Stardust Global Ventures

First the written news:

Friends, Family Go Online To Find Loved Ones

MIAMI (CBS4) ? Amid the devastation in Chile is a communications meltdown leaving people with few options. There are virtually no phone calls, but lots of digital messaging.

Moments after hearing about the earthquake, tweeter Sheryl Breuker in Walla Walla, Washington tried reaching her sister-in-law in Santiago, Chile. When she couldn’t get her on the phone, she turned to Twitter.

“So I gave out her phone number to a couple people. About two hours later, we received notice that she was safe, she was OK,” Breuker told CBS4’s Gio Benitez over the phone.

Total strangers went out to find her sister-in-law in Chile. They found her.

“What I learned was that the person helping us was also missing family and had not yet heard from his family, so it was a pretty big deal, and pretty awesome, honestly,” said Breuker.

Today, phone lines did not connect families, but fingertips did.

“You’re pretty much a social media expert, in a sense. I see you have like 18,000 tweets, did you ever expect something like this to happen?” asked Benitez.

“Absolutely not. I’ve been doing this for a long time, and you hear these stories of people having these experiences, certainly nobody I know,” said Breuker.

Follow Sheryl Breuker on Twitter here.
Follow CBS4’s Gio Benitez on Twitter here.

Note: Moved the CBS video below the fold to stop it from running every time people hit the web site. You can see it below (more…)

Imagine awakening only to learn there’d been a major earthquake in Chile, where you have family. We did.

Many of our friends know Sheryl’s brother Brian and his wife Mariali. We’ve all been friends for quite some time (Jaiku, Facebook, Twitter), but now we’re also family. She lives just outside Santiago, not far from where the big earthquake hit this morning.

We immediately tried calling, texting, online, but no contact. Power, water, and phones are out there. In many areas the devastation is severe. We simply didn’t have any idea. We reached to social media. Everywhere.

People responded, mostly by retweeting. The power of the retweet is something we take for granted. A man we didn’t know in any way sent a simple tweet that he was in Chile and
asked how he could help. We scrambled to give him every bit of useful information that we could come up with.

He messaged several times that phones were out and he couldn’t get through. Then, amazingly he said “as soon as I get a chance I will go to the address you gave me.” Through Twitter, we made contact with someone in another continent, but close enough to go physically check on our family.

If that isn’t magical enough for you, if you really don’t understand the power of human communications through technology, the power of what we can do together, within two hours of our first contact with this man, I got a DM in Twitter than said “found her! she is OK…. she told me to tell Twinkie to stay cool, she is fine!” And an email with more info on how to try to contact her directly.

Twitter’s a tool. The power is in the people, but the reach and potential is far bigger than you understand. Until your life is personally and directly impacted, you simply can’t truly appreciate that power.

Technology gives power to communications tools. Communications tools give power to people. People impact one another and change the world.

Our deepest heartfelt thanks to @jpcoderch. You are our hero of the Santiago earthquake JP. Now we’re connected. At some point Sheryl and I hope to visit Mariali in Chile. It’s a part of our family. I hope we can take you to dinner one day and get to know each other in person as well

Side note: Many of you know our dearest and best friend, JP. What an interesting bit of serendipity that our new friend and hero is also JP. John Paul and Juan Pablo. Two gentlemen and friends who touch our lives.

Social media = ROTC or Return on Trust & Credibility. I grabbed that from friend, Shashi Bellamkonda and think it incredibly compelling. One of the things we all look for when trying to understand the value of social media is a way to define it so it makes sense en masse. In attempting to define the ROI it gets a little sticky because there are so many different sets of analytics and no one can agree on a standard. For more on my thoughts on that here is an article I recently wrote for Women Grow Business in Washington DC – Replacing ROI’s Old Monetary Vision.

Last night I was pointed to a great article that actually helps remove some of the mystery around social media and the value it has in the world we live in today. One of the biggest indicators is that social media investment is minor if anything at all, and your return is potentially huge. I’m sharing from the article but I hope you’ll go and read it in it’s entirety.

The SBSI found that nearly one out of five small business owners are actively using social media in their business. Small businesses are increasingly investing in social media applications including blogs, Facebook® and LinkedIn® profiles.

And further to that is this next paragraph by small business owner Dr. Alan Glazier.

“In order to meet the growing challenges of a tough market last year, I was forced to consider alternative options to keep my business visible,” says small business owner Dr. Alan Glazier, CEO and Founder, Shady Grove Eye and Vision Care. “With a very small investment in social media marketing, I was able to generate new business opportunities. Our Google® ranking is consistently number one for many of the phrases people use to search for eye doctors in and around my city and we have received a “bump” in terms of new visitors to the site. My blog has been picked up by different news sources and led to media interviews. I am now recognized as a thought leader in social networking within my profession and lastly but most importantly, my marketing budget has been reduced by more than 80%.”

Let me just reiterate, the cost of social media is minimal. As stated above, Dr. Glazier lowered his marketing cost by 80%. What could your company do with that 80%?

Of course, it’s not enough to simply create a presence in the online world of marketing venues. People want to have a relationship with those they hire. I would caution you that engagement must be a part of your marketing campaign. Broadcast messages will not build a customer base. You must use tools, video, audio, and messaging systems to encourage a relationship.

Today, small business is winning. It’s winning because they are resourceful and far more attuned to their clients. During an economic downturn such as we have been experiencing for the past 18 + months, small business success is a key indicator of the value in social media.

Yesterday Ken wrote here on stardust three key factors to success. Adapt, Adopt, Adjust. This should be every small business’ mantra. Social media must be included in that.

Remember, Social media = ROTC or Return on Trust & Credibility. We build our trust through social communication. Credibility will follow with engagement.

I was just reading an article by David Reinhardt entitled Think There’s No Room for Social Media in the Workplace? Think Again!. It gives some great points to consider, but I think the issue goes far deeper. Reading David’s piece is a great starting point for thinking, so go do that first. I’ll wait. When you get back, I’d like to share some added comments on on his seven points.

Before we go further, let’s debunk one of the great delusions of the day. Social media is in the workplace already. In nearly every workplace you can think of. It’s already there. Be honest with yourself. Social media is in schools. It’s in planes, trains and automobiles. It’s in restaurants. It’s even in the bathroom, as troublesome as acknowledging that may be.

