Archive for December, 2008

Pragmatism Over Purism

When I first got into social media, I was a purist. By that I mean I would evangelise for companies to go out, do their own engagement online and build their own relationships. Every time. Without fail.

Over the last year or so, however, I’ve developed into more of a pragmatist. Like it or not, I’ve found that as I work with more clients from the consultancy side that their answer will often be something like "I hear you and I agree with you, but I just don’t have enough time to do that."

Do you just tell these companies that they shouldn’t get involved in social media until they can find the resources to engage as Dell, Zappos, Comcast or Molson do?

If you’re talking about writing a blog, then perhaps they should wait (I’ve already given my thoughts on ghost-written blogs). If you’re talking about monitoring and outreach then maybe not, as long as you’re open about who’s doing the outreach.

It’s not ideal, but sometimes have to compromise… not your ethics, but your approach. I’ve done it – it’s not my first choice but sometimes the ideal approach isn’t the feasible one.

You can do your client justice by acting as their representative online. Let’s face it, in a downturn where budgets and staffing is being cut, you could find yourself waiting a long time before your client can find those extra resources. Social media purists might not like that answer, but I suspect the average person would be quite happy that a representative of Company X is engaging with them, regardless of who pays their salary.

A more important question is whether the company’s culture is ready for online engagement. Do they really want to hear what people don’t like about them? Are they really ready to respond… genuinely, without trying to ‘spin’ their way through these situations? Do they really want to help, or do they just want to look like they do?

If you don’t get the right answers to questions like those, consider that the company may just not be ready. They’d be better served by starting to listen to what people are saying and learning from it before starting to reach out and engage with people.

Only once you can get satisfactory answers to the question of if the company is ready for online outreach should you start worrying about who does that outreach. The ideal then is for the company to do it itself, but if that’s just not possible then so be it.

Pragmatism takes preference to "take it or leave it" purism. The only exception is when it comes to your ethics.

That’s my take, anyway.

What do you think?

Survey Sheds Light On Canadians’ Views Towards Social Media

A new survey released today shows that Canadian business leaders plan to invest more in social media in 2009, while increasing numbers of Canadians see social media tools as important for learning about products, services, organizations and brands.

Increased social media spend planned by marketers

The second annual Social Media Barometer survey, conducted by Pollara and com.motion, shows that 82 per cent of the Canadian business and marketing leaders who responded plan to spend as much or more on social media in 2009 compared to this year. That’s up from 51 per cent in the 2007 survey. Also, more than three quarters indicated that senior management supports greater investment in social media.

Interestingly, the only other communications discipline that showed a net increase in planned spending in 2009 was public relations, while banner, newspaper, radio, TV and magazine advertising show over a quarter of respondents plan to decrease spending in those disciplines.

Trends in marketers' planned media spend for 2009

This may be due, in some small part, to the other significant trend revealed by the survey…

Social media seen as more credible

The survey also gives some interesting insights into Canadian respondents’ use of social media.

While Facebook unsurprisingly rears its head as the top social network for Canadians (with 87 per cent of social media users having tried it), the survey showed that 13 per cent of social media users have tried Twitter.

One result that is surprising, though, is that the same proportion of respondents (65 per cent) rated social media tools as important for learning about products, services, organizations and brands as rated them important for developing relationships. Interestingly, in 2007 more people viewed social media as important for products than for relationships (59 per cent compared to 52 per cent).

Methodology concerns

With all that said, I need to offer a caveat around the methodology used for the survey.

This survey – on social media – was conducted online, which is akin to asking Democrats how they voted. It’s hardly surprising that people who responded to an online survey indicated they think online tools are important.

I would love to see this addressed in future surveys – as things stand the credibility and applicability of the results is reduced by the methodology. While the trends revealed here are useful, and the survey offers a useful insight into the views of online consumers, as it stands the results aren’t really translatable to Canadian consumers as a whole.

What do you think about the trends highlighted by the survey?

