Archives for category: social media
« Older Entries

Social media: no old media mindsets need apply

July 6, 10 //
View Comments

I wrote a rather ranty blog post the other day following an opinion piece on NMA suggesting that social media wasn’t all it was cracked up to be.

The whole incident got me thinking about the reasons why some people, brands, agencies, marketers etc. find social media so difficult to understand and get to grips with. Afterall, it’s not rocket science and the vast majority of us use it in our personal (and often professional) lives on a daily basis.

I’m more and more convinced that the real reason for misunderstanding social media is that, more often than not, it is approached with an old media/marketing mindset.

Because that is the key challenge for brands. It’s why so many marketing industries have struggled to get to grips with social media. PR runs scared because it diminishes the role of media relations. Advertising is scared because it doesn’t let you buy your way into people’s living rooms. SEO is scared because it is reducing the power of natural search (just ask Google). Direct marketing is scared because it challenges the role of email (and offline).

These however are all worries that can be overcome. PR has a fantastic opportunity to use its traditional skill-set to engage directly with end users. Advertising doesn’t need to worry about a lack of paid-for opportunities on social networks. SEO can add social media into it’s toolbox and influence SERPs in new ways. And even DM or email can link up with social media to reenergize and increase the effectiveness of campaigns.

Social media is just another channel and whether your background is earned or paid media, there are opportunities. But the old techniques and tactics just won’t work. We all need to adapt and learn new ways of using this new channel.

Often however, to get the most out of social media, it needs to be integrated with other marketing forms. This isn’t a new approach. Very few brands do PR or advertising in isolation. Marketing departments exist to ensure that all marketing activity across all channels is unified an integrated to a certain extent (or at least they should). And social media is no different.

So, investing in social media is important and requires new skills and approaches. But, just because of this, don’t silo it, integrate it into the rest of your marketing activities to get the best returns.

picture credit

Is social media overhyped?

June 30, 10 //
View Comments

Sometimes you read something that makes you sit up and look quizzically into the distance. This happened today when I read this article by a certain Nigel Walley (it doesn’t say where he is from, so I’m assuming he is the ad-man, Managing Director of Decipher Concept).

I’m sure Mr Walley is merely trying to play devil’s advocate or ‘put the cat amongst the pigeons’, but the scalawag has riled me a little bit with his mis-informed piece, so I felt urged to pen a few words to set the record straight.

The social media opportunity

He kicks of with a slam-dunk, wind-up merchant question: “Is it okay to think that Facebook is a bit crap?” Well, of course it is Nigel, but just exactly what is your point?

Well, his main beef centres around three points: firstly, that “our industry” (not exactly certain which industry he means) is ‘apparently’ banging on about the fact that brands “must” do social media. Secondly, that “our industry” doesn’t seem to know what it’s doing when it comes to social media and is merely picking on the social-network-du-jour (he names Bebo, Myspace and Second Life as examples) and lastly he seems a bit upset that some people (I suspect they are again in “our industry”, though maybe not and maybe that it the problem!) are making money from social media.

So, leaving aside the last point, let’s investigate this in more detail.

First, the ‘why do social media’ question. Surely we are beyond this? The ‘maybe brands should just stay away’ argument is naive! Walley brazenly proclaims: “Could Facebook not just be a globally successful communications medium that doesn’t need brands, like the telephone?” As a consumer, I’m damn sure I want brands to be accessible on the telephone and, increasingly, I want them to be accessible on social media too!

The amount of people now using social media alone suggests there is a fantastic opportunity for brands. The relationships that brands can develop through social have also been proven to be more powerful and lasting than other forms of marketing. For many brands, embracing social media is not a choice anymore, it’s an imperative. For many, their customers are there in their millions talking about them, criticising them and praising them. Try telling these brands that they should stay away.

The social media bandwagon

However, his complaint that brands are being ‘forced’ to do social media (not quite sure who is saying they ‘must’ do it, but I’m assume he means agencies), then he is right to say this is an error (I’m not in a position to say whether agencies are saying this btw).

