LinkedIn

Corporate Social Media Backlash: The Virtual Firewall

On February 9, 2010, In Biz, By Tac Anderson

In December I predicted that over the next 5 years we would see intranets begin to integrate with social networks. I’ve seen some signs recently that this might take longer than I anticipated (but trust me it will happen).

The intranet is a metaphor for corporate control.

Intranets are secure networks of communication. Employees can safely share information, trusting that it won’t find its way out into untrustworthy hands. With the exception of email sent outside the network almost all communication stays behind the firewall. The firewall works both ways to keep information in and information out. Intranets are siloed and, as they exist today, make it difficult to share information across a company. Just over 10 years ago the Cluetrain Manifesto hypothesized:

the cluetrain manifesto

Corporate firewalls have kept smart employees in and smart markets out. It’s going to cause real pain to tear those walls down. But the result will be a new kind of conversation. And it will be the most exciting conversation business has ever engaged in.

Social media tools have shown an incredible ability to tear down those walls. This has caused a lot of pain and consternation among executives. My last post covered a disturbing email I received from a friend of mine in the financial sector that was being forced to delete their LinkedIn profile because it was considered an individual, professional website.

On the WE Studio D Thinkers and Doers blog I also posted about Forrester forcing all of their employees to shut down their personal blogs if they overlapped with their area of focus at Forrester and would only be allowed to blog about that topic on the forthcoming Forrester blog.

What we are witnessing is the corporate extension of the “firewall” into social media. While this is not an actual firewall it is the way companies are trying to control what would normally happen within or through their firewall.

Shel Holtz has started the Stop Blocking blog to address the problems employees face when their employers flex their firewalls to stop employees from accessing social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter. With the ever increasing capabilities to access these sites via mobile phone that just seems ridiculous. You can’t stop my smart phone, even if I am at work.

All of this seems like a sad attempt to stop the inevitable. Why not work with your employees to reach a win-win instead of trying to stifle them? It just doesn’t make sense to me.

Popularity: 10% [?]

Company Forces Employee to Delete LinkedIn Profile

On February 8, 2010, In Comm, By Tac Anderson

I received a disturbing email from a friend of mine. I have changed the message and obscured any personal or employer reference for obvious reasons.

Due to the recent FINRA (the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Inc) ruling (see below) I will have to take down my LinkedIn profile. The finance industry is so far behind the curve on social media communications it may be a while before my profile is back. In the meantime, feel free to contact me via e-mail or on Facebook (while I can still use it!).

The FINRA has released it’s first member firm communication relative to regulatory treatment of social media communications. Regulatory Notice 10-06, emphasized that all broker-dealer business communications taking place through social networking Web sites such as Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, and LinkedIn are indeed official communications with the public and are subject to all corresponding FINRA supervisory requirements. This Regulatory Notice confirmed that a profile page on LinkedIn is considered an individual registered representative web site

The FINRA does not make the rules. They provide guidance and the individual firms have to create rules based on those recommendations. There’s a lot of room for interpretation. It turns out that while some firms allow for individual representative websites some do not. My friend’s firm obviously does not. I asked another friend in the financial industry on their thoughts (also changed and held anonymously).

My opinion is simple, if you don’t have confidence in the people you hire to deliver the message and give people appropriate information whether on or off the clock then you have hired the wrong people. Our job is rather simple, but most advisers are too lazy to stay well read because all they see is money(commissions) thus it’s easier for companies to just control what their employee’s say.

I have read through the 10-06 document and can’t find any specific recommendations for Facebook vs. LinkedIn. I can only assume that my friends firm determined that LinkedIn is a more professional network and Facebook is more personal. It will be interesting to see how they react as our personal/professional lives continue to converge.

Ars Technica has a good post explaining more details on FINRA 10-06: Brokers must think twice before tweeting, Facebooking

The new guidelines have two broad effects on the way financial firms use social media. First, the new rules attempt to take the traditional distinction between marketing a brand and hawking specific investment products, and to enforce it in online venues that sport a constantly evolving slate of features and functionality, and where the lines between the personal and the professional—or, the personal and the promotional—aren’t always clear.

Has anyone else been effected by this new ruling? Let me know: tac [at] newcommbiz [dot] com.

I think it’s going to be really important to watch, especially as other regulated industries have yet to make up their minds. I’m afraid we’re beginning to see a general backlash against social media by companies unsure what to do with it.

