Moving along...

Thanks all for the great convos here, here, and  here yesterday. Having had a day to think about it... after thinking about it for several days... I've come to the decision that I made the right decision, for me.

Which is good.

Because it really bites when you come to the decision that you made the wrong decision--especially if you went and blogged about it. So I'm taking a note to say a few things and then I'm moving along to other topics.

Just to be really clear and fair: I think social networks have MUCH upside and huge potential. The kicker? The reason I think this has nothing to do with billion-dollar valuations or because, being a blogger, I have to say that. It's because social networks have been around since the dawn of time. They've just become far less localized, moved online, and cut across a much broader spectrum like professional interests, hobbies, parenting, music, marketing, Sci Fi, knitting, whatnot.

net net: People need to connect. Not want. Or desire even. They need to. It's core. Even on the collage a year ago, my primary value of blogging was "connection".  Still is.

I think Facebook groups are great and Facebook causes are ripe with potential. Most of all, what I like about Facebook is that they opened their platform to developers. It's not just the brilliant way; I think it's the only way for many of these ventures. (It is The Share Economy.) Thus, I will use both good and bad examples for Facebook with my clients when I'm teaching them the ropes, or explaining my take on things. Because that's fair and there's much to be learned, many practices to tap into--and many to outright avoid.

The concept of ad targeting? Love it. I think it's kind to prospects. I can't tell you how sick I am of car insurance banners. I haven't owned a car in a decade; I live in New York City. (Which begs the question...why can't the direct mail houses figure it out since they have my address and it's common knowledge that hardly anyone in NYC owns a car?)

Moreover, I buy "stuff" because of you good folks all the time--movies you've (authentically!) recommended, music, books, cameras, seminars and so on. So a lot of companies owe you thanks. And I've been very happy with those purchases; I genuinely thank you, too.

Alas, I just can't be over at Facebook with the manufactured WOM practices. That one is just TOO big with me and it was just too big a gamble with user trust. And yes, I do hope that advertisers stay weary of this model as then they're demonstrating responsible practices.

But ya know what? By not spending time over at Facebook, it frees that time. Hey, all of us can only allot a finite amount of time on social media. And for me, spending that time on blogs and twitter (and helping plan socials) is the perfect mix to enjoy this community--and still meet my work deadlines. Works for me and I hope it does for you. You all rock; thanks so much.

PS: Since the writing of my last post, I've bought the expensive kind of cat food, Claritin for my allergies (there's some link love for big pharma!) and a Coke. While I cannot be certain, I am thinking that "Wednesday night is taco night!", so there is a strong likelihood that salsa and other CPG purchases are in my near future. To my readers who have no idea why I'm divulging this, sorry, it's a "blogger joke" and will stop soon. Or until it discontinues amusing me.

PPS: And for Zuckerberg's blatantly manufactured response go here (sorry, I see the careful crafting but many will disagree. And hey, that's cool. Because it's an agree to disagree and even deactivate week ;-).

Comments

[Seni Thomas]

CK,

I'm seriously considering canceling... deactivating, my account, but I can't seem to muster the courage of being disconnected.

Like you said social networks have always existed, but at a more local level, a more meaningful level. My prediction in the coming years with the build out of the social graph is that much like TV we will see a great deal of fragmentation occur, but there will still be a place for a giant or two. Facebook or something similar will be the aggregating behemoth (Maybe OpenSocial) that allows us to connect with, and find friends new and old. However, as our identity becomes more portable I predict that the majority of a person's online social interaction will take place in 1-3 niche communities that they are passionate about. Communities or networks that are more personally meaningful.

More thoughts here:
http://senithomas.wordpress.com/2007/10/31/how-googles-opensocial-will-revolutionize-community-targeting/

Also some thoughts on why all media must fragment:
http://senithomas.wordpress.com/2007/10/18/why-all-media-platforms-must-fragment/

[CK]

@Seni: Will check out your posts soon...and I love what you're doing at The Daily Fix (so impressive that you're there!).

Ya know, because I'm active in the community and have a blog--and now am taking to Twitter--I'm not worried about losing touch.

But FB is primary to many. I get and respect that. And those connections are important.

This is just a decision for me to feel I've done what I needed; but I'm not at all calling for some big boycott. Not at all. And I feel like I can move along now that I've said my peace (and you fine folks are so cool to listen to me). Honestly, I feel better about this community than ever. Because we really take time to focus on these issues. Shows we're good people and good pros.

