Thornton May has a wonderful insight into how the generations view technology, he says each generation has a different relationship to technology describing it as

“a sixty year old uses a pc; a forty year old needs a pc, always; a twenty year old needs connectivity, always; and to those under twenty an Xbox is technology“

What struck me is how we need to realise that technology itself is not the key part to understanding how the different generations view new technology….it is about how they connect with it, and how they use it in relation to their lives.

A piece of advice for anyone wanting to participate in the social media world. Although it may be tempting to make friends with everyone in the scene, resist, and get out into the world, not just the industry, and talk to people in complimentary and completely different fields.

I know from experience that the social media scene will fall into distinct echo chambers, no matter what happens, and then what happens is we all talk to each other, about the same things. Agreeing, disagreeing, repeating, saying the same thing but using different words. It becomes one big circle of noise.

The only way to break out of this, that I’ve personally seen, is to engage in other friendships, hang out with different groups of people, go to unrelated conferences and make sure that when you do show up to an event, that you make an impact with people you see there. Do your absolute best to diversify your world, your events, your experience, and ensure that everything you do, everywhere you go, you bring value to the conversation.

This happens everywhere, and frankly, in every industry. And the inevitable begins to happen - the comparisons to high school begin, and the next thing you know, people are badmouthing each other, having public fights and creating unnecessary drama where none needs to be. It becomes, in the immortal words of a good friend, “all kinds of f’d up.”

Pick your events to attend that occur in the social media world. Here in Vancouver, there are a million and one events, all with, more or less the same people. Judge the events you want to attend not by who will be there - that’s generally a given, and you’ll run into that person another time, guaranteed. Judge them by who is speaking, what the topic is and when and where it will take place. If you’ve got to go far out of your way for an event that is only mildly interesting, your heart won’t be in it and you won’t want to be there.

I was told this weekend that a friend in the scene respected me because I exist outside of the Vancouver Echo Chamber (ok, the phrase he used was a little more graphic than that, but this is a family friendly website for the most part), and the reason I manage to do so is because I’m careful about where I go, when I go and what I do. I show up for certain events, skip others and make sure that I’ve got other things going on outside of the standard social media circle.

Just like in a marriage, you’ve got to have outside interests to have other things to talk about and make things interesting, in an industry like social media, you’ve got to do the same. Otherwise, you’re just talking to yourself, over and over again.

[image source: sxc.hu]

I can admit it - I geek out over statistics. I pour over my Google Analytics reports, and I ogle Omniture. I also get a little gooshy over seeing compete.com come out with statistics for social networks as a whole… oh, and my hands down guilty pleasure has got to be all of those Twitter statistics measurement APIs floating about like Twitter Grader and Twinfluence. I can’t help it, deep down, I am a dork.

Compete.com recently released their January 2009 statistics for traffic ranks to the various social networks.

I find this endlessly fascinating. Look at Twitter’s skyrocketing hurtle from 22nd place to Top 3. I’m still, and always, surprised that Classmates.com and MyYearBook.com are in 7th and 8th places respectively - I’d always used FaceBook for random connections with classmates I wasn’t friends with then really, and am not now either.

The one thing that is missing from this data, and the thing that would make it of more use is where this traffic is coming from. While these are global sites, the stats only pull from US browser information, and so sites like Orkut and Bebo, whose users are primarily come from continents other than North America, get the short end of the stick with these numbers. 

Like Caroline McCarthy from CNet said, "Still, statistics are like tequila shots. Always take ‘em with a few grains of salt and a slice of lime, and be warned that they may give you headaches." [source] That said, and while I agree with Caroline 100%, I do still love me some tequila.

[image source: Compete]

Oh, this whole world of social media and social networks and network fatigue is ticking over so very quickly when you’ve been called an influential, anything with -rati at the end of it (digerati, twitterati…), or as I was recently called, Twitistoric.  The cycle of interest, adoption, mastering, abandoning is happening at a mind numbing pace.

Because of that rapid pace, some people are claiming that the Death of the Influentials will happen sooner than later. Some digerati (Guy Kawasaki, Robert Scoble to name a few) are claiming that the best way to create an internet strategy is to obtain massive reach.  The Online Media Metrics Newsletter suggests that Guy’s argument is that the internet and social media have eliminated or at least reduced any semblance of information dissemination hierarchy.

Basically, what they’re suggesting is that if you stretch your reach as far and as fast as you can, through as many network nodes as possible, you’ve got a chance to reach more prospective customers and ideally, increase your results.