Join the New Comm Biz Facebook Page or follow the Twitter account.

Popularity: 37% [?]

Tagged with: Facebook • FINRA • LinkedIn • Social Networking • The Backlash

You Need Your Own Disclosures Page. Here’s How.

On January 14, 2010, In Comm, By Tac Anderson

Full Disclosure

If you publish content (whatever that may be) about the industry you work in, I think you have an ethical obligation to disclose any potential conflicts.

It is not practical to disclose conflicts of interest in every tweet, blog post, location check in and Facebook status update. You’re going to miss something sometime. So I highly recommend that you build a disclosures page.

With the FTC rules yet to be clarified it’s better to be safe that sorry. The FTC guidelines will require case law to determine what they actually mean and trust me you don’t want to be the case.

This is a really simple fix:

Create one about page for all your disclosures. It doesn’t have to just be disclosures, it can be one all inclusive “about” page.
Link to that page from all of your accounts.

Because I have so many places I publish to I wrote a post on my Posterous site www.tacanderson.com/tac-anderson. On this page I link to all my blogs, my employer and a separate more detailed disclosures page. I now link to this page from all of my profile pages (I’m sure there are a few I’ve missed but as I find them I’ll change them).

This is something that most reporters, especially in the business sector, do. Kara Swisher has an Ethics Statement on her WSJ blog

Kara Swisher | BoomTown | AllThingsD

Here is a statement of my ethics and coverage policies. It is more than most of you want to know, but, in the age of suspicion of the media, I am laying it all out.

From there she links to a page which lists EVERYTHING. She was right that it lists more than you want to know.

What if you don’t have a blog? You could use LinkedIn this way. You could also use a Google Profile page or even a single post to a blog site like Posterous Tumblr or WordPress.

Am I just being paranoid? How are you handling this? Do you have your disclosures posted somewhere? Leave me a link, I’d love to see your approach.

How Gen Y will turn to blogging (tacanderson.com)
Just because you can update all you networks at once doesn’t mean you should (newcommbiz.com)
Six Ways to Expand Your 2.0 Sociability (nettiehartsock.com)
a new take on short-form disclosure (jburg.typepad.com)
FTC takes first steps to regulate blogging (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
FTC: Bloggers must disclose paid reviews (msnbc.msn.com)

Popularity: 3% [?]

Tagged with: Blog • disclosures • Facebook • Google Profile • LinkedIn • Posterous • Tumblr • Twitter • WordPress

How to Manage an Overzealous Manager when Running Social Media

On December 30, 2009, In Comm, By Tac Anderson

: Overzealous Manager

It amazes me that, to this day, I run into employees/agencies still trying to convince their managers/clients that they need to be doing social media. (Really? Still?)

A more common problem that I run in to (and one I’m more than happy to help with) is that management is on board with social media and is relying on them to put together a plan, but they’re not sure where to start and often over worked as it is.

And finally, the one that I sympathize with because I’ve been there over and over again is that their manager is pushing a social media plan or tactic that the employee is not comfortable with. The discomfort is felt when either it’s not the right plan for the strategy (if there even is one) or worse it’s boarder line unethical.

There are plenty of people talking/blogging about points one and two. I’ve even covered these topics before and they are probably worth addressing again, but not right now.

Right now I want to help those growing number of people that are dealing with the last point. Why? As more and more companies enter the social media space, more and more managers, with the best of intentions, will push misguided efforts.

First off we have to help you identify a misguided efforts. I must tell you at this point that if you are not active in social media, at least from the point where you’re reading blogs and books on the topic you’ll have a hard time answering these questions. Of course if that’s the case then you aren’t reading this blog anyway, so we’ll move on.

Ask yourself:

Are we doing this to copy a competitor or because it aligns with our customers?
Does this make logical sense when we step back and take off our marketing hat.
Does this feel right?
Is this transparent?
Is this honest?
Is it real?
Will this achieve the goals management is expecting (and that you’re likely being measured on)?

If you can’t answer all of those questions with a yes, then you have a potential problem. If you answer no to any of those questions you need to go do some research. You need some case studies, examples or at the least some good blog posts explaining why said tactic is wrong.

Don’t go back to management and just tell them you can’t do it, tell them why and offer an alternative.

Where do you go to get these answers? This is where being active in social media pays off. Ask your Twitter followers. Ask a question on FriendFeed, LinkedIn or Facebook. I’ve done all of these and they all work great. You don’t have to give specifics or violate any company sharing policies but ask in generalities about the topic.

