Question of the year: How can Social...

Incentivising members to engage with advertisers could be one way.

For example Facebook members could start earning Facebook Points for actively participating in the community (earn points for referring friends etc). Advertisers could then target members and offer points for responding to their ads/questions/surveys. Incentivised ad netwroks have been around for a while now and although they may not always be the best quality of lead (they've been intivised to click after all) but at least they drive good volumes of traffic which may in turn be converted to quality leads. The main challenge facing many of these social networks is simply getting ads noticed and I believe incentivising click throughs (and possibly conversions) would improve things dramatically.

Facebook is far beyond most social networks in their commitment to advertisers...read about Facebook's CPC.  We are running our first targeted ad this weekend...it'll be interesting to see the turnout.

I think social networks can be monetized, but maybe not in a traditional display ad sense. I wonder if a social network could operate similar to a tradeshow, where the whole thing or different sections are sponsored. The challenge is to make that sponsorship something other than exclusive rights to display advertising. Since social networks are conversation based, I think the advertising should be also.

An idea is the ability to put a page/site-relevant text message somewhere prominent on the page, woven into the conversation. Or a message from the site's community manager, thanking X company for their sponsorship. Just a couple of ideas.

I personally believe that advertisers need to speak to consumers in a method that befits the medium. Social networks are not the ideal place to try to draw someone to your site. The person has came to the site to participate in the community and also to communicate with their friends. Maybe advertisers should try to draw the consumers into a conversation that doesn't involve forcing them to their site. It's just a thought, but has anyone ever tried participating in the community by doing something like asking how to make their product or company better without trying to record a "conversion" without using a formal questionnaire? Open conversation will give you much more valid answers than something formal. Although quantifying the results maybe more difficult, you can receive answers to questions that would not have been on a form. Isn't having the opportunity to listen to the voice of the consumer a major benefit of web 2.0?

As far as monetizing this as a CEO of a social networking site-possibly hosted forums with perks for participating, homepage positioning of the questions, and being treated as an affiliate based on conversions stemming from the company's participants. That is definitely the hardest part of the equation to answer.

It is just a thought, but maybe using the essence of the medium as a form of honest conversation would be more beneficial than making the consumer view more impressions.

Just my random ramblings...

I agree almost wholeheartely with the previous post.

I think that the biggest asset of Web 2.0 is that it develops an open line of communication between A and B.  In the traditional Web 2.0 model, A is a member, B is a member, and C is that annoying friend that won't stop barging into your conversations (advertisers).  But why not make C less annoying.  Why not allow C to ease into the conversation with something relevant to say.

For example, let's say you and a friend are talking about your new puppy.  You are commenting on your friends page that you love your new puppy but HE WONT STOP PISSING ON THE CARPET.  The part in all caps catches the attention of a nearby advertiser, who can now enter the conversation, via email, banner ad, PPC ad, etc., and contribute relevant content. 

The key for CEO's is to make sure their advertisers are not barging into conversations