I’ve been doing some research on data visualization lately. And infographics (love ‘em or hate ‘em), are perhaps the best known format for visually representing large sets of data. They allow content creators to take complicated subjects and distill the most important points and themes out of all the complexity.

The problem with infographics, however, is that they can be notoriously expensive to produce, in terms of both time and dollars. For this reason, many tools are now available that enable low-cost, do-it-yourself infographic production. Visual.ly is one of the most well-known. But right now, my favorite tool is Piktochart.  I created the infographic below while testing out Piktochart. It’s sort of a visualization of my recent career experiences. It took me about an hour to produce.

Think about that: one hour to produce.

Now granted, I had my data points handy (via my resume), so my data collection costs were non-existent. But in my experience, design costs are the most significant expenses associated with new infographic projects (Of course, good design is worth the money. But budgets are tight.).

Would a tool like Piktochart help lower the costs of our your content marketing efforts? If so, give it a look. And check out my infographic below, which encapsulates a handful of accomplishments from my current role. I’d love to heard what you think of it.

Top secret iPhone photo?

Sometimes the world needs a superhero. And with Apple slated to release the next iPhone within weeks, now might be one of those times — at least for fans of technology and gadget news. Rumors are swirling about the latest smartphone from Cupertino, and it’s hard to keep up with all of the predictions.

For example, major tech blogs are reporting that a new dock connector is likely, and that Apple will finally support LTE. But a lot of questions remain unanswered: Will the device have an NFC chip? Will it be called the “iPhone 5,” or not? And will Apple release an iPad Mini alongside the iPhone?

One could spend hours scouring news outlets for information, in an attempt to make sense of these rumors – and still come away confused.

Enter the Drunk Hulk – one of of the strongest, most entertaining — and yes, most inebriated — heroes in the world. In 2011, Time Magazine named him as one of the 140 best feeds on Twitter, where he shares his perspective on the world’s top headlines related to technology, politics, entertainment and other topics:

SNOOKI IN LABOR! NEIL ARMSTRONG JUST DIE AND ALL HIS HARD WORK ALREADY CANCEL OUT!

— DRUNK HULK (@DRUNKHULK) August 25, 2012

Having interviewed Drunk Hulk in the past, and in need of some real insightful analysis, I sought him out again to discuss the latest iPhone rumors. Here is the transcript of our interview:

Hi, Drunk Hulk, thanks for joining me again. First things first. If you had a $1 million to bet on what Apple will call the next iPhone, how would you place your bet? Will it be the “iPhone 5,” the “new iPhone,” or something else altogether?

THEY SHOULD NO CALL IT mePHONE PART FIVE! PART FIVE NEVER GOOD! HERE IS SCIENCE TO BACK UP CLAIM! FRIDAY 13TH PART 5 SO BAD THAT JASON NO EVEN IN IT! HARRY POTTER AND ORDER OF PHOENIX! DAVE CLARK FIVE! ERNEST RIDES AGAIN! JOHNNY NUMBER 5! NEXT DIE HARD MOVIE! NO GET DRUNK HULK STARTED ON PARTY OF FIVE!

FOR ONE MILLION DOLLAR! DRUNK HULK PREDICT THEY CALL IT mePHONE 5: FACE OF DEATH!

The next iPhone is rumored to have a different form factor, and a larger screen. With some Android phones sporting huge screens that border on tablet-like dimensions, is this a step in the right direction for Apple?

BIGGER SCREEN IS BETTER! HOW DRUNK HULK SUPPOSE KNOW YOU IMPORTANT AT COFFEE SHOP UNLESS YOU HAVE BIG SCREEN ON YOU mePHONE 5: FULLY LOADED?!

Is that rain, Drunk Hulk?

Apple has been promoting Siri heavily. Many iPhone owners, however, have complained that the voice-activated assistant has failed to deliver on its promise. Will the next iPhone include a more useful version of Siri?

FRANKLY! CONSIDERING SHE TOM CRUISE DAUGHTER! AND CRAZY RICH! DRUNK HULK SURPRISE SIRI WORK AT ALL! ESPECIALLY FOR mePHONE 5: DREAM CHILD!

The next iPhone will replace Google Maps with a new default mapping application, called Maps. Do you think it will be a suitable replacement for Google Maps, and will you trust it to get you home after a few drinks?

WOW! APPLE REALLY WENT OLD SCHOOL! DRUNK HULK REMEMBER MAPS! YOU SEE KIDS! BEFORE THERE WAS GOOGLE MAPS! THERE WAS MAPS! MAPS WAS LARGE SHEET OF PAPER THAT ONCE UNFOLD WAS IMPOSSIBLE TO REFOLD! DRUNK HULK GUESS HIPSTERS WILL LOVE MAPS! BECAUSE THEY WERE NEVER COOL TO BEGIN WITH! DRUNK HULK CAN NO WAIT TO USE MAPS ON mePHONE 5: FINAL FRONTIER!

