It is no surprise that Twitter is considering to introduce advertising into its service. But why has it adopted the traditional model of advertising - an umbrella model affecting all of its half a million users?

In 2009, just three years since its launch, Twitter was valued at $1bn (£630m). Even before it had made any substantial revenue strategy, it was close to securing $100m funding from a consortium of investors. We knew advertising plans would soon follow.

The micro-blogging site has started addressing the issues that stopped it from accessing advertising revenue which is derived out of data on its site. The company's tweet said it is developing its own tools to provide features on the site that are currently provided by third party desktop clients.

Third party services include features such as geolocations- crucial to advertising and is now offered by service providers such as Tweetdeck, Seesmic Desktop and Echofon .

Twitter has decided to go down the Google way of displaying ads with its search results and not by incorporating them into actual feeds. This means for instance if you do a search on laptops, it would feature Sony or Dell deals ads. The adverts will follow general Twitter principle of 140 characters.

What is surprising is its choice of traditional advertising model. Before securing funding, in May last year, the site said banner advertising was not of interest. Later on, it said it was open to advertising.

While, it is a relief to know that the actual feeds would be free of ads as of now, it is likely that its investors could put further pressure on the site to generate more revenue through banners, user feed-based ads and even meaning-based behaviour-targeted ads. What worked for Google may not work for Twitter- people used Google primarily for search hence, its advertising on search was spot on.

It could have subjected advertising to specific product enquiry tweets. It could have accessed revenue from large businesses by allowing them to post their updates- for instance a Lufthansa tweet that a London-Frankfurt flight is delayed. Followers get their information and Lufthansa communicates effectively but pays a price. Or even a product inquiry tweet by a user asking whether Virgin is better or Sky? There can be a million ways rather than going down the Google lane.

The beauty of Twitter was its neutrality and the ability to post data real time using mobile devices. The popularity and use of the site was so overwhelming that the US has allowed army troops to use the feature and it is now used by corporations and businesses for corporate communications, e-learning through social web and even raising help for natural disasters.

Move towards traditional advertising may have come a bit too soon even before the service is fully explored and exploited. Some enterprises and sensitive groups are likely to back out while it is mulling advertising plans and Twitter for information's sake would be a thing of past.

-Archana Venkatraman

Posted by P. Williams | March 3, 2010 | Permalink  | Comments (0)  

The communication, collaboration, networking and coming together of people after the unprecedented and devastating earthquake in Haiti has once again illustrated the importance of social web.

As the traditional channels of communications collapsed in the area and as rescue professionals were stuck away for a while before getting to the scene of disaster to help victims, Tweeters, Facebookers, charity organisations and users of other social media tools collaborated to share information, raise cash and check whereabouts of the loved ones.

Immediately after the disaster struck, social web was full of minute-by-minute updates, appeal for help, witness accounts and some stomach curdling pictures from the scene.

Even now, thousands of web users from around the world are continuing to come to social networking sites for sharing news in the aftermath of the earthquake and are searching for news about missed relatives.

Twitter's "Trending Topics" today focus around- "Help Haiti" and "Yele"- posts that are raising funds for the victims. It was reported that major media channels connected with aid workers through Skype as phone lines were dead and redundant.

This latest disaster highlights the way social media sites have evolved and used as a means of raising global awareness and even for campaigning. In the past we have seen the effective use of social web in environmental campaigning, Iran elections, Hudson bay plane landing and more recently in the support shown towards Google's exit from China.

The first pictures of the Hudson bay plane incident was out on Twitter and then on terrestrial news channels where as in Iran, the authorities could not control the expression of displeasure through Twitter by Iranians.

More recently, social web has given people an alternative medium to be heard and be heard effectively.

The opinion of people and their information in these websites are so binding and hard to ignore that it helps not just raise awareness and bring transparency but force the authorities to act in favour of the emotions and views expressed through the web.

How social networking sites and the web in general have proactively played their roles in enabling loved ones get in touch with or know the whereabouts of the victims of the unprecedented earthquake in Haiti will go a long way in calming their critics.

Posted by P. Williams | January 18, 2010 | Permalink  | Comments (0)  

It's Christmas time and most information professionals are wrapping up their data projects to spend time with their loved ones.