(Disclosure: com.motion and its parent company Veritas Communciations are competitors of my employer Thornley Fallis. Thanks to Keith McArthur for the information on the survey)

Are Media Channels Diverging Or Converging?

Are media channels fragmenting? While looking over the new Vancouver Sun website recently (congratulations again on the redesign to Kirk Lapointe and his team), a blog post by Pamela Fayerman on the Sun’s Medicine Matters blog caught my eye.

Fayerman’s post, entitled Health and medical blogs; what interests you?, offers a couple of interesting thoughts on the changing nature of journalism:

We know that print stories are just a stop along the information highway for readers, not their final destination. Tom Rosenstiel, an author and director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism, says reporters are like hunters/gatherers of information. Our role, on the digital side, is to do the aggregation work so that readers can use links where they can go to learn more.

Meanwhile, on my way home from work yesterday, I listened to the latest Media Bullseye Radio podcast with Ike Pigott. The panel featured a lively discussion about the role, nature and future of mainstream media and how it will influence social media (and vice versa) as different media channels converge.

There’s an interesting trend in these two pieces – they both talk about the different media coming together:

  • Fayerman’s piece mentions media as aggregators (a role frequently played by bloggers)
  • The Custom Scoop team talked about convergence between the different forms of media.

Over the last couple of years I’ve observed lots of discussions about the way that conversations are fragmenting. I’ve bemoaned this trend with social media tools as they take up ever-increasing amounts of time just to stay involved with the diverse channels.

I found it interesting that on one day I came across two mentions, on both sides of the old/new media divide, that mentioned a similar trend.

What do you think? Are channels fragmenting or converging?

Update: Ike offered a useful summary of his key points around convergence in the comments:

  • “Print, radio and television news outlets aren’t really all that different when you look at their web components.
  • The fear among all forms of media about “scooping yourself on your own website” is gone. Getting news on your site first does indeed count as “getting it on the record.”
  • The typical silos that media relations people used to consider are gone. If you’ve got some relevant b-roll for your event or news release, you stand a better chance of getting it on the newspaper’s website than you do of the TV stations pulling from it.
  • Eventually, those outlets that are still competitive now will continue with web as the primary means of distribution, but with legacy branding from when they were primarily pulp or broadcast.”

Bring Twitter Onto Your Blog With Chat Catcher

Chat Catcher If you’re anything like me, and you’re sometimes frustrated by trying to track conversations about you all over the web, you may just love Chat Catcher.

What’s Chat Catcher?

Chat Catcher, as it turns out, is a service developed by Shannon (of course) that uses Twitter Search to scan Twitter for people linking to your blog posts, and posts links to those tweets in your blog comments. Unlike Chirrup, which places Twitter comments separately to the rest of your comments, Chat Catcher places them in the regular comment stream.

I found Chat Catcher while I was browsing Shannon Whitley‘s blog the other day (which I recommend you do too). Several comments caught my eye:

Chat Catcher

Chat Catcher

Chat Catcher should work with any blogging platform that supports trackbacks. I’ve just installed it on this site, which runs on WordPress – we’ll see over the next few days how it goes.

How it works

It’s very easy to install Chat Catcher – there are just three simple steps:

  1. Enter your URL on the Chat Catcher registration page
  2. The site will give you a code script; save that into a .php file and upload that to your web server
  3. Let Chat Catcher know where on your server that script is.

Note: Shannon tells me he’s still fine-tuning Chat Catcher. I’ll let you know how it goes.

What do you think about the idea of Chat Catcher? Does it appeal to you?

6 Tips For Engaging Online

Online outreachIf you’re new to the social media "scene," it can be scary (just ask the folks at Motrin). For a company used to "controlling the message" through carefully crafted news releases and press conferences, engaging in it can be even scarier.

Here are six tips to help that engagement go a little more smoothly:

Disclose who you are

If you’re engaging on behalf of your employer, be up-front with that fact. That can be in your comment, in your bio (if it’s visible), in your username; whatever. Just make sure it’s clear.

