Posted tagged ‘twitter’

How do you feel about digital memories?

September 14, 2009

digital ageListening the OnPoint, the topic is whether it is possible to create a “total recall” for all our memories of our lives. With all the social networks like Twitter and Facebook–not to mention the plethora of others–should we as human beings be recording all the minutiae of our lives to be retrieved at a later time?

Should we supplement our memory with the digital gadgets like cell phones, iPods, social networks or other aids?

Is there anything to the argument that the more you memorize, the more ability you have to memorize other things in the future? With children, it’s clear that the more you stress their brain with input of classical music or shapes/colors, the smarter the child will become and the faster her brain will be able to process new input.

What do you think? Should we record things that we don’t “need” to remember in our lives?

Kevin Rose: 10 Ways To Increase Your Twitter Followers

March 19, 2009

Since my son’s been onĀ  spring break this week, I’ve been paying attention to him and neglecting my blog. So today I thought I’d make two quick posts. This post by Kevin Rose is pretty good. Take a moment and check it out.

Kevin Rose: 10 Ways To Increase Your Twitter Followers.

Is Twitter Subjugating Social Networking

March 13, 2009

twitter_logoFor quite some time, people have been all a-twitter about twitter. I thinkĀ  I read that somewhere but don’t remember where. At a men’s retreat with my church, someone named Bob asked me what Twitter was all about. As I searched my mind for a clearly-defined advantaage provided by Twitter and NOT by other social networks, it kind of got me thinking Bob’s question.

What is it REALLY?

Bob said that he heard Twitter is “sort of the younger generation’s Facebook.” Well, in a sense, it is true that fewer retirement-age people are on Twitter. However, as Paull Young said in his Fox Business interview at Happy Hour, the social networks transcend all generational barriers. What is really key to the social networks is what it is that compels people to be there in the first place.

On Facebook, there are groups for members to join and causes which can be championed. And the common thread between all the social networks is the common interest held by the members. For instance, MySpace is typically thought to be used by not only the younger crowd, but by people who have an interest in music. MySpace is supposed to have a better interface with which musicians can showcase their work. I’m not a musician, and I have not experience with placing my songs (or anyone else’s) on a social network.

Based on that school of thought, one can assume that the common interest among members of MySpace is music. For the members of Facebook, interests are range widely. From countries, to cities, to places of work, the list of common interests continues to grow as people find their own areas of expertise. Why is this such a big deal? Because it is the common interests of members from all over the world.

Does Twitter Really Compete?

With the “micro-blogs” of 140 characters on Twitter, can we really get to know one another well enough to develop a relationship? Or even to begin to build a reputation or earn trust? Twitter allows the posting of “Tinyurls” which provide links to posts, sites or articles of interest to us. By clicking the tinyurl, we can go immediately to the page which may or may not be written by the person whom we “follow.”

Ben Yoskovitz, of Instigator Blog, breaks down the pluses and minuses of Twitter, but he comes back to the importance of having a blog in which one can showcase his/her expertise and develop more thought than he can in Twitter.

So what are your thoughts about the importance of Blogging as opposed to Tweeting? I’d love to hear your thoughts.

How ’bout it?

The Marketing Rules are (Still) Changing

March 6, 2009

tre-coverAs the world has witnessed the collapse of billion dollar companies such as AIG and Merryl Lynch, some of us stood by and were only able to watch in horror as if we were watching the Titanic sinking after hitting the iceberg. “It can never sink. It’s just too big,” they said. One can almost hear the naysayers scoffing at anyone who predicted such a catastrophic failure as what happened on Wall Street. “No, the banks can never fail. The government won’t let that happen.”

Look where it [our confidence] got us. Over the past two or three years, we have taken special notice to some blogs, names and phrases, such as, “Relationship Capital.”

The Relationship Economy is a system in which we are worth who we know and what we know. For example, I personally have just over 2,400 so-called “friends” on the online social network known as Facebook. A year ago, I had exactly 67 “friends” on that same network. Realizing that the shift from a goods-based/knowledge-based economy to a relationship-based economy, I started adding “friends” like crazy. Today, with my 2,400 + “friends,” I am more valuable than I was on March 5, 2008.

I’ve made connections to people all over the world, most of whom I will never meet or even speak to on the phone. And while I would say many will prove to be fruitless, I have made some really good connections to people in some very high places with companies such as Dell, IBM, Apple, HP, and, my favorite, Comcast.

The marketing has changed in the past six months. People are coming to the realization that the social networks are becoming more vital to businesses rather than just a fad. People are watching television online, listening to the radio online, getting their news online, and companies are capitalizing on the world’s ability to connect online.

So what’s my point?

With people spending so much time online and our ability to remain connected to the world, via Twitter, Facebook, Myspace, and RSS feeds, the marketing has changed locations and forums, but the message is still the same: “LOOK AT HOW GREAT MY PRODUCT IS!”

That’s where the marketing guys come up short. Rather than talking to us, they need to be talking with us. Finding out what it is we need. What we want a product to give us, etc.

In The Cluetrain Manifesto, written by Doc Searls et. al., says that marketes are conversations. It does little to aid your bottom-line if you are speaking in a language none of your customers can understand. Therefore, the relationship isn’t there.

Now, some companies have adapted their marketing to The Relationship Economy, but the big-boys–the banks, the insurance companies, etc.– have not. That’s why they collapsed in ’08.

Companies have forgotten that they aren’t all about million dollar homes and large offices with gold trash cans. When a person is made to feel important, that is when you will develop consumer pride and brand loyalty. But when a service call is not kept, the call is dropped, or the company doesn’t seem to care about YOU, the consumer, that is when the walls they have built all around them start to crumble.

The move toward the relationship economy is coming, and I think it may catch many big companies unaware.

How ’bout it?