The real question is how much and for what. Friends and acquaintances need personal information to maintain relationships; Facebook requires it for access to their platform. An email address is standard currency for admittance into most social websites and Google uses location, search history and much more to provide a more meaningful search tool and more relevant ads.

Google’s newest product, Google Instant, also relies on this user data. The live blog of the launch event posted on Readwriteweb.com hinted at past user searches being used to generate SERPs as the user enters their query for very real performance benefits.

How does Google scale this? Optimizations: prioritizes searches that are the most likely. Checks if users is doing searches on another server. Results cached.

Where this deal breaks down is if the information is used in a way the user was not expecting. Entering an email address to post a comment is no big deal, but if it is then used to distribute spam, there is a problem. This surprise and betrayal of expectations is a large part of why Facebook’s users reacted badly to most of the site’s changes, and the same again with Google Buzz. The other issue is a lack of universal agreed value.

One degree from evil

It is the fluid nature of these transactions that has created campaigns and conversations like these. One of the more interesting exchanges was between this defense of Google and this subsequent rebuttal.

Users will always exchange their private information for benefits. How much they are willing to give up will vary from person to person. One thing is consistent though: expectations for how the information will be used need to be set, managed and met, or they might find that what you have is just not worth the price.

Since MMORPGs and virtual worlds arrived, there have always been people willing to spend money for virtual goods. Most of the time this is against the terms of the world, with a few notable exceptions. There are a growing number of games that have embraced microtransactions, including Guild Wars and Farmville. In fact the Free2Play MMORPG market is based on this.

Facebook closed their gift shop a while ago. It was making money, and it certainly proved that Facebook users were prepared to buy pixels long before Zynga was around. The closure of the gift shop was not a step backwards. Facebook is doing more now than ever to make it easy for people to get Facebook Credits to spend, they can even be bought as a gift card in real life.

People are willing to spend real money on virtual goods, and Facebook will profit from expanding the market for Facebook Credits. As a platform accessible through multiple devices Facebook is well placed to facilitate a virtual economy based on games, virtual and real goods purchased online with their currency.

All communication is a marketing communication, including customer service. This is even more critical in public spaces like the Internet. However there are still a number of important points to be considered when determining if a response is needed, and what form it should take.

• What is the nature of the complaint?
• Where is the negative commentary taking place?
• What is the company’s relationship with the affected parties?
• Who is exposed and potentially will be exposed to the negative commentary?
• What action, if any, has already been taken on the issue?

What is the nature of the complaint?

Reasonable, articulate or funny negative commentary can have the greatest impact through credibility and potential to spread. Inarticulate, abusive and unreasonable complaints usually do not gain much traction, and will attract more attention if they are given attention.

Where is the negative commentary taking place?

A brand’s presence on the Internet is not limited to a single site any more. Most brands have a fragmented presence spread across a number of platforms, sites and mediums, either perceived as being under their control, or operated by a third party.

Dealing with complaints in managed spaces, such as a Facebook page, will more often require direct action than a comment on a small community forum. Legitimate complaints can be an opportunity to explain or demonstrate a product, answer a frequently asked question or express a brand value to the touchpoint’s audience. Any response given does create a reasonable expectation that should another issue be raised in that space, the company will need to address it too.

What is the company’s relationship with the affected parties?

The more involved the customer is with the company or brand, the less likely they are to be a troll and the more the relationship is worth to the company. However, new customers with legitimate complaints should not be ignored.

Who is exposed and potentially will be exposed to the negative commentary?

Does the negative attention have a large or small audience? Is it indifferent, supportive of the brand or hostile? Someone saying bad things about a brand to other people who already agree and are not your customers should probably not be your first priority. Trolls trying to start a flame war with brand advocates are another situation that probably does not need direct engagement.

What action, if any, has already been taken on the issue?

