Tag Archives: Twitter

Internet Vices

18 Jul

Andrea vascellari, ceo von ivite, hat sich mal ein paar gedanken über unsere internet-laster gemacht und die youtube’s, tumblr’s, facebook’s etc. dieser welt, auf denen wir uns mittlerweile täglich stundenlang tummeln in illustrationen festgehalten, indenen er deren wirkung auf/mit uns mit drogen vergleicht…natürlich mit einem augenzwinkern, jedoch nicht ganz ohne ein fünkchen wahrheit…



The Bermuda Triangle of Productivity

5 Jul


Your Professor Tweets More Than You

30 Jun

How many of y’all are friends with your professors on facebook? I have friended a couple of my past teachers, but not very many. I feel that the learning community didn’t really know to jump into the social media wave, but they ultimately went for it. Over 90% of college faculty engages with social media compared to less than 50% of other professionals. Those in higher education seem to care less if students know about their real life as to someone with a business client.

I’ve heard that employers and universities will look up applicants on facebook or twitter to see what they are like when they aren’t in an interview. As much as it is creepy, sometimes having a company see that you will fit its culture from your twitter is a good thing.

In my opinion professionals will gradually enter the social media world. Most start-ups and technology companies encourage their employees to have a twitter. This way customers believe they are creating a relationship with the companies through social media outlets. All organizations know the key to repeat customers is post-purchase interaction.


The Pope Sends His First Tweet, From an iPad

30 Jun

Holy tweet! The Pope is on Twitter.

His Holiness used the Vatican’s news account to send his first tweet, which announced the launch of a news information portal (and, of course, praised Jesus).

Unlike other tweets sent from the account, the tweet from the Pope was sent using Twitter for iPad.

Does the Pope have an iPad? You bet! Or at least he used one to launch the new site.

We wouldn’t expect any less, technologically speaking, from the leader who has overseen the launch of the Vatican’s YouTube channel and “Pope2You” mobile and Facebook apps as well as encouraged priests to blog.


Social networking ‘utopia’ isn’t coming

29 Jun

(CNN) — As 2011 dawned, Facebook released a map that spoke to our era of social media in much the same way the first pictures of Earth from space spoke to the 1960s.

The map showed the connections between the world’s Facebook friends — a number now approaching 700 million — as beams of light. Gossamer-thin threads linked every major city on the planet. The cities shone like stars.

No one has done this, but just think what that map would look like if you were to add Twitter users, whose numbers last month surpassed 300 million.

A grand total of 1 billion accounts, and who knows how many billions of connections? (Facebook friends max out at 5,000, but there’s no limit to the number of people who can follow you on Twitter.)

Then consider that all these threads connected in the last five years. And that at the rate of growth both services are enjoying, the connecting party is just getting started.

You might be forgiven for looking at this imaginary map and thinking some very 1960s-style thoughts — that we are forging some kind of global consciousness where everyone will end up friending and following everyone else, right?

Not so fast, man.

A study released this month shows that digital tribalism is alive and well in the social network era. The tribes I’m talking about aren’t nations, corporations or sports teams, though clearly these brands all matter as much as they ever did.

I’m talking literally about tribes — as in the kind of village-sized small groups most of us lived among for nearly all of human history, right up until the 20th century. Small groups that we now seem to be organizing ourselves into again — virtually.

Scientists at Indiana University collected the conversations of 1.7 million Twitter users over six months, a total of 380 million tweets.

What they wanted to know was this: How many real connections do Twitter users have? Not just silent following, not retweeting, not a stray @ message to someone, but a real back-and-forth conversation. How many people can you maintain that kind of contact with online before you get overwhelmed?

The answer, on average, was roughly 150.

If you read Malcolm Gladwell’s best-seller “The Tipping Point,” you probably remember the importance of 150. It’s Dunbar’s number, so named for an anthropologist who predicted the size of the “tribe” we can comfortably handle, based on the size of our brain compared to that of other primates and the average size of their groups.

Turns out we’re hardwired to get along best in tight groups of no more than 150, and have been since we were living on the African savannah. Armies take advantage of this hardwiring, as do the smartest corporations, not to mention wedding planners.

Even if you’re a gregarious soul, Gladwell suggested you list how many people you would actually stop and have a catch-up conversation with if you bumped into them on the street. I might add: How many of those Facebook acquaintances of yours truly deserve the title “friend”?

If social networking were changing our brains’ wiring, then, yes, maybe we would one day live in some utopian world where technology connected everyone in a meaningful friendship. But the Indiana study doesn’t hold out any hope that this will ever happen.

The authors explain it this way: Calculators are great tools, but they don’t turn us into math geniuses. They don’t expand our brain’s natural limits. Neither do Facebook or Twitter.

And maybe this is no bad thing. What social media gives us, for the first time, is the chance to choose our own group of 150.

Instead of being lumped with the village we happened to be born in, as happened for most of history, we each get to construct a virtual village that suits us — cobbled together from family, old friends, our best co-workers and mentors, and that like-minded spirit you met on vacation one time.

The key is to keep it small. For example, a popular iPhone photo sharing app, Path, limits your network to just 50 people.

