Tag: Facebook

  • ABC Nightlife Computers: The Internet Name Wars

    ABC Nightlife Computers: The Internet Name Wars

    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.

    Similar posts:

  • Re-evaluating social media

    Re-evaluating social media

    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.

    Linkedin

    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.

    Similar posts:

  • Is Facebook worth $50 billon?

    Is Facebook worth $50 billon?

    Goldman Sachs’ recent $500 million investment in Facebook that values the entire business at fifty billion dollars raises the question, can a business that was founded in college dormitory seven years ago really be worth that sort of money?

    It is possible Facebook is worth that sort of money, but to figure out if it really is, we have to crunch some numbers. So here is a back of an envelope calculation.

    Learning from others

    The first thing we need to look at is similar examples, the closest comparison is Google who were launched on the stockmarket shortly after Facebook were founded and today have a market worth of $195  billion.

    So Facebook’s investors are valuing the business at about ¼ of Google’s size. Yahoo’s stock analysis of Google allows us to look at the rough numbers.

    Income

    Currently, Google is earning 29.3 Billion and making a profit of 8.5billion for a Price to Equity (P/E) of 23.26.

    To justify a 50 billion dollar valuation on similar rations, Facebook would have to make around 2 billions dollars profit on revenues of $8 billion .

    Facebook is reported to have made $1.2 billion in sales with $355 millon profit in the first nine months of 2010. If we extrapolate that, crudely assuming no revenue growth in the last 3 months, we come to 2020 earnings of $1.6 billion and roughly $450 million profit.

    So Facebook has to grow revenues and profit by a factor of five, based on the same ratios as Google, to achieve the $50bn valuation. Where could this come from?

    Advertising revenue

    The bulk of Facebook’s current revenue comes from advertising, according to Inside Facebook in 2009 all but $10million of their $660 million earnings came from one form of advertising or another.

    Online advertising is going to continue to grow spectacularly, a 2010 Morgan Stanley research paper illustrated (on slide 25 of the previous link) how advertisers will have to increase spending onling by $50 billion to match the Internet’s share of media consumption.

    It’s a fair assumption that Facebook, as the biggest social medial platform, will get a large slice of that $50 billion. If Facebook were to capture 10% of the market’s growth, they’d achieve their valuation easily.

    We should also consider that most of Facebook’s revenue is coming from the United States and they barely touched international markets, so there’s even more potential growth in their advertising revenue.

    Games revenue

    One of Facebook’s biggest growth opportunities comes from the games. Games like Farmville and Mafia Wars are proving popular with the user base; Zynga, the developer of Farmville, itself has a projected market capitalisation of $5.8 billion.

    The global games business is valued at $105 billion dollars and much of this market is moving to web based, online platforms. Should Facebook based games grab 10% of that market, the platform’s 30% cut would see another 3 billion go into Facebook’s revenue, most of which would be profit.

    The credits market

    Related to the games market is the sale of credits for purchases of games and other features like virtual, and real, gifts and products.

    It’s almost impossible to quantify what that market would be but already credits have gone on sale in US stores like WalMart and Best Buy and the virtual world site Habbo Hotel reports 2010 credit revenues of 4.5 million Euros on a user base that is a fraction of Facebook’s size.

    So is Facebook worth $50 Billion?

    Facebook’s fifty billion dollar valuation is feasible. That’s not to say there aren’t risks, it’s possible Facebook could turn out to be another fad like Myspace or that users might decide to value their privacy over Facebook’s benefits.

    While it’s not an investment you’d like to see your grandmother in as a safe source of retirement income, for risk tolerant Russian fund managers and high income clients of Goldman Sachs, it’s a punt worth taking.

    Similar posts:

  • Twenty Internet rules for politicians

    Twenty Internet rules for politicians

    In the 1960 US Presidential race, Richard Nixon’s campaign was thrown off course when his team misunderstood how the new medium of television worked from politicians. Today’s political candidates are facing the same challenges with the Internet and social media.

    Social media and the internet are great platforms for politicians to talk directly to their constituents without going through the filters of mass media however there are risks for the clumsy and ill-prepared.

    The main risk for politicians, and businesses, is the Internet increases accountability and magnifies gaffes; a mistake in a remote town that may not have been noticed by the press ten years ago can today be the lead story on the national evening news thanks to an audience member with a mobile phone.

    Social media increases that accountability as every tweet, Instagram post or Facebook update is effectively a public statement making these services powerful tools that need to be treated with respect.

    1. You’ve put it in writing

    As soon as a tweet, update or email is sent or published, it’s in writing against your name. Once you’ve posted it, it’s impossible to deny it – don’t even think about using the lame ‘my computer was hacked’ excuse. So don’t put on the Internet what you wouldn’t write in a letter or memo.

    2. Everything you do online is permanent

    Even if you delete an email, tweet or blog post after sending there will always be a copy somewhere. Nothing on the net is ever completely deleted and if it’s in the slightest bit controversial assume someone will make a copy. Think before pressing send.

