U.S. Army using social media as new recruitment strategy

The United States Army is now using Facebook, Twitter and its own blog called “Army Live” to recruit new people, and to give soldiers and their families a place to connect.  This is according to a NY Daily News article by Stephanie Gaskell.  And according to an article from the Army News Service, the social networking pages and the blog were launced by the new Online and Social Media Division of Army Public Affairs.  Gaskell points out that  the Army’s Facebook page has about 3,000 friends, and it has more than 5,000 followers on Twitter.  It’s interesting to note that on the Army’s Twitter page, the bio section points out that “Following does not = endorsement.”  

The U.S. Army wants you – to be its friend on Facebook.   You can also follow the Army on Twitter. Or post a comment on its new blog. They’re all part of the Army’s new mission: social networking.  “If Ashton Kutcher can do it, the U.S. Army can do it,” said Lindy Kyzer, who posts the Army’s “status updates” on Facebook and “tweets” on Twitter. [...] “We know that our ability to share the Army story is shaped by how we tell it and where we tell it,” said Lt. Col. Kevin Arata, who heads the Army’s new Online and Social Media Division. “Using social media platforms allows us to tell our story where we know people are at and are listening.”

I also recommend this article from ReadWriteWeb on how the U.S. State Department is sending Twitter to Iraq “to bring the microblogging service into government and civil society there.”

From Facebook to Twitter Convocation Slideshow

On Monday March 2, 2009 Belmont University’s “Practicum Pioneers” hosted a convocation event entitled From Facebook to Twitter: Rules, Rights and Realities of Social Networks. A panel of experts to discussed the latest controversies regarding online social networks, privacy issues and copyright laws. Panelists to included the Freedom Forum’s Gene Policinski, Nashville attorney Doug Pierce (a specialist in media/First Amendment issues), Belmont Web Developer Paul Chenoweth, journalism student Abby Selden and Nashvillest.com co-founder Morgan Levy.

Click here to view a slideshow of photos detailing the events and to add your own comments!

Facebook’s attempt to “involve” its members just a con?

An interesting article posted by Lidija Davis on ReadWriteWeb yesterday asserts that Facebook’s extension of the “site governance vote” to its users could never work the way Facebook says it could.  In fact, Davis and others are calling this seemingly generous move by Facebook downright deceitful.  Back in February, Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced that Facebook would soon start letting its users vote on major changes to the site, calling this action an “unprecendented” effort to involve users.  But global privacy watchdog Privacy International is calling foul.

They say the problem lies with the condition that 30 percent of Facebook’s active users (active meaning that a user has logged in sometime in the last 30 days) have to vote on a proposal for the voting to even count.  This means that, for the current vote on Facebook’s Terms of Service to be valid, 49 million people would have to vote.  But this seems pretty unlikely, considering that, as of a couple of days ago, there were less than 281,000 votes.  Privacy International is calling this a “publicity stunt and a massive confidence trick on its 200 million users.”

“While we support the concept of user participation, the idea of establishing a thirty percent participation threshold is a complete joke. It will never be reached, and Facebook knows it. Earlier this year the figure had been set at 25 percent, and it was edged up because of concerns that users might actually succeed in changing the terms and conditions,” Privacy International’s Director, Simon Davies claimed in a statement Friday.

Check out the whole article, “Facebook’s Site Governance Vote: A Massive Con?”

Would You Pay For Facebook?

Pete Cashmore posted this article examining Facebook’s business plan and the possibility of the website charging for a “premium” membership in the future.
Facebook continues to uphold the notion that advertising, their current source of revenue, will remain their primary source of revenue. However, when asked if they would entertain the idea of charging fees for a premium membership, Facebook authorities seemed to avoid a clear answer to the question.
Here is chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg’s answer to the question:

SANDBERG: The answer is no, we are not planning on charging a basic fee for our basic services. Once again, that question stems from people thinking we’re growing so quickly we’re running out of money. We’re growing really quickly, but we can finance that growth. We’re not going to charge for our basic services.

Seems as though they are leaving the door open on the idea of a premium membership option. Do you think think this could be successful? What Facebook features, if any, would you be willing to pay for? Are there any additional features you would like to see Facebook add?

Below is a chart that shows what Facebook members use the website for the most.

Notice that browsing profiles and pictures is the most popular Facebook activity by far. Facebook says they would never charge for “basic use” so would a premium membership be profitable right now?

Who will monetize social media?

In the Mashable article “Who Will Monetize Social Media?”, author Ben Parr discusses the  front-runners in the race to establish a viable and sustainable way to monetize social media.  Parr says the top candidates are Facebook, Twitter and Apple mobile media.  The Mashable poll accompanying this article asks readers “Who will be the leader in monetizing social media?”  The results were mixed, with 15 percent of people responding that “There will be no one leader.”  But the option getting the largest number of votes was Apple mobile applications, with 27 percent of the votes.  Parr says that while Apple itself is not a social media outlet, the incredible success of the iPhone demonstrates how indispensable Apple may be a social enabler.

Apple isn’t a social media company, so why does it get a spot on this list? The answer is the wild success of the iPhone application store. Apple has succeeded where Facebook has not – in monetizing third party applications. On top of that, it has created a vibrant marketplace for mobile social media.  Will that innovation lead to more social media companies turning to mobile devices for monetization, a place where people seem more comfortable paying for software?

With Facebook, does a young person really have a past anymore?

Is it really possible to have a past when past actions are documented on Facebook, and old friends never really fade away because they technically remain “friends” with you online? These are some of the questions Peggy Orenstein addresses in her article in New York Times Magazine online, “Growing Up on Facebook.” Orenstein compares her own generation to the younger generation; while she is busy finding old friends on Facebook, she notices that young people, in a way, don’t really have a traditional past. After all, they have an online archive of their lives. Does this mean that the young people who have grown up with Facebook will have a more difficult time escaping their childhoods?

For all the discussion Facebook has prompted [...] its most profound impact may be to alter, even obliterate, conventional notions of the past, to change the way young people become adults.

“From Facebook to Twitter” Event

The panelists and the moderator of “From Facebook to Twitter: Rules, Rights and Realities of Social Networks” convocation event at Belmont University talk about the importance of the discussion.

Blogtalkradio Show Following “Facebook to Twitter” Convo

Derek Moore and Cody Badaracca hosted a Blogtalkradio show following the “Facebook to Twitter: Rights, Rules, and Realities of Social Media” Convocation last night. They interviewed panelists and audience members from the event.

Facebook: Giving democracy a try

According to the Associated Press, Facebook is asserting that its 175 million users will  play a vital role in determining the website’s policies – through reviewing, commenting and voting.  Zuckerberg is stressing this fact after receiving some pretty vicious feedback in response to Facebook’s new Terms of Service, which Consumerist.com called “We Can Do Anything We Want With Your Content. Forever.”  Read more for an excerpt from the article.

What did you really agree to when you signed up for MySpace, Picasa, YouTube, Twitter…?

Amanda L. French posted an interesting article a few days ago comparing Facebook’s Terms of Service with the Terms of Service of other sites, including MySpace, Picasa, YouTube, Flickr, Twitter and LinkedIn.  While this article was written before  Facebook returned to its old Terms of Service, it still provides some really interesting and important information about what you really agreed to when you signed up for these sites.