If you’ve been paying attention to the news lately, there has been a lot of frantic discussion about the privacy issues of Facebook, so I thought I would weigh in.

Over the past few months, Facebook has seen a flurry of media calling them out for giving away and selling personal information, as well as not granting enough privacy for users viewing other user pages. Facebook has sense responded with new account privacy settings and several apology letters from CEO Mark Zuckerburg, but does sole responsibility for this really fall on Facebook? I believe people’s frustrations really lie on two different paths here because Facebook, and social media in general, can only be held responsible for their own actions, and not the actions of others. In the midst of this Facebook privacy controversy has been several stories about lawyers, private detectives, and court decisions being affected by social media (especially Facebook). This has stemmed confusion between what rights of protection users have on the internet and the dangers associated with being a social media participant. While both of these can have serious consequences, the differences are extremely important to understand before you place blame on the failure of enforcing privacy.

Facebook came under heat specifically for allowing 3rd party corporations access to user’s personal information as a ‘default’ setting added without anyone’s knowledge. Of course, this addition was discovered and leaked over social media, and has spawned a cyclone of messy PR and public flame over everything that can be blamed on Facebook. However, Facebook users have been freely giving their information away to third party applications for years. While this number changes every day, an estimated 73% of users have some third party application tie-in that grants someone access to their information. There is no excuse for Facebook to allow these parties unrestricted access to your pages information, but theirs also no reason to think that information on the internet is ever ‘private’ in the first place.

Just because Facebook has become popular (ok, worldwide phenomenon) doesn’t mean it suddenly isn’t owned by a corporation. Every user is responsible for entering his/her own personal information into their database to use their services. There is nothing forcing you to use your real name, e-mail, phone number, etc. but people choose to in order to connect on a social level with accuracy. To be frank, it’s you who puts your information on Facebook, not the other way around. Facebook has to have some sort of integrity in sharing your information, but does the responsibility really fall on them to go out of their way to protect it?

Take this article on divorce attorneys catching cheaters through their Facebook for example. These lawyers aren’t invading anyone’s privacy because all of their information is coming from user’s public pages. Let’s say a man who’s cheating on his wife is taking pictures with his adulterous girlfriend on vacation, and she posts them on her page, tagging both of them. The man could block this picture from his profile and remove his tag, but that picture is still very accessible on the internet, and quite available to be snooped on by an attorney or private eye, regardless of ‘privacy settings’.

Ultimately, it has to be up to the user to be responsible for their actions on social media and accept the risks of being a participant. There will never be total privacy on the internet, because you simply can’t control what others post. It’s really like a tabloid for your circle of friends customized for your browsing. You can’t expect to post your relationship status, religious status, and pictures of you and your friends possibly doing something you shouldn’t and get mad at people you don’t like finding them.

Facebook has a responsibility to protect its users as far as not freely shelling out personal information, but the ultimate responsibility for keeping personal information personal resides in the user.

First things first, this is not a slam on SEO tactics or the industry itself, but in the way that some operators in the industry go about it. The fuel for this article really just stems from the 200+ spam comments I swept under the rug on our blog this morning. For those of you that don’t know what the purpose of spamming a blog post is, I’ll explain it simply:

Organic SEO is essentially based around getting your Google search rankings as high as possible. One of the ways that Google decides the importance of your website is how many other websites link to it. This acts as a ‘recommendation’ from one website to another on its content and relevancy. When Google is prompted to search a keyword, the highest ranking sites for less-then-corporate keywords (i.e. how to tie your shoes, parachuting tips, bike-riding backwards) often come up because of their title and article that re-uses these keywords in the site. Usually, the ones with the most inbound links (other sites linking to that site) will win Google’s competition for the most relevant site, and pop up in the top 7 search results. Getting in these spots for search results is essentially the goal for SEO.

Because of this universal goal, inbound links are basically treated like a commodity. An SEOer’s goal is to grow as many quality inbound links to their site as possible in order to increase their search ranking. They will then list websites in directories, create partnerships, or post blogs or articles and site their homepage as a resource, really any way to create an external link from someone else’s site. Spamming is basically doing the same thing, except with no regards to content, purpose, or relevance to the content of a blog or directory. This is why if you’re reading a blog and notice comments that are seemingly out of place or in Russian, that’s because they ARE. It’s a technique to gain as many inbound links as possible.

