For me, what the study illustrates is how far--for all the buzz about Web 2.0--social media evangelists have to go in proving the value of being open and social.
Adding flesh to that argument, Ken Deutsch of Morningside Analytics did a quick look to see if groups that ranked high in the study were indeed having a greater impact with one high-value audience, bloggers. Here's a bit of what he found, using a 4000 blog dataset that Morningside developed to look at the health and energy debates:
Compared to the other organizations that were included in the social media tools study, the Sierra Club (the organization that used the most social media tools - ten ), was also the organization that was most cited as a source from the blogs most focused on energy policy.
Looking at the same organizations, SEIU (second in the social media tools study using nine social media tools), was the organization that was most cited as a source within the blogs focused on health policy.
However, after the Sierra Club and SEIU the correlations between tools used and links trail off. Two of the four organizations that used eight social media tools and three of the four of the organizations that used seven were not within the top sources used by bloggers discussing energy or health policy.
The American Medical Association, which used only one social media tool, was cited as a source by bloggers engaged in health policy more then any other group in that study with the exception of SEIU and the Human Rights Campaign.
Deutch notes that several DC policy shops that were not included in the study, like the Center for American Progress and the Heritage Foundation are cited much more often by bloggers than any of the groups in the Ross/Stineman/Lisi study. This isn't surprising, given that these big think tanks have actually invested a lot of energy in engaging online, and they have a huge stake in influencing (and being seen as influencing) the health and energy debates. By contrast, several of other groups in the Ross/Stineman/Lisi study aren't really trying to be players on those topics.
There's no question that, as a community, tech-pol practitioners need to do more research on how usage of social media produces tangible value for political and advocacy organizations. I'm not disagreeing with the points Browner-Hamlin and Cornfield make; mere presence proves little.
But I still think the Ross/Stineman/Lisi study shows something else that is also important to think about: Many name-brand trade associations still have pretty traditional media operations, and they're taking a pretty cautious, "you-first" approach to embracing new media tools. If you're the American Medical Association in the middle of the country's biggest health care debate in a long time, obviously you are going to be in the middle of the fight whether or not you're on Twitter (which they are, and which suggests that Ross et. al. may have erred in scoring the AMA as low as they did). For me, what the study illustrates is how far--for all the buzz about Web 2.0--social media evangelists have to go in proving the value of being open and social.
Tories use Spotify to target young voters
revolutionmagazine.com reports: Spotify users will be targetted with a marketing campaign from The Conservative Party next week, marking it the first time that a UK political party has run a campaign on the music streaming service.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Did President Obama’s Winning Campaign Change Advocacy in DC?
Nearly a year after President Obama’s historic campaign enhanced voter communications and engagement to previously unseen levels by utilizing readily available online tools and websites, we committed ourselves to analyzing how America’s leading trade associations, pressure groups and cause organizations are using the same technologies and techniques to engage their supporters and shape legislation.
In this report, Christine Stineman (Tribe Effect) and I identified fourteen online advocacy tools, websites and grassroots techniques that serve as the foundation for online advocacy programs. From the email signup to the newer tools such as a blog badge, we reviewed the organizations’ online and social media advocacy tools based on these fourteen requirements over the course of a ten-week period concluding with a final review on October 2, 2009. The information in this report is timely and concluded late enough in the year to provide ample time to embrace these tools.
In this report, we did not analyze or provide commentary on the quality or quantity of the advocacy communications and engagement; we simply measured presence and employment of tools only. Some organizations did extremely well, such as the Sierra Club and Service Employees International Union with scores of 71% and 64% respectively, while three organizations scored zeros.
Overall, there is a lag in the implementation of the new media tools. Many of the organizations reviewed in this report have not yet embraced or employed many of the readily accessible online communication and social media tools. Many groups in this report do have an advocacy action center and email signups, but most, 75 of the organizations reviewed, had four or fewer online new media tools. The average score of the organizations reviewed was 24%, meaning 76% of the most commonly used social media tools are not being utilized to communicate with members, voters and other constituencies.
The data collected in this report provides a baseline from which organizations can measure themselves from a social media and online advocacy perspective.