To deny social media is already in the workplace is to bury your head in the sand. If that works for you, continue. But before you do, consider this. if you bury your head in the sand, you’re in a very dark place with nothing to see. And, note the picture. Your ass is a target. A big target. If you’re comfortable in denial and placing your ass in the air as a target, just remember you’ll never see what’s coming when your ass gets blown out of business. You’ll remain blissfully ignorant as you fly into the abyss of that long, dark goodnight.

Or, you can pull your head out.

People naturally gather around common points of interest
Humans are social creatures. We gather in communities, tribes, enclaves and neighborhoods. We share stories of the events in our daily lives, both business and personal. It’s ingrained in our nature socially back to the the early origins of our race.

In the workplace, we gathered at the break room, coffee pot and water cooler. Today, we can gather and share space online without being physically colocated. We can and do. And we will. The workplace cannot change our nature.

People like visuals
Not only are we social creatures, we’re visual creatures. Those early clans in caves told stories around the fire and left pictographs of their world. The social web is our canvas. It’s where we paint the pictures of our world and our lives.

We share pictures, words, music, what we had for lunch, and personal snips from our lives. We also share what we do, what we think, our ideas and ourselves in the workplace. To stop that would dehumanize us. In today’s information economy, dehumanization simply doesn’t fit. We are not drone workers in a factory and will never be that again. We, as a species, have evolved.

People are increasingly able to use complex websites
The web has become our natural home. For many, it’s what we’d refer to as our third place. Home is our first place. Our job is our second place. Our third place is where we choose to spend time. With the information age and communications technologies, the delineation between these places has vanished. Just as we can timeshift and placeshift our work to any time and any place, we all integrate our social selves into our work life as well. And we do.

People want to be able to add their own content
The old broadcast media world is dying. Quickly. The gatekeepers of news, information and entertainment have lost the reins. No matter how the clutch at them, that horse has run away from the old media cart. Everyone is an author. Everyone is a mdeia producer. We add content to the global body of knowledge constantly. And we like it. The concept of 15 minutes of fame is very much relegated to the abyss alongside the legacy broadcast media that promulgated the very idea. Why should you or I be relegated to 15 minutes when we have something to share every day? We shouldn’t. We aren’t. And we won’t.

Different people have different styles of working together
Just as there have always been loners and teams, there are different working styles among individuals in the connected world. Some people love to share; others do not. But companies have said for years, “our greatest asset is our people.” Really? And how do you encourage that asset? Not by trying to control how they work together. The greatest productivity comes from letting all that brainpower that works for the company unleash something new and innovative. That comes from the personal freedom to kick ass, not from the handcuffs of being told how do to every little thing.

Micromanaging people by telling them how to work, and how to work together has never been effective. It never will be. Today people will change jobs 20 or more times during the course of their career. The old model of taking a job “down at the plant” where dad worked, then spending 40 years there simply doesn’t fly. The workplace is changing and many of us are simply independent contractors who choose who we work with and how. The smart business leverages this reality by giving people the ability too work together in ways that are effective. For many of us, that must include social media and networking. It’s our lifeblood in our career. It has replaced the old human resources career guidance process. Like what McKinsey called Frogs in a Wheelbarrow, the best performers will jump to the most suitable work environment.

Even that model is evolving. That model applies to digital immigrants – those of us who grew up in the legacy analog world, but today live in the digital world. Digital natives entering the work force have always had open and unfettered access to the digital tools of now. They simply aren’t interested in working without the tools they view as basics of life. A business is going to have to embrace digital natives or shutter the doors over time as baby boomers exit the workforce.

Information that is not found might as well not be published
Publish or perish is no longer just a rule in academia. It’s a reality we all live with every day of our lives. We feed the Internet machine with so many routine actions. We publish our lives without thinking. Even those who don’t know their lifestream is published, are publishing in some fashion.

Use your ATM card. Swipe your employee ID. Enter a door code. Private transactions, though private they may be, are published somewhere.

If you aren’t on the Internet, you don’t exist. If you don’t publish, there is no record of your existence. Publishing in the now, is the word of mouth stories our ancestors told by the fire in caves. It is our record. Our existence.

As a business manager or executive, if you’re asking how to control social media, you are asking the wrong question. You cannot control social media. You cannot contain conversation. You cannot dictate. It’s far too late. Just as China cannot contain the vocies seeking expression, you are fighting a hopeless cause. In business, that’s counterproductive and costly. Not smart business. So be a smart business person. Pull your head out of the sand, and quit exposing your backside.

It’s easier than you think.

Adopt social media technologies with an open mind and thoughtful steps.

Adapt to the world as it changes. You have to be flexible.

Adjust work flows, business processes and management oversight to make the best use of the power of social media. Don’t expect to control it. You can’t. Slip into the groove. Like driving down the highway, and sliding into the slipstream of that big 18-wheeler, find your comfort zone and slide into the fit the brings value to every involved.

It’s easier than you think. Need help? Contact us.

Caveat: This is Ken’s opinion and post about Google Buzz. Sheryl and I have pretty different opinions and experiences. Don’t infer that she agrees with anything said here.

Last week the buzz hit the Internet to a flurry of very mixed reactions. My own reactions have been pretty mixed thus far too. Mostly the Buzz feels like a rug burn, but I want to be open about it and really give it a fair chance. I really really want to give it a fair chance.

Then there’s this:

Excuse me? Is Schmidt channeling Jerry Yang and leading Google to be the next Yahoo? Take a hundred days Eric. You can afford it. Get out of the way and let your team fix the damage. The worst thing an exec can do is pour gas on a fire, and you sound like a kid with a gas can and a book of matches. Go have a long conversation with Jyri Engestrom. By conversation, I mean go ask him what you should do, shut the hell up and listen. Take notes. Then get out of the way.

Up until today Schmidt was a long way from my list of executives in dire need of a smack with a clue-by-four. But he fought and clawed his way onto the list. Yes, one of these days, I’ll disclose who’s on the list and why. If you’ve followed for any length of time, you already know some.

Where was I? Oh yeah…Buzz. I’m left with questions. No answers. Ideas. No warm fuzzies. I see possibility. I see ego. I see the GOOG in a new light, and it’s not pretty. I could wax sarcastic about doing no evil. I could compare the sly and underhanded way Microsloth makes users de facto beta testers. I could point out how Google made a move to out Microsoft the big M by doing so openly, with a brash attitude. I could.

But that would take effort. Like Buzz, it would take more effort than any return could deliver today. I’ll save it for another time when I’ll get more out of it. And I’m saving Buzz until some time when I’ll get more out of it. More return for all the draining work it takes. Maybe. But really I’ll just step back and wait for some indication that the voices of reason, like Jyri, have been heard and somebody down at the Googleplex has done something really smart.

