Want evidence of end user control?

If you really want to underline the way control is now being shared with an ever greater number of people historically know as your ‘audience’, then show people the increasing rise of Firefox browser usage – then show them Greasemonkey.

Now Firefox isn’t the most used browser globally – Internet Explorer still rules, and Google’s Chrome certainly has some advantages and enthusiastic adopters. But whether or not Firefox ever dominates the browser market, the influence of the open source approach, add-ons and plug-ins is undeniable. It’s the reason that many people, including myself, might use Chrome for certain tasks for speed, but can’t give up the utility of plugins which offer everything from easy ways to see the way a page is coded, to Swedish spellchecking, mouse gestures and more.

But why is Greasemonkey so incredibly important?

Greasemonkey is a Mozilla Firefox add-on that allows users to install scriptson-the-fly changes to most HTML-based web pages. As Greasemonkey scripts are persistent, the changes made to the web pages are executed every time the page is opened, making them effectively permanent for the user running the script. Greasemonkey can be used for adding new functions to web pages (for example, embedding price comparison in Amazon.com web pages), fixing rendering bugs, combining data from multiple webpages, and numerous other purposes. From Wikipedia.

So that means:

You can spend as much time and money as you like on designing your webpage, but if I want to disable elements, change the layout, or do whatever I like, I can.

For instance, Facebook’s redesign angered many people – so if you want to hide the Highlights sidebar, just install one of three Greasemonkey options.

Or you can just emulate the old Facebook design.

And what’s really interesing?

As a website owner/publisher, I’m not aware of any way you’d know this was happening via analytics (And I’ve asked a few metrics/analytics types before posting), and you wouldn’t know what users are adding to your site to improve their experience, and possibly conversion rates.

(If you do know ways to track any of that information automatically, I’d love you to share it in the comments.)

Your users would though.

Resources:

You can keep up with the Greasemonkey blog at Greasespot, and find Userscripts for it at Userscripts.org. Please do keep in mind that you’re installing code which may in a very small amount of cases have been created by people who aren’t 100% lovely, so do some research before adding new scripts. Or just don’t blame this post if you kill the internet by accident.

Why Mark Zuckerberg is right to dismiss Facebook users

As a specialist in online communities and social media, it may seem a little strange that I would suggest Mark Zuckerberg is right to ignore the complaints of Facebook users over the recent changes to the social network, but stick with me on this one.

Mark Zuckerberg by Leafar. on Flickr (CC Licence)

Mark Zuckerberg by Leafar. on Flickr (CC Licence)

The story so far:

Facebook releases a redesign which shows more of a Friendfeed/Twitter influence. Users react badly and an app is introduced to vote on the new design. The app has over 1 million votes so far, with 94% against the new layout and 600,000 comments – Facebook has over 175 million users for context. (A suitable time to remind everyone of ‘the supermarket effect‘ when it comes to redesigns?)

Then on Friday, Gawker posted details of a memo by Mark Zuckerberg to Facebook employees, supplied by an anonymous tipster.  ‘He said something like ‘the most disruptive companies don’t listen to their customers’

Sadly, the memo hasn’t been published anywhere, so like everyone else, I’m going on the third-hand hearsay. Cnet has a reasonable summary of the split between people attacking Facebook/Zuckerberg for his apparent lack of concern about users, and those who are supporting Facebook. So far, though, only Robert Scoble appears to have addressed why Zuckerberg is right to dismiss user concerns in this instance.

So why is Mark Zuckerberg right?

There’s a difference between collaboration and co-creation (which I evangelise), and, as Scoble puts it, ‘letting the customers run our business mode’. Think of every product that has been dulled by focus groups until it fails to ignite any interest from anyone.

Zuckerberg wants to keep Facebook disruptive – which is completely correct if it will avoid the loss of interest associated with the previous big social networks – look at the current state of Friendster and  Myspace. Both are still sizeable, but when did either of them ignite any sense of passion or controversy?

Too often, a great idea gets lost in repeated meetings, discussions and trying to meet the expectations of everyone involved – now try applying the views of 175 million people to a business plan.

