Category: new media

  • Successful Sources Will Not Be Paid

    Successful Sources Will Not Be Paid

    The whole world wants a freebie, and many of us are giving our ideas, intellectual capital and service away to online magazines in the hope of getting a link or a little bit of publicity.

    Bringing the idea undone is the unfortunate reality that web is awash with free pointless material that adds little value. Your contribution, however valuable, gets lost in the static of PR driven articles and SEO optimised fluff.

    This is why Google are trying to tie social recommendations into their search results, although it’s hard to see how your cousin’s LOLCat posts are going to add any more value than the generic garbage served from services like eHow.

    Yet every day there’s more callouts for  free content – desperate journalists and publishers beg for our ideas or labor in return for some ‘exposure’.

    And that ‘exposure’ floats away into the ocean of noise and irrelevance filled with the rest of the ‘free’ content.

    Giving stuff away for free isn’t working well anymore and for those of us who are trying to build a business around that model, we’re struggling to get found or heard in the morass.

    Along with the wasted time, the danger is we start giving away our best, most valuable work in order to get attention and then we have nothing left to sell.

    Consumers are waking up to this and beginning to focus about what they read online. We should too.

    Similar posts:

  • What’s a Twitterer worth?

    What’s a Twitterer worth?

    $2.50 per month is what Phone Dog think a Twitter follower is worth in their lawsuit against a former employee.

    As nebulous and ambiguous as Phone Dog’s claim seems to be it appears some price is being created on the business value of social media users.

    To date we’ve seen services like Empire Avenue, Klout and Kred try to measure social media users’ real influence on the different web platforms which in turn allows businesses to allocate some sort of value.

    As social media and the web mature, we’ll see businesses spend more time understand where the value lies online.

    Each platform is going to have a different value to a business. Depending on the market, one person may be worth more on Twitter than on Facebook and similarly a business may put more value on members of a specific LinkedIn group or industry forum.

    What we shouldn’t confuse “value” with is how the services themselves make money. For Facebook, the value comes from the marketing opportunities presented by people sharing their lives while for LinkedIn it’s largely coming from employment related advertising and search.

    Other social media platforms are finding other ways to make money and each will have a different attraction to users, businesses and advertisers. All of which will affect their perceived value.

    That perceived value is the most important part of social media. If users don’t think a site adds something to their lives, then that service has no value to anyone.

    It’s tempting to think that people will object to having a “value” placed on their heads as users, but most folk understand the commercial TV and radio that does pretty much the same thing.

    The real question of how much people are prepared to share online will come when they understand the value of the data they are giving the social media platforms. When users start to understand this, they may ask for more service from these companies.

    What a Twitter user is worth right now is probably different to what they will be worth this time next year, but there’s no doubt we’ll all have a better idea.

    Similar posts:

  • The learning curve

    The learning curve

    When new technologies appear it’s interesting how people experiment and adapt to them, we’re seeing this right now as businesses grapple with social media tools like Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter and discover where the benefits lie.

    The second edition of the Social Media Benchmarking Study, a joint release by Sydney online consultants Community Engine and the research company Nielson, illustrated how things have changed over the last two years.

    One of the clear conclusions from the study is how businesses are developing the ways to determine benefits of their social media activity with near halving of the number of organisations citing lack of measurable return on investment as a reason for not engaging online.

    A barrier that is increasing is the perception that businesses don’t have the time or resources required for which is probably business owners and managers realising that maintaining a Facebook Page, Twitter account or blog isn’t easy.

    Time is the scarcest asset for any business that gets more precious with smaller organisation. Even large corporates and government departments struggle with finding the resources necessary to run effective online presences.

    One of the tragedies of social media is how it’s been identified as a marketing tool and in this survey with over half the respondents stated they are going primarily use the tools as a marketing channel rather than in customer support, recruitment, research or product development.

    This is probably why the perception that social media is a time sink comes from. As purely marketing tools social media is time consuming and difficult. A challenge made greater by the fact we’re all still figuring out how to effectively connect with customers in what is a hostile place to more traditional broadcast based marketing methods.

    Given social media is being used primarily as a marketing tool by business, it’s no surprise that the survey found larger corporations are the biggest users as they have the marketing budgets to allocate.

    An interesting aspect with big business’ social media investment is how much it’s focused on Facebook. On one level this is understandable as a Facebook “like” is easy to set up and becomes a very simple measurement to follow, although the challenge still lies in converting a low friction click on a Like button into a useful customer or advocate.

    What is surprising with corporate Australia’s adoption of Facebook is the apparent lack of understanding of the platform’s terms and conditions and the business risks involved. Again this is probably part of the collective learning curve.

    Possibly because of those risks, public sector use is static. We can expect this given as social media is being pushed as a marketing tool which isn’t a priority many government agencies, are you going to skip registering your car because the motor registry doesn’t have a “like” button on their web page?

    This liberation from being obsessed with marketing and sales is probably why the public sector is using social media a more creatively as collaborative and research tools where many of these services do an extremely good job.

    Many businesses, particularly smaller organizations, believe social media doesn’t fit their objectives. A terrific quote from an SME accountant is “I run a business, not a chat show”.

    That attitude’s fine as social media – like pretty well everything else in the business world – is a tool to be used the best way you see fit, just because some businesses don’t need a hammer but that doesn’t mean hammers aren’t useful.

    Although when that tool is fairly new, as social media is, it’s probably best to have a play with it and see where if can help your business.

    The Social Media Benchmarking Study is a useful survey that shows where businesses are using these tools and how effective they are finding them. It’s going to be interesting to see the field evolves as we all get to understand social media as both consumers and business owners.