Individuals, organizations, corporations and small businesses are joining Twitter, Facebook and other social media sites at a surprisingly rapid rate. This is where people are communicating about issues, politics and products as they relate to their lives both personally and professionally. Social media and social networking offer remarkable tools for trade and member organizations as well as tremendous opportunity to expand their reach.
It is our opinion that It is critical for advocacy organizations to not only share legislative positions of their organization, but to join in the conversation already taking place among voters via social media.
To succeed in today’s new communications environment, advocacy operations must now think in terms of harnessing social media tools to engage in a dialogue, listen, interact and understand what supporters and constituencies are saying and hearing about the issues. These organizations stand to gain long-term benefits from establishing a deeper relationship with members, supporters and decision-makers by establishing a social media connection that has not previously been tangible.
We hope you enjoy the report and we look forward to hearing your thoughts on this analysis.
In this report, Christine Stineman (Tribe Effect) and I identified fourteen online advocacy tools, websites and grassroots techniques that serve as the foundation for online advocacy programs. From the email signup to the newer tools such as a blog badge, we reviewed the organizations’ online and social media advocacy tools based on these fourteen requirements over the course of a ten-week period concluding with a final review on October 2, 2009. The information in this report is timely and concluded late enough in the year to provide ample time to embrace these tools.
In this report, we did not analyze or provide commentary on the quality or quantity of the advocacy communications and engagement; we simply measured presence and employment of tools only. Some organizations did extremely well, such as the Sierra Club and Service Employees International Union with scores of 71% and 64% respectively, while three organizations scored zeros.
Overall, there is a lag in the implementation of the new media tools. Many of the organizations reviewed in this report have not yet embraced or employed many of the readily accessible online communication and social media tools. Many groups in this report do have an advocacy action center and email signups, but most, 75 of the organizations reviewed, had four or fewer online new media tools. The average score of the organizations reviewed was 24%, meaning 76% of the most commonly used social media tools are not being utilized to communicate with members, voters and other constituencies.
The data collected in this report provides a baseline from which organizations can measure themselves from a social media and online advocacy perspective.
Individuals, organizations, corporations and small businesses are joining Twitter, Facebook and other social media sites at a surprisingly rapid rate. This is where people are communicating about issues, politics and products as they relate to their lives both personally and professionally. Social media and social networking offer remarkable tools for trade and member organizations as well as tremendous opportunity to expand their reach.
It is our opinion that It is critical for advocacy organizations to not only share legislative positions of their organization, but to join in the conversation already taking place among voters via social media.
To succeed in today’s new communications environment, advocacy operations must now think in terms of harnessing social media tools to engage in a dialogue, listen, interact and understand what supporters and constituencies are saying and hearing about the issues. These organizations stand to gain long-term benefits from establishing a deeper relationship with members, supporters and decision-makers by establishing a social media connection that has not previously been tangible.
We hope you enjoy the report and we look forward to hearing your thoughts on this analysis.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Congress To Probe 'Grass-Tops' Lobbying
National Journal Online -- Under The Influence reports: Grass-tops lobbying, the practice of tapping local civic, business and labor leaders to push lawmakers to support or oppose federal legislation, is a huge business in Washington, but just how big isn't know because it isn't required to be reported under current lobbying rules.
We might learn more about the practice this Thursday as the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming is holding an investigative hearing into fake letters sent to members of Congress urging them to vote against the Waxman-Markey clean energy and climate legislation.
The letters were sent as part of a grass-tops campaign run by consulting firm, Bonner & Associates, on behalf of the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity. Bonner has blamed the incident on a now fired temporary employee.
Click for the committee statement about the hearing.
We might learn more about the practice this Thursday as the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming is holding an investigative hearing into fake letters sent to members of Congress urging them to vote against the Waxman-Markey clean energy and climate legislation.
The letters were sent as part of a grass-tops campaign run by consulting firm, Bonner & Associates, on behalf of the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity. Bonner has blamed the incident on a now fired temporary employee.
Click for the committee statement about the hearing.
What is your advocacy challenge?