But professionals may still have their nerves on the market, thanks to the rise and adoption of social web and mobile computing devices and impressive broadband promises in 2009 alone.

Info pros can pat themselves on their back for helping their organisations sail through the tough economic conditions after being entrusted the task of maintaining their organisation's data management capabilities, communication activities and keeping up with technology all on a shoestring budget.

As we look to come out of this deep recession at the start of the next year, their roles will become more exciting yet crucial and challenging. It will be in the next twelve months that info pros can demonstrate how their organisations gained after allowing these professionals to integrate social media in their professional activities; how their digitisation process has helped their companies to be in sync with technological advancements and how investing in right information solutions and subscribing to the right products have given their companies an edge over competition.

But it is also in the next twelve months that businesses would fail to see impact of projects initiated by info pros. If info pros cannot tangibly showcase how much, for instance Twitter has helped their marketing and communications arm in reaching out to the public, their traditional colleagues will get only further cynical. Experts have said that social media can do wonders to businesses, but info pros must be able to quantify the benefits and have the facts and figures ready.

Likewise, if research and academic info pros are not able to justify investing in information technologies, cash-strapped institutions will feel they have "wasted" money. Also if professionals have released exclusive data and products online for free which has backfired, their organisations will feel betrayed.

Amid increased pressure in 2010 when their initiatives will start showing results, info pros need confidence and conviction to justify themselves and assure their slightly-wary organisations that all steps have indeed been in the right direction.

Gathering such information may not be daunting with today's information feeds, measuring technologies and social media.

Happy holidays and of course, happy holiday tweeting!

Posted by P. Williams | December 21, 2009 | Permalink  | Comments (0)  

Newspaper publishers and NLA may have won the battle against content aggregators, but can they really claim victory?

Not until copyright laws define and cover online aggregation service.

NewsNow, the UK content aggregator is set to remove links to most national newspapers after a row with the Newspaper Licensing Agency (NLA).

The site will pull links out of its subscription service that relates to content from titles of eight major newspaper groups - including Guardian Media Group, News International, Telegraph Media Group, Associated Newspapers and Independent News & Media- who own the NLA.

NewsNow's move comes after a debate with NLA after the agency launched a crackdown aggregators, PR agencies and all organisations that recycle links for commercial purposes. It announced of plans to claim copyright fees against organisations which share press cuttings by emailing links to newspaper articles on an industrial scale starting from January 2010.

NLA also aimed at charging web-based news aggregators who collect news headlines, make their own feeds, tailor-make it and distribute it widely to businesses and then profit from it (the B2B service providers).

This crackdown is to ensure that a typical aggregator such as NewsNow, which links to content from newspapers and provides them to business on subscription, would be expected to pay up to £10,000 as "web database license fees".

It is clear that NLA has attempted to introduce a new revenue stream at a time when newspaper publishers are losing to freely accessible information on the internet.

NLA spokesman Andrew Hughes clarified that it will not charge backdated fees and will not charge users sharing news links for free. "Our new licences only to paid-for web aggregation services, free-to-use services are unaffected. Web aggregators copy and index website content. This requires the consent of the content owner, and charging those who use website content commercially is fair and reasonable. The reason NewsNow and most other aggregators have accepted our proposals is that detailed legal advice supports our position."

NLA said that all of the major paid-for UK web aggregators except Meltwater have agreed licenses. Meltwater's resistance and NewsNow's plans to remove links than agree to pay license-fees demonstrates the reluctance in the aggregation business to pay because, according to them, their service constitutes "content-search2.

In the last few months the debate between aggregators and publishers has been whether aggregation is a search service or content copying because existing copyright law does not cover aggregation.

While NLA thinks aggregators must pay, legal experts point that circulation of hyperlinks cannot be an infringement of copyright, and that the newspapers' own 'Print 'and 'Email a Friend' icons allow any user to access the article directly, without payment.

In a report, Robin Fry of Beachcroft said: "Most businesses have abandoned the circulation of physical press cuttings, leaving it to individuals to access stories direct from the newspaper websites. The broadsheets clearly allow this on their websites but the NLA still seem to be pursuing businesses for licences which are simply not needed.

