Comments on: Social Networking in 2007 http://fstutzman.com/2007/01/02/social-networking-in-2007/ Thoughts about information, social networks, and privacy Wed, 10 Mar 2010 07:23:29 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Anonymous http://fstutzman.com/2007/01/02/social-networking-in-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-1042 Anonymous Wed, 05 Dec 2007 19:48:00 +0000 http://127.0.0.1/~fred/projects/blog/?p=364#comment-1042 One social network that i know will be around will be FanBox.com. One social network that i know will be around will be FanBox.com.

]]> By: Troy http://fstutzman.com/2007/01/02/social-networking-in-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-732 Troy Mon, 28 May 2007 12:18:00 +0000 http://127.0.0.1/~fred/projects/blog/?p=364#comment-732 Interesting article about <a HREF="http://www.friendlot.com" REL="nofollow">social networking</a> sites, would be interested to see at the end of 2007, what's came true and what didn't. Interesting article about social networking sites, would be interested to see at the end of 2007, what’s came true and what didn’t.

]]> By: Anonymous http://fstutzman.com/2007/01/02/social-networking-in-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-626 Anonymous Wed, 21 Feb 2007 09:41:00 +0000 http://127.0.0.1/~fred/projects/blog/?p=364#comment-626 I really love the ideas of your social networking in 2007. I will take with what you have to say about <a HREF="http://www.friendwise.com/" REL="nofollow">social networking</a> <br/> sites and use that information to my advantage. I really love the ideas of your social networking in 2007. I will take with what you have to say about social networking
sites and use that information to my advantage.

]]> By: David Ingram http://fstutzman.com/2007/01/02/social-networking-in-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-559 David Ingram Mon, 15 Jan 2007 12:52:00 +0000 http://127.0.0.1/~fred/projects/blog/?p=364#comment-559 Hi Fred, interesting article which I have referenced from my blog (www.dpingram.com). Hope you dont mind. D. Hi Fred, interesting article which I have referenced from my blog (www.dpingram.com). Hope you dont mind. D.

]]> By: yaromir http://fstutzman.com/2007/01/02/social-networking-in-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-554 yaromir Mon, 15 Jan 2007 00:57:00 +0000 http://127.0.0.1/~fred/projects/blog/?p=364#comment-554 Nice post. Mobile social networking in Japan is more popular than web-based. Its specific feature is that it is closely linked to real-life. Here is the latest example of niche mobile SNS, targeting young moms:<br/>http://analytica1st.com/analytica1st/2007/01/mobile-social-network-mamasa-targets-at.html Nice post. Mobile social networking in Japan is more popular than web-based. Its specific feature is that it is closely linked to real-life. Here is the latest example of niche mobile SNS, targeting young moms:
http://analytica1st.com/analytica1st/2007/01/mobile-social-network-mamasa-targets-at.html

]]> By: Brian http://fstutzman.com/2007/01/02/social-networking-in-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-543 Brian Tue, 09 Jan 2007 21:08:00 +0000 http://127.0.0.1/~fred/projects/blog/?p=364#comment-543 Hey thanks for linking to my predictions on web+. I think you're spot on about the rich getting richer. Some of these established communities are already social, its just not as readily apparent. Amazon was web2.0 before that was even a trendy term (user reviews) Hey thanks for linking to my predictions on web+. I think you’re spot on about the rich getting richer. Some of these established communities are already social, its just not as readily apparent. Amazon was web2.0 before that was even a trendy term (user reviews)

]]> By: jkd http://fstutzman.com/2007/01/02/social-networking-in-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-537 jkd Sat, 06 Jan 2007 02:40:00 +0000 http://127.0.0.1/~fred/projects/blog/?p=364#comment-537 I definitely agree that existing websites <i>should</i> go social, but I'm just not sure that they have the werewithal to do so. Some of them do - I'd say WaPo rather than NYT, given the general approach to online strategy thus far. It's a process that might start in 2007 - even probably will start - but I'm not sure if enough people in established non-SNS contexts really "get" social software, yet.<br/><br/>Heck, I'm not sure that <b>I</b> get it, for whatever that's worth.<br/><br/>I think one thing that you're not hitting on, here is the user experience side. Given the spate of recent crossings-over of SNS context to meatspace consequences (e.g., the Peyton Strickland tragedy) and some initial evidence that users don't fully realize the extent of their exposure via SNS profiles, 2007 might be the year when users really start drawing back from full exposure and/or more fully explicating their ideas of who should know what about them. I definitely agree that existing websites should go social, but I’m just not sure that they have the werewithal to do so. Some of them do – I’d say WaPo rather than NYT, given the general approach to online strategy thus far. It’s a process that might start in 2007 – even probably will start – but I’m not sure if enough people in established non-SNS contexts really “get” social software, yet.

Heck, I’m not sure that I get it, for whatever that’s worth.

I think one thing that you’re not hitting on, here is the user experience side. Given the spate of recent crossings-over of SNS context to meatspace consequences (e.g., the Peyton Strickland tragedy) and some initial evidence that users don’t fully realize the extent of their exposure via SNS profiles, 2007 might be the year when users really start drawing back from full exposure and/or more fully explicating their ideas of who should know what about them.