12 questions to ask before you launch your advocacy effort:
1. What is the compelling reason to make this happen?
2. What are the strengths?
3. What are the weaknesses?
4. What are the opportunities?
5. What are the threats?
6. What are the short term tasks?
7. What are the long term tasks?
8. How will the effort be marketed and/or branded?
9. How will be your allies and how will you find them?
10. How will success be measured?
11. How will failure be measured?
12. What is the budget – dollars, staff, time, technology?
Monday, October 12, 2009
How To: YouTube "Autoshare" on Twitter, Facebook, and Google Reader
Nancy Scola of TechPresident reports: It has come to our attention that YouTube has this potentially useful option where you can set your YouTube account to automagically post to Twitter, Facebook, and Google Reader each and every time you upload a new video. YouTube turned on "autoshare" this summer, but that must have been when we were out flyfishing and we missed the news. No matter. It's still current, and potentially helpful if you or your organization regularly works with video. Here's how to get YouTube autoshare up and running.
Why Twitter and Facebook Will Never Kill E-mail
Fast Company reports: Twitter's [1] on every tech-fan's lips, half the World's teens seem permanently plugged into MSN or Facebook, and seemingly every gadget's getting wired [2] to a social network. With these big changes afoot, is email slipping into history?
From some Nielsen research published in The New York Times, you could certainly be forgiven for thinking so: In August this year, 276.9 million people in the U.S., Europe, Australia, and Brazil used email (that's equivalent to 90% of the U.S. population). Last year the same figure stood at 229.2 million, meaning a rise of 21% has occurred. But, on the other hand, this August some 301.5 million people used a social-networking type of site, outstripping email use and equating to a rise of 31% on last year's figure.
With growth like that, you could easily argue it won't be long before time-management issues end up pushing aside email usage altogether. There's only room for so much electronic communications in a day, and Twittering or Facebookmailing just seems quicker and more convenient than sending an email.
But this line of reasoning totally misses the point. Email has a purpose and is evolved to fit this purpose well. It's not going away any time soon, because while it's not ideal, it's almost infinitely more convenient than the paper-and-ink communications it replaced. And there's more:
You can't embed a file directly in a Tweet.
Would you trust Facebook, with its odd history of rights control, with a corporate Excel file?
Legions of gray-surfers have adopted email as a way to keep in touch--they won't be switching.
While email is usually formatted informally, it's still more formal than social networking norms--important in a business setting.
Millions of BlackBerry and iPhone users will testify to mobile email's convenience.
Some say the one technology that could seriously impact email as a messaging format is Google Wave, but the argument for the message aggregator's supremacy comes undone when its subjected to the favorite axiom of the digital realm: Keep It Simple, Stupid. Email is straightforward, easy to understand, and can be formal or informal. You can rattle off a quick email to one or many recipients in just a second or two. Wave [3], on the other hand, still possesses that ultimate geek quality: It's actually really hard to explain what it is, how it works, and what it's for.
Email's actually still settling into the public's consciousness and becoming just another tool for digital communication among a range of different tools, each fitting its own niche. In other words, it's absolutely not an "end of an era" for email--it'll be around for ages yet.
From some Nielsen research published in The New York Times, you could certainly be forgiven for thinking so: In August this year, 276.9 million people in the U.S., Europe, Australia, and Brazil used email (that's equivalent to 90% of the U.S. population). Last year the same figure stood at 229.2 million, meaning a rise of 21% has occurred. But, on the other hand, this August some 301.5 million people used a social-networking type of site, outstripping email use and equating to a rise of 31% on last year's figure.
With growth like that, you could easily argue it won't be long before time-management issues end up pushing aside email usage altogether. There's only room for so much electronic communications in a day, and Twittering or Facebookmailing just seems quicker and more convenient than sending an email.
But this line of reasoning totally misses the point. Email has a purpose and is evolved to fit this purpose well. It's not going away any time soon, because while it's not ideal, it's almost infinitely more convenient than the paper-and-ink communications it replaced. And there's more:
You can't embed a file directly in a Tweet.
Would you trust Facebook, with its odd history of rights control, with a corporate Excel file?
Legions of gray-surfers have adopted email as a way to keep in touch--they won't be switching.
While email is usually formatted informally, it's still more formal than social networking norms--important in a business setting.
Millions of BlackBerry and iPhone users will testify to mobile email's convenience.
