Oh the Places you might not Like to go on Facebook

There's Trouble again in Facebook land, and that starts with T and that rhymes with P and that stands for Places.

Per a really interesting article in Ad Age that describes a "real life" experiment in trying out the new Places feature on Facebook in real life, there are a lot of aggravated people. The issue at hand is again the DEFAULT settings that Facebook arrogantly selected including one that enables anyone to check anyone in to a location, true or not, desired to be revealed or not.

You would think Facebook would have gotten the clue from the Beacon fiasco, but not so much.

There are a lot of good articles on Places to learn more (like on Mashable ) if you want, but as always, I think the reader comments (including my own) especially on this particular article are a reflection of the feelings of many. It all feels very similar to the uproar created by Beacon which infamously automatically posted purchases made online via Facebook connected sites to one's wall. The Beacon anecdote that circulated as an example of a good idea gone wrong was the guy who cancels on a date, only to have the movie tickets he purchased posted on his Facebook page, to his girlfriend's dismay. Now imagine being location-outed by a friend to the delight of a stalker-ish ex, or your boss if you're playing hookey!

We have got to pull the reins in on giving power to the people and keep it with the person.

The majority of commenters on this story echo how I feel, and why I immediately disabled the ability of someone else to "check me in" on Places. While I have a lot of respect for Read, Write Web content, they are not as much concerned about "asynchronous" check-ins. But they DO bring up another issue - that of labeling a place with a less-than-desirable name...like, say, your own home, or a restaurant you didn't love...and having it stick.

So, if you agree, and I think most do, go to your privacy setting immediately.
Here's a how-to from my @rww source.

Looking Up

My dear friend Rita, a respected businesswoman in the marketing world, forwarded me a link to Pete Blackshaw's column today in AdAge. I was very moved by the piece and submitted a long comment back to Pete, but the topic is worth a couple hundred extra words...at least.

Pete, a regular AdAge columnist and VP at Nielsen Online Digital Strategy, lost his sister recently. He became aware of the contrast between real, deep offline connections and community created by her passing and shared grief and support vs the surface kinds of connections we are all running after in our online world. Here's a link to his column: http://bit.ly/Blackshaw-adage

I found myself buying every admonishment and silently vowing to work those offline relationships harder than my Twitter-based ones, but found the comments posted very interesting for the push back from a few readers. This is actually why online conversations can be so important and compelling. We actually have more opportunity than ever before to share and hear other opinions. This hopefully will make the world a little smaller, but it also reminds me of the need to remember the middle ground.

Here's what I wrote in response to Pete's column and others' comments:

"Pete, I too am sorry for your loss, and sadly grateful for the column it inspired.

Yes, there are those who feel the connection you made between your experience of a family member's death, offline, with the lifestyle we live now, online, was "kind of too much" or "nearly blasphemous."
And others will share the pathos completely and hang their heads in shame for a moment vs just hanging their heads down over a smartphone, thanks to the reminder that we need to emerge from our avatar-selves and raise our eyes and our consciousness more frequently, and seize the offline day too.

That said, the ship has sailed and I fear we won't easily be able to find our way back to the kind of connections we SHOULD have. I'm guilty of missing the chance to share a smile or receiving one, and have heard annoyed passersby say, "Look up!" And I've been annoyed in return to see every single person on the train completely absorbed in their own digital world.

Tim Sanders wrote his book, Love Is the Killer App: How to Win Business and Influence Friends back in 2002 on the premise that "being a lovecat" is the only way to succeed in the 21st century, and necessary to overcome our Dilbert society of isolation in cubbies.

We crave community. I think we're creating it in any way we can.

Digitally, time suck that it is, is just easier for many. Unfortunately, we end up back in the digital version of a cubbie after all.

Thank you for the excellent reminder to look up."

Blue Green?

