Social Media: “Unlocking the Awesome Potential of Behavioral Disorders”

June 9th, 2009 § 3

A decade ago, I bought several packs of notecards from corporate satire specialists Despair.com (see bottom of post) and mailed them to my clients.

They loved them (proof a little self-deprecating humor won’t hurt you), and now the wily business satirists are taking aim at the overheated social media space with a stunning t-shirt graphic:

The subhead on the t-shirt product page? “Unlocking the Awesome Potential of Behavioral Disorders.”

Yes, I think they’re making fun of all of us (at least the social media world), and frankly, it’s about time.

Stay engaged, Tom Chandler.

p.s.:
When You're Not Part of the Solution, Then There's Money to Be Made Prolonging the Problem

Social Media Hype, Meet Social Media Backlash

May 22nd, 2009 § 7

With Twitter doubling in size and Facebook ramping up new users as it were free, the hype surrounding social networks has reached, well, Internet proportions.

Social media “gurus” have begun popping up like weeds in spring, and yes, a certain backlash to the linky lovefest was inevitable. Thus, we point you towards a report from online researchers Knowledge Networks, which suggests social media’s affect on the population is vastly overrated (via a Media Post article):

Among other things, the study finds that less than 5% of social media users regularly turn to these social networks for “guidance on purchase decisions” in any of nine product and/or service categories (see table below), and that only 16% of social media users say they are more likely to buy from companies that advertise on social sites.

Based on the findings, Knowledge Networks categorizes the value of social media advertising “somewhere in the long tail” of marketing options, way below TV ads and personal, word-of-mouth recommendations.

“Obviously, a lot of people are using social media, but they are not explicitly turning to it for marketing purposes, or for finding out what products to buy. It’s really about connecting with friends, or connecting with other people,” says Dave Tice, vice president and group account director at Knowledge Networks, and the top analyst behind the report. “What we’re seeing is that word-of-mouth is still the No. 1 most influential source, followed by TV. The influence of social media isn’t at the bottom of the list, but it is somewhere in the long tail of marketing – about the same as print ads, or online [display] ads.”

The online marketing boot camp I’m teaching to small/micro business owners tends to bear out the above contentions; only two of the 28 entrepreneurs in my class know anything at all about social media.

Next week’s classes look hard at social media channels, and the students – while eager to learn – are asking questions like “how much time will this take?”

I developed my online marketing curriculum with the realization that – unlike so many of those touting the power of social networks for corporations – my students have businesses to run, which often involves not staring at a computer screen for hours on end.

I love the engagement potential of social networks, but find the hype – and the raft of “experts” who have zero experience generating revenue for a company – troubling.

Then there’s the troubling ROI question dogging social media (explored on the Ad Contrarian blog). The ROI of email and search strategies is relatively well known (or at least relatively easy to measure). Social media remains two steps further removed from the media stream, and until that connection can be more firmly established, I’m advising my small business clients to experiment

Like water, hyper-connected social networks will eventually find their own level in the marketing watershed. Until then, I’m advising my students (and clients) to step carefully – and to carefully evaluate their time investments in social media against the returns they could find elsewhere.

Stay engaged, Tom Chandler.

, , ,

Facebook Kicks Sand in MySpace’s Face, Steals Desirable Girlfriend (err, Demographic)

May 4th, 2009 § 4

Right now, the social media world is the online equivalent of an all-night rave: The noise level is deafening, the posturing is mind numbing, and every 18 seconds, a bad decision is made.

Remember when MySpace was going to rule the world? (And Second Life, and Friendster, and…)

Suddenly, it’s not looking good for the social network famous for its jumbled page layouts and teen sensibilities – especially on the monetization front, where rival Facebook is sucking the ad dollars (and the fluffiest, most desirable demographics) right out of MySpace’s Twinkie:

A Makeover for MySpace as It Slips in Popularity – NYTimes.com

Meanwhile, Facebook has surpassed MySpace as the biggest social network in the world and is on track to beat MySpace among United States users this year.

Furthermore, there are indications that MySpace is losing audience outright. While the site drew 70 million unique visitors in the United States in February and in March, that figure was down from 75 million in December and in January.

Compared with the overall online population in the United States, the site draws disproportionate numbers of teenagers, twentysomethings and people whose household income is less than $25,000 a year, according to the measurement firm comScore. The Facebook audience tends to be more affluent, making it a more appealing space for higher-end advertisers.

There’s no doubt social media is here to stay, but which social network is ripe for engaging with customers & prospects? Where should a company put its resources?

Unfortunately, we’re afraid to ask an expert; using powerful scientific methods far too complex to explain here (we extensively surfed the Internet, and wrote numbers on a napkin until we found one that looked impressive), the Engagement Principles has conclusively proved there are more social media experts in existence right now than there are human beings on the planet (hey, science isn’t perfect).

