SOCIAL IMPRESSIONS

Raise your hand if you have ever asked your facebook “friend” why he restricted your view of his profile. Many users have found it offensive that a colleague has limited their access to their profile. After all, aren’t you supposed to be “friends”? Facebook has evolved to much more than a site that allows friends to reconnect and share a few laughs online. It is now a site that also serves as a professional, a personal branding, and relationship building tool.

My question is - Should you be facebook friends w/ someone who restricts your view of a large portion of their profile, (images, information and wall?) For me, it depends on who the “friend” is. Facebook offers the privacy setting for a reason – it allows users to still associate with colleagues and limit the amount of information shared with others. For those concerned about maintaining a professional relationship with their co-workers, they may block access to their wild pictures and status updates. For those who have parents as friends on facebook, the privacy feature may be a God send. But what if you are supposedly real-life friends with this person?

I asked the tweeple their opinion about having their access limited to their facebook friend’s profile

solessence: @rabeidoh Some people need a little privacy -if they are willing to let you in a portion and you’re interested, why not.

devindra: @rabeidoh Don’t see why not, maybe as they get to know you better they’ll relax those restrictions, but those privacy options are valid imo

DerrickWheeler: @rabeidoh I use the restricted profile for people that ive met but dont know well enough to give full access in hopes that someday I will

davechensky: @rabeidoh Gotta disagree with @devindra here. They are getting a lot more out of this “Relationship” than you are. Cut the bastard loose

devindra: @davechensky Not saying @rabeidoh shouldn’t do the same thing to this person, it only seems fair. Not a reason to drop someone entirely tho

I personally believe that when considering friends, quality matters more than quantity. I would prefer to develop relationships with a hundred people over having a thousand strangers as friends on my profile. The reason I am on facebook is to get to know my friends, blog readers, and social media chums better. I also want to provide them with the opportunity to learn more about me beyond my tweets, digg votes and Linkedin resume. In my case, blocking my followers from my wall, pictures and personal information disrupts the evolution of these relationships.

It is important to be careful about what you post on social media sites. I never depend on the privacy feature to protect my content – nor should you. If you don’t want the world knowing your phone number, just don’t post it. My rule of thumb is – if I don’t want mommy and daddy seeing it, I won’t post it. From a reputation management standpoint, it is important to be conscientious about what information you share on your profile, pictures you upload, comments you write on friend’s walls, and so on. Although there are people who don’t necessarily use facebook for personal branding, they should realize that future employers could be looking at their online profiles to learn more about them.

What about you? Do you get offended when your friends block your view of their pages (subject verb agreement)? How do you react to that? Do you delete them completely from your profile or do you just accept that your access to their profile is restricted?

My fiance posted the following status on his facebook profile Friday morning: Howard McAuliffe is wondering if social media people tend to be anti-social when not on media. I am sure many people have asked this question before, and bloggers have addressed it at some point or another.

I think the first point to address is the term “social media people.” I have participated in many sites this past year and have yet to see an average Digg member or a Tweep referring to himself as a “social media person.” I think marketers coined that term to easily identify users who engage in the space. That term has gained traction where “online users” is now synonymous with “social media people.” A user can be engaged online but not be social with others. I think this is an important distinction to make.

Having made that distinction, I believe Howard’s question was with regards to users who are social and have conversations with one another. They are naturally participating in the space, providing content that they consider valuable/funny/intelligent/silly and sharing their opinions with the masses. When looking at it from this angle, it makes me wonder - is socializing online equivalent to being social offline?

While I am very active online, it is no more than I am in real life. I follow 600+ people on Twitter. I read their tweets, and respond to the ones that appeal to me. If I have something personal to say, I will send them a direct message. If I really connect with a fellow user, I will move the conversation to IM or email. Over time, a friendship may blossom. So far, that type of relationship has only developed with 20% of the total users I connect with online. My online social activity mirrors that in real life - we only build relationships with people who share common interests and we connect with.

The internet has evolved allowing people to easily voice their opinions and be heard by the masses. Although there are commonalities between social behavior online and offline, they aren’t regarded the same. A user shouldn’t automatically be deemed anti-social just because he doesn’t feel like going out with a bunch of friends on a given night. If a person constantly declines human interactions in favor of playing on the internet, perhaps there is an addiction issue at hand. Obviously, I am not addressing online addicts or hermits in this discussion.