Another rumor making the rounds is that the next iPhone will support Near Field Communication (NFC). If this materializes, will it spur a new era of innovation around mobile payments?

NEAR FIELD COMMUNICATION? WHAT ABOUT IF DRUNK HULK WANT COMMUNICATE WITH SOMEONE ON FAR FIELD? THIS SEEM LIKE TERRIBLE MISTAKE! IF IT NEAR FIELD! DRUNK HULK CAN WALK OVER AND TALK IN PERSON! DRUNK HULK MORE WORRY ABOUT COMMUNICATING WITH GUY IN FAR FIELD!

HEY APPLE! YOU REALLY DROP BALL ON mePHONE 5: FIELDS OF TERROR!

iPhone sales, in millions

Apple might sell more than 50 million new iPhones over the holiday quarter, and over 250 million units over the device’s lifetime. With demand for the next iPhone expected to be so heavy, will you be camping out overnight to buy one as soon as it becomes available?

LAST TIME DRUNK HULK CAMP OUT ALL NIGHT FOR SOMETHING AMAZING! DRUNK HULK DISCOVER JAR JAR BINKS! SO UNLESS DRUNK HULK HAPPEN TO PASS OUT IN FRONT OF APPLE STORE NIGHT BEFORE! DRUNK HULK WILL NOT BE CAMPING OUT FOR mePHONE 5: NEW BEGINNING!

While we’re on the subject of Apple, let’s talk about technology patents. Apple is involved in patent litigation with Samsung, Motorola, and others. And with other innovative technology giants such as Facebook, Amazon and Google devoting significant resources to patent disputes, it’s time to ask: Are technology patents promoting, or inhibiting, innovation?

Drunk Hulk

DRUNK HULK NO EXPERT! BUT THIS REMIND DRUNK HULK OF TIME WHEN DRUNK HULK GO ON TWTTER! AND THEN THERE HUNDRED OTHER HULKS ON TWITTER! AND DRUNK HULK SAY, “HEY! DRUNK HULK FIRST! GIVE DRUNK HULK BILLION DOLLAR!” AND THEY LAUGH AT DRUNK HULK IN 140 CHARACTER OR LESS!

NOW THAT DRUNK HULK THINK ABOUT IT! MAYBE APPLE GETTING READY FOR mePHONE 5: INFERNO! OR TAKE SAMSUNG MONEY AND MAKE mePHONE 5: ASSIGNMENT: MIAMI BEACH!

Hulk, thanks again for your time and insights.

YOU MOST WELCOME! CAN NO WAIT FOR mePHONE 5: FIGHT TO FINISH!

So there you have it — analysis of the latest Apple rumors from the Drunk Hulk (Who, by the way, is the creation of Christian A. Dumais, a writer whose work I highly recommend; you should also check out his TEDxWroclaw talk). As Drunk Hulk infers above, fifth-generation movie titles are rarely any good. With all the rumored changes to the fifth-generation iPhone, it remains to be seen whether the device suffers the same fate.

What do you think about the Drunk Hulk’s assessment of the issues above? Let me know with a comment below!
Follow @shanebarnhill

Few topics arouse as much fierce debate as Klout, the company which claims to provide a standard measure for individuals’ online influence. Perhaps politics. Or religion. But unlike debates about the latter two topics, which often center around larger world views regarding morality, economics, and the role of institutions, Klout is a different animal.

I don't have much Klout.

Klout is personal. It’s a number. Right next to your face. Scoring your supposed value.

This little number bothers a great number of people, either because it (bizarrely) impacts their sense of self-worth, or because it invokes a competitive urge to outrank friends and colleagues.  Naturally, this leads detractors to criticize Klout’s scoring algorithm, its mechanism for correlating topics with individuals, and its relevance as a gauge for real world influence.

Much has been written about these deficiencies, but my favorite assessment is by Jeff Moriarty, who writes, “The problem is that social influence is a hideously tricky thing to measure.” Jeff then goes on to describe how, in the past, Klout pegged him as an expert on terrorism. Now, I don’t know Jeff very well. But I’ve met him several times, and from what I can tell, he’s a smart, hardworking guy who is very involved with a lot of projects that benefit the Phoenix community. He hardly seems like a terrorist, and as his blog post explains, he’s obviously not one — despite what Klout may have purported.

And like Jeff, Klout thinks that I’m influential on topics that aren’t among my areas of expertise. They include: Walmart (a store I visit maybe 1-2 times per year), Spain (a place I’ve never been), and Tim Tebow (a person who I tweet about only occasionally, in order to goad a friend of mine into a reaction). Keep these three topics in mind, because I’ll return to them in a moment. But suffice it to say that I know little about each one.

However, despite Klout’s struggles, it’s not time to write off its value.

Case in point: Michael Arrington, who mocked Klout in a past blog post, titled, “My Detailed Thoughts On Klout.” The post contained exactly one word, meant to summarize all the gnashing of teeth over Klout scores and topics: “Why?” But even a skeptic such as Arrington has changed his tune.

