Top
Let me feed you.
Get at me.

 

 

tweet tweet

Loading..
Loading..

Entries in facebook (3)

Tuesday
Jul282009

Day 1: Who's so social on social media?

DateTuesday, July 28, 2009 at 12:25PM

Day 1: This is the first day of my month long experiment. I wanted to count yesterday's post as my "day 1" posting, but it would defeat the purpose of the experiment if I was an insincere weasel. So I didn't. Which brings me to today, and the post below about a study released this week that digs in to who is actually using social media.

Twitter followers:92

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Today, Anderson Analytics released a study tracking U.S. user behavior in social networks. The firm surveyed 5,000 users over a span of 11 months, and conducted a 15-minute survey of more than 1,000 users age 13 and older. The results of the study were actually pretty interesting. You can find the whole surveyhere, but below are some of the more interesting points:

 

  1. Users who belong to a social network arefour timesmore vocal about products and services than those who don't.
  2. More than 20% of Twitter users have their own blog, a large portion of which trumpet social causes.
  3. 44% of 35 to 44 year-olds in the U.S. and 30% of 45 to 54-year-olds have profiles on a social network.
  4. More than 50% of U.S. users have associated their profiles with a brand, company or product. This association has been overwhelmingly positive.
  5. The average U.S. user logs into a social network about 4x daily, 5 days a week, for a total of roughly 1 hour per day.

What these points (and the study itself) resound, is the idea that bloggers + social media users are not only active, but they are hugely important for brands. I know that this isn't the most groundbreaking discovery in the history of humanity -- or of this month -- but getting concrete percentage points for activity is radically different than simply saying "Brands should use social media... it's important?"

 

AuthorRobert Boyle | CommentPost a Comment |
tagged , , , , , , in ,
Monday
Jul272009

My Resolution: Do it until my fingers bleed

DateMonday, July 27, 2009 at 11:53AM

The point of starting this blog was to create a portal through which I could write about what I wanted, when I wanted.  My intention was never to develop my own personal brand or become the world's foremost authority on anything.  I just wanted to write.

That said, I am going to use this blog as something a little different for the next month: as my home base in an social media experiment I am undertaking. I am going to dance the social media dance for one month.

 

The breakdown of my experiment:

 

  1. Write an original blog post every day.  Because I still want this to be my safe zone, I will still be writing about the internets and anything else I find interesting.  Once a day though.
  2. Synthesize the 5 most interesting stories of each weekday and put them here.  I have pledged to do this countless times, and have never done so.  I am going to do it now -- GET TO THE CHOPPA.
  3. "Tweet" 10 times a day.  This might not sound like a lot, but I HATE "tweeting" random shit like "just leaving the gym" so this really means finding 10 articles/websites/videos/lovemaking tips that I think are interesting enough to tell people to check out.  See, doesn't that sound more difficult?
  4. Tumblr + Flickr = I am still finding these redundant, it's true.  But I will post 15 times this month.

 

The purpose of this experiment is to find out how much activity it takes to gain followers on twitter.  I am interested in this because so many people on Twitter tout themselves "experts" in social media, but previously had jobs as Northeastern Sales reps for Bally's (just an example -- obviously not everyone on Twitter used to work at Ballys, some of you sold insurance) or owned a hardwood flooring company.

Obviously the end outcome of this experiment will not be a definitive measurement of the correlation between activity in social media and Twitter followers, but it should provide some insights into how social media impacts personal branding campaigns.  I will track the entire process here, but should point out that all activity (blogging, tumbling, tweeting, flicking, ha) goes through Twitter.

I should also point out that I am starting this experiment with 92 followers.

 

AuthorRobert Boyle | CommentPost a Comment |
tagged , , , , , , , in
Thursday
May142009

Because the Facebook community can't handle it (apparently): Verified apps.

DateThursday, May 14, 2009 at 05:14PM

So both Venturebeat and Techcrunch are reporting on the incoming "verified app" program that Facebook is launching.

Here is the official Facebook response:

Apps apply to be in the program, and are judged based on the company’s trustworthiness criteria, which include being “Secure,” “Respectful,” and “Transparent.” Verified developers will get a series of benefits, the company tells me. On the product side, these include the ability for an app to let users send more invites and notification to friends, and greater prominence of app activity in news feeds. Developers will also be able to put a “Verified App” badge on their apps, and in the site-wide app directory. On the business end, they’ll get a discount on tickets to Facebook’s annual developer conference, and a $100 credit for purchasing ads on Facebook.

Something just rubs me the wrong way on this.

First off, why can't Facebook users decide which apps are spam and which are great?  It seems to me that Facebook has went out of its way to give users the opportunity to give the thumbs up or down (literally) on their interaction with Facebook and the feed.  This move just seems like a strange decision with this fact in mind.

Secondly, will every app that meets the above 3 (plus additional critera) critera be verified?  If not, this is seriously problematic, as it would give an unfair advantage to the earliest entries into app markets -- not the best apps.

Lastly, what happens to apps that are unverified?  If we assume that Facebook will determine app acceptability, then should it also police app existence?  What is the purpose of having verified and unverified apps, other than to help users?  And if helping users is the focus, why leave apps in that are not Secure + Respectful + Transparent?

It just makes very little sense to me.

AuthorRobert Boyle | CommentPost a Comment |
tagged , , in