...what happens when technology and public relations collide
i was looking at the attendees to a a facebook event and where i showed up as an attendee the error message was quite explicit:
It’s you! But there’s like six other buttons that go to your profile, so fuck right off. Search
hmmm not sure if the facebook developers had inteded THAT particular message to actually appear, but that’s one hell of an an oops!
***update***
the message has been updated to:
i have been thinking alot lately about the development and evolution of social media. i have also been tuning into alot of twitter conversations and reading alot of blogs. what is becoming apparent is that there are many social media jihadists out there that think social media is the only form of media for the future.
to a certain extent, i think we need the extreme viewpoints because it’s the extremists the fuel the discussion. you don’t get the moderate middle without the extremists on both sides. like religious extremists though, i am quite ready to listen to their viewpoint but i certainly would not counsel anyone to act on their diatribe.
the problem with social media jihadists is that they make social media the point of the conversation, rather than the media that facilitates the conversation.
social media is irrelevant. whatever. i couldn’t care less.
what is relevant and what is important, is the contents of your message, the people you need to hear your message and choosing the right medium to talk to those people.
there are people out there who would have you believe that everyone needs to get onto twitter now, and that friendfeed is the the bee’s knee’s of all social networks. rubbish.
if your customers, friends or family are not on the these networks, you need to ask yourself the: “why?” question.
in ten years time, it won’t be “social media” it will just be media. it is media because it is simply a medium of communication. the general public doesn’t care whether it’s social media or web 1.0, or web 2.0. to them it’s just the internet. the important part is they get the information they need.
when the phone rings, do you care that it’s a cell, landline, voip, copper line, cordless, or the line uses 8 kHz using 8 bit ulaw coding? i don’t. i care about what the person on the other end is saying though.
as practitioners sometimes we get carried away with our subject matter because we’re immersed in it every day. we also have to defend our views on social media everyday, thereby enforcing them. it is important though that for our clients – who pay us good money to help them communicate better with their publics – that we advise them objectively and not get carried away with the medium.
so i originally posted the full name and details of everyone involved, but now that sick boy has taken down his public facebook page, i think it only nice to anonymise.
the interesting thing about this, besides the obvious lesson, is if there are only two people involved in this exchange, how did this email go viral?
–Update 23/10/2007
Now that all the news media have reported his name…
—
From: Boss Man
Sent: Wednesday, 27 August 2008 9:35 a.m.
To: Kyle Doyle
Subject: Absence on Thursday 21st 2008
Hi Kyle,
Please provide a medical certificate stating a valid reason for your sick leave on Thursday 21st 2008.
Thank You
BOSS MAN
Real Time Manager, Workforce Operations
________________________________________
From: Kyle Doyle
Sent: Wednesday, 27 August 2008 9:38 a.m.
To: Boss Man
Subject: RE: Absence on Thursday 21st 2008
Boss Man,
1 day leave absences do not require a medical certificate as stated in my contract, provided I have stated that I am on leave for medical reasons.
Thanks
Regards,
Kyle Doyle
Resolutions Expert – Technical
________________________________________
From: Boss Man
Sent: Wednesday, 27 August 2008 9:39 a.m.
To: Kyle Doyle
Subject: RE: Absence on Thursday 21st 2008
Hi Kyle,
Usually that is the case, as per your contract. However please note that leave during these occasions is only granted for genuine medical reasons. You line manager has determined that your leave was not due to medical reasons and as such we cannot grant leave on this occasion.
Boss Man
Real Time Manager, Workforce Operations
________________________________________
From: Kyle Doyle
Sent: Wednesday, 27 August 2008 9:43 a.m.
To: Boss Man
Subject: RE: Absence on Thursday 21st 2008
Hi Boss Man,
My leave was due to medical reasons, so you cannot deny leave based on a line manager’s discretion, with no proof, please process leave as requested.
Thanks
Regards,
Kyle Doyle
Resolutions Expert – Technical
________________________________________
From: Boss Man
Sent: Wednesday, 27 August 2008 9:50 a.m.
