Wired writes that Twitter CEO Biz Stone believes Twitter will generate revenue through non-traditional advertising in 2010.

Twitter boss Biz Stone has revealed that paid-for accounts are all ready to launch and that we will see the service this year. Speaking to the BBC, Stone announced that the commercial service, which has been mooted for a while, will be open to those who want to pay but it does not mean that businesses using the micro-blogging site will have to migrate over to the new premium accounts.Find out more about it, here.

Twitter multiplie les objectifs ambitieux et ne s’en cache pas. Après avoir dévoilé qu’il sera désormais possible de géolocaliser la provenance des tweets par le biais des applications mobiles du site de microblogging, il vient d’annoncer qu’il proposera d’ici la fin de l’année l’ouverture de comptes payants destinés aux professionnels. Ceux ci proposeront la même interface que dans la version gratuite mais en y ajoutant des outils d’analyse statistique des données échangées sur le réseau social. Concrètement, les professionnels pourront analyser leur audience afin de monétiser leur contenu et d’adapter leurs tweets à une stratégie commerciale mais également, analyser en temps réel un buzz.

Pour enfin devenir rentable, Biz Stone, le co-fondateur de Twitter, ne cache pas que sa plate-forme pourrait également être amenée, l’année prochaine, à conclure des partenariats avec plusieurs médias basés sur la syndication des contenus Twitter. Il a cependant souligné de nouveau que son site n’était pas « à vendre ».

Comprenons ici que Twitter veut affiner son modèle économique. Dans un entretien accordé à la BBC, Biz Stone a déclaré : “Il existe plusieurs moyens pour nous de gagner de l’argent, et nous verrons ces prochains mois ce qui nous correspond le mieux”.

Twitter parmi les stars du Nasdaq, de la science fiction?

Souvenez vous, Twitter avait renfloué ses caisses grâce à une levée de fonds de 100 millions de dollars opérée auprès des banques et des fonds de capital-risque Insight Venture Partners, T. Rowe Price, Institutional Venture Partners, Spark Capital, Benchmark Capital et Morgan Stanley.

Maintenant, Biz Stone n’exclu pas la possibilité d’introduire Twitter en Bourse. « Notre objectif est de développer notre société d’une manière pérenne. Si une introduction en Bourse est la meilleure façon d’y arriver, alors nous le ferons », explique t’il lors d’une conférence à l’Université d’Oxford, sans pour autant citer de dates. Il prénomme cependant l’année 2010 « l’année du revenu » pour son site.

« Nous avons tout le temps devant nous ; créons d’abord de la valeur pour l’utilisateur, ensuite nous en créerons pour nous”, a expliqué Biz Stone.

Le dernier objectif est d’atteindre un milliard d’utilisateurs d’ici 2013, selon la BBC. Audacieux, quand on sait que Facebook, le réseau social le plus utilisé au monde, compte “seulement” 300 millions d’utilisateurs.

Sources : hightech.nouvelobs.com ; itespresso.fr ; e24.fr

Biz Stone says Twitter revenue will be in 2010, but promises advertising will be “non traditional.” Hmm. What does that mean? Non traditional is so, well, broad, right?

Does Biz mean that there won’t be a string of ads floating in the right or left nav bars of our Twitter pages? I hope it doesn’t ever come to that.

Here’s one way I think it might go. Twitter would be nuts to continue allowing businesses to use their services for free. WIth all the apps around to do the searching for you, like tweepsearch and Refollow, any business can hire a “Twintern,” load ‘em up with caffeine and for little money market the heck out of their brand.

I think Twitter will soon start charging businesses big bucks for access to their tweople. Basically, they are simply not in the business of doing favors for other businesses. All that money that has migrated away from newspapers and television (traditional media) over the past few years will flow to Twitter and other social media sites, like Facebook. You can’t open up the newspaper without hearing about another major corporation joining the social media bandwagon.

Why else would R. Rowe Price and Insight Ventures throw another $100 million at Twitter in September? How else could the business be valued at $1 billion? Any finance student will tell you it’s all about the present value of this huge future revenue stream.

Biz Stone, uno de los co-fundadores de Twitter, ha indicado que su empresa podría acabar cotizando en la bolsa para obtener capital para costear sus operaciones, una posibilidad que sería interesante para muchos inversores.

La empresa, que ya lleva tres años en el mercado, ya está logrando algunos beneficios, y de hecho está centrando sus esfuerzos en lograr cifras positivas en 2010, el año que va a ser realmente el año de los beneficios. No sé si vamos a tener cifras positivas, pero tenemos tiempo suficiente, dijo Stone el pasado lunes.

En septiembre, Twitter recibió una nueva ronda de inversiones. Algunos estiman en 100 millones  de dólares la cantidad total, pero para poder continuar con sus operaciones Stone indicó que no quería vender la empresa, pero que analizarían las posibilidades de ir a una oferta pública de acciones inicial.

Si realmente llegase a cotizar en Bolsa (en la NASDAQ), sería un gran avance tanto en lo económico como en conjunto de todo lo que es Twitter y lo más importante, un servicio de microblogging estaría tras los pasos de gigantes como Google, Apple, Amazon en lo que a términos económicos se refiere.

