Thursday, June 11
dailyblog image

Posts Tagged ‘Social Media’

Productivity and Foursquare? That’s a stretch

Friday, April 30th, 2010
by Duncan Kinney

The usually reliable Lifehacker is really stretching it with this article; Five Ways to Make Productive Use of Foursquare (and Not Be Annoying).

Foursquare is the refuge of the oversharer. The service broadcasts to Twitter, Facebook and your Foursquare friends  when you check-in at various locations around town. If you ever wondered why Johnny was telling you he was at “Mr. Benson’s Big and Tall Shop” via your Facebook stream, the answer was most likely Foursquare. The article has two good points.

Never ever, ever, ever link your Foursquare account to your Facebook or Twitter account. Just don’t do it.

It’s hard to overstate how crucial this is. Unless your goal is to show the world just how amazingly busy you are, you should not have every single check-in also appear on your Twitter and Facebook profiles

It helps you find good, nearby places to eat. Because people frequently live tips to the locations they check in to I’ve found that it really helps in the decision making process when you need a quick bite in an unfamiliar area.

Even if you don’t have a FourSquare account, you can test out the veracity of Foursquare tips using FourWhere, a Google Maps/Foursquare mashup. It requires Java, unfortunately, but works pretty well if you’ve got it.

This articles relation to productivity is tenuous at best. Just remember, if you enjoy Foursquare, never link it your other social streams.

Re-defining the Kodak moment

Tuesday, April 27th, 2010
by Jeff Lewis

Eastman Kodak, that timeless purveyor of Kodachrome film, is entering the social media fracas with gusto. A new campaign from the company that rode to prominence with the famous ‘Kodak moment’ tagline is updating the corporate brand to reflect the reality that film (sadly) is fringe.

The new impetus is reflected on a website that crows: The real Kodak moment happens when you share. “That is different from the longtime meaning of the words: a special instant that is — or ought to be — captured in a photograph,” writes NY Times reporter Stuart Elliot. Indeed, the new focus is centred on the idea that real moments (those warm, fuzzy feelings of goodwill) happen when you upload photos and attach them in emails, or post them on someone’s wall.

Look for Kodak to enshrine this idea in print and T.V. ads, as well as on the aforementioned website. Speaking of moments, check out The Big Picture over at boston.com for some incredible, and eerily end-of-days images of the eruption in Iceland. Sorry Kodak, this was a moment defined by grounded air traffic, volcanoes and, oh, economic losses topping $1.7 billion.

Killing your online self

Tuesday, April 6th, 2010
by Jeff Lewis

Tired of wasting hours on end spying on old high school chums? Paranoid that your voyeurism and online dithering at the office will get noticed by the boss? Perhaps it’s time you killed yourself; your digital self, that is.

Newspapers keen to coin the latest trend have latched on to a growing movement among Facebookers and their ilk to digitally off themselves in an effort to reclaim some semblance of the un-wired life.

Websites like Web 2.0 Suicide Machine make pulling the trigger on your virtual life easy. In language reminiscent of dustbowl folk singer Woody Guthrie, the website’s manifesto reads: “This machine lets you delete all your energy sucking social-networking profiles, kill your fake virtual friends, and completely do away with your Web 2.0 alter-ego.”

Of course, the ironic aspect here is that Web 2.0 Suicide Machine resembles a social network unto itself (albeit one that’s distinctly morbid). Still, give it a try. Why not discover real people for the second time? You’d at least get more done at work.

Social Media in the Workplace Survey

Monday, November 9th, 2009
by Duncan Kinney

Far too often people think the only ones vulnerable to fads are soft-headed teenagers. The tamagotchi and pet rock may have something to do with that assumption but businesses are not immune. Given the instantaneous nature of the internet fads go through the business world like lettuce through a rabbit. How many companies have just had to have a website/podcast/blog/iPhone app when it didn’t have the know-how, the necessary staff or the right fit.

