A wonderful pattern demonstrating the privacy issues about Facebook.
It underlines the diverse paths & the diverse actions btw the different parameters and what it allows to Facebook.
And so the word-of-mouth is spreading around, that’s why it’s so complicated to add a measurable timeline: so many parameters can interfer on the organic buzz.
In a recent interview, Chris Abraham mentioned that psychology was superior to marketing:
“In the big picture, what do you think is more helpful in understanding buzz and word of mouth: marketing or psychology?
Psychology. I think that the first step is always to understand what motivates people to do certain things. Marketing techniques come and go, but if you understand why people talk about products, you can find new ways to motivate them to talk about your brand.”
Well, which marketing are we talking about? probably not the very last one that says that we’re now in the 4 E’s age:
To which we could also add a fifth E’s:
And it’s certainly where psychology can match with marketing. But I’m now going to tell you why it’s not about psychology but about gentle manners:
A great insight from Korea:
More and more Korean netizens are “fleeing to foreign internet services”, in response to tighter net censorship recently being implemented by the Korean government, Korean newspaper Hankyeoreh reports.
So if we consider that social conversations are like liquid transactions, will we experience social web havens ?
Here’s what we can read this morning:
If you want to share your thoughts on what should be in the new terms, check out our group Facebook Bill of Rights and Responsibilities.
Good news and good reaction for us. And probably a way to dismantle the “bad buzz” around Facebook. Nonetheless, 3 thoughts:
“The backlash against Facebook’s updated privacy policies is about to expand. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) is preparing to file a formal complaint with the Federal Trade Commission over the social network’s updated licenses, PC World has learned.”
A very important issue happened in Sweden with Q-Med, a company specialized in medical implants.
Blogger and model Johanna Trenck was contacted by Q-Med to publish a post, with a counterpart to get a free lip augmentation treatment. The problem is that Johanna did not mention the deal on her blog.Summary:
“(…)This case deals with an extremely important principle. We know this sort of hidden marketing is common, but we’ve never been able to prove it before,” said Mattias Grundström from Sweden’s Consumer Agency (Konsumentverket – KO) to the Upsala Nya Tidning (UNT) newspaper (…).
The Consumer Agency is also considering making contact with the Swedish Tax Agency (Skatteverket), as bloggers who accept gifts are required to pay taxes on them, UNT reports.”
The good thing of this story is that it brings into focus some ethics when it comes to a business relationship between a brand and a blogger. So to say, that there is a media / brand transaction.
More about Q-Med issue: