Mike’s Points

Maybe it’s USA Today’s fault, maybe blogging is to blame or maybe I have Twitteritis. But, my attention span and getting around to putting together a post of any length is lacking of late. (Good thing there’s a monthly TalentZoo column and the periodic free-lance gig to keep me honest. See page 10.)

Regardless, here’s one post with a couple points for your digestion and review:

A lot on the Internet is free — but there’s still a price

There’s a lot of “things” free about social media. Blogging is free. Social networking is free. Sharing pictures and video is free.

Outside of social media, a lot on the Internet is free. Email is free. Job searching is free. And, a lot of information is free.

And, some of that information is questionably accurate. As an example, Sandeep Krishnamurthy  has a very interesting article at iMediaConnection: Beware: the search advertising sky is falling. There’s good food for thought in Professor Krishnamurthy’s column. However, some of his stats — from compete.com — were questioned by Bill Burke.

Website stats from compete.com are free. So are those from quantcast.com. And, I’m sure there are similar others.

Ah, remember, you usually get what you pay for. Buyer beware.

While social media — which clearly should be a subset of public relations (I ain’t talkin’ advertising) – may be free, doing it well requires an investment in time. Time to get to know the online community to which you are marketing. Time to develope a relationship and comfort level with the community. You don’t need to be buddy-buddy, but any good PR practitioner knows that true success is about relationships. Not about getting “hits.” It’s about connecting your employer or clients’ products and services with the needs and wants of your audience. (For more on this, see one of my TalentZoo columns.)

How best to teach?

You often hear or read in sports that the best managers and coaches know as much about human nature and pyschology as they do about their sport’s fundamentals and tactics. They know which players to pull aside privately to deal with an issue and which will respond better by a public tongue-lashing.

Chris Brogan publically called out a company this week for poor pitching. Chris Anderson at Wired called out a bunch of supposed PR pros for poor pitching. CrunchNotes does it. And, when it occurs often enough, the BadPitch Blog does as well.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, it’s easy to pick on mistakes PR people make.

I’m not saying what Chris B. or any of the others did was wrong. Sometimes, to get someone’s attention, to really get through to him/her, you need to call ‘em out.

There are times — guess it’s up to your own judgment — when a private approach is best taken to teach someone the right way to do their job.

Just because you can easily give someone a public tongue-lashing, doesn’t mean you should.

– Mike

Photo from: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/03/0317_060317_two_headed.html

Often, one of the best results from reading blogs is that it spurs other, related thoughts.

The judgement and weight given to how you differentiate your brand and the need for clarity in communication came to mind after reading the Mark Cuban/BlogMaverick post on Branding and Newspapers, a Lesson in How Not to Brand and Market.

He makes several noteworthy points about the value of differentiation in branding. For example:

Never, ever, ever consider something that any literate human being with Internet access can create in under 5 minutes to be a product or service that can in any way differentiate your business.

If you feel that you must offer this product or service as a means of “keeping up” or as a checklist item that you must have for competitive reasons, then do everything possible to brand the product or service in a manner that segregates it from the masses. Perception is reality. If you can leverage your existing brand to create the perception that yours is different from the masses in some meaningful way, then you must do everything you can to do so.

Creating a perceived differentiation can take the form of promoting better execution or quality of the product or service, or it may be something as simple as just branding it with a different name than the mass product or service.

Failure to do so will pull your brand down to that of the masses or elevate the masses to a position of being better able to compete with you.

For the most part, the emotional ties around a brand are what make it a success, a failure or just mediocre. The strengths of the brand are what allows the company to survive a crisis, and what propels the company to continued growth beyond competitors. And, for weak brands that have no emotional ties and rely on other activites like low-end pricing and commoditization, they struggle in times of crisis and the regular, cyclical market downturns.

But, part of that branding is to clearly communicate what’s so different. Educating the market is often unnecessary time and costs spent away from effectively marketing the brand — and communicating what’s so different, so special, so unique, so in-demand about it.

Sure, education plays into the branding process, but it can be an up-hill climb and distracting from the core message.

Just because someone can quickly, easily duplicate the appearance of what you’ve done — copy a blog like the one you have — it doesn’t mean the content and the quality are also copied. A blog is just a platform. The content is what makes it different.

