Tech Crunch has been digging and buzzing to find out everything they can about the “facbeook phone.” Early this morning, Michael Arrington posted his interview with Mark Zuckerberg about their “mobile platform.” It’s been buzzing about the twitterverse all day.

Mark Zuckerberg: I think it’s different in different places. For example, take Instant Personalization. Our goal is to make it so there’s as little friction as possible to having a social experience. So you go to some apps, take Rotten Tomatoes, which we just launched last week. If people had to click this blue button to Connect, then some percent of them would, but it would be the minority because you don’t know exactly what you’re going to get before you click it. If you had to put up some modal dialog then that would be crazy from a UX perspective. But the fact that they can do that instant integration for the users that want it means that everyone has a good experience as soon as they get there.

On phones we can actually do something better. We can do a single sign-on if we do a good integration with a phone, rather than just doing something where you go to an app and it’s automatically social or having to sign into each app individually. Those are the two options on the web. Why not for mobile? Just make it so that you log into your phone once, and then everything that you do on your phone is social.

Michael Arrington: You’re turning on a layer…

Mark Zuckerberg: That’s what we’re trying to do. The reason I just gave that example is that some things, like the implementation is different on mobile.

One thing that I think is really important — that I think is context for this, is that I generally think that most other companies now are undervaluing how important social integration is. So even the companies that are starting to come around to thinking, ‘oh maybe we should do some social stuff’, I still think a lot of them are only thinking about it on a surface layer, where it’s like “OK, I have my product, maybe I’ll add two or three social features and we’ll check that box”. That’s not what social is.

Social – you have to design it in from the ground up. These experiences, like what Zynga is doing or what a company like Quora is doing, I think that they have just a really good social integration. They’ve designed their whole product around the idea that your friends will be here with you. Everyone has a real identity for themselves. And those are fundamental building blocks. Now, I don’t know how long it’s going to take to get the mobile environments that you see today to a state where you can build really robust social applications on top of it. So that’s the biggest driving force for us — to try to work with these folks and see how deep we can get on our own to make sure that we can build that plumbing. Our goal is to make it exist.

Okay, apologies for the enormous quote. The context was important.

I want to talk about the social layer and in some ways link this to expression theories. Mark Zuckerberg does not want to build a social layer. I think that’s what we have now. You go to a website, click the connect button and some social integration is slapped on top.

But, I’m thinking about Bell. I’m thinking about our invisibile states of mind and the way that Zuckerberg has to translate his vision to his developers and to interviewers like Michael Arrington. He has to translate an abstract idea, this social shell that will integrate into our mobile lifestyles, into something that will make sense to us.

Photoshop uses layers, lasagna uses layers. We understand what layer means. It seems to me that Mark Zuckerberg wants to penetrate our lives with the social interactions and connections that Facebook.com does so well right now.

So, I guess my question is, for people like us, and Zuckerberg or anyone who is working on a concept or idea and has to sell it. How do we translate these invisible states of mine into a material form?

We do this through criticism, sketching, designing, writing and many other forms of communication. But, essentially, it comes down to this: how do I make sure the designs our teams work on get developed the way we want them to? I think expression theory can help. Can it?

Advertisements