To: Kyle Doyle
Subject: RE: Absence on Thursday 21st 2008
Hi Kyle,
I believe the proof that you are after is below
Boss Man
Real Time Manager, Workforce Operations
________________________________________
From: Kyle Doyle
Sent: Wednesday, 27 August 2008 9:55 a.m.
To: Boss Man
Subject: RE: Absence on Thursday 21st 2008
HAHAHA LMAO epic fail No worries man
Regards,
Kyle Doyle
Resolutions Expert – Technical
twitters investors have run out of money. the massive hits to the market have taken their toll, and bad loans elsewhere have forced investors to pull the plug.
at the moment the scenario is improbable but not impossible. if you said lehman brothers and wamu were going to go bust two years back you would have been the laughing stock of wall st. if a bank that has been in business for hundreds of years through recessions and depressions fail how strong are web 2.0 start ups?
can we be so confident that these startups which have not yet been able to develop a monetisation model are insulated?
here are some potential issues that i see:
what happens if twitter does collapse? what of the businesses that have been built on it? what about the contacts that you have been collaborating with purely on twitter? how do you find each other again? what would you do if you woke up tomorrow and couldn’t tweet?
what about facebook? what would you do if all the photos you loaded and did not have a backup elsewhere were gone?
there are some friends whom i don’t maintain any other contact details for except facebook, because why would you need to?
what if it is a bubble and what if it bursts?
so there are a bunch of horrified people reading my last post thinking: “what the hell drugs is he on?!”
the assumption for a very long time is that advertising was the way forward for web companies to make money. the assumption has been that we need to come up with some way to advertise in order to monetize web because people are not going to pay for web apps.
advertising to support web apps is an outdated and is a web 1.0 mindset.
that’s right little old me just made a very bold statement. here is why.
in what other scenario would you adopt a strategy in the marketplace where:
you don’t have to be an mba to work out that’s madness.
i can only go back to marketing 101: “what is your point of difference?”
in the case of facebook, the point of difference is that people willingly submit identifying information. they willingly supply identity information. in return for that they can exchange photos and messages and add apps. that is one thing you can do with that capability, but why don’t facebook actually capitalise on their point of difference and harness that identity information.
throw that outdated mentality of “advertise! advertise! advertise!” out of the window.
before we get to the juicy bit…
security
facebook does not instill trust. not only is it not secure, it doesn’t feel secure.
think about this:
now think about this:
it would instil trust wouldn’t it? if facebook stopped being so aggressive with things like beacon, it would also instil trust wouldn’t it?
okay, so i won’t get into the nitty gritty here, but let’s say facebook get their security where it was similar to that of an online bank, and make it really logical and simple for users to use and understand. what next?
monetisation
switch the spammy apps to commerce apps. turn facebook into not only a trusted online platform for commerce, but a trusted identity provider. instead of logging onto 30 different bank accounts, mail accounts, online stores, create one identity on facebook and have facebook verify the user’s identity.
something like open id but even more positive. the avenues to generate increase dramatically. sure, the photo sharing and messaging will still be there, people won’t pay for those services but what about:
the possibilities are endless.
what’s more, the user gets all the free features and can pay for added value, the added value would actually be valuable to the user.
what’s more, they could charge a blend of:
the trick would be to strike that balance. thoughts?
my last post raised some questions amongst friends as to how we would get to the social media brave new world. i would like to take a few posts to step through this new “social media future”.
the first part that raised some eyebrows was facebook as a federated identity platform.
let me make this clear, it could be facebook, myspace or any other platform, i will use facebook because i think it’s probably closer than any of the others to getting there first.
what is identity?
one of the definitions that dictionary.com provides for identity is:
“The set of behavioral or personal characteristics by which an individual is recognizable as a member of a group.”
the definition is quite apt to describe what our identity is in the real world in our day to day. the characteristics of:
are all things that make up who we are. these attributes are how the people we know identify us. some attributes more than others. how we look is one of our primary methods of being identified by people we know.