I’ll let the occasional spam comment slip by because some of them are well written, or sometimes I’m not sure if it’s a real person behind a computer who actually runs a jewelry blog. Spammers are counting on no one moderating the smaller, local blogs, so they’ll fill their comments with things like this:

“Both sides other two energizer e2 rechargeable batteries specs jurors for heard thattarka trail the plaque very particular icn isotope products shall all you assumedlidoderm patch and dot ragon was”

Pay attention to the links imbedded in that incoherent product ramble (replaced with dead links). Every time one of those is posted on a website, it’s a recommendation from the site it’s posted on to the site it links to. So whether these links follow to a blog article, porn site, scam, or energizer battery commercial, the result is the same. Your site has given a ‘vote of authenticity’ to these links. Also, when someone posts on a WordPress blog like this, they usually get to link back to their own site, or any site of their choosing, which is why you’ll see spam comments without any links on them, like this:

“My mother recommended your blog. I’ve bookmarked it.”

This particular post linked back to wildcasinos.net and was posted by admin@calcuttatube. Now I’m pretty sure a network’s admin’s mother in Calcutta isn’t out recommending my blog to her family in the casino industry, but this is a good example of a ‘masked’ spam comment.

For those of you that have worked with SEO or have hired someone to do your SEO in the past, this is just me highlighting a tactic used by the less scrupulous operators in the industry. For those of you that may run your own personal or recreational blog, this is something that might help explain all those comments you’ve been getting about a Russian porn stash on your article “10 places to walk your dog”

This is why it’s important to know that when you hire someone for SEO, or any advertising for that matter, you need to know who and what you’re working with. Hopefully if you’re reading this, you can avoid your brand becoming victim to these illicit tactics.

April is always such an exciting time for me.  When I was in high school and college, it was a spring break dance-a-thon on some overcrowded beach.  But once I realized I was too old (and far too impatient) to hang with all the young partiers, I had to find a new spring event to get me excited. Enter NAB.  The National Association of Broadcasters Convention in Las Vegas.  Yep – you heard right.  Vegas Baby.  Consider it the spring break for post grads.  Okay, well, maybe for the tech geek.  Regardless – it’s a tradition going on eight years now.  Every year I look forward to walking the Convention Center Halls, checking out the new technology – cameras, editing platforms, software, you name it, it’s there. Oh, and did I mention it’s in Vegas?  After being back from NAB for a week and playing catch up, I finally had time to reflect on what I saw.  And hands down there was one topic that dominated all the buzz.  3D.  You couldn’t walk two feet without stumbling upon something 3D.  Lenses, monitors, cameras, classes…they had it all.  A number-letter combo that could instantly cause a roar of applause, or a violent array of boos and groans.  Since it stuck in my mind, I decided to do some research. I’m not gonna lie – I’m a sucker for a 3D movie.  But what makes some better than others?  And why all the controversy?

THE PROS AND CONS OF DIRECTING

People will never agree on the same thing.   3D is a perfect example.  Some of the biggest directors in Hollywood have let their opinions be known.  The directors that are Pro 3D – James Cameron (he took a chance on the format for a little movie called Avatar), Robert Zemeckis, George Lucas, Steven Spielberg, and surprisingly, Martin Scorsese.   The long and the short of it?  Just because you agree that 3D is the movie format of the future doesn’t mean there won’t be conflict.  Avatar has obviously set the standard for how a 3D movie should be made, having every shot set up with 3D in mind, versus Louis Letterrier’s Clash of the Titans, where 3D treatments were added in the edit suite. James Cameron has openly criticized the film, with the belief that if you are going to complete a film in 3D, do it from day one.  George Lucas is currently looking into having the Stars Wars films converted into 3D.  And on an interesting note, we’ve mostly seen 3D used for animated movies and blockbuster films.  Be on the look out for Martin Scorsese’s latest film, slated for a 2011 release titled The Invention of Hugo Cabret, to be one of the most interesting and intriguing projects we’ve seen to date.  Scorsese believes 3D can and should be used to enhance dramas, as well as blockbuster and animated movies.  The Invention of Hugo Cabret hopes to achieve this.

The Not-So-Pro – Michael Bay (this one was a shocker), Christopher Nolan, Jason Reitman, and Louis Leterrier (explanation below).  Michael Bay, probably known as one of the BIGGEST blockbuster “let’s-see-how-many-things-we-can-make-explode-in-one-movie” directors in Hollywood is not looking to enhance his films using 3D.  He told Deadline Hollywood, “Right now, it looks like fake 3D, with layers that are very apparent. You go to the screening room, you are hoping to be thrilled, and you’re thinking, huh, this kind of sucks.”  So don’t expect to see Transformers 3 in 3D anytime soon (sorry to all of you who were hoping to see Megan Fox in 3D).  Christopher Nolan (Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, The Prestige) just to name a couple, would rather focus his energy and budget on having fun with the possibilities of IMAX, toying with the idea of shooting an entire film using IMAX cameras and lenses.  And why Louis Letterier, who recently released 3D Clash of the Titans? Apparently he was unhappy with his finished product after the edits were all said and done.  Maybe the director doesn’t have the final say afterall.  Or maybe it was just a way to deflect all of the criticism.

