Yesterday, Reuters released what could be called a “reverse step” in social media policy, which instructs their journalists to avoid bias and specifically instructs them not to scoop the news wire by breaking their stories on social media sites first.

While it’s understandable that Reuters seeks to uphold the trust placed in them by their readers, the policy is moving in the wrong direction as many other online content providers strive to provide information in real-time. Indeed, the past year has seen Facebook, Google, and other online mediums provide real-time results in their search content. Additionally, search aggregators, such as LeapFish, not only provide results based on the major search engines, but access to real-time results as well, all from a single query.

The instructions make it clear that journalists are to release stories via the wire first, and then on social media outlets, including Twitter, secondarily.

The policy advises Reuters’ journalists to seek approval from their managers before using Twitter for any professional purpose, and also suggests that someone within the Reuters organization check the tweets before they’re posted so that personal bias is not disclosed. Reuters also suggests that journalists separate their personal accounts from their professional accounts.

Jennifer Bruin at Mashable states clearly what seems to be the news organization’s major concern:

“[Reuters] is torn between encouraging employees to use social media and the realization that the online behaviors of their staff put them at risk, a sentiment expressed in the comment that these tools, if misused, could ‘threaten our hard-earned reputation for independence and freedom from bias or our brand.’”

As local and national television news leans toward becoming entertainment in the face of poor ratings, news sources like the Associated Press and Reuters are fighting to protect their main business services while simultaneously recognizing that news gathering and reporting is changing. As seen during the conflict in the 2009 Iranian voting violence, the “Miracle on the Hudson” aircraft landing, and the total takeover of Twitter, Facebook, and Skype as the only means of communication during natural disasters, social media’s already on the front lines while journalists are scrambling to arrive.

The BBC has gone the exact opposite route, according to Social Media Today. Their new director, Peter Horrocks, tells journalists to get on-board, or get out:

Peter Horrocks assumed the position of director of BBC Global News last week, and he’s not wasting time with niceties. The self-proclaimed technology enthusiast is telling journalists to get with the social media program or get out.

While news agencies struggle with how to incorporate social media into their services and still remain profitable, it’s certain that social media, as a source of news and information, is not some trend that will go away in a few years. How the major news services handle this new wrinkle in reporting will undoubtedly play a key role in the future of how news is reported.

A long time ago in a far away land called Los Angeles, there was a great king named Conan O’Brien. After several years of his reign, his network turned on him and he went into hiding. Those still loyal to him searched high and low to no avail. Then on February 24th, he came to Twitter and announced, “Today I interviewed a squirrel in my backyard and then threw to commercial. Somebody help me.”

He was back, sort of. Before long, his people came back together. Over half a million followed him wherever he went, reading his tweets and, in some cases, retweeting. Soon after, Conan did something most interesting – he began to follow someone. Just one. The “followee: was a 19-year-old college student in Michigan who had only started tweeting two days before Conan under the handle @LovelyButton. O’Brien would then tweet “Sarah Killen, your life is about to change.” And so it did.  Very quickly.

The tweet that launched a new celebrity

Killen hadn’t taken the comment seriously but soon enough, word blazed across the social media lands and she had a following of over 15,000 people. Quite a large number since she was new to Twitter and only had about three followers beforehand. Not only was her name gaining notoriety, she was also amassing a small fortune. When her webcam threatened to prevent her from doing a video interview with MTV, some kind soul who sells horns in Florida bought  her a new Apple computer. And with her wedding set for later this year, she is being offered a tailor made wedding dress by a designer in New York.

We still aren’t sure why Killen was the chosen one. She says that Conan’s people contacted her through MySpace quite randomly and she said sure, not taking it too seriously. But with all the attention and very real treasures, she’s probably had a change of heart. Thousands are reaching out to a girl who, just a couple days ago, was practically unknown.

No one knows what O’Brien is plotting. Him coming onto Twitter was strange enough, but following only one person makes us all scratch our heads. I guess we’ll have to keep following Conan and Sarah to see where all this ends up.