Creating and unleashing Buzz just because the technology made it possible does not creating a winning solution. For me, today, Buzz isn’t as big a flop as Wave, but it’s all fizzle, no sizzle. I’m putting Buzz in the hold file as something to dabble with when I’m very bored.

Since we’ve made the switch to iPhone, partly out of necessity after my Blackberry died, we’ve spent a bit of effort exploring apps. In my view, many are a great waste of space. They’re a variation of digital noise cluttering the app store, vying for attention.

Some, but not all. Bleam is an app that recently caught our eye. As it turns out, a friend (Dean Landsman @DeanLand) is partnered up pretty close with their marketing efforts. Bleam’s new, and their pitch is, I’d say, understated. Hugely understated. Here’s what they say:

Bleam
Local Instant Messaging

Mobile social networking just got a whole lot easier – thanks to Bleam for the iPhone™ and iPod touch™.

Because Bleam uses Bluetooth and/or WiFi to create an instant network, you don’t need a service signal to connect with the people around you. Just turn on Bleam and chat publicly or privately, share photos and exchange contacts with other Bleamers.

You don’t need to know someone’s ID or phone number to start Bleaming. Just be within range. And since Bleam networks iPhones together, your range will extend much further than with other Bluetooth messaging apps.

We have just submitted Bleam 1.1 to the App Store. Bleam 1.1 will let you set up multiple profiles. It’s the perfect feature for Bleamers moving between a variety of social settings – from business conferences to conference championships, lecture halls to concert halls.

So get Bleam now!
WHERE YOU ARE IS WHERE IT’S AT!

Neat and simple, but it’s an app that made me think. Walk with me down the path a ways…

Let’s begin with an appreciation of the etymology behind Bleam, because that alone hearkens to our roots, the jargon of our heritage, and for some of us, simply brings a smile. From the Free Dictionary:

(jargon)

bleam – To transmit or send data. “Bleam that binary to me in an e-mail”.

Ok, so perhaps it’s just nostalgic for guys like Dean and I who’ve been there and back. Still, it feels like a respectful hat tip from the iPhone generation to the past, and I like that. I won’t show you all the screen shots. I’m not here to do a review. I’m here to acknowledge the door Bleam flings open.

The opening screen sets things in motion. it simply says, I’m hunting. Seeking a connection media and peers (Bleamers) on that media. ‘Nuff said.

Bleam is an ad hoc chat tool. Think of it as a back channel you put up , take down, join or leave at will. Any time. Any place. You are the network if there isn’t one.

You can exchange information either in public or private. Here’s a sample:

I picked this shot simply to show how you can transfer text messages, pictures and contact cards. Certainly the obvious future ideas could include other media – video or music.

It’s interesting. A tidy little program that fills a gap. Sheryl and I tested it and were quite pleased.

I can’t do Steve Job’s impressions, but allow me to channel him for a moment…and another thing

Bleam portends a future that isn’t here today. I’d challenge the Bleam developers in ways I’m pretty confident Dean has, is and will continue to challenge them. This is a nice point of entry. Don’t let it be the end game, because there is so much more. Think about how Bleam does what it does, through options of WiFi and Bluetooth, and let your imagination stretch a bit further than chatting with your BFF.

As a speaker and presenter, I see my iPhone, iPad, device of choice using Bleam’s core to connect with a Bluetooth-WiFi enabled projector in a conference room. I don’t want or need a laptop. Let me Bleam my presentation to the projector while I walk around the room giving my talk.

As a listener, let me Bleam music to my speakers. In my car or my house. Or let me Bleam it to Sheryl’s nephew’s audio system, properly enabled of course, when we go visit.

When we get on a plane because we’re traveling to some exotic destination (no we are not going back to Waseca, MN), why don’t you let me join the Bleam driven network on the plane to send me movies and audio.

In fact, just Bleam enable my house and appliances. We’re still waiting for Smarthome 1.0 to become a reality. Let’s skip it and go to Bleamhome instead. Let me use WiFi and Bluetooth in my really smart home. I can control lights, fixtures, temperature, turn on the oven (and check how long the roast has left to cook) and all manner of wireless controls. Without wires. Without infrastructure. Simply enabling the connector widgets.

Widgets? Yep. Hardware and software widgets. Bluetooth/Bleam enable a lightswitchand sell it for $25 instead of $1.95. I’ll buy one for every room. Don’t build a supersmart home nobody can afford but the elite. Widgetize the process making migration a consumer owned and operated experience.

I recently wrote some pretty favorable things about another app service…Foursquare. I think Bleam is bigger and has more potential than Foursqare. Go to Bleam and check it out for yourself. Or go on your iPhone and get it from the app store. But don’t overlook it. It could be your future.

Disclaimer and note to Dean and the Bleam Team: I haven’t been paid or asked to write this. We bought the app. That’s right we shelled out the whopping 99 cents for each of us. No compensation or external motivators. That said, Dean…Bo… when you get ready to move into new areas, I’d love to help with strategy, direction, biz dev and what Bleam might do  in a bigger way. Keep me in mind.

My 2 cents, for what it’s worth. I don’t get all this hub bub about how scary it is to share your location with the world. We used to put our addresses in the phone book. OH NO! Who hasn’t been ’stalked’?

Just today I saw no less than 4 posts about the geolocation craze. I’m in it and loving it. My favorite quote comes from Euan Semple.

Euan wrote:

I am always surprised when people write as if they were victims of technology rather than in control of it – I guess it is a bit like email!

Why do I like this? It points out that with technology we have more choices and more options to control what we take in, or to better filter things. Expecting everyone else to accommodate us is a little arrogant. Certainly we should try not to be too disruptive, but we really do need to better handle what we take in and stop expecting others to handle it for us. Filters are a key component to our sanity in a world where we are inundated with too many choices and too much noise.

Just a little piece of my mind. I won’t be leaving too many lying around. I need them.

Technorati Tags: geononymity, sheryl breuker, filters

This morning I received a message from Andrea Weckerle.

Andrea wrote, “I promised I’d tell u about my new project: CiviliNation/cybercivility See WSJ op-ed I wrote w/ JW. Would love ur thoughts & support!” Of course I went straight away to see what she said.

I read it and think Andrea hit on something that’s incredibly valuable, so much so I wanted to not only share what she wrote but some of my own thoughts on this as well.

