Dear friends, colleagues and supporters,

I’m thrilled to announce that I’m joining CNET and CBS Interactive as a contributing columnist and commentator!

Ever since my departure from Mashable, I’ve posted my personal take on the big technology news of the day on BenParr.com. The response to my work has been overwhelming, and traffic to this blog has skyrocketed. Thank you all for reading, commenting and sharing.

But now I have a chance to make a much bigger impact with my writing. Starting this week, my commentary on technology, social media and startups will appear on CNET several times per week. I will not be doing any straight reporting — CNET has a talented team that already does an amazing job at that. Instead, I will be doing what I’ve been doing here on BenParr.com: breaking down the big issues and players in tech and explaining what it actually means for both the tech industry and society as a whole.

To do that, I will be writing a combination of thought pieces, analysis stories, response pieces and the occasional long-form column. My CNET column is called The Social Analyst, just like my column on Mashable. It’s going to have more bite than my old column, though. I intend to keep tech’s biggest names honest.

I decided to join forces with CNET/CBSi because CBS Interactive CEO Jim Lanzone and CNET General Manager Mark Larkin have an ambitious vision for the future.

CNET is huge: it is one of the 100 most visited websites in the world, but Mark and Jim are not content with resting on their laurels. I believe in their vision and their leadership, and I am thrilled to be working with them.

CNET isn’t my only gig, though. For the last few months, I’ve also been working behind-the-scenes on a startup, which we can’t wait to talk more about! My co-founder and I have a clear vision, as well as a duty to our investors, and we will move heaven and earth (and forgo sleep) to make sure our company succeeds.

My new role at CNET and CBSi is the best of both worlds. I get to reach millions of people with my thoughts on technology, but still retain the flexibility to be an entrepreneur, build amazing products and change the world.

Don’t take your eyes off of CNET. Big things are happening over there, and you won’t want to miss all the action. 2012 is going to be an amazing year.

Cheers,
~ Ben

I make 12-18 introductions per week on average. Some of the intros I make are favors to friends, some of them are to journalists, some are for the startups I advise, and some were because I thought that two people just needed to meet each other.

Most of the time, the introductions I see people make are terse with little context and even less reason for both sides to follow up. The conversion rate for these types of introductions is poor.

This doesn’t have to be the case for your introductions, though.

Introductions are as much an art as they are a science. Making a few changes to your intros will not only dramatically increase their quality, but it will improve your standing with both parties. In other words, you’ll become a far better Connector.

The Anatomy of a Great Introduction

I follow a structure when I make intros — I don’t reinvent the wheel every time. This means I can get a GOOD intro out the door in under two minutes.

Consistency is important — it gives your intros more continuity.

Below are the four key structure points of my introductions. I’m using John Smith of Kleiner Perkins and Jane Doe of Google as examples for this introduction so you get a better idea of my style of intros. Of course, my method may not be for you — definitely adjust your system to match your personality and the personality of the people you’re introducing.

Here are my four key structure points for introductions:

• The Subject Line: The subject line of any email introduction should be simple and straightforward. It should convey two things: who the people being introduced are and what they do. The person who is receiving the introduction should be first in the subject, while the person being introduced should be second. “John Smith (Kleiner Perkins), Meet Jane Doe (Google)” is a typical subject line for my introduction.
• First Intro: Make the first introduction and explain, in three sentences or so, who this person is, why you like them and why you’re making this introduction. I also usually say something fun or interesting about the person. In my example, I’m going to address John Smith first and introduce him to Jane Doe.
• Second Intro: Great introductions actually consists of two separate introductions. I always flip the introduction and explain who the other person is and why I like them. In this case, I’m going to address Jane Doe and introduce him to John Smith. Typically the second intro is shorter because Jane already knows John and, in all likelihood, asked me for the introduction.
• The Loop out: Unless you need both parties to report back to you, it’s best if you get out of the conversation. Thus a simple “Feel free to loop me out” sentence helps remove unnecessary clutter from your inbox.

Now let’s apply this to an actual introduction. Here’s what an introduction between John and Jane might look like:

SUBJECT: John Smith (Kleiner Perkins), Meet Jane Doe (Google).

John,

I’d like to introduce you to Jane Doe. She’s one of the super-talented product managers over at Google — she’s been kicking some ass over on the Chrome team. She’s also a master scuba diver (I’ve done a bunch of dives with her!) Jane is actually working on a startup, and I knew that the two of you had to connect.

Jane,

John is one the partners at Kleiner Perkins. He’s led some awesome investments in Google, Zaarly, Erly and Flipboard. He’s been my sounding board over the years for my crazy startup ideas.

Feel free to BCC me/loop me out.

Cheers,
~ Ben

Final Thoughts

The more introductions you make, the better you will get at making them. Don’t be afraid to make introductions if you think both sides will gain something out of it. It ends up being a benefit to you, too, as you become a greater connecter and gain credibility on both sides of the table. The positive karma you create by connecting two smart people often comes back in wonderful and unexpected ways.

Don’t make an introduction if you’re uncomfortable, though. If you think someone is not ready, or if you think the intro will do more harm than good, just tell the truth to the person asking for the introduction. Never be afraid to protect your reputation.

