I’ve x’d out numerous of these posts that have targeted many of my friends within the social space. The more I closed out these posts, the more I began to realize that perhaps we’re the ones at fault for adding these folks. Hear me out though before you think I’m telling you how to maintain your profile.

Quantity

We’ve always preached openness and to build our communities of like-minded individuals, our blog readers, those who admire the work that we do. It became second nature, even for me, to add anyone and everyone so long that we knew they were involved in the social space. We’ve matured over the years, as have our relationships within these communities.  With that maturation we’ve also seen several ways to manage our Facebook communities, which fits several different types of users. But when does adding everyone become disadvantageous for us?

Quality

Back to the issue at hand, I’ve seen my fair share of spam from my friends within the social space (them being tagged, not so much them spreading it). Where I haven’t seen one bit has been from my friends and family outside of my social media world – those people who, for the most part, have more strict filters in who they accept or ignore. Now I understand this is just one sample and definitely not trying to generalize here, but this observation is fairly telling to me.

It’s not just about Facebook – but the relationships within our online communities have certainly evolved. So I ask you this – have we reached a point where we need to become more cognizant of who we actually invite into our networks? Do we focus on the quality of those connections that we can actually vouch for or do we continue to increase the quantity in these communities because that’s what we feel ‘social’ should be?

I understand there will be folks who wish to add the masses; because you never know who you may come across, meet, do business or connect with – but where do we draw the line for sake of bastardizing these communities?

Is engagement in social media a prerequisite to writing a book on social media that’s to be taken seriously?

That had me thinking and led me to the observation that the social web makes the answer largely based on our online writing (blog), all-around connectivity within the social community and for good or bad, popularity (call it influence, if you’d like).

There are a lot of factors that play into Marc’s question, one of which he asked – is success based on social observation or social experience? I started chewing on that on a broader basis, as I feel there’s a misconception with those who have visible experience and activity online vs. those who may not have as large a footprint but work more so behind the scenes.

The Unsung Heroes

I get it. The relationships we build and content we produce online provides us with unique experiences and an immense amount of opportunity in this space. Trust me, I know firsthand. But there are individuals who may not have strong influence/visibility in the public social eye because they don’t tweet or blog as often, or attend many of the conferences that we all go to on the regular.

But these folks are in the background – busting away at their craft, understanding the ins and outs of the business, and putting to action their knowledge of social & the former and doing great things for their company or client. Are they deemed as ‘prolific’ in the social space? Maybe not. But I’ve worked with numerous leaders and peers who fit this mold and have my respect and sign-off on what they would bring to social, a business, a book deal, etc.

Is That Enough?

On the flip side, I understand the nature of the space and what/how people get recognized for their work – but I also feel that there needs to be a shift. Do we ‘over-vet’, as Marc would say, those who are visible to the masses to the point that others are overlooked? Is it to the fault of those who have chosen to focus their work in a different manner vs. those who have chosen to communicate, create and develop their footprint in the more public social arena?

There’s a lot to be said for both sides of the table and I don’t necessarily have the answer, but let’s hear your stance on this.

Do the unsung heroes deserve more recognition or is it up to them to create it?

I was glad though to see that Southwest responded quickly and even more than once (whether to people’s liking or not) – but I want to tackle an even deeper issue than that:

Social Responsibility

It’s no secret that the social web allows us to interact with businesses more closely and under a larger microscope than ever before. But when does one draw the line from expecting rapid communication to an issue, to going overboard and abusing your ‘social power’ for the benefit of yourself and to balloon a story even larger than it needs to be?

On one side I see Kevin Smith, a filmmaker who has more followers than Southwest Airlines themselves. A guy who was definitely wronged by the company and used his influence to voice his displeasure. On the flip side, I see a guy who continues to berate and badger SWA all over Twitter and IMO, abusing the social responsibility that we all really have in this space. For what? To truly push the message that SWA did wrong or to USE the social web to continue one’s own agenda?

We EXPECT, DEMAND, WANT big and small from companies online – but when it comes to us, the consumer, we apparently get a free pass when it comes to RESPECT, UNDERSTANDING and RESPONSIBILITY online.

