Tag Archives: Internet

Know The Length of Everything Online

Have you ever wondered how long your blog posts should be? That email you just sent, was it too wordy? What about your Facebook update? Did it go on forever? Maybe you’ve agonized over the proper word count for a blog title. Oh, come on, don’t act like it’s just me.

How long should your email be? How many characters should you use in your Facebook post? What is the proper count for use as your titles, tags, and other descriptions?

A lot of time has been put into calculating the exact length of titles, tags, posts and everything in between. The crazy good people at The Next Web have found out the best length for everything on the Internet. In fact, I may be typing too much right now! Take a look.

The-Length-of-Everything-online infographi

Editors Note: I took their advice. The title of this blog is only six characters, as they indicated it should be. Interestingly enough, the title of their blog was eight words. Things that make you go, hmmm.

It’s a Smart World After All

The “Internet of Things” is exploding.  It’s made up of billions of “smart” devices — from minuscule chips to mammoth machines — that use wireless technology to talk to each other.  Our IoT world is growing at a breathtaking pace–from 2 billion objects in 2006 to a projected 200 billion by 202.  SOURCES: IDC, Intel, United nations:

VIDEO: The Smart Work in 2020

In his post, When Things Matter More than People, author and marketer, Geoff Livingston shared that:

The Internet of Things is beginning to drive the tech industry and soon the marketing and media sector. You need look no further than this year’s CES to see the trend unfold. At the same time, social media is losing luster in the eyes of traditional technologists and marketers.

The Internet of Things incorporates Internet capable sensors into many objects in day-to-day life, including current electronics but also new unthought of ones (like refrigerator magnets).

iStrategy LabsPeter Corbett recently noted that Internet of Things trend was becoming a powerhouse in marketing: “If you’re a communicator and you’re not at least conversant in what’s going on in that space you’re at a dramatic disadvantage. With this technology, you can build anything from a James Bond style bookshelf opener to a Spongebob Skill Crane that you can play with over the Internet.”

Silicon Valley investors like Marc Andressen are focusing on start-ups that leverage sensors. And with good reason. The market opportunity for this new layer of smart things is huge.

From a marketing perspective, the Internet of Things allows incredible new possibilities for precision. Connected ads allow brands to serve content based on someone’s demographics as determined by their physical body or the data they willingly surrender via social media, mobile phones, and web cookies. Unique applications can be created (like pizza delivery by pressing the aforementioned refrigerator magnet) or apps like Nike’s sensor-driven Fuelband.

He goes on to share: It’s not that businesses won’t continue spending on social or that PR people/community managers will be out of work. Far from it. Social isn’t going anywhere. In fact, it’s a primary driver of data needed for contextual media and word of mouth trust. Social remains a valuable asset for companies.

It’s not that businesses won’t continue spending on social or that PR people/community managers will be out of work. Far from it. Social isn’t going anywhere. In fact, it’s a primary driver of data needed for contextual media and word-of-mouth trust. Social remains a valuable asset for companies.

It’s just that, well, social media marketing is not new anymore. You could argue that companies are in the learning phase, but last I checked they were still determining how to build a decent website, too.

Although I agree with Livingston that social isn’t going anywhere, I do wonder how companies can keep up with the trends and yet still stay true to our Brand Promise. How are we able to continue to make those personal connections; to remain change agents.  I asked Livingston, “what can you share with current social media marketing experts who may have no clue how to wrap their brains around the concepts you shared in your blog?  You say “social” isn’t going away but surely strategist will need to think about how they continue to market.  What should they be doing now to stay relevant and on top of things for their clients?”  Livingston replied:

I think social media marketers need to focus on how and where their interactions impact the customer acquisition life-cycle. We know now that social is not just top of the funnel, but an actual medium that touches various points. Where do you fit in, and how do you make sales increase?

I think social media marketers need to focus on how and where their interactions impact the customer acquisition life-cycle. We know now that social is not just top of the funnel, but really a medium that touches various points. Where do you fit in, and how do you make sales increase?

 

This post originally appeared in AllThingsE.  Read the full story here.

The Internet Makes it More Likely You Will Be Social, Not Less

I once had someone say to me that he couldn’t understand why a group of social media folks were getting together in real life for a social media conference. He was talking about SXSWi and was clearly clueless but I like that there is now data to back up the fact that those of us in social media are actually… well… social!

