If you bother to check out my blog regularly (thank you), you’ll notice a couple of odd posts recently. The first was in some ways an accident. Being a smartass, I decided to react to some random subscriptions to both of my Posterous blogs with a post telling people not to subscribe there. There’s no point. Of course, my hope was that some people would subscribe anyway, despite the complete lack of any benefit- in fact, the explicit promise of no benefit at all. Why? Because it would amuse me. What surprised me was that the post all of a sudden showed up in my RSS feed; for this blog. I forgot I had set up automatic cross-posting, but was reminded of my penchant for experimentation.

The more recent post was a Storify experiment that I decided to demonstrate live in front of colleagues as an easy way to post to your blog. By George, it was in fact quite easy!

I feel that someone doing social media for a living should experiment. Often. Most of us who do this (come on, admit it) have blogs and other social media channels that are not meant to be polished business honey pots, but are repositories for our thoughts which are brilliant at best, a strange hash of trails at most times, and only a failure when it lies empty. Too many of us either do very little in social media because we either don’t want to be public (there are ways around that), or feel too much pressure to make our blogs look professional all the time, because, damn it, we are potential book authors or professionals.

Are either of you types of folks kidding? This is the place to experiment, to go out and  figure out the possibilities of tools and of raw content. What types of posts/topics/titles/words/calls to action, for example, get people to respond to your blog over other types? We should be doing more, not less, shouldn’t we? Why are some of us polishing our blogs into tepidity (though I do understand that some folks are in business for themselves and use them to show their polished, professional sides), and others letting their blogs and other channels lie empty?

Empty, you say? In 2011, I published about half as often here (42 posts) as I did in 2010 (85 posts). That disappoints me.

My publishing on this blog has been less frequent for a number of reasons:

• Work keeps me busy. Though I absolutely hate the “I don’t work on my personal brand because I’m doing billable client work” excuse- it is true from a “note enough hours in the day” standpoint.
• My most interesting thoughts are too closely attached to current client work, and there’s no way I’m going to reveal the inner workings of things, especially when that would require permission (and might better reside on the Voce Nation blog anyway)
• I write for other blogs (primarily Voce Nation), but not really that much. That’s pretty weak.
• I can’t write the same opinions about the same social media topics as everyone else. That’s kind of weak too, but I do get topic fatigue and have no desire to be a “me too” social media marketing blogger any more.
• I can’t write the abstract “advice” or “state of mind” posts about strategy and how to live your life or think or blog or whatever. At this stage in my life they come off as the blatherings of someone trying be sound smart or inspirational, rather than actually just being smart (and it looks like that in all the other blogs I read- is that mean? Too bad). Also, admit it; the title of this blog post made you throw up in your mouth.
• I took part more voraciously in private discussion groups rather than publishing longer, more one-sided screeds like this.

So, why not more experimentation on this blog rather than feeling a need to be controversial, relevant, brilliant, or topical every time out, or failing to do so because I don’t want to tread water in my writing?

Why not indeed. Far from a promise to do things, it’s a thought I would like to follow up on. I may need a few more kickses in the pantses.

Or should I just pile on and write about whatever, like I used to? Feel free to yell at me in comments. 2012 is a new year.

Photo Credit: Mavis (Flickr)

Cross-posted from Voce Nation

Recently, I had a discussion with a local (Boston) technology professional about finding influencers via social media. Additionally, I constantly have discussions with clients, colleagues and peers about measurement. Why mention these two facts together? These two topics have a lot more in common than they might seem to on the surface, at least when it comes to the practical applications in social media programs.

Photo by Martijn vdS on Flickr

First, both “influence” and measurement come with a variety of tools designed to help us find and analyze. These tools, whether they be Klout, PeerIndex or Traackr on the influence side, or Radian6, Sysomos, Spredfast and any number of tools on the monitoring/metrics/analytics side, all have their plusses. They all have their minuses too. Are they too unsophisticated or broad, too complicated to use, missing pieces, too expensive, lacking tech support? There’s always something.

Which tool a given program uses isn’t all that important, it turns out. However, let’s assume that having some tools to help you harvest information is necessary. The reality is that most social media professionals have to have at least some familiarity with a variety of the tools, as different clients, or even departments within a company (probably a separate discussion there), use different tools.

OK- we have established that we need tools, but we are limited. That sounds like a nightmare, no?

