I was browsing around my about.me page this morning and came across this seminar that I gave to the Knoxville Chamber of Commerce earlier this year. It’s always fun to listen to yourself talk.

Use http://Klout.com to identify “influencers;” engage with 50 of them; and raise your Klout score by 20 points.

Klout uses “influential about” to determine the topic areas where you are considered most influential. For example, my twitter account @jfloyd is considered to be most influential about the following topics:

• Knoxville
• Social Media
• Legal
• Business

1. Identify 50 people that you believe are influential about topics that you want to be influential about (i.e. ”Sales” “Sales Coaching” etc. using http://wefollow.com)

Here is a report of “Sales”

Then run over to Klout and check the scores:

2. Increase “engagement” with these people over the next 30 days.

• If you register on Klout, you can click the  beside topics and it will notify them that you have given them Klout+
• Retweet them
• Respond to their questions
• Ask them to retweet you

3. Raise your following by 100 people and Klout score by 20 points in the next 30 days.

That’s the task, let me know how you do!

This article originally ran on Posterous.

Like others in the social sphere, I’ve been playing around with Google+ since its release last week (thanks to James Herbert). Like the Google Buzz experiment, I’ve been casually playing with it to see how Google envisions their second stand in the social sphere. So, I’m a bit cautious to make any predictions as to whether it is truly the Facebook-Twitter-All-Things-Social killer.

If you can imagine the cosmic dust swirling around the big bang in the world of the social cosmos, you have seen bits and pieces of Google+:

• Wave – Do you remember that experiment? The general idea of allowing groups to share information and have a threaded conversation on a particular topic seemed like an enterprise win, but the lack of notifications and nebulous interface made all wave goodbye.
• Buzz – It was the Twitter killer, but it ended up being the Buzz kill–for me. The privacy faux pas set Buzz’s first footing on shaky ground. Then the inbox overload was too much. For me, it was superfluous to my twitter stream, so I eventually Buzzed off.
• Google Chat - No complaints here. The solid jabber chat interface is a mainstay for our business to stay connected. Adding video chat and eventual Voice integration will make Google Chat a Skype killer.
• Google Profile – At first, the Google Profile was a meteor in the cosmic dust. I remember setting mine up in 2009 purely for SEO purposes, but it wasn’t apparent how it ultimately played in the bigger equation.
• Social Circle – For some time, Google has been playing with Social Circle to provide more accurate search results. The idea that a friend’s interaction with a site is some predictor of my favor is probably not too far off, but it needs fine tuning.
• Picassa – Google’s acquisition of the Flickr competitor seemed to follow the YouTube acquisition as a logical move into multimedia–in my opinion for enhanced search results.
• +1 – A few months ago Google’s +1 seemed like an enhancement to Social Circle. Now with Google+ it makes much more sense.

With all of the “circling” social mass, I present to you Google+. I’m not going to recount all of the features and analysis (and trust me there is plenty). For a few nice articles, take a look at Chris Brogan’s 50 and Joshua Michele’s Google Plus, The Great Game and why Social is the One Ring to Bind the Internet OS.

Instead, I wanted to share a few of my initial observations. I think Plus is a nice collection of all of the tools that Google has developed, and I think that there are some features that it offers over the predicted enemies (Twitter and Facebook). But, I’m stuck with “why?” At its genesis, Twitter (more so than Facebook) filled a niche of apparent human need to share in excruciating detail the happenings of one’s life with a very simple interface. It was non-intrusive and non-competitive. Twitter was transparent text messaging for the world to eavesdrop. From any mobile phone, smart or dumb, a person could text about their soup, and then the users and developers built a world around this simplicity.

It seems that Goliath, er Google, has developed a very sophisticated platform that combines many wonderful sharing features. My struggle is that it’s not anything New. Ezra Pound once said that “Literature is news that stays new.” By analogy, a social network is something New that becomes Need. Quora was new but it wasn’t needed–not every day. I am struggling to see how Plus is New. For the current users, I believe there is Need.

