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.

Learning to Swim at Broadband Speed

I was just reading "High Speed for the Sparsely Wired" in @NYTimes this week about the portion of the government stimulus program that allocates $7.2 billion for extending high-speed Internet access. I have to say, I'm pretty fascinated by both the possibilities facing rural communities about to get transported to the web 2.0 community via the economic stimulus plan...and by the perspectives of people in and out of those in dial-up-speed land.

Think about it: if you're reading this blog, chances are you didn't have to wait a half hour for the page to load. (And if you did, and think I'm THAT worth it, bless your heart.) That means you likely live in an area where broadband means PDQ* access to the world wide web. It means traversing global villages and accessing the knowledge of the crowd on literally any topic you can imagine. It means you can, like view images of Mars or play web chess with someone in the Czech Republic...or try the impossible of keeping up with every damn article on social media marketing, staying up every night til 2AM....

The comments on this news story are inspiring, as many in rural areas talk about gaining the ability to work virtually, or post resumes, or set up online storefronts -- helping to open up new commerce opportunities. And imagine this: expanded health care options, too! For example,

"doctors in Anchorage, 400 miles to the east, can see patients via videoconference."

It's a whole new frontier for many, down to learning how to build a skyscraper ad right in their own backyard. Of course it also means closer examinations of the less illustrious and the downright icky. Or, as "Mike" commented on this topic in a NY Times story:

"How can you not look at that [article] and think, "Hi, JokrBoy. I'm HotBlonde. What r u wearing?"

Access to the vain or glorious aside, it means a whole new part of the country will be exposed to social media tools that some 500,000,000 Facebook users take for granted. We're not talking total social media virgins, as patience, or satellite and cellular services have certainly enabled access for many. But from an almost anthropological perspective, it will be interesting to observe how superfast, 24/7 entry to Twitter, YouTube, Flickr and Digg impacts life as they knew it. I can already hear the cries of "and WHY do I want to 'tweet'!?" or "What a time suck!" Oh the stories I could tell...the caveats...the techniques... Don't use all CAPS! Don't "sell!" Do remember my social coaching mantra of "Look. Listen. Learn. Participate. Lead!"

Unless our rural friends stay up nights studying Mashable and Brogan, Ochman to Owyang til all hours, they will have to learn it all the hard way. They will be jumping into the deep end that most of us had the chance to hold hands and wade into more slowly back in the day, last year or so.

*Now it will even be easy to figure out obscure references like "PDQ."

3-D'lemma

I had a reality check the other day when it came to the check at a restaurant. Not the price. The reality check was seeing the check. Sigh. I borrowed a votive from the table next to mine and made a vow to head to Duane Reed for the cheap-o reading glasses. Add that to the pile of things I'll have to keep by the bed, by the remote, by my desk. Maybe I should get three pairs...Oh and one for each purse and backpack since lately my friends (who can't laugh at this post since they know who they are) are asking if I have any they can borrow. I'll make it an even dozen.

So what happens when I have to deal with 3D glasses on top of that?

So far seeing a regular screen without glasses isn't a problem (phew!), but I can envision tons of issues when I invest in a new 3D capable TV. For example, how many pairs will come with a set? Any? I hear they go for $30 - $50 a pop...so how many will I need for when I have company? And speaking of company, what about cozying up for a date, watching TV, and looking...well, NOT CUTE! Are there designer frames? I'm just sayin'.... Let alone can two people actually smooch while wearing 3D glasses if the mood strikes during, say, one of DIRECTV's new 3D shows?

Will networks, like ESPN and their new 3D channel, distribute the glasses, or will Comcast or other providers? Who will brand them? I'm thinking its a new market for branded premiums.

What if someone walks off with your 3-D glasses? Can they be tethered to the TV? Will those little chains that turn eyeglasses into necklaces support 3D goggles? And what about prescription 3D? Can I get them at Lenscrafters?

Will I need to have them just to do most things online, soon? I mean, there's already Club Cooee, a sort of 3-D Second Life meets IM, and its fan page already has about 14,000 fans. And there are a ton more online places and ways to wear your glasses. Or not.

You can try to skip 'em and just cross your eyes with some content, and you kind of get a sense of it like in this YouTube video. I know this should work; there's even a drop down menu for about a dozen ways to watch it, but without those actual glasses, it's just not optimum. And frankly, all those options and trying to cross my eyes just gave me a headache.

Or maybe I just need glasses.

Lessons in Sponsor Engagement from Wondering what's Up with Chuck

If Twitter moms can get a Motrin ad pulled, can Facebook friends save Chuck?

Will the roar of the social media crowd be able to influence programming? We're always hearing from programming execs that they just "give the people what they want." (I'm not sure if that was entirely accurate when striking writers helped spark the plethora of reality shows.)

