Bing, Microsoft’s search engine, is now a year old and it’s been a good one.

They’ve clawed 12.7% of the enormous search market, which is no small feat. And they’ve got what political campaigners crave: momentum. Bing will be powering Yahoo search from this autumn and Yahoo’s got 18.9% of the market. Granted, it’s early days and Google is still undoubtedly the goliath, but there’s plenty of reason to break out the cake.

But what about Twitter? According to its co-founder Biz Stone, Twitter isn’t a social network, “We’re much more like an information network or a source of news.” He’s not kidding as they’re clocking 24 billion search queries a month! Test it yourself here. Look for your company name, your brands, your services, your competitors, your customers – it’s illuminating.

Fast Company have the search big hitters lining up like this:

Google 88 billion searches per mth
Twitter 24 billion searches per mth
Yahoo 9.4 billion searches per mth
Bing 4.1 billion searches per mth

Photo credit: Search Engine Land

Managing Director of Emerging Media for Proof Integrated Communications, B.L. Ochman recently wrote about ‘the top 10 companies in the Fortune 100.’ She’d been checking if ‘they included their social media involvement on their homepage.’

Ochman quotes a study by Burson Masteller and her own firm indicating that 54% of Fortune 100 companies employ Twitter; 32% use blogs; 29% have Facebook fan pages. Yet her look at the top 10 found only three who show any involvement with social media.

I decided to do the same in the UK by looking at the top 10 of the FTSE100. These 10 were calculated only by sales price, not any other measure.

1. Rangold Resources (RRS.L)
Nothing anywhere on their site.

2. Reckitt Benckiser Group (RB.L)
Nothing, but there is a news aggregator dragging in stories that mention Reckitt Benckiser (shows some grasp of interaction).

3. Rio Tinto (RIO.L)
Nothing anywhere on their site.

4. Astrazeneca (AZN.L)
Nothing anywhere on their site.

5. Carnival (CCL.L)
Very small Twitter & Facebook icons at the very bottom of the home page.

6. Anglo American (AAL.L)
Nothing anywhere on their site.

7. Vedanta Resources (VED.L)
Nothing anywhere on their site.

8. Next (NXT.L)
Nothing on the Plc site but the commerce site has a Facebook link plus an iphone app.

9. British American Tobacco (BATS.L)
Nothing anywhere on their site.

10. Sabmiller (SAB.L)
Nothing anywhere on their site.

This is all way off the 54% engagement that the Fortune 100 apparently sees, but what does it mean?

Are we less communicative than our American counterparts?
Big Business doesn’t waste time on the latest fads?
Proper business isn’t for wishy-washy social media?
Established stalwarts aren’t clambering for market share like some others?
The top 10 are involved but aren’t yet broadcasting that from their home page?

Does it mean anything transferable to you and your business? What do you think?

Nestle are used to their fair share of bad press; students the world over have seen to that. But March 2010 is when they will go into social media case study history.

For anyone who’s not read the full saga, here’s the short version: a video was staged which drew a play on eating Kit-Kat and orangutans’ fingers. Nestle had the video taken down but, of course, it reappeared. They chased it around the ‘net like a drunk trying to bath a cat and made life pretty miserable for themselves by fumbling over logo violations when Greenpeace were organised.

I’m struggling here between ethics and communication tactics. If you make a bad product – deem that as you will – then, with or without a great web interaction, you deserve to be called on it. But, lets assume you aren’t evil personified and you deserve your place in the world of commerce, what do you do when attacked online?

Despite what some experts portray, social media isn’t always a simple mirror, signal, manoeuvre affair. On top of the immense variables, there is the fear of inflaming situations, adding sugar to the fermenting jar that forums and blog comments can become. I don’t believe there is a definitive three, five or ten-point plan. Social media has only one absolute for all organisations: listening. If it’s nothing else for you, it’s an opportunity to listen.

