7 Reasons Google Buzz Matters

Mind you, this is coming from a someone who does not profess to understand Google Wave (after several attempts)...and from someone who believes that Facebook is the bigger than most give it credit for.

Here are seven unsorted reasons Google Buzz matters:

1. Buzz integrates directly into email.

One of the failings of Wave is that I had to repeated return to see new activity... that's asking too much for a new service with still sporadic usage. The email integration gives a large population (Gmail users of course) immediate and continued access to Buzz - all within a setting that is stickier than any other: email.

2. Buzz is familiar.

Combine email, Google Chat, Facebook status updates, Google Reader, etc... and you have Buzz. A familiar combination of web activities. Wave is too complex - this is simple enough to bridge us from email to Wave (or whatever is next).

3. Email contacts are the original - and perhaps most powerful - social network.

The ability for Buzz to connect you with people you already contact on a daily basis is powerful... it also means new users never are lonely.

4. Content is public. Conversations are defaulted to being public and have their own URLs. In anyone else's hands, this is not revolutionary. But Google has worked hard to integrate blogs and Twitter into search results... it is a powerful way to accelerate Buzz and to reward / incent active users with traffic (much like SEO).

5. It is versatile. The ability to pivot conversations through Buzz, GChat and Email is slick, simple and powerful because activities can also pivot between public / private and one:one / one:many.

6. It beats CC'ing The public functionality makes Buzz a powerful tool for group activity and chat. People can jump in and out of threads.

7. ... And it therefore makes sense as a Google Docs Tool There are clear benefits for team usage and it fits within the Google Docs suite of corporate products.

SEO: Content is King; Social Media: Context is King

While leading natural search strategy at eBay, we had a motto: Content is King. It wasn't a unique tagline - even CKX, Inc (American Idol, Elvis Presley, etc) stands for "Content is King". While at the Polaris Digital Media Summit in Jackson Hole this past week - several folks (including myself) referred to social media as the "new SEO". When it comes to traffic acquisition and product marketing strategies, Facebook is indeed the new Google - it is top of mind for marketers in much the same way that natural search was a primary focus over the last several years.

And if SEO is driven by content... Social media is driven by context.

Google :: Facebook SEO :: SGO Content :: Context

In fact, context is so critical to social efficacy that it has been billed as SGO: Social Graph Optimization. Meebo founder Seth Sternberg is credited with the term: "Search has been great traffic driver. Now social media drives [traffic] and needs to be optimized." Much of the conversation at the summit was focused on driving traffic through social media and optimizing content across the social graph. The consensus was that context drives relevancy... and thus virality... and thus efficacy. Consider social sites like Quora and Aardvark as examples: using Facebook Connect and algorithms, questions are delivered contextually based upon your social graph, knowledge and activity.

And as the world of friends / followers, status updates and 'check-ins' grows - context helps stand out among the noise and therefore alleviate users from being overwhelmed.

This is further complicated by Facebook's "News Feed" - which itself is akin to Google's black-box search algorithm. We have a general sense for how it works and what Facebook values: activity (comments, likes, shares) results in content being "news worthy". As it has been described by Alex Shultz before, it is about "interestingness squared":

- content that is considered "interesting" is rewarded (highlighted in newsfeed with better chance to becoming viral) - and content that is uninteresting (ie irrelevant) is punished (relegated to "live feed") and consequently has difficulty gaining visibility

As you think through social media and optimization, think through how it relates to your brand and product experience... and how the outputted content relates specifically to users (both the publishers and consumers). The more relevant and closed that loop is, the more effective the experience will be and the more likely your users are to engage / share.

Checking-In: The Geo-coded Status Update

Two excellent posts on the current status of geo-location companies by Robert Scoble and Hunter Walk (both bloggers are great and their blogs are must reads). Scoble argues that industry-first Foursquare is being squeezed by Gowalla (best UI) and Booyah's MyTown (best gameplay and my personal favorite!).

Hunter argues that, considering their rapid growth, there is room for Foursquare assuming they move beyond 'utility' and into an experience:

"If they get reduced to being a utility ("publish location") or end up focused on too narrow a group of users, they'll get passed by general purpose geo services or social networks on one side and out innovated by gowalla, mytown, etc on the other. [read more]" Both Hunter and Scoble are spot-on: Foursquare, Gowalla and others need to build social and/or finding experiences beyond the 'check-in'. Consider that Foursquare has 1,000,000 weekly check-ins. That's significant size and growth. But when Facebook and Twitter turn geo-coding on, they will dominate by volume (and I have written about this before): on Facebook, 40,000,000 users update their status each day.... and 20% of Facebook users are on their mobile platform. "Check-ins", whether passive or active, will be massive. Between Facebook, Twitter, and the development on their platforms - the "check-in" will be commoditized (and that doesn't include Google, Yelp and other big players).

That is why I believe that the gameplay is so critical: it creates an experience beyond the 'check-in' that is part social, part gaming and part finding. Booyah's MyTown is a terrific example: in an interview with Scoble, CEO Keith Lee said that the average MyTown user (and there are 850,000+) spends 50 minutes per day. Clearly there is more to it than 'checking in'... and the Booyah team's background is in traditional gaming: Blizzard, EA, etc.

Another way to think about it: Facebook's power is in the social graph and the experience they have created... not in the 'status update' itself. Surely statuses are a core part of Facebook, but status updates exist on numerous websites and in various forms. The conversation is powerful in part because of where it sits, the network it is in and the responses that it generated. The act of checking-in should be thought of similarly... after all, in its simplest form, it is a status update with a geo-code appended to it.