Now that you’ve armed yourself with reams of data showing why this is a bad idea, you need to make a convincing presentation not about what not to do and why, but what you should be doing and why. In your backup slides put your arguments why the other plan won’t work, but first try selling management on a better idea before you tell them their baby’s ugly. Leading off with a positive approach is always better received than starting off with a negative.

What if you present your case and no one listens? What if they still want to do the wrong thing? If it’s just strategically wrong, there’s only so hard you can push. If it’s ethically wrong you need to make a choice, and it can be a damn hard one to make. Ask yourself and then ask your management:

Are you willing to ruin your reputation and the reputation of the company over this?

Don’t be afraid to phrase this to your management like that. I have and it worked.

What if you don’t come up with a good reason why not to do something? What if it’s not unethical, devious or even wrong? It just doesn’t *feel* right. You need to ask yourself why are you uneasy with it? I’ve usually found that it’s because of one of three reasons:

You’re not comfortable with how to pull it off
You’re afraid that the tactic won’t deliver the ROI management is after
You’re concerned about the motives behind the request

#1 fortunately there’s a relatively easy solution for this one. Get some help. Either through an agency, consultants, books and blogs or maybe there’s someone in your organization that has more experience than you. I can tell you that I worked on more social media campaigns while at HP for other department than I did my own.

#2 If management is hell bent on doing something you know won’t deliver the results then try to temper expectations and move forward with it. This can be a scary proposition because no one want to be the sacrificial lamb. Cover your bases, document the process and always map back to what outcomes you’re driving and do what you can to pull it off.

#3 Why is management so determined to do marketing tactics even when everyone thinks it’s wrong? I’ve often found it’s because of ego.

I worked for a manager with a company blog who wanted to blog more frequently. The easy solution was to open the blog up as a group blog and get some regular internal contributors. He wouldn’t go for this. The compromise we eventually came up with (instead of ghost blogging) was to get internal guest posters. He insisted that each post have an intro written by him. This caused extra delays in posting and extra work on the teams part to coordinate. Yeah we were playing to his ego, but it’s his blog, his budget and he could do what he wanted.

Knowing when to trust your manager

Finally I’d like to address the hardest lesson for me to learn. Sometimes, your manager, who has no experience with social media, is going to be right and you’re going to be wrong. <cough><cough>

Your manager is *probably* a pretty smart person. They *probably* (hopefully) have a better understanding of the overall business than you do. They *probably* have years more general marketing experience than you do. They *probably* got to be where they are for a good reason. At some point you may have to trust them to make the call. And I have found, more often than not, things turn out alright. They could have probably turned out better (at least we think so) but things turned out okay and everyone had more experience the next time around.

If you do your homework, things will rarely turn out as bad as people sometimes imagine. We love to focus on the social media disasters. In reality there are far more examples of successes (small and big) out there than failures. Don’t let the bloggers and consultants preaching FUD get to you. Not every effort will be a home-run, but very few will be a disaster.

This post is an Updated Post. An Updated Post is where I take an older post and update it based on current thinking or examples. The original post can be found here: Managements Misguided Social Media Efforts

2010: The Year of Quality, Not Quantity (markevanstech.com)
Social Media Outsourcing: Good Business or Fake Dialogue? (socialwebschool.com)
Being a Social Media Ninja (newcommbiz.com)
The Time I was Written Up for Blogging (newcommbiz.com)
What the Heck is a Lifestream? (newcommbiz.com)

Popularity: 3% [?]

Tagged with: Add new tag • Blog • Business • Facebook • LinkedIn • Marketing • Social media • Twitter

Will 2010 be the Death of Free and Open?

On November 30, 2009, In New, By Tac Anderson

: Image via Wikipedia

Arrington, I’m really sorry, this seriously sucks.

Mike Arrington can’t get a break. His Last startup, before TechCrunch became his full-time gig, Edgio, DeadPooled 2 years ago and now the CrunchPad joins it’s much older sibling in that same grave almost exactly 2 years later.

This is disconcerting to me for a few reasons:

I know how hard it is to lose a startup. It sucks more than anything I’ve gone through.
I really believed Arrington was on to something and was excited to see a content company join the hardware fray.

But what really, really concerns me is what this could be an indicator of.

