Death. Life. And 6 Things To Do About It
May 7th, 2008 by JeremyYesterday I sat on a panel at an American Business Media conference. The audience was mainly b-to-b magazine publishers looking for solutions as the web rips apart the fabric of their universe.
The stated purpose of the session was to help these guys understand the concept of social media. Here’s a definition that reasonable people can argue about:
Social media is the aggregate of the tools, systems and functionality that enable anyone to create content and push or pull it seamlessly around the web.
For traditional publishers this is a huge (and extremely unnerving) deal. Social media has enabled the absolute democratization of content. We used to live in a world where information was scarce and therefore expensive. Now, thanks to the web and the groundswell of consumer participation, it’s ubiquitous and mostly free.
Publishers used to be the gatekeeper of reliable information, eking out news, stories and opinion to an eager audience. They’ve lost that role. Subject-matter expertise (on any subject) is not confined to these self-appointed guardians of the public record. Now anyone can have a say and many, many do.
One of the most interesting aspects of the rise of the blogosphere is that although the MSM (mainstream media) continues to deride it as pajamas media, the most successful parts of it are made up of extremely knowledgeable and eloquent specialists – academics, ex-journalists, business leaders, lawyers, analysts and so on.
These (unpaid) contributors are experts in their fields – certainly as informed as many of the (paid) writers relied on by traditional publishers. The result of their participation is that the essence of the information flow has changed.
Where publishers used to tell a captive audience what was going on, now a community informs itself. What used to be a (paid) lecture has become a (free) conversation. That’s social media. What the hell can publishers do about it?
The first thing (and most have already, painfully, figured this out) is to forget about trying to control content on the web. They need to take an open-source approach to its distribution. No firewalls, no walled gardens, no subscriptions.
Read the rest of this entry »
Tips for dining at the social media buffet: part 1
May 6th, 2008 by Jim
The WOM has spread, the penny has dropped and now everyone is queuing up for another plate of appetizers from the banquet of new marketing options available. But which fork are you going to use for your salad, and is it ever okay to double-dip?
This is a basic guide for agencies, marketers and in-house brand teams who want to better understand some of the advantages and pitfalls of spreading your own brand or the client’s brand across the current swathe of social media applications.
This is part 1 of a 5-part series, to be continued in between extreme bouts of web programming (my role at Campbell-Ewald).
1.) Pass the salt, don’t throw it
So you want to show existing and future clients that you understand the landscape of social media and that you’ve done more than dipped your toes in the water? You want to demonstrate your capabilities in the field and show proven results? Whatever you do – don’t force it, and don’t fake it either.
This is one of those scenarios where “put your money where your mouth is” becomes vitally important, and any claims you make will have to stand up to inspection and critique from the social community at large.
For instance, it won’t be enough to convince your CEO to put herself out on Facebook or Myspace if she’s not really going to actively engage in the network and maintain a presence there. You’d be better off leveraging/trusting other employees who have well established profiles and a history of online interaction to be your brand ambassadors. Try to take natural steps towards making this more of a company philosophy though, rather than a rather inorganic initiative
Same goes for blogging – though it is incredibly cool if your CEO blogs, keep in mind that people can spot a ‘my secretary updates this page for me’ situation a mile off, and it just won’t do you any good. A ‘bottom-up’ approach is usually better – your regular employees have a level of credibility with the general public (read: potential customers/clients) that those at the very top can’t normally maintain. And of course you know an entirely fake blog that doesn’t call itself out as such is also a really bad idea, right? Good.