Newspaper classifieds are going the way of the dodo, recruitment agencies and even online jobs boards have seen the light and are doing a lot of their investigating through social networks such as LinkedIn, Facebook, and yes, Twitter. And if you, as a job hopeful, aren’t active on these sites, you can bet your briefcase that you’re losing out.

According to research in the good ole’ US of A, LinkedIn is the social network of choice for both employees and aspirant employees. It has a more professional feel to it than Facebook and Twitter, and the less said about MySpace the better. Jim Durbin of St Louis based Durbin Media broke it down like this:

• LinkedIn tells others who you are
• Facebook tells other who you know
• Twitter tells others what you’re doing now

Of course it’s not quite as simple as that, there are obviously areas where they all overlap, but Durbin nailed the gist of it.

However, which social network you use will depend on where you are in the world. LinkedIn is very popular in the US as business networking tool. Business issues are discussed, contacts are made and shared and there are no pictures of drunken Saturday nights, even if they are the aftermath of a high-powered business conference. But, LinkedIn is not the social network of choice in many other countries. It’s gaining credence in the UK, but in South Africa it’s still largely ignored (although the following is growing), so while South Africans shouldn’t dismiss it, they shouldn’t place all their hopes on it either.

In fact, South Africans might be better off using the less professional social sites, such as Facebook and Twitter, which are very popular and getting more so among older age brackets, i.e. those that are likely to know of job opportunities, or know of someone who knows someone who knows of job opportunities, and are willing to share that knowledge with their circle of friends. And, as we know, the circle of online friends extends very far indeed.

The downside to this, of course, is that you have to be very careful how you conduct yourself online. Those high school pictures of you mooning the chess club will come back to bite you in the … moonshine region. Being tagged in the pictures from your best friends bachelor party, with your tie around your head and someone’s tongue in your ear could also have an adverse effect on your job prospects as a neurosurgeon or district attorney (although they could stand you in good stead if you want to become a politician or national sports hero).

You need to be selective about the groups that you join – try not to join any ‘hate’ groups and, if possible, don’t become a fan of Boyzone. Limit your use expletives and foul language and whatever you do, don’t trash your old boss and your old job and don’t broadcast company secrets. Pathological malice and the overt need for revenge aren’t going to get you very far with people who could potentially be in the firing line at some point in the future.

It’s still way too soon to tell if recruitment via social media will have any legal ramifications. Those with an eye to equality and fair practice have already argued against using social networks as a recruitment aid because it leaves so many people out of the loop. In a way, it’s a very elitist method to use. To stretch a stereotype, usually only middle to upper-class citizens frequent social media sites, because they’re the ones who have easy access to the net and all the benefits it brings. There is the very real danger that the people who are most in need of the boost social media sites can give them will be sidelined simply because they don’t have the right connections, relationship and telecommunications wise.

There is also the danger that even if you take extra special care on Facebook or Twitter, you’ll be tripped up by the simple, supposedly innocuous information you choose to share, such as your sexual orientation, race or physical disability.

Trying to find a job is like walking a minefield, you really need to watch your step. Using social media to find a job is like walking a minefield on tall stilts while juggling chainsaws. But, by leveraging all the tools at your disposal, online and off, you can give yourself the edge, which is what it takes to nab a job, really.

Related posts:

1. Search engine and social media market share statistics for 2009
2. Social networks and social status: Social network market share indicates snobbishness
3. Social media over share: are brands just as obsessed with social media as we are?

Does social media give you the edge in the job market?

In 2007, Sophos conducted a study in the UK to determine how willing Facebook users were to give out personal information. The result, 43% of UK Facebookers become friends with a complete stranger, a fake Facebook profile setup by Sophos. This year the study was moved to Australia, and given that two years had passed and that much has been made of privacy and the dangers of revealing too much information online, Sophos expected Facebook users to be much more cautious than before. They were wrong.

Two fictitious accounts were set up, one for a 21-year-old single woman – Daisy Feletin – and one for a 56-year-old married woman – Dinette Stonily. If you’re wondering at the unusual names, they are anagrams of false identity and stolen identity. According to Mashable, Daisy was represented by a beaming rubber duck and Dinette by two cats lying on a rug. 100 friend requests were sent out to random, age-appropriate Facebook users and it turns out that young and cute – Daisy – beats older but still cute – Dinette.

