Paul Wallbank | Paul Wallbank - Communications Professional

The mobile payments revolution

Paying bills through a smartphone is going to radically change how we do business

Ten years ago when I was running a computer support business we spent a lot of time trying to find an mobile payment service for our on-site technicians to process payments.

At the time there were plenty of options but they were all expensive, asking 6% in merchant fees at a time when our bank merchant facility charged us 2.75% to accept Mastercard, Visa and Bankcard. Interestingly, the cut the mobile providers wanted to take which was the same commission as American Express and Diners Club.

We’d long before decided Diners and Amex were too expensive and it was easy to make the same decision about mobile payments. The technicians were given a manual card swipe to carry around and they phoned through authorisations. It was messy and time consuming but a lot cheaper than the then high tech alternatives.

Given that history, I was keen to get along to the Australian Information Industry Association’s “Mobile Payments – Cooperate, Collaborate, or Abdicate” breakfast panel held in Sydney last week to see what has changed in the mobile payments space.

The rise of smartphones – and the developing SoLoMo trend among consumers which brings together social, local and mobile technologies – should have meant the era of online payments should have arrived and it’s puzzling why it hasn’t happened.

It isn’t for a shortage of operators; one of the panel members, Oliver Weidlich of Sydney’s Mobile Experience mentioned a number of the services such as Square, developed by one of Twitter’s founders that are changing mobile payment overseas.

Interestingly it was the audience questions that gave the answers to why online payments haven’t taken off in Australia. The key question from the floor was “which authority handles disputes should a phone be lost or stolen”.

As a customer, one hopes it’s the bank that takes responsibility as the idea of a telco – particularly their mobile phone divisions with their attitude towards billing customers – having control over your credit card or bank account would make most consumers’ blood run cold.

The point was well made though as it saw the panel’s bank, telco and credit card representatives all ruminating over the question of ‘who owns the customer’.

Oddly, while they argue about whose property the customer is, all of them may lose out. While services like Square and built in payment features on social media and mobile apps such as Foursquare or Red Laser may take a slice of the market, there is a bigger competitor already making huge inroads.

The day before the AIIA event, Internet payment giant PayPal announced a series of deals with various group buying sites and online applications. Their press release pointed out PayPal’s mobile payments, or mCommerce as they call it, is growing at over 400% a year

While it might not be correct to say PayPal were the elephant in the room at the online payments breakfast, it isn’t unfair to say Big Ears was just outside scoffing the morning tea while the incumbents argued about who would have first dibs on clipping the tickets of both merchants and customers.

It’s too early to say the banks, or the telcos, have lost the market but players like PayPal, Google with their wallet service and possibly even Apple – should a Near Field Communication (NFC) equipped iPhone appear in the near future – are going to make the mobile payment sector far more interesting and competitive.

For businesses, we need to keep a close eye on the mobile payments market as it is promising to offer a lot more options in banking and transactions that what we’ve been used to in recent years. The days of 6% merchant fees are well and truly over.

Digital art is more than iPod wielding basket weavers

What is the future for the arts in the digital economy?

This is a transcript of the digital arts opening keynote for the Digital Culture Public Sphere conference discussing the Australian government’s cultural strategy.

Thank you Senator Lundy. A little bit more about me, as well as being a writer and broadcaster on change I spent 18 months with the NSW Department of Trade & Investment setting up the Digital Sydney project.

Digital Sydneyis a program designed to raise the profile of Sydney as an international centre of the digital media industry.

One of the problems with Digital Sydney was that it was very inner Sydney centric and this is a perennial question we face as to where does Australian culture, and art, spring from? The first idea I’d like to throw to the room is that ‘digital’ frees us from many narrow geographic boundaries.

When we add the term ‘digital’ we hit another problem, that almost every aspect of our lives – be it in art, business or our personal lives – is being affected in some way by the Internet and digitalisation. In reality all art is becoming ‘digital’ in one way or another.

As broadband becomes more pervasive, particularly as the National Broadband Network is rolled out, we’ll see art and the creative industries become even more digitised.

In many ways we are today at the point in history not too dissimilar to that our great grandparents found themselves a hundred years ago. In 1911, our forebears couldn’t imagine the massive changes the century ahead would bring and we’re in a similar position in the first decades of the digital century.

The first half of the Twentieth Century saw radio start a cultural shift which was accelerated in the second half as television radically changed and redefined our culture. Today the Internet is doing exactly the same in ways none of us quite understand.

