The latest news on Facebook is that the site has changed its’ privacy settings. Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook CEO, wrote a letter to the sites users explaining the changes.

It has been a great year for making the world more open and connected. Thanks to your help, more than 350 million people around the world are using Facebook to share their lives online
To make this possible, we have focused on giving you the tools you need to share and control your information. Starting with the very first version of Facebook five years ago, we’ve built tools that help you control what you share with which individuals and groups of people. Our work to improve privacy continues today.

…

We’ve worked hard to build controls that we think will be better for you, but we also understand that everyone’s needs are different. We’ll suggest settings for you based on your current level of privacy, but the best way for you to find the right settings is to read through all your options and customize them for yourself. I encourage you to do this and consider who you’re sharing with online.

(Bold added for emphasis)

It has indeed been a year for making the world more open and connected. I wrote previously about the growing trend of real-time search. Its’ becoming one of the hot-topics of many a social media and tech blogger. Some have even called it a “race” between the big sites like Twitter, Facebook, Google, and Bing. When people search for something online, they are no longer satisfied with an article written last month. They want to see what was written this week, today, and even this second.  Google has officially launched their real-time news feed. It doesn’t appear for every search query (some things just aren’t very exciting, so they aren’t being talked about right now). But, for the queries it does work for, the result is very exciting. A “Latest Results” box appears, and instantly updates with the most recent articles, blogs, and even Twitter and Facebook posts.

So now, when you search for something, you can see what other people are saying about that topic right this second, and you don’t even have to have a Twitter or Facebook account.But therein lies the problem; you don’t have to have a Facebook account. (Twitter news feeds have always been public information, so that is not an issue.) Now, before you stop reading this and go delete your Facebook profile, take a deep breath. Not everyone’s Facebook status updates will appear on Google.

You control your privacy settings, and if you choose some of the stricter options, nothing from your profile or status updates will appear on Google. In the past these settings have been confusing, and possibly even completely unknown to some.  But have no fear, Facebook is going to make it all clear. As Zuckerberg said, the site has been continuously working to improve their privacy settings.

“In a conference call with reporters, Elliot Schrage, Facebook’s vice president of communications and public policy, said the changes, which the company first discussed over the summer, are a response to “consistent requests from users and experts.”

They also nod to the fact that relatively few Facebook users bother with their privacy settings. About 15% to 20% of the site’s 350 million members have adjusted them, Mr. Schrage said.”

While there is some merit in the changes Facebook has rolled out, there is also much speculation as to the company’s true intentions. In his blog for the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) Kevin Bankston explains why his view on the new settings is less than favorable. His key points:

• The Good: Simpler Privacy Settings and Per-Post Privacy Options

The new changes have definitely simplified Facebook’s privacy settings, reducing the overall number of settings while making them clearer and easier for users to find and understand

• The Bad: EFF Doesn’t Recommend Facebook’s “Recommended” Privacy Settings

Although sold as a “privacy” revamp, Facebook’s new changes are obviously intended to get people to open up even more of their Facebook data to the public.

• The Ugly: Information That You Used to Control Is Now Treated as “Publicly Available,” and You Can’t Opt Out of The “Sharing” of Your Information with Facebook Apps

Looking even closer at the new Facebook privacy changes, things get downright ugly when it comes to controlling who gets to see personal information such as your list of friends.

It seems that Facebook’s suggestion of “Reccomended Settings” is not looking out for your best interests. These new privacy settings were really created so that Facebook could have a chance to urge all of its’ members to make their profiles less private. Users are met with a window that recommends they share their information with everyone, and it then allows them to select settings for each component of their profile. But why would Facebook do this? Shelly Palmer’s blog entitled Facebook Privacy: An Oxymoron, points to the answer:

Facebook is described many different ways. To some, it is a community. Others call it a social network. Still others say it is a “conversation.” All of this is wrong. Facebook is a commercial enterprise started in Silicon Valley. It is a “for profit” venture with the goal of increasing shareholder value. No decision is made about the “community” on Facebook without a group of very serious, profit-minded executives thinking through how the decision will impact the bottom line, the cap chart, the exit strategy, etc. Facebook is, first and foremost, a business.

