Social networking is the #1 activity online. Even though Google gets the most visitors, Facebook is where most of us are spending our time. And it’s not just about Facebook anymore. We are spending a lot of time on LinkedIn, YouTube, Tumblr and Twitter. While there are some clear major players in the social space, the social media universe continues to expand and 2011 was a banner year for the idea of an “Interest Graph.”

In 2011, we saw Google launching Google+ and Pinterest grewing at an astounding rate. Facebook launched “Timeline” and “frictionless sharing” with partners like the much anticipated Spotify. Facebook also acquired design companies and the team behind Gowalla, showing the company’s intent to provide a consistent experience across devices and becoming a more prominent player in the mobile space.

2011 was also a big year for social IPOs: From LinkedIn to Groupon and Zynga, small tech startups are becoming public companies. There is much speculation around the existence of a bubble, and some say growth cannot continue because social networks are running out of users. However, Facebook is not yet public and we still don’t see a clear exit for Twitter.

There might be saturation, but social media has changed the way we live. And this means social media is no longer a question for marketers. Companies of all sizes have accepted and even embraced the importance of social media. Investments are starting to increase and companies are now building teams to tackle the new risks and opportunities that social media has created. While Facebook and Twitter ad spending is expected to grow only at a decreasing rate, advanced brands are leveraging more digital dollars for their social media marketing strategies and tactics. “Social” has been an afterthought for many years, but marketing campaigns and programs are finally starting to feel inherently social.

This presentation is about the state of social media and social media marketing on January 1st, 2012:

Chris Brogan is a blogger, speaker, consultant, bestselling author and President and CEO of Human Business Works. Chris was one of the very first people I ever “met” on Twitter and I’ve been reading his blog www.chrisbrogan.com ever since.

Below is an interview with Chris about his upcoming book, examples of brands on Google+, Black Friday marketing in 2011, content curation tools, and more.

1. Congratulations on your upcoming book “Google+ for Business: How Google’s Social Network Changes Everything.” The book description says “This is a business book, not a technology book.” Can you share more about how this book can help businesspeople?

[CB] Business people tend to get a bit twitchy when a new technology comes along. But what I’m saying with this book is that this is a book about how to use the telephone to sell, or how to use business cards as part of your selling, or what to talk about at the cocktail party to sell. The tech of it all isn’t the worry. The problem is, for some unknown reason, humans get really weird when they start trying to use social media to sell. They forget the niceties and the human nature sometimes.

2. Google+ Pages have been around for a few weeks now. What are some examples of companies and organizations making good use of them?

[CB] I love what Samsung USA is doing (and no, not because you work there). I love what Dell has done. I think that Pepsi is already getting great engagement on their site. For a small business, check out Allure Home Improvements. I think people can really learn from places like these. Oh, and Kodak! Great work, Jennifer Cisney and team.

3. Social media is becoming an important part of how brands do marketing. What did you think of Black Friday efforts this year? You know who I saw doing something interesting for Black Friday?

[CB] Cali Lewis. Not a company, a person. Someone who works for a brand of her own, but who used Amazon associate links to point people towards products she endorsed, with a cut for herself. Did I see any brands doing something amazing with Black Friday? Well, at the risk of really seeming like I’m sucking up (I’m willing to risk this), I *did* like that Samsung had a nice summary on the Google+ page. Beyond that? Not as much on Twitter as I’d had expected, and I’m no longer qualified to talk about Facebook. I don’t go there anymore.

4. What are your thoughts on content curation and services like Pinterest, Curated.by and Storify?

[CB] I think that content curation is *finally* getting its due. Steve Rosenbaum wrote a grossly overlooked book, CURATION NATION, that deserves more eyeballs and thought. The specific tools will come and go, but people are finally understanding that curation is just as important as creation.

5. You’ve been blogging for over a decade and you’ve been using WordPress for many years. Do you think WordPress is at risk with the increased usage of Tumblr, Google+ and social media overall?