Given the massive disruption and technical advances we’re going through we need to be cautious about being too prescriptive as we can’t foresee many of the new technologies that will become normal to us over the next decade.

This provides a challenge for government agencies supporting the arts as the established gatekeepers such as galleries, production studios and regional organisations become less relevant as the means of distribution evolve and become easier to access.

We’re already seeing the traditional model of government support to big producers; be they factories, movie producers or games studios suffering as economic adjustment undermines many of their business model. The old economic development models are becoming irrelevant as history overtakes them.

It may well be that the role of governments over the next decade is to create a framework that allows new mediums, creation tools and distribution channels to develop.

One area we should be careful of when looking at the digital future of the arts is not to follow the UK’s Digital Economy Act where the protection of existing rights holders took precedence over the creative process.

It is important that governments create legislative frameworks that balance the rights of all stakeholders, consumers and new content creators with the objective of encouraging new works and innovations to evolve.

In an Australian context we need to acknowledge and develop our diverse population and the opportunities this presents. Our indigenous and immigrant communities with their artistic and cultural traditions give our national economy advantages that many other countries lack, this is one thing I regret I wasn’t able to push more in my role with the NSW government.

Education is another critical area, this isn’t just in the arts but right across Australian society and industry as new entrants into the workplace are expected to spring forth with the skills making them as productive as experienced workers, this is clearly a flawed idea, particularly when many of the tools business expects students to be skilled in weren’t invented when the students started their studies.

Over the next decade we’ll also have to confront one of the great Twentieth Century conceits; that artists are a separate breed from scientists, Engineers and business people.

Prior to the beginning of the last Century it was accepted a tradesman or inventor could also be an artist and this damaging idea of silos between creative and so called ‘real’ industries, suited only to a brief period of our mass industrial development, will have to forgotten. This will be a challenge to our governments, educators and training providers.

The digital arts are not about iPad wielding basket weavers, they about giving today’s workforce the creative tools and flexible, imaginative thinking to meet the challenges our mature, high cost workforce faces in a world where the economic rules are changing as fast as our technology.

We have a great opportunity at events like today to determine how we as a nation will benefit from the next decade’s new technologies that will change our arts communities and society in general.

The great challenge to policy makers will be dealing with the rapidly changing and evolving world that the digital economy has bought in the arts, in business and in society in general.

Today I’m sure we can bring together ideas on how we, and our governments, can meet these challenges.

Thank you very much Senator Lundy, Minister Crean and Pia Waugh for giving the community an opportunity to contribute to the development of this valuable policy.

Price points

Amazon’s new range of Kindle e-book readers illustrate how important price points are to winning consumer confidence.

It’s no coincidence Amazon’s media release announcing the new range of Kindle e-book readers was headlined introducing the All-New Kindle Family: Four New Kindles, Four Amazing Price Points.

The $79 price for the base model has authors excited, and quite rightly too as this will guarantee sales of the e-readers and spur sales of e-books.

Once a product’s perceived as being affordable by the market, sales take off. The classic is Josiah Wedgwood selling bone china at prices affordable to the 18th Century English working classes. The basic product was similar in all but the decoration to the ornate wares Wedgwood sold to Europe’s royal families and the then new methods of mass production guaranteed a quality product to all customers.

Just over a century later, Henry Ford did a similar thing with the motor car, meeting the price points that made the horseless carriage accessible to the middle classes in early 20th Century United States.

In more recent times we’ve seen similar trends happen; the under $2,000 personal computer in the 1990s, the sub $500 netbook in 2008 and the affordable smart phones of recent years.

We can add broadband Internet and budget airlines as other examples of how demand has exploded when the cost has dropped below a certain price point.

As technology becomes affordable, we use more of it. A point that’s often lost monopolists and established players in industries.

This is the real opportunity Amazon are now offering with the cheap Kindles and we’ll see e-books boom as people are prepared to make a small investment in the devices.

Almost certainly this will open new markets and unforeseen opportunities for entrepreneurs and writers. The resulting pressures on competitors like the Apple iPad and the various Windows or Android tablet devices should increase innovation as well.

In our own businesses we need to ask what those price points are and what is stopping us from meeting them. As other price busters have shown, if you can meet these price points, the riches are there for the taking.

Do you have customers or just users?

Are subscribers, visitors and users really supporting your business?

