Nicholas Carr has written a post in response to Tim Berners-Lee’s article about the Giant Global Graph. Tim Berners-Lee, the creator of the worldwide web, makes a powerful statement:

Its not the Social Network Sites that are interesting — it is the Social Network itself. The Social Graph. The way I am connected, not the way my Web pages are connected.

We can use the word Graph, now, to distinguish from Web.

I called this graph the Semantic Web, but maybe it should have been Giant Global Graph!

Whoa, the semantic web is in reality the social graph. I wonder if Mark Zuckerberg foresaw Tim Berners-Lee suggesting that the social graph was indeed the future of the web. Right now Facebook has the most accurate representation of the social graph … at least in the United States. The social graph still has a long way to go but the reality is that we are at the forefront of, as Nicholas Carr suggests, an entirely New Paradigm.

Berners-Lee suggests that the acceptance of open standards such as FOAF will be the future. I think that OpenSocial is the most effective step toward standardization. The effectiveness of the graph is only as effective as the data though. We are at the beggining of a phase during which thought leaders on the web will try to determine how to most effectively express the graph. Facebook (and Mark Zuckerberg) appears to be the leader in this space currently.

Nicholas Carr also makes an excellent point:

But while it’s true that technologists and theoreticians desire to abstract the graph from the sites - and see only the benefits of doing so - it’s not yet clear that that’s what ordinary users want or even care about. That’ll be the real test to whether the graph makes the leap from mathematician to mainstream - and it will also tell us whether a social network like Facebook has a chance to become a true platform or is fated to remain a mere site.

I would suggest that whether or not the social graph makes the leap from thought leaders to the mainstream, the web is continuing to become more social. How the web chooses to express the social aspects is up to its members. While I don’t know where it’s going, I will surely cover the entire process.

Working for an ad company can be extremely entertaining. Just imagine the people who were sitting in a room together and came up with the idea to connect women through cookies in order to improve their social lives. Honestly, making a site more social in order to share a branded experience with your friends is not a bad idea. As the New York Times has pointed out, brands are hopping on the social bandwagon.

Pantene’s hair care line, Campbells, Dove, Jockey and other large companies are all creating niche social networks to increase brand awareness and help people communicate in a branded environment. Honestly, there is nothing better then this for a brand. Uber networkers will tell you that hosting a large event where you help others connect will do wonders for your personal brand. The same goes for virtual events and networks. Just ask Mark Zuckerberg how big his personal brand has become.

Are we going to get tired of creative brand experiences? Not anytime soon! Are you going to show up to an event offering free food or drinks brought to you by a given brand? Probably. You will definitely show up if the event helps you connect with others that you have shared interests with. The same thing goes for social networks. If brands can target people with similar interests they will join a branded social network any day.

I honestly think all of this is a great thing: friendly brands that help me connect with other people. Brands are finally becoming more social.

Yesterday, Marshall Kirkpatrick wrote an interesting article about the seemingly infinite niche social networking space. I have to say that I mostly agree with what Marshall is suggesting. One after the other, we hear about yet another social network that launches. There are so many, I think we should add YASN as an acronym for “Yet Another Social Network.” Every day we see a number of them launch with a Mashable or Techcrunch posting. One newspaper after another launches one and commercial brands are launching their own social networks as well.

Eventually it seems as though every entity has its own social network. It makes sense but I begin to wonder if we will really sign up for a wide array of social networks to express our vast number of affiliation groups. Ultimately, humans love to be a part of affiliation groups. Those affiliation groups have shared interests among their members. The only problem is that the number of interests that we each have has appeared to expand as we spend more time on the internet.

Personally, I am interested in Non-Fiction business books, The Office, web development, mens clothing, international travel, tennis, blogging, DC new media, business news, the stock market, Facebook, networking, dating, entrepreneurship, Wine Library TV, video editing, foreign languages, skiing, sleeping and a limitless number of things. Am I supposed to join a social network for each of these interests? The funny thing is that there are social networks for most of these interests.

Ning has tried to accomodate individuals facing the same problem. Facebook has provided users with groups and fan pages where you can find people that are members of shared affiliation groups. Honestly though, when does it become too much? Is it really possible to keep track of my activities across a number of disconnected social networks? I doubt it. That’s why I think Facebook (or a similar competitor) is the real solution.

The counter-argument would be that the internet’s key feature is the long-tail. Long tail interests and sites that cater to these interests are a key characteristic of the general web. Can one social network satisfy those users or should they be distributed across a multitude of social networks?

Last night, Ashkan Karbasfrooshan posted an article on HipMojo about the state of blogs, technology blogs in particular. His article describes how rumors among the tech blogs can rapidly snowball and eventually become a pr disaster for smaller companies. Apparently, CNET ran a false story stating that YouTube would be launching an HD service. This story ultimately ended up being incorrect and the Google pr machine was able to quickly resolve the issue. Ashkan suggests that smaller companies would never be able to pull off such a quick response. I agree with Ashkan.

The real issue here is not the power of each organization’s PR team though. The issue that Ashkan believes is limited to social media in fact expands to traditional media. I’m sure most of you followed our previous presidential elections including the 2000 election during which Al Gore lost to George Bush. As I recall, Fox News reported that Bush had won Florida prior to being able to confirm it and suddenly all the other mainstream media began reporting the same thing. We all know how that story ends.

The real issue here is that many of us involved in new media/social media have a habit of typing up stories and hitting the publish button without considering what could result if the information turns out to be false. I admit that I have done this on a number of instances and it has resulted in false information being dissiminated. I have since learned my lesson and try to think twice before hitting the publish button. The real issue here is that the large blogs such as Techcrunch, GigaOm, CNET and others have become the leaders in the industry just as NBC, FOX and CBS have become the leaders in traditional media.

