According to the Guardian, the Financial Times is launching an exclusive social network that will cost members up to $4,000 a year. This membership comes with the benefits of networking with “peers and luminaries operating within the digital, new media, mobile and telecoms sectors.” Benefits include tickets to one Financial Times conference, offline networking events and a 12-month premium subscription to the Financial Times website.

For those looking to take their social networking to the next level, this may be a great opportunity as long as you can afford the $4,000 price tag. Other social networks such as A Small World successfully used the exclusive model to attract a highly select group of individuals. Previously, there were rumors floating around that the Wall Street Journal may be launching a similar service in conjunction with LinkedIn. So far nothing has been confirmed.

Niche social networks tied with exclusivity provide a highly valuable service to its members. There is almost an infinite number of “exclusive” groups that could be targeted so I would expect to see these types of networks continue to pop up. One thing that I think would be useful on this network is to name a few of the participating members or at least the companies they represent. This would help some executives make a more informed decision about purchasing a membership.

Would you pay $4,000 for an exclusive social network?

I was reading NewsWeek when I came across an interesting post by Sharon Begley regarding a Stanford study. The study focused on the way that people interacted with different Avatars online.

The study found that people with more attractive Avatars were more confident, better conversationalist, and had better interactions over all with other people. The Stanford study then took these same people and asked them to pick from pictures from an online dating service.

People with attractive Avatars picks much more attractive people to talk to online and said that they felt more confident about their interactions. When the subjects were asked if attractive people would be interested in them most said yes. The study found the people with attractive Avatars thought higher of themselves than those with unattractive Avatars.

The study also found that men with attractive Avatars often told the truth more online than those with unattractive ones. The study sited that most men often lie about their height online but found that men associated to an attractive Avatar were more likely to tell the truth.

The implications of this study are much larger than people’s esteem. I read this study and I am concerned that people are beginning to cross the line between their virtual self and their physical self. People are seeing their virtual presence as an extension of their physical presence.

This is fine and dandy for helping people deal with phobias and building self confidence. But what happens when people begin to confuse violence and hate online with it in the real world?

What will happen if people no longer make the distinction between online fantasy and the real world? Will we see people only interacting with other people online because they are are more confident there? Or will people use the online world to get over their social anxieties and blossom in the real world?

On Monday, a Washington Post article was published discussing the AOL exodus effect and the impact on the local D.C. technology community. Since that article was published I’ve had a number of conversations with individuals active in the community. There are a few points that I think are critical to this conversation as I’ll outline below but ultimately it’s the participants that decide what will really happen.

Is there a lack of community?
According to the census bureau, D.C. has the second highest technology population outside of silicon valley. If there was anywhere else that would have a vibrant tech community outside of Silicon Valley, I would imagine D.C. would be it given our “tech density.” There are a number of people that have been criticized for not being highly active in the community and I still think that’s the case but it’s changing rapidly.

In Silicon Valley, company executives of larger companies attend events and brush shoulders with aspiring entrepreneurs. This exposure helps both the entrepreneurs as well as the companies that these executives work for. In D.C., many of the technology companies are multi-billion dollar companies and having the executives of these companies hanging out with aspiring entrepreneurs may not paint the right picture nor may it be necessary.

If you attended the Refresh DC event last night you would have seen that this community has grown rapidly over the past 12 months and I would imagine that this continues for at least the next 12 months as well. While we may not have the same mixture of entrepreneurs, venture capitalists, angel investors, developers, designers and tech bloggers as Silicon Valley, we definitely have a great mix.

What is missing?
Currently I believe that there are only a few things missing from the community that would help contribute to the growth but I also think that we are well on the way. One of the primary things is positive press about the D.C. technology community. The Washington Post is consistently critical of the D.C. technology community. In their most recent article, Kendra Marr and Zach Goldfarb describe the AOL exodus as throwing this community into turmoil.

Perhaps their article may not have been as critical as I have portrayed it but time and time again, there is negative press about this community coming from the Washington Post. I have personally spoken with writers at the company and each time I do, they speak with a tone that implies there is no chance this community will materialize into anything significant. With our without the post this community will succeed and I think that it’s going to happen through a highly active blogging community which has already begun. It simply needs to continue to grow.

The second thing missing is a culture of risk that exists out west. I don’t think we’ll ever have the same culture of risk but we can sure embrace it and encourage others to take risks. Rewarding failure is critical. Part of this risk taking includes the need for venture funding. There are already a few venture companies locally but without local universities that consistently produce entrepreneurs, this community will always have less entrepreneurs than Silicon Valley and we won’t see the influx of continuous web focused venture funding.

There is plenty of room for discussion surrounding the culture of risk in D.C. and the supposed “lack of funding” so feel free to post about it in the comments.

Where do we go from here?
As long as the local people including Jason Garber, M. Jackson Wilkinson, myself and others continue to host events, we’ll see this community continue to grow. I think involvement with the local universities would be a great thing and we have already seen a little of that with the University of Maryland but there is plenty of room for growth.