46% of users accepted Daisy’s request, 41% friended Dinette. When it came to personal information: 89% of Daisy’s new friends shared their full date of birth compared to 57% for Dinette; 100% gave their email address to Daisy compared to 88% for Dinette. Encouragingly, only 4% gave Daisy their full address and 7% gave up their phone number, 6% of Dinette’s friends gave up their full addresses and 235 their phone numbers. Which seems to indicate that wisdom doesn’t necessarily come with age. Worryingly for those who are friends with those who friended the fictitious accounts is that 46% shared information on family and friends with Daisy compared to 31% for Dinette.

The Sophos study shows that despite warnings and bad experiences we’re all still idiots when it comes to divulging sensitive information online. Without any effort at all, scammers and assorted bad people can access enough information to steal your identity and make your life a living hell.

The big question is why: why are we so trusting online and so circumspect in real life, why are we so open online and so tight-lipped in real life?

I think that the relative anonymity of social networks plays a role. Like a child who thinks she disappears if she hides behind her hands, there is this perception that if you can’t see them, they can’t hurt you. The tacit intent also lends to a trusting environment, after all, why would someone want to be your friend just to hurt you? Then there is denial, we want to believe that people are good and that nothing bad will come from interacting with others. We need to believe that otherwise we would never meet, make friends with or trust anyone.

But we also need to realise that amongst our real friends and all the good people of the world lurk baddies, who just don’t care about anyone else. When it comes to online mingling, caution is just as important as in the real world. It’s all about balance, blind trust is bad, but so are undue skepticism, cynicism and isolation.

Remember that your real friends are likely to know almost everything about you anyway, all online social networks really need to do is serve as easy means to keep in touch.

Related posts:

1. Facebook Places and Online Privacy
2. Social networks and Google results: A bigger and better way to follow your friends.
3. What Facebook reveals about your sexuality: Gaydar project unveiled

Facebook friends: how much is too much information?

In an interview with the BBC, the web officer for the New Yorkshire Police Department, Tom Stirling, says that social media allow officers to communicate directly with the public. Facebook pages, for instance, allow people to relate their experience of police services – good and bad – so that departments know what they need to change or do more of.

The West Midlands Police Department is one of the more on the ball social media users. They recognised that people were posting videos of their services on YouTube, not all of which were complimentary, and so it was decided that they would give the public a police perspective by uploading their own videos and getting involved in the various discussions that were taking place.

You know things are changing when the UK’s National Police Improvement Agency has a social media advisor – Nick Keane says that unless police departments engage their critics who are active on social media they risk being undermined as public protectors. One of the dangers of social media, especially videos is that events can be easily misunderstood or taken out of context, which is why the West Midlands police have started using Twitter and YouTube proactively.

By sending tweets out before demonstrations (using the appropriate hashtag, I might add), they are able to outline acceptable behaviour and by uploading videos of their handling of demonstrations they are able to circumvent a lot of negative impressions. This approach was used to good effect by the Metropolitan Police during the G20 Summit at the beginning of the year, when they monitored Twitter and Facebook to find out what various demonstration groups were planning and taking appropriate steps to ensure the safety of everyone concerned. Metro Police Commander, Simon O’Brien said that tapping into social networks is a “key area of intelligence gathering”.

Also at the beginning of the year, New Zealand police used Facebook to catch a burglar. It must be said that the burglar in question was a bit of a dunce, removing his balaclava and exposing his face to a hidden camera, but by uploading the footage to the police department’s Facebook page police were able to make an arrest within 24 hours. Just FYI, as a result of the successful arrest, the police force managed to double their ‘friends’.

It doesn’t matter where in the world you live, police services are traditionally the least expected to be on the cutting edge of technology (episodes of CSI notwithstanding). Which makes one wonder, if they can recognise the importance of listening to the public and adapting their approach to services be of greater benefit to citizens, why can’t multinational corporations get it right?

To show exactly how well some members of the UK police services understand social media, let’s turn to West Midlands Inspector Mark Payne: “We want to talk to people and allow people to talk to influence the way we police … This is not about abandoning the traditional ways. More and more people are using social media to communicate and, if that’s where people are talking, that’s where we need to go.”

Amen.

Related posts:

1. Social media over share: are brands just as obsessed with social media as we are?
2. Social media (for the laggards)
3. Charities continue to use the power of social media to evoke change

Social Media Crime Fighting: Using Twitter and Facebook to beat crime

I don’t deny that it given today’s increasingly online social society it’s a relevant word. And I think that it’s placement in the dictionary has been legitimately earned, but is it really The Word of the Year? I don’t think so.

At least I didn’t until I visited the askoxford.com site and read the reasoning behind the choice of many past winners. The Word of the Year, apparently, is supposed to succinctly summarise a period in time, and what summarises 2009 better than Facebook. I mean, you Facebook someone when you want to send them a message, you friend them and, of course, you unfriend them. Facebook has grown a convenient way to get in touch with long lost friends to become the communication medium of choice between families that are separated by oceans and continents. I know parents (not mine) who are on Facebook more than their kids, which negates arguments that Unfriend has relevance for only a select few in the online industry.