“I was on your mailing list for general info, for spams and scams etc which were helpful. Suddenly it changed and now the business format is not useful to me” said an lady when unsubscribing from one of my newsletter mailing lists.

The lady concerned had been on one of the mailing lists for over ten years and, once upon a time, had been a paying customer for my old business, PC Rescue. Although we’d only earned a $100 off her and that was seven years ago.

While it’s sad to lose a subscriber – you don’t run a service business for twelve years without caring about those who use your services – the question is was the lady really a customer?

This is an important distinction where many of us are giving away much of our knowledge for free; are our users really customers?

For the social media and web2.0 sites, this is easy; users are the raw material for their aggregated and segmented data feeds and audience, the customers are the advertisers. This is just a modern twist on the broadcast model that sustained the radio and TV industries for most of the 20th Century.

Many of those social media platforms aren’t making much money from that data and there’s a good argument those who are have been wildly overvalued by investors.

The value of user data, whether it’s aggregated or identifiable appears to be nowhere as high as most of us think, unless you intend to rob your users’ bank accounts.

Overvaluation of your customer, or user, database is a common problem for smaller businesses too. If you’re the local plumber, computer repair guy or coffee shop then the value of any mailing list is probably way overstated – the only metric that ultimately matters to the business is how much money you’re making from the customer.

If you care about the people that you deal with, this may be a hard reality to face but those who visit your shop, subscribe to your newsletter or download your free e-book aren’t your customers, only those who are prepared to pay are.

This is something we have to understand in this era of abundant free information and online services. The challenge for most of us is how many users we can convert from being window shoppers and freebie seekers into customers.

Technology with Carol Duncan on ABC Newcastle

On ABC 1233 Newcastle with Carol Duncan we discuss privacy and security on social media after Facebook’s privacy changes.

In the occasional tech spot with Carol Duncan, we looked at Facebook’s new changes and what they mean to users.

The immediate changes to Facebook are the News Feed at the top of the page where updates and posts will be ranked according to what Facebook thinks are your interests, to the left of the screen is “the ticker” which will give summaries of updates.

Coming in the next few weeks will be the Timeline feature which will give show the history of all your posts.

A great summary of the changes with a hands on review is Jason Kincaid’s article on the Facebook changes in Tech Crunch. The official Facebook blog goes into the detail of all the new features.

The purpose of these changes is to increase Facebook’s value as an advertising platform and it raises the question of the viability of these networks.

One of the interesting features of these changes is that users will start seeing increased advertising, if you’re not happy with this our Netsmarts site goes through the process of shutting down your Facebook account.

Join us on ABC Newcastle with Carol Duncan to discuss these issues and more.

Is the social media business model dying?

Have the social media companies reached their peak?

Is the social media business model dead?

The frenzied rush to release new features such as Facebook’s latest changes, along with Google’s updates to their Plus platform, may be the first indication the big social media business model is broken.

Driving the adoption of social media services has been the value they add to people’s lives; MySpace was a great place to share interests like bands and music, Facebook’s is to hear what was happening with their families and friends, LinkedIn is for displaying our professional background and Twitter keeps track on what’s happening in the world.

Now the social media services want to be something else, Facebook wants to become “a platform for human storytelling” where you’ll share your story with friends and friends of friends (not to mention the friends of your mad cousin in Milwaukee) while Google+ wants to become an “identity service”.

The fundamental problem for social media services is their sky high valuations require them squeezing more information and value out of time poor users by adding the features on other platforms; so Facebook tries to become Twitter while Google+ desperately tries to ape Facebook and Quora.

Adopting other services’ features is not necessarily what the users want or need; you may be happy to follow a Reuters or New York Times journalist on Twitter for breaking news but you, and them, are probably not particularly keen on being Facebook friends or professionally associated on LinkedIn.

If it turns out we don’t want to share a timeline of our lives with the entire world but just know how our relatives or old school friends in another city are doing, then the underpinnings of the social media giants value may not be worth the billions of dollars we currently believe.

This isn’t to say social media services themselves aren’t going away, it could just be that the grandiose dreams of the online tycoons where they become an identity service or a mini-Internet are just a classic case of overreach.

For Google and Salesforce, whose core businesses aren’t in social media, this could be merely an expensive distraction, but for those businesses like Facebook it could be that Myspace’s failure was the indicator that making money out of people’s friendships isn’t quite the money maker some people think.

