Disclosure: Philosophically, I’m equidistant between John McCain and Barack Obama. I like both. And I haven’t decided whom I’m going to vote for. I’m an independent and I’ve always voted for the person.

Okay…

When I say internet, I don’t mean the thing that was started by the Pentagon after World War II. Nor do I mean this great medium that we can do marketing on.

When I say internet, I mean the internet as a catalyst that’s causing huge cultural shifts in the way we as individuals and organizations present ourselves, from the way we communicate and the way we handle commerce. It’s changed. It’s a massive change, it’s a widespread change, it’s a permanent change.

Therefore, the next American president, regardless of who he is and key members of his team MUST seek to understand digital media. They MUST understand how this will affect society. It’s becoming too important and too ingrained in the lives of too many Americans.

What made me think this way was that I read two articles (here and here) in two days regarding John McCain’s understanding of technology and the internet. He’s got little to no understanding of either.

This past January, McCain responded to Mike Allen, a reporter for the Politico as to what he preferred - a Mac or a PC by saying

“I am an illiterate that has to rely on my wife for all of the assistance that I can get.”

This isn’t about Mac vs. PC, it’s about attitude, interest, and involvement. Commerce has changed, communication has changed, entertainment has changed, and individual behavior has changed. We’ve changed. We need a president who understands this. We can’t afford to have someone who plays the role of the technoboob. The media will smirk (because they won’t see why this is vital), the political arena will chuckle. It will be fodder for Letterman and Leno.

This is no longer cute. It’s no longer good enough to play up one’s ignorance. He’s not your granddad or dad that you’re showing how to use the web with him playing along out of curiosity and courteousness. The internet is not a teen phenomenon. It’s not Elvis and Buddy Holly. It’s 50 years of rock ‘n roll, still going strong.The internet is what the vast majority of Americans are about…and about where we are going.

If McCain is elected, he’ll be the leader of the country…one that has about 225,000,000 people that have internet access, one that has billions of dollars (or is it trillions) of ecommerce being completed each year. He’ll need to get a grip on this cultural shift.

If you think this is silly, then you’re not getting what I’m saying. I don’t care about left or right, Democrat of Republican. And, no, he doesn’t need to have his own Facebook page or join Twitter. He needs to realize that this paradigm shift is being created by and, as a result, greatly impacting his constituents, the people who will be looking for him to lead.

With all the discussion on what social media is, what it’s future will be like, who will control it, I often feel we fail to see the forest for the trees.

I see it as too diverse of a phenomenon to pin down with one easy definition. Its applications go far beyond the neat capsules that can be used to pick a particular department or function that should “own” it. Social media is creating, empowering, and accompanying a paradigm shift in the way we use all media.

Are we fully there yet? Of course not. These are only the early stages, part of an evolutionary process that often comes step by step. But those steps are happening and happening and soon we’ll look back and be amazed how far we’ve traveled. Then before we know it again, we’ll be stepping again and look back again and we’ll be amazed how much we’ve come from that first time we looked back.

Yes, organizations are going to have to harness social media in ways that they can benefit from, to reach ROI. This means trying to create some sort of structure for it without “siloizing” it. Very difficult indeed.

I’ve tried to lay out what I see social media as. Not from a specific definitional standpoint, but from a several miles up point of view.

Interested in your feedback… Read more…

T. Boone Picken’s, Texas oil man, 1980’s corporate raider and current manager of BP Capital Management has something new up his sleave. And it features an internet strategy.

In 1997, he shifted his focus to natural gas. and 10 years later, in 2007, on wind energy. He formed Mesa Power LP in west central Texas and is constructing what will likely be the world’s largest wind farm. The project will feature thousands of wind turbines and cost hundreds of millions of dollars. This follows his belief that natural gas remains the best alternative to oil for motor vehicle fuel. That’s why he formed Pickens Fuel Corp eleven years ago.

Now, with $4 a gallon gas prices, he’s funding a public affairs effort to help us cut out oil as a our primary fuel for transportation, substitute it with natural gas, and then substitute the use of gas for other types of energy needs with, you guessed it, wind energy.

Today, he’s launched an online public affairs effort to convince Americans to look to natural gas and wind as proper alternatives. He points out that we currently import 70% of our oil - up from 24% in 1970. What’s new about his effort, is that much of it is bein launched online.

He’s got a YouTube channel.
They’ve got a page on Twitter.
A fan page on Facebook.
And a page on Mypace.

They even have an online community that they’re building.

Pretty neat concept. I’ll be following this campaign to see how effectively they use social media.

U.S. District Judge Louis Stanton may have opened up a Pandora’s box.

