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

While we all are interested in “who’s the biggest,” size does not necessarily equate to quality. (Heh, I sound a bit like SWBU, but look much different.)

Guess I’m puzzled why this is such a big deal: Aegis, WPP Dominate Digital Agency Ranks, Account For Half The Industry.

Size can be important (or, impotent for some I suppose), but it’s the quality and rating of the work that really sizes up a firm. So, for those companies seeking an online marketing partner, don’t be fooled by the size of the package. It truly is what is inside that counts.

– Mike

Now, I could use this opportunity to tout my employer, but I won’t.

In doing research looking for trends, stats, supporting documentation, I’m amazed at how relatively recent information (like from 2004 or 2005) is too old.

The speed of light has nothing on the speed of information.

– Mike

“Media companies are exerting pressure on YouTube to develop a system to screen material for copyright violations before allowing it on the site. But, regardless of whether courts will require YouTube to implement such a system, it’s becoming clear that the video-sharing site needs to vet claims of infringement better before removing them and suspending user’s accounts.”

From today’s Just an Online Minute from MediaPost.

It echoes loud and clear the music industry’s pressure on Napster to prevent members from sharing MP3 files.

Wonder how YouTube’s fate will differ than what Napster became?

– Mike

For no particular reason (or value to society for that matter), here’s a few thoughts that have popped into my head during the past week . . . .

• I find it kind of funny (at first glance) when a person apologizes over his/her lack of recent blog posts, or the self-admitted poor quality of posts. One could look at it as arrogance. I tend to look at it at those posts (or, now tweets) as the person being realistic that he/she does have a level of regular readers (me, for instance), and maintains a passion and sense of pride over the quality of his/her work.

• I think all bloggers should have a brief audio recording of their voice to help personalize their blog(s). Am I going to do it? Naaaaa. I stutter at times and think I sound too nasally when I hear a recording of my voice. I have talked with Kami, Ike, Phil, the BC part of BC/AC, Peter, and I think that’s it. (Did I miss anyone?) So, on some level, I feel as if I know them better than other bloggers.

• Badges?! Badges?! We don’t need no stinkin’ badges! (Okay, it’s not an exact quote, but close.) . . . . in agreement with Phil’s post on Tim O’Reilly’s draft of a bloggers’ code of conduct.

• Why do thaw and dethaw mean the same? I guess for the same reason that flammable and inflammable do?

• And, inspired by a bit of Twittering back and forth with Andrea Weckerle (plus a comment from Ike Piggot): When will business cards be able to include a small screen or an audio chip with speaker to allow them to offer the card holder a personal glimse into the name on the card?

You may now rejoin your regularly-scheduled life, already in progress.

– Mike

If you’re learning about something, then you want know about the features and then the benefits.

But, if you’re selling something, shouldn’t you present the benefits . . . and then the features?

I don’t see that as often enough as I think I should.

– Mike

Yeah, I know it was an eBay hoax a couple years ago. (Though I just found out while doing a search a few minutes before starting this post.)

But really, wouldn’t that be a great idea: to have a dual-sided screen for a laptop?

That way, you could share with others around a table a particular Web site or other bit of information on your laptop computer (rather than projecting to a screen or crowding behind you to see the monitor).

Chalk this up to as another one of my great technology predictions.

– Mike

One’s mindset is an interesting thing.

When you’re single, it’s predominantly about you. You do what you want when you want to do it.

When you get married, it’s not so much about you. It’s about her (or him), too. There are other considerations. So, you adapt.

Then, you have kids. And, you adapt again. It’s predominantly about the kids, some about your spouse, and relatively little about you. Your mindset about what’s important and what needs to be done and how you do it changes.

Whenever one changes his/her environment, whether it’s a relationship, a home, a job, etc., your mindset changes and you get perspective. One’s mindset changes either by force — such as a life-changing event like becoming a parent — or by being open to change.

Our industry — professional communicators, no matter what service we offer — has been expanding in recent years. The socialization of marketing has started. For the most part, traditional agenices and communicators are stuck within their mindset. Whether about media relations, advertising, direct mail, events, etc., the methods of communication and messaging are predominantly one-way.

Inform. Educate. Persuade. Make aware.

Those more open-minded traditionalists have explored, accepted, learned from and even expanded the online socialization of communications. They’re no longer traditionalists.

But, it’s not surprising that those in the technology industries (computers, software, interactive agencies) are the early adotpers of social media (blogs, boards, community networks, etc.) because computers and the Web are all about socialization in some degree. Two-way communication. Interactivity. Experiences.

So, as social media like blogs took root and grew, it was all part of the mindset of developing networks, Web sites, etc. There was no fear of bloggers as there is from many traditional agencies.