In a statement issued by Oxford’s US dictionary programme, Chrstine Lindberg said that Unfriend has currency and potential longevity. I’m not sure about currency, but it certainly isn’t going anywhere, if anything it will only grow as the numbers of online social networkers increases.

What is quite interesting is that many of the Word of the Year finalists also had a modern, technological mien: hashtag (very Twittery) and intexticated (surely you don’t need that one explained), for instance. But the emphasis on evolving technology is not new. In 2005 the Word of the Year was ‘Podcast’, but if we go all the way back to the beginning of the award (which, incidentally was in 1906), we see that 1911’s word was ‘phone number’ (very indicative of a shift in communication), in 1953 it was ‘teleconference’, ’69 was microchip, ’87 was ‘to email’ and ’97 ’98 and ’99 had a strong internet focus with ‘WAP’, ‘to Google’ and ‘blogger’ respectively.

Yes, Unfriend lacks the sophistication that the award implies, but it could be worse. In 2006 the Word of the Year was ‘bovvered’ and if that isn’t a crime against humanity I don’t know what is.

PS: ReadWriteWeb has a poll on whether Unfriend deserves its award or not. I initially voted no, but after due consideration am going to change my vote to yes. What do you think?

Related posts:

1. 2011 is the year for Online Video
2. Facebook friends: how much is too much information?
3. Word of mouth and consumer reviews top paid ads

Facebook jargon gains credibility as Unfriend gets Word of the Year

Just ask Motrin, pain management specialists. In 2008, Motrin launched a print and video viral campaign that, I assume, was supposed to be a tongue-in-cheek solution for the headaches and back pain that plagues many mothers. Unfortunately, the ad was in incredibly bad taste, it alleged that babies are fashion accessories, and claimed that carrying babies may be bonding but that while babies cried less, mom’s cried more. In my opinion, the most damage was done at the end, when the mommy narrator said that carrying her baby was bearable because it was a ‘good’ pain and that it made her look like an official mom, and that when she looks tired and crazy ‘people will understand why’. (see the video here)

Motrin Print Ad

The reasons why the campaign bombed are as numerous as they obvious. In fact, it was obviously doomed to fail from the start, which makes you wonder how it got passed the approval board. For a start, Motrin had no clue about their target audience. If they did they would have known never to refer to mothering styles as fashionable and that there is no such thing as an ‘official looking mom’. In fact, to allege that by not following mom fashion trends mom run the risk of appearing ‘unofficial’ is so insulting as to border on blasphemy.

Not surprisingly, the campaign elicited a barrage of complaints and retaliatory videos on YouTube, not to mention the Twitter backlash. One mother summed it up accurately:

“You know, you’d think that a big company like Motrin, would, I don’t know do some research before launching a new ad campaign. You’d think that with all the money they have that they would actually put some of it into finding out what their target market is and not piss off the Mommies that they disrespected so.” Prarie Momma

The video even had the dubious distinction of being spoofed – boob implants and associated back pain leaving you looking nothing like a mom (it’s pretty funny). Not surprisingly, Motrin pulled the ad and apologised for their crass insensitivity, although they didn’t phrase it quite like that.

Mozilla, who really should have known better, also managed to muck up a campaign that was supposed to set Firefox up as preferable to Internet Explorer. Called “Firefox Users against Boredom”, the video campaign is saturated with bad taste, starting with the spoofy sing-along on the lines of the save-the-world-save-the-children campaigns by collective musos to the statistics that crawl at the bottom of the screen. Some stats were relatively harmless: firefox users are 67% more likely to go mountain biking and 21% less likely to fish. But others are plain insulting: firefox users are 51% less likely to be accountants and 16% less likely to have fungal infections. And then there are the insensitive stats: firefox users are 40% less likely to be widowed, 23% less likely to have cancer and 20% less likely to live with cancer sufferers.

Apparently the campaign was released before it was approved, which at best means that Mozilla is as careless as it is dumb. Mozilla’s vice-president of marketing, Paul Kim, apologised for the campaign saying that they hadn’t reviewed the stats before they were accidentally published and that they recognised that some of the stats were in poor taste and humour and didn’t reflect Mozilla’s views.

In an article on computerworld.com, Kim is cited as saying, “Something went seriously wrong with our content development process, and I’m working to clean this up now.” Kim said that the site and the list were supposed to be locked behind a password until they had been checked and approved. He added, “Regardless of these issues on our end, the main thing is to say that I take responsibility for the situation, and again, apologize to anyone who was upset by this.”

