Facebook announcement.

FriendFeed has made little impact on the mainstream but it does appeal to the geek audience, including myself. In my mind, FriendFeed works best as an aggregator as opposed to a destination for content – its closer to the failed Facebook acqusition target, Twitter. The FriendFeed interface is very simplistic unlike the increasingly congested and hectic Facebook.

The user bases are very different, which suggests primary motivation is to absorb talent and expertise (particularly in the area of real-time services) rather than eliminate a competitor – FriendFeed traffic has stagnated for most of the year. The co-founders of FriendFeed and staff will join Facebook’s engineering team.

I think its unlikely that Facebook will continue to support FriendFeed as a separate entity given the fact that both sites are burning rather than generating cash at this point in time. It makes sense for Facebook to consolidate but expect a lot of user angst from one or both communities when the integration process begins.

This is very early days for the social networking sector as a whole. Will Facebook still hold the lead when the industry begins to mature (whenever that might be but a fair few years from now)? Who knows? It will be interesting to see how this all plays out, not least in relation to the monetization and data privacy issues – the elephants in the room for this industry sector. This space won’t stand still for long as evidenced by a wide range of social networking services out there nipping at the heels of Facebook.

Check out Twine, FourSquare, Posterous, Yahoo Mosh and MySpace (just joking).

]]> http://justanother24hours.com/social-media/facebook-consolidates-with-acquisition-of-friendfeed/feed/ 0 http://justanother24hours.com/social-media/is-the-social-networking-star-waning/ http://justanother24hours.com/social-media/is-the-social-networking-star-waning/#comments Tue, 14 Jul 2009 11:59:40 +0000 Daniel Young http://justanother24hours.com/?p=783 Is the social networking star waning?

This graph shows the Traffic Rank for the three biggest international social networks since mid-2007, courtsey of Alexa.

Traffic Rank compares all websites and ranks them from number 1 up in terms of traffic figures. Facebook has been the fourth most Trafficked website on average over the last 3 months.

MySpace has gone from 6 in mid-2007 to 11 today. Twitter has enjoyed a steep ascent from around the 3,000 mark in mid-2007 to 15 today.

Google.com is number 1, at the time of writing. The number 1 spot rotates between Google and Yahoo.

This graph shows that total social networking activity peaked in Q308.  It shows the percentage of total daily page views for each of the three sites.  MySpace has been on a steady decline since then.

The MySpace experience suggests that social networks have a limited lifespan or that they need continual re-invention to motivate their members.  The challenge lies in making changes and re-inventing without alienating users, as Facebook has found to its cost.

News Limited is about to embark on a new strategy for the loss-making site . The site will re-cast itself as an “entertainment portal” following a spate of redundancies and cut backs.

In 2008, U.S. ad spending on MySpace was $585 million, up 15% from 2007, and on Facebook was $210 million, up 50%, according to eMarketer.  Facebook generated $210 million in ad revenues in the same period.

Ad spending on Facebook is expected to surpass that of MySpace in 2011. This will be a good indicator of the overall health of the social networking market.

Twitter has dominated the headlines in 2009 thus far. Facebook – which was today valued at $6.5billion – continues to be the star of social networking but I feel that there are signs that it’s star is waning.

Anecdotal feedback from friends suggest that the novelty factor has worn off. Photo sharing seems to be the primary function of the site for most users who tend to interact inside Facebook with the close circle of friends that they hang out with in real life.  The re-design hid many applications and services behind tabs meaning that users have to go and look for content rather than have it come to them.

There are signs of an emergence of editorial ruminating about the future and usefulness of Facebook. In this article for Mac World, Hillary Rhodes asks: Is Facebook past its prime? Hillary makes the point that ‘the quality of the content that people share at Facebook may contribute to the longevity of the site far more than the sheer number of people who connect with each other’.

Negative editorial can only serve to speed the deterioration of the Facebook brand as a cool go to place. We always knew it was geeky but perceptions of the site seem to be edging into ‘un-cool’ or at least ‘old-hat’.

