Technology | Samuelson's Media

February 11, 2010

Changes in Facebook – Thoughts about Social Media

Filed under: Opinion, Social Media, Technology — Tags: communication, facebook, facebook apps, facebook client, iphone, iphone apps, microsoft, Social Media, statistics, twitter — Garth @ 11:04 am

For the umpteenth time since last year Facebook has changed its interface. (actually, it’s the second, I think) It seems a kind of petty thing to comment on, but given that 400 million people use Facebook, it is more interesting that you don’t see commentary on this kind of thing in the mainstream.

Facebook is free. Additionally, as a part of web 2.0, it is in a real sense ‘permanently broken’ or incomplete. Nobody really knows what we’re doing, and so things change and adapt quickly. However, a real question arises – if it is true that for instance Facebook will be launching a gmail clone – will people begin to actually rely on it for vital communications? If this is so, what will a fairly moderate interface change mean? Given that people on the web are about as vocal every day as strikers are on the day of the ‘general strike’, can a service like Facebook ignore comments? What are they to do if a change removes key functionality (such as in this case, viewing updates from a specific application or status updates alone)?

It can easily be argued that Facebook is free, and therefore, you pay for what you get. But Facebook itself does not have that attitude; that’s a ’screw you’ attitude that they’d never be caught uttering. Therefore we can assume that despite being free (on the front end, anyhow) Facebook wants to give its users the best experience possible, as though they were being paid for all of this. (They are, but not directly by us.)

What is interesting in all of this is that when I spoke to Ron, he mentioned that his iPhone app still had the same functionality. In other words, the same Facebook ‘data’ is sitting there, there is just a new ‘terminal’ we who are using the Web need to use. It makes me think that going forward we will see Facebook clients, much the way we see clients for Twitter. The difference is of course that Facebook is many times more complex! Imagine though, if you could get a Facebook client for 1.99 – Facebook gets a cut of that – over a possible group of 400 million folks?

And what about how widely used (and despised?) it is… I am reminded of everyone carping about Microsoft whenever they try to change something. Difference is, we have to accept the change on Facebook. With Microsoft at least there is a few years for us to adapt. And yet we keep using it!

Free, rich communication is valuable; just like a very generic & flexible operating system is. Maybe Facebook will give up trying to play nice and annoy us until we pay to stop the annoyance. I’ll bet they won’t lose people – where else will they go? Twitter?

Or maybe the value is like that of a huge fan page – everyone is there! How can you take credit for that?

2 Comments

January 22, 2010

News in the Internet Age

Filed under: News, Opinion, Technology — Tags: culture, ebooks, internet, journalism, micropayments, new york times, publishing, tablets — Garth @ 6:11 pm

For years now, newspapers have been trying to figure out how to finance news journalism in the internet age. Or, as it is more commonly put, “get people to pay for news online.” For a time, it seemed like micropayments would be the solution, but the profitability of online payment transactions relies on the rule of fewer transactions, larger amounts. It is far easier to move a one-hundred dollar bill than ten thousand pennies.

But beneath it all there was a deeper issue; we have been trained on the internet to search for news, and search algorithms rely on spiders, or automated or robotic browsers, to follow links and search content. Paid content may sit behind a wall, disallowing both robots and humans from finding it. The converse is that which is searchable is accessible.

Then there is the issue of what the subscribers do with the information. In traditional print, there was some limited oversight in reprinting and republishing and redistribution, mostly because of the cost and effort required of such things. On the internet, you can go to the public library, log in, and start a blog on blogger and publish to the world. Even before this, it was fairly inexpensive to get your name out there, with a bit of know-how.

This all adds up to the concept that if you do not offer the news that you may have paid to compile or write for free, someone else will. Indeed, early on some savvy writers such as Drudge took advantage of free distribution to gain immense popularity while newspapers were still struggling to figure out what the internet was, much less how to maintain their current business through the changes it would impose.

The New York Times has suffered no less than any from this unwelcome disruption, and their recent actions show that they are still trying to figure things out:

The news that The New York Times will start charging for access to its website broke over the weekend, but now it’s officially confirmed. As anticipated, one of the world’s most recognizable newspapers will be introducing a metered model, meaning they will “offer users free access to a set number of articles per month and then charge users once they exceed that number.”

