Google’s long awaited entry into the virtual world has taken place in the last week with the launch of their competitor to Second Life, lively.com.  According to the Google blog the initial idea came as they “looked around the social web and wished that it could be less static”.  I’m not quite buying that seen as Second Life has been around for a while now but that
doesn’t mean it isn’t an interesting entrant.  Much like in Second Life you create an avatar for yourself although in Lively.com this is in more of a cartoon vein and in more of a Sims fashion.  You can also create your own rooms within the world and customise their look and decoration.  You can then hang out with your friends in the rooms you create, which brings in the social element.    The interesting part comes with how and where you engage with lively.com.   The system enables you to embed your room into your blog or website, and interact with it directly without the need to visit lively.com.  Whether this is enough of a selling point I am not sure but lively.com will certainly appeal to the youth market more than Second Life and lets face it, the younger generation are much more likely to spend ours chatting to friends online, even more so if they create a cool avatar for themselves in the process.  I was never a big fan of Sims, and never really got into Second Life, so I don’t think Ill be rushing along to set my account up.  But if the Alexa rankings below are anything to go by lively.com could create a bit of a stir in the world of social media.

Was it a plant? Wasn’t it a plant? The guy who posted the video on Youtube and Nintendo claim that there is no link between them and this is not an attempt at social/viral media which has gone wrong. In reality the arguement is unimportant as Nintendo will have benefited massively from the exposure Wii fit has gained through this story so whether it originated from them or not doesn’t actually matter, it is still a huge success. Im not sure whether the viewers on Youtube are marvelling at the technology behind Wii fit but they are showing an interest in something!

Some of the articles relating to this story:

Wii Fit Underwear Girl a Marketing Hoax
Wii Fit YouTube clip gets two million admirers
Wii Fit turns YouTube sensation

And here is the link to the video, I would have embedded it but for some reason it is messing up the page layout!

Wii Fit YouTube Video

I was reading Marketing’s fourth annual survey into the top loved and hated brands and noticed the fickle nature of the public in their views on brands, and undoubtedly linked, their advertising campaigns.  What struck me from the survey, more than the strange appearance of AOL at number 2 in the top 50 hated brands even though their UK profile doesn’t warrant such a high profile spot, was the number of brands named highly in both the most hated, and most loved lists.  In the main list you actually only have two brands appearing in the top 20 of both, these are The Sun and Nokia (via ngage in the most hated), but if you get down into the different tables for the individual markets it is much more apparent.  I suppose you could just argue that the more you drill down by market, the less brands their are and so the more chance of a brand appearing in both lists but if you take such a broad market as “fashion” you would imagine there are enough brands out there to limit duplication.  But yet in this particular category 3 brands appear in the top 5 for both hated and loved!  Topshop is number one hated and number 5 loved, Levi’s is number two loved and number 4 hated, and Next is number one loved and number 3 hated.  How can brands be perceived in such a different way?  Is it simply that such well known and high profile brands are more likely to stir an extreme emotion in users where as slightly lesser brands stay under the radar a little more?  Your guess is as good as mine.  I have listed some of the other occurences of this below, focussing on the digital areas of the survey (as that is the topic of the blog after all!):

Is microsoft about to revive the rumours and constant wondering about Facebook buyouts?  After every billionaire tycoon and his dog were linked with buying the social media phenomenon it has all been quiet for a while.  Now apparently it has come out that Microsoft has put the feelers out about a purchase of the social network.  Full article from search engine watch below:

About Face(book): Microsoft Feels Out Social Network Acquisition

Though Bill Gates was out there telling people Microsoft is not interested in making non-Yahoo acquisitions right now (at least in the search/social world), word comes that Microsoft bankers have sent “feelers” to Facebook about a full acquisition.

Here’s why this is a solid move:

1. Microsoft already owns 1.6% stake in Facebook, worth $240 million
2. Microsoft formed a data portability partnership with Facebook and 4 other networks
3. At least two Google execs have jumped ship to Facebook in recent months

While Facebook has yet to “overtake” MySpace in the social media market, it is a viable competitor. And I’m sure Ballmer would love for Microsoft to own a social network that even Apple has used as a marketing ploy as of late. Recent commercials for the iPhone entice potential customers through the ability to access Facebook on the popular mobile device.