Well, yes and no. I believe it’s healthy to believe that the “magic bullet” tool that finds the best influencers for any specific program, or covers all your metrics needs, will never exist. It’s also healthy to believe that just about any tool, despite any public criticism, will help you in some way.

Great; so what?  

Even as these tools become simultaneously more sophisticated and easier to use (good luck with that) the need for what I like to call spade work does not go away. The spade work is divided into two categories:

• Figuring out what to ignore: Good tools mine everything. That’s almost as bad as having nothing, as a large chunk of the work in analyzing info is figuring out what not to include. How do you sort for the things that only affect your goals? How do you find people who are not merely “influential,” but are specifically relevant to your program? How do you filter monitoring data only for the things you need to see- and how do you determine which metrics are the one you need to see? Great tools filter further. Klout does offer some categories of influence, for example, and most monitoring tools allow you to tweak and adjust search terms. However no matter how good or great the tool manual sorting is necessary; not just due to a lack of complete trust in tools (Klout categories, to keep using that example, can yield some head-scratching results, such as the marketing expert who was, hilariously, deemed to be influential about “sheep”), but because every program, every campaign- and every data source- is unique
• Goals: Actually that should be first, but I’m being counter-intuitive. I was also tempted to write “Program goals” to distinguish from campaign oriented goals, but it is important to find influencers for and measure campaigns as well as the ongoing program. As hinted at in the previous paragraph, your goals determine which of the endless metrics and influencer types you need to focus on, to the exclusion of all else that lacks relevance, beyond the limited extent of any tools.
• Analysis: The value any social media professional brings to a program is in the analysis- I don’t mean sifting and sorting data, as anyone can learn to do with the tools, but in figuring out what it all means. At the beginning, it’s applying thought to the types of influencers that matter and what criteria count most. In the end, it’s applying meaning to the program data. For example, what does that decline in Facebook Page comments mean? Why were there fewer clicks to the Website from Twitter vs Facebook? How did a surge in blog publishing frequency this month affect subscriber numbers- or even product sales?

Tools are necessary. But making them worthwhile is hard work. Anyone who thinks differently is not using them (or their social media team’s brainpower) to their full capabilities.

Flickr photo by tgkohn

I have much antipathy - make that hostility – toward any kinds of predictions (see my 2011 social media predictions post  for the only explanation I will give for that). Despite that, I was honored to be asked my 2012 thoughts by the folks at Awareness for their eBook “2012 Social Marketing & New Media Predictions.”   There are some great thoughts by several folks in the industry smarter than I, but I thought I would take the opportunity to expand on my thoughts that were included (in case anyone holds me accountable).

Below are the e-book topics for which I provided predictions, and my further comments on each.

The Biggest Social Marketing Developments

What I Said:

“More companies will move to the next stage, having a more innate understanding of what they need to do in social media, and being more specific about where they allocate budgets within social media. Google+ will make some inroads, enough to add G+ more formally to the debate over how to split resources among existing social media platforms.”

A Bit More:

I noted in the last year or two that more companies of all sizes seemed to understand they needed to do include social media and brand publishing somewhere in their communications plan – selling the very idea of social media is over. Next is developing a more ingrained sophistication about what and how to do it. And yes, the patience I have preached regarding Google + is still needed, but will probably pay off soon as companies (and their consultants) figure out the best use for this social network.

A bit more about other social networks: it seems that many companies are jumping onto social tools specifically geared to arranging certain types of media– there has been a lot of noise about Instagram and Pinterest lately, for instance. That’s interesting, to the extent that these tools might differentiate themselves from what web developers will do for companies’ owned channels.

The Role of Big Data in Social Marketing 

What I Said:

“All data will be important. Responsible agencies and marketers will be measuring their programs with anything available to them. As for databases, merging CRM and sales databases with social outlets will get more intense. Sales people and departments need to get on board, and that means deciding once and for all how social sits in your organization. That may take more than a year.”

A Bit More:

2011 saw a lot of talk about “Social CRM” and “Big Data.” I think communications professionals are still figuring this out. We will see more flesh put on these bones, but complete understanding and utility is beyond the grasp of 2012.

Key Technologies to Impact Social Marketing and the Role of Mobile (I combined two since I talked about mobile in the first)

What I Said:

“Smartphones will continue to spread, especially Android, and tablets, still led by iPad, will only proliferate more. Figuring out the easiest way to interact with people via mobile will get more attention. The ones who succeed will be the ones who actually make apps and mobile sites that don’t break.”