So how is Facebook making money off of people’s decision to bare it all? It goes back to the phenomenon of real-time search. Facebook is trying to become as indispensable as Twitter in the real-time search race, and their efforts are paying off. Google is now paying Facebook to put feeds into its’ “Latest Results” section.

Although every user has the option to set strict privacy settings on their profiles, and keep their info off of Google, there are a few things on Facebook that Zuckerberg claims are public information. The site’s Privacy Policy explains what these are:

Certain categories of information such as your name, profile photo, list of friends and pages you are a fan of, gender, geographic region, and networks you belong to are considered publicly available to everyone, including Facebook-enhanced applications, and therefore do not have privacy settings. You can, however, limit the ability of others to find this information through search using your search privacy settings.

If you want to remain completely concealed from the millions of users on Facebook who aren’t your ‘friends’ – let alone now the entire web due to real time search—I would suggest you don’t join.

When you navigate to the Facebook homepage, you are met with this message: “Facebook helps you connect and share with the people in your life.” The part of the story you are missing is what Facebook helps Facebook do.

A second line should read, “Facebook helps you connect and share even with the people who aren’t in your life. Facebook will help you share your personal information with the entire Internet. And Facebook will help Facebook get filthy rich.”

Thanks Facebook.

Sometimes the stress of it all can be too much, physically and mentally.

One school is trying to ease the stresses of finals week for their students in a somewhat unconventional way—with puppies.

Chapman University, in Orange County California, is bringing puppies to campus. Students will be able to take a break from the library, get some fresh air, and play fetch.

Google Goggles is an application (currently only for android phones) that makes searching for information even easier. Now, we no longer have to toil over tiny key boards, or strain our vocal chords, to search for something on our mobile phones. Google Goggles lets you take a picture of something to search the web for it.

As of yet, the app is still “in it’s infancy,” so we can expect further development and improvement on it in the future. For now, it works very well for searching things likes books, restaurants, and land marks.

Another useful feature is data entry. You can take a picture of someone’s business card and the app can automatically enter their information into your phone book.

This video gives a little preview of all of the great things Google Goggles can do:

Now with the mere click of your thumb you can do all of that. Google has done it again.

While the British group The Buggles did have a hit with this one, they were way off on their main point. Eric Schmidt, the CEO of Google, sung a different tune in an article he wrote for the Wall Street Journal saying, “Video didn’t kill the radio star. It created a whole new additional industry.”

Now, Schmidt has nothing against the Buggles, and his article’s main point has nothing do with anyone who sings for a living. He was talking about the current crisis in the news industry. Their old business model does not work in this new technologically advanced, Internet dependent, I want information now, era.

“So when I think about the current crisis in the print industry, this is where I begin—a traditional technology struggling to adapt to a new, disruptive world. It is a familiar story: It was the arrival of radio and television that started the decline of newspaper circulation. Afternoon newspapers were the first casualties. Then the advent of 24-hour news transformed what was in the morning papers literally into old news.”

Sometimes new technologies are like wildfires, while they are beneficial for the greater good of the environment, and they make room for new and better things, someone or something has to get burned. What better kindling than a big stack of newspapers.

The Internet has massively burned the business model for journalism, even more so than the radio or television. The news industry is quite unhappy, and knows something needs to change. No one is more publicly unhappy about the current situation than Rupert Murdoch, founder and chairman of News Corp.

In an interview with Sky News, Murdoch made it clear that change is going to happen. He is most upset that Google is “stealing” the content his company works hard to create. While he can’t change the fact that people have (in his mind- wrongly) had all of this content available to them for free since the invention of the Internet, he is ready to take a stand. Murdoch wants to charge people to access “his” content. The Wall Street Journal Online (a member of the News Corp family) is already operating under a “pay for subscription” model, and according to Murdoch, soon the rest of his news will too.

How exactly is he going to accomplish this? Murdoch says he plans to remove some or all of the News Corp content from Google. What will this really accomplish? This video likens his de-indexing from Google to removing Fox News from TV, taking down News Corp signs, un-listing their phone number, and making their employees walk around with bags over their heads- basically making themselves impossible to find.  Well of course Murdoch’s move is not as idiotic as all of that, or is it?

What does News Corp currently gain from Google? Schmidt claims that Google does a lot of good for News Corp.

