Part of what makes the combination of globalization and social networking so amazing is that it has the ability to connect previously unconnected groups of people.  What was already socially organic in the real world, ie. a person meets someone and becomes involved with the groups and communities the person belongs to, and vice versa, became global and instantaneous thanks to the web.  And just as in the real world, individuals that do the connecting, called “bridges” or “social connectors” will prove to be a vital in studying behavioral change between online communities.

Previously, researchers focused on identifying central individuals, (ie. influencers or  leaders), in the group to accelerate behavior change or stem disease spread.  We utilize this principal all the time — for instance, we trust the reviews of our favorite movie critic; we reward the coworker who always boosts team morale; we identify the coworker who helps to spread or prevent disease (the guy who NEVER washes his hands/the OCD hand sanitizer freak).  But this only works locally, within groups or communities.  For non-movie buffs, the critic’s review doesn’t mean much nor does the morale boost or potential sickness to someone outside of the company.  Influence is only important to those who are in the know — and central individuals struggle to affect behavior because their influence means that they must share their attention and persuasion with numbers of people, reducing effectiveness.

A new study by Thomas Valente and Kayo Fujimoto, which appears in the April issue of the journal, Social Networks, suggests that when compared to central individuals, identifying bridging individuals who connect two otherwise disconnected groups is a much more efficient way to affect behavior change or stem disease spread.  Furthermore, the study presents a new model for identifying bridging individuals.

According to Valente in a recent article from U. of Southern California, researchers systematically deleted each link in a person’s network and calculated the resultant network cohesion, enabling them to identify an individual’s bridging effect.  Using their model, researchers were able to correctly identify the bridge individual in two separate studies: the spread of HIV among the first 40 cases diagnosed in the U.S. and drug use behavior among Irish teenagers in certain social networks.  Thinking about the introduction of the myriad of diseases introduced to Native Americans by European bridge individuals (and other more recent examples), it’s clear that this model will be important to public health officials who wish to prevent the spread of disease.

But what does the bridge individual mean to online communities?

Online communities work in a similar fashion to their real world counterparts: viruses and information spread through networks utilizing bridging individuals to reach previously unconnected groups.  It’s important to many people to be thought of as a thought leader within their network in order to influence behavior (get someone to read their blog, buy their product, etc.) but this study shows that at a macro level, it’s more important to be a connector, linking groups that might not otherwise organically come together to influence the same behavior.  In the case of web marketing/public relations, this model makes it possible to identify individuals and businesses who belong to several groups and who influence those groups naturally — as opposed to individuals and businesses who have influence only within a limited group.

Image courtesy of Mobilissimo

On September 25, 2009 AT&T launched Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS) on the iPhone–something that the iPhone had been technically capable to do for months but was not supported by the AT&T network.  The capability, available on other phones on the market for years, lead bloggers and users to exclaim, “Welcome, AT&T iPhone, to 2003“.  While iPhone users in other countries around the world–users not forced to subscribe to the AT&T network–were happily sending pictures and video to their friends, the resentment of U.S. users toward AT&T was becoming palpable.

In fact, the outrage became so intense that AT&T issued a YouTube video featuring an unknown, jittery spokesman explaining why AT&T had failed so hardcore.  The lasting impression, however, was a chiding from AT&T for iPhone users’ usage of the network.  Over 172,000 people have seen the video and instead of appeasing it’s indentured users, many openly criticized the company.  For now, AT&T has nothing to worry about because it has an exclusivity agreement with Apple which prohibits iPhone users from (legally) using any other service provider other than AT&T.  But the exclusivity agreement won’t last forever.

According to a recent study by CFI Group, 92% of iPhone users believe they have the best phone around, leading the pack in satisfaction when compared to its competition.  But while users like myself love the phone, we can’t STAND AT&T.  Given the chance, half of all iPhone users would switch to another provider. Not surprisingly, AT&T received only a 69% satisfaction rating, the lowest among service providers.  Experiencing the poor service for the first time are the 40% of all iPhone users who switched from another service provider to AT&T in order to use the iPhone, myself included.