My second issue at the core has to do with playing nice. Twitter is ubiquitous because it was non-threatening. Application developers were able to sail through the approval of Apple, Android, Web OS, et al. with no problem because Twitter and Facebook posed little threat. Google on the other hand, has experienced dramatic setbacks with many of the applications (namely Voice with Apple). So, if I understand it correctly, Google+ is going to work best as an untethered application on my mobile device. While the HTML 5 application is acceptable on the iPhone, it doesn’t have many of the features that I expect from my social networks (i.e. real-time notifications, competition between developers (for better applications), etc.). Mobile is the key, and any viable network must play nicely with “all” mobile.

Finally, Twitter is by far my favorite social network; I love it because the users have built Twitter’s sandbox. Hash tags were a result of users agreeing how to categorize information. URL shorteners thrived because Twitter users needed a way to share links in 140 characters. Twitpics (and all variations) exploded to allow users to share their images. From the ground up developers and users have tapped ingenuity to figure out how to work within a wonderfully simple sandbox: 140 characters. On the other hand, I sense some suggestion that Google+ has defined the sandbox and I should feel free to play.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I have said for years that Twitter and Facebook are the current social platforms, and there will be eventual replacements, but I am more concerned about a thousand more niche “killers” than a single atomic explosion. The coveted designer network Dribbble is a great example of a niche network that is not the 400 pound gorilla but has great loyalty.

Are you on Google+? Connect with me. If not, let me know that you want an invite in the comments, and I’ll email you to confirm the correct email address. Most importantly, let me know your thoughts is Google+ going to be a sea change in social? Also, if you don’t mind, indicate in your comment whether you’re an android user.

Have you seen this photo?

Photo shared by @Stefmara

Talk about being in the right place at the right time. On Monday, Stefanie Gordon snapped the pic while flying on Delta from NYC to Palm Beach, and when she landed she posted the picture to Twitter. The result? As of the time of writing this post, this TwitPic has viewed more than 450,000 views, and Stefanie has quadrupled her Twitter followers.

The (well documented) problem is that Stefanie’s pic was picked up by MSM. Despite the promises to credit her with the picture, they didn’t. Big surprise.

I don’t want to get into the legal analysis of the use of this picture. Our laws and contracts that govern these uses are a reflection of the culture at the particular time. My question is what time are we in? This issue is occurring at the intersection of two paradigms: mainstream media and social media revolution.

In one time, images or user generated content have rights and are compensatory, and in the other they are free, sharable, and the rights function on the honor system.

The value of the content in the mainstream media paradigm has traditionally been increased by scarcity. Networks invest heavily to have an exclusive story, which increases the audience for the network. Increased share of the audience translates into increased advertising revenue.

The value of the content in social media is increased by ubiquity. When a user creates interesting “share-worthy” content, they are “compensated” by their networks with shares, likes, retweets, comments. This economy of generosity catapults unknown people onto a connected stage. For example, Antoine Dodson was propelled into national spotlight with more than 80 million views thanks to the Gregory brothers, and the bed intruder song instantly became a meme with hundreds of variations (including my favorite).

Like two ships passing in the night, MSM and social have incompatible values. Language of copyright, compensation, ownership are not the tender in the world of social. Regardless of the compensation or “legally compliant use,” attribution and conversation is the standard of currency in this economy. The beauty of this paradigm, however, is that means by the one-to-many MSM to circumvent attribution leads to many-to-many conversation through blogging, tweeting, and communicating with friends.

Sorry. All of that emphasis on page one SERPs of Google may not be the funky cold medina after all. Search Engine Optimization, which is a profession that didn’t exist a few years ago may not exist in a few years. Thus, the modern era of the Internet: professions that don’t exist today may be the top job in 3 years. [check this video for an interesting communication of this phenomena]

In a recent  article, ClickZ likens the current environment to early paid search in  Social Media 2009 = Search 2002

If you’ve been in the interactive advertising business for at least the last five years, you’ll recognize the pitch for social media to be nearly identical to the ones we heard (and made) in 2002 for search. Search ads were fast and cheap to create and dirt cheap. (You didn’t even have to pay unless you got a click!) In the face of a bloated and barely effective display advertising market, search looked to be the best deal in town.