My problem with that is my own network, which is just now beginning to reap benefits, has taken me almost exactly a year to build. Social media, reach, influence and anything else you can measure is not going to be a silver bullet of any sort of marketing campaign you could begin. Reach and influence aren’t something you can buy off a shelf. They’re something you need to build, nurture and encourage.

After reading Pat LaPointe’s article, I’m not clear on whether or not he’s saying that brands shouldn’t bother focusing on the Influentials because they’re not a magic bullet (we’re not!), or if he’s suggesting that the right influentials need to be targeted still…

Whatever he’s saying, it’s important to remember that reaching the influentials is still important, because they can disseminate your message further and sometimes deeper, depending on how many conversations they can begin, but those influentials are still not the be all and end all. And they never will be.

Tags: Influential, Twitterati, Influentials. Guy Kawasaki, Robert Scoble, Silver Bullet Marketing

Every once in a while, I realize that I’ve got a compendium of sites that I look at daily, sometimes to find topics for BuzzNetworker, sometimes just to learn things, but that I don’t always share with you guys. So today, to give you something to read for the weekend while I’m up in Whistler for Word Camp, I’m going to give you a few of my favourite sites.

In no particular order, here’s five of my regulars.

WebWare - Cool Web Apps for Everyone - One of the reasons that I really like this site is because it’s comprehensive coverage of some cool tricks to either speed up your surfing, tweak your experience etc.

Muhammad Saleem - Dude has a brilliant mind. Some of the things that he comes up with are simply awesome, and anyone who wants to learn about social media from one of the stars of the game, go check out Mu writes.

Eyecube - Rick provides thoughtful content, and talks about seriously interesting things. What more do you want?

Dan Zarella - A master of metrics. If you’re looking for anything related to social media metrics at all, Dan’s your guy, and I love him. He’s a social & viral marketing scientist… and that’s really quite brilliant I think.

Chris Brogan - No list of social media sites would be complete without Chris. Such a nice guy and so smart! Chris takes his time to explain things and provides thoughtful content, interesting insights and food for thought.

These are just a few of the sites I follow … What are some of your “must-reads?

[image sources: Muhammad Saleem by CC: TopRankOnlineMarketing and Chris Brogan by CC: Phil Campbell]

Tags: Blogs, Reading list, recommendations, social media blogs

Buzznetworker has had the privilege of being the top choice for many guest posts, and the quality of the posts we get is astounding. This one, by Dave Macaulay of Aplus.net is certainly no exception.  Dave as been thinking a lot about the ‘Blogosphere’ and has some great insight as to where we’ve been in the past few years and where we’re headed.

***

Acme Printing has one. The local historic preservation society has one, too. So does your Aunt Clara. Chances are that at one time or another you’ve read someone’s blog, even regularly. Or maybe you have your own.

There are political blogs, business blogs, university and high school blogs, blogs about just one thing: woodworking or coin collecting or 1950s bebop. Now there are even photoblogs, sketchblogs and blogs comprised solely of music (MP3 blog), video (vlogs) and other multimedia, in addition to the traditional text-based blogs.

How did we get here, arriving in Web 2.0 land? The “blogosphere” has become an Internet fixture – although technology watchers like Gartner predicted that blogging would peak in 2007 as the novelty of this as a publishing format gradually wears off. Still, Technorati’s “State of the Blogosphere / 2008” may suggest otherwise: in 2007 there were 94.1 million U.S. blog readers and 22.6 million U.S. bloggers (eMarketer, May 2008); while 184 million people worldwide have started a blog and 346 million read them – 77% of active Internet users (Universal McCann, March 2008).

It’s remarkable to think that the concept of a blog, or “Webblog,” dates back only a few years to the early/mid 1990s. Many credit Swarthmore student Justin Hall with creating the very first blog, Links.net. Other early bloggers followed, experimenting with online diaries, journals and Web-based commentary that linked to other articles. Commercial blogging platforms launched with Open Diary in 1998 and LiveJournal in March 1999 and then Blogger’s free blog-creation service later that same year. Blogging went mobile with the availability of new apps in 2003, and by the end of 2004, Merriam-Webster dictionary declared “blog” as its “Word of the Year.” And ever since, blogs have been gaining notice – and notoriety – for their role in breaking news and entertainment stories.