So while we iPhone users continue to get frustrated with dropped calls in urban metropolitan areas, AT&T will spend $18 billion this year on top of the $20.1 billion it spent last year to upgrade its network–which is ironically called by AT&T spokesman Mark Siegel: “A strong, high-quality mobile broadband network. It is the nation’s fastest 3G network, now in 350 major metropolitan areas.”  AT&T does itself a great disservice by rejecting the comments and complains of its’ customers who must cope with dropped calls, a hard-to-access network, high plan fees and extra SMS costs.

And while users continue to shout their complaints into deaf ears, AT&T’s Siegel says that “The surest indication of customer satisfaction is churn.  And ours is at record-low levels. Our own internal data suggests that our iPhone customers are very satisfied with AT&T.”  Churn rate is that rate at which users switch service providers and AT&T’s is the lowest in the industry–1.09% as of July.  But will that number stay so low once the exclusivity agreement ends?  My bet is no.

It boggles my mind that AT&T has made no effort to establish itself as a brand that cares.  Where is the customer appreciation?  I was even threatened by an AT&T collection agency operator who said that I have to pay $40 for some unknown charge or it would go on my credit report.  When asked what the charge was, she couldn’t explain other than that it was a “service fee”.  I’d have to formally write my dispute in a letter and it would be reviewed.  Don’t bother to call or visit an AT&T store, she said, because they would refer me back to the collection agency.  Best to just pay the fee and move on–”You don’t want that on your credit file, just for a $40 fee,” she said.  What did I do?  Luckily, I kept the card of the guy who helped me at the AT&T store when I bought my iPhone.  I gave him a ring and told him the situation and he was able to fix the “AT&T oversight” for me in five minutes.  I called the collection agency the next day and they said it had been resolved.  Now what was that for?  To ensure that I would hate AT&T forever?  Mission accomplished.

Long story short, when the exclusivity agreement ends and I am released from my shackles to use my iPhone through any service, I don’t plan on using AT&T for anything ever again.  But how long will I have to wait?

iPhones and iPod Nanos in the gym are a common sight

Apple continues to innovate in ways that we never dreamed of just a few years ago.  With the recent launch of it’s iPod Nano with video capability and the sustained popularity iPhone models, we continue to see the death of the standalone music player.  But while as an iPhone owner I love being able to easily switch between listening to music and chatting with my friends on the same device, there comes a huge liability.

Bathrooms, Gyms, and other Non-Camera Areas

Many iPod and iPhone users (including myself) love being able to take music with them anywhere they go–including to the gym.  I’ve even spotted audiophiles plugged into their devices while standing at a urinal.  You and I would probably think nothing of it.

But imagine if you saw someone walking around a gym, bathroom, or child’s playground with a camera or camcorder.  Would you do a double take?  Avoid the person?  Confront the person?  Report them?

The reality is that as time goes on, more and more handheld devices like phones and music players will incorporate cameras and camcorders.  So while you may naively assume that the guy at the back of the gym is rocking out, he might also be taking pictures or video of the people in front of him.  What about when he takes that device into the bathroom, dressing room, or showers?

It’s not a new concern, but it’s one that gyms in particular will need to tackle as the threat of iVoyeurism continues to grow.

What is Being Done?

In short, not much.  Self-regulation and reporting suspicious behavior are the best ways to keep these areas safe for everyone.

Many gyms have for years banned cameras and camcorders for obvious reasons.  Some have gone on to ban camera phones like the iPhone.  But with the iPod line of Apple music players being ubiquitous among gym-goers and the new iPod Nano’s tiny size (less than 4″ x 2″) the hardest part becomes policing.

Some gyms–such as Life Time Fitness–have banned the iPod Nano from use within locker rooms.  It will still be allowed in the gym workout areas.

