Liberté, Egalité, Bureaucracy

French Bureaucracy.  Those words should strike fear into the hearts of everyone.  For a country whose motto translates into “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity”, the byzantine stretch of absurd regulations in France often makes one wonder if the ghost of Kafka is laughing or crying.  

So it really comes as no surprise to hear that the French government in its infinite wisdom recently decreed that hosts of television and radio programs must refrain from uttering the words “Facebook” and “Twitter” on the air. Imagine if that happened in the US.  CNN might as well shut down, as currently every third sentence is a request to “Join the conversation”.  Who knows, maybe they would have to go back to actually reporting the news rather than everyone’s reaction to it.  Hmmm… But I digress. 

What was surprising was the reaction to the decree in France, or should I say, the non-reaction.  Some newspapers published straightforward reports of the government action, some French bloggers questioned the decision, but overall the reaction was “meh” combined with the classic French shrug. 

Now there were reasons given, having to do with egalité.  The CSA (France’s Conseil Supérieur de l’Audiovisuel, the equivalent to the FCC) maintained that any on-air mention of a program’s Facebook page or Twitter feed constitutes “clandestine advertising” for these social networks because they are commercial operations. In a word, French television and radio programs cannot be seen to be promoting Facebook and Twitter as commercial brands. There are outlets available other than Twitter and Facebook.  To allow the preference of the the two largest players in the room  would “be a distortion of competition”.  If the government allows Facebook and Twitter to be cited on air, it’s opening a Pandora’s Box — other social networks will complain saying, “why not us?”.

However, as pointed out by French blogger Benoit Raphael, Facebook and Twitter are now “public spaces” of communication with a global reach. And it is because of that reality TV and radio stations use the two extensively to connect to their audience.  Too bad, according to the bureaucrats.  No mention of Twitter or Facebook unless it is a direct story about the companies.

Of course, one may point out that la paperasserie is still motivated by an institutionalized hostility towards Anglo-Saxon domination, but that would be rude.

Weekend Wrap Up–Bad Moves Edition

It has been a busy week, at least if your job is spinning jaw-dropping stupid stunts.

Bad Move Number One.  I think that people have a right to talk about “conflict of interest” in an honest way when you approve one of the largest mergers in US history, then four months later go to work for the company you approved the merger for.  Meredith Attwell Baker, one of the two Republican Commissioners at the Federal Communications Commission decided to take a lobbying position at Comcast. But, as we all know, one did not have anything to do with the other. 

Bad Move Number Two.  You know it’s a bad move to plant smears on your corporate opponent when the PR company you hired to do so suddenly says “Wait a minute, this isn’t right”.  But Facebook went ahead and did it anyway.  Really, Zuck?  Do you really feel that people are going to leave Facebook for whatever the flavor of the month Google is pitching to be relevant in the social market? 

Bad Move Number Three.  Rupert Murdoch decided to create his own version of Wikileaks, called “Safehouse”.  Yeah, I know, it took me a while to stop laughing on this one.  Of course, unlike Wikileaks, if the heat gets to be too much (you know like someone asks “who sent you this?”), they will sell you down the river to the authorities.  Really, the man is known for spreading lies concerning just about everyone on the planet and we are supposed to believe that if it is posted in “Safehouse” then it must be true?  They say that two positives don’t make a negative.  Yeah.  Right.

Bad move Number Four.  Something that really has something to do with technology, although it doesn’t look like it on the surface.  The political season is once again upon us and unfortunately, we are going to have to put up with political ads.  So far, we have a tie for what are the worst political ads ever, and we have only just begun, so the only place you’ll see them is either on “Web Soup” or the internet.  Really, Newt Gingrich has no reason to be turning out this cheese.  He has been in the game too long to think that this pile of excrement is actually good for him.  But Dan Adler’s ads are starting off by being, well, different.  And by Different, I mean just WTF?  I mean, Patty Duke, in the Muscle Beach weight lifting area telling constituents “Dan Adler gets sh*t done.” and a second ad that makes as much sense as the first.  I don’t know whether the guy is serious or is trolling the southern half of California. BTW, his campaign manager is Sean Astin, he of LOTR fame and Patty Duke’s son.  So there is no excuse for these either.

Just remember, folks, technology is a tool.  Unfortunately, so are many people. 

T-Mobile Bobsleds Into Facebook

If you’re T-Mobile, you can either sit and wait for the US Government to OK the sale between you and AT&T or you can actually do something big.  T-Mobile opted for Big.  As in Facebook’s 500 million users big.  And Skype may have taken the mortal hit because of it. 