Compare the story about the social media pressure mounting to save NBC's "Chuck" in the Observer, with the LA Times blog talking about NBC's new fall season. The blog quotes Ben Silverman, co-chairman of NBC Entertainment and Universal Media Studios, talking about the network's effort to speak to advertisers on a more 1:1 basis, than at the usual party-riffic dog-and-pony upfronts: “We’re not interested in just screaming out to 5,000 people and then walking off to some VIP corridor. We’re here to talk to you and speak to you and connect with our client base and allow them to ask questions in small settings.”


That's GREAT to get the feedback of the people footing a lot of the bill. Though it sounds a little like "IF I were to ask you to marry me, what would you say?"...instead of being confident in your value and just jumping in and proposing. After all, they're buying your brand, your track record...oh, wait, NBC was fourth in line this year. What about the opinion of the people passionate about a program, though? Well, programmers do what programmers have to do, and they have tough choices to make, based on eyeballs, network brand decisions, trends, etc.


But the thing that really gets me thinking is that the social media crowds were actually trying to drive more REVENUE to Subway, one of the show sponsors, as an additional incentive to keep Chuck on the air. This to me is the embodiment of how the consumer is in control now. (Well, maybe except when programmers are involved.) But THIS is the opportunity to court the consumer AND offer a deeper opportunity for advertiser engagement with the viewer on multiple platforms. How has Subway leveraged that viewer passion? What did Subway say to Silverman in those 1:1 discussions? Did they "friend" HIM?


It's really time for media executives -- especially those in ad sales -- to apply best social media practices. This is a chance to do the old "consultancy sell" and do more than push "spots and dots" in a numbers guy of ad sales. Instead:

• Listen to what people controlling the purse strings and the remotes are saying
• Learn more about what they want and what they like about your programs and about your advertisers
• Share that information with your sponsors and prospective sponsors in order to educate them
• Find ways to facilitate a dialogue between your sponsors and your program's biggest fans. (Shameless plug: Did I mention I am an excellent promotion/ad sales marketer with social media chops?)
  

Give ALL the people what they want. Advertisers and Twitterers are people too.

Socially Transmitted Dis-Ease

I've been putting together a How-to deck on participating in social media at the request of a client. I feel like the guy on that commercial whose wife comes downstairs in the morning to find him up all night, sitting slack-jawed and messy-haired. He tells her that he just got to the end of the internet.

Only we, of course, never do.

It's an addiction. A compulsion. A necessity. As an advisor or resource, staying one, or preferably three, steps ahead of the average guy's knowledge is like being in a constant race to a never approaching finish line. So over the next few days or weeks, I'll try to share some of the elements I'm going to share with my client as I pull together reframe some of the basics for them.

Overarching Rules for Social Networking Participation Part 1:

• If you don’t know anyone, but want them to know you, blog
• If you don’t know them, don’t friend them on Facebook
• If you don’t know them, but wish you did, try to connect with them on LinkedIn
• If you don’t know them, but they are a good resource, do follow them on Twitter (@mossappeal )
• If you don't know what they're saying about you and want to know (which we all need to know before diving in for business reasons), by all means, ask. And I do mean "by all means," like Google yourself, set Google alerts, Monitorr yourself, and pose some questions!
  

Have at it.

Facebooking the Music

Had a biz lunch with a rep at Broadway Video, which is the mac-daddy of production/ duplication/ editing companies (Ask for Mort and tell him E.B. sent you!) We were talking about social media, and Mort was saying that he needed to know more about the whole Facebook, etc., phenomenon. The reason? He personally experienced its DWOM (digital word-of-mouth) power:

He got a call from his nephew saying, "What's up with so-and-so?"
"Whaddaya mean," Mort asked.
"I read that he's in the hospital!"

Turns out, the family -- at least the younger set -- was pretty connected through Facebook, and the nephew read about the family member before anyone had a chance to call Mort! (The guy's okay.)

I'm still figuring out my way around Facebook, and while I'm actually ahead of the curve compared to some of my peers and pals since I've actually had a profile posted and have added "friends" for months now, I'm way late to the game compared the average 18 year old.

Every 40+ Facebooker's got a story of how they icked out their son/daughter, etc. when they found each other on the site. We invaded their turf and they're starting to move out, of like a neighborhood going through a gentrification. We're migrating from LinkedIn and changing the Facebook landscape to be more of a business networking tool, and they're moving off to greener pastures and social tools.

Applying the Facebook power to business is a double-edged sword, though. It's great to use for outreach and creating buzz or connections, and you can have a lot of fun building a community in our increasingly isolated world. But...and this isn't news, but bears repeating...you want to make sure you're giving the "right" impression, since you probably don't want to post that picture of you crushing a beer can on your forehead or worse, (supply your own visual here).

At Monday's Small Business Technology Summit, sales training pro Adrian Miller repeated the advice about carefully considering what you post:
"Think of your Facebook profile like your desk top. Would you want those pictures in your office for your boss to see?"

That advice applies to the "younger set," too. There are a zillion examples of bad judgement showing up later to bite one in the behind from aspiring Miss Americas to Minneapolis students. But we're all so eager for our 15 minutes of fame or so myopic about the pervasiveness of the internet that we post with abandon. (Yikes. Blogger heal thyself?)