LB's Rambles

The Real Question for Google

I don't always agree with Erik Sass, who writes at MediaPost's TheSocialGraf blog, but I really think he's hit this one squarely. Looking at Google's rumored plans to build its own social network, presumably to rival Facebook, he observes that there's discussions about, and answers to, the questions of "when" and "how" and even "who." But the big question he thinks is unanswered on Google's part is "why" - WHY would Google want to do this? Are the proposed gains so great for Google that they could succeed in knocking Facebook off its perch? Sass says he's stumped.

So am I. I live very happily with Facebook AND Google, using them for quite different things. The figures Sass quotes suggests I'm hardly alone; roughly 2/3 of all search requests go through Google, while only a tiny fraction of Facebook page views are generated by search queries.

I generally use Google as my home page because, if I'm generating a new browser window, it's usually to find something - and I find Google unequalled for that (sorry, Microsoft). When I move to Facebook, as I do with distressing regularity, it's for a completely different need - the need to find out what others are doing, or post about my doings and my blogs. No problem - and I suspect I'm not alone.

So the unanswered question remains: why is Google doing this (if, in fact, they are pursuing their own social network). What do you think?

To Cross-Post or Not?

Let's face it: social media is a time-eater. Often a productive time-eater to be sure, but a time-eater nonetheless. That's one reason why many of us who post to more than one social network tend to cross-post the same message in many places. When I look at the status updates displayed on my Facebook feed, I frequently see obvious tweets from Twitter that have been cross-posted - and, quite clearly, it works both ways.

But it may not always be such a good idea. Writing at Ragan.com, Ari B. Adler offers some ideas about when and why cross-posting may not be the right thing to do. A lot of it boils down to message: if you're not reaching the same audience at all the different social networks, then perhaps you should be tailoring the message to your audience. And, of course, if you are reaching the same people, will they be annoyed by the duplication?

I know that I've cut back on the cross-posting I do. When I have new blog posts, I will generally post to both Facebook and Twitter, sometimes expanding the wording on Facebook. But I've stopped a lot of the automatic cross-posting; my FourSquare adventures, for instance, are only shared on Twitter, which seems to me to be designed as a more immediate mobile service than Facebook. I think Adler makes some good points - and I'd be interested in hearing what you think.

Google vs. Facebook: Battle of the Titans?

A report that came out a few days ago from Compete finds that Facebook has become the major driver of traffic to some of the more significant portal sites on the Web - more so than Google.

Now don't jump at me like that. Of course Google remains important. There's still a real difference between social networking and search. Although you could argue that the difference is blurring at best and could eventually disappear. Maybe.

I think, though, that it's fair to take the numbers from Compete together with a different report from Nielsen which looks at the really amazing amount of time that users spend on Facebook - and consider the impact of both reports. I think Catharine P. Taylor does a pretty good job of that at MediaPost's Social Insider blog.

Granted, a lot of the difference in the time-spent numbers comes from the difference in the way we use social networking vs. the way we use search. I spend hours on Facebook, keeping up with friends, following groups, reading "fan pages," and the like. When I want to search the web, I may just type into a Google search box on another page, rather than going to the website - and I don't really linger over the results page, once I've found what I'm looking for.

So how does all that affect our usage of social networking? Of search marketing? Check out some of the comments on that article at the Social Insider blog. And I'd love to hear what you have to say here.

What is the Future of Social Media?

That headline is intriguing, but a little misleading. The question eMarketer is asking and answering is really about the future of social media marketing. Not exactly the same thing, though, obviously, one is dependent on the other. At any rate, the service offers some insight into what they believe are trends that will help shape the future of social media, including interesting directions for search and analytics, and the marketing that follows those trends.

Looking for Twitter Followers - As a Job Qualification

There has been a fair amount of discussion in the various emails and newsletters over the past couple of days over companies that are looking for social media-savvy workers and using the number of Twitter followers as one determining qualification. MediaPost's Online Media Daily has a good writeup pointing to BestBuy's recent search for someone with at least 250 Twitter followers, not to mention Facebook friends and a year's experience at blogging.

