Showing posts tagged social.
x

second brain

elsewhere   

a digital common place book | an @s_m_i production

twitter.com/s_m_i:

    "What Google should have realized is that the important part about sharing content online is not who you share it with, but who you share it as. We all have various personalities. Mine might be my work personality, my photographer personality, my hometown-highschool personality, my video gamer personality. These interests are bigger than my small group of friends who also share these interests, but it’s really, really hard to express my various interests online without managing a bunch of distinct social networks. Our social tools need to allow us to share whatever we want, whenever we want, and not worry about pissing off our friends and followers."
    — 4 months ago with 1 note
    #social  #sharing  #social networks  #identity 
    "

    The looking glass was now a mirror; instead of reinventing us, the web simply provided more of us to the world, and more ways to take advantage of the world around us. We speak of Yelping and checking in on 4Square as if these were activities, when they are simply the day-to-day cataloguing of our lives—or, even worse, a grimly detached version of modern life in which we aspire to be ourselves. Mediation presents itself as a friendly tool when in fact it creates distance between us and the ordinary.

    An excess of candor remains a problem—the digital equivalent of a nip-slip or drunken voicemail—yet these cases are more accidental than confessional. Secret identities and alternate lives have been ferreted out, turned into a professional liability. When they persist, they are (hopefully temporary) refuges created out of need—like the online homes made by teens who don’t fit in in their real-life homes. These internet lives are real life by proxy, not a shadowy, distorted version that is never intended to be realized.

    "
    — 9 months ago with 1 note
    #identity  #internet  #Social  #PRIVACY  #attention  #Technology  #culture  #audience  #sharing  #society  #Bethlehem Shoals 
    "Among a select group, G+ is a Facebook replacement and many are on it all day. However, they are part of a rarefied subculture, the equivalent of Deadheads or Phish fans in a Rihanna world. For most, barring a few tech gadflies like Robert Scoble and Tom Anderson, Google+ is an afterthought; a third or fourth social network to keep track of that you can forget about for days or even weeks."
    Keep meaning to login to Google+…

    Google+: A Year of Missed Opportunities

    — 9 months ago
    #google  #Social  #networks  #social networks 
    "Human are inherently social. It is the core of our species. It is not a feature. It is not an add-on. It is not a business model. Please stop molesting this word."

    Stipsters is definitely fetch, though.

    9 Signs you’ve become a Startup Hipster

    — 10 months ago
    #Startups  #tech  #hipsters  #stipsters  #social  #social media  #business models 
    "What intrigued me most of all when we did the test was not that “position A” generated more share interactions than “position B”, or that “position C” sounded the death-knell for sharing whilst “position D” caused people to share more freely. What intrigued me was the effectiveness of the positions was different for each service, even though they were always all presented as a block together."

    Some insights into sharing buttons from The Guardian

    Give share buttons their due - they do change user behaviour

    (via percolatehq)
    — 11 months ago with 8 notes
    #audience  #attention  #engagement  #social 
    percolatehq:

“Tumblr likes to party” … Bitly data shows Tumblr posts perform best later in the day.
    (via bitly blog - Time Is On Your Side
    )

    percolatehq:

    “Tumblr likes to party” … Bitly data shows Tumblr posts perform best later in the day.

    (via bitly blog - Time Is On Your Side )

    — 1 year ago with 5 notes
    #social media  #sharing  #audience  #social  #attention  #tumblr 
    Abraham Lincoln Filed a Patent for Facebook in 1845 →

    futurejournalismproject:

    dbreunig:

    Nate St. Pierre writes:

    Lincoln was requesting a patent for “The Gazette,” a system to “keep People aware of Others in the Town.” He laid out a plan where every town would have its own Gazette, named after the town itself. He listed the Springfield Gazette as his Visual Appendix, an example of the system he was talking about. Lincoln was proposing that each town build a centrally located collection of documents where “every Man may have his own page, where he might discuss his Family, his Work, and his Various Endeavors.”

    He went on to propose that “each Man may decide if he shall make his page Available to the entire Town, or only to those with whom he has established Family or Friendship.” Evidently there was to be someone overseeing this collection of documents, and he would somehow know which pages anyone could look at, and which ones only certain people could see (it wasn’t quite clear in the application). Lincoln stated that these documents could be updated “at any time deemed Fit or Necessary,” so that anyone in town could know what was going on in their friends’ lives “without being Present in Body.”

    A patent request for Facebook, filed by Abraham Lincoln in 1845.

    I’ve long argued Facebook is working towards natural or timeless (for lack of better words) human interaction. That their central idea is relevant in any age should not be surprising.

    (Though it is astounding Lincoln was imagining a nearly identical privacy system.)