Earlier this month, Arrington posted an about-face regarding Klout. Extolling Klout’s value, Arrington announced that his CrunchFund venture capital firm had invested in the service. Arrington writes:

“They’ve relaunched the product and a lot of the tricks that people used to game the system are gone… Klout will have a constant, ongoing battle in fighting gaming. But that’s ok. Google is in a constant fight defending the integrity of PageRank, too. And yet we find it interesting. Klout is very much like a PageRank for people and things. And it can be much more useful than just helping companies hand out perks.

First, there’s a lot of data being collected and processed by Klout. A staggering amount of data about people and things from a wide variety of social services.”

So you see, Klout’s just not that into you.

And really, it never was. To expand on Arrington’s point, Klout’s not into serving you, it’s into serving the data about you to companies that can use it for all sorts of purposes, ranging from helping brands target people who like to converse about specific topics, to potentially serving as a data source for other forms of advertising.

Klout’s business model shouldn’t — and probably doesn’t — come as a surprise to people who understand the value of data for targeting ads to consumers. So big deal, right? Klout’s like a lot of other businesses that offer data for customer segmentation?

Kind of, but it’s different in one important way. Klout’s data isn’t unique as a data source for demographic information. It’s more valuable a source of information about: (1) The willingness of specific individuals to spread the word about specific topics, and (2) Whether their viewpoints are perceived as insightful when they do spread the word. So Klout’s data is less about who people are, and more about what topics they’re willing to engage around.

Purchase Funnel (click for source)

Think about the marketing funnel. Klout’s data helps out with awareness initiatives at the top of the funnel (as do Facebook ads), by helping brands target people (I won’t call them influencers, necessarily) who will spread these brand messages via social media channels. By comparison, Google AdWords is geared toward helping companies with sales closures at the bottom of the funnel.

But I digress, so let’s get back to the subject of whether Klout has value (Hint: it does).

Klout scores are yet another valuable data point for digital marketing and brand managers, especially in light of today’s resource constraints.

Unemployment in the United States is currently north of 8%, and the underemployment rate, defined by the Wall Street Journal as “people who want to work but haven’t looked in the last four weeks because they figured no jobs were available and those working part-time gigs but would prefer full-time positions,” is above 15%.

What does this have to do with Klout? Well, despite record profits for many large corporations, it’s clear that a lot of the jobs shed by companies during the recent Great Recession aren’t coming back — at least not in the near future. And thus, marketers today are having to do more with less. Fewer people, but with more powerful tools and technologies.

The data from these technologies, of which Klout is just one — think of data from CRM systems, marketing automation systems, social media monitoring systems, etc., as others — is being aggregated by marketing managers in order to analyze audiences and plan campaigns. So that’s just it: Klout is one of many data points used by marketers today to help them conduct efficient audience analyses, at a time when they can’t rely on a sizable team to do this kind of work. That’s why Klout scores are now available in Radian6, for example. It provides additional context for data analysts tasked with analyzing online conversations about brands.

But this doesn’t excuse Klout’s inaccuracies, right? Don’t incorrect topic/person correlations and influence scoring actually make it harder for marketers?

It makes the data imperfect, yes. But imperfect is not the same thing as “not valuable.” Consider the data on website traffic from sources such as Alexa, Compete, Doubleclick and Google Trends. It’s widely understood that these tools provide inaccurate data that may vary widely from what a website manager will see in Google Analytics. And yet, as Kristi Hines writes on the KISSmetrics blog, “Are these sites 100% accurate? No, they’re not. But they all offer some good data that you can use for competitor research.”

This takeaway applies to Klout. It may not perfectly quantify topical influence for each individual, but it indicates an individual’s willingness to talk about a subject. And this signal of willingness is important for marketing managers.

This, in turn, brings me back to the three topics that I mentioned above: Walmart, Spain and Tim Tebow. Am I, as Klout has posited, an influencer on any of these topics? No, not at all. But have I demonstrated a willingness to discuss them online? Yes, I have.

Regarding Walmart, I do sometimes refer to it on Twitter as the future epicenter of the zombie apocalypse (I don’t hold it in high esteem). I also wrote a blog post titled, “Facebook is Walmart, and We Love Boutiques,” in which I examine negative reactions to Facebook’s acquisition of Instagram. Similarly, on Twitter, I have praised Spain’s Olympic basketball team as a worthy competitor to the U.S. team. Lastly, during NFL season, I frequently link to stories about Tim Tebow’s successes, but in a playful way to torment a friend who despises Tebow.

So clearly, Klout has picked up on something here. It has correctly identified some level of interest, on my part, in these topics.

Sometimes #tebowing lacks context (click for source)

But what Klout is missing, for now, is context.

Klout sees that I have interest in Walmart, but it lacks an appreciation of my mindset. It has also identified some interest in Spain, albeit lacking the specificity that my interest is only related to its basketball prowess. Finally, Klout knows that I’m willing to link to articles about Tim Tebow, but it misses my associated attempts at humor.

