Obama Vs. iPad

Here are the exact words of President Obama while giving a speech on the importance of access to information:

“With iPods and iPads and Xboxes and PlayStations — none of which I know how to work — information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation.”

Surprising, especially from a president who used social media as a key communication tool during his election campaign. Although Obama is probably one of the most tech savvy politician of his time, he's seem to think that digital communication doesn't mean everything.

I agree with Obama when he says that iPads & co tend to make information a distraction because we pay less and less attention to complex content on the Internet. But according to me, the real problem comes from the way people choose to use these amazing communication tools. The information itself hasn't change, but the way it reaches us did.

We get information through the same technology that entertains us. It was already the case with television and radio, but multimedia tools like iPads made this statement even more obvious. Indeed, the media that Obama accuses are a part of our everyday life, and pretty addictive. We carry these tools around everywhere we go, and like the president says we live in a "media environment that bombards us with all kinds of content and exposes us to all kinds of arguments".

I think the message to remember is that it's up to us to make the most out of technology. Fortunately, iPads don't have the power to make information a distraction, human beings do.

What's your opinion?

Do you think we could use technology and social media for more noble reasons or are we doomed to be distracted by this constant flow of information?

The Only Thing Constant In The World Is Change

Funny fact...the only thing you could possibily write as a status on Twitter or Facebook is : I'm on Twitter, or I'm on Facebook.

But everyone knows that social media are not about being honest.You have to litteraly be extraordinary. Updating your page is a way to show the world you exist, otherwise people will think you're dead, or just borring which is even worse.

If the Internet is the Kingdom of impermanence, it's in war with Boredom Land.

Constantly reinvent yourself or die, that's what social media tell us.

Beside from making people even more self-centered, I think this tendancy to always stay in the newsfeed has been really challenging for businesses. Indeed, a company that decides to be on Twitter signs a fictitious contract with the public that says, "I'm newsworthy". So it is up to brands to keep their followers or fan basis entertained.

This is also true for famous people. I'm a fan of rap singer Lupe Fiasco on Facebook and I think he's doing a great job with his page. Not only he uses it to give people's official information about his album, concerts, or important events, but he manages to create a real relationship with the fans by simply staying aware of the news. Lupe Fiasco supports other artists on his status, wishes a happy mother's day, and ad personal pictures. Unlike Beyoncé, who only updates her status to promote herself or sell something.

I think it's important to stay creative to incorporate social media in a business. The whole point of it is to develop a different relationship with your client, one that you wouldn't have on a traditional communication's channel.

Do you have examples of companies or celebrities who use social media in an original way?

Is Transparency A Good Thing?

Have you ever googled your own name? Well one of my best friends did it for me and told me I was in the autocomplete...scary!

It made me think that transparency seems to be a phenomenon directly linked to the Internet and social media. Hiding from people is becoming more an more complicated, even for totally anonymous persons since we all have profile on different networks.

So you can only imagine how twisted it can get for celebrities, especially for politicians who are supposed to represent their party and electors. The Internet is dissuading political figures to lie to the people because the new technologies make it harder for them to withhold information, which is a good thing.

But every single word that comes out of a politician's mouth is now recorded and posted online, even when it's useless. I don't tolerate the bloopers of French president Sarkozy who insult his opponents when they refuse to shake his hand. But the problem with transparency, is that it totally erased the line between the official speech and what is supposed to be off the record. Ministers and presidents are being judged for the people they are in real life, but the danger with transparency is that it makes people focus on trivial things.

We are lucky to live in a society that doesn't keep the information hidden. But westerns countries have to be careful not to abuse this gift and turn it into a disinformation tool. New technologies allow to record anything at anytime and social media help to spread the news, so let's save this amazing communication flow for information worth sharing!

Hugo Chavez On Twitter

Last week, Twitter was welcoming an unexpected new user in the network, the Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez. He might be a politician, but he sounded more like a messiah on his first tweet:

"Hey how are you doing? I appeared like I said I would: at midnight. I'm off to Brazil. And very happy to work for Venezuela. We will be victorious!!"

Although Hugo Chavez is not the first president to be on Twitter, his new activity raises many questions on the relationship between the Internet and propaganda. Hugo Chavez is indeed known to give media a hard time in Venezuela, and was accused by many journalist organizations to jeopardize freedom of press. The president closed many TV channels and holds a monopoly on Venezuelan media that allows him to appear as much as he wants. He even has his own TV show called Alo Presidente.

The Internet is often seen as the media of the opposition, because it gives a voice to people who don't usually have one on TV, radio or press. We all remember the role that Twitter played in the dissenting movements in Iran. Unfortunately, it seems like politicians are more than ready to get their share from social media.

I think that everybody has the right to use social media to express themselves, the only problem with Chavez becoming a Twitterer is that he doesn't recognize that statement himself. The main reason why the Venezuelan president, considered as a despot, is on Twitter is to fight the presence of the opposition on the Internet. "The Internet is a battle trench because it is bringing a current of conspiracy," he declared.

Nobody can prevent Hugo Chavez from tweeting, but it's sad to see that repressive personalities like him start to use a tool that was partly used to struggle against repression!