So where’s blogging headed? The future is here…it’s mostly about making what we have now – even better:

• Better design, more sophisticated blogging platforms: new widgets, plug-ins, custom CSS and a wide array of SEO tools – thanks to TypePad and WordPress and the other major blogging services
• Mainstream marketing/brand building channels for business, higher education and the non-profit world.
• More ad revenue – and not just for the big guys: Google AdSenseAdify and other ad networks are generating some serious ad revenue for the A-listers, and they’re interested in the smaller and mid-sized bloggers too
• “Tweet”, and then some: Micro-blogging – short text (140 characters or less) and/or multimedia posts – is here to stay. TwitterPlurk continue to transform the world of social blogging. So do lifestreaming aggregators like FriendFeed and Plaxo Pulse that allow people to continuously share their daily activities and discoveries online

New and different kinds of blogs and blog hybrids will start to appear as well:

• More collaborative, multi-author blogs
• Cross-platform “tumblelogs” like Tumblr will bridge the gap between long form content and micro-sharing
• Blog mashups that combine wikis and electronic mailing lists with other content-creating virtual communities online

At the same time, we’ll return to long-form blogging in a big way – something that’s already happening. The best new blogs are still personal and diary like, but very, very focused: What I Saw Riding My Bike Around about post-Katrina New Orleans and Art Spark Theatreby an illustrator in Northern California who likes to discover unexpected connections. Or they delve deeply in a special topic: I Love Typography and Film Noir

Blogs continue to be democratic, diverse, dynamic experiments in self-expression that have quickly become an integral part of our lives. Even the lines between blogs and mainstream media are beginning to blur. Bloggers increasingly influence political races. They drive conversations that can make, or break, brands. They offer informed insights on topics we care deeply about – and often can’t get elsewhere.

We’ll continue to want the first word, the inside scoop, the final say. We’ll also network more. We’ll use video, audio and chat in ways yet imagined. And someday soon, your blog will be the first thing you read in the morning, every morning, over your cup of coffee. For many, it already is.

Couple of months ago, Geoff Livingston, among many others, including me, waxed philosophically about Personal Brand vs Reputation. There was quite the debate both on Geoff’s site and here. 

I’ve struggled with my own business brand for years, even when I had a strong brand with my PR business. I have always had a billion projects on the go, and they don’t all fit under the umbrella of the PR firm. Some of them downright seem contridictory.

What I ended up doing, was technically, creating a brand for “Colleen Coplick” rather than anything else. I’ve got a site, sure, but much like Rebecca is known as Miss604, I am working on connecting Colleen with MissManifesto, (no, that wasn’t planned, and I just noticed the similarity now!)  which acts as my umbrella brand for all of my projects. There’s a place for all of it under there. 

But then, based on my defintion of personal brand, does that mean I’ve created a brand out of Colleen Coplick, or have I developed my reputation?  

Rick over at EyeCube says that “Brand You” is dead and what’s more important is the brand you build, rather than the brand you are. 

In today’s hyper-connected, no-barrier-to-entry, Consumer-generated-content world it’s hard to escape the cult of Personal Branding. Everyone has a website, blog, Twitter account and Facebook page and they aren’t afraid to use them. But it seems to me we’ve reached an inflection point, and what was once smart move now feels self-congratulatory and driven more by ego than producing value.

I think we as marketers, strategists, consultants and social media participants need to re-think what we’re doing and how we’re doing it. [source]

What I’m wondering is, is this any different than what Geoff and I said initially? At least, I know it’s what I had in mind when I wrote that post. 

I think that the bottom line, no matter who says it, be it me, Geoff, Rick, or even the commentors on Rick’s post (Scott Monty’s stood out to me personally as excellent advice) is that no matter what technology does to our lives, or how it advances, when you work to build a brand, whether it’s your name (ergo, yourself) or your company, it’s not enough to just have a persona. You need to build the brand rather than just be a brand. 

It’s not enough to have thousands of Twitter followers (and it shouldn’t be, as many said, about the numbers. It should be about the relationships you build with those followers), an impressive Linked In account, (”oooh! I’m two degrees away from Bill Gates!” Great, but what can that do for you??) or more friends on Facebook than any of your other friends. 

Create something that other people can get interested, involved and immersed in. What is it about you that someone else can get immersed in?  Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but you’re just not that interesting. What you create is.

Find out what’s important to your audience or community. Put them first - show them (don’t tell them) why they need to be paying attention to whatever it is you’re doing, and what’s in it for them. Your brand has got nothing to do with YOU, it’s got to do with the value you provide to others.

This goes for your personal brand, your company’s brand, or even the brand you work for. Find a way to provide value, or you’re just another “rockstar“.

You’ve heard every single social media/web 2.0 expert/pundit/blabbermouth/evangelist repeat it ad naseum:

Companies in this new world must be honest and transparent with their publics or face the wrath of their consumers. 

In this case though, the “wrath” might just be mere annoyance. 

Apple said that the reason they were pulling out of MacWorld is because they were scaling back on conferences. The direct quote from their initial release is: “Apple has been steadily scaling back on trade shows in recent years, including NAB, Macworld New York, Macworld Tokyo and Apple Expo in Paris.” 