Class: Whatever happened to it?
We’ve become a crude and crass global world. It’s as though we’ve stepped back in time and all become what once was called the lower class. Cue the music for the song that was cut in the musical Chicago. The words are definitely raw, but in a sort of tongue and cheek way, they hit the nail on the head.

Click the words above for the rest of the song, but you get where I’m headed.

No longer does anyone stop and consider how what they have to say may impact others. Which is rather ironic because our individual reach has grown and as our arms have gotten longer, we have used less decorum. It’s almost as though we’re determined to hurt others as much as possible. Or are we?

I’ve thought about this a lot and I’m guilty of saying things I regretted later. Andrea makes a really great point when she says this:

Just as we’ve learned what is deemed appropriate face-to-face communication, we need to learn what is appropriate behavior in an environment that frequently deals with purely written modes of communication and an inherent absence of nonverbal cues.

I’m not entirely convinced we want to hurt so much as we want attention. Any kind of attention, but attention none the less. I’m reminded of children and how in an environment where they are not given enough positive feedback or boundaries they frequently rebel and become aggressive. Is there a corollary? Is it possible as a society we have stopped behaving well because there are no longer well defined boundaries, or is it something else?

Enter video.
We’ve been dragging our feet to adopt video, but what video has the ability to do is remove the barrier to those visible cues Andrea talks about. I think video might be a tool that has great potential to influence our relationships with those from other cultures, and even those in our own who would otherwise misconstrue our words.

It’s interesting that one of the topics of academic boards is how our kids are failing at language skills. Yet, most are involved in communication daily online. How do we give them the tools to communicate and be understood, so what is written is actually not misinterpreted? Video.

I don’t want to get so long winded you all no longer have the energy to go read the article by Andrea. I merely wanted to put out a couple of thoughts, incomplete though they are and stimulate some thoughts or dialog from others.

If I have one suggestion, it would be to treat each other kindly and with respect. That you have a voice or the ability to think and type out words doesn’t give you the right to be cruel. Be thoughtful. Maybe think of that as a New Years Resolution? I am terrible with metaphors and quotes, but treating others as you would wish to be treated isn’t such a bad idea, is it?

Technorati Tags: Andrea Weckerle, Jimmy Wales, WSJ, Cybercivility, CiviliNation, Sheryl Breuker

Every writer blogger feels compelled to spew at times. It’s one of our inner demons. We must write. This is my spew as we leave 2009 and look to the next year. If something I say here doesn’t make you angry, I will have failed miserably. If something I say here doesn’t motivate you to change how you view the world for at least one day, I will have failed miserably. If one of you reads this and takes some small action to change our world, even one, I will have wildly succeeded. Read on if you dare.

I’ve been focused on a word the last week or two that echoes in my brain. Transformation. I’ve used it a number of times lately, and as I begin writing this, I think of a friend who asked “what are we transforming?” Thank you Eran, for making me reach for an answer that came effortlessly, without thinking…the world. We are going to transform the world.

I’ve spent 30 years of my life in the tech sector. Telecommunications and networks, switches and routers, bits and bytes. Bullshit and dollars my friends. Bullshit and dollars.

Depending on how you count the decades, we’re wrapping of the decade of decadence. Gadgets and toys, we’ve got plenty.  As the song says “whoosits and whatits galore.” And with any collection of gadgets and gizmos, we’ve been awash in a sea of marketing/sales/pitch babble that has threatened to drown out our own humanity. Threatened and failed dismally.

I work in sector that’s all about information movement. It doesn’t matter whether it’s voice or data, pictures or video. It’s information and we hunger for it. Or so we tell each other. We need more. More more more. Faster. Bigger. Cooler, Slicker. New UI. Broadband. Wideband. High Definitiion. Let’s concentrate the bullshit so we can inject the essence of crap directly into our brains and a concentration of 1 million ppm. That’ll sell right? People will buy it. We’ll get rich. Then we can have more!

What a crock!

If I learned any real lessons in 2009, it came as a result of being laid off in January and spending almost the entire year looking for work. Not very successfully I might add. God has this mysterious way of slamming us to the ground hard before he let’s us bounce back. Crying uncle isn’t enough. Not really. But I’m not alone. I won’t call out the names of friends and colleagues who are unemployed or underemployed. You know I’m pulling for you every day. Just like you do for me. And every day is still a scary new beginning. But the lesson I learned this past year, is that I’m alive. I’m well. I have a wonderful woman I love by my side, and she loves me back. I have dreams. We have dreams. We have friends far and wide.

I’m not decrying technology. Not at all. We’re geek freaks and admit it. I’m a geekaholic, and it’s been 2 hours since I last lusted after some new gadget. We’re human. It’s our nature. But with technology comes a price if we pay it. We don’t have to pay it, but sometimes it’s easy to choose to pay the price. Let me explain, and I’m going to use a phrase I will abandon this year. It’s something I intend to speak about in the past tense. It was a bubble, and I’m just the prick to call bullshit and burst the damn thing. That’s right, I’m talking about the elephant in the room, social media.

There are very few more ill-conceived terms in use, but they do exist. Web 2.0. SEO. SEM. Convergence is another. They are the cornerstones of buzzword bingo. Designed to either befuddle us or set our salivary glands to drooling so we’ll write a check and buy something. Dammitall stop that foolishness. Now.

Is social media about technology? No
Is social media about business? No
Is social media about marketing? No

Dictionary.com has a number of meanings for social. Let’s just look at the first nine:

1. pertaining to, devoted to, or characterized by friendly companionship or relations: a social club.
2. seeking or enjoying the companionship of others; friendly; sociable; gregarious.
3. of, pertaining to, connected with, or suited to polite or fashionable society: a social event.
4. living or disposed to live in companionship with others or in a community, rather than in isolation: People are social beings.
5. of or pertaining to human society, esp. as a body divided into classes according to status: social rank.
6. involved in many social activities: We’re so busy working, we have to be a little less social now.
7. of or pertaining to the life, welfare, and relations of human beings in a community: social problems.
8. noting or pertaining to activities designed to remedy or alleviate certain unfavorable conditions of life in a community, esp. among the poor.
9. pertaining to or advocating socialism.

I used to talk a lot about what I called digital common sense and it’s time to get back to that. Look at the definitions and you’ll see that social is all about people and human society. It’s not about bits and bytes. It’s also not about how many followers we have or how often we get retweeted. It’s not about whuffie in any way shape or form.

