Simon Booth-Lucking

The title of this great piece of research by the Brand Science Institute of Hamburg was irresistible to the sober judge in me. I recommend taking its 24 pages with a glass of water if you've done a heavy night on the social media Kool-Aid.

Hat tip for the find to We Are Social.

Micro-bots attacking surveillance cameras are seen as a growing threat. Photo by Matt Biddulph.

Yesterday I listed privacy as one of three problems that will define the next five years of social media. In his post, A Privacy 9-11 Could Derail Social, Steve Rubel describes the threat to social media's (commercial) success.

Anyone in security will tell you that a good defense is only as strong as the weakest link in the chain. Yet, no matter how hardened our technological defenses are, it's my bet that somewhere someone will suffer a major privacy leak that impacts millions, sends shock waves through our system and makes us feel less secure than we did before. Such an event could slow interest in social networking and derail its marketing potential.

He points to design decisions by the big platforms (Amazon, Facebook etc.) that are aimed at improving things, and calls on marketers, government and the media to pull their weight.

How might marketers contribute? An immediate thought is inspired by the way that it has become accepted that opt-in rather than opt-out is the right way to do email marketing: must marketers now develop and adopt social permission models? For example, I need to explicitly opt-in to let you tell that hot new Facebook game to invite me to a game. Of course marketers might see that as stopping them creating a viral hit but, as with email marketing, accepted practices do change.

A seemingly small step, but given the growing popularity of social gaming one that potentially changes behavioural norms.

Where will social media be in five years? Mashable, the hyperactive yet still damn useful social media guide, has celebrated its fifth birthday with an article asking just that question. Predictably it is now trending through the TweetBook-o-Sphere quicker than Usain Bolt on skates.

Never one to miss the chance to sober up a passing bandwagon, here's my alternative next five years in social media.

Privacy problems

In January Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg caused a fuss when he was interpreted as effectively saying privacy is dead. Around the same time Google CEO Eric Schmidt was saying, "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place." Creepy.

I find these attitudes uncomfortable, and the skeletons in my cupboard aren't even that exotic!

A backlash is growing. Advocacy groups like Consumer Watchdog and Electronic Frontier Foundation run critical ads on giant screens in Times Square and help internet users keep up with the privacy settings of new services like Facebook Places. Even Schmidt himself is aware of the risks to vulnerable members of society.

Users need safeguards and control. Companies need the advertising revenues that keep their services largely free at the point of use. This is a big issue to resolve in the next five years of social media.

Identity crisis

Related to privacy problems is identity. In real life we present different selves to different people; clients, colleagues, friends, family. And within those groups we have different circles based on past experiences and future hopes. In the last five years social media has largely put that element of human nature in the ignore pile, leaving users with the choice of self-censorship, potential oversharing or just plain old giving up.

Plenty of research has been done into this problem, with the best I've seen coming from Google researcher Paul Adams, leading to speculation that Google will swoop in and solve it. Whoever solves it in the next five years will have to pay much more attention to:

• How we really think about "friends"
• How we influence and are influenced by other people's opinions
• How we control what others can put in our profile and vice versa
• How we don't understand how big our audience is (for example, here are people slagging off their boss in public)

Power to the people?

In these disengaged and cynical times there's a lot of excitement about social media's impact on democracy. David Cameron and friends are busy talking with Mark Zuckerberg and just about everybody. The best exploration of the potential I've seen is the documentary Us Now - well worth taking the time to watch fully.

But when Clay Shirky, an intellectual cheerleader for online democracy, says that actually it's a bit broken you know there's a problem. So far social media has increased noise but not impact, with politicians disliking or plain ignoring the bulk e-petitions we've all signed. And well-organised but non-representative groups, whether they be lobbyists, football fans or pranksters, have been able to hijack attempts at online consultation.

Despite predictions, the 2010 general election was the TV debate election not the internet election. Social media has got five years to change that next time.

Some more well-known Mad Men

"Are you mad?" This is the most common response I get when I tell people that I've started working for myself. Okay, what they actually say is "That's brave", but I think what they really mean is, "Are you mad? In this double-dipping economy where people are clinging onto their jobs and praying that interest rates stay low? Rather you than me!"