If you haven’t already read the previous piece by Sunil on the Chatroulette site, let me give you a short breakdown. Chatroulette is a video chat-based “networking” site, consisting of two windows for video. The top window will be a random stranger from anywhere in the world, and the bottom window is you. To the right there is a text window. You can turn your video off, but you won’t be getting any action on this site without it. Sunil and I had different ideas about whether this site gets a thumbs-up…which has a whole different meaning if you spend enough time on Chatroulette.

My review is slightly tainted after finding myself more often than not coming “face to dick” rather than “face to face” with these strangers. Sunil found the site “unorganized”, but I think the better term might be primitive. You can “Next” people, “Report” people, or “Stop” – that’s about it.  To me, this is actually VERY organized. I had to give my dad a tutorial on Facebook, which might be user-friendly to the networking generation, but Chatroulette is an attractive site for people that find all the profiling and posting and gifting and fanning and following…overwhelming. And for people who don’t want a profile for one reason or another, there is another turn-on – no membership required! No email and no password, no way to trace or block anyone who disobeys the site’s BS clause forbidding obscene or pornographic material.

I couldn’t get the site to see my built-in camera. While I was problem solving, I figured I could get some help from this great network of people. But with strangers not being able to see me, I got skipped before I could even type “WAIT, HELP” or “Having technical difficulties.” Jeff Foxworthy’s doppelganger skipped me. He appeared to be networking from a suburban, country home den, the kind where your quiet and “keeps-to-himself” neighbor researches the anatomy of young children in a hidden cellar.

I got skipped two more times by guys that probably had browsers like eHarmony.com and the Craigslist personals up at the same time. I was about to throw in the towel until I could get my camera working, when my fortune changed – one person didn’t skip me. All I can tell you about him – Caucasian and uncircumcised. After asking for some insight on why my camera wasn’t working and not getting a reply, I had to ask if he might have a “free hand”, but after a few more spastic strokes, I found myself “nexting” him, still sans video.

Finally, the light bulb went on. I remembered after I reinstalled my operating system a few weeks ago, I hadn’t downloaded Adobe Flash. Problem solved; I was nervous but ready for my close-up. I actually never saw a girl on there, which might be why I was able to keep up a good text chat with a couple of guys. They seemed happy to chat as long as I wanted. So, networking is technically possible. But there are also some other variables that make Chatroulette a risky bet.

For the most part, I was faced with the head of a penis rather than the head that traditionally sits atop a neck. It seems to be the platform of choice for guys who like to “chaturbate.” But I also can see this being a tool for cruel entertainment. In a similar screen grab, a girl that may well already be insecure and rejected in the real world will be subject to insults.

There’s a good chance that you will experience some rejection from people that just immediately disconnect when your face (or whatever) pops up. But a sensitive, tormented teen might also face people that don’t click “next” because they get their kicks ridiculing an easy target. And that’s the kind of activity that makes suicidal teens go for it. Maybe that’s extreme, but it’s not unlikely that an insecure girl, seeking approval, might be naïve to a charming and persuasive person who asks her to compromise herself for his viewing pleasure.

Without actual members, there is no way to objectively say who uses Chatroulette, but based on my experience and the opinions of the few people I had chats with, it’s mostly men, and mostly from the waist down. But there are people on the site that just want to experience networking on a random, instant-gratification level.  I actually had some good chat experiences on there, but without cock-blocking security, this site might be best left in the hands of Chris Hansen.

I have to digress and conclude here with a helpful pointer for Dateline. This could be a great outlet for Dateline’s righteous and fruitful work on “To Catch A Predator”, the eye-opening, pedophile-busting stings mixed with a little “You’re on Hidden Camera” and a side of “Punk’d”! I can see it now – Chris Hansen gliding into the kitchen to spoil the fun for the antsy dullard that just drove four hours, toting nearly $20 on study materials such as Astroglide and condoms to “tutor” a 6^th grade girl. I doubt there is a shortage of perverted numbskulls, but either way… Chatroulette could be the f*cking jackpot!