Some say the one technology that could seriously impact email as a messaging format is Google Wave, but the argument for the message aggregator's supremacy comes undone when its subjected to the favorite axiom of the digital realm: Keep It Simple, Stupid. Email is straightforward, easy to understand, and can be formal or informal. You can rattle off a quick email to one or many recipients in just a second or two. Wave [3], on the other hand, still possesses that ultimate geek quality: It's actually really hard to explain what it is, how it works, and what it's for.
Email's actually still settling into the public's consciousness and becoming just another tool for digital communication among a range of different tools, each fitting its own niche. In other words, it's absolutely not an "end of an era" for email--it'll be around for ages yet.
Hearst Launches Web Aggregation Site, Too: 'Let Me Know'
Silicon Alley Insider reports: Hearst has launched a new aggregation site, LMK.com (Let Me Know), which aims to be a comprehensive source of information for a number of topics. The first focus is college football. Next up is reality television, then dozens more.
Twitter to Introduce Live Video-Tweeting
Telegraph reports: Twitter's founders are discussing an update that will enable Twitter users to upload brief video snippets to their profiles directly from mobile phones, laptops, and other devices. Third party sites Twiddeo and Tweetube already allow Twitter users to post video tweets but only by creating links to their sites.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Advocacy 2.0 Asks Nate Green
Advocacy 2.0 speaks with Nate Green at the famed Billy Goat Tavern in Chicago, USA. Nate and I were in Chicago to attend the 11th Social Media for Government Conference.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Promiscuous dispersal of your email address
From Seth Godin's blog: I just went through the hassle of trying to get some B2B firms the details needed to give me an informed quote on a project.
I visited eight sites. Six of them hide their email address. They use forms of one sort of another. One firm refused to accept more than 500 characters in the "how can we help you" box, while three of them wanted to know what state I was in, etc.
Email contact is like a first date. If you show up with a clipboard and a questionnaire, it's not going to go well, I'm afraid. The object is to earn permission to respond.
If you sell something, set up an address like "sales@xyz.com". Put this on your home page, "contact us if you're looking for more information or a price quote." Sure, you'll get a lot of spam, but deleting spam is a lot easier than finding customers. (Hint, ask your IT people to make it a mailto link, with a subject line built in. That way, you can use the subject line to find the good email).
I visited eight sites. Six of them hide their email address. They use forms of one sort of another. One firm refused to accept more than 500 characters in the "how can we help you" box, while three of them wanted to know what state I was in, etc.
Email contact is like a first date. If you show up with a clipboard and a questionnaire, it's not going to go well, I'm afraid. The object is to earn permission to respond.
If you sell something, set up an address like "sales@xyz.com". Put this on your home page, "contact us if you're looking for more information or a price quote." Sure, you'll get a lot of spam, but deleting spam is a lot easier than finding customers. (Hint, ask your IT people to make it a mailto link, with a subject line built in. That way, you can use the subject line to find the good email).
Monday, October 5, 2009
Why Google is on its guard,' by Ken Auletta
Courtesy of Mike Allen at Politico: The New Yorker, 'Annals of Communications: SEARCHING FOR TROUBLE -- Why Google is on its guard,' by Ken Auletta: 'A number of media companies are actively lobbying Washington to monitor Google's activities. ... There is a common belief at Google that the Obama Administration and the Democratic leadership in Congress are more sympathetic to Silicon Valley companies and technology issues. [Google CEO] Eric Schmidt is an economic adviser to Obama, and other Google executives, such as David Drummond, the chief legal officer and senior vice-president of corporate development, were early and fervent Obama supporters. But Democrats traditionally favor more regulation, not less, and Google has powerful rivals that command attention in Washington. Google also touches on issues-privacy, concentration of power, copyright-that tend to draw scrutiny. And Google has other governments to contend with. ... As Google moves beyond search, it has antagonized just about every traditional media company at one time or another. ... 'The goal of the company is customer satisfaction. [Schmidt said] You should think of Google as one product'-customer satisfaction. ...