But let’s face it, while we certainly don’t want pictures or videos of us changing in locker rooms to show up online, who wants a video of them sweating like a pig on an elliptical on the web either?  Not me.

What do you think should be done to combat this problem?

An article today by Steven Walling entitled, “Forget Gen Y: Gen X is Making Real Change” got me thinking, why are Gen X-ers and Gen Y-ers at war in the workplace?

Walling’s article is nothing more than an attempt to bully and patronize Gen Y-ers into thinking that their Gen X bosses are more valuable.  False.

Walling cites a new Forrester survey that suggests that Gen X (those aged 30-43) are leading the way in their company to adopt social media technology and are the fastest-growing demographic among social media users.  What he leaves out is that Gen Y (those aged 10-29) was the fastest-growing demographic–in fact, the only demographic–back 5 years ago.  Now that nearly all of Gen Y (96% according to some reports) is on social media, we’ve plateaud.

I joined Facebook in March of 2005.  My Mom joined a couple of years later, followed by everyone else in the world.  Including my 85-year old grandmother.  But not the other way around, as Walling would suggest: “A favorite argument … is that the youngest demographic is more adept with technology.  The idea of Millennials at the vanguard of innovation … is a myth.”

Walling neglects the notion that it was Gen Y-ers who influenced their Gen X bosses, friends, and family members to check out social media.  Indeed, many of the Gen X and above crowd may find it impossible to reach Gen Y-ers though any other means besides social media–because to Gen Y, email is dead.

Not shockingly, Walling hails Gen X as the people who actually create change within the company to adopt social media technology (therefore you should “forget Gen Y”).  But let’s face it, without hearing about these technologies by Gen Y-ers–many of which were created by Gen Y-ers (like Facebook, whose founder Mark Zuckermen, was born in 1984)–there would be nothing to make into a reality.  And nothing to praise Gen X for.

As Walling says, it’s all about the clout.  Gen X is older and more experienced, and are therefore more likely to be managers.  Gen Y is largely still in the internship/entry-level stage of their career and won’t have that “clout”.  Therefore, they take their ideas to their boss, who takes it to his or her boss, etc. etc. etc.

I’ve lived this reality. Let me paint you a picture:

Me: “I discovered a great social media tool.”
Gen X boss: “I’m skeptical. Show me the ROI.”
Me: Writes a report detailing usage, application, and ROI.
Gen X boss: “Looks great. Let me take this to Baby Boomer CEO.”
Baby Boomer CEO: “Great, Gen X boss. Let’s get this rolling.”

I had the idea and knowledge. My Gen X boss had the authority and ear of the CEO.  Together, we made it a reality.

The only thing that Walling and I agree on is this: “Even if Gen Y was significantly better at using social software, it wouldn’t matter at this point.”  And it doesn’t.  What matters is utilizing the ideas and creativity of Gen Y-ers and the strategical, decision-making “clout” that Gen X possesses.  It’s not a competition.  It’s collaboration.

Cool video that describes the Social Media Revolution:

Seldom do stars rise–so gallantly–from such astonishing personal and career lows.  But then, seldom are there stars like Whitney Houston.  And this new Whitney comes back swinging.

Under normal circumstances I would never consider doing an album review but I as I mentioned above, we’re talking about Whitney.  And I was pleasantly surprised that I found myself listening to “I Look To You” on loop.

Download IMMEDIATELY:

“A Song For You” — 5 stars. I didn’t like it at first, but now that I’ve listened to it, oh, 50 times, I’ve come to appreciate everything about it.  At the 2:50 mark Whitney kicks it into high gear and tears it up.  I can’t wait for the dance remixes.

“Million Dollar Bill” — 4 stars. This song didn’t catch me at first, but after a couple of times hearing it, and with a drink in my hand I had the overwhelming urge to dance.  The next day–and every day since–I couldn’t stop myself from humming the tune.

“I Look To You” — 4 stars. This is the power ballad of the album.  I like the song, but I like the uptempo songs better.