Vía| The INQUIRER

Twitter désormais disponible en français
Les utilisateurs francophones de Twitter peuvent désormais consulter la version française du site de micro-blogs, a annoncé Twitter vendredi sur son blog officiel. “Il est maintenant possible de changer les paramètres de langue en français grâce à la participation des traducteurs qui ont contribué à transformer Twitter en une plate-forme de communication véritablement mondiale”, annonce le site. Biz Stone, le cofondateur de Twitter, avait invité début octobre un “petit groupe” d’usagers à devenir des “traducteurs bénévoles”, comme l’avait déjà fait le site de socialisation Facebook, pour disposer de version en français, allemand, italien et espagnol. Twitter, qui permet de publier des messages de 140 caractères maximum, revendique plus de 50 millions d’utilisateurs, 3 ans après son lancement en août 2006.
La source : CBNews

A bit of a tweet deal for companies

Twitter co-founder Biz Stone today confirmed plans for paid-for corporate accounts on the microblogging giant. Within these new commercial accounts users will gain an enhanced experience with access to analytical tools and ways to gain feedback from their followers. In the interview with the BBC, Stone comments;  “One of the first things we’re going to do explicitly is commercial accounts and that is providing a special layer of access. Twitter will always be free to everyone whether it is commercial or personal, but you’ll be able to pay for an additional layer of access to learn more about your Twitter account to get some freed back to get some analytics to help you become a better twitter

Keen to stress the free and openness of Twitter, Biz also took a pop at Rupert Murdoch’s plans for paid content during the interview. He said that he “would love to see what happens” if Murdoch’s plans of banning Google were to happen. His take on the situation: “They should be looking at this as an opportunity to try something radically different and find out a way to make a ton of money from being radically open rather than some money from being ridiculously closed.” Stone was in the mood for talking having also tipped his hat at possible media company and search engine team ups in the near future, naming Google and Bing as companies that he would like to get involved with. Even with the possible commercial deals with Orange and Vodafone announced this week, the plans for the future and over 7 million users worldwide Stone believes “We have a lot of work to do”.

http://www.t3.com/news/twitter-to-offer-paid-for-commercial-accounts?=42371

Check out this insightful forum discussion (video via Fry) with the following three insightful participants plus host.

Stephen Fry, Biz Stone, Founder and Chief Executive of Twitter; and Reid Hoffman, Founder and Chief Executive of LinkedIn will discuss the phenomenon of social media and its future impact. [Location: London, UK]

P.S. For those that only know Stephen Fry as a funny man (of which he is), Stephen was exceedingly insightful and eloquent in this forum sharing his perspectives on things. Go check out the video. For those that care about social media and social networking, it is a must watch. Enjoy.

In light of my recent post about Biz Stone’s remarks about Rupert Murdoch’s displeasure over his News Corp titles being linked to by Google News, I decided to do some more research on Twitter. I’ve never really gotten the gist of it – I tried to get into it about a half a year ago, but couldn’t. I’ve always understood and appreciated the importance it has played in citizen journalism and political life – protests in Iran and updates on the Mumbai terror situation. Twitter has undoubtedly enhanced social media and revolutionized citizen media. We no longer receive day-old news. Updates are instantaneous and we can find out what is happening around the globe with the click of a button. I found this video on ComedyCentral.com – it’s pretty funny and made me realize aspects of Twitter that I did not know of before.

What really interested me about Stephen Colbert’s interview with Biz Stone was the co-founder’s plans for a business model. Many think that because Twitter does not generate any revenue, they lack a business model, which is untrue. Stone has sort of a delayed business plan, which he admits is a slow process. People can really learn something from Stone – not to rush into anything and let things unfold as they may.

We have studied different types of business models for online and independent newspapers/magazines in my Independent Media class. Most organizations subscribe to a consumer-supported business model, or an advertiser-supported business model. They either receive money from subscriptions or advertising. For the past two years Twitter has tested out alternative methods to rack in some revenue. Whether it’s partnering with businesses to get products more notoriety or enhancing features on their search bar, Stone is doing what he can to prevent his site from either accepting money from advertisers or charging users for subscriptions. Business Week blogger David L. Smith does a good job of outlining the test models.

Whether these models actually work are in question. But it would be interesting to see if any of them do work. They could fundamentally change the way independent businesses receive funding for their projects.

kayBEE.

Twitter founder Biz Stone challenged media owner mogul Rupert Murdoch’s accusations that websites like Google are stealing content from his News Corp congolomerate and reposting it on the Internet. Murdoch has plans to set up a paywall next spring in order to block stories from being linked by sites like Google.

Stone suggested that Murdoch take a deeper look into linking his content with Google and “find out how to make a ton of money out of being radically open rather than some money by being ridiculously closed.”

In a time of radical change, Murdoch seems to be holding on to traditional volumes of news and communication. It’s obvious that he is not on board with the current media revolution. Charging users to see his content seems to be counterproductive–he’s closing out his audience and making the Internet, which for now is free from any barriers, an exclusive space limited to those who are willing to pay the fee.

Stone says he’d “love to see what happens“ if Murdoch begins to charge users to read the news. He also was interviewed by the BBC and told them that the”future is openness, not closed.”

Wow. That really really sounds familiar. Arianna Huffington anyone? Rich Lowry possibly? Matt Taibbi, Kate Sheppard, Josh Marshall, Glenn Greenwald? You think that men like Murdoch would learn from people who have seen success while doing things differently. This brings us back to the issue of net neutrality. If it doesn’t harm other people and doesn’t have an affect on internet providers or other people’s services, what is the big deal? Is it because there is a big bad scary world out there with a ton of ideas that are different from the norm?

Rupert Murdoch’s Tweet from 11.20: I want to control the world.

kayBEE

p.s.- I used Google News to look up the articles for this post. HAHA!

