Itai Boublil

Social Media Hub

Facebook has completed a series of changes to its service in the past several months. The last of these changes was completed a few days ago and calls for a special attention simply because Facebook had just redefined its role in the Social Media sphere.

People I spoke to in the past 3 three days did not like (an understatement) the new design. The opinions vary from person to person, but mainly they tend to focus on the design, or the look if you will.

To be perfectly fair, design is something that is very subjective. One person’s favorite design is another person least favorite design. With this in mind, trying to analyze a business that is a content/search/social media based business by sheerly focusing on design is like trying to rank a Blog by its sheer look and not its content. It is simply the wrong way.

I tried, therefore, to put things in order and share with you my view on Facebook’s new design. Also in this post, where I think Facebook is heading in 2010, and how Facebook is turning into the biggest Social Media Hub.

This is how it translates from a Social Media perspective:

• We now have the ability to Bookmark applications. You can bookmark your favorite applications using the “Add Bookmark” button in an application, this will allow a one-click access to your bookmarked applications from the left-hand menu. This to me sounds as if Facebook is trying to create a Delicious Bookmark service.

• The left column gives a very RSS feed like feeling. Notifications, news, and updates  seem to appear live. The dashboard is surfacing the most recent application activity and your friends’ activity, which to me resembles a RSS feed feature.

• The new Email approach is very welcomed in my opinion. I really found the process of opening private messages on Facebook tedious. I do have to admit that the new email system reminds me very much a Gmail mobile experience. I want to dare and say that Facebook is heading toward taking a slice of the Email market, and to be honest I think they have a great advantage if they decide to do so. In the future, I will not be surprised if your new Facebook email address would look like this: Username@facebook.com. Hmm, did anyone say Email Marketing? This will open a great debate in the Inbound Marketing community.

• Another proof that Facebook is turning into a Social Media Hub is their plan to upgrade its photo service. Upload photos, and creating new albums on Facebook is also a tedious process. This process is coming to an end, and soon we will all experience a new way to share and upload photos to our Facebook account (installing a plug-in is required). I am not going to go into details, but it is very much similar to the Flickr service

• The Chat application had also received an upgrade, and a big one too. By shifting it to the left side column, Facebook is saying that they want us to pay attention to it. What you see is a list of some of your online friends in the left-hand menu. This list is not comprehensive, but includes people who you communicate with frequently. I think Facebook has bigger plans than we actually think. I will not be surprised to see in the near future some sort of a Mobile interaction, the same one we saw in Google Voice, and  Skype.

The list goes on and on, but suffice it to say that Facebook is slowly shifting itself to become the biggest Social Media Hub in the Online sphere, or at least is trying to, and it will be interesting to see how things will develop in the year 2010.

What do you think? Do you think Facebook can become to Social Media what Google is to Search?

Steve Jobs with the iPad

For the past year now, just like many other tech geeks, I followed the numerous rumors covering the biggest event of the year, the upcoming (now released) Apple iPad. Finally, after long waiting, Steve Jobs introduced the iPad to the public in an event that was broadcasted live…from an iPhone. Apparently, Apple did not allow any camera crews to broadcast the event to the masses. Strange, but it is not why I write this post.

By now, there are possibly hundreds of blog posts floating in the blogosphere covering every inch of the iPad, analyzing the pros and cons, and telling us why we should or should not purchase an iPad. Fair enough, but still it is not why I write this post.

There is also a lot of disappointment among many tech geeks who think that Apple did not do enough to provide an “iPhone like” product, something that will flip the industry upside-down, and will create the same revolution the iPhone created when it was first released. Good point, but wait, did Apple really talk about a revolution?

This type of high expectations unleashed quite few reviews, most of them negative reviews, numbering the reasons why iPad is a big disappointment.

The question that came to my mind is this: Is it fair/right to blame Apple for the lack of adobe flash, camera, signing with AT&T, not providing USB port, not having E-Ink for easy E-book reading, lack of multitasking, no drag and drop management, no SD slot, no HDMI Out, no 1080 Playback, no Native Widescreen, no full GPS, no Open SDK? The answer, I think, should be No. I will explain:

All the features I mentioned are great and needed features, but unfortunately we, the masses, created them. All the rumors and speculations we read over the past year, created in our mind the “perfect’ iPad. The iPad we, the masses, wanted to have, and the iPad we the masses thought Apple will introduce.

I agree the lack of all the features I mentioned above left a somewhat bitter taste from yesterday’s event, almost a defeat, if you will, to our high exceptions. But wait, I see hope in the horizon. Look at Apple’s products over the years (iPod, Macs, iPhones, etc), they all prevailed, and they all started as a tool that lacked one or two features (e.g. iPod: was too big. iPhone: not as fast as 3GS). No matter which Apple product you will pick, they all ended up turning into something we never expected (a great example would be the latest redesign of the iPod Nano).

When I talk to Apple users/fans all over the world, I always detect the sense of pride and admiration they hold toward Apple products. There is always the feeling that you are talking to Steve Jobs himself. In that sense, I can see why people will get angry with Apple, almost resentful at the fact that they did not release the iPad we ALL wanted, you know, the one that “will show” Microsoft who is the boss, who will teach Google how it should really be.

No, not yesterday, not today, and probably not tomorrow either. Apple is a company that strives on innovation, true, but it is also a company that is strategic, and their strategy this time is simply to “wait”. There are currently at least 5 companies who are developing a tablet, and one of them is a big “whale” name Google, thus from a strategic point of view it would not make sense to introduce a full product when your competitor is trying to learn your steps.

In sum, even though we did not get the iPad we all desired, the future for this type of devices looks promising then ever, and in many ways the current iPad is indeed a revolution.