Do you ever wonder why, with all of the marvelous personal info that Facebook collects, they’d allow an advertiser to run an idiotic ad for mortgage refinancing with a hairy, caveman looking dude on it, or those ridiculous “Find out who Googled You” ads with the image of a college girl that wouldn’t Google you if she were the last piece of ass on Earth?

It’s obvious that the ads must be working because they’re still running. Either that, or they’re running on a pay-per-click basis and no one is clicking, thus costing the  advertiser nothing. I’ve come to think that social media is such a targeted platform that, when an offending ad comes up, I never fail to wonder which “marketing genius” dropped the ball.

Don’t get me wrong…I don’t have anything against banner ads on my FB page, nor do I have anything against the companies behind the ads. What bugs me is that we hear about what a great platform Facebook is for behavioral and geographic targeting, then these Run-of-Site (ROS) ads show up.  I know that money is money, but when the advertising starts to negatively affect the medium, or the brand, it’s time to make a decision on which one is of the most importance.

Why am I bitching? Primarily because I’m allowed. Yet…I do have a point, although it’s feasible that I’m the only person who took notice. This is doubtful, but theoretically within the realm of possibilities.  Maybe Facebook needs the money, although Inside Facebook projects that the social media powerhouse could boost ad revenues from an estimated $700 million in 2009 to a whopping (estimated) $1.1 billion in 2010. Why estimated? Facebook does not release their advertising revenues. So, maybe those “Who Googled You?” ads are working perfectly…

Some of the ads are so poorly targeted (or wholly un-targeted) that I report the ads as offensive.

In case you’re unaware of this “featurette,” Facebook allows users input as to which ads they like or dislike, and why. You can mark the ads as misleading (no one really Googled me), offensive (that chick’s a whore), or just poorly targeted (irrelevant). While it’s not a perfect system, the reasoning behind it is brilliant; the more information you give away, the better Facebook’s advertisers are able to reach you.

Overall, it’s a pretty sweet marketing tool for all involved because it provides you, the user, a vote. There isn’t another ad medium in the world that does that, my friend, so take advantage of it. If you are easily offended, mark the ad that way; I actually mark quite a few as “offensive,” but I’m not easily offended. I do it because I learned that “offensive” seems to be the  single voting button that guarantees an ad won’t show up again. Don’t tell Facebook, though, or they’ll take it away.

As Facebook gathers more information about you, your surfing habits, and your online behaviors, they’ll be able to cross tabulate the data with information that’s related to your demo- and- pyschographic profile. (Demographic information is your age, income range, highest level of education, race, and etc. Pyschographic data is comprised of your opinions, attitudes, and activities.) Over time, the information becomes an accurate picture of who you are and what you buy, allowing advertisers to serve ads to you for items you may actually purchase.

Think about that for a second. Instead of searching for a product, you might just see something that you want to buy on your profile page.

While the following statement may seem obvious, it’s nearly impossible to predict:

“The simple idea is that advertising influences the brand-choice of consumers who are in the market for the product. It’s about how we think advertising works.” [emphasis: mine]

- Erwin Ephron, the man behind is the concept of recency.  Even simpler, take only the emphasized words:

Advertising influences consumers who are in the market…

Pay attention, this is important! If advertisers had the ability to engage us at the exact moment we decide to enter the market, sales would skyrocket. Pay attention to what they come up with next.

We are taking a break from our regularly scheduled programming today in order to honor (and attend) the Second Annual Shorty Awards! The awards ceremony will honor the best represented personalities and social media elites on Twitter, and all winners will give their acceptance speeches in 140 characters or less. Please join us virtually (or vicariously) by going to the official site to watch the streaming video of the ceremony, beginning at 7:30pm EST tonight. You can also follow the @ShortyAwards on Twitter and Facebook.

For more background on the ceremony, please revisit Rocky’s post on the nominees! Join us later in the week for all of the insider details too hot for other social media news sites (we may even name names and provide photographic evidence of debauchery…).