    3. All online comment is publishing

    Prior to the Internet, publishing involved owning or hiring a printing press, radio station or television studio. Today anyone with a PC, tablet computer or mobile phone is a publisher. Every time you press “submit” you are publishing a comment with all the same potential consequences as writing an article or campaign flier.

    4. Off line rules apply online

    Many people on the net have the idea rules don’t apply online. Those people are wrong, defamation and electoral rules apply online as much as they do offline. What’s more, the Internet magnifies errors and dishonesty. Even if you haven’t strictly broken the rules, you still may find an ethical lapse could sink your campaign.

    The difference when you do it online is that the record is permanent and available world wide, that’s why it’s called the World Wide Web.

    5. The net makes copying easy

    In a digital world, all content is endlessly reproducible, so your material can be copied, altered and distributed easily. This was a lesson learned by a bunch of London lawyers ten years ago. Learn from their mistakes and use it to your advantage.

    6. Nothing is off the record

    Everything you write on the Internet is on the record; an offhand Twitter comment is just as official as a press conference statement or media release. So keep the smart comments off line. If you’re going to be rude about someone, don’t put it in writing on the net even if the message is supposed to be private.

    7. Online private and public domains are blurred

    While there are private channels on the Internet, the boundaries between them are not always clear. For instance a Facebook group can be seen by anyone who is a member, so postings in that group can be passed on from there.

    It’s also easy to make mistakes; a private Twitter message could go public if you hit the wrong key. There’s no shortage of horror stories where people have been included on email messages that were never intended for them.

    Assume everything sent on the Internet can potentially become public.

    8. Be transparent and consistent

    As a research tool, the Internet gives media, the voters and your opponents the opportunity to quickly verify every statement you make.

    If you are going say the dollar collapsed when your opponents were in government, check this really did happen. If your party promises a can of baked beans in every household then details of The National Baked Bean Access Program have to be online.

    9. The Internet loves a vacuum

    Should you leave questions unanswered, or if you make an empty promise with no supporting information, then you’ll find no shortage of people on the net willing to fill the blanks for you. Leaving people guessing is the quickest way to get an issue spinning out of control.

    10. Be careful of delegating

    It’s tempting to give the job of social media expert to the youngest staffer or volunteer in the office, however you are responsible for everything written. So if you delegate, think carefully. Blaming an over enthusiastic intern or contractor is rarely a good look even if it is true.

    A good example of this was Hugh Jackman’s Sydney Opera Center gaffe which was clearly a Tweet from someone who wasn’t Australian. While for Hugh it was a minor embarrassment, a similar trivial mistake could derail a political campaign or career.

    11. Think before you tweet

    The best measure for posting on the internet is never to say anything you’d be embarrassed to explain to your mother. In a political context, don’t say anything you’d be uncomfortable justifying to your party leader, whip or the host of a radio talk back program.

    12. Engage with your audience

    You need to be adding value, while mediums like Facebook, YouTube and Twitter are quite effective for getting out prepared material, that isn’t using those channels to their full potential.

    The word “social” in “social media” indicates how these services have become communities where people exchange views and participate. Your Facebook pages and Twitter streams should be engaging voters and acting as a rallying point for supporters. Think of them as a virtual 24/7 town hall meeting.

    13. The net is a big playground

    The Internet is a perfect democracy. Everyone who chooses to participate has a voice.

    This means the informed, engaged and intelligent have an equal voice with the ignorant, deranged and obsessed. While it is important to listen to what the lunatic fringe have to say, you don’t have to engage with them.

    14. You are judged by your company

    Be careful of joining online groups or being too closely associated with individuals who may be an embarrassment. Facebook is particularly bad for this as you’ll get many offers to join groups. Resist most of the invitations as even the funny ones could backfire.

    15. Play nice with the trolls

    On the net, you should never get into a fight. As the saying goes; “never wrestle with a pig; you both get dirty and the pig enjoys it.” The same applies with internet trolls.

    The Internet is the greatest invention for idiots, giving them a forum to exercise their ideas and find like minded fools. Don’t join, argue or engage with them, you’ll only encourage them.

    16. Don’t get clever

    One thing the Internet doesn’t do very well is humour, sarcasm and irony. So be very careful with the smart comments as what would be a funny off-hand line at a press conference or walk around could be totally misinterpreted online.

    Another problem is context which is easily lost on the net; be careful with statements that could be taken poorly by those not aware of the surrounding circumstances. This is particularly true with Twitter where it can be difficult for bystanders to understand the entire online exchange.

    17. The web is worldwide

    There’s no such thing as an intimate chat online. Everything you do could be passed on. You may only have a thousand Facebook friends or Twitter followers but if each of them has a similar following, that’s an immediate audience of a million people. Treat each tweet, post or update as if it is going out on the Morning Show or 7.30 report.