There are various comments, both by the author and by his commenters regarding the situation. It is always a touchy subject. Some like to get their news for free, and would never pay for it. Others see the ebook tablet – Kindle and so forth – as a possible route for rescue of the newspapers.

Either way, the internet offers no help; the information on the internet is in practice not free to produce or distribute (there used to be time and rate limits on internet, if you can remember back that far…!) but the scale of the internet combined with the ubiquity of computers distributes that cost. If it had come around 50 years ago out of the blue, the $500-$1000 for a computer alone would be enough prevent illusions of it being free of cost. Those of us who grew up with computers had our first use for ‘free’ as it were; with our parents or guardians paying for both computer and internet access.

The way I see it, if we set up a system to reliably pay for journalism, we prevent two things: The first is invasive and pervasive advertising, and the second is outright begging. It’s a cultural thing. Will my generation adapt?

One Comment

November 23, 2009

The Social Media Train is Coming At Ya

Filed under: Social Media, Technology — Tags: brand name search experience, google social search, Mashable, News, search ranking, SEO, text rich, twitter, Yelp — Garth @ 12:14 pm

This train doesnt have to stop for anyone.

It has been long clear that blogs and other kinds of fast-updating media – especially of the text-rich variety have dominated other websites in search.

The formula is pretty simple: New content is news, blogs and public social media produce more new content than even periodicals, therefore to the search engine they essentially produce more news. A standard method of ranking includes a measure of relevance – which for many things will be how recently the information was acquired. The search engine can’t tell Plato from Gawker and add to that a frequency of smaller and more diverse postings (as in Twitter or Facebook,) and you have a recipe for search-domination.

Jennifer Van Grove at Mashable writes:

Essentially what customers, fans, and detractors are posting to social media sites are dominating the brand name search experience over social media content created by the brands themselves. This data clearly creates a legitimate reason for brands to be proactive with their social media presence, as participating in the exchange about their brand should improve the quantity and quality of customer-created social media content that searchers will happen upon.

It is worth noting that this only effects opinion and brand, since these sites (blogs and the like) are less apt to drive sales than product-rich websites. They have a broad but shallow impact. It really makes clear what marketers have been saying about word-of-mouth advertising for a long time, doesn’t it?

Google Social Search is coming!

Add to this the emergence – and how soon no-one knows for sure – of Google Social Search, it might just be the moment to be on social media (or the time to stay very, very far away from it!) Which you choose depends on how you interact with customers.

A final note is that Google Social Search requires a person to keep connections in their Google account (which not everyone has or does) so the impact may be spotty for awhile. I’ve experimented myself, and my results tend to be dominated by a few people who are more connected in that way, or who run blogs or comment on blogs frequently.

It is cool, though, in a weird kind of way. What kind of SEO can you do on that kind of stuff?

My brain replies:

To: john

Subject: your posting on Yelp!

Body: Can you please include the words ‘diamond retail experience‘ in your review? Thanks.

Oh! That would be strange.

Leave a Comment

November 13, 2009

Guest Blog Post: Which Social Media “Expert” are you?

Filed under: Guest Posts, Social Media, Technology — Tags: Bridget Forney, business, experts, followers, local, public relations, Social Media, twitter — Samuelson's Diamonds @ 5:37 pm

Here’s a funny and informative post by our friend Bridget Forney titled “Which Social Media “Expert” Are You?”. You can read more of Bridget on her blog http://www.numbersnotinvited.com or follow her on twitter @BridgetForney.

Which Social Media “Expert” are you?

These days, it’s not hard to find an expert on social media. Well, to rephrase, it’s not hard to find a self-proclaimed expert on social media. With the semi-recent craze for all things Twitter, Facebook and web 2.0, everyone seems to be coming out of the woodworks announcing their know-it-all status when it comes to online marketing and poking around the deep dark corners of networking websites. But how knowledgeable are these “experts”? What makes a social media expert to begin with? Which social media expert are you?