Imagine if (or rather, when) Klout closes the context gap. The value of its data will grow exponentially. And there is good reason to think Klout may eventually get there, because the team behind the tool is continually refining it. As Sarah Lacy of PandoDaily writes about Klout’s latest re-tooling:

“Klout does something very impressive if you step back and think about it. A relatively small team of people crunch 12 billion points of data everyday across every open, active Twitter profile they can get their data-grubbing paws onto, some 100 million profiles. That’s equivalent to one-third of the US population. And that challenge only grows as more people are creating more data every single day. The fact that Klout can come close to making sense of all that should be considered a coup.

The new version is taking into account real world influence — through a combination of bringing in 12 times more data points everyday, and taking into account things like Wikipedia pages and weighting LinkedIn profile data higher.”

The takeaway here is that Klout is surfacing a set of signals from an enormous amount of information, and it’s getting better by broadening its pool of data. As “real world” sources — and potentially contextual cues — become integrated with Klout’s existing data sources, its end product increases in value.

Value. For brands. Not necessarily for you.

Klout, then, is another example of the increasingly understood (and increasingly trite) rule that “If You’re Not Paying For It, You Become The Product.” Klout is just a set of data points, one set among a broad array of data points that marketing managers are using — that they need to use — in light of the resource shortages that are plaguing organizations of all sizes. The team behind the service is continuing to refine it, and additional rounds of funding from investors such as CrunchFund will only provide the Klout team with the resources necessary to make it more valuable.

But not necessarily for individuals. Because, despite the big, bold numbers next to our faces, and the perks that companies are awarding us based on them, it’s really not about us.

Thus, you may hate Klout. But as Joe Fernandez, the CEO of Klout, says, “At least we’re relevant.” Because Klout is. Maybe just not for you.

Follow @shanebarnhill

I’m pleasantly surprised to read the news that Dalton Caldwell’s audacious proposal for a user-funded, ad-free alternative to Twitter has reached its funding goal. A week ago, it didn’t look like Caldwell would fetch the minimum target of $500,000 worth funding that he’d set as a requirement for launching — or rather pivoting — App.net. But he did, and it’s an achievement with potentially significant ramifications.

App.net looked certain to miss its funding target

Why is App.net so important? Simply put, it reflects a growing frustration with the insidious nature of advertisements on social networks. While many people are now able to tune out traditional banner and sidebar advertisements, social ads are constantly evolving. And as social networks like Facebook, Twitter and even Tumblr struggle to find viable business models and appease investors, so-called in-stream advertisements are becomingly increasingly common.

Evidence suggests that they’re working, which will only embolden those charged with generating revenue for social networks.

Don’t get me wrong. I don’t have a problem with in-stream ads that enhance, or at least don’t worsen, my overall user experience on a platform. My experience as a user (and yes, I’m aware that if I’m not paying for something, then I’m its product) is especially important to me as I spend more and more time accessing social networks — and the Internet in general — on mobile devices. In-stream ads need to be subtle on small screens in order to avoid becoming disruptive.

In my experience, however, subtlety is fading away (see the screen shot from Facebook’s iOS app). Which sucks. And so it’s time for a new approach, one in which advertisements aren’t crammed into every nook and cranny of screens both small and large. It’s time for social networking leaders to think different.

In-stream overload.

And that’s where App.net comes in, as a paid service that puts the interests of users first. Caldwell’s idea may or may not succeed — and some smart people are on the record in saying that it’s likely to fail — but I’m still hopeful. And thus, I’ve put my money where my mouth is, by backing the App.net project as part of its Member Tier.

I’m helping to fund App.net, in hopes that becomes a great service. But more importantly, I’m funding an idea, one that is best expressed in the words of former Facebook employee Jeff Hammerbacher: “The best minds of my generation are thinking about how to make people click ads. That sucks.”

Yes, it certainly does. For all of us.

While in-stream advertisements won’t (and shouldn’t) go away entirely, they need to remain minimally obtrusive. But within the streams of my social networking apps, they’re trending in the opposite direction. So perhaps there’s a place for App.net’s user-funded business model.

I certainly hope so. But what about you?

Follow @shanebarnhill

I’m bullish on Redmond again.

Don’t call me a Microsoft fanboy, though. If anything, it would be easier to accuse me of Apple fanboy-ism. I own an iPhone, an iPad, an iPod, and a second iPad for family use. I even have a company-issued iPad for mobile-related projects at work. I just want the best technology products available, and right now — at least in my opinion — those all come from Apple. Though, to be fair, Android-based smartphones — across of a variety of hardware manufacturers — have a larger share of the smartphone market.

Regardless of your preference for Apple or Android, however, it’s clear that Microsoft — along with Research in Motion (RIM) — has a lot to lose as consumer preferences influence enterprise buying decisions. A Cisco study, in fact, reported that 88% of IT leaders are seeing increased growth of Bring Your Own Device (BYOD ) policies, which allow employees to choose their own work-related computer hardware. A lot of this is driven by intense consumer demand for Apple products, and to some extent higher-end Android smartphones from Samsung and other manufacturers.

