BackType Connect for WordPress
BackType announced the availability of a new BackType Connect plugin for standalone WordPress blogs; http://tr.im/iuV3
BackType announced the availability of a new BackType Connect plugin for standalone WordPress blogs; http://tr.im/iuV3
Google Reader copies the comment function of FriendFeed with a few key distinctions; http://tr.im/hjRH
Blackshaw believes that the future of marketing is about marketing to marketers; http://tr.im/hjR2
Google started an official Twitter account: @Google has found >5.ooo followers within 7 hours; http://tr.im/gNhG
Jarvis and Edelman are discussing the future of PR: nothing more, nothing less; http://tr.im/gHq1 – http://tr.im/gHq2
Edelman: “In Jeff’s world, companies speak directly with consumers, giving up control of product development, focusing on customer service instead of marketing/advertising, building strong relationships within communities of interest. Public relations actually plays a vital role in this new construct by making valuable information easily accessible and open for improvement. We provide big ideas that bring together constituencies (such as the Quaker Oats Substance) for action. We also offer advice to companies, encouraging them to take on the big issues of our day that inspire employees while offering new opportunities to make money. – So Jeff, will you reconsider your blanket condemnation and acknowledge that PR folks are at least better off than lawyers doomed to be ‘disintermediated, undercut and exposed’!”
Jarvis: “But perhaps there the possibility of creating a new kind of agency that is really is owned by the public – the people formerly known as consumers – that is so good as representing customers that companies gain credibility by working with it and paying attention to its precepts. That, I think, is what Doc Searls is trying to build with VRM: a platform for that new relationship. Is that the new agency? … What do you think? Can PR live by the ethos of the internet age: open, honest, transparent, collaborative? Is the inside-out agency possible? Or does the paycheck rule the relationship?“
Zuckerberg wants Facebookers trust: Why doesn’t he simply change the TOS and trusts his users? – http://tr.im/glsx
Zuckerberg: “Even if the person deactivates their account, their friend still has a copy of that message. We think this is the right way for Facebook to work, and it is consistent with how other services like email work. One of the reasons we updated our terms was to make this more clear. – In reality, we wouldn’t share your information in a way you wouldn’t want. The trust you place in us as a safe place to share information is the most important part of what makes Facebook work. Our goal is to build great products and to communicate clearly to help people share more information in this trusted environment.”
TC: “Zuckerberg is saying, ‘Trust us.’ But it is difficult to trust a company that is stripping users of rights they’ve become accustomed to, even if hardly any of them ever actually asserted those rights in practice. And the principle that you should be able to delete your data from the Facebook service is one that many would argue trumps the good that is done by letting Facebook keep it.”
Mashable: “Once again though – like with Beacon and the Facebook re-design revolt – Facebook has done a poor job of communicating the changes, leaving Zuckerberg on the defense instead of proactively keeping users informed on potentially controversial moves the company is making.”
NYT: “Greg Lastowka, an associate professor at the Rutgers School of Law who is writing a book on Internet law, said Facebook’s language was not unusual. “Most Web sites today offer terms of service that are designed to protect and further the interests of the company writing the terms, and most people simply agree to terms without reading them.’ … ‘Zuckerberg’s response to the protest is just the modern version of ‘Ignore the fine print, ma’am, just sign here,’’ Mr. Frere-Jones wrote in an e-mail message. ‘Why would anyone trust a company with his or her personal information, especially when that company’s explicit legal language claims eternal rights to exploit that information, and there is good reason to expect that they will?’”
Scoble: “Truth is it doesn’t matter. – If you are uploading your content to, and participating online with, you are giving a HUGE amount of ownership to services that, well, you really don’t control. … So, relax, have fun, just realize you’re here to serve Facebook, not necessarily the other way around.“
http://TwitterHawk.com automatically sends @replies on given topics: highly interesting idea but close to spam?
Duell, TwitterHawk: “First of all, we do not in any way condone using TwitterHawk for aggressive SPAM based marketing tactics to harass or annoy people with advertising material on a regular basis. – With that said, we acknowledge that notifying someone of relevant information or services based on their tweet content may in fact add value to their twitter experience. We view this in the same way that Google Adwords provides non intrusive offers to users based on the keywords they told Google about – but without this being forced upon them or annoying them. – Therefore, in the spirit of allowing contact with people for relevant, targetted information but not wanting to annoy them with harassing advertising, we have just put in place further restrictions on the use of TwitterHawk, the frequency of messages has been reduced to allowing only one per DAY per twitter account. – We may in fact increase these restrictions again in future based on our observation of Twitterhawk account owners if we believe that the service is being abused or causing the Twitter community unwanted problems. – We did not expect such in explosion on use of the tool and considerably underestimate it’s effect on the social medium. Which is why our number one focus right now is ensuring that Twitterhawk adds value to all those who come in contact with the service.”
Does direct, real time feedback via Facebook have any impact on WEF‘s sessions? Proabably: yes; http://tr.im/e43m
Tip @Techmeme suggests stories to Techmeme via Twitter; works even with shortening services: http://tr.im/dgh7
AdAge; “If you’re trying to break into this industry and you’re not on Twitter, you’re missing out”; http://tr.im/czl3
TC: “Conversations in Google Reader are only be visible to friends of the user who originally shared a story (FriendFeed allows comments to be displayed to the public with input from users who aren’t your friends). … There’s apparently no way to export the conversations that are held on Google Reader.”
Mashable: “It’ll be interesting to see the reaction to this from bloggers. Hopefully Google decides to make comments exportable, so we can include them in the commenting section of blogs, the way we currently do here on MashableMashable reviewsMashable reviews with our “social media comments” feature. ”
RWW: “Google has been relatively slow to add social features to Google Reader and most of the discussions around shared items now happen on other services like FriendFeed and Facebook. It will be interesting to see if users will actually use this new feature in large numbers, but it is definitely an interesting addition to Google Reader.”