Buzz on Google Buzz Getz Big Buzzer

If you had a cruise ship with no passengers, it wouldn't matter how decked out with luxurious and useful amenities, fantastic movies, art and music it was, or if it had a great cruise director to organize the guests and activities. With social media, just like with like parties, having the ship all to yourself is not a good thing. 

For two days now the buzzers have been buzzing about Google Buzz. The Google gaggle clammered, "Google's got a Facebook. It's Google's new Twitter. It's got update streams, comments and media sharing, right in your email!" My first reaction was, "Oh, like Yahoo?" 

Note the "buzz up" button at the bottom of this blog. It's not for Google Buzz, it's for Y! buzz. That's Yahoo. Yahoo has had it's own social network for years now, since Facebook was an infant. The Yahoo 360 Beta, which was great like MySpace in the beginning, finally closed in 2009 because not enough people were on it. Yahoo integrated much of the 360 info right into their regular profiles. I can blog, update, comment, connect to other people, media sites, apps, get feeds and news, and so on right from my Yahoo email or home page.

Here's a look at my barely populated Yahoo stuff...

... and here's a look at my barely populated Google Buzz stuff:

Underwhelming.

I know Google is big, I know they're everywhere, they even ran my favorite Super Bowl commercial. But sober up techies, another social network is just another social network, no matter who owns it and this is sort of a knock off of Yahoo anyway. So it's not benefits we're comparing, it's location. Where do you spend your time? Do you feel like relocating everyone you know and all of your information? If you already use gmail as your hub, it will be great for you. If not, it's just another added feature that lives there. I don't see all the bees buzzing away from Facebook, Yahoo, Twitter or whatever hive they've already built, I see it as simply a benefit to gmail users.

PS: click the "buzz up" & Digg buttons, please and thank you!

('’)

Friends don't let friends friend randomly

Imagine this: You walk into a mall. People are everywhere, going about their business alone or in groups, in a hurry or strolling at their own pace. You are wandering along, browsing music and books, lost in your thoughts.

Out of nowhere, you feel a poke in your side. You turn around and some guy is standing there, hand extended in anticipation of a firm shake. "My name is Bob Smith, can we be friends?" he asks matter-of-factly. You stand there, looking at him in silent pause, waiting for him to say something more about himself and why he suddenly wants to be friends with you. You ask yourself, "Have I met this man before? Do we have mutual friends, and if so, what is the nature of those relationships? What made him come up to me and ask such a forward question?"

The silence is awkward. Not seeming to notice your confused trepidation, the man goes on. "Let's be friends! Then I can look at all of your photographs, listen in on your conversations, see how much time you spend online, I'll tell you what I am doing and thinking, we can play games, you can recommend me professionally, you'll trust me with your valuable reputation, and then all my friends can see you and maybe be your friends and poke you all the time, too!"

You don't know what to do. You don't want to be rude, you might know this guy from somewhere. You don't want to admit you have no earthly idea who he is, but you don't want to acquiesce and trust this person with your personal information and connections. Besides, you don't even know if you like this person or if he is of any value to you in any way. What to do, what to do?

It's an uncomfortable yet all-too familiar scenario.

As I write this right now, a friend of mine popped up on IM to ask me if some guy has friended me.  "Cos he seems to be friending almost everyone on my page! I have no idea who he is. It's creepy cos he's just randomly friending my personal connections."

I've got three friend requests sitting in my Facebook notifications right now that I have no idea what to do with, so they just sit there. Who are these people? One is a complete stranger - profile pic is of a baby, not in my network, no friends in common. One is a Realtor office in Ocala, we have 16 friends in common. The other one, well, I really don't know what it is to be honest. It might be a fan page for motorcycle riding in the area, or a magazine maybe, but it has a realtor logo on it and it's a personal page... so I'm confused despite the 14 friends in common.

I don't know who is behind any of these pages and so I will not give them my endorsement, much less my friendship. I could send a note to them asking who they are and how they know me, but then that's putting me out of my way and making me ask the awkward question.

