Alliance Blog Reviews

I know us Americans tend to view the entire world from our point of view, so it’s easy for us to think that the entire world rotates around Facebook and Twitter. Not so! Vincenzo Cosenza has compiled a world map of social networks–highlighting which networks are the most popular in each country. As you can see, head to Brazil and you’ll find Google’s Orkut thriving. Take a trip to Russia and you’ll see Facebook clone Vkontakte holding firm. I was able to find a similar map from June 2007. It’s easy to see just how quickly Facebook is taking over the world: PS. If you prefer tabled data, here’s the 2009 breakdown: ( via )

The rest is here:
Want to See the Most Popular Social Networks in the World? There’s a Map for That!

Back in July, Facebook was challenged by the Canadian government about some privacy concerns around third party apps and information shared that was taken about users. Many wondered how the social media giant would handle the situation. Would they thumb their nose at the information police? Would they stand up to the Canucks? Well, that was answered in August when they folded like a cheap card table and rewrote their policies to meet Canadian concerns . Well, if that was a precedent then the folks who run the Facebook Legal team fan page (Is there really one of these? I just made that up) are about to get real busy. You see there are several privacy groups who are up in arms about the latest privacy policies handed down by Zuck and the boys. According to the WSJ’s MarketWatch Ten privacy and consumer groups announced Thursday they’ve filed a complaint with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission alleging that Facebook Inc.’s privacy-policy changes violate federal law. The Electronic Privacy Information Center said in a statement that it and nine other groups are urging the FTC “to open an investigation into the recent changes made by Facebook … and to require Facebook to restore privacy safeguards.” These kinds of things usually sound a lot worse when they are first brought to light. Ok, so let’s stand in Facebook’s shoes and let this one sit for a second and let the scariness of the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) being called on to investigate your company’s privacy policies go away. Hmmm. Doesn’t seem to be working this time. Why? Well, because this could be a real serious deal for Facebook. They went from cruising along and just gathering more and more steam in their quest to become a money making machine to now being a social media whipping boy……again. While what they have been accused of lately (breaking a valued trust with their users by making their information, all of it, public unless opted-out) isn’t sleazy on a Tiger Woods like level, it is a serious issue. That’s not good. Now add on the possibility of the US government (you know the one that thinks it can do everything for everyone so no one needs to think for themselves anymore) being asked by not one but 10 privacy advocates to take a look at your policies. There probably were happier endings envisioned by the Facebook folks on this one, like huge profits from data being available to mine and sell. EPIC said in its statement that the service “should not be allowed to turn down the privacy dial on so many American consumers,” adding that the changes “violate federal consumer-protection law.” As they say in some parts of the world “Them thar is fightin’ words!” Of course Facebook has something to say about all of this. In a statement, a Facebook spokesman said: “We’ve had productive discussions with dozens of organizations around the world about the recent changes, and we’re disappointed that EPIC has chosen to share their concerns with the FTC while refusing to talk to us about them.” The spokesman, Andrew Noyes, also said that Facebook discussed its privacy program with regulators “including the FTC” prior to its launch. Well, shame on EPIC for telling on Facebook after the company worked so hard to grease the skids to prevent this very thing from happening. By the way, how productive a meeting is can be pretty subjective. In other words, there is no mention of groups endorsing what Facebook did, just a statement that they met and talked. Look this may turn out to be a non-issue. The FTC may decide to not act on the request of these groups but it might be hard for them to do so. Of course, with Facebook letting the world know that they spoke to the FTC before this move was made may make some wonder just what kind of ‘agreements and understandings’ may have been reached. Whatever they were, they may now be null and void if there is enough of a stink raised. So what looked like a pretty strong year for Facebook may end on a sour note. They’ll get over though just like they did with Beacon. Apparently that gaffe was either forgotten or it’s the policy of the company to see just what it can get away with until someone slaps their hands or slaps them with an investigation. Your thoughts? Pilgrim’s Partners: SponsoredReviews.com – Bloggers earn cash, Advertisers build buzz!

