Thursday, July 15, 2010
A Visitor's Guide To Boston
Thursday, May 20, 2010
How To NOT Retain A Loyal Customer
Friday, April 9, 2010
Privacy - Giving It All Away
Facebook and other sites on the internet collect our names, the names of our spouses, partners, parents, children, friends, our birth dates, where we live, where we go when we leave our homes, where we work, what activities we enjoy, our ethnicities, where we went to school, where we grew up, details about our health and sexual orientation – quite simply, everything about us.I have seen a number of employment advertisements lately requiring the applicant to include their Facebook link on their resume or in their cover letter. I find this alarming on a number of fronts. First, this precludes anyone who can not afford a computer or internet access from applying. I'll dismiss this fact early with the recognition that most people without a computer or internet access would not see or even seek to apply for these positions but that doesn't make it right. In general, I'm concerned a lack of access to computers and internet service will leave a sizable chunk of people who want to get ahead behind but that is a whole other post.
I quit Facebook in 2008 before the great surge of people joined. I was alarmed when I joined because no other site wanted as much information from me to set up an account. It went downhill from there. People linked photographs and wrote things on my wall I did not want associated with me. There is a mechanism to remove these things but again and again it did not work. Facebook would not assist me with these problems. They also refused to let me change my name to my initials followed by my last name. They said it wasn't my real name. Really? I have been known as E.L. Devlin many places. Would they give that kind of attitude to E.L. Doctorow? (I'm not saying I compare in a literary sense but hope you get my drift.)
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Is a Personal Social Network Emergency Notification Plan Necessary?
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Social Media Family, Friends, Colleagues and Neighbors: What I've Learned About Online Relationships
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
What Constitutes Fair Play in The Social Media Playground?
I recently came across a web article exposing a social media certification program as “nonsense.” I won't get into whether I agree or disagree. Anyone who knows me can probably guess my opinion but that is not the point of this post. The article in question absolutely skewered the partners and company offering the program. It makes me uneasy when people do that. I've ranted about a few very large companies I've had customer service issues with but as a paying customer, I have some right to do that. I try not to attack individuals but will instead comment on the behavior that disturbs me. I have many reasons for this but the main one is, I don't put myself above other people. I will satire a group but what if I am wrong about the individual? I've only walked in MY moccasins.Tuesday, November 10, 2009
An Overview of the New Retweet Feature on Twitter.com
Briefly, for those who may not be familiar, a retweet is the reposting of a tweet that an individual feels is worthy of sharing with their followers. The traditional means of tweeting this are as follows,
RT: @personquoted Space aliens invade Punxsutawney, PA and kidnap Phil.
You spread the news but the original person gets credit for saying it first. Twitter can be a wonderfully democratic.
In the header photograph the conventional retweet formula is in violet. Notice there are two “RT”s which means this is the second time this is being repeated. This means the original message has most likely been shortened to accommodate two user names as well as the original message. The orange shows a retweet done by a third party application. Rather than starting with “RT” it ends in “via” and then posts the user name. This method can be confusing to some who mistake it for an original statement. The new retweet feature is pointed out in yellow. There is a symbol at the front of the tweet representing “retweet.” The avatar and user name is of the original person who posted the tweet. The retweet appears unaltered with the person who retweeted it, in your stream, listed at the end. It may have been retweeted several times but you will not see this in the home screen.
To examine retweets click on “Retweets” in the right hand column. This brings up a three tabbed screen with “Retweets by others,” Retweets by you” and “Your tweets, retweeted.”
The other two tabs are self explanatory. They show posts you have retweeted to those who follow you and posts where others have retweeted your original content. With these tabs you can examine where a retweet was before you saw it and you can track where your own original content is spread.
Through the good graces of Amy Palmer (@BoSoxAmy), Douglas Breault (@GenKreton) and Jeff Reneker (@jreneker) I was able to experiment with the retweet function and use their eyes to get an idea of what they saw in their stream. We discovered that retweets of mutual followers do not show up in an individual’s main stream. This makes sense from an efficiency standpoint since it leads to a less cluttered stream but there are times a person only catches a general post upon seeing a retweet from a mutual friend. I can see where some people won’t like this. If a person retweets another who their followers don’t follow this will appear in their stream. If someone you follow often retweets another person you don’t follow and these updates are posts you would rather not see (which is why you aren’t following them in the first place) the only way I am aware of to prevent being barraged with these retweets is to block the person you do not follow from appearing in your stream. This could become a somewhat hostile move but I can’t think of another way around it. I am very sensitive about whom I block because, while they may not be my cup of tea, they have a right to be heard and with all the spammers about, someone who is blocked too often could be seen as suspect. I hope Twitter will find another work around to this problem so that people do not have to block others just to avoid seeing them retweeted in their stream. If you go to the profile of someone you follow you can manually turn off all their retweets. If the only person they ever retweet is @Hitler this is a practical solution but chances are that is not all they retweet so turning this off means losing that potential value added content.
Another notable is, the retweet function does not work for protected accounts. The only way to retweet a post from a protected friend is to manually cut and paste or hand type it. Also, the retweet button does not allow a person to add to or change the original content of a tweet. This helps preserves the author’s original words and intent. It is arguably the best and primary reason for having a retweet button. No longer will words be cut out and spelling changed to accommodate a person’s user name. All that said, I am certain there will be a lot of backlash on this because people really LOVE to add their own two cents to retweets. The only thing I don’t like about the direct quote is not being able to delete “please retweet” or “pls RT” from the end of a retweeted post. A post should be retweeted because it has value to an audience, not because someone asks. I don’t add this to posts because I have faith in the intelligence of my followers. They know their audience and will retweet what I write if it has value to them and the people who follow them. If it doesn’t they won’t. That is the way it should be.