Except that not everyone is happy with the apology, as this comment on TechCrunch shows:

“Frankly, the excuse doesn’t even make sense. Saying that it was not meant to be ‘publicly available’ makes it seem as if these comments are only acceptable as a private joke at Mozilla. Caesar’s wife must be above suspicion, and if something like this came from Microsoft, you’d go absolutely crazy.”

Lastly, we have Toyota’s YourOtherYou viral campaign which was designed to let consumers prank their friends. Unfortunately the prank involved convincing unsuspecting victims that they were being stalked and, as we all know, stalking is subject to be taken lightly. Toyota used details provided by pranksters to subject victims to “a series of dynamically personalised phone calls, texts, emails and videos.”

First, if you have a friend that would do this to you, cross them off your Christmas list and alert the police – seriously. Then put all thoughts of ever buying a Toyota out of your mind, because a company that treats your psyche so callously is hardly likely to give your physical safety much thought.

There is a school of thought, and it’s quite popular, that there is no such thing as a bad viral campaign as the purpose of viral is to draw attention to brand and get people talking. In that sense, all the campaigns above are a resounding success, as for me, I’d rather have my campaign go unnoticed that cause innocent people sleepless nights as they anticipate coming home to a boiled rabbit and enraged psychopath.

Related posts:

1. Big brands approach to viral marketing video’s: don’t worry, be happy.
2. Why go Viral?
3. Viral copy is golden thread

Viral marketing: panacea and pain

This year, there is less recession-related panic but online is still where it’s at for retailers, only this time the battlefield is social media.

Facebook and Twitter were around last year, and some companies put them to good use (Starbucks for instance Raised money for World Aids Day via Facebook), but the social hype wasn’t nearly as big then as it is now. In an article for Reuters, Nicole Maestri said that social media provides retailers with the perfect opportunity to interact directly with consumers and also provides an avenue for immediate feedback. She cites Chris Bruzzo, vice-president of brand, content and online for Starbucks, who said, “This is going to be a really interesting holiday season with social media.”

And he’s not wrong, because, also according to Maestri, a Shop.org survey has found that 47% of online retailers plan to increase their focus on social media this holiday season.

In case anyone thinks that social media campaigns lack the effectiveness of traditional marketing, think about the sheer volume of active accounts on Facebook and Twitter. The growth in new accounts every month is phenomenal (even though Twitter’s growth is rumoured to have stalled over the last month or so), and if only a small percentage become active participants, i.e. use their platforms more than two or three times per week, the potential to reach a wider audience is enormous. And if only a small percentage of those convert into purchases, the numbers still make any investment in social media worthwhile.

Of course, you can’t just slap a social media campaign together and expect the conversions to start rolling in. Assume the best and that your site will be flooded with traffic once your campaign launches. First, you need to be able to cope with all the extra visitors, it’s no good attracting consumers and then having your site go down. Second, you need to make it easy for your visitors to make it all the way to your “Thank you for shopping” page. If you’ve enticed traffic with online vouchers or coupons, make it easy for visitors to use them, don’t complicate the checkout process any further than you have to.

Then there are the obvious things: make sure you have enough stock for increased demand in special deals. Keep consumers on the purchase path with more enticements, such as free delivery. If free delivery by itself will stretch your profit margin to breaking point, consider free delivery for purchases over a certain amount. Kalahari.com in South Africa takes that approach and I know people who order extra products just to get free delivery (even if the extra products cost more than the delivery fee).

And, very obviously, ensure that “proceed to checkout” is as clear as possible. Nothing frustrates shoppers more than filling a shopping cart and then not knowing how to get to checkout. And specify delivery areas. If you deliver internationally, say so, and if you don’t, say it even more clearly.

Social media is big and powerful and growing bigger and more powerful all the time. But unless you get the basics right, no social media campaign will save you this Christmas.

Related posts:

1. Social media over share: are brands just as obsessed with social media as we are?
2. Social media (for the laggards)
3. Marketing products on social media

A merry social media Christmas to you

Nielson Claritas recently conducted a study on the demographics four different social networks (Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn and Twitter) and found that affluent, highly educated people congregate on Facebook, while less affluent, less educated people favour MySpace.

According to the study, nearly 23% of the people on Facebook earn more than $100,000 per year; nearly 42% earn more than $75,000. 37% of MySpace users earn less than $50,000, while only 28% of Facebook users fit into this salary bracket.