Next time you want to flip the script and go Kevin Smith or Motrin Moms on a company, sit back and think about the openness of this space and the responsibility that comes along with it. Even more so, think to yourself if you’d truly do the same in-person if this situation were to happen at a brick & mortar.

But enough of my side, what do you think of this story? Is Kevin right in his continued messages against SWA? Or did Southwest drop the ball far enough to deserve this amount of ridicule?

What got me thinking is the social web and how we, as consumers, respond to brands that are utilizing these platforms to build a community but to also attract new customers. Razorfish recently conducted a study on this, stating that special offers drive engagement in social media. Some interesting takeaways:

• Those who follow a brand on Twitter, 44% did so to receive exclusive deals (37% Facebook)

• 24% follow a brand on Twitter for customer service (33% Facebook)

• 64% made their first purchase from a company as a result of a digital interaction

Garrick Schmitt of Razorfish, also stated:

To retain and add customers, marketers need to shift focus from brand awareness and impressions to creating campaigns that drive people to make purchases and spread the word about products and services they use to friends.

While I agree these product-driven strategies have been successful for big and small businesses, I’m curious how sustainable it can be in the long run. Gaining customers through special offers may be obtainable, but what happens when that next, more exclusive deal comes from a competitor?

What I feel has even more value, in addition to this study, is organizations offering exclusive content to their community. Providing value, not just monetarily, but by connecting them with content that is 1 – solving a need through direct communication and 2 – created specifically for that social community. Ultimately, creating longer-lasting customer relationships.

So, I ask you this:

Can a sustainable relationship be built between a customer and a brand – solely through exclusive deals? Or does it require more of a connection, driven by not just $, but through content that provides value and engages the community outside of the product itself?

Affirmation

I say this from more of a development standpoint. From hearing numerous panels to having 1-on-1 sit-downs with industry leaders. I’ve seen the growth from both ends of the spectrum, as talks are far past the tools and the newness of social media and deeper into what we’re actually doing right now to help businesses achieve their goals with the help of the social web.

What has this affirmed for me exactly? That the work that I and the rest of the community have put in this past year, since my last smart-people meeting, is helping move needles and shift our thinking forward with ideas and case studies on what’s working for companies today.

Testing

This second takeaway directly relates to that next level of thinking and how organizations are approaching social media today. They’re continually testing & optimizing their strategies and aren’t afraid of failing during this process.

Jay Baer summed up this thought well with this quote:

Instead of swinging for the fences all the time in marketing, try to string together base hits and ultimately you’ll win

Better yet, watch our interview for yourself and hear what Jay thought about the event, it’s well worth the 2 and 1/2 minutes:

So, a big thank-you goes out to the MarketingProfs team for inviting me out to this great event. Thank you for giving me ideas to take back to the desk, for reconnecting me with good friends, and introducing me to some new faces that I once only knew online.

Were you at the event or watching the livestream? What were your biggest takeaways? And if we haven’t gotten the chance to connect face-to-face yet, let’s change that!

As a strong advocate for communities, as well as being a co-founder of #CmtyChat, I was definitely intrigued by Thursday’s interactive session on building and nurturing your online community. The panel was led by Beth Harte and included Rachel Happe, Gretchen Harding and Mildred Center.

The super smart panel had a lot of great thoughts & ideas, but here are some of the main points taken from the session:

• Communities are smaller entities within networks (Twitter/Facebook) that have a more concerted effort towards engagement and communication

• Numerous communities can exist within a single organization. Different audiences create needs on different levels. Focus your content and engagement for your individual communities respectively

• Posting content only equates to being just a website. Build an interaction and response portal for your community

• Measure growth bi-annually vs. monthly – communities require nurturing and time to build & grow. Communicate to your company so expectations are the same across the board

• Give your community superpowers – allow them to grow and get smarter. Equip them to grow their community voice

• Understand your business’ community goals & strategy and cater your content around that, as well as your community’s expectations

• Leverage existing customers and advocates of your brand to help start and build your community. Small group of passionate and engaged people help get the energy going for the community and allows the community manager to build a strong base before rolling it out to a larger base of people

There was a great discussion around these points, though the biggest takeaway for me was that your organization doesn’t always have just one focused community and can create segmented content & engagement strategies for multiple audiences within.

