Social Networks

social-networks

Three Essential Tools For Media Publishers

Posted Sun, 01/20/2008 - 20:31 by awakenedvoice

This post continues the practice of giving advice to those web services that aim to capitalize on the explosion in independent media publishing on the internet. These services are attempting to gain the favor of bloggers, podcasters, community builders and enterprise level producers who are looking to leverage Web 2.0 or social media technology.

Sadly, just about all the companies that are in the space fail to recognize what tools publishers really need. Or if they do recognize what publishers need they aren't acting on it. Here are five tools that online media publishers need in order to create a more powerful and simplified publishing experience. All of these suggestions relate to tools you can build simply by accessing the publisher's RSS feed.

  • iPhone Compatible Views - The iPhone/iPod Touch is the hottest mobile device on the market today. And while the built in Safari browser is great at viewing web pages, that doesn't mean that a publisher's site will be able to provide a great experience for iPhone users. You're in the money if you can take an RSS feed an then create an iPhone compatible view that also allows for properly linking to audio or video enclosures if they are present.Publishers need to have access to this growing mobile audience. Give the publisher a nice widget that they can drop on their web page to guide iPhone users to the correct view.
  • Email Subscription With Statistics - The prospect of reaching the masses is really the promise of indie media publishing. And while RSS subscription is getting simpler there is still a strong majority of people who prefer email to get their updates. The very popular FeedBurner service offers this option but at the cost of changing a site's feed address. Serious publishers want to maintain their brand and own their feeds. Provide an email subscription service along with statistics and a nice, clean widget and you will hit a home run with publishers.
  • Cross-Platform Publishing - The list of networks where publishers want to broadcast to keeps increasing. First there was MySpace, now Facebook and Twitter are also hugely popular. It is a troublesome task to have to republish a single item multiple times just to reach all points of presence. Tools do exist for different publishing systems to integrate with these services. But there are still many publishers who don't want to deal with plug-ins and work arounds that need to be updated every time a service updates their API. You can handle that for them. Provide a dashboard that allows publishers to set preferences to cross-post to the most popular social networks. By doing so you will save the publisher time and certainly gain their respect.

I know that the thought of being a utility for media publishers is not exciting for many entrepreneurs. If you want to make a business out of this thing you need to gain the respect of the enthusiasts. Face the fact that your site is not going to be come a mass destination like Facebook, YouTube or Digg. Take a cue from FeedBurner. Become a utility that publishers cannot live without and the value of your service will grow at a very rapid rate.

New Social Networks Don't Need A Business Model

Posted Sun, 12/02/2007 - 22:33 by awakenedvoice

I've said before that I believe there will be millions of social networks on the web in the future. These networks may consist of just a few people up to thousands of people. If you think about it every family could have a social network. Every sports team could sprout a social network. Fans of every leisure activity known to us could conceivable have social networks. And I believe they will.

We're at a point in time where the level of technological ability required to build a social network is shrinking. We have systems like Drupal that allow those with just a bit of web expertise to get started. We have services like Ning that make network construction as easy as managing a blog. I have no doubt that these tools will get easier and even more tools will spring up.

It is my perception that most people who are creating social networks today feel that there has to be some sort of a business behind it. A good number of network creators are shopping their business plans and looking to get venture capital so that they can someday rival Facebook and MySpace. Some are simply loading up their networks with AdSense and other types of online advertising.

It seems to me that stressing on trying to make your social network into a money maker is probably the quickest way to ensure failure. How can you focus on the important things related to creating strong social networks when there is so much emphasis on revenue generation. Strong social networks need to provide a pleasant user experience, with feature that easily connect others. They require a great deal of care in order to grow. Growing a social network should be like tending to a garden. A garden is all about the plants. So a social network is all about the members. Do those members need advertising or efforts related to raising venture capital in order to enjoy the experience? No.

I know that many people will say that you need to have money in order to be able to afford development of the site. The founders may need money to live why they build their networks. To that I would say that many people have forgotten (or never learned) the basic business fundamentals.

You should start any business with as little capital as possible to get it off the ground. You should also be schooled in the fundamentals of how to build your businesses. For social networks that includes have some abilities in the area of web development. Get started by doing it yourself. If you don't have those skills then bring on a partner who does. Real entrepreneurs take on the risks of building something themselves. And smart entrepreneurs do all they can to minimize risk. You can always start a web based social network using your knowledge capital and personal savings. If you don't have personal savings then there are other issues to be attended to.

I really do think that some people just like the idea of being called the founder of a startup more than they like the idea of cultivating a business to be successful in the long run. Success is certainly not about being the most high profile, most blogged about service on the web. It is about lots of work that no one ever sees or gives you credit for. And I think that some who could start and run great networks refrain from doing so because they don't think they can be successful based on what the current web2.0 community considers a success. Well most of those measures are wrong.

I look at Craigslist as a great example of a network that was created the right way. It started small and was created with the resources at hand. There were no launch parties or big investments. For a long time Craigslist grew in a very organic way. It is only in recent years that Craigslist has received investment capital. But that was after many years of independent operation and growth. Some estimate the worth of Craigslist to be over a billion dollars. Meanwhile, many a web startup with a bigger investment has ceased to exist. Makes you think doesn't it?

I think there's one more point to be made here as well. What about fun? Can't someone start a social network for fun or as a hobby? Certainly all family based social networks will have to be a labor of love. And they will bring great value to all kinds of families everywhere. People just need to get comfortable creating something that is not created to flip or take public. Because it is very possible and very worthwhile to create something just to enjoy and learn from the process.

Why I'm Down On Facebook

Posted Thu, 11/08/2007 - 06:56 by awakenedvoice

Zero I was never a big fan of Facebook in the first place. I have an account there. I have a bunch of friends over there. I've used the thing occasionally over the last four months. There is absolutely nothing revolutionary about the technology. You're limited in a lot of ways, not the least of which is the fact that someone absolutely must be a member to see your data there. So everyone who invests time in that site automatically requires their friends, family and acquaintances who want to keep up with them must join Facebook. Its like the ultimate pyramid scheme.

Like many people I was waiting to see what Facebook would come up with in terms of their shiny new ad model. Whatever they did the smartest move they could make is to cut the users who actually make the site worth something into the action. Didn't happen. Instead we now see that the kids at Facebook have been toiling day and night to make the social network an amusement park for marketers. I think that's fair game to a certain extent. The site is free after all. But then again Facebook is worth zilch without the users. So why not give something to the users?

One way that Facebook could have (or could still) compensated users was by adding some more features. How about the option to create a public profile? Or an RSS feed for all of your Facebook activity? How about a rewards program so that popular people can earn something for their loyalty to the service?

I look at this thing and the only upside that I can see for the individual users is the fact that many of them have friends and colleagues active on Facebook. What technology on Facebook is so revolutionary besides their new ad targeting? The brand marketers surely have a reason to stay but the users can find the same functionality and more someplace else.

I think that it's reasonable to expect that Facebook should attempt to make more money to support their service. Lord knows that they need to now that they have $500 million of investors money. But its also very reasonable for users to expect that with the innovations for advertisers come innovations for the users. And many of the things that Facebook doesn't do are not technically difficult in any way. Many other social networks have open profiles and activity feeds.

The people who run Facebook would do well to create more features that appeal to users while allowing user data to be made available on the wider internet. Because even though 50 million user accounts is a lot we know from experience that users (even locked in ones) will find their way to other destinations on the internet. See the folks at AOL if you doubt that can happen.