Paris Blog » network

HE-Feed Module Development News: Facebook Will Soon Meet Mustang-Look "in the … – MarketWatch (press release)

Fri, 23 Apr 2010 12:36:21 +0000

HE-Feed Module Development News: Facebook Will Soon Meet Mustang-Look "in the ... MarketWatch (press release) ... requested by our clients, we started with them, but obviously HE-Feed will accommodate in the future many other network feeds like Twitter and LinkedIn . ... and more

A Battle for Control of Your Online Data – NewsFactor Network

BlogPostman — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:11:59 +0000

A Battle for Control of Your Online Data NewsFactor Network "Facebook, MySpace and LinkedIn limit the rights of users, but leave themselves plenty of leeway for handing data over to third parties," it reported. ... and more

Are you happy with Twitter’s new direction?

Thu, 15 Apr 2010 15:09:33 +0000

There’s no doubt about it: Twitter is growing up. After a year of explosive growth paired with a total lack of strategy, the news coming out of Chirp seems to suggest that the micro-blogging platform wants to step its game. As we note in the lead story of SmartBrief on Social Media , the company has sketched out its future in more concrete terms than ever before. Metadata for tweets, @anywhere functionality and better location-aware features made headlines this week — but those announcements all felt anti-climatic to me. These are things Twitter should have been doing all along — in most cases, they’re things other social networks already do. The announcement that it was going to provide more robust access to user data, however, got my attention. Twitter’s simplicity makes it a powerful tool for research. It could tell us so much about ourselves and about how we interact with each other. The Library of Congress is acquiring Twitter’s archives for exactly that reason. Normally, social-media research makes me nervous, but I think that because Twitter is a broadcast tool, it makes a better candidate for academic work than most networks. Twitter is meant to be public, meant to be shared in a way that other networks just aren’t. It’s coming as close to a public record of what the world is talking about as we’re ever likely to see — and I think Twitter is smart to capitalize on that. But what do you think? Are you happy with the announcements coming out of Chirp? What initiative are you most excited about? Are you worried about Twitter being turned into a research engine? What other directions would you like to see the network explore? Image credit, M. Dykstra , via Shutter Stock

Go here to read the rest:
Are you happy with Twitter’s new direction?

Will Twitter’s ad model be good for businesses?

BlogPostman — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 15:04:25 +0000

Twitter is expected to announce its advertising model today. The site will begin running ads known as “Promoted Tweets” in Twitter searches for keywords. Eventually, the ads may also appear in users’ Twitter streams. These ads will be labeled as such, but unlike regular tweets, they will not move down a user’s feed over time. The company says it will measure user engagement to try to make sure the ads are relevant to the users. That’s all well and good — I hope Twitter is able to use the model to support the network we’ve all come to know and love. The question is: Will these “Promoted Tweets” prove to be a worthwhile investment for advertisers? I’m not privy to what the network plans to charge for these ads — but I think it’s a safe assumption that the total cost in money and time of running an ad on Twitter will be greater than the cost of just having a Twitter account and using it to promote your brand. And I suspect that having a static ad — the Twitter equivalent of a banner ad — may not be as effective as some companies may hope. I think it’s harder to get a consumer to engage and connect with a paid advertisement. Will people respond to these ads? Will they want to connect with the company to learn more? Will they re-tweet the ads? I’m not saying there’s no way that Twitter ads can ever have a positive ROI. But I am skeptical. I worry that companies will look at these ads as social-media billboards, instead of additional opportunities to engage. I suspect the companies that fare best under the new system will be the ones that best understand how to use social tools to reach out to the fans. What do you think of Twitter’s advertising system? Will “Promoted Tweets” prove to be a better investment for businesses than the Twitter tactics we’ve seen to date? Does using paid media hurt a company’s ability to generate earned media? Image credit, kentoh , via Shutterstock

Visit link:
Will Twitter’s ad model be good for businesses?

Are acquisitions good for Twitter?