Open Collaboration

Arrington’s approach with the CrunchPad mirrors very closely the model laid out in the book Collaborative Entrepreneurship. From Amazon:

Collaborative Entrepreneurship: How Communities of Networked Firms Use Continuous Innovation to Create Economic Wealth: Today, the ability of firms to innovate is restricted by barriers both inside the firm and within their existing markets—barriers that produce limited knowledge utilization and incremental innovations. “Collaborative Entrepreneurship” describes how these barriers can be overcome so that shared knowledge can drive continuous, sustained innovation across a network of firms and markets.

The book is very theoretical but prophetic at the same time. I know that the scenarios they lay out in the book won’t come to fruition exactly the way they predict but I do believe they’ll come about in some form.

I loved the blog, hardware crossover Arrington was taking. Hardware is tough. Really, really tough. I always stayed away from business plans that required hardware. Too many hard costs, too many headaches. Arrington’s trials are proof of that.

Cross company collaboration is probably even harder. Even the poster child for open collaboration, Wikipedia seems to be cracking under the pressure:

Free vs IP

What about Cris Anderson and the promise we were given in his book, Free: The Future of a Radical Price? The real irony is that even Chris struggles to reinvent Wired and their business.

I’m also a big fan of Cory Doctorow and his new book Makers which may be more accurate than any non-fiction business book:

The decline and fall of America and the boundless optimism of open source/hacker culture
Brilliant geeks in a garage, are trash-hackers who find inspiration in the growing pile of technical junk
Cheap and easy 3D printing, a cure for obesity and crowd-sourced theme parks

Both Chris and Cory support open/mixed/free (whatever you want to call it) business models. The CrunchPad is the counterpoint to their argument. Greed is the reason we have lawyers and IP laws. It’s a sad reality we have been trying to fight since Gen X started taking corporate jobs.

Content Ownership and Advertising

2010 could be the year that Murdoch pulls his content from Google and hundreds of publishers could follow suit if he’s at all successful. I firmly believe that a publisher should be allowed to do whatever they want with their content but it does move counter to this free and open trend we’ve been living off of.

Hulu’s been great but they are slowly adding more and more ads to their programming, negating half the reason so many of us have flocked to it.

Apple (which made the opposite move Arrington was shooting for, from hardware to content) has recently filed patents for unskippable ads on their devices: Apple Files Patent for Un-skip-able Ads on iPhones, iPods

Even Google, the original purveyors of this free and open movement have been slowly adding more adds to their content to the point that some worry about the lines they may be crossing. Google Experiments With Paid Inclusion & Does “Promoted” Meet FTC Guidelines?

Where’s the Money?

Finally what really worries me is the lack of sustainable revenue from the big social media companies we rely on. Twitter is finally taking the easy fix with advertising and away from their promised premium and value add revenue models.

LinkedIn, Digg, Technorati and Facebook have gotten so huge and taken in so much VC money that the only reasonable exit strategy is an IPO. But none of them have the revenue to support that strategy yet. As this recession plods on and some begin to talk about a possible second dip, despite this “jobless recovery,” You have to wonder what will the big social networks do? How desperate to monetize will they be? Will they be able to deliver on the promise we all bought off on?

Or have the last 5 years been a departure from reality and the fact of the matter is that advertising is the only option and you should never openly collaborate and any collaboration joint venture should only be done with legions of lawyers at your side?

I believe in the open nature of the Internet. I have always believed that open is better than closed. I truly believe that open collaboration is the greatest approach to creating value and economic wealth. But for the first time I have doubts that it’s an unstoppable force.

Murdoch extends WSJ Paywall to iPhone (vator.tv)
Get the “Free: The Future of a Radical Price” Book for Free (bradblogging.com)
An Interview with Retweet.com about Ripping off Tweetmeme.com (newcommbiz.com)
Twitter and Distributed Influence (newcommbiz.com)

Popularity: 1% [?]

Tagged with: Cory Doctorow • CrunchPad • Digg • Facebook • Google • LinkedIn • Mike Arrington • TechCrunch • Technorati • Wikipedia

Conversations as Data: We need new UI

On March 31, 2009, In Comm, By Tac Anderson

Image by monsieurlam via Flickr

This is another one of my thinking/blogging out loud posts so your feedback is appreciated and encouraged. I would also like to note that I am not a programmer and I’m sure my description of databases and UI is laughable to anyone that knows what they’re doing but these analogies work for my purposes

I don’t think anyone (or at least anyone reading this) would argue that the Web is evolving at an exponential rate.

