Personality Marketing is the new game. Having a basic presence online will not suffice. The creative underlings with mega talent but unknown at this point, will create their personas through content sharing and engaging in dialogue in the communities of their interest. Let me stress however, that 50 - 90% of personable communications online have to have some value for the audience that follows them. This means no tweets or talking about "What you're doing" BS. Maybe some voyeurs out there may be casually interested, but for total engagement - the level of content sharing & conversation has to be progressed to a higher etage. That is unless, one's very happy using web 2.0 to just connect/interact with a small band of like minded friends/associates.
- Sustainable Digital PR guy @mvellandi

Web 2.0, in its present incarnation, has a lot to do, for better or for worse, with narcissism. Not the sweetened flavour we coin as "personal branding", but a true mental interlacing between our concrete production and our personality. Creativity is a different kind of horse, and even tightly related to our ego, it appeals to other, deeper, more intimate parts of our personality.
There is no definite model such as a creative person. Andy Warhol would have tweeted, but Vincent Van Gogh would have never used Flickr.
I don't think this is related to the average value of what is shared online (sorry Mario), but rather to the very creative process of individuals. Web 2.0 services are still all whizz and bangs, and not yet mature enough to create a true intimacy with the mind. We are now able to externalize our ego online, but the mindset it presently requires doesn't fit with everyone. When tools are ready, people will adopt them.
@t_de_baillon

It's not surprising. Creative types are looking to create things not just play with them. Most of the Web 2.0 social interactions are actually passive and lack control. They are oriented towards reading a lot, and only occasionally commenting. Sure, you can post some stuff, but the mediums are all very hollow and unless you dedicate massive hours to the task, your effect gets lost in a sea of noise. If you're really creative, why the heck would you want to twitter?

Maybe they don't need any more relationships -- they're well-connected already? Hmmm...did you do a connected/relationship test factor? How truly creative can you be as a techno-hermit?

I have been using social media sites for almost 8 months religiously. I invest over 10 hours a week working with numerous social sites and reading and keeping up with the latest trends. I build websites for a living and I have incorporated a lot of ways to generate traffic to them through sites like Facebook, Twitter, Yelp, Myspace, Linkedin, etc. I use analytics and can verify that my efforts are worthwhile. You might find this humourous, but when I go out to the local bars and music venues to film video content, the people there comment "there goes Mr. Facebook". I actually have people instant messaging me from other parts of the country asking what do I do this weekend as I will be in town. I have had major news camera crew executives ask me where are the local places to go to film family outings on a limited budget. While I'm far from being rich I am getting popular using social media from my home office computer. I am not paying huge expenses in traveling and meeting with individuals, and I'm interacting with individuals that are at least interested in the communities I promote or in Web 2.0 or social media marketing which I now specialize in. guidetosouthjersey.com (A Work In Process)

--
Respectfully,

Christian McCarthy
http://www.guidetosouthjersey.com

AS an artist I LOVE Web 2.0. But I'm kind of an oddity. It's because you have to shift gears. I'm a musician and picking up a guitar and getting on the computer are two completely different zones. You're in a different head space. Other times if I was painting, I just didn't want to get paint on my lap top.

One time during band practice my lead guitarist and I couldn't stop laughing during the songs because we couldn't stop thinking about this You Tube video where "pinky the cat" practically destroyed this guy trying to get him adopted from the animal shelter. I eventually took my computer and turned it to face the wall so I could get back to "reality" as I called it.

I don't blame them. For some people, personal information needs to stay personal. Until (IF) there are guidelines to legally protect personal information on Web 2.0, some people will shy away from publicly cataloging their lives.

As you can tell by the fact that I posting from facebook, I am not one of those people.

In our soon to be Post corporate world, relatiionships matter more than anything else in terms of business prospects. Sometimes it's not the relationship you have with others,but the relationship you allow others to have with you that matters the most. It is the relationship with people and not the tecnology that enables commerce for someone on my level. But the creators-I think- have a relationship with the technology and not with the people. They say "I made this now go sell it". We create the relationships with those who would buy and use it.

Transparency in business is the issue. The old guard has not become comfortable with the notion of transparency. We have seen major corporate foul play due to boards and management not being held accountable. The future leaders will be able to embrace this new openness because they have grown up with these social networks that encourage the sharing of tedious details in their lives. Companies will have better relationships with shareholders and customers as a result.

Ok, this is the first time I've heard "Enterprise 2.0" - methinks it won't be the last!

I think the real issue here is who is your market? If you are a solopreneur making widgets, no, Twitter probably won't help you grow your business. If you are a solopreneur designing widgets, well maybe.

But only if you will add value to the conversation. I really don't care what you had for lunch.