Social media is in the same boat. Managers have heard of how great this Facebook/Twitter/LinkedIn thing is and they want in. Often the social media strategies come down on people on the junior side of things. People like me. I love social media and think it’s more than a fad. I think it has the power to engage audiences in ways that content producers have never had before but I think there some legacy businesses like Comcast, Zappos and Sun are doing some great things on the social web. I’ll give you a little behind the scenes on how we do things here.

We love Twitter at Venture. I am in charge of a bunch of Twitter accounts.

@DuncanAtVenture – A mix of handcrafted tweets and RSS feeds from Alberta Venture, Alberta Oil and Unlimited.
@UnlimitedMag – The official Unlimited Twitter account. Split between me and a couple of other Unlimited staffers.
@VentureMags – RSS feeds from Alberta Venture, Alberta Oil and Unlimited and announcements from Venture Publishing.
@DuncanKinney – My personal Twitter account.

Unlimited also has a Facebook Fan Page. If you like our articles and blog posts you should probably become a fan. Y’know, just saying.

We’re in a unique position as an online magazine but I want to know how other businesses are using social media in the workplace. I want to know whose shoulders it falls on and what services and strategies you use. We want to write an article on this, so the more contributions in the comments the better. Thanks!

Be a Savvy News Consumer – The Myth of Objectivity

Wednesday, September 30th, 2009
by Duncan Kinney

If you’re a regular news consumer I’m about to burst your bubble. Journalists are not objective robots and often have opinions on contentious subjects. For far too long the myth of objectivity has led to milquetoast journalism.

Why am I even talking about this? The Washington Post (they broke that Watergate story a while back) released a new social media policy in the past week that got a bit of blowback. Their new social media policy severely restricts what their journalists can say on social media sites like Twitter. You can read more about it here. The policy was hastily enacted after Raju Narisetti, one of its editors, had some, shall we say, inelegant tweets on certain issues. I’ll copy and paste the offending text here.

“We can incur all sorts of federal deficits for wars and what not. But we have to promise not to increase it by $1 for healthcare reform? Sad.”

“Sen Byrd (91) in hospital after he falls from ‘standing up too quickly.” How about term limits. Or retirement age. Or commonsense to prevail.”

Now, this is not to say that professional journalists shouldn’t be prudent with their Twitter accounts. If you’re a professional journalist there are certain expectations on your public life that are entirely reasonable. But a social media policy should be common sense, it shouldn’t read like this.

“Post journalists must refrain from writing, tweeting or posting anything – including photographs or video – that could be perceived as reflecting political racial, sexist, religious or other bias or favoritism that could be used to tarnish our journalistic credibility.”

and

All Washington Post journalists relinquish some of the personal privileges of private citizens. Post journalists must recognize that any content associated with them in an online social network is, for practical purposes, the equivalent of what appears beneath their bylines in the newspaper or on our website.

Reading these policies one sees the complete neutering of any kind of real, legitimate discussion by Washington Post journos. Howard Kurtz, a media reporter, had a memorable tweet saying that “Under new WP guidelines on tweeting, I will now hold forth only on the weather and dessert recipes.”

Mathew Ingram, the communities editor at the Globe and Mail has a great take on the subject with his article “Is transparency the new objectivity?

I think a smart reporter or writer won’t say things that would damage his or her credibility, either on Twitter or anywhere else… At the same time, however, a smart newspaper or media outlet should realize that using social media to connect with readers — even if that means embracing more transparency than it is typically used to — is a positive thing, rather than something to be feared and protected against.

The Post’s policy got James Poniewozik going as well with his article on Time’s website called “The Washington Post Slaps the Twitter Handcuffs on Its Staff“. Here are some juicy morsels from another excellent piece.

To successfully use Twitter et al., you have to give up control, and that scares the hell out of institutions like the Post. Their old way of doing business is to make sure that (except for a few stars like Bob Woodward) their staff remain anonymous drones who subordinate themselves to the paper’s brand.

But that day is over, and the Post only hurts its brand by handcuffing its writers on Twitter. Its policy amounts to: just don’t say anything interesting, and things will be fine.