We need to keep the buzz going so if you aren’t blogging regularly, start blogging more! Seriously, this may be one of the most important things to the success of any community. Right now the tech blogs are mostly a silicon valley echo chamber. That needs to end now and D.C. needs to be one of the top participants in furthing this effort. Any other ideas about what should be done?

Some things just go with social media, a person can look at them and say, “wow! why didn’t I think of that.” There are somethings that make you scratch your head. H&R Block has entered the world of social media full force. They have hit the social media world with all the favorites:

• Twitter
• Myspace
• Facebook
• Their Own Site Called Digits
• Youtube

I have never been one who hated paying taxes, but I know that there is a HUGE undercurrent of American culture that doesn’t trust the IRS or Tax Agents. I also know it is a charge of the Federal government to stream line the tax process and make more Americans use online tax services.

I think going social is a bold and wise move for H&R Block to make a jump into uncharted waters. One, it targets a demographic that has the most questions about taxes. Two, it creates a sense of trust and friendliness that a business like taxes lacks. I honestly believe the Federal government should set up a similar program to try and educate people about taxes.

I am interested to hear if any of you out there would consider using H&R Block now they have gone social? Have any of you found H&R Block online already using social media? Do you trust them more or less? Do you feel this program creates an air of friendship with your tax man? Let me know.

As promised, I have details on the MashMeet DC Remix coming up on March 5th at Ogilvy PR. The event is going to consist of presentations and networking for a group of 170 individuals in the D.C. area. It costs $20 to attend unless you get one of our free tickets. So how do you get a free ticket? Well, the first 5 people to email contact [at] socialtimes [DOT] com will be able to get a free ticket. There is also one other requirement: you must be a blogger. The free tickets are of course in exchange for a little extra press ;).

If you aren’t a blogger, don’t worry about it! You can go register at http://mashmeetdcremix.eventbrite.com/. There are still plenty of tickets available so you should have no problems getting in. The fee will go toward covering the costs of food and beverages that will also be provided. Virgin America will also be raffling off two round trip tickets at the event so that gives you pretty good odds in a group of 170 people!

I hope to see you there! Also, if you didn’t notice above is our new logo. Thanks to Jesse Thomas, the creative director of Social Times for putting it together! We have some exciting design changes coming soon!

Earlier today I saw a press release for the new video site that MySpace co-founder, Brad Greenspan, had launched. The site is LiveVideo.com and the title of the press release describes it as “a new proprietary web 3.0 community platform designed to protect, grow, extend, and celebrate original online content creation by empowering users with new technology to create instant online live shows that are integrated with real time interactivity.”

First of all the title of their press release has to be the most ridiculous title I’ve seen in a while. The second thing that I found to be interesting is that LiveVideo.com is called a “Web 3.0″ site. What is Web 3.0 and when did we leave Web 2.0? Also, as Web 3.0 emerges can we vow never to use the term “Web 3.0.” As far as I know people have been calling it the semantic web but there is still debate going on about what the future of the web is. Then again it’s a never-ending debate.

The benefit of this new site is that it integrates live streaming just like Ustream.tv or one of a countless list of competitors. I’m not sure that this is really a revolutionary product and it appears that Kristen Nicole agrees. As I said yesterday though, having a big name involved with your product is definitely one way to get some attention.

Back in the 60’s George Romero and a few friends made a low budget horror flick on the outskirts of Pittsburgh. The film was grainy, used local towns people as extras, and completely redefined the horror genre of movies. Before Night of the Living Dead horror films were campy gore fest with no story really to tell.

Night of the Living Dead took on social prejudice and challenged viewers to think about who they would trust in the event of the end of the world. In Romero’s latest film Diary of the Dead he challenges viewers to again consider who they would trust, but this time it is the media that he examines.

The premise of the film is simple: A group of college students are filming a horror movie when zombie outbreak occurs. After arguing what to do and where to go they decide to head to Scranton, PA. The twist is the the director decides to film the entire trip and upload the events to his Myspace page. The entire film is narrated by one of the survivors who movies the film along.

I will not get into the cinematography and the ins and outs of the film. What is really interesting is the way Romero juxtaposes traditional media with social media. The director in the movie is convinced he is making a film that will show other survivors how to survive and since people are turning to things like Myspace and Youtube to get news about what is happening around the world.

Several scenes the narrators reminds the viewers that traditional media is covering the news to make money, if there is no more money, chances are there will be no more news. Romero isn’t all praise for social media either. Another quote was, “when there were three media channels there were three lies, now there are 40,000 channels and 40,000 lies.”

Romero also examines why we blog and why we upload things to Youtube. His theory is that by looking at things through a camera lens, or convincing ourselves that we are informing the public allows us to be less human and also allows us to desensitize to the horror around us.

There really is too much social media commentary for me to talk about in one post. The film is almost as good as Night of the Living Dead and it really challenges us to think about media and social media in a new way. To be honest I don’t think the film will do to well in theaters, zombie horror is always a tough sell, but I suggest that any one that loves social media check this movie out.

The honesty that Romero presents the situation in is compelling even if the characters are a bit archetypal. In the past people have complained that Romero tries to preach too much in his movies. I think Diary is a success because Romero doesn’t take a side he simply says this is what would happen if; a mark of a fine film.

