CAN DINOSAURS DANCE? DDS VS MEDIABANK

Backroom operations are battling it out. The stakes are high.

Agencies seeking out software systems for the management of an enterprise wide management suite are pitting Donovan Data Systems (DDS) to defend against Mediabank as smaller contenders including Strata and Harris sit it out in the bleachers. All the while, entrepreneurial entries in the form of MediaX begin nipping at all their heels.

Starcom’s move from Donovan to Mediabank likely cost them a small fortune and a major migraine, sparking rumors of a return to Donovan, while driving part of its account to nimble entrepreneurs ala MediaX.

IPG’s Mediabrands is on the fence and about to fall one way or the other as Mediabank pushes for a move to unseat Donovan. Mediabank toppled Donovan when it won the DraftFCB account, jamming its foot in the Mediabrands door.

But eating Donovan’s lunch will not be an easy feat as it represents the majority share of agency business, driving close to $200 million in revenue.

Donovan’s Achilles Heel: It’s the system of choice that everyone loves to hate and a dinosaur that cannot easily innovate.

Mediabank’s underbelly exposes hubris that allows them to believe they have sufficient resources to manage a large win.

Among the underdogs, Harris seems not to have been invited to the party while Strata was simply glossed over.

And …. An honorary mention to the new entries that seem to “get it” and are willing to match their resources to agency visions.

An upset may be close at hand, before year’s end.

WATCHING FACEBOOK

That I have been casting a watchful eye on the ever expanding Facebook tentacles, often cautioning users on privacy issues, is no secret. The exponential, albeit unaudited, growth of its user base closing in on one half billion and the questionable collection and use of the data it collects from its users continues to pop up like a bad penny.

This week's gaff, exposing tens of millions of its users' personal identity to advertisers, should be a wake up call for Facebook to finally clean up their act.

But it won't.

If we were to trace the "gaffs" back to revenue produced for Facebook, the picture could morph from Pollyanna to the greed of big business. No doubt the overzealous digerati would come up with blinded observations and poorly manufactured statistics, never losing site of self centered and self serving arguments .... drinking the Koolaid they mixed themselves.

The Internet provides us with a treasure trove of new and exciting options for entertainment, information and productivity platforms to enhance the world around our personal space. However social networks, moving in the direction of Facebook with total abandon and disregard for the sake of "advertising" revenue may, in the end, do more harm than good for the future of the Internet.

Simply, Facebook cannot seem to come up with a business model that does not deal with the discreet (and seemingly illegal) distribution of, or access to, personal data. The conversations and arguments center around "a better Internet experience", serving ads and content that THEY THINK .... make that THEY KNOW.... you want to see.

Give me a break!

It's about time we put the cards on the table and re-think the social network models before the house of cards collapses on itself. Let's begin the challenge by removing "advertising" from the equation.

And to those individuals that "don't care about their personal data being collected" ... please keep those empty arguments to yourselves .... you just don't get it.

FACEBOOK "NOSE" BEST

As Facebook grows to a reported 500 million users globally, its privacy policies and the management of information their users post is coming under more intense scrutiny. On the heels of the movie release, Social Network, Facebook announced new tools for its users to manage that information across personal groups of people they "trust".

But things may not be what they seem.

What follows are excerpts from Facebook's commentary ... what they are saying, followed by our interpretation of what they may be thinking.

"We use your information to make your experience better"
Interpretation: We want to know what you've been up to so that we can direct more relevant ads and search results .... so that we can sell you stuff.

"When a group member posts to a group, everyone in that group will receive a notification about that post"
Interpretation: But what your friends do with it we can't control. It's your problem.

"The whole experience is organized around spaces of the people you care most about"
Interpretation: We want to confuse you to the point of exasperation and give up control of your information.

"You can quickly download everything you ever posted on Facebook"
Interpretation: Because we don't want to be responsible for your garbage.

Most comments post on the Huffington Post review were overwhelmingly negative which leads one to assume that there are many more users abandoning the social network than meets the eye.