Photography: suesviews

It might be hard to believe now but when Facebook began, the settings were so restrictive that unless you were a university student you couldn’t even join the site. You could see the names of the elite who could join the site. You might be able to look at their avatars if they’d posted them, but even for other members, almost everything else was kept private. Private was the default setting. Members of the network could see where friends were studying, where they’d worked and what they liked to do, but everyone else was locked out.

Those were the days.

As Facebook has grown so has its troubles with privacy issues. The site now has over 400 million active users, a community that’s about a third larger than the population of the United States. Those people interact with more 25 billion pieces of content, from Web links and news stories to notes and photo albums. They post status updates that keep friends and family informed about what they’re doing, upload pictures and videos that reveal private aspects of their lives, and they use over half a million Facebook apps that often draw on the information they’ve posted.

Fundamental Privacy Mistakes

It’s a huge amount of material that’s both essential to Facebook’s value to advertisers and a giant headache to Mark Zuckerberg, its 26-year-old CEO. You can almost forgive him for making the mistake of offering privacy settings that assumed users wanted everything open but which were also too complex to be changed easily.

Almost, but not quite. Facebook’s mistakes were fundamental, an example of what to do to get privacy completely wrong. The only consolation that Steve Zuckerberg can draw from his failure is that Google made exactly the same mistakes when it launched Buzz. The search company attempted to start with critical mass by attaching itself to users’ Gmail accounts, exposing the email addresses of account holder’s contacts in the process.

Facebook, at least, didn’t do that kind of damage but both companies made the same error. They both assumed that because no one ever reads the privacy policies at the bottom of Web pages, no one ever looks at the EULAs on downloaded programs before they agree to them, and few people in practice ever say anything that could land them in serious trouble with a third party app developer, no one would mind if the default setting was maximum exposure. After all whoever was accessing the information — whether it was an old friend, a new retailer or an exciting app — was only acting in a way that would benefit the user. Privacy is a flexible thing these days and besides, those people who really are paranoid fussy cautious about what happens with their private information could always head to the settings page and change them.

On Facebook that meant playing with a host of different “granular” settings relating to a range of the site’s different functions. For Buzz it looked like it meant clicking a link to turn the system off, but it turned out that just meant you couldn’t see it. To get rid of Buzz altogether, users initially had to leap through one digital hoop after another, hoops they weren’t even aware existed.

Ask First, Share Later

The problem with those mistakes wasn’t that they actually revealed vast amounts of personal data that individuals needed to keep private (although a few unlucky individuals were affected). It made the public aware that they had personal information, and worse, that big companies were interested in it. Website users don’t read privacy policies because they don’t care about their privacy; they just don’t believe that their private concerns are of any interest to anyone else. Until a company comes along and helps itself to their personal data.

So what can companies hoping to amass vast amounts of user data learn from the mistakes of other corporate giants? How can they balance their need to please advertisers and app developers with the concerns of their members?

The simplest strategy is to ask first.

Email marketers aren’t fond of double-opt in requirements because it means they can’t be accused of spamming. They like them because so few people object when they’re asked. For much personal data the response is likely to be similar although much depends on the kind of information being requested (anonymous demographic is unlikely to raise many objections; private purchases might do.) It’s when companies take information without asking that users object and become suspicious.

It’s also important to make the privacy settings simple. As Mark Zuckerberg himself put it in his blog:

The number one thing we’ve heard is that there just needs to be a simpler way to control your information. We’ve always offered a lot of controls, but if you find them too hard to use then you won’t feel like you have control. Unless you feel in control, then you won’t be comfortable sharing and our service will be less useful for you. We agree we need to improve this.

But the most important thing you can do with privacy is to understand users’ concerns. When Google changed the way it offered Buzz, it went a long way towards showing that it understood those concerns. Leaving it in Gmail however, a place that users think of as a personal space, suggested that the company still isn’t standing with its users. Similarly, Facebook’s simpler privacy settings hand more control to its users, but its recommendation

that you share basic info like status updates and posts with everyone, content like photos and videos of you with friends of your friends, and sensitive items like contact information with only your real friends.

also suggests that it’s still not quite getting it. Many users would consider status updates to be as personal as their pictures.

