I’ve run through some of the scores of press reports and blog posts that have erupted today following Facebook’s announcement of a new open application interface that allows developers to create all kinds of gizmos, gadgets and services within the Facebook platform.
There’s little to add to the growing mountain of coverage regarding this astonishing move. If you have to read one item that pulls it all together, check out Richard MacManus’ analysis of this development.
But it’s beyond fascinating that one of the 70 or so initial partners that have teamed up with Facebook to create an application using the open Facebook platform (called The Platform) is the Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama’s campaign.
The Obama application (which is here but you have to be a Facebook member to access it) is a pretty nifty set of tools designed to allow users to add “Obama” to their Facebook accounts.
Once users add Obama — and thousands, if not tens of thousands will do preciesly that if the number of Obama groups that exist on Facebook already are any indication — they are agreeing to put an “Obama box” on their profiles. This box currently features videos, articles and updates on which friends also support Obama or which friends have also put the Obama box on their profiles.
That’s what’s inside this free mini-portal right now, but based on what I’ve read about Facebook’s platform, the Obama box can expand to include more kinds of content. Music, chat, voice communication.
Although I wouldn’t go so far as to say the Obama gizmo on Facebook will make or break the campaign, its potential to revolutionize political organizing and messaging is phenomenal. As Alan Rosenblatt notes on TechPresident:
The potential for these tools to create a whole new dynamic in the race for the White House is extraordinary. What used to be the domain of professional organizers and zealous volunteers is now also in the hands of anyone with a penchant for networking online. And with tens of millions of voters on these social networks, our expectations for voter awareness, activity, and turnout might be turned on their heads in this and future elections.
What’s also fascinating is that although Facebook purportedly contacted all the campaigns to get them to jump onto the new open platform, Obama is the only presidential contender to do so. What’s wrong with the other campaigns? Facebook’s platform is free, it’s easy to use and it’s a way of reaching out to millions of people with (almost) a click or two of the mouse.
As Alan Rosenblatt also notes, the other campaigns can’t be far behind.
Posted by Cynthia Brumfield at 12:22 PM | Print | Comments (1)
Municipal Wi-Fi is at a point where hype is meeting reality. A lot of cities, not to mention EarthLink, one of the biggest private sector participants in the muni-Wi-Fi realm, are growing skeptical about the viability of wireless service as a public good.
Fortunately for the city of Philadelphia, its high-profile Wi-Fi project just got the green light to expand beyond its 15-square mile test zone to a region-wide 135-square mile service area.
The service, funded, built and managed by EarthLink, is free in public spaces and the group spearheading the effort, Wireless Philadelphia, hopes to bring broadband connectivity to 300,000 low-income homes in the city that don’t currently have broadband access by charging only $9.95 per month for service. (The service, however, is only 1 Mbps downstream. I’ve got to wonder if this low level of throughput isn’t going to quickly alienate many of those low-income residents, who are bound to know that wealthy communities can get 7 Mbps, 15 Mbps or higher from Comcast or Verizon.)
Another big EarthLink muni-Wi-Fi market, San Francisco, isn’t proceeding quite as smoothly, or at least as smoothly as Mayor Gavin Newsom, the main architect of the city’s Wi-Fi effort, would like.
The SF board of supervisors has been causing the controversial and charismatic mayor nothing but grief from the get-go and now they’ve pushed off until July a vote on a proposal to let EarthLink, with help from nearby Google, offer Wi-Fi service throughout the city. In an interview with CBS’s Marketwatch (see video), Newsom said “I think if this doesn’t pass, inevitably we’ll be one of the last cities in the United States to have Wi-Fi.”
That might be right, but San Francisco could arguably wait in line to get Wi-Fi. Compared to Philadelphia, where one in four residents live below the poverty line, San Francisco is a hugely wealthy city (with a poverty rate of 10%), where almost all residents, not to mention Wi-Fi enabled businesses and coffee shops, already have access to broadband service.
Posted by Cynthia Brumfield at 8:59 AM | Print | Comments (0)
Blogs We Read
