Web 2.0 Expo – User-generated censorship

Annalee by etech

[More semi-live blogging]

Annalee Newitz – what happens when people game social networks. get on Digg by paying people. social media depends on user-generated material but how to rid oneself of cheats.

social media censorship – bottom up, not top down; collaborative; punitive (the cruelty of crowds); not within terms of service.
here it is users who are making decision.

people get together in groups to remove people from a site for reasons that do not have to do with terms of service. it is personal.

Censorship makes user-generated content less valuable; creates divisiveness; drives community away; it is unjust; fear of posting.

“let’s collaborate to destroy free expression!” Examples – Blogger – Flag blog. sends it to database. not granular or a lot of choices to explain why. if too many people flag it, it becomes unsearchable. no accountability for person doing the flagging.

[in this case, there is no transparency about censoring, which is really done by corporation. not by community. This is really a bad amalgam of bottom up mixed with top down. may not be the best way to do it.]

Flickr – can also flag items but not clear.it also allows people to declare before hand what content may be. it does not make it disappear just harder to get to. Again, transparency of decision why an account is flagged is not readily apparent. A bunch of people or even a competitor could flag an account and make it invisible. Then it requires a long process to fix.

[She is talking from the side of the user, but it would be nice to know more about why companies make their decisions on process or just how many flags need to be sent.]

YouTube has better granularity and takes down things quickly. She has talked with Google about this. But still no transparency.

Digg – can digg or to bury a story. bury is used in ways that some call censorship. Problem with Digg is that how stories moved up or down is not transparent so people use bury to game in a zero-sum game. It is way for people to game system to their own advantage. Does not make things disappear just hard to find. On INternet this can be deadly since we rely on filtering.

Wikipedia – does a reasonable job of providing transparency to flagging. makes it harder for people to expel. It allows community to decide.

Solutions – clear content guidelines. clear and fast routes of redress; easy use of filters to self-moderate.

[This was a very interesting talk. Most sites do not really examine why or how people can game the system to harm other’s visibility. Essentially, by making flagging anonymous and without accountability, they open their systems to being abused. But, sites that make censorship/hiding as open and accountable as they do with posters will have fewer problems.]

Technorati Tags:

Beginning of 2nd day of Web 2.0

Made it through this morning’s keynotes. I did not take any notes. Saving my power. Keynotes are better for inspiring than for new information.So I’m up in the blogger’s lounge, eating a bagel, drinking some coffee and talking with other people about why there is a yoga instructor in a room full of bloggers? Not a lot of interest but the massage guys have a lot of interest. Now that is a great idea!

More Clay

clay by Joi

[Update: after thinking about it overnight, the main take away I got from Shirky’s talk was examining media in a different fashion. It is too easy to just look at Web 2.0 as just normal media taken online. But the Web is not TV and will have its own way of connecting  people.  In the end, it will be the people in a community that determine the network’s utility/importance, not the media and not corporations. So listen to what the community wants, not what the hype says.]

Just got back from Shirky’s talk. He is a very engaging speaker. No slides. Just very different points of view that require you to alter your perspective. There has been some discussion of Shirky’s new book ‘Here Comes Everybody’ at Bench Marks that invites some thought.

Interestingly, he directly answered the ‘people with too much time’ meme. His point was that one of the huge aspects of the last 50 years is that almost everyone has too much time. It has been spent watching TV and consuming.

He stated that 100 million hours of human thought produced Wikipedia. We spend 100 million hours every weekend just watching ads on TV. Which one wastes the most time?

According to Shirky, those who say Web 2.0 approaches as being used by people with too much time ignore the fact that virtually everyone has too much time today. That is, there is a culture-wide cognitive surplus that, until recently, was filled by TV and consumerism. What happens if some of this is harnessed?

Shirky mentioned the inability of modern media to accurately describe what is happening. It sees anyone who is not watching mass media or consuming as a waste. But TV is really the waste.

New technologies now allow people to also produce and to share. He stated that even if a very small fraction of the total amount of time spent watching TV, say 10%, was utilized, it could result in 10,000 wikipedia sized projects a year. His point here was that even if people are playing World of Warcraft that it is a better use of their time than watching TV.

Now, according to Sturgeon’s law, 90% of the stuff produced and shared will be crud, because 90% of everything is crud. But to throw out that 10% because the rest is hype or echo chamber is a mistake. That is still about 1,000 wikipedia-sized projects a year.