Facebook got privacy right the first time when it assumed that users wanted to talk only with their friends. The way its mishandled privacy may well end up prompting users to choose to bring those old days back.

Last summer, Alex Brownstein decided to advance his career. He had a job as a copywriter at ad firm Publicis, but he really wanted to work at “a really creative shop for really creative [creative directors].” Rather than follow the usual route of updating his resume, sending it to the human resources departments of other ad firms and hoping that they had an opening, Alex took a route that gave him direct access to the people he most wanted to speak to.

In a move that also showed off his creativity, Alex identified the creative directors he wanted to work for and bought AdWords ads for their names. When the creative directors Googled themselves, the top result was an ad that said: “Hey, [creative director's name]: Goooogling yourself is a lot of fun. Hiring me is fun, too.” The ad linked to his website, alecbrownstein.com.

Brownstein targeted a total of five creative directors, received interviews from four and job offers from two. He now works as a senior copywriter for Ian Reichenthal at Young & Rubicam’s office. The entire search cost a total of $6. Had he mailed in his resume, he would probably have spent more on postage.

Caught in the Act of Googling Themselves

Brownstein’s approach had several advantages. He was able to put his name and his skills directly in front of the people he most wanted to target. By addressing those people by name, he showed that he knew the industry and was familiar with their work. By using an original strategy, he demonstrated the very creativity that he was selling. And by intruding at a time when the creative directors were Googling themselves, he was also showing that he understood human behavior and how to use it for effect — an important feature for an advertising copywriter.

As a model for other career-minded types to copy though, it has its challenges. Not everyone knows the names of the people who are most likely to employ them, and not all industries are as public with the identities of their key personnel as the advertising industry is. Nor are those personnel likely to Google themselves as often as advertising people might. Brownstein got the idea for the approach after Googling himself, something he told Mashable that he does with “embarrassing” frequency. Marketing manager Karl Sakas estimates that it took Brownstein about six months to land his job. Hopefuls seeking employment in industries staffed with more modest types might have to wait even longer.

But it worked, it cost little and for jobseekers looking for specific positions but who aren’t desperate for immediate change, there’s no reason it won’t work again.

Who Wants to Work for Microsoft?

Google isn’t the only place that creative jobseekers have been advertising their skills though. Even before Brownstein was interrupting the private browsing moments of some of New York’s top ad people, a man called “Eric” was promoting himself on Facebook. He took out an ad that included his picture, a headline that stated “I want to be at [company]”, and text that read “Hi, My name is Eric and my dream is to work for [company]. I’m an MBA/MFA with a strong media background. Can you help me? Please click!” The companies he targeted were Microsoft, YouTube, Netflix, Apple and IDEO.

Despite the difficulty of believing that anyone actually dreams of working for Microsoft, Eric did receive plenty of offers of help from Redmond employees offering LinkedIn connections, the addresses of recruiters, and the job descriptions of specific roles in their division to apply for.

Eric chose Facebook, he says, “because it was unconventional, cheap, highly targeted and offered solid performance metrics.” He was able to limit the ads so that they were seen by people employed at the companies he was targeting, and the keywording would have made sure that a manager at Microsoft didn’t see that he was also dreaming of working for YouTube. The whole process took about half an hour, cost less than $50 and resulted in more than 50,000 impressions and more than 500 clicks. It’s not clear though whether the leads produced a job offer.

This is a very different approach to that used by Alex Brownstein. Brownstein was hoping to land one of a number of specific positions that could only be offered by one of a number of specific individuals. Eric’s approach was broader. He was looking for “help” rather than a job, something that more people can provide, even though it won’t lead directly to the end goal.

The best approach of all then might be to combine the two: use Facebook ads to generate information about individual employers; then use that information to offer Google ads that put your online resume in front of them… eventually.

There is a third method that you can use though. When Web marketer Larry Dinsmore found himself out of work, he went for a scattergun approach that should put even Eric to shame. At one point, he simply opened the Yellow Pages, started at A and worked his way through the listings, emailing his resume to every business with a website. He even thought of printing a stack of resumes and handing them out like flyers. Fortunately, he had a better idea. He printed the words “Damn, I need a job!” on the front of a t-shirt, and placed a short cover letter on the back.