Excerpt from:
Facebook’s Privacy Policy Produces Plea to FTC

Google is the master of creating demand, and it started with a single tweet: Since then, technology and gadget bloggers have been in a frenzy not seen by me since the iPhone was first announced. I’m not about to get into the many details of Google’s Nexus One phone–I’m going to take a different angle, below–but you can read all about the unlocked Android phone, here , here , and here . Oh, and here’s what it looks like: So, what’s my take on this? The media frenzy! OMG! I don’t know how much Motorola and Verizon spent trying to hype up the launch of the recent Droid phone, but that publicity doesn’t compare to what Google has accomplished over the weekend. How smart was Google? It handed out free phones to Google employees, either didn’t tell them to keep quiet about it, or actively encouraged the discussions, and let the details slowly leak out. All weekend long, I’ve seen post, after article, after post hit the web. Right about now, everyone that doesn’t own an iPhone is currently drooling over becoming a Google Nexus owner–and there are probably a few iPhone owners feeling the same way too! Perhaps Google has realized that it’s just not that good at artificially creating excitement with its own advertising . The company became the world’s #1 search engine via word of mouth. Could it own the world’s #1 cell phone the same way?

Read the original here:
Google’s Nexus One Phone; Like Shooting Media Fish in a Barrel

Last week I talked a bit about experience marketing. At the end of the post I linked to a video of a talk given by economist Joseph Pine . In Pine’s talk he briefly articulates a transformation from an agrarian economy to what we now know as an “experience economy”. Pine tells us that goods and services have become commodities, and experiences have become the growing consumer demand. It’s the same reason that so many people will pay $4.00 for a cup of coffee – the experience of connecting with a trusted brand is important to them. Pine then tells us that not all experiences are equally sought after, the dominant experience within the consumer conscious is authenticity. …authenticity is therefore becoming the new consumer sensibility — the buying criteria by which consumers are choosing who are they going to buy from, and what they’re going to buy. Authenticity is responsible for fueling the independent music and art industries. It’s the reason that original concepts , that would have been written off as foolish 10 years ago, are changing the way we communicate. And it’s the same reason why Google has grown in popularity over its competitors. But Pine then fills us in on a little secret: There’s no such thing as true authenticity. This is because every experience is created by external stimuli and thus our experiences are only as authentic as they are rendered to be. In the end it is the illusion of authenticity that drives consumers to engage. To quote Rae Hoffman , “Good spam never looks like spam.” As marketers and business owners it is our job to render authenticity. If we fail at doing so, we will lose the consumer’s trust and risk being “fake”! OK, so what’s your point Joe? Last week, Google announced a gamut of changes that they will start to implement. The most significant of these changes is default personalized search . Around the same time, Google’s CEO made some pretty alarming comments regarding privacy concerns. In short, Google now collects all sorts of data about its users and then customizes its search results and other services to reflect each users unique behavior. It collects the user’s location, the web sites that they have visited, and various other pieces of data. All of this is done with relatively no consent from the user and without notifying them. It is clear that Google’s mission statement that now reads “…organize the world’s information…” should read “… exploit the world’s information…”. All of these changes reflect a continuing trend at Google to create a highly sophisticated personalized platform that not only produces the best results but also the best ads. This disregard of user privacy completely goes against the feel good, do good image that Google has worked hard to create. As a result Google is killing its rendered version of authenticity. Pine gives us three tips to staying authentic: One, don’t say you’re authentic unless you really are authentic. Two, it’s easier to be authentic if you don’t say you’re authentic. And three, if you say you’re authentic, you better be authentic. A large part of being authentic is staying true to yourself. Which is why classifieds giant Craigslist is fighting eBay with everything they have to retain a majority of seats on their own board. For them, running the company they founded the way they always have, is that important to them. Which is the same line of thought that ultimately lost Jerry Yang his job as the CEO of Yahoo. Yang refused to sell out in the beginning to Microsoft because he believed in his company, he believed in staying true to his ideals. At the end of the day it won’t matter who has the better search engine. If Google loses the trust of its users and cannot retain authenticity, Bing, will be more than happy to step up to the challenge of earning that trust and building its own brand of authenticity.