To directly answer Howard’s question, I would have to say that it depends on the person. I know, it sounds like a cop-out response, but I can’t speak for the millions of online users and their varied social desires or habits. I close with these questions - There are many online users who have more friends online than in real life. Given this, is there a viable correlation between a person’s online activity and whether they are anti-social in real life? And if someone is more social online than in real life, does that mean he shares more common interests with his online community of friends?

When friends convince you to join a social network, they mention all the positive aspects of being connected. They tell you about reconnecting with friends or how sites can assist you with finding a new job. Some only want you to join these sites just to have you on board. But they usually forget to mention that the sites can be addictive and time-consuming. If you aren’t careful, it might even impact your offline relationships.

Social media can impact your communication with offline friends. It is easy to get distracted by the hubbub that occurs online while hanging out with a friend. If you are logged on while talking to a friend, you may be distracted by the email alerting you to a new message and the IM anxiously blinking. Although we are accustomed to juggling several things at once, it is still quite challenging to have more than one conversation simultaneously. It seems like one always gets the short end of the stick.

How many of you have even experienced dialogs like this:

You: I have this hilarious story to tell you.
Friend: Oh? Tell me!
<Twitter message for you pops up>
You: Hmmm <as you quickly type a response>
Friend: …
You: So, I was out shopping and I ran into…
< Twitter reply pops up AND an IM message>
You: Hmm… I… hmmm… saw… <as you quickly type your responses>
Friend: … Hello? You saw…?!?!
You: Sorry, ok… back to what I was saying…

You’re lucky if your friend doesn’t walk away frustrated by your rude behavior. Those who are still unfamiliar with the addictive nature of the social world might not understand why you have shifted your attention. Hell, even those who are connected could be offended.

If you, have the “too connected” addiction like I do, here are some recommendations I have found helpful:

1- Apologize: You know you were being rude by disregarding your face-to-face conversation. Let the person know that you respect and value their friendship, especially if this ALWAYS happens.

2- Educate: Explain how distracting being connected might be and that you will work on being a better listener

3- STOP: If you are having a conversation with a friend, step away from the computer. Ignore the flashing, beeping and ringing. Set your IM to “busy” and answer your emails when you get the chance. Your online friends will understand, because they’ve probably had to deal with the same situation.

Have you had a similar problem? If so, how did you handle it?

Follow up post discussing how being too connected can impact your professional life.

Social media mainly served as an entertainment medium to many people. On this Election Day however, social media is playing an even greater role than just to pass time. The online world is rallying people to go to the polls to cast their vote. Facebook is featuring a widget that allows users to find polling locations and to show that they voted. Additionally, Twitterers are hyping up the elections by demanding that people vote.

Gearing up to this point, social media also served as a space that provided interesting, educational and even funny stories about the candidates and their campaigns. When I asked Twitterers how social media helped them decide on which candidate to vote for, they said:

BrentCsutoras: @rabeidoh Sure. I am on social news site all day so I get to see almost everything from both sides on the election.

mammainthescene: @rabeidoh I feel so much more informed this election because of social media then last time around

Tabz: @rabeidoh Social Media is pretty much how I got all my election news (except for occasional TV news). So it informed my decision.

Not only did the online world serve as an information hub for people, it also allowed similar-minded users to join together in educating the masses about their candidate of choice. Additionally, it encouraged debate and discussion between democratic, republican and undecided voters. This election is probably the most viral campaign ever initiated online.

During the debates, social media was the “place to be” to discuss what the presidential and vice-presidential candidates said. Twitter was the meeting spot for many users who wanted to exchange their opinions. Obviously, the humor was very prevalent and made the experience enjoyable for the users providing and listening to the feedback.

Social media also served as an excellent alternative to traditional media. For example, if one missed the debates, he could search on Twitter using specific keywords, read blog posts, or go to YouTube. The user’s options for finding more information online are endless, which I believe has had an impacted on the percentage of informed voters.

The election is vastly different from many elections past, simply because of the use of social media to educate, disperse information, and encourage users to go to the voting booths. Barack Obama is a great case study of this. Social media users served as reporters, experts, analytics and columnists during this election.