Social networking is SOCIAL. It's not just about clicking around randomly and seeing how high you can get the numbers. It's making and strengthening relationships, being genuine like you would in the "real world" because it IS the real world. It's got to make sense for someone to be your friend, and the more sense it makes, the better (or more useful) of a friend (or potential customer) they will be to you. Have a reason for adding someone to your network and if you're not sure they will know you by your name and face, for the love of Google, please add a quick personal note.

I'm still trying to decide what to do with those requests... should I send a note back asking who they are, or just ignore or decline them like I usually do? Maybe I should have a stock note ready to send, something like... "Hi there, where do I know you from or why would I be interested in connecting with you?" ... but ironically, that might be too impersonal.

A Not-So-Virtual Wake

It's been a rough week. I should have blogged yesterday or the day before. I started the week moving forward under an already heavy workload, then a good friend died and it really threw me off.

Joe Juriga was a cherished friend to many - so many that I doubt his family would have known even half of them, much less have been able to personally contact everyone who loved him. Think about it - how many people are you good friends with but have never had contact with their family? With social networking what it is today, our connections are growing in number and even more so for the outgoing, genuine people like Joe. So how did we all find out?

Facebook.

Joe's status update gave the sad news and offered his page up for memories in celebration of his life. I immediately Skyped a friend about it. Within 30 minutes, the posts started. They went for days. On day two, a friend of his posted a MySpace link to a song called "Broken" that he wrote and recorded in memory of Joe. On day three, an article went up in Fort Lauderdale, FL saying goodbye to the leader and friend that Joe was, and the obituary went online from Birmingham NY, with a guestbook that comments can be left on.

In these few days, dozens of friends and relatives have been able to share stories, photographs, tributes, music, love, disbelief and understanding with each other - many not even knowing one another. It is an online wake, it is instant - no waiting for the funeral, no travel time, no black outfit to find, and his family has been able to see what a huge and positive impact he has had on so many people.

The "virtual" communities online are very real. We now accept telephone communication as person-to-person, as real as it gets - but we still call the online world "virtual" because there is a visual that doesn't correspond with our visual "reality." It's all in a little box, not out in the "real world."

Phooey. It's real. The voice isn't IN a phone, it's real. The phone is simply a connection device, and so is the computer. The people inputting and uploading the information are very real, and the information is their voice. That's why it's so important to be honest when it comes to social media and marketing. It's all just like stepping out your front door and joining a big world party, person-to-person.

I think it's really cool, even if a little surreal, that all of this happened instantly in an online community. It has helped me to process some very sad and shocking news much better than simply not being able to make it to the "real" wake.

I'm making people batty!

Introducing the first annual, freshly-brewed batch of Halloween Portraits from Little Black Mask Marketing. I love Halloween and wanted to sprinkle some of the boo spirit around as well as launch a project in anticipation of the soon-to-be-live Little Black Mask website. If you'd like your Halloween portrait done, pop me a line and a photo (or a link to one on FB or somewhere) and I'll make you batty, too! I'll keep making them through October and it will all come together on Halloween with a poster and website unveiling (not unmasking though!) OOoooOOOoooohhhhh.

Either that or - there were these bats at a party who were taking pics for their social network profiles.

All portraits can be seen on my FB page [click here] and will be uploaded there as they are completed.

Designer Cannibalism?

Tiredly checking my email late last night, I came across an invitation to sell my logos on iStockphoto. I couldn't really process it mentally, so I left it open and gave it a second look this morning. I honestly don't think I processed it any better. WTF is this?

Confused, I read everything and then went onto the website to check the forum. I sent an email to a few esteemed designer friends to see if there was something I was missing, some positive angle that I hadn't seen right away. Because to me it looked horrible and I couldn't understand it.

Quick catch up:
In case you're not familiar with iStockphoto, they are an internet-based "member-generated image and design community." Translation: they sell people's photographs, illustrations, videos, audio tracks and Flash files as royalty-free files. They sell to designers. RIght, back to this logo thing they're doing.

The nuttyshell:

A designer submits a logo they have sitting around or a new one they come up with to iStockphoto. If iStockphoto approves it, for a limited time only, the designer receives $5. Woo hoo! iStockphoto now owns it outright. This logo goes up on the site for an asking price of 100 to 750 credits (value of each logo suggested by designer but determined by iStockphoto). If I've done my math right, this puts the logo dollar amount somewhere between $24 and $847.50. Upon sale of said logo it comes down (one-time sale), iStockphoto gives 50% in royalties. The designer walks away with $12 to $423.75 for their original logo design.