I predict big things for the first social service to make sure you max out at 150 friends or followers, making the resulting interaction all the more worthwhile.

Perhaps only when we are in such networks can we construct a meaningful map of the world.

*Editor’s note: Chris Taylor is San Francisco bureau chief of Mashable, a popular tech news blog and a CNN.com content partner.

Source: cnn.com

The Reality Behind Social Location Apps

22 Jun

Digital services company Beyond compiled the results of their research into location-based apps, and designed this infographic summarizing the results; Check-In Data: The Reality Behind the Hype.  Released in conjuction with the Social-Loco conference in San Francisco, CA on May 5th.

As part of our involvement in the Social-Loco conference we have done some research to try to understand the difference between what people are saying online compared to the actions of early adopters and the views of the rest of the US population when it comes to their mobile check-in habits.

The results give us a clear understanding of who the winners and losers are likely to be, as well as the types of things that will motivate the mass consumer to adopt location-based apps. They also highlight some of the real challenges there are to consumers embracing this technology.

The data is very interesting.  Personally, I continue to use Foursquare, but find myself checking in less and less because I don’t get any direct benefits out of it.

From a design standpoint, I like the circle clusters, but I don’t like data separate in a legend on the side.  I appreciate that the color-coding remains the same, so Twitter is the same color in each visualization.  I would have included the logo images for the social location-based apps, and connected the data directly to the circles.  Data legends like this make your readers work harder to understand the information.

I also think that the most interesting learning from the study is the comparison between how people interact with national brands and small, local businesses.  However, this is the last visualization at the bottom, and gets lost.


Jack Bauer trends on Twitter after Bin Laden killing

4 May

Those Jack Bauer fans just won’t give up: The infamous character from Fox’s long-running drama “24” was a big trending topic on Twitter late Sunday in light of the Osama Bin Laden news — no doubt because many were thinking (hoping?) a Bauer-like embed was responsible for the “actionable intelligence” that led to President Obama’s press conference.

Here’s the good news: Kiefer Sutherland could be back on Fox this fall. Now, the bad news: He won’t be reprising his role as a counter-terrorism agent. Instead, he’s playing a dad whose autistic son can predict events before they happen in a project called “Touch.” The drama’s from Tim Kring (“Heroes”) and is already generating great buzz.

But a return of Bauer is still in the cards. A big-screen version of the drama remains in the works at 20th Century Fox, and producer Brian Grazer (whose company, Imagine Entertainment, was behind the TV show) recently acknowledged that he’s on board. In March,

Sutherland told the women of “The View” that the movie will come out in 2012. Hey Kief: Care to rethink that timeline now?


For example:

Everything Ages Fast…

26 Apr

Gorgeous ads done by Moma Propaganda, an advertising agency in Sao Paulo, Brazil. They created them for their client Maximidia Seminars as part of a campaign titled “Everything Ages Fast.”

Check the Moma website, it’s awesome!

Piped Music:

Some interesting revelations about Twitter

20 Apr

Yahoo and Cornell University did a big research project on Twitter, trying to figure out “Who Says What to Whom on Twitter.”

Here’s what they figured out:

Twitter is a media platform, not a social network. “First, we find that although audience attention has indeed fragmented among a wider pool of content producers than classical models of mass media, attention remains highly concentrated, where roughly 0.05% of the population accounts for almost half of all attention.”

Twitter is clique-y. “Within the population of elite users, moreover, attention is highly homophilous, with celebrities following celebrities, media following media, and bloggers following bloggers.”

Twittter is the Evening News broadcast: full of stories reported elsewhere, brought to your attention by a personality you trust. “Second, we find considerable support for the two-step flow of information—almost half the information that originates from the media passes to the masses indirectly via a diffuse intermediate layer of opinion leaders, who although classified as ordinary users, are more connected and more exposed to the media than their followers.”

News stories don’t last long on Twitter. Laga Gaga sticks around forever. “We also find that different types of content exhibit very different lifespans. In particular, media-originated URLs are disproportionately represented among short-lived URLs while those originated by bloggers tend to be overrepresented among long-lived URLs. Finally, we find that the longest-lived URLs are dominated by content such as videos and music, which are continually being rediscovered by Twitter users and appear to persist indefinitely.”

Source: businessinsider.com

More about the Twitter elite:

Apparently 50% of the tweets made on the social networking site (in an eight month sample period) were produced by an “elite group” of 20,000 users.

The research authors noted that they used Twitter lists to pick out these elite users, “specifically celebrities, bloggers, and representatives of media outlets and other formal organizations, and ordinary users.”

The authors stated: “Based on this classification… a striking concentration of attention on Twitter – roughly 50% of tweets consumed are generated by just 20K elite users – where the media produces the most information, but celebrities are the most followed.”

The study reckons these 20,000 elite tweeters make up less than 0.05% of the social network’s population – a lot less, by our reckoning (although the data was sampled a while back, most of it from the second half of 2009).

Still, whatever the exact figure, there’s clearly a huge concentration of tweeting done by a very vocal and minuscule minority.

Source: techwatch.co.uk

Find the whole study here: Who Says What to Whom on Twitter