Posts Tagged ‘Social Media’

Social Music Done Right: Turntable.FM

Posted by Justin Shimp
Jul
14
2011

2
Comments

Filed Under: Culture Everything Else SmallBox Social Media

turntable.fm

 

Back when I first started college, I found a group of college kids from around the world, connecting on a web forum about music. I quickly got hooked, as my budding interest in recording and listening to music on vinyl wasn’t very accepted by my peers in the dorm rooms of Ball State. This online community was the perfect place for me to grow musically.

I remember talking late one night in one of the chat rooms we had set up through IRC (remember those days?). I knew that this community could benefit from having an internet radio station where we could feature different users each week, with the ability to chat and exchange ideas while listening in on the music.

I figured out how to broadcast from my computer to others, but it was difficult to bring in users to play and participate. Needless to say that idea failed quickly due to the time requirements it would take for me to organize and run it. Plus it cost money, money a poor college student didn’t have.

Now in 2011 we have what I wanted in 2005, and it’s called turntable.fm. Turntable is simply brilliant.

For those unfamiliar, you sign up through Facebook or Twitter, and enter rooms and listen to music, chat and if you are lucky enough, you can snag a DJ table and start spinning music for that group of people in that room. Turntable has many features that will suck your soul out and soon you will find yourself spending hours picking that next perfect song for all your friends.

It has become quite the hit here at SmallBox. All of us are avid music and technology lovers and turntable blends the two in harmony. But what really impresses us is the social aspect of it. Listening to music is one thing, but being able to share it with others is so engaging and helps expand and refine your tastes in music. I have already found 5 bands on turntable that I have never heard of previously, and now have bought their albums because of it.

There is a gaming element as well. When playing a song listeners can vote whether they thing the song is awesome or lame. If awesome, your DJ avatar gets points that can be used to upgrade your appearance. If voted lame by a majority of people in the room, your song will be skipped. The thrill of getting a song voted awesome by everyone in a turntable room is addictive and exhilarating.

There are some limitations right now unfortunately. First, only people from the US can access the site. Rooms only allow up to 5 DJs and as a DJ you can only play one track at a time.

As with many music sites on the web, the future of Turntable.fm is uncertain. Currently they are dealing with licensing problems and many songs are getting pulled from the site. Users can still upload their own songs, but it is often buggy and takes lots of time. Apparently there’s interest among many investors in supporting the company, and only time will tell if turntable will stay alive in this strange digital rights battle online.

In my opinion if done correctly, turntable could be an integral part of my social interactions with people on the web. It’s addictive, fun, and combines my a few of my favorite things – technology, music, and friends.

I would continue, but I am DJing right now and I need to find the next song to play.

Social Networking via Mobile Apps

Posted by leigh
Feb
7
2011

1
Comment

Filed Under: Everything Else SMO Social Media

It seems everyone is on Facebook these days…. from news media “crowd sourcing” their latest reports to the DOT hosting a page to post traffic issues and road closings for area citizens — its widespread adoption is more and more apparent. Many come because they want to be part of the “social media” party — they want to engage and be a part of a bigger conversation. But with a party as BIG as the one Facebook hosts, how much “socializing” actually happens?

Let me put it another way — how many times have you posted something to Facebook and were left feeling like you were casting a message in a bottle out onto the open sea? Only to get back — if you’re like me —  a few passive-aggressive thumbs-ups and a comment or two from people you rarely actually see in real life. What’s so social about that?  In my opinion, it appears that in the mad dash to get everyone on board the social media train we’ve somehow lost the whole “social” part of it. But I see a glimmer of hope… for those of us interested in being a bit more social and a little less “sold” in our social media…

Enter what I am calling the “niche social network disguised as a mobile app”. With the rising popularity of mobile applications for smart phones and iPads, more and more developers have been integrating social media engagement right in the app itself — a smart move, geared toward driving more audience engagement, traffic, and therefore growth.

Of course gaming apps have been doing this for ages, but specifically I am talking more about “hobbyist” apps… for instance:

I love apps like these and others that feature integrated social media  as part of the overall app. Frankly, it’s a more satisfying user experience — not to mention a shrewd business strategy —as typically the user interprets the social integration as part of their paid experience. That is, they see it as a feature of the application and therefore are more likely to utilize it.

A Real World Example: SketchClub – I love to sketch and draw on my iPad. I recently bought an app called SketchClub from the App Store.  Now, I’ve tried almost every drawing app available for the iPad, but this one is my favorite by far — not because its a better drawing app (it has its strengths and weaknesses, but is essentially on par with the rest) — I like it best because it gives me something to DO with the artwork that I create.

Behind the app lies a small, but robust social network for those that buy the app… in this case, other people like me who like to draw. Why is that great? Relevance. You see, when I use the app to draw, its a natural next step for me to then post that new drawing to the group via the app. And the BEST part? The members actually INTERACT!  No more “message in a bottle” feeling… Members comment on each others artwork — from compliments to constructive criticism to tutorials and tricks. Plus I feel way more satisfied because my experience doesn’t stop with me drawing a picture, throwing it up on Facebook, and hoping someone eventually takes interest. Now when I post something, I know I am going to get a response, I look forward to it. That’s called ‘engagement.’

Recently they upped the ante even more… providing new features to the app/network that give a user inspiration and even more reasons to engage, such as:

  • An earned-points system, where each task you perform (upload, leave a comment, rate a drawing, etc.) earns you points… encouraging members to continually interact.
  • Weekly themed drawing competitions — these give people lots of good inspiration for subject matter (sometimes the scariest thing about drawing is figuring out WHAT to draw.) The competitions are decided by member vote, and first place actually gets a real reward — typically a $25 Amazon.com card.