I’ve begun to think of the Web and our activities on it in a new way. It reminds me of the way archeologists discover ancient cities.

You have one layer that may be the aqueducts or catacombs with a city built on top. Then a major war, volcano or new ruler comes along, wipes everything out and builds a whole new city right on top of the old one.

Databases and the Old Web

At the core of everything we do on the Web are countless numbers of databases processing 0’s and 1’s. On top of that raw data programmers and designers build user interfaces (UI) that allow us to read and interact with that data.

Web 2.0

A lot of the meaning was lost behind the buzz around Web 2.0 but at the core (my definition) Web 2.0 is the capabilities behind social media. RSS, AJAX, etc have enabled the programming inept (aka regular people) to become mini-media empires.

We can start a blog (or several), fill out dozens of social profiles, join social networks like Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn and easily start reaching hundreds of people interested in what we have to say. If we are moderately good at it we can reach thousands with very little extra effort.

The problem is that all of those millions of conversations, in aggregate, become as un-consumable as the raw data that lays at the core.

So with the Old Web the database was processed into a consumable UI and with Web 2.0 that database is filtered with a UI that allows us to then create more data in the form of conversations.

What I see happening now is only the tip of the iceberg; we are creating new layers of user interfaces to aggregate and consume that conversation data.

Look at sites like Alltop, ExecTweets or the recently announced Tinker. These are efforts to create another layer of UI over the conversation data.

As marketers I think a huge opportunity is to harness past, present and future conversation data in targeted efforts using a new layer of of aggregation UI.

How would this work?

Imagine you want to target Moms. Let’s also imagine that your company has a company blog or several blogs that contain useful information for moms (even if you don’t this would still work). To date the main approach has been to sponsor popular mom blogs. There’s nothing wrong with this but I think companies could take it to the next level.

Why not create a site that integrates the best blog content across several, if not dozens of, mom blogs as well as content from your company blogs (past content)? The site would also aggregate real time posts from select mommy blogs as well as your company blogs while simultaneously integrating Twitter and creating a presence on Facebook (present content). The site and the Facebook pages would also encourage and reward participation from moms (future content).

I think that as conversation data continues to explode (and believe me, it will)marketers need to look at this as a huge opportunity not a problem. Let’s get creative and innovate around not just our products but how we communicate with our customers.

Popularity: 1% [?]

Tagged with: Alltop • Facebook • LinkedIn • RSS • Social media • Social network • Twitter • Web 2.0

Is there an end in site for companies that raise large VC rounds?

On January 26, 2009, In Biz, By Tac Anderson

It scars me when I see social networking sites like LinkedIn, Facebook and now Twitter raising large (read huge) follow on rounds. Twitter Raising New Cash At $250 Million Valuation

If you raise VC money, you have to have an exit at some point. If you’re raising this kind of money it makes it really hard to get acquired, which leaves an IPO as the only viable option. In this market, with the banks in the situation they are in, who’s going to back a public offering.

Either these guys are going to have to figure out something or some people are going to loose an awful lot of money.

Popularity: 1% [?]

Tagged with: Facebook • LinkedIn • Twitter • Valuations • VC

Social Media is not a back channel

On January 21, 2009, In Comm, By Tac Anderson

: Image by Getty Images via Daylife

Peter Shankman has a great story about an agency guy that tweets about his distaste for Memphis while visiting FedEx to do some social media training. Oops. He got busted big time.

People have a tendency to get comfortable social media. Too
comfortable. There’s no shortage of examples where people post
incriminating photo’s on their Facebook or MySpace pages.Â This is a problem that’s only going to get worse.

Like many HPers, I first joined Yammer after they won TechCrunch50.
I was first excited about the product (and I think it has a lot of
potential) but for me I didn’t find much to post there that I wouldn’t
post on Twitter. I think it has potential for two reasons:

Some employees like the idea of Twitter but don’t want something so much out in the open
There are things you may want to say to employees that you wouldn’t say on Twitter

TechCruch reports that Yammer has just raised it’s first round of funding. Yammer Raises $5 Million For Workgroup Micro-Messaging
So other people obviously feel it has potential as well.Â Yammer has a
nice business model. It’s free to any employee with a company email. If
you want to control this group, say exclude people who have left the
company since signing up, or brand your companies page, there’s a per
user fee. This is great for small businesses who want a company wide
back channel, this doesn’t make sense for large enterprise customers. I
haven’t checked recently but I’m sure that if they don’t know, at some
point they’ll offer enterprise licensing.