Plus, I really want to check out seesmic (sp?) and so I'm glad I'll have more time for that.

[David Reich]

You say you like the idea of ad targeting. Good from a marketer's point of view, but I don't like it from a consumer's viewpoint. I still don't want to b e hit with ads, especially intrusive ones, even if they're "targeted." It's easy to simply ignore the banner ads we now get, so I'm happy to leave well enough alone.

[CK]

@David: Hiya ;-). I say I like "the concept" of ad targeting. It is far from perfect and advertising is somewhat helpful to me and most times annoying.
But I think we can do much better here...and I hope the emphasis goes to ad targeting vs. manufactured buzz. I'll take obvious advertising over manipulative buzz any old day ;-).

We'll talk it; that terrain has a lot to be worked out, too.

[Ryan Karpeles]

From the fingertips of Mark Zuckerberg himself...

http://blog.facebook.com/blog.php?blog_id=company&blogger=4

Pretty impressive apology. Thought you might be interested :)

[CK]

@Ryan: Hello my TwitterBud. It's a great apology. He has hired great resources...

I see through the spin, honey. I'm a marketer. (per my post 4 days ago, it's the damn beauty industry's spin that I fall for like a silly girl, time and again. But not when it comes to community stuff with a profit motive and privacy violation).

Go see the Haw's place (link is above in the PPS): I weighed-in there. I'm also voting for Paul to be the new owner of FB. I think it perfect, no? And I think you need a talk show or something. I'll figure that out next week, k?

[Lewis Green]

CK,

As I mention a few minutes ago in our e-mail exchange, tomorrow my blog jumps that tracks and heads into a new direction. At the heart of the change is the idea that being human means we are relational. As much as our bodies need air, food and water to survive, our very center depends upon relationships, whether in life, in business, or in social media. Peace!

Lewis

[CK]

@Lewis: if you blog's new direction includes Beacon, I'm so gonna kick your ass.

Just kidding, pal. Happy new blog launch ;-).

[Ryan Karpeles]

I thought it sounded a little contrived as well, CK. But at least there was an apology of some sort (even it was all marketing-gobble-dee-speak).

I guess the lesson here is to try not to screw up in the first place...

[Paul Soldera]

The apology is interesting, but they had to have known what they were doing and what effect an opt-out only program would have. Great use for a simple research project - "Hey FB users, we have this new program called Beacon that... 1. All For it! 10. Sucks ass".

And speaking of marketing spin in the beauty world CK, can't these guys be up for false-advertising or something? Jeeze!

http://beauty.iqderma.com/dms270/

[CK]

@Paul: Yes, FB had to have known. To say "we needed to find the right 'balance'" is just BS. See, there simply is no 'balance' with privacy. Was just saying over at twitter that, because they went with Beacon, instead of just ad banners, they went from 'social utility' to 'marketing utility' overnight.

It wasn't just a revenue model decision; it was a decision to change the co. They simply cannot, in using user data to 'market to one another', call themselves a social utility any longer, IMO.

That said, I wish them well, and will not be using their utility any longer. Don't trust what they're doing with my data--becuz I just know they're tracking it even if Beacon is turned off.

That aging ad is just crazy; I've seen it many places...and it will sell a lot of stuff - ha!

[Shaping Youth]

Hey CK, fellow AOC author here, onboard with similar 'beacon' and 'beauty' rants, as you can see on a couple of posts here:

FB Beacon: up to date info/CDD & Euro commentary via journalism/digerati/legal beagle prose: http://www.shapingyouth.org/blog/?p=818

And you're absolutely right, FB 'balance' is
bogus PR. This was unequivocally a guinea pig 'test the waters see who squeals' endeavor...

Re: My beauty interview w/Rye Clifton on the Dove/Axe YouTube/Ad Age mashup and recent Chicago Trib chat re: the irony of it all, see:
http://www.shapingyouth.org/blog/?p=773
(didn't tackle the aging/beauty issue full tilt this round:)

Anyway, thanks for being 'on it' girl! You're to be admired and appreciated as one of the good guys...er..gals... ;-)

Payin' it forward on AOC 12/14 for the bum's rush. ---Proud to virtually 'know ya'---All the best, Amy

p.s. Agree w/Seni re: the personally meaningful social media niche...(e.g. Care2Connect, etc.--