Time for a fresh coat? When to update your social media profiles
April 4, 2012 by Rita Marshall
image by matt hutchinson
You probably update your Facebook or Twitter account on a daily basis, but when’s the last time you looked at your profile description on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn or other social media networks?
As I prepare to take a year-long assignment, I’m also preparing to change my Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn information to reflect my temporary new employment. While I’m there, I’ll also see what else I’d like to change in the “about me” section.
The “about me” section in your social media networks is usually ignored by you and the connections you’ve already made, but it’s still the first impression for people “meeting” you digitally. (In the case of LinkedIn, changes to your profile usually trigger a note to all of your current connections as well).
When should you change your social media profiles?
It’s also a good idea to review your “about me” section, on both your social media networks and your website, every few months to make sure it’s accurately reflecting what your business is currently focused on.
Should I change my photo?
It depends. Are you the face of your business? Is it important that everyone recognize you? Or do you prefer keeping things fresh with the risk that people might lose you in the shuffle because they don’t recognize the new photo?
I’m a believer in the “your photo is part of creating a recognizable brand” school of thought. I rarely change my photo. I used my headshot from the local newspaper across all of my social media profiles so that I was easily recognizable. Print might be dying, but that newspaper headshot made me very recognizable to local people when it appeared on social media. I kept it for almost two years. I obsessed over my current photo, mostly because I knew it would be sticking around for a long time.
What about SEO?
For advanced SEO tinkering, read this post by blogger Kristi Hines.
SOPA, PIPA and the Battle of the Corporations
January 18, 2012 by Rita Marshall
photo credit: ikrichter
The fight over SOPA/PIPA is an epic battle between freedom-loving, open-source netizens and the giant, evil corporations who want to crush all that is good.
Right, right?
Not really.
I am not a supporter of SOPA and PIPA. Like most opponents of the bills, I do agree with fighting online piracy, and I feel that the current DMCA is pretty reasonable. (The mere mention of it has certainly been enough to deal with the ding-dongs who have stolen my content over the years.)
But this is not (simply) a case of power being put “in the hands of corporations” and only your Facebook status update can stop it. Yes, many of the opponents of SOPA and PIPA are plain home-spun Internet folk like you and me. But you know what? The US government doesn’t give a crap about us and our love of YouTube.
They care about YouTube itself, which is part of a corporation. They care about the signatories on a Nov. 2011 letter sent to the US Congress — AOL, eBay, Facebook, Google, LinkedIn, Yahoo, Twitter, Mozilla. These zillion-dollar corporations made their point that SOPA/PIPA will damage an important part of the economy. Now they’re also showing that they have remarkable influence over people (ahem, voters) by encouraging online users to speak out against the bills.
“Corporation” is not shorthand for “evil, greedy pigs”. A corporation is simply a large entity with a lot of weight (and money) to throw around — sometimes for better, sometimes for worse. NBCUniversal and Viacom (among others) have thrown their weight around, but are now challenged by the new digital corporate titans who have their own interests to protect.
To me, “corporate dinosaurs facing younger, powerful corporate newcomers” is the real story behind the clash over SOPA/PIPA. “Soulless business-suits vs. ragtag digital warriors” does sound better, but it’s not the truth.
It would make a hell of a Viacom pic, though.
Crisis, Communications and a Blue Christmas
January 4, 2012 by Rita Marshall
Oh, dear. Christmas may be partly to blame for the difficulties Twitter and global intelligence company Stratfor currently find themselves in.
Twitter is facing (and avoiding) questions over a briefly-verified Twitter account for Rupert Murdoch’s wife Wendi Deng-Murdoch. The account turned out to be a spoof set up over the Christmas holidays — some suggest the prank might have slipped through the gates due to reduced holiday staffing, but don’t bother asking Twitter if that’s the case, because they’re not in the mood to share. Neville Hobson takes a look at the questions over Twitter’s verification policy and their continued silence over the matter here.
Meanwhile, David Henderson at Ragan.com outlines the case for why Stratfor’s compromised security earns the award for hack of the year. Wincingly bad security and terrible crisis communications from a company specializing in intelligence analysis, whose clients are governments, world leaders and CEOs . Oh, and all those clients’ financial information, including credit card PINs, were also taken, according to unconfirmed claims by the hackers.
The hack occurred on Christmas Eve. Another case where a holiday season skeleton staff at a tiny (and easily found) internet hosting company made the difference? It can’t be that much of a factor given Stratfor’s loosey-goosey approach to security. It doesn’t help that the company’s website is still down as of January 4, and their communications have been through their Facebook page. Click, read and cringe here.
So apart from finger pointing and handwringing, what do we learn from these crises? Check out Gil Rudawsky’s advice on who businesses should be talking to (constantly) when something blows up real good. (Hint: there are nine groups to keep in mind, and the media’s not one of them).
photo by kimubert