What do you think about the presence of Hugo Chavez on Twitter?

Craigslist Gets Busy

I was having a random conversation with a friend a few days ago. We were talking about my roomates and he asked me how I had found an apartment, so I obviously answered: "Craigslist, of course!". Before coming to New York, people would say it was the best website for housing but also for buying all kind of things like tickets, furniture...

But my friend had a surprising reaction: "Oh my God, you're brave!". I didn't understand why so I asked him for further explanation and he told me something that scared the hell out of me: "Craigslist is known for being dangerous, heard people got killed" he said.

After considering the possibility that I was currently living with serial killers, I stopped being paranoid but did some research out of curiosity. It turns out that Craigslist is actually in the news for suspecious activities.

It seems like the success of Craigslist partly depends on a controversial revenue called sex ads. Indeed, more and more people are posting ads on the website to promote prostitution. Users have to pay from $10 to $15 to publish an ad on Craigslist, and as there is no efficient regulation for sex ads, the website makes money by promoting horrible things such as child exploitation and human trafficking. This is completely scandalous.

Craigslist used to give all the money from the sex ads to charity, which is kind of gross when you think about it. Solving problems by making money out of another huge social issue is not helping. But the icing on the cake is that now the company stopped committing to give that money away! Basically it's almost like saying "We make money by promoting prostitution, so what?" to people's face.

The ads of Craigslist are likely to bring $36 billions to the company this year, which is three times the revenue of last year's projection. But can a company really grow and spread its influence while being involved in such unethical issues?

Just because Craigslist provides online services doesn't mean it should be exempt from regulations. My point is, we should expect integrity from the Internet too, especially from Craigslist which is in the top ten most visited websites in the US. Can you imaging ads for prostitution on the New York Times or CNN? The digital media shouldn't be a no man's land in terms of rules.

Too Much Texteen

Pew Research Center recently published a study revealing that one in three American teens send more than 100 text messages a day. Text messaging becomes centerpiece communication nowadays, as it is the first channel of basic communication between teens and their friends, before cell calling.

That trend keeps on growing since 88% of teen cell phone users do text messages compared to 51% in 2006. That sharp rise doesn't really suprise me, as I'm pretty addicted to texting myself. But I'm not a teenage anymore and I still remember the time when I didn't own a cell phone. Even if this memory is getting blurrier and blurrier, it makes a difference. No matter how much I depend on mobile communication, I'm from the generation that discovered cell phones. I mean that when I got my first one, I was excited about it and didn't take it for granted, it was a major event. But now, it became totally normal for teens to own one as soon as they enter mid school, and maybe even earlier. I think this habit has an impact on many levels of our society.

Another study made by the University of Maryland reported that college students using social media showed signs similar to drug addicts. To avoid this dangerous trend, Riverdale Country School took a really interesting initiative by lauching an experiment in text-free living. They asked the kids not to use their cell phones for texting or chatting on social media for two days. As difficult as it was for teenages to keep their phones away, they were all suprised to see how fast they would finish their homework.

Texting and chatting with friends on social media are a part of our daily language. Although I recognize it can be really convenient to communicate this way, I also think it tends to narrow our thoughts and ideas. It's a really distracting activity that makes people use simple vocabulary, and that's why it's scary that so many teens are addicted to their smartphones. I believe we should encourage young people to express themselves in a more complex way, so that they always know the line between digital communication and traditional one.

Unlike The New Facebook "Like" Button

Facebook launches a new "Like" button allowing the social network to spread its influence beyond its own website. How can I unlike this?

We all know the "Like" button on each Facebook profile that allows people to show their interest in others' activity. The more friends like your status, the more influential you can consider yourself on your network. But Facebook is now applying this popular concept to a different field. Indeed, we should all prepare ourselves to see a new "like" button on famous entertainment or information websites within the weeks to come.

Becoming a fan of a brand requires the user to actually search for the company on Facebook. So in addition to that, the new "like" button will appear on the brands' official websites so that Facebook users can directly like them when they log on. It completes the function of "share" buttons already established and very popular on many websites such as Youtube.

But what looks like a partnership or an exchange of visibility from one brand to another is actually more strategic. Facebook has to pay a price to have a "like" button on other websites, because it represents a considerable opportunity for the brand.

Unfortunately, the price is people's privacy. Facebook will offer data about its users to the websites agreeing to display a "like" button. These websites will then be able to advertise for their service by targeting specific audiences thanks to the information that Facebook owns about us. I think this is the sign that Facebook crossed the line because it is openly using its users as merchandise. We think we are just expressing ourselves by saying what we like, but we are actually a part of a mercantile system we don't even get. Social media are supposed to connect people to one another, not to companies.

Social networks definitely have to think more seriously about the evolution of their business model if they don't want to loose their users' trust. The saddest thing is that people accustom themselves to the fact that they are being used because Facebook tends to be addictive. Even I, knowing the company's intentions, don't feel ready to give up on my social network.

One thing is certain: Facebook is blessed with an incredible base of brand loyal users. The executive team has to use this in a positive way if it doesn't want to turn Facebook into an unethical company. Because to me, that is what's happening right now.