I promised this post in early summer, but I’ve been waiting until I had a clear sense of what life on FourSquare is like before I wrote it. I feel like I’ve been on FourSquare long enough now to give a sense of what kind of things people should stay clear of. So, here are my suggestions for the three rules of etiquette of FourSquare.

Feel free to post a comment with your own FourSquare pet peeves or to disagree with one of mine.

1. Think before you sync: If you forget every other rule, remember this one. Technology allows us to do many cool things — including syncing, but that doesn’t mean we have to do them. What is syncing? It’s when you set up one social medium to automatically update another social medium. Good idea, right? Well, sometimes.

I had synced my Twitter to my Facebook page at one point, so every tweet turned up as a Facebook status update. The problem was: My followers on Twitter are very different from my Facebook friends, so I was sending messages to the wrong audience. That gets annoying quick, as a real-life friend cautioned me.

Same thing can happen with FourSquare. The application allows you to update Twitter or Facebook every time you check in, get a mayorship, lose a mayorship, earn a badge. You may be tempted to do this. Resist. Resist. Resist. None of your Twitter followers want to know how many times a day you go to Starbucks.

My rule: I set up my FourSquare so that the only time it updates my Twitter account is when I earn — or lose — a mayorship. My thinking is this is a rare enough occurrence that it won’t annoy. (Hope that’s true.) Also, syncing this aspect enables me to connect with my FourSquare friends on Twitter.

For example, when I lost the mayorship of the Tim Horton’s coffee shop near campus, the woman who won it announced her new mayorship online. I @replied her, joking that she had ruined my day for stealing Tim Horton’s. She consoled me. Granted, this is hardly a high-level form of relationship, but we made a connection. Now she is someone I know on Twitter, not just a follower.

For another look at the sync or not debate, read this post by Steve Buttry.

2. Search before you add a venue: At one point, a Mobil Mart near my house was on FourSquare three ways. One with a street address. One without a street address. One as Mobile Mary (not Mart). I know how this happens. You go to check in, and the location you’re at (such as this Mobile station) doesn’t immediately pop up in the FourSquare queue. So you decide to add it. But you’re on your cell phone, so you make a typo because you’re typing quickly or your can’t remember the street name. Then two more people do the same thing.

The result is: Multiple check-in locations for the same spot.

Why is this a problem? Well, in the whole scheme of problems such as childhood cancer and world poverty, it’s not. But in the microcosm of the social media world, it’s annoying because when other people go to check in, they aren’t sure which is the real location. The result is multiple mayorships of the same spot. Again, not cataclysmic, but it does make FourSquare a bit messy and less fun.

There’s little cache to winning the mayorship if you know anyone can do the same by just creating a duplicate location.

And if a company wants to offer coupons or specials to people who earn mayorships or even just check in, you darn tootin’ want to make sure you’re checking in at the bonafide location.

So, search before you add a venue. Sometimes, venues don’t just pop up. It could be that your GPS is off slightly and reading you in a different location. It could be you just need to hit “refresh.”

FourSquare will often warn you if you try to add a location that already exists, but if you misspell it or don’t add the address, often this warning won’t happen. Doing a quick search for the venue doesn’t seem like too much work, now does it?

3. Don’t lie. I may get some heat for this one because I know some people consider the fun of FourSquare is to check into Starbucks while standing in their office a quarter-mile from Starbucks. But nobody likes a cheater.

Yes, compared to robbing a bank or cheating on your income tax, lying on FourSquare pales. But remember what you learned in kindergarten: It doesn’t matter who wins or loses. It’s how you play the game.

So to check into a location you must actually be at the location. That means you didn’t just drive by or you didn’t just think about the place. And if you forget to check in and try to do it later to make up? Well, that’s probably OK in my book, but I’d worry if that becomes a habit. Really.

One exception to this rule: fake locations.

I have no problem with someone checking into “hell” or “heaven” while obviously still alive. I kind of like the metaphysical locations. But for brick-and-mortal places, please, actually walk in the door before you check in.

What do you think?

Like what you’re reading, subscribe

Back from a summer hiatus, and I have some interesting stuff for you from my jaunts around the blogosphere:

Would you pay for online news? Who wants to know? Well, Chas Hartman, a former newspaper reporter and now Ph.D. candidate at the University of Kentucky for one. And, well, pretty much everyone else who cares about the future of journalism. I “met” Hartman through Twitter (He’s @scoopingthenews). He’s gathering data on how people feel about paying for online news, and I offered to post a link to his survey. Stop right now, and take it. It takes, honestly, about two minutes. Thanks in advance. As for me, would I pay for online news? Sure, if it’s worth it. I’ve elaborated on this before.