Amplify’d from gigaom.com

Four out of five Internet users participate in some kind of group in the “real” world, compared with just 56 percent of those who don’t use the Internet regularly, according to a new study from the Pew Research Center’s Internet and American Life Project. Those figures rise to 82 percent for users of social networks, and to 85 percent for users of Twitter — in other words, being social online makes it more likely you will be social offline as well.

Ever since the Internet first started to go mainstream, there has been an image of the archetypal Internet user: someone hunched over a computer in the dark, spending hours online instead of interacting with people in the real world. Although such creatures undoubtedly exist, this has always been an unfair portrayal of most people who spend time online, and the Pew data confirms that. Lee Rainie of the Pew Center said in a statement:

Use of the Internet in general, and social media in particular, has become the lubricant for chatter and outreach for all kinds of groups ranging from spiritual communities to professional societies to ad hoc fan clubs.

The Internet-related results are part of a larger Pew report on the real-world social activity of Americans — how many people belong to social groups in their communities, what kinds of groups they tend to join, how membership breaks down based on age and income, etc. But as part of the study, the group also asked those who belong to groups about their use of the Internet and of social media and social networks.

The report also found that a majority of Americans — both Internet users and non-Internet users — believe the Internet has increased the ability of groups to communicate with members and to draw attention to an issue. The report also found that those who are members of groups and associations say the Internet has had a major impact on their ability to communicate with and stay connected to other members of those groups, and to stay informed about the group’s activities:

  • 68 percent of all Americans (both Internet users and non-users) said the Internet has had a major impact on the ability of groups to communicate with members.
  • 62 percent of all Americans said the Internet has had a major impact on the ability of groups to draw attention to an issue.
  • 59 percent of all Americans said the Internet has had a major impact on the ability of groups to organize activities.
  • 53 percent of online users who are active in groups say the Internet has had a major impact on their ability to keep up with news and information about their groups
  • 46 percent of Internet users who are active in groups say the Internet has help them be active in more groups than would otherwise be the case.
  • Read more at gigaom.com

    Internet Gains on Television as Public’s Main News Source

    I have to admit, I check my newspaper apps (which seems like an oxymoron) upon rising each day. If I find a national news story particularly interesting, I’ll head to the Internet long before I turn on the TV. I even turn to a TV station’s website long before I actually watch the news on TV. So, where do you get most of your national news from and what does this say about broadcast news?

    Amplify’d from people-press.org

    The internet is slowly closing in on television as Americans’ main source of national and international news. Currently, 41% say they get most of their news about national and international news from the internet, which is little changed over the past two years but up 17 points since 2007. Television remains the most widely used source for national and international news – 66% of Americans say it is their main source of news – but that is down from 74% three years ago and 82% as recently as 2002.

    The national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Dec. 1-5, 2010 among 1,500 adults reached on cell phones and landlines, finds that more people continue to cite the internet than newspapers as their main source of news, reflecting both the growth of the internet, and the gradual decline in newspaper readership (from 34% in 2007 to 31% now). The proportion citing radio as their main source of national and international news has remained relatively stable in recent years; currently, 16% say it is their main source.

    An analysis of how different generations are getting their news suggests that these trends are likely to continue. In 2010, for the first time, the internet has surpassed television as the main source of national and international news for people younger than 30. Since 2007, the number of 18 to 29 year olds citing the internet as their main source has nearly doubled, from 34% to 65%. Over this period, the number of young people citing television as their main news source has dropped from 68% to 52%.

    Among those 30 to 49, the internet is on track to equal, or perhaps surpass, television as the main source of national and international news within the next few years. Currently, 48% say the internet is their main source – up 16 points from 2007 – and 63% cite television – down eight points.

    Read more at people-press.org

     

    The Future of Television and the Digital Living Room

    The future of TV & Film will be as different as the transition from radio to TV was. As is widely known “many of the earliest TV programs were modified versions of well-established radio shows.” Why wouldn’t we think that 50 years from now our initial Internet meets TV shows won’t seem just as quaint?