DEMAND AND SUPPLY

In case you thought 3D was just a ploy to drive more people into the theaters, it goes both ways.  Sure, the hearts of Twentieth Century Fox Film Studio execs skip a beat when they hear Avatar has grossed over 743 Million Dollars at the box office alone, but since it’s release, 33% of the box office earnings have been from 3D movies, proving there is a demand.  People are willing to spend the extra money on a 3D ticket. And now, huge brands such as Sony, Samsung, Panasonic, and Fuji, just to name a few, are scrambling to release High Def 3D TV’s for the home, despite Samsung releasing a warning this week that there are health risks related to 3D TV’s.  Playstation is currently working on perfecting 3D gaming.  Even popular viral video website youtube is testing codes to upload videos in a 3D format.

Who knows if we are merely rehashing a fad that started in the 50’s, came back in the 80’s, and is now back again in 2010, OR, if it truly is a wave of the future.  Regardless of its lasting power, expect the 3D Blockbuster movie wagon to continue.  Shrek Forever After 3D will be released in late May, James Cameron is set to start production on the sequel to Avatar, and just announced, Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones have signed on to reprise their roles for Men in Black 4 in 3D, which Sony will attempt to fast-track for a Summer 2011 release.  Hmmm…Fast-track?  Maybe Sony should take a page out of James’ Cameron’s book on 3D film making and take the time to shoot it right from the beginning.

Yesterday was a beautiful day here in sunny Scottsdale with the temperature in the mid 70’s, so we decided to let a little fresh air into our office. As I pulled our rather heavy front door open, I searched for something I could use to keep it from closing. As a chair is to bulky and the potted plant outside to dirty, my eyes leaped for joy as I sited the two phonebooks sitting in the corner of our office, and quickly went to work. One of the books was too small that the door simply passed over it, and the other book was too large, but not heavy enough to stop the door. After carefully balancing the forces of nature and physics, I managed to prop the door open using both books in a pattern too complicated to explain. I felt bad about ruining these books for 3 or 4 hours of fresh air, but proud of my achievement, I boasted my door rigging skills to our accountant, who simply said, “Well, yah, who uses phone books anymore…”

I couldn’t have said it better myself.

The phone book, since its initial inception in 1878, has transformed from a 2-sided white sheet of paper mailed by a phone company to a government-mandated service. The fact is we have become so accustomed to the internet now that we’re frustrated when it takes longer then five seconds to find any unit of information we are looking for. There’s a figure out there that says that if a web page won’t load in five seconds, over 90% of users will navigate away from the site and look somewhere else. Imagine cracking open up an encyclopedia, Thomas guide, or phonebook to take 3 minutes to browse hundreds of pages to look for the tidbit of information relevant to your search. By the time you’ve done that, I’ve already found the number and driving directions from my GPS location to the publisher of the encyclopedia you were reading and posted it on Facebook, and two people have already commented on it. I find it astounding that we still get these phonebooks delivered by these companies when they are so clearly outdated, it’s almost nostalgic.

Our internet use as a culture has become so common place that in its relatively short life 74.2% of the population of North America are unique users. This means that almost everyone is using the internet from their own device everyday for various purposes. As far as our phonebook topic is concerned, there are about 6.4 billion searches through search engines a month which means about 213 million searches a day. I believe it’s a safe bet to say that the internet has caught on.

While our current use of this incredible tool is astounding, it’s also growing. With the adaptation of mobile web use, people are accessing information instantly anywhere in the world in ways never before imaginable. It is becoming possible to walk down the isles of your favorite store, scan a bar code with your phone, and get product reviews and price comparisons in as little as five seconds. With this level of complexity and an obviously predictable increase in the adaptation and development of these tools, why are phone companies still shelling out the 17 million dollars a year it takes to print these? Oh well, time to put this on the internet.

Note: None of the research in this post took more then 5 seconds to find. Also note that while researching I felt significantly less prophetic when I stumbled on banthephonebook.org, an on-line petition 31,000 strong that’s sponsored by The White Pages.