Got a blog? Pay up: Speaking of paying for things, the city of Philadelphia seems to be taking the notion of  charging to the absurb. Apparently, the city has begun sending letters to bloggers, alerting that they’ll need to “file for a Business Privilege Tax Return, even if they make far less than the $50-per-year or $300 lifetime fee the return requires,” according to Popular Fidelity blog. I heard this first on City Pages, although that entry seems to have been removed. Not sure why. So I’ll put a huge caveat before this blog entry by saying, if this is true, it’s crazy.

Most bloggers make almost nothing from their blogs. In a survey I recently conducted of a random sample of more than 400 women bloggers, 80% made not one dime from their blog. The remaining 20% made something, generally about 50 cents per month. (I case you’re wondering, I make zip. No ads=no money). What’s next? Kids will need a business license to sell lemonade.

Social media polices: I’ve written before about what I considered overly stringent social media rules some newspapers impose on their employees. Now, BusinessWeek has compiled a list of rules other organizations use. My take: Sure, a company needs some sense of what their employees are doing on social media because there is always someone who ruins it for the rest. But bottom line: Too many rules make social media about as fun and useful as staring into space with your hands on your lap. I worry about the proliferation of rules for a medium that only works if people can improvise, be themselves, and communicate freely.

Like what you’re reading, subscribe

The Pew Research Center released an interesting study last week that offers some sobering — although not surprising — insights for the news business.

Researchers examined top news stories in the mainstream press as well as what news got traction on blogs, Twitter and YouTube. A main finding was that what’s hot on social media differs — a lot — from what leads in the mainstream press. But what’s even more interesting, I think, is that what’s popular on one form of social media differs significantly from what’s trendy on another.

For example, Twitter’s domain is technology, not surprisingly. Blogs and the mainstream press focus more on politics and government. Also not a shocker. As my kids might say: “No duh.”

But I think what isn’t so obvious is what this might mean. I’ve written before about how I believe the real reason many people don’t subscribe to news online — or in print — is about commitment, not money. This study crystallizes my thoughts.  I suggest these findings illustrate the radically different way today’s consumers think of news, compared with the past. It’s not brand based. It’s not even platform based.

Read the rest of the post at Harvard University’s Nieman Journalism Lab.

Like what you’re reading, subscribe

Quill online, of the Society of Professional Journalists, released its list of 20 “industry thinkers, innovators, and practitioners” to follow, and I’m humbled and honored to be one of them.

But what’s way more important that my tiny moment of fame is the list itself. It’s chock full of folks I want to know more about. Some were folks I follow regularly on Twitter and through the blogosphere. Folks like Vadim Lavrusik, who works for Mashable, or Steve Buttry, a longtime journalist who recently left the newspaper biz.

But I also came across some new folks who I can’t wait to get to know virtually. Below is the complete list, so you can do what I just did — follow all of them on Twitter.

Benet J. Wilson

David Cohn

Steve Buttry

Gina M. Chen

Emma L. Carew

Mark S. Luckie

Vadim Lavrusik

Linda Thomas

Sree Sreenivasan

Monica Guzman

Laura Oliver

Victor Hernandez

Mark Briggs

Suzanne Yada

Greg Linch

Jeff Cutler

Pia Christensen

Megan Garber

Eric Kuhn

Jay Rosen

Like what you’re reading, subscribe

 I’d say the Syracuse BizBuzz Social Media Conference this week was a great success.

The buzz was about 325 people showed up. The whole experience was pretty exciting — to be around so many people who want to get more connected and engaged online.

A few hiccups, of course: WiFi was really spotty in the main conference area, especially if you use Verizon, as I do. I wanted to live-tweet keynoter Dave Evans,  author of “Social Media Marketing: An Hour a Day,” but to do that I had to borrow a friend’s Mac to do so. (The conference offered a login to get free Wi-Fi from the Oncenter, but it didn’t work that well for phones.)

That aside, I met some great people. Shared ideas. Learned some technical tips, especially during the Linked-In seminar. But for me the best takeaway is that we’re part of a something new and exciting. The tips on how to tweet or blog or connect on Linked-In matter less than the energy that spurs us to do it.