That said, Seth Godin believes he’s got an answer: brands in public. He launched this aggregator back in September last year.

Strangely for a Godin fanboy I wasn’t convinced at launch. And after six months or so I can’t say I’m overly impressed with their client list – no Coke, no Cisco, no Microsoft, all of whom are being critiqued hugely online. If anything, is this not a $400/month garden where a bad ‘vibe’ can grow? From a brand manager’s standpoint, doesn’t she prefer any negatives to be disparate across the web, rather than collate neatly in one screenshot? Of course, the positives mentioned online will also look more powerful together.

Which brings us right back to our variables problem: join in and risk inflaming the situation or enter and solve problems with a swath of your service sword? The trouble is unless the Nestles of the world truly engage (as in adopt some of their philosophies, ecological or otherwise) with the likes of Greenpeace, they’re likely to find hugging a tree has morphed into overtaking a Facebook wall as the militant tool of choice.

But don’t be frozen by fear. The wonderful John Battelle at Federated Media recently wrote, “…all of our customers are already operating in social media. You can’t pretend otherwise. And it’s better to engage, make mistakes, admit those mistakes, and move on, than to not engage at all. I call this “conversational judo,” and suggest we all practice it, daily. Twice on Sunday, perhaps….”

Touché.

As we increase our personal openness and honesty via social media, so too are we appraised more as data-mining never had the chance to go so deep.

Californian data-mining company Rapleaf are at the bleeding edge of social media monitoring (SMM). Short version: they track everything about you online – every comment, every review, every status update, every tweet, every contact, every friend and they appraise you via some massive algorithms.

This pretty much promises to offer the Holy Grail for advertising online where uber-relevant adverts are delivered to you and your peer group. But Rapleaf are taking that peer group and going further than ads – they’re suggesting credit ratings! A ‘prospect’ might fail a credit score rating but their closest online friends are quite affluent, so perhaps some extra leeway should be given (they wouldn’t see you on the street would they?).

Given that we know all this, how long before people start spamming the system? In a view to becoming more credible, will the scumbag hook up with the solicitor, doctor and police officer? If an online friend will upset your credit score, would you oust them? Will this lead to appraising people who ‘poke’ you to see if they lift or drop your ‘perceived value’ to the market (think mortgage providers for a start)?

If you thought social media was free, you’re wrong. Facebook is inching toward its big payday and Rapleaf and others are offering tools that help social media grease the skids nicely.

Cartoon: the infamous “On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog” by Peter Steiner originally published by The New Yorker in 1993.

John Battelle recently said, ‘Marketing is now like moving quicksilver. The marketer is the publisher and visa versa; the consumer is now both… that we should rethink, ‘our brand in the market’ as, ‘our conversation with the market.’

I’d like to chirp a complimentary point about synergy with product (otherwise it’s all about the sell and very little about substance). As I see it marketing, branding and product are now *more* than joined at the hip. They’re our own holy trinity of business.

All three are separate but suddenly they’re one and the same. They’re more than interlinked – they are each other. If marketing was a message or a story about a product/service, it has now become the book itself.

Simple example: the iPod was an instant phenomenon because of the product and how it made people feel, not because of its raw above-the-line marketing efforts. Great products and services are a conversation starter for me, how about you?

Just read Tom Asacker’s post on frustration and I needed to rebroadcast:

Marketers, we need you now, more than ever, to be the voice of value creation for the benefit of your organizations and other brand constituents (customers, suppliers, communities, et al). So please don’t let the frustration, and persistence, of the Social Web ecosystem cause you to aimlessly invest those scarce resources in “following,” “friending” or “tweeting.”

Some are proving there is a benefit to social media but don’t forget Twitter, Facebook, etc are all tools. Merely tools, not the whole ball game itself. If your business is using them successfully then kudos to you. If you’re employing them but not gaining value, then you must realise they’re no longer tools, they’ve become toys.

