A few months ago I finally decided to try out Foursquare, after getting a few different invitations to the service. I quickly set up an account and checked in at a few different places (the office, JP Licks, Starbucks and others). I also used the tips tab to see what other people enjoyed at certain restaurants. One day I was in a new area and needed to find lunch. I ended up at a local pizza shop that had good reviews on foursquare.
After my trial period with Foursquare, I’ve decided that I only enjoy certain features of the social network. It’s great being able to get tips from people that have been to restaurants already, and I will continue to use this feature going forward. However, I really do not want people to know where I am at all times. Since I’m already using Facebook and Twitter (and anyone that is truly a friend follows my updates on Facebook) there is no need to provide another audience with my whereabouts. Foursquare can get a little too personal, especially if it’s letting strangers (i.e.: online friends and others) know my location, especially if I’m away on vacation. (Yes, location-based networks help thieves).
Having reached this decision, I am now using Foursquare in conjunction with Yelp, as a tool that can help me find location places and check reviews. This is how Foursquare provides value to me.
My question is if other feel the same way. Do you believe that foursquare is a little too personal? And how is it different then Twitter or other open social networks?
Reuters issued their social media policy to employees yesterday, and the one thing that’s attracting the most attention is a policy that news should be broken on Reuters.com, not on Twitter:
As with blogging within Reuters News, you should make sure that if you have hard news content that it is broken first via the wire. Don’t scoop the wire. NB this does not apply if you are ‘retweeting’ (re-publishing) someone else’s scoop.
The policy also notes that Reuters employees should have the word “Reuters” in their Twitter user-name and all tweets from that account should be professional, not personal. Facebook and Wikipedia are also briefly discussed, but the breaking news element is quite interesting.
For a while now, reporters have been scrambling to break news first. on Twitter websites, blogs, or anywhere possible. Embargoes are almost entirely a thing of the past (according to TechCrunch they already are the past), and some companies are breaking their own embargoes on Twitter.
So why is Reuters opposed to reporters breaking stories on Twitter?
Quite simply, reporters that have a large, intense Twitter presence are able to turn themselves into a brand, while Reuters and other media outlets want the company to remain the strongest brand. When Bloomberg took over BusinessWeek and sent a significant number of journalists packing, it was the well-known visible people who were laid off. Reuters’ social media policy is meant to keep their reporters reporting factual and reliable news, instead of participating in a second-by-second race to break every last little piece of news.
Today Racepoint Group is launching a new offering – Racepoint Labs – to help companies, communities, causes and countries leverage the power of social media. To mark this launch we sat down with W2 founder Larry Weber, to get his thoughts on what this means for the overall digital marketing landscape.
College admissions can be one of the most difficult times in anyone’s life. It’s a process that offers little control and a lot of chance or dumb luck. Sure, you can work heard to earn good grades, participate in extracurricular activities and do well on the standardized tests, but when admissions staff is going through tens of thousands of submissions, there are a lot of people that may be equally as accomplished. The decision to accept one person over another can seem almost random, and many well-qualified people can be rejected from colleges that their peers are accepted into.
That is why Tufts University’s new policy of accepting YouTube videos is a blast of fresh air. For the first time, applicants can now share their personality, creativity and passions with admissions staff without the stress and nervousness of a sit-down interview. While some people are good writers (and are able to share in the personal essay), other people need different methods of showing who they are. Tufts use of social media is refreshing, especially in a process that can involve so much stress.
Hopefully more colleges will adopt Tufts’ policy and allow applicants the opportunity to demonstrate their abilities through multiple social media platforms that have become such a large part of our lives today. Of course, students must also be careful about what they upload to these sites, as every time of video and picture is available for admissions staff to see.
Below is one video that Tufts included on their admissions page as a demonstration of what they’re looking for.
Earlier this week New York Times business reporter Zachery Kouwe resigned following a plagiarism debacle. While attention was originally drawn to an article that appeared exceptionally similar to a story in The Wall Street Journal, an investigation found that additional articles by Kouwe appear to have been plagiarized from various other media outlets.
Kouwe’s job was focused on writing for the Times‘ DealBook section and blog, which requires relatively short posts and articles about the large amount of business-related news.
While I was not in Kouwe’s position, I’d imagine that he spent most of his days browsing through press releases and news to identify topics for the blog, and used these releases and article as sources for information. Yes, he should have been more diligent in writing this information in his own words, but I don’t think this is entirely his fault – there is a problem with the system.
As blogs and breaking news reporting have taken over our news cycle, reporters have begun using other media outlets as sources more regularly. It’s easy to simply throw in a boxed quote onto a blog post – and enables you to get the information to your readers more efficiently and quickly then re-writing it yourself. However, if Kouwe simple posted large amounts of Wall Street Journal and BusinessWeek content into his articles, the Times’ would suddenly look like the Business Insider – which they definitely don’t want.
While only Kouwe knows if his plagiarism debacle was intentional or not, it’s clear that his job was to produce a lot of content daily through news announcements and articles, because there was no way he had enough time to actually investigate news like in the past. Is it his fault that he wrote his articles a little too carelessly or the Times’ fault for putting him in this position to begin with?
