Facebook abuse

I've been waiting to hear a story like this one. It completely supports my hypothesis that more than anything, sites like Facebook are stalking mechanisms.

So, a friend of my co-worker Jim has an ex girlfriend he can't quite get rid of. I'm talking a year after they've been broken up she's still constantly contacting him to hang out. Anyway, through what one could assume was an exercise in online stalking, said ex recently discovered that Jim's friend is seeing someone new.

Now, most (normal) people I know would accept this fact and move on. Those who are captivated by the ease of online stalking clearly behave otherwise. The ex used Facebook to send rather nasty messages to Jim's friend's new lady. Seriously?!

My friend Eddie Radshaw contends that Facebook doesn't create stalkers like the ex in question; rather, it empowers them. He reasons that this girl probably also stalks in real-world terms. I'm not so sure I agree with him. Sending an evil Facebook message seems rather innocuous compared with showing up at someone's apartment uninvited, for example.

So does Facebook create stalkers, or does it simply make stalking easier for existing stalkers? As a non-stalker, I'm not so sure. I'm inclined to think that perhaps it does a bit of both...

Too much information?

For the record, Technorella really isn't a sappy girl. In fact, she might be the anti-sappy girl.

But sometimes she has a soft spot - as indicated by the following reaction to a Facebook update.

Long ago - when I was in college, and for a couple of years after - I dated one of the nicest, best guys I've ever known. But it just wasn't right and I ended up breaking his heart pretty badly. We don't talk much; I like to stay friends with exes, but it just didn't work out that way with this one. We're Facebook friends and that's about it.

Sooo... I was just checking out Facebook, and looking at my recently updated friend profiles. And this ex - we'll call him Fred - had an update that said: "Almost 6 years to the day since an earthquake woke me up in the middle of the night."

He lives in Chicago now - and the profile refers to last night's Midwestern quake. It also refers to a mini-earthquake that happened when we were together in undergrad in Vermont.

It was just the smallest thing... but I'm not sure anyone else would have had the same reaction to his profile update as I did. I was there with him for the Vermont earthquake... and it made me think about our relationship for the first time in a long time. Part of me wonders if he knew I'd read it... part of me thinks it was just a passing comment. Either way, I guess this is the first time a Facebook interaction with someone who used to be in my life kind of got to me in a real way. Not to sound too sappy or anything...

What are Social Networks, Really?

I've been perusing the news over the last few days to find something interesting and blog-worthy... but nothing has really grabbed me.

So, I went to Google and typed in "social networking" simply to see what popped up first. I thought this might help generate a blog topic idea. Anyway, the first thing I saw was a Wikipedia definition... check it out:

"A social network service uses software to build online social networks for communities of people who share interests and activities or who are interested in exploring the interests and activities of others. Most services are primarily web based and provide a collection of various ways for users to interact, such as chat, messaging, email, video, voice chat, file sharing, blogging, discussion groups, and so on.

Social networking has revolutionized the way we communicate and share information with one another in today's society. Various social networking websites are being used by millions of people everyday on a regular basis and it now seems that social networking is a part of everyday life."

Since Technorella is completely obsessed with the way online social networking sites (mainly Facebook) have influenced the way people communicate, it perhaps goes without saying that what I find most interesting is that inherent in the Wikipedia definition is the implication that social networks "have revolutionized the way we communicate and share information." If Wikipedia says so, it must be true, right?

I find it interesting how much social networking sites are taken for granted as a communications mechanism. They didn't even really exist five years ago, and now they're considered mainstream and integral to our social interactions. Oh, how time flies in the online world...

Does not being on Facebook mean you're a social outcast?

"Jim" from my office and I have been reviewing resumes of soon-to-be college grads to join our team this summer. One of Jim's favorite techniques (being a few years younger than me and a Facebook expert) is checking out the candidates' profiles on Facebook. Naturally.

Anyway, thanks to people coming their senses and making their information private, there's not a lot to learn about these kids on Facebook (aside from if they're cute enough to meet Jim's standards). But, a few of the candidates actually weren't on Facebook at all. According to Jim, this made them suspect.

With the younger generation, it seems that an absence from online social networks sets off alarm bells. And I can kind of understand Jim's perspective; if everyone that age is Facebooking right and left, what kind of person doesn't participate? Sure, my friends aren't all on Facebook - but the site didn't even exist until I left college. We communicated via IM and, yes, landline phones when I was doing my undergrad. Facebook is such a given, on the other hand, with people several years my junior that it's hard to think of someone opting out.

Again, it comes back to the role Facebook, and social networking sites, play in our day-to-day lives. In this instance, choosing not to participate on some level is apparently a professional deal-breaker. At least, it is when someone like Jim is making the decisions...