Just as we had to get through My Mother the Car to finally see Battlestar Galactica, we may have to deal with some online crud. But, a social network will not gain much unless it serves the needs of the community. So echo chamber blogs will not really have much impact as they seal themselves away from anything that breaks the echo. Blogs as cults will not be very sustainable nor have much impact.

On re-reading the article by Brabazon, I think she is concentrating on something that was not at all the focus of Shirky’s book. If so, that is somewhat unfair. Or perhaps she found a blind spot in his discussions. But that may not invalidate what he has to say. What her article and Shirky’s talk have accomplished is that I may have to read the book to figure it out for myself. Score another victory for consumerism.

Technorati Tags:

Web 2.0 Expo – Clay Shirky

shirky by etech
Transfer from agrarian to industrial really sold a lot of gin for a generation. it took 30 yeasr before the institutions of industrial revolution we recognize came into being. gin was king.

20th century lubricant – sitcom. 5 day work week, rising middle class. first time had too much free time. filled it with TV. desperate housewives was gin of our times. only now are we starting to see cognitive excess as a plus.

interviewed on TV about book. What is he saying that is interesting? He discussed pluto on wikipedia. pluto dropped from planets. moved with lots of push-pull to move to a large rock.

Where do you find the time? Noone in TV should ask that question. well TV has masked it for 50 years. wikipedia is 100 million of human thought. TV is 200 billion every year. 2000 wikipedia projects a year watch TV a year. 100 million hours each weekend just to watch the ads.

so wikipedia is only a small portion of surplus. so how do you figure out what to do with surplus. no one has any idea of how to deploy it. early phase is all special cases. do not understand how it all fits. can;t predict outputs because of complexity.

try lots of things and hope fail informatively. wikimap for crime in brazil. put pushpin on map. converts tacit information to explicit. cops do not share the info. easier to rebuild from scratch than to get it from authorities.

someone working with cheap tools can have a huge effect. talking about WOW with TV. thought they were at least doing something. watched gilligan only choice. It is better to sit in the basement and pretend to be an elf than to wonder whether if Gilligan will get off the island.

Social participation is better online than to passively watch. media does not understand. only measures consumption. but people also like to produce and to share. so it is being split up not.

also the cognitive surplus is so large. if only 10% is carved out for producing and sharing – results in 10,000 wikipedia projects a year.

is it a fad? it is a shift coser to industrial revolution. society is not growing out of this, it is growing into.

Now has story. 4 year old looking for something behind new TV screen. asked what doing? Looking for the mouse.
screens that ship without a mouse is shipped broken.

media more than just consuming. it is producing and sharing. how to get ahold of cognitive surplus.

Web 2.0 expo Keynote – O’Reilly talk

O'Reilly by takeshi

enterprise wants in to Web 2.0 heart of it is collective intelligence, it is about using data to provide services.

PageRank begining of web 2.0. people vote by links. wesabe – how people spend their money is a vote. can mine in waays that banks will not. let into back office.

cloud computing – if you are not connected to the cloud, it is worthless.no more computers. connectors to web.

difference between wordpress and facebook – why was facebook worth 15 billion and wordpress only 200M? market values consolidation but this is against where we want to go. web 2.0 is not just putting everything in one pot.

every true web 2.0 is building a database. but this leads to centralized databases which negate positive aspects of web. have to maintain openness.

Mobile – more than iPhone. more important than just a phone. synch online. dashboard on car. use to provide traffic flow from GPS. quake catcher uses Mac accelerometer to detect earthquakes. leads to ambient computing. sensors detect and create database without needing a keyboard.

confluence of tech and circumstance create opportunity to remake world. create congress. public markup.org. InStedd – infectious disease outbreaks. use google earth to track deforestation. alternative energy needs.

don;t follow headlines. go after hard problems. read the man watching by rainier maria rilke.

Technorati Tags:

Web 2.0 Expo – Website Psychology

hand by woodleywonderworks
Gavin Bell – designing website for people

tell 5 stories – cognitive psychology. started 1956. we are systems of human behavior. make decisions based on systems process.

psychology provides framework for understanding human behavior. Schema – model of understanding of how world works. 1832 – Bartlett. teddy bear schema – if teddy bear misses ear, is it still a bear? how tell if it is a restaurant or a take away? look for congruence – expectations meet reality.

if not, congruence can cause problem. Adaptation – schemas can change. takes some time. web development and schemas – gradual change better because it allows audience to make adaptations. measured development. small increments better.