“Anything mobile will be big. The only difference between B2C and B2B will be the scale and depth of how they deal with the customer on the go. If they treat their mobile channels (and many companies have both B2C and B2B) as they treat all other sales and marketing channels, then they have their baseline strategy right there.”

A Bit More:

Anyone can say “mobile” – so I did too. Neener-neener. The fact that I actually bought a tablet recently (an Android by the way) says a lot about the affordability (or willingness to pay the price) coming to a larger market. We need to continue with “mobile” as part of our thinking, but I think we’ll see more use. Aren’t you using your mobile devices more? What apps we rely on vs what we are used to from our PCs and Macs will also change as a result. What is easy to use and what translates to the primary “experience” (web site, document format, what-have-you) will be the most interesting to me.

The second answer seems a bit convoluted as I read it now. Essentially, don’t let new channels (mobile or whatever) drive your strategy and goals. As ever, it should be the other way around.

Top Challenges for Social Marketers

What I Said:

“Focusing on what works and not being distracted by shiny new objects, while making sure they don’t miss the shiny thing that actually becomes the next ‘what works.’ Measuring programs and linking them to business goals will become more important and more recognized.”

A Bit More:It shouldn’t be new to caution against chasing shiny objects, but people still do it, so there. Measurement has been a standard par tof the programs I lead at Voce, but too many people argue about the “warm fuzzies” aspect of social media, leading me to believe that more people need to be kicked upside the head regarding measuring their efforts. Even the fuzzy stuff and the unicorns (you know, I am an expert in Unicorns according to Klout, http://klout.com/#/dough/topics so listen to what I have to say).

Top Trusted News Sources

What I Said: 

“The grapevine, wherever it may grow. Currently it’s some combination of Twitter, Facebook and Google+ from peers in the industry.

A Bit More:

Total copout- but still true. Did you really want 19 people all to say “I read Mashable?” Follow people you trust, and they will lead you to good news sources.

Thanks to Mike Lewis of Awareness and Lora Kratchounova for forcing me to say something about the coming year. I expect it all to come true. Every last thing. Except the bits that don’t.

Flickr Photo: lalunablanca

Is it “talk about ROI” season now? I have seen several posts online lately about social media ROI, ranging from “it doesn’t exist” to “here’s how you find it.” It makes me think about my own current thinking in the space. As with many things, I fall in between the two extremes, if you can call the latter an “extreme.”

A few thoughts about the ROI question:

• If corporate management is asking for a Return on Investment, then saying “there is no ROI” will be the end of the program.

• A measurement program is not necessarily an ROI metric

Just a few thoughts on ROI from someone in the trenches. And no, I do not always see ROI figures from programs, nor am I 100% certain they are always called for (or is that just being lazy?). But it does exist and it probably should be asked for. What are your thoughts?

Pet Peeves: Washington Post Facebook App

Recently I noticed in my Facebook timeline (yeah, i look at that) a lot of links to interesting stories with the “Washington Post” logo on them. Trusted news source, so why not click? Being greeted with a pop-up asking me to grant a Facebook app permission just so I can read articles I always used to read anyway. Kudos to getting more people to post your articles, WaPo, but making people give access to an app just to view them is really creepy. To be fair, if you deny the app you are taken directly to the article (not so, it seems, with other similar publisher apps) but it’s still creepy to me. Blech. It’s important to consider the user experience when taking advantage of a popular platform. There’s a give and take. Does WaPo cross a line there? It does for me.

Liz Strauss and Quitting Klout

There has been a lot written lately about problems with Klout (the social media influence scorekeeper) and why it makes some people uneasy (score is too simple a metric to be useful, “algorithm” is unexplained, potentially horrific privacy stories). Liz Strauss recently wrote a more detailed and heartfelt post about why she opted out of Klout (now that, thanks to Danny Brown and others, one can actually do that). Am I moved to quit Klout? No, my curiosity remains, and the potential use as a (very) minor tool in finding out the right people for the right conversations and messages remains. I’ll support people wanting to leave for these legitimate reasons, but I’ll remain patient.