I suggest this from an ethical perspective (and yes, Keith, also because of the potential backlash) – I think pretending to be something you’re not is a bad idea.

Choose your words carefully

You can make your life considerably easier by researching the questions that people are likely to have  and the issues they’re likely to raise (ask the support/customer service team!) and proposing some very rough "messages" that you can use in those cases.

I’m not talking about "messages" in the old-school communications sense. Don’t regurgitate the same thing each time someone asks a certain question. Your pre-approved set of generic points gives you a base to riff-off and helps you to avoid upsetting your boss, while still allowing you the freedom to speak directly to the other person rather than in their general direction.

Avoid bureaubabble

This relates to the "messages" I mentioned above.

Don’t become a mindless message machine.

If someone’s post just calls for a quick "thank you" then just say that! Don’t be a machine – speak like a person, because that’s what you are and that’s the expectation in these forums. While remembering that you do represent a company, be as conversational as you can.

Avoid corporate speak" wherever possible.

Ask

You’re unlikely to have the authority to make decisions for your company. If you’re not sure about something then ask.

Set parameters

Sometimes your overlords will be comfortable in trusting you to just go out and engage on the company’s behalf. If so, fantastic.

Other times, management may want a little more input into what you say.

In that cases, I have two recommendations:

  • Start to gently educate people about the nature of social media, the cultural changes they may need and the increased effectiveness that results from empowering you to engage on your own;
  • Set some parameters for your engagement.

What parameters? For starters:

  • What you’ll do
  • The options you may recommend (consider triaging posts)
  • The timelines in which your boss needs to respond (you might have better luck in not getting fired if you position this as a way to increase effectiveness rather than just setting deadlines for your boss)

Establish an engagement policy

Set an engagement policy. Lay out, in clear terms, where you’ll engage with people but more importantly, where you won’t. For example, you may want to avoid conversations involving personal attacks, offensive language or obvious trolls. State that up-front (perhaps in the ‘policies’ section of your website) so you can point to it when people ask why you didn’t engage in a particular discussion.

What other recommendations would you add for companies getting ready to engage online?

5 Lessons About Self-Promotion In Social Media

Train wreck! A little storm-in-a-teacup erupted online today around a press release issued by Matt Bacak. The release was almost comically self-promotional, evidenced by the headline:

"The Powerful Promoter Promotes Himself Straight to the Top of Twitter – Matt Bacak Achieves Another Social Networking Milestone"

Quoting the release:

"Anyone can call their promotional abilities ‘powerful’ but I actually prove that mine are," says Matt Bacak of his most recent accomplishment.

Unsurprisingly, once a few people noticed the release the reaction in the social media sphere was rapid and negative. Plenty of people have piled on commented on this including Scott Baird, Warren Sukernek, Chris Lower and Tris Hussey. The release has garnered over 310 votes under the title "The. Biggest. Douche. In. Social. Media" and there’s already a site entitled doiknowmattbacak.com, elevating him alongside the large hadron collider in the geek world.

I had my own little chuckle at the release earlier, but I have a feeling people don’t come here to read cheap shots (although I am tempted). Instead, let’s take some positives away – what can we learn from this little blip? What should people looking to promote themselves in social media learn take away from it?

As I mentioned earlier, I have little doubt that Matt Bacak is an extremely smart and successful guy. He may in fact be rubbing his hands in glee at all the free publicity (however negative) this is getting him.

However, if you take a step back and look at the tactic used alongside the reaction it received, these five lessons stand out for me.