Finally, a person won’t see themselves retweeted in their stream. Gone are the ego gratifying days where you post something and see it catch fire across Twitter. Now you have to go to the “Your tweets, retweeted” screen to see this. I think this is a good thing. There are other metrics to determine your impact on Twitter. Why not use them and spend your time on Twitter connecting with your audience and hearing what they have to say? A cleaner stream will allow you to do just that. Plus, with any luck, you’ll learn something.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Who Is The FTC Sleeping With?
Much has been written this past week about the Federal Trade Commission's "Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising" which goes into effect December 1st, 2009. These guidelines effect all persons providing commentary (reviews) on products for which they have received any form of material compensation in exchange for their commentary. The FTC seems to be giving a pass to traditional media outlets such as newspaper, television, radio and magazine news outlets and concentrates on "real" individuals who give testimonials in exchange for money or products. Going forward these individuals have to disclose when they are receiving material compensation or face fines for not doing so.Personally I think people should have been doing this all along and some have. Better bloggers will not risk ruining their credibility by endorsing a product which is substandard. Most consumers are smarter than the FTC seems to think. Consumers who are naive enough to grant credibility to a sponsored review on a blog or an infomercial are as likely to believe the same sort of fluff from a "valid" news organization or a magazine which has to print "advertisement" over a rave review for the next big thing.
Since they don't appear to be doing much with these guidelines to protect consumers from themselves, what is the FTC really doing? Are they now in the business of regulating what qualifies as news? Several articles I've read have expressed this concern and I think it is valid. It deserves close scrutiny to examine how that all plays out. When Government gets involved in judging what is legitimate news and insinuating citizen journalism is illegitimate they are walking dangerously close to censorship similar to the Chinese model. I'm not sure that is what they are attempting to do nor do I think, if this were the FTCs motive, they could get away with it long term. There are too many individuals and lawyers to challenge them.
What I have seen curiously absent is any mention of material compensation being monitored as income. At least I find it curious and I am not much of a conspiracy theorist. The United States is in the midst of an economic recession and the United States budget is running a previously incomprehensible deficit. Anyone would be foolish to think the United States Federal Government doesn't need as many tax dollars as it can get its hands on. You're likely thinking bloggers who collect Adsense revenue and the occasional freebie in exchange for a review are making peanuts for their efforts and in many cases you may be right but there is no doubt some freelancers are making a living from web content.
Freelancers are self employed and it is generally easier for the self employed to juggle their books to appear as though they are making less income than they actually are. I can attest to this since part of my profession is to indemnify people for loss of income. The cost of these policies are partially based on the amount of income a person makes which is determined by how much the individual claims on their income taxes. When it comes time to collect on these indemnity policies it is not at all unusual for the policy holder to miraculously present alternate proof their actual income is greater than previously stated.
As the public turns away from traditional media in favour of the internet and advertisers turn from conventional print advertising to viral and guerrilla internet marketing techniques there are increasingly more opportunities for individual freelancers to profit from new media. If PR firms are seeing this, I am seeing this, and freelancers are seeing this wouldn't it be naive to think the United States Federal Government isn't? Rather than wondering whether the FTC is crawling into bed with the FCC why isn't anyone wondering whether they are crawling into bed with the IRS?
Sunday, September 6, 2009
Here Is My Link
Dear Guru SEO Affiliate Marketing Expert Designer Person,
You sent me a link so I thought it would be rude of me to not send my own. I'm fully aware you won't read this because you don't have any more time to read unsolicited material from a stranger than I do. Still, my Mama raised me to be polite so I'm taking time from my busy day to write this to you.
I would hate for you to think sending out that link was a waste of time for the computer program you used to generate it so I want to reassure you; I know exactly what your link says. It tells me how wonderful you are and details the myriad accomplishments you have achieved to make you the best there is at what you do. If I stick with you, I am certainly going to achieve unimaginable heights. All I have to do is purchase and read your e-book, listen to your recording, attend your workshop, hire your company and follow all your instructions implicitly. This is the opportunity of a lifetime. I am sure to succeed and if by chance I don’t, it is because I don’t know how to follow directions. It has nothing to do with you since your plan is fool proof and is the reason you are so wildly accomplished.
You can’t imagine how pleased I am that YOU, out of the kindness of your heart, have chosen ME to share your success with. I don't know what it is that made you single me out but I am grateful beyond my ability to express it. I am also humbled because unlike you, I have nothing to sell. Sure, I have causes I champion and sometimes I ask for donations or support for those causes but you can feel free to disregard any of those causes you don't personally feel passion for. I certainly will never direct message you with anything like that because I know you are a busy, busy person and frankly, those messages can be intrusive.
I hope, in return for your largesse, you allow me to be of any assistance I can to you. I know it is unlikely I have anything you could possibly need but I just wanted to put the offer out there. I've been doing a great deal of listening and learning about this new media thing and I am happy to help anyone who asks. I don't have an e-book or product like that because I like to keep things on a more personal, one-on-one basis. I also don't have any mechanism to charge you for my assistance but that hasn't been a problem in the past. Heck, it works out better for you that way because whatever I give for free is valueless and you don't have to feel any obligation toward me.
Thank you for reaching out to me and sharing your specialness. I look forward to our long and fruitful relationship.
Sincerely,
Little Ole Me
(Graphic courtesy of Rhonda Hitchcock)