MySpam.com… So what?

After reading Trent Lapinski’s “MySpace: The Business of Spam 2.0 (Exhaustive Edition)” I can’t stop wondering what all the hubbub is about. Sure, some questionable men used questionable marketing techniques. Yes, Tom is more than a nerd at a keyboard – he’s a nerd at a keyboard with a multi-million dollar job. And there is no denying the template for MySpace was borrowed at best. But really, what is the big deal?

Questionable men, questionable marketing
All right, I was a little taken aback by felony charges and semi-hostile takeover talk, but I’m not the most business minded person. For all I know, that’s standard operating procedure in the big leagues. Look at Enron. And I felt a bit lied to when I read that creators intentionally made up a story to hide their intentions. But I was more interested in how far off that made up story was from the one I originally heard – that the site was created as a way for bands to communicate with fans. According to Lapinski, the agreed upon story was that Tom stumbled into creation in some serendipitous event. He doesn’t offer further details, but according to his article, the public doesn’t want them.

So what about marketing MySpace as a networking tool when it is actually a spam machine? Well, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see ads on every page. Banners across the top, eye-catching movement to the right and left, occasional sounds, etc. bring innumerable companies to the user’s attention. Duh… someone is paying for this sucker. But it is still a social network. No matter how many ads run in the background, the public wouldn’t sign in just to watch them. We (yes, I’m a MySpace ho) sign in to keep up with bands, find and e-meet interesting people, keep in touch with our friends and family, or just surf about and indulge our voyeuristic tendencies. And we don’t pay a dime. Who can complain? Certainly not me.

I associate this form of advertising with the television model. We have free shows, but must watch advertisements. Why are we fine with knowing that Toyota will force the biggest sale of the season down our throats during ER or football or whatever? If we hate advertising so much, why haven’t we revolted against the broadcast industry yet? Well, we like our free TV, for one thing. MySpace is no different. I like my social networking to remain free to me. I don’t care who pays for it, as long as I don’t. And I don’t mind a couple of pretty colors moving about while I message my cousins or sister-in-law, either.

Tom – your number one friend
The first person (profile, nerdbot, whatever) to invite new users to add him to their friends lists is Tom Anderson. I must be honest; I never made the connection between Tom and origin. When I signed on to MySpace, I pretty much just ran through the click, click, agree click, click motions until my profile appeared. Lapinski was right; I didn’t care about the company’s history. I didn’t know there was a company. But I didn’t buy Tom as a super genius with the luck of the Irish either. I always looked to him more as the face of tech support. If I ran into problems, it was his face I saw – for better or worse – and it was he who I thought to contact. But I never had problems, so Tom, still on my friends list, has yet to hear from me.

I see Tom’s role in the MySpace PR machine the same way I see any actor’s role in any advertisement. Do I think the Orbit girl really has gleaming teeth that offer a computer graphics sparkle every time she smiles because she chews Orbit? No. I live in a capitalist society. I recognize the necessity of role playing in order to turn a profit. I mean, really, if all that woman in white did was show us gum and tell us it was tasty, we wouldn’t be interested. She is someone with whom consumers can identify, as is Tom.

Borrowed template
Lapinski also raised the issue of MySpace’s originality. I see how borrowing content could bother some – particularly those whose content is borrowed. As a matter of fact, this is the biggest problem for me. But if you consider the timing involved in getting a venture up and running, I don’t see how it is avoidable. Friendster existed, it pushed the tech-geeks (don’t take offense, I stand among those ranks) through the homeostasis issues. But the masses were not ready. By the time a large enough population saw the social network model as advantageous, the MySpace team had already started moving their idea into the Friendster frame. If Friendster had spam-o-vision, they could have done the same thing.

To argue that borrowing a format is grounds for running someone out of business is to say that every department store, fast food chain, gas station, cannery, etc. needs to go. All of them, save the first of each. Oh wait, the first of many businesses fails. Does this mean we no longer need to fill our cars with gas? Or that we no longer need cars, since it’s safe to say that the Durango was not the first SUV, nor was it among the first cars? I love my Mini, and have no intention of telling BMW to stop making it just because they are not John Cooper. Oh no, not this girl. So I can’t very well hold MySpace to different standards just because it operates through the Internet.


Pop-ups
I’ve touched on the advertising thing – free for me, weehee – but I also want to pop-up to other advertising. Pop! There it is again. Remember those? If this company is focusing its energy on placing ads inside the social network framework, it’s a good chance they are not focusing on placing pop-ups elsewhere. If MySpace is designed as a spam machine in which users sign in to view all the spam, sign me up. Heck, if users embrace this we could eventually remove the need for pop-up blockers. It’s a stretch, but thinking in the long term, advertising goes where it will be seen. Logitech, if the company has any logical thinking capability, isn’t going to pay for a pop-up that the only 20 people left without a blocker will see if they can get the same ad to 109 million of Tom’s friends when they log into MySpace. That would be counterproductive. If users show a strong preference for ads through the network, the company in charge may not even need to send e-mail solicitations. Wouldn’t that be nice?


MyDay in MySpace
As a MySpace user, I don’t feel taken advantage of by Tom, Greenspan, random bands, advertisers or even Rupert Murdoch. I log in whenever I can, watch the banner ad while my profile loads, and assimilate at least three ads subconsciously while I run through my messages. I contact the family in California, see who has had babies, who is marrying, divorcing or living in sin, and snoop around a few band profiles. By the time I log out, I’ve seen junk from phone carriers, haunted houses, tax specialists and who knows who else. And I love it! No, I’m not running off in search of advertising, but I appreciate the format. I know the ads will be where they always are. I can tune them out or click on them as I see fit. (Although, I have yet to get over the multi-window pop-up experiences of my pre-MySpace days and don’t generally click on anything.) I have not seen an increase in e-mail spam ads, but I could be lucky. It’s not like my bank, credit cards, grocery store, gas station and university wouldn’t let my e-mail address out to advertisers.

Bringing people what they want and allowing advertisers to pay for it isn’t illegal. It isn’t even irregular. This is what every medium does, so why not a network? My position will probably go against the “stick it to the man” majority, but what else is new? Taking a stance against MySpace’s practices means taking one against everything we have internalized as acceptable advertising in our culture. I, for one, am not ready.