Whither Gowalla (Owning Your Stuff Part 9,000,000)

For those who like Location-based social media services: a few months ago, Gowalla changed how it works, focusing on users telling “stories” rather than merely checking in to a location and posting said checkins to Twitter and Facebook. As a way to differentiate from Foursquare, it made sense. But I found the idea to be more work than I wanted to devote, so I used the service less.Now that Gowalla has been purchased by Facebook and is essentially being dismantled, I am reminded of the “owning your stuff: mantra that I like to mumble on occasion. Gowalla users don’t have a lot of content stored that they are going to miss; not like if a service like Tumblr or Posterous went away. But it is a reminder that if you rely on an outside service for anything, you run the risk of that service going away and having to change course. I have worked with clients who ran campaigns with Gowalla. A tighter integration would be more troublesome, but it is also hard in this social media environment to run up some sort of consistency if services keep rising and falling. Part of the environment, I’m afraid

Apple’s Social Media Policy Leaked

So, an Apple store employee is fired because her rants about apple online to friends saw the light of day. So, Apple’s restrictive social media policy was leaked. As a PR person, I have always had problems with Apple’s closed culture. Maybe friends would expect me to rail against Apple’s fascist-state communications regime. Not at all. I think that while restrictive, the Apple ethos is quite clear, and seemingly within their rights (I’m not a lawyer. Whoopee). Don;t talk smack about your employer- or anyone/thing- anywhere unless you’re ok with it coming back to you. Period.

Losing My Stuff

I have been travelling again lately, and have begun to realize that the things I have lost or left behind on trips might be able to tell their stories.

“Remember me? I’m your Ray-Ban sunglasses you left in that Nissan Cube you rented in San Francisco in 2010. Oh fine, you thought you would wait until your next trip rather than spending the small pile of cash to have me shipped back. How can you be surprised that I had disappeared from the lost & found when you finally came back to claim me? I’m an attractive pair of sunglasses- you lose, and I’m seeing the world through different eyes now.”

“Well weren’t you clever? Throwing me in the front seat of the rental car in Orlando because I wasn’t worthy to take the holiday party snaps- a “snap” decision you made after parking. Oh sure, you were going to toss me back in your bag the next morning on the way to the airport. Seems I’m still here, big-shot, stuck between the seat and the gear-shift, waiting for the next renter to liberate me. I’ll bet you’re glad you already uploaded your last crappy photos to Flickr. Enjoy your next camera, bought in a rush to replace me, on the cheap no doubt. Feh.”

“I seem to have found my way to the Land of Doug’s Lost Pan-Mass Challenge Baseball Caps. Remarkable, considering you only misplaced two (or was it three?) of us in your house, the rest being spread around in Las Vegas, San Francisco, and Maine. Enjoy that new light blue cap. It sets off your eyes (not). Putz.”

My “Buzzword Radar” is oversensitive, honed over years in the PR profession, where the temptation to go the lazy route “”leading provider of robust, scalable solutions” was often too great (or driven by inexperienced managers and less sensitive clients) to resist. This is a great example of a web site from the 1st Internet bubble that had many PR pros- and most all media hacks- nodding in agreement at the same time they were burying their foreheads in their palms.

I’m a fan of plain speaking, and most of the gibberish I lay out is in the spirit of absurdist wordplay.

When people in my industry started plastering the word “social business” everywhere they could over the last several years, my buzz-dar went nuts. What could that term possibly mean? Sure, it’s two simple words put together that could have a simple explanation, but my instinct was to run far away.

However, I saw that organizations and people I trusted were latching on to “social business,” so either it had gained a respectable definition or it was simply too late. Being a cynic and a pessimist, I chose the predictable path at first.

In the past week I attended two events that referenced “Social Business” heavily. The first was the annual Society for New Communications Research (SNCR) Symposium, in a room filled with people whose intelligence I respect. I expressed my differing feelings on Twitter and got more smart responses.

From Hillary Boucher, what I dubbed an “elevator pitch:”

@mpace101 @dough #socbiz =orgs applying 2.0 web tech & cultural/org'l changes to do better biz & meet the reality of connected global market

November 3, 2011 10:21 am via HootSuiteReplyRetweetFavorite

@hillaryboucher

Hillary Boucher

From my friend Rachel Happe of The Community Roundtable:

@DougH @mpace101 @hillaryboucher my definition of social business is here: http://t.co/kRRIYJCM

November 3, 2011 1:19 pm via Seesmic DesktopReplyRetweetFavorite

@rhappe

Rachel Happe

Rachel’s longer definition lives here: http://www.informationweek.com/thebrainyard/news/229401355/social-business-requires-socialized-processes

Lowe's Andrew Carusone at Social Media Club

Later, I attended the Social Media Club Boston chapter meeting where the subject was, you guessed it, “Social Business.” IBM, the host, has actually co-opted the term (defining a social business as one that has engagement, transparency and speed), meaning social business has either achieved legitimacy or been consigned to the big-time corporate buzzword dustbin.

