Comments on: To Twitter or just copy Twitter?

By: Truthseeker

Truthseeker — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 10:18:47 +0000

my identiy is all in a computer
its a way for me to have the world at my fingertips

By: Truthseeker

Truthseeker — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 10:17:55 +0000

ask me a question about anything I can anser it
I get my answered from online

my computer does all the dord

By: FoolsGold

FoolsGold — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 12:27:40 +0000

>>>>Is there now a system or site or spider somewhere that would unite all these various discussions?
>>Short answer to my knowledge is nothing exists that is ‘well organized’.
>>I think this would form the basis of a great website by the way.
It seems that PixelPipe and ConvoTrack are positioned in this general direction.

By: JoeDuck

JoeDuck — Thu, 02 Apr 2009 06:09:40 +0000

its real value is that it is a tightly-controlled lobbyist’s tool for opinion shaping

VERY good point, lost on many and routinely denied by the practitioners

By: FoolsGold

FoolsGold — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 09:53:49 +0000

Concerning metrics for monetizing social sites:
Analogous situations might be the various “front organizations” used by lobbyists to create a grass-roots aura. The depth and breadth of the organization’s membership is touted but its real value is that it is a tightly-controlled lobbyist’s tool for opinion shaping or donation laundering. Or consider perhaps the oriental practices wherein the organizers of gambling junkets wield greater power than in the USA.
It would be difficult to measure the degree of social cohesiveness much less market it.

By: JoeDuck

JoeDuck — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 17:58:12 +0000

the social cohesiveness of the group is itself a value

This is a huge point though nobody seems to have found acceptable ways to “mine” this golden value, esp. since users are understandably reluctant to help advertisers market to/with them.

Although there’s a lot of lip service given to the idea of companies truly meeting the needs of customers in the best way possible I think few companies will sacrifice much when profits are at stake. It would be interesting to go to the drawing board and look for the big picture right answers with respect to people and products, and then work to reinvent marketing and shape it more as a way to *optimize* economic relationships more than simply *develop* them.

By: FoolsGold

FoolsGold — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 09:00:35 +0000

Social monetizing would involve perhaps two separate aspects. The easier one would be monetizing of expertise or reputation. The more difficult monetizing would take place on the basis of cyber-friends or a cyber-neighborhood. A grouup of people with common interests can have value since it is already a “narrowcasting” market rather than a “broadcasting” market. I’ve used before an example of a site relating to travel to Las Vegas: gambling, hotels, discounts, real estate trends, nightclubs, restaurants, etc. The assembly of the group can be monetized by advertising but also the social cohesiveness of the group is itself a value. Various members of that group have value based on what might be termed a “defacto cyber-friendship”. Think of how so much money is now made in Product Placement on television shows. Social groups in cyber-space would be an analogous situation.

By: JoeDuck

JoeDuck — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 03:21:11 +0000

FG as usual you have several interesting ideas about how this might shake out favorably. Monetizing might get interesting if a site could offer people unique, real time, expert perspectives on breaking news. This would be cheap to do if you rounded up the right data and people… FOX, CNN claim to do this but generally are time delayed and only working the big ticket stories.

Whoville – good one Mr. Glenn – great Social Media analogy!

By: glenn

glenn — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 22:26:53 +0000

(3) Actually LE (as I am sure you know FG) uses many of the social sites and twitter type technology to investigate things and to keep track.

It still amazes me when people post videos of themselves breaking the law because they think it is cool but are completely surprised when a LEO arrives at their door…lol.

The one interesting part of social chatter is it does afford the opportunity for someone’s voice to actually be heard…like someone in Whoville who actually gets heard.

At the same it certainly lends itself to abuse to achieve the opposite.

By: FoolsGold

FoolsGold — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 20:59:41 +0000

>social media chatter isn’t valuable to somebody who wants good quality.
True. (Most of the time).
If there is a news report of an air crash somewhere in Fredonia social media chatter is likely to consist of well-intentioned but meaningless wishes, basesless speculation as to causes, speculation revealing an abysmal lack of aviation knowledge, etc. However, the social media chatter might well include: residents nearby the site, experienced pilots, etc. And some of the chatters might have reputations which add weight to their comments.
Such “weight” might be the means of monetizing the social media.
A twitter feed about “Dormitory of Death” might normally contain useless chatter about a headline making crime but it might also contain remarks by a noted detective or crime author.