May 27, 2026 at 8:57 am | Blog | No comment
Over the past few weeks rumours have been mounting up about a possible Facebook music service, the loudest of which suggest a partnership with Spotify. This would tie in with other stories that Facebook has been chatting to movie firms, notably Netflix. These are interesting, but not surprising, moves.
Facebook, or Zuckerberg, wants the platform to become THE hub for the internet especially when it comes to media, something that puts it into competition with Google on some levels. It would make sense for integration of other platforms considering Facebook’s subscription numbers. Add to this the amount of personal data held and you’ve a record labels, or film studios, advertising wet dream.
We know that Facebook wasn’t about the money and advertising, and I’m not sure it still is now, but this will all change in the future. It has to and will probably be a key point when Facebook start to talk to more labels/studios. At the moment integration with Spotify doesn’t seem that surprising - the music service already has integration of sorts, allowing you to post songs and link your accounts. But this could be the tipping point for entry into the US market where it’s not currently allowed due to labels antiquated copyrights and contracts.
Looking back at my previous post on the Web 2.0 crash, a move like this by Facebook paves the way for the dot.com winners to come into the fold and for smaller, less known dot.com platforms to be bought by the bigger boys or fall along the wayside. Surely integration with Facebook’s a winner? Or will it just make Facebook the new MySpace? Maybe Facebook will launch its own label? Time will tell, but things are moving so quickly we won’t have to wait that long.
May 23, 2026 at 8:52 pm | Blog | 1 comment
The past few weeks I’ve felt like I’ve been bundled into a Delorean and traveled back to the nineties - a Conservative government making a hash of things, Irish bomb warnings in London, and dot com companies listed with eye watering valuations. Linked In reached around $45 a share last week on its first day and when you look at Facebook (valued at $55 billion) and Twitter (valued at about $6 billion) you’d think that we were in another Dot Com boom. But we all know how the last dot com bubble burst. So are we heading for a dot com 2.0 crash? Very possibly.
The last Dot Com saw internet companies fold very quickly and even those that survived are now being sold at values far less than they were purchased for during the boom (Friends Reunited and MySpace anyone?!). But it’s not necessarily a bad thing. Businesses, digital included, need to evolve and offer features that users ‘need’. Looking at current platforms there is no doubt that Facebook will survive, possibly at a lower value. It’s become so ingrained into our social conscious that it’s part of everyday life. Where MySpace failed, Facebook reigned as it got the model right.
However I can’t see how platforms like Foursquare or Gowalla will go on to survive on their own. The only way they could survive is to be bought by someone like Facebook and embedded into their platform. The same could be said about ‘newbie’ Groupon which is already being imitated across the web.
It is an inevitable part of evolution that some will fall along the wayside. So I wait to see the winners and losers of the Dot Com Crash 2.0.
May 18, 2026 at 2:01 pm | Blog | No comment
I’ve had some brain busting meetings recently with some great minds in the digital world and there’s one question that I keep being asked - what do you see as the future of social media? This usually raises a smile from me not just because it’s a really good question, but it can also be a subjective one. So here’s my take on it. Social’s become the adopted platform of the majority, validated by people now asking you socially to Facebook them or DM them apposed to dropping them an email. But to look at the future of social we need to look at the tech that we use to access our social networks - mobile.
Mobile is said to account for something in the region of 60-65% of all traffic to Facebook. Looking at my Twitter feed through Hootsuite I can also see what platform people are using to update their status and the majority are third party apps for mobile devices. So there’s already a good argument for mobile being the game changer for social, something Facebook are taking seriously as they focus on it this year.
Reports also suggest that mobile users tend to be more social than desktop users (see this interesting infographic for this and more stats). This is an interesting statistic when you start to look at the way people are interacting with new technologies. As smart phones become the norm people are increasing their use of social media as it becomes easier to do so, especially in their downtime (or away from the bosses prying eyes!). Add to this the tablet and there is further scope for interaction away from the desktop. Having recently got an iPad I’ve rarely turned my Macbook on, instead preferring to update my Facebook status through my iPad (app please!!).
And speaking of iGadgets you can’t not mention apps. As it becomes standard practice to share news stories by the click of a button, more apps are starting to integrate ‘like’ and ‘share this’ buttons to their sites. Some do this better than others (check out the amazing Flipboard on the iPad) but all will do this sooner rather than later. And in some way this is the most exciting aspect - turning Facebook and Twitter into your own news source, following the channels, Tweeters and media that interest you the most, whilst also allowing you to become the journalist.
Social is here to stay and the future is very exciting. Whereas ‘checking in’ was once seen as the major change in mobile (and still is by some), the lack of interest in Foursquare and Facebook check in’s suggest otherwise. At the time I write this there are rumours that Facebook is to introduce it’s own Groupon platform, so there may also be another game changer soon. But for now mobile offers the most interesting advancement in the social arena.
May 13, 2026 at 8:50 am | Blog | No comment
I finally got round to visiting Internet World yesterday which I make a habit of slotting into my calendar every year. It may be quite a salesy event, but I always come away with some great contacts and a better good insight into what’s going on in the digital world.