Mike Mancini, vice-president of data management for Nielson, says that MySpace users “tend to be in middle-class, blue-collar neighbourhoods … They’re on their way up or perhaps not college educated”. Facebook users, on the other hand, tend to live in upscale suburbs, are aged 45-64 and have high levels of education. LinkedIn, which is primarily aimed is business professionals, also featured prominently with users aged 35-49 and who earn more than $100,000 per year (38%), in fact, Nielsen says there is a correlation between Facebook and LinkedIn users. Interestingly, Twitter uses also appear to be the more affluent in society.

So what, you say. Tell us something we don’t instinctively know.

Well, according to danah boyd (who, according to CNN.com, doesn’t capitalise her name) this divide is problematical in that it allows segregation to spill over from the real world into the world online, which detracts from the whole “everyone is equal on the net” theory. “The Internet is not this great equaliser that rids us of the problems of the physical world — the Internet mirrors and magnifies them. The divisions that we have in everyday life are going to manifest themselves online,” says boyd.

Sara Perez, technology writer and blogger, shares boyd’s sentiments. Because people are creatures of habit, and they like what they know, they tend to socialise online with the same people they know offline. Studies have already shown that white people tend to friend mostly other white people, and black people friend other black people. Unless you’re circle of friends offline is multi-cultural and multi-racial, you’re unlikely to cross the race divide online.

Jason Kaufman, research science fellow with the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University, is more optimistic. He believes that social networks have the potential to overcome social and racial prejudices. He says, “I think it’s fair to say that the Web has great potential to at least mitigate everyday tendencies towards self-segregation and social exclusion.”

One of the biggest problems with the clear difference in demographics, according to boyd, is that the cycle of segregation is self-sustaining. She gives the example of universities that only advertise on Facebook, they advertise because they know that Facebook users are more likely to go to university, or the parents of university-bound children, who are likely to be affluent and highly educated themselves, will see the ads and investigate. The kids on MySpace aren’t exposed to the ads; they won’t be prompted to think about higher education options and are more likely to follow their parents into blue collar jobs.

It’s only one example, and it’s a little extreme, but it highlights the potential pitfalls of social stereotyping online.

Enter Twitter, the saviour of the online masses. We already know Twitter makes it very easy to follow people whose interests and social status differ from your own. All it takes is one interesting tweet to catch your eye and you’re willing to give their Twitter feeds a try. You may unfollow them later, but basically, Twitter helps to knock down caste walls. Relationships on Twitter are casual, you don’t feel like you’re making a solid commitment when you follow someone, unlike Facebook or LinkedIn, where you’re almost honour bound to interact more socially. The casual nature of Twitter naturally lends itself to a willingness to experiment with your social circle.

I’ll be the one to say it: Twitter lets you follow people that you’d be too embarrassed to add to Facebook. So, in a way it does knock down walls, but, unless you go that extra step and mix up your online social connections from all networking sites, you’re still pandering to social stereotypes. Keeping your friends in separate boxes is never cool, whether you’re online or off.

Social networking by the numbers:
Users with household income above $75,000
Facebook — 41.74 percent
MySpace — 32.38 percent
LinkedIn — 58.35 percent
Twitter — 43.34 percent

Users with household income under $50,000
Facebook — 28.42 percent
MySpace — 37.13 percent
LinkedIn — 17.34 percent
Twitter — 28.36 percent

Female users
Facebook — 56.33 percent
MySpace — 56.69 percent
LinkedIn — 48.11percent
Twitter — 53.59 percent
Users aged 18 to 24

Facebook — 10.27 percent
MySpace — 15.46 percent
LinkedIn — 3.99 percent
Twitter — 9.51percent
Users aged 35 to 49

Facebook — 31.54 percent
MySpace — 29.09 percent
LinkedIn — 43.64 percent
Twitter — 34.02 percent
Source: The Nielsen Co.

Related posts:

1. Search engine and social media market share statistics for 2009
2. Search Engine and Social Media Market Share Update
3. Does social media give you the edge in the job market?

Social networks and social status: Social network market share indicates snobbishness

Nutristyle’s adopts an holistic approach to healthy living. It works to increase awareness of the dangers of obesity, especially childhood obesity and donates 2% of all revenue to non-profit organisations dedicated to stamping out childhood obesity. Basically, it bridges the gap between grocers and consumers. You register, and fill in the comprehensive profile questionnaire, which includes sections for exercise and weight goals, menu preferences and favourite foods.

In turn it supplies you with customised shopping lists (with recommended grocers in your immediate vicinity), meal plans and suggested exercises. One of the most common obstacles to a healthy diet (other than lack of discipline) is difficulty finding appropriate ingredients. Nutristyle does away with that excuse. It would be nice to see the idea spread to other cities and countries. I know South Africa desperately needs something similar, particularly if your diet is limited (diabetic or vegan, for example).