Forget media. Your voice is media. Writing a grocery list uses media. Think about the core. Social is about people. What we practice online, badly for the most part, is a form of digital socialism. Did that make your back teeth hurt? That same dictionary defines socialism as

a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

Ouch you say. Why? Does that hurt. What the Internet has given us is real democratization where every individual has voice. The real question is not what toys you have. It’s not whether you have an iPhone or Blackberry, tablet or netbook, Kindle or Nook. The question that matters is how are we using our voices?

I know you’re wondering where I fell off the planet and lost my theme of transformation right about now. So put your thinking cap on and hang on. It’s about to get bumpy for those of you selling trinkets, gadgets, and yes, services.

Fire did not transform the world. How we used it did.
Gutenberg’s printing press did not transform the world. How we used it did.
The light bulb didn’t transform the world. How we used it did.
Same for the automobile, the airplane, and countless other inventions and discoveries.

Radio and television changed us into receivers. We became fat, dumb and happy. Spoon fed by an industry created of greed that became the choke point of information that fed us what was popular. And we know that because people (advertisers) paid lots of money to spoon feed us that stuff. They changed the world in ways that are neither good nor bad at this point. Some of each.

The iPhone did not transform the world. How we use it hasn’t either. But it can.
Netbooks did not transform the world. How we use them hasn’t either. But it can.

Technology, used by people, can and does transform the world. And let me give you some examples. First, remember the story of the little girl throwing starfish into the ocean. A man told her she couldn’t make a difference in the number of starfish dying. She simply tossed another one back into the see and said “it made a difference for that one.“

Now I’ll give you some off the cuff examples of some people I met online this year. People who make a difference one person, one child, one village, one cause at a time. Transformation heroes who are out to make a difference. They’re using social tools for social causes. Helping fix broken pieces of our society and make the world a better place.

Jeff Power – Schools in Africa
Lotay Yang – Cause after cause
Pete Miller – Children, our most precious resource
Mark Horvath – Homeless people and their value
Drew Olanoff  – Cancer awareness
Alex Plank – Autism education

These folks are simply a tiny handful of the people I’ve met this year who through either little things every day, or major investments of their lives are transforming our world by using the tools of technology to bring about awareness, involvement and change.

We, yes we the people of the world, can transform the world in ways technology cannot. We’ll do it in the ways we come together to support causes, to support one another, make friends, engage, and share our lives. Technology won’t do that.

Used one way, technology is a great enabler for mankind. Lose sight of that and it becomes a great obstacle driving lust and greed. In the tech sector, I see fartoo much lust and greed. I’m too often guilty of it. If you’re honest with yourself, so are you.

What we have every day is something best illustrated by Hugh.

We reinvent ourselves every morning when we awaken. Are you awake? Who are you inventing today?
Are you inventing a marketer? Are you selling snake oil or making the world better?
Are you inventing a maker of products? Are you distilling snake oil or making the world better?
Are you inventing a commercial service? Are you selling illusions or making the world better?
Are you inventing a conference to promote hype? Are you selling tickets on a carousel or making the world better?

Many of you…many of us are far too busy building a house of cards. We chase money, success, prestige, and objects rather than real good.

2010 is a year of transformation. It’s a year of change. When we leave it on December 31, 2010, the world will be transformed. How are we all going to help?

One thing I’m going to do is pay far more attention to real change, real transformation and real commitment. Companies that do things that can changes our lives will get far more attention than bit twiddlers who can shave a penny off the cost of a phone call. Gadgets and services that are me too responses aren’t creators or innovators. I’ll do my best to either ignore them or call them out. I want to focus on the things that matter in the world.

Sure, I’m a geek. An enterprise architect. Technology strategist. Business professional in marketing and sales. But before all those things, I’m a person on this planet we call home. In 2010 I’m going to do something to make it a better place for you and me.

I’ve been thinking about the power many of us grant Twitter lately. It’s been fueled by a number of conversations and articles I’ve read. I’d like us to consider something I’ll call the Zen of Twitter.

In the visual, the little blue pie slice represents our network – our real network – the people we know that we know. Large numbers or small doesn’t matter. It’s a finite set of people we know we have an established connection with.

The larger coral section represents a larger group – the people we know that we don’t know. We aren’t connected, but we know they exist. We saw someone speak to them or of them. They were on some video we saw and mentioned their Twitter name. We know these people use Twitter, yet we have no connection. We’re simply aware they’re outside our network.

The largest slice, the green one, represents most of Twitter. The people we don’t know that we don’t know. They’re there on Twitter. Some are more active than we are. Yet we don’t know that they exist. We don’t know what they do. We don’t know their value. They could easily become part of our network, but we’re unaware of each other, so far.

Consider how much effort is spent in follower counts. It’s the holy grail for the clueless on Twitter. More is good, more is better, I need more. More, more, more.  I won’t name anyone, but the misconception that more has higher value is rampant among even the most elite of the Twitterati. And many speak of little else at times.

I’m not denigrating the value of enlarging your network, but I am going to make a point.

Twitter exists inside that pie. It’s a closed ecosystem. True, the barrier to entry is zero but let’s be realistic and not give Twitter more power than it has. I know you want me to explain that, right? Read on. (more…)

A little over a year ago I posted to this and believed that while it might be good to have a twitter presence it certainly wasn’t right for all businesses. Today I have modified that thought and here’s why.

This week has been rather interesting in the world of technology. LeWeb, the conference held in Paris, is an opportunity for startups and entrepreneurs to come together and present, learn and coexist in an environment that offers collaboration as well as partnerships, providing both funding and help in building towards a funding stage. It also allows advisement to those unsure of how to proceed and really offers much more.

What’s interesting about this particular iteration of LeWeb is what happened when Robert Scoble met several entrepreneurs and asked the basic question, “Do you have a twitter account?” When he was told they did not he blew up at them. Hmmm, well, it raised a really good question about necessity in my mind.

Robert suggested that every business should have a twitter account, but in my opinion an opportunity was missed. He suggested that without a twitter account he can’t promote the company. I don’t completely agree. What would be wrong with twittering out a web address? After all, whether you’re on twitter or not, doesn’t every company have a web address? Another question to answer!

I’ve talked to several people recently and felt compelled to quote someone I respect for having pointed out that in todays world without a web presence you simply won’t exist to the young adults who are quickly moving into the business world. But I digress.