]]> By: FERNANDO ARDENGHI http://fstutzman.com/2007/01/02/social-networking-in-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-533 FERNANDO ARDENGHI Fri, 05 Jan 2007 03:55:00 +0000 http://127.0.0.1/~fred/projects/blog/?p=364#comment-533 My bet is:<br/> <br/>* Age segmentation will trigger the "fun" social_networking market <b> to merge </b> with the fun_online_dating market, mainly for 13-25 years old persons (teenagers). Many sites are only cheap channels for deliver ads, i.e. infomercial-advertainment companies on the web! <br/><br/>* the "quality" social_networking market <b> will overlap </b> with the quality_online_dating market: mainly for 26-and more years old persons. Clients will pay for quality contacts (compatible real persons) and to avoid being hurt in their feelings by other persons. They know the difference between real friends from casual acquaintances.<br/><br/>* business_networking will peak and decay.<br/><br/>Regards, <br/>Fernando Ardenghi. <br/>Buenos Aires. <br/>Argentina. <br/>ardenghifer@gmail.com My bet is:

* Age segmentation will trigger the “fun” social_networking market to merge with the fun_online_dating market, mainly for 13-25 years old persons (teenagers). Many sites are only cheap channels for deliver ads, i.e. infomercial-advertainment companies on the web!

* the “quality” social_networking market will overlap with the quality_online_dating market: mainly for 26-and more years old persons. Clients will pay for quality contacts (compatible real persons) and to avoid being hurt in their feelings by other persons. They know the difference between real friends from casual acquaintances.

* business_networking will peak and decay.

Regards,
Fernando Ardenghi.
Buenos Aires.
Argentina.
ardenghifer@gmail.com

]]> By: guy http://fstutzman.com/2007/01/02/social-networking-in-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-531 guy Thu, 04 Jan 2007 22:13:00 +0000 http://127.0.0.1/~fred/projects/blog/?p=364#comment-531 > The mean barrier I see to mobile are handsets and data plans.<br/><br/>What a great post. I have little experience -and low expectations- in this space but reading your comments was such an eye opener. Thank you.<br/><br/>I think there are other considerations when it comes to the mobile journey in the US<br/><br/>- tight grip from carriers<br/>- lack of iddle time<br/><br/>Bear in mind I didn't say "spare" time but iddle. Some of the greatest mobile successes in Asia ocurr due to lengthy commutes on public transportation and that is just one case. If you study the gambling markets as well as the adult markets expansions into mobile you could see what kind of obstacles same industries faced in the US.<br/><br/>According to your post, both myspace and youtube are aberrations as they don't really serve a community, at least, in the narrowest of senses. There may be other motivations at work, some not so openly embraced -as myspace served as a platform for the adult industry far and wide-. So many of this webspaces are governed by the self interest of the people joining them, each of which wants to extract some kind of juice for their own benefit. Hardly the definition of a community...<br/><br/>What a gem if one could find -and define- an offline group of people who are connected in some way without even knowing it and crystalizing that sentiment in a social network. Professionals? > The mean barrier I see to mobile are handsets and data plans.

What a great post. I have little experience -and low expectations- in this space but reading your comments was such an eye opener. Thank you.

I think there are other considerations when it comes to the mobile journey in the US

- tight grip from carriers
- lack of iddle time

Bear in mind I didn’t say “spare” time but iddle. Some of the greatest mobile successes in Asia ocurr due to lengthy commutes on public transportation and that is just one case. If you study the gambling markets as well as the adult markets expansions into mobile you could see what kind of obstacles same industries faced in the US.

According to your post, both myspace and youtube are aberrations as they don’t really serve a community, at least, in the narrowest of senses. There may be other motivations at work, some not so openly embraced -as myspace served as a platform for the adult industry far and wide-. So many of this webspaces are governed by the self interest of the people joining them, each of which wants to extract some kind of juice for their own benefit. Hardly the definition of a community…

What a gem if one could find -and define- an offline group of people who are connected in some way without even knowing it and crystalizing that sentiment in a social network. Professionals?

]]> By: Andrew http://fstutzman.com/2007/01/02/social-networking-in-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-530 Andrew Thu, 04 Jan 2007 19:42:00 +0000 http://127.0.0.1/~fred/projects/blog/?p=364#comment-530 As community tends to emerge around shared experience, I suspect that the sites being experienced are not best suited to indentify, cultivate, and leverage the blooming community. Your example of YouTube is terrific. YouTube's not designed to encourage socialization; it's design to make you watch and contribute as many videos as possible. SN features were built at YouTube to encourage more video discovery and distribution. <br/><br/>It seems like there's an opportunity for a meta social network to insert theirselves into shared experience sites (like YouTube) and encourage social interaction via widgets. <br/><br/>MyBlogLog is a great start, but I imagine blog widgets that direct a user to a different portal doesn't go far enough. More interaction in-widget is necessary. As community tends to emerge around shared experience, I suspect that the sites being experienced are not best suited to indentify, cultivate, and leverage the blooming community. Your example of YouTube is terrific. YouTube’s not designed to encourage socialization; it’s design to make you watch and contribute as many videos as possible. SN features were built at YouTube to encourage more video discovery and distribution.

It seems like there’s an opportunity for a meta social network to insert theirselves into shared experience sites (like YouTube) and encourage social interaction via widgets.

MyBlogLog is a great start, but I imagine blog widgets that direct a user to a different portal doesn’t go far enough. More interaction in-widget is necessary.

]]>