“Put something about yourself on your shirt and not only will they read it they will strain to see it,” he writes on his site damnineedajob.com. “They will position themselves for a better look. Stand in line at a fast food joint and at any given moment someone will be checking it out. I’m telling you people can’t help it.”

There’s no indication that Larry’s approach worked any better than Eric’s but the efficacy of turning yourself into a human billboard will depend on where you choose to stand. It’s the kind of strategy that’s more likely to work at a convention than in line at a fast food joint — unless your dream job is to flip burgers.

Whatever kind of job you’re looking for, creativity is going to be an important part of staying ahead of the pack. That applies to the way you search as much as the contents of your resumé.

Image: Paul Rj Muller

Usually, Web 2.0 just gets it right. Facebook has brought together old friends and keeps connections alive, blogs have given everyone the power to publish without the need to be a media baron first, and Twitter is now letting Iranian demonstrators bring millions onto the streets and send out information that might just change the government.

And yet, those same tools that have proved so useful for communicating, networking and publishing have also been used for more dubious purposes. Here are a number of ways in which Web 2.0 has gone wrong:

Pool Jumping with Google Earth

According to a story published last year in the UK’s Daily Mail, which might not be the most reliable source, groups of young people in Britain are using Google Earth to identify homes with swimming pools then sending invitations through Facebook groups for impromptu pool parties. The sessions specify a meeting place, a time – usually between midnight and 3am – and mobile telephone numbers for contacting the organizers.

While flash mobs have long been one product of Web 2.0, those gatherings were usually harmless fun that brought like-minded people together. Finding a bunch of people in your swimming pool in the middle of the night and a pile of beer cans in your roses isn’t quite so harmless.

There seems to be little sign that the habit is repeating itself, even as the summer gets under way again. Instead pool-based Facebook groups seem to be largely dedicated to people jumping in with their phones in their pockets. Not quite the way to dive into social media.

Rocket Launching with Google Earth

Trespassing might be naughty but it won’t actually kill anyone. Hamas rocket launchers in Gaza do kill people and they also do it with Google Earth. The BBC has described how computer-savvy militants from Fatah line up targets with Google’s satellite images before sending their rockets into nearby Israeli towns. One racketeer even complained that the map-makers deliberately mask Israeli military installations.

If that is true, it might not be the first time. There have also been reports that Google replaced pictures showing UK forces’ bases in Basra with older images taken before the Iraq conflict after British forces were targeted by Iraqi militants, and terrorists arrested in the US had apparently planned an attack on JFK International Airport using Google Earth.

And you thought Google’s satellite globe was just for looking at the roof of your house.

Divorced by SMS

Ending a relationship is never easy. It starts with “we have to talk” and always seems to end with “it’s not you, it’s me.” Wouldn’t life be easier if you could just send a text message saying, “You’re dumped”?

Easier, but not very nice – unless you happen to live in Dubai, in which case you can not only dump your girlfriend by SMS, you can even divorce your wife. One report even quoted one impatient man who had sent his wife the text message: “Why are you late? You are divorced.”

It’s questionable whether that would stand though. Under Islamic law, the husband has to tell his wife three times that he divorces her for the marriage to have ended – which requires a bit more thumb-work — but it is enough of a phenomenon to have prompted officials to take action. Singapore’s Islamic authorities have banned the practice of divorce by SMS, and while the Malaysian court has sanctioned it, the government there has criticized the practice.

Westerners will have to stick with divorce lawyers.

Texting Bullies

Bullying has been around as long as there have been children, schools and allowances to swipe off the small kids, but until communication became universal, it was usually limited by location. You had to be in the same cubicle as the school bully if he was going to stick your head down the toilet.

Today though, the ability to send messages such as “We are watching you … we are going to kill you … we are going to kill your mum”, as Wired notes, means that the victimization can continue wherever the bully might be and wherever the victim is too.

Even the home no longer offers a safe respite, the distance means that bullying is much easier to do and the knowledge that someone has your personal details makes the attack feel even more intrusive. Wired cites one report of a teenager who committed suicide after receiving 20 abusive messages in half an hour.

Children tend to be pretty creative when it comes to finding ways to do what they want, and that includes bullying. One company though has spotted an opportunity. CellChek is a piece of software, currently in Beta, that is intended to protect children from text bullying as well as adult grooming and offensive online material.