Honestly, I am not predicting that one medium will trump the other, but I believe that a single tool arsenal is not the Internet “marketing” solution. Staking one’s business upon Google results is simply not a sound solution. For a few weeks, the question, “will Twitter trump Google?” has been circulating tweets and blogs.

No, but social media will rule supreme as the top referrer of the web.

Twitter is already towering over the news sources in the UK and this doesn’t even include the API connections (i.e. Tweetdeck, Twhirl) to the social service:

TechCrunch reports:

In February, 4 million people in the U.S. visited the site, up from 2.6 million the month before, according to the latest data from comScore. That represents a 55 percent month-over-month growth rate, compared to 33 percent growth in each of the two months prior.

There is a good reason for this explosion in use. Social media serves niches that search engines and blogs alone cannot.

1. Internet Portal

Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter are many people’s portal to the Internet. Sorry of conjuring up imagery of AOL. But, these are the first and last accessed sites that many people use during their Internet sessions. In a recent Nielsen study, 10% of all “internet time” is spent in social networks.  Facebook is being used as their portal page to the web, and they find referral links through in-network communications.

2. Hyperlocality

National sites and search engines will always be handicapped to scale down to provide accurate poignant local results-despite the changes to the algorithm. Social Networks have the ability to scale because the content creators are local. For example, if you want a Hot Dog in a particular city, page one results and the top result are far more national with localized information (Krystal). However, tapping out less than 140 characters, “where is the best Chicago dog in Knoxville?” will likely return nuanced and accurate local results.

3. Contextual Relevancy (crowdsourcing)

In the network of friends and followers, questions are not blindly stripped and plugged into an algorithm that may or may not account for misspellings or memory lapse. For example try this query on Google, “what is the name of the place that used to be next to the pizza parlor on johnson st.” Surprisingly, the same query to Twitter will likely yield a poignant response. In addition, all of these past queries are searchable.

The key difference here is primary vs. secondary research. My network “filters” the results for me:

add context to relevant information. Searchers don’t just want facts. They want to learn more about the experiences of real people they can relate to.

Trust is key. These “relational” or “social” queries are built on trust. If I ask a question to my network and they mislead me then I turn them off (unfollow or unfriend). On the other hand, the percentage of trust in search engines results continues to decline.

4. Immediacy

On a cold day in January while staring off into my tweetcloud in tweetdeck. I noticed a surge in Hudson and Plane. At least 30 minutes before any television news network could mobilize, Twitter broke the story. The Hudson is not the only case. The Mumbai terrorist attacks were best reported via Twitter by people inside the hotel.

Users can access Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn through web, text message, mobile applications. So, unfiltered information can be in real time. As these services become more ubiquitous, we will have a variety of devices that are fully integrated with our social networks–and yes that will include more than just my washer telling me that the spin cycle has finished.

5. Direct Access

Throw your Rolodex out the window. Social networks are connecting people directly to their sources. Want to complain about comcast or tell motrin that their ad is offensive? You don’t have to write letters that may or may not be read, you can tweet or blog directly to the source.

The caveat is that  BS detectors are very high in social mediums. For an advertiser or owner, simply setting up twitterhawk to swoop in to keyword mentions or hiring ghosttweeters to engage customers can be catastropic. Inauthentic posts or ghost written material can be obvious to readers / followers / friends, and as @guykawasaki has learned, exposure of ghost writing can be a disaster (or at least distracting).

6. Eavesdropping is Awesome

My guilty pleasure is  to eavesdrop on (interesting) conversations while dining in restarants. Whether on someone’s wall or in their Twitter feed, social marketing is largely about listening to people talking. If something is interesting, we are generally permitted to engage in that conversation. Of course, this can be exploited by marketers, but in some cases I want to be engaged while ranting about the ridiculously slow download speeds on my comcast connection.

7. Google Doesn’t Care

Some suggest that Google is “passionate” about providing quality search results. Google is an advertising company; first and foremost the objective is to generate revenue. Facebook recently redesigned the intro screen to open up more advertising, and this emphasis towards ads will like be more pervasive in future redesigns. On the other hand, Twitter’s revenue model is nebulous and undefined [probably best served and most profitable to sell to Google]. Therefore the free flow of information is not altered by the revenue model (yet).