Gling’s focus is narrower than that of Nutristyle, catering to those who have to follow gluten-free diets (Gling – gluten-free living). It was founded by Mike Lee, whose wife and son are gluten intolerant. It was born out of a need to find appropriate recipes and shopping resources in one place. It provides pages upon pages of gluten-free recipes, food descriptions, labels (so you know whether something is entirely gluten-free or there is any doubt about the ingredients) and locations for gluten-free food suppliers and restaurants that serve gluten-free food.

Tweet What You Eat is based on a far simpler principle: the food diary. Food diaries have long been considered one of the most effective diet monitoring tools around. The premise is simple enough; anything you eat is recorded in a food diary – anything, from the two grapes you tasted at the supermarket to a mid-afternoon biscuit binge. If you go out for dinner, you should even include the mint that came with your bill. The diaries show, in stark reality, exactly how much you eat per day, and I understand that the revelations can be shocking (I’ve never kept a food diary – I’m too lazy to record the vast volumes that I consume each day). They’re supposed to make you more aware of how often food passes your lips and, if you’re determined to be more careful about what you eat, provide a baseline for you to see how well, or not, you’re doing.

Tweet What You Eat is the online version, the very public online version. If you have to record a bad food day in your private food diary, you feel bad and then shrug it off with a promise to do better tomorrow. If you record a bad food day on Tweet What You Eat, everyone knows. Of course, this could lead to cheating, but then you’re only cheating yourself. Ideally, it should provide greater motivation to eat well because the whole world is watching; you don’t want to let them or yourself down (just don’t take it too far and veer towards anorexic). Some British celebrities have done quite well on Tweet What You Eat, Matt Lucas (Little Britain) and Stephen Fry (Twitter pioneer) are fans of the service, and so if you want to give it a try, you’ll be in good company.

Related posts:

1. Social media over share: are brands just as obsessed with social media as we are?
2. A merry social media Christmas to you
3. Social Media – The Online Tattoo

Social media watches what you eat

The bank’s incompetence is twofold. Not only did they send the email to the wrong person, but they also attached a confidential document that wasn’t supposed to be sent anywhere. Now, it’s fair to say that a great many of us have, on occasion, wished that we could un-send an email, but so far clicking send remains irreversible. The best you can do is email the accidental recipient and apologise, and, depending on the contents, explain. This is pretty much what the bank did. A second email was sent out instructing (not requesting, thank you very much) the recipient to delete the email without opening it and to contact the bank employee concerned to “discuss his or her actions”.

Not surprisingly, there was no response, which is when the bank decided to sue Google to reveal the recipient’s identity.

The bank abdicated responsibility on several levels. First, they required action from the unwitting email recipient. Granted, it wasn’t an onerous request, it’s a simple matter to click delete and send a quick email to inform panicking parties that they needn’t panic anymore, but the manner of the request didn’t lend itself to compliance. If someone ‘instructed’ me to do something to clean up their mess, I would be inclined to tell them to stick it. Second, they made their problem Google’s.

Google is the whipping post of choice in a lot of matters online these days, but it clearly has no responsibility in this scenario.

But this is where Google’s sticky reputation acts in the bank’s favour, and gives hope to all future litigants. You see, Google recently revealed the identity of a blogger to a ticked off model so that she could sue said blogger for defamation. Liskula Cohen’s case against Google made headlines a couple of weeks ago and the verdict, which forced Google to reveal the blogger’s identity, raised the ire of much of the blogosphere, which relies heavily on Google to protect the privacy of all blogging platforms.

Without going into too many details, Cohen found a blog post that referred to her as, among other things, a skank. It’s not a nice thing to call someone (though it could have been worse) but, in my opinion, Cohen took matters a little too far. By all accounts the blog in question was small; the blogger claims that only two people saw the page: herself and Cohen. Which suggests that no action would have been the best course of action for Cohen. But models, especially those getting past their prime, are a sensitive bunch and the resulting umbrage was extreme.

The ruling is pertinent to all bloggers everywhere because the judge, Joan Madden, reckons that blogs are not a “modern day forum for conveying personal opinions, including invective and ranting”. She also rejected the defense’s claim that blogs should not be treated as factual assertions. And that means that if we so much as express an opinion that could in any way be construed as negative, we risk running foul of the law.

