I live a digital life. I don’t mean that I’m involved in digital media, though I am (hey, you’re reading this, right, and you probably got here via Facebook, Twitter, or Google). I mean that my first instinct to discover, research, connect or share now involves digital platforms. Cases in point:

I saw a tweet by Heather Caliendo on Twitter about the movie Inception last Friday. It was positive, and I know and like Heather and more importantly, respect her opinions and know she has high standards for smart stories. So, when my husband and I considered a movie on Saturday night, guess what we saw? Yep… Inception, based in large part on Heather’s tweet to the world. I’ve not seen Heather in months, since she’s moved to Colorado, but our relationship matters to me regardless of our “face-to-face” interaction (or lack thereof).

I recently dropped my iPhone into a toilet. It suffered a severe case of PTSD (Post Toilet Submergance Dysfunction) and then died. Through my digital friendship with Bobby Rettew, who sympathized with my phoneless plight and had also recently upgraded to an iPhone 4, I became the very happy owner of his lovely 3G S phone. I’ve never met Bobby in person, though we keep threatening to make that happen. However, I consider him a friend, not just a “friend” in the Facebook sense of the word.

On a trip through southeast Kansas over the weekend, we stopped in Pittsburg to eat dinner. I used my UrbanSpoon app to check out possibilities and we discovered some awesome Italian food at a place called Napoli’s, located on Broadway in Pittsburg. I posted via Foursquare & shared the post to Facebook that we’d really enjoyed our visit. A FB friend, local to the area and someone I’ve not seen in person for many years, said they’d been hesitant to try it, but now they might after hearing our experience.

What is the point of all this? Digital relationships matter. People do pay attention. The relevance quotient for digital relationships is high…. I didn’t do a Google search for restaurants in Pittsburg since I didn’t want to know about all of them… just the good ones. I didn’t buy a phone from Craigslist because I depend (and Crossroads Communications depends) on my phone for my business and I trusted Bobby. And the movie… we see maybe two or three a year. So we choose carefully… and Heather is a writer. She knows a good story when she sees one. Her recommendation elevated Inception to the level of “worth spending one of our two movie nights left this year on” status.

Relevance is the engine that drives our digital decisions. The future of the web as a connection medium  lies not in creating more information nor in more platforms for sharing information. It lies in better ways for relevant information to be funneled to the people who care about it. When you think about how to use the web to drive business, or use social media, or anything else “2.0″ related, start with answering the question, “Who cares?” because that forces the question of relevance. It’s not about creating buzz, or getting hits, or driving traffic… it’s about nurturing relationships that allow your offering, be it information or an iPhone, to become relevant to a very specific set of consumers at exactly the right time. THAT is what translates digital interest into business or brand success.

Results from my Social Circle for "Marketing"

I noticed yesterday that new results were on my Google results page (entry on the page, above?).  A bit stalker-ish, I guess, but its the beginnings of mainstreaming the relevant web the way we’ve been talking about on this blog and many others.

Google’s take on Social Search mirrors what I’ve been saying (or my thoughts mirror theirs, I guess… probably should go ahead and assume they thought of this whole relevance thing first… ) for a while: Results from people we’ve chosen to connect to are more relevant to us. Now that Google is showing me results from people I’m connected to online (Twitter, Facebook, Google Reader, etc.) the size and quality of that network matters more than ever.

The search page above is one for “Marketing.” Since I am connected online to a number of talented, prolific, smart and creative marketing people, the results returned for me were a list of awesomeness I could peruse. Blog posts I missed, white papers, web sites, all sorts of goodness. From people I’ve already chosen to listen to. In one place, regardless of how I’m connected to that person and where the content resided originally.

Some of the "Marketing" results from my social circle via Google

If I were only connected to a few great marketers, I’d miss out on some of the great resources I found. Social search filters the web through my definition of relevant and shows me more of who I trust. I am very, very happy.

Where do you see this going? How will it change how businesses view connecting with people? How they treat their web sites? Social results are on the bottom of the coveted first page… maybe the best new way to get first page placement is to be (drum roll…) RELEVANT to your prospect rather than merely the best SEO-’d web site out there. Here’s hoping.