I think Robert missed an opportunity to educate, inspire and influence others with his current belief system. Rather than get annoyed and take it personally, Robert could have talked to these people and expressed his opinions, both why he thinks it’s important and what he thinks they should be doing. I understand that Robert is a big name in the world of technology, and I understand he may not feel it’s his job to teach, but whether he takes that as part of his job or not, people do follow his lead much of the time so he has a responsibility to his network to be an example.

Yes, Robert has a twitter presence and he uses it, today, but he also vacillates much of the time, moving to the next big shiny and frequently balking at the very things he claims are necessary today. Much of ‘09 Robert talked about how great friendfeed was and how it was much more powerful than twitter was. Then, once friendfeed got bought up by facebook he switched and started posting more to twitter talking about how it was worth 5-10 billion dollars and the best, most important tool out there. It’s not a good testament to the value of having your business on twitter.

Having just chastised Robert, something good came of his behavior and the much discussed berating he gave the people in France. I started thinking about my own views, I also came across some other articles that sort of support my own thinking and I’d like to share those with you and let YOU make up your own mind.

The first article I read this morning was – a berry business blog hosted on Chicago Now. The blog post that set things in motion was, To Tweet or Not to Tweet.

I recently took a meeting with a potential corporate partner to discuss an opportunity for co-branding and quickly found myself in a heated discussion about social media and its effect on our respective company’s brands.

“You don’t tweet?” I asked, in disbelief.

“We don’t tweet. Corporate is nervous. Too much room for discussion,” responded my associate.

“But that’s the whole point!” I exclaimed.

The rest of the story is here.

People still aren’t sure what they should do, which is one of the reasons I think Robert should have been a little less harsh. Just because he does it, and he gets it doesn’t mean the rest of the world does. They do have an obligation to learn, but it takes time and anytime we try to force our ideals, our views down someone else’s throat without giving them an opportunity to understand the value or make up their own mind, we essentially say to them, if you don’t agree with me, you are not worth my time. That’s a huge mistake. What business would exist if that were the perpetuated mindset?

In reading the article, To Tweet or Not to Tweet, what occurred to me was the value in having a twitter presence that is a representation of the company’s views, a visual helpdesk, a persona people can identify with and a LINK to the website for the company. It’s becoming the norm to see all across the web the twitter equivalent to a web address by using a ‘@’ in front of a company logo or name like this: ‘@so-and-so’, or in my case, @sherylbreuker .

We used to believe that aggregation was where it was all going, and while there may be some value in having a single point of reference for all of that, that was still about sites like friendfeed or jaiku where all your blogs, all your weblinks could be found in one place. Great as that is, what has changed is now people look for you on twitter, and will click through to your blog via the sidebar. My sidebar very clearly shows a Web address which directly links to my website. It’s a lot easier to have a single name, @sherylbreuker, for instance.

Today as a company trying to stay afloat in the business world, you have to meet your customers where they are. Twitter is powerful. Twitter isn’t all, though, and you need to seriously consider a presence not only on twitter but every other place there are potential customers for you. The web is bigger than anyone could have predicted. Existing there, is the only way to stay alive.

The next article I read that also gave me food for thought was by Ari Herzog. Ari posted a Case Study of 4 Companies on Twitter. The opening paragraph is, in my opinion, a fabulous directive to all companies sending one of their own into the marketing realm of twitter.

Short of the official Twitter rules and usage guidelines left and right, it is the choice of each business to either emulate best practice or test how to write and respond to 140 character updates on their own.

I have long believed if a company is to succeed on twitter, they need to keep in mind a couple of basic rules:

• Reciprocity is mandatory and should be written into a company policies and guidelines, under rules of engagement
• Authenticity, another critical piece of the corporate pie today, largely because people can smell a rat and if you’re simply sending a front person into the lines and provide them a script, it’s not real and they will be eaten alive
• Trust is what you gain by allowing for the above to take place and there is precious little else as valuable

Having said that, what is more important today, even than engagement is protecting your brand. A future proofing of sorts. Having a twitter presence and growing organically a following is just as valid as seeking the instant gratification so many large corporations expect and desire to prove ROI.

Today I rescind my past assertion that not all business should be on twitter. I embrace the need to look toward a future where all things are based on the web. Even the small town business will need to be findable. Why? Geo location services/devices will not find you and someone just passing through will be pointed to a competitor. Many twitter clients offer location services and people are using them.

Twitter is no longer a flash in the pan, or fluff. Twitter is one of the most powerful tools in the industry.

The other day I posted 2009 – Ken’s Year in Review and promised I’d follow up with this requisite annual blogger’s rite, my look ahead. There may be some bumps in the road and unexpected twists here, so hang on dear reader. Put your tray table in the upright and locked position, raise your seat back and make sure your seatbelt is securely fastened. I’ve never been particularly shy or softspoken about my look at the future, and I probably won’t be now.

Disclaimer: These are my opinions alone. They don’t necessarily reflect the opinions of any employer past or present, my lovely partner Sheryl, the companies named herein, or anyone else on the planet. Your opionions and mileage may vary widely. Cheap shot comments will be tossed into the abyss, but open conversation and debate is always welcome.

Disclaimer 2: This is not only an opinionated post, it’s a long one. Don’t say I didn’t warn you.

Early in 2009 I predicted it was going to be the year Cisco took a big black eye. I agree, that didn’t happen. Instead they’ve taken a light bruising all year long. 2009 was a year when Cisco excelled at absolutely nothing that mattered in the market in my view. They were vanilla custard and simply didn’t matter in the market. They got off easy, and in 2010 they won’t. I said a black eye in 2009. I’ll predict a savage beating in 2010, the likes of which they’ve never felt before. I bet you’re curious where, aren’t you?

First in unified communications and VoIP space. I’d say Cisco is going to get their lunch eaten by multiple players. The Cisco solution set is pretty decent (Call Manager and the like), although their phones are forgettable. It won’t matter. I think they’ll get beaten repeatedly by Lucent, Asterisk, Mitel, and others. Even IBM, yes IBM, will cause pain for Cisco. 2010 will be the year Cisco learns how much they don’t know about telecommunications. It will be a bitter pill to swallow.

They bought Pure Digital for the Flip and they’re about to get a bunch of hype for the new Flip with built-in WiFi. I give that buzz six weeks and then they’ll take a good old fashioned, bare knuckles ass whuppin from the likes of Kodak’s Zi8 and a handful of others. More importantly, the current generation of cameras built in to mobile phones, notably iPhone and Blackberry, are likely to shift up taking another huge bite out of the whole dedicated camera market.

