Thoughtpick: A unique perspective of the Web and social media...
A unique perspective of the Web and social media...

September 15, 2009

Does More Social Media = Shorter Product & Service Life Cycle?

Is the relationship between the life cycle of products and services inversely related to the use of social media? How does social media influence the perceptions and even usage of products and services, especially when it comes to the trendy, fashionable and high tech ones?

We’ve Heard it All!

Throughout the past 2 years or so, we have heard almost everything related to social media and how it plays a role on almost every stage of its users’ lives! Whether it be how social media could kill us, its effect on our mental health or how its use can positively or negatively effect an enterprise, social media has been taking the lead amongst all online related news!

But, from a marketing point of view, and after seeing how social media is able to highly spread or deeply bury a marketing/promotional campaign, one must take a moment to think: How does social media affect the life cycle of all those products and services it touches?

The Past… The Present…

Beware Products & Services!

Beware Products & Services!

Scientifically, it is well known that “an inverse or negative relationship is a mathematical relationship in which one variable, say y, decreases as another, say x, increases”. When applying this to my topic of discussion, if y is social media use and x is product/service life cycle would mean the more the social media use increases the shorter the life cycle!

But the question is: Why?

It is very simple: sometimes what is more is less! (My favorite example here is salt: a great addition to food yet when heavily used it could cause serious health problems!)

Long before social media ever emerged, even more so, way back when the Internet was just a distant concept, I truly believe that products and services used to live longer.

Allow me to further explain by sharing with you my reasoning for such a rationalization:

[read full article >>]

July 31, 2009

Do Larger Social Media Channels Always Have the Upper Hand?

What are the advantages and disadvantages of small scale communities vs. larger more popular ones? Is bigger always better? How does communication differ amongst larger social media channels as opposed to smaller yet more specialized ones?

Come to think about it, it’s true what they say: “sometimes less is more“! Allow me to further explain.

During our ordinary lives, we are always faced with situations that make us wonder: Do we really need many friends or just a few true close ones? Do we need fame or simply a good reputation? Do we need many meals a day or only a few healthy ones? This applies to everything we do offline and online as well!

Earlier on this week, while doing some usual research on the web, I came across the video sharing channel, Vimeo, which is very much similar to Youtube yet on a smaller scale. The first idea that popped to my mind was trying to figure out the reasons why Vimeo is not as popular as Youtube, treating the situation as a problem. After some research, I was able to find out that maybe, just maybe, this smaller number of users is there for a reason: specialization! Although Vimeo and Youtube have a lot in common, Vimeo’s competitive edge probably lies in its ability to create a more intact and integrated chain of users who make up communities that know each other by face and name and who interact with each other on a more personal level than any large social media channel can possibly provide!

But the buck doesn’t stop there!

There are many other social media channels for which this theory can perfectly apply, namely: the infamous social bookmarking sites Reddit and Mixx vs. Digg.

Got 69 points and 25 comments on Mixx, but not even noticed on Mixx!

Got 69 points and 25 comments on Mixx, but not even noticed on Digg!

Let me break it down to you in simple points to bullet-proof my argument…

[read full article >>]

July 9, 2009

10 Things I Hate About So-Called Gurus!

What is the real definition of the word “guru”? How many real gurus, on different topics, could there possibly be? And what is this new emerging trend of having people describe themselves as gurus in their biographies and resumes?

The exact definition of a guru is: “is a person who is regarded as having great knowledge, wisdom and authority in a certain area, and uses it to guide others. A guru is literally a preceptor who shows others knowledge (light) and destroys ignorance (darkness)”. This definition lead me to think of all the so-called gurus I bump into on Twitter and other social media sites and of how annoying it can be to find hundreds of self acclaimed gurus with no proof or record of their expertise!

The Xara Art of Zeb

The Xara Art of Zeb

Therefore, I decided to compile a list, with examples, of the top ten things that I hate about fake gurus:

Is it still 1995?

1995 left-overs, and yes, that's a "guru's" 2009 site!

  1. False Credit: In order to be a real guru, you must possess certain characteristics, education and knowledge. So-called gurus are self acclaimed, which means they give themselves credit they most probably do not deserve! An example is a tech guru” on Twitter with 72 following, 62 followers, a site which looks like a 1995 leftover with no traffic and around 414 updates about random things that do not relate to technology!
  2. Inaccurate Advice: A guru is supposed to provide his audience with advice, tips and information which is accurate and even more-so, life-changing! Falsified gurus will do the exact opposite, providing downright wrong advice that might get their audience into trouble! Check out the Financial Gurus Hall of Shame!
  3. Lack of Humbleness: A real guru is humble and selfless; helping his followers excel, learn more and be more just for the mere pleasure of watching them grow. Self-acclaimed gurus ruin that image by boasting about who they are and what they do! [read full article >>]