Losing sight of what matters

Are we losing focus of what matters in our business?

Last Night Google’s chairman Eric Schmidt testified before a US Senate antitrust committee on the search engine company’s market power.

In opening his testimony, Schmidt alluded to Microsoft, saying “twenty years ago, a large technology firm was setting the world on fire. Its software was

on nearly every computer. Its name was synonymous with innovation.

“But that company lost sight of what mattered. Then Washington stepped in.

It’s an interesting and probably accurate perspective given how Microsoft has effectively lost its way for the last decade – although given Google’s urge to become an identity service and its buying a mobile phone manufacturer doesn’t auger well for their focus on the core search business.

Losing of focus of what matters is a problem for all business owners. We’re busy, it’s hard winning orders, getting paid and keeping customers happy so we lose track of the reason we went into business.

For most of us it was because we had a great business idea or a belief we could have a better life being our own bosses.

That latter objective is often the first one lost, usually we find ourselves working harder, taking fewer holidays and seeing the family less than if we’d stayed in a comparatively safe job with BigCorp.

Great ideas can also be our undoing – if you’re constantly having brainwaves, you find you have lots of ideas but no time to execute on any of them.

Similarly, one great idea that turns out to be dog can be bad news as well. Often, we’re loath to admit we’re wrong and hold onto a failing business idea long after it’s shown not to be viable.

Probably worst of all is when we violate our own values; many of us went into business because we didn’t like the values of the corporation we worked for.

Then one day we find we’re screwing subcontractors, that we’re leasing an expensive car the business can’t afford while cutting staff benefits and we’re tying up customers in legalistic contracts in attempt not to deliver the services we promised.

Just like the big company we swore we’d never become.

If you’re a big company with a lucrative business niche – like Google or Microsoft – you can get along quite nicely with the rivers of gold flowing subsidising your indulgences and distractions, most of though we don’t have that revenue buffer protecting our assets.

The cost of losing focus is a killer; even if it doesn’t kill our businesses, it will destroy our souls.

Are you keeping focus on why you went into business?

ABC Nightlife Computers: The Internet Name Wars

How the Internet’s name wars can affect you

The online empires want our names and identities, are the real costs of social media now being exposed? Our September ABC Nightlife spot on September 22 from 10pm looked at these issues and more.

Paul and Tony discussed how Google’s “Name Wars” or “nymwars” came about, why social media sites like Facebook and search engines want you to use to use your real names.

The podcast from the program is available from at Nightlife website, more details of Tony’s programs can be found there as well.

Is this a good thing or are there costs we should consider before handing over our intimate details to a social media or free cloud computing service?

Some of the topics we covered included;

What are the “name wars’?
Why do companies like Google and Facebook want us to use our ‘real’ identities?
How can they use the information they gather?
What problems does that cause for Internet users?
Can these problems spill into real life?
Are all web services doing this?
What are the risks to businesses using social media?
Is this the real cost of social media?

Some of the information we mentioned can be found here;

The cost of lunch: Google and Information Revenue
Google’s real names policy explained
Google’s Eric Schmidt on being an “identity service”, not a social network
Google’s company philosophy (note item two)
Why Twitter doesn’t care what your real name is

We’ll be adding more resources in the next few days, the next ABC Nightlife spot is on 20 October and our events page will have more details. If you have any suggestions for future programs or comments on the last show, please let us know as we love your feedback.

Cloud computing and Small Business September Digital Day

How can online tools help grow your business?

As part of the NSW state government’s Small Business September Digital Day for Startups and Growth Businesses, we’ll be looking at exactly what cloud computing is and how it can help businesses.

Some of the services we discuss in the presentation are listed in the Netsmart’s web post on the 5 essential cloud computing tools for business. Although there’s many more we’ll mention that can help organisations of all sizes.

Given the time constraints and the event’s focus is on the specific social media and cloud computing tools available to small business, much of the background information to the Online Tools to Turbocharge Your Business session is available in the previous series of posts about cloud computing previously done for the 2011 City of Sydney Let’s Talk Business series.

Detailed information from that presentation can be found on the following pages;

The networked business Part 1: What is cloud computing?
The networked business Part 2: The benefits of cloud computing
The networked business Part 3: Managing risk in the cloud
The networked business Part 4: The business case for cloud computing

All of the tools discussed in the Small Business September presentations are available in our ebook, Online Business Essentials which is available for all subscribers to our newsletter.

