Accidentally on Purpose Blog

SearchCIO.com has an interesting article on how an increasing number of employees are ignoring IT and “installing” Web 2.0 apps on their own – not just because the apps are fun but because they’re useful. 

“Alas, herein lies the argument. These rogue users aren’t just checking their MySpace pages or chatting with overseas friends via Skype. They’re using those technologies to be more productive at work. For instance, 53.6% of respondents told Yankee Group that they would be more productive at work with access to the applications and technology they use at home. Forty-nine percent said their personal technology is more advanced than their workplace technology.”

Many organizations resist and discourage the adoption of Web 2.0 on the assumption that it reduces productivity. Some of this is certainly justified.  But when the rank and file finds a better mousetrap, it may be time to stop thinking of them as rogues.

At the risk of whistle blowing on myself, I guess I would be considered a “rogue”.  I use a feed reader, Facebook, Linkedin, three different wiki platforms and I even used Windows Live Writer on my work computer to write this post.  Am I a rouge?  I really don’t know or care.  I definitely feel I’m more productive as result.  

Vauhini Vara has a scoop in today’s Wall Street Journal:  Facebook is working on a plan that “would let marketers target users with ads based on the massive amounts of information people reveal on the site about themselves.”  The news may come as a surprise — though it shouldn’t — to the hordes of new Facebook users who have signed up in recent months. As Vauhini notes, “Most users of Facebook treat it as a sort of online scrapbook for their lives — posting everything from basic information about themselves to photos to calendars of events they plan to attend.”

As Google has learned over the years, striking the right balance between commerce and privacy is a tricky thing.  Remember the initial backlash to Gmail, when Google first revealed it would be selling AdWords based on keywords scanned from personal email? 

I see three areas of potential concern:

• will Facebook users revolt? 
• will the ads work — will people click through?  
• will people continue to post so openly about themselves? 

My answers to the above are: no, only marginally, and yes.

For all you Facebookers out there — How would this change your use of FB? 

Under some circumstances a headline like that above could send shivers down your spine.  But, check out this story in The Register.  The Central Office of Information (another scary name) — which Wikipedia describes as “The UK’s marketing and communications agency” — has begun to monitor conversations in the blogosphere through the agency’s Media Monitoring Unit.  Purpose?  To get smarter about public opinion.

“The move reflects concerns within departments that government is largely ignorant of much of the debate taking place online.  “MMU director Clarence Mitchell said: ‘Clients have told us that campaigning and debating are taking place online to such a degree that there’s a whole new medium out there. They don’t want to be blindsided by material appearing from the web out of the blue in the external media, so the online monitoring product we’ve been working on over the last year is really going to help’.”

Listening is definitely a step in the right direction.  I’m often asked: “Where should I begin engaging with the blogosphere?”  I mostly begin by advising people to “listen,” the metaphor that’s most often used in conjunction with “conversation.”  Listening is not a bad way to start but remember its only the first step.

Have a look at the comments generated by the original post, for me it conjured up images of the movie V for Vendetta.  I hope they get to the conversation part soon!  Disclosure: the “Mike” who commented — That wasn’t me!

In the Technology section of Sunday’s, NYT’s; , there was an interesting article about corporations gaming Wikipedia, Seeing Corporate Fingerprints in Wikipedia Edits.  The impetus for the article is the launch of a neat little service  called Wikiscanner that “cross-references an edited entry on Wikipedia with the owner of the computer network where the change originated, using the IP address of the editor’s network.” 

The reaction to Wikiscanner? 

The conversation this weekend seemed to follow two threads of logic:

–the service exposes flaws in Wikipedia (bad Wikipedia, bad!)

–the service exposes the corporate “PR” gaming that’s going on behind the scenes (bad PR people, bad!)

From my perspective, Wikiscanner looks like a good thing.  Shining a bit more light on what businesses are doing is a good thing — for both Wikipedia and the business people who take care to make their movements in Wikipedia transparent.  

I think I liked David Churbuck’s post the best! 

You gotta applaud Google for its recent decision to allow people to comment on news stories in which they are featured.  Reminds me of the March 2007 post by journalist/blogger Tom Foremski, in which he argues that “the right to respond”  should be a rule of engagement on the Internet.  

“Publishing  a response to a critic is not enough because it is unlikely to be ranked on the first page of search results. Similarly, if a critic were to change their mind about a company, an individual,  or product–the search engines could still be serving up the original complaint on that crucial first page of results.  This is a serious problem in terms of reputation management for companies, and it will increasingly affect individuals too as they seek new jobs, new partners, etc.”

I agree with Tom, and in the age of conversation, it seems odd — if not unfair — that the subject of a news story cannot directly comment on or refute the story.  But while this may be a big step for Google, it’s a relatively small step for Internet journalism.  Until news organizations uniformly begin to allow comments, the “Right to Respond” will remain elusive.

I was both amused and flattered to read Sascom’s Alison Bolen’s recent post in response to our Global Social Media Survey.  Alison asks, “where are all the little guys” in this conversation — a conversation that has included quite a few “big-name” blogger’s.  She then modestly notes that she’s one of those little guys.   There’s nothing little about Alison’s answers to the survey, they’re are among the smartest and most insightful to date.

One of the most remarkable things about social media is that it provides a forum for lots of interesting voices.  As a new blogger myself, I am thrilled that I can make the acquaintance of and converse with many of my peers in the communications business through social media.  And I am grateful that so many people are taking Shel’s advice and “rolling their own” survey responses.

So, if your a self-described “little guy” and you haven’t participated in the survey — please do!