The great thing about social media is as a phenomenal shift in the way we communicate, it has been embraced by some great technology companies who have done all the hard work to make our own lives more simple.

Introducing TweetDeck…

TweetDeck is a desktop app that allows you to setup segmented twitter feeds, LinkedIn and your Facebook account (and others) all in one. It uses fairly simple columns to segment your interests, mentions, direct messages or general friend feeds at the click of a button.

My columns are fairly simply setup, with a feed with all friends tweets on the left, any mentions following that, direct messages, my LinkedIn news updates and finally Facebook feed.

It means I can keep an eye on the basics. It lets me know when someone has retweeted what I have said, so I can return the favour at a later date. Or if someone has asked me a question, I can reply promptly, without having to be reminded by Twitter that I have a message.

As a desktop app, I can leave it running in the background (with noise notifications setup) so I can be aware of what’s happening, without having to keep a constant eye on it. I can quickly switch between what I am working on and Twitter without any fuss. Most importantly, if I have something to say, I can flick it up, and, using one of the integrated Twitter tools such as TwitPic, YFrog, bit.ly etc, tweet anything from pictures to videos all through the same tool. It saves me time, and allows me more flexibility in my tweets.

For those of you with lots of followers or are looking for more advanced management, try playing about with the global filter under preferences. This tool will create a column with updates surrounding certain terms, so if you’re an IFA and someone mentions #pensions, you could jump right in and message them with some advice. You also may wish to segment your friends into groups, so you can keep an even closer eye on those people who influence you, as we all have them, rather than shifting through hundreds of micro-blogs that may not be relevant.

Introducing Twitterlator…

So, while you’re at your computer, use TweetDeck, but what about on the move, in theory one of the most powerful uses of Twitter, instant micro-blogs. Well, Twitterlator is another great tool. Available as a free or paid app, Twitterlator offers an easy means of keeping up to date while out and about. Much like TweetDeck (which coincidentally also has an iPhone app) it segments things into general tweets, mentions and direct messages, and allows easy use of third party tools for the on the go photo or longer message. Coupled with TweetDeck, it means you can easily stay on top of your tweets, without taking up all of your time. There are plenty of other android and iPhone apps that achieve fairly similar things, I just happen to use Twitterlator, but find one that works for you and use it, and let’s start some #intrigue. @rjpalmer

Now let me (briefly) outline what a cookie is. The Information Commissioner’s Office, the body tasked with introducing and policing the revisions define a cookie as, “a small file of letters and numbers downloaded on to a
device when the user accesses certain websites. Cookies allow a
website to recognise a user’s device”. Fairly nondescript I’ll admit, but it kind of sums up what could otherwise be a long winded and boring topic. In essence, a web cookie stores information about you and talks to a web application in order to provide a more personalised user experience. Every time you add an item to your basket in an e-commerce shop, it is saved in a cookie. Every time you revisit a website and it says, “Hello Fred” (or your name more likely), it is because it has stored a cookie in your browser.

The new Regulation now demands that users be given clear instructions as to what a cookie will do, and requires them to ‘opt-in’, allowing one on your browser only after full understanding and acceptance. Now I’m all in when it comes to consumer rights and privacy, but this is taking things a little too far if you ask me.

Admittedly, I haven’t explained that there are also such things as ‘persistent cookies’ that can last for many years (even if you upgrade your browser) that track your movements across sites to display more relevant ads and can even analyse search patterns. Sound scary? I’m not entirely convinced it should, as even these are in theory design to help everyone. Yes of course, help the media companies and advertisers, but who likes seeing ads for tenner ladies when your a 27 year old bloke.

Some may argue that cookies can be misused both by site owners and malware, but most cookies these days are encrypted to protect your information, so if the agenda here is to protect user privacy, then that’s a good place to start.

My biggest problem is the user experience though, after all, that is what cookies are designed to improve. How does the ICO expect web designers to get ‘meaningful consent’? They suggest not to use a pop-up, but unless you shove in people’s faces, they won’t see it (and while they advise against pop-ups, they don’t give a decent alternative, which means they haven’t thought of one). And what do you write? I’m sure you’ve probably seen a pop-up before stating, “This site requires the use of cookies, please enable cookies in your browser.” or some such. But do they really expect to see, “This site uses cookies. Here are the 192 reasons we use cookies, each individually explained and referenced with links to relevant parts of the website….”. Cods wallop, much like T&Cs, we’ll just click accept and move on.

To summise, placing the need for ‘informed consent’ on every website is ill advised. Users won’t read them, but will get frustrated with them, web owners will need to pay for them, but not benefit from them, and web developers will spend a long time developing the best solution for something that browsers will undoubtedly replace in the future.

If you are worried about the impact these regulations may have on your website, please call our dedicated hotli… yea right – follow this link. A few good suggestions for preparation, although most small e-commerce owners will not enjoy the cost of this. Alternatively, just ignore it, and hope that Google or Firefox step in and pave the way for all browsers to solve the problem for you – except Internet Explorer of course, that would be asking too much.