“We send online news publishers a billion clicks a month from Google News and more than three billion extra visits from our other services, such as Web Search and iGoogle. That is 100,000 opportunities a minute to win loyal readers and generate revenue—for free.”

So Murdoch would essentially be hiding his content from millions of users. But he says he doesn’t want those visitors. Those are people who come once, for one particular news article, and never become loyal to the brand. He would rather have fewer customers, who pay, than a bunch who eat and run.

Well fewer customers is exactly what he going to get, especially because his plan includes Microsoft’s Bing search engine.

According to Business Week, Microsoft is going to pay some (still undisclosed) fee to News Corp for the rights to index its’ content in Bing. But Bing is a small fish in a big pond, with a minuscule 10% of the market share, versus Google’s almost 70%. All the move would do is vastly reduce traffic to News Corps sites, and thereby reduce revenue.

“To the extent that they find reduced traffic, it would be reducing their revenue and they would become more dependent on Microsoft,” says David Hallerman, senior analyst at market researcher eMarketer. “Being dependent on a large giant company for a large share of your revenue is very shortsighted.”

But, Murdoch has already said he doesn’t care about reducing traffic. And if his scheme actually works, Microsoft could finally get a leg up on Google. They just need to get enough news providers to de-index with Google and join Bing. Since news companies are unhappy with Google, the move seems logical. Mike Butcher gives insight into how Microsoft can woo other news companies.

There’s also been a lot of speculation about how Microsoft will lure newspapers into Bing. Money talks, obviously, and we understand that the payments could be a) part in revenue share from advertising on Bing b) the inclusion of news partners in adverts for Bing. In other words, you’d start to see ads with “You’ll only find The Wall Street Journal on Bing.com” etc.

In a different article, Butcher sheds some light on a part of the story that some people don’t know, Microsoft is planning to fund the development of ACAP (Automated Content Access Protocol). Google has always said, “Your in or your out,” when it comes to indexing content in its’ search engine. But ACAP is layered, so you can allow access to some, but not all, of a site. Publishers are highly in favor of ACAP.

“Unsurprisingly, it’s been developed by a consortium of the World Association of Newspapers, European Publishers Council and International Publishers Association.”

Paul Carr, thinks that ACAP may be a bit more than just one page in the story, and Murdoch is not as foolish as he looks.

“By convincing Bing that there’s a chance he might drop Google – for the right price – Murdoch suddenly has a new partner falling over itself to give him prominence in their search results, on his terms. Sure enough, Microsoft has just agreed to help fund the next-generation search crawling protocol, ACAP, which gives content owners like News Corp more control over how their news is indexed.”…And that’s where we see Murdoch’s real genius: he has managed to use his illusion of influence to get all of these benefits without having to commit himself to anything, or expose himself in any way.”

Is Murdoch really a genius? Is he really creating a viable business model? Porter Bibb, managing partner at Mediatech Capital Partners, thinks the move is all wrong, and that it will not benefit News Corp or Microsoft. Bibb is aghast that Murdoch would want to partner with a “loser like Bing.” Why not cozy up to Google, instead of running from it? Google has recently cut a deal with AP- they are paying AP for full content stories on Google News- and created a model that could actually work for the news industry. News and print media should be trying to work out an effective business model with Google; it could even include ACAP. Eric Schmidt agrees that new technology needs to be developed that can reach readers in new ways to raise revenue combing free and paid content, and that Google is here to help do that.

Video did not in fact kill the radio star, and the internet is not going to kill any journalists. We just need a new business model, technology, or something to change the way news is accessed online. I say Murdoch and Schmidt sit down for some coffee and work this out, let’s leave Steve Ballmer out of it.

People have been lining up to get the vaccine in such large numbers, you would think the Rolling Stones were on tour again. In Glendale, 2,500 people waited in hopes of a shot at getting the shot.

“Long lines at public flu clinics — initially intended to primarily serve the uninsured — are now commonplace nationwide as doses of the vaccine remain scarce.”

Google has always been on the cutting edge, able to keep up with trends, and give people what they need. Well, they have done it again, joining the battle against the swine flu.

Google has developed a tool using their Google Maps program to help people locate a vaccine near them.