The question isn’t if Facebook and Twitter will win. It’s “who’s next?”

And how many companies will get hosed along the way.

Social media is in its bubble stage, and while there’s no denying the utility of the bazillions of social media channels appearing hourly, some perspective is needed – perspective not found in the social media’s own echo chamber.

Remember; authenticity, attitude and personality are key. The basic laws of marketing still apply. And when someone offers to fire up your social media program for you, make sure they’re (at least) out of high school.

Stay engaged, Tom Chandler.

, , ,

Automotive Industry Increases Online Spending 55% – Radio & Magazine Decline 40%

April 23rd, 2009 § 1

The automotive industry – caught in the grips of a recession and poor management – is turning to “cheaper” social media en masse.

I took at close look at Ford’s new “Fiesta Movement” social media campaign in a prior post (Ford gave Fiesta cars to 100 people who were supposed to report on them via Twitter, Facebook, Flickr, etc).

In that article, I suggested some companies were accelerating their switch to social media precisely because their situations were so dire; those with little to lose often take the biggest risks.

Here’s a little more evidence for the pile: (from the Truck blog) Automotive Online Advertising Up, Print Media Is Dead

Automotive online advertisement is on the rise and print media is officially a lost cause. Over the course of 2008, advertising dollars spent for television rose 2 percent, Internet spending up over 55 percent, and radio & magazine advertisements were down over 40 percent combined. Analysts predict that the internet will become the second largest advertising channel by 2010 with television leading the pack at three quarters of the total advertising dollars spent each year. Nielsen Online says “The key to successful Internet spend in 2009 will be identifying where your target audience goes online and interjecting yourself at the right moment in the vehicle purchase funnel”.

As the recession drags on, expect to see more companies switching budgets to social media. And yes, expect to see even more new media carpetbaggers “Social Media Consultants” emerging from the woodwork, sensing the potential for a quick buck.

Keep writing, Tom Chandler.

, , ,

Ford Motor Hands Fiesta to 100 Connected Consumers, Asks Them to Twitter Away

April 22nd, 2009 § 0

Companies sometimes take big risks because they’ve got little to lose. That explains why – in the grip of a powerful recession – spending on social media marketing is accelerating (automotive online advertising up 55%, print and radio down 40%).

And why Ford Motor Company – which isn’t exactly lighting the world on fire – launched a social-media based “reality” campaign that provided Ford Fiestas to 100 people, asking them to record their experiences with the Fiesta on social media channels.

This from Autotopia on Wired):

Ford recently handed 100 Fiestas to 100 people selected from 4,000 applicants. These “agents” — that’s what Ford calls them — get to use the cars for six months in exchange for completing monthly “missions” with different themes. They’ll share their experiences through YouTube, Flickr, Facebook and Twitter accounts Ford created for the campaign.

It’s a smart move, Shafer said, because it plays into consumer demand for unofficial — read, unbiased — information about a new car. By turning the marketing over to social networking sites, Ford provides its target audience with content generated by people within that audience. Ford is taking a hands-off approach and telling participants not to hold back their opinions, bolstering the campaign’s credibility.

Credibility? It’s more credible than advertising, though I think there are still enough conflicts of interest that “unbiased” may be a bit of a reach.

Still, the reaction (so far) to the Ford program seems positive compared to the reception accorded a Nikon camera blogger-seeding program that raised cries of “blogola” among some of the bloggerati.

Ford’s created a microsite tying together the social media feeds of the participants – an intelligent (and intriguingly realtime) idea.

The participants themselves are a mashup of Ford’s target demographic (natch): young-ish, hip – and connected. This aspect remains at the core of the campaign; buyers often place greater emphasis and credibility at the feet of testmonials delivered by those who look, act or sound like them, and Ford’s provided a nice cross-section for prospects to engage with.

The social marketing aspects of the Ford Fiesta are already creating buzz around the concept. And yet I
wonder how much Google juice Ford’s “Fiesta Movement” microsite will accumulate by the end
of campaign.

It is, after all, at the hub of a lot of social media
channels, and it wouldn’t hurt Ford to see their flashy social media site appear near the top of the organic search
rankings.

Given the rave reviews aimed the Fiesta’s way in Europe, the risks Ford is taking aren’t really significant.

But would Ford have embraced this level of “social media crowdsourced
advertising” (whew) had their balance sheet looked a little healthier?

Stay engaged, Tom Chandler.

, , ,

Why is Online Advertising Failing So Badly – Especially on Social Media Sites?

April 22nd, 2009 § 2

In the era of engagement, how is online advertising faring? And why are clickthrough rates on social media sites so abysmal?

And is the ad-driven business model – the economic engine that was supposed to power the “everything is free” Internet – destined to underperform?

