Krywosa, IMC

Indeed: my feed reader is, in fact, blowin’ up. The past 24 hours have been intense. The one thing I personally didnt see coming was the proliferation of music: buying, gifting, searching. Its all over the place.

Today, MySpace unveiled enhancements meant to appeal to consumers and content providers alike. Funny since we’ve all been reading articles that announce the continued sickly state of the MySpace platform.

Also announced yesterday, Facebook has launched a music gifting service which allows users to purchase and gift music to other users.

On top of all this, Google is rumored to have a music service of their own, allowing searches to yield downloadable purchased tracks. Tuesday, Apple began Tweeting about iTunes.

Although the music industry has been deemed dead for a very long time, it appears that by adding social and searchable attributes, music is now becoming integrated into everyday digital interactions a bit more easily. But, what does this mean for the industry itself? Will this help struggling companies or will it open up a whole new mess of problems between artists, rights owners and labels?

I recently read an article in Ad Age regarding how brands will be lost in Facebook Lite.  After a quick spin via Facebook lite last week, I found my reaction to be ’so what?’.

Per Twitter convos, I’d also consider the Lite version to be not only useful for those on a slow connection, but for people who are sick of the constant interruptions. Chat, apps and pages that may otherwise clutter up your home feed – its a streamlined version with easy access to people and news rather than toys and brands. Initial results seem to be a slow adoption, probably of curious Twitter users checking out the hype.

It seems odd that the Lite version is lacking in brand presences for businesses when Facebook is trying to feign Twitter like functionality for businesses to reach consumers. Although they’ve introduced new functionality, it seems those who chose to use Facebook Lite wont be able to interact with brands as easily. Considering that more serious social media users may chose the pared down version of Facebook to avoid extraneous posts, it seems that early adopter types may be the ones that are being missed by businesses who could lose the opportunity to interact in ‘Lite’.

Facebook also finally sees Twitter as a legitimate threat, but, does Facebook Lite make sense if the audiences and reasons for use are different? Those that enjoy multiple applications and quiz results most likely are not Twitter users who enjoy the more pared down communication that Twitter provides. For the Twitterati, Facebook seems to be a place to hold pictures and video, interact with those who are not Twitter users, and to feed Twitter updates and information to.

Could Twitter replace Facebook? In my opinion, no. Could the opposite be true? Absolutely not.

Thoughts?

In another installment of ‘getting to know Jess’ and after many great Twitter conversations created around @rachelreuben’s conference Tweeting, I’m attaching links to a few choice publications that I authored in my previous position. I think they are still relevant in the conversation of ‘is social media worth it’, especially for low income families.

Achieving College Access Goals: The Relevance of New Media in Reaching First-Generation and Low-Income Teens

How College Access Marketing Campaigns Can Utilize Social Networking Web Sites

Creating a Strategy for Community Engagement

Ah, and here we are again: people complaining about how Facebook has changed its layout yet again. Think about it: did you end your account last time? No. You probably used it more.

As for the suggestion that FB wants to be the ‘new’ Twitter, its impossible. People who Twitter do not equal those who FB. Even though to some they seem interchangeable, they are in no way such.

Yes, I agree, the new home page for your FB account does seem a bit Twitter-esque but at the same time is a baby step towards Twitter for those who are social media newbies. Maybe it will facilitate more people understanding Twitter, but wont take the place of.

Not sure about you, but I enjoy Twitter for its compactness. Its simplicity. Its sole purpose. I dont have to follow all convo’s if I dont want to. I am not inundated with apps and chain letters. If you do something rivaling that, I simply unfollow you. Case closed.

Twitter for me is immediate. Its taken the place of blogging, FB’ing – except for keeping up with people who do not Twitter -, and reading my RSS feeds. I get everything in one quick stop. I find new people more easily. I respond much quicker.

Has the new FB affected you? Do you think it rivals Twitter in any way?

With all of the recent Tweets regarding who to follow, how to follow and why to follow its made me think a lot about what Twitter means to me. There have also been just as many, if not more, posts about Facebook: what content to feed to your wall, privacy settings for business contacts, etc. Which leads me to: whats the big deal?

I’ve found that people respond to the fact that I have constant content additions from a number of places. Even those who do not live and breathe social media find some information useful, funny or thought provoking and tell me so with a message. Past business acquaintances comment on my new dog or family members post follow ups to Friendfeed items posted for work from Google Reader. Isnt the cross pollination what social media is all about? The greater spread of information in a quicker format?

Further, I dont know if I subscribe to many of the ‘gain tons of followers’ or ‘get the most out of Twitter/Facebook’ posts that I’ve seen. I feel its much more organic. “If you use it they will come”, if you will. Just like losing weight, I dont believe there is a quick fix or magic equation.

As I said in my previous post, I find that I learn more from people that I dont necessarily have a common bond with than those that I do. I’ve learned more about myself by disagreeing and having a thoughtful discourse than by engaging in ‘yup’ comments tirelessly. Its made me carve out what social media, or anything, really means to me. Having more followers than I can probably handle makes this even clearer: I find that what I’m drawn to may not be what I originally thought I would be. The need I feel to comment on something is much stronger that the feeling that I have to comment.