I graduated from journalism school and the students and faculty all knew objectivity was a crock. So keep in mind that the next story you’re reading was written by a real person, they may not be objective but if they’re transparent about any conflicts of interest and strongly held beliefs and they’re worth a lick they should still be able to tell a decent story. If they aren’t transparent or don’t tell a good story vote with your eyes and read another article., it’s your job as a savvy news consumer.

Brave the New World Revisited

Monday, September 21st, 2009
by Rachel Singh

Early last August I came across an article by Clive Thompson on how constant-contact media (ex. Twitter) creates “social proprioception,” or a sixth sense, giving “a group of people a sense of itself, making possible weird, fascinating feats of coordination.” The idea resonated with me. I had an overwhelming feeling that there was some sort of connection between Thompson’s observations of social media and my own observations of the digital communities I frequented web editing for Venture Publishing’s magazines.

In the days that followed, the experience served as inspiration for a pitch I made to an editor at Unlimited. The idea was to write a humorous take on digital communication for our readers. What I ended up writing was a 546-word equation employing pure mathematics to map the evolution of communication. No joke.

I finished it at 4 am, and sat back dumbstruck by the realization that after leaving my academic studies in anthropology behind 10 years ago, I had come full-circle to the study of culture. This time, instead of studying ethnographies of the Pacific Islands and Latin America, I was looking at the shifting landscape of magazine journalism, Web 2.0 networks and the evolution of print.

And so, I have recently left Venture to pursue research about digital media and the evolution of publishing. I will be working toward a master’s of digital anthropology within the University College of London’s anthropology department. This new anthropology stream focuses on technology and culture — lessons and observations of which I’ll be sharing with you here on occasion as a guest blogger.

Special thanks goes to boss lady Ruth Kelly for giving me a job instead of calling the police when I refused to take ‘No.’ for an answer, digital queen Joyce Byrne for her mentorship and not laughing (or looking concerned) when I thought RSS stood for my initials, web and systems architect Gunnar Blodgett who taught me the same things (over and over again), editor Craille for being that sparkly something good each day (and more than a few evenings and weekends), and Malcolm Brown who from day one was a huge support and my #1 web ally (some people get it, some people don’t) and founding editor Dan Rubinstein for his support and kind words. And of course, Kent Bruyneel. Without him, I wouldn’t have stayed up late one night and written a theory that has now led me to exactly where I am supposed to be.

***

Sometimes it seems like our career trajectories take us to strange places and that we don’t always get the jobs we apply for. Cases in point: I wanted to be a hostess; I became an apprentice master chef. I wanted to work for the UN; I ended up teaching English in Taiwan and running backpacker hostels in Australia. I applied to be a managing editor; I was offered a web editing position instead.

That last one, landing this gig, was a year ago. At first it was eight websites, me and Gunnar and a camcorder. Now, a year later, Venture Publishing (which produces Unlimited) has expanded our portfolio of sites (including yours truly and WILL) and we’re making history by being up for an award at this year’s inaugural Canadian Online Publishing Awards thanks to a whole bunch of dedicated Venturites (besides those already noted, special mention goes to Kim Larson, Scott Messenger, Zoe Morris, Kelly Sysak and Daska Davis).

If there is any lesson to be learned, any business-savvy you might find applicable from my experience it would be the meaning behind the words in this postcard, given to me by my mentor Ron:

I CAME WITH NOTHING AND THEY BOUGHT IT

Those words have seen me through a lot – perfecting the creation of cold avocado soup with deep fried basil (which is disgusting by the way), fixing industrial-sized washers and dryers that have gone on the blink in the middle of the Australian outback, learning not to use toxic paint with toddlers during arts and crafts hour, navigating magazines online. Things like that.

The meaning behind those words are an uncanny match to the theme and title of my favourite issue of UL — the Comings & Goings issue, which said stuff like this:

mar-apr09 issue, unlimitedmag

“What are plans anyway? What are they but vague ideas we have of ourselves? For some of us it is clear: attach yourself to a profession like a stamp that addresses the envelope of your existence for the outside world. I am an accountant, one says. An editor, says another.

These are jobs though, not identities; I now understand the difference…. Coming and going is the process of discovering who you are and who you could be.