I’ve always regarded “What are you doing?” as mere placeholder text. Look at it this way: if you use Twitter long enough, you’d soon ignore the question’s existence altogether. You don’t even notice it’s there. Something like Seth Godin’s ‘Purple Cow’ analogy.

When it comes to prompts, I believe their primary role is to attract new users to Twitter. The prompt influences what their first tweet will be about. Twitter CEO Biz Stone would probably agree with me on this. (Initially, I thought Twitter was banal and pointless because I took “What are you doing?” at face value.)

Be it “What are you doing?” or “What’s happening”, I don’t feel that either question can justify itself based on the many ways Twitter is used. I feel that prompts like these can actually affect the type of information that flows on Twitter perhaps by subconsciously directing the user’s thought processes. Considering this, “What’s happening?” is disruptive and debilitates Twitter in more ways than one.

Firstly, the new question’s specificity makes it even more narrow and limiting than “What are you doing?”. If enough people are influenced and hence adhere to answering “What’s happening?” more and more often, the Twitterverse will be so much for the worse – being reduced to 5 million news organizations. People’s expectations and perceptions of Twitter will undergo a gradual mental shift, and you might be more likely to see Twitter as a news outlet more than anything else in the future. I don’t wish to see this sort of influence on a write-what-you-want platform. It seems to me insidious.

Secondly, I see the new question as an inadequate attempt to include the activity of linking Tweets to news stories and blog posts. The vagueness of “What’s happening?” seem to indicate classifying every linked-tweet under a single, universal category. Fort Hood is placed on the same cognitive level of importance as eating KFC chicken – the un-newsworthy but interesting/witty tweet will be marginalised gradually, moving Twitter towards being just another news aggregator like Digg. Contrary to the very idea of bringing people of different places and walks of life together via microblogging, we may see people drifting apart and communities separated just because they have a different take on “What’s happening?”.

Then again, the impact of the above may me reduced if users naturally begin to ignore the prompt altogether after say, maybe 100 tweets.

What should the prompt be then? I suggest something inclusive, catchy, and not even a question.

‘Go ahead’.

A few things have got me thinking about the etiquette of Twitter recently and the social norms that are developing around it. Many of these themes were addressed at the ‘Social media – a force for good?’ event held at NESTA yesterday that featured Biz Stone, co-founder and Chief Executive of Twitter; Reid Hoffman, Founder and Chief Executive of LinkedIn, and the inimitable Stephen Fry.

You can watch the whole event here, so rather than rehash their discussion, I want to highlight three instances where the unspoken social norms of Twitter were brought out into the open.

To Tweet or not to Tweet

The first was a reaction to my use of Twitter.

Earlier this week I launched the Urban Mashup blog with a post on the  ‘Social Media 09′  Mashup*event where I had been one of the speakers. As I was keen to get a debate going, I used Twitter to send a Direct Message (DM) to a number of the other speakers and participants that had attended the event. I also copied the DM to a few people that weren’t there who I thought might be interested.

I didn’t figure this was a big deal. After all, you didn’t need to be at the event to have an opinion about what I was discussing. However, I figured wrong.

I soon received this public rebuff from a recipient of my Direct Message:

1. I wasn’t at the event. 2. We’ve never spoken. 3. You DMing me a link to your write-up not exactly *social* media genius it?

Although I issued an immediate public and private apology (via DM) to the offended recipient, there followed something of a ‘Twitter spat’ between us that required an intervention from @paul_clarke, who knows us both, to help calm things down.

The harder they come, the Harder they Twitterfall

The second situation occurred at another Mashup* event where this time, I was not present. The story goes that during the panel discussion there was a delay in connecting the live Twitterfeed to the overhead display.

While this was getting set up, a member of the audience used the #mashupevent hash-tag to criticize Tony Fish, the Chair of the panel, using a four letter expletive and making a derogatory remark about his physical appearance. Moment’s later, the feed went live and the remark was made public to everyone in the audience, much to the shock of everyone in the room.

What happened next was interesting.

Emma – one of the Mashup* organizers – was so incensed by the remark that she identified the individual concerned through his Twitter ID (@swith) and attempted to confront him immediately after the event finished. His rather sheepish looking colleagues all claimed that he had legged it, but that didn’t matter because the Mashup* team had all the details they needed to get in touch with him and his employer (who had paid for him to attend).

Sure enough the next day, @swith sent a deeply apologetic email claiming that he was horrified when it appeared on the screen. But you’ve got to wonder why did he use the event hash-tag if he didn’t want it to be seen? Given that his company had paid for him to attend the event, who was responsible for his message? If the comment had been sent by email, would the consequences have been different?

The court of public opinion

My third observation comes from the national response to the appearance of the BNP’s Nick Griffin on Question Time.

According to Tweetminster (who did an excellent job of providing live stats throughout the broadcast), 99% of Tweets expressed anti BNP sentiment.  However, the comments received by message boards such as the BBC’s ‘Have Your Say’, were far more varied, and apparently the moderators were overwhelmed managing the flood of offensive comments.

Why the difference between sentiment expressed on Twitter and elsewhere? A recent YouGov poll points to a different Twitter demographic, but I think there could be something else in play.

Unlike a message board that enables you to post messages as ‘Angry from Aldershot’, Twitter displays your personal identity to the world. As a result, I suspect that people Tweet the version of themselves they want other people to see.

As Stephen Fry and the other participants at the #svuk event acknowledged, Twitter is blurs the public and personal even more than Facebook. If you break the unwritten social etiquette – as I discovered – there is a powerful and immediate feedback loop.