I’ve been working on this post in my head since Friday. Before finishing it Tuesday evening, I checked back on Mark Cuban’s blog. Lo and behold there was a comment on another post that makes my point — and makes it better. It comes from NYTimes Sports Editor Tom Jolly:

[T]he defining difference among all news sources has been whether the reporting is reliable - and that has been the case since the beginning of time. When you need information - real, trustworthy information - you go to the source you believe in, whether they are distributing their content by word of mouth, on a cave wall, via pamphlet, newspaper, magazine or through a digital format.

We call our “real time” news reports “blogs” because it’s a term our readers have become familiar with, but what we do with our blogs is different than, say, Deadspin or BlogMaverick. The convention is popular because of the ease of posting, but that doesn’t mean the content of our postings is the same as other sites that also describes themselves as “blogs,” any more than the content of our newspaper is the same as other newspapers.

As with any branding effort, there are judgment calls in how to proceed. Yes, you need to set your brand apart from others in the marketplace — but you can’t confuse the marketplace with your communication.

There is no right or wrong answer in the process — until you start getting results and you see where you need to better differentiate or more clearly communicate.

–Mike  

UPDATE, March 7, 2008: The fine folks at CustomScoop’s Media Bullseye republished the below post. I updated the content to include two other services: CyberAlert’s BlogSquirrel and CustomScoop’s BuzzPerception.

See a need, fill a need: It’s a philosophy that is one of the primary themes of Robots (and what inspired Rodney).

You could also say it’s the driving force in a free market, and why many businesses are started.

While social media is still in its infancy — it’ll have a long life, so many years is still an “infancy” — many who’ve been involved have several years experience. Some of us, even have a couple!

However, while the social media populous has been and continues to grow, the tools available to public relations professionals have been lacking, compared to what we’re used to offline. Offline, there’s media tracking services like Luce (okay, BurrellsLuce) and Bacon’s (okay, Cision), as well as newer online and less costly services like Factiva (via the WSJ) and NewsLibrary.com. If you’re tasked with keeping track of clients’/your employer’s media coverage, it’s great knowing you have other professionals and reliable services to work with.

But, online? It was much more manual and, from my experience, included doubt because social media was so new, and there. seemed. to. be. so. many. blogs! Early search engines like GlobeofBlogs, Technorati, BlogPulse and Google Blog Search while free, were very manual and still left a bit of doubt.

However, 2007 saw and early 2008 has seen the birth of many new social media tools. Tools that actually have functionality and make our jobs easier. Still, there’s spam and junk blogs to filter out, but the functionality of these tools versus what’s mentioned above is like day and night.

Here’s a rundown of the tools I’m familiar with — please offer your comments and positive/negative feedback if you’ve tried them, or add your own cool tools. (When possible, I’ve included what I know about each of the services — but by no means are my comments below a thorough commentary of all tools noted. For your own use, please review/evaluate these services yourself.)

Comprehensive tools

Techrigy’s Social Media Manager: Covers blogs, as well as a discussion boards/forums, social bookmarking sites, Flickr, YouTube and other, Twitter, etc. Offers a lot of functionality and flexibility. Note: I had an extensive evaluation of SM2 last fall and into early 2008 before we committed to a contract with Techrigy. I’m very satisfied with SM2, and company has been extremely responsive to suggestions and on-going communication.

Radian6: Similar to Social Media Manager in its range of social media covered. It’s been in the news every so often with contracts with some notable agencies. Note: I had demo of Radian6 early this year, and liked what I saw. In many ways, Radian6 and Social Media Manager are comparable — though each have their “differentiators.” There were a few key differences as to why we chose SM2.

Visible Technologies’ TruCast: I’ve not had a demo of TruCast, but from its site and from some communication with a sales person, it seems to offer capabilities comparable to the above: a “comprehensive solution for social media analysis and participation. Our enterprise level solution enables clients to complete the conversation by allowing them to track, analyze, and participate in blogs, forums, social networks and online communities.”

Forums/Boards

As a smart man once twittered — “forum mining is a tough nut to crack; it’s the deep, unsexy social web stuff that’s oft influential AND overlooked…” — discussion forums and boards are more important than blogs in social media monitoring in many ways. You can obtain so much feedback and trend information on companies, issues and industries by monitoring and participating. And, unlike blogs, you have only a few places to look.

Awhile ago, I had a post about a number of vertical forums and boards. Now, without time-consuming, in-depth searching, you can use board-focused search engines to find, review and monitor them.

