Posts Tagged: Editor’s Take


27
Apr 10

Should Facebook be regulated?

Frustration with the constant tweaks to Facebook’s privacy policy is nothing new — but experts say they believe the situation is getting worse because now it’s a challenge to even understand what a Facebook user is agreeing to. When average users get upset about Facebook’s policies, we have limited options. We can show our outrage online, we can send Facebook a strongly worded note or we can opt out of the service. But Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., isn’t an average user, and, as we note in the lead story of today’s SmartBrief on Social Media , he’s begun to call for regulation . Schumer says he wants the network to make it easier for users to understand how their personal information is being used. He’s asked the Federal Trade Commission to look into the issue. Schumer says that if that doesn’t work, he’ll craft legislation to achieve the same end. Does Facebook need to be regulated? Would an FTC rule on disclosing data sharing improve the average Facebook user’s experience? Is legislation the better bet? Image credit, James Steidl , via Shutterstock

3c3b757d57button.gif Should Facebook be regulated?

Excerpt from:
Should Facebook be regulated?


23
Apr 10

What does a lower bar on privacy mean for marketers?

One of my journalism professors once began a lecture on the unreliability of online sources by showing everyone a famous “New Yorker” cartoon — at that point already nearly 10 years old — of a dog using a computer and saying, “On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog.” Today, we not only know it’s a dog, but we also know his name and his breed. Soon, we’ll know what kinds of tricks he can do and how many fleas he has. We can bemoan the death of online anonymity. We can rail against the services that constantly threaten to expose data we once believed to be safe. We can look for ways to protect the privacy we’ve got left — or even drop out of the scene entirely. But we can never go back to those early days of the Web when we were all strangers and nothing could be verified. The masquerade is over. Even as some of us (me included) shift nervously in our chairs at the thought of someone sniffing about in our online detritus, others are overjoyed — especially younger users for whom sharing so much information is more natural. The New York Times profiles the rise of several newer services that allow users to share more information than ever before, including Dopplr and Blippy . These sites raise some interesting questions for users, but also for businesses. At first, it might seem like these services make a marketer’s job much easier, but I think that as these kinds of sites catch on, they’re going to require strategies that are profoundly different from the ones that worked on traditional social platforms. On Facebook and its ilk, companies are fighting for users’ attention, but also for their trust, as they try to create a relationship with fans. If a user is already giving everything about themselves away, then disclosing information no longer creates a lasting bond. Marketers are going to have to think of ways to establish relationships that don’t center on this traditional transaction. It may be tempting to say that once you have the data, you don’t need the relationship with the customer — but that’s selling the power of social media short. Instead, marketers will have to craft strategies that don’t center on cementing a relationship with the exchange of information. Should marketers encourage customers to display their purchases online? What does engagement mean in this context? How will marketers need to rethink their strategies to account for these kinds of sites? Image credit, iQoncept , via Shutterstock

3c3b757d57button.gif What does a lower bar on privacy mean for marketers?

See the article here:
What does a lower bar on privacy mean for marketers?


22
Apr 10

Is the new Facebook a boon or a threat?

The Facebook overhaul announced at F8 yesterday is easily the most significant social-media development of 2010  — and it’ll be a tough act to follow for anyone to follow this year. Like all great shifts, it’s impossible to say what these changes will mean. Are we looking at a shiny new dawn of the social Web ? Or is this the biggest invasion of privacy this side of a George Orwell novel? A boon for marketers everywhere? A naked grab for power ? Talking informally with friends yesterday about the changes, I was struck by how divided many people were. Some people were salivating about how the changes would enhance their businesses — and then they’d turn right around and fret about what would happen to all their personal data. I found myself feeling the same way — profoundly torn between the promises and the perils of that much data. The only thing I can be sure of right now is that I’m dying to learn how these changes will unfold each day as I prepare SmartBrief on Social Media . The biggest news of the year may already be out — but the story is just beginning. What about you? Are you more excited or concerned by these announcements? How will you respond to these changes? Personally? Professionally? What will we need to relearn to survive in “a Web where the default is social”? Image credit, Gunnar Pippel , via Shutterstock

3c3b757d57button.gif Is the new Facebook a boon or a threat?