"Our aim is to demystify the situation, as we have seen an increase in enquiries from clients on this issue, who are understandably baffled by the numerous and complicated rules and fees in this area. It's quite possible for organisations to access all their press cuttings at no cost whilst staying within the law.

"The NLA has a responsibility to explain the correct legal situation to those it seeks copyright fees from - but at the moment, many are entering into licences - and possibly paying backdated 'indemnity' fees - without really understanding if these are needed for their business."

The battle will only get bitter unless a legal framework is put in place soon.

Posted by P. Williams | December 15, 2009 | Permalink  | Comments (1)  

As the three-day Online Information 2009 conference wrapped up in London yesterday [Thursday], most information professionals in public and private sector organisations as well as the information technology professionals left the premises a little wiser on how to deal with the emerging social technologies, knowledge management, information management in recession, digitisation and preservation and even hard engineered semantic web technology.

But some were left scratching their heads too- those reluctant to take the "risky" dive into the social web, those adopting the traditional digitisation and preservation technoques, those operating on tighter budgets and those wanting more technology democracy in their workplaces.

The message came stark and clear to these reluctant professionals - you have to do it now, you have to do it fast and you have to do it right.

The professionals attended the sessions in all their sincerity, aiming to take away something effective and useful to their institutions' boardrooms. We saw it all- experts presenting their information, offering case studies and juggling questions while the information audience absorbing the information and advice, counter-arguing, questioning, agreeing and collaborating.

The closing keynote session may have already set the agenda for next year- a "Google dominated" session where experts provided insights on how Google will shape the information landscape in 2010.

In addition to the final session, many questions and discussions in individual sessions for three days too were focused on Google and that's what I want to say- Google's absense at the event was conspicuous.

While we had panelists praise as well as critisise Google and predict its move next year, at the next Online Information conference, we want to hear from the search giant about its own plans. During the post-session discussions over a few glasses of wine, I could hear some professionals expressing their frustration over predictions and not hard facts about what Google will embark on in the coming year.

And another issue that struck me was the absence of professionals who chalk out the social web policy within their organisations. Some librarians were keen to understand ways to develop a social web strategy only to find themselves full of knowledge but helpless to implement as they were not directly responsible for these strategies.

An information-explosive event, I am already beginning to think about the next OI conference where we must question experts on trends they wrongly predicted, on questions we missed to ask, on failing to spot opportunities and see more experts from internet giants who are shaping the future of online information at a lightening speed.

Posted by P. Williams | December 6, 2009 | Permalink  | Comments (0)  

The government used the Queen's speech to introduce a Digital Bill that will "enhance UK's digital economy" by effectively tackling the copyright infringement online and improving digital infrastructure and content technologies.

Realising that rapid digital technological evolution calls for legislation that can resolve digital information issues such as file-sharing on the internet, book digitisation, internet privacy and even copyright violations on the web, the government has outlined its roadmap.

Addressing one of the most pressing concerns of the digital age, the proposed Bill aims at providing essential support for creative industries in a digital world, through proposals on online copyright infringement and changes to copyright licensing.

Through one of its primary elements - Online infringement of copyright - it will tackle widespread copyright infringement via a two-stage process. First by making legal action more effective and educating consumers about copyright online. Secondly through reserve powers, if needed, to introduce technical measures, such as disconnection.

But legal experts say the bill could bring in unexpected registration requirements and government control over online libraries and many other rights owners. They may need to register with the government, pay annual registration fees and be subject to codes of practice, backed up by criminal sanctions, if provisions regarding the control of 'licensing bodies' are brought in.

Copyright expert, Robin Fry, a partner at Beachcroft, said: "The government might have been thinking about the UK's fourteen main collecting societies - but unless there's a radical rethink any business selling rights to use copyright material could be forced to confront a new licensing regime.

He added: "The IT, information and the media industries have not yet picked up on the impact of this proposed law. There will be consternation in Soho and confusion in Shoreditch. This Bill already needs a desperate overhaul."

And the ISP association said they strongly oppose the proposals. The Bill also commits to public service content in a rapidly changing broadcasting landscape, through action on the provision of news in the nations, regionally and locally.