Stay tuned!

No one cares if you’re a Mac or a PC. There is no such thing as being a Mac or being a PC, and anyone who says otherwise is a complete fanboy who needs to grow up and realize that we live in a world where the work that we do is more important than what we do that work on. Computers are computers, whether it has a glowing Apple on its back or not. No one cares, just like an idiot is still an idiot whether they’re rich or poor.

Yes, I’m typing this out on a Mac, but that’s because it’s my primary computer at the moment. However, I could just as easily get a PC and do the same thing.

Owning a “premium” computer that costs nearly double that of a PC will not make you produce better content. I’ve been using my MacBook for almost three years and after switching to Mac, I was convinced that I did better work on Apple’s computers. For the last few years, I’ve deluded myself into thinking, because of my affiliation with the Mac, that I was superior to all my friends who were banging out on their ugly Dells and HPs. How wrong I have been and I am glad that I’ve realized it before it’s too late. My work flow may have improved significantly because of OS X’s more manageable interface, but it doesn’t mean I’ve produced better material.

Some people will say that a beautiful piece of hardware inspires them to create wonderful content and, for a short bit of time, I bought that bullshit too. I was so high from drinking Apple’s Kool-Aid that I completely forgot that I once wrote great articles on a PC (a lousy one at that, a Windows ME).

Apple’s “Get a Mac” commercials with their infamous “Hello, I’m a Mac. And I’m a PC” slogan, starring Justin Long and John Hodgman, would like you to think otherwise. Their iconic commercials have been airing since 2006 and have done nothing but fan the flames between Mac and PC users. Often witty and humorous, Cupertino’s ad agency has really created a cult following through these commercials. It’s not pretty.

The problem is that they’re giving off the wrong impression. Completely trashing the competition wreaks of the “ruthlessness” that is often ascribed to Apple CEO, Steve Jobs himself. People say this guy is a visionary, but it’s always his way or the highway. As well outlined in the recent fallout over including Adobe Flash on the iPad, Jobs dissed Flash as a “CPU hog” that is often the culprit for crashing Macs and called it a “dying technology.”

In the 21st century, being computer literate is much more important than siding with a brand. With the web now the central purpose of computing, being a Mac or PC is even more irrelevant. Knowing how to use services and programs to the best of your ability is what counts.

With that said, I ask everyone to stop this madness now and denounce being a Mac or a PC. One doesn’t make you any better than the other. Taking sides just shows what an idiotic fanboy you are.

When we think of social networking tools, the obvious choices that come to mind are Facebook, Twitter, and (perhaps) MySpace. They  follow a somewhat similar format; you can add your own media (music, pictures, links, etc.), there’s a place for you to give everyone the 411 on what you’re up to or who you are, but more importantly, you can socially network. Your friends or people you awkwardly added to your friends list can interact with you and vice versa. You can even follow people or have them follow you, despite how unbelievably creepy that sounds. So when I first heard Chatroulette being mentioned in this arena, I really began to wonder…is this really a social networking tool?

Here are some things you should know about Chatroulette.  First, unlike Facebook, Twitter, and MySpace, there is an age restriction to Chatroulette -  you must be 16 and over to enter. Secondly, anything goes for the most part. Despite the weak warning from the site, anything you do is really all good unless someone reports it. You can see an Al Gore masked man, followed by boobs, followed by some American troops stationed overseas who are just as curious about Chatroulette as you are. Thirdly, this was invented by a 17-year old boy in Moscow, yet the servers for the company are in Germany. Why Germany? Because it’s halfway between the United States and Russia (there’s something oddly politically poetic in that precise planning).

But, I digress. As much as I wanted to shun Chatroulette from the realm of social networking and put it in the category of short term novelty/failed speed dating site, I have to admit, there is some social networking going on there. I don’t just get a link to a rockers music – she can play it for me live. I don’t need to look for the latest pictures; there’s a live feed of your face. And I don’t need to add a comment on a wall and wait for a response. I can tell that strange Asian guy in a bra “Dude, that bra is working for you.” In a way, I am social networking.