The Twist in the tale

Ironically, it seems my public spat on Twitter led to more people viewing and commenting on my original blog post. So was it a case of  ‘lose friends and influence people’?

Photograph: Stephen Fry and Biz Stone at Social Media – A force for good? Courtesy of NESTA via Flickr

The first ever World Innovation Summit for Education put on by the Qatar Foundation in Doha last week was a great success. The intelligent and forward-looking ideas and programs discussed throughout the conference represented a ‘triumph of humanity, not of technology’ – a phrase coined by Biz Stone, co-founder of Twitter, in the Wednesday morning plenary with regard to their aspirations for the now-ubiquitous micro-blogging platform.

Having the rarely paralleled budget to fly and accommodate 1,000 delegates from all over the world undoubtedly helped QF to gather the varied, dedicated, talented and truly global audience. And while certain aspects of the event were quite un-innovative (i.e. traditional conference format, limited wireless accessibility in session rooms), overall, the 3 days of discussion were extremely valuable, promising great things for WISE 2010 and beyond.

I found the Innovation plenary on Wednesday morning particularly interesting, and in the name of the event’s overriding theme, wanted to share some highlights from that session. Professor Sugata Mitra of Newcastle University wowed the crowd with his ‘Hole in the Wall’ – an experiment demonstrating the value of ’self-organized’ learning for children of all backgrounds, in all contexts. Between myself and colleagues from Birzeit University, hopefully Prof Mitra will join us in Palestine very soon to help us replicate the lessons he’s learned to promote intellectual curiosity and self-learning among at-risk and hard-to-reach children. One colleague made the valid point that teachers would never be irrelevant or unneeded. It is not enough to provide kids with access to information: we must provide some guidance to shape and direct their learning. In the ideal case, I absolutely agree. However, Professor Mitra’s method (learn more about his striking results here) is a wonderful option for communities who otherwise have no access to education.

“Mediators,” not teachers, are required for Professor Mitra’s work – not repositories of knowledge, but rather warm individuals who admire children’s natural curiosity and drive to explore the world around them. Again, I would be the last to make all teachers redundant. However, in hard-to-reach and low-income communities, this is a very interesting supposition. Perhaps programs like Teach for American (and soon Teach for All) can lead to successful hybrid models of trained teachers and ‘just-good-smart-and/or-dedicated-people’ as ideal brokers of learning in usually marginalized communities.

Another important tension that surfaced throughout the event, and particularly during this session, is that between public and private provision of education and related services. One panelist made the valid point that this is an old and tired debate, which we must move beyond toward a widely accepted consensus that it can be neither one nor the other. New partnerships are required to adequately provide the access and quality that all children in the world have a right to (as laid out in the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which celebrates 20 years today under the shadow of 70 million children out of school). Alex Wong, director of the World Economic Forum’s Global Education Initiative, made a valuable point based on his experience in Palestine, Jordan, Egypt and Rajasthan, that governments, at the Ministry level, need to hold ultimate responsibility and oversight for the field of education. However, he endorsed without reservation the essential value of engaging private and civil society partners as sources of innovation, increased coverage of remote areas and insurance of education’s relevance to eventual economic activity.

Finally, Biz Stone asserted that all beings on earth learn through play: a message that I particularly appreciated, coming from the early childhood and non-formal education sectors. His message about Twitter’s massive success was also familiar to TYO: wait to see how people use a technology or service in order to advance its design. This advice resembles TYO’s needs-based approach to implementing our programs on the ground, based on an original mission and vision.

Great video coverage of the event is available on the WISE website, and some fellow participants (Times Ed correspondent Michael Shaw and educator/blogger Tom Barrett) have done a good job of covering various aspects of the event. Despite the predictably vague laundry list of ’strategic priorities’, we are hopeful that WISE members will challenge themselves to integrate the conference’s lessons in their work. Further, the recurrent mention of early childhood education was inspiring – while it didn’t come out in the Final Declaration as hoped, it was a real pleasure to meet so many like-minded folks. Keep your eyes on this space for further news about the evolution of partnerships developed at WISE 09!

Charging to read news content is like ‘putting genie back in bottle’, says Twitter co-founder Biz Stone

The co-founder of Twitter today warned Rupert Murdoch that his plans to charge for online content, and block Google from using stories produced by his News International titles, were a vain attempt to “put the genie back in the bottle”.

In recent weeks Murdoch has launched a vitriolic attack on Google and other web companies, accusing them of “stealing” content created by his titles, including the Times and the Sun. Management at News International is working on plans to introduce an online paywall next spring and prevent stories from being linked to by sites such as Google News.

Twitter co-founder Biz Stone today warned that Murdoch “should be looking at it as an opportunity to do something radically different and find out how to make a ton of money out of being radically open rather than some money by being ridiculously closed”.

Speaking at an event organised by the National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts (Nesta) in London, Stone added that the speed of change on the internet meant Murdoch’s plan was likely to “fail fast”. He was joined in his attack by Reid Hoffman, co-founder of networking site LinkedIn, who added: “I am sure that during the transition from horses to automobiles there were some people bemoaning the loss of horse transport.”

In contrast, Stone said Twitter’s future lay in making more of the service available to application developers and other partners so they could build on the stream of “tweets” created by its users. The social networking site’s users post more than 500 messages per second. The service is increasingly being used by news organisations as a way of discovering breaking news.

“I don’t know what the future of traditional media is,” said Stone. “But from my perspective and Twitter’s perspective I think there is a wonderful co-operative alliance there in terms of the wisdom of crowds, and as we add things to Twitter… maybe we can help.”

