I used it as a way to post easily via mobile, and a way-station for photos and other mobile content. It’s too easy to put stuff where I really want it now, so while I’m not cloosing this account I find it uch less useful, for now.
So whatever you do, don’t subscribe. I mean, you can, really. If you want.
I am newly tempted to rename this blog “The Long View” because I find it painful to see people get whiplash as they turn to see the new shiny objects of social media whip by. I wonder if I get tagged as an angry nerd (ok, I have) for not being too quick to embrace the latest and greatest. The truth is, I am aways suspicious of new platforms being declared “The Next XXX ” before it has had a chance to mature a little and give users enough chance to figure out how the platform is going to work for them. Google Plus has been a prime example, making some folks giddy before most people – especially businesses – we’re able to use it, a direct before it was even complete. Not that I don’t think it will make a huge impact, but if the train is leaving the station, say, in eight months, don’t line us up on the platform today.
I have seen several tools vying for “next big thing” status lately, but rather than fitting these for crowns, I see them – and others – fitting into a larger trend, whether they succeed or not.
Pinterest: Wowie-wow-wow has Pinterest gotten a lot of buzz lately. It’s very compelling in that it provides a simple visual way to organize links, visuals, products, or other items. You can see my first Pinboard here (photos of my son playing sports) and there have been several wonderful examples of organizations and companies putting up some nice Pinterest pages; the most recent I caught was the Hell’s Kitchen Flea Market in New York City. Many of my friends are caught up in and addicted to various Pinterest pages. Frustratingly, many more can’t interact with Pinboards the way they ought, as Pinterest is an ivite-only beta product. That will pass, but it shows how quickly people will jump on a bandwagon – before it has all its wheels. The question is for brands is, is this something good they can’t already build easily on their existing websites and blogs? It’s worth asking.
Path: this was presented to me as a new way to separate your closer group of friends from the rabble on Facebook. But can’t you tier friends online, Facebook? Certainly you can using Circles on Google Plus. Also, it focuses on “journaling,” to my main point buried below. Yet, Path gains users, so it’s worth watching.
Instagram: As an Android user, this one mystifies me. How can an iPhone/iPad only app be haied as a next big thing? Love Apple all you want, but that app environment hardly constitutes Everyone. Sure, my making fun of Instagram photos as people purposely denigrating their photography to resemble 40-year-old Polaroids is probably missing the point. Also, the Android problem will be solved shortly. I’ll be eager to see what the fuss is about, as that fuss seems to be centered on the interactions among the network of photo sharers.
Storify: This one seems to be more of a slam-dunk. The ability to curate other sources easily and assemble them into a story is attractive. If you can insert that into your own platform, into your own site or blog, all the better. Makes sense, it’s just a matter of how many people or companies catch on.
Overall, what I do see? Storytelling is the new focus of social media apps. We see this in Facebook’s new Timeline. We saw it in Gowalla attempt to differentiate as a location-based service before it got sold. We saw it in the much-hyped Color (is that one still happening?). Social tools are moving beyond status updates, what we are doing, and towards telling stories, filling get in the gaps of what we have done, what we are doing, and what we want to do. My main question is, did social network users ask for this? As for the overall community, I’m not sure. Facebook seems to have forced Timeline on us rather than asking. This change to “stories” rather than “status” is far from complete, but has been openly attempted numerous times. It’s where we’re going right now, like it or not.
Recently, I had a discussion with a local (Boston) technology professional about finding influencers via social media. Additionally, I constantly have discussions with clients, colleagues and peers about measurement. Why mention these two facts together? These two topics have a lot more in common than they might seem to on the surface, at least when it comes to the practical applications in social media programs.
Photo by Martijn vdS on Flickr
First, both “influence” and measurement come with a variety of tools designed to help us find and analyze. These tools, whether they be Klout, PeerIndex or Traackr on the influence side, or Radian6, Sysomos, Spredfast and any number of tools on the monitoring/metrics/analytics side, all have their plusses. They all have their minuses too. Are they too unsophisticated or broad, too complicated to use, missing pieces, too expensive, lacking tech support? There’s always something.
Which tool a given program uses isn’t all that important, it turns out. However, let’s assume that having some tools to help you harvest information is necessary. The reality is that most social media professionals have to have at least some familiarity with a variety of the tools, as different clients, or even departments within a company (probably a separate discussion there), use different tools.
OK- we have established that we need tools, but we are limited. That sounds like a nightmare, no?