SketchClub focuses on improvements that increase creative motivation and usage of the app, which in turn creates more conversation and engagement between members — and that’s called ‘sustainability.’

Tell me, do you find yourself more inclined to participate in online “social” activities when its part of a mobile app experience?

How to use Twitter to prove you’re an absolute moron.

Posted by ben
Jul
28
2009

14
Comments

Filed Under: Search Engine Optimization Search Engines SEO Social Media

There’s been an overwhelming amount of love for Twitter this year, but Larry King might be single handedly responsible for starting my disenchantment with the most recent installment of the seemingly annual progression of the latest and greatest social media wunderkinds.  To be fair, my disenchantment began a few months ago, but a tweet a few days ago (2:58PM on July 26 to be exact) from Larry King’s official Twitter account (@kingsthings) sealed the deal:

Larry, I’ve got some news for you. For at least three reasons Twitter is the absolutely, positively WRONG medium to use for finding out why a Marathon is 26.2 miles.

First off, Larry, it demonstrates what we’ve kinda been suspecting all along – namely that you’re a no-talent, hack who’s risen to your station through merely the arbitrary caprice of fortune.  The standard answer to this question is pretty much conventional wisdom. I’ve taught middle school kids that could answer it.

Second, Larry, you can actually get your answer faster by using this crazy, new technology called a search engine. I’m sure this whole Internet thing is probably brand new to you and has to be pretty confusing (in fact, it’s probably pretty safe to assume that you’ve got some ghost writer Tweeting on your behalf to solicit the questions for your interview with Colin Powell that you’re unable to prepare on your own). But just in case you actually do get on the Internet someday, I created a demonstration of how this new-fangled thing called a “search engine” can help you find answers to life’s persistent questions.  Just CLICK HERE to see how it works!  Then, to get your answer click on the blue, underlined text at the top of the page that says “Marathon – Wikipedia the free encyclopedia”.

Third, Larry, the answer is actually more nuanced than you might think at first blush. Turns out that the distance from Marathon to Athens is shorter than 26.2 miles.  Turns out that primary historical sources disagree about whehter or not the first “Marathon runner” ran before or after the battle of Marathon.  Turns out that the 26.2 mile distance was the result of a series of last-minute changes made to the first modern marathon route established for the 1908 Olympics in London.  Maybe you knew that the standard answer wasn’t 100% accurate (I doubt it). But even if I stretch my imagination beyond the comprehensible and give you this benefit of the doubt, the fact still remains that crowd sourcing via your celebrity Twitter account is the least effective and most time consuming way to actually get your answer.  Just take a look at the overwhelming volume of responses your question generated by CLICKING HERE. You’ll notice something pretty quickly: a lot of people know some version of the standard answer, but nobody agrees on the more nuanced details.  If you’re really into crowd sourcing your answer, you should just cut to the chase and go to Wikipedia where the crowd sourcing has already been done for you.  Plus, Wikipedia has at least a modicum of editing that’s gone into their content.

Which brings me back to how Larry King finally brought about my disenchantment with Twitter.  In short, Twitter has become filled with crap and wading through all that crap takes more time and effort than regular people should have to put into it.  It takes a considerable investment of one’s time to follow Jeb’s advice about having a meaningful online converstaion and craft your Twitter network to a manageable level so that it’s actually useful and doesn’t become a ridiculous time sink.  What we need first and foremost in an answer is “correctness”. I have yet to find a better way to get “correctness” than by identifying an authority that can be trusted.  It’s way too easy to present the appearance of authoritativeness on the web without actually being an authority.  Just look at all the self-proclaimed authorities who wound up giving Larry a technically incorrect answer to his question.  Finding an authority is hard work (even off line).  Crowd sourcing via Twitter doesn’t get you any closer to an authoritative answer.  It just compounds the problem (especially when you use a celebrity account).  I know it’s tempting to think that crowd sourcing via Twitter is the way to go when it’s been so successful for Wikipedia, but Twitter just doesn’t work like Wikipedia.

I used to think that Twitter was pretty cool and pretty useful before the proliferation of celebrity accounts from the likes of Larry, Oprah and Martha.  So it looks like I am now beating Jeb to the punch in writing his next latest-social-media-fad-jumps-the-shark-blog-post.   Why is it that all these social media sites go through the same cycle of explosive growth that eventually brings about their demise? I suspect it’s because no one’s figured out a really good way to make the hard work of identifying authorities become easy. Finding an answer “that works” by playing a numbers game through social media sites can work OK for a while so long as the numbers stay fairly small.  However, once they reach their critical mass these social media fads just implode. Plus, playing the social media numbers games just skirts the fact that the answer is by no means guaranteed to be authoritative.  In attempting to make finding an authority easy, Twitter seems to have thrown their lot in with the celebrities. Or have the celebrities high-jacked Twitter?  Either way, that celebrities have made a good thing bad should be pretty self-evident.  I hate to say it but it seems that counting backlinks and other artificial “signs of trust” like the search engine algorithms do is the best thing we’ve got going so far.

So, Google don’t be worried by Jeb’s post that opined whether Twitter is a Google-slayer.  It isn’t and it won’t be.  In fact, it’ll probably be something our kids and grandkids reference when making fun of our generation.  I can already hear my daughter incredulously asking her friends, “Can you believe our parents spent their time at work reading ghost writers typing ‘In da house ATL!!!’ on some rapper’s Twitter account?”.

And if you’re wondering, yes, I probably woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning.  So feel free to flame me in the comments below for being so hard on the beloved institutions like Larry King and Twitter. But be forewarned: I’ll probably be just as snarky in my responses as I am now.