A recent study covered by The Australian identified a reaction to digital lifestyles. It found that the younger demographic longs for simpler times, it interested in retro and vintage (comes as no surprise if you live in Surry Hills) and has a desire for more authentic real-world relationships. The study found declines in the time spent on the Internet amongst 1,600 young adults (16-30 years old).

My view is that Twitter has a relatively sustainable lifespan because of its simplicity and its diversity.  Twitter seems to have m0re potential due to the fact that it connects people that don’t know one another creating many more opportunities for users to refresh, grow and evolve their networks, exposing them to new sources of information and opinion.

It seems inevitable to me that the traditional / new media pendulum would swing back towards the reality of physical offline media.  Like the dotcom bust, this process will redress the balance and bring a sense of reality to what has been a massively over-hyped area. I’d be a nut to argue that social media has had its day. We’re still in the formative phase of social networking and the chances are that Facebook will be superseded by something else in the short to medium term, in the same way that it has overtaken MySpace.

What does this mean for marketers?

Firstly, for online campaigns leveraging social networks and the Web. Marketers must ensure they have a presence within all major social network. Do not put all of your eggs in one basket.  It must be possible for the customer to engage with the brand and participate in the campaign within the social network of their chosing. This ensures maximum reach. Post campaign analysis will provide some interesting insights as to where  your audience participates, which can be weaved into future campaigns.

Secondly, social networks will come and go. What’s important is that brands interact with their target audiences online in an authentic and credible voice.  Its not about Facebook, MySpace or any other social network per se, its about understanding your customers and engaging them via the Internet and other forms of media in meaningful and valued interactions and conversations.

They were supported by Seekae, a group from Sydney and Seekae were brilliant. You can check them out at MySpace.

Can’t wait to see them again…

Pivot were great too!

The conference kicked off with two keynotes in the morning and then split into three tracks.

The presentations that I saw were very case study driven, which is nearly always the case with these types of conferences. Agencies and clients were happy to talk about the revolution that ‘is occurring’ or ‘has occurred’ and to report back on successful campaigns and projects but few were willing to tackle some of the more challenging topics and issues facing the industry. I saw four members of one panel swerve the question of: What is influence and how can it be measured?

This is a topic that I plan to come back to.

Fox Interactive Media announced ‘four new initiatives‘ to ensure that it ‘enables marketers in their fight to be more efficient and relevant’.

One of the four initiatives – MySpace Lifestages’ will allow marketers to target Australians in a range of lifestages, including:

• When a MySpace user has graduated from Uni
• Is engaged to be married
• Is Pregnant
• Has given birth
• Has lost a job
• Has entered a new job
• Has had a birthday

MySpace will provide marketers with access to this data in real-time (its based on the users’ self expressed interests on their public MySpace profiles’.

Some facts about MySpace Australia:

• More than 2.4million uniqe Australian visitors in Jan 2009 – according to Nielson Online
• Australians spents 2.3million hours on MySpace during Jan 2009
• 65% of MySpace Australia users are 18 years or over

The theme of brands engaging with consumers via existing social networks was a dominant one during day one of Ad:tech and its clear that huge value lies in the access that these social networks have to user data. Further, the value held in this data is the key to successful monetisation of social networks. The ability of social networks to harness information and present it in ways that are useful to marketing people will determine the future of social networking.

Users have – in the most part unwittingly – accepted this process by agreeing to the End User License Agreement, which is an essential step when signing up or becoming a member of a social network but one wonders how consumers will react in the long run when it becomes apparent to them that brands have access to this information and are using it to target them with offers and promotions. The onus is on the marketing industry to do this in a way that is truly engaging, entertaining or useful.

There were examples of some creative and engaging campaigns today.

I think there is an inherent danger for today’s popular social networks – the pressure to successfully monetize will increase over time (accelerating from now) resulting in them making more and more information available to marketers and potentially alienating their members. This may create the opportunity for new social networks to come in with promises not to share personal information with marketers.

Of course, there are other methods of monetizing social networks. This post by Laurel Papworth provides a comprehensive run down while Robert Andrews at The Guardian predicts a tough 2009.

Some more thoughts on day 1 from Ben Shepherd at Talking Digital here.

More from me from Ad:tech tomorrow.

