The Blogs as Aggregator

Posted on February 16, 2010 by Mark Cahill

Over the past two years, we’ve seen the genie come out of the bag on blogging. In the good old days if you wanted our content, you came to our blog. Now, our content is being automatically posted in a bunch of spots, perhaps on Facebook, Google Buzz, Google Reader, and even the headline shows up on Twitter.

Then we throw our participation on those other sites in, and now we’re all over the place. It’s hard for us to keep up with everything we’re doing, but our readers are at best getting an incomplete picture.

So I pose this question: should not our blog be the place where all of our participation is aggregated? Maybe this site indeed should be “All Things Cahill” as the name implies.

There are several problems:

We need to filter for unique content. The recent Google Buzz launch has shown that cross posting between services can lead to some truly weird looping problems. Multiple copies of the same post start to show up as Buzz posts to Twitter and Twitter sends to Buzz. Honestly, I’m surprised some of you haven’t unraveled the fabric of the universe…
What about the unique flavor of those services? Personally, I like the distinct difference between my Twitter posse, the Facebook crowd and my audience here. They’re all different communities and the idea of tying them all together here might be somehow denigrate that. For the record, Facebook tends to be my long time friends, the folks I have physically met, whereas Twitter is a more general distribution.
Does removing the message from the service remove it from it’s context? Quite probably, esp. in the situation that my comment is part of the ongoing discussion.

So I ask the question: does it make sense attempt to pull in as much as possible from around the web? Obviously twitter is here, how about Google Buzz, Foursquare, Yelp, etc.?

Deep down suspect we’d find overall the non-blog content is generally of much lower value. Share your thoughts…

Mattel Adds SMDB Barbie

Posted on February 14, 2010 by Mark Cahill

Mattel today announced they’ve add “Social Media Douche Bag” to the list of Barbie’s professions. The new Barbie, which comes complete with it’s own iPhone, iPad and Twitter account will hit store shelves soon.

“This career just kind of happened.” notes Mattel product coordinator, Roberta Smith. “We had a ton of left over ‘Journalist Barbies’ and ‘Dental Hygenist Barbies’ and we had a quick look at where those folks were going when they were laid off, and there it was, ‘Social Media Douche Bag Barbie’.”

Smith notes that “It was surprisingly easy. When we started looking into the profession, we couldn’t really find anything they really did. We did consider adding a voice chip that would tell everyone to ‘join the conversation’ but in the end, we felt that less was more.”

The project was not without it’s problems:

The new Barbie immediately monopolized access to the Barbie Dream Jet, flying around to conferences.
There were internal problems, when SMDB Barbie tried to tell Computer Programmer Barbie “she didn’t get it” and that you could “make up for lack of revenue with scale.”
SMDB Barbie had an annoying tendency to post confidential strategy on Twitter and Facebook. Even worse, it signed a consulting deal with Hasbro and began divulging Mattel secrets. Luckily, it had no real knowledge to share with the competition.
The doll kept demanding large checks for doing nothing.
The release date had to be postponed as SMDB Barbie “was presenting at SXSW” on the initial date.

If you’d like to own this doll, you should be aware there are some requirements for ownership:

You must have high speed broadband. This doll uses bandwidth like you can’t believe, Twittering, Facebooking, and using virtually any other social network it can find. Except MySpace. Cuz it’s not cool anymore.
You will be expected to wait in line at ToysRUs every time a new tech accessory is released. A new android phone? You’ll be buying it for her. A new Apple lappie comes out, you will be waiting in the snow to buy it for her.
You must own the Barbie Dream Jet, Start UP CEO Ken, and the Barbie Dream Loft.
You may NOT have Skipper or Computer Programmer Barbie. They are utterly incompatible.

The Illusion of Privacy

Posted on February 12, 2010 by Mark Cahill

The launch of Google Buzz this week has once again brought questions of privacy and social networking applications to the forefront. Just as many of us have questioned over the past few years the repeated failure of Facebook to respect our privacy.

To my mind, this is a very simple thing: never post anything to any networking service that you wouldn’t want to see again. Ever…

People have lost jobs over what they have posted on Facebook and elsewhere. I have seen it several times personally. Further, at some point you may need to search for a new job. A prospective employer may see that photo of you doing belly shots off that Asian hooker in Vegas last year, and bang, you don’t get a call back. In other words, it’s hurt you, badly, and you never even know it.