BlogPostman — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 13:39:30 +0000

When a business has a problem, it has two avenues for solving it. It can either build its own solution or it can buy one from someone else. Many young companies opt to build their own solutions, since capital is in short supply. Twitter is different. Capital hasn’t been a problem during its four years of operation, but the network is plagued with more shortcomings than the company could hope to address on its own. Twitter could have made some tough calls about where to innovate and where to fall behind. Instead, it took a third path, allowing developers to create solutions in exchange for a chance to piggyback onto the network’s popularity. I’ve argued before that Twitter can’t go on being a piecemeal collection of apps — but with its acquisition of Atebits — the lead story in today’s SmartBrief on Social Media — a new question arises. Should Twitter build its own solutions or buy the developers that have helped keep the network relevant? At first blush, the better move might be to freeze out the developers and create a robust platform in-house. Twitter is all grown up now, right? They’re going to announce a revenue model, and soon they’ll be raking in the cash. The temptation has to be there to scorn their developers and create in-house versions of all the best apps. I might love that as a consumer, but I think it’d be a mistake for Twitter in the long run. Twitter’s app community is always going to be more robust and innovative than Twitter on its own could ever be. Rather than trying to compete with its greatest asset, the network needs to make deals with the best developers, possibly even making more acquisitions, so that the network continues to evolve. I think Twitter has come too far with its community to turn its back on them now. Will buying app developers make Twitter a stronger network? Would Twitter be better off designing its own solutions in-house, rather than partnering with developers? Which solution is more likely to drive innovation? Image credit, bioraven , via Shutterstock

See the rest here:
Are acquisitions good for Twitter?

Mad Men Yourself: The beauty of putting fans to work

Thu, 08 Apr 2010 13:40:44 +0000

At Monday’s IAB Social Media Marketplace , Ian Schafer , CEO of Deep Focus , offered a case study of the work his firm has done to promote the AMC hit series Mad Men . In so doing, he pointed to a key ingredient to some of the most successful social media campaigns: putting your fans to work on your brand’s behalf. Schafer’s presentation, a case study on the massively successful Mad Men Yourself social marketing campaign, captivated the brand and agency folks in the room — what more appropriate audience, really? Deep Focus worked with AMC to create a site where fans could create an avatar of themselves as part of the award-winning drama. (That’s my avatar to your right!) The challenge : AMC came to Deep Focus to devise a plan to engage the Mad Men audience in advance of the premiere of the third season. The goal: Increase the premiere’s viewership from 2 to 3 million people. The result? 1.3 million new viewers tuned in for season three’s premiere. In fact, after only one week of the campaign there was a critical mass of hits on the site. 600,000 unique avatars were created leading up to the start of season three. Method to the madness: Deep Focus and AMC did the math. They figured out how many site visitors they would need to get their desired level of sharing. They understood that customers are media channels too. The campaign was a riff on an idea that came from one fan, freelance illustrator Dyna Moe , who was “MadMenningHerself” already on her personal blog. They hired her to do all the artwork on the avatar site. “Social Media is inherently narcissistic,” said Schafer. “People love to create versions of themselves.” They had confidence that they could turn this echo chamber inside out. Takeaways for all marketers : “Know your audience, almost in the biblical sense,” advised Schafer. Understand who they are, what they do, what media they like and their hobbies. Reverse engineer success. Understand how many good users you need to spread the word and create a successful social campaign based upon your knowledge of your audience, what the ideal user looks like. Make it easy for your best users to bring others into the fold. The Mad Men Yourself campaign has in fact been so successful that it is still running, and Schafer said they plan to use it as part of the campaign to promote season four as well. I guarantee I wasn’t the only person in the room who Mad Menned themselves after the presentation and then told my network about it!

Read the original here:
Mad Men Yourself: The beauty of putting fans to work

ThePort Network Announces Blerts – PR Web (press release)

BlogPostman — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 07:11:14 +0000

ThePort Network Announces Blerts PR Web (press release) ... their own group through public social networking sites such as Facebook and LinkedIn ,” stated Suzanne Carawan, Vice President of Marketing and Strategy. ...

Read the original post:
ThePort Network Announces Blerts - PR Web (press release)

How should brands handle unofficial communities?