Fact: social media isn’t right for every company. It’s why I still advocate an audience-focused approach: identify who you are targeting, with what message and then choose the right channel to reach this audience. This could be social media, but it might not be.

He suggests that the phrase du jour of social media experts is that “brands must learn how to engage with their customers through social media”. A more appropriate phrase is perhaps that “brands must learn how to engage with their customers if they are going to use social media as a marketing channel”.

The social media challenge

Because the fact is, if you do decide to go down the social media route, learning about the ‘engagement’ bit is a challenge. Most companies need to refocus or realign themselves to deal with it. Brands that are used to whacking out their billboard ads or popping a press release to a journalist will have a shock when they find users responding to a tweet or commenting on a blog post. Learning to deal with this isn’t rocket science, but does take careful consideration.

When it comes to the ‘doing’ there is still, of course, much to learn. Social media is a growing, developing medium, so there will be the Myspaces, Bebos and Second Lifes of this world that will not survive. However, although NIgel Walley might think Facebook is ‘crap’, he would be foolish to suggest it won’t survive. 400 million people worldwide (and counting) disagree with him.

We are all learning. We will all get things wrong. Some of us might even push some boundaries. Again, it’s not rocket science, but it’s only by ‘doing’ that we will get better and be able to give better advice to the clients or brands that we work for.

If you are coming from an advertising, media buying or push marketing background, then I can see exactly why you would want to belittle the potential and effect of social media. But, if you are more used to managing reputations, raising profiles and building influence, then social media not only makes sense, but, in many cases, is a fantastic opportunity.

Danny Whatmough (@dannywhatmough) is a PR consultant at Wildfire PR. He blogs at dannywhatmough.com and the Wildfire Blog

picture credit

Is customer service via social media really the answer?

June 28, 10 //
View Comments

My new iPhone 4 arrived on Friday; I was very excited. But alas, my experience in trying to get it activated and in getting my old number ported across has been less than satisfactory. My dealings with Vodafone as a new customer have hardly turned me into a customer advocate (give it time, I guess) and, whilst I won’t bore you with the various trials and tribulations (you can get an idea from my Twitter feed), the various phone calls and tweets I have exchanged with the company over the last couple of days have made me think about the role that social media can play in customer service.

The first thing I will say is that, despite the problems they’ve had in the past, the @vodafoneuk Twitter account is impressive. They answer tweets in good time and are always helpful and friendly. They also work long hours and are available throughout the weekend as well, unlike certain other telecoms companies (yes O2, I’m looking at you!).

But, having said that, when I came to actually trying to get things done, it was only through a call to the contact centre that things were accomplished (albeit slowly and painfully, but that is another post for another time).

So the question is, can customer service via social media ever really be effective in getting problems solved, or will it always just exist more as an advanced information distribution service? When the Twitter rep did want to try and check the status of my activation, I was forced to use good old email to get in touch (an email that received no response I hasten to add), so back to the same old problems.

So how did my experience via social media make me feel as a customer? On the one hand, I was impressed by their speedy responses and genuine desire to help. But once I had got over that surprise, all I really wanted at the end of the day was a resolution to my problem and this they couldn’t help with.

I appreciate this is early days for companies like Vodafone and that many are still feeling their way, but I can’t help but think that brands might be setting themselves up for a fall. After all, Vodafone are able to manage the relatively small number of enquiries they receive through Twitter at present, but what happens when or if numbers start to skyrocket. In terms of the investment, is this a drain on resource for Vodafone or are they seeing reduced call volumes as a result? Customer service is always a big resource hog for businesses and I wonder whether social media helps or hinders that?

The fact is that the ‘customer service through social media’ issues aren’t ones that brands can easily ignore. If you have a presence on social media as a business then your customers or clients will get in touch with you to discuss customer-service-type enquiries whether you like it or not. Is there a way to do this effectively or are we all just delaying the inevitable call?