Additionally, internet users are turning to their social networks during their search process. Consumers want answers and reviews and social networks help them get opinions from trusted sources.

The Facebook move would likely be seen by many as a better fit than Yahoo. But expect just as many to see it as a negotiating ploy in their bid for Yahoo. Though Microsoft has officially withdrawn its bid for Yahoo, many analysts expect Ballmer and the team to return to the table for another stab at a grab for the search engine.

Neilsen/Netrankings has released some figures which show a monthly decline in Facebook users for the first time since its launch, before it has even managed to fully leverage its traffic volumes into advertising sales.  Its unique audience dropped 5% from December to January prompting many people predicting the demise and claiming Facebook is a fad which will go away as quickly as it arrived.  Have people really already become Facebored?  Or is it simply inevitable that sooner or later there would be a dip in audience as the users who created an account “just to see what all the fuss is about” disappear back to their own world grumbling that it was a load of rubbish anyway?

Mark Ritson, in his article for Marketing, blames the decline on Facebook’s open door policy.  Since September 2006 Facebook has allowed anybody with a valid email address access to their network which was previously exclusive to US students (and before that just Harvard students).  This is where the influx began and over the last 18 months its user base has just grown and grown, until now!  Ritson uses the analogy of being in a hyper trendy bar with his friend, surrounded by beautiful people, drinking beautiful cocktails, listening to great music, before realising the only thing which spoilt the bar, was them!  Two middle aged blokes with expanding waistlines stood out like a sore thumb and somehow made the place less cool.  By opening its doors to anybody in the world, he argues, Facebook has made itself less cool and exclusive, and the seriously cool people, aren’t going to want to be sent a friend request from their mum or an old school teacher!  They want to hang out in a cool environment which similarly cool people, doing cool things and just generally being cool.

So has Facebook’s open door policy caused this dip and is it to be the demise of the worlds largest social networking site?  I don’t know, but I can say that my usage habits have changed slightly since I added my mum and dad as friends!  I am now a lot more careful about what I post and where I post it, although that doesn’t really change the experience too much.  Personally I would blame the 5% drop on the part time users departing, there had to be a dip at some point and I’m sure that’s how the guys at Facebook will see it. 

What it does say to me is that Facebook need to get their act in gear and make this thing profitable, they have an advertising model in place now should start to reap the rewards but it is still not the finished article.  I feel for them in that they are trying to be innovative and make their ads as unintrusive a possible and this is difficult to do but they must find a way.  They have already been chastised for their beacon system and they probably cant afford another mistake like that.  I just hope for their sake, that they don’t rue missing out on a  slice of their $15 Billion valuation which could start to decline a lot faster than their user base if next months figures aren’t more positive.

I have just come across the Yahoo! Buzzapplication which is currently in beta testing.  From what I can see this is very much like Digg and Sphinn in that users provide articles of interest which are then voted on by the users to push them up the listings. 

Stories are given a “buzz score” which is ”derived from search term popularity, the number of times a story is emailed from Buzz, and the number of votes a story receives.”  Which could add a slight element of mystery if it is more than simply a case of adding the sum of all these parts together.  If it is going to work much like the quality score system in PPC then it may change the game a little and avoid all the spamming which takes place in Digg.  There will apparently be a manual editorial team in place to prevent spamming from taking place but how many and how effective they will be remains to be seen.

The other major twist in the tale is the statement from the site “stories with the highest Buzz Scores may be published on the Yahoo! home page.”  this would make the reach of top performing articles massive and the potential of this new application greater than that of Digg and Sphinn as it goes beyond the user base of the programme itself.  Apparently the same editorial team which will monitor the spam will also be responsible for deciding which stories are worthy of the Yahoo homepage exposure.  It will be interested to see what prominence these articles are given as they are free content and so Yahoo! would potentially be losing out on revenue if they replaced any of the paid placements.

It will be interesting to see how this progresses and whether the exposure on the Yahoo! homepage can make it a bigger property than the more established players in social bookmarking.

An application has been developed which allows you to view your Myspace page through Facebook.  The application, developed by Fuser, allows you to check your messages, bulletins and comments without ever leaving the Facebook site.  for the social hardcore this could be a god send and could also be a big dent to Myspace as it will enable users of both to monitor them through one single website, hence less visitors going to the Myspace site.  If users are beginning to migrate from Myspace to Facebook then this could be the final act which prompts a complete switch as they will be able to keep an eye on their lesser used Myspace page without having to visit it.