Well, yes and no. I believe it’s healthy to believe that the “magic bullet” tool that finds the best influencers for any specific program, or covers all your metrics needs, will never exist. It’s also healthy to believe that just about any tool, despite any public criticism, will help you in some way.
Great; so what?
Even as these tools become simultaneously more sophisticated and easier to use (good luck with that) the need for what I like to call spade work does not go away. The spade work is divided into two categories:
Tools are necessary. But making them worthwhile is hard work. Anyone who thinks differently is not using them (or their social media team’s brainpower) to their full capabilities.
UPDATE: I am officially signed up for the 2012 Pan-Mass Challenge: to sponsor my ride (and make these graphs prettier next year), please go to http://bit.ly/pmcdoug to donate. Thanks!
Last year, after riding in my third Pan-Mass Challenge (an annual two-day bicycle ride/cancer fundraiser), I thought I had enough of a track record to look at fundraising trends. In that post, I saw the rise in overall fundraising, number of sponsors and average donation amount as the progression of an improving fundraising effort and the expanding reach of my social networks. This year, the numbers were different but still interesting. First, the fundraising total shrank for the first time:
While an organization may see this as alarming, I should add that I once again surpassed my goal; after 2010′s success, I upped my goal from the minimum ($4,200) to the “Heavy Hitter” line ($6,300), and actually had little problem making that mark. I see the $9,000-plus total from 2010 as somewhat of an aberration– not in success, but in the amount of it, as several one-time sponsors donated late last year in memory of my father-in-law’s passing (the family had actually steered people to the PMC in the obituary, a fitting tribute). Despite the “one-time” donations in 2010, I still saw a sharp increase in sponsors from 2010 to 2011, the most encouraging number in the bunch. The message of the PMC’s cancer-fighting cause continues to spread:
Repeat sponsors was a bit of a mix, but again no surprise: more “repeats” donated this year, with the falloff in percentage a factor of the ever-growing total number of sponsors. I can probably do more to keep current donors involved and perhaps get the repeats up over the 50% next year.
The average donation fell off, close to 2009 levels. The major reason for this was that several of my “corporate” donors, people representing organizations that generally donated in the $500 range, did not repeat this year. The median donation was still $50, meaning that individual donors were not giving less, as this number might indicate and for the short-term that will continue, I suspect. So, the drop in average donation is not so alarming, though if I were a non-profit organization I would be concerned about the corporate sponsor drop-offs (and would certainly welcome them back, hint-hint).
Putting the numbers in perspective: I am happier with the increase in people sponsoring than I am disappointed at the lower dollar amounts. If I were an organization I would have some concern about the dropoff in larger “corporate” donors, but as those have been outliers in my case rather than the primary targets I cannot be totally surprised.
For 2012? I will target getting more repeat donors while continuing to increase my base of generous sponsors as well as my overall fundraising target. I hope the look at numbers does not make my PMC fundraising seem too clinical- as I sincerely appreciate each and every sponsor, as well as others who support me in various ways. On to 2012!
Flickr photo by tgkohn
I have much antipathy - make that hostility – toward any kinds of predictions (see my 2011 social media predictions post for the only explanation I will give for that). Despite that, I was honored to be asked my 2012 thoughts by the folks at Awareness for their eBook “2012 Social Marketing & New Media Predictions.” There are some great thoughts by several folks in the industry smarter than I, but I thought I would take the opportunity to expand on my thoughts that were included (in case anyone holds me accountable).
Below are the e-book topics for which I provided predictions, and my further comments on each.
The Biggest Social Marketing Developments
What I Said:
“More companies will move to the next stage, having a more innate understanding of what they need to do in social media, and being more specific about where they allocate budgets within social media. Google+ will make some inroads, enough to add G+ more formally to the debate over how to split resources among existing social media platforms.”
A Bit More:
I noted in the last year or two that more companies of all sizes seemed to understand they needed to do include social media and brand publishing somewhere in their communications plan – selling the very idea of social media is over. Next is developing a more ingrained sophistication about what and how to do it. And yes, the patience I have preached regarding Google + is still needed, but will probably pay off soon as companies (and their consultants) figure out the best use for this social network.
A bit more about other social networks: it seems that many companies are jumping onto social tools specifically geared to arranging certain types of media– there has been a lot of noise about Instagram and Pinterest lately, for instance. That’s interesting, to the extent that these tools might differentiate themselves from what web developers will do for companies’ owned channels.
