We've created a monster!

In general, people are very sceptically of younger generations. I am not immune to this phenomenon and often find myself shaking my head in bafflement (or annoyance) at the seemingly unruly and rambunctious under grads at my university. I feel as if it was a lifetime ago that I was their age (even though it has only been 5 years), and I am not sure how to relate to them, or even if I care to do so in the first place.

However, it would be foolish to underestimate this generation.

Even more so than myself, at the age of 28, this generation has completely integrated social media and networking technologies into their lives. Sure, I have a pretty good grasp on these things, and am actively trying to learn more, but these kids breath social media, and the technological tools are an extension of their own bodies.

Sure, there are times when this is a bad thing (do they really need to whip out their cell phones and openly start text messaging in class? At least my generation has the sense to be discreat). But overall, this younger generation will be the key to taming the wild beast of social media.

Right now, we are passengers on this social media roller coaster-- trying like mad to understand it and figure out the best ways to utilize it. But what seems like a giant roller coaster to us, is more like a kiddy ride at the county fair to the younger generation. So it is no surprise to realize that they will likely be the ones to solve the major issues that have cropped up throughout this revolution-- mainly, issues of privacy, transparency, and the effective gathering and distribution of information.

This revolution all started with the idea that these technologies were in place to protect us. However, things quickly spiraled out of control. We now find that the very things we thought were in place for our protection are actually the things from which we need to safeguard ourselves. (For example, consider medical files-- an aggregated system that allows all of our medical information to be accessible from one source seems like a good thing- but how do we maintain and securing that record, and is it safe to have all of our eggs in one basket?)

These are issues that we will continue to grapple with. But I imagine that it will be the younger generation- those to which social media and new technologies are second nature- that will ultimately be able to put a harness on this beast.

Don't get me wrong... I am not about to let those undergrads out shine me... but I can at least start having a little more faith in them, even if i feel like I can't relate.

For more on this topic, check out Lawrence Lessig's speech 2008 speech at the University of Chicago Law School.

Apple can sell ice cubes to Eskimos... (I'll take the entire tray please!)

Everyone is talking about the iPad, (largely for all the wrong reasons-- eh-ehm, can we all grow up, please). As an employee of National Geographic, I was personally very excited when Steve Jobs visited our newly redesigned website during the iPad product launch. Oour advertisers must have been in heaven when they saw that pleasant surprise-- the hits we got were jaw dropping!




But I digress.

Everyone knows that when Apple talks, we listen. Sure, we all have seen tablet technology before.... but never like this. Apple has (once again) created a new breed of technology that might just span the gap between computers and cell phones. And true to Apple form, this new technology is neither frivolous nor boring. Even all you nay-sayers out there have to admit that this product is not only beautiful, but also fulfills a missing, traditional need in today's technologically driven society (more on that to come).

So, it's not surprising to hear that software designers all over the world are developing applications specifically for the iPad. I am not a "gamer,"virtual nor do I have a particular interest in spending time in the virtual world (I can barely keep my head on straight in the tactile world!).

Yet I can see how something like the iPad could facilitate accessibility to the virtual world for those like me who really can't be bothered with it at this point.

I can't help but think of a beautiful, well-made, sleek and sexy Apple product in my hands-- with graphics to die for, the speed of lighting, and an intuitive, user-friendly platform.... Ok, maybe I could get into this virtual world thing afterall.

But here is what I find most interesting about this new product. "Techies" and business professionals are drooling over the opportunities to develop new software and applications. But at the SAME TIME, traditional publishing gurus are seeing the iPad as a way to salvage their industry! What gives?

Well, the software/application perspective is pretty intuitive; latch on to a hot product, design applications, sell them to the millions of captive consumers, and watch your money grow. Apple has not missed a beat in twenty years or more (excluding the recent "naming" oversight). Stakeholders want to ride that big, red-delicious wave, all the way to the bank, by creating new applications and reaching consumers who were previously intimidated by programs such as Second Life.

But how does traditional media reinsert itself in this picture?

