The Steve Rubel Stream

Great strategy. I added a Facebook Page nearly a year ago, which greatly increased the number of people my blog reaches. Like it or not, everything revolves around Facebook these days...

Great news - look forward to more engagement over there and made my comments on your FB stream :-)

Ok now for my $0.02 on your new themed posterous look from metalabs --> I like it, vibrant mixture of colors - loved your name in a square box with a drop shadow, classy.

Though i like the colors i can't help think myself why the drastic change from simple white's to darker ones (which to me was more readable than this design Sir). However i can understand the need to change it up, it does add another look and dimension to you. I'll give ya'll a 9 out of 10 for that.

You might want to double check your post headings which i feel aren't as readable or large as they should be.

Best,

A

You might want to try using my site Postling.com to post to your Twitter and Facebook Fan Page from a single place. You'll have the option of posting to one place or both simultaneously. You'll be able to post to / monitor your clients' accounts as well as share access to those accounts with the rest of your social media team. While we do support all of the major blog platforms, Posterous unfortunately does not have the API support we need to include them (I've told the guys what we need to add them.)

I really like how you make your content slightly different across different channels. Keeps things interesting. Thanks for that.

Thanks Leslie. That's the plan. You need to do so - and to tailor your message accordingly. It's not one size fits all.

Exactly. I'm new to the game and trying to figure out exactly what I want to put where, but I'm starting to get the hang of it. I've been using a sort of funnel approach with Delicious, Google Reader, and Twitter.
Anything I might have to reference in the future or think someone I know will need in the future: Delicious.
Articles that are good, but not, tape to your refrigerator good-Share on Google Reader.
Articles that I'd tape to my fridge (especially if written by an author/blogger I particularly like), Twitter.

I'm still experimenting with the whole blogging and which niche goes where.

This article definitely got me thinking about it. And thanks for replying.

Sounds similar to your post about moving from a "full" blog to posterous. I'll be interested to see how it develops.

This seems like a smart idea, but I still worry that Facebook as an aggregation platform wll turn into fruit cocktail (can't taste any particular fruit). Is it possible that the differentiated Steve Rubel (business, non, and realtime) is more interesting? Time will tell I guess. Keep me posted.

Your providing content solely on Facebook reminded me of a comment you made on one of your other articles "... when marketers promote their social network hubs over their URLs they risk that more savvy consumers will see right through it. People could perceive it as a flat attempt to look cool and hip...." Why force your followers to go to multiple places to read your great content? Doing so, at least in my view, simply isn't cool.

I like the simplicity of Posterous and the fact that I do not have to be concerned getting sucked into other Facebook stuff that is not relevant to being productive at work. I am only subscribed to several posterous posters and really enjoy the zen-like quietness with which Posterous feeds the updates from the different Posters.
I am sure that you can make good use for business with Facebook, but at the moment for me it is a dip in and out as there is mostly non-business. The other risk for me with Facebook is that you turn into an Amway friend or Tupperware mum. I sell consulting services related to SaaS, Webinars and Cleantech-I do not want to start selling those to friends.

I think it completely depends on what your profession is and how you live your social live.

You as a publisher of information with the objective to get in front of as many new and existing relationships as possible - it makes complete sense to be ubiquitos, regardless of URL, domain or tool. You just need to make your messages and communication available to where your audiences hang out and they have a choice to consume your stream where they prefer to hang out.

I for one appreciate your content, but it gets lost in all the other streams - but comes through nicely here. Most of the time, I will read it in between meetings, in my inbox on my smart phone. One comment on the design. I am on an HP Netbook at the moment and your navigation is barely readable.

I heartily encourage people to think of how to structure content differently across different platforms. By doing so you'll learn more about the limitations of each platform and what each platform needs to do if they want to do a better job of achieving your goals. By having that understanding, it will help you develop a mental model that will help you understand the pros and cons of subsequent platforms. You'll be able to skip the "web/social/mobile/RT" jargon and get to the heart of the matter, "Will this help me?".

For example, Posterous lacks javascript support. While this may not seem important, I use Apture to enhance links and I use javascript to animate my blogroll and tweets from social media strategists at leading companies. Javascript technologies are a web and iPhone-friendly way of bringing curated data to life. (See the result at http://blog.connectme360.com)

While I certainly understand, Steve, your necessity to live on the bleeding edge of social interaction, I am not sure that this change is great for me as a consumer of your content (however free that consumption may be). I am a big fan, and because of that, I desire to consume everything that you have on offer. I don't, however, want to have to sign up for every new social media site to do so. The "lifestream" as it was, was a great way for people like me to keep up with you - all your public content easily accessible in one place. Since all these updates are of a public nature (i.e. your personal facebook updates are most likely of a personal nature and are therefore private, and everything else is intended for a public audience), the idea of logging in to multiple sites to keep up with you (and others like you) does not sound good to me.