After a Facebook campaign emerged asking for Betty White to host an episode of NBC’s “Saturday Night Live”, the network is said to be considering the option. The Facebook page called “Betty White to Host SNL (please?)!”, now with over 400,000 fans, materialized after the 88-year-old actress appeared in a popular Super Bowl spot. “SNL” is thinking about teaming White with other comediennes (said possibilities include SNL alums Molly Shannon, Tina Fey and Amy Poehler). This just shows how influential social media can be! I think it definitely makes sense for NBC to follow through with this – they can broaden their appeal to a new audience and draw some excellent press attention in the process. Really, how can you go wrong with Betty White?? See the Entertainment Weekly article here: SNL Close to Land Betty White

It appears that Google has really missed a rare mark with their new attempt at social media, Google Buzz. Why all the uproar? Google has taken the liberty of synchronizing everyone’s Gmail account with Buzz, a twitter-like program that is supposed to let your contacts see changes in your status while letting you view theirs in a constant stream. Sure this sounds like a smart sync, but it is getting absolutely hammered on as a violation of privacy. As part of their plans for this integration, buzz takes the liberty of automatically ‘friending’ your top 40 Gmail contacts to your profile, regardless of your real world affiliation. This means that anyone can automatically be integrated into your email account, regardless if it’s someone who you may have e-mailed once or twice, an old acquaintance, or someone who you would like a discreet relationship with that isn’t broadcasted over Google space.

I have opted out of Buzz because I heard about this integration close upon its launch shortly after seeing who my ‘top contacts’ were. I don’t particularly want to connect my mother, aunts, and brother with ex-girlfriends and old frat buddies (This is why we’re not Facebook friends, mom). I’m sure my personal life isn’t the only one that would benefit from keeping certain social areas separate.

However, I can see the wisdom behind Google’s move…well maybe not the wisdom, but the reasoning behind it. In order to compete with long established social media sites like Facebook and Twitter where long time users already have friends in the hundreds, Google had to assume that people wouldn’t want to ‘start fresh’ with a third, fourth, or fifth social site, and starting out with a base set of followers would really expedite the connection process. These social media communities can take a long time to set up because finding people you know and want to connect to can be found much more quickly searching your 2nd degree connections rather then searching for people individually.

The launch of Google Buzz is equivalent to launching a new NFL, NBA, or MLB overnight, and expecting everyone to wake up with their jerseys on. Google has made incredible strides in providing fast, free, and accurate information to nearly everyone, unless of course you’re in China or looking for Donald Rumsfeld’s house on Google Earth (Go head, try it), but needs to take more consideration into the privacy of its customers. Providing information is one thing, shining spotlights on people’s personal lives is another.

From time to time, I’ll see some marketing ideas that just absolutely blow my mind. I can remember some commercials from my childhood that were cutting edge at the time, but compared to today’s technology, are just being blown away graphically. However, the essence of the creativity still doesn’t change, but evolves with our technology, and we’re getting really, really good at it.

I’m talking about interactive marketing, the hybrid between different media all working together (hopefully) seamlessly. There are many different ‘forms’ of interactive marketing, but it all revolves around the same point: spreading a brand massively by word of mouth. While the every day marketer is becoming more and more adept at using new technology, there are a few small gimmicks that I’ve stumbled upon that have really struck as ingenious.

The Travel Channel: In an effort to gain a younger audience, the Travel Channel decided to the hit 18-35’s right where it hurts; their Facebook. The Travel Channel unleashed a Facebook app titled ‘kidnap’ where users can kidnap their friends and take them to different cities and earn points by answering geographical trivia questions. If you think this might not be a great way to reach your audience, about 2 million Facebook users would disagree. In its first 6 weeks of inception, over 1,700,000 requests were sent, coming out to just over 40,000 requests to friends, by friends, a day.

Pepsi: While Pepsi has always been a heavily promoted brand, they have seen their successes on the big name, big budget advertising methods saved for only the largest of industry powerhouses. However, Pepsi has taken an incredible new step with their big budget Super Bowl ad; refusing to make it. Pepsi has instead launched www.refresheverything.com, an outreach project that invites users to submit ideas for a grant to improve their communities. This site allows anyone to submit an idea for a project, and then allows the site’s users to vote on who is awarded the grant, ranging anywhere from 5 to 250k, awarded monthly. To date, Pepsi has 729 submitted proposals and over 1.3 million in available funding. This project launched under the basis that Pepsi wanted to do something with its advertising that could help a down economy and directly improve people’s lives rather then put on one thirty-second Super Bowl spot.

Lost: ABC’s hit show has always used its fan base to help spread the message and used its web following to create a culture around the show. That’s why this first gimmick could very well be the work of some guy messing around at work instead of a corporate viral team, but the effect is still the same. www.kayak.com, a travel search engine, is either a victim of a fanboy employee gone rogue or a stroke of genius. Because I’m a nice guy, I did this for you, but if you search for flights originating from Sydney, Australia to LAX on September 22nd, you will see a flight advertised that doesn’t exist. For those of you not familiar with the show, this is the flight and fictitious airline whose crash is the basis of the show. Whether or not anyone ‘officially’ knows its there is a mystery to me, but this little gimmick has received a huge praise from people even outside of Lost-nerd circles.

