Its nearly upon us ? the inaugural ?Content is King? conference.</p> <p>Hosted at the Cabinet War rooms in Whitehall this prestigious event is going to be talked about long after the snow has gone?..</p> <p>Four acclaimed speakers will be sharing information and secrets with those lucky enough to get seats?. experts within their fields with a wealth of experience in web strategy, search and content arenas.</p> <p>Spaces are very limited so if you have not had your personal invite yet, then follow the link to ?Contact us? and you never know you may be lucky enough to pick up one of the remaining spaces.<br /> Watch this space for the big unveiling of the speakers!!

After first failing to acknowledge that he had done anything wrong, the Republican candidate for a vacant senate seat in Minnesota finally apologized for tweets that were widely seen as distasteful. Conservative candidate Mike Perry called US President Barack Obama a ?power-hungry, arrogant black man? on Twitter. After initial hesitation, Perry apologized for his tweet, which he claimed was written in ?haste? and out of frustration with what he believes is Obama?s left-wing, free-spending approach to governing the country. But an added piece of mystery surrounding Perry?s Twitter activities was the fact that his most controversial tweets almost always disappeared from his page after being posted. Perry now notes that his staffers may have removed up to 33 tweets, but that he still takes responsibility for this content.</p> <p>Brian Melendez, Perry?s opponent on the left, accepted the candidate?s apology for his comments on Obama, but noted that many of the 33 or so older tweets also contained inexcusable remarks. In fact, Melendez asserts that in one of these Twitter posts, Perry tried to draw an indirect connection between Democrats and pedophiles.</p> <p>What politicians continually fail to realize is just how rapidly news and comments spread through Twitter and other social networking sites. Twitter profiles and tweets are not open exclusively to one?s followers, but they are also indexed by Google and made available to all internet users, journalists and rival politicians on a profile page where all tweets posted by an account holder are displayed. While Perry is hoping to fill a Republican senate seat, only time will tell what impact this Twitter error in judgement will have on his electoral chances at the end of the month.

Anyone can delete their Facebook account if they have had their fill of the web?s most popular social networking site, but what if someone wants to go out with a bang, rather than a whimper? A handful of websites have been offering Facebook users the option of what some refer to as social networking ?suicide?--a way to ritualistically delete all Facebook friends or Twitter followers, post a farewell message online and even upload a special commemorate ?plaque? or memorial, to serve as a virtual tombstone. The Web 2.0 Suicide Machine is a website and application based in the Netherlands, which allows Facebook users to disengage from all major social networking sites in one swift, decisive click of the mouse. Those who use this website can sit back in front of their computer and watch as all their Facebook friends and Twitter followers are systematically deleted from their account one-by-one.</p> <p>But Web 2.0 Suicide Machine may face legal challenges from Facebook, which is reportedly worried about the site storing the profile, account and password information of its users. When Seppukoo.com tried to popularize a similar form of disengagement from Facebook last year, the social networking site sent it a cease and desist order. Seppukoo.com arguably went even further than the Web 2.0 Suicide Machine. The company?named after an ancient Japanese death ritual--went as far as to organize a ?virtual group suicide? in November 2009, when people related to this project created a series of fake Facebook profiles?using the names of late celebrities such as Kurt Cobain--only to then delete them all as a group. The site even offers people the opportunity to replace their Facebook profile pictures with a memorial plaque, serving as a virtual tombstone. Facebook has reportedly opened an investigation into this growing phenomenon and is considering further legal action.