How often do you disagree with people? Do you follow/friend those much different from yourself or stick with those who are like minded/of the same industry?

I’ve noticed lately that I’ve become somewhat of a hermit in the eyes of my non-digital friends. My ‘in real life’ (IRL) peeps. I wonder if this is detrimental or if its only made to feel that way by those who just dont get the benefit of virtual friendships.

Dont get me wrong: I’m by no means sitting home all day every weekend chatting or xboxing with people across the globe as my main point of human contact. I still go out on the weekends. I still catch the occasional post work drink with coworkers both past and present. I’m still entertaining in my home and meeting people offline in the dating world.

If you’re like me, you know a large number of people online that you may have never met. Not yet, or maybe, not ever. Does that make these relationships less real? Are they one dimensional? Are they just ‘pretend’ or ‘play’ friends? I’d argue not. But some people may have you thinking of yourself as Sandie Bullock’s character in ‘The Net’. Kinda sad. Too much food delivery and not enough interaction. But that was the 90’s and now these types of relationships proliferate and people need to update their judgements.

Some of my online peeps are more involved in my life than some friends I live close to. Some comment more on my virtual existence which bleeds into my ‘real’ life  (blogs, Twitter, Facebook pics and posts, etc.). Lately, I’ve spent more time Tweeting TV shows, football games and social outings with online peeps that they’ve become my main base of contact. But here’s why: I have the ability to always be connected. Sad as that may sound, with the cold, harsh winter taking its toll on my outings with friends, and my recent lukewarm feelings for phone conversations, Tweeting/Facebooking/Texting have become the norm even with IRL peeps.

My argument is that I’m more connected to people than ever. Just because I’m not face-to-face doesnt mean that my interactions are any less fulfilling. I know more now about more people than ever before because I can be updated in real time. I can comment on things that I may not normally have known or be told because they get caught up in the minutia of every day life. I’d argue that I feel closer to more people with minimal effort. I’d ask my non-connected friends why they arent?

So: what is ‘real life’? How do you feel about your digital existence?

I know I’m preaching to the choir here, since a majority of my readers are involved in the infamous ‘Facebookgate’ but here’s a few blog posts to catch you up on the dealings:

The initiator and champion @bradjward: Squared Peg Post.

Labeling of ‘Facebookgate’ @andrewcareaga: Higher Ed Marketing Post.

My Two Cents: At first glance this may not seem like a big deal, but these people are collecting profitable information from students without their consent. They’ll use their comments in their $39.95 subscription based web service and wonder what we see wrong with it.

So, what DO we see wrong with it? Personally, the posing as potential incoming students is what irks me the most. They purposefully only show their high school networks – if any at all – and not their undergrad networks. They post question to tease similar answers from all groups. They are obviously interested in other schools these students consider, where they are from, and are shady in how they get it.

For the rest of us trying to get people on board, this really puts egg on the face of social media. It makes it much easier to say no to the next request. It creates more hoops to jump through and logins and passwords. I’m personally very upset by this misuse of organic social media.

With that said, I’ve began talking with students in this group and inviting them to our truly official group for new students. I’ve recruited new admins and asked them to leave the old group to boost our numbers and make theirs lessen, bringing us up in search. I’ve reported two phony Suffolk groups, made all students involved aware, and am working on a copyright infringement report to FB for the unofficial use of our logos.

Phew. What are you doing?

Danny Sullivan in Ad Age discusses why Facebook’s Social Ads still rank second with Search Ads.

I know it sounds like Social Mapping may be the future, but I still feel like push is never better than pull. Give people what they are looking for, not something that gets in the way. Advertising on social networking sites only dilutes the purpose of those sites. If you’d like to get involved in these mediums, then look for opportunities to engage with consumers in a meaningful way. Learn something from them to make your product better. Teach them something to help them use your product in different ways. If you do this, you wont have to worry about where to advertise: consumers will start coming to you.

Look out Facebook. Your 240 million had better be well invested….

After reading this weeks installment of Ad Age, I’m finding I’m doing a double take on how I think about Facebook. I’m wondering if they can keep up with all the hype surrounding marketing to their social graphs. People seem to think of this as a ‘magic bullet’ theory on reaching the masses. I hope they all don’t drink the kool-aide.

Consumer marketing has no real place in these networks. There. I said it. Unless these groups can find a way to be useful or sponsor usable widgets, I dont see it happening. The real value of the social graphs is to see how consumers discuss brands and how companies can (gasp) make products better. Reach consumers in a conversation they actually want to be a part of. Not pushing more banner ads or ‘click here’ collateral.

Social marketers already know this. They know these networks are fantastic in building awareness and communities of conversation around topics and barriers to behavior change. Consumer marketers – the good ones at least – also know that online social networks like Facebook will ultimately serve one purpose for them – brand building. Not brand building in the sense of creating loyalty or building visibility, but more so creating a venue for healthy conversations between a brand and its community of users. Healthy meaning frequent two way communication with room for those who are anti-brand and that ultimately helps create new ways of relating.

Bottom line – if people want your product they can buy it. They’re already talking about it – why not be a part of that conversation?