I hope this quick primer has been helpful, even if much of it is common sense. Please post in the comments if you have any other tips or thoughts on the art of the introduction!

Most people think that Apple has two operating systems — iOS and OS X — but the reality is that Apple is creating one OS right before our eyes, piece by piece.

Apple unveiled OS X Mountain Lion on Thursday, dropping the “Mac” label from the name in the process. It’s not a rebirth of Apple’s flagship computer OS, but instead transforms some of OS X’s most important apps into perfect counterparts to Apple’s most popular iOS apps.

iChat is no more. Instead, it is being replaced by Messages, which is interoperable with the Messages app on iPad and iOS. Reminders is being divorced from iCal, and iCal is becoming Calendar. Notes is become a standalone app from Mail. Game Center, Notification Center and iCloud are making their OS X debuts.

If that weren’t enough, OS X Mountain Lion is introducing Gatekeeper, which will, by default, limit the apps you can install to apps from the OS X store or verified Apple developers.

Oh, and one more thing: OS X Mountain Lion boasts complete integration with Twitter, just like iOS. Microsoft will need Facebook integration in Windows 8 more than ever if it’s going to catch up to Apple (remember, Microsoft is a Facebook investor).

These changes come on top of the additions Apple introduced with OS X Lion, which introduced Launchpad and the Mac App Store.

Apple is pushing iOS and OS X closer and closer together. In three years, you’re going to barely be able to tell the difference between the two, especially with OS X now employing a yearly development release cycle.

Apple wants you to have one seamless experience across all of its devices, whether it’s the iPad, iPhone, Macbook or the highly anticipated Apple television set. Everything you do on one device should simply “be there” on the other ones. That’s where iCloud comes into play. It is quickly becoming the cornerstone of Apple’s products, and its influence will only grow.

Here’s my prediction: in four years or less, Apple will not have two operating systems. It will have one unified OS with one brand and one development cycle.

You may think the two operating systems are too different to merge, but remember that iOS was derived from OS X. “The iPhone runs OS X” was even Apple’s official stance when the device was first unveiled.

Apple’s clearly merging iOS and OS X. The only question is how long it will take Apple to make it happen.

I’ve been following the Path privacy controversy with a great deal of interest for the last week, but Crunchfund’s MG Siegler has somehow steered the conversation from Path’s mistakes to the degradation of journalism.

The result: an increasingly nasty tech blogger catfight that I was going to avoid. That was, until I read this. And this. And this. Oh, and don’t forget about this.

Seriously guys, can’t we all get along? No? Well, that’s fine with me — it’s more entertaining this way. But before we go back to life as usual, I want to address some of the assertions being leveled in this fight.

Quick recap: in a rather depressing post, Siegler rips apart a recent column by NYT’s Nick Bilton, accusing him of not putting in enough work to get his facts straight about the story.

Siegler doesn’t really blame Bilton for his poor writing, though. Instead, he blames the “pageview beast”, which doesn’t care about the quality of an article, but its speed, reach and the level of sensationalism it employs. His argument is simple: pageviews equal advertising dollars in the modern media world, and it doesn’t matter how many facts you get wrong, so long as you get the pageviews.

Of course, when you attack the media, the media bites back. Dan Lyons is leading this charge, but he’s not the only one.

Now for a few quick thoughts on this catfight:

1. Siegler’s right — the media is getting more facts wrong, and investigative journalism is becoming a lost art, thanks to decreasing news budgets and more efficient means of delivering and disseminating information.
2. That doesn’t mean people aren’t getting their information from more sources, though, and the new media ecosystem gives more people the power to respond to misinformation with their own blog posts and tweets. This is a smart point that Scott Fulton of RWW makes in a rather lengthy counterpost.
3. Everybody — not just journalists — now have the power to report and make news. This is a good thing. Just ask Sohaib Athar, the man who live-tweeted the raid on Osama Bin Ladin’s compound.
4. Siegler also needs to realize he isn’t the average reader. Most people don’t spend six hours a day on the blogosphere. In an era of information overload, they just want the Cliff Notes version of the tech news for the day (they have more important shit to do than watch insiders like us bitchslap each other). So they turn to shorter posts that give them the bite-sized information they need. Insiders (the few, the proud) are the crazy ones that like the 49-paragraph monsters like Siegler’s post.

With all that said, Siegler’s post proves, in a twisted sort of way, that the new media ecosystem works. Because of its competitive nature, the media keeps itself in check. Readers get more opinions and can make a decision for themselves based on multiple voices, and when there’s an egregious screw-up, the Twitterverse kicks into high gear. The downside is that more false “scoops” and incorrect information makes it through the cracks in the first place because of the focus on speed.

In the end, the media’s job is to give readers what they want. While MG and I may wish readers would crave more in-depth thought pieces on the startup ecosystem, more of them prefer drama and catfights like the one happening in the tech blogosphere.

But do you know what readers like even more than catfights? They like funny texts, celebrity gossip and Jeremy Lin:

My point: life is short, and the human race is probably doomed. Get your fill of lolcats and tech blogger catfights while you still can.