'While rivals like Steve Ballmer, the CEO of Microsoft, may label Google 'a one-trick pony,' Schmidt has a ready rejoinder: 'I like the trick!' Google's search engine was responsible for ninety-eight per cent of the company's twenty-two billion dollars in revenues and $4.2 billion in net profits last year, and Google today accounts for almost seventy per cent of the world's Internet searches. Schmidt added, 'The Google model is one-trick to the extent that you believe targeted advertising is one trick.' And if Google can find a way to sell advertising on YouTube, on mobile phones, and through its cloud-computing programs, Schmidt says, Google could become the first media company to generate a hundred billion dollars in revenues, more than twice as much as any of the world's biggest media companies: Time Warner, the Walt Disney Company, and News Corp. ...
'[Longtime Google adviser] Al Gore re-counted a conversation he had with [co-founder Sergey] Brin and [co-founder Larry] Page [namesake of the patented PageRank™ algorithm] several years ago in the conference room near their office. Gore raised specific concerns about aspects of search quality. 'They had to go to another meeting,' Gore recalled, 'and said, 'If you can stay, Al, we'd like to bring in the search-quality researchers and specialists in charge of this part of the business.' Ten of them came in. Larry and Sergey left. I spent another three hours. And then, when it was over, I gave Larry and Sergey an oral report.'
'Some weeks later, Gore said, laughing, 'I went up to their office and found that all ten of these people had been moved in. All ten of them!' He described how Page and Brin had had to cram twelve computer monitors into their office, and 'move around some of their toys-a remote-control helicopter, flying messenger boards . . .' The researchers and specialists stayed-until Brin and Page 'satisfied themselves that they had an ongoing system for maintaining hyper-vigilance.' He added, 'I defy you to think of any other executives in the world who would bring a team like that into their personal office for weeks on end.'
AULETTA's 11th book, 'Googled: The End of the World As We Know It,' will be published Nov. 3. $18.45 from Amazon
'While rivals like Steve Ballmer, the CEO of Microsoft, may label Google 'a one-trick pony,' Schmidt has a ready rejoinder: 'I like the trick!' Google's search engine was responsible for ninety-eight per cent of the company's twenty-two billion dollars in revenues and $4.2 billion in net profits last year, and Google today accounts for almost seventy per cent of the world's Internet searches. Schmidt added, 'The Google model is one-trick to the extent that you believe targeted advertising is one trick.' And if Google can find a way to sell advertising on YouTube, on mobile phones, and through its cloud-computing programs, Schmidt says, Google could become the first media company to generate a hundred billion dollars in revenues, more than twice as much as any of the world's biggest media companies: Time Warner, the Walt Disney Company, and News Corp. ...
'[Longtime Google adviser] Al Gore re-counted a conversation he had with [co-founder Sergey] Brin and [co-founder Larry] Page [namesake of the patented PageRank™ algorithm] several years ago in the conference room near their office. Gore raised specific concerns about aspects of search quality. 'They had to go to another meeting,' Gore recalled, 'and said, 'If you can stay, Al, we'd like to bring in the search-quality researchers and specialists in charge of this part of the business.' Ten of them came in. Larry and Sergey left. I spent another three hours. And then, when it was over, I gave Larry and Sergey an oral report.'
'Some weeks later, Gore said, laughing, 'I went up to their office and found that all ten of these people had been moved in. All ten of them!' He described how Page and Brin had had to cram twelve computer monitors into their office, and 'move around some of their toys-a remote-control helicopter, flying messenger boards . . .' The researchers and specialists stayed-until Brin and Page 'satisfied themselves that they had an ongoing system for maintaining hyper-vigilance.' He added, 'I defy you to think of any other executives in the world who would bring a team like that into their personal office for weeks on end.'
AULETTA's 11th book, 'Googled: The End of the World As We Know It,' will be published Nov. 3. $18.45 from Amazon
What Do All These Phone Apps Do? Mostly Marketing
NYT reports: When Stanley Works, the hand tool maker, offered an iPhone App that turned the phone into a level, its goal was to create young loyalists to the Stanley brand.
The company does not know if the iPhone app drove a single sale or fostered any brand loyalty. But based on the 400,000 downloads, Stanley declared the iPhone level a resounding success and is now looking for other tool apps. “It was low-risk experiment,” said Todd Langston, a company spokesman.