You see, today, T-Mobile announced their new Facebook application, Bobsled.  Teamed with developer Vivox, Bobsled is a web-based voice chat app that runs in Facebook .  That’s right, this lets you start voice chats with your Facebook friends from within Facebook’s chat window. All you need is a mike and speakers. You can leave a voice message for your friends and family when they are not available. You do not need to have Bobsled in order to receive a voice message. Did I mention this was free? And since approximately 88 percent of Facebook users have said that voice chat is something they want, that’s a lot of users.

How does it work?  The app is natively integrated into Facebook’s chat system. When you pull up a Facebook chat window, you can see a phone icon. If you click on that, you can call your friend. It’s instantaneous. I’ve been playing with it this afternoon.  The call quality is OK. 

So what does this mean for Skype? A previously announced partnership between Facebook and Skype has left many people expecting the two would be taking care of intra-Facebook calls, which makes the announcement by T-Mobile all the more interesting.  Apparently, someone wasn’t moving fast enough.  A possible 500 million plus users, and you know that T-Mobile is going to expand into video chat, the ability to place VoIP calls to mobile and landline U.S. numbers, and apps on all devices.  T-Mobile appears to be getting aggressive and fast.  This does not bode well for Skype. 

But besides the business of business, this is a nice to have. 

The More You Know (And Shooting Star)

While everyone was busy watching the budgetary hi-jinks in Washington this week, Google re-organized itself.  The reorganization is not like most in that Larry Page wants no committees and no managers between him and the people he can hold  accountable for each Google product.  Sound like Steve Jobs?  Oh yeah.  Here’s hoping it works out as reorganizations on this scale usually do not end well, as it requires a change in the culture as well as the org.

There is also a brilliant story from Reuters concerning what happened after Rupert met Myspace. For all those who didn’t read it, it boils down to Facebook.  Zuckerberg and his team were focused on product development and innovation while Myspace had become too concerned with revenue and meeting traffic targets of its Google deal.  A point which will be missed by many out there: focus on your product and the traffic will follow, not the other way around.

Oh, by the way, apparently Rupert’s other product, The Daily apparenly is not doing too well after the splashy launch on the iPad. In the words of Nieman Labs, “The Daily is losing audience over time rather than gaining it.”  How the numbers are arrived at are not necesarily the best, but if true, this would not be good news for the King of news.

And finally, while I like Pandora, knowing that via the Android app they are sending the user’s birth date, gender, Android ID, and GPS information to various advertising companies doesn’t make me very happy.  And apparently, the US Government is looking into this.  Pandora revealed that it had been subpoenaed by a federal grand jury to produce documents about its user data collection practices on Android and iOS devices. The company said that it believes the subpoena is part of an industry-wide investigation into popular applications on both platforms.

Well, that is if the government doesn’t shut down.  If so, then App makers can breathe a sigh of relief.  At least for the moment.

Google’s Crop Circles

Real or not?  That seems to be the question concerning Google “Circles”.  On Sunday, Read Write Web’s Marshall Kirkpatrick published a story that Google was readying their own social network, called Circles.  Google would show it to the world at the ACLU party at SXSW, a well known gathering in Austin, Texas.  As this was what people call “a big thing”, bloggers started jumping all over the news, with Tim O’Reilly, the well-known technology pundit, seemingly confirming the existence of Circles by tweeting “I’ve seen google circles, and it looks awesome.”

Only one problem.  Like the proverbial crop circles are likely not made by aliens, Google’s Circles likely does not exist, at least in the format that people thought.  Google rebutted claims by saying: “We’re not launching any products at SXSW.”  Google’s Chris Messina, who had been pegged as one of the leaders of Circles, said in an interview that he “didn’t know what [the story] was talking about.”

O’Reilly ammended his original “seen it” statement.

“It’s not a product, per se, and it’s not a new social network. Just some research-y thinking about how you could better manage social data. Exactly what Chris said. I got fooled by the RWW story into thinking that they’d turned it into something they were going to announce. There’s no story here. Just some labs stuff.”

But you’ve seen that, right?

It makes sense for Google to research social networking and how to use the nuances of contacts and the like.  But usually when something as big as Google launching a social network is in the works, then there have been leaks well ahead of time.  The reason for this is because these days, you need to have developers on your side, so somewhere along the way news would be sort of out there before the big reveal. 

I’m not saying that it couldn’t happen eventually – Marshall has been right more than he has been wrong. but at the moment, the niche seems to be where Google is researching, rather than the whole market. All you aliens out there can breathe a sigh of relief.

Twitter, Facebook Providing Emergency Services – Again

Twitter and Facebook. The two sites have been there for people in Iran, Egypt, Haiti, Chile and now Japan. The two social networks are being used extensively in Japan, as cell phone networks are jammed due to the fifth largest earthquake ever recorded and subsequent Tsunami.