But I digress, the point I was heading towards is that Google obeyed the court order and revealed the blogger’s identity. She is now being sued for defamation and is in turn suing Google for breach of privacy. With regard to the bank’s case against Google, the big G has said that it won’t reveal the identity of the recipient without a court order, and if it should receive a court order, it would first have to notify the account holder to give him, or her, a chance to object to the disclosure. A comfort to Google account holders everywhere, except of course for our defamatorily-inclined blogger, who was given no such opportunity.

According to the court’s ruling in the blogger case, and Google’s subsequent actions, the bank should be successful in its application. I find this alarming. It gives corporations, who are supposed to guard our private and confidential information with more diligence than their own lives, blanket immunity against stupidity. And, if you complain about it too strongly, you’re likely to be on the receiving end of yet another lawsuit.

Related posts:

1. Bing search market share grows: Should Google worry?
2. Should newspapers charge for news online or buy into the Google dream?
3. Big brands approach to viral marketing video’s: don’t worry, be happy.

Google lawsuits should worry the online masses

A task of this magnitude is fraught with danger. The inclusion of some stars automatically necessitates the exclusion of others and the risk of bruising egos and evoking the ire of fans is ever present. In addition, SEO experts can’t be pigeon-holed, very few specialise in only one aspect of SEO, cross-over skills are omnipresent and there is the risk that people will see preferred skills handed over to rivals and be placed in areas not of their choosing. But that is their fault for being so damn good.

Danger aside, we present our ideal SEO agency for your judgement. Praise, condemnation and differing opinions are welcome, but please, try to keep it clean

Writers

Lisa Barone is one of the most obvious choices for the writing department. She’s eloquent, likes grammar and punctuation and knows how to keep it fresh, as well as controversial. Never one to mince her words, Ms Barone is a no-brainer in our SEO agency. We’ve followed her from her days as a mere minion in other-owned search agencies but since establishing Outspoken Media with cronies Rae Hoffman and Rhea Drysdale she’s become an SEO heavy-weight in her own right. For those who’ve been living under rock, you can find Lisa on Twitter or read more about her role in Outspoken Media (an apt name if ever there was one).

Darren Rowse writes a blog about blogging, ProBlogger. This is the man you want managing your company blog and that makes him perfect for our dream team. He knows more about the blogging process, optimising blogs, looking for topics, fine tuning topics, attracting readers and blog writing styles than any of us could hope to learn in a lifetime. What’s more, he walks the walk, as opposed to many self-proclaimed experts who simply theorise and piggy back on the ideas of others. Follow Darren and keep up to date on ProBlogger news on Twitter.

Patricio Robles is one of the most insightful voices to come out of E-Consultancy. He knows his way around search engine news, social media and search marketing in general. He’s not afraid to challenge accepted thinking or the opinions of established industry greats and is willing to tackle any topic from the foibles social networks to Google’s market share and paid advertising. You can follow Patricio Robles on Twitter where you can find out the latest E-Consultancy news, or get a sneak peek at what makes Mr. Robles tick.

Links

Eric Ward is the King of Links. His link building philosophy – based on merit – has been praised by Google’s Matt Cutts and even Danny Sullivan has seen fit to give Eric his golden stamp of approval. His informative blogs are much anticipated by SEO agencies the world over and his link building podcasts are dedicated to all of your FAQs. He’s generous with his knowledge, sharing hard won lessons through training courses and advice dished out over Twitter.

Wiep Knol is the next obvious choice when it comes to filling the link building department. He’s young, he’s cool and he’s a link building genius. His site provides nifty link building tips and important information about link baiting, link building strategies and the continuing importance of links in an increasingly social/content driven world. His Twitter stream is a nice blend of personal and business.

PPC

Jon Myers’ background in search marketing includes SEO and PPC. He’s one of the UK’s biggest names in all things search with even Yahoo! seeking his advice. He’s a regular on the SEO conference scene, presenting at search marketing events throughout the UK, Europe and all the way across the Atlantic in the US. He makes our list because, basically, he’s a PPC genius. You can follow his interesting news, views and conversations with other SEO agency big guns on Twitter.

David Szetela has devoted his company, Clix Marketing, to PPC advertising. He’s also spent time on the search marketing conference circuit and has a following on a number of SEO/PPC networks, including MediaPost, Search Engine Land, Search Engine Watch and Marketing Sherpa. His weekly radio show, PPC Rockstars, is just one of the reasons why he snatches a position in our SEO agency. Follow his Twitter stream for invaluable PPC tips, news and developments.

Social Media

Mashable was co-founded by Pete Cashmore, who is a serious contender for best SEO all-rounder. Pete is only 24-years-old but has already nominated as one of Forbes top 25 Web Celebs. Mashable has passed the coveted one million followers mark on Twitter and is fast approaching 1.5 million, and it’s largely thanks to the work and high online-profile of Mr. Cashmore. Pete is one of social media’s most respected figures, which makes him our first choice.

