As Expected, Expectations Are Way Too High On Diaspora

from the you've-been-warned dept

Back in June, we wrote about some concerns we had about the amount of money and attention given to the NYU students who wanted to create Diaspora, a distributed Facebook. We had nothing against the project itself -- a distributed Facebook sounds great, even if other, similar projects have failed. If someone can do it right, that would be fantastic. Instead, the worry is that the combination of massive attention and a ton of money so early would (a) set up ridiculously high expectations while (b) limiting the team in adapting to a changing market. It's not clear if the second part is true, but the first part seems to certainly be coming true. When the team recently released it's extremely rough pre-alpha code, suddenly a bunch of security experts and the press pounced on them for having all sorts of security vulnerabilities.

But, uh, that's what you would expect at this stage of the game. It's pre-alpha for a reason, and they released it by saying that it had lots of security flaws. Now, your standard startup could release this kind of code without a huge spotlight shining on them, and it would give them time to work through the issues. But with so much attention on Diaspora, suddenly the press feels the need to point out every little flaw, even at the stage when such flaws are necessary. Hopefully the Diaspora team doesn't get exasperated by this -- because it could also make them either clam up, or start focusing too much on responding to these trumped up worries at this stage of the game.

Filed Under: expectations, security, social networking
Companies: diaspora, facebook

Juror Didn't Disclose MySpace Friendship With Defendant... Because It Was Just MySpace

from the talk-about-damning-myspace dept

Here's a fun one. An appeals court in West Virginia has granted a new trial to a defendant because one of the jurors failed to disclose that she was a "friend" on MySpace with the defendant and had sent him a message during the trial. The message itself was mostly meaningless ("I can tell ya that God has a plan for you and your life..." etc. and even mentioned "Hey, I don't know you very well"), but the juror never bothered to mention that she knew the defendant at all, let alone well enough to be a MySpace connection. When asked why, she answered:

I knew in my heart that I didn't know him . . . I should have at least said that . . . he was on MySpace, which really [wasn't] important, I didn't think.

Ouch for MySpace. Either way, a new trial has been ordered, and yet again questions revolving around social media in the courtroom need to be tackled in court.

Filed Under: disclosure, friendship, jurors, social networking
Companies: myspace

Should Doctors Google Patients?

from the information-wants-to-be-free dept

We recently had a story about an article in the Journal of Medical Ethics that recommended doctors avoid using social networks entirely, because of potential ethical issues related to patient information. That seems a bit extreme. It seems like there would be ways to use social networks without compromising your ethics. However, a recent article in the LA Times takes this discussion a step further. Beyond discussing social networking usage and "friending" between doctors and patients, it wonders if it's okay for doctors to do internet searches on their patients to find out more info about them (or even see if they're lying about stuff). Of course, this seems like a bit of a flip side to the typical complaint from some doctors who don't like that patients are searching for information online themselves, though usually more for self-diagnosis. The article suggests that it really depends on the doctor, the patient and the situation, but it seems that many doctors are afraid to search for info about their patients.

Filed Under: doctors, patients, search, social networking

Google, Facebook Sued Because Without Some Random Patent No One Would Ever Access A Social Network From A Mobile Phone

from the this-dept.-is-patented dept

Wireless Ink was a company that I remember getting some buzz back in the 2005/2006 timeframe... and then they dropped completely off my radar. Honestly, I had thought they had gone out of business. So I was a bit surprised to see them suddenly pop back up with a patent (of course) and a lawsuit against both Google and Facebook, claiming infringement because both companies allow users to access social networking tools via a mobile phone. Seriously. Does anyone honestly (honestly, really) think that without this patent, no one would have ever figured out how to let people access a social network via a mobile phone? The patent itself (7,599,983) was filed in 2004, but was granted at the end of last year. Wireless Ink (also known as Wink) is claiming that since the patent was filed in 2004, both companies must have known about it, which seems like an odd argument considering how many patents were filed since 2004. Once again, it's hard to see this lawsuit as anything other than an attempt to shakedown more successful companies.

Filed Under: mobile, patents, social networking
Companies: facebook, google, wink, wireless ink

Labels Saying They Don't Want To Deal With Artists Who Won't Make The Effort To Connect

from the get-busy-connecting dept

When we talk about why content creators need to connect with fans, we always have naysayers pop up to say that this is a waste of their time, and content creators should just focus on making content -- and that if they have to use Facebook or Twitter, it's a huge time waster. Back in December, we discussed how this was misleading, quoting some artists who were saying that (1) it's not that hard and (2) not doing so is "selling yourself short," because you're not building up your audience.

It looks like record labels are beginning to recognize this, as apparently some labels have started turning down musicians who say they're not interested in using social media to help build their audience. While you can understand why some artists might not like using the tools, what they're basically telling the label is that they're going to be a deadweight on the marketing side, and won't help out at all. That makes the job of the record labels much more difficult, and makes that musician much more of a liability.

Of course, some of the problem is that some musicians seem to think that using social media means they have to "reveal everything" or "put themselves out there." Nothing is further from the truth. Certainly, some musicians do that -- but plenty have found a much more reserved way to use the tools. They don't have to tweet every day or share intimate details. They can still be authentic, without going overboard. I follow a band on Twitter that probably only tweets one message every other week or so, and that's plenty for that particular band. But it does keep me connected to them, and what they're up to generally.

