Home
Adriana Lukas's Library tagged → View Popular, Search in Google
fairly decent exposition of the problem of privacy in social networks
social media negates the consumer paradigm. Clear enough? You can't understand social media without understanding that it turns 'consumers' into producers, creators and distributors.
-
Yet the vast majority of executives have no idea how to harness social media’s power. Companies diligently establish Twitter feeds and branded Facebook pages, but few have a deep understanding of exactly how social media interacts with consumers to expand product and brand recognition, drive sales and profitability, and engender loyalty.
-
Second, there’s no single measure of social media’s financial impact, and many companies find that it’s difficult to justify devoting significant resources—financial or human—to an activity whose precise effect remains unclear.
- 4 more annotation(s)...
This is as close as I ever got to describing what I do for, or shall I say to, companies. If it actually makes sense, it's thanks to Jackie's masterful transcription and rendering of our conversation.
a must read
in list: Mine!
-
A web action is the interface and user experience of taking a specific discrete action, across the web, from one site to another site or application. They're not a specific technology but use a variety of technologies.
-
Web actions are not "just" hyperlinks. Hyperlinks are nouns and they reference destinations (sometimes with an explicit relation) with an implied action of navigation. In contrast, web actions are verbs and are first and foremost about a specific action that often but not always does something with the current page or site.
- 7 more annotation(s)...
-
For consumers, there was no hiding: after all, there is no online equivalent of discreetly checking out a magazine while a bookstore employee is looking the other way. Amazon.com has pretty much saved all user data from its beginning.
Back then, customers had no choice but to share their intentions with firms. If a technology enthusiast wanted to find out if a website sold a particular surveillance device, there was no shortcut but to type some keywords into a search box and therefore give the company a valuable intention stream. Companies, therefore, had all the power. Many tried too hard to push products and advertisements. The consumer had no voice.
-
During the first data revolution, successful companies gained power by collecting, aggregating, and analyzing the customer data they collected. However, most companies did not know what to do and ended up burying their data in tombs.
- 2 more annotation(s)...
seems to me that social = distribution. pretty obvious when you think about it in network context
-
"The number of hours per evening that students were using this was completely off the charts," Kapor said. "The lessons we can draw from that are that almost all applications are going to have a social layer to them. We're still going to be living in a world where one size does not fit all. There will be both broad platforms like Facebook, and verticals in lots of different areas like e-commerce, travel and education. But if something isn't fundamentally social, it's not going to be viable."
-
Although a common lament among companies is that interacting with consumers via social media means giving up a measure of control over brand strategy, Katz argued that many firms are fooling themselves in that respect. Echoing a comment he heard from the CEO of JetBlue, he noted that "social media eliminates the illusion that you actually have control. [Companies] always thought they had control over a brand and control over the message because they weren't hearing the conversations that [consumers] were having. People are always talking about your brand in ways you can't control."
Social data overload... not sure what these actually mean. I know, I know, it's meant to show engagement and popularity... but does it?
Actually, I don't want a social network, I want ways to control and manage my stuff. Social may or may not be part of it, but it can't be the default, otherwise whichever platform is hosting all this depends on pushing the social aspect of their services. Facebook anyone? The 'aspects' stuff is cool, but it's still software developer's solution to the problem...
didn't really know what farmville was until now. What a bore! Left Facebook some months ago, from outside the whole thing looks really weird.
-
The secret to Farmville’s popularity is neither gameplay nor aesthetics. Farmville is popular because in entangles users in a web of social obligations. When users log into Facebook, they are reminded that their neighbors have sent them gifts, posted bonuses on their walls, and helped with each others’ farms. In turn, they are obligated to return the courtesies. As the French sociologist Marcel Mauss tells us, gifts are never free: they bind the giver and receiver in a loop of reciprocity. It is rude to refuse a gift, and ruder still to not return the kindness.[11] We play Farmville, then, because we are trying to be good to one another. We play Farmville because we are polite, cultivated people.
not sure that's the point of communities. Sure, exchange of information, education of others, etc but there is much phatic stuff going on as well. The dynamic of communities has several stages - the impetus for creating one is different to what sustains it in later stages.
this is one of the sloppiest articles I have read for some time...
-
The point of communities is, when you think about it, to ensure that people and organizations don't just get any old information — but the right, the best information. They should filter out bad, inaccurate information from unreliable sources and replace it with its opposite. They are, in short, the economic mirror image of markets: where efficient markets ensure information efficiency, efficient communities ensure information productivity.
-
Add Sticky NotePeople, truth, identity, reputation, values are the five elements of an efficient community. Efficient communities sort good information from bad by inducing people to reveal their true expectations and preferences — whether managers, customers, or investors.
-
Adriana Lukas on 2010-04-17words, words, words. community is a network with a purpose. All the other attributes/requirements are non-essential or rather, without purpose, it doesn't matter that they are there.
-
- 1 more annotation(s)...
only the individual whose behaviour is being observed can confer the meaning of that behaviour. otherwise, responses based on observation of someone's behaviour are likely to fall into the 'uncanny valley' category.
-
people mistakenly assume that 1) any social network that can be boiled down to a graph can be compared and 2) any theory of social networks is transitive to any graph representing connections between people. Such mistaken views result in broad misinterpretations of social networks and social network sites.
-
three distinct ways of modeling a social network. These are not the only ways of modeling a social network, but they are three common ways that are often collapsed in public discourse.
- 4 more annotation(s)...
a fascinating piece, written in a rather ADD style (not necessarily a downside!), and with some interesting examples of real-time search and it's feedback loop or the impact it has on itself. Well worth reading. Not sure I agree on 'history isn't that relevant', which is true only if you are interested in real time search... :) Good point about context, which I believe is crucial for managing 'information overload' and for better filtering. However, I differ on where the context will come - (analysis of) the past will be the foundation of that rather than everything happening in the 'now'. (for a cute analogy, think of it as a difference between CPU and RAM.) Also, there are more contexts than just social or phatic e.g. context based on analyses of previous interactions, data and sharing. To me the greatest disruption would be individual's ability to analyse their own data/existence, with increased self-awareness and enhanced feedback loop.
-
Christensen didn’t buy it. He said time and time again disruptive business confuse adjacent innovation for disruptive innovation. They think they are still disrupting when they are just innovating on the same theme that they began with. As a consequence they miss the grass roots challenger — the real disruptor to their business. The company who is disrupting their business doesn’t look relevant to the billion dollar franchise, its often scrappy and unpolished, it looks like a sideline business, and often its business model is TBD. With the AOL story now unraveled — I now see search as fragmenting and Twitter search doing to Google what broadband did to AOL.
-
Video search is different because it alters the line or distinction between search, browse and navigation. I remember when Jon Miller and I were in the meetings with Brin and Page back in November of 2006 — I tried to convince them that video was primarily a browse experience and that a partnership with AOL should include a video JV around YouTube. Today this blurring of the line between searching, browsing and navigation is becoming more complex as distribution and access of YouTube grows outside of YouTube.com.
- 4 more annotation(s)...
Selected Tags
Related Tags
Top Contributors
Groups interested in social
-
China unit of work
A set of bookmarks for some ...
Items: 30 | Visits: 647
Created by: Rob McTaggart
-
History
Great history websites to le...
Items: 128 | Visits: 730
Created by: Mrs Brown
-
Social Networking
Items: 4 | Visits: 499
Created by: James Garrity
Diigo is about better ways to research, share and collaborate on information. Learn more »
Join Diigo