The bullies will have to go back to the bathrooms.

Fired on Twitter

There’s been a lot of talk about how Twitter can find people jobs, connect them to customers and allow their businesses to build brands, form communities and conquer the world. It certainly can do all that, if it’s done right.

But when it’s done wrong, micro-blogging can also have some pretty negative consequences too. When the “theconnor” famously tweeted:

“Cisco just offered me a job! Now I have to weigh the utility of a fatty paycheck against the daily commute to San Jose and hating the work.”

he received a response from another Cisco worker who asked who his hiring manager was. The tweet caused a storm and even produced a dedicated website.

It wasn’t clear whether “Cisco Fatty” did have his job offer rescinded, but he certainly wasn’t the first person to get in trouble for saying something he shouldn’t have done on the Web’s open communication channels. Soren Dayton, a communications officer for John McCain’s presidential campaign, was suspended for tweeting about a video mash-up smearing Barack Obama, and MSNBC reports that a Philadelphia Eagles stadium employee was fired for tweeting that the “Dam Eagles R Retarted!!” [sic].

He might have been a little unlucky to have lost his job for that, but here’s a bunch of people who are lucky to keep their jobs for their daft tweets.

For those who feel Google, Inc., is spreading tentacles everywhere in a sinister way, it might be difficult to see, but there are many reasons we need Google.

Reasons We Need Google

1. They made the Web easier to use with Google Search. There were search engines before Google (I worked for one such), but Google seemed to achieve market share where others could not, and has since indexed a greater share of online content. (Now they’re trying to index offline content, too. E.g., through the controversial Google Books project, which of course irks many authors and publishers – all of whom have lost income since the spread of Internet use. Librarians, too, have expressed concern about the value of their own existence.)

2. Leveled the playing field by really enabling the concept of web income opportunities. They did this with the spending and earning of ad dollars, creating a micro-economy online that might eventually rival real-world GDP. Since this is not a closed system (that is, online funds can be moved to the real world), this could be a fundamental reason we’ll never truly have another Great Depression. Small players can build a thriving online business, and that reality was catalyzed by Google.

One way is through AdWords and AdSense. AdWords gave small web-based businesses a chance to advertise to a wide audience at a lower cost. AdSense gave fledgling entrepreneurs a chance at web-based income.

Though rumors (and polls) suggest that the majority of people do not earn any worthwhile income from AdSense, its mere existence helped fuel the growth of other ad networks, which in turn enabled the whole web worker phenomenon – especially Digital Nomads. Sure, there were other ad networks before Google AdSense, but can you name any one of them? Unless you’re in advertising or Internet marketing, probably not. The lure of working online is the result of the early AdSense-fueled successes of a few popular bloggers, and other ad networks have capitalized on the web working desire.

3. Opportunity for web presence. Without various types of Google juice – such as Google Search and Google News – your web traffic might disappear altogether. (Of course, Google created this dependence in the first place.)

4. Offer powerful, quality web applications to millions of users, for free. What’s more, these apps show proof concept and a ready online market. That in turn encourages other webpreneurs to produce similar web applications – sometimes even better. Those web apps often get purchased, giving those webpreneurs the incentive – and capital – to produce more applications. In other words, they’ve catalyzed the ubiquity of web applications.

If you hadn’t noticed, Google has spread from their core practice of being a Search engine – the most popular one by far – to several other operations: advertising network, web analytics (Google Analytics), web feed management (Feedburner), daily business (Calendar), important and private files (Google Docs and Spreadsheets), email (GMail), and numerous other web applications. Now they’re getting into the mobile space – not just by having mobile web apps but an actual Google Phone.

So many people now use so many Google web apps in the course of a regular web working day that they would be affected if Google went down for a few hours or days. Work productivity would go down. When GMail or another Google app seems to have a service “brownout”, you’ll see tweets about it on Twitter, and you can feel the frustration mounting. (Of course, the lure was free, powerful web apps that people feel they can’t do without. There are alternatives, but an educated guess suggests that most people seem to pick a web app and stick with it – unless functionality or service is very poor.)