Filed Under: connect with fans, social networking

Turns Out That People Are Actually Pretty Honest About Themselves Online

from the myth-debunked dept

Many people think that when people set up their online social networking profiles, they may be prone to... exaggerating a bit. Given that they can control what they say about themselves, many have posited that those profiles really represent an idealized version of themselves. Yet, perhaps that's not true. Jose Luis Campanello points us to a recent study that found that people actually tend to be pretty honest in their social networking profiles. This really doesn't seem all that surprising when you think about it. I would guess that the results might be a bit different if they looked at dating sites, rather than social networking sites. On a social networking site, you're connecting with a lot of people you probably already really know in real life. As such, it makes little sense to present much of an idealized version of yourself, because your friends already know you -- and might even call you out for being fake. Still, as the report notes, there are still some people who believe that the norm is for people to lie about themselves, when the truth is that, in such realms, people really do tend to be pretty honest. And that's a good thing.

Filed Under: honesty, idealism, internet, online, social networking

No, Twitter Use Is Not Costing Companies Billions

from the stop.-now.-please. dept

Not this again. It happens with every new internet fad. Some company trying to sell something (filters, consulting, training, etc.) comes out with some study claiming that the new popular internet thingy is "costing x billions of dollars" because workers are using it for some amount of time per day. All of them work on the same basic principle. Figure out how much time people spend using the service, and multiply it by how much people make per hour, and then voila. Of course, this assumes (incorrectly) that every minute not working is "lost productivity." Of course, if that were true then coffee breaks, lunch breaks, sleep and many other things would also be "lost productivity." But, we all know that's ridiculous and that the truth is those things make people more productive by giving them a break here and there to recharge.

So, please, please, please don't believe the latest ridiculous study coming out of the UK claiming that Twittering employees are costing UK businesses £1.83 billion. It's the same ridiculousness, calculating that the average worker spends about 40 minutes on Twitter, but making no effort to figure out if that actually negatively impacts productivity -- just assuming that it means 40 minutes of "lost productivity." How many times do we need to repeat that time does not equal productivity before these companies stop coming out with such bogus studies?

Filed Under: productivity, social networking, twitter

Gartner Finally Realizes That Social Networking At Work Isn't Evil

from the could-have-found-that-elsewwhere-earlier... dept

It wasn't that long ago that Gartner was spreading FUD about the use of social networking tools at work, saying it didn't think the technology would be beneficial within corporations. It seems that Gartner has a new tune. Just a week or so after we pointed out how silly it was to block social networks at work, Gartner has come out and said the same thing, pointing out that such blocks don't really work, and most people now use such tools for important forms of communication, which would be harmed by IT decisions to cut them off. Of course, some of us have been saying that for years. Good thing companies are paying billions to Gartner for its advice, right?

Filed Under: social networking
Companies: gartner

With Viral Media, It's The People Passing The Links Whose Brand Is At Stake

from the important-to-think-about dept

There's obviously been a big push by companies these days to embrace "viral media" that gets passed around. There's lots of talk about the value of "passed links" or "earned links" within marketing and ad agencies. The idea is that if a friend passes along links to content, that content gets taken a lot more seriously than if it's pushed out there by a brand. But, still, some of these agencies don't quite realize what's at stake. Tim O'Reilly points us to an interesting discussion on this topic by Mike Walsh, where he notes that marketers seem to forget whose brand is at stake when it comes to passing around links. They are, of course, focused on the company who is their client (or employer), but ignore that it's actually the person doing the passing:

Stunning art direction is useless if no one actually watches your ad. In a world of audience networks, people will only forward your content to their friends and followers if it makes them look smarter or cooler by doing so. Their brand, not yours is at stake. You would be surprised how few marketers take that into account and are left wondering when their viral campaigns are socially vaccinated before they get off the ground.

This works in other ways as well. We often write about the fact that advertising is content and content is advertising, such that smart advertising these days is good content. So, we're always interested in awesome examples of this in practice. Yet, we recently received a submission for a video, sent via a marketing agency's IP address, pointing to a cool YouTube video. The video itself was, in fact, cool and has been getting sent around a lot lately. But, the video was actually an ad. At the very end, a brand pops up. I don't mind this at all, because it fits with the recognition that content is advertising. If the marketing agency had sent it in making that point, I might have been interested in posting it. Instead, the marketing agency pretended to be some random guy (hint: we can check your IP address!) who had "just found this totally cool video." It was so transparently fake that it turned me off from the whole campaign (and that particular marketing firm). Passing on links is a reputation play -- and while it can do good for some people, if you're just out there faking it, it can do a lot of harm as well.

Filed Under: brands, earned links, passed links, social networking, viral media

Why Doesn't Amazon Allow Referrals On Passed Links?

from the keep-up-with-the-times dept

A few months ago, we were talking about the growing value of "passed links" or "earned links." These are links that to things that others passed on to you, via email or social networking services like Facebook and Twitter. As more people have been using these services, the value of such links have grown as traffic generators. And yet, some have just realized that Amazon doesn't reward affiliates for using such links. It's not difficult to understand how this came about, but it certainly seems like the type of thing that the company should reconsider. Basically, Amazon's original affiliate program was so that you could send people to Amazon from your own site. In order to become an affiliate your site had to be approved. But if you're just passing around links, then that has little or nothing to do with your site, and thus Amazon doesn't pay such referral fees. I would imagine that Amazon is also quite worried about potential fraud.

But given the growing popularity of things like Twitter and Facebook, it seems like Amazon might want to reconsider this policy, and recognize that if someone promotes a book via these services, they're equally as deserving of the affiliate referral fee than if they had simply posted the link on their own site.

Filed Under: earned links, passed links, referral payments, social networking
Companies: amazon, facebook, twitter