“Like I Never Left” – 4 stars.  Collaboration with Akon.  What’s not to love?

Before and After pics:

22 years of aging never looked better.  And 20 years of crack and Bobby Brown at that.

“

"I Look To You" - 2009

"Whitney" - 1987

Once upon a time I enjoyed the days when I could mentally and physically punch out at the end of the day and not think about work again until the next morning.  My work and personal lives were totally separate.  But, my career advanced and now I respond to emails when I first wake up (there’s always something waiting for me), when I’m out at lunch, and long after I’ve left the office.  I always take a bit of the office with me wherever I go.  There’s definitely something 21st century about emailing your boss while watching trailers at the movie theater.  And I’m not alone.  In a world of 24/7 communication, many companies expect that employees are “e-vailable” (available online) at all hours of the day and night.  It’s not being “on call” per se, because you don’t have to actually pack up and go into the office, but “on email”, where you can make decisions from your jammies as you watch Conan O’Brien.  The difference is overtime pay.

So, should workers get paid for being evailable?  ABC has brought to light a handful of lawsuits that have recently popped up from disgruntled employees saying that yes, that is personal time used for work and therefore compensation is required.  Then there is the reaction from the company that everyone is required to do more with less–more hours, less pay, more off-hours communication.  In my case, the recession impacted my company such that  it cut expenses like work phones, which meant that I was communicating with my boss on my brand new (personally-financed) iPhone.

Now, I get it.  The reality is that in this world of 24/7 communication and during this recession we all need to stay connected to make sure the machine runs smoothly.  Mentally punching out at 5:00 isn’t going to work.  If a worker isn’t willing to commit to constant communication, there’s a line around the block of desperate job-seekers who will be. As Darryl Ohrt recently wrote, “We bring our personal lives into the workplace and our work into our personal lives thanks to smart phones, internet everywhere and teams spread across time zones. At our agency, we openly encourage employees to spend time on Facebook, Twitter and other personal social networks while at work, and they’re answering emails from home at night. This is the workplace of 2009.”

So, while it may be hard to demand monetary compensation, especially if you’re paid a salary (like I am) and not hourly, what may be best is a “two-way street” of time flexibility.  Darryl Ohrt suggests just that:

“What if employees were required to be at the office from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m., but the rest of the schedule was left to their personal preference? Meetings could be scheduled, clients could make contact and collaborations could continue to flourish during the core part of the day. But otherwise, morning people could be morning people, and night owls could be night owls. A morning person might come in at 8 a.m. and leave at 5 p.m. A late sleeper might come in at 10 a.m. and leave at 7 p.m.

Executives and senior creatives are already working with open schedules, as management trusts that employees at this level have dedicated themselves to a career, and are going to work day and night anyway. Freelancers and independents also enjoy a schedule of their choosing. Naturally, some agencies require a 12-hour work day for all employees, and can’t even enter the discussion.

But what about the average knowledge worker? The people that fill your agency not because it’s their calling, but because it’s the job they love. The people without the fancy offices or fat salaries. Fixed schedules seem to be kept for clients (a good idea) and for fear or distrust of employees (a bad idea). Management wants to avoid the potential predicament of ‘awesome … I’ll only work 3 hours a day,‘ and embraces the structure of a fixed schedule as a safety net instead.”

In the end, we’re left wondering, is this the death of the 9-to-5?  Well, we’ll have to wait and see.  And if you feel like “office hours” are already reminiscent of days gone by then curl up on your couch, slip in the classic comedy starring Jane Fonda, Dolly Parton, and Lily Tomlin, and enjoy–but don’t neglect those work emails!

The U.S. Department of Transportation released the findings of a study on Wednesday that details the dramatic rise in impaired driving among women between 1998 and 2007: a remarkable 28.8%.  During that same period, impaired driving among men FELL 7.5%.  Yet, impaired driving arrests among men outnumber those for women by a staggering 4-to-1.

While I am saddened by these statistics, I’m not terribly shocked.  What I am shocked at is the sexist tone and complacency that Mothers Against Drunk Driving (M.A.D.D.) President Laura Dean-Moody exhibited when questioned by CNN about the issue:

“Women are unfortunately picking up some of the same terrible, reckless behaviors that men have exhibited.” — As if men invented drunk driving and women are simply imitating the behavior.

When asked why women are increasingly driving while impaired she speculated, “Women are under more pressure. They’re now perhaps the breadwinner with the unemployment rate.” — Sounds a little sympathetic to me.  I wonder if this reason would have been cited if the statistics were reversed–this recession affects both sexes, after all.  She adds, “TV shows have made it look hip or cool to be a mom that stays home and drinks.” — Well, if the mom is STAYING HOME and drinking it wouldn’t be a problem, now would it?

My advice? People of the world: men, women, children (?!) please stop drinking and driving!

P.S. I think it’s lame that only mothers can be against drunk driving.  I cry sexism!  What about fathers?  Maybe there should be a Fathers Against Drunk Driving.  Hmm, “F.A.D.D.” almost makes it sound cool.  Ok then, an all-inclusive Parents Against Drunk Driving. “P.A.D.D.”? No, that won’t work either.  What about Citizens…I think “C.A.D.D.” works out alright…

It would be silly to not mention the fact that it’s been MONTHS since I’ve updated this blog. It would also be counter-productive because, let’s face it, all bloggers run into this issue at some point. This post will both acknowledge and attempt to remedy the problem of not posting to a blog. Here are some of the excuses that I’ve been giving to folks:

1. I’m so busy that I don’t have the time!
2. I just don’t know what to write about.
3. The blog is not important enough for the inactivity to be noticed.
4. I keep forgetting and I’m just too lazy to update it.
5. I’m comfortable with leaving my last post on the front page for a while.  I mean, it’s about a Twitter fight with Carson Daly!

Ok, so you might be able to empathize with #1-4.  #5 is sort of my own thing.  Following are the things that I’m going to remember in order to maintain a healthy, active, vibrant blog that will continue to grow and build my personal brand.  Whatever that personal brand is.

1. This blog entry took me less than 15 minutes.  A post doesn’t have to be long or in-depth.  In fact, it’s better to have several shorter blog posts than one long one.  If your blog is very focused (unlike mine) consider creating a series of posts about a particular topic—this will take less time than writing an essay about the topic.
2. Think about the things that pique your interest throughout the day and make a note of them.  Go back later and draft a paragraph about your reaction to something.  You know when you read an article and Digg it or share it on Facebook?  Perfect blog post material.
3. First of all, it will be noticed.  And those who actually LIKE what you have to say will consistently be disappointed when they visit your blog and there’s nothing new.  And they may think you’ve died.  Besides, it’s not about whether the inactivity is noticed.  It’s about continuing to add to the collective dialogue, sharing content, and learning (even if that’s just learning about yourself).
4. Set up a reminder.  Put a sticky note on your computer.  Whatever you need to do.  As far as laziness goes, I feel the same way about exercise.  You have to do it even if you don’t feel like it.  In the end it’s better for you and you’ll be happy you did it.
5. While it’s tempting to leave a post you’re proud of on the front page, especially when all of the other things above are obstacles, it’s doing you no good.  Remember: it’s about consistently sharing your thoughts, listening to what others are saying, and adding to the collective dialogue.  A stationary post that sits there for months does none of those things.