Whether you took part in this interactive discussion or not, what else would you add to this list that can help build your business’ community?

Now, there are similarities and no-doubt Facebook copied the @mentions feature from Twitter, but these comparisons have lead me into a reoccurring thought about the Facebook experience and how Twitter has changed it for me.

Experiences

To put things into perspective, Twitter has typically been a place where we (bubble-dwellers) connect with a community of smart industry professionals from across the world. It’s free-flowing, quick, and concise – but yet gives us the ability to create strong relationships with people that we learn and grow from every day. On the flip – Facebook, for me, has always been more of a personal avenue where I could let loose a bit more and share different types of ideas, media & thoughts with my friends – but without that professional ‘feel’ that Twitter brings about.

Twitter vs. Facebook Voice

With the evolution of these communities and how we network & connect with one another online, I’ve slowly opened up my Facebook network to SM/PR pros that I’ve gotten to know fairly well on Twitter – this, after years of connections with just close friends from college and otherwise. I understand these platforms are what we make of them, but the experience for me has been tricky as far as the content I publish there and the ‘voice’ people hear.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m myself every time I step foot in this e-world, but let’s not fool ourselves to think that certain communities of friends don’t react differently depending on what you talk about – that’s the voice I’m talking about. So, where is that fine line between your professional/career-oriented voice vs. let-loose/happy-hour voice?

Can’t Please Everyone

I’ve been a lot more active on Facebook in the past month and have seen these differences in engagement between the various ‘mini-niches’ of friends. My close hometown friends don’t care to comment on Mashable articles, while my friends from Twitter typically don’t comment on more personal posts that grabs the attention of close friends & family – and I’m OK with that. I’ve come to realize that I won’t be able to please or engage everyone with every update or post.

What it really comes down to is who you’re comfortable with adding. Some people feel that Facebook is a friends-only affair (which I can relate to), while others have opened the dam and let a rush of people in, all the way to their 5,000 friend-limit.

Personally, I want to know you and have built a relationship with you to where I’m comfortable with emailing or giving you a ring. I guess my fine-line is somewhere between personal-only and dam-breaker.

What’s Your Experience?

What’s your thought on how these networks intermingle in today’s open-book online world? Has your Facebook experience changed as Twitter and our communities continue to evolve? Let’s hear it.

From what I’ve heard from Chris and several others today, the downfall has been panelists promoting their submissions through Tweets and DMs, asking for votes and trying to garner as much response as possible, while trying to beat out the other 2,215 submissions (keep in mind, voting accounts for 30% of the decision process.)

Have I received requests today? Yup. But mainly from people who I consider good friends and whose opinion and knowledge I respect and trust. Do I have a panel and have I promoted it? Yes – Bryan Person and I have a submission, but actually haven’t mentioned it until now. Regardless, in the end it’s ultimately up to us and which submissions we find relevant and most important.

PanelPicker or the highway?

Pimping out online voting systems is a reality within social media and the online world as a whole that we’ve unfortunately become accustomed to (remember the Shorty Awards?) I understand Chris’ feelings, especially when it comes from individuals you don’t have a relationship with. But are we making a bigger issue than there really is, or is there a better way SXSW and potential panelists could get the community involved instead of this voting system?

I’m always open to discussion and hearing how this process could be made more efficient. Have at it, I’m all ears.

Update: Ran across a great post by Len Kendall that promotes a handful of non-SM panels (with background info) but also his own, in a non-pimping sort of way. Kudos, Len.

We’re all aware of the hyper-connectivity that Social Media has created in today’s digital age – providing us with information and numerous forms of media at the tips of our fingers. The speed at which technology has changed our everyday lives and the opportunities it has created for businesses is amazing; but the SEC doesn’t see it that way.

