Something struck me recently when reading Dave Churbuck's blog. For those of you unfamiliar with Churbuck, he is VP Marketing at Lenovo and a pretty fab blogger in his own right. He has a way of cutting through much of the subtle, latent Web 2.0 BS and calling things out.

I happened upon Churbuck's post around the time I was "connecting" on LinkedIn with past coworkers and trying to loogle them. It started out quite innocently with me trying to find one of my good friends on there who is a student at UCLA's management school. I kept on getting an "upgrade membership" button that kept flashing every time I tried and failed to click away from the page.

When did LinkedIn start bugging me to upgrade my membership? Thinking back, I had started noticing this a while back, but it took a few months to settle in my mind to the point of distracting me from enjoying the site.

Unfortunately around the time this malaise set in, I was also on Facebook. My friend had sent me another of those SuperWall pictures which required me clicking on the image to see what it did, but before I could get to that image I was navigated to yet another page which prompted me to send the very image to all of my friends before I was allowed to open the actual image. Thankfully it also selected all of my friends as recipients of this picture so it saved me the work of having to send a picture of a dog to 50 of my nearest and dearest.

On the flipside, when I tried to "pull one over" on the system by "unselecting" all, it prompted me to choose one lucky recipient of an Alaskan Husky picture which most likely barked and sang"Happy Holidays" to the tune of "Feliz Navidad" when clicked on. Annoyed that I had just spent seven minutes of my life driving towards a reality far less appealing than the my mind's conjurings, I started to philosophize a bit on Churbuck's likening of "spam" to this tactic that Facebook API developers have taken to spreading the word of their creations. Initially I had taken to this feature, especially because I could choose which of my friends would care to partake in a game of Scrabble with me and go a few rounds. Same with Flixter. In a sense it also allowed me to be more social with people I wouldn't have contact with on a daily basis and rediscover or discover connections I never would have found otherwise.

Newsweek maintains that Facebook is the console of the future (replacing Wii??) and it will connect people socially through computers as never before. Considering it's the sixth most trafficked site in the world, it's a possibility. But really short of wireless remotes combined with action-oriented competitive games w/amazing graphics, how can the existing Facebook APIs compete with what Sony, IBM, and Microsoft are putting out?

In the news today, Ford is launching a host of widget ads to promote their new Microsoft-powered affiliation, the highly touted voice command device for mobile and digital music, Sync. For those of you who haven’t yet visited the site, the Sync My Ride slogan is rather catchy for a domain even if the commercial campaign for the Ford Focus which cross-advertises the Sync doesn’t quite convey the message as readily. Both campaigns are in line with a Net-Gen/MTVu-generation demographic which makes sense given the pricetag of the Focus and the interactive-heavy, rich design feature set of Sync.

Ford’s widget ads, which can be seen on AOL sites starting this week, will boast portable API-friendly code to embed the widget on other sites. While I understand what Ford and Microsoft have to gain in the process of building a community of MySpace and Facebook users flaunting their products, I’m not sure what users get in return. To this point, if there isn’t an existing community of users and advocates for a product (like Sync), how does a campaign like this get wheels. Does it have all the ingredients? Or is a bit like putting a cart before a horse?

Google’s Gmail ad campaign stemmed from a preexisting fan base of avid and enthusiastic users to build a more cohesive community through the power of user-generated video and the simplicity of its message: Just how does a single email navigate from point A to point B? In other words, what’s its path? (Google’s satellite feature to map out user video locations is a nice add-on to the video visual) Google’s success with this ad, much like many of their initiatives, stems from a keen understanding of the precise intersect between timing and innovation. Had Google launched a campaign like this before Gmail branded itself as synonymous with “email” and asked users the very same question, it would have sunk.

Widget ads do appear to be the wave of the now with major industries (entertainment, automotive, romance) piggy-backing on the new trend, but again, I’m brought back to the same burning question. What’s in it for me? As the consumer? As the Facebook member? As the occasional MySpace voyeur? What do I have to gain from posting a widget from the film August Rush with trailers from the film and local show times unless I’m a publicity agent at a PR firm or an industry-related site owner that gets some sort of monetary pay-per-click/pay-per-impression incentive? (assuming there is a performance model in place) Companies like ClearSpring, PointRoll, and Interpolls, who is hosting the Sync product, are already fast-track on the way to creating systems for tracking and monetizing traffic based on widget ad revenue. As an aside, Yahoo is currently working on sprucing up their widget platform, most likely to accommodate for this growing trend.

I get that advertising models these days are shifting with the times to incorporate ways of involving the everyday person in opportunities to have a “voice” in their public campaigns and that truly successful campaigns empower individuals by giving them ownership and a sense of tangible pride in their brand, but whether the widget ad model can support this model remains to be seen.