There are a few types of “experts” on the web that you may run into when looking for a professional in the social media world. Heck, you may very well be one of these social media experts. Read on to investigate the inner workings of online “specialists”…

The Twitter Expert
The Twitter Expert is one who has a Twitter account, and is probably an obsessive tweeter. They probably follow people in the thousands in an effort to increase their “follower” numbers. The people they’re following most likely will exceed their followers by a number in the hundreds at the least. This expert thinks they specialize in all things Twitter, but they’re likely the type of “I am clipping my toenails right now”-tweeter that you try to avoid. Follower quantity means more to them than follower quality and to credit their expertise, they’ll often boast about the number of followers they have – even though 80% of them are likely spammers. If you don’t follow the Twitter Expert back, they might shamelessly DM you to say, “Will you follow me back!?”

The Business Expert
The Business Expert is one who has an online presence for their business, either on Twitter, Facebook, both or other networking websites. This expert thinks their knowledge of social media is credible due to the fact that they use it for their business. This expert is about as much a social media connoisseur as the person who hands out teriyaki chicken samples in the food court at the mall is an expert at marketing Thai food. Just because you play the game, doesn’t mean you should be a coach.

The Local Expert
The Local Expert is a native to the area and may or may not be a shameless self-promoter. This expert promotes their credibility through the fact that they know the city, the town and what’s going on with the local culture, thus they probably tweet useful information often and may have a substantial and legitimate following. The only problem is, this expert probably learned everything they know from someone else. All of the information they give you is likely second hand knowledge and they may or may not take the credit for it. There is no disputing the fact that The Local Expert is experienced and familiar with using social media applications, but by no means are they social media specialists or should be offering their “services” to others.

The Unemployed Expert
The Unemployed Expert, it goes without saying, does not have a job. For this reason, they can spend unparalleled amounts of time online perfecting their social media expertise. They’re the people you see flooding your update column with useful, and sometimes controversial thoughts…ALL the time. Sparking a controversial conversation with an A-lister is probably the highlight of their jobless day. It’s okay though, because due to those particular conversations, they’re seen and virally heard by hundreds, sometimes millions. At the end of the day, sometimes it’s their social media presence that ends up getting them hired. The Unemployed Expert will likely know social media pretty well, but may or may not know the inner workings of strategic communications specifically for businesses. Ancient Chinese Proverb: He who can market himself, may not necessarily be capable of marketing others.

The Public Relations Expert
The Public Relations Expert is usually a professional in the marketing industry who first stumbled upon the beautiful world of social media in an effort to promote or advertise a client. These professionals were probably the first people online who immediately recognized the power of social media, harnessed its raging potential and used it to their advantage. Whether or not they do it effectively, however, is open to interpretation. The Public Relations, or PR, Expert accredits their expertise to the fact that they use social media for their client(s). This lucky expert has the ability to transfer their authoritative status in the marketing industry over to the world of social media. Some PR Experts can talk the talk, but not all can walk the walk.

The Salesman Expert
The Salesman Expert is generally someone who isn’t at all interested in joining a social conversation, and doesn’t really care about social media at all. This selfish social savant is only interested in selling their own product or service, and their updates will generally reflect that. These Internet marketers will sometimes boast about having the secret juice, the magic dust that will bring you followers. Don’t fall for it. Like a fat person trying to lose weight, the only way to gain followers is by doing it the good old-fashioned way: hard work and (metaphorical) exercise.

If you think your expertise has been questioned here, it probably has. Don’t get your panties in a bundle; it’s for good reason. Step back and ask yourself which social media expert are you? Are you a mixture of a few classifications? Should you REALLY be offering “services” to others on social media? The definition of a social media “expert” should not be open for interpretation. It’s not a grey issue. You either are or you aren’t.

If you’re not sure, a good rule of thumb is to wait until someone ELSE says you are. Otherwise, you’ve just been self-diagnosed. Where’s the credibility? You can tweet about being an expert and others can too; you may even have your own website, blog and newsletter, but the only thing that can qualify you as a REAL social media expert is a PROVEN track record of success. That means results.