If you’d like to see the presentations themselves, both The Networked Business and Online Tools to Turbocharge your Business are available through the Slideshare service.

Seats are still available for both of the Digital Day presentations at the Telstra Experience Centre, Level 4, 300 George Street, Sydney. The Start Up session begins at 8.00am and the presentations for growth businesses begins at 1.00pm.

Come along if you’d like to learn how social media and cloud computing can help your business improve productivity while building an online brand.

The quiet revolution

Productivity gains of the 1990s were based on accessible computer technology, are we about to see a cloud computing revolution in our workplaces?

Earlier this weekPricewaterhouseCoopers released their Productivity Scorecard, which showed Australia’s business efficiency isn’t improving as fast at it once was and the country’s relative performance is steadily slipping down international tables.

One of the notable things in the PwC report is the massive growth of productivity in the 1990s, a point emphasised by the accompanying paper on business productivity in a presentation by economist Saul Eslake last month to the Reserve Bank of Australia.

Economists attribute most of this late 20^th Century growth to deregulation and privatisation by governments in the 1980s and 90s but the driving force was really computerisation that allowed most businesses to do much more with less.

Immediately noticeable for an Australian walking into a British, European or Japanese office during the early 1990s was the lack of desktop computers.

Australian businesses adopted technology a lot quicker than their counterparts outside of North America and this alone was probably responsible for the country’s relatively good productivity growth in that decade.

The arrival of computers – followed by desktop printers and Internet access – suddenly gave small businesses access the means to do jobs that even the biggest corporations had struggled to do previously and drove a rapid reorganisation of most offices.

Everybody from secretaries to architects and graphic designers to lawyers – even economists – suddenly found they had the tools at their fingertips to do work they could have only dreamed of prior to 1990. This drove massive productivity gains in businesses of all sizes.

From 2000 onwards, things became tougher as the easy gains had been made and the incremental improvements in technology, such as smartphones, cloud computing and web publishing didn’t have the same substantive effect the early PCs delivered with spreadsheets, word processing and desktop publishing.

The real challenge we now face in business – and government – is to start harnessing cloud computing driven online services that promise to deliver similar productivity gains to what we saw twenty years ago.

We have the tools; online office apps, Customer Relation Management services (CRM) and sharing platforms all deliver major improvements in the way we work within our businesses and with external partners like contractors, suppliers and event clients.

One of the most powerful aspects of cloud computing services is reduced capital cost meaning reduced barriers to entry into markets we previously may have thought were safe.

This easy access into established sectors is one of reasons the retail industry’s giants are now struggling as online competitors can setup cheaply and quickly while offering better prices and service.

Retail is only one of the more obvious sectors being changed by these technologies and as the decade continues we’re going to close to every industry be radically changed by low cost computers accessing the Internet.

As business owners and managers we need to look at our own processes and systems with an eye on how we can improve workflows and customer service within our organisations.

Those of us who manage to get these new technologies are going to reap the benefit of the next productivity wave, those who don’t are going to go the way that many uncompetitive and slow to respond industries did in the 1980s.

Trusting online reviews

How do we spot fake reviews on sites like Tripadvisor, Yelp! and Eatability

Review sites where customers can post their experiences are changing consumer behaviour and bringing a new level of accountability to businesses, but how do we trust the comments on which appear online?

Travel review site Tripadvisor is a good example of how consumers are able to spread the word about their good and bad business experiences, much to the displeasure of the UK hotel industry and its media friends. To make things worse, many of those reviews are further spread by social media services like Twitter and Facebook.

While the travel industry complains about fake reviews from competitors and disaffected customers, the majority of fake reviews are from hoteliers themselves pumping up their own business. It’s always interesting how many gushing reviews are from anonymous posters with only one or two reviews to their name.

Should any of the threatened court cases actually make it before a judge, there may be a few hoteliers finding themselves in an uncomfortable position, a classic case of being careful about what you wish for.

That’s not to say Tripadvisor doesn’t have a problem, the comments in a recent Telegraph story about the service show they have the web 2.0 problem of lousy customer support which comes from a low cost, user generated business model.

A more serious point which is overlooked by most of the critics is that Tripadvisor, like most travel sites, is linked to certain booking services. If you attempt to use the site to book a property that isn’t aligned with the site, it may well falsely report there are “no rooms available”, which is deceptive and will almost certainly fall foul of competition laws in most countries.

