With the end of the year almost here, iand a number of recent stories, now seems like a good time to take stock of what’s happening on the social web. A mini news-roundup:

1. Facebook recently tried to buy to Twitter, perhaps just before their own valuation fell too far, but for that or other reasons, Twitter held out.
2. Facebook Connect service was launched, immediately followed by a competitive open-source solution from Google, called Friend Connect, supported by MySpace and others. Bot services extend users’ web personae and logins across participating sites.
3. Browser plugins support Google’s favoured OpenID website login system, and are offered as an integral part of Flock, the ’social web browser’.

I don’t want to go in-depth on these - links are to ars technica’s

excellent coverage. But they don’t name what I think is the elephant in the room, the iPhone, and other smartphones and small portables. I think 2009 will be an important year for them, recession or not. Laptops and desktops are essentially for work, and businesses and private users properly want to separate work and personal activities. The mobile phone is anyway right at the heart of interpersonal communication anyway and now offers better keyboards, screen resolution and apps. Mobile computing for business travellers is also pretty easy now on these devices. So for one thing I think both Google, Facebook and MySpace could become a little less dominant.

So this is a time of experimentation with a lot of new potential players creating apps, and brand loyalty is less of an issue when crossing platforms, so plenty of developments are possible, e.g:

1. Social networks are used more to organize the web experience and integrate it with users social experience more.
2. Location-based apps are increasingly players in both social networking and search functions.
3. Smaller screens create opportunities for a less complicated news aggregator than Google’s igoogle page, for example.
4. The browser and home page may become less crucial because of how apps are accessed on smartphones.
5. Aggregators of social networking sites, plus systems like OpenID, mean it is easy to have multiple memberships.
6. Twitter will continue to do well because of their minimalism.

OpenID and Friend Connect might also create opportunities for business social networking apps, though people will probably use them with caution at first for security and reputation reasons. Hard to see anyone getting ahead of Twitter’s combination of usability, flexibility, and discretion over how open to be, and Twitter groups could be key to directing traffic - functioning like a bunch of loose social networks and a dynamic news and views portal at the same time. Facebook might wish they had been able to grab them while they could.

US marketing and branding company Cone Inc. has just published a survey on using social media to promote businesses, with pretty dramatic findings. According to the survey, 93 percent of Americans believe a company should have a presence in social media, while an overwhelming 85 percent believe a company should not only be present but also interact with its consumers via social media. In fact, 56 percent of American consumers feel both a stronger connection with and better served by companies when they can interact with them in a social media environment.

When asked about specific types of interactions, Americans believe:

• Companies should use social networks to solve my problems (43%)
• Companies should solicit feedback on their products and services (41%)
• Companies should develop new ways for consumers to interact with their brand (37%)
• Companies should market to consumers (25%)

Cone also point out that this is a marketing lifeline for desirable but elusive prospects such as men in general, particularly, young men, and wealthy households. I think anyone would say these figures are high, but a little thought suggests they shouldn’t really be so surprising. In online marketing, the classic AIDA rules, Attention, Interest, Desire, Action, are more like:

• Get attention
• Drive to your website
• Encourage interaction
• Move to action

The middle two points can be weak points in the chain, and this is where I think social media make marketing more effective.

Why ‘driving to your website’ is hard

People come online with a view formed already of where they want to go. Particularly, I suspect, men. Most men I know like to (in theory at least) do their shopping with a kind of military attitude – decide on the shop/s, what they’ll buy, how much they’ll pay, and what time they’ll be home again. If we imagine them transferring that mentality to the web, diverting them is going to be much harder than interacting with them where they are, and much easier if you have already started the interaction there.

Really encourage interaction!

People like the feeling that they are the one holding the remote control. No matter how friendly your website is, users don’t normally get that sense, because you decide the content and the rules. Social media offers a “home space”. If users can interact with you there, they don’t relinquish control.

In Europe, too?

Social media sites, YouTube, Flickr, MySpace, Facebook etc, are doing pretty well in Europe. Facebook is apparently having difficulty getting the numbers in Germany, and actually hiring students to introduce them, but I think this reflects their being a little slow to localize, and maybe a preference for local rather than US sites. So with younger people social media are important, and the US experience is definitely relevant. For the rest of the market, we may still be a few years behind the US in using web features, so perhaps there is time to let this develop. But there’s no disadvantage to being on the scene early.

In a couple of pitches recently I had a problem getting prospects to really see what is meant by participation marketing. So, anticipating that this could be a common problem, I’m going to try in this post, and maybe afterwards I’ll find it easier to explain!

When we talk about participation in an online conversation, some people feel they already do this by creating relationships with specialist journalists, sending news releases, and getting onto blogs published by mainstream news sites. But that is not the same thing at all. Participatory activities are fundamentally different. They’re not a way of broadcasting your message, but of creating a presence. That demands a different mindset, in which dialogue has to be more spontaneous. Normally this is also a method that suits the longer term, not a substitute for news releases.

Participation requires a different idea of speed and scale, and this is where the benefit is hard to see at first, If relationships are initially with a few bloggers whose readership is orders of magnitude smaller than those of TechCrunch and Engadget, why should a limited ‘live presence’ matter? The answer depends on how we see Web 2.0. Web 2.0 is not primarily about social networking - that’s important for young people, but in some ways it has been over-hyped both because MySpace etc. are popular and because they showcase many Web 2.0 features. But the key for businesses is that browser and email are points of entry to lots of different applications and forms of communication (features that the Chrome browser in particular is pointed at). The attraction to business is functionality. In all kinds of businesses, people are spending an increasing amount of time, and engaging in an increasing range of activities.

As business activities move online, ‘live participation’ become more valuable for three reasons.

1. Neutrality is highly valued

Vendor-neutral blogs are highly visible for search terms that are highly specific to them - and that does not just mean for Internet search, but for services like Google alerts, widely used to keep up to date with breaking news in all industry sectors. The well-known blogs are usually not talking about your subject and even when they are they will often approach it from a completely different point of view from yours. The ‘magic middle’ blogs - with thousands rather than millions of readers - can be a powerful presence, because search engines give precedence to what they see as neutral content. Good posts on a new topic (together with comments sent to them) are likely to get referenced many times and stay high in search rankings for a long time, maybe years.

2. Conversation is a two-way process

Dialogue will really show you what works and what doesn’t. Normally, when you talk to PR and advertising agencies, they take your message and convert it into a sales message. They may turn it this way and that first, but they are unlikely to really challenge your information. When you are in a conversation where no-one gets a financial benefit, sales messages don’t work, and you have to be more objective and informative. As that kind of communication acquires added value, you will find out how to make it work for you online. How else are you going to do that?

3. Advocacy multiplies your efforts

When you develop relationships with people who are strongly interested in you, those people will often turn into advocates. If they like you and think you provide a genuinely useful service, they will be happy to help you promote it by providing links to your website and other offerings. That is particularly true if you can help them with insight or expertise. Relationships of this kind can then create advocacy. That advocacy is priceless because you are not directly promoting it, or paying for it, and neither is your PR company. But it depends on risking a degree of directness and openness.