She's Baaaacccckkkk!

So, a few days ago, Technorella blogged about her roommate's abrupt departure from Facebook. Turns out, it didn't last long... she wrote a message on my wall yesterday saying she was bored in class (she's a law student) and decided to reactivate her profile.

Here's what's interesting: it took her all of two seconds to re-join Facebook. They were beyond happy to have her back and made the process as simple as possible. I guess Facebook knows that quitting is hard. And it's not so easy to leave the online social sphere.

Sending shockwaves through my social network

This is why I am too old for Facebook (yes, Technorella just turned 28). So, the other day I rather innocently updated my Facebook profile. I changed my picture, edited some of my "favorites," accepted new friends, and removed my "dating status" from my profile.

The rationale behind said dating status change was not anything significant; I'd accepted a couple of friends from work and didn't want to be broadcasting that kind of information to my co-workers.

But, no sooner than I'd deleted it from my profile than I received a series of Facebook messages (and text messages) about it. My friends wanted to know: was I still single?

Seriously. I'm not trying to be a grinch, but I'm just not that calculating of a person. I wasn't trying to say ANYTHING by deleting my dating status. My goal was to say less, not more.

So... apparently I need to be more careful with my Facebook profile. I guess the smallest moves online can have massive consequences...

Bold move...

Wow. So, last night I went to dinner to celebrate my birthday. Somehow we got to talking about social networking - focusing on the lack of personal privacy thanks to sites like Facebook.

Long story short, when we got home, my roommate made the bold (and relatively novel) decision to completely eliminate her Facebook profile. Just like that, she's gone from the online social networking world.

Her reasons? She simply didn't feel like she wanted the whole world to know her business. Most of her Facebook "friends" were completely superfluous from her "real world." She was tired of being subject to online stalking. Nothing major prompted this decision, mind you. Really, she just didn't see the value of it anymore.

As much as I rant about the validity of Facebook "friendships," I have to admit - I'm TOTALLY not ready to give it up. Maybe I'm becoming an addict, or maybe I find it a fun distraction from time-to-time. Either way, for me, it's kind of like once you start, you can't stop. Apparently my roommate felt otherwise about her weak social ties...

It's been a while...

Apologies for the blog hiatus: work has been crazy and Technorella was traveling this past weekend. But, thanks to Eddie Radshaw I'm back in the game. This article on CNET talks about the upcoming launch of Publish2 - a social network for journalists.



Publish2 will launch this spring. It's goal:


Publish2 brings together the most interesting and informative news headlines on the web, from mainstream and blog sources, on a wide range of topics. These headlines are chosen by journalists across the country, making Publish2 one of the most trustworthy, informative, and interesting news sources on the web.


According to the article, Publish2 "aims to bolster journalism by giving newsrooms and journalists the tools to save articles from around the Web and network with others in the field."

Hmmm. It really does look like highly targeted social networks on on the rise. But on the flip side, Facebook continues to promote itself as the "go to" social network. I'm curious to see whether the tide goes the way of specific, mini networks or a "one size fits all" approach. Maybe it will be both. I personally can't fathom finding the time to be part of multiple social networks... but maybe that's just me...

Social Networking Meets Open Source

Check out this article on open source applications for social networking sites.

Ringside Networks has launched a Social Application Server that is "the first open source platform that enables website owners to build and deploy social applications that operate with existing website content and business applications while seamlessly integrating with social networks such as Facebook."

According to the article:

"The idea is to make it easier to add social application features, like user profiles, friends, and groups, to existing Web sites and to create close interoperability with Facebook, where there are 19,000 third-party applications.

Applications written for Ringside Networks' "social application engine" will run on Facebook. People can also share information with Facebook, such as user log-ins."

According to the company, this provides three key advantages:

• Maximizes existing investments by making corporate websites and business applications socially aware.
• Ensures social applications can be customized to meet the unique needs of your business.
• Leverages your existing corporate website brand, look and feel.

To Technorella, two things about this new application are most interesting.

First, I think it's interesting that Ringside is focusing mainly on Facebook (versus other social networking sites like MySpace) with this application. It seems like Facebook is rapidly becoming the de facto social networking site of choice.

Second, and most obviously, is the use of open source technology in the social networking arena. It's nice to see Tim Burners-Lee's vision of "open everything" continuing to dominate the online world.

Could Social Networking Change the World?

Maybe this is a bit of a digression, but I'm stuck on this New York Times Op-Ed. We are spending $5,000 per second on the Iraq war. According to the article, which discusses economist Joseph Stiglitz's new book:

"Professor Stiglitz calculates in a new book, written with Linda Bilmes of Harvard University, that the total costs, including the long-term bills we’re incurring, amount to about $25 billion a month. That’s $330 a month for a family of four.