Think about owning your own iPad. You can hold it in your hands- but it is by no means just a cell phone, nor is it a big, bulky laptop. You cherish and love this object like it was you child. You swab and dust the screen clean, (only with the factory approved shammy cloth!), and you feel very important when using it. You don't have to zoom to read web pages. The orientation of your device is horizontal. In fact, you can flip "virtual" pages, almost as if you were reading an actual book or magazine! And unlike the Kindle or other electronic book devices, your iPad is about the same size as a book or magazine, and offers rich and interactive content that helps you connect with content-- much like you did as a child when you insisted upon reading your favorite book over and over again.

Are you starting to see why "tech-nerds" and traditional media giants alike are excited about this product?

The iPad is an innovation that pushes the technological (and marketing) envelop by facilitating wide spread accessibility to the virtual world, while fulfilling a long-overdo need and desire for meaningful connections between readers and content- much like our forefathers experienced with books and other forms of print publications before computer screens were invented.

So go ahead and share your iPad predictions. I am interested to know what everyone thinks! Will it change everything? Will you spend more time controlling your avatar than being yourself? Will you read more books and magazines because they are readily available in complete visual, graphical splendor-- in the format from which we originally learned to read (HORIZONTAL!).

Let me know! And if you have a iPad, I would love to hear about your experiences-- for alas, I am a poor grad student who will not have the discretionary cash to buy one for quite some time.

LinkedIn... really?

Am I the only person out there who really can't get into LinkedIn?

Somehow I doubt it... but why is it that such a potentially powerful tool isn't really catching on?

I think it is because it takes all the fun out of social media. Today's professional certainly needs a presence on LinedIn, but what insentives do we have to actually visit the site on a regular basis? There are no changes occuring so I have no reason to visit.

Actually, I visit on average about once a month, unlike facebook, which is more like once an hour...

Bearing that in mind, will LinkedIn ever catch on? Or will it die off completely?

I'm not sure I will notice either way.

My buddy and me

For years now, I have been longing for a fancy, shinny iPhone, but I could never bring myself to spend the money (or switch to AT&T- I'm a Verizon girl all the way!). A few weeks ago, my old smart phone (Motorola Q... booooo, bad phone!!) died, and not a moment too soon. I was forced to buy a new phone, and I must say, I am in love.

My new Motorola Driod is everything I could have wished for in an iPhone, but it was half the price, and has the service of any Verizon wireless phone! This phone has quickly become my best new buddy.

And I must admit, now that I have this fancy phone that does so much more than allow me to make phone calls, I spend much less time talking to people. I do spend more time texting, playing on the super speedy internet, or searching through all the cool applications that I can download for free to make my phone even more personalized!

But this doesn't mean that I don't appreciate face-to-face human interaction. Actually, it is quite the opposite. Being able to communicate with others in chunks, (like using SMS or perhaps this new technology, MoSoSo) gives me more time to interact with the people in front of me. I used to have a friend (didn't we all), who would be hanging out with me, but talking on her cell phone with another friend at the same time. I never knew who she was trying to communicate with! And I was offended that I was getting so little of her attention. Now, with the amount of flexibility we have to communicate on our cell phones without making a call, it is very easy to multitask, or better yet, excuse yourself for a moment to ask another friend a question via text message.

Because lets face it, we are not going to just up and stop our habit of multitasking.... it is part of our culture, and we get a lot of things done because of our ability to do it successfully!

I admit, there are draw backs to being so dependent on our cell phones for communication and information sharing, but once we settle down and learn when to use them and when to look up and smell the roses, we will find they really are great tools.

The internet is not making me stupid, you idiot.

There is a trendy sentiment coming out of the internet revolution: the internet is making us more stupid.

People touting this idea claim that because information is so readily available, we (especially young people who were raised using the internet) are damaging our ability to read "deeply," think, and comprehend. Instead, we are becoming slaves to skimming, largely because there is such a vast amount of information at our finger tips.

Personally, I find this concept not only offensive (after all, it is directed at people under the age of 30), but logically flawed.

First, I don't understand why there is an assumption that we can no longer read and contemplate books or anything of length. Having a great deal of information readily available to us via the internet actually gives us more time to read and comprehend the things that are most important to us. I can quickly find and skim information I need about an ancillary topic. But if I am reading something of interest, I have more time and attention to give to that topic. This is called efficiency.

Second, let's look at this from the writer's perspective. The wealth of information on the internet causes us as writers to be more captivating and to-the-point. It is up to the writer to keep the readers' attention. Since when is that a bad thing? Most writers aspire to be this way. The internet weeds out the writers who fall short.