In last week’s core community group the issue of Yammer came up. (I’ve mentioned our core community group before and written about it on my HP blog.)
The question was basically “What do we do about this?” It’s a very
valid question. The Yammer community is kind of a HP community, but no
one at HP gave them permission. The concern is that employees will
treat this like an official HP communication channel. Or just get a
little too comfortable with it and start saying too much.

HP has an official policy in our standards of business conduct which
applies to all company communication, to paraphrase: you don’t share
privilaged information through non secure channels. This means you
don’t send email to the wrong people, you don’t talk about certain
things outside of work, etc.

I quickly made the point that Yammer is no different than Ning, Facebook groups, LinkedIn
groups or anyother employee group, of which there are many. Anyone
could star a group for employees and people do. The thing to remember
is that these are not official and secure channels.

We will see a time where someone screws this up. Hopefully not at HP
but someone at some company will. We’re not perfect. Just like people
say the wrong things in email and to the wrong reporter, people make
mistakes.

I’m proud to say that the group at HP didn’t freak out and didn’t
try and shut it down. Instead we decided to make sure that our business
conduct standards are emphasized and updated to explicitly include
social media platforms.

Popularity: 1% [?]

Tagged with: Facebook • HP • LinkedIn • MySpace • Twitter • Yammer

Death to Social Media and their Experts!!

On January 15, 2009, In Comm, By Tac Anderson

Normally I hate the whole “Death to/of…is dead” whatever, blog titles but I couldn’t resist.

There’s a great article on CNET about the burst of the social media bubble. The particular bubble is the one where every consultant and marketing blogger has been calling themselves “social media experts.”
Marketing: Social media’s hidden bubble | The Social – CNET News

A search for “social media expert” on business networking site LinkedIn yields 175 results. “Social media consultant” yields nearly 400, and “social media strategist” about 300.

When you specialize in a certain area it’s hard to not want to call yourself an *expert* in that area. Hell I’m pretty sure I’ve used the word expert from time to time although it makes me cringe every time I do it.

Just like all *tags* that we use; Web 2.0, Social Media, expert, etc, it’s a way to shortcut a prolonged description.

If I had my way I’d say I’m a passionate and experienced social media guy. I like that better but it even sounds weird.

The differentiation I’d like to make is that I’ve done the stuff I talk about. Am I an expert? I don’t know, what makes someone an expert? I get paid to do social media by one of the largest brands in the world. At the least that makes me a professional social media marketer.

But is “social media marketing” even the right phrase?

I’ve noticed Peter Kim has been using the terms Social Computing and Social Business.

Marketing causes social computing impotence.

The presence of reverb doesn’t surprise me.Â I’ve been thinking about hundreds of social media marketing examples and the majority appear to be the unfortunate output of unevolved agency thinking on channel integration.

I believe that social technologies have the power to transform the way we live and work.Â So why should we have anything less than transformation in mind when putting social technologies to use?

Our efforts need to aim forward, not backward.Â We need to improve what we do today with the ultimate goal of changing the way we work and connect with co-workers, customers, suppliers, shareholders, and other system participants.Â Social technologies should change the world of work – applied to not just to marketing and IT, but also HR, finance, legal, and every other functional area.Â And potentially change the functions that exist at all.

I couldn’t agree with Kim even more. My very first post to this blog was about how new/social/media/Web 2.0, whatever, is so much more than just Marketing.

But what do we call it? Who cares.

When I was an undergrad in the mid 90’s we called it Computer Mediated Communications. That obviously didn’t stick around.

In a few years Social Media probably won’t be around either.

I’m not a branding guy. I hate crafting copy and taglines or any of that stuff. I love communicating. I love how the computer and the Internet has changed the way we interact as human beings.

Whatever we call it I’m in for the long haul. I’ll continue to do whether I’m paid or not. I just want to do cool stuff.

Ultimately I don’t think an expert is something that you can call yourself. I think it’s the result of experience.

So get out there and do stuff.

Popularity: 5% [?]

Tagged with: Business • LinkedIn • Marketing • Social Business • Social media • Web 2.0

New Comm Biz

Social Media and the Future of Business

You Need Your Own Disclosures Page. Here’s How.