Customer complaints, legitimate or otherwise, often have a history. Social media is not always the first point of contact between the brand and the customer. Often there is a history to any complaint. Ideally the complaint would have been resolved before it entered a public space, but sometimes these things happen.

Very rarely will a brand benefit from engaging with a troll. The attention will often make the problem that much worse, and give them more credibility and consequently attention. While potentially almost any form of content can reach a huge audience online, not every tweet, post, video or blog will. Dealing with legitimate problems in a public space can be an excellent opportunity to to explain or demonstrate a product, answer a frequently asked question or express a brand value to an audience. Responding to trolls does not support any of these objectives. Choosing who to respond to, where and how is an important part of a Social Media Engagement strategy, and should be treated as such.

Social Media Sandwich

Why not go further? Why not move from a boring world of plates, knives and forks, to a place where salami and salad can be enjoyed at the same time between two pieces of bread? The sandwich is a truly revolutionary construct. Taking the best of both foods and making them available in the one easy to consume package through the medium of baked goods.

How do you eat it? Must you use a plate, can you carry it with you, maybe it is only available in a specific restaurant and you can’t take it away? Or is it the übermensch of sandwiches and able to be eaten in whatever way you see fit, and if so, is this the revolutionary development? There are a lot of content aggregation tools available now, from Friendfeed through to Google Buzz, Windows Live Messenger Beta and device specifc tools like MOTOBLUR, Flipboard and Google’s Social Search. They vary greatly in capabilities, sources of media they can access and curation tools, but they perform the same task for the user.

A lot of these services and tools take a few social media activity streams and create a single feed, but a few index or include the content linked to and present it to the user directly. Flipboard delivers this content in the app, and Google Social Search presents the links in a results page of a relevant search query.

Questions of fair use and legality aside, providing socially sourced content from multiple sources in the one place with tools to make this information manageable is a significant development in how the Internet is used. From Google’s personalisation of search to the increasing importance of social networks for filtering content and the shift away from static portals, each user’s experience of the Internet is becoming more unique.

Why the Site

Devoting all content creation and administration resources to single site or community is no longer the best strategy. Internet users seek out different content in different formats for different platforms. What meets their needs on their mobile phones will be different to what they want on their desktop computer, or their netbook, web-enabled TV, or tablet device. After all, social media is just people being people online, and what they use and how is a result of this.

The kind of platform and task they want to complete changes how they search for, evaluate and use content. From asking their social network for advice, to searching for product demonstrations on YouTube or store locations on Google Maps.

There is a need for the ‘Big Website’ and campaign or product specific microsites. While there is a need for control over a hub to facilitate list building, acquire links and generate direct navigation traffic, sites and microsites will be a part of the mix. While Facebook is not likely to suffer the same fate as Blogetery, developing content on external platforms also comes with a certain level of risk.

Being visible across multiple, relevant platforms, sites and communities gives brands the chance to manage the user’s experience of the brand. Providing compelling content and engaging with customers, the brand can develop on its campaigns further, ensure that customer service queries can be responded to and clarify information about their products.

Creating brand touchpoints like fan pages is an “as well as”, not an “instead of” developing microsites and promoting the the brand’s main web presence. They are an opportunity to put content in front of the customer in the place that they already are, and in a format tailored for the situation. A YouTube channel, Second Life store and a Facebook page are not a substitute for the spaces online that the brand controls.

Social media is just people being people online, but with better tools. Nothing has changed in their behaviour; it is their ability to be found and heard, and find others who think the same that is new and significant. Social media and the internet amplify the voices of those who publish content online, whether they love you or hate you.

Sometimes people will say things that businesses would prefer them not to. The internet has made it easier than ever to publish and spread this material. Sites like Facebook and WordPress make it easy to tap into an existing audience, or get indexed by Google and appear in brand searches. When a product or service has a branded social media presence or community, it can give them access to a highly relevant audience for their dissatisfaction, ire and angst, which can disrupt the business’ promotional activity and damage the brand.