Third, what is wrong with skimming anyway? Living here in DC, I know many very good lawyers who have piles of boxes of documents, all of which they need to read and be familiar with in order to serve their clients. If those lawyers didn't know how to skim, they would be dead in the water. Sure, lawyers have a bad wrap in this country, and most people don't aspire to be like them. But you can't deny the ability of a good lawyer to internalize huge amounts of information and process it in a way that paints a picture of their case and helps their client in the end. I WISH I was that good at skimming.

So for all of you people out there who think the internet is making us stupid, try being a little more open minded... it's a sign of intelligence, you know.

To read more, visit this site (with SEO in mind, I choose not to put the direct links of my blog). You will be linked to articles that tell you how dumb you are. Feel free to skim.

Will you be my Facebook "friend?"

Facebook is not about nurturing friendships and connecting with people.

Facebook is about me.

Sure, people use it to stay in touch with friends, but it is actually just a socially acceptable venue to grandstand about ourselves and feed our precious egos. We boast our accomplishments, showcase our hobbies and interests, and make sure everyone knows what's on our minds at any given moment.

And the more "friends" we have, the better! Not because it means we are so lucky to have all these wonderful people in our lives, but rather because it means we have more people who are willing to listen to us talk about ourselves! And of course we all know, the higher our friend count, the more inherently awesome we really are. It doesn't matter if we actually know or like all those people. Of course, we all do these things to varying degrees, but you can't deny the underlying fact that we use Facebook to make ourselves feel good about being "me."

So what are the ramifications of this for companies who are using social media tools like Facebook in their marketing strategies?

The Economist published an article about conversational marketing and whether websites like Facebook and MySpace were going to change the world of advertising. The article mostly talks about how word of mouth advertising and the concept of marketers engaging in the conversations of their consumer are NOT new ideas. Instead, the article indicates that these strategies have been around for a very long time, but the internet has made them more powerful than ever.

What I found most interesting was a comment credited to Paul Martino, the creator of Tribe. He said that the quality of the connections made on soical networking sites is quite low. So markters who think they are utilizing these tools to spread conversational or word of mouth advertising might be in for a surprise.

I know that I have a lot of "friends" on Facebook that I don't have much of a connection to, but I accepted the request because (1) I didn't want to make the person feel bad and (2) it boosted my friend total, thus making me look more popular and feel better about myself! But when it comes down to it, there is no real connection, and I usually wind up ignoring or blocking any feeds associated with those type of people.

So my network is actually much less powerful than it appears. If corporations are expending resources to exploit our social networks, their ROI is bound to be less than they were expecting. The Economist called these networks "visual clutter about the banal doings of increasingly random people."

Time will tell, but this is defiantly something marketers should keep in mind when developing social networking advertising strategies.

btw... are we friends on Facebook yet??

It takes a village... or does it?

"Crowd Surfing" -not to be confused with "Crowdsourcing"

My high school volleyball coach used to always say, "It takes a village to win a volleyball match." (His funny way of saying we have to work as a team to succeed). The idea that collaborative efforts yield superior results is widely accepted. So why is everyone getting so upset about this idea of crowdsourcing?

The issue comes down to semantics. "Crowdsourcing" implicates that a large, overarching group is responsible for a new idea or innovation. Studies have shown, however, that while many people are blanketed in crowdsourcing, only the obsessed, vigilant experts are making meaningful contributions. The word "crowd" doesn't seem to give these experts due credit.

Are we splitting hairs here? I don't think so.

Semantics is such an important aspect of language that is commonly overlooked. So often, we use words that almost communicate what we want, and we are too lazy or complacent to come up with the best. In the end, we wind up with a weakened language and poor communication skills. Sounds pretty inefficient to me.

If "crowdsourceing" is inappropriate, then what term should we use? "Virtuoso Search" has been thrown out there by Forbes.com writer Dan Woods. I am not sure how I feel about that phrase, but it is certainly more descriptive than "crowdsourcing."

We are still in the early stages of the social media phenomenon. Now is the time to get the terminology straight. Otherwise, overtime, the social media/networking language will be twisted, confused and weak. We have enough to learn about this frontier, lets not make it more difficult by misusing words.


For more information:
NPR Adam Davidson
Open Innovation

Forbes Dan Woods
Myth of Crowdsourcing