Danny Whatmough (@dannywhatmough) is a PR consultant at Wildfire PR. He blogs at dannywhatmough.com and the Wildfire Blog

Newsjacking in a social media world

June 26, 10 //
View Comments

The PR industry is used to the term of newsjacking – the idea of taking something that is on the national news agenda (e.g. the budget, new legislation or even a event like the World Cup) and using it to get coverage or mentions for a brand. It’s a tried and tested tactic and can get good, short-term, results.

Newsjacking is equally effective in a social media world however and with the luxury of not being dependent on third parties (e.g. journalists), it means that brands (or anyone in fact) can be a little bit more creative.

The strategy is the same. Take an event, issue, news agenda item that is gripping the socialmediasphere, add in some creativity, seed it effectively and you have a recipe for creating the next viral hit.

It’s actually interesting that brands aren’t jumping on the social media newsjacking bandwagon more frequently. There was a good article recently on this by James Whately. When the ITV HD TV channel accidentally switched to an advert during England’s World Cup game, viewers missed a crucial goal. James suggested that this was a fantastic opportunity for Hyundai - the brand whose advert was shown – to create some buzz around the unfortunate incident. I mentioned in the comments that this was in fact similar to a viral video released by Tic Tac following a similar incident earlier last year.

Of course there is a reputation issue here too. It’s not only brands that can newsjack in a social media world. Anyone can create entertaining or thought-provoking content and sometimes this can cause a brand reputation issue. But it can also provide a potential opportunity for brand as well, with grassroots content generation.

I was lucky enough to be at Wimbledon on Thursday and witnessed the end of the marathon Isner/Mahut match out on court 18. I was therefore intrigued to see today a video of the match which has been edited to show a box of Weetabix in Isner’s bag at the end. Whether by the brand or not, it’s quick, entertaining example of digital newsjacking.

So what are the things brands (or non-brands) need to consider when newsjacking on social media:

  1. Be quick – as with all newsjacking, time is of the essence
  2. Be creative – as with all content designed for social media success, the more creative, the better
  3. Seed effectively – seeding content is also important – remember that the majority of information that is shared on social networks actually originates from traditional media sources
  4. Monitor – keep an eye on where the content is being shared, talked about and maybe even reworked
  5. Consider a follow-up – often the problem with newsjacking campaigns is that they are short-lived. Consider ways to lengthen the effect of any activity

Danny Whatmough (@dannywhatmough) is a PR consultant at Wildfire PR. He blogs at dannywhatmough.com and the Wildfire Blog

An ode against automated tweets

June 13, 10 //
View Comments

If there’s one thing that really annoys on Twitter, it’s automated tweets. You know the ones:

  • xx has uploaded a video on YouTube
  • xx has checkedin on Foursquare
  • xx has added xx film to their Lovefilm account

It’s lazy and annoying.

I’m not saying some these updates won’t be of interest to your followers. But all of them, really? If there is something you really want to share, then take an additional 2 minutes, log into Tweetdeck and pen a 140 update that adds some value.

Social media is a highly personal medium and doesn’t suit automation at all.

I blame the brands too. I can see why they think it’s beneficial to get users to spam their followers with updates on their latest film choices, shopping basket selections or YouTube uploads. But more often than not, it ends up frustrating – hardly a good brand association.

Increasingly it happens by accident (again, I blame the brands). You forget that you joined your Twitter/Facebook account to your Lovefilm/YouTube/Foursquare account and it happens automatically, just at the point when you decide to upload 50 videos, and automatically inflict your followers with a stream of useless, context-less drivel.

Sharing branded content is important to companies using social media marketing. But the sharing has to be earned to be effective. Sending automated updates isn’t clever and doesn’t demonstrate an eagerness to share, just forgetfulness. There are no shortcuts.

LoveFilm: Facebook traffic’s increased 300% with Facebook social graph

May 19, 10 //
View Comments

Fascinating stats from NMA today, revealing the potential impact of Facebook social graph for brands, businesses and publishers:

LoveFilm said it had increased traffic from Facebook by 300% and had seen thousands of users ‘like’ movie and actor pages. Stephen Field, LoveFilm’s head of traffic, said that although early statistics had been positive, LoveFilm wants integration to equate to more subscriptions.