    Amplify’d from www.fastcompany.com

    TV

    Nobody can predict 100% what the future of television will be so I won’t pretend that I know the answers. But I do know that it will form a huge basis of the future of the Internet, how we consume media, how we communicate with friends, how we play games, and how we shop. Video will be inextricably linked to the future of the Internet and consumption between PCs, mobile devices, and TVs will merge. Note that I didn’t say there will be total “convergence”–but I believe the services will inter-operate.

    The digital living room battle will take place over the next 5-10 years, not just the next 1-2. But with the introduction of Apple TV, Google TV, the Boxee Box, and other initiatives it’s clear that this battle will heat up in 2011. The following is not meant to be a deep dive but rather a framework for understanding the issues. This is where the digital media puck is going.

    While we won’t get through all of this, here are some of the issues in the industry that I plan to bring up and ones I hope we’ll discuss tomorrow:

    1. “Over the Top” video distribution–Apple TV is brand new and is priced at $99. Given how Apple’s products are normally delivered to near perfection it is likely to be a huge holiday hit this year. While their past efforts at Apple TV have been mediocre it seems clear that this time they’re really trying to get it right. That said, Apple will remain a closed system designed to drive media consumption through a closed iTunes system and a take a toll for media distribution.

    apple tv The device itself will have no storage. So without my weighing into the pro’s / con’s of this I can say that I believe it will capture a large segment of the market but leave room for “open platforms” to play a big role.

    Just as in the mobile battle when Apple goes closed it creates an opportunity for somebody that is substantively open. Enter Google. If you’re an OEM who wants to move more hardware but you don’t have the muscle to create an entire media ecosystem then you’re best off finding a partner who can build a software OS, app platform, and search capabilities.

    So it is unsurprising to see companies like Sony, Logitech, and Intel partner with Google. Google balances the universe and helps all of the hardware, software and media companies ensure it isn’t a “one horse race.”

    That said, it would be an understatement to say that traditional media is skeptical about Google’s benevolence and many fear a world in which video content margins are crushed in the way that print & music have been with the primary beneficiary having been Google. So while they enjoy a race with two major brands competing they also have three other strategies they’ll pursue.

    • they’ll try to “move up the stack” and provide some of these services themselves. Thus you see television manufacturers rushing to create content ecosystems, app platforms, TV OS’s and Internet offerings.
    • they’ll continue to partner with the MSO’s: tradition cable & satellite providers as well as the new FiOS offerings from Telcos. The MSO’s are today’s distribution platforms and they still have a lot of muscle in the ensuing years.
    • they’ll continue to look for independent technology partners. They will find the Hobbesian power relationship more palatable than strengthening what they consider their “frenemies” (Apple & Google) and as a result will work with independent players like Boxee.

    I have always thought there was room for an independent success story like Boxee or someone similar. I’ve always believed that such a player would only succeed if they could capture an enthusiastic user base that feels compelled to use their platform to discover and consume content. Clearly Boxee captured the imagination of this early-mover user base 2 years ago. The launch of their new Boxee Box in November and the user acceptance of that will be telling for their future development.

    2. Attempts at “moving up the stack”–In 1997 I led a project to help senior management at British Telecom define its Internet strategy. I did some market sizing analysis and wrote a strategy paper called, “It’s about the meat & potatoes, not the sex & sizzle.” I argued that if BT was focused there would be a large business in access services (dial up, ISDN and the equivalent of T1′s), hosting services and other infrastructure related products that would be very profitable and they had a great chance to corner the market on a high-market growth business.

    samsung tv app storeMy paper warned of the dangers of trying to “move up the stack” and become a content company. At the time all telco’s were envious of Yahoo! and Excite in particular as well as all of the Internet companies with grandiose stock market valuations. The attitude was “I’ll be damned if those young kids are going to get rich off of our infrastructure.” Needless to say BT didn’t follow the advice of my paper and it went bananas for content deals signing a string of money-losing content partnerships. I guess shareholders would have probably punished them for being boring and prudent.

    Fast forward nearly a decade and it was unsurprising to me to see the death grip that global mobile operators placed over the handsets. They threatened any hardware manufacturer with not putting anything but operator approved software on the phones. In this way they locked down the device (they controlled the phone distribution market through owning retail stores and subsidizing handset costs). The mobile operators were run largely by the same people who ran the wireline telcos a decade early and still felt screwed by the tech industry. The created a hegemony that delayed innovation until January 2007 when the iPhone was introduced.