These types of tradeshow can be a mixed bag and Internet World is just that. At one end you have established, industry names who promote themselves and their products with professionalism. At the other end you have those who promote themselves with glamour girls a Del Boy mentality. You also have great people like Tony Wood from Vision With Technology whose stand was so busy this year. In the matter of disclosure he is a personal friend, but I’ve worked with him on a number of fantastic projects which his company launched with fantastic results.
So, plug over, on the established side I went to see the social giant Facebook to chat about their PPC and how I could better promote my business. The purpose was to hear it from the horses mouth and not base my theories on what I’d read in the trade press. And I’m glad I did.
A quick chat about the basics had me nodding - yes, I have a page; yes, I am promoting it on other on and offline channels. But an invite to look under the hood of their advertising platform had my inner geek salivating.
One thing that was confirmed was that it’s pretty much the Google approach to paid advertising. Rightly, if it ain’t broke why fix it. But where my interest peaked was with how you can target your advertising. Where Google targets advertising by search term, Facebook targets by a persons interests. And it doesn’t just stop at that - you can drill down even further. Take the example I was given - target by age, location, etc. and then by the interest golf. You can leave it there or you can drill down to PGA, courses, and more.
“So what” you may ask, and “that’s not that different from Google“. Well, in part you’re right. Google does allow you to target a number of search terms and their variants, but Facebook’s way allows direct targeting to a person who is already interested in that term. By this I mean when displaying a result on a Google search that person may have got the term wrong, or they may be looking for something for someone else, etc. Anyway, with Facebook you are getting your ad directly in front of someone who is guaranteed to like it as it’s in their hobbies and interests, and because they’ve given over so much of their personal data to Facebook you can directly target the demographic for your product or service. That, in my view, trumps Google. This is data that marketing departments would kill to get their hands on. Well, maybe not kill, but pay data firms lots of money for.
And no, I don’t work for the PR firm Facebook have allegedly paid to slander Google. I just think this is a refined way of targeting ads. Especially if you take into account the possibilities - target by ‘Likes’, Fan Pages, friends likes, networks…..
Facebook is still fairly new to the advertising game, and anyone who’s seen The Social Network will know how anti this Zuckerberg was. But even with a ‘small’ 250 member team in europe, they are a major contender in this field and one to be thrown into any digital marketing mix.
Here’s a good article from Mashable which takes a look at the difference in revenue for Google and Facebook: http://mashable.com/2011/05/12/facebook-google-revenue/
May 10, 2026 at 4:26 pm | Blog | No comment
It’s been quite a busy day in the digital world. Microsoft acquire Skype for silly money, and Google announce a music service. The question that springs to mind for both - why?
Yesterday it was rumoured that Facebook were courting the debt ridden VoIP provider, but today Microsoft have emerged the victor having bought Skype for $8.5 billion - the largest sum it’s paid to buy any company. I could slightly get my head round Facebook as it would add VoIP and face-to-face into the social mix, but Microsoft I can’t quite figure. It’s as if it saw Apple’s Facetime and wanted in on the action. But Microsoft’s plan is to add it into the Xbox, Windows Phone, Lync and Outlook. I would argue that similar functionality exists within the systems, and haven’t they already got Window’s messenger?! And if the move is to buy the 170 million Skype users into the Windows family, I can’t see that being worth $8.5 billion. That’s a grossly inflated price, a figure that one of Sir Alan’s ‘Apprentice’s’ would pluck out of the air.
And so to Google and their music service - one that has no buy in from the music industry and also no music. Wow. Where do I sign up?! The marketplace has its leaders - Apple and Spotify - who do it well. Spotify may have changed its model, much to some users annoyance, but I’m still happy to part with £10 a month for all that music when and where I want it. There are also rumours that Apple is planning to release its own cloud version of iTunes, so as the leading online music store it would have the market covered. I just can’t see the USP of Google Music unless it’s for Android. The major players (and don’t forget Amazon) do it well at the moment. As I say, at the moment….
May 9, 2026 at 4:56 pm | Blog | No comment
I’ve seen a lot of articles today saying that the Android Marketplace is killing the platform. Although extreme, I think this has some validity.
About 10 months ago I decided to upgrade my iPhone 3G to an HTC Sense. I was intrigued by the Android platform that a few of my more techy colleagues had been glorifying. To a devotee to the Church of Jobs (Steve) this was a brave move, one that proved to be a stupid one. Having cooed over the initial interest in the new OS, the better graphics, and similarity to iOS I began to feel out of place. The fact was, it was not the iPhone and its iOS. The problem - the apps.
At first the Marketplace seemed clunky and then just downright bizarre. A quick search for a yoga app returned some, um, let’s say “interesting” results, and a further search for most of my favourite iPhone apps returned nothing. I started to convulse like Lindsey Lohan on a driving charge. I wanted my iPhone back. This was after four days.
Apple have got it right - moderation and quality rules work. Marketplace may be loved by programmers for its open source approach but this leads to a cluttered and frankly mind boggling store with some very dodgy side streets left to places like Soho. If the rumours are correct and Amazon are to launch an online Android Marketplace, I hope they bring in similar controls to those of Apple. A small change could make it a serious contender once more.