It’s a huge figure, but not totally surprising I guess. In fact for me, the most amazing thing is that Facebook hadn’t implemented something like this sooner.

I’m also surprised that we haven’t seen more brands implementing the feature on their websites, not to mention publishers (how many of the UK’s newspaper websites have implemented it for example – I’m still annoyed every time I go to the Guardian that they don’t even have a retweet button!!).

LoveFilm’s comment about turning the integration into subscriptions is interesting and suggests a very shortsighted approach. Brands that see integration like this as a shortcut to social media nirvana will be sadly disappointed.

Facebook Open Graph has a massive potential for businesses of all sizes, but it needs to be properly integrated (and supported) by a well thought through social media strategy otherwise it’s pointless.

Three social media buckets

March 29, 10 //
View Comments

Firstly, an apology – blogging on here has been sporadic at best recently for a number of reasons, but mainly because things have been very, very busy of late. Whilst busy is good, I intend to try and blog on here a bit more frequently too!

Secondly, a big ‘hat tip’ to Ben La Mothe and his new weekly social media cheat sheet; it’s a fantastic overview of everything ‘social media’ you need to know and may have missed in the last week.

Lastly, to prove just how useful Ben’s sheet is, I’ve pulled out this post which he referenced, as it is a great summary of how social media works. We are often asked about the pros and cons of having microsites versus a presence on social networks etc.

This overview from Michael Hyatt is one of the most concise and clear descriptions I’ve seen:

  1. A Homebase. This is a digital property you own and control. It is where your loyal fans gather. It can be as simple as a blog or as complex as a self-hosted community. Regardless, it is where you direct all internet traffic. Why? Because this is the place where you can best sell your ideas or products. You control the borders and determine who has access.
  2. Embassies. These are places you don’t own, but where you have a registered profile. In other words, you have a regular presence on someone else’s property. You engage in conversations with those who congregate there. Examples would include Facebook, Twitter, Linked In, or even other blogs you follow. You generally need a “Passport” (verified credentials) granted by the site owner to maintain residency or participate in conversations.
  3. Outposts. These are places you don’t own nor have a regular presence. Instead, you simply listen into conversations about you, your brand, your company, or topics that interest you. For example, I have search columns in HootSuite that monitor mentions of both my name and my company. I also have Google Alerts that monitor the same information wherever it may occur on the Web.

picture credit

Is there room for work on Facebook?

March 1, 10 //
View Comments

PR Week has today revealed comments from the Daily Telegraph’s assistant editor Neil Midgley who warned journalists and PRs that Facebook shouldn’t be used for work:

‘It’s my network. I won’t post details of my sex life on it, but I can post status updates on there that I wouldn’t post on Twitter. Don’t talk to me about work on it’

These are comments that I’m sure many PRs and journalists – indeed most people – would agree with. I certainly use Facebook very much from a personal standpoint.

But, as you have possibly seen me ranting talking about recently, I think Facebook is changing. And I wonder whether these changes will alter the way we all use the service.

This has appeared on the same day as PR blogger Steve Rubel has launched his own Facebook page. As Steve explains:

“Now I am also adding a Facebook Page that will feature everything that’s posted here plus exclusive content for those of you who opt in and become a fan. It’s very similar to how I approach Twitter – which also features links that I don’t always share elsewhere. The difference is that the new Facebook Page will sit in between what I do here and Twitter and hopefully spark a rich discussion from a broader group of people who don’t necessarily read blogs or use Twitter.”

So is this possibly the way we – as individuals and also possibly as brands – should be going? Are Facebook pages the new ‘public Facebook’?

With Google in the US now showing Facebook updates in Google social search, I’m sure it’s a trend that Facebook is keen to encourage.

Facebook pages don’t have the same ‘conversational’ element that Twitter has, but could be an effective way to have a publicly available presence on Facebook that doesn’t encroach on your personal space.