When Chicago blogger Robyn Okrant decided to walk in Oprah Winfrey?s shoes for a year by following all of the iconic talk show host?s lifestyle suggestions , she never knew that her unique experiment would not only cost her $4,782 in expenses, but would eventually land her a book deal and international fame in the blogosphere. Okrant was never your typical Oprah fan. She did not clap and cheer enthusiastically as part of the perpetually exuberant television audience, nor was she uncritical of Winfrey?s message. But like Oprah, Okrant is based in Chicago, and she wanted to see where following every single one of Oprah?s tips for an entire year would land her. When Oprah suggested that all women should own at least one pair of white jeans and a matching jacket, Okrant went out and bought just this, right before she subscribed to the television talk show host?s three week-long ?Vegan cleanse? diet.</p> <p>Okrant purchased nearly every product that Oprah recommended on her television show, including a Panini maker, even though it turned out to be of neither use nor ornament to her. In fact, over the course of Okrant?s Oprah adventure, she discovered a glaring contradiction in the magnetic talk show host?s message. One day she called in experts to convince her viewers to de-clutter their houses and go beyond mere consumerism, while the next moment she energetically ordered her followers to buy an invaluable fire pit, Barbara Walter?s autobiography, a Panini maker and white jeans.<br /> In the end, the Oprah blogger never used the Panini maker, dumped the white jeans off with a charity and no longer watches America?s most popular talk show. But what Okrant did manage to pull off is to publish a headline-catching book entitled ?Living Oprah?My One Year Experiment to Walk the Walk of the Queen of Talk.? If the numerous headlines across the world are any indication, Okrant will be able to recover the $4,782 spent on her project with handsome interest, thanks to her book deal.

After threatening to cancel his Twitter account last fall over snarky remarks noting that his tweets were dull, British celebrity Stephen Fry has decided to finally bid farewell to the world?s most popular micro-blogging site in order to spend more time writing his autobiography. Fry reportedly requires ?zero distraction,? if he is going to be able to finish his book by April, which is the deadline set by his publisher. But news of Fry?s Twitter farewell?where he said good-bye to one million followers this past weekend?is hardly the first time that high profile celebrities mull bringing an end to their micro-blogging endeavours. Ashton Kusher?who has more than 4 million followers?recently threatened to quit Twitter as well, in order to protest the production of a reality show based on the social networking site.</p> <p>While most western celebrities have signed on to Twitter, the bigger question is: will anyone truly care if they stop micro-blogging, and should the social networking site be used by actors and pop stars who rely on it for little else than self-aggrandizement in the first place? One might argued that Fry?s announced departure from Twitter was little more than a clever marketing ploy as well, since this piece of information generated nearly a hundred pages on Google News, a mere five hours after the announcement.</p> <p>Despite Fry?s departure, the English celebrity has already hinted that he would eventually return to Twitter and that he ?yearns keenly? to once again be in the company of his online followers. Twitter is, no doubt, an important part of Fry?s marketing campaign, as it is for most actors, authors and musicians. In fact, Fry made headlines last year when he got stuck in a lift and even posted photos of his captivity to his Twitter account.

America?s Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has set its sights on a prominent travel industry blogger who leaked the agency?s new airport safety directives following the failed terror attempt aimed at blowing up a Northwest Airlines flight on Christmas Day. Christopher Elliott used his blog, Elliott.org, to upload the TSA?s formal directive in the midst of the airport chaos that the Nigerian would-be bomber caused, after he attempted to blow up a transatlantic flight scheduled to land in Detroit. But little did Elliott know that simply publishing a document that might quell the confusion among hundreds of thousands of stranded passengers would result in a surprise visit from federal authorities at his home.</p> <p>The leaked document instructed security personnel at airports across the world serving flights to US destinations to conduct pat down searches of all passengers, to restrict carry-on baggage to purses, laptops and camera cases, each of which had to be physically searched, and to ban passengers from getting out of their seats one hour before a flight is scheduled to land. The document also confirmed that what initial reports claimed was a man trying to light fireworks on a flight had actually been an attempted terrorist attack.</p> <p>But the blogger?s decision to leak this document has landed him in hot water. Just as Elliott had started bathing his children before putting them to bed, a special agent who introduced himself as Robert Flaherty knocked on his door and requested that the blogger indicate who leaked the TSA directive. The agent handed Elliott a subpoena, requiring the blogger to disclose all e-mails, letters and other communications concerning the leaked document. The blogger has yet to decide whether he will comply and has indicated that he would first consult his attorney. But failure to cooperate with a subpoena may land him in prison for up to a year.

If you are a site owner, you know that you need to keep your site stocked with fresh content on a regular basis. Internet users are always hungry for information. If you let your site stagnate for very long without updating it, you run the risk of losing traffic.