Yeah… bubbles. Stay with me… you’ll see

After another furious #blogchat on Twitter where smart people were discussing the differences between passion and influence as it pertains to blogging and why (if?) it mattered, some things I’ve been thinking about began to crystallize. And because it’s what I do when that happens, here I am writing about it.

Before we dive in, thanks to @spikejones for inspiring some of this, @MackCollier for #blogchat (and lots of inspiration over time) and @edosegal, who wrote the ambient streams post I read recently.

First, some definitions (well, mine, anyway):

Passion (in the marketing sense) = commitment to/attachment to a brand, product, idea or position regardless of compensation.

It’s a feeling, an internal condition. It cannot be manufactured or externally created. Passion is a choice the individual makes… I choose to love Godiva dark chocolate. Godiva hasn’t asked me to love it, paid me to love it, and doesn’t particularly care that I do so… I, on an individual level, am not influential in their marketing planning. (Oversight on their part? Perhaps… )

Influence = ability to affect other’s perceptions or awareness.

Influence CAN be purchased/created. It’s an external perception… Billions of ad dollars are spent every year trying to influence the awareness and perception of potential customers. Is it possible for an individual blogger to have influence in a space he or she is not passionate about? Long term, I think the answer is no. Bloggers who have influence in a particular space usually have earned that right through good information, solid community, earned respect. Not always… because, as we’ve already said, influence can be purchased. Programs and tools and schemes exist to “grow your blog” and “get thousands of followers” to jump-start influence.

At least initially. Some of the current “stars” of the social media world, for instance, may not be around in a year or two. If they aren’t passionate about the relevant, interactive web, they will run out of things to say that resonate with the community marketers are hoping to reach through their influence. If they stop resonating, they will lose influence, and their relevance.

Someone who is passionate about an idea or product or brand keeps on learning, and loving, and sharing experiences and interactions born of the love affair. And those shared moments will typically only resonate with those who are interested in the same brand or idea. Maybe the audience isn’t in love yet… maybe just experimenting or looking for a first date. That’s where passionate people and influence intersect.

I can be influenced only by those people or messages I choose to pay attention to. Repeat… I can only be influenced by those people or messages I choose to pay attention to.

Why do I care what TechCrunch thinks in general about [insert brand here]? I don’t. I don’t care about what TechCrunch thinks about a lot of things. But I <3 Apple products. I tend to pay attention to what TechCrunch says about all things Apple… I am passionate about that brand and TechCrunch’s opinion is more relevant to me when they are talking about Apple than when they are talking about XBox360. I choose to pay attention… and then TechCrunch has a chance to influence me and my opinion.

What is missing from all this influence and passion is a way to filter relevance. It’s a fact that humans filter information and stimuli all the time. The web’s current model is based on active search:

Random thought triggers question…

Brain can’t supply answer…

Enter phrase into Google, or more typical for me, Twitter (or your weapon of choice)…

Scan results… (FOR WHAT… ?)

Click on choice that seems THE MOST RELEVANT to me (I trust the source/know the source or believe Google’s method for determining importance and value)

The future of the web, I believe, won’t be based on active search, but on ambient streams. Already, who I choose to follow on Twitter creates ambient streams that bubble up the information I care about. As more and more of the web dabbles in relevance… more information will find us rather than us going to look for it.

Who we choose to be influenced by (who we let control our information streams) will matter a great deal more than it does now. I suspect we’ll get more picky, too. More fragmented as a marketplace, more determined to know what we want to know and not see the rest. How will we determine who makes the cut? Passion… who we believe. Influence… who we trust. And relevance… who we perceive to “understand who and where we are in life.”

Already, the web can tell where I’m located, who is tweeting or geotagging near me, what sites/locations/stores I’ve visited recently (and if I positively or negatively reviewed them), and who I’m choosing to be influenced by (who am I connected to on Twitter, Facebook, Ning groups, LinkedIn, etc). How far off is that one app/program/site that will analyze that info, assign relative relevance scores to the possible streams of info, and show me what is relevant to me based on ME, not on Google’s basic algorithms?

Heady, and scary, stuff. What do you think… what’s next?

Google's Real Time Search is the "oh, Shiny!" topic we need to talk about.