Oh, and as for why bloggers attack bloggers, the correct answer is pageviews. It’s crack for bloggers.

Almost everybody wants to have an assistant, even if people won’t freely admit it. Who doesn’t want an extra set of hands to help out with chores, scheduling, reminders, meetings, reservations, and the myriad of other tasks that we need to complete every single day?

Just a few years ago, the only way you could get yourself an assistant was to pay one a full-time salary. Very few people can afford the luxury having somebody help them with all of the tasks and information in their lives. But that has rapidly changed with new technology that makes it easier to outsource our lives.

This is what I call “Smart Assistant” technology, and I group it into three distinct buckets:

1. Technological Assistants: The best known of these is Apple’s Siri, but that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Evi, for example, is far better at searching for relevant information on-the-fly.
2. Virtual Assistants: Virtual assistants have been around for a while, but now they’re far more affordable thanks to services like Zirtual (which I use and love) and FancyHands. Rather than paying somebody $50K a year, you can pay $50 to $200 a month and get almost all the same benefits.
3. Task Outsourcing: I’m a huge fan of services like Taskrabbit and Zaarly, which lets you outsource chores like food delivery, IKEA furniture assembly, laundry and grocery shopping. The convenience is worth the price.

While each bucket is vastly different, they help accomplish the same things — they help people save time, and they help put people’s minds at ease.

We’re only at the beginning of this phenomenon though. I believe it’s especially true for technological assistants, which are in the best position to deal with (but have yet to solve) one of the biggest problems of the Internet age: cognitive and information overload.

Smart assistants are huge businesses. Five years from now, you’re going to wonder how you lived without them.

Siri image courtesy of Flickr, Kaptain Kobold

Hot mobile social networking app Path has been under fire for the last few days for saving users’ address books and contact lists on their servers in order to help them connect with their friends.

Path’s intentions were innocent enough — they wanted to make sure more people discovered their friends on Path — but the result is a privacy fiasco that rightfully blew up.

What do you do when you’re under fire for betraying user trust? Path co-founder Dave Morin’s answer: apologize and make it right.

Morin quickly apologized for what happened, explained what Path was doing with the data, and announced that Ptah has deleted the data and will give users the ability to upload their contacts on an opt-in basis:

“We believe you should have control when it comes to sharing your personal information. We also believe that actions speak louder than words. So, as a clear signal of our commitment to your privacy, we’ve deleted the entire collection of user uploaded contact information from our servers. Your trust matters to us and we want you to feel completely in control of your information on Path.”

This is how you do an apology. Path clearly learned from Airbnb’s mistakes and decided to fire off a straight apology and stop the issue in its tracks.

Path will end up stronger once the dust has settled. Side note: Apple really needs to fix this gaping privacy hole.

Facebook has filed for IPO. It will likely be the largest IPO in Internet history.

Here are some quick things I’m noticing in the company’s SEC filing:

1. Zynga accounts for 12% of Facebook’s revenue. Facebook needs Zynga just as much as Zynga needs Facebook.
2. Zuckerberg owns a WHOPPING 533,801,850 shares — that’s 28.2% of the company. And because he controls 30.6% of the voting shares via proxy, he has full control over decisions.
3. The next biggest shareholders: Accel Partners (11.4%), co-founder Dustin Moskovitz (7.6%), DST (5.4%) and Peter Thiel (2.5%).
4. Sheryl Sandberg only owns 1.9 million shares. That’s barely a blip on the radar. Peter Thiel owns 22x that amount.
5. Facebook has 2.7 BILLION likes and comments every single day. That is nearly a trillion interactions per year.
6. 845 million monthly active users, 483 million of them are daily active users. Those numbers are up 38% and 48% from the year before respectively.
7. $3.7 billion in revenue last year. In 2009, it was “just” $777 million in revenue.
8. Facebook has $3.8 billion in cash on hand. That’s a big chunk of change
9. 83% of Facebook’s revenue came from advertising. In 2010, that number was 90%
10. Zuckerberg has a salary of $500k, while COO Sheryl Sandberg and CFO David Ebersman take in $300k.

I’ll add more as I find them.

Facebook will reportedly file for IPO later today, and it has the entire tech world buzzing. It will be the only thing people will talk about when Facebook finally files its papers with the SEC.

Don’t believe me? Here’s just a sampling of my Twitter feed from the last 30 minutes:

Clearly people are excited — it’s the first time anybody outside of Zuckerberg’s inner circle has gotten a good, hard look at Facebook’s business. The social network is going to deliver some powerhouse numbers, including its revenue, employee count and current user base. It will also tell you exactly how much of Facebook Mark Zuckerberg currently owns, as well as reveal anybody else that owns more than 5% of the company.

Of course, Facebook may not file for IPO today. It may not even file this week. That will make for a lot of sad techies.

But I’m going to be just like everyone else — I have my SEC notifications turned on. When the IPO paperwork hits, I’m going to pick that thing apart and provide my analysis on one of the most important IPOs in American history.

So stay tuned — it looks like today is Facebook D-Day.

Image courtesy of Flickr, Rishi Bando