Does that kind of thing make you a more savvy social media person? Maybe. This blog is a couple of years old (and to those few of you who read it regularly, my thanks!), and I have about 300 people following @LesBlatt - but am I better qualified for a job in social media than someone with different qualifications? Take a look at some of the comments on that MediaPost item. What do you think?

Twitter: Serious About Search

There's been a lot of speculation in recent weeks about Twitter's growth as a search engine - and as a possible eventual challenger to Google. I'm not convinced that it will reach that point - Google's pretty solidly entrenched and its massive index is pretty thorough. But there's a great deal of chatter today both on and off Twitter about changes under way to that service's search engine. Mashable has one of the best writeups, with full details.

If Twitter IS serious about search, as it now seems to be, that could explain some of the sudden increase in speculation about possible acquisition deals, in which major players including Google and Apple are said to be bidding for Twitter - and Twitter is said to be uninterested in takeovers. We'll see...

Search and Social Media

At our panel discussion of social marketing this week at Baruch College, there was a lot of discussion about the blurring lines between social media and search, and the prediction that we will see more of a merger between them - and, in particular, that social media is the "new search."

David Berkowitz of the digital marketing agency 360i has something to say about that in his new column for MediaPost's SocialMediaInsider newsletter. As he has been writing MediaPost's Search Insider column for more than 4 years now, I think he brings a good rational perspective to the discussion, with some pretty clear arguments about the similarities - and differences.

Measuring the Impact of Social Media

Investing money, time and energy on a social media campaign for your business will, sooner or later, persuade your bosses and/or clients to ask you: why? How can you demonstrate that the return on investment (ROI) makes this new media usage worthwhile?

It all comes down to metrics again. So here is an incredibly complete and good list of tools, statistics and articles which will help the dedicated marketing pro show the ROI on social media, courtesy of Interactive Insights Group's Robin Broitman.

Note that this list is NOT aimed at beginners (although newcomers to social media will find some excellent ideas here) - it's aimed at people who are deeply involved both in social media marketing plans and in the reporting and measurement of the impact of their campaigns.

Hat tip: Measurement guru Katie Paine (via Twitter and a retweet from @rgbroitman). 

Searching for Blog Search

I have had several occasions recently where I've wanted to search the blogosphere for articles on a particular topic. To say that the job has been difficult is a gross understatement. Technorati's blog search rarely works as it should; Google's is essentially non-discriminatory, making it of very limited use.

What's a writer/editor/reader to do? Well, here are some suggestions from ReadWriteWeb - but they seem to be saying the same thing I am saying: no matter which search engine you use, the prospects for a successful search seem to be pretty limited. Someday - soon, I hope - there will be a better way to do blog searches. Anybody want to make that a priority this year?

Hat tip: Sally Falkow, via Twitter

Pandora Opens the Box

Pandora, in this case, is ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, which has voted to open up top level domains to just about anything that just about anyone might want.

That means that in addition to the established top-level domains, such as .com, .net and .org, and the additional domains opened up fairly recently, such as .tv, you will soon be able to open it up to just about any three-letter-or-more word or abbreviation you like.

Sell a lot of tchotchkes? Maybe you want to open up /MyBrand.tchotchkes/ for yourself. Of course, anyone else who wants to use that top-level tchotchkes domain may have to negotiate rights with you. But that's just the beginning of the potential headaches.

So before you get in line, take a look at comments by Rob Garner, strategy director for iCrossing, on MediaPost's Search Insider blog. If you're an established brand, you may want to think a bit before rushing out to make your brand a new top-level domain - because it will have a tremendous impact on your search visibility, especially if you already have your brand out there, building up its great position on Google.

Garner's post - and the comments on it - might give you some fairly sober second thoughts about the whole process. We live in interesting times. And there's a reason why that is generally considered a curse...