“The tool leverages Google Maps to show you nearby vaccine locations for both the seasonal and H1N1 swine flu varieties.”

While Google claims it is still a work in progress, I’m sure it has already been a help to many. Thanks Google, for always looking out for us.

Now you may be wondering how a social media website can help you lose weight. No, you will not magically burn 1,000 calories viciously typing status updates every 10 min (although I guess that would burn a few extra calories, but not enough to make a substantial difference).  Instead, Twitter has graciously offered to tell the whole world exactly how much you weigh, every time you step onto the scale.

Twitter has announced the launch of a new wifi scale that can automatically tweet every time you weigh in. But that’s not all. It can also tweet how far away you are from reaching your weight-loss goal. Other amazing features are also available, including the ability to add multiple users and measure your percentage of body fat.

What better way to ring in the holiday season with Turkey dinners, pumpkin pies, endless Christmas cookies, and the reassurance that the whole world can be privy to your expanding waistline. This could all be yours for only $159.99 (minus the cost of food, plus the cost of humiliation).

Personally, I think I’ll pass. You can decided for yourself.

Has the government or some tech-savvy alien beings learned how to tap into our subconscious and reveal it to the world? Not likely, though that could help out with the lost key issue. The truth is that Google and Microsoft have both struck data-mining deals with Twitter. This means that tweets will be search-able through each company’s respective search engines.

The relationship between Twitter and the two internet giants has been blooming for quite sometime; talks of acquisitions, pseudo mergers, and the like have been flooding the tech blogosphere. It is not surprising that a deal has finally been inked; in light of the recent social media craze, Google and Microsoft have a lot to gain from Twitter.

Social media of all kinds has exploded in recent years. It is now an integral part of our daily lives. Most can’t go even a few hours without updating their status or checking their profiles. Social media has flourished largely because of the many different ways it can be used.

Not surprisingly, many people use it to connect with other people; whether it’s finding old friends or making new ones – it’s called ‘social’ media for a reason.

But other uses, more interesting to Google and Microsoft, have also emerged. People are using it increasingly more to publish/view news and as marketing tool. Twitter specifically has gotten a lot of press as a hot source for current news and the like. The nature of Twitter, with the limited 140 character “Tweets”, allows for you to view the current conversation (about pretty much anything) in a very clear, concise way.

It didn’t take long for Twitter to become popular. Without generating a single cent in revenue (before the Google/Microsoft deal) it earned a 1 Billion dollar valuation.

However, not everyone has been bit by the Twitter bug. There have been claims that Twitter’s growth has slowed and the fad is dying out. In his blog, Cody Brown talked about the future as he saw it for Twitter. With no real business plan, or even mission statement, he claimed Twitter is suffering somewhat of an “identity crisis”.

Hate to break it to you Cody Brown, but a lot of people are using Twitter. It just reached its’ 5 billionth “Tweet”.

Safe to say, Cody Brown’s opinion aside, that Twitter is popular. The question is, what can Twitter do for Google and Microsoft? The answer is right here, right now. Literally.

In today’s tech crazy world of iPhones and “Crack” Berries, information is always at our fingertips. Patience is becoming a thing of the past. People want to know what is going on right now, and they don’t want to wait to find out. Searching Twitter’s endless log of Tweets, gives a good look into what’s being said, literally right this second.

John Borthwick commented on how real time search is becoming increasingly popular and necessary. Searching the old Google is like going to the library and pulling out a dusty book. You can find information quickly and easily, but you don’t get insight into the real conversation currently taking place. He gives the example of a breaking news story. If you search the old Google for it as it is happening you will most likely be left with little information (news sources don’t publish articles the second something happens). However, people do Tweet the second something, anything, happens. For real-time, real life information about something going on, searching Twitter has proven much more informative.

Where Borthwick went wrong was in his main conclusion, that Twitter will kill Google. It is evident now, as the courtship between the two is finally coming to a head, that each with be fruitful for the other. Not only is Twitter finally making money (and its billion dollar valuation starting to make sense), but Google and Microsoft will be able to evolve with the trend of real-time search.

You may be wondering what this all has to do with the hospitality industry.