Additional information

Mars this week launched a Facebook application which allows users to send their friends the gift of a real life Mars bar.  The “gift” will be in the form of a message which, once opened, asks the recipient to enter their mobile number and from this they will be send an SMS voucher which can be redeemed in a participating store.  Twix, Galaxy, Malteser’s and Mars will all be able to be sent with the sender paying via a Paypal account.  This is a bold venture by the guys at Mars but I cant help but think it is a desperate attempt to get involved in social media by a brand which doesn’t necessarily fit.  I am seeing all to often recently companies who know of the buzz around social networking and decide that “we need to be part of that!”  No thought given to whether their brand or product fits or whether the audience they are trying to engage with is part of the social environment they are considering.

To me, social media, social marketing, social networking or however else you want to term it is about engaging with your audience on a personal level, listening to what they are saying and bringing those learnings back into the business.  Too many people are deciding they want to be part of the social phenomenon without thinking whether it suits them, their audience and their product.  The first questions they should be asking are, what am I looking to achieve? Who am I trying to engage? where are these people interacting? Mars is a border line case and they have probably just about pulled it off but in many cases people are missing the mark by a long way just to be involved in the current craze.

As part of its record breaking 2008 marketing budget Cadbury are planning a follow up to their much loved drumming gorilla advert. According to the latest edition of Marketing the new ad will also feature an animal playing an instrument. The original advert was a major viral success achieving numerous blog postings, massive word of mouth and many a parody on Youtube (you can see some of them here). So the follow up has a hard task following in its footsteps, as do he agency charged with creating the ad. The original one worked well due to the human like actions of a gorilla but I cant see many other animals having the same impact without looking too comical. Answers on a postcard what you think the new animal and instrument will be and heres the original again just for fun!

There have been a couple of posts recently on the social networking weblog about adult social networking sites and the potential for virtual adultery, questioning whether it constituted being unfaithful. I thought I’d delve into this a little more and give it further consideration.

This first article, virtual adultery, briefly discussed the use of social networking sites such as second life and ever quest for building relationship, some innocent, some not so innocent! It then went on to ask whether these relationships constituted adultery. The author and some quoted users didn’t seem to think it did, so long as it didn’t impacted the “real world”. The second article discussed red light center which is a virtual world created purely for engaging with like minded adults and engaging in “adult activities”. This is one step on from the second life example as this platform was set up primarily to engage in “sexual” (I use this term loosely!) activities in a virtual environment.

I have to say personally I don’t agree that it is all ok so long as there is no impact on real life but thought Id do some slightly more “scientific” investigation to get to the bottom of it.

Dictionary.com defines adultery as “voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and someone other than his or her lawful spouse”. So assuming that one or both of the participating parties is married I guess the next thing to do is quantify “sexual intercourse” which is defined by the same site as “genital contact, esp. the insertion of the penis into the vagina followed by orgasm.” Now I could obviously go on and on with this and begin defining each different points but I don’t think I would get much closer to a conclusion simply because all definitions of this nature are going to refer to one or more human elements, associated with the real world. I would therefore come to the conclusion that it qualifies as adultery if the individuals involved consider their virtual characters an extension of themselves, a bit woolly I know but that’s as close as I can get to a conclusion.

It doesn’t stop there though as there is another factor to consider, betrayal, “to disappoint the hopes or expectations of; be disloyal to”. By engaging in “sexual” activities in a virtual environment whilst in a relationship I would suggest you are betraying your partner, that is assuming they are not aware of what you are doing! The author does make this point in her closing comments from the first article.

“My advice if you want to engage in online relationships is talk to your real life partner about it and see how they feel. Reassure them that’s it’s just a game and a way to have fun, relieve some tension. If they really object then you have two options. Either don’t do it, or be really careful.”

I would echo these sentiments and in my eyes, virtual adultery would constitute betrayal if the partner of one or both parties involved was not aware of what was going on. So if you are looking to make the most of what the virtual world has to offer my advice would be, be honest, be open, or be prepared to sacrifice your real life relationships.

Some of the virtual sex sites across the web include:

Somasex - virtual sex super site
3d-sexgames.com
3dslut.com
Hentai Park