Speculation about the ‘real reason’ Apple had pulled out was because of the rumours swirling around CEO Steve Job’s health, and yet today, Jobs sent out an open letter to the Apple Community.

Dear Apple Community,

For the first time in a decade, I’m getting to spend the holiday season with my family, rather than intensely preparing for a Macworld keynote.

Unfortunately, my decision to have Phil deliver the Macworld keynote set off another flurry of rumors about my health, with some even publishing stories of me on my deathbed. [source]

Apple now claims that it was a political decision not to have Jobs to deliver the keynote. All of which means that yet again, Apple isn’t being completely honest and upfront about Jobs’ health. 

What’s up with Steve, how he’s feeling, or why that even matters is of no consequence to me. Apple will be fine, with or without Jobs at the helm.

What’s bugging me about this is that the company couldn’t, or didn’t anticipate their community’s response to the other guy giving the MacWorld Keynote, when it’s always been up to Jobs, and then they pulled out of MacWorld all together after this year? And they didn’t anticipate that this would cause any kerfuffle at all? That the tech reporters, Apple reporters and pundits and the entire fanatical Apple community wouldn’t put all of this together and wonder what was really up?

Apple has built a large, loyal fanbase. They’ve created their own little cult, and have had years and years to get to know this group, to understand how they internalize information and repeat it, and yet, they’re still stumbling, the way they always have, over some pretty basic tenets. 

(image source: Wikimedia Commons)

Recently, I wrote about who owned your online identity, and today, I came across an article about Google et al, and the amount of information they gather as we trip through the internet.

According to Fortune Magazine, “Google & Co. gather a lot of information about you as you surf, including the date and time for your search, your search terms, and your IP address, which is an 11-digit number that identifies your computer and, more important as far as advertisers are concerned, your location.” [source]

At first, I didn’t think much of this. Yeah, ok, so Google (or Yahoo, or whomever) keeps track of my searches - they know that tonight I searched to find out what Singapore-style Fried Vermicelli is and if I thought I might like it. (Turns out, I do!) By the time stamp on my search, they also probably know that I was deciding on dinner options. Does that even matter? 

But then I read about when AOL accidentally released the search information of 650,000 members. AOL Stalker reported the most popular search is User# 672368. In the course of two months, this user searched “curb morning sickness,” “you’re pregnant he doesn’t want the baby,” “baby names,” “abortion clinics charlotte nc,” and “engagement rings” - in that order. Is this relevent? Maybe… maybe not. How many people know each other’s AOL user numbers (or, heck - maybe everyone does, like we used to with ICQ… I’ve never used AOL so I don’t know how it works….). What if, instead of user numbers, that had been an email address? Lots of people know my email address(es), and I wouldn’t really want them to know if I was searching for information about a pregnancy.

Now, granted, this information is only kept for a few months (Yahoo keeps information for 90 days, Google for 9 months (down from 18) and Microsoft, 18 months), but still. It all feels very ‘big brother’ to me, and that’s just kinda uncomfortable.

I suppose all of this isn’t particularly surprising given that we’re in the “Facebook era”. Many people are avid users of a social network or four, where they freely offer their favourite movies, bands, relationship status, location and contact information. Marketers point out this fact when arguing that people actually want to see advertising tailored specifically for them, and hey, maybe they do. Or, maybe this is just advertising’s way of trying to convince us the industry isn’t fading into obscurity?

Image source: Google

2008 has been a hell of a year, hasn’t it?  The economy went to shit, the automakers asked for a bail out and the States got one hell of a new President. For me, 2008 started out very promising, and then quickly went sideways, and kinda stayed that way for the rest of the year. Kinda rollercoastery.

There were a couple of events and phrases that popped up through the year, that I am hoping were a 2008 phenomenon and will get buried under the passage of time, like the rest of the year, including:

“Rockstar” “Guru” and people just starting out in social media calling themselves “experts”. Maybe this was happening in late 2007 too, and lord knows I was one of those who called myself a rockstar at first and then a guru for a while after that.

Here’s the thing:

If you don’t get up on an arena stage, sing or play your guts out, every night, are a household name, have groupies and can’t walk down the street to go grocery shopping without paparazzi following you and selling your picture to every celebrity rag in the USA, you are not a rockstar. Let me say it once more, so it sinks in: YOU ARE NOT A ROCKSTAR.

If you are not a spiritual teacher who has the power and wisdom to erase others spiritual ignorance and help them practice a certain religion as a discipline; if you do not have a following, an ashram, and people do not seek out your assistance to help them find their spiritual path, you are not a Guru. Let me say it once more, so it sinks in: YOU ARE NOT A GURU.