Craig Lynch, a 28 year old Briton with a seven year sentence for burglary, not only managed to escape from his Suffolk prison more than three months ago, but he continues to evade police despite posting daily status updates and photos on Facebook. Most of Lynch?s more than 9,600 Facebook ?fans? must be scratching their heads, wondering why British police have been unable to catch the escaped felon, even as he taunts and teases authorities on the world?s most popular social networking site. Characteristic of Lynch?s brazen manner, the escapee recently posted a photo of him with an extended middle finger and a status update in which he noted that English police ?couldn't catch themselves a cold.? Lynch also uses Facebook to discuss his favourite meals while on the run, to ask the social networking site?s users to create fan t-shirts for him and?rather ironically?convince British authorities to hand down hefty prison sentences to anyone convicted of cruelty to animals.</p> <p>Most of Lynch?s Facebook fans are based in the United Kingdom, but his newsfeed is also followed by hundreds of people in the United States, Norway and Canada. For his part, Lynch lists his current location on his Facebook page as being Wembley, London. Most recently, the escaped convict told his Facebook fans that he was still in the process of deciding where to celebrate New Year?s Eve.</p> <p>Many of Lynch?s Facebook ?fans? aren?t really that thrilled with the escaped convict at all, and they express their disapproval by posting disparaging comments on the 28 year old man?s page. This led Lynch to recently argue that he is ?here, there and everywhere, but not out to harm the world.?</p> <p>What appears to be the biggest mystery to most Facebook users is why police have not been able to trace Lynch?s location by simply tracking his IP address. This past Saturday, for example, Lynch posted two dozen status updates during the day, and often at just 15 minute intervals. According to reports, Facebook is cooperating with authorities in the UK on this file.

With New Year?s Eve around the corner, the customary array of ads and public service announcement aim to ensure that party-goers do not sit behind the wheel after a night of drinking. But authorities in Texas have decided to take a controversial step in order to stop drunk driving and are now using Twitter to shame those who are charged with drinking under the influence (DUI). The District Attorney (DA) for Montgomery County will now start publishing the names of both offenders and suspects in Texas who have yet to be formally charged, so as to shame them in the world of micro-blogging.</p> <p>But how ethical is the practice of using Twitter to publicly humiliate people who may not actually be guilty of any crime, and is this any better than the Medieval practice of using tar and feathers to shame citizens? Some civil rights activists think that the DA?s move will lead to a slippery slope, with Twitter used to presume that people are guilty before proven innocent. In fact, the publication of people suspected of DUI offences on Twitter has been tried before in other states, with very mixed results. For example, a woman from New York had her name published in a Tweet as a form of public humiliation, after she was suspected of a DUI offence. In the end, however, it turned out that the female driver had not been drunk behind the wheel at all. Instead, the woman suffered from a form of diabetes which impaired her ability to drive a vehicle. Yet even though this had surfaced, her reputation was already in tatters, thanks to the DA?s Twitter-based shaming.</p> <p>But none of this seems to bother Montgomery County?s DA. The Texas jurisdiction will begin posting the names of absolutely everyone arrested on a DUI offence, regardless of the fact that they may still be exonerated in court.

With the holiday season upon us, one of the topics of discussion around the family dinner table may be Facebook and whether constant use of the popular social networking site increases the odds of divorce. Research conducted by Divorce Online offers some surprising results. The study claims that almost 20 percent of all divorce cases are the result of a Facebook addictions or secret online romances. But it?s not just the amount of time that a spouse spends on Facebook which may cause a problem. More often than not, divorce lawyers interviewed as part of the study suggested that flirtatious wall posts and cheeky messages that rekindle old high school romances or spark new flings can cause serious damage to existing, real-life marriages.</p> <p>Mark Keenan works as Divorce Online managing director and he noted that one in five of the clients that he has dealt with cited problems caused by Facebook usage as a major factor behind a decision to seek a divorce. In fact, Keenan noted that married couples who have been living together for years often discovered a nasty little secret about their spouse, through old photos posted to the site by other friends, through messages on profile walls or even by status updates.</p> <p>But the biggest problem for happily married couples is when one partner notices that the other is engaging in edgy Facebook message exchanges with an unknown online ?friend.? To make matters worse, some people have informed their partners about their wish to seek a separation or divorce by simply changing their Facebook status. In fact, this is precisely what happened to Emma Brady?a 35 year old woman from Britain--when her husband posted a status update on his wall noting?in the third person?that ?Neil Brady has ended his marriage to Emma Brady.? Some social networking specialists contend that this may very well have been the first ?Facebook divorce.? If Divorce Online?s statistics are anything to go by, then there are many more to come.