Twitter, which was valued at more than $1bn just over a month ago, is looking to drive revenues and eventually start making a profit. It plans to introduce some new features over the coming months. Stone, who set up the company just two years ago, said that by the end of the year it would have begun to offer its corporate users a suite of new analytical tools to help them use Twitter to keep in touch with customers and keep an eye on their brands. An increasing number of corporations, from mobile phone companies to airlines, have added Twitter as a means by which customers can get in touch.

Twitter is also considering giving its users reputation scores, which would help traditional news organisations using the social networking service to spot breaking news stories. Twitter recently announced search deals with both Google and Microsoft’s Bing and the deals added fuel to recent speculation that the micro-blogging site might be a takeover target for either business.

But Stone emphasised a sale was not on the cards: “That was never something we were interested in talking about”. Instead, the company was interested in doing more partnership deals. “One of the things we are seeking to do as we have already done with Myspace as we have done with LinkedIn, as we have done with AOL, as we have done with Google, as we have done with Bing, is to share our data and form partnerships that are long standing… Twitter wants to work with social networks, with mobile networks, with TV networks with search engines… we want to put a little Twitter in everything.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/nov/19/twitter-murdoch-paywall-charge-content

Now we all know that YES2009 is a thinly veiled data-mining operation of massive proportions.

But a few days ago I received a free ticket via their lucky draw, so yay me: free hotel stay! Chen Chow pointed out that I was but part of a fortunate 500 who were selected out of 550,000 people, for a 0.1% success rate. And off I went to YES2009 as a delegate. Gratis, muchos gracias.

And now the best (read: aptest, most truthful, critical, scathing) review so far of the event has been by Zedeck Siew on KLue, and adding to the cacophony of post-YES2009 comments are my rants.

One must wonder, though, why no one has written about all this except Zedeck, especially given the massive media coverage of the event (CNN, IHT [what. really? official partnership = free IHT newspapers in their definition], Media Prima, et al] with the Malaysian journos and dozens of self-proclaimed twitterati in attendance.

But we all know why.

***

This was how low the New Straits Times stooped:

Net-savvy Najib is way to go, says Facebook’s Zuckerberg

Twitter founder applauds Najib for embracing new media

***

YES2009 was held in the Putrajaya International Convention Center, which despite its spanking interior design and impressive architecture, was a massive flop.

Wi-fi sucked ass, and was as steadfast as Ibrahim Ali and Jelapang’s Hee Yit Foong. But the clincher was that the designer of the 5,000?-seat auditorium did not find it fitting to place plug points anywhere near the audience, and where plug points were placed, they did not work. Syabas, Malaysia boleh!

If this is an International Convention Center, my college Lecture Hall must surely qualify to be an Interplanetary Convention Center. Okay, bad joke.

***

What was truly disappointing was not the USD450 ticket price, the non-engagement (only two questions from the floor for Biz Stone, really?), the shoddy logistics, the shitty Hotel Malaya with its nonexistent wake-up call, or the misnomer “Youth Engagement Summit,” as Zedeck points out. Rather it was the patronizing attitude with which the organizers saw fit to treat the “youth” in the summit. This is the biggest irony of it all: that a convention supposed to “inspire” and “empower” youth import and duplicate such “adult” condescension from the outside world.

Right before the summit began I went to relieve myself, as is my habit, trained no less by 11 years of Malaysian education. When I came back, however, a couple of delegates and I were told to “wait outside” because “dia kata apabila pintu dah tutup, tak boleh buka” (instructions are that once the doors are closed they cannot be opened again). Right.

So I asked “Bang, dalam ada tandas tak?” (Are there bathrooms inside [the auditorium]?)

“Takde.” (No)

“Ah. Jadi bagaimana?” (How now, brown cow?)

The guy was hesitant, but another person in charge was nicer, smarter, and opened the door for the rest of us to go in.

Such bullshit. Of course I was incensed. As if they were going to tell captains of industry or CEOs that they could not go to pee, because if they did, they would not be allowed in. This was way before the summit started, and when we were allowed in the band had just begun playing their opening song.

This was the attitude with which YES2009 treated its youth delegates throughout the event.

Underlying this condescension was a sickening, parallel system which treated “non-delegates” better. Youth delegates who came for free (all 500 of us) were given blue tags, and everyone else (sponsors, media, paying delegates), who probably outnumbered the youth, had tags of different colours (refer to picture).

In this system, non-delegates sat in front; the youth sat at the back, away from the speakers.

Non-delegates could go pee anytime they wanted; youth delegates would be locked out.

Non-delegates could enter the auditorium from the ground floor; youth delegates, coming from lunch at the cafeteria on the ground floor, had to enter the auditorium after a pointless climb on three or four escalators, and take their seats after descending a few flights of stairs.

During tea breaks non-delegates and youth delegates were served in exclusive areas: no cross-socialization was allowed.

These are small things, yes, but all these small things exactly replicate the inequality in access, status, opportunity, information, and networks that the youth face, vis-a-vis the rich, old, connected, and powerful, in the outside world. That a self-proclaimed equalizer of the playing field (“where opinions, discussions, and experiences can be shared”) can duplicate real-world, systemic, structural barriers is the ultimate irony.

Youth Engagement Summit? More like Non-Engagement Summit. Or Non-Youth Engagement Summit.

***

Of course there were good things.

Goethe-quoting Geldof was very inspiring.

I had fun, I met amazing people, I stayed in a shitty hotel, and (this is for you, Zedeck) I talked to some very cool Indonesians about rasa sayange and batik and told them how much I liked their Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (Corruption Eradication Commission).