5. New technologies. Google is instrumental in pushing cloud computing, showing proof of concept by running all their web apps on cloud technology. Apps like Google File System (still in research mode) will be of great benefit to web-based businesses that need to store massive, growing quantities of data. (Of course, Amazon’s Web Services is an alternative, but that costs money. Google already offers some free storage space via GMail accounts, and it’s possible that if they offer cloud storage online, there might be free and premium options.)

6. Citywide Wi-Fi. Okay, for now it’s only in Mountain View, California, to the best of my knowledge. But that’s a start of more free metro WiFi across the U.S. – something that many people will welcome.

7. Google Maps. Coming from a past that includes seven years of digital mapping, I can say that Google Maps has to be my favorite of their suite of web apps. They helped bringing inexpensive mapping to anyone with fast Internet access, as well as enabled a least a low-level of demographic analysis features with their customization features.

8. Google App Engine + Google Gears. With App Engine, you can build scalable web applications. In other words, if you’re so inclined, you can compete with their web apps.

With the introduction of Gears, you can now run a variety of web applications while you’re offline, with data synchronization taking place when you’re connected. Even the latest version, 2.7, of the WordPress blogging platform provides integration for Gears so that you can speed up web page load time for any users who also use Gears.

9. They fund external tech projects that advance the web, including Mozilla/ Firefox web browser. (However, web sentiment suggests that the latter might change, now that Google has their own browser, Chrome.)

10. They fund world projects. Through their Google.org branch, they’re looking at “climate change, poverty, and emerging disease,” amongst other world-affecting issues.

When most people think of setting up a business, they imagine the pleasure that comes with being their own boss. They assume that they’ll get to pick and choose the tasks they have to do, keeping the exciting stuff for themselves and delegating the dull work to employees who are happy to do it for a salary.

What often happens in practice is that, certainly at the beginning of business’s growth, the CEO is also the company’s Head of Sales, QA expert, Production Manager, Head of Distribution… and office cleaner too.

When you’re a one-man band, you have to do everything — even the sorts of jobs that had a boss asked you to do them, would have had you storming for the exit.

While hiring help can be one useful solution, many small business owners are faced with a Catch 22: paying employees lets you focus on the most valuable parts of your business and boosts growth; but it also requires capital… which you won’t have until you’ve achieved that growth.

When it comes to one of the most difficult (and frustrating) aspects of running a small business — the logistics of delivery and warehousing — there is a way out of this vicious circle. At least two businesses let small companies store their goods in a professional storage center (one that isn’t a garage) and handles their packing and postage too.

Shipwire Lets you Buy Space
Shipwire has warehouses in Chicago, Los Angeles, Toronto and Vancouver but says that it’s aggressively bringing more centers on line around the world. For just under $30 a month, it will give you 16 cubic feet and for a delivery fee added to your products’ sale price, ship up to eight different items. More space and product lines can be rented for a higher fee. The price also includes a number of useful goodies such as an easy insurance process, online shopping cart integration, and credit card and Paypal payments.

The whole system is very simple. You just have to ship your goods to Shipwire’s warehouses, send them your orders — together with the delivery fees — and they handle everything for you.

Perhaps the most interesting thing about the company though is the businesses they describe in their case studies. These aren’t medium-sized firms looking for an alternative to renting their own storage center; they’re husband-and-wife teams producing one product and which don’t have the space to handle everything from home. Their products include potties for pets and toilet deodorizers.

Presumably though, Shipwire can also handle uniquely designed lampshades or computer programs to be shipped on CDs.

Amazon’s Other Business
It’s certainly likely that Amazon can. That’s the other company offering small businesses a share of warehouse space as well as delivery and stamp-licking services. The pricing here is a little more complicated. Amazon charges 45 cents per month per cubic foot for storage but lifts that fee to 60 cents in the fourth quarter of the year. (You might want to encourage your customers to do their Christmas shopping in the summer.)

It also has a three-step procedure to calculate the total fulfillment fee that takes into account whether the product qualifies as a “media unit,” the price of the item and of course, its weight.

All of that — and particularly the seasonal price increase which cuts into profits during the biggest sales period — makes Amazon’s system less than perfect. As a seller, you want to know exactly what to tell buyers when they ask to know the delivery charge. You want Amazon to take away a headache completely not replace it with a small pain as you try to calculate the costs.

