This week General Motors announced plans to cease much of its paid advertising on Facebook but retain its various brand pages to “keep the dialogue going” and continue promoting its automotive products on the popular social networking site.

A GM spokesperson said, “paid ads on the site have [had] little impact on consumers’ car purchases”, suggesting GM’s social strategy on Facebook has failed to meet investor expectations.

This is an interesting revelation amidst the IPO frenzy this week, considering GM is one of the top U.S. advertisers in terms of ad spending, dolling out a mammoth $30 to $40 million alone to nurture its Facebook presence.

Regardless of whether GM is doing it wrong or not, or merely broadcasting instead of listening, one critical question being raised of late centers around the long-term viability of Facebook’s business model, which relies almost exclusively on paid advertising revenues.

The challenge for Facebook, particularly in the growing mobile space where people are typically less than receptive to ADs thwarting their small-ish screens, is in monetizing the more than 900 million users without significantly undermining the user experience to the point people feel compelled to leave.
Myspace quickly comes to mind as the poster child in this regard, illustrating the historically fickle nature of Web audiences and the staggering speed with which tech fortunes can rise and fall on the Net. Though Myspace never had 13% of the world’s population perusing their social network, so things could be very different this time around for Mark Zuckerberg and his talented team of 6 billionaires and 1000 millionaires.

But the question stands: Do Facebook Ads really work? And do ‘Likes’ and ‘Fans’ ultimately translate into product sales? Well perhaps not directly into car sales, but how about something a little smaller, like slices of pizza.

The story of Pizza Delicious out of New Orleans appearing on NPR this week is an interesting one because it paints a cautionary portrait of the challenges in running a successful Facebook advertising campaign. But don’t expect a mass exodus of advertisers just yet, Facebook is only 8-years old! Let’s give the platform time to mature.

Alan Kay once famously said, the best way to predict the future is to invent it.

“Invent” also happens to be Hewlett-Packard’s long-standing tagline (exactly how long, I’m not sure). Did you happen to spot the HP logo on Hugh Jackman’s screen above? How about Hugh’s glass phone on the right prominently sporting the Nokia logo.

Glass interfaces seem to be showing up more and more in popular sci-fi lately. And why not? They’re really cool looking, but not quite practical from an ergonomics, manufacturing or design perspective —but perfect as movie props to convey a sense of technological advancement and sophistication several years off into the future.

Let’s assume for a moment HP and Nokia are working on glass interface screens and mobile devices right now, just like the ones depicted above in the film Real Steel. Incidentally, consider the rumour Apple is developing an all-glass version of the iPod and iPhone. Awesome! I want one. Oh but wait, exactly what are the benefits of a glass screen again? —sustainable use of materials? —reduced power consumption (over a standard LCD)? —or does glass merely fulfill some tactile aesthetic desire?

Perhaps our love affair with plastic products is finally coming to an end. Plastic is of course petroleum based and could one day become cost-prohibitive as global oil production slows and environmental concerns curb its use in consumer product offerings.
Karim Rashid made a good point in Objectified when he said high-tech objects, which generally have a shelf life of eleven months, should be 100% disposable. How about laptops and mobile phones made of cardboard, sugarcane or bioplastic instead of polycarbonate.

So maybe glass does make sense.

Even Google seems to be jumping on the glass device bandwagon. Unlike their April Fools spoof last month, Gmail Tap, the Project Glass initiative we’ve been hearing about lately is a very real invention, one that could be destined for our eyeballs very soon.
If you can get past the parody videos poking fun at the concept you might feel slightly titillated—perhaps even a little creeped out—by the thought of friends and family bumping into one another when wearing these accident inducing glasses out in public. While Apple’s Siri and other voice-op UIs suggest conventional screen based interfaces may someday be on the way out (perhaps first in the mobile space), the question worth asking is, would you really wear a pair these Web connected (eye) glass devices?

This isn’t the first time we’ve seen a future concept from one of the tech giants touting shiny glass augmented reality displays and wearable computer devices. Back in October 2011 Microsoft produced a highly polished video entitled Productivity Future Vision that left some people wondering if the future of interaction should be relegated to a single finger sliding ‘pictures under glass’, as Bret Victor eloquently put it in his post on the the future of interaction design.

John Cleese knows a thing or two about inviting creativity. In a very stimulating talk on this very subject, Clesse explores the various challenges in getting to what he calls the open mode of creative thinking:

“We all operate in two contrasting modes, which might be called open and closed. The open mode is more relaxed, more receptive, more exploratory, more democratic, more playful and more humorous. The closed mode is the tighter, more rigid, more hierarchical, more tunnel-visioned.”

Cleese begins his talk (again, well worth a view) by reflecting that he has spent the last 25-years watching how various creative people produced “their stuff”, which ultimately lead to his fascination in how he could become more creative.
Although Cleese concedes, ”telling people how to be creative is easy —it’s only being it [creative] that’s difficult”; “The reason why it’s futile to talk about creativity is that it can’t be explained.”

Clesse notably cites the work of Pscycologist Donald W. Mackinnon who researched creativity in the 1960s and who sought to explain the major facets of creativity, including the generally ill-defined creative process itself.