Does anyone rave on about email, fax or telephone use in business anymore? When did you last hear someone brag about their team’s wonderful clearing of their inboxes? All very useful, but tools nonetheless.

WARNING: this is a lengthy diatribe on ecommerce. If online retailing isn’t your thing then run away now. If it does float your boat then grab a coffee, my friend:

Scoble has been posting lately about the future of the Internet, calling it the Web 2010, others are more likely to call it Web 3.0. What will ecommerce websites look like in this future world? Amazon and the other ‘Web Whales’ don’t give us much of a clue what they are rolling out before the next Olympics, so here’s my take on some of it.

ECOMMERCE PROLOGUE
As the amount of data available to us grows exponentially, even the most naive of customers are suddenly morphing into prosumers (professional–consumer). Prosumers scan for information before actually shopping and they’re in your stores already. Armed with spec lists, reviews and price comparisons, they push back your sales team and POS with hard data and raw opinions.

Perversely, more data is seeing customers take longer to make decisions and impulse buys are now filled with doubt – “I should’ve checked the reviews on this.” It could be argued that retailers who engage the longest and build the most trust, will win the most favour (oh yeah, AND the most orders).

BLENDING
Firstly, from a marketer’s perspective, online wont replace offline. More than ever, we’ll see a blending of multichannel operations. Next.co.uk will still produce their very expensive catalogue and their website will outperform other channels, but their property managers will still have a job to perform. Ditto M&S and Tesco, but there is no question that the small and unremarkable of the high street will feel ever-more pressure from those dastardly dot coms.

DELIVERY
Free delivery is largely becoming the de facto choice online. With retailers pushing this, they’ll offer consumers in high street outlets the chance of delivery to home rather than carting it onto the bus. The visa versa of this is already becoming more popular but in-store collection is likely to be incentivised more as it’s a double opportunity for retailers: delivery is less costly as it remains within their own supply chain (they’re transporting from the hub to the high street anyway) and, as you collect, it’s far more likely that you’ll pick up that extra item (cross selling heaven).

MOBILE VALUE
Mobile web access will grow as smart phones continue to take hold but M-Commerce value will start from a low base – think ringtones and iTunes. However, these should see repeat visitors and as trust builds, value should grow. Until then, fears of data breaches and insufficient speed will prevent anything like widespread acceptance.

SEARCH
In-site search will gain intelligence as search engines are forever increasing shoppers’ expectancy of relevance, thanks to their ever-improving accuracy. Typing ‘white 16″ collar double cuff non iron‘ on next.co.uk results in “There were no documents that contained all of the words in your query. These results contain some of the words…” and they proceed to show me 225 products with a white luxury Percale bedset toward the very top. (Yes, they do list shirts with all those keywords.) Partnerships with the search guys are likely as algorithms need to improve.

SEARCH ENGINE PAYMENT
Facebook money and nano-payments are going to become a reality, but how about making your transaction on the search engine itself? If Google, Bing or Yahoo shows you a product you want from a five star retailer, there’s no real reason to jump through to the site at all. You could plug in your payment details right there, completing the transaction (Google checkout really starts making sense now, eh?). This will increase shopping speed where trust already exists.

AUGMENTED REALITY
Augmented reality will take place using your photo library. A plug-in will scan your local machine and online (esp Flikr and Facebook) to find an image that it can use to best display the latest wares from Asos.com and TopShop.co.uk. It will superimpose clothes onto you and put you on an exotic location, not a paid model, in true CSI style.

SIZE AWARE
Zappos, the US shoe mail order giant, budget for a 20% return rate. Size aware sites will pummel that kind of error. Using the augmented reality above, you could see yourself in specific sizes: perhaps the large (your normal size) is a little too loose and viewing the medium shows it to be more correct. Obviously, very accurate pixeling and measurements from the site are a prerequisite. Women will be addicted to this feature; men might well become extinct from the high street.

