I bet that most of you reading this post have over inflated your online / digital profiles to some extent or another.

I’m not only referring to perennial social networks like Facebook, Myspace or local flavoured Blueworld, but have you considered other digital formats where you present a piece of yourself to the public like your blog, your e-mail sginature, your online resume, your Linked-In profile, your mobile answering message, online dating profiles or even your twitter conversations?

What are the impression people get from you when they visit your personal footprint?

Before you discount yourself from these majorities, ask yourself these simple questions:

1. Have you spent more than a considerable amount of time choosing a picture for your online profile / have you used image editing software to improve your picture?

2. Have you looked up words or searched for more “clever” words to spice up writing so that it comes across as more professional?

3. Have you ever excluded certain (critical) personal information from your profile?

4. Have you ever been reluctant about publishing information online because of its availability to others?

5. Have you connected with higher statused people to improve the perception of yourself?

I have.

Some call it common sense, some call it vanity. Scientists call it impression management. Society’s moral standards have demanded from us to live a more congruent life, one that is aligned with our inner beings through every format we present ourselves.

Isn’t it shocking then how badly we want to portray an image to society that isn’t a true reflection of our true self?

Isn’t it indicative of a lack of contentment with whom and what we are that we strive to represent a more refined model of ourselves online?

How important is all this? Well, for one, in an era where many conversations are occurring digitally in some format or another, I’d think it’s pretty darn important.

Previously, where resumes were printed and handed to future employers, candidates were then invited for interviews where a pretty accurate analysis of the person could be performed.

As more and more people shift their focus online to improve their lives, their jobs and the company they keep, how much of our lives have become a fad?

How would we be able to establish trust, form substantial relationships or deliver on a promise of something we certainly aren’t capable of that have been imprinted in people’s minds and on digital real estate?

One thing I’ve learned ever since my entire professional life and much of my personal life occurs online is to try and stay true to myself.

But when people e-mail you something like: “Your bad, slangy English is intolerable. I can’t stand it.”, how many of us revert back to impression management?

Living and working online have made celebrities from all of us, even though it’s to a much smaller fanbase. What we reveal to them is just as important as to what Britney Spears reveal to millions.

Think about it.

Idea source of this post: New York Times

There’s a new buzzword that’s making the rounds these days in the internet world and it’s called ORM (Online Reputation Management).

It’s hardly groundbreaking stuff, since public relations mostly catered for this need ever since that first company decided to badmouth a competitor, but it was certainly given an enormous boost with the recent launch of BrandsEye from Quirk and the proliferation of its existence by all and sundry and the spectacular ability to track brand mentions on the internet.

Similar to previous other buzzwords like join the online conversation, Web 2.0 / 3.0 / Semantic Web, Generation X / Y or whatever fancy term you’ve come across, it tends to become a tad annoying, overcooked and almost always, (slightly) overhyped.

I am not disputing the advantages of incorporating these elements into your online strategy as it may provide your business with a distinct advantage over your competitors, a true reflection of (the perception of) your brand on the internet, a way to engage with your target audience and a two way channel for client relations.

However, while those are all beneficial business add-ons, it might not be a requirement for your imminent needs nor may online even be a critical element of your business model.

You might find the odd meeting or conversations with social media strategists (those guys that keep on harping about how fantastic the internet is) to start off with “you need a blog” or “if you’re not on Facebook, you’re not online”. I am one of those guys and have fallen into that trap before, especially considering the industry being relatively new and the eagerness with which we approach this international communications facilitator.

Despite the obvious benefits online serves many businesses and industries, it is never a good idea to rush into any new media practice with rigorous excitement and a futile follow through.

If “the online conversation” with your consumers does not add value to your client relations strategy, then it’s certainly not a commendable route.

Rather focus your money and your efforts on the things that matter most to the foundation of your business, whether that is professional business cards or exceptional coffee. The best advice I can give businesses today is to “establish what the best thing is you can do with your time and money today”.

While you’re at it, add bootstrapping to your buzzword list of 2008.

I’ve noticed some mixed reviews from influential bloggers and internet strategists on the Carte Blache documentary about the “Web 2.0” revolution aired last night.

Many questions were left unanswered according to Nic Haralambous, where he asks what exactly the quote “The pace of change has exceeded our ability to keep up” means and to who they were referring to.

Another obvious question was centered on all the internet buzzwords like Mxit, Facebook, Twitter and the vague or non-existent attempt at explaining what these are during the programme. “There was no definition of what web 1.0 was, never mind what web 2.0 is and where it’s headed.”

It seems from reports that people (regular, non internet thought leaders) were left still confused and uncertain to what Web 2.0 entails.

From a previous discussion I had with Tyler Reed and some others to a lesser extent, my answer to these probing questions is simply, what does it matter?

Through a medium like television or the “old media” as it is referred to, what is blatantly obvious is the audience they’re adressing: The older generation, many of who probably has no interest in where this is heading or the impact it will have on their lives.

What is of importance is the influence it has on their children and a future that is as uncertain as the ones before.

Web 1.0 and 2.0 are merely phrases the internet strategists has coined to encapsulate a change in consumer behaviour, a change not enforced by them mind you, but a change brought about by entrepreneurs and strategists around the world.

We’re not seeing consumers changing society, but they’re now leading the way because of advanced technolgy enabling them to do so. This has caused businesses to adopt or ultimately…be left out.

What is the impact of the Carte Blanche documentary? Honestly, I believe not too much and I doubt any difference in their approach or clarification of terms and phrases would’ve changed that.

What they attempted was to mash up various technologies and bring in an element of cool, a concept almost certainly lost on the majority of their target audience. I believe a 20 minute interview with either Rafiq Philips or Dave Duarte would’ve explained new media in a better way.

However, I doubt the impact would have been different. Our consumers are nonchalant in the jargon we publish. They are completely oblivious to the mechanics behind the scenes. And they certainly don’t care.

As long as we, the technology and service providers, keep producing innovative platforms that allow them to express themselves to a wider, more diverse and controversial spectrum of people and brands are smart enough to adopt these in their marketing strategies, there’s little else we need to evangelise.

Whether we term that Web 3.0 or semantic web, is beside the point. All that is important from this documentary is that we’ve established a vantage point of rapid change. We’ve opened the technological can of worms and have broken down the barriers that were once standing firm in protecting a society from outside influence.

Do we need to educate the Carte Blanche audience on the changes they are witnessing? Yes, but only to those that are interested in the change and the next generation that would truly be living in the digital era.

For them, the programme has sparked a big enough interest to further their knowledge.