So right now, I bet a lot of you are saying “no problem, I’ll just clean up my profile if I need to do a job search.” The problem is that content often gets scraped off sites and turns up in other places. My content from this blog is regularly grabbed by sploggers and reposted elsewhere. It’s almost impossible to get the content removed. I’ve tried. Further, to take our Vegas analogy further, what happens if Google grabs that picture in their image search? Many bloggers use that service to find pictures to reusue, regardless of copyright. What would you think if your little Vegas picture appeared here?

Remember this: any semblance of privacy online is an illusion. From the beginning, your ISP could be logging what you do, Archive.org could be archiving the sites you post on, and Google could be indexing the images you post. Once it’s out there, you have no hope of pulling the information back. So think twice…and don’t put your faith in Facebook, Google or anyone else to respect your privacy.

The Day Social Media Went Mainstream – Google Buzz

Posted on February 10, 2010 by Mark Cahill

Google decided that I was ready for Google Buzz this morning, and it magically appeared in my email console. If you haven’t heard of it, watch this video:

On first take, when viewed inside of gmail, Google buzz seems to be a real yawn. Just another place where you need to update statuses to keep in touch with folks. Exactly what I’ve been warning would become the death of social media, the great diaspora wherein we all end up on separate and unconnected platforms.

That was my initial opinion, and now I can see I was dead wrong. This isn’t just another service, this very well could be THE service (I struggle to avoid LoTR analogies here). You see think about all the Google services, mail, image hosting, url shortening, search, profile, translate, Youtube, all woven into a single semi-open platform.

Instead of bits and pieces, we have the whole ball of wax. Then wrap in a nice little API which I assume they will offer and you have everything that Twitter, Facebook and all the other social media services aren’t – an all encompassing open social platform.

So what happens? Buzz becomes the lynch pin for the service that allows them to take on Facebook. Forget about Twitter, they are immediately an also ran service. By the end of the week, my Mother will be following me on Buzz, something that will never happen on Twitter. No, this is a Facebook killer of epic proportions.

Here’s how it goes. They firm up the platform, get people used to using it, then they make a simple pitch: who do you trust – Facebook or Google? At that point we all nod, and it’s “last one left on Facebook turn out the lights.”

This is the day when Social Media went mainstream.

NY Times: When iPhone Apps Are Too Smart

Posted on February 1, 2010 by Mark Cahill

The big secret of iPhone apps is coming out of the bag: most apps that are downloaded are rarely, if ever used.

While I’m not saying we’ve jumped the shark here, it is important to note that if the New York Times has picked up on this fact, then it’s approaching common knowledge. Read their article, “When iPhone Apps Are Too Smart” here.

So, for every zealous owner whose iPhone is loaded with little-known programs that predict asteroid fly-bys, there are many more Caroline Cuas, who seldom venture outside the predictable. Most say they’re too busy, too lazy or just plain flummoxed by the choices.

“I think I’m supposed to want more of them than I have,” said Julie Graham, a psychotherapist in San Francisco who echoed Ms. Cua’s vague anxiety. “There’s this sense that I’m missing out on something I didn’t know I needed.”

Ms. Graham, 50, said friends were shocked when she confessed to having failed to download Urbanspoon, a compendium of restaurant reviews. She now has it — and seldom uses it. “I don’t have time,” she said.

So what does it all mean? I’ll put it simply: don’t put too much stock into how many times your iPhone app (or any other) was downloaded from the App Store. More importantly, build in the appropriate mechanisms to allow you to find what the actual usage was. Once again, it comes down to a pure matter of metrics. How many page views, how many purchases, etc.

Similarly, we’ve got to bridge the gap between coding neat little apps that get downloaded and get to the point where we have serious apps that get used.

A few things to consider:

What is the core user need your app is fulfilling?
If there isn’t an existing need, what need are you creating?
Are you applying the tenets of online community building to maintain user interest?
What are the top apps you use? What is it about those apps that makes them compelling to you?
Have you closely examined competitor apps? What’s good about them? What isn’t? What can you do better?
What are the real metrics for your app? Compare downloads vs. actual usage.
Talk with real iPhone app users, not the Tech/SM crowd. What do they really use for apps?