Originally posted here:
Is the new Facebook a boon or a threat?


21
Apr 10

Should companies focus on targeting peer-influencers?

If you’ve been working social media or word-of-mouth marketing for long, it shouldn’t surprise you that 16% of Web users create 80% of brand impressions . WOM marketers have operated under an 80/20 principle for a long time — now  they’ve got the data to back it up . But now that we have this information, what do we do with it? How do we take this information about an influencers’ role in creating brand impressions and turn it into something we can use? I think there are three natural questions that stem from these reports. How do I identify the connectors and mavens who speak to my target audience? By their very nature, influencers want to be found. They tend to be active and visible in their communities. If you’re not sure who you should be talking to, that may be a sign that you need to learn more about your target community. How much of my energy should I put into engaging influencers ? Anyone who has ever tried to win over an influencer knows what a time sink it can be. You can spend hours pitching to one person and come up empty again and again. So, take a diversified approach. Think of your marketing plan the way you would a stock portfolio. You want a mixture of risk and reward levels. Pitching to connectors and mavens is a high-risk, high-reward scenario. Make sure you balance those efforts with campaigns that aren’t all-or-nothing. How do I engage them? This is the hardest part — and getting an influencer’s attention will only get more difficult as more marketers target them. There are plenty of easy ways to rise above the din — but one of the best may be to start early. Don’t aim for the biggest fish — aim for the little fish that’s growing fastest. If you can form a relationship with someone before everyone wants his or her attention, you’ve got a much better chance of making an impact. Will you change your marketing strategy in light of this information? How should marketers use this new data? What companies do an especially fine job of reaching out to influencers? Image credit, iofoto , Shutterstock

3c3b757d57button.gif Should companies focus on targeting peer influencers?

Follow this link:
Should companies focus on targeting peer-influencers?


20
Apr 10

Does Foursquare need to change to be successful?

We love looking for the Next Big Thing. Social-media enthusiasts of all stripes love scanning the Web for hints of what’s to come — for the next social technology that will take us all by storm. A lot of social pundits are pumped up about the potential of location-based networks such as Foursquare — yet as Caroline McCarthy points out in the lead story from today’s SmartBrief on Social Media , these networks have some pretty significant limitations . I think McCarthy is dead-on in her analysis of the hurdles these networks have to overcome if they want to be the Next Big Thing. But what if they don’t want to be Big? What if they just want to be What’s Next? Not every burger shack needs to be the next McDonald’s to be considered successful. Not every retailer needs to be Wal-Mart. Not every software developer needs to be Microsoft. Yet when it comes to the social Web, there’s a sense that anything short of total ubiquity is a kind of failing. We’ve seen so many giants born in the last 10 years that we’re starting to forget how abnormal that really is in the business world. Foursquare doesn’t have to replace Twitter — or anything else — to be a success. It’s playing a different game, one that caters to a naturally smaller audience. It’s not for every person, or every business. And that’s really OK. If it tried to appeal to everyone by becoming more like Facebook or some other network, there’s a good chance it would ruin the utility it already has. Sometimes, having a powerful draw for a specific audience can be the most powerful thing a brand can have. It’s better for the network to develop its user base organically, focusing on better serving the kinds of people it does attract. Niche communities can be prosperous without being everywhere; they can be What’s Next without being Big. What do you think? Do location-based networks need to become more mainstream to be successful? Do social networks need to be large to be important? Are location-based networks overrated? Image credit, Eric Isselée , via Shutterstock

3c3b757d57button.gif Does Foursquare need to change to be successful?

Continue reading here:
Does Foursquare need to change to be successful?