    Similarly, some political organisers think the web is best for rallying the troops. That’s a dangerous idea as many teenagers have discovered when a horde of gatecrashers have turned up to their Facebook advertised parties. Your political opponents are probably taking as much interest in your posts as your supporters.

    18. Don’t deceive

    The New Yorker once said “on the Internet no-one knows you’re a dog.” So it’s tempting to set up anonymous accounts and webpages to discredit your opponent or derail their campaigns.

    In reality, your posts in dog food forums will probably give you away and all but the most sophisticated hoaxer will leave clues in their digital footprint. Even if you cover your tracks, being mischievous can bring you unstuck.

    You need to also keep your volunteers and staff aware of this; by all means let them engage, promote and defend your positions but make it clear that underhand and childish stunts will hurt more than help if they are exposed.

    19. The net does not replace other channels

    The digital natives will tell you old media is dying and only the Internet matters while older comms people will mutter darkly into their drinks about the net being over rated as a tool. Both are wrong.

    Mainstream media and the Internet increasingly rely on each other as sources and distribution channels. Tools like Twitter help journalists find sources and spread stories while the news papers and TV shows provide material for Twitter and Facebook users.

    Where the Internet works particularly well is enhancing the “traditional’ channels of community meetings, media appearances, fliers and articles.  What you can’t say in a 15 second TV ad or 500 word article can be expanded on and enhanced online because you aren’t subject to other peoples’ restrictions and guidelines.

    20. Experiment and learn

    In a risk adverse world it’s easy to ask why you should bother with the Internet as most voters are still getting their information through mass media and advertising spending is still largely used for broadcast ads.

    The reason you need to be on the Internet is because your constituency has moved online and the broadcast journalists are online. You need to be listening to them and to understand how issues are developing and how these channels are being used.

    As these tools develop, they are going to become more powerful. The politician who ignores them today and misunderstands how the medium works could find themselves being remembered in the same way Richard Nixon was in 1960.

    Our society is increasingly using the Internet to debate and develop new ideas. If you hope to be part of those ideas, you need to be part of the debate.

    Similar posts:

  • The downside of social media marketing

    The downside of social media marketing

    Until last Sunday, Facebook was working well for jeweller Victoria Buckley; the page for her store in Sydney’s upmarket Strand Arcade was generating sales and had a rapidly growing fan base from around the world.

    One of the key parts of her marketing campaigns are porcelain dolls made by the Canadian designer Marina Bychkova. Her classic doll Ophelia features in the window displays, on posters in the store and on the shop’s Facebook page.

    Ophelia is a little bit different to most dolls in that she’s naked and anatomically correct — she has nipples.

    Last weekend Victoria received six warnings from Facebook about “inappropriate content” on her page. There was no indication of which images or text broke the rules or what would happen to her page if she took no action.

    “The frustrating thing is I can’t pinpoint which images” says Victoria, who goes on to point out that over the year she’s used Ophelia in her marketing, including two large banners in the busy shopping precinct, she’s received no complaints.

    “It’s all a bit arbitrary”, says Victoria “it only takes one anonymous person to click on the flag content button and there’s a problem”. Earlier this year her Flickr account was set to restricted because of Ophelia’s nudity.

    To avoid problems, Victoria has blacked out any potentially inappropriate parts of Ophelia on the store’s Facebook profile and started a “Save Ophelia- exquisite doll censored by Facebook” group until she can resolve the issue.

    But here lies another problem; she can’t find a way to contact Facebook. “It’s become an increasingly important part of the business” Victoria says of the Facebook page and “I just don’t know what’s going to happen to the site”.

    Right now Victoria has no idea what is going to happen to her business’s profile. As she can’t talk to Facebook, she’s uncertain of the page’s future.

    This uncertainty illustrates an overlooked issue with social media sites. All these services are proprietary, run by private organizations to their own rules and business objectives.

    In many ways, they are like private mall owners. They are perfectly entitled to dictate what merchants and customers can do on their premises. If you don’t like it, you have no recourse but to take your business elsewhere.

    As consequence these sites have a great deal of control over your online business, a lesson that’s been hard learned by many eBay and PayPal dependent Internet retailers.

    A good example of what can go wrong are the Geocities websites. Ten years ago Geocities was a popular free hosting site used by many micro businesses and hobbyists. Just over a year ago the now parent company Yahoo! shut them down and all the data on them has been lost.

    By relying another company’s Internet platform, you are effectively making them a partner in your business. That’s great while things go well, but you have to remember their business objectives and moral values are different to yours.

    This is why a business website is essential; your traffic and all your intellectual property is too important to sit on another businesses’ website with all the risks that go along with that.

    The lesson is that while using Facebook, Twitter and other Internet services are an important part of the business marketing mix, your business needs the security of its own website and all your marketing channels, both online and offline, should point to it.

    Fortunately Victoria’s across that, she’s pointing her Facebook fans to her website telling them, “You can join my independent mailing list at this link, in case they get really stupid and close this group.”

    Similar posts: