Bad Reputation? Google Says Change Your Name

In a recent interview with The Wall Street Journal, Google CEO Eric Schmidt predicted that young adults would need to change their names in order to protect their reputations. Since social media and the Web are gaining stronger influence in people’s lives, he believes this will be a natural solution moving forward.

“I don’t believe society understands what happens when everything is available, knowable and recorded by everyone all the time,” said Schmidt to the WSJ.

Does this seem like an odd solution coming from Google’s chief executive? Many people across the Web think so since Google collects valuable user information and makes it available. Read Write Web, who first drew attention to this statement, suggested that parents give their children shortened names since they would have to change them down the line anyway.

TechCrunch refers to the idea as “downright pointless.” In addition, the always intriguing Gawker points out that Google’s CEO has “the scariest vision of the future of privacy.”

WebProNews also caught up with college student Andy Norris, who calls the concept a “cop out” on the search and advertising giant’s part and says, “Google should be able to do better than that.”

Privacy issues related to Google are nothing new, but it appears that consumer concern for them is growing. What are your thoughts regarding this proposed solution from Google’s CEO? Do you find it ironic coming from one of the most powerful technology companies?

Transitioning to the Cloud

The second annual Mimecast Cloud Adoption Survey conducted by Loudhouse offers some promising statistics in the adoption of cloud computing. Specifically, it found that 51 percent of businesses in both the US and the UK are using some form of cloud computing service.

The survey polled over 500 IT decision-makers in the two countries and saw that 74 percent of businesses using cloud services have noticed relief internally. What’s more, 73 percent believe cloud services have decreased their infrastructure costs, and 57 percent said their security has improved on the cloud.

Incidentally, cloud computing management company RightScale also announced this month that its customer cloud infrastructure spend has increased 1,000 percent from June 2009 to June 2010. It credits the increase to the following reasons: the number of cloud servers in use by its customers, the servers running for longer periods of time, and the customers using larger servers.

Another indicator of cloud computing growth is that Gartner, the world’s leading information technology research and advisory company, projects cloud service revenue to reach $68.3 billion this year.

Although these statistics show dramatic growth in the transition to the cloud, many businesses are still fearful of making the move. They are concerned about the security and privacy of their sensitive data, the sustainability of cloud service providers, and potentially high bandwidth costs.

Despite the concerns, multiple federal agencies in the US are embracing cloud computing, including the departments of defense and energy. The Securities and Exchange Commission is adopting cloud computing as well. Although the government is aware that concerns are present, it hopes they will be resolved before the 10-year transition is complete.

To alleviate some of these issues associated with the cloud, Gartner’s Global IT Council for Cloud Services constructed six rights and one responsibility for consumers and providers. If implemented, Gartner said these standards would be beneficial for businesses and providers, and also make the transition to the cloud smoother.

What is your view on cloud computing? Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages, or is it the other way around?

Facebook to Take on Google?

Although it’s only 6 years old, Facebook has reached a considerable level of success. It is the largest social network, and just last month, it announced that it had more than 500 million users. Not many companies have this much success in such a short period of time, and those that do, make up an elite group.

Incidentally, another company that is included in this select group is Google. Although Facebook has been likened to the search and advertising giant on many occasions, the list of similarities might get a little longer in the near future. Speculation has it that Google is in the process of developing a Facebook rival called “Google Me.”

Google has had several failed attempts in social with products such as Sidewiki, Wave, and Buzz. However, there are no signs that it is giving up in its quest for social success, especially, since it recently acquired Slide and Jambool.

Even if it is developing the rumored “Google Me,” could it really compete with Facebook? As we all know, Google is clearly the leader in both search and advertising. So, is social the only element it is missing?

WebProNews spoke with Ed DeRosa, News Editor with the Thoroughbred Times, who said he did not believe Google could create a product that could legitimately compete with Facebook.

“If you’re already on Facebook, I don’t really see any migration to another platform that Google would offer. We’ve seen what Facebook did to MySpace – they crushed them,” said DeRosa.

On the other side of the equation, since Facebook has the social component mastered, is it trying to extend its success to other areas? It already has access to valuable user information. In addition, there is speculation that it could expand its advertising platform to other sites, which could pose a direct threat to Google’s AdSense. All that said, is Facebook the one that is trying to outpace Google?

Emily Sandford of Office Suites PLUS tells WPN that she believes the two companies will grow more and more similar with time. She said, “It’s really going to be an interesting fight to watch.”

What are your thoughts on this issue? Do you believe Google wants to be a viable social competitor to Facebook? Or, is the social network looking to take on the search and advertising giant?

Living without Facebook, Twitter, and IM – Is It Possible?

Facebook, Twitter, and Instant Messaging have become natural parts of our everyday life. They also play key roles in many businesses. But is there a downside? Can they dominate too much time?

We all know that each of these platforms can be extremely valuable to business. However, many businesses do not allow their employees to use them due to a lack of productivity. For this reason, WebProNews would like to extend a challenge to you to see how long you can go without Facebook, Twitter, and Instant Messaging.

We are, by no means, suggesting that you drop these platforms entirely. Instead, we would like to see if you notice any changes to your personal well-being, your business, and your level of productivity.

For starters, you could try going without the 3 mentioned platforms, or any other technologies that consume vast amounts of your time, for 1-2 hours each day. When you turn everything off for the first time, it will probably seem way too quiet. In addition, you will likely struggle with the urge to share something.

Once these instincts pass, chances are, you will develop a stronger focus. Not only could you dedicate more time and energy toward one project, but you could also generate a greater appreciation for what you do. What’s more, you may find yourself developing new ideas and strategies that could take your business to the next level.

So, are you up for the challenge? How long can you go without Facebook, Twitter, and Instant Messaging? And, are you more productive for doing so?

Creating Content That People Want to Share

The Web has drastically changed the way business is conducted. Fortunately, it not only provides many new opportunities, but it also, simplifies certain tasks. According to David Meerman Scott, Author of World Wide Rave and New Rules of Marketing and PR, there were essentially three ways to generate attention before the Web.

As he explains to WebProNews, these ways were buying advertising, the media, which he calls begging, and a sales force. These tactics work well for generating attention offline, but online, it’s a different story. Generating attention online requires marketers to create content just like a publisher.

Scott says the old rules make it hard to generate attention. However, the new rules allow any organization to earn attention, if it creates valuable information. He points out that organizations need to stop thinking like marketers, advertisers, and public relations specialists, and instead, think like publishers.

Once businesses create content, what can they then do to get people to share it? According to Scott, most companies talk about their product, which is not what users want to hear. He advises businesses to create content for their target market, or as he likes to call it, their buyer personas.

“It gets an organization away from talking about themselves in an egotistical way,” says Scott.

In reality, consumers only care about themselves and solving their problems. As a result, Scott suggests that marketers create individualized content for each of their buyer personas.

Once this is done, he recommends creating trigger points to encourage users to share. These trigger points could involve contests, humor, blog posts, videos, and many other ideas. If the content is good, then users will naturally share.

Lastly, Scott says marketers need to point users back to a place where some type of action can take place. Once again, as long as the content is valuable, it will draw users back to make a purchase.

Are you creating valuable content for your buyer personas?

Next Page »