For users of sites, it means we have to be careful with what the reviews and the sites themselves tell us. So what should we watch for?

Spotting dodgy reviews

The obvious thing is the planted review. The easiest way to spot this is by the number of reviews submitted by the commenter.

If a commenter only has one or two reviews then it’s almost certain they either have an axe to grind or they have been submitted by the establishment or it’s staff as most rational people don’t have the energy or time to build a comprehensive profile of reviews just to shaft one place.

Another useful tactic is to look at the reviews around it, do others disagree with that reviewer or are they consistent? Outlier bad reviews can indicate a plant, a grudge or simply a bad day in the kitchen.

Dealing with bad reviews

As we’ve pointed out before, consistent bad reviews on these sites usually indicate a structural problem in the business however if you suspect a fake or planted review, most services have a “flag as inappropriate” option or a dispute mechanism.

Be careful using these however as flagging a legitimate complaint as malicious or fake may antagonise the poster and give the poor review more publicity than you would like.

The social aspects of the web, such as review sites and social media services like Twitter and Facebook, are going to become more important over the next few years as internet users use them to help sift through the massive amount of information on the net.

All businesses, whether in hospitality or other industries, need to take these sites and the reviews on them seriously.

Re-evaluating social media

How are you using social media services in your personal and business life?

We often forget the Internet as we know it is less than thirty years old and many of the social media tools we use have been around for less than five.

In such a new field, we’re all learning and experimenting which means some tools become essential while others are recognised as yesterday’s shiny toys.

As the depth of the name wars and the related privacy issues become apparent, it’s worthwhile re-evaluating how we use these services. Here’s how I’m now using some of the online social media platforms.

Foursquare

I quite like Foursquare, the idea of knowing which friends are nearby when you’re out on the town is great. But as someone who has a dismal social life, it was wasted on me.

The gamification angle is interesting, but the privacy implications of the service make me uneasy. I’ve stopped checking in and will probably close down my account pretty soon.

Empire Avenue

As a sociological experiment on the rampant egos and deep insecurities of the social media community, Empire Avenue is wonderful. Otherwise, it’s just another spammy online application trying to harvest personal information – I came, I saw, I decided life was too short.

Quora

On first glance, Quora looked good, but the changing of posts by moderators concerned me, the cliqueiness of users was the killer and I closed my account. I suspect Google Plus will kill this platform.

Google Plus

Apart from being a Quora killer and having some interesting collaboration feature, there doesn’t seem to be a compelling reason to use Google Plus instead of Facebook.

While it’s in its early days, I’m finding it less than compelling while Eric Schmidt’s claim it is an identity service rather than a social media platform deeply unsettles me and makes me less likely to engage in conversations on the service.

Facebook

When Facebook first became available I was intrigued as able to connect with relatives along with past and present friends always struck me as being one of the Internet’s killer apps. As various business features evolved, it was clear Facebook was a serious online tool.

The problem with Facebook has been the way strangers become friends, not to mention how acquaintances and relatives have a habit of posting private things you don’t particularly care to know about, along with the wave of invites to games and applications that come and go.

Overall, I’ve been using Facebook for business purposes rather than sharing private information for nearly two years now. That works, but it isn’t the intended use and I’m probably not getting the maximum benefit although I am preserving some modest degree of privacy.

As a means to establish your professional credibility, LinkedIn is unbeatable. For those with a lot of time, the various professional LinkedIn groups can be a valuable way to show your industry knowledge.

One thing that surprises me is how many people notice your status changes so it is certainly a good way of keeping your business network up to date with what you are doing.

The concern with LinkedIn is similar to Facebook and Google Plus in that there’s a lot of market intelligence being gathered on our professional networks and the recent attempt to ‘enhance’ social advertising around our online personas does not fill me with confidence that LinkedIn is the best platform to be displaying our professional abilities.

Twitter

I’ve had a turbulent relationship with Twitter and it took me three attempts to really see the point. I’m still careful about what I post and who I follow.

However Twitter has become my main news source and I find it keeps me ahead of the major media outlets. For this reason alone, Twitter has become the social media service I use the most.

What occurs to me in writing this is that these social media tools are really about listening, not talking or marketing. Perhaps that is the point we’re missing in the noise generated by these services, that listening is where the real power lies in these online platforms.

The six tools I’ve listed are just a small subset of a massive range of social media services, I’d be interested in hearing which ones you find useful and why.