A Congressional study by the Joint Economic Committee found that the sums spent on the Iraq war each day could enroll an additional 58,000 children in Head Start or give Pell Grants to 153,000 students to attend college. Or if we’re sure we want to invest in security, then a day’s Iraq spending would finance another 11,000 border patrol agents or 9,000 police officers."

My question is this: why isn't anyone listening to this? Why aren't young people up in arms about the future of this country? Why is the audience for this kind of message limited to Limousine Liberal NYT readers?

There has to be a way to harness the power of online social networks to engage a younger audience. I know a lot of politicians are trying - but it doesn't seem to be working. I don't have an answer - but I think politicians, writers, academics and activists need to better take advantage of "weak social ties" in a real and genuine way. Online social networks could - if used properly - become an agent of social and political change.

Starbucks Tries Social Networking

My friend Eddie Radshaw just sent me an article about Starbucks' new social networking site. "My Starbucks" provides a forum for customers to offer up ideas and suggestions to the company.

The article highlights Starbucks' ongoing use of digital technology to engage/attract customers:

"You could say the company is as aggressive with its Internet campaigns as it is with its prices. There is Wi-Fi in the stores, they let you log onto iTunes to see what song is playing in the store and download it, let you use text messaging to find the nearest store, and they gave away free digital songs for a month last year."

I'm interested to see how Starbucks' use of online/digital technologies pans out. On the one hand, you could say Starbucks is ahead of the curve. But does that make the company more profitable? Starbucks' growth is at it's slowest pace in two years. Most of us following business news know about Howard Schultz's return to the company's CEO spot (after 7 years off the job) to revamp the company.

What do social networks, Wi-Fi and iTunes mean for business? In my mind, not much. Starbucks' drinks are pricey. To me, a $5 coffee drink is completely ridiculous - especially since the customer experience in a Starbucks is borderline terrible. If I'm going to spend big on a coffee drink, I'd prefer to do so in a "coffee house" environment - rather than a cookie-cutter Starbucks. But maybe that's just me - I'm from Northern California, where independent coffee houses are arguably the backbone of our culture.

Either way, I think Starbucks has its work cut out for it. Cutting-edge digital technology may help - I'm just not sure how much.

A Real, Live Social Networking Expert...

Technorella interviewed a real-life social networking expert to get a fresh perspective on what it's all really about - especially with the younger set. After all, I joined the online social networking sphere just recently, and still don't consider it a part of my day-to-day life.

In my mind, a "real" social networking expert isn't a professional. It's someone who uses sites like Facebook and MySpace habitually and regularly. So I spoke with "Jim" (who prefers to remain anonymous). Jim is 24 and was a freshman in college when Facebook launched. In other words, he was a Facebooker from the very beginning.

Most interestingly, Jim is friends with Kevin Colvin, who made it onto CNN (in addition to Rolling Stone Magazine) due to a Facebook photo blunder. Colvin's story gained considerable traction in the blogosphere and eventually made national news headlines.

What happened? Last Halloween (which was on a Thursday), Colvin (a senior in college) sent an email to his bosses at the bank where he was interning. In his email, he claimed he would be unable to show up to work on Friday, November 1st due to a family emergency.
Apparently, he was always making excuses for not coming in. And it was the day after Halloween. So Colvin's boss looked him up on Facebook (to check his story) and found a photo of him dressed as a fairy at a Halloween party. It pretty much speaks for itself.


Colvin's boss - upon finding the photo - sent him an email, which included the photo, a (sarcastic) note of empathy regarding his "family emergency" and, added a P.S. of "nice wand." The email went viral because Colvin's boss bcc-ed the entire company on the email.


Below are some exerpts from my conversation with Jim.

Q. Why do you think the blogosphere and news media latched onto this story?
This was a social networking case study that everyone had been waiting for. It shows how Facebook can intersect with the business world.

Q. So, what do you and your friends think about what happened?

We thought it was hilarious when it happened - and knowing the kid, it was great. But, it was also unprofessional that the email went to the whole company. This could have completely ruined his career. The email made its way to all of Wall Street within half an hour. I had it forwarded to me by multiple friends within ten minutes. It was all over Internet... tons of blogs were posting about it.

Q. How did Colvin respond to the whole thing?

At first, he thought it would totally blow over... but it was everywhere. I heard that he threatened the bank with litigation because his boss violated the company's privacy provisions, and was offered a permanent position upon graduation.

Q. Has this changed the way you approach Facebook (and other social networking sites you belong to?)

Honestly, we started to see it as a potential problem. So most of my friends changed our profiles and made most of our information private. It also made me realize that an internship in college could still have an effect on your professional career after you graduate.