Issues that I see straight away:

One, copyright. iStockphoto is putting the burden of checking for trademarkability on the client. Dangerous, plus don't you just want to know that you are spending money on original art?

Two, branding value. Talented, professional designers have enough of a struggle trying to prove their worth without companies like this establishing "bulk pricing" for something as custom as a logo. How can one $50 piece of art tell the story of your company when it wasn't even made for you?

Three, designer cannibalism. Paying slave-labor prices to designers in order to turn around and sell to designers who then have to turn around and sell to their client. What is this saying?

On iStockphoto's forum, designers sound happier than pigs in mud and are rolling their sleeves up to start mass-designing logos for mystery companies. I am so confused! Here are comments from this morning's email that went between a few of my professional designer friends:

"Isn't it time to stop using Istock and other "stock companies" (it's not even really stock, it's really cheap royalty free)? I hope none of you all take part in this. Likewise with crowdsourcing. You can't expect everyone to understand the value of real design in the business environment, but there is no excuse for industry suppliers. Hopefully this logo thing will end up the same place the stock layouts did, nowhere."

Kip Williams [www.kipcreative.com]

"I agree Kip. I have a hotline set up for anyone who is contemplating Spec Work. I will talk you off that ledge. Remember, you are loved, so are your talents and design. Dont throw it all away and make a mess for the rest of us."

Andy Stracuzzi [www.zedzedeye.com]

So, is iStockphoto helping designers in a rough economy by offering them the opportunity to put work on a site that might or might not yield them at most a few hundred dollars? Or is this yet another pin in the design industry voo-doo doll that someone out there is wickedly poking in? There are no rules for this, we have to police ourselves. If you agree with me that this sounds horrible, please, don't do it and tell your designer friends the same.

Whores don't put their goods up on spec, let's not jump on this new, designer, pimp ride either.

R3: Renaissance 3.0

Web 2.0 is dead. Social media and social networking are the new PR and advertising is blending into marketing is the new black and white newspapers are dinosaurs are still hot with the kid market your product as a human seeking a date with your customer not their wallet. Forget CEO, it's SEO, SEM, SMO, SMS, GPS, conversations, experiential, engagement, behavioral, digital, e, i, blog, blawg, vlog, pod, dig, cast, web, net, analytics, metrics, pay-per-click, micro, global, tweet, portal, virus is bad, viral is good. Can anyone hear me? Yes, loud and clear! The world is listening just as much as the world is talking.

We live in a world of paradoxes. We constantly want and resist change at the same time because of our basic needs for stability and variety, leaving us with an ever-present inner-struggle. Hence all the panic right now. I say we calm down a little and enjoy the ride, this recession part of a renaissance. A transformation. An evolution.

People are running around saying that the automobile industry is in trouble. Really? Are we suddenly not going to need to get around? *blows raspberry* Of course the automobile industry is in trouble, but only as we know it. Thank God! We've been using outdated technology – I look forward to clean, efficient, quick transportation. In fact I really look forward to teleporting, but that will take a bit longer.

It's not any one industry that is undergoing metamorphosis, it's industry itself. Everything is changing – corporate structure, systems, religions, expectations... we are in a renaissance of science and culture.

The advertising industry is no exception. Technology has given us a whole new world of media, and has shifted the powers around to level the communications playing field between the consumers and the marketers. This is exciting! We are all both consumer and marketer to whatever degree, so it's good for everyone. The trick is to jump in with an open mind and to let go of the old games. It's time to redefine, for a greater good.

During artistic renaissances, there are a plethora of artists that sprout up and help push up the concrete institutions, but only certain people really get it right and are remembered for it. So who are the Michaelangelos of the ad industry during this renaissance we're going through? How can we tell the hacks from the masters? The trick might be to watch for people who practice the very thing they should be preaching right now: honesty.

