“Open database of places”: Could it be true?
Since social media landed on the radar of business marketers, one of the toughest challenges has been how to keep up with the latest tools and platforms. It wasn’t long ago that I was charged with building my former company’s MySpace strategy. Man, that skin was something else. Today, marketers are faced with more opportunities than ever — but directing resources toward all of them is near impossible. So what do we do?
Some of us bet on the front-runners; some us gamble on the new kids on the block; and some of us build our own networks. Nearly all of us, though, are hoping for a universe where data is shared across platforms, allowing business to engage efficiently and effectively.
The lead story in today’s SmartBrief on Social Media examines the possibility of such a system in the white-hot location-based services sector. Erick Schonfeld’s back and forth with Foursquare CEO Dennis Crowley suggests that a shared database of places may not be impossible. Crowley calls a “Facebook Connect for places” an “amazing” opportunity that will be “fixed by next year.” Next year? That would be impressive.
If such an open database were to come to fruition, it seems plausible that it could start in the location-based area. These are, after all, physical locations, not virtual spaces. What might be built could serve as a shared atlas, complete with rich data on users, businesses, transactions, reviews. The possibilities are exciting for developers, end-users and, of course, businesses.
While we seem to be hearing more great case studies of companies leveraging location-based social services (which, incidentally, I’ll be covering in my session with Foursquare’s Tristan Walker at the upcoming Social Media Success Summit), the truth is that the vast majority of businesses are still struggling to leverage these services — partially because the usage and data is so splintered.
If Crowley’s prophecy proves correct, and an “open database of places” were to become a reality, would you (as a marketer) be more likely to engage with location-based social services?
Image credit, Maica, via iStock
Posted by Joe Cibula on April 20th, 2010 at 1:20 pm
Think about the consequences of what you're saying and where you're going. You're talking about open databases – databases, retailers, shopping, as if there's nothing else in the world. Databases are for researchers. Physical locations; virtual spaces; doesn't matter. The web is a mess, and we do need a "shared atlas," a semantic web. What we don't need is rich data on users, businesses, . . . especially transactions, that is unless you're super happy with pay per click advertising, which, by the way, is the root of most if not all problems Internet. People need to relearn to think on their own, without reviews. The possibilities you speak of are not exciting for end-users or businesses. What you're talking about are more tasks, as if people don't have a life other than searching or surfing. Just a few notes about why "the vast majority of businesses are still struggling to leverage these services — partially because the usage and data is so splintered." The businesses are frustrated as Hell. The developers are the ones "struggling." Inverse search and be done with it.
Posted by Sergei loves Data on December 18th, 2010 at 3:37 pm
Yes, to answer your question, only concern is Facebook's platform is horrible, I really do not know the buzz behind but I think myspace was a lot better, a little messy. I guess implementing a places should be tie to GIS info. THanks for the update. Sergei from Edigitalz