All in all, however, it was a very expensive (rumour has it that Sime Darby paid RM5 million? and AirAsia more than that?) summit that did not walk its talk. Really, all I wanted to do was to meet more amazing South East Asians. But there was no time and no structured program through which to do so. Ahmad, fellow Malaysian, shares my longing for more engagement.

And thus, YES2009 is at most but a wasted opportunity: feel-good, inspiring in the vaguest sense possible, and enjoyable for most participants, but utterly and sickeningly hypocritical for me.

Social Media – A force for good?

So, this is the first of my Happening posts, and I’m deviating already. This event tomorrow isn’t actually ‘happening’ in Manchester – at least it isn’t at time of writing!

This event happens in London with a small, and probably quite select, audience. I only got the email from NESTA today, but with a bit more notice maybe we could have called some friends, carved out an hour, found a place with a macbook wired up to a plasma, and gathered round with our pack-up lunches. Maybe we still will?

Tomorrow, Stephen Fry (you know who he is) ; Biz Stone, Founder and Chief Executive of Twitter; and Reid Hoffman, Founder and Chief Executive of LinkedIn will discuss the phenomenon of social media and its future impact.

Frankly, I’m getting rather bored of Stephen Fry and his love/hate thing with Twitter – sometimes I worry he will tweet himself (like pop).  That said, when I first opened my account I did follow him and @wossy for a while, until I found my own friends and interests online. So, with others I’m sure, I thank @StephenFry for my introduction to the Twitterverse.  Yes, sorry Stephen, I used you up and spat you out – or unfollowed you to be more precise.

So, in isolation, sat at ones desk with headphones on – this event might class as a ‘learning lunch’ but it’s not much of a cultural experience.  But if you guys want to gather together round a screen and discuss what’s said (with or without me!)  I think it classes as a Happening - so yes, it’s in!

IMPORTANT BIT: You can watch the discussion here on the NESTA website.

Join the conversation by posting a question for any of the speakers – all you need to do is add #svuk to your question on Twitter.

This event forms part of NESTA’s  Silicon Valley comes to the UK event programme.

O microblog Twitter voltou a testar sua ferramenta oficial de ‘retweet’ (encaminhamento de mensagens) automático em fase beta. Nesta terça-feira (17/11), usuários do microblog voltara a visualizar o botão ‘retweet’ em suas mensagens, logo abaixo da função de resposta (‘reply’). A ferramenta apresentada em meados de setembro pelo Twitter dispensa o uso do comando ‘RT’ no início das mensagens encaminhadas no microblog e foi criticada pelos usuários por não permitir a edição do conteúdo ‘retwitado’. O beta liberado hoje mantém o retweet sem edição.

O microblog também decidiu acabar com a lista de “usuários sugeridos” depois que políticos da Califórnia acusaram o recurso de “tendencioso”. Na segunda-feira (16/11), o cofundador do Twitter, Biz Stone, informou que, no lugar do serviço, virá uma lista com escolhas feitas de modo “mais programático”, o que sugere que ela será automática.

fonte:IDGNOW!

Twitter says it plans to scrap its hand-picked Suggested Users List after controversy has erupted over the selection of people on the list.

According to a study by O’Reilly tech researcher Ben Lorica, on average, users on the list could gain approximately 50,000 new followers after being on the list for a week.

Wow! Unfortunately, I was never on this list

From NBC Bay Area:

“That list will be going away,” Stone told reporters on the sidelines of a conference for young entrepreneurs in Malaysia’s capital, Putrajaya. “In its stead will be something that is more programmatically chosen, something that actually delivers more relevant suggestions.”

Twitter co-founder Biz Stone said the company was looking for a more systematic way to introduce its prominent posters, including sports figures, celebrities and politicians, to newcomers to the site.

Twitter’s Suggested Users List, more commonly known as the SUL, numbers around 500 suggested users and proved controversial after its launch earlier this year. Recently, political watchdogs in California criticized the list, claiming it favors Democrats over Republicans in the state’s gubernatorial race next year.

Twitter co-founder Biz Stone

 Social media site Twitter plans to scrap its handpicked list of “suggested users” to follow after controversy erupted over the selection of people on the list, a company executive said on Monday.

Twitter co-founder Biz Stone said the company was seeking a more systematic way to introduce its prominent posters, including sports figures, celebrities and politicians, to newcomers to the site.

“That list will be going away,” Stone told reporters on the sidelines of a conference for young entrepreneurs in Putrajaya. “In its stead will be something that is more programmatically chosen, something that actually delivers more relevant suggestions.”

Twitter’s list, which numbers around 500 suggested users, proved controversial after its launch earlier this year. Recently, political watchdogs in California criticised the list, claiming it favours Democrats over Republicans in the state’s gubernatorial race next year.

Stone and other company employees choose who will be featured on the list. Twitter has said the list is based on users “who show that they provide value by posting often and engaging with their followers.”

Stone indicated the suggestions could eventually be tailored to new users’ interests, though he did not elaborate. Nor did he say when the list would be removed or replaced.

Twitter plans to add other new features, including an easier, faster way to forward messages, and wants to be translated into more languages, Stone said. It is presently available in English, Japanese and Spanish.

“Ninety-seven per cent of our efforts are basically on delivering user value,” he said. “Everyone is still experimenting. It’s still young, it’s still early. Anything goes right now as we figure out what works and what doesn’t work.”

