Scobleizer - Latest Comments in The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

Afifa Nurhanifah — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 03:23:55 -0000

so sick!!!!!!

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

Frank "Grayhawk" Huminski — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 12:35:19 -0000

Once again, you show how much of a blithering nincompoop you can be.

There is exactly *one* reason I maintain *any* sort of presence on Facebook: To connect with old friends. Y'know, just like your wife does.

I do not wish to be moved into Facebook's "Public World". I do not wish to have anything to do with their "Cool Experiences". Forcing such bullshit upon their userbase will make me (and countless others like me) reconsider whether or not it's worth it.

Yes, Google may be the "prize" for businesses. What you apparently & consistently fail to realize is that "Social Media" is about PEOPLE and PEOPLE connecting. NOT business. When I'm on FB, I am there for people, not "celebrities" or businesses.

Sounds more to me like Facebook may be (inadvertently) recognizing what the REAL value of their site is: People.

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

Rob — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 12:45:59 -0000

Robert, I had to post your response to my posterous.

It is just perfect!

http://robwagner.org

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

Rob — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 12:33:29 -0000

Gr8 summary Robert.The best i have read so far actually.

And yeah i am ignorant but they didnt choose me as a beta tester for lists so i guess that is alrite.

I like these lists now :)

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

Nigel @youpage — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 10:40:50 -0000

Great Post Robert,

I think even with the Twitter/Google & Facebook/Bing tie ups we are still somewhat short of the true potential. I think the real goldmine will come with associating meaning with these Tweets.

For example how will we 'know' exactly which restaurant a tweet is referring to if it's full name and address is not used? Algorithms can only go so far...what if there are more than one restaurant with that name? Imagine people being put of the wrong restaurant because of a rumour about rats crawling around is being spread. This is a story just waiting tohappen...false rumours for celebrities is one thing but it could actuallybe used maliciously against business owners (now there's a lawsuit just waiting to happen).

The 'like' system seems to be a step in the right direction but in my mindit still isn't rich enough. For a given post why can't I filter on all users that 'liked' it. What if I want to tag something as a 'dislike'??? or other sentiment? I think there is still potentially so much more that can be done...

What do you think?
Nigel

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

Hackadelic — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 06:26:34 -0000

This is a bit off topic, but I thought you may want to know that your post has been scraped. Check it out here.

In case you gave them permission (they sometimes ask for it and promise to link back to your site), then you may want to know they only have the site name as plain text (and in a really tiny print at that).

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

Amit Gawande — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 23:04:16 -0000

I do agree that part of Facebook user content has potential to go public, particularly status updates, and Facebook Pages for that matter are already public. But including updates in Google search may not be on high priority yet. Facebook profiles and pages already result in google search.

But as of now, Facebook public updates are still not mainstream.

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

Scobleizer — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 23:04:03 -0000

This demonstrates how you are ignorant. Twitter's lists are NOTHING like Seesmic's lists. For one, they don't just work in Seesmic. For two, I can see your lists. For three, I can see when you add me to a list (and which list you added me to). For four, they are built into Twitter's UI. For five, my lists work on my iPhone (Seesmic is not yet on an iPhone). For six, I can steal your lists. For seven, I can see who is following your lists. I could keep going.

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

@steveplunkett — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 17:56:44 -0000

most excellent point for now..

totally agree... i only downloaded firefox, for sidewiki, claimed my client websites.. and haven't been back yet.

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

Alex Hager — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 17:36:27 -0000

But what is really behind the deal with Facebook and Microsoft? Is there definitely a contract?

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

Henry Yates — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:11:38 -0000

I dont neccesarily think Facebook is the loser here. You have to give them credit for their ambition - I think they believe that they will win the personal status war. I agree with you that this is what will eventually make them the best place to look for “Sushi in Palo Alto, CA."

The reason they could win the personal status war, is that they have always mostly successfully focused on replicating offline relationships on the web. This is the core of their success. MySpace was/ and is now very much about music, Twitter is more business and celebrity than communicating with friends. Facebook believe they own the social graph and status is very much part of that. I dont blame them for not wanting to share it with Google.

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

Edwin Khodabakchian — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 15:58:35 -0000

You are right: twitter has a better naming story and that is really important. But it remains a very primitive platform beyond that. I think that facebook+facebook connect will end up winning this war. You could very well be right in which case I will eat my hat and buy you a bottle of aged scotch! I hope that baby is doing well.

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

Rob — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 15:35:46 -0000

I have to admitt that i sometimes use the facebook search over google and twitter.