Twitter Local Trends: Local Search is About to Change

I might be in the minority here, but I consider Twitter's launch of Local Trends Twitter's most significant product advancement since... launch? It will no doubt be overshadowed by tomorrow's Apple announcement - but local trends are important for, among numerous others, three primary reasons: 1. It marks the next generation of Twitter: geo-location posts, communities and trends. Tonight is step one (you could argue the Town.me acquisition and some of their key hires were actually the first steps... but you get the point). 2. Twitter's Developer-friendly platform will enable rampant development and innovation in the local and social spaces. Imagine Foursquare, Gowalla, MyTown, etc all on steroids.

3. Facebook's location play must be coming. With Facebook and Twitter already dominating social discussion and mobile usage, they both have a chance to redefine 'check-ins', location based services...

4. ... and geo-location based advertising. Which could be Twitter's revenue fountain, open up a compelling off-Twitter ad network and/or be the next evolution of mobile advertising. Each of these points are relevant to Facebook as well - should they move aggressively into local.

Sure... I might be speculating too big and too far - but Twitter and Facebook can (and I predict will) revolutionize "local", both disrupting the landscape and enabling development / innovation.

As an aside, take a look at the difference between the national Twitter trends and San Francisco's trends... it is very clear (as if we didn't know), that we are far geekier than most. Our top trends are: "iPad", "McGraw-Hill", "Local Trending", etc:

Facebook Friends and Twitter Followers

Mike Hirshland today has a blog post, "Friends or Followers", which describes the frequent conversation / debate around Facebook and Twitter:

In the course of our meeting [at Facebook] the Twitter question came up, and we divulged our bipolar personal usage patterns: Ryan is a total Facebook bigot and never uses Twitter, while I am an avid Twitter user, though I have been spending increasingly more time on Facebook. We spent a bunch of time discussing why this was so. For me the answer is simple: with the exception of a couple dozen folks who I follow because we are friends, for the most part I follow people on Twitter expressly because they have interesting updates and/or link to interesting content. As such, Twitter has entirely replaced my usage of Google Reader.

While the highest level discussion is whether you find yourself using Twitter or Facebook more often (there are few people who split time evenly between), there are several contributing factors that lead you into either Twitter or Facebook:

- What is your motive? for instance, brands, thinkers and socialites have totally different wants and experiences on each.

- What is your 'experience' on each? I would argue that Twitter is kinder to new users because of the one-way relationship; whereas Facebook can be a lonely place if your newsfeed is not vibrant. For more 'experienced' users, I would argue that Facebook is less noisy, easier to navigate and therefore more efficient from a consumption standpoint.

- Who are you following? This is Mike's point exactly: his feed is a mixture of peers, colleagues and friends... some of which are not "friends" (by the original Facebook definition). Again, Twitter's one-way relationship format allows for a mixture of personal and impersonal followings. That is more difficult on Facebook - though it is changing as user habits change (more public, network driven) and as Facebook enables the change.

Ultimately, as Mike puts it, I am "a total Facebook bigot and never uses Twitter" because: - my network is there (for the most part) - the network is generally easier to mange (I can 'handle' 1,250 friends but only 300 followings) - the experience is cleaner - the content from my feed is generally of higher quality - the conversations (comments, likes, emails) are as rich as the content... following a thread is easy and important - it is within a larger platform that provides other key values: email (I get a ton of email through Facebook), photos, search, etc

Not to say I do not think Twitter is important or powerful (it certainly is) ... just to say that, while Mike live on Twitter, I live on Facebook.

One Week: Facebook's FB.me and Google's Goo.gl

I wrote on Saturday that Facebook had rolled out a new URL shortener, FB.me (covered on InsideFacebook here):

Today, Google announced their own shortener: Goo.gl. Interestingly, it is available only on the Google Toolbar, as a Chrome extension and with Feedburner. google shortener

Like Facebook, it is clearly a move into penetrating the real-time web and its culture of sharing / clicking. It is also a way to determine trending and velocity while delivering analytics to publishers, users and brands.

And as it pertains to brands, it will be interesting to watch whether brand plays a role with URL shorteners... or whether success is a function of in-application / in-site availability (for instance, all things being equal, FB.me should win on Facebook). The real battle will be for off-domain activity - Google's toolbar is a powerful tool here and Facebook Connect could / should play a key role as well. As TechCrunch notes, off-site scale matters:

Up until now, bit.ly has moved quickly to become the standard shortener. But the sheer volume of short links which both Facebook and Google can produce could soon overwhelm the number of bit.ly links. It’s the data behind the links, however, which is valuable. Whoever can gather the most unified view of all shortened links will end up winning.

How long before Twitter announces their shortener?

Dynamic Twitter Results Now Appearing Within Google SERPs

This is my first time seeing Twitter results integrated within a Google search results page. The below query is for "Windows 7" and you will notice a dynamic Twitter 'widget' in-line with other results. The unit scrolls automatically through the most current Twitter results for that query.

Like the recent Chrome Extensions, this is lightweight, minimalist and is visually very clean... in fact, it is so clean and flush within the standard search results, that it is almost confusing. The widget's animation is what visually separated the Twitter results from the web results. google twitter in search

When you click see all results, you arrive at a full-page Twitter search results page. It looks and behaves similarly to the in-page unit - though it is cleaner and includes Twitter user-icons.

google twitter full size

The Bit.ly Google Chrome Extension Is Also Awesome

I just raved about Google Chrome extensions and, in particular, the Brizzly extension. Well the Bit.ly Chrome extension is also great:

Once the extension is installed, it allows you to easily post to Bitly and access analytics (much like the bookmarklet I have written about)... but the other feature is the seamless inline preview of the URL.

The below screenshot captures a hover on a Bit.ly URL with high-level metrics (total clicks) and links to deeper information. Like Chrome and the other tested extensions, this is lightweight, fast and simple:

bitly extension