The Southeastern collegiate athletic conference has sent out a new media policy that outlines stringent limitations to reporters, but even more importantly, rules for the fans. That’s right – the SEC and their perceived threat of technology and social media made them issue this guideline for fans that attend SEC events:

Ticketed fans can’t “produce or disseminate (or aid in producing or disseminating) any material or information about the Event, including, but not limited to, any account, description, picture, video, audio, reproduction or other information concerning the Event.”

The growing issue we see here is about media exclusivity and whether organizations such as the SEC have the rights to exclusive ownership to media (while preventing user-generated media) – or do those of us paying for & consuming such events, have the rights to utilize social media to capture and share created media with our communities. On one side you have billion dollar budgets from companies that expect such media to be produced and viewed within the confines of their respective platforms – where on the flip, you have the power of technology and the evolving world of media and how it’s consumed IRL and shared in the e-world. There are many arguments here but Lauren and I have come up with a few points for both sides of the media exclusivity debate:

Pros

• Companies pay for exclusive sponsorships/advertising – The SEC wants viewers to tune into ESPN and make their advertisement rates appealing to companies. Sure, companies that are on Twitter can tweet about the SEC games, give away prizes and show pictures – but they have to link to picture and interviews provided by media and SEC.

• The media – Current outlets will have an exclusive right to report and share media, while not having to compete with social networks and the thousands of citizen journalists that reside there.

Cons

• Fans won’t go to games – Not only will fans just update and tweet if they aren’t ticketed, the SEC might lose out on ticket sales. This could be detrimental in the sports realm. Can you imagine a school such as LSU enforcing this, and what their alumni base will say? A big part of SEC schools are their alumni support, which comes from…you guessed it: sporting events.

• Backlash from actual policing – Trying to police social media use within a stadium, such as the Florida Gators who host around 90,000 fans, is a ludicrous thought in its own. But what happens when fans are ‘caught’ live-tweeting or taking pictures of events? Are they kicked out? Mobile devices taken away? Wherever that line is drawn, the outcome of reprimanding your fan-base, those very people who support you on a daily basis, will not be pretty and have a lasting negative effect.

There could be compromises from both parties, such as having the SEC’s own social media team create the media that can then be shared and reproduced by their fan-base – but anything short of deleting this policy would not only create a larger uproar online, but would alienate many SEC supporters.

Lauren and I could add even more points to this issue, but we wanna hear from you? What other pros & cons could you add to our list? Is the SEC in the right about this, or will they drive fans away?

Let us know what you think!

Update: The SEC has posted this on Twitter, saying they’re working to clarify their policy. We’ll update you when they’ve released this change.

Update 2: Here’s the revision to the policy via Mashable. To sum it up, they’ve realized that they can’t force fans to not use social media at games, thus allowing it, so long it’s not for commercial or business use – aka making a profit from the event. Win-win for everybody, here. Big ups to SEC for turning this around into a compromise that benefits both parties.

You know, the one where people are basically trampling over one another just to get some hot new toy or that extremely cheap TV, because you can never have enough televisions – especially at that price.

Well, get a grip. Like these crazy Black Friday sales, Social Media isn’t something that everyone has to run after. Because you see a slew of people gunning for that new piece of technology doesn’t mean you have to do the same. If you feel joining the gold-rush is something that’ll help you and your company, or your already gadget-riddled home, then ask yourself these questions:

• Does Twitter really make sense for my business? (Does my home really need this fancy waffle maker?)

• Do I have the time and resources to make it worthwhile? (Will my wife send me to the couch if I come back with that guitar I always wanted to play?)

• Will Social Media really save my business? (Can this new grille really help me learn how to barbecue?)

• Will rushing into Social Media before other companies give me a competitive advantage? (Will waiting in line at 3am get me 1 of 3 available $200 laptops? | OK – maybe it will, but you’re still crazy!)

Aside from a little comical value, the point here is whether it’s Black Friday or Social Media, take a step back and assess the situation and see if it really makes sense for your home or your business. Do you need binoculars or an ice-cream maker? Is a new blog and a Facebook Fan Page really best suited to connect with your audience?

Do what’s best for your business and your household – regardless if it includes that next shiny new toy or not.