It is hard to completely avoid this risk without losing the benefits from fostering conversation and building online communities. Here are a few ways a business can prepare to address these problems if or when they arise:

• Anticipate the negative responses and plan on how and how not to respond
• Make internal stakeholders aware of what can go wrong
• Communicate response plans and processes internally with key stakeholders
• Ensure that those with the authority to respond in negative situations are easily reached
• Make staff aware of relevant policies

If no thought is given to what might go wrong, there is a greater risk of the company responding badly, and inflaming the situation further. Planning for problems that may arise before the fact ensures that the business’ response will most likely be timely, articulate and appropriate.

Toy Story 3 Promoted Trending Topic

Twitter has already rolled out promoted Tweets, and the first sponsored trending topics also appeared. Toy Story 3 has appeared as a sponsored listing with the site’s trending topics today, as reported here, here, and probably dozens of other places all over the web.

The ad itself drives traffic to a Facebook page, where people can order tickets or enter contact details for a chance to win. The real point of difference offered by Twitter for this campaign is the user’s ability to retweet the ad, and to see other people discuss the subject by hashtag.

Pinning the message to the top of the stream coupled with Twitter’s tools for sharing content means that the Toy Story 3 promoted Tweet will get repeated again and again, and not just in the narrow window around when it was originally posted. The conversation revealed by the hashtag provides social proof of the subject’s interest and encourages participation through exposing other thoughts surrounding the topic which may resonate with the viewer.

Toy Story 3 Promoted Tweet

For potential reach to kick-start conversation and begin to generate interest, Twitter advertising looks like it might be very powerful.

Toy Story 3 Landing Page

A lot of people watch TV and discuss it with others watching the same things. Online Back channel conversations around TV shows, live events, launches and sport are more visible than before, thanks to platforms like Twitter and Facebook, adding an interactive social dimension to an otherwise passive experience. This behaviour is not new, but it used to be confined to narrow interest groups in their own online communities, with little visibility to those who are not already directly engaged.

TV’s place as a standalone source of entertainment and information has diminished over the last decade. The proliferation of mobile Internet-capable devices such as laptops, netbooks and smartphones have made it easy to consume content and interact with others while watching TV. This behaviour will probably become even more prominent in future, especially with products like Google TV.

There is a very interesting section in the Google TV Developers area:

• Remember that TV is social.
  • Consider how groups might use your website or application.
  • Offer ways for individuals to use your site or apps in social settings.

Integrating the Back channel conversations around the content, and making it more visible than even Twitter’s hashtags will enhance the experience for the average user. With most social networks supporting cross-posting, posting out to the user’s Twitter and Facebook feeds from the TV based app, even a message as simple as “/me is watching Show” would be an effective form of social proof for the show exposed to the user’s friends. Similar tools are already being used by games.

Once a best practice has been established for TV as a platform, in terms of interface and hardware useability, this may be the killer app that keeps TV in the living room, and not just for consoles, media boxes, or Blu-Ray players.

Google TV

The idea of viewing the Internet on a TV is not new, but Google’s implementation based on Google Chrome will be a long way ahead of those old thin clients. There is only a small niche market for media boxes and computers connecting TVs to their home networks, and Google TV promises to drive this trend into the mainstream.

In the blog post announcing Google TV, the line “With Google Chrome built in, you can access all of your favorite websites and easily move between television and the web” really stood out. Combining Internet and TV in one device will create a far richer experience by simplifying access to a wider variety of content. Simplifying access and integrating streams of social media content around existing audio/visual content could be very interesting.

There is already a highly active Backchannel about certain TV shows, reality TV, interviews and news. Twitter, with its transparency, effective search tools and the use of hashtags is a great example of this. Currently this turns watching TV into a far more social experience and offers social proof to others watching the feed that supports program promotional activity.