See original here:
Cup of Joe: The Seeds of Google Destruction Are Within

I have spent a considerable amount of time in the past year watching the decline and fall of the newspaper empire. At times I have had a ‘you get what you pay for’ take on the situation while at others I find it sad that an important industry is in a rapid downward spiral. Now add to the mix the musings / rantings of Rupert Murdoch and his thought that he can revive his industry through his proposed tactics and you are close to a three ring circus with all clowns and no ringmaster. You see, when I get the most value out of a newspaper it really has nothing to do with the hard news. In fact, I have already heard most of the news that I care about before a newspaper gets my fingers dirty (which I think is one of the cool things about newspapers because there are fewer tactile experiences in the online world). What I devour though in the newspaper is any investigative reporting. Anything that took time to compile and either promotes someone doing good or exposes someone doing bad. That’s one place where the printed ‘news’ works well. There could be others as well. I would like to propose some possible solutions / options for newspapers to consider. Let hard news ‘reporting’ be online and embrace it. The Internet is becoming a more real time medium and the printed word will not be able to compete. As a result, I would love to see in a newspaper a 4-6 page section that is just chock full of snip-its about news items. Just the facts. No opinions. Just a strong aggregation of the high points and no one’s opinion attached. Let me decide what to do next after you have gathered it up for me. Stop telling me what to think. Tell me what you think but don’t force me to think it. Now I am not suggesting that you go the Newsweek route and just have all op-eds all the time because quite frankly I hate that format. It’s arrogant and it is designed to divide and conquer. We have enough divisiveness in this world. What if you just had a strong stable of consistent op-ed type players who clearly identify where there allegiance is and then provide that content for their audience as the other side of the ‘news’. If I don’t like one or the other then I either don’t read it or, even better, I read it to be better informed. Present both sides of arguments REGULARLY as part of your format rather than trying to look balanced by occasionally bringing in someone from the other side as a sacrificial lamb for your readers to offer up to their ideological god. Be truly balanced. Stop taking sides for goodness sake. This Washington Post v Washington Times, right v. left crap is just that. Crap. I would LOVE to see a newspaper talk evenly about both sides of the same coin. That would take guts but I think there is a real market for it. I would read that one for sure. Recognize the real audience. The printed word is more for the thinker, the ponderer (I made that word up so sue me) and the person who wants to digest the news. Online is for the ADHD world we live in of ‘read and reject’ and ‘consume and dsipose’. The quick hit. The surface player. Let the online world serve the ‘real-timers’ and you serve the thinkers. Since an investigative technique takes time to put together there won’t be the ‘it’s old news before the ink hits the paper’ issue. Make a difference. As I stated earlier I think that a newspaper that was out there uncovering the good, the bad and the ugly of the world with long-term investigative pieces that dig deep and create change and impact would be awesome. You would have less staff because you were not concentrating on the minutiae of each insignificant story. Leave that to the online quick hit environment. Be a true change agent. I would pay for that and I think advertisers would to. Embrace bloggers and tweeters. Rather than view the real time nature of the web as a threat and somehow ‘beneath your standards’ embrace it for your readers and help them sift through it. What if you put yourself in the position of telling your dedicated readers that “we trust this or that blog” because of the following reasons. That would be cool. Bloggers would then be a much different animal if your could have a frienemy or co-opetition like relationship rather than a completely adversarial one. Let the engines index your content. This one’s easy. Don’t be an idiot. Stop playing political games. You report news not set public opinion. When you choose sides you actually lose credibility. That’s not reporting that is campaigning. As always there is more and I would love to hear your thoughts. If there is a paper that is doing some or all of these please let me know. Where else could newspapers evolve and take full advantage of the new world media order rather than act like there is a way to preserve their no longer relevant status quo? Thanks for reading and have a Happy Thanksgiving.

The rest is here:
Options for Newspapers in the New Media World Order

Apparently Google is more than just the world’s most used search engine. It’s also “Super elastic, soft, smooth. Highly absorbent, for you always!” Via The Huffington Post

See the original post here:
Google, the Butt of Toilet Humor