Carriers were limiting voice calls on congested networks, with NTT DoCoMo restricting up to 80 percent of voice calls, especially in Tokyo and in northeast Japan. Service throughout the rest of the country remains patchy at best. Twitter, Facebook, and Japanese social-media site Mixi were helping fill the communication gap though, as online networks held firm. However, Internet service was on-again, off-again in Tokyo. There are reports of people lining up at the few public pay phones, which are programmed to take priority over networks during and after an earthquake. 

But this points out how any country can be overwhelmed by an emergency. In the DC area on 9/11/2001, the cell system overloaded and collapsed under the sheer volume of calls. However, some people found the following workarounds:

• calls to dedicated “#” or “*” numbers went through unhindered.
• most cell to landline calls were being made to local numbers, so long distance lines were open. People called friends in other states who then relayed the information to loved ones in the area.
• cell to cell calls just would not go through. However, they would drop into voice mail. So people also communicated that way.

Connections are being restored, but it will be some time before the complete picture of the disaster can be assessed and we can lear lessons for the next time. Until then, than you Twitter and facebook.  You have proved your usefullness once again.

Come Sit By Me Some More

Yesterday, I was talking about Facebook Commenting and being anonymous vs. being private.  Apparently there are a few other people out there talking about this as well and with everyone talking, there is a valid discussion about the two going on.

Yet no one is talking about the one thing everyone should be looking at.

First, as I have said in several posts about the subject, anonymity is a good thing to have on the internet.  It gives people who, for whatever reason, do not have a voice, the ability to be vocal.  For those folks, if being anonymous is the only way you can rock the keyboard, rock on.  But the concept of being anonymous is tricky at best. For every political or social dissident out there that needs anonymity, there are a hundred rabid fan-bois who are simply afraid to man up and publicly embrace their inner troll. As Felix Pleșoianu, one regular commenter to this blog said, “You can’t have a magical fire that can heat but not burn.”  To that, I whole heartedly agree. 

My agument was not about dissidents, however.  It was against people who feel that in order to be “authentic” on the web, you need to be like an internet version of the United States of Tara, and that it was perfectly OK if everyone you knew realized that you were basically a nice guy, but could be an ass under certain conditions.  Happens to me all the time.   

But I also touched on a point yesterday that people should be looking at.  By turning you comments over to Facebook, you are missing more than just random shouts of “Microbloat”, Bloat Farm” or “Epic Fail”.  You are giving data over to Facebook.  Data that can be mined, sliced, diced and sold to the highest bidder.  After all, when Facebook knows what you like, that’s one thing.  When they know why you like or dislike something in your own words, that is another.  Plus, by forcing your name into the comments, they knew that most of the “Epic Fail” crowd would be weeded out, giving them more relevant data without so much of the cost of weeding out the trolls. 

Besides, everyone should realize that there is a way to keep yourself private while continuing to troll.  Just get yourself a different e-mail account, and create a new Facebook identity that has no connection to your current one and troll away.

If You Can’t Say Something Good About Someone, Come Sit Next To Me.

Last week, Facebook launched Facebook Commenting, which means that on many websites, if you have a comment to say about an article, you need to be signed into Facebook to do so.  This means that everyone in your social circle can read what you have to say about matters.

Comments about this have been, well, somewhat muted.  To some, the stripping away of anonymity in comments is a horrible thing.  To others, it has been as if someone opened up a can of “Troll-Be-Gone” and disinfected the comments. While I do not like using Facebook for comments because it is really whoring out FB by forcing people to sign up if they really feel positive/negative about something, this can be seen as a good thing.

Of course, having all your friends and family see what a jackass you really are when you go off on your Apple fan-boi shoot-from-the-hip comment drive-by can put a damper on your fun (EPIC FAIL!!!).  But really, didn’t they all ready know this?  Come on, if you troll comment logs, you probably troll in real life.  It’s just that no one has sat you down and told you so.

Now, some people, like Steve Cheney at Posterous claim that this decreases your “Authenticity”. Quite the contrary.  It forces you to own up to your words.  It makes you think before you hit the ‘send’ key.  At least it does for some of us.  If you have to hide behind an anonymous façade in order to make snarky comments with no real redeeming value to the rest of the thread, then frankly, you don’t deserve to make comments at all.  And if you are one of those people who do not care who knows what you are saying, then you are probably more authentic than most.  It takes a certain amount of personal bravery to “go there”.  Because going there means defending your position, regardless of how many people you may offend, Grandma included.  Being authentic does not mean showing different faces to different people.  If means showing the same face to everyone all the time.

I have a seat next to me if you need to sit and ponder that.