The Role of Big Data in Social Marketing
What I Said:
“All data will be important. Responsible agencies and marketers will be measuring their programs with anything available to them. As for databases, merging CRM and sales databases with social outlets will get more intense. Sales people and departments need to get on board, and that means deciding once and for all how social sits in your organization. That may take more than a year.”
A Bit More:
2011 saw a lot of talk about “Social CRM” and “Big Data.” I think communications professionals are still figuring this out. We will see more flesh put on these bones, but complete understanding and utility is beyond the grasp of 2012.
Key Technologies to Impact Social Marketing and the Role of Mobile (I combined two since I talked about mobile in the first)
What I Said:
“Smartphones will continue to spread, especially Android, and tablets, still led by iPad, will only proliferate more. Figuring out the easiest way to interact with people via mobile will get more attention. The ones who succeed will be the ones who actually make apps and mobile sites that don’t break.”
“Anything mobile will be big. The only difference between B2C and B2B will be the scale and depth of how they deal with the customer on the go. If they treat their mobile channels (and many companies have both B2C and B2B) as they treat all other sales and marketing channels, then they have their baseline strategy right there.”
A Bit More:
Anyone can say “mobile” – so I did too. Neener-neener. The fact that I actually bought a tablet recently (an Android by the way) says a lot about the affordability (or willingness to pay the price) coming to a larger market. We need to continue with “mobile” as part of our thinking, but I think we’ll see more use. Aren’t you using your mobile devices more? What apps we rely on vs what we are used to from our PCs and Macs will also change as a result. What is easy to use and what translates to the primary “experience” (web site, document format, what-have-you) will be the most interesting to me.
The second answer seems a bit convoluted as I read it now. Essentially, don’t let new channels (mobile or whatever) drive your strategy and goals. As ever, it should be the other way around.
Top Challenges for Social Marketers
What I Said:
“Focusing on what works and not being distracted by shiny new objects, while making sure they don’t miss the shiny thing that actually becomes the next ‘what works.’ Measuring programs and linking them to business goals will become more important and more recognized.”
A Bit More:It shouldn’t be new to caution against chasing shiny objects, but people still do it, so there. Measurement has been a standard par tof the programs I lead at Voce, but too many people argue about the “warm fuzzies” aspect of social media, leading me to believe that more people need to be kicked upside the head regarding measuring their efforts. Even the fuzzy stuff and the unicorns (you know, I am an expert in Unicorns according to Klout, http://klout.com/#/dough/topics so listen to what I have to say).
Top Trusted News Sources
What I Said:
“The grapevine, wherever it may grow. Currently it’s some combination of Twitter, Facebook and Google+ from peers in the industry.
A Bit More:
Total copout- but still true. Did you really want 19 people all to say “I read Mashable?” Follow people you trust, and they will lead you to good news sources.
Thanks to Mike Lewis of Awareness and Lora Kratchounova for forcing me to say something about the coming year. I expect it all to come true. Every last thing. Except the bits that don’t.
Flickr Photo: lalunablanca
Is it “talk about ROI” season now? I have seen several posts online lately about social media ROI, ranging from “it doesn’t exist” to “here’s how you find it.” It makes me think about my own current thinking in the space. As with many things, I fall in between the two extremes, if you can call the latter an “extreme.”
A few thoughts about the ROI question:
Just a few thoughts on ROI from someone in the trenches. And no, I do not always see ROI figures from programs, nor am I 100% certain they are always called for (or is that just being lazy?). But it does exist and it probably should be asked for. What are your thoughts?
Pet Peeves: Washington Post Facebook App
Recently I noticed in my Facebook timeline (yeah, i look at that) a lot of links to interesting stories with the “Washington Post” logo on them. Trusted news source, so why not click? Being greeted with a pop-up asking me to grant a Facebook app permission just so I can read articles I always used to read anyway. Kudos to getting more people to post your articles, WaPo, but making people give access to an app just to view them is really creepy. To be fair, if you deny the app you are taken directly to the article (not so, it seems, with other similar publisher apps) but it’s still creepy to me. Blech. It’s important to consider the user experience when taking advantage of a popular platform. There’s a give and take. Does WaPo cross a line there? It does for me.
Liz Strauss and Quitting Klout
There has been a lot written lately about problems with Klout (the social media influence scorekeeper) and why it makes some people uneasy (score is too simple a metric to be useful, “algorithm” is unexplained, potentially horrific privacy stories). Liz Strauss recently wrote a more detailed and heartfelt post about why she opted out of Klout (now that, thanks to Danny Brown and others, one can actually do that). Am I moved to quit Klout? No, my curiosity remains, and the potential use as a (very) minor tool in finding out the right people for the right conversations and messages remains. I’ll support people wanting to leave for these legitimate reasons, but I’ll remain patient.