Standard-issue BlackBerrys and cheap laptops are under attack. This situation is problematic for organizations concerned with cost containment and data security, however, as IT begins to lose oversight of the devices that employees connect to company networks.

Enter the Microsoft Surface tablet.

It runs Windows, with all the familiar Office applications (at least the Pro version does). It has a keyboard. It’s secure. Essentially, the device is a touch-screen laptop in a tablet’s clothing. Some commentators have gone so far as to say that the Surface isn’t even truly competing with the iPad.

From a perception standpoint, then, the Surface tablet is poised to solve a huge issue that CIOs and other executives have with BYOD, and more specifically, with the invasion of iPads into their previously tightly-controlled environments.

The problem: CIOs are deeply concerned with controlling their device footprints.

As companies deploy mobile devices (especially tablets) to mobile workers in sales, event management, on-site tech support and other functions, the number of devices that require IT oversight begins to creep uncomfortably upward. Each incremental device on a company network increases the cost to serve an employee base, and the last time I checked, CIOs weren’t complaining about budget surpluses.

CIOs want to keep the ratio of devices per employee at 2:1, or lower, in order to control costs. Consequently, the refrain that I’ve started to hear from IT leadership, then, goes (facetiously) something like this, “Sure, I’ll grant your request for an iPad. Just let me know which device you’ll give up in return — your laptop, or your phone.”

The tablet-for-a-laptop trade-off just isn’t a legitimate option for most employees. Let’s face it: the iPad is better-suited for consuming information, rather than creating it. For browsing the web, checking email, watching videos and using apps, the iPad is a great device. It just works. However, specialized apps and hardware (e.g. keywords) are often needed for content creation, data security, enterprise email access, and integration with Office applications. Microsoft’s Surface tablet won’t come with these issues, thereby enabling IT leaders to meet the increasing mobility needs of workers while simultaneously controlling costs (by replacing laptops).

Microsoft has an enormous opportunity to disrupt tablet use within enterprises.

While many analysts are focused on comparing the Microsoft Surface to the iPad as a consumer device, Microsoft’s best opportunity to gain early traction with the Surface is likely the enterprise market, a segment in which 80% of the Fortune 100 have deployed iPads for productivity purposes.

RIMM's beaten-down stock (click to enlarge)

But Microsoft has to nail this opportunity out of the gate. A good comparison is RIM, which rushed its highly-anticipated BlackBerry PlayBook tablet to market out of desperation. The PlayBook has been an unmitigated disaster, and has contributed to RIM’s stock price free fall since its release (see chart).

Here’s how Microsoft can get the Surface right, the first time:

1. Make it easy for application developers to build apps that run on one operating system, across smartphones, tablets and laptops/desktops. This is key, and Microsoft is already taking this step.

2. Continue paying app developers to build top apps for Windows devices. Microsoft has been footing the bill for companies such as foursquare to bring versions of popular apps to Windows phone. While this is a highly unusual and expensive approach, it’s strategically brilliant. If Windows devices support most of the top mobile apps, this reduces switching costs for iPhone, iPad, and Android users. Microsoft needs to continue financing app development for makers of popular apps, and sell their accessibility across devices.

3. Get the messaging right. Is the Windows RT model a toy for consumers who want to play with apps? Is the Surface for Windows 8 Pro model aimed toward making workers more productive? There is already confusion regarding the two devices. Microsoft’s Marketing Communications team will need to work hard to market the RT and Pro tablets differently, especially given that many business executives still scoff at iPhones and iPads as “toys.”

4. Leverage its best assets, such as Xbox and Skype. This is a no-brainer. The Surface must — and undoubtedly will — come with seamless Skype integration at launch. What is less clear, however, is how the Surface will connect to the Xbox ecosystem (e.g. Will the Surface eventually double as an Xbox controller?). The Xbox is a unique competitive advantage among players in the tablet space, and Microsoft should play up future connectivity between the two systems.

5. Beat competing devices on price. Microsoft didn’t announce pricing for its two Surface models during its much-ballyhooed launch event. But make no mistake: pricing is critical for the Surface. The Windows RT model should be priced well below the iPad, and the Windows 8 Pro Surface should be priced somewhere between an iPad and a mid-tier laptop. These price points will position the Surface to siphon away market share from iPads and laptops. Pricing is especially important for the Surface’s Pro model, as Microsoft will seek to familiarize business users with its tablets in order to change consumer preferences.

In summary, Microsoft has a better chance at tablet success than many are predicting.

Granted, Microsoft has to get a lot of steps right in order to make a dent in Apple’s dominance of the market for tablets. And there is very little room for error. The first generation of the product has to be amazing in order to convince a skeptical public:

Here’s the how the story ends with the Microsoft Surface: “Zune.”