This illustrates the complexities of tackling copyright issues and other digital information related issues by playing catch-up. In a reactionary bid to tackle copyright concerns with new legislation, we are running a risk of chalking out hasty and sweeping rules that may, in fact, harm creativity.

The problems of mass digitisation and copyright and security must be resolved through due diligence, debates and inputs from experts working in the information industry. It must uphold the principles of existing copyright framework that is fair to creative enterprises and amend it to fit to the digital age rather than launching a new bill exclusively relating to the web. In addition, state intervention in the broadcast of news will only delay the flow of information to users.

Lastly, We have always argued on this blog that it is time to drop the silo approach. As complexities of having 27 varied copyright legislations across the EU challenge us, introducing a nation-specific bill will only double the woes of the European wide plan to address these concerns.

We don't need to be arm-twisted by the government, we need a bill that will resolve digital problems without impeding UK's digital growth and without limiting the amount of information accessed by the public.

Posted by P. Williams | November 23, 2009 General | Permalink  | Comments (0)  

CrossKnowledge, the European expert in the remote development of leadership and management skills through new technologies, wanted to look at the social web from "every possible" angle, certain that it is the future of business, communication and information exchange. Interesting no one thought of conducting such an experiment before!

It asked the opinion of five observers from very different segments of the information sector- a publisher of web 2.0 solutions, a consultant specialising in social networks, an HR executive, a sociologist and a teacher - to study the impact of social networking on a company's strategic vision, structure and leadership.

The academic described the new forms of work organisation; another expert spoke about the impact of 2.0 applications in development practices and skills management; a third expert explained the link between tools and bu¬siness; the consultant spoke of his understanding of the impact of so¬cial networks on business; and finally the HR professional described the implementation of a tool created within a mobile phone company.

It found that the culture of exchange and openness encouraged by social networking sites enables companies to accelerate their decision-making processes, and increase their capacity for innovation and commercial productivity; social networks boost a company's competitiveness by providing it with improved responsiveness. Far more than just a technological revolution, the predicted arrival of the company as community translates above all into a cultural change.

By creating a networked organisation, social media encourage the lasting participation of employees, clients and partners, which in turn prompts reflection on both management's role in the corporate structure and the form that training takes.

That social media are about more than just technology, they're also all about combining social interaction and content creation: they use collective human intelligence, in the spirit of online collaboration. Consequently, the impact of professional networks will change the actual structure of corporate strategy.

Of course, collating such information is extremely useful for businesses and institutions that look to integrate social web in their communication strategy and allow technology democracy. But the ultimate factor that determines the direction of the social web is the user himself.

This is the beauty of interactive social web - making every user a publisher, researcher, aggregator, information provider and content generator. And he, who is empowered by the social web, must form a crucial part of such a research if we are to understand the mysterious world of web 2.0. Ask yourself why you use it, how you use it and what it has done to your personal and professional life, if you want social web explanations.

Posted by P. Williams | November 17, 2009 Arts, Humanities & Social Science, General, News & Reference | Permalink  | Comments (0)  

Google has launched a software application in the UK that will give consumers information about their energy consumption, usage pattern and carbon footprint thereby enabling them to save both money and energy. The "opt-in" tool receives information from utility smart meters and energy management devices and provides it to customers on their screens.

Currently Google just has a deal with energy supplier first:utility in the UK. Users of other energey suppliers need to install a sensor device AlertMe Energy (for £69) to their meters and then view the data for an additional £3 monthly charges.

Powermeter provides energy information in the form of graphs on a daily, weekly or monthly basis and enables users to compare their usages and derive their average use.

However, in keeping up with users' demands for interactive tools, Powermeter aims to allow users to share their energy habits, tips and light-hearted energy-saving competitions, according to a report in the Guardian.

Google has expressed its wish to bring the social element on to the software, perhaps for a more robust uptake. But here in lies the future of interactive media - an innovative application build on the premise of providing crucial information and then building the interactive element on to it. A refreshing shift from standalone social media websites.

As rapid advances are being made in the web 2.0 tools and interactive technologies, several studies and surveys suggest that most of the user-generated content in Twitter is "banter" and that such tools are hampering people's productivity at workplaces.