If you couldn’t make it to Biz Buzz, here is the power point from my speech on blogging for business. It was aimed to business professionals, but the tips are really relevants for anyone who wants to use their blog to engage. Enjoy.

Like what you’re reading, subscribe

I am part of what I think is a pretty exciting event going on this week in my hometown of Syracuse.

The Syracuse Biz Buzz is the area’s first major social media conference.  The keynot speaker is Dave Evans, author of “Social Media Marketing: An Hour a Day.”   A slew of presentations are planned, including a session on blogging by yours truly.

The event kicks off 5 to 7:30 p.m. Wednesday (May 26) with a Tweetup at the Syracuse Technology Garden. The sessions run 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Thursday (May 27) at the Oncenter.

My friend and Every Patient’s Advocate blogger Trisha Torrey will be speaking about using social media to build your brand. Syracuse University professor Jill Hurst-Wahl, who has guest blogged on Save the Media, will talk about developing and maintaining your reputation using social media. (Read the full schedule.)

I’ll be speaking from 11:15 to 11:45 on Thursday. (Get ticket information here.)

The event is geared to business professionals, although the tips and suggestions are relevant to anyone who wants to learn more about social media and blogging.

If you can’t make it — or you’re from out of town — be sure to check this blog on Thursday afternoon. I’ll be posting my power point from my presentation.

Like what you’re reading, subscribe

Time for some short-takes of cool journalism-related stuff you should be reading around the blogosphere:

Social media goes mainstream: So finally, being on social media has stopped being gee whiz and started being, well, normal. Manish Mehtma sums this point up well in this Huffington Post blog item. He notes that this process of normalizing will allow the technology to fade into the background — so people focus on the relationships created, not the tool. True. For the news media, I think (I hope) this will mean more embracing of tools as tools — rather than writing about the fact that people use them. Kevin Sablan, of Almighty Link, puts it well:  “Tales of journalists using social media, and non-journalists committing acts of journalism using social tools, are starting to sound like stories of people using their telephones.” Amen.

Has social media changed us? Yes, for sure.  They naysayers say it’s turning our brains to mush, just as every technology since paper was feared to do. Advocates, like me, say social media is a tool that can be used for evil or good. Mike Laurie has a good list on Mashable of how social media has changed life for the better. Not sure I buy the one about social media helping kids be more literate. But I definitely agree social media has made news and political involvement more accessible to everyone, particularly young people. That’s a good thing.

FourSquare: I’ve just joined FourSquare. So far, not sure what I’ll use if for, but I think us journajunkies need to be knowledgeable about what’s out there — and the best way to gain knowledge is to try it. Lehigh University journalism professor Jeremy Littau has some interesting ideas on how to use FourSquare journalistically.  He suggests it could be a place where journalists can put news — like a business failing a health inspection — that now gets lost in a sea of information online and in print. It’s an interesting idea. FourSquare, from what I gather, is geographically based, which could make is useful, especially for local newspapers. It’s worth exploring.

The basics: In today’s constantly changing journalism world, the basics can get forgotten. Don’t let them. Bad writing is bad writing whether it’s on paper, online, on Twitter or on GoogleWave. Some good reminders of this point come from Steve and Emilie Davis, journalism profs at Syracuse University, on their new blog. Here is their take on cliches.

Like what you’re reading, subscribe

I can hardly believe it has been more than a year since I started this blog. Back in those early days, I had hardly any readers. I was writing for myself, but bit by bit some of you started to read. I thank all of you for that. I appreciate your comments, your interest in what I have to say, and your ideas for the transformation of journalism. I hope to see you around the blogosphere in 2010.

Here are the 10 posts from Save the Media that you made popular in the past year:

1. 10 “journalism rules” you can break on your blog. This one raised the biggest buzz of anything I’ve written. Some liked it. Others didn’t. But it is safe to say this post got a lot of people thinking, which is always a good move in my book.

2. How Journalism Can Change. The credit for this one goes to my former Post-Standard colleague, Amber Smith. She blogs about health and fitness.

3. Top Twitter told for journalists. How to use Twitter as a journalistic tool, not just for telling people what you had for lunch.

4. A journalist’s guide to the ethics of social media. Is ethical social media use an oxymoron? I think not. I explain that ethics in social media are just like ethics anywhere else. Right is right.

5. Is blogging journalism? Yes and no. Blogging, I write is a tool, like newsprint or airwaves. Blogging can certainly be used for journalism, but not every blog is journalism.