I’ll leave you with this ancient Chinese proverb: Keep your broken arm inside your sleeve.
Go forth and tweet,
Bridget Marie

P.s. If you know of an Expert I didn’t list here, please leave me a comment and I’ll add it to the list!

Leave a Comment

November 5, 2009

What not to do, American Airlines Edition

Filed under: Marketing, Opinion, Technology — Tags: American Airlines, bureaucracy, dustin curtis, Mr. X, Social Media — Garth @ 3:47 pm

I’ve often written here regarding social media, and the ‘world’ it inhabits, one of interaction, where instead of carefully choosing interactions with a mind for secrecy, we carefully choose secrets with a mind for interaction. Obviously not everything can be ‘open’ (to do so would in many cases be more confusing than helpful, as twitter or facebook can often show us) but then the old fortress mentality is both unattractive to public opinion and in this time of rapid advance, often harmful in its effects on business practice itself.

Enough from me, though, check this out:

A FEW MONTHS AGO, I wrote an article expressing my displeasure with American Airlines‘ hideous online presence. I also spent some time mocking up a redesigned version of their website. To my surprise, a user experience designer at AA.com emailed me an amazing response describing some of the design problems faced in large corporations.
…
An hour after I posted the response, American Airlines fired Mr. X.

Read the whole thing (it isn’t long.) It is sad, perhaps, to have a non-disclosure agreement which prevents what the author suggests is a needed innovation. Sometimes business reality prevents much being done as a result of even helpful commentary from customers, and often for large corporations a comments box is open so that ‘cranks’ (people who are irate) have some place to vent.

But when things are genuinely wrong, or could be better, it is not unreasonable to interact with customers. Granted sometimes this conversation can be harmful rather than helpful – anyone who has seen an order messed up by mistake at say, McDonald’s, can recall how temper mostly just serves to cause the problem to be resolved slower. Especially this is true when the person who receives the criticism has no power to act on it. It would be rather pointless to take the cashier to task in McDonalds for the poor quality of their ketchup.

It is our sincere hope – and we think it is for many other companies – that Twitter, Facebook, MySpace and other venues can be a place for conversations like the one Mr. X got fired for.

Of course, to be fair, the size of the company matters (as bureaucracy tends to scatter power rather than delegate it) and a large company, like AA often has little choice but to keep following its present policies. Internal politics, arcane rules, and just plain human limitation all play roles.

All in all, the new landscape is difficult for those who have the most power in it – in mass media, and in money, it is large corporations. But their method is largely impersonal, and even when their icons work, it still feels like puppetry.

Leave a Comment

October 5, 2009

We ask: What is Google Wave?

Filed under: News, Technology — Tags: collaboration, Google Wave — Garth @ 12:18 pm

We’re not alone:

‘Collaborative tool’, we’re told, is the best description of Google Wave. It is seemingly designed to combine the technology of email, threaded forum conversations, mash-ups, instant messaging, video, word-processing and power points to enable a new level of collaboration. Will it be free? (We wouldn’t mind hosting our own.) But before we can make any kind of real comment, give an opinion, or share information and tips, we’ve got one thing to ask: “Where’s our invitation?”

Seems like a lot of people are asking the same thing.

2 Comments

October 1, 2009

JCK’s Five to Follow on Twitter

Filed under: Jewelry, Marketing, Press, Technology — Tags: JCK, twitter — Samuelson's Diamonds @ 3:27 pm

OCTOBER 1, 2009: Samuelson’s Diamonds, the premier downtown diamond destination in Baltimore, Maryland, was mentioned as one the five most important groups to follow on twitter:

Retail jeweler Ron Samuelson, owner, Samuelson’s Diamonds, Baltimore, operates @SamuelsonsRocks for the store and @DiamondBuyer as his personal account.

Follow Ron to learn how to seamlessly utilize personal and professional Twitter accounts. For example, Ron talks about music (he’s in a band) on the @DiamondBuyer account, striking up friendships with other Twitterers with similar interests—involving them in what he does professionally. When these new friends need help buying a diamond, they’re likely to call him.