Search engines are not going away. They will continue to improve the results, but the fact remains that people are continualy drawn to people. This is not a new phenomena as any listserve or newsgroup junkies of web 1.0 will tell you. As social networks continue to proliferate, they will become increasingly important referrers of the web.

He titled the keynote, “Twitter As A Tool For Social Media: Nobodies are the new Somebody.” While 80% of the audience at SES NY admitted to be “twittering” while Guy was talking, his keynote read like an intro to Twitter, but that is not to say that it was not without a few new nifty tools.

This is an interesting keynote topic of a “Search Engine Strategy” conference, but this base thread seemingly weaved into all of the first day sessions.

1. Forget the “A” list - don’t worry about the big Twitter names. It is not about a “trickle down” interaction. Twitter is about a “bubbling up” of excitement and evangelism.

2. Defocus

3. Get lots followers – it is important

• Autofollow everyone that follows you. You can use SocialToo to do this automatically.
• Retweetist. Retweeting is the sincerest form of flattery.
• Epenis.nl - How do you measure up?
• Twitalyzer 100 Most Influential
• Funny: Top Oddities News
• Timely: Top Most Popular News
• Adjix
• TwitterCounter
• Twitter Suggestions

4. Monitor

What are people saying about you or things that you care about? Construct advanced queries and feed that to a reader.

For example, use “contractor” within a geographic radius. Are there any painters on Twitter?

Or, look at the use of negative terms: “floyd -landis -pink.”

5. Copy – What are others doing?

• Twibs.com monitor what companies are doing on Twitter
• @comcastcares is a great model of using Twitter in business.
• @jetblue airlines. Does company stuff and personal.
• Amazondeals
• CirqueLasVegas

6. Search

• Use advanced search. Term + zip.
• Term OR term NOT RT
• Simple search: Scion
• Advanced Twitter Search
• Advanced search: Scion 100 miles
• Advanced search: SEO 100 miles

7. Tools.

• TweetDeck – Great to organize information.
  
• Twhirl – Nice if you have mutliple accounts
  
• CoTweet - nice for a team to use a single twitter account
  
• Tynt Tracer – copy and paste text with reference to source.
• How to Change the World
• Tweetie

8. Squeeze the trigger.

TwitterHawk – Keyword based tweets. Automatically generate tweets.

9. Make it easy to share.
Share on facebook button. Share on Twitter button.
Twitterfeed – rss reader to tweet.

10. Heat

Alltop All

MyAlltop

As a supplement, here is a comprehensive list of Twitter apps.

photo by tochis

So, they have talked about it for some time. I just want to say, “it’s here.” Welcome to the age of the conversation. Don’t believe me? Leave me a comment below, and we can talk about it.

The days of standing in an auditorium with a spotlight on stage shouting while the audience obediently listens are over. The era of big broadcast messages on television shows, billboards that clutter every open space, or in the pages of your magazine are reaching the end of their usable lives. People are tired of businesses screaming at them and telling them what to buy, at what price and how many. Now consumers are talking to each other, talking to the businesses, and sometimes even shouting back, a little.

B 2 C (Business to Consumer) is redefined. Under the new definition, Business to Conversation, businesses eavesdrop on the Consumer to Consumer conversation for an opportunity to jump in:

Take Comcast, for example. Have a problem with your cable or internet connection. Jump on Twitter and start talking about your experience. I wager that a friendly tweet will come from @comcastcares trying to help–talking with you about your problems (and not just sleeping on your couch).

Have a problem with Quickbooks? I posted about the diabolic Quickbooks. Within a few hours, Intuit jumps into the conversation pledging assistance.

A friend was raving about a new wireframing application, Balsamiq, through a tweet. They reached out to him and started a conversation about the product. They not only gave him a free license to the product, they offered more licenses to friends. The online conversation that started with a tweet sprang to life as he truly had something to talk about: a great product and a company that engaged.