BoardReader: “BoardReader was developed to address the shortcomings of current search engine technology to accurately find and display information contained on the Web’s forums and message boards.” (Personal/Local note: It was developed by some U of Michigan people! Go Blue!)

Twing (courtesy of the aforementioned “smart man,” aka Mike Manuel): “Our intent is to enable you to quickly find highly relevant communities and discussions pertaining to your interests, as well as keep you informed on the latest trends influencing communities.”

Omgili: “Omgili is a specialized search engine that focuses on ‘many to many’ user generated content platforms, such as, Forums, Discussion groups, Mailing lists, answer boards and others.”

Ultimately, it really doesn’t matter what tools we use — clients/employer just want quality, cost-effective results. However, it sure is nice when the marketplace sees enough demand to develop tools to make our respective jobs easier and more effective.

See a need, fill a need.

– Mike

Control of branding and “the message” or word-of-mouth talk about a company, product, service, issue, etc., is a common theme in social media. It’s been written about in many books, on many blogs and, heck, even in person I’m sure.

And, it came up in a brief back and forth Twitter conversation I had with Geoff Livingston Thursday.

Maybe we’re talking about the same thing, but taking a different approach. Maybe it’s just semantics. Or, maybe we disagree.

As I’ve said in the past, businesses ultimately have control. Or, at least, the most influence.

Let’s start at the beginning: Essentially a company forms when someone sees a need in the marketplace and tries to fill it. (Yes, there are variances, like when a someone makes a product and then tries to find a need, but let’s stick with the basic premise.)

Before that company starts, there is no conversation, reputation or perception about it. It didn’t exist.

That company markets its products, so has contact with prospects, vendors and, ideally, customers via marketing communications, sales personnel, retailers, customer service personnel, etc.

Then, prospects and customers react to those “touch points” with the company — and have the opportunity to give their opinion of the touch point, whether its bitchin’ about a product online or giving rave reviews to the next door neighbor.

What online communication and social media — email, blogs, boards, etc. — have done is give consumers more power. More influence. More opportunity for our voices to be heard by a larger audience. Yes, more control over how ABC Company Inc. and its products are perceived.

But, remember, WOM is as old as history. (Just ask Adam about Eve’s review of the apple!) Companies have never been in total control of their brand or the WOM chatter.

Today, various tools and technology on the Internet give consumers more influence than ever before. Despite that, the ultimate influence of a company’s brand and the perception of its products and services is in the hands of the company.

The company starts all “conversations” via its marketing and other customer contact activities. We’re all just reacting to those contact points. And, we’re having a level of control or influence as to the positive, neutral or negative tone of the chatter — as we’ve always had.

But, ultimately, the company has the most control and influence because it initiated the chatter — via good or bad products, customer service, etc., — or it chose to heed the feedback of its marketplace.

Just like all good companies have done, and will continue to do.

– Mike

especially social media.

Today, the Center for Media Research has a must-read report: “Emotional Business Bonding on Social Networks,” based on research from Communispace:

“New research from Communispace, supporting the hypothesis that people are looking to fulfill six essential social needs online, and drawing on the Maslow hierarchy of human needs, concludes that businesses that help facilitate those needs are more likely to create deeper emotional bonds than usually exist between companies and customers.”

The key point that, while consumers don’t necessarily want a relationship with companies, they do want their needs met. You market by meeting needs. And, in the online world, you need to meet personal, social needs to be successful.

You don’t “hook” people. It’s much more subtle. I don’t mean deceptive tactics, but play into human nature.

This is an approach I bring up every so often via Twitter (in reply to Chris Brogan) or here, and definitely in my work when possible. Here are some pointers and thoughts on how to:

• In social media marketing, keep in mind we’re typically dealing with every-day people; not people at work, like reporters. Even if you are dealing with professional or industry bloggers and in other social media, you need to meet their needs.
• Effective working in social media requires the same long-term commitment and effort as in face-to-face dealings with people.
• Be humble, admit when you’re wrong, and be open to criticisms (call it “market research” if it helps).
• Contribute to the social media you’re involved in when it doesn’t have anything to do with your employer or client. In addition to sharing knowledge and helping others, it can lower barriers to how people view you when you’re not always bringing up employer/client-related stuff. After all, you are there to better the community, right?

Ultimately, when you’re in public relations (or other professional communicators role), you’re involved in social media to market a company, product, service or cause. Just make sure that you don’t forget that your audience’s needs need to be met first, before they will consider your needs.