Samuelson’s Diamonds looks forward to the many opportunities which still await in upcoming next-generation networking technologies, of which Twitter is an important part.

The original article is located here: Five to Follow on Twitter | JCK Online

Leave a Comment

September 11, 2009

Twitter Changes the Rules?

Filed under: Marketing, News, Opinion, Technology — Tags: advertising, skepticism, Social Media, social pecking order, terms of service, twitter — Garth @ 11:11 am

Biz Stone (or so we might think) dropped me a message my gmail inbox yesterday, indicating that Twitter had changed its terms of service. What has caught most people’s eye is the following:

Advertising—In the Terms, we leave the door open for advertising. We’d like to keep our options open as we’ve said before.

This is of great interest to larger players, especially some big media: Who in the main seems skeptical (I will leave it to the reader to determine who ’some analysts’ are):

Some analysts are skeptical that advertising will catch on in a meaningful way on social networks, arguing that companies are reluctant to juxtapose their brands with unpredictable, and potentially offensive, user-generated content.

This doesn’t seem like a change in policy, but it is being billed as one. Twitter wants in on the ad action, and 9/10/2009 marks the crossing of the Rubicon.

Another important thing for twitterers to remember: There is a follow limit.

If you follow too many people, there is no way you can keep up with everyone’s updates in your home page. If you’re following more than 2000 people, you’re missing quite a few updates from many people you follow. You can view a profile page to catch up with someone’s latest updates.

It seems to be hard and fast set at 2000, but what about the thousands of people who are following more? It is unclear how this effects everyone, but here is my analysis:

Following does not imply friendship, and Twitter is encouraging instead the use of following for listening, and the use of @ messages as a more proper way of communicating. This means that users actual relationships are entirely informal as far as the system is concerned (an interesting choice) and given that Tweekdeck automatically searches for ‘@yourname’ messages it is actually pointless to follow people you don’t want to hear from unless they address you.

This doesn’t address the issue of social pecking order, of personal pride and prestige, but I would (almost) say Twitter is getting themselves out of the business of providing it.

If you want to hear from me, give me a shout at @riverc. Or you can hit up Ron at @diamondbuyer or any of us at @samuelsonsrocks. Nothing to it.

Leave a Comment

August 14, 2009

Ron Samuelson explains how Social Media can Boost Your Bottom Line

Filed under: News, Press, Technology — Tags: blogs, diamonds fan page, digital marketing, digital rock star, facebook, national jeweler, Social Media, twitter — Samuelson's Diamonds @ 4:44 pm

AUGUST 14, 2009: Ron Samuelson, CEO of Samuelson’s Diamonds, the premier downtown diamond destination in Baltimore, Maryland was interviewed by the National Jeweler publication about their involvement in online social media:

Ron Samuelson, chief executive of Samuelson’s Diamonds in Baltimore, Md., has taken that philosophy to the extreme. On his 12-year-old Web site, he offers links to the company’s official Facebook page, Twitter account and MySpace profile. He’s also got links to his personal blog and Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn profiles.

As if all that weren’t enough, a year ago Samuelson created a Facebook fan page simply called “Diamonds,” that has since amassed 260,000 fans, all of whom he can blast with updates about his business. While some of those fans live as far away as Australia and Saudi Arabia and therefore have little value to him as potential customers, he does not underestimate the value of free marketing.

“People ask me, ‘Do you get business from this? How do you have the time?’” Samuelson says. “That’s my job. The old way of doing things is handwriting tickets, making double your investment and those days are over. Young guys getting engaged–they’re all on Facebook. It’s like going to a big party.”

Samuelson is such a strong believer in the power of digital marketing that the JCK Show tapped him to lead a roundtable discussion in Las Vegas on May 31 titled “Become a Digital ‘Rock’ Star.” Naturally, Samuelson promoted it via Facebook and is also offering his consulting services to jewelers who need guidance on where to begin.

(Note: the aforementioned diamonds fan page now has closer to 280,000 fans.)

Samuelson’s Diamonds maintains its focus on interactive marketing and online networking in the digital age. Find us on Twitter, Facebook, Youtube and Flickr, and look for Ron Samuelson on various other mediums, including his blog.