Do you agree?

I attached a video of a different point of view :-) enjoy:

As part of my morning reading routine, I came across an interesting article about the new Google phone, Nexus One. I will not go into details about what this article covered (you can read it yourself when you are done with this post), but I would like to quote one part of this article that made me cringe with astonishment:

“…Wall Street Journal quoted one analyst as saying, “Unless [Google] gives it a big push with marketing dollars, which they are not, consumers aren’t going to know the phone exists…the company says it is favoring an online strategy as opposed to television for its campaigns (which is why the analyst quoted above doubted its chances)…”

I could not disagree with this “analyst” any more that I do now. I mean, unless this “analyst” lived in a soup can for the past decade or so, he should really seek for a different profession.

Consider this: according to a survey published by Harris Interactive, “adult internet users are now spending an average of 13 hours a week online. About 14% spends 24 or more hours a week online…”

To say that favoring an Online Marketing Strategy as opposed to Traditional Marketing Strategy (aka Outbound Marketing) will make Google Phone fail is really ignorant, to say the least.

Furthermore, the “analyst” suggested Google should “give it a big push with marketing dollar”, really? Why? With 65.4% of search engine market share, why should Google invest in Outbound Marketing, when it can save all the “big marketing dollars” by using free marketing services of which some they already own? Example: PPC, YouTube, Bloggers, Twitter, and Facebook just to name a few. Personally, I think a blog post review by a Techcrunch geek can generate more buzz and traffic than any TV ad. I am not suggesting Google is not spending money on Marketing, they do, but what I do say is that Google should not and does not need to spend money and effort on outbound marketing.

The Bottom line quite simple: It is Google, and Online is what they do best.

What do you think Google’s best marketing strategy should be?

Update: I just read this interesting update: Nexus One gets prime ad real estate on Google’s Homepage (check it out).

Angry Inbound Marketer

Traditional PR still exists, and it is uglier than I thought.

Last week, while driving to Trader Joe’s, I happened to listen to a talk show on NPR and was stunned by what I heard. They were interviewing a “famous”  blogger (I wasn’t familiar with his name) who was talking, and raving, about the (in)famous Facebook application Farm Ville. In case you have not heard, you can read about it here.

As I kept listening to the interview, I was dumbfounded by this blogger’s attempt (and also by NPR’s ignorance about the topic) to rave about Farm Ville, which is, as you already know from reading this link, one big scam . Worst, they did not once mentioned  any of the misleading, unethical and spamming techniques the company is using during this interview. All they said is how great and innocent this application is.

I would have expected a minimal effort by the NPR research team to learn about the topic before promoting a company that uses unethical approach to spam its customers.

I guess traditional PR still exists, and it is uglier than I thought.

By the way, if you are wondering about my  choice of picture, please don’t. It is simply the way to describe what I felt doing during the talk.

As part of my effort to explain people the power of SMM, SEM, and SEO, I come across some interesting discussions and opinions that I thought would be interesting of sharing with you.

One of these discussions occurred yesterday, when I conversed with a client of mine about how to engage his students using online tools. He has recently learnt that the college he teaches at will soon offer online classes to its students, and his concern was that he will no longer be able to interact with his students while lecturing (i.e. taking and answering questions).

Puzzled from this statement, I asked him if he has ever heard of what a webinar is. He responded by telling me that he might have heard of it, but never took interest.

I explained to him the simple process of creating a webinar, and at the end he asked me about what to do if students want to ask questions. I gave him the options of Twitter, Chatting, Forums, and other SMM tools that he can use, and explained to him that all he will need is a computer, and his notes.

Why am I writing this? Well, after conversing with many clients, colleagues, and friends, I realized that Inbound Marketing is far from its full potential. Furthermore, there is a big misconception of what various SMM tools are, and how SEO is not what it used to be 4 or 5 years ago (i.e. it is not just about keywords anymore).  What seems obvious to me as a social media marketing strategist is completely alien to someone else.

I find the most challenging aspect of promoting an Inbound Marketing Plan is the vast effort it takes to explain executive level personnel what seems to be the big pink elephant in the room. The way I see it is quite simple:

1)      you have the opportunity as a CEO to bridge the gap between your company and your customers.

2)      It gives you an opportunity to create an honest relationship with your clients, which is something you can not do by placing big billboard ads on buildings, or blasting your customers with TV commercial ads while they watch a movie.

3)      You will attract more visitors, create more leads, and nurture more leads better than any other marketing 1.0 technique you choose to use.

4)      It saves you money!

Ironically, bullet number 4 is the least important when creating an Inbound Marketing strategy. Yes, I agree that money is a good incentive, but it is also a given ‘obvious’ when creating an Inbound Marketing plan. Why? Because most of the SMM and SEO tools are absolutely free (for now), and if you hire a good SMM strategist you can rest assure that he or she will probably keep it this way for a long time. .

Of course, if you are a small to mid size business, you can always invest in one of HubSpot marketing kits, or SEOmoz SEO innovative solutions, but it will only be a fraction of what you will pay if you were using a Marketing 1.0 strategy.

Inbound Marketing has come a long way in the pass 5 years. Books have been published, Webinars were launched, Inbound Marketing companies were created, and there is even an Inbound Marketing University out there that spreading the knowledge of Inbound Marketing for free.

With all of this wonderful infrastructure in place, I still see a gap between corporations, and SMM. It is almost as if the corporate world (on its different levels) refuses to accept the change, or even more alerting, afraid to adapt to the new rules of marketing.

With all this said, I find it the most exciting era to work as a SMM Strategist.

Share your comments if you have one.