Colvin wasn't conscientious enough on Facebook. People just have to be careful with Facebook, work email and the intersection between their social lives and their work lives. Anyone who doesn't accept that there is no "known fine line" between business and personal spheres is kidding themselves.

Facebook versus LinkedIn: Job Recruiting via Social Networks

I've expressed my utter dissatisfaction with LinkedIn as a viable recruiting tool in previous posts. It actually drives me insane to spend hours interviewing candidates who are not really in the market to be poached.

Well, it appears that Facebook may also become a recruiting tool in some sectors. This hypothesis isn't based on a set of statistics - but on the fact that someone on my team at work was just contacted by a headhunter on the site.

To me, this concept raises a host of issues. Will one social network (Facebook, for example) become the global be-all-and-end-all? Or, will social networking continue to become more focused and fragmented- with users joining specialized social networking sites specific to their geographic locations, interests, etc.?

From an ethical/privacy standpoint, I think there are, again, a series of issues that come to the fore. Facebook is supposed to be a way of connecting with friends; does corporate infiltration somehow violate the very point of the site? I'm not sure I want headhunters looking at my tagged photos. Nor do I want to deal with these kinds of (typically stalker-esque) individuals when really, I'm visiting Facebook to see photos from the party I bailed on last weekend, or to play poker with my little brother.

Maybe recruiting and other solicitations via social networking sites are Web 2.0's version of spam. Food for thought on a Monday (as I continue trying to find a good candidate to fill an open position at my company).

Sunday Blog...

As usual, my Sunday blog entry is more personal than not. But hey, it's been a big weekend.

So, a friend of mine from my old job was in town on Friday. We worked together in Washington, DC but now he lives in Philly with his wife and two kids. He also changed career paths... needless to say, we don't keep in touch regularly at all - actually it's been almost two years since we last saw each other.

Anyway, we had a great time and promised to be better about keeping in touch in the future. And I got to thinking about how things would be different if we were part of an online social network.

This guy is 38 - and definitely not a Facebook user. But our social interaction would have been extremely different if he were! If he had photos of his kids posted on his site, for example, I'd know much more about how Bryson and Catherine were doing. To me, it was a glaring example of how social networking sites truly do shape "real world" interactions.

Social Networking Meets Breaking News

ABC News just broke the story (about an hour ago) about the identity of Elliot Spitzer's call girl. Where did the news organization get most of its information about 22-year-old Ashley Alexandra Dupre? Her "well kept MySpace page."

Dupre's MySpace page has apparently received 5 million hits since her identity was revealed. The ABC piece uses her MySpace profile to speculate on Dupre's life, motivations and personality:

"In some of her MySpace photos, Dupre is the sexy club-goer out on the town, or is goofing off, making digital self-portraits; or she is sleek and tan on a boat in a shot she says was taken in St Tropez; or she is passed out after what looks like a long night. "It happens a lot," she writes."

What do I find interesting about this? That social networking sites are driving mainstream media coverage. We know more about Dupre because we can see how she describes/presents herself in the online sphere.

Social Networking Stats

Happy Monday from Technorella. I just came across this chart on a blog about the social economy. A resource called Complete ranks social networking sites by total monthly visits for the month of February:

To me, less interesting than the actual rankings are the changes sites are experiencing. While MySpace continues to be #1, visits are down 1% from a year ago, while Facebook visits have increased by 77%. Xanga has experienced a 66% decline. And newer, more specialized social networking sites are clearly on the rise.

What does this mean? Maybe it's that as social networking sites become more popular, users seem to be looking for online communities that are more specialized, and address their individual needs. Maybe it's that MySpace is too big, too "Rupert Murdoch," too one-size-fits all in its approach to be a sustainable category leader.

Clearly, the online social networking space is evolving. My bet is that as mobile takes hold, the sites most conducive to it will dominate - at least with the younger set. Given the iPhone/Facebook ad I saw on TV recently, I think Facebook will be the new leader in a very, very short amount of time.

Finally!

Technorella has frequently ranted that she receives Facebook "friend requests" from people who are a) her close friends in the real world or b) people she hasn't spoken to in years/met once.

Yesterday I received a friend request from someone in the middle. And it made me think that these kind of relationships are what social networking sites are really about (I mean, aside from online stalking).

To be specific, Rachel - a close friend of my close friend, Jen - asked me to be her friend. Rachel and I have spent a good amount of time together; she came to visit DC when Jen and I lived there, and for a good year we hung out a lot thanks to another mutual friend's wedding activities.

But, Rachel and I simply aren't close enough to keep in touch via traditional communications methods. Plus, she lives in Chicago, Jen lives in Portland, and I live in New York - so there's not a lot of opportunity to see each other anymore.