Now that we’ve had almost 48 hours to recover from the Superbowl and a full share of the “Manning face,” it’s time to take a look at the very best commercials from the big game. After all, it is the only three hours of television that isn’t skipped over these days thanks to TiVo and DVR.
Below is a list of our top 10 favorite commercials divided into three categories. Tell us what you think – what was your favorite commercial?
Yesterday Boston Celtics forward Sheldon Williams sent out a tweet with very little information: “Man when it rains it pours!!! Yall will find out what I mean soon!!!!”
Within minutes, NBC and Celtics blogs began speculating what he could be talking about. The first assumption that quickly picked up steam and David Aldridge of NBA.com soon reported that Paul Pierce had a broken foot and would miss a large part of the remainder of the season. People on Twitter were RT’ing each other recklessly, blogs were posting this information at reckless speeds, and this had all come from one very vague tweet.
The something happened – the Celtics put out a statement contradicting the Twitter buzz. It said that Pierce strained his foot and was listed day-to-day. This news was quite different from what was being circulated on the Internet.
Maybe Sheldon Williams was indeed talking about Pierce’s injury – just for the mere fact that he was hurt. Maybe he was talking about something else basketball related, or maybe it was a totally separate subject. In any case, many media members have become so focused on breaking the story first that the accuracy of what they’re reporting suffers.
I don’t blame the reporters for this – they’re just trying to earn a living and make a name for themselves. It’s the structure of reporting that has initiated this change. Twitter’s popularity and 140 character posts have simplified reporting to quick announcements that don’t need sources attached to them. It’s allowed reporters to broadcast news to a large audience quickly and claim their dominance of the story before getting into the details and writing a full article. Often times this is great – it enables people to get information so quickly, like during Apple’s iPad announcement. However, as we saw in this case yesterday, it also increases blind assumptions sacrifices accuracy.
It’s almost time for the Superbowl again, which means companies are getting ready to shell out significant money for a 30-second commercial spot on the one day people actually watch – and look forward to – the commercials. This year’s estimated cost for 30 seconds of airtime: $2.5 million (if only that could go toward creating jobs).
In preparation for the big game, Coca-Cola has debut a sneak preview of a Superbowl add (well, part of one anyway) on their Facebook fan page in order to raise money for the Boys & Girls Club of America (and get some consumer attention). The add can be viewed in the Live Positively tab of the page.
In order to see the commercial – which features the Simpson’s – users must post a gift (a.k.a. post/note) to a friend’s wall. Each gift results in a $1 donation from Coke to the Boys & Girls Club of America, and Coke will donate up to $250,000 total (the equivalent of a 3 second add during the Superbowl).
After sending a gift, users are able to watch a sneak peak of the commercial. While it seems promising (it’s about the country’s economic problems – what else!), I have no idea how it ties into Coke (however, the currently Blackberry commercial on TV has more to do with purchasing a Beatles album on iTunes then it has to do with the Blackberry).
Some waking from a coma this week might think the Apple Tablet is able to find the cure to cancer or create world peace due to all of the attention that it’s getting. There are articles popping up left and right telling us all about this new tablet, even though we still don’t have real confirmation that it exists. It’s overshadowing everything, including President Obama’s speech tomorrow – which seems to be a lot more important then Apple’s rumored new device. Has a gadget ever received so much attention before it was launched or confirmed?
Sure, the Apple Tablet sounds cool – I admit, it should be good for newspapers and magazines if it can provide them with a decent revenue model, but it’s not like people are going to need to purchase this product – it’s very much a luxury. First, it will likely be very expensive, just like all of Apple’s products. This means then a very small percentage of the population will actually purchase one. Second, is a tablet the right product for right now? People have been purchasing smaller mobile devices (smart phones), not larger ones. Since the Tablet won’t fit in your pocket, it simply replaces a laptop, or becomes another gadget for the living room.
I understand that people follow Apple’s every move, but this time it seems a bit overdone (how funny would it be if tomorrow’s announcement is about a completely different topic!) Can we please see the Tablet for what it really is: another device Apple wants us to purchase and add to our collection of gadgets so that we can post tweets and brag about which gadgets we have and how cool they are.
I’m not against the Tablet (although the constant talk is getting pretty old at this point), I’m just questioning how it can possible live up to the hype. If it was some other lesser known company that was developing it, there would be a lot of questions brought up instead of people drooling over the chance to see some photo-shopped picture of the device.
So let’s take a step back and see what the Tablet is all about before we credit it with changing the world.
Disclosure: Racepoint Group works with Sony’s eReader division.
Add “making a joke about blowing up an airport” to the list of what not to tweet.
After a canceled flight disrupted his travel plans, British traveler Paul Chambers (26 years old) wrote on Twitter that he was going to blow the U.K.’s Robin Hood Airport sky high:
Robin Hood airport is closed. You’ve got a week and a bit to get your sh** together, otherwise I’m blowing the airport sky high!!
However, the authorities did not find this particular tweet to be very funny. A week following the post, the man was arrested under the country’s Terrorism Act and question for hours. He was eventually banned from going to this specific airport again
This is not the first time this has happens – but it is the first reported case in the U.K.