B 2 C is also flipped to C 2 B. The consumer now has a voice to reach out and talk to businesses. If careful and attentive a business can listen exactly to the needs of their market. What would have required focus groups and millions of dollars in testing is now just a matter listening, which is reserved for the courageous.

After listening to a few raving reviews, I wanted an invite to a cool new application, Boxee, but Alpha testing was backlogged. After my subtle suggestion, Boxee obliged the next day. By gently listening, which in this case required nothing more than a search feed, this company can organically grow their product to interested parties. Compare that with a blairing billboard.

Sometimes the Customers shout a bit more. Glenn Reynolds’ core concept in Army of Davids is that the emerging (conversational) Web and other technological enhancements are allowing the little guy take down giants. For example, conversations between a group of moms in the fall of 2008 forced the Goliath, Motrin, to yank their ads after a short run.

We are truly in a different era that is not fully understood. Some businesses lightly wade into the social sphere to “get the benefits” of the new web, but they are unwilling to truly get wet. Unfortunately, there are some still standing on the dimly lit stage, shouting and no one is listening–they just don’t get it. The age of conversation is here, just listen.

140 characters. That’s all you get. Accept a few terms–no bells and whistles, no groups, no pokes, no pictures. In 140 characters you can talk about walking your dog, report live accounts of breaking news, or link to relevant information. Very basic, right?

Not exactly. I have been on Twitter since April, and it is interesting to follow the social agreement over what is acceptable and what is not. Out of chaos and void, people form rules. If for no other reason: unfollow lurks a click away. Without fanfare or drama you can be dropped or blocked. End of story.

Here are a few:

• Don’t betray me. Don’t use me. Don’t patronize me. This is one of my top rules. Apparently, a number of tweeps agree as seen wtih Magpie.
• Don’t be an asshat–even if you have been drinking.
• Reply if you wanna. “Twitter is Reply-Optional.”
• Auto replies, love ‘em hate ‘em. Is it courteous to send a canned answer when someone follows you? Tweetlater offers some cool tools (like @reply digest), but you can also send a canned DM when someone follows you. Some loathe this.
• Retweet me. Asking for people to retweet doesn’t make sense to me. If you share a message that is unique and interesting people will retweet. Right?
• Groups. Personally, I don’t get it. Why bloat the simplicity?
• Be yourself. Don’t hire someone to write for you. BS detectors are very sensitive on Twitter. As Doug McCaughan says, “Tweet naked” (ie. be honest and transparent.
• Use the right number of characters. Some say leave enough characters to retweet. Others say to use all 140. I think you create relevant content sometimes it is 10 characters and others it is 140.
• Guard your Twitter password. Several months ago, Twitterank allegedly set out to “steal everyone’s password” who waded into their own Narcissist Twitterverse. As it turned out, no tom foolery, but it was a wake up call. For more information on Twitter’s password issues, check out this article.
• Most importantly follow this rule, at least once. We all have to lose a few followers.

Just like “clean up your forwards” and “snopes that shiz” became mandatory rules with email, and all of the delicate and obscure etiquette emerged from BBS and newsgroups, social networks don’t need no stinkin’ rules–we’ll make them ourselves. We tear down signs and erect pillars. Sometimes it is the way we make sense out of this nonsensical world.

I was at an Entrepreneurs of Knoxville meeting last week talking about the interplay between social media sites and main sites (however you define “main sites” blogs, main pages, or otherwise). It reminded me of this slide that I threw together for a client a few months ago:

Interaction of Social Media Sites for Marketing Strategies

It is certainly not a new idea to describe online assets in this way, but I think “hub and spoke” is fairly fitting for the current web environment. Clear execution throughout all channels is important, so engaging in social media requires strategy–although many apply a whimsical approach.

I encourage clients to:

• Identify goals
• Identify appropriate mediums
• Create genuine, quality content–even if it hurts
• Truly engage with others
• Remain active

There is no easy shortcut to crafting your online persona. It takes time and energy to create these networks, but the benefits are significant not only to generating more business but also the learning that occurs in the engagement of others. Hit me here if you would like to discuss more.