[CB] I rarely worry much about the tools. I think that there’s a huge group of people using Tumblr for curation and sometimes throwaway products. I think that people looking to use serious tools for serious business will stick with WordPress, but when I say that, don’t presume that I’m being elitist. I’m saying that one set of tools, WordPress, delivers a lot more business value. I’m saying that Tumblr is easy and makes it very easy to share and create. Both are quite wonderful and useful. That’s how I would divide them.

6. What advice would you give to bloggers who aspire to be book authors?

[CB] Blogging and books are two different disciplines, but I will say that if you blog daily and if you can write thoughts up such that they have a beginning, middle, and an end, you’ve got some potential. If you REALLY want to know what bloggers have to focus on, it’s building platform. Book deals go to people with lots of followers and readers, not the people with the best ideas. Sorry to pop your bubble, aspiring authors, but Trust Agents isn’t a great book. I just have a huge platform. Yep, there it is.

The A Case for Social Depth

+Dan Reimold has 44 followers at the time that I write this. He wrote an “article” called “Google+: Social Media Upstart ‘Worse Than a Ghost Town.”

Dan‘s article basically says “Google+ is not good because no one follows me.”

Now, Dan has some “evidence” for this. Of course he does.

Except his evidence consists of Rainbow Rowell’s article on Omaha.com. +Rainbow Rowell has 33 followers on G+ and she has posted a handful of times. Rainbow’s opinionated column basically comes down to this: “My Google+ home page is worse than a ghost town. It doesn’t even feel haunted. Meanwhile, down the road,in a much less desirable neighborhood, Facebook is teeming with life.” So apparently Google+ is dead because Facebook, which is over half a decade older has more users poking each other (I’m not disagreeing necessarily, just paraphrasing).

And her “sequel” is well… “The fact that I think Google+ is useless might be one of the best possible indicators that it’s going to succeed. Get yourself a Google+ account. This thing’s going to be huge.”I’m not sure what it is. Insurance? Change of heart? Sarcasm? Live journal emotional flashback?

But that’s not all. The “best” evidence comes from the one and only Forbes: +Paul Tassi, the person who called the “eulogy” for Google+ and celebrated when others talked about it on G+.

Apparently Google+ has become appealing to Mr. Tassi, who ironically also wrote a follow-up article only hours after the first one. No one remembers that one. Now, when I first saw Tassi’s profile on Aug 15th, he had few followers and aprox 5 public posts. Today he’s a happy Google Pluser with 1200+ followers. He almost raves about it without having to rave about it. Paul has converted and has amassed a following.

But wasn’t G+ dead? Hmmm… I’m confused now. I thought the word “EULOGY” was a strong one but apparently I’ve been reading the wrong dictionary.

Now, I would’ve rather Dan linking to this TechCrunch article. Despite their opinionated (and allegedly unbiased) point of view and their recent TMZification, TC writers actually know what they’re talking about. +Robin Wauters actually posted some numbers: A 41% decrease in public posts month-to-month. He might be right (someone please do call +Robert Scoble lol), but I will soon tell you why less posts doesn’t show the whole story. It’s not a good sign, but it doesn’t say anything about the quality of posts and the engagement within them (take a look at the average Fb post), or the quality of users (take a look at your DMs and you’ll see what I mean).

My thoughts are that if something is dead or a “ghost town”, then no one will care enough to write about it more than once. Google Buzz died once and it was a quick death. Google+ is dying on a daily basis but I don’t think +Larry Page is worried about what to post next before someone else tweets about his absence.

Traffic matters and all these deaths of Google+ create traffic. Even if the only people who care about it are those geeking out here and the media which absolutely loves to cover social media at its shallowest.

25 million or not, the Google+ community is unique and it has something worth coming back here for: DEPTH.

We’ll see what happens but I can assure you that there is no dead player in the Social War(s). Social depth is what I see as the next big thing in social. And I don’t mean this based on evidence but only as my personal hope (I’ve learned from the pros above that writing is apparently all about my own experience). In all seriousness, this is why I think Google+ matters to me: SOCIAL DEPTH.

Google+ doesn’t create it, but it enables it in a way that my blog doesn’t, location-based apps don’t, Twitter barely does, FriendFeed almost did, Tumblr almost does, and MySpace never will.