It doesn’t look good (at least according to Eric Clemons at TechCrunch):

Why Advertising Is Failing On The Internet

The expected drop in internet advertising revenues this year was neither unpredictable nor unpredicted, nor was it caused solely by the general recession and the decline in retail sales. Internet advertising will rapidly lose its value and its impact, for reasons that can easily be understood.

Traditional advertising simply cannot be carried over to the internet, replacing full-page ads on the back of The New York Times or 30-second spots on the Super Bowl broadcast with pop-ups, banners, click-throughs on side bars. This might be a subject where considerable disagreement is possible, if indeed, pushed ads were still working in traditional media. Mostly they have failed.

What gives? Why is all the nifty social media advertising falling short?

This Isn’t Newspaper or Television

The rub is this: feeding advertising to a television or magazine viewer is an attempt to “interrupt” a passive viewer – one who enjoys little control over their experience beyond the binary (watch, or stop watching).

By contrast, online users have a great deal of control over their experience, and they’re typically actively engaged with getting what they want.

A comparison? Imagine a shopper idly browsing a store. Now compare that shopper to one intent on locating a specific item; the latter is more engaged with the search, and less likely to be distracted.

Engaged readers – not passive consumers – are the explanation for the dismal clickthrough rates on most social media sites.

Social media users aren’t a passive consumers of information, but participants in a community. Unlike non-interactive media, they’re intent on not only receiving information, but acting on it.

And unlike yesterday’s passive information consumer, they also demand to be heard.

If you don’t believe me, try this experiment: Create a blog filled with controversial posts, and then limit the responses to an arbitrary 100 character length.

Stay engaged, Tom Chandler.

, , ,

Engagement Marketing on the Rebound (or, Your Competitors Use Search Too)

April 14th, 2009 § 3

The advent of granular search tools – capable of singling out specific conversations on social media like blogs, twitter, Facebook and others – means marketers can now find and track brand-related conversations.

Most marketers consider it a happy reality; they can now intervene when the muttering is bad for the brand (and take credit at the next staff meeting when the news is good).

Still, we have to ask: What happens when your competitor is watching too?

Engagement on the Rebound?

What happens when a customer is on the rebound from a negative interaction – and a competitor takes advantage?

bandaidsClearly, the effective storyteller would offer an actual example. Which I’m about to do.

My fly fishing blog’s content is regularly stolen by automated scraper sites, and in this particular instance, the company hosting the scraper’s site (Dreamhost) couldn’t have been less helpful.

After several frustrating emails, it became clear their “abuse” process was simply designed to drive away those with abuse complaints (people like me) rather than protect my intellectual property (as required by law).

Unhappy at their sheltering of an automated scraper site, I vented my unhappiness on my Twitter account.

Less than thirty minutes later, I received a tweet from a Dreamhost competitor.

Which offered me a free trial.

Ouch.

When the Online Conversation Spins Out of Control

For corporate marketers, the bogeyman of the online world remains the loss of control over brand messaging.

With the huddled, Web-surfing masses inconveniently ignoring those expensively crafted messaging documents, what’s left is an often unpretty mash of online conversations, including some featuring an unhappy patina.

Once a company has demonstrated a reluctance to make a customer or prospect happy, that customer’s ripe for conversion – raw meat to any marketing lion.

Since the advent of database-driven marketing, marketing departments have pursued “one-to-one” marketing with a fervor.

In recent years, the delivery of “relevant” offers has acquired a similarly rosy glow.

Reaching out to a potential customer – fresh off a disappointment administered by your competitor – combines “one-to-one” and “relevant” in a uniquely effective format.

And yes – given a little work with the right search engines – it’s entirely possible, though I suspect only in markets with high margins or customers offering significant lifetime value.

I typically describe true customer engagement as a linking of shared passions and values. What if that shared passion simply revolves around mutual loathing for a company?

I suspect most companies are just fine with that.

Stay engaged, Tom Chandler.

JetBlue Goes Viral; Bashes Overprivileged CEOS at WelcomeBigWigs.com

March 30th, 2009 § 0

Given the populist anger sweeping the country, CEO-bashing just might be a safe bet – especially when you’re attempting to engage with budget air travelers.

In a series of three hope-to-go-viral videos spoofing a CEO forced to fly a commercial airline instead of his private jet, budget airline JetBlue manages to (softly) bludgeon overprivileged CEOs while still sneaking in a handful of “benefits for the rest of us” (leather seats, low prices, free snacks, etc).

In the marketing universe, humor isn’t easy, though it is an excellent way to engage an audience.

I’ve been witness to many “funny” campaigns that flopped badly (and sadly, once wrote one), and JetBlue is clearly running a few risks.

After all, there’s little funnier than a live comedy show where the comedian’s on fire – and little more embarassing (for everyone involved) than a comedian who isn’t funny.

In this case, the satire never offers too many sharp edges, and offers the pleasing bonus of putting the presumably common viewer on a plane of existence just slightly above that of the befuddled CEO.