    The iPhone broke the hegemony with hardware and software that had no telco software on it–thus the Faustian AT&T / Apple iPhone deal. They both gained. They both lost. But ultimately we all won because consumers finally had enough of locked down, crappy software from telcos. Imagine how much mobile telco money still exists in meat & potatoes. Imagine if one of them had created a Skype competitor.

    So entering 2011 why does this matter? I see a repeat from television manufacturers and MSO’s. They know that the world is changing and they’re shit scared of what that means for hardware and pipeline providers. The hardware manufacturers are on razor-thin margins and see that having apps on TVs will be a way to build direct relationships with consumers and built higher margin businesses. It’s hard to blame them. But none of this will stick. Not because they are bad companies–but because software is not a core competency.

    They will never succeed in these businesses. And I think the smartest hardware providers & MSOs are the ones that will sign unique and daring partnerships with startup technology firms. But the whole market will develop more slowly as we watch this bum fight take place. Get your seats ringside–it will take place over the next 2-3 years.

    3. The “second screen”–One of the most exciting developments in television & media to me will be “second screen” technologies built initially on iPads and extended to the plethora of devices we’ll see over the next 3-5 years. And this will be real innovation and revolutionary in the way that the iPad is, rather than just being incremental. It will involve 3D (see Nintendo’s moves, for example). You’ll likely see applications that draw you into interactive experiences, connect you to your social networks, help you browse your TV better, and create a richer media experience overall.

    ipad iphone couchI think we’re in the 1st inning of second screen technologies and applications, and this movement will create whole new experiences that the 50+ crowd will lament as “ruining the TV experience.” The 15-30 crowd will feel like this is what TV was meant to be–social. In my opinion this will replicate what most of us 40+ year olds already experienced when we were in our 20′s. We’ll have the post show water cooler effect that was popular in the Seinfeld era. We’ll have simultaneous viewing parties like we did for Friends or Melrose Place. But most of it will be virtual.

    4. Content bundling–When there was one pipe capable of broadband delivery leading into our house the person who controlled this could control what we saw and it was delivered in a linear timeframe. As a result it became popular to bundle content together and get us to pay for “packages” when all we really wanted was The Sopranos or ESPN. We all saw what happened when technology let us buy singles on iTunes rather than whole albums pushed by record labels. No prizes for guessing what the future holds for video. The idea of forced bundles will seem archaic. Smart companies will figure this out early. The “Innovator’s Dilemma” will hold others back. The bundle is the walking dead. Only question is how long it survives.

    5. Torso TV – Television was designed for a mass audience in a single country. One of the things that has fascinated me over the past couple of years is the rise of global content and its ability to develop a “niche” global audience that is relevant. Think of about the rise of Japanese Anime, Spanish Novelas, Korean Drama, or the rise of Bollywood entertainment from India. It’s not a mass, mainstream audience but I would argue that it’s “global torso” content that will be meaningful at scale. Websites like ViiKii, which have been launched to create realtime translations of shows by fan-subbers, have huge followings already. And I’m sure that this is what popularized the SlingBox in the first place. British, India & Pakistani ex-pats on a global scale want to watch cricket.

    I believe that NetFlix has won the battle for the “head end” of content from films. They have such a strong base of subscribers and their strategy of “Netflix everywhere” is brilliant. We watch it on the iPad. We pause. We turn on our TV and get it streamed through the Wii. And it’s available also on the Apple TV. It’s on Boxee. It’s effen awesome. Game over. IMO. But the torso? It’s up for grabs. And I think players like Boxee understand this is a juicy and valuable market. As does ViiKii and countless others racing to serve fragmented audiences the good stuff.

    6. YouTube meets the television–It was funny to me to hear people say for years that “YouTube had no business model.” It made me laugh because it is so obvious when you capture an entire market of passionate consumers in any market–especially in video–that in the long-run it becomes a huge business. So many people are stuck in the mindset that YouTube is UGC (as defined as people uploading silly videos or watching Coke and Mentos explode) and that brands don’t want to advertise on UGC.

