TheWayoftheWeb

Businesses and organisations can either embrace the opportunities and challenges of increasingly easy social interaction, or they can react against it. And two recent examples show how worrying that reaction can be.

Most digitally-aware people realise that anything you put on a public (or even supposedly private) social networking site can be seen by people including your employers.

But how about Bozeman City, in Montana, which requires job applicants to hand over their log-in information and passwords to any internet chat rooms, social networks or forums?

Why should potential employees have any right to privacy at all?

And then a media company, which by rights should know better, gets shown up. The Associated Press has issued social media guidelines, which not only match the restrictions put out by other media outlets such as the Wall Street Journal,  but actually asks employees to monitor and edit what appears on their social network profiles, even when it’s written by their friends.

From the guidelines (via Mashable)

“Q. Anything specific to Facebook?

It’s a good idea to monitor your profile page to make sure material posted by others doesn’t violate AP standards; any such material should be deleted. Also, managers should not issue friend requests to subordinates, since that could be awkward for employees. It’s fine if employees want to initiate the friend process with their bosses.

The News Media Guild, which represents 1500+ AP employees is rightly speaking out about the matter, which could, in theory, see AP employees punished for something written by someone else on their profile wall etc. Or, as is equally likely, a spambot.

Both coming from recent updates on Twitter:

1. If we need proof that people are inherently social, how the hell did everyone find out about fire and the wheel before Mainstream Media? Or Social Networking, Social Media Marketing and Web 2.0 for that matter?

(brilliant response by both @epredator and @dalvado – seeing a wheel rolling past on fire!)

Wheel of Fire 5 by SanGatiche on Flickr (CC Licece)

2. In a hyperconnected world of broadband and mobiles, will we see a premium on those things which allow us to break away and enjoy solitude – for example, with motorcycling, the supposed thrill of speed became a byproduct for me of experiencing solitude, extreme concentration, and getting close to experiencing ‘flow’.

That thought came from seeing @gapingvoid tweet that in a world of oversupply, ‘hope’ is pretty much the only thing people are willing to pay for.

It’s tempting to think that social media is a good place to be right now – after all, there’s good evidence it’s one of the few areas of growing employement.

There’s also plenty of talk about how it’s going to grow as a low cost/more effective way to engage people, and therefore drive revenue – but also harder to measure. And it can be hard to tell who is bluffing, at least until someone came up with a checklist!

So we spend our time joining groups and chatting with our peers, whether it’s on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, Ning, etc, etc.

PAR-TIC-I-PA-TION by cindiann on Flickr (CC Licence)

But the one question we need to keep asking is whether each group is really worth joining, and whether we’re actually going to have the time and dedication to make a difference.

It’s something I’ll admit to being guilty of. There’s Social Media Mafia, MeasurementCamp, Social Media Club, Social Media Today, P2PR, EverySingleOneofUs,  just off the top of my head, plus Triiibes, which prompted this post when I thought about how much value others are getting from it – and I’m missing because I’ve spread myself out so much. And some groups, such as the Blog Council, are attracting some criticism. As indeed WOMMA has in this case.

Then add in several Facebook groups, a few LinkedIn groups, and others I’ve forgotten – and suddenly it’s sounding ridiculous, even though I’ve increasingly only tried to be involved in groups with a reasonably clear and defined purpose.

Credentials Required by TheTruthAbout... on Flickr (CC Licence)

I’ve already started politely resigning from a few places, because I’m barely even remembering to check in and see what’s happening once in a while, let alone contribute to anything of value – from now on it’s about having a real focus on what matters to me personally and for my career, and selecting a smaller collection of key groups who I can offer value to (and perhaps where interlinks can be found).

Perhaps this is what Twitter has really affected for me – in the past I was a pretty active member of a variety of groups and forums, but now they don’t seem so important, as I’ve got an expanding network of over 1900 in my community for instant responses on a variety of topics, rather than forcing myself to go and check in somewhere else.  The common complaint was that it detracted from blogging, but I tend to find the opposite – but I do find myself spending less time at other social locations, unless it’s a real focused community.

Perhaps it’s just me, and the fact I’ve got a great and involving day job, two blogs, and a young family to think about now? I know from forum involvement for a decade that there’s also a cyclical nature to forum membership – the new excitement, the start of seeing repetition from other members, taking a break and then coming back with new enthusiasm etc….

And I do know some people who seem to benefit from seemingly being in almost every group on every network ever created.

But what do you think? Have you been a little guilty of serial group joining without considering the value? Found yourself stretched too thin? Or do you think it’s fine to be a silent member in places on the off chance people might find you and request a connection/contribution?

And where have you found the clearest sense of purpose/best value?

Because that’s a difference between the old world and the new.

I’ve been following the always awesome Gary Vaynerchuk for the while on Twitter, as well as watching his videos at GaryVaynerchuk.com. If you don’t recognise the name, he decided to launch Wine Library TV from his basement, became a major internet celebrity and business success, and now also speaks with authority on what is happening to business and marketing, such as this great appearance at Web 2.0 Expo:

Another great example of how he does things differently to a traditional marketer or businessman appeared on Twitter yesterday:

In case the image is too small, he’s actually telling people not to buy from his own company, because he was about to reveal a free shipping code for wine.

Now companies have special offers all the time, especially at the moment, with the economic climate – that isn’t unusual.

• But how many firms would actively tell people ‘Dont BUY ANYTHING FROM @wldaily ( winelibrary.com) for another 4 1/2 hours’?

In general, they wouldn’t, because it would seem stupid to stop people paying full price while they’re willing, and then to get the boost at a lower price.

But what that misses is the amount of immensely annoyed people who find out they missed out on a special offer by valuing your product enough to pay full price – and by a matter of days, hours, or minutes.

Not only are they likely to be annoyed about your brand in general, but are they likely to pay full retail price ever again if they know you could launch a sale at any second without warning them?

Sure, you might get a higher profit on one purchase, but what will the difference be over a year? five? ten? Especially when they’ll tell everyone they know?