What does AOL mean to me? AOHell, dial up Internet connections, 1000’s of installation CD’s on supermarket checkouts and dropped through my front door to be immediately binned, hours of trying to remove AOL software from a new PC just because they couldn’t write uninstallation routines that worked.

So although a household name I would hardly say a good reputation especially within digerati circles. Well at last it seems that AOL have finally got the picture and are trying to push new alternate brands online although as the post says they don’t really seem to be causing too much of a buzz online. Must try harder and for got sake test the uninstallation program you distribute work properly.

Had to write a quick post about a post saying Branding is Dead; Long live SEO. The argument behind it is that people are now searching for the product/service they want and then follow the search results. Therefore it is assumed branding isn’t such an issue any more as people will follow the links listed highest on the search engine even if this isn’t for the actual branded company.

To me this is totally back to front. SEO is only a tool in my opinion. A very powerful tool especially when it come to that of brand awareness but a tool none the less. Branding is important online and offline but you can’t have one without the other.

So no branding is not dead, it’s fit and alive. I can’t deny that SEO however is increasingly important to protect a brand online.

Social media websites have been in the news a lot, mainly with regard to how people’s privacy is compromised when they sign up to one. However the big sites, although slow off the mark, do seem to have realised that their future depends on getting people’s trust with regards to holding their data.

Both MySpace and Facebook have agreed to over 40 steps to protect users. What these steps are I haven’t been able to find out and therefore can’t comment on whether I think they are likely to make any real difference (if anyone has any more details give me a shout).

Google of course has been trying to get onto the social media bandwagon with OpenSocial and recently announced another initiative called Friend Connect which looks to allow people link up all their social media applications online.

Sounds great! But this of course is assuming all the data is held is way that protects to user. Google to be honest seems to have a good record for this kind of thing which is why I was very surprised to hear that Facebook had started to block Friend Connect. It would seem Facebook aren’t entirely happy with the amount of user data available to application developers which therefore breaks their own terms and conditions.

I’m very impressed with Facebook as this shows the kind of attitude needed to protect people online. This stance could be seen by some as negative as it’s inhibiting the free transfer of information in the social universe but clearly the technology is not mature enough to be main stream in my opinion.

Google won’t stand still on this of course and I’m sure the issues will be addressed and Facebook will come back on board but good on Facebook for taking this stance. More of the same and privacy issues might not be such a thorn in the side of social media.

The vision of the semantic web was that of Tim Berners-Lee’s - to ensure it was a universal medium for data, information and knowledge.

A noble idea, I’m just not sure this is going to be a realistic goal due to human nature’s tendency to try and exploit technologies for their own ends.

Certainly if this goal is achievable now is the right time for it to take off. There is a buzz online with regard to various technologies that can be used to achieve it (including microformats) with many proponents to semantic web cause.

The issue is that all these methods rely on correct and honest use online. In it’s simplest form the semantic web attempted to use meta tags in years go by. These became a well known method for black hat search engine optimisers to try and shoe horn inappropriate keywords into pages to try and fool the search engines. The result? Search engines generally ignore meta tags because of this easy abuse.

So is this also going to be the case for the new drive for a universal information medium? Not currently maybe. As it stands the uptake isn’t large enough so there doesn’t seem to be any advantage in trying to provide inaccurate data. But just wait until the tipping point is reached I’m sure that search engines will try to lean on this extra layer to improve results. Some people will be waiting to exploit it.

The only thing we can hope is that the lessons constantly being learnt from the constant battle against the black hats can be applied against them again to ensure this new semantic vision isn’t muddied. I also feel that social media is going to become even more of a watchdog for content quality - those millions of eyes put to good use. The advantages of the semantic web can’t be ignored - machines understanding human content opens so many doors.

As usual though the main issue here is getting people to use the technologies. From a business perspective people aren’t going to adopt this without it providing some kind of return on investment. Implementation is simple in most cases so I can perhaps see people dipping their toes in the water and this gradual adoption may start the tide. I for one will be looking at the hCalendar, hCard and XFN formats as a starting point.