Kerouac [said] that the noble thing his beat generation could do was move. Maybe the millennial generation can find nobility and its identity in coming and going, too. Like finishing that story, when you come and go, you acquire new elements of yourself, and after time and practice, you can enlist them in the building of who you want to be. Wherever you are.”

Rachel Sarah Singh

Facebook vs. Google, or A Whole New Internet

Thursday, August 27th, 2009
by Craille Maguire Gillies

The Great Wall of Facebook. Photo illustration by Brent Humphreys for Wired

[The Great Wall of Facebook. Photo-illustration by Brent Humphreys, via Wired]

If Google is the king of the internet, then Facebook is the rebel prince, waiting not in the wings but on 40,000 of its own servers to overtake the search behemoth. Wired outlined the Facebook vs. Google boxing match, along with interesting stats on what exactly takes place each month on FB:

4 billion: pieces of info shared among friends and “friends”
850 million: photos shared
8 million: videos shared
200 million: number of users
240 million: how much Microsoft paid for a 1.6 percent stake in Facebook
1 billion: amount of money Yahoo reportedly offered for Facebook in 2007

Why is this important? Why does Google care? Facebook trades not in ad algorithms but in personal information, and Google can’t access most of that since the FB status updates you create (but never on company time!), along with most other data, is locked away on Facebook’s servers. This, as Wired puts its, “kneecaps” the very concept of Google.

There’s more. FB is rapidly expanding with the kinds of social networking engines that could create a parallel internet. Consider Facebook Connect, a 10,000-member-strong network of sites that pull your FB info on to them. Wired explains:

Go to Digg, for instance and see which stories friends recommended. Head to Citysearch and see which restaurants they reviewed. Visit TechCrunch, Gawker, or the Huffington Post and read comment they have left. On Inauguration Day, millions of users logged in to CNN.com with their Facebook ID and discussed the proceedings with their friends in real time.

Think about how you use Twitter. When someone I follow tweets a Bitly link on some obscure topic, I’m pretty likely to click on it and I’m pretty likely to find what they posted interesting. In the media sphere, I’m discovering all sorts of information and stories that I wouldn’t have otherwise. Likewise with Facebook. But on Google I just have a strange spider – albeit it a very smart one – suggesting ads, along with the linear, one-dimensional searches that I create. Maybe it’s reductionist, but Google’s brilliance as a place to find what I’m looking for is linear; Twitter is more of a stream of information, a string of information that flickers in my peripheral vision; Facebook, though, is a self-perpetuating web — its own web thanks to those 40,000 servers.

While we’re on the topic, join Unlimited’s Facebook page.

As much as we want to live open source lives, the FB privacy dilemma makes many people anxious about where the personal info they feed into it will end up. Are you rightly paranoid? Yup. Will you stop using it? Probably.

[But he looks so nice and innocent! Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg. Photo by Raphaël-Labbe, via Flikr.]

The Wired story explains a lot of business challenges Facebook, um, faces in its race to conquer the web, so I’ll let you read it here.

The story briefly touches on the web-sized ego of FB’s CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, with this gem: “Two years ago, he walked away from a reported nearly $1 billion offer from Yahoo for his company… His business cards once famously read: I’M CEO…BITCH. And he has described Facebook as a once-in-a-century communications revolution, implying that he is right up there with Gutenberg and Marconi.”

JobVite Recruitment Survey

Tuesday, June 23rd, 2009
by Craille Maguire Gillies
2009 JobVite Social Media Recruitment Survey

2009 JobVite Social Media Recruitment Survey

With all the talk about Twitter helping people find jobs — like the woman in California who tweeted her way to a job as a “lifestyle correspondent” at a winery for a cool salary of $10,000 a month — you’d think that all it takes it 140 characters to advance your career. Not so, at least if you consider the statistics from a recent study on job recruitment through social media. JobVite, a U.S. company, found that 95 percent of companies in the U.S. use LinkedIn to find job candidates, while 42 percent use Twitter. In fact, more companies reported using Facebook to recruit than Twitter.