It seems, for now, to be the former. One of the evening’s featured speakers, Andrew Carusone of Lowe’s, spoke with conviction about the company’s efforts to build a “social business” (not necessarily the phrase they use), from the inside out, and the successes they have had so far. I had the chance to speak with him beforehand, and wondered aloud whether “social business” is replacing “Enterprise 2.0″ as the catchphrase. I suspect that’s a matter of semantics, as the “experts” on Quora can’t seem to decide either. Carusone himself had been happy with “E20″ as late as last year  so the I’m guessing any distinctions will be steamrolled by those not inclined to nuance.

Is “Social Business” a meaningless buzzword? It seems I can’t dismiss it. Don’t any of you all go around ruining it for everyone else. I mean it.

Photo by spemss on Flickr

I spoke on a few current social media topics on my monthly appearance on Media Bullseye Radio this week. I thought I would throw a few more thoughts out there. The overall theme seems to be that people judge too quickly and rely too deeply on things they don’t understand.

Snap Judgment: Chapstick on Facebook

Quick synopsis: Chapstick starts an ad campaign, some people object to the ad on the Facebook page, Chapstick deleted comments, making it worse, AdWeek calls it a “Social Media Death Spiral.”

What the hell is “Death Spiral” supposed to mean? A brand makes a mistake, people jump on them as of a single misstep will harm the company forever. I suspect something like this won’t even affect sales.

People need to count to 10 before denouncing a brand over a single mistake, especially without knowing the full background and giving the entire situation time to play out. Lots more mistakes are coming, and very few of these brands will suffer real consequences, provided the mistake doesn’t indicate a wider problem of product or company ethics (most likely this is a result of the company not empowering the social media program minders as part of the larger strategic team- but really? I don’t know). Also, many of these mistakes are dealt with or resolved in some sort of reasonable time period (and a lot of the time “reasonable time period” doesn’t mean what some social media folks pretend to know it means).

Lack of Understanding: Klout Changes Algorithm, World Ends (Again).

I was flummoxed by the reaction to Klout (“The Standard for Online Influence”) adjusting its algorithm (which it has done before) and, at the same time, affecting most everyone’s scores. The reactions (many in klout’s own blog post) revealed an ugly underworld of people desperately relying on Klout scores for business, grades, and other things that are too precious to leave in the hands of a mysterious third-party measurement.

Klout is useful in some ways, but relying on it as a sole measure of social media worth or to sell your services is– well, susceptible to the whims of whatever Klout decides to do with its mysterious algorithm.

Either/Both/Neither: Klout and Privacy?

Some friends have noted that people- some of them minors- with private Facebook accounts have shown up with Klout profiles. Is this because these people interacted publicly and Klout scraped that info to provide them with a profile? Seems likely, and it’s unclear if any terms of service or privacy laws were violated. It is, however, a reputation problem for bout Klout and Facebook, an indicator of the public nature of just about anything we post online, and brings up the question of whether it’s a violation to create accounts in absentia for people who have not (yet, presumably) joined a service? I know of no others that do this, though I suspect there may be some.

There ar elots of real issues out there in social media-land. Understanding them requires more patience than many of us are exhibiting, the wisdom to recognize the linits of tools that too many lack, and the ability to back off judgments and admit you don’t know all the facts.

Google Plus an Afterthought?

I attended Exploring Social Media Boston last week (ok, Burlington is NOT Boston, but I hope the traveling speakers got a good tour of scenes where Paul Blart Mall Cop were shot). My thoughts on the overall event are here at the Voce Nation blog, but one thing that struck me…

With all the talk about tactics and strategy for social media, Google Plus, the hot shiny new social network, didn’t even get a mention until about 3:30 pm, an hour before the event closed (thanks, Laura Fitton, for ruining the perfect game).