So why the move, and why the delay? Well it’s a good question. Many developers liked the development model firmly routed in php, and visual controls certainly load more quickly via FBML. Having said that, there is a dependency on Facebook, and overloaded servers result in slow running apps. Applications built on FBML also only allow allow FBML, so you can kiss goodbye any opportunities for JavaScript, Flash or Ajax. The other bain for developers is that there is no option for a local test environment as such. You can’t set up a local host and therefore quickly run tests to see what works and what doesn’t, which makes the development process far longer and unsurprising more frustrating.

On the other hand iFrames, as you may well know, load content from your own server, meaning these factor becomes irrelevant. Being completely independent of Facebook, this also means that you could, probably after a little tweaking, transfer the application to another platform.

Strangely I have heard a few people say they like FBML as it makes the platform look more like Facebook. Of course this is a bit of a confusing argument as the content of an iFrame can look exactly ow you want it to with a bit of decent CSS.

The bottom line is, iFrames make more sense, and if anything open up the market to the less technically gifted. Plenty of people these days are capable of throwing together a basic website, even if there design skills or advanced technical knowledge is lacking. iFrames allow them to give it a go too, making it accessible to small businesses without the budget to hire an agency. Just remember, if you are to go down this route, Google the basic principles of a Facebook page, such as width requirements.

My hope is that this move makes social media more accessible to businesses, and can provide richer experiences to the end user.

I suppose I wasn’t let down in that way, as that is exactly how the young Jesse Eisenberg portrayed the youngest billionaire on the planet, aptly supported by Andrew Garfield. But how, you may be asking, does this tie in with my blog about all things digital and entrepreneurial? Well, it got me to thinking. Young CEOs, egos and money.

Sean Parker, the genius behind Napster (and apparently also an absolute idiot) talks about having a brilliant idea and then the ‘corporates’ taking over. Now, I agree with him that the whole point of young and enthusiastic CEOs is that they have real creativity, but he seemingly fell into the hole of the arrogant know it all, who until Facebook, had never been able to make and keep his, some would argue, ill gotten gains. I must admit I know little of Sean Parker’s history, not particularly being a music buff myself, but the film certainly portrays him in a rough light.

Successful young entrepreneurs need to be careful. You see it happen to footballers all too often. Just because you make a success of something, and even if that success leads to a small fortune, don’t get cocky. The recession should have taught you that, and I have seen plenty of talented businessman who, at the age of 45/50, have only just ‘made it’. Often the biggest difference between a successful young entrepreneur and an unsuccessful one is luck (and timing).

Don’t be afraid to hire a team far older, more experienced, and yes, even wise than you. It’s not about your ego, it’s about your vision, and trust me, you’ll need help in making it a reality.

Here’s an interesting article on being a good CEO of a startup.

I remember years ago during my gap year working as an Acting Deputy Manager (a nice way of giving me the responsibility without the money) in Holland & Barrett. The Regional Manager used to say, “dress the window like a voluptuous woman”. Now forgive the need to add this typically male response to something that looks appealing, but despite the obviously sexist analogy, he was right.

Not that he had a clue how to fulfill this enormous feat, but it’s much like Google AdWords, you need people to know they have come to the right place before they even enter the site, digital or physical. That’s more than popping a few of your better sellers in the window. It’s about highlighting who should come into your shop and why. Something that can be done for a surprisingly small budget if you’re careful.

However, this post isn’t really about pretty wallpaper and vintage ornaments in a shop, it’s about sales. Strolling around the ever thronging highstreet of Bromley, I could not help but notice how many shops were offering 50% off already. Now I realise the last few years have been tough, especially on highstreet retailers, but as the purse strings start to loosen, I am shocked that large chains such as Aldo feel the need to try and steel the competition’s customers with 50% off. While perhaps more of a reflection on their decision to drop brands and only sell own name products, the sale seemed to have little effect. The store was pretty empty. I think it comes down to something I was saying back in the lows of the recession. Don’t devalue your services (or products) just because some people can’t afford them. By using 50% sales, you devalue your brand, especially at a time when people expect to pay top dollars for their Christmas gifts.

From shop owners I have spoken to, things really seem to be on the up, at least those who stuck to their guns during the recession. And for those who haven’t, think long and hard about your shop front. What does it say about you?

My personal feelings aside, most articles look at the potential benefits, but always end up slating the invasion of privacy, and somehow end up referencing Ian Green (the recently convicted ‘Facebook Paedophile’), or someone else with, well, similar disturbances. I have to say, that is quite a jump, even for our over zealous fear mongering press. Whether a direct result of this moral panic (no where near a moral panic, but I like to stir things up) or not, when Googling Facebook Places, the 6th entry is entitled, “How to disable Facebook places”.

What makes me laugh of course is the rantings of frustrated nominal Facebook users. Those who clearly do not want to be tagged with friends in certain places (what are you trying to hide!) but can’t figure how to turn it off. Admittedly, Facebook took on it’s usual tact with Places, and opted everyone in with a voluntary opt-out, which I completely agree is borderline a breach of privacy, and certainly cheeky.  But, when is the media going to realise, it is deliberate. They can’t seriously believe that Facebook forgot to set the normal parameters to opted out, not after the several outcries they have experienced in the past over privacy issues. The simple reality is, it causes a buzz, it gets people listening, and it overshadows the competition.