It is really good and not as spammy...

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

Rob — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 15:33:26 -0000

I dont get the hype about twitter lists. Been using them for half a year now on my desktop app ( seesmic)

They are great but nothing new.

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

Scobleizer — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 15:23:38 -0000

Sorry, Twitter has, by far, the best tools to feed and manage your community (I'm a bit biased because I have access to lists). EVERYONE has an @reply name on Twitter and it always works the same way. On Facebook? No. They are trying to add that but haven't gotten there yet.

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

Scobleizer — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 15:22:04 -0000

No one will use Google Sidewiki. It's a Firefox plugin and an ugly one at that. This list I demonstrate above? It works on my iPhone. You think Apple is gonna let Sidewiki show up there? Riiiiiggghhhttt.

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

Tobin Truog — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 12:46:28 -0000

Huge Point and well put. Here comes real time. The more we think about uses, combinations and new cool stuff that we would love to have in real time, the more "real" real time will get.

I know the FriendFeed guys are going to help FB with its search issues...I think they already have improved. But, I agreee, the public perception of FB is fueling behavior.

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

Chris R — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 12:23:49 -0000

I would hate for twitter searches to be integrated with traditional results. Wading through all the bull to find what I am looking for is hard enough as it is.

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

Edwin Khodabakchian — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 12:19:50 -0000

I do not agree. I think that over time, small businesses will realize that have a public page on facebook is as valuable (more valuable) than having a twitter account. When those pages will be public, they will be automatically available to Google (that is the power of the open internet). So facebook will not sell the data. But the google traffic will still be there. I do not think that the twitter vs. facebook argument for celebrities and small businesses will be based on whose has a deal with Google.

The key is who will offer me the best tools to feed and manage my community and it is not clear at this point to me who the winner is.

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

ceben — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 11:40:40 -0000

But does Microsoft slowly steal search share from Google by employing this strategy? Can Facebook's popularity directly effect the search/ad wars or is Facebook just getting left behind as a result of this dynamic?

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

@steveplunkett — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 11:27:04 -0000

@Scobleizer... What you are talking abot in google is there and has been there, Google is just waiting for all the puzzle pieces to fit..

your sushi place? Google Sidewiki... let people know that Fuki-Sushi has the best sushi...

then one day.. google maps will show your review..

i'm with phikai, right now you can't find me on facebook.. or let's say you can't find my content..

here.. try..
http://www.facebook.com/plu...

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

adir1 — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 11:02:02 -0000

I can see where Facebook will continue and combine private family/friends interactions with public fan/businesses/media interactions, and so far I see them doing good job of keeping it separate.

I think we need to keep in mind that for search engines social and real-time is only a fraction of functionality. It can help spot trends and maybe more (with potential deal where Facebook can share people's Like ratings, and finding celebrities with more "fans"), but majority of their Core functionality is pure "Ask and Answer" research type of queries!

Speaking of which, I wonder if anyone has actual statistics which tries to separate Trending queries versus Research queries, to show us a nice pie?

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

Danny Denhard — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 10:59:28 -0000

Like phikai points out, most people use facebook for private world, twitter is public.
Facebook is basically a closed platform so will be very difficult to have just one deal.
Unless they go for behavioral ad's they may lose to more open platforms i.e twitter and search engines.
However - the benefit facebook have is they very personal interaction through the inbox and wall to wall posts so targeting ad's which will appeal to any of the ad networks especially the largest ad networks, it might be a case of who has the best negotiation skills to work with each other.
The losers in all of this is really is the general public, do we get what we want or do we get what makes the most revenue for the "service providers"?

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

hardaway — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 10:17:59 -0000

I bet it's not terms, Robert. I bet it's the problem they will have convincing the people who don't WANT a publicly searchable FB that it's desirable. Sam is on FB because it's not searchable, and so's Chelsea. They don't live publicly and don't want to.

Re: The biggest loser in the Twitter search deals

Seth Gottlieb — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 10:08:34 -0000

My wife uses Facebook the same way that yours uses Facebook: to connect with friends. Why is that wrong? Not everyone wants to be a internet celebrity egomaniac. People who want to stay private represent a market that is big for Facebook. Personally, I use both. Facebook for my IRL friend social network, Twitter, my blog, LinkedIn, for my professional, public social network. That is working pretty well for me.

I think trying to be the dominant Internet destination is Web 1.0 thinking. The beauty of the Internet is how nicely different resources can be assembled to create enriching experiences. Its not all about being on Google. I think our wives like Facebook precisely because it is not on Google.