AllFacebook: Facebook Users Ignore Brands’ Content.
Anyone surprised? Our physical ability to block inputs is becoming more and more sophisticated.
Re/code: One Year Late, Facebook Rolls Out Scaled Back News Feed Redesign.
Redesign is a never-ending process, these days. FB is not a place I go to for inspiration.
New Republic: Technology’s Mindfulness Racket.
Fast Co: Oral History - Sex! Drugs! Apps! SXSW Interactive At 20.
Long read; familiar names and faces. Leave for when you have the proper time to stroll through it.
NewMusicBox: You’re Doing Targeted Marketing Wrong.
RandomHouse.CA/Hazlitt: What Do We Actually Want Social Media to Do?
“So what do want social media to do? We want it to externalize and enable the good things: the connections with others, the lively public square, the humming pulse of the world. At the same time, we wish it could somehow evade the other side of things: the tracking, the personal branding, the fear of missing out, the pointless evasion.” I picked a bland pullquote; do read the whole thing.
What do I want? Not filters. Not lists. Hallways between niches, with doors that can be slammed shut. More control. Better implementation of subject niches. Too often a casual ‘Like’ becomes the forcible rape of my timeline. Excuse the graphic description, but that’s exactly how it feels. The goal has become to ‘get responses’, and as such, we have another race to self-exposure and that former blog-addictor, sensationalism. Or pee-on-the-fire-hydrant-last ‘personal branding.’ If I like a page for photos, and get descriptions of what your parrot horked up after dinner, I’m out of there. Social media as implemented today encourages blather. Blather has its place; just not as the majority of my timeline. Anyone can be funny. Not everyone is witty.
If you put up a page for a specific subject, please God stay on subject. A waver or two is fine, once in a while. But we came to you for a specific reason. Don’t forget that reason.
Via wood s lot.
BBC: Facebook quietly ends email address system.
ReadWrite: How Facebook Plans To Take Over The Internet.
[Hysterical laughter.] AOL. He wants to be AOL. That’s the best he can do?
I’m this close to immolating my FB account.
Webdesigner Depot: Nothing left to say? The decline and fall of blog comments.
In this particular case, I’d be more likely to comment if I didn’t have to scroll the gauntlet of ads and share links. It’s a full screenlength from the last word of the article to the comments. I don’t bother. Out of sight, out of mind. Just sayin’.
NewsBlur Blog: Connect NewsBlur to dozens of web services with IFTTT.
Two great tastes, that taste great together.
That kind of day.
I open up Instagram, and have three images from different snappers, all portraying the ass-end of a feline looking out a window. I suppose it’s a sign. Expect cliché‘d repetition today.
NotCot: Coca Cola Social Media Guard!
Oh, I’ve got a use for this.
Re/code: With New Publishing Tools, LinkedIn Makes Everyone a Professional Blogger.
“On Wednesday, the company announced that everyone can now publish personal, long-form content to their LinkedIn profile pages, providing the site’s 277 million-plus users with their own professional blogging platform.” Ugh. Well, maybe the self-referential and deity-worship crowd will stay there, rather than in the more general web-space.
Mashable: How to Spend Only 10 Minutes Per Day on Twitter.
Hootsuite focused power-user tips.
Twitter has its share of whack jobs.
Dude wants to convince me I’m wrong, that astrology IS science. Goooooood grief.
LA Times: Second-screen apps? Viewers say ho-hum, but execs see potential.
“It seems that people who use their smartphones while watching their favorite shows are only doing so to distract themselves during commercials — not good for advertisers — though they do often look up websites related to the show.” Once again, execs are going to burn through significant wads of cash before they learn the lesson.
The Atlantic: The Facebook Effect on the News.
Cnet: Eterni.me lets you Skype with the dead.