It is nowhere near as organized as one of the other major social networking sites, but it works, and maybe it’s better. Socially interacting with total strangers seems to be a bold move, but it’s strangely making the world a smaller place which seems to be the overall goal for social networking sites. In the end, Chatroulette might not be the prettiest person at the party, but it’s the one you’ll have the most fun with.

Out of the myriad of social media choices, the most simple and intuitive choice would have to be  Twitter. While I admit that figuring it out at the beginning was puzzling for about five minutes, there weren’t problems setting up my account or figuring out how to use the service. Minutes after I joined, I sent my first tweet and waited. Nothing. However, over time, my following started to grow. Then I learned out how to figure out which accounts were spamming me with porn links and others that were bots. That same night I learned out how to change the background, use the privacy settings, and interact with FriendFeed and Facebook. Simple.

I’m no genius, so I tend to assume that when a company begins to engage in social media, they probably have some idea of what they’re doing.

Wrong! On nearly a weekly basis, news of company’s botched foray into social media is posted on sites and blogs in cyberspace. I have to wonder if anyone reads the thousands of blogs written by the thousands of knowledgeable people on how to begin a social media account. It isn’t, after all, rocket science.

Companies begin social media engagement for a variety of reasons – they’re told to by a boss, it’s imperative for their business (ad agencies take note), or they’ve realized that there are several new marketing channels available for their products. It’s also possible that they dive in because they read, or heard, that it was important.

Thus, with little-to-no research or thought, off they go, creating Twitter accounts, Facebook pages, and blogs until it’s so confusing that it’s easier to just scrap everything and start over than to fix the damage that’s been done. Then, there are those well-meaning companies that are just too damn cautious, waiting by the side of the pool until they’re sure it’s safe. Slowly building their courage by watching others, they leap head-first into shallow water…

This is exactly what befell Denny’s. The restaurant, known for their all-day breakfast and 24-hour operation, added their social media “cool” right onto their menus in every Denny’s located in the United States. Denny’s, now hip social media hep-cats, asked their customers to join the conversation, inviting them to follow @Dennys. Unfortunately, the link didn’t lead to Denny’s the restaurant, but to Dennys, a dude located in Taiwan.

Unfortunately, the Dennys in Taiwan is not open 24-hours (I don’t think…), and he doesn’t serve any food.

Not only was this accident a huge waste of money (menus in every restaurant!), but a marketing blunder that portrays Denny’s not as a cool social media company, but as one that seems to know nothing about social media whatsoever.

The lesson? Before advertising your Twitter account (or any account), make sure that:

1. It’s registered to you or your company
2. You’ve tested it, and it works

If there’s any doubt as to your account’s availability, use a web service such as KnowEm to find out. If you believe that someone is squatting on your brand name and is doing it for some sort of monetary gain, notify Twitter and they’ll toss Dennys right out of Denny’s…

Twitter is antisemitic. At least that’s what I thought this past weekend, when #jewishrapnames, a random hashtag I started using early Saturday morning, blew up all over the 140 character micro-messaging service hours later. I began a series of tweets around 3am Saturday morning. The first one was “50 Schpent #jewishrapnames.” What followed were a few more tweets from myself and followers. In all, perhaps 50 names were tweeted with the tag. I thought nothing of it and by 5am was fast asleep. But when I woke up in the afternoon on Saturday, I saw a few @ replies from people who normally never reply to me, and thought maybe I was onto something.

Around 8pm on Saturday night, I started sending #jewishrapnames tweets into the Twitterverse again. The same core group of followers from the night before began adding and retweeting them. Within an hour, a Twitter search for #jewishrapnames yielded many results. It seemed as if just sitting on the search page would show that there were roughly 10 tweets coming in per minute. Not enough for a trending topic, right? At this point I decided to keep going and kept tweeting, realizing the hashtag was catching on. Another hour passed and after @SamanthaRonson got in on the act, her one million+ followers all joined in. At that point, it seemed as if there were tweets coming in every second.