The Material Girl (does she still go by that name?) graced the threads of Twitter Monday night to answer questions for 90-minutes. Billed as a “one night only” event, Madonna live chatted with fans at @MadonnaMDNAday who were encouraged to use the hashtag #askmadonna to help build interest in her latest studio release MDNA, her first album since 2008.

Meanwhile over at the design inspiration/lifestyle site fab.com Madonna is offering Web audiences a deluxe “web only” $7.99 version of her latest CD at almost 50% off the regular store price.

There’s also a giveaway with the digital music service Spotify for two listeners who play MDNA at least three times during the next two weeks who could then win tickets to one of her upcoming shows.

On Saturday (prior to the Twitter event) Madonna was on a Facebook livestream with late-night TV host Jimmy Fallon responding to fan submitted questions, again just for one night.

Hmm…smells like there’s a digital strategy at work here. All this activity indicates that Madonna is proactively taking steps to strengthen her social media following rather than rely on the traditional talkshow routes and news outlets to create buzz for her new album.
Consider Spotify’s recent integration with Facebook and the new Timeline feature which, among other things, allows people to view a small thumbnail of recently listened to albums and tracks. Madonna’s marketing people are clearly targeting the Facebook platform and things like the new listen with friends feature.

But the above mentioned events (the Twitter chat in particular) seem carefully choreographed—dare I say contrived, perhaps by one of Madonna’s PR marketing aides. After all, the 53-year old Madonna (is she a grandmother yet?) may have just a passing interest in connecting with fans on social networks. Why else would she engage with fans on Twitter for just one night? I suppose daily chats are out of the question, so how about once a week?

Check out the spike in the chart over at social media monitor Radian6 which reveals an interesting blip in Madonna’s recent Twitter feed exchange with fans.

The obvious comparison comes next: Lady Gaga, who arguably sets the bar for social media engagement with fans. No one does it better. With well over 21-million followers they don’t call her the queen of Twitter for nothing. Gaga is also fast approaching 50-million fans on Facebook and is in approximately 1.1-million circles on Google+.

The Material Girl on the other hand couldn’t possibly buy that kind of digital clout. Now could she?

The distinction one could draw between Gaga and Madonna is not simply the disparity between the number of Likes, Followers, and Circles (incidentally Gaga has 5-times as many Facebook fans over Madonna), but the consistency of engagement.
In Gaga’s case the fan engagement seems more authentic because it occurs on a daily basis and doesn’t start and stop abruptly to coincide with album releases as in Madonna’s case.

The Material Girl could learn something from mother mons†er —don’t you think?

Last week I read a great piece about the magic of doing one thing at a time by HBR blog contributor Tony Schwartz.

This morning a link to this same post appeared in my LinkedIn feed as I was doing a number of things simultaneously. In no particular order: responding to emails, checking Twitter, answering a few phone calls, making breakfast/getting my son ready for school, and writing out a few thoughts for this post.

Okay, maybe 4 or 5 things—but who’s counting?

Much has been written lately of the time suck of social media and the Web as a whole contributing to the fragmentation of our thoughts. Quick check: How many browser tabs do you have open at this very moment? Checking Facebook and responding to emails while on the on the phone? Many of us do this and whole lot more every day without even thinking twice.

Not surprisingly the Web is encouraging our brains to be less linear and more hyper-active/multitasking oriented. In fact you could liken our tendency to jump around from hyperlink to hyperlink, browser tab to tab, text message to email to Facebook and so on, as a form of self directed content filtering in which we’re mentally prioritizing and absorbing small chunks of information.

A recent post (definitely worth a read) written by Adi Gaskell touches on the subject of curation, which apparently was a wide topic of discussion at this year’s SXSW conference. But the notion of idea curation is particularly interesting. Adi suggests this is essentially how we process and filter our ideas so we reject the duffers and keep the winners.
In other words, idea curation could be seen as our brains unconsciously telling us where and when to focus our attention by filtering out what’s important and what should be deleted or sent to the trash bin.

So, as Adi suggests, here’s what we could try doing next as a technique for curating our ideas at any given moment:

“Take some time to towel off, maybe put the kettle on and take your mind off of your idea to let your mind mull it over in the background.”

• Take a break
• Do something you enjoy
• Come back to your idea in the cold light of day

Thanks Adi.

(Photo by romanlily)

Expect more airlines to follow KLM’s lead with ‘Meet and Seat‘ over the next few years. The new program allows you to share your Facebook or LinkedIn profile through KLM’s booking management system. Passengers who opt-in can view the profile details of other passengers and determine where they might want to sit on the plane.

Never mind watching in-flight movies or pre-recorded television episodes —content you’ve likely already seen at home. Wouldn’t you rather chat with someone you’ve recently met in the digital space? Perhaps someone with whom you’re casually acquainted but may never have the opportunity to meet face-to-face.

Does sitting next to a social media maven or someone sharing your interests mean you’re more or less likely to engage in conversation than if you were sitting next to some random person?