As such, anything that they report is considered fact. Techcrunch for one, frequently violates this trust by reporting rumors that end up being false. The blogs that were once small and have now become industry leaders have been forced to adjust and now have to think twice about hitting publish. Unfortunately they don’t always do that but they should. I don’t think this is a sad state of affairs though. What really needs to take place is some sort of new media journalist integrity standard. Why not reward those that accurately report information with a stamp of approval? Am I way off here?

While it’s not new, I just stumbled upond this social networks video by Ze Frank. Given that it’s the weekend and news is slow, I thought I’d post an entertaining video. Enjoy!

This isn’t as related to the social web as it is to the web in general but I couldn’t resist a post about it. Henry Blodget is at it again and is moving markets. After posting an article on his Alley Insider blog, Henry posted a similar article on the Huffington Post about Microsoft acquiring Yahoo. Those rumors have pushed up Yahoo’s stock close to 6% as of this post. Many of the traders are blaming it on options expirations but if you compare the rest of the industry stocks, they are not swinging heavily in either direction.

It may end up being true this time but Blodget’s rumors are now driving the market. Microsoft has previously set lofty search goals, this may just be another one of those. That’s like Google saying that they plan on dominating the social web via Open Social. While Google hasn’t said it, it is simply an assertion. This isn’t the first time that rumors have surfaced about Microsoft acquiring Yahoo. Honestly, it would be a great move (as you can tell by the market reaction).

I would be a little careful though about making such a bold statement (although I guess I’m somewhat of a hypocrit given my habit of making bold statements). I definitely think Microsoft should acquire Yahoo here, but they may want to hold out and see if Facebook turns out to be the next Yahoo or Google. Facebook would be a cheaper acquisition target.

Last night, Douglas MacMillan posted an article about elitist social networks that require credentials in order to join. Douglas used a number of examples including Reuters new network of individuals involved in the finance industry. In order to join the network, your information must cross check with Reuters’ large database which will verify your employment status.

The model of exclusivity has been highly effective for many social networks including the highly successful A Small World. A Small World has become known for its exclusive group of people including worldwide jetsetters that swap planes with each other or go party at each other’s island vacation houses. If you ever obtain membership to the social network, you must befriend at least 7 other people on the site before you can send out an invitation to others.

I honestly have never seen a company’s decision to make their site to invite only backfire. While we all like to publicly dismiss our desire to become members of these closed networks, at heart there is always some part of us that wants to be part of the group. It’s human nature. So if you are trying to come up with a strategy for your social network, consider the invite only model. The invite only model is not limited to social networks either. Products such as Gmail and Joost have used this model successfully and have experienced tremendous growth.

Has the invite only model worked for any of you?

Over the past couple days there has been a bunch of buzz about MTV’s new latin-focused mobile based social network. The new social network is called Con3xion. According to Marketing Vox, “San Diego-based mobile social networking company Intercasting will provide its Anthem platform to create a simple interface for users to ‘view photos, send and receive messages, post comments and search profiles.’”

Recently, I’ve been talking with a number of executives about their thoughts on mobile. The responses have been widely varied. While mobile technology is growing in the U.S. our mobile technologies still fall behind international markets where mobile has become ubiquitous. It is so widespread that in most countries, mobile use is more common then computer use. This is not to say that mobile will not be booming in the U.S. Many people in the U.S. complain about the lack of flash support but over the next couple years we will see more robust applications appear on our mobile devices.

I have a feeling that Google’s Android platform will be one of the primary driving forces in mobile technology. I would guess that the same boom that we’ve witnessed for web 2.0 startups will be repeated with mobile devices. Many of the industry thought leaders also see mobile as the future and that’s why they are beginning to invest heavily in mobile technologies. Just ask the advisors at LaunchBox Digital, a new seed financing investment fund based out of Washington, D.C.

One of their primary investments is going to be in new mobile technologies and other technologies focused on the social web. This is just the beginning of a new trend that started a couple years back but is now starting to gain traction. The social revolution on the web is in full force. In the U.S. the mobile social revolution is just getting started. What mobile technologies are you looking forward to?

On my AllFacebook blog I have frequently discussed Facebook’s killer feature that would be the end of LinkedIn. Unfortunately Facebook has yet to release that feature and according to Nielsen statistics that were just released, LinkedIn is growing faster then Facebook on a year-over-year basis. According to the statistics, LinkedIn grew 189 percent between October last year and October this year. Facebook grew 125 percent for the same period.

I found the released statistics to be pretty interesting. Apparently none of the other large social networks (Hi5, Bebo, Orkut, etc) aside from Facebook, MySpace and LinkedIn ranked in the top ten in the United States. Also beating Facebook in growth was Club Penguin the Disney owned social network for kids. Also of particular interest was AOL’s continued descent in the world of social networking. AOL’s People Connection site decreased 30 percent year-over-year.

A look at Compete.com’s statistics shows that LinkedIn actually grew a whopping 400 percent over the past year. Compete.com statistics for Facebook produced similar results to Nielsen, reporting a growth of approximately 140 percent. The main story here may be that the top 10 social networks grew a strong 25 percent year over year. While social networking has been forecasted to slow by 2012, there are still a few years left of continued growth. So let the good times roll!

Today, I’ll be streaming live a presentation on “Using Social Networking Tools” in D.C. Thanks to the New Politics Institute for putting this together and thanks to Peter Corbett of iStrategyLabs for taking care of the streaming! The stream is now live and the speakers will start talking momentarily.