3D
Why wouldn’t future sites look like merchandised finished stores? We’ve all seen Second Life and other virtual reality sites. Well, imagine you could ‘walk’ the whole store or teleport to the men’s shoe department. The store’s branding could even change to suit your mood – upbeat and funky, or perhaps click to change the ambiance to sedate and sophisticated.

SOCIAL PLUG-INS
This is where the likes of Facebook are betting on the big money. You’ve seen the sonar picture in the Batman movie where Morgan Freeman can view the whole of Gotham thanks to everyone’s mobile phone acting as a radar device. Well, as you ‘walk’ through the 3D reality store and into others in the shopping centre (because they’ll collaborate, as retailers know proximity brings success), you will be aware of your social media contacts – Julie is 50m off to your right, David is in the café upstairs. Virtual geotagging would allow you to meet them/talk/show as busy.

FRIENDLY FOCUS
Social advertisers are of the mindset that if you like snowboarding, heavy rock and fast convertibles, they can serve you ads that will interest you i.e. heavily targeted. They’re also of a mindset that your friends wont be too far off that choice spectrum either. If you’re golf mad then it stands to reason some of your contact book will be fellow golfers, right? Therefore if they can define you, they reckon they can define your group.

If our virtual store knows that ten of your friends bought something from the homeware department, it might well show you an offering from that neck of the woods. If it knows two of your mates browsed a particular shirt and another one bought it, perhaps it might show you the shirt. But wait, you don’t all want to look the same (though you may well want to buy identical music and games) so the store’s intelligence shows you similar styles, but not an identical shirt.

4th DIMENSIONAL WEB
The focus on friends and your group above is referring to the social graph (a modern take on six degrees of separation, if you like). The problem with that graph is that as your social list grows, the trending becomes diluted. Let’s say you ‘friend’ two people you work with: one is into motorbikes and cooking and has married four times; another is a spinster and likes books and knitting – correlation is becoming far more difficult (simple example, but you get the idea).

You ‘friend’ people almost on a daily basis because you’ve touched each other in some way. But it is NOT an indicator of similarity. However, if you and I are connected *and* we’re both members of the Chartered Institute of Marketing and the Institute of Directors and we also list similar books and blogs as of interest, then the algorithm could rightly pair us on the same graph. The trouble is, which graph: perhaps occupation (to serve job ads), but music and clothing? How about sport and movies? Will we both like cricket?

Incorporating the social graph along with real time search is what the master mathematicians are coding right now. It will make the web more than 3D. The intelligence and relevance will mean no serious retailer will have a standard look. Very few visitors landing at the home page will see identical layouts and offerings. The big players will become more relevant and successful because of it.

VOTING RIGHTS
Scoble had this down when he said, “So, if someone says “Pluto’s rocks” there should be an aggregator that lets you see how many people talked about Plutos. Obviously only people writing on their iPhones FROM Plutos on University Ave.”

He’s talking about your contacts (friends again) informing you of what’s well regarded, but there’s also the possibility of the wider view from perhaps the whole of Twitter or Friendfeed. I’d say this could split in two, similar to paid ads appearing above the SERPs in a Google search with your closest friends (easily ID’d beause of most interaction) biased toward the top. The intelligence knows that I’m biased to my friends views, but still shows me what the masses think.

MOBILE NETWORKING
Jason Calacanis says that the Mobile SNS (social networking services) is up for grabs in the United States. I’ll take his word on that, and I’ll completely agree that social networking will shift from the desktop to your pocket. The phone coupled with geolocation tools will become networking nevada.

BRILLIANT BAR CODES
The cubic generation of bar codes is coming where data matrix squares will replace the traditional lined rectangle. But we’ll also see QR (quick response) codes more frequently in the UK (they’re common in Asia and North America). The QR code can look like art, but when scanned, usually by a mobile phone camera, it reveals data. These can take you to micro sites, or vouchers, or secret passages to hidden info (known as easter eggs) – like game cheats and movie trailers for example.