What must traditional agencies and communicators do to change their mindset (which is no easy task, I’m sure)?

Think two-way. Think interactively. You don’t have to abandoned “offline” strategies and tactics that work. Instead, think how you can engage your audience(s) in what you currently do. Write engaging and even conversational copy (news releases, ads, etc.). Not informal style, but question your audiences. Research and relate the copy more to your audience (yes, customization and personalization).

Engage your audience by making the text and graphics more engaging. Put yourself in the shoes of your audience or think about everyday life. No one really likes to be lectured, preached to. So, you need to think of involving your audiences. Engaging them. Even entertaining them. All to get the message across.

Granted, you may not be able to do it with every project, but consider it for every project and determine if it makes sense. Force yourself to go out of your mind(set).

– Mike

P.S. For an interesting perspective on the different hands (and feet ) trying to grab onto social media, see Mike Manuel/Media Guerrilla’s post from Thursday.

P.P.S.: I hope the above was of value. If not, that’s okay. I’ve mentioned before (somewhere) that blogging has helped me crystalize thoughts. This is one of those times. So, sorry if I sounded preachy. But, I was writing to myself as much as I was to you.

It amazes me how attached we can become to people we don’t really know. Like fellow bloggers or members of a discussion board.

I feel as if I know Kami Huyse, Ed Lee, Greg Brooks and others. But I don’t really know them. Heck, except for Greg, I’ve never even talked with the majority of them.

My relationships with bloggers and others in my cyber realm is based on reading their blogs, e-mail and IM correspondence and assuming the good in my fellow man/woman.

That relationship is similar to what we may feel for a TV show host or a radio DJ we regularly watch and listen to. But, closer because there is better back-and-forth communication.

Another person I don’t really know is Reid/SCEagle. Reid’s A Storm in Afghanistan is a blog I found and started reading regularly just about a year ago for a client. (Even by then, I think Reid was out of Afghanistan and stationed in Germany.) When the client project finish, I continued to periodically read Reid’s blog, and other milblogs I found.

I read about the new home Reid and his wife, Ellicia, and three children moved into. I read his other posts about serving the military.

I read about his wife’s battle with cancer.

I read about his successful efforts to apply to the military to move his family back to the states to seek better treatment for his wife.

Yesterday, I read of Ellicia’s death on New Year’s Eve.

This morning, I saw his loving tribute to Ellicia with a series of photos of her and with the family.

And, both mornings, I cried for the loss of a mother and wife, and for Reid’s moving and loving tribute to Ellicia.

Really, I don’t know Reid nor his family. But, from reading his blog (and a couple e-mail exchanges), I know we share some common values and he has allowed me — and many others — peaks into his military and personal life.

I guess that’s why it’s called social media.

And, if we can become better — professionally and/or personally — from it, those relationships are just as valuable in their own way as those relationships with people I really know.

I know I’m a better person because of those relationships.

– Michael

I’ve had two or three posts whirling around in my head of late, but been a bit too tired at night to type them out. (Must be the time change.) So, I’ve been in a questioning mood. Thanks to Ed, Kami and the others who have contributed their valuable insight and $0.03.

One more question, though:
Why does there seem to be such a difference in the various site traffic counters in use?

For me, I have four programs to track traffic (all free).

One is AWStats which is what my IP host has. That says I averaged 326.48 visitors a day during October. Now, I assume that at least half of that is from comment and trackback spammers. (Though, I plan to verify that someday. It’s probably > half.)

Via MyBlogLog, I average about 30 visitors a day, Monday through Friday.

Via Google Analytics, I seem to register 10-25 visitors a day.

Via Sitemeter, I’m averaging 10 per day the past week. (Sitemeter is the only counter that lets me exclude the computers I use. And, trust me, I don’t visit my own site more than two or three times a day, depending if I’m posting.)

Though I’d like to believe the AWStats count, I’m sure the actual real visitor count is much lower.

So, I’m wondering what others use and if anyone can explain why there’s such a difference in counts.

OTHER GREAT POINTS

Old People Like Web Video!, Louis Hau/Forbes.com

Video New Releases… fake news?, Philippe Borremans/Conversation Blog

Sony’s PS3 Plan: Lose $300 On Each Unit, But Make It Up In Volume, Carlo/TechDirt

Reasons to continue this blog, Mindy McAdams/Teaching Online Journalism

A Missed Opportunity?, Paul Holmes/Holmes Report Blog (Using ministors, pastors, etc., as a WOM medium.)

Who Should Be Named 2006 Media Person of the Year?, I Want Media.com. Get your nominations in now. Online-only voting starts Nov. 27.