--
Sandra
www.ourspecialfamiliesvillage.org

I am actually waiting for someone like Dion Hinchcliffe to comment. Very recently I read Bob Dylan urging young people to get away from technology and connect with nature. My take is that too much of anything kills - Take for example the Twitter din (People talkin' without Listenin'). If the Talking Web becomes a reality we'd probably see more of them sign up or will they? Just a question for everyone - If God had Twitter what would he do?

I don't get people's opinion that sharing with social media is arrogant or narcissistic. It seems to go against the whole notion of sharing information. Sharing of information that is of value to other people is like free microconsulting, and can be a valuable public service.

Sharing valuable information helps people. Helps them select music, doctors, solutions to complex problems. These are just communication tools, and they can be used any way that people might wish to communicate.

As long as we stay honest in our sharing, we all help get a clearer view of our world, we get a little bit closer to reality.

The tool is not the motivation to use it, nor the motivation of people to consume its outputs.

Arrogance is when you take up someone's time with information they don't want. Fortunately, with social media, users still have a lot of control over what information they choose to spend their time on.

Embracing social media, whether you are a "creative" business type or not, should be a strategic decision, but it's a time-consuming task. Plotting out a social media strategy for you as an individual or for your company, requires you to then marshal forces to execute on it. It IS a time vacuum. Christian commented that he devotes 10 hours a week on social media. For many business people, time is the key. However, if wisely invested, that time spent can extend your personal brand, create buzz about your product or service and solidify customer relationships. So...it seems like a no brainer: FIND the time and get social!

Loraine Antrim, Co-founding Partner Core Ideas Communication

Embracing social media, whether you are a "creative" business type or not, should be a strategic decision, but it's a time-consuming task. Plotting out a social media strategy for you as an individual or for your company, requires you to then marshal forces to execute on it. It IS a time vacuum. Christian commented that he devotes 10 hours a week on social media. For many business people, time is the key. However, if wisely invested, that time spent can extend your personal brand, create buzz about your product or service and solidify customer relationships. So...it seems like a no brainer: FIND the time and get social!

Loraine Antrim, Co-founding Partner Core Ideas Communication http://thecxomindset.blogspot.com/

comment

Well, 1/3 (33 of 100) have Twitter accounts as you say. Whatever the number of actual Twitter users may be, no one is speculating that it's 1/3 of the population (that would be 100 million Twitter users) or even 1/3 of adults (what, 50 million?). So, 33 of 100 is actually high if compared to the total population.

Well, 1/3 (33 of 100) have Twitter accounts as you say. Whatever the number of actual Twitter users may be, no one is speculating that it's 1/3 of the population (that would be 100 million Twitter users) or even 1/3 of adults (what, 50 million?). So, 33 of 100 is actually high if compared to the total population.

There are so many successful people which don't disclose too much detail about their life or business. And they don't have problems being successful because of that Why should we publicize everything. Some things should remain "sacred". As a guy under said, it's pure narcissism- people trying to look cool on line while they maybe do something totally boring in reality. These networks brought a shitload of clutter to virtual space that consumes time and undermines worker efficiency. It comes from experience - how can someone be work efficient if he's chatting with me for an hour while at work and checks photo albums and statuses of friends on Facebook to be up to date?

I don't twitter or blog. I can see their value as a calculated part of relational marketing. But, social networking consumes so much time that it had better be an integrated part of a larger plan. I have started a blog a couple of times and let it die because I just couldn't see the value of the time. I think I will start a blog again at some point, but before I do, there will be intentionality and focus to the effort so I can justify the time.

I don't twitter or blog. I can see their value as a calculated part of relational marketing. But, social networking consumes so much time that it had better be an integrated part of a larger plan. I have started a blog a couple of times and let it die because I just couldn't see the value of the time. I think I will start a blog again at some point, but before I do, there will be intentionality and focus to the effort so I can justify the time.

I use to have my own ISP and managed 20 people for two years. I work in technical support now as a Linux/Unix sytem administrator. I probably use the WWW 30+ hours a week. Web 2.0. What was the impact...not that many sites are using far flung "unreal" technologies that I can see. They have quit pushing the envelope...development and ideas are DEAD.

The most important thing preventing this, in my opinion is that there is NO bandwidth available where many people live! I cannot get it in Chicago, Illinois on the Near South Side so, as far as any future technologies go I and many others am at the bitter end of DSL line until AT&T, Sprint, etc., get it in gear and install a 10MB/sec line to our residences. I am far below 750k!!! I barely get non HD YouTube video without hesitation in the stream at my residence.