One friend suggested that the lack of focus on tools was to blame for the lack of mentions. That’s fair– strategy before tools, we all say– but I also call BS on that, as Facebook, Twitter, and countless other platforms were mentioned throughout the day. Why would a bunch of social media’s smartest minds fail to mention Google Plus?

Because, when it comes to enacting social media programs, it’s not on our minds.

Yet.

I still contend that Google Plus will most likely matter. The search engine ties are too strong, Google too big, and the features (and potential features) too rich and simple to use. Facebook killer? It’s silly for anyone to say that, but I won’t say no either. I continue to preach patience.

Flickr Photo by Jonathan O'Donnell

As I pick up my own personal use of Google Plus, I am struck by the number of animated GIFs being posted. Animated GIFs? These are only thing more insipid than cat photos (being a cat owner, I’m a bit more forgiving of those). Not just a stream of animated GIFs, not a river– but a plague.

Which made me think: perhaps there are a series of plagues that Google Plus must endure before it matures; ten, maybe?

Perhaps this list is a clue- not exactly frogs, locusts, or death of first-borns, but perhaps more a set of growing pains (but nonetheless listed with the corresponding historic Plagues of Egypt):

1. Beta invites; the first stage that create a divide between the “ins” and “outs,” which Google managed to screw up in the process, denying entrance to those who had been promised access as a way of controlling the early traffic (Water)
2. Social Media “gurus” and whatnot declaring that Google + the next big thing before it has even publicly launched- to the extent that “Google + for Dummies” and “Google Plus for Business” are being written before all- or even many- of the real facts are in (Frogs)
3. Other gurus declaring Google Plus “dead” because they perceive a dip in traffic, whether that dip is real or not- again, before the product is really finished (Mosquitos)
4. Getting “circle” follows from people they have never met, from halfway around the world. Once Plus opened up to the public, people seemed to randomly follow anyone, willy nilly, confusing folks like me who know very few actual people in, say, India (Flies or Wild Animals)
5. Animated gifs (and cat photos) (Unhealable Boils)

1. Opening of business accounts; Yes, I know that’s a planned feature, but it also may be akin to the Plague of Locusts to some users. As a consultant to corporate social media programs, I am looking forward to what it may bring (Locusts)
2. Malignant virus or phishing attacks- that should be a no-brainer (Disease on Livestock)
3. Over-wrought discussions of Politics and religion, made worse by the invasion of mainstream news media outlets (Hail and Thunder)
4. A network outage – surely, that is not impossible? (Darkness)
5. Google will kill off useful and interesting products as they have in the past– will it be in the service of, or despite the success of, Plus? Google Buzz is already out the door (Death of the First-Born)

Podcamp Boston 6 is in the can- I can’t believe there have been 6 (the first occurring on the fall of 2006). As someone involved in each of these PodCamps in some form (I’m going to be like one of those old guys who has been to every SuperBowl) I have been fascinated watching the event mature from “Hey, let’s put on a (really big, with lots of people travelling to get here) show!” to a more consistent gathering of people who want to learn and converse about social media.

For my part, I decided to lead a session this year, “Culture Clash of Personal & Professional Brands, and Why It’s Necessary.” What I meant by that terribly convoluted title was that the public questioning and criticism among members of the social media community is a good thing, and discussed some of the things I make such back-and-forth valuable, such as the addition of constructive arguments coupled with the lack of intimidation against questioning someone who is popular, vs those things that aren’t, such as out and out trolling, the unexplained “Great Post!” comments, and ultra-defensiveness by those being “attacked” (and since one of my tenets is it’s ok to name names, tag Chris Brogan, you’re it).

What was awesome, is that at least one person came to the session thinking it would be more about mixing your personal and professional life online, said, so, and helped start a good discussion on that topic. Somehow, that tied in the spirit of my original topic. Bravo!

I don’t necessarily follow my own advice to the letter, but I lean toward all of us having frank and open discussions about what’s good and bad in what we are doing in our profession. So next time you see a practice or idea, say so publicly– same if you really like something. Just bring something to the table.

Now if we could only get social media d*****bags to stop posting photos of themselves speaking on their blogs. That is such obnoxious egotism. Look at that self-satisfied grin. Have at it in comments if you like.

(photo by Wayne Kurtzman on Flickr)

Yeah, right– you think there’s a “social media lesson” for everything? Get a life. Have fun once in a while. Hope those of you in the Northern Hemisphere had a chance to enjoy yourselves this summer.