    And meanwhile I’ve seen several L.A. startups focus on creating low-cost video production & distribution houses. They are quietly accumulating audiences in the same way that Zynga did on Facebook. And if you think that these guys can’t monetize then I’ll refer you to everybody’s arguments about games–that free-to-play would never work in the U.S. And meanwhile Zynga is one of the fastest growing companies in U.S. history.

    kassem gWhat Zynga understood is that you need to go where the consumers are, capture those audiences, build a direct relationship and then diversify channel partners. This is happening in spades now on YouTube as a new generation of viewers is being served up by a new generation of TV production houses that are currently under the radar screen of many people. This will change in the next 2 years.

    And as they explode and become bigger companies YouTube becomes even more of a Juggernaut. And don’t forget that as the Internet meets TV, YouTube will continue to be a brand to be reckoned with served up by Google TVs.

    7. Content discovery–new metaphors–Anybody who tries to search for a program to watch on TV on an EPG (electronic programming guide) knows just how bad they are for finding “the good stuff.” And for a long time the Internet has been that way, too. The best online video search tool (in terms of usability) that I’ve seen is Clicker. By a long shot. Do a little test yourself. Trying searching for something on Hulu. Then try the same search on Clicker. Try it first for content that is on Hulu and then for content that is not. And Hulu’s search is actually reasonable.

    Much of web video search is bad at finding “the good stuff” including YouTube itself. Try searching “Dora the Explorer” in YouTube and then try it on Clicker. And then try it on Hulu. I feel confident that any user trying this will not go back from Clicker (no, I’m not an investor).

    But as the Internet & TV merge it will be a major fight for how you find the good stuff. Google isn’t that good at video search today. Will this change in a world of Google TV’s? Boxee prides itself on social TV & content discovery. Will their next version blow us away and be the way we search our TVs? Will the MSO / EPG world improve (answer: not likely)? What about discovering content on our TVs via Twitter or Facebook? Or some unforeseen technology? Will we discover stuff through second-screen apps?

    Technology such as that being created by Matt Mireles over at SpeakerText is trying to make video transcriptions and make video more searchable and discoverable. Imagine that world. I’m sure others are focused on solving this great problem.

    The amazing thing about content discovery is that it can alter what is actually viewed and thus becomes a powerful broker in the new TV era where pipes don’t have a stranglehold on eyeballs.

    I have no idea who will win. I only know who won’t.

    Read more at www.fastcompany.com

    ivi TV Sues Major Media, Claiming Right To Internet TV

    Here’s a nice twist on the side of the digital video company. Chalk up one for the tech team!

    Amplify’d from www.mediapost.com

    IVI-TV-B

    Another digital video company has ridden the wrong side of some copyright issues in running television programming via the Internet. But in an unusual twist, the company — Seattle-based ivi TV — has decided to sue first. 

    The company launched last week and immediately received cease-and-desist notices from all the big TV broadcasters and media companies: NBC Universal, CBS, Walt Disney, ABC, The CW Television Stations, Fox Television, Major League Baseball, Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, WGBH, WNET.org, and Seattle-based TV station group, Fisher Communications.

    Because of its technology, ivi TV said it complies with copyright laws, and in a complaint filed earlier this week says “secondary transmission of an over-the-air primary transmission is not an infringement of copyrights in the works contained in the primary transmission.”

    The complaint was filed in the United States District Court in Seattle, Washington, on Monday, as “a preemptive move to discourage needless litigation from big media.”

    Todd Weaver, founder and CEO of ivi TV, says: “ivi is not another Pirate Bay or Napster trying to gain from others’ works. Rather, ivi wishes to work with content owners in helping them to realize new revenue streams and reach more viewers from around the globe.”

    The company says ivi TV “gives people what they have wanted for years, easy-to-use live Internet TV anytime, anywhere to almost any bandwidth speed on a growing number of Internet-connected devices.”

    Read more at www.mediapost.com

    The Internet… how far we’ve come and where we go next!

    “In only a few short years, electronic computing systems have been invented and improved at a tremendous rate. But computers did not ‘just grow.’ They have evolved… They were born and they are being improved as a consequence of man’s ingenuity, his imagination… and his mathematics.” — 1958 IBM brochure

    Amplify’d from www.smashingmagazine.com

    The Internet is a medium that is evolving at breakneck speed. It’s a wild organism of sweeping cultural change — one that leaves the carcasses of dead media forms in its sizeable wake. It’s transformative: it has transformed the vast globe into a ‘global village’ and it has drawn human communication away from print-based media and into a post-Gutenberg digital era. Right now, its perils are equal to its potential. The debate over ‘net neutrality’ is at a fever pitch. There is a tug-of-war going on between an ‘open web’ and a more governed form of the web (like the Apple-approved apps on the iPad/iPhone) that has more security but less freedom.