— Joseph Manna (Joe) (@JoeManna) June 19, 2012

Remember the Microsoft Kin? lol… Remember the Microsoft Zune? lol… Remember the Microsoft Surface? #exactly

— Skylor (@skylor) June 23, 2012

Hey, wasn’t the Atari 400 also a pressure-sensitive keyboard? zd.net/LiKAAJ #surface #microsoft

— Eric Y Lai (@ericylai) June 19, 2012

But it’s because of this skepticism that there’s reason to believe that Microsoft will be successful with the Surface. Unlike RIM’s rushed attempt to build a tablet for enterprise buyers, Microsoft has taken a slow, almost plodding, approach. And now the business case for its resulting product is clear. With a device that enables mobile workers while controlling costs, there is evident ROI for IT departments to justify investing in the Surface.

And I believe they will. So despite what you might think, it’s time to be bullish on Microsoft again. Are you bullish or bearish? Let me know with a comment below.

Follow @shanebarnhill

Note: I had originally written a much harsher critique of Scott Thompson for this post. However, I decided to revise my original article after Thompson revealed, as part of his departure from Yahoo!, that he is fighting thyroid cancer. I wish Thompson well and hope that he makes a full, speedy and complete recovery.

Scott Thompson was ousted as the CEO of Yahoo! recently, and it’s a safe bet that almost nobody outside of his immediate family feels bad for him about the dismissal. The reason? For many people, it’s due to a sense that lying — especially on a resume — is morally wrong and should be punished.

Lying is bad. Is cultural ignorance worse?

But for many people, satisfaction over Thompson’s firing stems from a perception that Yahoo’s recent lawsuit against Facebook is akin to patent trolling. To many observers — venture capitalists, tech journalists, bloggers and customers — Yahoo’s actions reflect an inability to drive shareholder value through innovation, which has instead spawned a desperate attempt to unlock value via unscrupulous means.

This perception is particularly difficult for a company based in Silicon Valley. The region’s culture prizes innovation above most, if not all, attributes. And Thompson is squarely to blame for ignoring this cultural tenet, and instead huddling with consultants to plot strategy and make plans to drain cash away from a true innovator.

The validity of Yahoo’s patents became irrelevant the moment an entire worldview was violated, and Thompson’s BiographyGate became fresh blood in the water for an already-ravenous sea of sharks.

The lesson, then? Well actually there are two.

First, don’t lie. Your parents should have taught you this one, but if you need a refresher, go read The Boy Who Cried Wolf.

Second, cultural ignorance is a dangerous thing. I’ve written about this before, and it applies to a myriad of situations: corporate life, social media channels, etc. Just think about the number of colleagues that you’ve seen exit from organizations because of poor cultural fit. Can you think of several? I can.

But you can roll these two lessons into one. A family friend once told me, “You get no points in life for being a butt.” Remember this one above all. Scott Thompson will.

Agree? Disagree? Let me know below.

Follow @shanebarnhill

Like a lot people, I use lists within Twitter to segment content by topic, or to group together thinkers whom I admire. My favorite list has about 100 sources — both people and news organizations — and each day I read every single Tweet from that stream. On some days, I have to stay up late into the evening to keep up, especially if those sources have linked to a lot of articles. But I do it. Every single day.

So yeah, I read a lot. A lot. Here are some of the best articles that I’ve read this week. I’m posting them here, as a collection, in hopes that you’re able to take away something valuable from them, just as I have.

The Rosenbergs; ‘The Terminal’; ‘Ch-Check It Out’; Ground Zero

Adam Yauch of the Beastie Boys

Description: Letters to the editor from the June 20, 2004 edition of the New York Times. The third letter is from Adam Yauch of the Beastie Boys, who died earlier this week.

Best quote: “And in the process the goat died, and then I had to give the mailman one of my goats, so remember, you owe me a goat.”

140-character (or less) summary: Always keep your sense of humor. Yauch did it, in the face of a harsh review of his work by the mighty NYT. Life lesson.

10 Things Your Commencement Speaker Won’t Tell You

Description: A top-ten list that is useful not only for new graduates, but people of all ages (And okay, I’m cheating a bit with this one, because I actually read this over a week ago. But it inspired me enough to open it back up and read it again this week, so I’m including it in this list).

Best quote: “I know that I’m supposed to tell you to aspire to great things. But I’m going to lower the bar here: Just don’t use your prodigious talents to mess things up.”

140-character (or less) summary: No syrupy, forced inspiration here. And that’s okay. These tips are both practical and though-provoking.

Tap-To-Pay Smartphones: The Coming Near Field Communications Tsunami

Description: A look at the weak value proposition associated with NFC payment technology, and how Apple may be poised to alter it.

Best quote: ”One does not overcome the chicken-and-egg problem by taking it slow.”

140-character (or less) summary: Until now, NFC has been a solution in search of a problem. Apple may build an NFC ecosystem that offers new value.