But Amazon is familiar and trusted. Its pricing per cubic foot means that you only pay for the space you use, its distribution network is well-oiled and reliable, and it has plenty of experience.

It also offers a lesson in maximizing the potential of your business. Amazon might be best-known as an online retailer but in the process of selling and delivering goods, it’s picked up all sorts of valuable knowledge and services. Selling those too provides a number of additional revenue streams.

Whichever company you choose, outsourcing distribution does require a cultural leap in your business. As a manufacturer, you’d be accustomed to seeing your products before they go out. That lets you feel like you’ve created something tangible and it reminds you of what your business actually does. Outsource storage and distribution, and unless you’re still producing the goods in your garage, your products will ship straight from the factory to the distribution center, and you’ll never see them.

Your own work will shift from manufacturing to marketing and managing. Until you employ people to do those too.

What happens if you email some of the top web 2.0 web sites for customer service?

Who will answer first and who has the best support?

We emailed 10 different major internet websites with idiotic questions. This usually took the form of registering on the website, and then submitting a support request to ask how to register. (Yes, most of the time it was required you register before opening a ticket.) We didn’t cut anyone any slack; we threw low blows wherever we could. We even submitted questions to the wrong tech support groups wherever needed.

So, the results from WORST (longest response time) to BEST( shortest response time):

7. Facebook

Facebook comes in dead last with a response time of a whopping 1,406 minutes.

But we aren’t all complaints. Their response was far from the cookie-cutter responses customer support teams love to send out. The technician, who signs the name Lauren, spoke in clear English and was very helpful to point out that we already had a Facebook account. Thanks, Lauren.

6. CafePress

If you needed help in ordering a shirt or two, CafePress may lag just a little more than your liking. We got a response in 651 minutes (although like Facebook, it was a genuine response).

5. Amazon.com

Amazon came in at 457 minutes, as we got a response from Deepanchakaravarthy C. (Yes that is an actual name.) Although we did get a relevant response, it was a little too cookie-cutter for our liking. It was indeed helpful, however. It seemed more like a copy and paste job than the previously reviewed companies, but perhaps that is the price you pay for fast support.

4. ITunes

iTunes came in at a respectable 162 minutes. They had a very helpful response, gave a few links, and even emailed us back a day later to ensure that we solved our problem. As far as quality assurance goes, iTunes has this down well. Although, this shouldn’t be surprising; we had to search their website long and hard to find any contact information.

3. Ebay

Perhaps one of the most helpful emails we received was from eBay. And, most likely, we weren’t the only ones who asked how to register since we got the full textbook-quality tutorial on how to do so. We really couldn’t go wrong with Reggie K.’s instructions — our thanks goes out to him. What’s more impressive is that the response time came in at 118 minutes. Not bad at all.

2. vBulletin

VBulletin has some of the fastest response times on the internet. Just take a look at their homepage if you ever want proof. They even broadcast their average response time for all to see. We were impressed to see a human-made response in 16 minutes flat. And the best part is that this is usually considered a long wait on vBulletin’s terms. If you ever need to run a forum and want good support, look no further.

And the winner is ….

1. myspace

Say it isn’t so! How could one of the largest social communities on the website (which, consequently, is hated by many) have the fastest response time? We pondered this too. But coming in at 6 long minutes, we got a legit response. It seemed like a copy and paste job, but it was relevant nonetheless. This may be a fluke, perhaps, but there is no doubting the results.

Wait! Where are the other Three???

Although we would love to wait a few weeks and let you know where they stand, the remaining three web entities have yet to email us back. A full 10 days later, and we haven’t heard a single thing. So who’s part of the club? The answer may surprise you.

Yahoo, Google, and 37 Signals Tie for Worst

Life isn’t easy being a global super giant. (We’re looking at you, Google.) And we can let it slide that you can’t answer every question that passes by you within 10 days. And while we’re being generous, we’ll let Yahoo! slide as well.

But, 37signals? Yes, they are indeed a large and extensive company, but 10 days warrants an answer.

In the end, it all comes down to how bad you want support. If you’re itching for a response, you’ll generally get a quicker one by phone than by email.

And if you ever want to shoot the breeze with Google, Yahoo, or 37signals over email, prepare to do most of the talking.