    Brochure in The Future of the Internet

    An illustration of a computer from a 1958 IBM promotional brochure titled ‘World of Numbers’

    So what’s the next step in its evolution, and what’s the big picture? What does the Internet mean as an extension of human communication, of the human mind? And forget tomorrow — where will the web be in fifty years, or a hundred? Will the Internet help make the world look like something out of Blade Runner or Minority Report? Let’s just pray it doesn’t have anything to do with The Matrix sequels, because those movies really sucked.

    This article will offer in-depth analysis of a range of subjects — from realistic expectations stemming from current trends to some more imaginative speculations on the distant future.

    Read more at www.smashingmagazine.com

    Are you getting distracted by your interactions on the Internet? The Freedom app has come to the rescue!

    Have I written one chapter of my book today? No. Have I sent in either of the proposal that are due by COB tomorrow? No. I have, however, done about 15 Facebook comments, countless tweets and several Amplify posts. Will I pay for an application that locks me out of the sites that distract me on a daily basis. Probably not, at least not yet. I would like to think I can self monitor myself. Having said that, I STILL need to post my 12 Step Social Networking Addiction blog. OK, clearly and very sadly, I need to purchase this Freedom productivity application. 😦

    Amplify’d from macfreedom.com
    Freedom is a simple productivity application that locks you away from the internet on Mac or Windows computers for up to eight hours at a time. Freedom frees you from distractions, allowing you time to write, analyze, code, or create. At the end of your offline period, Freedom allows you back on the internet. You can download Freedom immediately for 10 dollars through either PayPal or Google Checkout.

    Icon

    Freedom enforces freedom; you’ll need to reboot if you want to get back online while Freedom’s running. The hassle of rebooting means you’re less likely to cheat, and you’ll enjoy enhanced productivity. Freedom does one thing and it does it exceedingly well: It helps you get work done.Read more at macfreedom.com

    The Huffington Post is profitable, although just barely.

    According to Newsweek, in an engaging profile of Arianna Huffington, the popular and expanding Huffington Post generates little more than $1 per reader each year. So while it is clearly the winner among Internet media companies a new business model may be in order.

    Amplify’d from www.newsweek.com

    Charles Ommanney / Getty Images for Newsweek

    Arianna Huffington at her home in July.

    If you had to declare a winner among Internet media companies today, the victor easily would be Arianna Huffington. Her site, The Huffington Post, attracted 24.3 million unique visitors last month, five times as much traffic as many new-media rivals, more than The Washington Post and USA Today, and nearly as many as The New York Times. HuffPo’s revenue this year will be about $30 -million—peanuts compared with the old-media dinosaurs, but way better than most digital competitors. And HuffPo has finally started to eke out a profit.

    Those numbers, however, don’t fully convey the site’s place in this new-media world. What began five years ago as a spot for Huffington and her lefty celebrity friends to vent about the Bush administration has become one of the most important news sites on the Web, covering politics, sports, entertainment, business—along with plenty of tabloidy stuff to drive clicks, like photos of “Jennifer Aniston’s topless perfume ad.” HuffPo’s mission, Huffington says, is “to provide a platform for a really important national conversation.”

    Read more at www.newsweek.com

    The Huffington Post is profitable, although just barely.

    According to Newsweek, in an engaging profile of Arianna Huffington, the popular and expanding Huffington Post generates little more than $1 per reader each year. So while it is clearly the winner among Internet media companies a new business model may be in order.

    Amplify’d from www.newsweek.com

    If you had to declare a winner among Internet media companies today, the victor easily would be Arianna Huffington. Her site, The Huffington Post, attracted 24.3 million unique visitors last month, five times as much traffic as many new-media rivals, more than The Washington Post and USA Today, and nearly as many as The New York Times. HuffPo’s revenue this year will be about $30 -million—peanuts compared with the old-media dinosaurs, but way better than most digital competitors. And HuffPo has finally started to eke out a profit.