    Similar posts:

    • No Related Posts
  • The listening business

    The listening business

    Some years back a crook computer repairer did the rounds of Sydney and regional NSW. For all his sins Joe, as we’ll call him, always stood out as an example of a business that effectively listened to the customer.

    Joe would advertise in local papers and you could spot his ads by the line “all our technicians are qualified computer programmers”, which is a nonsense slogan like a landscape gardener claiming all her labourers are civil engineering graduates, but it was an effective catchphrase in a market that didn’t know better.

    After a while the local community would start wise up to Joe and his “computer programmers” and when the complaints and fair trading investigations mounted, he’d change his business name, move to another suburb or town and the cycle would start again.

    I was reminded of Joe at the City of Sydney’s discussion on the connected consumer at the latest Lets Talk Business seminar last week and wondered how he’d survive in today’s markets where people are quick to go online and criticize.

    Dealing with criticism has always been big businesses’ Achilles heel; bureaucracies have a tendency to protect themselves and when there’s managerial or team bonuses at stake there’s strong incentive to ignore the concerns of customers.

    A good example of this Vodafone where the chief executive, Nigel Dews, has been open in admitting the company failed to listen to their customers as their network failed to meet the demands placed upon it.

    While the network itself was buckling under the strain, the company spent millions on sponsorship and advertising effectively trying to drown the criticism under a wave of tightly controlled good news stories, promotions and competitions.

    It didn’t work, just as Facebook’s PR agency Burson-Marsteller failed dismally in planting an anti-Google story, which saw the two organisations not only busted but also descend into an unseemly argument with their client while frantically deleting Facebook posts.

    All of these actions – deleting social media comments, ignoring customer complaints and attempting to distract critics with pictures of pretty girls and racing cars – smack of the old way of doing business in an era where tightly controlled mass media was the only channel complaints could be heard. Those times ended with the arrival of the Internet.

    At the Lets Talk Business event one of the panellists, Jody Fox of Sydney’s Shoes of Prey described how her business is engaging with customers online and discussing any concerns openly on the Facebook page, not deleting them.

    This is the new reality of business, if you don’t listen and engage with upset clients or ­– even worse – try to control their comments on your sites, you’ll only get them angrier and they’ll go elsewhere to tell their stories.

    Another striking difference between the new and old business was Jody’s point was that shoes of Prey treats customer service as a marketing expense, not a separate cost centre. In most large organisations helping paying customers is treated as an unnecessary expense that should be outsourced and minimised as much as possible.

    This sort of works when you have a licensed oligopoly like telecoms or banks but fails dismally in competitive industries. Without purchasers there are no shareholder returns and eventually no executive bonuses.

    Ignoring customers worked nicely in the era of mass media when it was difficult for upset clients to be heard above an expensive marketing campaign; Vodafone, Burson-Marsteller and even governments are finding it doesn’t work today.

    Joe the computer technician would have understood this, if he’s still doing dodgy IT support then he’ll be watching the Facebook pages, Twitter feeds and blogs for bad news.

    Somehow though I suspect he’s no longer in computer repairs though, my guess he’s making a lot more money in social media or search engine optimisation these days.

    Similar posts:

    • No Related Posts
  • Destroying your brand

    Destroying your brand

    One of the constant business tips in the last few years is that be competitive in the new economy an enterprise – big or small – has to blog, tweet and have a credible online presence. But there is a downside to this, a business or individual that lets too much hang out runs the risk of trashing their brand.

    Two recent examples of this are a PC Repair business on Queensland’s Sunshine Coast and a bar on the Gold Coast, there’s no links to the businesses in this post as the intention isn’t to trash their brands any  further.

    Customer service is always a tough business and the Gold Coast bar their blogger, who bills themselves a “jaded bar worker” and is obviously one of the younger members of the staff, recently wrote a post on customer “whining”. Some of the whines include;

    • asking to change the music
    • wanting a drink in a different glass, or with less ice
    • preferring a decent head on a beer (referred to as “foam” in the post)
    • asking for a table to be cleared
    • complaining about a wobbly table

    While all of those customer requests can be irritating, and sometimes unreasonable, there’d be little sympathy for the bar staff dealing with these complaints from any hospitality professional or a customer expecting any standard of service.

    It appears the blog’s intent is to be a local, chatty version of the successful Waiterrant blog whose author, Steve Dublanica, chronicled the adventures of New York waiter. Waiterrant was good for Steve’s brand, but would have been disastrous for some of the restaurants he worked at.

    Steve got around this problem by remaining anonymous until he landed a book deal – always a bad sign for a blogger – along with never identifying the establishments he served at.

    While whining about customers is a necessary pressure relief for anyone serving the public, it’s not a good idea to do it publicly unless a particular patron has done something spectacularly rude or stupid. Asking to clear a table or for less ice in their drink does not qualify as even being unreasonable.

    By just moaning about the typical day to day work that most of us have to deal with, this blog is not helping the bar’s brand. They might want to consider shutting it down or getting a more senior person to write or edit it.

    A little further North on the Sunshine Coast, a local computer tech has built a successful YouTube channel with 20,000 subscribers based around his rough, Aussie larrikin persona featuring some very, very robust language and views.

    With eight million views, the YouTube channel is doing well, but as an advert for the business it doesn’t portray his outlet in a particularly positive way and as the video clips become more popular, the damage to the shop’s brand becomes greater – along with the risks given he’s already had one legal threat against him .

    Online channels give us the opportunity to get our businesses before the world but with every opportunity comes a risk. When we post a blog, video or tweet online the entire world can see what we’ve said.

    Understand those risks – and they are very real – and be careful with what you post and which staff members you trust to post on your business’ behalf. What might have once just upset a few people can now turn the market against you.

    Similar posts:

    • No Related Posts