Above all else, this level playing field has forced honesty, and if a marketing company is telling its clients that they need to have "honest conversations" with their consumers, then the marketing company should be having one too. That means admitting that no one is an expert right now because things are changing too fast. There are strong players, though. These players are out there not just speaking the new language, but questioning and redefining it as they go, faster than Googles changes its SEO criteria.

So engage in the conversation whether you're a marketer or a consumer, because really, you're both.

Hey Fox, you're micro-blogging my view!

Last night my mom was freaking out because Twitter posts were on the television screen while she was watching Fringe. At first I thought her complaints were the voice of her opposition to the conformist “twitterland” that we're all being sucked into. She isn’t a fan of the social media renaissance. 

"Come out here and look at this Jessi! You have to see it!" 

I tore myself away from Facebook, Twitter, Skype and Yahoo, and went into the living room. To my surprise, what I saw really was bad! One third of the TV screen was being taken up with two tweets at a time, by the Fringe people answering fans' questions. 

At first it seems like a good idea: engage the audience in a conversation, celebrities answer questions live on TV, yes? 

NO! Three strikes, they’re out.

First strike: The beauty of social media is that it is conversational, putting power in the consumer’s hands. It’s not one-sided messages that TV throws at us. Last night we (the viewers) couldn’t see the questions and @FringeonFox didn't answer with the question built-in. Interviewing 101 – phrase your answer with the question. Question: What’s your favorite color. Correct answer: “My favorite color is blue.” Wrong answer: “Blue." Here are some of the tweets they posted:

- RT @PeterBishop2 @jimdumas - the answers are yes and yes. #fringe

- RT @LabDad1 Watch what happens #fringe

- RT @LabDad1 Look at this! #fringe

- RT @JPFringe Sanford Harris - what a sweetheart! #fringe

- Don't miss season 2 of #FRINGE premiering Thu 9/17 at 9/8c on #FOX.

- RT @LabDad1 @xcori Of course! I'm only human #fringe

- RT @JWFringe @aolli I am so glad you love the show. Thanks man!!! #fringe

- RT @LabDad1 Josh and Anna said that Clint Howard was fantastic to work with! #fringe

- RT @LabDad1 This is a very important scene! #fringe

- RT @LabDad1 I haven't seen this scene for ages! #fringe

- RT @LabDad1 This is pretty powerful #fringe

- RT @LabDad1 Watch this scene here - she's really mean to me! #fringe

- RT @PeterBishop2 I hope you mean "did" metaphorically. #fringe

- RT @LabDad1 this is really cool what happens here #fringe

- RT @PeterBishop2 Like Father Like Son. #fringe

What a waste of space. 

Strike two: Distraction. Tweets like, "Watch this!" and "This is powerful" don’t add to the plot. They actually make it impossible to watch with any kind of focus. Fringe isn't a light comedy where you don't need details. It's a metaphysical-psycho-drama that you want to pay attention to. By distracting their viewers, they have taken away from the product. If their goal was to detract value from the show and replace it with sensationalism, they might have hit their mark. Here are some tweets that went out from their audience last night:

- bobh62000 @FRINGEonFOX I will never watch Fringe again if I see twitter popping up on my TV.

- irishgirlene @FRINGEonFOX: why r u doing this on screen and will u b doing this all season

- Eskissmo_chick @Fringe This is rediculous! I hope this doesn't happen on any other good shows.

- HeatherAre @fringe how do I turn this off my tv?!

- gregtarnoff @mkebiz seriously? I can't watch it because they are distracting. Bad move @fox @fringe #fringe

Strike three: It's contrived. Unofficial rules 1, 2, and 3 in social marketing: be genuine, be relevant, be transparent. Rule 4: listen, don’t push. Fox decided to take up 1/3 of the screen during a show that has avid and intelligent followers, to disseminate drivel. I wonder if they filmed for it. Did they actually compromise creative integrity to make space for these tweets? I hope not.  Either way it was not asked for by their audience, it was “forced.” I hope Fox uses Twitter to listen, not just to masturbate in the mirror. 

- carsnmoney00 @fringe I hope you idiots dont do this again

- rebmarks @fringe GET OFF MY TV SO I CAN WATCH THE DAMN SHOW

By the time it all ended – the hoopla and the show – my mom threw up her hands and said, "I didn't even see the show!"