I’m a big fan of all Facebook, Twitter and Google+. Google+ is new so I may be blinded by that. Or maybe I’m excited to see 3 big competitors instead of two or maybe I’m more of an “interest graph” kind of guy. I’m in a position where I can, and must, get to know them all quite well. But bottom line, I’d interested in more meaning and substance while I’m spending time on these networks. And the same goes for articles with clever traffic-driving titles.

I’ve recently been advising the social media marketing efforts of Cucupons, a Guatemalan daily deals site that launched today. When I first met with the team I asked them if they had considered creating a video, such as the “How it Works” video by Groupon.

I quickly discovered that Groupon has inspired not only tons of daily group deal companies, but also lots of marketing videos in all kinds of languages from all over the world.

Alas, Cucupons launched without a video of its own, focusing on more cost-effective and differentiating tactics based on how Guatemalans actually shop offline and online.

You can find 100 Groupon “clone” videos that I’ve curated at www.curated.by/socialnerdia/groupon-clones.

It’s funny to see some of the same people who have praised Web 2.0 and social media for years and highly depend on social media themselves, pointing the finger at “social media experts.” These myopic blog posts get views and buzz, but they are so generic that it shows that they don’t really see the entire picture or are simply seeking attention by trying to stand out amidst a sea of social media related content and opinions.

Are these kinds of articles/posts new? Nope. Criticism of “gurus,” “ninjas,” “experts,” “snake oil salesmen,” etc. abound online. Everyone and their cousin has written about it (I’m sure I’ve done it myself and I apologize on behalf of my younger, ignorant self).

Ironically, many of the people  making these claims are the same ones that speak at conferences, write books, and appear on TV and magazine articles to talk about how much they know about social media. They speak as experts and then talk about a generic group of renegade “social media experts.”

Based on my experience, I know how some small business owners see social media and how very large corporations see social media. I also have interacted with PR/marketing/advertising agencies, technology vendors, and startups/developers to have enough of an idea of how they see it.

And from what I’ve experienced, regardless of what you read in blog post x, most large companies need people who specialize in social media in various areas of the organization. In the same way, most small businesses need help with getting started in social media.

Sure, it would be fantastic if everyone from the CEO to customer service reps, marketing departments, and the agencies helping them were not only aware of how the space is evolving on a monthly basis, but also had experience and deep knowledge about what works, what doesn’t, and what it all means for the organization.

In an ideal world, everyone would have experience and knowledge around social strategy, integration, execution, management, testing, and measurement, and everyone would know how to spend dollars correctly to make things happen efficiently, creatively and with relevance, but that is not the case. The fact is that most large companies are still learning and some are still skeptic, despite the strong data suggesting that people are spending a lot of their time and attention on social sites. It takes resources and money to provide great customer service and create great marketing. In the same way, most small businesses probably don’t even have the time to do much more beyond creating a Facebook page and putting a Facebook icon on a billboard.

Pointing a finger at “social media experts” is like pointing a finger at “media planning experts.” It’s terribly vague.

Another case against the “social media experts” is the large amount of scammers and spammers out there. True, there are a lot of people trying to sell you everything from “ROI” to revolutionary sentiment analysis to $99 Facebook pages and Twitter followers by the gazillions.

Every single day of the year I get either a call, a LinkedIn message or an email from someone trying to reach the social media strategist/manager/expert/owner/director/leader at the company I work for. Every single day.

Are we in a bubble? Nevermind, wrong topic.

So every single day I get these kinds of messages and I try to take some of them because there are some pretty interesting and valuable tools, vendors, agencies and startups out there. The interesting thing is that all of these salespeople want to talk to some kind of social media specialist. Regardless of how good these vendors are, they are all looking for who? Social media experts.

And you know what? The good companies will try to talk to a social media specialist. The bad ones will probably try to reach anyone in marketing communications, corporate communications, media planning, research, or who knows, maybe even HR, legal, and accounting to try to sell what the anti-expert experts call “snake oil.” It might be easier to sell “snake oil” (either through a phone call or a blog post) to someone who doesn’t really understand what works in social media.

Without experts/specialists, it’s easy for companies to fall for fluffy, borderline useless, and/or expensive services and products.