By midnight Saturday, the real time results from Trends Map was showing #jewishrapnames trending in New York City, San Francisco, and globally in a few different countries. Suffice it to say, I wasn’t able to take a screenshot of where it was trending at the time (silly me), so the real time results are a little sketchy as of now. But a Twitter search will still yield over 100 pages of results. That’s a lot of tweets. Is it enough to become a trending topic? Perhaps.

My timeline was inundated with #jewishrapnames tweets. In fact, the entire night, there was nary a tweet from anyone having to do with anything else. I could see that the hashtag was trending in NYC, but by 1:30am Sunday morning, it was gone. Why? The search feed on the Jewish Rap Names website was still showing hundreds of tweets coming in by the minute.

Then I got to thinking, I’d never really seen anything religion or God-driven subject in the twitter trending topics. Was Twitter blocking #jewishrapnames because it had the word Jewish in it? My research turned up the fact that last October, the hashtag “No God” became a trending topic behind atheists’ efforts to mobilize on Twitter. Still, I’m not so sure that I’d need an army of Jewish supporters to make #jewishrapnames trend. Why it disappeared from twitter, and why it didn’t at least trend worldwide during its peak around 1am Saturday night is still beyond me. Could it be an antisemitic force at work? Perhaps it’s the same force that keeps @Jesus_M_Christ’s #JesusAfterDark from trending. Are religious topics allowed as long as they cannot be misconstrued as inflammatory? I guess we’ll know the real answer when #ShabbatShalom starts picking up steam.

Editor’s note: Official requests from Twitter for information regarding trending topics/hashtag rules went unanswered.

After a long history of hardships, Haitians are now enduring a long and disastrous aftermath from last month’s most severe natural disaster in current history. The death toll is estimated at over a quarter million, the damages exceeding those of the Asian tsunami in 2004, and the costs are billions more than that of Katrina. Being one of the poorest Third World countries, Haiti is no stranger to suffering, with poverty, disease, debt, and a long list of political problems with dictatorship having existed for decades.

With their previous beloved leader, Aristide, sent into exile and the current president, René Préval, walking around in a daze, the Haitian people are short-handed on powerful leaders, and are relying on short form aid instead. Relief efforts for the massive destruction and displacement of Haitians are endless, and the partnering of big brand relief organizations with social media sites could make the overwhelming process more efficient. But for real-time news about the relief progress and inside perspectives from locals in Haiti, social media networks are revolutionizing the way we stay informed. By following local publishers, donors are empowered to make more informative decisions on how to help.

Although the Red Cross has the most branding power and continues to receive millions more in donations than any other agency, there are many more organizations with progressive, innovative approaches that hold a certain expertise. Questioning the legitimacy of an organization with an unknown name is only logical; there are predators who are using this ravaged country as an excuse to wring cash out of well intentioned donors. The less informed the donor, the more likely their funds will go to familiar agencies like Red Cross and UNICEF. There have been debates of pooling U.S. disaster funds to spread the help to other organizations that are more specialized, yet it doesn’t seem like a timely solution to what needs immediate attention.

There are easy ways to donate and some sponsors are doing it for you. If you become a follower of the Clinton Bush Haiti Fund by March 2^nd, Rudy’s BBQ will automatically donate fifty cents to CBHF. (You can participate via the CBHF Twitter account). You can also sport your support with a Fashion for Haiti t-shirt (@fashionforhaiti on Twitter). New York community group To Haiti With Love, is asking artists to create and donate. Art will then be auctioned off via their website, tohaitiwithlove.co.uk. Also, if you are an eBay shopper, you can automatically donate during your checkout.

To read what people on the ground in Haiti are saying and to learn about other ways you can help and become a part of the plan, check out the publishers and citizen journalists below on Twitter:

http://twitter.com/MakHaitian

http://twitter.com/mediahacker

http://twitter.com/firesideint

http://twitter.com/RAMhaiti