In the May 5th issue of AdAge, Adam Werbach wants to shift focus to a new BLUE movement to embrace more consumer comfort and eradicate the growing consumer green fatigue:

"Blue is a platform for sustainability that goes beyond the deep, beautiful green of environmentalism. Green puts the planet at the center of the dialogue; blue puts people -- consumers and shoppers -- at the center."

This is a head-spinning topic, and while Werbach makes some worthy points, I hope the dialog doesn't obfuscate the objectives:
In other words...We've gotta get going here!


One article commenter makes a good point:

"If fatigue is prevalent among some circles, it's because we have yet to offer the consumer clarity. Throwing in new terms or words such as "blue" doesn't help move us closer to a common understanding. I would hesitate to guess the average person wouldn't have any idea what "blue" means."

The heads of Corporate Social Responsibility from Discovery, Amex and Price Waterhouse Cooper spoke at a terrific panel discussion from the IABC last week. But the first part of the panel had to do with what the heck we should be calling CSR: Corporate Citizenship? Corporate Philanthropy? Cause Branding? I know that clear communication is key to getting the message out there...and we'd like to be able to have a phrase that we can all refer to for common ground. Like, say, "Green." It's just easier, even if, say, "Green" is a subset of social responsibility.


(FYI: If you are practicing social responsibility as a company, you're most likely going to INCLUDE "sustainable" actions, like not polluting and using up virgin forests for your paper needs. BUT social responsibility ALSO means you're looking out for your workers and being a good corporate citizen by doing things like supporting the local library or whathaveyou. So "green" is a subset -- a PART of doing good overall. If you want more, contact me and I'll share some pages from my eco-education deck.)


Back to my point, since I let the words get in my way: I worry that debating the phrasing too much can get in the way of action. "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!" As a marketer, I'm all about proper positioning to get a clear and effective message out there.

But, to borrow from that company with a swoosh, let's "Just Do It" already!

Green Streak

This week has given me the opportunity to reflect privately and publicly about all things ecological and not so logical. I sent a note to some clients and prospects right around Earth Day, and have been pondering how in less than a year, that became a borderline faux pas. Ad Age published my reaction and plenty of others to their article about marketers glomming on to the event like a materialistic Christmas grinch. I'm a little optimistic about good green intentions, despite the "road to hell" and all that. But it did give me pause.

I'm constantly "checking in" and running through a mental check list about my own eco-actions. They say it takes three weeks of doing something consistently to start to form a habit. I know my reasons for not eating meat started from reading "Diet for a Small Planet" (still a great book) back in the '70s, but I sometimes think now it's more a habit than anything; I'm just USED to skipping to the vegetables and fish on a menu and not even considering any other options. But that's a 30 year old "habit" by now!

I've always loved antiques and the concept of "repurposing" perfectly good items (influenced that childhood favorite book, "The Boxcar Children," from even longer ago, perhaps?) And I have pangs of guilt if I toss so much as an envelope into the garbage instead of the recycle bin, so I guess that's a habit.

Motivated by saving green and going green, I tried to break an unconscious shopping habit by forming a new NON-shopping habit. I forswore buying anything other than replacing necessities, except for dinners out, etc. That meant I passed by ALL the January post-holiday sales (except for one shirt I got with an expiring gift certificate) and even worked to work my way through the old travel size shampoos I'd stored up like a squirrel before allowing myself to indulge in a new full sized bottle.

Then spring happened. And conspiring with that like the perfect storm was a big going out of business sale at my favorite store. Four dirt-cheap but fabulous skirts and shirts later I felt like a glutton after a midnight snack. Truth be told, I'm still pretty proud of myself. I was on the wagon for for 15 weeks of purchasing only necessities, and intend to get right back on.

Lots of people have done this, and done it better; there are plenty of blogs and books describing the experience in different levels. It's astonishing to look around at all I have, and see all I don't need more of. And it was (make that is) a big deal for me, a recovering shopaholic, and was an important habit to FORM, just like recycling or buying local.

I may fall off the wagon again, but I believe I'm officially in the conscious consumer camp now...daycamp perhaps, but