when we deal with people we don’t know or officials, we use a papers that have been verified by someone who has seen us and our photo is permanently affixed to those papers. think passport, and drivers license.
how does this relate to facebook?
on facebook, there are multiple aspects of our identity already on there:
so clearly there are already many methods that already prove our online identity. the next step is to link those identities to prove that your online identity matches your real world identity. credit cards are one way or setting up positive identity vet methods are others. in australia, we use the 100 point check system. 100 points is enough to positively prove your identity to even open up bank accounts or get a passport.
there is no reason why a facebook office could not perform these type of checks.
once it does this, it is well and truly on the way to being able to monetize its services.
in the next post i will discuss security issues and monetization.
i thought i would throw my hat into the technology-crystal-ball-gazing ring.
i have a theory that the things people do online, reflect the things that people do in the real world, so these series of predictions are based on this premise.
social media is simply a reflection of social networks and activities seen in day to day life. the social groups may be different and more geographically dispersed, but i think they are fundamentally the same. as humans, i don’t believe that the way we relate to each other has changed much in the millions of years that we have been here. so on that basis, here are the predictions.
social media explosion
over the coming years there will be a massive increase in the amount of social media applications and social media adopters. social media really is still in its infancy right now. i see new startups every week and almost every website has the obligatory “beta” stamped on it (how can gmail still be in beta??).
all these new sites and services are really just experiments to find out what people want or need. most of these companies will not succeed.
social media amalgamation
in probably two years time, adoption of these services will start accelerating a little faster than they have been. only time will tell how many will win out and not go broke, or be bought and integrated. there will be fewer services but they will be more widely subscribed to.
further amalgamation
in probably five years time, the platform type web 2.0 companies will be very strong. if they can interoperate they will succeed. facebook and myspace accounts will be used as your online identity. you buy, sell and relate online via your identities on these platforms. so they must interoperate. it is much like our current real world identities our bank accounts and credit card numbers. the credit card and bank accounts we use would be useless if banks did not interoperate with each other and the services that we use with them to transact (shopping, paying bills).
your facebook (or myspace) account would be your passport online. your credit card or pay pal details would all be hosted on facebook and you would transact simply by visiting online stores through your account. it will be increasingly difficult to trade without an social utility account much like a credit card today.
increasing trust
for the future to work, your online identities will need to be verified and secured. signing up to one of these services will require a positive identification process. once this is complete, you are provided with a digital signature that will allow you to transact and enter into contracts online. your employment details and education details are automatically updated by employers and educational institutions.
the death of the giants
microsoft and google are strong brands now but in 8 or 10 years time, they are losing their relevance in the face of disruptive social technologies. search by robots is becoming increasingly less relevant as searches through social bookmarking becomes the de-facto standard. social searches are in fact human powered search, automated. the google pagerank is obsolete.
windows is replaced by virtual desktops online, that have advantage of being continuously backed up and completely shared and integrated into your online identity. forget the network operating system, now it’s time for the social operating system. bandwidth is no longer an issue.
social media is obsolete
everything is social. online reflects the real world. our networks in the real world are totally reflected in the online world. the system will continuously monitor our relationships with people and increase and decrease their access to our information as in the real world when acquaintances become friends, and friends become lovers, or vice versa. this reflects how we do this in the real world anyway by our level of engagement with particular people.
social media is looked upon as an archaic term, like “information superhighway” is now. everything is now social. we are all connected.
the evolution of media
every so often there is a quantum leap in technology. changes that are more than just a step change or an improvement. these changes are considered disruptive changes. they are changes that initially look like the poor younger cousin of the dominant technology, but rapidly overtake and eclipse the established technology.
an example of this is digital photography. initially when digital cameras were introduced they were prohibitively expensive and the quality was very low. over time though, the quality increased and there are now very few firms engaged in film production. consumers to professionals now predominantly use digital photography, because it is inexpensive and provides instant feedback.