Il simbolo della nuova alleanza

Continuano le alleanze. Dopo aver trovato l’accordo per fare telefonate voip tramite Twitter (il cui unico limite è la lunghezza della telefonata – al massimo due minuti) ora l’uccellino più famoso del mondo ha stretto amicizia con un altro social network unico nel suo genere, LinkedIn.

Ora, grazie a questo accordo, gli utenti di entrambi i servizi potranno aggiornare il loro account da entrambe le piattaforme. Grazie alla partnership, spiega LinkedIn in una nota, gli utenti della rete sociale dedicata al mondo del lavoro e ai liberi professionisti avranno la possibilità di «condividere informazioni e conoscenze strategiche per il loro business all’interno di un network di contatti ancora più ampio, ma anche tenere traccia e gestire i propri “Twitter feed” direttamente dal profilo su LinkedIn, monitorando in modo immediato le notizie e le discussioni più recenti sul loro settore d’interesse»

Un altro modo per la compagnia di Biz Stone di spostare la piattaforma in un lato sempre più business, in linea con le dichiarazioni fatte un po’ di tempo fa, e un modo per LinkedIn di diventare più immediato e veloce, elemento fondamentale in un mondo del lavoro sempre più legato all’immediatezza delle informazioni.

In questo video, Biz Stone (co-fondatore di Twitter) e Reid Hoffman (co-fondatore di LinkedIn) spiegano assieme le loro motivazioni sul perchè di questa partnership.

In questo link troverete le istruzioni di LinkedIn per integrare al meglio i due servizi.

NOWTRUTH.ORG
NEWS NOW!
(510) 394-4701
EMAIL: nowtruth1@gmail.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/griotz

Herein below is an email to Twitter regarding their engaging in censorship to protect California Attorney General Jerry Brown, Oakland City Attorney John Russo and Alameda County D.A. Tom Orloff’s corruption in an ongoing case reported to the U. S. Attorney General, Department of Justice.

Ginger,

On October 17, and 21, 2009  I sent emails to Twitter complaining about a “suspension” of my account (@nowtruth) for allegedly replying to tweets sent to me and “suspicious activity”!
I have not received any response to my rejection of the claims and contesting of the “suspension”. The idea that someone can have their account suspended for replying to tweets sent to them is preposterous!!! Isn’t that the process? Further, there were @mentions, not replys, for which your system does not seem to be able to distinguish the difference!!
However, when someone tweets you, you can and should reply with a meaningful response. ALL of the @mentions/replies/responses were to related items or news of a related nature to the attention of those mentioned, not anyone else. So there is no spamming issue. What’s the offense?
There is NOTHING suspicious about this action! Were you contacted with a report of reply spam? Our tweets are all you need to establish their validity. The tweet was regarding the corruption on behalf of California Attorney General Jerry Brown, Oakland City Attorney John Russo and Alameda County D.A. Tom Orloff in an ongoing case reported to the U. S. Attorney General, Department of Justice. We have received several @mentions from people sympathetic to those parties had have tried tirelessly to silence this case and the information about it from getting out to the masses in an effort to protect them. The specific tweet in question was displaying an email from John Russo threatening a KPFA reporter, Gabrielle Wilson, if she proceeded with a radio broadcast of a show with Brown, Russo and the plaintiff in the case.

During the week of August 23, 2009 Miss Wilson received a phone call from Evan Westrep from Brown’s office. He left a voice mail message for her at radio station KPFA stating he would pass her interview request along to Brown’s schedulers.

During that same week, Miss Wilson received emails and phone calls from Oakland City Attorney Russo’s press director Alex Katz. One email Katz sent to her and Sasha Lilley, interim Program Director at KPFA, with a cc: to Mark Moromodi, Supervising Deputy for the Oakland City Attorney, proclaiming that City Attorney John Russo was not involved in the case, yet he wanted her to answer questions as to why she wanted to provide a forum for the plaintiff, al-Hakim whom he alleged had posted threatening videos about John Russo. Heres an copy of that email that was a twitpic sent to our followers:

Katz followed up that email with a voicemail message he left for Miss Wilson after the close of business just hours before the scheduled broadcast was to occur threatening her and warned Miss Wilson not to broadcast the interview and demanded she speak with him before she aired the scheduled program. He did this though he wanted Miss Wilson and KPFA to believe that John Russo and the City Attorney’s office was not involved in the case and had nothing to hide! You can listen to that voicemail message here.

Download now or listen on posterous

Gabby-Katz 2nd Call.m4a (1821 KB)

Download now or listen on posterous

Gabby-Katz 2nd Call.mp3 (1821 KB)

Luis Medina, a manager in the music director’s office at KPFA then calls Miss Wilson just hours prior to the scheduled broadcast and leaves a voicemail message warning her that it was very important for the broadcast not to occur. He also stated that there might be very serious repercussions taken if she were to proceed as planned. She even received a phone call from the long-time regular show host, Emmitt Powell whom was contacted by the station in response to Russo’s effort to censor the show.
Miss Wilson proceeded to host the program all alone to comply with the City Attorney and KPFA’s censorship directive…without any of her invited guests. You can listen to that voicemail message here.