Still, I feel like it's nice to be connected to her on some level. In other words, she's the perfect Facebook friend.

Facebook's Profitability

Forgive the blog hiatus - it's been a hectic week for Technorella work-wise. Anyway - an article from Wednesday's Wall Street Journal (you can only read the article if you're a wsj.com subscriber - sorry) discusses how Facebook, in its effort to become more operationally savvy and profitable, has poached a top Google exec, Sheryl Sandberg, to help grow the business.





Facebook has skyrocketed - check out the chart below that shows the increase in unique Facebook visitors since April 2006.

But, just how profitable are social networking sites really going to be in the long-run? Based on this article, it looks like very:

"Last year, Microsoft Corp. invested $240 million in the company, valuing the startup at $15 billion. That gives Mr. Zuckerberg a net worth on paper of at least $3 billion. According to comScore Inc., a Web tracking firm, Facebook had 101 million visitors in January, up from 25 million in January 2007."

I'm interested to see how the company will grow revenue-wise. How will it enhance ad revenue? Will games and video content become the site's profit centers? Social networking sites have clearly provided new ways for companies to reach consumers - particularly young consumers who aren't so easy to reach. My two cents? New advertising and profitability models will evolve to fit the site's "personality."

Hillary Clinton's Facebook Page

Don't tell my boss, but I was just watching the SNL Clinton-Obama debate skit from this weekend.

For anyone who hasn't seen it - it's absolutely hysterical, regardless of your political leanings. At the end, Senator Clinton (the REAL Hillary - not the SNL version) gives an "editorial response" to the skit, which - I thought - painted her as a human, not simply a politician.

SNL is an excellent venue for political candidates looking to enhance their personal appeal. And got to thinking about the role social networking sites play in helping politicians create human identities to appeal to voters.

This thought brought me to Hillary Clinton's Facebook page. I actually like Hillary a lot more than most people do - but her page was beyond canned. For example, in her "About Me" section, Hillary says:

"I was raised in a middle-class family in the middle of America. From that classic suburban childhood in Park Ridge, Illinois, I went on to become one of America's foremost advocates for children and families; an attorney twice voted one of the most influential in America; a First Lady of Arkansas who helped transform the schools; a bestselling author; a First Lady for America who helped transform that role, becoming a champion for health care and families at home and a champion of women's rights and human rights around the world."

I fully understand that politicians must be "on message" all the time. But come on... this is Facebook. If Hillary is really trying to engage younger voters through her official page, she'd be well-served to let go of political-speak and try to communicate in a genuine way. I guess my point is that while digital forums are trendy, I'm not sure they're relevant in politics unless a candidate is truly willing to let go of the spin.

Tipping Points and Social Networks

... Technorella is back. After procrastinating for much of the day, I'm catching up on my reading for my digital media class. This week, it's all about social networks, tipping points, and early adopters.

Right now, I'm struggling with the idea that in a very tangible sense, weaker social connections may be more "beneficial" to an individual than stronger ones. For example, it's usually helpful to use a broad network of friends, colleagues and peers when engaging in a job search. Broadly speaking, good things - like a new job - can come out of relatively weak social ties.

I completely buy this idea; a former colleague of mine who works in the cosmetics industry and I frequently support our respective friends and co-workers in their job searches by trading resumes. This relatively "weak" social tie is certainly useful. But what interests me is what this really means about online social networks.

Sites like Facebook and MySpace enable us to broaden our social spheres - quickly, easily and without much thought. To a large extent, these forums are all about establishing weak social ties. Maybe I've had the wrong idea about social networking in the digital age; maybe in trying to compare Facebook friendships to real world relationships, I've missed the boat.

Perhaps online social networks are more about reaping tangible benefits from weak social ties - instead of replacing in-person communications.

IPhone Meets Facebook

I was just watching Saturday Night Live on DVR, and an iPhone ad I've never seen came on. I don't watch a lot of live TV (meaning I usually fast-forward through the commercials) so I'm not sure how new this one is, but I've never seen it before.

Point being, the ad featured mobile social networking as one of iPhone's main features - specifically focusing on Facebook.

My friend Eddie Radshaw - who blogs about his iPhone - has pointed out that iPhone's target demographic is students. The social networking angle makes sense in this context, and also makes me think that mobile might come around sooner than we think in the U.S. - largely thanks to iPhone's technology.

I mentioned this idea to my roommate (she's my age) and the idea of mobile social networking completely freaked her out. My question is this: will those of us who clearly weren't early adopters of social networking always be adverse to this idea, or will we drink the kool-aid eventually? My thinking is that if mobile social networking becomes applicable, in some way, to the corporate sector, it may eventually impact an older set.