in publishing, newspapers have been around since the 1575 and have gone through different methods of production (some of these are considered disruptive changes of themselves) but they have basically remained the same. however, with the increased availability of internet access, newspaper have increasingly moved online. there is recognition of the fact that people are wanting to read their news online with richer content. in the case of white collar workers who spend 8 hours a day in front of a pc, it just makes sense.
then came blogging. an adaptation of the term weblog, blogging enabled just about anyone to put their thoughts and ideas online simply and quickly. it was press, by and for the people. sign up to any of the major blogging services and putting ideas to the internet is almost as easy as using a word processor.
blogstars & you
there are many reasons why blogging has become so successful, one of which is that it gives readers the choice of perspective, and not just one presented by the two global media giants. it can also give readers a very unique perspective. the “blogger of baghdad” gave people a peek into daily life in iraq during the gulf war.
bloggers themselves have become opinion leaders, and the more tech saavy, and particularly in tech pr, key bloggers are consulted as a journo would be. an good example is robert scoble. scoble came to fame as an outspoken employee of microsoft.
a progressive technology company, microsoft encourages it’s employees to blog. scoble at the time was technical evangelist and his blog became popular because he was he was often brutally honest about his employer and had no fear in criticising microsoft where he thought they were wrong.
rather than damaging microsoft’s reputation, it gave the company a very real face and built a relationship with one of it’s most important publics, the techs.
scoble has now moved onto other projects but his blog still attracts several thousand readers daily. now bear in mind this is not a multi-billion dollar enterprise, it is one guy writing stuff online with now advertising. however if scoble mentions a technology, particularly a new technology, there’s a very good chance that if it’s a startup, it will get a significant boost in both signups and credibility.
do you think then that it would be worth including scoble in a technology product you may have? ex-googlers friendfeed and microsoft still do.
on a more populist route, and a much larger scale celebrity gossip blogger perez hilton gets approximately 4 million hits a day. again, is this a significant enough number that publicists need to pay attention to? i think so.
i believe it would be safe to say that bloggers have influence on public opinion.
online social networks
unless you’ve been hiding under a rock, most people will have heard about facebook. if you haven’t, facebook describes itself as a social utility to enable friends, family and colleagues stay in touch. the 70 million users is testament to it’s usefulness.
everyday people share their thoughts and lives on the platform, uploading photos of things they’ve done, witnessed or experienced, they communicate by writing on each other’s “walls” which is akin to leaving a sticky note on someone’s monitor or simply send emails to their friends.
all these conversations are happening everyday outside facebook as well, but those conversations as an organisation, you can’t be a part of very easily.
facilitating conversations
one of the few models at our disposal in pr is grunig’s four models of communications and for much of the traditional media, the nature of communication is very much one-way. the sender (organisation) sends messages but gets very little, if any, feedback.
in social media though, there is definitely feedback, and readers have mechanisms, depending on the social media platform, have many different ways of sending feedback back to the organisation. you can gauge very quickly, who is interested in what you have to say, and who is not. you can also identify those who are positive and those who have negative responses to the things you or your organisation is involved with. this becomes a two-way symmetrical exchange.
even more interesting is that you can see who is listening. social media is as about social groups. so there are the opinion leaders and those that are listening. it is now possible to target these groups directly. don’t you want to be part of that conversation?
they are not a rabble assembling outside of the front of your building protesting at this stage. they are voicing their opinions online, and if you tune in, you can prevent the rabble.
when these audiences feel they can voice their views directly to the people inside the organisation, and not just the faceless corporation, there is more likely to be forgiveness, and understanding.
people just want to be heard.
social media is important
online media is becoming more and more important, and over time, its relevance will will only increase over time and not diminish.
the internet is representative of the real world because there is real people behind it, and people congregate and talk. when people talk, there are talkers and listeners. this makes online media increasingly social media.
now more than ever the internet makes it easier and easier to open the communications channels to a wider audience. truly facilitating two way communications.
as time moves on, the question is not whether social media will be important, it will be a question of whether or not you will be part of the conversation.
Recent Comments