Dealing with the YouthForce

The Millenials and Gen Ys are an increasingly important segment of our workforce. This demographic has had the luxury of a prosperous economy during their teenage years and adult life. They haven’t experienced an economic downturn or heaven forbid – an R!

Accenture coined the term user-determined computing. The relates to the increasingly tech savvy workforce and the dramatic increase in the availability of free, customisable and easy to implement software.

The Accenture argument goes that new technology within the workforce is just as likely to be deployed by users as it is by the IT department, which poses the question: How much control should IT (the business) exert over its users in the Web 2.0 world?

In recent years, we’ve seen social networking applications, instant messenging, RSS readers and so on enter the workforce in a big way. They may or may not be being used for work related activities.

Companies are presented with four options:

Get Back to Work Make a Phone Call!

BLOCK: Prevent access to social networks, sites and services that aren’t obviously related to work.

TRUST: Allow access and leave workers to discover their own professional uses for the technology.

APPLY: Work with employees and third party consultants to identify ways in which the technology can be applied to work. Lay down guidelines for the use of social media and other tools in partnership with staff and communicate these guidelines.

MANAGE: Tap into workers enthusiasm for online communication by rolling out a Facebook-like platform for internal (and external with trusted partners) company communications.

Telstra and Channel 7 are two companies in Australia that have received negative media coverage for blocking access to social networks (Facebook in both cases).

It will be interesting to see how the issue of the tightening economy and the use of social networks in the work place converge during the next twelve months. We’ve seen a rash of retrenchments in Australia and around the world, which looks likely to continue.

Recent research by the people at Wikinomics found that 50% of the Net Generations surveyed spend more than 2 hours every day using work technologies (Internet, IM etc.) to complete non-work tasks. 

My bet would be that corporations will increasingly opt to BLOCK as staff are cut back.

The forward thinking companies will respond to this issue by trying to find ways to use new technology to increase productivity in the workplace rather than adopting the punitive BLOCK mentality.  

Here are the results from Wikinomics:

Disclosure: Accenture is a client.

My first impression of the new new design was that it felt more like an enterprise application. I think the tabs have added a sense – imagined or real – of complexity.

I don’t understand the justification from moving from the one profile page to the tabbed format. A service which made a huge amount of information and interaction readily available has become much more cumbersome to use.

With the old version, you didn’t know what was new, but by scrolling down the page – the new content was revealed to you. Now users must click on tabs and literally find content and updates – it’s much less fun and much more effort.

Facebook won’t be supporting the two versions, unlike Yahoo!, for example, which continues to support ‘Classic’ and ‘New’ Yahoo! Mail. This is despite the fact that 1 in 4 users prefer the old design (Facebook data).

The Inside Facebook blog is a great source of info on – you guessed it – Facebook.

People have an emotional connection with Facebook and they tend to be resistant to change in general so it’s inevitable that there would be a kick back to the re-design.

This Facebook group ‘1 000 000+ to bring back old facebook’ has 369,810 members.

Papworth’s presentation provided an overview of well known social networking sites and blogging platforms and instructions on how bloggers and content creators can promote their product via social media. It dealt with some of the implications for the freelance journalist community.

The content was relatively rudimentary but well matched to the level of knowledge and experience among the audience of freelance writers.

I have seen Papworth speak a few times. Tonight, I again learnt about some new stuff, fact and figures:

• The biggest concern for 50% of the journalists that participated in a PEW survey (State of the News Media) ranked economic concerns as their biggest professional issue  
• MySpace = the third largest country in the world
• More on corporate activity within Facebook: Salesforce has created an application that links Facebook activity with its CRM application. More on this here.
• Glassdoor: A site that provides an environment for employees to anonymously rate their employer. More from Ms. Papworth here.

The take away was basically: Freelances need to get theirs head around social media and learn how to use it to their advantage because in the future an editor is just as likely to commission a blogger with a ready made audience and some degree of authority on a specific topic.

I don’t think there is any doubt that this is true.

The evening got me thinking about journalism and how this compares to blogging. Surely good journalism is mainly but not totally about objectivity, as defined by Yahoo! Education:

The style of writing characteristic of material in newspapers and magazines, consisting of direct presentation of facts or occurrences with little attempt at analysis or interpretation.  