If you have a facebook page and you twitter, but have just started dabbling in the social media scene or even if you’ve been here for a while; if you cannot think strategically enough to get yourself to your destination with maximum efficiency or cannot demonstrate enough ‘thinking-it-through-edness’ to develop and implement an effective plan to increase brand visibility (or if you know what all those words mean, but you can’t explain their true essence to me), you are not a social media expert. Let me say it once more, so it sinks in: YOU ARE NOT A SOCIAL MEDIA EXPERT.

The sheer volume of “new media experts” “web 2.0 experts” and “social media consultants” that have cropped up all over the place, hanging their shingles out, hoping to cash in on the wave of social media is staggering. Every 1 in 3 people who follow me on Twitter these days are “social media consultants” but, they have nothing to back it up. Where’s the honesty and transparency folks? Where’s the truth? Do they even know that’s a tenent? If they do, can they tell you why? If the person you are talking to about your upcoming social media strategy can’t answer that simple question, along with “how long have you been working in the social media scene?”  then run. Do not walk. Do not hire them. RUN.  And quickly.

This wasn’t any more obvious to me than the other day, when Chris Brogan tweeted that if he didn’t have your twitter name top of mind, you might be missing out on work and fifty-eleven billion people all tweeted @ChrisBrogan here’s mine! Here I am!. Great, you know how to Twitter, but can you produce a strategy?

Now, yes, I term myself as a social media strategist, and here’s why: I have more than 8 years of traditional public relations experience - which has taught me a huge amount about how to create effective strategies, how to reach the people, and what the public responds to. I have spent the past two years working with real social media clients, helping them to develop communities, speaking on the topic of social media, and analyzing every single new tool, service, and goofy “measurement” schtick out there. I know the ins and outs of those services and I know why it is that certain brands work better on certain platforms, and best of all, I can tell you why. So yes, I’ve got the phrase “Writer. Social Media Strategist. Loudmouth.” on my business cards. And I am all of those things. I’ve earned the right to call myself that after 8+ years.

Along with the terms that I would banish for 2009 are “Web 2.0″, “blogosphere” and “weblog”. They’re outdated, outmoded and they suck. They are no longer representative of what we do.

Web 2.0 is very 2006/2007, back when it just began. Maybe just 2007. Either way, it’s no longer the next thing. It’s the now thing. You want to differentiate? Fine, use “traditional” or “conventional”. That means that the way we’re doing things now is new. Is different than the traditional.

Blogosphere. Oh, the Blogosphere. A rip-off of “atmosphere” and, sure, I get it, but it’s very 1998. Much like “weblog”. Let it go. It’s not a “sphere”. I have…. (counting)… seven blogs at the moment. Four of which I get paid to write. Plus two of my own and one that is connected to the book I am writing. I’m about to launch an eighth on travel etc. Due to the volume, does that mean that I have my own ‘blogoniverse”? No. It means I have blogs. I write for several blogs. And we’re done, mmk? Thanks.

The other thing that I was very aware of in 2008 that I think should just go away and stoppit entirely, is the public drama/cat fights/bullshit. As one of my local Twitter connections recently put it brilliantly:

Holy Brilliant, and Amen sister!! Thank you for saying what the rest of us are thinking.

There were several public blow outs - both online and face to face, but still in the community that I was either dragged into, a part of, or witnessed, and damn am I tired of them. The social media community is a small one, and any words that are said, shouted or written, can and will be repeated. I am guilty of this myself - as well as guilty of participating in said dramas. I regret it, but 2008 was a year of personal drama for me that spilled out into my public life, what can I say, except “I apologize”?

For my part, I’m taking a break from the world and focusing on my own life for at least January - and that means few social commitments, little online interaction and more introspection and work.  It means letting go of several of the people to whom I threw drama at, who dragged me into drama, and whom I dragged, unwittingly into drama. It means letting go of the drama, of the people who cause it, and concentrating on my own development.

To those who were involved in drama I witnessed or took part in and to those whose dramas I didn’t see, just let it go. Please. It’s dumb. It’s not worth it, and it mars your reputation and brand.

Either way, whether you take my advice or not, I’m out. I don’t want to play anymore, and to that end, I will not rise to the bait, I will not lash out at those who have wronged me, whether real or imagined.

The moral of this post? Drop the drama. Be honest. Do unto others. Most of all, stop the bullshit. I’m over it, and I know others are as well.

Let. It. All. Go.

(image sources: Sam Roberts at the Commodore, by me, on Flickr; Shallomj Screenshot from Twitter)