The original article is available here: “Can social networking boost your bottom line? | National Jeweler“

Leave a Comment

May 7, 2009

Will Technology Make You a Better Person?

Filed under: Opinion, Technology — Tags: blogs, bowflex, computers, facebook, Poetry.com, self-help, technology, twitter — Garth @ 11:01 am

These days, the self-help book is ubiquitous. Everyone’s got a solution for everyone else – or at least a significant enough portion of everyone else to convince a publisher to lay out money for a printing. But our attraction to self-help goes deeper: we are made to believe by various popularizers that various technologies and products will solve our problems. (Bowflex, anyone?) Since when was technology ever something other than a technique – a means – to attain a particular end?

Well, it’s not right to say we’re made to believe it; there’s no argument. We’re presented what we may assume are the results.

And so in the world of image it might seem that all it takes is an allergy pill to move us into that eternal spring day (how this works in January is not discussed.)

Not to be overly facetious (too late by three paragraphs) but, Everything that competes must also compete in how it sells itself. From this we remember – ’sex sells’. This is not ‘the whole bill of goods‘ as they used to say, though. Sex sells is simply a part of selling you the better you; the you that you want to see or be. (What do you think the appeal of Poetry.com was?)

So here’s the doozy: Do you think that we are being sold the internet (for recall that even though the internet is essentially free, a computer and an internet connection are NOT.) on the premise it will make us better people?

Watch a Comcast ad; a Verizon ad, see Dell and Mac. Do you suppose that people who have computers and the internet are better overall – because they are connected to information they would not otherwise have, can communicate faster, can buy things that might have been out of their reach, and so forth?

Doesn’t the fact that we’re racing to get computers cheap enough so that most people in the ‘3rd World’ can have one say what we refuse to say explicitly, the elephant in the room? Have you ever recommended to someone, based on their circumstances, that they NOT use the internet, that they AVOID purchasing a computer? For reasons other than budget?

If you’re reading this entry, probably not. In fact, if you’re reading this on a Mac, you can probably add style and sophistication to the benefits of that technology you would consider recommending.

Okay, take the Bowflex that I mentioned earlier. Anyone with enough money can buy an exercise machine and let it sit in their basement, unused. That is to say, the lazy man is still lazy. The technology does nothing to change that. What the machine can do is allow him to make a better use of his time exercising. But the machine will not make him that ripped gentleman who is always curling his bicep – and who wears more body oil than a medieval king.

What about the Internet? Does it really make people better? I can get an invitation digitally over Facebook instead of in the mail, and each message is ‘free’, but that is only if I have all of the things necessary. Facebook is faster, but those who don’t want to respond, or can’t make decisions, still fail to say ‘yes or no’ to your invitation. You know it!

The gossipers still gossip; the oddballs still are oddballs. The jerks find a way to keep being jerks; people keep their secrets secret. Sure, books get published online, and news gets spread faster via blogs and people get called out for corruption.

But has corruption in DC ceased because of the internet? Have the budgets been balanced? Have men come together in like mind? The fact that newspapers are dying because they gave their content away for free will be a lesson for future newspapers (and still existing ones.) – the lesson? Don’t.

Has anything really changed?

… Nope.

Facebook and Twitter will not make you a better person. They might not even make you a better-informed person. Heck, they could just make you a more distracted, less focused person. So for whatever reason you use a new technology, consider it a means to an end.

The question we should ask always is, “What does it do?” and “Do I want to do that?”

With the use of Twitter and Facebook around the world rising, clearly there is a market for “being distracted every 5 seconds by random conversation around the world.” Of course, we call it the ‘Status Update.‘

Sounds hypocritical, maybe, that the technology guy is writing like a Luddite!

To be fair, I prefer to get my distraction by reading and writing blog posts.

—

Humor and self-deprecation aside, my point is that the world of the internet is not any different than the world outside of it. The more it is used and the easier it is to use the more it will look like the rest of our society.

So no, technology won’t make you a better person. It won’t make you a worse person either – it will just change the means by which you do what you already do.

And that’s worth thinking about.

Leave a Comment

Older Posts »