As a freelance art director I might want to sit next to a potential client based on their Linkedin profile or a digital strategist I follow on Twitter (though not included in KLM’s M&S) who’s resourcing creative for an upcoming campaign. Things could get really interesting if you decide to sit next to someone outside your professional field or immediate area of focus.

While aligning seating plans to social media profiles doesn’t automatically mean conversations are poised to blossom among passengers, it’s a great way to improve the flying experience.

If you’re concerned about sharing too much information about yourself, KLM says, “You can always choose to show less or more profile details, or remove your profile details from the seat map entirely”. Although, as more flights begin offering free wi-fi, once enroute you could easily Google the names of your fellow passengers.

The airport is a prime example.

After wading through a couple hours of mind-numbing line-ups: a long baggage check-in, customs, then security, weary travellers stumbling towards their gate at Toronto’s Pearson International Airport are greeted by a series of loud television screens indiscriminately scattered throughout the travellers lounge area.
The sound of news, sports and weather highlights blaring in continuous loops is obnoxious and difficult—if not impossible—to escape. Their presence only adds to the already high ambient noise levels and overall sense of chaos most of us grudgingly accept as unavoidable aspects of the airport/travelling experience.
I remember writing a post last year citing some of Roland Krundt’s thoughts on this very subject. One passage in particular seems relevant here, again:

“When TV in public spaces intrudes uninvited into our awareness, it’s a form of theft. The intrusion is most shamelessly predatory in spaces where, of necessity, people are temporarily trapped: for example, in elevators or taxi cabs. We’re being coerced, robbed of choice about how to allocate our attention. Our presence contributes to the revenues of the TV provider, but we’re not getting paid in return.”

If you can get far enough away from the television screens in the waiting area (at Pearson) you’re likely stuck hearing the top-pop-40 elevator music filling the airport corridors. This fizzy music is of course periodically interrupted by loud random mechanical buzzing tones (denoting what?), followed minutes later by pre-recorded airport safety reminders, repetitively sounding-off over and over again. Yes yes, I know, we’re not supposed to leave our bags unattended—okay, I get it.

Would it be possible to accept some sort of travellers EULA prior to my airport visit so I wouldn’t have to constantly hear these PA system alerts before my flight?

I really just want a nice quiet place to sit and relax. I don’t want to be force-fed hockey highlights or the latest stock market reports at 110 decibels. After all, I, like every other traveller, carry with me a number of Web-connected devices that allow for instant access such information at my discretion. So why do we need these TVs again?

I wish I had a pair of noise-cancelling headphones at this very moment.

Maybe airports could start incorporating designated “noise-reduced” areas for travellers looking for a little peace and quiet. Perhaps a place for meditation, quiet study, reading or power napping before flights.

Just a thought.

Pinterest, described by its creators as a visual bookmarking utility, is the latest social community flavour to hit the block. Launched a mere 2-years ago this month, Pinterest aims to fill the growing niche for digital scrapbookers who crave something between 140-character Tweets and traditional long-form blog posts.

Curiosity has risen steadily (in the shape of a hockey stick) with a reported 11.7 million unique monthly visitors in January 2012 alone, up from 418,000 unique visitors in May 2011 —a staggering 2702.2% increase in unique visitor traffic during a relatively short 8-month period.

A Site For Lululemon Athletica Toting Soccer Moms?
Pinterest’s user demographics are also quite interesting: currently 68.2% of visitors are women; 27.4% of which are between the ages of 25 and 34; 50% of users have children; 28% have an annual household income of $100k or more.

The endlessly scrolling pages are filled with beautifully curated photographs: dinner
entrées, desert recipes, pricey shoes, the latest Coach handbags and more. A special “gifts” drop-down menu allows you to browse products at various price points (retail prices are pinned to the corner of images), perfect for weddings and birthday parties.

Oh, and if you want conclusive proof of Pinterest’s female-centric audience base try searching for, say, Keith Urban, arguably the quintessential male heartthrob for the 25 to 34 set and you’ll see what I’m talking about.

The Globe And Mail’s culture columnist Russell Smith recently called Pinterest, “a vast city of beautiful mutes” and went on to lament of the site’s somewhat underwhelming “repin” functionality,

“…some people immediately repinned some of my images. Great! And that’s it. That’s all that happens. I did not feel the satisfaction that I am guessing I am supposed to. I didn’t really feel that I was involved with communication. Maybe I am just too verbal.

Actually, most posts on Pinterest are “repins” – that is, they are taken from someone else on Pinterest. So there are communication and community at work. I’m sure the motivations of the posters are genuinely generous desires to share ideas for how to make a prettier world. But there is also of course ego and competition.”

The “repins” incidentally are similar in function to Tumblr’s “reblog” feature, which make it incredibly easy to share (that is, repurpose) posts, but perhaps a tad difficult for Google’s search indexing algorithms.

Pinterest may very well be the place for the gluten-free-diet-preaching-Lululemon-wearing soccer moms and diehard Keith Urban fans, but also for anyone else looking for creative inspiration and fun. In fact it’s the perfect destination for that 15-minute mid-afternoon attention-deficit satisfying snack, in between Facebooking, texting, or whatever else it is that turns your social media crank.