Put Away The Bell Curve: Most Of Us Aren’t ‘Average’

Description: A fresh look at the bell curve. Is it really useful for categorizing human performance?

Best quote: ”Successful companies and nations would do well to identify superstars, because such performers were disproportionately likely to register new discoveries and achievements.”

140-character (or less) summary: If performance/output doesn’t neatly fit into a bell curve, should we be focusing more on nurturing superstars rather than broader groups?

You’ll never believe how LinkedIn built its new iPad app (exclusive)

Description: For nerds like me, this view into how LinkedIn constructed a hybrid native/HTML5 iPad app is manna from heaven.

Best quote: ”And a lot of that performance, Prasad said, came from removing unnecessary design wankery.”

140-character (or less) summary: 95% of LinkedIn’s iPad app is mobile web and not a native app (95%!). It’s placed neatly w/in a native wrapper, and nobody can even tell.

Taking E-Mail Vacations Can Reduce Stress, Study Says

Description: A look at the connection between email overload, constant connectivity, and stress.

Best quote: ”You probably don’t need a doctor or scientist to tell you this, but your e-mail could be killing you.”

140-character (or less) summary: I hate email. Hate it. And now that I know that it’s bad for me, I’ll give it even less time. Looks like you should stay away from it too.

Austerity, And A New Recession?

Description: An interview with Joseph Stiglitz, an economist who won the Nobel Prize in economics in 2001, on the economic impacts of austerity politics.

Best quote: ”Within academia, those who believed in free markets before the crisis still do so today… Believers in the free market have not revised their beliefs.”

140-character (or less) summary: Have I ever mentioned that I majored in both economics and finance in college? Anyway, political agendas often adversely impact economies.

The articles above represent a sample of the best content that I have read over the past week. And if you’re still reading at this point, then it probably means that you’re an avid reader too. So in that case, I’d love to hear about what you’ve read recently — suggest some links with a comment below!

Earlier this week, Facebook bought Instagram for over $1 billion, and the reaction to its acquisition of the popular photo-sharing social network was both strong and predictable. People hated the move. In a scene reminiscent of Quit Facebook Day, scores of people voiced their frustration via Twitter, and many threatened to delete their Instagram accounts:

time to delete instagram “@instagram: We’re excited to announce something very big: Instagram + Facebook bit.ly/Hslpv2”

— Hamce M (@Napaceni) April 9, 2012

RIP Instagram

— Mike Monteiro (@Mike_FTW) April 9, 2012

Awww…shit, Instagram.

— Andrew Crow (@AndrewCrow) April 9, 2012

But we all know how well Quit Facebook Day turned out, and in fact, news of Facebook’s acquisition has rocketed Instagram to the top spot in the iOS app store.

Regardless, there’s evident frustration here, which provides a clear lesson for all of us: Facebook is Walmart, and we love boutique shops.

Think about it. Facebook is the massive destination that has everything you need, at a level of quality that is just good enough. But Path, EveryMe (and arguably, Google+) allow for easier control of sharing. Twitter nails the interest graph, and Pinterest‘s unique approach to image curation has helped it explode to become the third most popular social network in the United States (so Facebook went out and bought a potential Pinterest killer).

Keep Calm, Instagram Defectors!

But what does this mean for you?

If you’re a marketer, you need to remember that niche networks with tight, interest-based communities are highly-valued by consumers (this shouldn’t be a revelation).  As the large networks like Facebook and Twitter race to the middle with “me too” features that appeal to broader user bases (which I’ve, ahem, written about before), there are opportunities to capitalize on granular interests and use cases. You just may need to work a little harder to find the hangouts of your target audiences.

If you’re an app developer, understand that narrowly-focused, well-designed products that do one thing (or few things) well are prized by consumers. People don’t need another Facebook or Twitter (as those 3 minutes/month they’re spending on Google+ indicate), and they certainly don’t need more location-sharing apps. Plan your strategy accordingly.

In summary, think like a specialty retailer. As an app developer, you’re unlikely to beat Facebook on volume, and as a marketer, there is evident potential for micro-targeting. Use this knowledge to compete more effectively, an tap into the sentiment that Instagram’s user base has expressed loud and clear.

What do you think about the Facebook/Instagram hubbub? I ‘d love to hear your thoughts below (And lastly, I have no plans to delete my Instagram account).

Yesterday, Google released a major update to its search engine and drew the collective ire of the Internet. Dubbed “Search, plus Your World,” the change personalizes search results for people who are signed into their Google accounts. According to Google,

“Search has always brought you information from across the web. Now, search gets better by including photos, posts, and more from you and your friends. When signed in with Google+, you’ll find personal results and profiles of people you know or follow. You can even expand your world by discovering people related to your search.”

Oh, the humanity! Critics have expressed hyperbolic alarm at the move, with many framing the release not only as an anti-competitive move with potential antitrust implications, but also as step towards aggravating non-techie, everyday users of Google’s search engine. Competitors such as Twitter even piled on with fake outrage, ostensibly in defense of individual privacy.