Then there’s Cisco’s core business – switching and routing. Coupled with some repercussions of the recent Starent acquisition and Juniper getting serious about the market, I expect some big moves in this space. Juniper will play big and strong. The big dog, Cisco, is going to get rocked back on their heels in some major networking deals in 2010. People will start to think about other options more often before simply choosing Cisco.

Oh, and John Chambers, the Rupert Murdoch of networking, will finally move on. I’ve seen his leadership at Cisco as ineffective in recent years and I expect him to move on, flying off with his golden parachute.

Then we have Yahoo. The worn and beleaguered Yahooligans will continue trickling out the door at every opportunity. There’s still a lot of talent at Yahoo and they are ripe for the picking. They don’t have that many execs left from the old days. Jerry Wang’s departure was really good for Yahoo. Replacing him with Carol Bartz was, IMHO, not a good move. Other than trying to prove her balls by swearing, she’s done nothing that I’d expect from a CEO leading a company. She needs to go. I believe in 2010 she’s out the door. She can take the flying monkees with her too.

Of course there’s Microsoft, the Gorgon with more snakes in its head than Medusa. (Yes, the irony of Gorgons being female is intentional, for a reason…read on). I expect more layoffs at MS. Significantly more. Microsoft is still a very fat company, with plenty of trimming to do. In 2010, I think they’ll do some in the right areas. They’ve missed the mark a time or two with cutbacks, and some course corrections will happen this year. OCS will do well, especially against Cisco. Momentum will gain there.

Most importantly, I think Steve Ballmer will depart. He isn’t good for MS. I think many people feel that way, but nobody says it. I expect him to leave MS and land somewhere equally visible. I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s somewhere near either Redwood Shores or Pleasanton in California. ‘Nuff said.

Oh, and MS in an effort to prove they’re not evil and soften their image will place a woman in a very visible leadership role, perhaps Ballmers. We should hope it won’t be Carol Bartz, although she certainly seems to cast a flirtatious eye toward Redmond every now and then.

Yes, there is plenty more if you’re still here. (more…)

We’ve been big fans of location based services for quite some time now. We both think they’re a vital part of the future, but we’ve also had plenty of reason to think about the reality of LBS in our world, privacy concerns, and a number of factors that tie into the general concept.

We were early adopters of Brightkite a long time ago.  We had a few moments of “do we really want the world to know what restaurant we’re at” thoughts. While it’s a bit of a no-brainer for me, as a woman, Sheryl has the random whackaloon stalkers that show up every now and then. I remember an instance in particular that gave us pause to think about how we use those services, and how public to make the information. Brightkite never gained enough critical mass to really catch fire. I was seriously frustrated with it on our recent trip to DC, and have pretty much lost hope for its ongoing success at this point.

Before we move to the others, there’s a sidenote on privacy to consider. The devices we carry, from iPhones and Blackberries, to those we drive, and many we carry are all easily trackable. And these tracking devices can be used for a number of purposes beyond what we’re sold as consumers. For example:

• Did you know your EasyPass toll booth token can easily be used to issue speeding tickets? It tracks the time you pass toll gates, and if you exceed the speed limit, this information is easily passed to law enforcement. Yes, I’ve actually been in conversations where law enforcement agencies talked of this in terms of fully automated revenue generation that the consumer pays for.
• Your cell phone is a GPS device, and it tracks to a pretty fine granularity on the planet. And while the paranoid of the world rant about the boss knowing they’re on the golf course when they’re claiming they’re working, other uses have been explored. The automotive insurance industry has invested a great deal of consideration into mobile phone tracking for the purposes if dynamic insurance rates. Imagine exceeding the speed limit and having your coverage costs go up because your carrier monitors your location in realtime.

Privacy. It’s an illusion. You have no right to privacy. It’s not in the Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights or the Constitution. We have no right to privacy. It is an illusion. It’s a courtesy, non an inalienable right. The question with this sort of privacy, and Internet privacy in general is not whether or not we can be seen. We can absolutely be seen. The Internet sees all. Whether or not we’re being watched is a more interesting question that I’ll leave for the conspiracy theorists among us.

The reality is, our location provides good information to the world about us, and sharing it opens the door to the world giving us good information in return.
(more…)

Every year bloggers around the world write two posts – the year in review and projections for the coming year. Thanksgiving seems an appropriate time to join in the annual event, and this year has some interesting areas to address.

Last year I expressed a lot of disappointment with Truphone. I still think the company has a long way to go. This year, I like many of the things they’ve done, which pleases me greatly. They’re friends and it was disappointing to see them struggling. They’re finding their way and I expect to see them continue to rise in 2010.

Twitter is everyone’s hot topic. I was very pleased to see the success of our friend @shelisrael’s book Twitterville this year. I’m far less bullish on Twitter itself. Just yesterday @biz held the annual news conference to announce that next year we’ll have a revenue model and make money. I think I’ve heard that announcement every year since I joined Twitter, and I’ve been using it longer than most. The people I think it’s important not to listen to when it comes to Twitter’s direction are the Twitter leadership team. They don’t eat their own dog food, don’t understand Twitter, and really seem to simply have hung on to the tiger’s tail this far. What they, and much of the design team at Twitter do well is break things. I still love Twitter and use it every day, but in 2009, Twitter was a boring yawner for the most part. There was zero innovation, reinvention and precious little progress of any kind. Not incremental change, but barely noticeable change. Chainging “What are you doing” to “What’s happening” simply isn’t innovation. It sends a message that says to me, we have no clue what we’re doing. If ever a service was more overvalued that Skype at the eBay purchase, it’s Twitter. Fantasy and delusion reign supreme when it comes to this simple service that simply hasn’t approached mainstream after nearly four years. No matter how wild the growth or how phantasmagorical the hype, Twitter is simply a niche tool for communications junkies.

Location based services saw some shifts. Brightkite finally did a release 2.0, but I fear it’s release 2.end in the long run. Unremarkable in every way, and broke much of the functionality. Brightkite has simply failed to ever achieve any critical mass. Google Latitude remains another fizzle. Google seems to be stuck in a half-decade development approach that’s served well enough in the past, but may raise problems for the future. More on that in another post about the GOOG later on.

Foursquare hit the scene pretty hard and is doing well. It’s on the rise, and I expect that will continue into 2010, and beyond if the trio behind it keeps moving. As LBS go, it’s the big winner with the most potential ahead. I think the game aspect of Foursquare is something that will have to be eliminated, but with the right advances, this simple service can easily lead the future in mobile LBS for mainstream adoption in the future. Monetization for this one is easy, lucrative and huge. Foursquare will be worth a fortune. Foursquare will surpass Twitter in value and popularity by 2011. More on that in another post.