    Those numbers, however, don’t fully convey the site’s place in this new-media world. What began five years ago as a spot for Huffington and her lefty celebrity friends to vent about the Bush administration has become one of the most important news sites on the Web, covering politics, sports, entertainment, business—along with plenty of tabloidy stuff to drive clicks, like photos of “Jennifer Aniston’s topless perfume ad.” HuffPo’s mission, Huffington says, is “to provide a platform for a really important national conversation.”

    Read more at www.newsweek.com

    Huffington Post well on it’s way to becoming an Internet Newspaper

    At a time when traditional newspapers and publishing as a whole are facing some of their most challenging times, the Huffington Post has found a way to remain relevant. Positioning themselves as an “Internet Newspaper” is a brilliant idea in my book or rather… iBook.

    Amplify’d from www.thewrap.com

    Last summer, when the Huffington Post was prepping the launches of its sports, tech and books sections, Arianna Huffington told me – and anyone who would listen – that her goal for HuffPo all along had been to create an Internet newspaper.

    “We always knew that with our core values of news and opinion and community, we wanted to cover more than just politics,” Huffington said. “We needed to speak to more than that, to move like an Internet newspaper.”

    On Wednesday, Huffington inched even closer, launching a travel section.

    The section, HuffPost Travel, will be edited by Kate Auletta, the daughter of New Yorker writer and author Ken Auletta and former assistant features editor at “WSJ.” – the Wall Street Journal’s luxury magazine.

    Read more at www.thewrap.com

    Social Media Scams

    picture credit to mohtballmilstone.org

    I read a post from Premier Social Media on Social Media Scams and thought about all the ways people are abusing the social digital space.  You know who they are, they friend you on Facebook to place ads on your page.  They fill your Twitter stream with “ways to your teeth white” or information on how “you too, can make money online”.  Then there are the folks who send you videos… a scammer or hackers favorite way to get your attention.  They often send it from a real friend compromising both accounts.  Here are of my steadfast Social Media rules:

    • If you try to sell me a product I will not engage with you
    • I do not open videos from anyone… period… unless I’m expecting a link
    • I don’t open links if there isn’t a message in the subject line
    • If I see repeated messages in any of the Social Media places I live I will “unfollow” or “unfriend” you
    • I will not follow back someone who is new in the space unless I know them personally.  By that I mean, if you only have two tweets on Twitter it’s not time for us to communicate… I need to see why you are where you are and what your messaging will be about
    • Finally, no photo, no profile information and no contact info… no reason to engage with you

    Here’s some great information on the subject from Premier Social Media in their post

    Social Media Scams: How To Spot Them

    Like any other popular medium, scammers have begun to really attack social media. The problem is that it’s not always as easy as you might think to spot them. After all, the main point of social media is talk up our businesses and ourselves, right? Networking involves discussing what you do and leaving relevant links . . . but some people take this too far and use Twitter, Facebook and other sites to promote complete scams. Here’s how to spot them.

    They promise to help you earn money. Social media works very well as a networking tool. It can be used to promote your business, too, but it’s not that great for actually raking in the cash. So, if you see someone offering to help you get rich on Twitter (or any other site, for that matter), beware! Too often, these scammers want you to send them money and they will share their secrets . . . or not.

    Robot tweets. Twitter is probably the most vulnerable to auto messages, though other sites do have issues with this, as well. If you see the exact same message popping up on everyone’s accounts, you need to be careful. It’s probably being sent out automatically and without actually being recommended by the person who sent it.

    Incorrect descriptions. When you see someone suggesting you take a look at their latest baby pic, then when you click you end up on a weight loss site, get out fast! This is a common scam, where the text is designed to make you want to click on the link, which actually takes you to a download page or requires you to sign in for something . . . which gives them your account name and password. You should also have an up to date anti-virus and anti-spyware program on your computer, since these sites can infect your computer.

    People become your friend only to sell you things. While there are plenty of interesting, useful people on social media networks, you’ll find that there are also entirely too many who pretend to be interesting and friendly, but once you’ve accepted them, they start bombarding you with pyramid schemes and assorted other scams. This is usually because the only way for them to make their money back is to get you to join.

    Using social media is a great way to build your brand for very little cost, but it can also cause you a lot of grief if you end up falling for one of the many, many scams out there. Be wary and just stay away from anyone who seems suspicious.