Whither Gowalla (Owning Your Stuff Part 9,000,000)
For those who like Location-based social media services: a few months ago, Gowalla changed how it works, focusing on users telling “stories” rather than merely checking in to a location and posting said checkins to Twitter and Facebook. As a way to differentiate from Foursquare, it made sense. But I found the idea to be more work than I wanted to devote, so I used the service less.Now that Gowalla has been purchased by Facebook and is essentially being dismantled, I am reminded of the “owning your stuff: mantra that I like to mumble on occasion. Gowalla users don’t have a lot of content stored that they are going to miss; not like if a service like Tumblr or Posterous went away. But it is a reminder that if you rely on an outside service for anything, you run the risk of that service going away and having to change course. I have worked with clients who ran campaigns with Gowalla. A tighter integration would be more troublesome, but it is also hard in this social media environment to run up some sort of consistency if services keep rising and falling. Part of the environment, I’m afraid
Apple’s Social Media Policy Leaked
So, an Apple store employee is fired because her rants about apple online to friends saw the light of day. So, Apple’s restrictive social media policy was leaked. As a PR person, I have always had problems with Apple’s closed culture. Maybe friends would expect me to rail against Apple’s fascist-state communications regime. Not at all. I think that while restrictive, the Apple ethos is quite clear, and seemingly within their rights (I’m not a lawyer. Whoopee). Don;t talk smack about your employer- or anyone/thing- anywhere unless you’re ok with it coming back to you. Period.
Losing My Stuff
I have been travelling again lately, and have begun to realize that the things I have lost or left behind on trips might be able to tell their stories.
“Remember me? I’m your Ray-Ban sunglasses you left in that Nissan Cube you rented in San Francisco in 2010. Oh fine, you thought you would wait until your next trip rather than spending the small pile of cash to have me shipped back. How can you be surprised that I had disappeared from the lost & found when you finally came back to claim me? I’m an attractive pair of sunglasses- you lose, and I’m seeing the world through different eyes now.”
“Well weren’t you clever? Throwing me in the front seat of the rental car in Orlando because I wasn’t worthy to take the holiday party snaps- a “snap” decision you made after parking. Oh sure, you were going to toss me back in your bag the next morning on the way to the airport. Seems I’m still here, big-shot, stuck between the seat and the gear-shift, waiting for the next renter to liberate me. I’ll bet you’re glad you already uploaded your last crappy photos to Flickr. Enjoy your next camera, bought in a rush to replace me, on the cheap no doubt. Feh.”
“I seem to have found my way to the Land of Doug’s Lost Pan-Mass Challenge Baseball Caps. Remarkable, considering you only misplaced two (or was it three?) of us in your house, the rest being spread around in Las Vegas, San Francisco, and Maine. Enjoy that new light blue cap. It sets off your eyes (not). Putz.”
OK, so here’s what’s happening:
We hear noises, and it sounds like a mouse, but I don’t want it to be a mouse. I want it to be the fridge, even though that would be much more expensive. Actually, it sounds like a mouse that has gained the ability to use tiny tools, like a saw or nail gun.
So the cat comes in, which is very good of him. It’s late, and he has a busy Monday lined up. But he hears the sound too, and knows it’s a mouse. I trust him with these things. So, there must be a mouse under or in the center cupboard where we store cooking implements (note: rinse the frying pan before use).
The cat (Whoopie, a name that strikes fear in the local rodents by the way) camps out near the furniture. He’s a great hunter, but I can’t help thinking I can be of assistance. My contribution? The cheese. I saw it work in a movie once.
I say to the cat, “The cheese is for the mouse. I’ll put it here, and when the mouse comes for the cheese…BAM! you hit him on the head.”
I know he won’t hit the mouse on the head, but I thought that sounded better.
The stakeout begins. I’m off to bed.
(Yeah, catblogging. One way to get unstuck)
My “Buzzword Radar” is oversensitive, honed over years in the PR profession, where the temptation to go the lazy route “”leading provider of robust, scalable solutions” was often too great (or driven by inexperienced managers and less sensitive clients) to resist. This is a great example of a web site from the 1st Internet bubble that had many PR pros- and most all media hacks- nodding in agreement at the same time they were burying their foreheads in their palms.