Friends With Benefits

The phrase “Friends with Benefits” has always intrigued me.  I mean, what, the person that you’re fooling around with has offered you a dental plan?  That guy over there wants to screw around, but only if you set him up with a 401K?  Please. 

But in the case of Goldman Sachs and and co-investor Russian giant DST’s investment in Facebook,  there are some friends with some major benefits.  500 million dollars worth, to be precise.  That puts the value of Facebook at $50 billion.  Greater than Yahoo! (you hear that, Carol?).  Greater than e-Bay.  As great (as The Register has pointed out) as the British retail giant, Tesco, a company with real honest-to-God assets, like stores and trucks and things.  Clients of the Goldman-Sachs who plan to invest in Facebook have to cough up at least two million dollars each, not sell their shares in Facebook until 2013, and steer clear of trading in secondary markets where the firm trades.  And what will those investors get?  A lot of non-public information about Facebook.  For this, Goldman and DST get about one whole percent of Facebook.  One percent.   

All of this would be fine and dandy, except given the players and what they are playing for.  Enter the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The fact is, the Sachs-Facebook deal is definitely enough to start the government investigating.  There are more than enough laws that this little transaction is walking on or tip-toeing around. 

So, two questions remain.  What does this mean and more importantly, when does Facebook go public?  Let’s go with the first question first.  What this means is that Facebook is going to get larger than they all ready are.  Zuckerberg just got back from China.  China has about 450 million people on-line right now.  Now, granted, China is not the easiest place to do business in, but you cannot turn your back on 450 million potential users.  The only question is when. 

Another point is that Facebook still really hasn’t focused on advertising, despite that $2 billion annual rev and nearly 1 trillion display ads per year.  Funny, that.  Facebook really has not focused their undying attention on what is probably the world’s largest database of human wants and needs.  When they finally do, be afraid.  You’ll realize it when you start seeing ads that display things that you’ve sometimes thought about, but have never, ever told anyone.  The fact is, the information has always been there, based on your likes, your friends likes, their friends likes, and so on.  Facebook just hasn’t gotten that nuanced enough.  They will.

Finally, when do they go public?  No general consensus on that, yet.  Maybe the end of the year, maybe 2012.  The point is, however, when it happens, expect the bonuses at Goldman to be incredibly huge.  Now there will be some friends with benefits.

It’s A Festivus Miracle!

Today is Festivus. In accordance with tradition, I submit my 2010 Airing of Grievances. The following have disappointed me over the past year, in no particular order:

• Carol Bartz for still not figuring out what Yahoo is, $@#$#%#^^$%!!!!!!!!!!!. Of course no one else has either, but really, she is the head Hooligan, so she should have some idea.
• Steve Jobs for not allowing Chris Chang’s company to make a really cool action figure of him. Yeah I know, someone would put a mini Darth Vader helmet on it and then make a viral video which would piss him off to no end. But really, Steve, I promise I wouldn’t skewer you too much.
• Ray Ozzie for not gathering the Microsoft developers French revolution style and storming Ballmer’s office for cancelling Courier. Of course I get the fact that Ray didn’t want his breast exposed as in the painting. But still, it would have been awesome.
• Every single TV maker in the world. 3-D. Really? After all these years and the only thing you can offer as an advancement in 3-d technology is polarized glasses? Really?
• Google. Before rolling out Google TV, don’t you think it would have been a really keen idea to get the networks to buy into it?
• Apple. Ping. The less said, the better.
• Airlines that think that voice recognition is really cool. It isn’t. It’s annoying. I have to say the same thing five times before the system recognizes it, or else do my impression of Lillith from Frasier.
• The TSA. Come on guys, I’ve been looking for a real good grope, and nothing. Am I that undesirable? I feel cheated.
• People on Facebook who immediately are up in arms when a change is made to the system. There’s a life out there. Go get one.
• By that same token, Facebook. You know if you set everyone’s privacy to the highest and let them decide to open themselves up, you wouldn’t have so many people out there screaming. Just a thought.
• Apple again for pretending to be East Germany over losing an iPhone, complete with Stasi-like raids in the middle of the night.
• Steve Jobs again, this time for telling left handed people that the iPhone is perfect and they are not.
• Viacom, for still continuing with a lawsuit that has been thrown out of court once.
• Microsoft for allowing Kin to see the light of day.
• Telecom companies that have made a standard like 4G a marketing tool. When you do things like that, then we know you aren’t telling the truth about anything, OK?
• And finally, to politicians who decry Net Neutrality really loud. Please to note that those who cry the loudest are the ones who have received huge amounts of money from the telecom companies. I still think that our legislators need to wear NASCAR jumpsuits with patches of the companies and groups who have sponsor them. Now that would be transparency I could get behind.