These examples reflect the creative, interactive, and community oriented vibe that viral marketers crave to design. Even if they are doing little more then talking about their brands, these ideas have exposed themselves to their target audiences a great deal with relatively low cost, quality creative ideas. Viral marketing is beginning to show up everywhere and, as the name suggests, is going to keep spreading and spreading, keeping people like me up all night thinking of the next great way to do it big.

Remember when we would watch the Super bowl and the ads would just pop up and we would not know what was coming? Well I am afraid that has all changed now we know everything there is to know about the spot before it airs. We know everything from how much they paid for it to what people think about it before the coin toss happens.

I like to be surprised. Good creative and a good message doesn’t have to be set up like a joke or explained to me. I see a spot and either like it or don’t. The internet and all the social and viral marketing has changed the way we see ads now, especially when it comes to the Super Bowl ads.

Personally, I miss Mean Joe Green tossing the jersey to that little boy in the tunnel and the warm fuzzy feeling that I had when I 1^st saw it. Wow and I still remember it. Funny I don’t remember any of last years ads, I wonder what I won’t remember this year…

Why does a company have a blog? Why would a company pay someone thousands of dollars to publish random articles with no traditional ‘call-to-action’? What is the point of taking money away from straightforward advertising?

The one thing that is common between anyone who uses the internet is that they desire content relevant to their interests. People who are interested in something as simple as finding a new camping spot, for example, generally have to sift through a sea of distractions to get what they want: information. Let’s say that a group of friends and I are going on our yearly camping trip, and want to find a new spot to explore. I want to find out a little information about some spots first, so I start searching around. I Google the word camping, and my first results are advertisements from REI on buying a new tent, offers to register to some anonymous newsletter about American camping, or I’m looking at the hottest RV lodges in town. Not exactly what I’m looking for, and I dismiss this entire search as clutter. This doesn’t mean that I might not be in the market for some new camping gear from REI, but that isn’t the content I’m trying to find RIGHT NOW.

This presents a window of opportunity for any company that’s willing to go after someone in this stage of planning their trip. Let’s say I get a little more creative with my searching, and Google great camping spots in Flagstaff, Arizona. Here we find the websites to a few national park websites and locally ran niche sites that will champion one of their spots as the best. Once again, I don’t want to be advertised too, and I still cannot find the content I need. Hmm…I smell an opportunity.

Obviously, this is the kind of consumer that an on-line camping supply company (henceforth referred to as Jim’s) would salivate over. Unfortunately, Jim’s only exposure is in the first Google search, and it’s screaming through the monitor BUY! BUY! BUY!, not exactly attractive unless a person is only looking to buy. This is where Jim’s has the opportunity to provide a customer actual value. What if Jim’s publishes a blog about 10 great local campgrounds, and invites site users a chance to write about their favorite camping spots, comparing and sharing memorable experiences worth writing about? This opens a dialogue between Jim’s online marketer and his consumers about a common interest, and is directing traffic to his website via blog. As Jim’s blog gains readership and people start hosting links through their comments, suddenly Jim’s store is becoming a hotspot for the best camping information around.

This is a great way for Jim’s to provide another level of service to their customers by not only providing the tools for their trip, but a place to reminisce, explore and connect with others interested in the same thing. Jim’s on-line shoppers are going to start subscribing to their blog and probably shoot some of the articles over to their camping buddies at work. Slowly more and more people are being exposed to this conversation, and thanks to new blog posts have something else to discuss every couple of weeks. Jim’s has started to create an on-line community about common, genuine, interests; common interests that have serious buying power in Jim’s niche.

Let’s say I start my search again, and this time, Jim’s blog about the top ten local camping spots pops up on my search. After scanning through the article and looking at the comments people left about these particular camping spots, I have access to an open discussion on a topic that I’m actually interested in. Holy relevant search content, Batman, I’ve finally found something worth clicking on! I’ve also happened to land on Jim’s website, which not only has provided me the value of some riveting camping content, but has me visualizing my next camping experience, and now I’m getting excited about it. Here’s where new readers are going to think about the details of their trip and remember their past experiences, and luckily for Jim’s, I just remembered my tent falling out of my truck coming home from last year’s trip. Looks like I’m going to have to pick up some new gear for this year. Good thing this blog I’m reading has a store less than an inch away from it, let’s see what they got…