Hotels, airlines, and the like all have their own Twitter accounts that they use mainly for customer service and to pump out deals and specials. Not only can hotels announce their own deals real-time via Twitter, but also a new company has emerged that can aggregate all of this information.

Inoqo is a new service that partners with hotels to give consumers access to last minuet hotel deals. The deals are usually posted with about 48 hours remaining for travelers to secure the low rate. The service makes bargain shopping easy for consumers, as they can ‘follow’ a particular city stream and see deals for all of the hotels in that city. Consumers walk away happy with a killer deal, Inoqo makes 15% on the rack rate of the rooms, and the hotels are able to unload inventory. Although Inoqo is off to a slow start, with less than 100 hotels signed up, if it can get more (and bigger name) hotels on board it could have a viable business.

The Twitter/Google/Bing partnership means more exposure for hotels and Inoqo. Before the partnership, Twitter enthusiasts could search the site for hotel and travel information. But now, even those who are not big “Tweeters” can, and will, be exposed to the information just by searching good old Google.

Want to travel to London? Searching the pre-Twitter way, you would be met with links to site such as London’s tourism website and Wikipedia. The new “twitterized” Bing and Google search results from Twitter will show you what people are saying about London, what they are saying while in London, and which London hotels are offering deals.

At this point, there isn’t any real reason for people who want to search Twitter to use Google or Bing, when they could easily go to search.Twitter.com However, if Google and Microsoft can find a way to use their search engine experience and integrate Tweets into other search results, then they would prove to be more useful than the Twitter search engine.

Say you want to use Twitter to find the latest news about Starbucks. You go to search.Twitter.com and type in “Starbucks”. The results are a bit disappointing; you could care less that someone tweeted, “@ Starbucks for my morning coffee. Gotta love vanilla lattes.”  If Google and Bing can create a better system to give more useful tweets priority, then they could become the one stop shop for search.

I’m sure it will probably take a while to iron out the specifics and fully incorporate tweets into the vast amount of results for any given inquiry. In my opinion the key to ensure the success of these data-mining deals is in how it is decided which tweets show up first. Let’s just hope both Google and Microsoft can find their keys.

Airlines are currently trying to change things, and make their food more appetizing. However, there is catch. Most airlines are now charging you for your onboard eatables. Hardly any free meals exist on airlines today, causing consumers to opt to carry on their own meals.

The airline industry has seen that they can make at least a small profit by selling food in coach, but not if the passengers won’t buy.  Scott McCartney, who writes for the Wall Street Journal, commented on the profitability of charging for meals in coach:

“Food sales will likely never generate hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue for airlines as baggage fees do, but meals can be a way for an airline to stand out over competitors.”

So even if the meals themselves don’t turn a substantial profit, if consumers like the food on your airline, they may be more likely to fly with you than someone else.

He shows that at least one airline is breaking even:

“United Airlines used to spend $100 million a year on coach-cabin food when serving free meals, but now spends $20 million and brings in $20 million in revenue, Dennis Cary, former senior vice president of marketing, said at a conference in March.”

So what kind of food can we expect to see for sale on board? Some airlines are using the names of celebrity chefs, others are trying the name brand food approach. Hawaiian Airlines does things a bit differently. They offer a free meal in coach, or your choice of two ‘upgraded’ meals for $10. How profitable is their program?

“On average, about 4% of customers buy the premium meal on daylight flights, and 6% to 7% on evening runs, and Mr. Saint-Cyr hopes to move it up to 10%. The premium-meal programs ends up partially subsidizing the cost of free meals. That allows for better quality on the free meals so passengers don’t feel that the free option is so bad the airline is forcing them to pay for decent food. “We are having the two compete with each other,” he says.”

One such ‘upgraded’ meal is a sushi and teriyaki chicken dinner. This past summer, on a flight home from Hawaii with my family, I had the opportunity to try Hawaiian’s “Sushi Bento Box.”

Let’s just say the experience confirmed two things. Number one, airline ‘food’ is still as unappetizing as ever. And number two, raw fish should only be consumed at reputable seafood restaurants, not thousands of miles in the sky.

Decide for yourself if you want to test out the ‘new and improved’ (and oh ya, more expensive) sky cuisine. I will be bringing my own food on board. It’s a cheaper option, and the food will actually be edible.