Have you seen the movie? What did you think about the film? Would you see it even though it evolves zombies? If you saw the film do you think Romero’s commentary was too harsh or was he on target? Let me know what you think.

For the past year there have been rumblings of a social network music service in the works. Much of the buzz surrounded Facebook and I actually had juicy tidbits from two separate sources that said they were launching a new music service. Since then there has been very little buzz until yesterday when news surfaced that MySpace may be launching the Hulu of music. Right now it’s only buzz since nothing has been signed but there is definitely momentum.

MySpace already provides musicians with the opportunity to stream their music for free. Greg Sandoval suggests that MySpace may simply add a “Buy Now” button. Honestly at this point everything being posted around the blogosphere appears to be hearsay and theories. Given that everyone else seems to be having fun with it, so will we!

We predict that MySpace is going to go head to head with iTunes by generating the first web based mp3 downloading tool that enables all music to be distributed DRM-free and playable on any MP3 player. The new service will attempt to beat Facebook to the punch by launching a full scale music service that itegrates directly into user profiles and enables MySpace users to automatically generate their own musical profile similar to the type produced by Last.fm.

I can hear the music executives shaking in their boots as this means even lower margins for the already struggling music industry. Do you think music will eventually become ad supported or simply included as a tax in our broadband bill as other has suggested?

The battle continues to become the leader in the social gaming space. There was a lot of debate over the weekend surrounding Fred Wilson’s claim that the Social Gaming Network is not a legitimate competitor to the Zynga gaming network. Tonight, Erick Schonfeld has posted that the Social Gaming Network has added Jetman and Free Gifts to their gaming network. This is not an acquisition but instead a partnership.

That’s not where it ends though. The drama is heating up as Caroline McCarthy emphasized last week. Following Schonfeld’s post which included a statement from Shervin stating “If you want to be a developer platform, you probably shouldn’t be copying developers’ games. If you want to compete with them, fine. That is why they are joining us,” Mark Pincus, CEO of Zynga, sent in a message contesting Schonfeld’s post:

Wow erick.

A) you give them credit for traffic they don’t even own
And
B) you won’t give us credit for traffic (clz apps) we do actually own.

Do you even care how hypocritical sherwin is to accuse me of copycat games when he copied free gifts on bebo and risk on fb? Getting the irony? He is partnering with an app he literally copied in december while accusing me of this?

Erick, with all due respect I’m wondering if you work for sgn now?

There is a ton of drama stirring. While it may not all be justified, the highly competitive duo are each working to build gaming empires on the back of Facebook applications. It’s a high risk scenario and in high risk situations tempers flare. I’d expect the drama to continue.

Everyday countless new social networks are launched and there are new entrepreneurs that are brainstorming the next hot social network. The development of a social network is only the first hurdle in obtaining a critical mass. Chance are when you set out to develop the site it is going to take at least twice as long as you were originally planning. I’ve personally developed a social network from scratch so these are wise words from a once over-confident developer who thought he was building the next big thing.

The majority of social networks crash and burn before they ever reach the tipping point. The real challenge with social networks (and most businesses in general) is knowing when you are beating a dead horse or when you simply haven’t gained enough exposure. There is no perfect science for deciding what state you are at in the business cycle and all you can do is go by your gut. For most people reaching critical mass is the biggest challenge. So here are a few thoughts on how you can reach the tipping point for launching your social network:

• Find a niche that hasn’t been targeted that also has a high demand and dominate it - This one is pretty much left to seeing an opportunity and going after it. Timing is critical. I can thank timing for the success of my AllFacebook blog. One extremely useful tip I would say is use freely available tools to simply test out your concept before heavily investing in building a custom solution. The site doesn’t need to be perfect to determine that there is a strong deman.
• Have a big name investor - Want to get a great kick start? Launch your social network and announce that Peter Thiel invested in it. That should get you an article in the New York Times and the longtail resulting from that single article should get you an initial base of users.
• Get a marketing budget - For those social networks that are not an instant success you’ve got to market it! One of the standard marketing practices I see with these sites is giveaways. I don’t think that’s necessarily the ticket. When I launched my social network years ago I made a script that crawled the web and collected band names and phone numbers. That’s definitely a spam tactic but close to 5 percent of recipients registered for the site. Pick and choose your marketing tools but make sure not to overspend in any one area. Diversification and repetition is key in marketing.
• Participate in the conversation - Rather than trying to get people to come to your site, go to where they’re talking. On blogs, at events and on other community sites, directly target people that would be perfect members of your site. If everybody is your target market then your market is too big and you might want to go back to the drawing board.
• Hire a community manager - Conversation is critical if you are going to build a successful social network. Get someone who is actively engaging all new users. You also need to make sure that the person who you hire is interested in talking with your community members. Not every community manager is fit for your social network.
• Define what success is - Make sure you have tangible goals set. Don’t aim to have 200,000 users if your market size is only 20,000. Create a time line with obtainable goals and go after them. When you go to your investor and are explaining why you only have 5,000 users explain that it’s because your market size is only 150,000 If that doesn’t work for your investor use the advice of my good friend Shipigler:

Have any other useful tips that have worked for you in obtaining users to your social network?