Affordances – Gibson. independent and inherent properties. does not need specific person. chair has affordances. schemas are models. make sure affordances match (use + sign for adding and for enlarging – not a good thing.

Cognitive dissonance – don’t want to confuse people. Consistent vs coherent. rules vs. context. implicit vs explicit learning.

Flow – lost in the moment. full involvement. try to engage people’s flow state. challenge people. add some difficulty to engage people.

Challenge their curiosity to increase flow. Pivots – changes in direction based on different types of links.

Reinforcement. operant conditioning. skinner. slower updates are better. random updates not good. do not want to make people have to check at random times.

Dunbar number – 150 people. Social software – not every update is joyful. try provide filters. need to be able to deny info feeds from some people. healthy to ignore and forget things. Attention – gating information to focus attention. Memory – much more news than 100 years ago. it is associative. primacy and recency effects. Miller’s number – 7 ± 2 . organize memory. Consciousness – 1) sentient – subjective experience. 2) self-knowledge – externalization of information. needed for social interactions. social relationships to be supported.

Collective intelligence – extract information from large amounts of data.

Technorati Tags:

Web 2.0 Expo – Bringing Web 2.0 to the Enterprise

carrier by SqueakyMarmot

[Semi-live blogging. I am uploading this after the talk from the Blogger’s lounge. I’ve tried to correct spelling but grammar may be a little lacking. I wanted to keep the immediacy.]

(not the carrier)

Still tackling same problems since 1988. Awareness builds branded web 2.0. broad participation. frictionless participation and credible content. this should be on all sites.

got investors from both enterprise and web 2.0

improve collaboration. take inside head info. and mash it up. provide context. inside enterprise it is all email. need to move away from crm, best practices, knowledge management.

problems of connecting personally gets harder as you scale. finding right people is hard. finding info is hard. context matters.

email is hard for newbies. and when people leave, that content is gone. at MS for 11 years. in year 8, wanted back to sales. told he was not sales. he was marketing. but he was in sales in year 1. it had been completely erased from corporate memory. people want credit and they want to be remembered.

On internet, know what you did on 2004 because it is already there. people know who/what you do. RSS/aggregators – bring disparate info together. end-users in control of data.

need good search. friend of a friend. move away from IT throttling exchange.

enterprise needs – security. accountability. ROI. departmental buy-in. structure. balanced with frictionless participation. anonymity? leap of faith. borderless. self-organization. grass roots.

missing from enterprise – notion of friends lists. self-created groups. sms or mobile strategy. personal profiles. personal blogs.

twitter works for individual even if no one else reads it.

fears – culture. swarming behavior. snark. worried about bad things.

need broad participation. everyone has to contribute and become part of community. works both ways from internal to external and back.

frictionless participation – don’t confuse with tools. get content into system. no new silos. awareness keeps the data together. uses different presentations.

content is corporate asset. compliance. departments want to know they will be separate and individuals need to get credit. my contributions are never presented as someone else’s.

want personal profiles. leverage. points of enthusiasm. certain events will trigger high participation. company meetings. employee reviews. file out form. voting, etc.

leverage any popular public web 2.0. allow them to submit content from facebook.

company culture – moderated vs open. structure vs self-organized. categories vs. tags. sizzle. profiles. is mobile important?

Technorati Tags:

Web 2.0 Expo: Community Building

sunrise building by David Wilmot

[Semi-live blogging. I am uploading this after the talk from the Blogger’s lounge. I’ve tried to correct spelling but grammar may be a little lacking. I wanted to keep the immediacy.]

No power cords so I will have to post this later. This could be a good start. The panel has some very strong members including Jeremiah Owyand from Forrester and Dawn Foster from Jive.

Jeremiah started with a nice easy question about what each panel member wore in the 80s. Lots of people using Twitter for the session.

Tools not important. It is the people and why they connect. Kellie Parker discussed gathering together to exchange ideas. Dawn – feedback on products. Bob – brand loyalty and 2-way communication.

Nothing new, right? just customer support.Kellie – old way is one to one. this is one to many or many to many. Collaboration provides support. Dawn – not just company providing solutions. Other members of community can. Bob – moving beyond support.