These days every company wants to have a social media presence.  As many would expect, Twitter is perhaps the most difficult for a company to manage because it’s nothing more than streaming, real-time conversations.  How can a company manage millions of conversations minute by minute?  The short answer is that unless you have lots of people working on it 24-hours a day, you can’t.  But here’s what you can do to effectively manage your brand in 5 easy steps:

1. Create a Twitter handle for your company or brand to use as a customer service and news platform.   This is most useful to announce news, point followers to relevant content, offer specials, and resolve customer service complaints/questions.
2. Then create a Twitter handle for the C-level executives (or at the very least, the CEO).  These types of accounts are becoming very popular (@richardbrandon of Virgin, for example)  because they allow a level of transparency that was previously impossible to attain.  This is good for tweeting during board meetings, giving little snippets of the day-to-day operations of the company, and for the thoughts of the executive so as to make them appear human and not simply the biggest cog in the corporate machine.
3. Go to Twitter Search and create searches for your brand, your company, your competitors, industry topics, and relevant people.  Some Boolean is allowed so be sure to make ample use of the “AND” function so as not to create millions of RSS feeds.  To create an RSS feed, simply do a search and click the “RSS Feed” button at the top right.  This will alert you in real-time when any of those search criteria are mentioned in a tweet.  I suggest you set the RSS feed up through Outlook (unless you use any other RSS-capable program more frequently than Outlook).
4. Dedicate people in your company to monitoring various feeds, dependant upon the size of your company.  A search like “Rubbermaid” AND “Sucks” OR “Terrible” OR “Worst” should create a feed that the customer service department should respond to.
5. If your company is large and/or there too many conversations happening at once, make sure to prioritize which types of tweets are the most valuable to the brand.  As a general rule, tweets that alter your brand adversely (complaints and rants, spreading of misinformation, etc.) should be responded to first.

Thanks to Jacob Morgan (@jacobm) for the tweet that spawned this post.

Craigslist is pretty hit-or-miss.  If you’re familiar with the free online community then you know that you can go on it anytime you want to find anything from a free couch to a place to live to a date to a date.

I recently moved out to the San Francisco Bay Area and Craigslist is essential out here.  It’s all but replaced printed classifieds.

My first experience with Craigslist out here turned out to be a sordid mess.  Long story short, I was looking for a living situation with a roommate in the Berkeley area and found what seemed to be a great situation.  Great price, great house, great roommate.  As they say, it was too good to be true.  While the price and the house were great, the roommate turned out to be a complete wacko.  It should have set off red flags when he wouldn’t disclose his full name until I demanded that he do so.  I lived there for exactly one week before packing everything up and moving into a friend’s apartment until I could find another.  But, you live and you learn.

Reluctantly,  I went back on Craigslist.  This time I searched for a studio, just for me.  I found a great place and I’m happy to say that I’m now safe and sound.

With the news lately about the Craigslist killer (I hate to cite Fox News, but here is a link to the article) I’m really beginning to wonder what types of things Craigslist can do to ensure the safety of its visitors.  It’s quickly becoming the hitch-hiking of the 21st century where you just don’t know anything about the person that you are dealing with and its becoming more dangerous every day.

As it stands now, you need only provide as much information as you want in any ad, and you don’t even have to put your “real” email; Craigslist will generate an anonymous email that forwards replies to your ad to your email account.  And while I think that it’s important for the seller to be able to be anonymous (from potentially sketchy buyers) I also think that buyers should have some ability to gauge the sketchiness of the seller.

So, as with many online merchant communities there is a seller rating.  Perhaps this would be an option.  Or, as with CouchSurfing, there are levels of verification.  Perhaps to get a 1-star verification level, a seller or buyer puts in a credit card number that establishes–to Craigslist–the identity of the person.  A 2-star verification could include feedback from buyers/sellers from previous transactions, etc.

The only hinderance to this would be in the sex trade that Craigslist is also known for.  Would people disclose their identity to Craigslist only to post a sexualy explicit ad?  Who knows.  But in the meantime, there is real danger in entrusting your personal information (even your name and address) to random strangers on Craigslist.  My advice would be to make sure that you get full name, address, and/or phone number BEFORE you meet someone for ANY type of transaction found through Craigslist and provide that information to friends along with where and when you’ll be meeting.  That way, if things get sketchy you can say, “My friends have your information and know exactly where I am and what I’m doing right now.”