– Mike

In writing this post, you’ll notice that I (too) often linked back to my own posts. I try not to do that (too) often, but it’s often easier to make my points. In this process of reviewing past posts, it struck me how similar Maslow’s Hierarchy of Human Needs, referenced in the Communispace story, is to Dale Carnegie’s “How to Win Friends and Influence People.”

What makes social media and related tools great — making it possible for a single voice heard everywhere with just a bit of momentum – is also their greatest opportunity for mob rule.

We all can applaud the sleuthing, okay fisking that goes into shedding light on someone that wishes to remain anonymous.

But, sometimes, the light being shed comes from the torches of an angry mob.

Case in point is the mother and family that played a harmful, deadly prank on a young girl, and is being blamed for pushing her over the edge to hang herself.

Legally, the family posing as the “friend” have done nothing wrong. You know, innocent until proven guilty. And, rightfully, traditional, trained, professional media kept the family out of print. But, then, there’s online rule.

The St. Charles Journal decided not to identify the neighbor in the absence of criminal charges or a civil complaint — even though her name is in a police report on a related incident. Columnis Steve Pokin said he wanted to protect her daughter. “Kids don’t get to choose their parents,” he said.

But once the story was posted online, bloggers matched details in his lengthy piece with property records to come up with the name. Thousands of readers soon began posting hateful comments. They posted a map and satellite image of her home on the website rottenneighbor.com, calling the family “psychos who pushed a teenager to SUICIDE.”

Yes, what that family did was wrong. Shameful. Vile. Evil. And, they will get their just desserts.

But, for that justice to come from an uncivil mob, even if only online . . . is that right? Shouldn’t we govern our actions according to the rule of law?

Or, does being online and the ability to be anonymous bring out the worst in us?

Unfortunately for many — an apparent vocal minority — it does.

For all the positive potential of citizen journalism and outlet for entrepreneurial spirit that blogs and other social media offer, there is a dark side of humanity that will always rear its ugly head.

I just hope that, when they do, their torches don’t do any real damage.

– Mike

I don’t have a big problem with services like PayPerPost (mostly because it encourages its bloggers to disclose a PPP post). And, really, if a blogger does paid reviews, it’s part of living in a free market society. For the most part, blogging doesn’t pay (much), and if you can make a buck or three, I can understand the enticement.

But, it’s . . . just . . . not . . . right.

David Binkowski often enough writes about PayPerPost and his opinions are pretty clear.

Sara of Suburban Oblivion, while not giving her opinion, recently asked her readers about paid reviews. (She and others do product reviews, but I saw no indication if they’re paid or not.) It seemed that most of the commenters have no problem with paid reviews.

If you’re being paid to review and blog about a product, there always will be a veil of bias hanging over the post.

I don’t think I’m being utopian by stating that blog posts are viewed as being honest. Forthright. Upfront. 
Trusted. Blogs are a powerful online, word-of-mouth, connecting resource. And, being paid to give an opinion hints at being biased. Not entirely honest.

Like advertising, I suppose services like PPP have their place. But, they do not — they cannot — have the same value as an honest, transparent product review.

As a public relations/marketing communications professional, I will not ask a blogger for a published review. I figure that, if a person blogs, he or she is naturally opinionated and will (postiviely or negatively) blog about the product, if he or she wants to.

The only thing I will ask for is for feedback — privately. That is one of the greatest values: objective subjective feedback.

Granted, however, I do tend to expect, or hope bloggers to blog about the product (because, as I stated, they’re opinionated). So, while not asking for a post, I have stated that, if a blogger does, then we’d try to work out a system where any of his or her readers who order a product and reference the blog, receives a small discount.

One of the greatest assets of social media is in how it connects. But, because that connection is done behind computer screens and keyboards — where you can easily be anonymous — what you type is who you are. Your reputation, your credibility is on the line whenever you blog.

If you’re being paid to review a product, your greatest asset – your credibility – suffers. And, no amount of payment will rebuild what’s been lost.

– Mike

I guess it depends.

Earlier this week, MarketingVox reported that BrandWeek reported that mobile and banner ads were the least trusted sources of media. Here’s a rundown:

• Newspaper ads: 63% of media consumers surveyed said they trusted newspapers ads.
• TV ads: 56%
• Search ads: 34%
• Banner ads: 26%
• Mobile ads: 18%
• Sites focusing on one brand, built by brand marketers: 60%. (Also called microsites. See my previous post.)