Social Networking Safety

A recent article in the New York times talks about safety concerns relating to social networking. A new Harvard task force is exploring the risk on sites like Facebook and MySpace that teens are being targeted by sexual predators.

I'm really, really not an obsessive social networker. But even I get bizarre, random pokes and emails on Facebook from total creeps. I'm a skeptical 27-year-old who doesn't spend all that much time on Facebook - but would I be so discerning and cynical at 16? Would I have been at all receptive to online weirdos? To be honest, I don't think so. But that doesn't mean that social networking sites aren't dangerous on some level.

It will be interesting to see what the task force finds out; the online social networking world is new - and will require a new approach to safety. For me - well, in a way I feel lucky that I didn't have to even think about these things at 16...

Mobile Networking in the US

I just saw this article on emarketer about mobile social networking in the U.S. While mobile social networking has taken off in Asia (not surprising) and in the UK, it's still not a mainstream concept in the US. That said, research suggests that mobile social networking will continue to grow globally:

The article also suggests that teens are a prime target audience for mobile social networking; cell phones are their main means of communicating, and most of them will come of age when social networking is the norm.

Still, I'm skeptical. What I'm wondering is who really has the time to stay so connected? Maybe I'm just too old (at 27!), too corporate, too thinly stretched balancing work, school, and a social life, but I simply can't imagine the time commitment associated with staying in touch with people constantly.

An article I read for a grad school class talked about the cultural rationale for the rise of text messaging in Asia. It claimed that mobile connectivity first came about in Japan because teens rarely had "personal space." Tokyo is a cramped city; text messaging enabled teens to communicate - and have a certain level of autonomy. In the U.S., personal space isn't so much of an issue (well, outside of New York).

Maybe that's why we were so slow to adopt text messaging as a communications method. I'm interested to see if the same cultural concept will influence our uptake of mobile social networking technology. My bet is that mobile is here - and it's only going to get bigger on the social networking front. How quickly we adopt it in the U.S., on the other hand, is harder to call.

It's Really All About Mobile...

I just came across this press release on Social Networking Watch - an excellent online resource for the latest and greatest in social networking news.

Just last week, Technorella was a bit overwhelmed with Gypsii's ability to take Facebook mobile, and was shocked to learn about ZuGiDoMe's laser technology. These new technologies seemed to be the "new wave" of social networking, unlikely to go main-stream anytime soon.

But the announcement that Xanga is going mobile in Hong Kong - in partnership with HK's largest mobile provider - makes me think that mobile social networking is already here - and rapidly becoming main-stream.

I guess Technorella shouldn't be surprised - but the more I think about it, the rise of mobile social networking is going to change the face of social interactions exponentially. The boundaries between online relationships and "real" relationships are going to continue to blur.

LinkedIn Logic

We've been looking to hire a few people on my team at work - and it's gotten me to start thinking about LinkedIn, and how it contributes to the job hunting scene.

Our head of HR has brought us a few candidates she's come across on LinkedIn. Most of them are stellar, and could be great additions to our group. The problem? Most of the good ones aren't actually actively searching for a new job. And when it comes down to it, they typically turn down an offer from our team. Why? Because they're truly not in the market to make a move.

As a result, I feel like I've been wasting time interviewing people who don't particularly want to work at my company. On the one hand, it seems like LinkedIn is a great way to find candidates. But how truly relevant is the site when it's not actually leading to legitimate hires? I'm curious to see how things go with LinkedIn, and its role in the job search process.

Social Networking in the Corporate Arena

I've been thinking about the role of social networking in the corporate arena. Technorella works at a PR agency with an incredibly strong interactive department - and the idea of social networking frequently comes up at new business pitches.

Potential new clients are always looking for innovative, new media recommendations. And our interactive team is more than capable of adding a social networking compenent to our strategic recommendations. After all, clients are looking for insight into the digital arena.

But here is my question: is social networking meaningful for corporate entitities? I'm just not sure people - when they're online - are all that interested in corporate messages. Communicating online is largely about staying in touch with friends - and taking a break from work.

Just some food for thought following a new business brainstorm.

What?!

So, I just came across this press release from a company called ZuGiDoMe (I subscribe to Google news alerts on social networking; I'm not an insane person).

Here is the deal: the company (which is seeking investors, and whose patent is pending, FYI) is taking social networking mobile. Ideally, it will become relevant for business as well as personal use.

Basically, it uses laser technology to "connect" people. So, you're walking in midtown with your ZuGiDoMe laser device, and it "connects" to someone else's laser device - who is deemed compatible with you (via information about the two of you stored on ZuGiDuMe's site). You go back to your computer, log into your ZuGiDoMe account, check out the person's profile, and connect with the person online if you choose to do so.