“Eterni.me collects almost everything that you create during your lifetime, and processes this huge amount of information using complex Artificial Intelligence algorithms. [snip] Then it generates a virtual YOU, an avatar that emulates your personality and can interact with, and offer information and advice to, your family and friends after you pass away. It’s like a Skype chat from the past.” I expect an Eliza-like experience. Even in primitive form, Eliza was surprisingly appealing.
Mashable: Why Klout Had to Change — and Why You Shouldn’t Count It Out.
“… Klout gave itself a whole new business model. Now it won’t just measure your score and offer dubious perks, it will also provide you with a stream of content you’ll most likely to want to share, actively boosting your score.” So, now I’m curious.
I finally signed up to Klout. And here are some of the stories they suggest to me, to ‘improve’ my score:
HuffPo, Why you should start eating more bugs.
Betfair.com, Argentinian Football.
Jalopnik, What Chinese Carmakers can learn from dumb Starbucks.
Forbes, Why your company needs to be ‘brandful’.
io9, Why cutting off the tail off someone’s horse used to be a huge insult.
These are supposed to boost my scores? If that’s improvement, I prefer oblivion.
Suffice it to say … FAIL. I’ll spend a little time to try to train it, but given their article sourcing, I doubt it will have any influence on my daily link trolling.
Unsolicited LinkedIn invitations.
A reader was pummelled by my LinkedIn account recently. Apparently if you link your Gmail or other contact list to LinkedIn, they feel empowered to start sending out invitations without your say-so. The only way to get rid of the invites is to go to your ‘sent’ folder, click the subject line of each unaccepted invite, and choose ‘withdraw’. And you can deauthorize LinkedIn from accessing your Gmail account.
Warning: Some of the newer address book apps try to use LinkedIn as a way to keep your other contact lists (Gmail, iCloud, etc.) current. BEWARE doing so. You’ll link without realizing you’re giving other services permission to behave in this nefarious manner.
And if anyone is getting abused by my LinkedIn account, let me know, and I’ll double check my deauthorizations. I think I closed down the loophole. I have nearly 1,000 contacts in my address book. You can imagine how happy I am (not).
Rawz: An Iron, Iron Man.
Independent.UK: Michelangelo’s fame built on forgery, claims author.
Ummmm. ‘Forgery’ wasn’t defined the same way back then. I just attended the Renaissance to Goya exhibit in downtown Santa Fe, and was quite astonished by all the outright copying that was being done between artists. One artist would create a beautiful lithograph, which would never see the light of public day (being done for a rich patron). Other artists would copy the piece, publish those copies in books and other media for wider (public) consumption. Some just copied in order to improve their technique. Some copies would far surpass the original; some did not.
Further, it seems it was not necessarily the first — or the best — that received the fame of their time period. It was the most popular artist of that time period — those who grabbed the most eyeballs with the greatest amount of compiled reputation, first. Surprising how a near-cartoon almost-childlike rendering of a scene could garner more period enthusiasm than a finely proportioned and beautifully executed realist rendering.
Which rang a bell: sounds an awful lot like today’s social media.
After many decades, the better artist(s) are now recognized as being the archetypes of that time period.
Which makes me wonder about our social media/weblog/photography future. What is archival? What will survive? Certainly our current DVDs and hard drives and tape will not be around in 200 years. We live in a consumer throwaway society. I suspect we should be rendering our creations to traditional archival materials, if we wish them to survive. Make those prints, print that text.
Jon Lovett tweeting on the Allen/Farrow case.
Interesting. From one of the reports: “The Yale team used psychologists on Allen’s payroll to make mental health conclusions.”
Later: Chicago Now, Separating the art from the artist. I’d like to pose a question, albeit admittedly extreme. Can you separate the art from the politician? It’s a fair question. More importantly … should you separate these components of a personality? Raises the whole issue of moral relativism, a subject not unfamiliar to Allen fans.
Champagne & Cupcakes Tumblr: His arm, tho.
Macworld: How to simplify your social-media life.
Another reason I hate hidden ‘rollover’ UI bits.