Eye tracking studies on old and new Facebook, MySpace and Twitter profiles reveal the differences in how they are viewed.

*profile pic still among the first couple of things noticed (cover pic not as attention-grabbing as one would think) *first couple of wall posts still top eye candy *almost everyone looked at pics, basic info and the first few wall posts *ads not noticed by many *info on lower right hand side is less noticed *in Twitter, tweets still king *each media has different tracking stats, proving people negotiate each media separately, even if its unconscious

1. Own your voice, don't share it *locate and identify key words and phrases to appeal to patrons, don't copy or imitate 2. Resolve to be relevant -five need states: utility, entertainment, information, rewards and recognition *online pyramid of needs? How does it compare to Maslow? 3. Context is King, and Content is Queen -value = creativity + technology *relevant content + context is essential to connect with consumers 4. The Data is smarter, are you? *change the way the data is measured 5. They's changed the channel *98% of 18-24 yr olds use social media *use social media in new ways to catch consumers, and enhance brand prestige/awareness

-for academic libraries, over 91% of posts had no comments 82% of user participation was through the "like" button most comments are not from the community, but from within the library system -most of the metrics discussed can be analyzed via the FB Insights page **analyze the literature review in more detail!!! -most library comments are complimentary, general or funny Very few actual library comments/reference Qs or suggestions -pics got more likes than status updates -libraries got more likes than comments *easier to click "like" than to comment... updates show in newsfeed! -"continuous updates and posts are not necessarily the most effective way to attract attention to the wall." *the etiquette of posting! Don't clog up a newsfeed with posts

-average FB user age has increased from 33 to 38 in 2 years *result of SMNs becoming more commonly used among the wider population -26% of people "like" content each day... 15% update status each day *libraries need to take into account stats like this when judging the efficacy of SMN posting -only 8% of FB friends are family, 12% extended family *the majority of FB friends are weak or latent links *SMNs encourage the maintenance of these weaker links by making it easy to stay in contact with people -56% of people update status 1x/week; 15% 1x/day 53% comment on someone's post 1x/week; 22% comment 1x/day *libraries need to shoot for the 1x/week people -52% of people use FB daily 36% of people use Twitter daily 6% of people use LinkedIn daily

-online vs offline social networks: what is happening when more people go online? -possible ideas of sociotechnical capital revolving in a more cyclical fashion *other articles (find!) mentioned the idea of FB interactions rising and falling, this could be similar -Internet-Focused Social Capital Research (history of social capital on the internet) *early researchers adopted an either/or philosophy where time spent online devalued time spent offline. They failed to conceive of a world where social interactions could be valuable online. -as different mediums occupy time, it is important to note that social interactions can occur within the online medium (unlike tv) *mediums allow for interactions around the medium... can discuss what was on tv, share memes, etc -Putnam's concepts of "bridging" and "bonding": "bridging" social capital is inclusive. It occurs when individuals from different backgrounds make connections between social networks. "bonding" can be exclusive... The continued reciprocity found in bonding social capital provides strong emotional and substantive support and enables mobilization. *libraries want to bridge social connections and form weak ties with all patrons online *more and diverse ties to better reflect the community -matrix of social capital measures Online Bonding Offline Bonding Online Bridging Offline Bridging -Putnam suggested that the social capital derived from bridging, weak-tie networks is "better for linkage to external assets and for information diffusion" (2000, p. 22). *validates the idea that libraries need bridging, weak-ties for information diffusion *marketing on FB is info diffusion

look elsewhere for text

**before SNSs -p348. possible uses on Internet to form social bonds *suppositions answered in many ways by the rise of the SNSs -p349 results of the HomeNet study showed Internet interrupted social relationships. However, there are a number of arguments against that occurrence -p377 Internet can both help and hinder people, depending in large part on existing personality characteristics -p377 People allow online and offline worlds to overlap *particularly with the rise of the SNSs