Jeremiah – asks audience to provide some answers on background. Do I great a new community or join an old one? Kellie – need to do both.set something on Facebook, twitter and on their own.

Bob – discussed Slash.dot almost too earlier since it was on before many web 2.0 came to maturity. need to use your own assets to create – train bloggers, etc. It is different from traditional marketing. Dawn – marketing messages are different from community. It is people who work for the organization not the organization. It is people not companies.

Kellie – community manager is the landlord, set up the space and take care of it but does not own it. She is just Kellie.

What is skill set for community manager? Bob – passion. need to have it not just be an expert. Helps but not required. needs to understand the community and the company. wants people who touch the technology. Dawn – a good networker. in real life and on the web. Kellie – tact and diplomacy. good people skills.here to serve community. Dawn – advocate to company and to community. [an effective ombudsman]

Bad – How? afraid of losing control. Bob – need to protect brand. but know culture. Need for risk may be more important than maintaining brand. for external deal with legal. biggest was company resource restraints when dealing with silos that need to communicate.

deployed tools, hired people but no one is coming. Dawn – how do you build initial community. in case of customer space, tap existing customers. Find outside evangelists. get early adopters on board early. if starting from scratch, find early adopters and use them to spread the word. Use marketing channels and other social media.

How flexible should community be with coporate rigidity? Kellie – keep goals in mind. realize that your plans may not be what the communities want. be creative.

Deal with trolls?Kellie – try to engage, at least once. often this just calms them down. if keeps on, will discuss in private and then ban.

Dawn – step back and do not get defensive. Typically there are people who will stick up for the community. It is much less defensive if you let passionate members help fight rather than the organization. Bob – train all bloggers on engagement. moderate lightly. often the community comes to the defense. use terms and conditions if they are egregious. let community have discussion.

Clay Shirky – deploy a community? what is funniest social dynamic on site? Kellie – general topics section. people find out they grew up in same town. what they had for breakfast. So have a place where community can just be people not part of PCWorld. Dawn – spammer got on and got Nigerian sam to members. Bob – discussed terms. not deploy but embrace. funniest is what does not make it out of moderation side. off the wall comments. experimentation.

How do you get people to stay at community? Kellie – ask general questions? favorite browser, etc. act as matchmaker and connect people. Dawn – give them something special like their own space. Bob – make it simple for people to engage. add captions to photos, etc. one sentence.

Within the enterprise (sales people or contractors) where do you see momentum inside companies. Dawn – mostly in external communities. seeing more around partners. semi-private. just starting inside company. does it at Jive. it is really helpful since all info on 1` platform and everyone knows where tp go to get answers. 2013 – 40% will be internal.

experience of community managers to senior management. Bob – distributed structure. need to make sure community is close to product. but need to evangelize up.

What are metrics? What is ROI? Bob – needs to know objective and be firm. outreach will have different than marketing. talking model – make intel more relevant. looks at organic traffic like to see referral links to site rather than number of visitors.
Dawn – look at participation. messages posted. do not need to look all the way down to leads. not really a funnel to purchases. Kellie – page views may be only way to tell who reads but not participating. looks at page views then number of messages. Jeremiah – depends on exact objective of community.

What about interactivity? Digg help hostage by community. cold community hurt product. Dawn – hard to value Digg because whole value is the community. can you buy a community. not an easy answer. different for dedicated sites like PCWorld.

Size of community. number of managers to community. resource management. Kellie – depends on culture. if community is self managing – then only need 1. if more like a cocktail party, then need more host activity and maybe more hosts. dedicated manager vs shared resources. Dawn – development manager but have help from developers. Bob – foster conversations. lots of managers living in community with 50-100 FTE with lots of bloggers. each post 4-5 times a week. no ghost towns.

Technorati Tags: ,

First day at Web 2.0

sunrise by Just-Us-3

The morning of the first day at one of these meetings usually starts with a continental breakfast followed by a search for a nearby plug in the meeting rooms. After my coffee, I discovered that none of the meeting rooms apparently has power outlets to use and there are no tables for computers.

I guess that is one way to prevent laptops from being used during a session. Little live-blogging I guess. There are several power-up sites at the conference, to recharge the computers but with 8000 or so attendees, they will be crowded.

There is a blogger’s lounge that I checked out and got myself invited to. That may be very helpful as time goes on. We shall see. It is sponsored by Blogtropol.us.

Technorati Tags: ,