Almost simultaneusly, niche and focus-group based social media applications such as Springer's The NeuroNetwork for neurology researchers and Sage's Methodspace to discuss research methodologies among others are proving beneficial in peer-to-peer information sharing, discussions and advice.

The primary function of the web - accurate information provision - was hijacked amid the launch of a slew of purely user-generated content through the latest web 2.0 tools.

Powermeter- that displays information on the web on users' customised iGoogle page brings progress in the area of information provision. It brings to our screens crucial information that is otherwise difficult to access and then builds interactive technologies around it, suggesting evolution in the mainstream social media space.

Posted by P. Williams | October 29, 2009 Arts, Humanities & Social Science, Company & Financial Information, General, News & Reference | Permalink  | Comments (0)  

Micro-blogging website Twitter has managed to secure a "significant round of funding" from five investment firms, as was revealed through the blog post of its co-founder Evan Williams.

The new funding has reportedly come from two new investors Insight Venture Partners and T R Price, as well as its existing funders Institutional Venture Partners, Spark Capital and Benchmark Capital.

There are two problems to start with. First is that Williams was not as candid about the exact amount of investment because the investors want the deal to be a private affair. Isn't web 2.0 all about sharing information and encouraging transparent and candid conversations? Internet has liberated information and has always preached professionals to provide information. Shouldn't it apply the same rules to itself?.

Unless social media companies including Facebook - which is also known for shying away from sharing plans, projections and security measures - come out in the open, it is hard for information professionals who want to capitalise on these tools to chart out their plan or realise the potential.

Amid tight budgets, it's extremely important for marketers too to define the return on investment and unless there is more information, it is hard to define ROI. The lack of information also hinders discussion on whether the amount of investment was right in the first place. And it does not set a basis to evaluate other social media technologies.

Also presumably, Twitter has secured the funds and valued itself on the basis of its whopping 45 million users in its three-year history and expecting this to grow exponentially.

Twitter is planning to roll out adverts and even provide companies with initial insight and market reaction. But the second problem is that because information on web2.0 applications are user-generated, scattered across multiple platforms and at different times, professionals and advertisers would find it difficult to target the right information for the right set of audience.

There has to be more collaboration of content in the social media technologies before any plans to leverage on them take to the sky. And there definitely needs to be more engagement between users and social media companies.

Posted by P. Williams | October 16, 2009 Company & Financial Information, Information Management | Permalink  | Comments (0)  

Two research reports on the impact of social networking and Web 2.0 tools in the workplace highlight the anxiety among experts over these issues. Suggesting identical outcomes, both reports - one from Economist Intelligence Unit on managing technology democracy in the workplace and the other study by Recommind on the use and implications of Web 2.0 tools in businesses - urge businesses to "act now and manage Web2.0, it's already late".

The reports found that even today, over 40% of senior executives in organisations said they restrict the use of such applications and have no training in place to manage the uptake of these tools by staff in the near future.

The concerns these executives raised were about security, lack of productivity, loss of information, data breaches, difficulty in preserving and accessing information and legal implications.

The moot point of discussion at both the events were about "Who takes responsibility for implementing and enforcing the company policy on Web2.0 use?"

Companies are finding it increasingly difficult to tackle the tricky issues of Web 2.0 because they acknowledge and identify its benefits in this internet age. Meanwhile, staff insist on "technology democracy".

People may be techno-savvy but they lack digital awareness and history shows that we pay a huge price for this lack of awareness. Young staff have been sacked for posting negative comments about employers or customers; public sector organisations have lost and misplaced highly sensitive information and personal data has been used for vetting future staff.

The question of responsibility is a tough and dodgy one. And the Recommind survey suggested that 70% respondents think it is IT department's responsibility, 17% said it was the legal department and the others were divided between dedicated Web 2.0 specialists in offices, team leaders and individual members of staff.

It's time to drop the silo approach. Not only does the IT department, legal team and staff need to work together, it is time individual users, application providers and regulatory services take responsibility too. Until now, the legislation and public awareness has always been catching up with technology. It is time to stop playing catch up and get even with technology.

Posted by P. Williams | October 2, 2009 Market Research Information | Permalink  | Comments (0)