6. The “hyperinterest” approach to news. What’s hyperinterest? It’s tailored to the niche. It’s specific to the audience.

7. Twitter etiquette, style rules for 2010. My take on the rules of Twitter.

8. How journalists can use Facebook.  Facebook is fun, but it’s also useful as a reporting, crowd-sourcing and community-building tool. Here’s how.

9. More on newspapers social media rules. This was about the ongoing hub-bub about The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal coming up with rules for how their staff use social media.

10. So what’s journalism? Folks on Twitter and yours truly tried to come up with a definition in today’s changing media climate.

Like what you’re reading, subscribe

Twitter turns 4 in the new year, so I think it’s old enough to learn some manners. Here are my suggestions for Twitter etiquette and style as we head into 2010.  I’m sure I’ve missed some ideas, so feel free to add in the comments.

To tweet or to twitter: I think it has been well-established by now on Twitter that the verb is to tweet. I tweet today; I tweeted yesterday; I have tweeted many times. Twitter is not the verb. To twitter is something a bird does, by emitting chirping sounds. People don’t twitter. And certainly, please, dear journalists, let’s not switch back and forth between tweet and twitter as a verb. You wouldn’t do that with any other verb.

Twitterati: I think there is more ambiguity about the noun to describe people who use Twitter. Are they tweets or twits or twitterati? I, personally, prefer tweets over twits. But I like tweeps even more. Tweets feels a bit like saying, “Hey, these are my peeps.” But I’m not opposed to Twitterati, as long as it is used as a plural for both men and women on Twitter. Then, following the rule for Latin endings, one man on Twitter would be a Twitteratus; one woman, a Twitterata; a group of women, Twitteratae. Perhaps that gets too formal. Twitter user is also fine.

Twitterverse vs. Twittersphere: My preference for describing the whole world of Twitter is Twitterverse, mainly because I think Twitterverse sounds better than Twittersphere. (However, I much prefer blogosphere to blogoverse.) Yet, I think both are correct.

Thank you: I think a culture has developed on Twitter where it makes sense to thank people for retweeting your blog post or adding you to their Twitter lists. I think it’s fine, but not necessary, to thank people for following you. But, please, let’s outlaw this too-pervasive practice of thanking people through automatic direct messages, especially those that tout an e-book or blog. Why? Because that’s just spam in the clothing of faux friendship. I like to compare Twitter to a party. If you walked in and introduced yourself by saying, “Hi, read my book,” I probably wouldn’t talk to you much. You can tout your book — just wait to we have some semblance of a relationship.

Retweets: In the old days (like a year ago), people typed the word retweet before they retweeted (repeated) another person’s tweet. Today, that has been shortened to RT. But always be sure to credit the original person who tweeted. (Via @username works well.)  My rules on retweeting that others may or may not embrace is this: If you retweet, you can shorten the original tweet to fit the 140-character limit. But do not change the gist or meaning. That seems like misquoting, to me.

@Replies: Twitter is a conversational medium. People say things; other people respond. But when a one-on-one conversation goes beyond two or more tweets, it’s time to take the conversation outside — to direct messaging. A group discussion is fine to have on Twitter, I think. But when two people just talk exclusively through @replies, it feels a bit like listening to a stranger’s yelled cell phone conversation. Lower your voice, please. But if the topic is general and might be of interest to others — feel free to chat away without heading to the DMs.

1/2; 2/2: Twitter’s 140-character limit can seem restricting, but it doesn’t have to be. If you have more to say than can fit in 140 characters, use this approach. 1/2 at the start of  a tweet or @replies means: first part of two parts. The second part is 2/2. Now, I’d advice using this sparingly because often — but not always — the best route is to edit yourself. Also, the 1/2, 2/2 trick theoretically could be used for tweet, but in practice it is usually reserved for @replies and direct messages.

Like what you’re reading, subscribe

Edited: 10:37 a.m. Dec. 29. Here’s what’s great about Twitter. I wrote this post, tweeted it, and within minutes got some smart comments froma fellow Twitter user, Frank D’Agostino, of Syracuse. I added his suggestions in italics, so it’s clear they came later than the rest of the post.

Edited: 11:25 a.m. Dec. 31. It’s official. Based on comments on this blog and suggestions on Twitter, I’m  updating my post to reflect my new belief that tweeps is the preferred term for people on Twitter.

Like what you’re reading, subscribe