JetBlue’s clearly looking for an “Us vs Them” kind of engagement, and yes – given the “we’re-not-committing millions” reality of viral campaigning (blow a major broadcast campaign and it’s time to touch up that resume) – I’d say they’ve got a hit on their hands.

Questions We’d Ask If We Were Having Lunch

None of the videos are available for streaming on YouTube (that’s why you’re looking at a linked screen shot instead of an embedded video player), so they’re committed to driving traffic to their site – and repeatedly urging viewers to “Share With a Fellow BigWig” on the site itself.

That’s better for conversion, but a tougher row to hoe from a “going viral” perspective. In essence, they’re limiting the amplification in favor of conversion.

Or, is this an attempt to straddle the fence? Score the early viral traffic to the site, then later post the videos to police up the latecomers? We’ll wait and see.

Should You Try Humor?

The answer is “maybe.” The ugly truth is humor can backfire in ways you never expected – and do so viciously. When my clients ask, I offer this simple answer: Are you funny? Really?

, , , , , ,

Engagement Marketing, Social Media Suffer From Hard-to-Define Metrics. Here’s a Solution

March 23rd, 2009 § 0

Engagement marketing has long suffered from a “hard to measure” reputation. Traditional online/offline metrics don’t readily apply – there’s nothing as neatly packaged as a two-decimal point clickthrough rate from the last email program, or even a solid conversion/revenue figure.

In the age of choice, businesses know engagement is critical, and the thrashing about for measurable results has gone on for years. In one sense, it’s odd that businesses – which were generally content to throw big budgets at print-and-broadcast-based “brand” campaigns for years – are reluctant to fund engagement (and check out the Nike+ site for runners if you don’t think some businesses are moving forward).

A Tokyo Web developer posted an excellent presentation on Social Media ROI, where he contends the problem isn’t one of a lack of metrics, but a focus on the wrong metrics. While his ideas won’t necessarily make the spreadsheet mavens happy, his ideas readily apply in the engagement world (as is the quote he uses to begin his presentation):

From his presentation (posted on the Zygote.egg blog):

It sounds like I’m stating the obvious, but the key to measuring returns is… knowing what to measure. This is the area where businesses – without proper guidance, or internal knowledge – start seeing fuzzy returns. Often the reason organisations or marketing teams don’t see recognisable returns or returns that are hard to quantify for social media campaigns is because they are using the wrong metrics. Choosing the right success metrics (or KPIs if you’re an MBA-type) is the first challenge of implementing a social media campaign you can measure.

There are infinite things that can be measured when you’re talking about digital communication / transactions. It’s so tempting to go into bean-counter mode and just start measuring any metric that keeps going up (because up is good, right?) when what you need to do first and foremost is: figure out what success metrics translate easily into a business context for your organisation.

Some will see YongFook’s ideas as a way to promote social media without accountability. (Can’t find the right metrics? Then lower the bar to make less-meaningful metrics seem more meaningful.)

My take? Engagement marketing (and social media) are still largely in their infancy, and while I’m all for looking hard before diving into massively hyped media channels which (so far) lack any hint of ROI, I’m also aware of the value of an engaged customer.

While engagement often occurs via channels other than social media, both concepts face similar challenges, both in metrics and credibility.

Stay engaged, Tom Chandler.

, , , ,

Saleforce.com (hosted CRM solution) Integrates Twitter Into Customer Service Tool

March 23rd, 2009 § 0

It’s happened to most of us; we mention a brand somewhere on the Intertubes, and soon find ourselves on the receiving end of an email/blog post/twitter reply from the company.

It used to be a little spooky; now it’s fast becoming an expectation. Given the customer conversations happening right now on social media, this news was inevitable: hosted CRM powerhouse Salesforce.com just integrated Twitter functions into its “Service Cloud” product:

Salesforce.com lets you answer customer complaints on Twitter » VentureBeat

Most people on popular microblogging site Twitter (which just turned three) have probably seen customer service-type queries from other users — questions about how to make a product work, or complaints that it’s broken. I have even posted some complaints of my own. That’s one of the reasons companies like Google have created their own Twitter accounts, and its why Salesforce.com is adding Twitter integration to its customer service product, which it calls the Service Cloud.

This is the kind of integration that can only help make engagement via social media tenable in the business world – a social media force multiplier that might protect marketing & service budgets from the skyrocketing costs of monitoring and stuffing a myriad of social media channels.

Lowering barriers to customer engagement can only be a good thing – though we note the other barriers to engagement remain in place (corporatespeak, hype, indifference, inauthentic behavior, etc).

I like this move, but have to wonder why it’s still so damned hard to get two-way integration between email service providers and CRM solutions. One step at a time.

Stay engaged, Tom Chandler.

, , , , ,

« Older Entries