U.S. Mobile Apps vs. Web Consumption, Mins/Day

Yes, this is a big change, and Twitter (among others) has reason to fear the move (read: $$). But the bottom line is that Google desperately needs to counter the rise of social networks as competing destinations for ad spending. And don’t even mention Google’s paranoia regarding the likely release of a competing search product from Facebook.

So I ask, People of the Internet, with your brilliant strategic minds and obvious business acumen, what would you have Google do instead?

Would you have tried to make more money with traditional website display ads, relying on the good ol’ web to stave off the rise of mobile apps? 

Oops. It seems like that wouldn’t be a good plan (Consult the chart from Flurry above).

Would you have advised Google to focus its efforts — and future profitability — on serving up ads within text-based mobile search results?

Oops. You mean you forgot about the imminent threat from Siri (And Kinect, and all inevitable clones of the two across all mobile platforms)?

OS Share of Smartphone Sales (click for source)

Would you have told Google to leverage the unchecked rise of Android?

Oops. You mean Android actually lost 13 percentage points of U.S. smartphone market share last month, while iOS gained 17%?

So go ahead, dear Brilliant Business Strategists of the Internet, who obviously have an amazing alternative strategic plan up your collective sleeve, lend us your keen insights and sage business advice.

I’ll wait here.

Radian6: New Year’s Resolutions Social Media Infographic

Millions of people are about one week into working on their goals/resolutions for the 2012 year. For tech savvy types, these plans may involve learning to code via Codeacademy’s Code Year initiative, or obtaining a new technical certification. For others (aka the “Normals“), plans might center around losing weight, becoming more active, or saving more money (at least that’s what this fantastic infographic from Radian6 shows).

And for me? I’m committed to reading more books, trying new foods, and learning to meditate. But each of those resolutions will be a piece of cake compared with my most ambitious goal for 2012:

I’m going to spend less time on Twitter.

To be clear, I’m not planning to spend less time on social networks. It’s just that I’ll be allocating my time differently. Twitter is great, obviously — it’s become a daily essential for me alongside air, food and water — but it has become relatively less interesting as other apps and/or social networks increasingly pull away my attention.

Like other established heavyweight networks such as Facebook and LinkedIn, Twitter has come to resemble a presidential candidate who has survived a grueling nomination process and must now focus on appealing to a more moderate general electorate. In other words, these social networks are racing to to the middle, adding “me too” features that newer users expect and appreciate.

A couple of examples:

• Facebook’s recent “subscribe” feature that enables individuals — especially public figures — to share public posts with non-friends, providing for asymmetric follower relationships similar to Twitter.
• Twitter’s enhanced profile pages that allow businesses to manage initial consumer impressions, similar to landing tabs on Facebook (yes, I know they’re not actually tabs anymore).

And there are more. This is a good problem for these networks to have, of course. But the need to cater to the expectations of newbies due to mainstream acceptance doesn’t always lead to terribly interesting innovation.

As a consequence, I’m starting to spend less time on the heavyweight social networks. My average time spent on Facebook per day has dropped by about half, and LinkedIn has been relegated to a few visits per week (Yes, I know this is a bad thing. I know.). And Twitter?  I’ve refined my Twitter lists to segment professional connections, news sources and personal relationships. These lists are so finely-tuned now that I keep up-to-date with news related to digital strategy and social media during the day, and scan through tweets from friends when I have free time.

From Instagram: "Opah Carving"

So where will I be spending more of my time online? In place of Twitter, I’m going to commit time to a handful of other apps that are simply more interesting to me right now, such as:

• Pinterest: A self-described “Virtual Pinboard” that facilitates easy sharing of images from across the web via virtual boards. It boasts a phenomenal growth rate – over 5x from September 2010 to December 2011. Here’s my profile.
• Instagram: It’s the fastest-growing mobile social network ever, and it provides an easy means for sharing photos with amazing filter effects.
• Path: Taking a unique approach to social networking, Path caps the number of friends for each member at 150. The focus is on closer, more personal sharing between friends (without the acquaintances and professional colleagues who have started to bleed over into your Facebook friendships).
• Google+: I’ve had the unique experience of recovering from Google+ page suspension; despite that, I’m bullish on its potential. G+ is fresh off of its largest-ever surge in traffic during December 2011, and the Google+ continues to add features to improve the service. Here’s my profile.

In addition to spend more time on these four apps, I have also started up a photo blog on Tumblr, a platform that I adopted early-on and then abandoned a long time ago. I’ve found a reason to give it another shot this year.

Thus, 2012 will be a year of trying out new things and spending less time on the networks — especially Twitter — that have garnered most of my attention over the past couple of years. It’s not just a case of chasing new and shiny objects, either. I view Pinterest, Instagram, Google+ and Path as apps/networks with real staying power, and the first three are especially interesting for brands.

Sometimes, it’s important to look beyond what is mature and proven. It’s certainly more interesting — wouldn’t you agree?