Other companies are experimenting as well. Gap gives away an app called StyleMixer app. Pizza Hut has a create-a-pizza app. Redfin, the online real estate agents, puts the Multiple Listing Service database in an app.
In fact, so many are doing apps that they are driving the cost of hiring a developer to build a simple app from $5,000 eight months ago to about $40,000 or more today.
Behind the land rush to apps is a belief that they may be some of the cleverest advertising devised. They are, after all, advertisements that people voluntarily choose to watch and share with friends. Some are even consulted in store aisles when customers decide what to buy. “Apps have a huge advantage,” said Carl Howe, a mobile market analyst for the Yankee Group. “You had to take a step to get it; you are already half sold.”
The company does not know if the iPhone app drove a single sale or fostered any brand loyalty. But based on the 400,000 downloads, Stanley declared the iPhone level a resounding success and is now looking for other tool apps. “It was low-risk experiment,” said Todd Langston, a company spokesman.
Other companies are experimenting as well. Gap gives away an app called StyleMixer app. Pizza Hut has a create-a-pizza app. Redfin, the online real estate agents, puts the Multiple Listing Service database in an app.
In fact, so many are doing apps that they are driving the cost of hiring a developer to build a simple app from $5,000 eight months ago to about $40,000 or more today.
Behind the land rush to apps is a belief that they may be some of the cleverest advertising devised. They are, after all, advertisements that people voluntarily choose to watch and share with friends. Some are even consulted in store aisles when customers decide what to buy. “Apps have a huge advantage,” said Carl Howe, a mobile market analyst for the Yankee Group. “You had to take a step to get it; you are already half sold.”
Saturday, October 3, 2009
Everyone gets paid on commission
From Seth Godin's Blog: The Washington Post recently laid off a columnist because his blog posts didn't get enough web traffic.
Of course, in the old days, the newspaper had no real way to tell which columns got read and which ones didn't. So journalists were lulled into the sense that it didn't really matter. The Times quotes Jay Rosen, a journalism professor at NYU, “It’s an unusual public rationale for serious newspaper people, that’s for sure.”
Wrong tense. It's not going to be unusual for long.
In fact, in a digital world where everything can be measured, we all work on commission. And why not? If you do great work and it works, you should get rewarded. And if you don't, it's hard to see why a rational organization would keep you on.
You don't have to like the coming era of hyper-measurement, but that doesn't mean it's not here.
Of course, in the old days, the newspaper had no real way to tell which columns got read and which ones didn't. So journalists were lulled into the sense that it didn't really matter. The Times quotes Jay Rosen, a journalism professor at NYU, “It’s an unusual public rationale for serious newspaper people, that’s for sure.”
Wrong tense. It's not going to be unusual for long.
In fact, in a digital world where everything can be measured, we all work on commission. And why not? If you do great work and it works, you should get rewarded. And if you don't, it's hard to see why a rational organization would keep you on.
You don't have to like the coming era of hyper-measurement, but that doesn't mean it's not here.
Top 10 countries on Facebook, as measured by users:
1. United States
84,104,460
2. United Kingdom
19,801,120
3. Turkey
13,020,000
4. Canada
12,367,320
5. France
12,005,320
6. Italy
11,174,000
7. Indonesia
8,932,160
8. Australia
6,481,900
9. Spain
6,443,940
10. Colombia
6,109,400
via http://www.churchofcustomer.com/
84,104,460
2. United Kingdom
19,801,120
3. Turkey
13,020,000
4. Canada
12,367,320
5. France
12,005,320
6. Italy
11,174,000
7. Indonesia
8,932,160
8. Australia
6,481,900
9. Spain
6,443,940
10. Colombia
6,109,400
via http://www.churchofcustomer.com/
A Banner Year for Chinese IPOs
WSJ’s Deal Journal blog reports: While there has been a burst of U.S. companies coming to market for the first time in recent weeks, 2009 is clearly the year of the Chinese.