The point, I guess, is to bring "real world" encounters and social networking together. Maybe this will be the new trend in social networking - or maybe it will go bust. Either way, I have to admit the demos on the site made me laugh out loud at my computer. The idea of lasers connecting people is just a bit much for Technorella. What ever happened to good old fashioned chemistry?

An Ode to Online Stalking

Typically, Technorella strives to refrain from bringing her personal life into the blog. But social networking is personal, and I can't resist commenting on a recent Facebook experience. I'm relatively new to the whole scene, and this experience - while typical - made me recognize for the first time why people are so interested in social networking.

So, I recently received an Evite for a party this coming Friday night. It's for a really good friend of mine - so imagine my suprise when looking through the guest list I came across a familiar, and uncommon, last name. Let's call it Kamikaze.

When I was living in Washington, DC, I briefly (and very casually) dated someone with the same last name. Thanks to Facebook, I was able to uncover that the Kamikaze on the Evite is actually the sister of the Kamikaze from DC. She's been friends with my friend for years - only we've never met.

Now, I'm not really sure what this discovery actually means; I'm not going to introduce myself to She-Kamikaze next weekend and bring up her brother. After all, it would be an admonition of some serious online stalking. But, still, there's something about this experience that grabbed my attention. It makes me wonder how many degrees of separation really separate us all.

Maybe Social Networking Sites Do Mirror Real World Relationships...

A classmate of mine from grad school just circulated this paper from June, 2007 by Danah Boyd.

According to her, social networking sites - namely Facebook and MySpace - reflect different demographics of American teenagers:

The goodie two shoes, jocks, athletes, or other "good" kids are now going to Facebook. These kids tend to come from families who emphasize education and going to college. They are part of what we'd call hegemonic society. They are primarily white, but not exclusively. They are in honors classes, looking forward to the prom, and live in a world dictated by after school activities.

MySpace is still home for Latino/Hispanic teens, immigrant teens, "burnouts," "alternative kids," "art fags," punks, emos, goths, gangstas, queer kids, and other kids who didn't play into the dominant high school popularity paradigm. These are kids whose parents didn't go to college, who are expected to get a job when they finish high school. These are the teens who plan to go into the military immediately after schools. Teens who are really into music or in a band are also on MySpace. MySpace has most of the kids who are socially ostracized at school because they are geeks, freaks, or queers.

Why? Because of the "elitist" nature of how Facebook was launched (via Harvard).

I've been ranting about how little online social circles look like "real life." But this article makes me want to reconsider my position. Just as we gravitate to different people, places and hobbies in the "real world," so too do we choose our online social forums based on where we feel comfortable.

I thought I joined Facebook simply because it's what my friends were doing. I didn't think about who my friends are (mainly white, college educated and from upper-middle-class homes) when I went about it. Maybe there's more to these online social circles than I've given them credit for lately.

How "nice" do I have to be to a Facebook friend?

Okay, it's Sunday - and Technorella must digress a bit. I've been thinking about how to be "polite" in the social networking arena, and frankly, I'm just at a loss.

To be specific, there is a certain person - let's call him Fred - who is pushing my social networking limits. Fred sits near my office, although we work in separate groups. And if I'm being honest, well... Fred annoys me. A lot.

I don't actually have any people from my office as Facebook "friends," and Fred and I rarely talk. So I was a bit suprised/perplexed when Fred invited me to be his Facebook friend.

Here's the thing: I don't really want Fred knowing what I do in my free time. But, since I see him daily, wouldn't ignoring his friend request be kind of rude? So I accepted his request, but I must admit that I felt a little bit forced into the situation. And the kicker? Fred just invited me to join his LinkedIn network.

So - here I am, socially networked to someone who I frankly don't particularly like. Yet, not taking him up on his offer would have been considered rude, especially given our proximity at work.

My point is that the more I explore social networking, the more I find online relationships to be relatively meaningless... thanks to people like Fred, online social circles don't mirror day-to-day reality. So here I am on a Sunday - feeling like a mean person because I don't really want to be Fred's Facebook friend - even though the social connection isn't there to begin with.

Is Social Networking Good for Society?

Today the New York Times Freakanomics blog explored the implications of social networking by interviewing a series of "experts."

My favorite insight came from Judith Donath, an MIT Professor:

"The big picture: social networking technologies support and enable a new model of social life, in which people’s social circles will consist of many more, but weaker, ties. Though we will continue to have some strong ties (i.e., family and close friends), demographic changes, such as frequent household moves and the replacement of friends and family with market services for tasks such as daycare, are diminishing the role of social ties in everyday life. Weak ties (e.g., casual acquaintances, colleagues) may not be reliable for long-term support; their strength instead is in providing a wide range of perspectives, information, and opportunities. As society becomes increasingly dynamic, with access to information playing a growing role, having many diverse connections will be key."