And without people who know how to get things done in social media, it is easy to miss on great opportunities and completely dismiss great threats.

I wish we could, but we can’t just become all-knowing over night.

Someone can’t just wake up one day and do marketing and customer service in social media simply by “knowing the consumer” and saying “transparency,” “brevity” and “relevance” out loud to magically “generate revenue.” Sorry but ummm no. You don’t magically wake up one day just knowing everything there is to know about any topic or profession. And you don’t magically learn about new technologies and opportunities simply by knowing the basics of business. And on a sidenote, marketing is not just about revenue. Social media is most definitely not just about revenue.

Another issue I have with the anti-expert statement is the despise for younger professionals. It’s easy to poke fun at interns but sometimes they might have more passion, interest and skill in social media than people that have been in marketing for a long time.

Everyone learns at some point and that’s why companies need to seek people who are most knowledgeable and experienced (not just most popular or “influential”).

In a way, many of us who work within social media have been snake oil consumers, and even “salespeople” if you want to think about it that way. A lot of the “influencers” in social media were once ignorant Kool-aid drinkers too. At some point Gary Vee was just a guy trying to upload a video online. At some point Robert Scoble got excited over a web log. At some point Frank Eliason was just someone in a customer service department who liked a site called Twitter. At some point everyone was on Google Buzz. At some point Empire Avenue was going to take over the world.

I’m not really sure if this is making sense as I’m just typing thoughts at this point but I must say I simply find it very dishonest and self-righteous to one day brag about the powers of something, and the next day shun others doing it or specializing in it. It is one thing to say to a colleague “watch out for x, y and z because it is not true and a, b, and c will save you some trouble.” It’s a completely different matter to point a finger saying “social media experts are idiots and I’m not.”

I think it’s time to end the whole “snake oil salesmen” and “social media guru” finger-pointing conversation.

We get it anti-expert experts. You think you’re awesome and everyone else isn’t, and you want us to retweet it because you’re so influential and strategic and revenue-oriented.

At this point, blog posts about “snake oil salesmen” are becoming “snake oil” themselves.

The “Social Media Exchange” Empire Avenue has been getting a lot of buzz. While I heard about the site last year, people like Jeremiah Owyang, Peter Kim, Scott Monty, Robert Scoble, Caleb Storkey and David Armano have written very interesting thoughts in the past week or so, and the community seems to be thriving like never before.

I was going to write a few fun Empire Avenue predictions (e.g. A “Buy” button that’s like the Facebook “like” button), but instead I decided to ask CEO Duleepa Wijayawardhana (aka Dups) a few questions about the past, present and future of his company. I think you’ll find his answers, including a hint about Foursquare as the next network to be integrated, very interesting!

Follow @dups and make sure to add some “DUPS” and “ESTEBAN” shares to your social portfolio.

1. What do you think about Seth Priebatsch’s prediction about the next decade being the decade of games and the “Game Layer?”

To be honest, I happen to believe that most of what we do in real life reflects the human mind’s love affair with what we call games. In fact, in most cases a game takes aspects of what we do in life, things we can understand, and place finite scores, missions, obstacles and rewards into it and then allow us to “play” it.

What I will agree with is the notion that this decade will be the decade that the mainstream understands the use of games and gaming layers in more than just building crops and shooting enemies. I do believe we are seeing the start of a generation that has grown up with computer games and can see that games can actually teach us about Real Life and, indeed, ourselves and how we affect our environment. It’struly an exciting time in my opinion.

2. There have been a few applications/sites that simulate investing in people, websites and organizations. What do you think is the one thing that positions Empire Avenue for success?

We studied almost every single one of them :). What we realized almost immediately is that stock market sites are based on current stock market models, which, I hate to say, are complex and almost incomprehensible beasts. With Empire Avenue, we actually went backward in time to a simpler market system. We have a system of “Market Makers,” who are algorithmic”people” who analyse your content and engagement, and create share prices every night. People add to or subtract from that share price by buying and selling. In effect we have created a very simple BUY/SELL/Earnings system which is not at all a real stock market — something that has many more Bids and Asks and so on. We admit, it does take a little while to “get it,” but if you start with Buy and Sell and watch your money grow, the game mechanics should lead you in the right direction. We also have a long way to make the whole thing simpler and easier. The one thing that puts us ahead, in my mind, is our team and our community. The team is dedicated, the community equally so, and they have helped us move the site to what it has become.