Let me know what you see…I’d love to share info on this!

The Real Currency of Social Media

Posted on December 15, 2009 by Mark Cahill

“It’s people. Soylent Green is made out of people. They’re making our food out of people. Next thing they’ll be breeding us like cattle for food. You’ve gotta tell them. You’ve gotta tell them!” Soylent Green – 1973

So what is the real commodity of social media? It’s people. You and me, and all our friends. Period.

Over the past few weeks, this as really started to steam roller. Let’s take a look at a few examples:

Fake Steve Jobs (Real Dan Lyons) slams NY Times for their failure to report both sides of Zynga/Farmville
Jason Calacanis lashes out at Facebook’s slimy new “privacy” settings which in most cases remove all privacy in his post “Is Facebook unethical, cluelessor unlucky?“
The ACLU proves that Facebook Quizzes bypass all privacy settings for you AND YOUR FRIENDS *with tacit approval from Facebook*
Google CEO Eric Schmidt opines “If you have something that you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it in the first place, but if you really need that kind of privacy, the reality is that search engines including Google do retain this information for some time, and it’s important, for example that we are all subject in the United States to the Patriot Act.”

Read all the links then think about it. Basically the fine folks at Facebook, Google, etc. are selling us, and not even to the highest bidder. They’re selling us to any bidder that comes down the pike.

For the record, if you use ANY Facebook Apps, like Farmville or do Facebook quizzes, I consider it mandatory for you to take the ACLU quiz.

I’ve made the decision a few years ago to leave somewhat transparently on the web, but most of you actually believe you have some level of privacy. That level of privacy is, unfortunately, illusory.

Expect this to become a huge fight in the coming year. It won’t go away, and I suspect few of you will accept such cavalier attitudes towards your privacy.

It’s Time to Rethink the Permalink

Posted on November 30, 2009 by Mark Cahill

The permalink – nothing could be more core to the concept of blogging, and indeed, content management. In it’s early inception, it was the one link to rule all others. The problem is that with the advent of microblogging systems like Twitter, the permalink has been devalued and now faces possible extinction.

From Wikipedia:

A permalink, or permanent link, is a URL that points to a specific blog or forum entry after it has passed from the front page to the archives. Because a permalink remains unchanged indefinitely, it is less susceptible to link rot. Most modern weblogging and content-syndication software systems support such links. Other types of websites use the term permanent links, but the term permalink is most common within the blogosphere. Permalink is a portmanteau word made from permanent link. Permalinks are often simply stated so as to be human-readable.

Here’s the problem: while the permalink once was the one true way to identify our content, it’s now going more or less unused, as people instead link to shortened urls, using services like Bit.ly or others which provide character economy in the links that are used around the web. Hence, with shortened urls in use, it becomes much harder, if not impossible to find mentions and, in fact, discussions, surrounding our content.

I’ve decried over the past year the ongoing diaspora of blog comments. The discussion continues, but for many bloggers, its moving out of the confines of their blog, into the realm of Twitter, Google Sidewiki, and in the semi-walled garden of Facebook.

It was one thing when there were reliable Trackbacks, but the spammers have all but killed that for us. Hence the discussion continues, but it often continues without us, the folks that wrote the content in the first place.

So here’s the thought: perhaps it’s time we rethought permalinks. Instead of existing as a single link, there probably ought to be both a long form (the old permalink) and a short form (shortened url) with the shortened url using the service of the bloggers choice. Hence the blog software would have knowledge of both the long form (which would be used mostly internally) and the short form, that which would allow us to actually track where our content goes online. This would further enable us to pull the discussions surrounding our content back into our pages where it ought to be…

Hence a blog which currently might have comments and trackbacks separately identified, might actually list the origin of a comment, such as “Via Twitter” or “Via Facebook” and actually thread the follow ups, and potentially direct replies from our blog to those comments back to the platform they came from as well.

The key concept here is that the blogger must control the initial shortened url, because the url shortening service becomes utterly key to our solution. That service, like so many today, could provide us with an aggregated comment feed via rss, analytics data about where our shortened url was used, by who and also combine the data with the usage of our long form permalink.

What are your thoughts?