I don’t claim to be an SEO expert…. But I DO know something about marketing. This post is about the future, the possibilities, and what people who are using any form of online marketing need to be thinking about NOW to get ready for what is coming. And it’s coming much faster than you might think.

Buzz is beginning about Google’s search integration deals with Facebook and Twitter… here are a couple of other people’s posts with more of the details, if you wanna know the specifics:

Info from Mashable

More, especially about Facebook

What does it mean for marketing? It means “integrated marketing” can’t just be about cross-platform and multi-channel. It now has to be about timing and velocity, too. If enough people on Twitter and Facebook are talking about your company’s product release, blog post or other shiny new thing, will you achieve the golden Google award of auto-real time search? What drives Google to choose which search terms/items get an auto real-time feed? I (obviously) don’t know the algorithm. But I bet it’s got everything to do with velocity and relevance. If Mashable tweets a post, and lots of people retweet it, is that out of the ordinary? Or a “blip” in the search world? Not really. If I tweet a post, and two hundred people retweet it, is THAT out of the ordinary? uh.. yes. Quite. It makes a blip on the search radar. It means something that WASN’T relevant a short time ago (my blog) is now relevant to (proportionally) many more people. Maybe I get my own Google live feed for a bit while people are tweeting, facebooking and commenting on the post. And then it goes away… rather like the auto live-feed for “Tiger Woods Mistress.” Was there… then not. May be again when another “revelation” breaks from someone else.

The point? “Buzz” has another dimension now. Real time matters because it gives the whole world (well, the whole Google-ized world, anyway) a snapshot of what’s important to EVERYONE, right now. Think of it as Twitter trending topics, writ large. Companies need to be ready…

Imagine a major hail storm hits the midwest in the United States. Guess what would suddenly start being very relevant?

“Roofing damage”

“Hail damage”

“local roofing in [city]“

These searches would all gain immediate, non-characteristic, traffic. They would form a blip, and the real time, relevant web will respond with live updates. If you’re a local roofing company, will your tweets/FB page/web site/blog be ready to take advantage of the traffic potential?

What do you see as the dangers? Benefits? Strategies needed? Future? So much to discuss here… looking forward to your thoughts!

UPDATE >> the number of results on Google for “Mandy Vavrinak” has jumped by about 1,500 since I last searched, about a week ago. THAT is what adding results from Facebook and Twitter means…

Random shoe

Blogs, sites, social networks, profiles, waves, channels… the level of content I consume, create and comment upon can sometimes feel incredibly overwhelming. Many things compete for my attention every day (including projects for my clients… and they have a built-in advantage in the attention-grabbing realm since their completion fuels my ability to pay attention to ANYTHING else.

Recently, I saw some conversation on Twitter about a Google Wave invite which reminded me I hadn’t logged into Wave in awhile. I made a mental note that I needed to do that… and finally did, three days later. I discovered it had been 7 weeks (since mid-October) since I’d “waved.”

OK, so life has gone on. Babies have been born (though thankfully no more in my house), business has proceeded. But there were two conversations/waves that ended in questions to me. Questions that had been waiting 7 long weeks for an answer. Ouch. Hate that… they were just hanging out there, lonely and useless… kind of like a single shoe without a mate. And that, for me, sums up my Wave experience to date. Without a mechanism to tell me something has happened, activity has occurred, SOMEONE WANTS MY ATTENTION, Wave feels like one half of a really great pair of shoes. Love the look, stylish, classy, hip! Feels great on… can see myself wearing them out and about… Goes with most anything… nearly perfect pair of shoes. Except I only have one of them.

My “new shoe” looks great, but without the mate of notification functionality it’s not very practical to actually wear (use). In the hyper-connected world that I live and work within, a better way to connect holds much promise and a definite allure. But I think Wave will never be the medium of choice unless it finds a way to successfully draw attention to what is happening in a user’s personal universe in real-time. Most social-media thinkers I know (I use the term loosely, I know them through social media) agree, as do I, that the channels in social media will change and evolve. The expectation of real-time availability, connectivity and interactivity between people, brands, information and applications will not change… only grow.

Wave feels like it is missing this key component for any new connectivity channel. If it’s me missing something… tell me what you think! Oh, and I have invites… if you want to test-drive it yourself, let me know in the comments.