Not everyone agrees on how many users Facebook has. Like most networks/media sites, the company has various ways of looking at users. Facebook reported 901 million monthly active users last month. It reported 483 million daily active users in its IPO filing.

And one person’s “active” user may be another person’s dormant or even spurious account. “Facebook’s IPO documents define ‘active’ users and finds that many of them may never visit the site. Facebook counts you as ‘active’ if your only involvement with the service is setting it up to republish your Twitter feed, or if you click ‘Like’ buttons but never log in to the actual service,” writes Cory Doctorow on boingboing, accusing the company of using “funny accounting” in its IPO documents.

Why does it matter? It matters to investors who want to buy and sell the stock and make money on it. Network valuations are heavily based on number of subscribers (number of people to sell advertising to.) That’s what makes a media company. For the same reason it also matters to advertisers, none of whom intend to reach anything like Facebook’s entire user base, but see the number as consumer validation of the importance of the platform.

Tags: facebook, ipo, active, daily, monthly, users

This has created a fuss among some people who have called this shameless self promotion (a tautology if there ever was one) and social media douchebaggery.

I’m no douche bag and I don’t consider myself a brand either, but isn’t Facebook the brand mecca? Twitter has promoted tweets, promoted trending topics and promoted accounts. Brands are all over Facebook and which ones wouldn’t want to highlight all or some of their status updates?

What’s so shocking about Facebook doing the same? Facebook isn’t a social network. It’s a personal and business communications environment FUNDED BY ADVERTISING ALONE. If Facebook has nothing to sell it has no way to continue to provide this service that we all apparently value and use daily.

Tags: facebook, promoted, status update, highlighted

The irrelevance and death of the press release has been predicted/declared every six months for the last five years with mind-numbing regularity. Yet, even in hip, slick 2012, journalists say they get most of their company information from press releases. A survey this March by PR firm Text100 found that the press release is the highest rated source of company information among journalists, bar none, exceeding the value of Facebook pages, blog posts and every other communications vehicle in the survey. To discard the press release as a PR tool (and it is only one of many) just to prove you’re a social media cool kid (SMCK), is a mistake.

The press release serves as a company’s official statement of record on a topic. For earnings, for example, it provides the SEC-compliant financial results and company context for those results. For the journalist, or the smart media consumer, a press release is just a starting point, but a useful one nonetheless.

Dietrich writes, “by posting your news release on your blog or social networks, you’re making it about you.” Well I damn well hope so. Social media is participative communications and no one with any sense is saying the company can’t participate, can’t have a voice, or can’t join in the conversation.

I once heard Wired editor Chris Anderson say he encouraged Wired’s bloggers to link to and quote press releases, since they were often the most authoritative source of company information. He added that they were not the only source of information, and that with the advent of blogs, no story is ever “done,” with comments and new blog posts adding new details and commentary to what we know about a story.

So if there’s any universal piece of advice for effective social media public relations, it’s “There is no universal piece of advice for effective social media public relations.” Before outlawing what can be a very effective part of your ocmmunications mix, consider the same things you would consider for any communications tactic:

1. Are your press releases relevant to the people who come to your Facebook page?
2. Does posting them provide people with useful information about the company, its products and its services?
3. Do you actively encourage spirited discussion among your customers, suppliers, business partners, etc.?
4. Do you use other sources of content on your Facebook page?

If you answered yes to all or some of these, you’re fine. Go ahead and post those links to your Facebook page. You can participate in the conversation, too! You have my permission.

Tags: news release, press release, facebook

Every time someone well known passes away, the poor taste jokes start flying on Twitter and then Facebook. (Be proud, Facebook, that you lag a bit here.) The cycle gets shorter and shorter, and today’s was the shortest I’ve ever seen.

Earlier this month, “Painter of Light” Thomas Kincade passed away. The personal attacks that plagued Kincade throughout his career persisted after his passing, and reportedly drove him to alcoholism which led to his death.

While I literally despised his paintings, I was able to separate the man from his work. I resisted the temptation (yes, there was a slight one) to make light (no joke meant there either) of his passing and his career. I may do so some day, but now is not the right time.

Thanks to social networking, the time-honored formula tragedy + time = comedy has been updated to eliminate the “time” variable. Gilbert Gottfried learned this well when he tried to make 9-11 jokes in an appearance at a Friar’s Club roast just three weeks after the tragedy. Gottfried was booed with chants of “Too soon! Too soon!” In other words, the club’s members recognized that some day it might be OK to make 9-11 jokes, but three weeks after the event was too soon.

I have given up hope that premature and uncalled for attacks on individuals will let up. (Personally I am opposed to any attacks on individuals, but the idea that these will stop is crazy.) It is an unfortunate and, sadly, institutionalized part of the dialogue found on social networks.

Tags: Dick Clark, poor taste, jokes, too soon, Thomas Kincade

A February post by Loren McDonald of Silverpop, an e-mail marketing company based in Atlanta, Georgia, points out that the Republicans have employed a number of “questionable (e-mail marketing) gimmicks” designed to “make the email stand out in the inbox or imply that the message is coming from a friend. These include (the use of) re: and Fw: or Fwd:, to grab the recipient’s attention.”

The use of e-mail with fake “REs” in the subject line has long been a staple of spammers, and is designed to create the impression of an e-mail response, simulating a relationship and ongoing communications with the recipient. It is surprising to see it in a presidential campaign.

People have seen everything, and they’re tired of being manipulated. They know a con. This scam has been around a long time, and legitimate marketers, particularly if they represent a presidential candidate, should know better. In any context, this technique is insincere and manipulative. It’s a strategy that will backfire with most consumers and most voters.

In commercial use, simulated email responses with “RE” in them are probably in violation of Federal Trade Commission (FTC) rules. The FTC announced ten years ago that it was waging war against e-mail spammers, and filed suit against perpetrators of an e-mail chain letter scheme.

A 2003 FTC report specifically defines false subject lines, including those with “RE,” as “deceptive,” and therefore potential violations of FTC regulations.

As Martin Chorich comments, political speech is not subject to the same oversight and restrictions as commercial speech, so the FTC rules do not apply, but clearly this kind of email deception is something that regulators have identified as harmful to consumers, and is equally harmful to voters.

Consumers can file a complaint about any deceptive email practice, by simply forwarding the email to spam@uce.gov, or by completing a complaint form on the agency’s site.

The Republicans are not alone in this. The Obama campaign came under attack recently for what some see as a sleazy e-mail campaign.  Earlier this month, Jon Stewart remarked that the e-mails from the Obama campaign were akin to a Nigerian 419 scam letter.

Note: This post has been edited to indicate political speech is not governed by FTC regulations, in respone to Martin Chorich’s helpful comment below.

Tags: obama campaign, deceptive e-mail, fake, RE, FTC, Federal Trade Commission, spam,, republican

• Susan Boyle: “Her popularity in Britain had been tempered by the ‘Boyle backlash,’ a phenomenon created and christened by the national media which at first hyped her natural talent and then attacked her for being overhyped.”
• Steve Jobs‘ passing: (Online comment reacting to S.F. vigil in memory of Jobs): “Disgusting. A vigil for a telephone? How about one for the millions of congolese raped and killed in a war over the minerals needed to create laptops and phones that become obsolete in a matter of months so that a corporation can reap billions of dollars?!”
• Samantha Brick, first attacked for “complaining” that her attractiveness was a nuisance, with reactions like : ”Most people have beer goggles. She has a beer mirror.” “I’m sure she has a ‘best’ side, but I think she’s sitting on it,” and then defended, in an unusual online turnaround.
• Olive Garden review, written by 85-year-old Marilyn Hagerty, “went viral” in mockery of Hagerty, but then saw some reversal. Anthony Bourdain tweeted, “very much enjoying watching Internet sensation Marilyn Hagerty triumph over the snarkologists (myself included).”

So what is it in us that drives the angry online reactions to almost anything in the news? For many years, both national and local media were accused of pandering to viewers. Every newscast started with a sensationalist teaser and highlighted stories of killings, disasters and crime. Now that social networking has democratized reporting, and we are all journalists, everyone is tempted to pander.

I’m not sure it can be stopped. It’s human to want attention and it’s easy to get by being outspoken. A while ago I realized I was being a little too agressive on this blog for openly and harshly criticizing people who had committed social media and PR gaffes, and decided to call attention to the bad behavior and propose alternatives, rather than making it about people.

I also tried to raise my own fairness standards, and recorded my own set of guiding principles in what I call The Social Media Love Manifesto. Unfortunately, in the war of influence, the idea of social media love hasn’t drawn much interest, and is in danger of cancellation.

We are present at a pivotal moment in the decline of modern civilization. The preeminence of these prepackaged ponderings is a step forward in our relentless march to illiteracy. Lightweight infographics are the SMS of critical thinking.

We have reached a point in our rhetorical inclinations where we have outsourced the tweet. We’ve gone from the hand-written letter to the email to the text message in less than 10 years. And now we have lost the desire to write 140 characters, or a few dozen words, of our own thoughts and post them for our friends to see. So instead we like, retweet, reblog, and repin the thoughts of others.

Maybe it’s not a function of time. Maybe we lack the confidence to stand behind our own thoughts, and must borrow them from other people who seem to be smarter, more credible, or more erudite than we are. With a few clicks we can either post or share something seemingly profound, or add a comment as we nod in knowing agreement, “It’s funny ’cause it’s true!”

Where do we go next? Enterprising Web 2.0 entrepreneurs have already launched sites where you can enter your own thoughts and automatically generate one of these graphics, so maybe there is a way to reintroduce original thinking back into the process.

Pinterest is the first step in automating the unoriginal thought curation process. Today, you have to go in and click “repin” to repost the things you like. Soon, we will have the option to have Pinterest, or a third-party add-on, automatically repin graphics, based on our profiles and repinning history, at pre-set intervals, so we don’t have to do a thing.

Tags: pinterest, repinnng, infographics, original, unoriginal, thoughts, outsourced tweets, automated curation