The idea of "weaker ties" is interesting... how meaningful, after all, are our online "friendships?" And to what extent will the social networking definition of "friend" come to replace actual human connections?

Some Thoughts on Twitter...

I spent some time last night thinking about Gypsii - and what it means for the future of social networking (and communications generally). And I got to thinking about Twitter.

I am not a Twitter user - so I checked out their page this morning. According to the site, this is why you should use Twitter:

"Because even basic updates are meaningful to family members, friends, or colleagues—especially when they’re timely. Eating soup? Research shows that moms want to know. Running late to a meeting? Your co–workers might find that useful. Partying? Your friends may want to join you."

Okay, those seem like logical reasons for staying connected. But I still don't see the point in essentially sending mini-blogs to my social circle about the ins-and-outs of my existence. My mom loves me, but I really don't think she cares about what I'm eating for lunch. I may indeed be running late to a meeting - but I have a Blackberry and a cell phone - so I'm not sure what added value Twitter offers there.

Again, I'm left wondering: has this craze gone too far? Are social networking sites going to tumble as quickly as they rose? According to a recent BusinessWeek article, social networking sites are experiencing a slow-down. Maybe it's just too much too fast.

As If We Needed More Stalking Options...

Gypsii, a new social networking site launched at a phone industry trade show this week in Barcelona, is raising the online stalking bar yet again.

Specifically, Gypsii's new technology uses cell phones as tracking devises, so social networkers can know the exact whereabouts of their friends at any given time. It's compatible with sites like Facebook - allowing users to share their location-specific information with their network of friends.

Call me a little paranoid - but I don't think I want people to know where I am at any given moment. Not only is this technology big brother-ish - but it just seems to be a bit annoying.

Again, for me this gets back to the why. Why would I want my friends, co-workers, or aquaintances to know I'm heading up 5th Avenue at 3:42 p.m. on a Wednesday?

Just seems like overkill.

Is Facebook Forever?

Today's most emailed article in the New York Times? "How Sticky is Facebook Membership? Just Try Breaking Free."

The article discusses how ridiculously difficult it is to deactivate your Facebook account given the way the company stores data. Broadly speaking, the article brings up a series of privacy concerns associated with social networking sites.

What's most interesting to Technorella? It seems to me that social networking sites bring out the exhibitionist in pretty much everyone. "Privacy" hasn't been much of a concern to those updating their profiles regularly.

Will the tides turn? I think it's too soon to tell.

Has Google Out-Googled Itself Again?

Last week, Google announced the launch of the Social Graph API.

In non-techie speak, the Social Graph is basically a vast social network - connecting users to one another outside of the typical Facebook/MySpace/Twitter realms in which they choose to operate.

According to Google: "The public web is made up of linked pages that represent both documents and people. Google Search helps make this information more accessible and useful. If you take away the documents, you're left with the connections between people." Basically, Social Graph API will show users the people they are linked to when sharing information - not simply the information itself.

What does this mean for the future of Social Networking?

One way of looking at it is that the digital age will increasingly be about social connections - and not simply about information sharing. And the "social" side of the online community won't be limited to sites dedicated to social networking.

Simply put, the Internet - in itself - will BE the social network.

Socially Networked's Official Launch

Today - Superbowl Sunday - is the official launch of Socially Networked, a blog designed to explore the social and technological aspects of social networking.

I must admit, I was late to join the social networking craze. I graduated from college before Facebook and was initially opposed to sites like Friendster and MySpace. I just didn't see the point of any of it. But curiosity got the better of me - and here I am.

It goes without saying that social networking has changed the way we stay connected to others. Only a few years ago, knowing the day-to-day activities of hundreds - if not thousands - of people we know peripherally was unheard of. But thanks to sites like Facebook and MySpace, I'm privvy to the details of people's lives that I thought I'd never see or hear from again.

To me, what's most interesting is how little my online reality replicates my day-to-day life. A lot of my "real world friends" - the people I value most and see on a regular basis - don't even belong to social networking sites. My online circle, on the other hand, includes people I haven't spoken to in almost ten years. I'm "Facebook friends" with an Italian guy I met once at a party in London, but not with my best friend in the whole world who I talk to twelve times a day.

So, what do online community relationships really mean? And why do we feel the need to create digital social circles? Why do we care to know about the lives of people we don't really know?

Maybe it's that online friendships fill a void that's a product of a global society, where people live thousands of miles away from loved ones. Maybe social networks are just another means of filling the age-old human need of feeling part of something. Or maybe - at the end of the day - we just like knowing what people are up to.

What's clear is that staying connected is important to those of us who are socially networked. Why we feel that way, on the other hand, is a much more difficult thing to answer.