Gorilla marketers will appear to make these bleeding edge, scattering them around cities and towns, but within a year the Pepsis and Fords of the world will drag them to the mainstream.

CHANNEL CONFLICT
Manufacturers want greater penetration and control and they can achieve both by cutting out the middle man and going direct to the consumer. When your products are as hot as Apple’s you can do as you please. Retailers are still falling over themselves to tout Apple’s wares despite the possibilty of losing a sale to apple.com. However, the majority of brands have their hands tied by the threat of retaliation (i.e. refusal to buy) from their retail partners.

It’s thought that 50-60% of customers looking for a branded product begin their search at the manufacturer’s website. Manufacturers will look for ingenious ways of capturing that consumer rather than just being a megaphone of information. Ship to store is the most obvious route but the marketing steps ahead of that will be ingenious – hooking in TV advertisment widgets for instance.

BRANDS
Own brand products will become even more obligatory. Did you know Amazon has had their own private label line-up for five years? China’s best will also feature far more in Europe as they cash in on the knowledge we’ve given them. It’s bite-the-hand-that’s-fed-you time.

The Times is reporting on a modern classic. The Facebook faux pas is a recent phenomenon witnessed too closely by the head of MI6 as he was outed by his wife on her Facebook wall.

From the piece: …entries by his [Sir John Sawers'] wife Shelley on the social networking site have exposed potentially compromising details about where they live and work, their friends’ identities and where they spend their holidays. On the day her husband was appointed she congratulated him on the site using his codename “C”.

As Yoda said, “Be mindful of your thoughts Obi Wan, they betray you.”

Two huge media companies are looking for new top dogs this week. MySpace chief executive and co-founder, Chris DeWolfe is on his way, along with ITV’s Executive Chairman, Michael Grade.

What’s remarkable is that the same candidate could be ideal for both positions, yet the view from both chairs couldn’t be more polarised.

MySpace is one of the great brands of the new millennium and the next CEO has a massive opportunity if he/she thinks big enough (could you put Facebook on the ropes?). ITV is a beacon of the past with largely outdated revenue models and the reality that its scale is shrinking.

Both are ‘big ask’ tenures as they’ll surely oversee the most challenging make-or-break, eat-or-be-eaten stuff either firm has encountered. Very exciting times.

Well, that’s my prediction. They’ll stop burning dollars acquiring paper mills and fork out $750+ million for Twitter.

Twitter is the most popular and certainly the most talked about social media tool of the moment, yet there’s no clear indication on how they’ll monetise the whole shebang. They raised another $35 million in venture capital last month but to what end?

If you concede that Google want to know far more about you and your digital habits along with the world at large, this source would make an obvious acquisition. The speed at which trends and news appear on Twitter is unmatched elsewhere on the web. Google could leverage this into their algorithm and gain much more real-time searching (certainly opposed to Google News).

Of course, we’re not privy to the magic that’s being created right now in Mountain View where Google’s rocket scientists wave their wands over the web with reckless talent. Have they got a Twitter-killer waiting in the wings? Personally I doubt it. And if they have, will it be another Google Video which was always the poor cousin to YouTube – remember Google later bought YouTube purely to get that online video foothold?

They’re into harvesting strategies and don’t need to monetise everything immediately. Again, YouTube teaches us that. So the lack of income at Twitter won’t be such a problem; the data is the treasure worth the capital outlay. Although, Twitter wont keep its monopoly forever – when you show the market what’s it’s capable of, it rarely stands and applauds for long. Immitation is immenant.

Then again, others might get to the buy-out first. Facebook is reported to have offered $500 million and Carol Bartz could do with creating some buzz about Yahoo other than dismal reports of staff exoduses. Either of these firms would be salivating at the thought of gaining those 6 million Twitterers and all that live data.

What do you reckon? Do you think Google will crush Twitter, buy Twitter or just look at it like a play-thing in the corner?