Clearly, journalists and publishers have biases and political leanings but famous papers got that way because they were objective. The skill in journalism comes from researching and understanding an issue before gathering credible sources together to present a balanced analysis of that topic.   

Bloggers have an agenda. They shoot from the hip and more often than not they promote themselves and their point of view. There is no requirement for objectivity. They know that their audience either already has an interest in their favoured topic or agrees with them or just finds their personal going-ons interesting. 

They operate within echo chambers (at least to some extent) and their success and the degree to which they entertain and inform is rarely determined by their ability to deconstruct relevant and topical issues.

This begs the question: Is it better to have an understanding of what’s going on or to know what somebody else thinks?

A combination of Opinion and Objectivity would be ideal but as Papworth said during her concluding comment the US newspapers are placing more and more blog content on their home pages and she expects this trend to be repeated in Australia.   

The last questioner of the night pondered the issue of time; where might freelance writers find time to blog and manage and extend their social networks? A valid question because now it’s my bedtime.

You’ll find the presentation from tonight’s event here (soon).

This one:

Apparently, GodsPlace, I mean MySpace, has deleted the Atheist and Agnostic group from its pages under pressure from religious intolerants. There is no allegation of a violation of terms. The group had 35,000 members, has won awards for not believing stuff and claims to be the largest collection of atheists in the world.

The objectives of the research were to:

• Capture data on the frequency and type of new media used by Australian Federal politicians, parties, interest groups and activists
• Provide an analysis of the new media used to identify the range of viewpoints and the level of interactivity and community engagement attempted or achieved

Overall, the level of engagement achieved had been minimal due to the failure of the politicians to use the power of social media to engage and interact. Only one of the 226 politicians studied allowed negative comments to appear on their site (this was Malcolm Turnbull). In all other cases, comments sections were either not available or carried purely fan mail i.e. positive/supportive messages. Very small numbers replied to questions submitted via Websites and social networks, completely missing the opportunity to engage in conversation and drive advocacy.

Some figures:

• Less than 6% of selected Federal politicians had a new media presence assessed as “fairly interactive” (i.e. involving links inviting people to comment, ask questions or leave messages)
• 185 elected Federal politicians had new media sites which were completly one-way information dissemination with no opportunity for comment or input by members of the public
• Web and other sites of 70 elected Federal politicians comprised a single page and were judged to be a ‘token effort’
• Only three (1.3 per cent) were classified as “very comprehensive”, assessed on the basis of multiple pages plus links to other information such as blogs, podcasts or YouTube. The Kevin07 site was one of the three.
• Two Websites were judged to be amateurish and the majority were based on templates
• There were just 15 blogs but on average Federal politicians used 2.24 types of digital media

One of the key conclusions drawn from all of this is that “new media have not created a new public sphere of political discussion and debate where citizens can participate as equals as envisioned by Habermas (1989)”.

I take issue with this conclusion. It’s clear from the data that new media hasn’t been given the chance to create ‘a new public sphere of political discussion’ because it has been poorly applied and executed. In other words, new media hasn’t failed but our politicians and their advisors have. John Howard provides a case in point. He made little or no attempt to adapt his message or presentation for YouTube and opened his maiden YouTube appearance with ‘Good Morning!’.

There was much talk after the presentation about the fact that the majority of people that visited these types of sites where politically active and that it’s not actually these people that influence the outcome of elections.

My colleague, Ed, made a good point after the event. He said that he agreed with this conclusion but that the experience of US pollies had shown that social media could be used effectively as tool for mobilising a community of politically active advocates and supporters i.e. it does have an important role to play/does add value.

I would argued that politicians, in general, need to change the tone of their message and the way it is presented (Infotainment). This would help to engage the politically apathetic and help voters feel that they were interacting with a real person with a personality.

The report touched on the contribution of prosumers or citizens in terms of video commentary and other types of media. Macnamara made the point that much of this content was spoof material and he said that the jury was out as to whether this represented genuine political discourse. I don’t think there should be any question that it does.

My other observation related to the number of times that the audience made a point based on an assumption that only young people use social media.

Overall, it was an informative session in an academic setting and food for thought.