Archive for the ‘Social Web’ Category

As seen on Bash:

<dsully> please describe web 2.0 to me in 2 sentences or less.
<jwb> you make all the content. they keep all the revenue.


Adweek is reporting that “advertisers are increasingly willing to try social marketing“.

Forrester Research, in a survey of over 90 marketers, found social media is gaining broader acceptance, though it still trails far behind Web mainstays like e-mails, search marketing and display ads.

Social networks should see a larger jump. While just over 20 percent of marketers are using social networks now, nearly 60 plan to do so by the end of the year. In 2006, just 13 percent of respondents said they were using social networks.

Mobile marketing is still slow to catch on. I attribute that to lack of understanding and unfamiliarity with mobile marketing jargon. Advertisers understand ads on websites, whether they are social websites or not. But ads on cell phones are still a mystery to them.

RSS and Podcast advertising is expected to gain widespread adoption. It will be interesting to see how the RSS adoption fares. I drop feeds with advertising in them and RSS targeting has been really poor.


Zudos bills itself as “a tool that allows you to easily monitor what everyday people and the media have to say about any desired topic”. If you’re in a hurry, it’s a social media aggravator. 3 out of 5 searches I performed timed out. Maybe it is really people powered as it takes forever to get results.

Just type in your query, and Zudos returns results from Youtube, Netscape, blogs, flickr mainstream media etc. This might be useful if you’re checking to see what people are saying about a technology or if you’re into reputation management. For me, opening new tabs in Firefox and performing my own searches was less painful.

No need for a widget or Javascript. If you’re on a WordPress hosted domain, (like this blog) just add digg= (surrounded by brackets) [like this] and it will turn into a Digg button. Source

You can see the story at Digg here: Just a side note, there’s some discussion there about Digg crushing a WordPress domain. My experience with Digg and WordPress was certainly crash free. WordPress held up quite well under the strain of over 75,000 visitors in just 24 hours.

It’s no secret that teens are influenced by trend setters, now they can become the trend setter, at least online, by participating in the multiplayer online game Trendetta.

In Trendetta, users are completely in control of the fads and fashions they choose to battle for — today’s hotlist topper may be at the bottom of the heap tomorrow. Players square off against each other to control the whims of public opinion and promote their favorite trends, fashions, musicians and celebs using word of mouth, television, the internet and the much coveted celebrity endorsement. Online players challenge up to three others to challenge for trend supremacy in a turn-based strategy game, while chatting with one another about “What’s Hot” and “What’s Not.” The top players vie to have their trend land a coveted slot on “50 Hottest Trends” list, and to earn a place in the “Trendetta Hall of Fame.”

Why would marketers care? If you want to know what the hot teen trends are, why not let the teens show you firsthand? Since it’s a competition, you might be able to pick out the top teen marketers as well. Source

I’m still pushing for a mobile marketing forum but it’s nice to see WebmasterWorld get onboard with a Social forum. For now though, enjoy the newly launched Social Media Tagging and Bookmarking Optimization Forum. Wow, that’s a mouthful.

Interesting that social networking already has its own ailment.

social networking fatigue n. Mental exhaustion and stress caused by creating and maintaining an excessive number of accounts on social networking sites. Also: social network fatigue. Via Wordspy.

Anyone found any instances of social network schizophrenia?

You may have noticed last week one particular post here received quite a bit of attention. On February 6th, Five Things To Do With A PC When You Have No Internet Connection was submitted to Digg. I didn’t submit the story, but I did notice a small influx of traffic coming that afternoon and evening. When I checked my stats at around 3 a.m. on the 7th, there were over 17,000 referrals from Digg. The piece had been made popular at shortly after midnight CST. So I checked Digg and saw that the story had over 500 Diggs. The odyssey had begun.

First, let me say that when you first see the traffic flooding in from Digg that it’s hard not to simply sit there and keep refreshing your stats. Then it is hard not to keep refreshing over at Digg to watch the Digg number increase. And the comments begin flooding in, and I do mean that it is a flood, both at Digg and at the blog.

Much has been written lately about the quality of Digg traffic and what happens after, these are my observations on the Digg Effect.

The first thing I noticed was that the Digg traffic almost immediately propelled the blog to the front page of for most popular site of the day, most popular post and fastest growing blog. More traffic.

Second was that the Digg visitor comments were generally polite, and after reading some of the experiences written by others, I was expecting to get slammed for the blog template, content quality, etc.

Then I noticed the pingbacks, and the links from other blogs and this was at 4 a.m.

Other news aggregators started sending referrals and then traffic started coming in and then traffic from places like, and Google reader. This is a modest little blog, two-three hundred uniques a day.

Emails started arriving, asking to translate the post into other languages. requesting typo fixes for comments, introductions, etc. The Digg count kept climbing. I was ecstatic when the Diggs topped one thousand.

Still wasn’t 9 a.m. By nine a.m. the post had 72 comments at the blog and around 90 at Digg.

Later, the story was submitted to Lifehacker, picked up by Gizmodo, Netvibes was sending traffic,, and on and on. Backlinks were still piling up. Currently, the little article has garnered 2057 Diggs.