Download now or listen on posterous

Gabby VM-KPFA MD,Luis Medina.m4a (2742 KB)

Download now or listen on posterous

Gabby VM-KPFA MD,Luis Medina.mp3 (2742 KB)

Miss Wilson was forced to make at least three announcements to inform the public whom had tuned in to hear this intriguing panel examine this critical civil rights and corruption case in an important election year, that this incredible show had been canceled due to KPFA’s censorship by Oakland City Attorney John Russo! You can listen to those announcements here.
First Announcement:

Download now or listen on posterous

Gabby Aborted Corrupt Show-1stAnn.m4a (1079 KB)

Download now or listen on posterous

Gabby Aborted Corrupt Show-1stAnn.mp3 (1079 KB)

Second Announcement:

Download now or listen on posterous

Gabby Aborted Corrupt Show-2ndAnn.m4a (1610 KB)

Download now or listen on posterous

Gabby Aborted Corrupt Show-2ndAnn.mp3 (1610 KB)

Third Announcement:

Download now or listen on posterous

Gabby Aborted Corrupt Show-3rdAnn.m4a (1953 KB)

Download now or listen on posterous

Gabby Aborted Corrupt Show-3rdAnn.mp3 (1953 KB)

Russo proceeded to engage in censorship by forcing the cancellation of the show and trying to conceal it from the public. Russo and Brown claim that they are not involved in the case yet irrefutable evidence prove otherwise! If they are not involved and have nothing to hide, why censor the show? Those actions are public now as the reporter released a statement on their crimes of which this is merely another instance of. Now for you.
You aren’t engaging in censorship are you? Have you been contacted by any of these parties or their representatives, including Alex Katz, Joe Trippi, Jeremy D. Thompson, or anyone else regarding this alleged violation of Twitter policy? Is this a problem of your system not being able to differentiate between a reply and an @mention?
I certainly know that if you were investigating suspicious activity in this case, you need to take a look at the actions of those that got you to comply with their desire to censor this case and their continuing crimes for which Twitter founder Evan Williams, co-founder Biz Stone, and Twitter are now involved. We will not stop our civil and criminal investigation in this matter as we proceed, it only widens and deepens in it’s breadth and depth.
There’s nothing even remotely suspicious about our tweets, we will not be censored, and we are continuing to investigate yours and their suspicious activity and to prosecute those involved in these continuing crimes. Anything you need to further investigate feel free to call.

We look forward to your response.

@nowtruth
510.394.4701

Previous message October 21, 2009:
Re: Twitter Support: update on “To Whom It May Concern,    How can an account be suspende…”

Ginger,

How can an account be suspended for replying to messages sent to YOU? Isn’t that the process? When someone tweets you, you can and should reply with a meaningful response. ALL of the replies/responses were to related items or news of a related nature. What’s the offense?
There is NOTHING suspicious about this action! Were you contacted with a report of reply spam? Our tweets are all you need to establish their validity. You aren’t engaging in censorship are you?
Thanks for the response.

ginger wrote:

## In replies all text above this line is added to the ticket ##

Ticket #605636: To Whom It May Concern, How can an account be suspende…

ginger, Oct 21 03:04 pm (PDT):Hello from Twitter,This is an automated confirmation that we received your ticket. If you’re contesting a suspension, be sure to read this entire email; you will need to take further action in order to reopen your ticket.   Please be sure your account is actually suspended. You should visit your own profile page to make sure you’re suspended and not viewing another person’s suspended profile page–many people think they are suspended when they aren’t. You’ll also know you’re suspended if you log in and see a red notice announcing your suspension on your account. Twitter primarily suspends accounts for Terms of Service violations or spam investigation. If you are suspended, it’s most likely for one or more of these reasons: · aggressive following or follower churn (repeatedly following and unfollowing users) · trend spamming (posting unrelated updates to trending topics to gain attention) · misuse of the reply feature · updates consist of links pointing to phishing sites, malware, or other harmful material · updates consist of duplicate links and/or text · updates consist mainly of links duplicated across multiple accounts, and not personal updates · account identified as potentially being part of a spam cluster · a large number of people block the profile or write in with spam complaints Please review the Twitter Rules for a more comprehensive list: http://help.twitter.com/forums/26257/entries/15790 If you feel you’ve been suspended in error, please reply to this email with a short explanation and be sure to include your username. Responding to this email will reopen this ticket and put your ticket in queue for support, but you need to reply from the address this mail was sent to. If you use an alias (such as username+alias@gmail.com), ensure that your reply comes from the alias address or your ticket may not be seen by our support staff. We will do our best to get back to you within 30 days. If this did not answer your inquiry, responding to this email will reopen this ticket. Thanks, Twitter Support nowtruth, Oct 17 10:39 pm (PDT):To Whom It May Concern,How can an account be suspended for replying to messages sent to YOU? Isn’t that the process? When someone tweets you, you can and should reply with a meaningful response. ALL of the replies/responses were to related items or news of a related nature. What’s the offense? There is NOTHING suspicious about this action! Were you contacted with a report of reply spam? Our tweets are all you need to establish their validity. You aren’t engaging in censorship are you? Thanks for the response.   ———- Review the status of your request and add additional comments here: help.twitter.com/tickets/605636

This email is a service from Twitter Support

Twitter is the leading traffic generator to Fuel Lines. It considerably beats SEO, email and bookmarking directing some 27,000 page views to my blog last month. Traffic is what will help build your agency’s inbound lead generation. So Twitter can be a powerful tool for ad agency new business.

Others are taking note of Twitters potential power for business. LinkedIn has recently announced the integration of its platform into Twitter so that you can cross post between the two services.

Allen Blue, Co-Founder of LinkedIn writes, “LinkedIn has always been about helping you to build your professional identity on the web. The many elements that make up your online professional brand range from your LinkedIn profile to the many professional conversations you’re a part of. Status has proved valuable to our users, from finding new assignments and jobs to kick-starting a global business enterprise.

Now you can amplify those messages by broadcasting them to your audience on Twitter.”

LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman and Twitter co-founder Biz Stone discuss the partnership and its value to you.