Look no further than the rankings of investment banks by the dollar value of IPOs shepherded to market. Two Chinese banks–China International Capital Corp. and Citic Securities–sit atop the global heap at No. 1 and No. 2. It is the first time Chinese banks have broken into the Top 5 of global IPO book runners since Dealogic began tracking public offerings in 1995. Three quarters into this year, the Chinese firms are blowing away historical powerhouses Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs Group and J.P. Morgan Chase, now sitting at Nos. 3 , 4 and 5, respectively. Another other Chinese bank, Orient Securities Co., is sitting at No. 8.
Behind the Chinese banks’ banner year is the fact that Chinese companies have been more active in tapping the new-issues market than the financial-crisis chastened companies from the rest of the world. There have been 75 Chinese companies that have gone public in 2009, three times as many as the IPOs completed by U.S. companies, according to Dealogic. China’s IPO volume accounts for half of all global IPOs this year.
Look no further than the rankings of investment banks by the dollar value of IPOs shepherded to market. Two Chinese banks–China International Capital Corp. and Citic Securities–sit atop the global heap at No. 1 and No. 2. It is the first time Chinese banks have broken into the Top 5 of global IPO book runners since Dealogic began tracking public offerings in 1995. Three quarters into this year, the Chinese firms are blowing away historical powerhouses Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs Group and J.P. Morgan Chase, now sitting at Nos. 3 , 4 and 5, respectively. Another other Chinese bank, Orient Securities Co., is sitting at No. 8.
Behind the Chinese banks’ banner year is the fact that Chinese companies have been more active in tapping the new-issues market than the financial-crisis chastened companies from the rest of the world. There have been 75 Chinese companies that have gone public in 2009, three times as many as the IPOs completed by U.S. companies, according to Dealogic. China’s IPO volume accounts for half of all global IPOs this year.
Friday, October 2, 2009
MyBO.co.uk: MyConservatives.com goes live
Dominic Campbell of PDF reports: “MyConservatives is a first in UK politics, and probably the most advanced party political campaigning network of its kind outside of America. Although the General Election is still likely to be months away, the campaign to gear up our supporters and give them simple-to-use tools to make campaigning easier is already underway and MyConservatives represents a big part of that” - David Cameron, Leader of the Conservative Party
The Conservative Party will launch their very own take on My.BarackObama.com (or MyBo for short) later today - MyConservatives.com. Timed to be released ahead of next week’s Conservative Party Conference in Manchester, ‘MyCon’ (or even #MyCon, as it's bound to become known on Twitter) provides a very British take on Barack Obama’s revolutionary approach to online campaigning and organising.
Developed in conjunction with global digital media agency LBI, the Conservative Party will no doubt be hoping the site can achieve the same profile and uptake as its American counterpart, fêted as one of the driving forces behind Barack Obama’s historic win. Equally LBI will no doubt be looking to reach the legendary status of Blue State Digital, the people behind MyBO, in the new media world.
Rishi Saha (Head of New Media at the Conservative Party and speaker at next month’s PDF Europe event in Barcelona) stresses that while drawing on many of the core features of Blue State Digital’s MyBO platform, it has very much been developed with a UK audience in mind.
The Conservative Party will launch their very own take on My.BarackObama.com (or MyBo for short) later today - MyConservatives.com. Timed to be released ahead of next week’s Conservative Party Conference in Manchester, ‘MyCon’ (or even #MyCon, as it's bound to become known on Twitter) provides a very British take on Barack Obama’s revolutionary approach to online campaigning and organising.
Developed in conjunction with global digital media agency LBI, the Conservative Party will no doubt be hoping the site can achieve the same profile and uptake as its American counterpart, fêted as one of the driving forces behind Barack Obama’s historic win. Equally LBI will no doubt be looking to reach the legendary status of Blue State Digital, the people behind MyBO, in the new media world.
Rishi Saha (Head of New Media at the Conservative Party and speaker at next month’s PDF Europe event in Barcelona) stresses that while drawing on many of the core features of Blue State Digital’s MyBO platform, it has very much been developed with a UK audience in mind.
In NBC Universal Bid, Comcast Seeks an Empire
NYT reports: If the terms of an intricate deal can be worked out, Comcast, already the biggest owner of cable systems in the country, could hold the most significant collection of cable television assets in the world, including popular and profitable channels like USA, Bravo, CNBC, and MSNBC.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)