Quite a lot has been written about the quality of Digg traffic, most of it not positive. Here are my thoughts;

First, I need to dispense with the word ‘traffic’, it is real people showing up, not bots. These people are just like you and I, they have diverse interests and they use the Web. They like to be heard and they aren’t afraid to voice their opinions.

Here’s what I noticed.

Digg visitors are focused on the article at hand, they don’t click around much. That post got 73,169 views that day. The next most popular post received 69. Yep, 69.

What about outbound clicks? Here are the top 10 outbound clicks for that day:… 466 106 104 23 20… 19 18… 17 17 16

The EnginePuller site is linked from a comment on the post. That next stat is interesting, that’s the subscription button for my feed. Compare that to the Google Reader stat for that day: 788

What about after the Digg visitors start tapering off?

Here’s the total referral info since the 7th.

75,865 on the 7th

20,503 on the 8th

3,815 on the 9th.

Google reader for the 8th, 753

Google Reader For the 9th, 124

Alexa’s rather humorous chart:

I haven’t finished looking at backlink data, but I do know that I stopped counting at over 300 hundred and that the number of backlinks is still climbing.

Is there value in getting Dugg? Certainly is. Some of that value resides in the experience itself but the most tangible value is the increase in exposure and the connections that are made. I’m still trading emails with people that I would never have met, I’m finding blogs that have useful information that I may have never seen and virtually meeting the people that write those blogs.

What have a learned about Digg visitors? They stay pretty focused on the reason they arrived, they like to comment and while they may not read many other posts on the site, they certainly read the article they came to read. Do some of them miss the point or disagree with what you wrote? Sure, but that happens at every forum I’ve ever participated in and in every conversation that has more than one person talking. ; )

If nearly 75,000 people show up in one place, there’s bound to be some differences of opinion and a little chaos. The experience is certainly worthwhile though.

If anyone would like to see more comprehensive stats, shoot me an email and I’ll send what I have.

Last week I reported on a conversation I had with the media manager of a local newspaper in a post entitled The Fall of the Paper Newspaper. This week, Eytan Avriel reports that Arthur Sulzberger, the publisher of the New York Times has a new goal:

“I really don’t know whether we’ll be printing the Times in five years, and you know what? I don’t care either,” he says.

Sulzberger is focusing on how to best manage the transition from print to Internet.

“The Internet is a wonderful place to be, and we’re leading there,” he points out.

The Times, in fact, has doubled its online readership to 1.5 million a day to go along with its 1.1 million subscribers for the print edition.

Sulzberger says the New York Times is on a journey that will conclude the day the company decides to stop printing the paper. That will mark the end of the transition.

Five years is a long way away, and I have to wonder if by the time they make the transition to the Web, that everyone else will have made the transition to mobile.

If you had any doubts about print advertising in newspapers being in serious decline, Sulzberger’s comments should end them. Related

Hat Tip to Threadwatch

There is no such thing as the ‘social web’ bandwagon. It’s a circus train. I’d like to introduce into evidence the following documents (links) that I received over the last three days: – Me.dium allows you to see, in real time, other me.dium members that are visiting the same page you are on. Is that useful? Not to me and me.dium has another downfall, that cutesy little period that breaks up ‘medium’ into two sections of an otherwise perfectly useful word. – Bills itself as social networking for productive people.

Add a contact in Handshake and suddenly a world of collaborative functionality opens up. Share task lists in Orchestrate, brainstorm together in Blueprint. The list goes on and is growing as we speak.

Here’s a little something I learned in the service; ask one guy to dig a hole, you get a hole, ask two guys to dig a hole and it takes twice as long, as three guys to dig a hole and you get no hole and you have to ask another guy to go find those three. – A social network site for parents. Parents can share advice about raising children. Something parents used to do long ago with people referred to as ‘friends’, or their parents. But hey, if you’re looking for advice on how to raise children, the Web is the first place I’d recommend. Brought to you by the same people that brought you OutDoorzy, FuelEmpire and MommyBuzz, but definitely NOT MDJunction. ; ) – Love cars? Boompa might be the place for you. Share photos of your car(s) and set up your own message board or blog. – Create your own photo and video sharing blog. It’s the fast and easy way to create custom social websites! I think that’s been done before. Blog/Flickr/youtube Mashup.

Ratepoint– A people-powered rating system. Just like, Digg! Oh, wait a minute, there’s a difference. Ratepoint has no thumbs. It’s a numerical scale from 1-5. – Hublounge offers, ‘virtual global networking’. Seemingly disappointed by angst-ridden youth spewing vitriolic comments while they twiddle their collective Digg thumbs, Hublounge looks a bit more upscale, made to appeal to young urban professionals. is an organizationally-driven networking platform that mirrors real-life social interaction in a virtual space. Through 5 hubs: Professional, Special Interest, Social, Cultural, and University/College Alumni, members are able to create their own lounges, join an existing lounge, or set-up a lounge for free for their own special interest or non-profit organization and its members.

Those are just a few of the alerts I received about the social Web over the last three days. There are 39 more of them, all similar to the above, in my inbox.

One of the major differences I see in this boom and the first boom is the cost to entry is significantly lower. The technology is cheap, programming rates are cheap, domain names are cheap, etc. Probably a good thing as I don’t believe there are enough people to provide the mass needed for all the social sites that are launching.