3. The fact that Empire Avenue helps us measure and create influence has been getting a lot of attention recently. How does the system measure one’s influence?

We don’t like to use the word “influence” any more. Each of our Network Scores really gives you an idea of your “Network Value,” and we’ll expand on the stats that give you an understanding of your network use. (By “Network” I mean, Twitter, Facebook, Flickr, LinkedIn, etc.). The difference between an algorithmic score and the share price is that the share price takes all your scores and then adds the Buy/Sell mechanic to it, which does indicatesome element of reputation. Naturally, in early days people will buy for games and profit, but the same happens in real life; the difference is thatthat initial buy might lead to a valuable connection.

4. What are the benefits for a brand to join Empire Avenue, and more importantly, are there any risks?

The risks are as with any use of social media by anyone, regardless of whether you’re a brand or otherwise. If you are perceived as having done something bad, you could see a backlash against you. This is nothing new and is certainly one risk. The advantage is, in my mind, two-fold:

a. Depending on your ability to engage with users on Empire Avenue, you might just want to connect and use Empire Avenue to value your network interaction. This one is *easy* and requires little to no effort. In this way Empire Avenue can be seen as a training game for a business within social media. We are, after all, a “meta” social network, which connects to multiple networks including our own.

b. You can engage with users by buying and selling, using our search to find people who could be valuable to your brand (not necessarily the most popular, but the most engaged with your product or interest). For example, a search for Samsung: http://www.empireavenue.com/search/#users/samsung . This opens up a world of possibilities: we could create custom Luxury Items forpurchase and sharing with people, so that your brand name can spread; and certainly you get to speak to your Shareholders. The Shareholding concept is also one you can expand on, by rewarding those users who remain shareholders and more. The potential use of Empire Avenue for a brand, as with any individual, is endless.

5. How did your role at MySQL/Sun help you start EmpireAvenue?

Both my roles at MySQL/Sun and BioWare were essential in starting EmpireAvenue. The experience of building out sites for gamers in the millions is obviously an asset, and working at MySQL interfacing with those that produce the world’s biggest websites – from Google to Facebook – was also something I valued greatly.

However, in truth, the biggest help was in working with all the talented and wonderful people that make up our small, dedicated and incredibly passionate team. Without the team, we would not be here.

6. It seems like Empire Avenue depends on advertising and partnerships to provide “Eaves” for users. How have people responded to this business model?

At the moment, we’re earning revenue from the sale of virtual goods –Luxury Items and Eaves themselves — which is something that a lot of other social startups aren’t able to capitalize upon. So far the “freemium” model has paid off quite well for us, and we have other models we’ll roll out in the future.

7. Do you plan on adding other services to Empire Avenue (i.e. Foursquare, Gowalla, SCVNGR, Color)?

Absolutely. Our immediate goal is to simplify the interface some more, but we built a scalable algorithmic system to support any network or service given a certain number of inputs and parameters. Basically we can implement any network, with specific values assigned to various actions. Our next network is most likely going to be Foursquare, but it’s ultimately driven by what our users are asking for.

8. Will we be able to add multiple accounts in the future (e.g. I use both @SocialNerdia and @SamsungEsteban on Twitter)?

For now we haven’t offered that option, simply because of the complexity of the interface, both for managing but also understanding and connecting. Start simple, complicate life later :) We are now in the market to raise financing for our next round, and with that in hand we’ll be able to growthe product as planned and pursue future opportunities.

Bonus question: Any advice for aspiring entrepreneurs?

Believe in what you build, dream big, don’t give up, get a great team and founders around you, and be passionate. Life is short, so do exactly what you want to do, do it well, and do it with humility and respect for everyone else.

However, most importantly, don’t be afraid of failure; we all fail, but it’s a matter of how you get up when you get knocked down!