There are a few reasons for this:
1) My facebook account is a personal account (i.e. I use it for friends and family and NOT business). My friends and family have no interest in how I feel about this media trend or that social innovation; they care about the pictures of the party last night, and videos of my kids playing. Following you on facebook forces me to cross that separation by first of all announcing to the world that I follow your updates, and further, syndicates any comment I might make there to my Facebook stream for all to see. Just like you, I would like to keep my personal facebook stream private and separate from my public interactions.

2) Speaking only for me, it doesn't matter to me at all whether your updates are short tweets, long form articles, or facebook notes: The fact is I am interested in what you have to say wherever it is. To me, separating content like this would be like having to watch multiple channels on different days to follow the same television show.

3) The proliferation of content aggregators (RSS readers, tweetdeck etc.) seem to indicate that at least "some" people, like me, prefer to consume content in one place no matter the originating source (in the case of tweetdeck: Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and MySpace.)

I know I am probably in the minority here.

Thank you very much indeed for all of the content you have disseminated thus far and will do in the future. I know I always feel smarter after having read one of your articles.

I don't think Steve is trying to force anyone to join a social media channel they don't like or have no interest in using or leave anyone out. I think it's more that he's just trying to offer some different content to people who are both on Facebook and Posterous.

One of Steve's points during the recent launch of Seesmic Look was the "digital embassy" -- the notion that if brands elect to be present on social media sites, they should take the time to understand what their consumers want to do on those sites.

Once they understand what their consumers want, they should consider steps to facilitate those consumer goals on those sites in a way that is consistent with their brand architecture and iconography.

Think of the role that the US embassy plays for you in your journeys to foreign lands, and how you would use the embassy in different situations.

I think there needs to be a mindshift for information consumers. Some people are concerned because it's now a bit harder to hear everything Steve says online. But in the age of twitter and facebook updates and other streams, this notion of catching every snippet is getting harder and harder to achieve. If we really want every single thing, we can subscribe everywhere and maybe double up a bit.

But before microblogging and streaming we were obviously not hearing every little thing Steve thought and said. And the world kept turning.

Agreed. You definetely can't be picky. You need to be where your customers are. I think it is great that Steve has finally "given in" and put his stream on facebook.

Again I disagree, Steve - and I feel I was right back last year in the first place when I was not convinced about moving your main presence from your own, established real estate to posterous. We had that discussion.

Now moving on to the next location (what I don't think is a smart move btw) shows exactly what the problem is with this strategy: instead of being a brand you become a nomad. Moving around will kill your personal brand on the long run I'm afraid.

Not a word against the fb stream, not a single word against an aggregator - but I doubt it makes sense to move to a hotel as your primary home when you built a nice house already (you know, I am building one in the real world right now again). Showing up in the hotel to meet people - yes. But moving there? - never ever.

@luebue no pun intended, but that is non-sense. the person steve rubel is the brand, not the house he lives in, e.g. the media.

We will see brands, products and services solely "living" inside and outside facebook. everything is evolving, changing, twisting back and forth. To stick to your analogy, of course it makes sense to build houses on earth because space is limited. but the web collapses our earths and builds new universes instead.

real estate on the web has nothing to do with tools but content.

@philschilling no, your are right, not the tools. BUT the url. really! server and url are real estate. I truly believe there will be only very, very few brands that will be able to live just inside a hotel like the silo facebook. connect to ppl, yes. but as I do not share steve's emphasis on facebook I am afraid he will lose his centre, part of his online branding aso.

I could say I don't care b/c I will always connect with him one way or the other - but looking at what this might mean for his or my clients, for "real" brands aso, I would say: bad move.

(and I said this before when I was with Edelman as well, just to be clear on this)

know I am probably in the minority here

I think there needs to be a mindshift for information consumers. Some people are concerned because it's now a bit harder to hear everything Steve says online. But in the age of twitter and facebook updates and other streams, this notion of catching every snippet is getting harder and harder to achieve. If we really want every single thing, we can subscribe everywhere and maybe double up a bit.

i could say I don't care b/c I will always connect with him one way or the other - but looking at what this might mean for his or my clients, for "real" brands aso, I would say: bad move

Agreed. You definetely can't be picky. You need to be where your customers are. I think it is great that Steve has finally "given in" and put his stream on facebook.