Why Twitter-loving PRs shouldn’t forget Facebook

February 17, 10 //
View Comments

I wrote last week about the battle between Google and Facebook. Now there is more interesting research out which adds yet another subplot: according to Compete, Facebook has passed Google to become the top source for traffic to major portals like Yahoo and MSN, and is amongst the leaders for other types of sites too.

This follows news earlier this month that Facebook is now the 4th driver of traffic to major news sites.

Whilst for many businesses, Twitter is seen as the social network to use, it would be foolish to ignore the power of Facebook.

This preference towards Twitter was well founded. Twitter has a very open doors policy to brands, unlike Facebook – at least in the early days – when the emphasis was social networking between friends that you actually know.

This ‘walled garden’ was a scary place for brands (and the media) that didn’t want to experience a backlash from consumers.

But it is perhaps exactly this walled garden approach that makes Facebook such a hotbed of social media (and traditional media) sharing. Facebook networks are tighter, more controlled than the often sprawling connections that are made on Twitter.

Sharing on Facebook is perhaps less frequent than retweets on Twitter, but when it does happen, the effect can be significant, allowing brands to reach targeted and carefully curated networks of like-minded individuals.

And it’s not the no-go area for B2B companies that it was in the past. To my mind, social media blurs the boundaries between work and home, between professional and personal.

With 400m users worldwide, ignoring something this powerful is ludicrous.

Buzz asks more questions than it solves

February 10, 10 //
View Comments


There’s been a mad rush in the last 24 hours to blog and tweet about the latest social media craze – Google Buzz. It’s rarely possible to objectively comment on something this new until you’ve tried it and lived with a for a bit, but such is the pace of social media…!

I always try and take a step back and avoid the urge to blog immediately but, as the day has gone on and as I have read more and more about it, there are a few initial thoughts that spring to mind that I thought I’d jot down.

A few caveats. Firstly, I haven’t really tried Google Buzz in anger yet. I use Google Apps for my personal email and it hasn’t been switch on there yet. Secondly, I reserve the right to change all of these views and opinions in the future! :)

  • Aggregation, location/mobile, social search – these are the three elements of social media that will be big this year. And to a certain extent, Google has made a start to confront each one. Google Buzz is yet another step in this direction, but they aren’t the only ones. Facebook in particular is also making big strides
  • This is not a Buzz v. Twitter debate – I see Twitter much more as a data store rather than a destination. This is enforced by Twitter’s willingness to encourage API usage etc. Twitter.com as a destination is likely to become even less important, it’s the tweets that matter. Therefore Twitter and Google could happily co-exist
  • It’s Facebook v. Google for social dominance - Facebook and Google have their sights on the big prize: they both want to become social media dashboards or the destination for all our online social (and even non social) activities. Facebook took a big step with the acquisition of Friendfeed and Google has moved into this domain today. Facebook’s announcement this week about it’s new email platform also adds fuel to the fire. It’ll also be interesting to see how software like Tweetdeck and Seesmic responds to this move
  • But what if I don’t use Gmail? – this could be a big issue for Buzz. I can understand why they wanted to integrate Buzz into the Gmail interface rather than create yet another destination, but what about those of us that don’t use Gmail regularly? It makes more sense for Facebook to bring an email client to its 400m users than for Google to bring Buzz to its 140m users
  • It’s more proof of the power of social – most of us now appreciate social media is here to stay, but this brings further confirmation from the biggest online player. Brin was on stage at the Buzz announcement which I think is a telling sign that Google has big plans for this in the future
  • What does this mean for Google Wave? - we all got very excited about Wave when it launched last year, but this has fizzled out to some extent. I just wonder if Google sees Buzz as some sort of link between Gmail and Wave. I still think Wave is potentially very interesting, but it is a big jump for most. Buzz is more palatable and could just possibly bring a middle solution

I started the day quite enthusiastic about Buzz but, having used it a few times I’ve become less convinced. I can see that it would be great for those that spend a lot of time in Gmail and use their Google address book etc., but that’s not me. Buzz is definitely one to watch, it has to be. But, I hope for Google’s sake, there is more to come…

Related Posts with Thumbnails
« Older Entries