    (Via The Next Web)

    Abe > Zuck.
    — 1 year ago with 610 notes
    #history  #society  #abraham lincoln  #facebook  #social 
    futurejournalismproject:

Facebook Social Reader Engagement is Cratering
Via Buzzfeed:

The Washington Post was the first publication to experiment with a “frictionless” social reader app, which launched last year. If you use Facebook you’ve probably come across it: it manifests as a clustered list of stories that are almost completely unrelated except for the fact that they all come from the same publication.
If you decide to click on a link it doesn’t take you to the story. Instead, it shunts you over to a signup screen for Social Reader, which you have to accept if you want to make it through to the site. This forceful behavior is how the Post’s reader app gained tens of millions of users in a few short months; it’s also how, as Jeff Bercovici at Forbes pointed out this morning, the Washington Post seems to have worn its readers — or Facebook — out. They’re annoyed, and they’re quitting in droves.

Via CNET:

Even worse, the tool had been getting more than 4 million daily users as recently as the second week of April, but ended up near zero for most of the rest of the month and is currently wallowing at around 220,000 daily. The publication’s social reader is advertised with this catchy plug: “News travels fast on Washington Post Social Reader. Get articles from the Web’s best sources, instantly share the stories you read with your friends, and see what your friends are reading. Start spreading the news!”
But what seems clear is that the only thing that’s spreading is a viral disgust with the application.
The same seems to hold true of other social readers. Dailymotion, which is a video site that features a social-reading app, also seems to be hemorrhaging users, dropping from a high of about 3.5 million in early April to about 670,000 today. And The Guardian, which topped out at nearly 6 million monthly average users and was still at 5.5 million last week, has now fallen to 3.9 million monthly average users.

FJP: Possible cause — interface design within Facebook is annoying. A user shares an article, you’re interested so select a link but instead of going to the article you’re brought to an interstitial page where you’re required to sign up for the app in order to access the content.
Second possible cause — as we share and share and share, we’re beginning to realize that a lot of what we read is a bit silly and it might be better not to share so much.
Third possible cause — as suggested by the Washington Post’s Engagement Producer Ryan Kellet, Facebook’s “Trending Articles” feature is superseding Social Reader stories by decreasing their prominence and bucketing “most important” stories all in one place. Again, an interface issue. — Michael

    futurejournalismproject:

    Facebook Social Reader Engagement is Cratering

    Via Buzzfeed:

    The Washington Post was the first publication to experiment with a “frictionless” social reader app, which launched last year. If you use Facebook you’ve probably come across it: it manifests as a clustered list of stories that are almost completely unrelated except for the fact that they all come from the same publication.

    If you decide to click on a link it doesn’t take you to the story. Instead, it shunts you over to a signup screen for Social Reader, which you have to accept if you want to make it through to the site. This forceful behavior is how the Post’s reader app gained tens of millions of users in a few short months; it’s also how, as Jeff Bercovici at Forbes pointed out this morning, the Washington Post seems to have worn its readers — or Facebook — out. They’re annoyed, and they’re quitting in droves.

    Via CNET:

    Even worse, the tool had been getting more than 4 million daily users as recently as the second week of April, but ended up near zero for most of the rest of the month and is currently wallowing at around 220,000 daily. The publication’s social reader is advertised with this catchy plug: “News travels fast on Washington Post Social Reader. Get articles from the Web’s best sources, instantly share the stories you read with your friends, and see what your friends are reading. Start spreading the news!”

    But what seems clear is that the only thing that’s spreading is a viral disgust with the application.

    The same seems to hold true of other social readers. Dailymotion, which is a video site that features a social-reading app, also seems to be hemorrhaging users, dropping from a high of about 3.5 million in early April to about 670,000 today. And The Guardian, which topped out at nearly 6 million monthly average users and was still at 5.5 million last week, has now fallen to 3.9 million monthly average users.

    FJP: Possible cause — interface design within Facebook is annoying. A user shares an article, you’re interested so select a link but instead of going to the article you’re brought to an interstitial page where you’re required to sign up for the app in order to access the content.

    Second possible cause — as we share and share and share, we’re beginning to realize that a lot of what we read is a bit silly and it might be better not to share so much.

    Third possible cause — as suggested by the Washington Post’s Engagement Producer Ryan Kellet, Facebook’s “Trending Articles” feature is superseding Social Reader stories by decreasing their prominence and bucketing “most important” stories all in one place. Again, an interface issue. — Michael

    — 1 year ago with 32 notes
    #sharing  #social  #engagement  #audience  #attention  #facebook 
    "when you become a broadcaster, you have to be more careful about what you say, or risk annoying a large number of people."
    — 1 year ago
    #twitter  #audience  #social 
    "we are actively discouraged from maintaining any separation of spheres of identity. Facebook was written by students, for students; one of its pernicious hallmarks is that it assumes that human beings possess but a single identity (which can be harvested by Facebook, needless to say). Ask any teacher whether they want to share their private life and relations with their students! Or parents with children, for that matter. Real human beings live complex lives in which they occupy different roles which are exposed to different people. Facebook tries to bundle everything up into one amorphous blob, and makes it relatively hard to hold information back from some categories."
    — 1 year ago
    #facebook  #privacy  #sharing  #social  #identity  #social networks