We ALL like to talk about technology but the corporations in charge are milking the technology they have installed and are not rolling out anything. We are dead in the water.

"...we'd love to hear your thoughts, feel free to leave them below. Then friend us on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, subscribe to our flickr photo feed and watch our YouTube channel."

I use to use Digg.com heavily, but the politicisation by socialists two years ago drove me off. I never went back. I've had "websites," dozens of them and they all have to be maintained, which is very time consuming. Because of privacy issues, and time constraints I am not interested in Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, etc. I also am not that interested in telling every stranger in the world what I am doing 24x7x365, and creating a permanent record of what I do every moment of the day! People using these technologies really need to buy a clue! Privacy and personal time are way under rated by the age group using these technologies.

I do use flicker and YouTube sparingly. The people that I want to spend time with do not use these technologies, they are my immediate family, neighbors, etc. If I was to set the sites up I would be reaching out to....who?

I use to have my own ISP and managed 20 people for two years. I work in technical support now as a Linux/Unix sytem administrator. I probably use the WWW 30+ hours a week. Web 2.0. What was the impact...not that many sites are using far flung "unreal" technologies that I can see. They have quit pushing the envelope...development and ideas are DEAD.

The most important thing preventing this, in my opinion is that there is NO bandwidth available where many people live! I cannot get it in Chicago, Illinois on the Near South Side so, as far as any future technologies go I and many others am at the bitter end of DSL line until AT&T, Sprint, etc., get it in gear and install a 10MB/sec line to our residences. I am far below 750k!!! I barely get non HD YouTube video without hesitation in the stream at my residence.

We ALL like to talk about technology but the corporations in charge are milking the technology they have installed and are not rolling out anything. We are dead in the water.

"...we'd love to hear your thoughts, feel free to leave them below. Then friend us on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, subscribe to our flickr photo feed and watch our YouTube channel."

I use to use Digg.com heavily, but the politicisation by socialists two years ago drove me off. I never went back. I've had "websites," dozens of them and they all have to be maintained, which is very time consuming. Because of privacy issues, and time constraints I am not interested in Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, etc. I also am not that interested in telling every stranger in the world what I am doing 24x7x365, and creating a permanent record of what I do every moment of the day! People using these technologies really need to buy a clue! Privacy and personal time are way under rated by the age group using these technologies.

I do use flicker and YouTube sparingly. The people that I want to spend time with do not use these technologies, they are my immediate family, neighbors, etc. If I was to set the sites up I would be reaching out to....who?

I think there is still a lot of fear around personality and sharing of your personal life, and it is understandable that the more public you become, the more private you perhaps want to become... (excluding, of course, the phenomena of the reality TV cast member).

It's really a question of balance.

Increasingly we will see more and more participation though - in as much as people want and are able to connect directly with the companies and leaders they trust, this will become more of an imperative. We become spoiled, and the expectation kicks in.

Otherwise - fairly or unfairly - it may look like there is something to hide
--
follow me on twitter @taniayuki

Chances are that the list of your most creative people in business represents a dying if not dead way of doing business. Many of this people might not understand Web 2.0 at all. They are still stuck and focused on Web 1.0 thinking with web sites, email and industrial age behaviors and techniques. Empowered customers and communities are foreign to people who are used to broadcasting and undermining. Let's see how well they fare in a new world.

The question I always asked myself about Tupac Shakur's public gangster persona was: "If he has to write rhymes, record tracks, do public appearances, live performances and general promotion of his product, when does he have time to actually be a gangster?"

This could be the same reason why we do not have many creatives making use of social media.

!. Time and ROI
2. Time and ROI
3. Time and...you get the picture.
The level of suspecting and prospecting that Twitter offers is just that, a certain level, and not for some, not for everyone.
Better, we should think of Twitter as an IM about a Rave that we call tell our followers about. Or, a social event your local followers can go to.
But, what value a Tweet to your corp CEO friends who are all over the world about your new Day Planner software?
Anything of value takes more that 140.
I use Twitter (sometimes) to post a link to a Blog; sometimes to a neat site.
But again, the C -level execs need real meat, real rational purpoose for engaging.

The creative top 100 have full lives and don't necessarily need social media to connect outward given the world generally comes to them. They simply connect via other forums. Not surprised by the findings.

Perhaps it is odder that Fast Company thinks the use of Facebook, Tweeting, etc. is a prerequisite for a creative mind? Maybe FC and its readers can take a lesson from these most creative people?

I think there is a privacy needed for creativity.

I read over at Lateral Action (http://lateralaction.com/articles/you-dont-need-to-be-a-genius/) an interesting story of Michelangelo. I think there is a truth to it.

Being in Social Media may be too much spotlight to have a safe creative place.