Oh yes, Foursquare. As a result of the above, Foursquare is losing ground. Let’s not forget it came out before Facebook, and while an specific app for download, thereby opting in, it’s far more flexible and fun than Facebook’s far too obvious alternative.

There are certain niceties to Foursquare that provide some potentially exciting opportunities. Leaving tips at certain restaurants such as, “don’t have the soup”, or “try the steak, but ask for it less cooked than you usually would” offer a myriad of opportunities that bridge the gap between immediate location based response, and blogs and reviews, post dated, and potentially outdated. I like to think of it as a potent mix of micro blogging (Twitter) with relevance (restaurant reviews for example).

Imagine 2 or 3 people in the same restaurant as you ‘tipping’ about what’s hot and what’s not. On the night advice about the food you are about to eat! Ok, so I’m a little obsessed with good food, but Foursquare for me is the outright winner. Facebook lacks anything other than an ‘I’m here’ service with a short message. Great if you are trying to bolster you numbers down the pub, but not useful for anyone you don’t know.

Foursquare has been criticised for the very fact that your ‘friends’ tend to be Twitter followers, and other people we clearly don’t know. Facebook Places is just your friends. But I think this is an opportunity, not a draw back. Yes, we need to have our real friends on there, to enable us to meet randomly for a bite or beer, but we need to know what everyone thinks about the places we are, currently, because I definitely would not have had the burger at Brown’s in Covent Garden, but would recommend the mushroom starter.

Undoubtedly the fine people at Google spent good time and energy creating something that would take the world by storm, but have seemingly forgotten their own early rants about the potential of this fine product. So what went wrong?

I remember using Wave in the office, as it allowed real time communication where you could reference earlier comments rather than replying inline. It was quite useful as a tool for project management surprisingly, which is perhaps where they should have taken it. I think integrating with Google Docs and even Gmail may have proven fruitful, collaborating on the shared aspects of Wave and tracking emails through tasks so that your team has the full picture.

If this had happened, I for one would have sacked off 37 Signals’ pm tool Basecamp (sorry boys), and opted for Wave, but as it stands, it became the tool that we played around with, then just plain forgot to use. It’s not that Wave was bad, but it focused on communication, improving on current offerings and amalgamating Skype, emails, and every other tool into one. They built it without actually deciding how they would promote it (which clearly wouldn’t be a problem for Google), but it’s like Facebook. Why join MySpace when all your friends are on Facebook. Why use wave when all my clients use email. Most have not even comprehended Skype yet, so the very idea of Wave could confuse simply confuse them.

Alter the marketing spin on it as a project management tool, integrate with Gmail and Google Docs, and you have yourself a long line of companies like my own that would welcome Wave. The future of communication can happen after that, once you have the early buy in and regular use.

Time is money…

Mark Zuckerberg certainly won’t be complaining about these statistics. Not only are there more users on Facebook, but individually people are spending far more time on it each month.

Two years ago, average usage per month was only a little over 2 hours. By the end of last year, they had more than doubled to over 5 and a half hours. Based on Facebook’s advertising model, this can only be good for for revenue, and for the rest of us who like to get involved with this social media malarkey, it’s a great result. On the downside, Facebook does not generate anywhere near the revenues of China’s Tencent, which published profits of $500million last year from less users. Never the less, the UK seems to be a fan (excuse the pun) of Facebook, heading up the time we spend browsing through photos, groups and pages just a fraction behind the US and Australia.

Global domination…

Much like Google’s dominance in the online search market, people have become bored of Bebo and MySpace, which now only hold a 3.43% share of the social networking market between them, compared to an overwhelmingly dominant Facebook share of 51.05%.

Facebook have very simply got it right. While the flexibility of MySpace is certainly appealing, Facebook is far simpler to use, and the common features that every individual’s profile has make it easier to navigate. While many people have got bored of the random games and applications that seem to keep popping along, the level of interactions on company pages is on the up, and people seem more inclined to share pictures, create events and join groups than ever before. What’s more, world wide there are now over 400million Facebook members, 23million of whom are in the UK. That has more than doubled in a year! That even beats China’s very own QZone according to Wikipedia, but then I think the Mandarin would cause problems for most of us.

Age doesn’t matter…

Growth in social networking sites is not just down to young people. There is a growing number of middle aged users, and the ‘silver surfers’ in retirement seem equally as engaged. While the statistics seen here, thanks to Pingdom research, are based on US usage, it clearly shows the relevance of Facebook in the older generations, with the highest number of users apparently between the ages of 45 and 54. That almost seems hard to believe, and while I think that statistics would vary slightly in the UK, with 61% of US Facebook users being older than 35, it may be I underestimate the (dare I say it) middle-aged.

The impact on social media…

Ok, so I’ve used the term, but to some extent I don’t care. Social media, brand engagement, whatever you want to call it, is in a strong position to interact positively with ALL members of society, not just the young. With such an impressive audience available, brands really need to look at what is worth using. You don’t even need to understand it, you just need to realise that it is here to stay, and not making the most of such a cheap medium to engage with your clients is downright foolish.