Leadership by Dunechaser on Flickr (CC Licence)

Leadership by Dunechaser on Flickr (CC Licence)

And it takes strong leadership to lead any project, no matter how democratic in nature – from Wikipedia to Twitter, users contribute, collaborate, create, build-on and influence – but eventually someone has to pick a strategy and run with it.

And the redesign is leading to reports of the benefits for brands and for Facebook advertising.

Meanwhile Scoble points to user data and recommendations leading to businesses. And the fact that people may claim they’re rushing to leave since the redesign, but what people say is often different to what they do, and with such a critical mass, there are a lot of strong ties to break, with no like-for-like alternative really getting any attention.

They just don’t get it:

Part of my reason for posting is an article by Frank Reed over at Marketing Pilgrim, and others like it. We shouldn’t confuse customer service with customers dictating business strategy simply by an immediate backlash – all customer input should be acknowledged, and then a decision has to be made to act on it. It’s the same confusion that portrays Open Source as impossible to make money from, or social media as the only place to bother marketing in.

(And for the record, I don’t like the new design, I’m not going to leave over it, and I probably use Facebook 1-2 times a day for pleasure and 3-4 times a day for work, preferring Twitter and Friendfeed).

Evan Williams talks Twitter at TED

I’m a big fan of the TED talks, the conferences which started by covering Technology, Entertainment and Design, and now include a huge range of thought-leaders on a variety of topics. (More about TED here)

Somehow I hadn’t got around to watching the talk by Evan Williams from Twitter until I saw a good article about it by Garr Reynolds at Presentation Zen.

One interesting point is how Evan has followed a couple of hunches to build projects – Blogger and Twitter.

Secondly – Twitter was designed as a broadcast medium – one message went out to many.

But users invented the @reply functionality, the API, the use of hashtags, and started using it to raise awareness around issues, raise money for causes, implement marketing and business use, etc.

It’s a pretty quick presentation at just 8 minutes – and worth watching until the end to see what happens when TED Curator Chris Anderson uses Twitter search to look for mentions of Evan Williams.

Useful study on Social Network Marketing on Facebook and Myspace

I’ve finally had a chance to sit down and read Tom Chapman’s study of Social Network Marketing, Engagement Marketing and Brands, which specifically looks at marketing on Facebook and Myspace from the perspectives of both social network users, and brand executives from the likes of innocent drinks and BBC Radio 1.

It’s quite unusual to see a report from someone who isn’t linked to either the network in question, or an agency which may be looking to attract business (Tom is Head of Marketing for an ISP).

It’s effectively split into two parts. The first section is a look at the quantitative findings of surveying Myspace and Facebook users, whilst the second part compiles the in-depth interviews with brand executives.

I won’t quote too much of the study, but it covers topics like the percentage of Myspace and Facebook users who would feel more affinity to a brand that listened to them and communicated with them (65% and 67% respectively). And it goes into detail for both social advertising and brand promotions, as well as finding out how many Myspace and Facebook fans are aware their profile information is used to target them – (56% and 45%). It’s quite surprising, particularly after the uproar within certain circles over Facebook’s Beacon advert system, for example.

And it’s certainly interesting to hear the responses of some executives who use both networks to great effect – for instance, the Chris Moyles fan page with 536774 fans.

As someone who is fairly deeply involved in the subject (It’s my day job, after all), I saw lots that will be useful in supporting my own work and theories, and some correlation between what other brands have found, and what I’ve discovered from Bauer Media’s brands on Facebook and Myspace.

I’ve had the chance to exchange a couple of emails with Tom, and voiced my thoughts that the next stage will be to look at exactly how brand executives are measuring loyalty, engagement and participation, especially with respect to Return on Investment and justifying the time and effort involved. It really is the multi-million dollar question of social media, and it’s getting closer every day – and I think this study goes a long way to reaching that destination.

Anyway, if you’re interested in reading more, the study is at socialnetworkmarketinguk.com. And if that inspires you, there’s still time to save 10% off the price of attending Social Media in Business on October 23rd.