Last year, Viacom, the owner of  such major cable networks as Black Entertainment Television, MTV, VH1, Comedy Central, and Nickelodeon, sued YouTube and Google because YouTube, through it’s uploading system, was allowing it users to upload Viacom copyrighted videos.  YouTube was profiting from this as it increased its audience and, thus, advertising revenue.  Viacom was, in turn, losing online audience and potential revenue.  It saw itself, legitimately in my mind, as a content provider for YouTube, without receiving compensation.

YouTube immediately began scouring its databases and removing copyrighted video from Viacom. But considering the amount of videos that are uploaded - every hour on the clock, 780 hours of video are sent to YouTube’s servers - the task of finding and identifying copyrighted material is daunting.  A lot can get by the YouTube’s regulators, so to speak.

So the lawsuit stayed, with Viacom demanding access to YouTube’s database of user info.  The database is larger that that of the Library of Congress mind you.

YouTube’s database essentially contains four pieces of info:  the user’s unique login ID, their IP address, the time frame that the video was watched, and the video itself.  Usually, a login ID and an IP address can’t be used to identify an individual, but “usually” is a very inexact word.

Viacom is saying that they aren’t doing this to go after individuals.  They’re not doing this to nail someone who uploaded last night’s The Daily Show.  I believe them, at least for now.  But that doesn’t mean that they keep to that forever.

It makes no sense for them to try to use this data to sue people who have been uploading copyrighted videos at this juncture.  The ‘YouTube culture’ is one that has permitted this to happen and Viacom needs to work to change that culture over a year or two.

Viacom is saying that it wants to gauge the popularity of its copyrighted material.  Again, that makes sense.  We are talking revenue generating material that, while on YouTube, ins not directly generating measurable video.

There is some good news here.  Google, while not appealing, has asked Viacom to give them time to erase user names and IP addresses.  Viacom is open to the idea.

That’s great.  But that’s only this case.   You can be that this is opening a can of worms.

I’ll be investigating this further.  Stay tuned.

Let’s take a look at the debate between Brian and Loic, point by point.

Point #1

Brian Solis: Understand You’re Not the Only Story in Town
Loic: Who cares about stories, you can get traction and users if you have a good product

Where do I start? First of all, Brian’s spot on in that many top executives in startups overvalue what the product or the service or whatever it is that they’re introducing. They don’t understand that the battleground for attention from key influencers and potential customers is filled with other players battling for attention as well. Sometimes it’s necessary to get someone to help craft a pathway through that battlefield, from someone one that understands which weapons and shields are needed. How to break through that clutter. Because on that very same battlefield are others looking for sweet victory as well. And that’s just the battle to get noticed.

Sometimes that’s having someone who can help craft and deliver a great story.

And, yes, sometimes, one of the best weapons is having established a blog and with that, a burgeoning community. Loic has done that and kudos to him for that. He is a great example of what he’s writing about.

Some of those competitors on the battlefield may not be direct competitors in business. No matter. They are still competing for mindshare of the audience a startup wants to reach.

CEOs need to understand this. They’ve worked their tails off for a significant period of time to produce something. That’s quite an accomplishment in itself. But many automatically think that whatever they’ve produce “sells itself” that it’s a “no-brainer” causing people to automatically understand why they should buy it. This is called hubris.

Hubris kills. For example, a trivia question. Guess who said this last fall:

“I’m in it for the long run. It’s not a very long run. It will be over by February 5.”*

History is filled with failed startups let by overconfident individuals that failed to realize they need some sort of marketing plan to get the word out, to position the product, to clarify key features and benefits. They decided to start companies and then implemented marketing as an afterthought. In other words, their companies have no stories.

While the atmosphere is much better today, I’ve seen decision makers that refuse to get this. It’s as if they seemingly believe that press rooms of major business publications had fax rooms where eager young interns hang out excitedly to retrieve their press releases and run to the editors with all of your important info. If you lack a story - and a decent product - it’s much more difficult to gain traction.

No, Loic, good stories are often needed. Stories can explain complex products. Stories can differentiate between competitors. Stories can offer insight that go beyond a series of sentences on a press release. Just as blog posts can. Blogging and trying to develop a community can work - but not really in time to help that start up. Unless they’re already a know quality like you. It also helps when you have a Web 2.0 type service that connects people such as Seesmic.

A second major point regarding Loic’s comments is that not all good products can get traction. Just as not every great guitarist gets that major record deal, just as not every great aspiring actress gets the big break, not every great product gets noticed. There are a bunch of factors that influence success. As Jim Kurkral commented on Loic’s post, “Even people with great products can still fail getting coverage.” Coverage in industry press, coverage in mainstream press, coverage in blogs. Nor will all creators of great bloggers be able to form online communities.

For that matter, not every product that meet with success is of top quality. Sometimes it’s luck. Previous reputation. Timing. Or a great story.

*Trivia answer: Hillary Clinton, (self)presumptive nominee for the Democratic Party in the U.S. Presidential race, describing how quickly she’ll win the nomination.