Contrast those trust percentages for ads with blogs:

Consumer-created blogs were trusted by 61 percent of global respondents, a figure that shot up to 66 percent for US-only respondents. That, combined with the 78 percent who trust word-of-mouth recommendations, suggests people put far more stock in the opinions of other “real” people.

So, for advertising, is it a person’s level of comfort and familiarity with the medium that impacts trust? Why are newspaper ads more trusted than banner ads?

And, funny how, even if a person is familiar with a company — say via advertising and other marketing efforts — he/she will trust a stranger — that is, a blogger — more so.

The survey reinforces the notion that bloggers are viewed as everyday people, given the benefit of the doubt, and trusted. Not some cold-hearted, profit-greedy corporation.

And, for ALL bloggers — even marketer types — we must not take that trust for granted and fake blog or fail to ensure transparency in our work.

Otherwise, we’ll get rightfully blasted, and whittle away a huge trust factor — which can be so valuable to our companies and clients when we do develop trusted relationships with bloggers. And, need them.

– Mike

While mainstream media (and the media relations/PR pursusing them) and mass-marketing tactics like advertising (offline and online) will always have their place, the future is definitely small.

As in small, targeted, niche-focused marketing. Micro marketing.

Okay, that may not be an “ah-ha” moment, but it is something to think about.

It’s easy to see micro marketing in social media. The blogosphere is pretty much nothing but a bunch of niche, topic-, cause- and geography-focused bloggers. The same is true for discussion boards.

But, there are other areas to view small marketing.

Website development. Microsites are growing for campaigns, product launches and just product emphasis. Bill Hanekamp, CEO of The Well has touted microsites, particuarly through WOMMA. (And, my employer has and continues to develop client microsites, as it’s determined that, that’s the best strategy.)

And, when you think of it, good media relations and public relations is about targeting your message, and working with the media as they prefer. While some mass media contact and distribution is appropriate, with today’s tools, every contact should at least appear as if it’s one-on-one. (Disclaimer: I researched and used GroupMail in a previous professional life. And, liked it.)

Don’t just take my word for this micro marketing work. Major auto OEMs and aftermarket manufacturers have also turned to micro or niche production to allow auto owners to customize their vehicles.

And, coming back to the online world, Amazon.com has known about personalized marketing for many years.

All the above and more is why, in today’s marketing world, to be successful, you have to be micro, not macro.

– Mike

As we get wrapped up in our work, setting — and meeting/exceeding — goals (hits, placements, coverage, etc.), it’s easy to loose sight of what we are really doing. We can get too wrapped up in numbers.

Driving traffic to Websites.

Getting online and offline “hits” for product or company coverage.

Click through rates.

Unless you are making a “pitch” in face to face, it’s easy to become separated from your audience sitting in front of a computer or even on the telephone phone. Just type, click and distribute.

A post by CityMamma/Stefania Pomponi Butler about a BlogHer session reminded me of the importance of knowing who we are dealing with in our work: People.

“In the “State of the Momosphere” session on day 1 of Blogher07, I listened as not one, but two PR guys stood up to tell us mothers how proud they were of their strategy to ‘hook’ moms into trying their products by pretending to read our blogs (so we’ll trust them) before offering up whatever it is that they’d like us to blog for free.”

Two things stand out as being VERY WRONG in the above.

First, in media relations (as in sales), if you’re really good at what you do, you don’t “hook” people to publish your story (or buy your product). You match needs/wants with what your product/service/company can offer. Generally, bloggers and traditional media have a need for good content to maintain and grow readership. If you can show how your ________ can legitimately help them, then you have a great chance for getting a hit. (And, there are other reasons to have bloggers and media review your______ than just coverage.)

Secondly, and most importantly, the comment by the supposed PR pros gave little credit to the bloggers they dealt with. They’re not bloggers. They are people. Assumingly, smart people. People with their own personality, expectations, objectives in blogging. They are individual human beings. Not just bloggers or possible hits.

If good marketing is anything, it’s about how to connect with people. And, social media is so much more because it can be so personal; so one-on-one — even if you are just sitting in front of a computer.

So, the better we can keep in mind that we are dealing with people — with individuals — the better our results will be.

– Mike
Point to Ponder: For another great perspective on that each individual is worthy of being treated as a human — not just another face or a number — see a post from September and follow the link to a column by Toledo Free Press Editor in Chief Michael Miller.