  1. People react badly to over-self promotion – Matt Bacak may be a smart, nice guy. If you dig back into the records before today, people have plenty of good things to say about him (Scott Stamper did so to his great credit in the comments on this post) and I’m in no position to argue otherwise. They key in this medium, though, is to let other people realize that themselves. Chris Brogan is a great example of this. He’s a smart guy – he does his fair share of self promotion, but you will never see him stand up and proclaim his goodness, and he promotes himself by helping others. There’s no mystery behind why he has such a large group of people that look to him for advice.
  2. Base your claims on solid facts – Bacak’s claims of entering "the Twitter elite" led to several posts mocking this statement from heavy Twitter users like Ike Pigott and Michael O’Connor Clarke who had never heard of him until today. It also led others like Jamie Scheu to delve into the claim, discovering that on closer inspection it wasn’t true.
  3. Back-up your words with action – The subject of all this controversy has been noticeably absent from this debate. Now, he may have made a conscious decision to not dive into the shark tank, but a simple indication of that might have headed some of the criticism off.
  4. It’s not about you; it’s about others – Adding fuel to the fire today was the realization by some that the vast majority of Bacak’s Digg submissions were for his own material. This is considered pretty poor form by most people in the fishbowl. Some promotion of your own material, sure, but if it’s only your own then what value are you adding?
  5. Help others and they’ll help you – Some of the old-school approaches that today and the recent Mumbai spam episode highlighted may work in other forms of Internet or mainstream marketing. Let’s face it, Bacak’s release was no worse than the majority of press releases that companies put out every day. The difference here is that the release proclaims ‘elite’ status in a forum that the release shows the issuer doesn’t understand. Tactics like that are unlikely to work here. If you’re going to engage using social media tools, instead engage, participate, help others, add something of value. Other people will realise it and will say good things. Let other people help you with your promotion.

What do you think? What other lessons can we learn here?

(Image source: Wikimedia)

The Danger Of Ego Services on Twitter

This weekend I received a direct message from someone on Twitter asking why I’d unfollowed him. He was a little upset that I’d decided to stop listening.

How did he find out I’d unfollowed?

Qwitter.

Image representing Qwitter as depicted in Crun...Qwitter is a service that lets you know every time someone unfollows you and tells you the last message you posted before they unfollowed. Some have suggested it could be useful to help people learn what creates negative reactions in their followers.

I tried Qwitter briefly when it first came out, and decided it wasn’t for me. It seems like a bit of an ego massager – simply for people to find out who has unfollowed them.

The problem in this instance? I hadn’t unfollowed. I hadn’t even considered it.

On checking with my fellow Twitter users, it seems this has been happening to other people too. It may be that Qwitter is quitting on us.

A word of warning to Qwitter users: Be careful what you believe.

Twitter Spam Doesn’t Work

SIERRA MADRE, CA - MAY 29:  Seventieth anniver...I’ve never really understood the mindset behind spamming. I get why it works, but it still boggles my mind that people do it. Especially in new forums like Twitter.

There’s a big difference between media like email, where spammers can push their messages out to millions of people and let sheer numbers do their work, and Twitter, where you need people to opt-in to your posts and where they can answer back.

Still, we’re still seeing people try to use old-school spam tactics to ‘game’ Twitter. This weekend I saw one of the more low-level attempts so far – someone who created a Twitter account just for the purpose of taking advantage of the Mumbai terrorist attacks to drive traffic to his site (a big tip of the hat to via Jennifer Leggio, aka mediaphyter).

New user @seanzyville took advantage of the #mumbai hashtag to spam messages promoting a CRM demo from Web Solutions.

Seanzyville spams Twitter

Not surprisingly, the Twitter community didn’t take too kindly to someone using the Mumbai tragedy to spam them:

As the last message notes, the spammer clearly got cold feet shortly thereafter and has now deleted the offending updates.

Lessons learned?

To take something positive away from this episode, there are a few clear lessons that I hope “seanzyville” has learned from this:

  1. Twitter is two-way – People will react negatively, publicly, if you try to spam conversational media like Twitter.
  2. You’re findable online – For example, I now know seanzyville’s email address, his Flickr account and YouTube account (which I won’t link to – NSFW).
  3. Your online brand is fragile – just as it takes a long time to build trust and just a few seconds to destroy it, your online reputation can be ruined quickly. Seanzyville’s name is now severely damaged online.

What other lessons would you suggest?

(Image credit: Spam image from Getty Images, first Twitter image by Jennifer Leggio)