Lee Odden, of course. Lee’s online marketing blog, TopRankBlog, serves as a virtual bible for those venturing in social media’s murky waters. Anything you need to know, from creating an in-house social media strategy to choosing an online savvy PR agency or PR savvy SEM agency, you can find on Odden’s blog. He even covers writing for social media or search engine optimisation. His ability to provide an holistic SEO/social media strategy is what makes him invaluable and earns him a place on our dream team. Learn more about the man behind the social media on Lee Odden’s Twitter stream.

We’d hate the southern hemisphere to think we’re biased towards the North, which is where South Africa’s Dave Duarte comes in. Dave applies his search engine and mobile marketing expertise to academia as well as commercial and non-profit ventures and has been voted one of the Top 100 Most Influential Media and Advertising people in SA. When not lecturing, running a multinational consultation company or working on his non-profit projects, he’s organising 27-Dinners (monthly meetings for people driving South Africa’s burgeoning online industry) and writing award winning blogs. Follow dynamic Dave on Twitter.

Developers

David Harry, aka The Gypsy, offers a range of internet marketing services, but his interest in the nuts and bolts of the SEO industry makes him one of our favourites for our SEO agency’s development department. With a business website (Reliable-SEO), an off-the-wall blog/SEO learning dojo (HuoMah) and Twitter account, he doesn’t lack online presence. He doesn’t shy away from lengthy blog posts but they make for compelling reading, at least if you’re an SEO geek.

Up next, we have Rob Kerry, who out-pseudonyms The Gypsy by going under the name, Evil Green Monkey, which is also the name of his search marketing blog. Rob is Head of Search at Ayima Search Marketing and can be found as search conferences and pubs all over London. As editor of Sphinn and former editor of Search Engine Watch, both respected sources of social media news, he has a proven track record in the search industry but his skills on the development side are what have earned him a place in our SEO agency.

Edward Lewis has been in search marketing, or internet marketing as it was known in the good old days, since 1995, that makes him one of the grand-daddies of search. It also means that he’s amassed the kind of knowledge that makes people sit up and pay attention. When he talks, you listen, and when he says ‘do’, you know that you’d better. His site, SEOConsultants.com, offers an eclectic range of information from finding search marketing companies in your vicinity to informative blogs about all things SEM and online advertising. You can enjoy his complete lack of sugar-coating on Twitter.

Strategists

Right at the top of the list is Gord Hotchkiss. In his Twitter bio he describes himself as a ‘student of human nature and search marketer’, two of the biggest understatements in the world. He’s a prolific writer, regularly appearing on Search Engine Land, MediaPost and Search Engine Guide, he’s got a personal blog (Out of my Gord) and he’s president of search marketing agency, Enquiro. His understanding of search behaviour (and human behaviour in general) forms the basis of his approach to search. His blog posts are among the most insightful in the industry. If we could only have one person in our SEO agency (with an option to outsource a bunch of stuff), Gord is who we would want.

Back to South Africa and we have Walter Pike, online marketer extraordinaire. Pike has a long history in marketing and advertising and is one of South Africa’s foremost early adopters, embracing online and all the opportunities it presents. He established South Africa’s first digital marketing academy and runs PiKE, a self-styled New Marketing agency. He also has a personal blog, where he writes bits and bobs about advertising and online marketing.

Analytics

Avinash Kaushik writes the highly acclaimed analytics blog, Occam’s Razor and is a self-proclaimed analytics evangelist for Google. He strives to make analytics, an avenue which can be daunting to the uninitiated, easily understandable and accessible to all. It’s to this end that he wrote his book, ‘Web Analytics: An Hour a Day and co-founded Market Motive’, which drives online marketing education. Proceeds from his book, by the way, all go to good causes – Doctors Without Borders and The Smile Train. He credits Andy Beal and Guy Kawasaki as the inspirational forces behind his blog and blogging style.

And there you have it, the perfect SEO agency, comprised of the best search marketing has to offer. Of course many big names are missing; Rand Fishkin, Matt McGee, Michael Gray, Jane Copland and Jill Whalen fans will undoubtedly feel aggrieved. If you think you can create a better dream team, go ahead. The floor is yours …

Related posts:

1. Real time search update: Is real time search being ignored?
2. How does search fit into the marketing mix?
3. Digital Asset Optimisation invades Search Engine Marketing

Put your hands together for the Real Madrid of SEO: Search marketing’s dream team