Mon, 05 Apr 2010 14:10:33 +0000

Facebook continues to tweak the way that brands and consumers interact on the network, replacing unofficial fan pages with “community pages,” as noted in the lead story of today’s SmartBrief on Social Media . Facebook officials say the change is meant to support the fans while preserving the official status of branded pages. Is this a knee-jerk reaction to the freewheeling nature of social media? Or is it smart brand management? My take on it is that your official Web presence should never be in competition with your fans. If it isn’t obvious which page really speaks for your brand, realize you have a choice. You can act like Ford and try to punish your fans for supporting you too effectively — or you can do what Coca-Cola did last year and try to bring your fans into the fold . Having passionate fans is a gift; treat them as such. What about those unofficial pages that are only tangential to your brand? I’m not convinced they dilute a brand’s image — in most cases. It would be one thing if the page were patently offensive or purported to speak for your company in an official way, but most of these pages are just harmless fun. They’re not meant to be replacements for your official presence — and it wouldn’t surprise me if they often attracted users who would be reluctant to follow your brand directly. The new community pages don’t look like they’ll do away with this kind of harmless fun; rather, they’ll enhance the distinction between the official and the unofficial. That’s all well and good, but I think brands would be remiss to try too hard to round all their fans up into a single community. The ability to support a range of voices is a strength of social platforms, not a weakness. Are you in favor of the shift toward community pages on Facebook? How do you handle your unofficial fan presence? Do unofficial pages have a hidden downside I’m not seeing? Image credit, Vibrant Image Studio , via Shutterstock

Go here to read the rest:
How should brands handle unofficial communities?

Do you “like” the changes to Facebook’s fan pages?

Wed, 31 Mar 2010 14:33:43 +0000

The top story in today’s SmartBrief on Social Media is the news that Facebook is making a subtle shift to the way users and brands interact on the network: Instead of becoming “a fan” of something, you will now just say that you “like” it. As Erik Sass notes , the change is significant because it erodes the distinction between brands and individuals on the network. The change makes a lot of sense for Facebook — the network wants users to engage with brands more, so that it can become more profitable. But it is also a really great example of a key social-media principle at work: Allowing brands and customers to interact on a more informal level. Say I like a particular kind of soda. Am I really a fan of the company that makes it? I don’t know if I’m ready for that level of endorsement. I’m kind of a commitment-phobe where companies are concerned. But yeah, I’ll admit to liking a product. For people like me, this shift makes interacting with brands feel like a more natural act. By breaking down barriers, the network is encouraging these kinds of tacit connections. And once a company establishes that weak tie, it can then work to win the customer over big time. What’s your reaction to Facebook’s change? Are you more comfortable saying you “like” a product than bestowing it with “fan” status? Do you think brands will see a higher level of engagement because of the shift? Image credit, Morgan Lane Photography , via Shutterstock

View post:
Do you “like” the changes to Facebook’s fan pages?

5 questions for Foursquare

Tue, 30 Mar 2010 13:31:24 +0000

Foursquare’s valuation went “stratospheric” last week — to $80 million. While we wait for the venture capital firms to duke it out investment-wise, I figured I’d tap Foursquare Business Development Director Tristan Walker to get the user side of the story. And, if you can’t get enough of me and Foursquare together, check out the session with Foursquare and Groupon that I’m moderating on May 13 as part of the upcoming Social Media Success Summit. In that conversation, we’ll focus on how to use location-based tools to bring repeat customers to your local business, and we welcome your voice in the mix. The event is fully online , so there are no travel expenses. Foursquare is just over one year old now. How has your growth accelerated over the past few months? Over the past 10 days, we’ve added 120,000 users. That’s 20% growth in 10 days. Month to month, we’re experiencing anywhere from 60% to 70% growth. Do you attribute that growth to product development, the deals you’ve done or the blitz of press exposure you all have received? All of the above. It’s hard to attribute the growth to just one. Over the past few months, we’ve launched Foursquare everywhere , launched our Blackberry app and launched Share to Facebook — all of which have been critical to growth. But our on-air promotions, another great South by Southwest experience and the latest announcement that we’re launching with celebrities all play a role. The exciting thing is that there’s even more in the pipeline, so we don’t see it slowing down. In our upcoming webinar , we’ll touch on how businesses should be leveraging Foursquare — but what would you say makes your service valuable for the end user? Foursquare is part friend-finder, part city guide. We use game mechanics to get people to explore their cities — making us the first people to make city exploration fun. Essentially, we’re in the business of making cities easier to use. How does the user experience get richer as their network grows? Foursquare is about serendipity. Discovering new dishes or meeting friends is key to the Foursquare experience. With a larger network, Foursquare users have greater opportunities for these serendipitous experiences. The badges — some more controversial than others — bring personality to your products. The closer you get to the “mainstream,” is there any pressure to become more vanilla? NO. Foursquare is good at being true to who we are and that is what has made us successful. As we go more mainstream, the opportunity to add more badges (even vanilla ones) exists, but we won’t do away with those distinctive elements that helped us be successful in the first place.

More:
5 questions for Foursquare