Chrome’s Browser Application Shop

The Chrome Web Store is a browser based application marketplace. The applications are “…regular web applications that are built with standard web tools and technologies” that will run in any current or future generation browser. As discussed in Mozilla Ponders an “Open” Web App Store on ReadWriteWeb.com, developers can make their applications ‘installable’ for Chrome through building the applications into a .crx file.

Aside from the open source discussion, the Chrome Web Store will simplify making money from applications for developers. With the credibility of the Google brand and a centralised store with billing support for an otherwise niche product, the application market for browsers will improve. Creating a software market not tied to a device or operating system, but rather to a browser, will also help to create a device-agnostic computing environment.

Google’s approach is different to the operating system based route that Microsoft is taking. Google Chrome OS, Chrome Web Store and Google’s current range of services and tools available online are all a part of a trend towards cloud computing aimed at the average user. The application store for Chrome might also increase the number of users for the browser, similar to the way that applications have shaped the Smartphone market.

Even through the web, the methods used to locate and consume information are diverse. From search to portals to socially generated recommendations, there is a huge range of navigational nodes online that shape the user’s experience. Focusing on what information is consumed and where, rather than on what the user is trying to do, can be very myopic.

Find music with only the Internet, Click for full size.

For example, what if the user wants to listen to music? With access to a computer and a browser they may go to YouTube, or the site of a band recommended in an email from a friend. With P2P software like a BitTorrent client they may use inbuilt search tools and download it via a peer network. They could also use iTunes to find, choose and purchase a song without touching a browser. Ultimately all these methods use the Internet, but only one is dependent on the World Wide Web.  This does not even start to consider devices other than a traditional computer.

Nodes and Friction

Each mode of content location and acquisition uses a different set of nodes and they can range from invisible to obstructive. Each one is another opportunity for the gatekeeper of the node to create friction and shape experience. Search and social sites have contextual advertising, Internet Explorer treats incorrect URLs as search queries, DNS services can redirect mistyped or incorrect URLs and the iPad does not support Flash.

Nodes such as portal sites, search engines, social networks and applications such as Steam control and direct attention in different ways. Each gives the user different tools to discover content, with different levels of friction placed between the user and what they wish to do.

Some sites use a disruptive model and place ads in front of the user, using available data to tailor their ads. Applications like iTunes and Steam operate as shopfronts and work to minimalise frictions between the user and the buy button. They help the user find, acquire and consume the media with the least effort, and generate sales in the process.

Why attention matters more

The internet is an environment where there is almost limitless content and space to display it in. The scarcity is with attention. The limits on the size of the audience and the amount of time they spend online are far more immediate than potential advertising inventory. Unlike traditional media, the Internet does not have a page limit, nor is it restricted by spectrum or the number of hours in a day. The low cost of storing and moving data, the asynchronous nature of most content and the ability to generate more content automatically or through user activity changes its value. There is no value in just existing; there is no ‘only two papers in town’ or ‘only three TV networks’ online. Online, the value of a node is in how much attention it affects. Each one is an opportunity to distribute attention among the next group of nodes in the chain.

Why the Task Model

How most people use and access the Internet has changed over the last few years. The ubiquity of Internet capable devices is as significant a factor as the prevalence of fast and wireless home connections. While the Internet on a phone in some form is not new, large numbers of people with fast and easy access is. A proliferation of applications designed to give access to content independent of the World Wide Web is significant too.

Social networks, both formalised like forums and Facebook, and ad hoc such as email, will remain a factor, as well as portal sites like Yahoo! and search engines. These tools for content distribution and discovery are not being replaced, they are just being supplemented.

The user’s aims and knowledge determine their actions online. The channels they use do have an impact on the kinds of information they access, how they access it and how they locate new material. As the Internet becomes richer in content and tools, it will also continue to fragment and change. We have gone a long way from the Internet being tied to a desktop computer through just a browser or email client, but the user will always have a want or desire that they wish to meet, and they will use whatever tools are available to do it.