There’s a sleeper company in the unified communications space that’s been on the rise for years – Voxeo. They recently got $9M in funding, and that was a good investment. While I think Twitter was ridiculously overvalued, I think the absolute reverse is the case with Voxeo. I think they’re on track for a billion dollar valuation and an enormous acquisition when the time comes. That’s right folks, there’s a $1B sleeping giant inside this little company. One with value in a trillion dollar industry that keeps doing all the right things. Watch Voxeo. (more…)

I have something on my mind, and you get to read about it.

This morning scrolling through twitter and google reader I came across several posts/comments all surrounding who the influencers in social networking are. What’s implied is that there is a set group of influencers and they are all that matter. I think that’s hogwash. Seriously.

We all live in this world, and are surrounded by a myriad of people. Some we come into contact with daily, some we see on special occasions, and still others we may never meet in person but due to social networking and media we invite them into our lives in some form or fashion. These people, all of the above, are our influencers. That doesn’t negate the reality that we are also influenced by the big screen or tv ads, but in our network those we communicate with are our influencers. I don’t care who influences my pal in Ottawa. Who he is influenced by may not be the same as who I am influenced by and it doesn’t change our relationship that we have other people in our network influencing us. it simply means we are a diverse grouping of people with a variety of influences.

But I took offense at the idea that there are a select group of people influencing the greater numbers of us. Is that true? Possibly, but it isn’t the whole story and that’s what I want to talk about.

I really do have a friend in Ottawa. He’s so incredibly special, and it’s reciprocal. Outside of Ken and my kids he probably has more impact in my life than anyone else. Most people who have paid attention to me know JP is not only special to me, but he influences a great many people in my world. JP is friends with many of my friends. JP and I go back to my days in Canada. He pre-dates Ken. Still, we live miles apart and live very separate lives, so why is he able to influence me? The same reason anyone is. Because I acknowledge him in some way to be worth listening to and value his opinion even if we disagree.

JP is not the only person who influences me. I would suggest there are a great many people who influence me. Every single person I have a conversation with has influence of some sort. This past week is a great example of that. I was in Washington DC. I arranged meetups with a number of people. Each of them was an influence on how I spent my day. Dinner Monday night with Chris Abraham gave me an opportunity to go to a restaurant another influencer suggested. Tuesday I took my first metro ride alone to visit with Michael Sanders down by the Capitol. Wednesday night dinner at Vapiano’s with Shashi Bellamkonda, a place I would never have found on my own, and an added bonus meeting with Mike Holden. Thursday lunch with Glenn Manishin, getting to see where he works and his prized bonsai. (I spelled it correctly, Glenn!) Friday traipsing around Adams Morgan where a friend suggested we would see ethnic diversity, he was right. And finally, Saturday morning coffee with Jim Long, someone I’ve known for a long time online, had many great thoughtful conversations with, but never met in person.

All of these people have been influences in my life or I wouldn’t have made plans to meet them. Jim is who suggested many of the places I wound up, from Georgetown to Adams Morgan. Chris showed me a Sculpture of Einstein that I probably would not have seen otherwise, Michael pointed out the proximity of the Library of Congress to the Capitol, and with so many huge government buildings I might have overlooked it. Dinner with Shashi brought us in contact with yet another person, Mike Holden. I had only recently come across Mike on twitter so he wasn’t on my radar but he’s doing some great things and well worth paying attention to. Glenn shared himself very personally, touring us through the inner workings of his law offices, and then took us to lunch at the Hotel Monaco, where the lunch conversation was wonderful, dessert was FABULOUS, the company incredible. Coffee with Jim was a long overdue meeting with an old friend. Comfortable. We shared pics from his recent tour of Asia with President Obama, I shared some of my pics, (I hear the song Copacabana playing in the background – her name was Lola)  and in general it was just a special time laughing, catching up and enjoying each other.

I had another encounter, one I haven’t shared yet, but I think is important and indicative of the diverse set of people influencing us. I met a homeless man. His name is Montana. Ken was in the hotel and I had gone down to the pharmacy. Montana was offering help to someone who was trying to get into the pharmacy but the doors were closed. It’s a 24 hour pharmacy and one set is closed after a certain hour, so Montana was directing this person to the other side. Montana made a comment to me and I responded. I am a bit ‘gabby’ after all.

Being gabby, I started asking him questions. He answered and before long he was telling me his story. Montana has been on the streets for a while. One of those people who got nailed with the economy falling apart. It doesn’t matter why so much, what mattered to me was hearing how he lives today. He had all his ’stuff’ in a bag which was stolen from him. Then some group in DC was handing out blankets and he got one, but the rain came and his blanket got soaked. He was trying to find a way to dry it out because, as he said, ‘it got that mildew smell.’ He told me how he figured out a way to get into a public washroom and lock it so he could get cleaned up. He talked to me about his struggles to find any sort of job that would pay him something so he could eat. He was very happy because one of the hotels let him do some sweeping and paid him. He was a nice, articulate, funny, considerate man who fate or whatever brought him to a life he certainly never envisioned for himself. Yes, Montana influenced me.

I went upstairs and went through my purse. I found all my 1’s and my only 5, and grabbed Ken. We went down but Montana was gone. I walked around the building and there he was. Moving on, because he can’t stay in one place or he’ll get tossed off the property. He said to me, “Did you come looking for me all the way around here, really?” And I told him I had. He influenced me, yes he did. You see, I could see myself in Montana. oh, I’ve never been homeless, but I’ve certainly had struggles not shared with anyone other than closest friends. I’ve walked the streets alone, trying to access my situation, wondering what to do and how to do it. His walking is forced on him for reasons only he knows, but we’ve both done it which makes us the same.

All of these people influence me. They aren’t the only ones but I am clear on who they are. Nobody telling me there is only a select group of influencers will change the fact that these men have influenced me. It’s time we stop looking to the outside world to tell us what we think and start using our common sense to make up our own minds. Who influences you may be people who influence me. They also may not be. And that’s ok. I don’t want you to be just like me, influenced only by the people I am influenced by. I like our differences. That’s another reason you’re in my influencer list. People I am influenced by teach me.

Technorati Tags: shashi bellamkonda, mike holden, jim long, newmediajim, chris abraham, glenn manishin, sheryl breuker