As adults, we are no longer enticed by what the prize counter at the arcade has to offer. However, accumulating points to get rewards is still something we can buy into. The most common rewards programs are offered by hotels, airlines and their affiliated credit cards. Spend money at a hotel, or use their credit card, earn points, and eventually turn them in for a free vacation. Sounds good right? Sometimes is may be too good to be true.

Starwood Hotels recently caused a bit of a ruckus among their customers, due to their rewards program. The problem was caused by their cancellation policy. Guests who booked their stays with points and then “no showed” were charged hefty fees, sometimes up to the amount of the hotels ‘rack rate’. According to Sarah Nassaure, who writes for The Middle Seat Terminal, Starwood has since made changes, charging lower fees and making their cancellation policy more clear to customers up front.

Is it right for Starwood, or any hotel, to charge you a fee for missing your ‘free’ night? It is important to note that while customers are charged a monetary fee for skipping out on their reservation, in most cases they do not loose their points. But paying for something you would have gotten for free? It seems a bit backwards. However, from the perspective of the hotel, they loose out on ‘selling’ the room to a different customer, and they loose the money they would have made on food sales, gift shop purchases, and the like. I think it makes more sense for customers to simply loose their points in lieu of being hit with a bill. Penalties do vary from hotel to hotel, as noted by Sarah Nassaure:

In a round of calls to major hotel brands, only Marriott says that their hotels can charge up to rack rate as a penalty for no-showing on a reward night. On the other end of the spectrum, Choice Hotels International, which includes brands like the Comfort Inn and EconoLodge, doesn’t charge a no-show penalty fee. Members simply lose their points for that night.

The standard seems to be, the pricier the hotel, the pricier the penalty. I guess you get what you pay for, or in this case you pay for what you don’t get.

About the Pass

• One month of unlimited travel, any available seat
  • Domestic taxes and fees included
  • International and Puerto Rico taxes and fees not included
• Travel Dates: Tuesday, September 8, 2009 through Thursday, October 8, 2009
• Each flight must be booked no later than 11:59 p.m. MDT three days prior to the flight’s scheduled departure.

Sounds like a pretty good deal right? How could the airline benefit by giving customers such a steal? Well, this time of year is generally the slow period for the airline industry, not everyone who buys the pass will use it to the point that they ‘break even’, and ‘no show’ fees are $100. A massive online social media buzz was generated by the pass (Jet Blue’s Twitter page practically exploded), and it actually ‘sold out’ one day early. The Airline did not release exactly how many passes it sold, regardless the experiment seems to have proven successful for the company. Jason Cochran, who writes for Wallet Pop, commented on the value of the deal for the company and consumer:

“Indeed, because of rising airfares brought about by declining availability, the pass’ worthiness had improved since its announcement. It could pay for itself in as little as two round-trips, even if one of them was not all that long (New York-Fort Lauderdale). It was still borderline, but it could be a money-saver for people taking two trips.

Plenty of other prospective passengers must have recognized the same thing, because the pass sold out a few days later.

Or maybe that was JetBlue’s plan all along. After all, what little the carrier may lose to customers who ride their passes the max has been regained by enjoying two episodes of priceless national publicity in a week.”

It would seem that the pass is profitable for both parties. Not only did it generate sales for the airline, but also upped their marketing presence quite a bit. Now the time has come for pass owners to start jetting. I am curious to see, at the end of the one month period, exactly how many flights are taken on the pass. We can be sure that at least two travelers, Clark Dever and Joe Dinardo, will be using it to its fullest potential.

“They plan to make the most of the deal, hitting at least 29 cities in the 31 days by taking about 49 one-way flights.

They’ll sleep during their flights, take showers in gyms, and have friends work as runners to swap out bags of clothes when they fly into New York’s JFK airport about every three days.”

Not everyone has to be as dedicated to the deal as these two college friends, one of whom actually quit his job, to make the most of this unique opportunity. I think one of the best parts about the promotion is that it’s getting people out there, taking trips, seeing the world, and being adventurous. In these tough economic times, luxuries like travel are usually the first to go. Jet Blue is giving people the opportunity to be spontaneous and have some fun, while hopefully saving some money along the way. Who wouldn’t be happy about that?