I’m a fan of plain speaking, and most of the gibberish I lay out is in the spirit of absurdist wordplay.
When people in my industry started plastering the word “social business” everywhere they could over the last several years, my buzz-dar went nuts. What could that term possibly mean? Sure, it’s two simple words put together that could have a simple explanation, but my instinct was to run far away.
However, I saw that organizations and people I trusted were latching on to “social business,” so either it had gained a respectable definition or it was simply too late. Being a cynic and a pessimist, I chose the predictable path at first.
In the past week I attended two events that referenced “Social Business” heavily. The first was the annual Society for New Communications Research (SNCR) Symposium, in a room filled with people whose intelligence I respect. I expressed my differing feelings on Twitter and got more smart responses.
From Hillary Boucher, what I dubbed an “elevator pitch:”
From my friend Rachel Happe of The Community Roundtable:
Rachel’s longer definition lives here: http://www.informationweek.com/thebrainyard/news/229401355/social-business-requires-socialized-processes
Lowe's Andrew Carusone at Social Media Club
Later, I attended the Social Media Club Boston chapter meeting where the subject was, you guessed it, “Social Business.” IBM, the host, has actually co-opted the term (defining a social business as one that has engagement, transparency and speed), meaning social business has either achieved legitimacy or been consigned to the big-time corporate buzzword dustbin.
It seems, for now, to be the former. One of the evening’s featured speakers, Andrew Carusone of Lowe’s, spoke with conviction about the company’s efforts to build a “social business” (not necessarily the phrase they use), from the inside out, and the successes they have had so far. I had the chance to speak with him beforehand, and wondered aloud whether “social business” is replacing “Enterprise 2.0″ as the catchphrase. I suspect that’s a matter of semantics, as the “experts” on Quora can’t seem to decide either. Carusone himself had been happy with “E20″ as late as last year so the I’m guessing any distinctions will be steamrolled by those not inclined to nuance.
Is “Social Business” a meaningless buzzword? It seems I can’t dismiss it. Don’t any of you all go around ruining it for everyone else. I mean it.
Photo by spemss on Flickr
I spoke on a few current social media topics on my monthly appearance on Media Bullseye Radio this week. I thought I would throw a few more thoughts out there. The overall theme seems to be that people judge too quickly and rely too deeply on things they don’t understand.
Snap Judgment: Chapstick on Facebook
Quick synopsis: Chapstick starts an ad campaign, some people object to the ad on the Facebook page, Chapstick deleted comments, making it worse, AdWeek calls it a “Social Media Death Spiral.”
What the hell is “Death Spiral” supposed to mean? A brand makes a mistake, people jump on them as of a single misstep will harm the company forever. I suspect something like this won’t even affect sales.
People need to count to 10 before denouncing a brand over a single mistake, especially without knowing the full background and giving the entire situation time to play out. Lots more mistakes are coming, and very few of these brands will suffer real consequences, provided the mistake doesn’t indicate a wider problem of product or company ethics (most likely this is a result of the company not empowering the social media program minders as part of the larger strategic team- but really? I don’t know). Also, many of these mistakes are dealt with or resolved in some sort of reasonable time period (and a lot of the time “reasonable time period” doesn’t mean what some social media folks pretend to know it means).
Lack of Understanding: Klout Changes Algorithm, World Ends (Again).
I was flummoxed by the reaction to Klout (“The Standard for Online Influence”) adjusting its algorithm (which it has done before) and, at the same time, affecting most everyone’s scores. The reactions (many in klout’s own blog post) revealed an ugly underworld of people desperately relying on Klout scores for business, grades, and other things that are too precious to leave in the hands of a mysterious third-party measurement.
Klout is useful in some ways, but relying on it as a sole measure of social media worth or to sell your services is– well, susceptible to the whims of whatever Klout decides to do with its mysterious algorithm.
Either/Both/Neither: Klout and Privacy?
Some friends have noted that people- some of them minors- with private Facebook accounts have shown up with Klout profiles. Is this because these people interacted publicly and Klout scraped that info to provide them with a profile? Seems likely, and it’s unclear if any terms of service or privacy laws were violated. It is, however, a reputation problem for bout Klout and Facebook, an indicator of the public nature of just about anything we post online, and brings up the question of whether it’s a violation to create accounts in absentia for people who have not (yet, presumably) joined a service? I know of no others that do this, though I suspect there may be some.
There ar elots of real issues out there in social media-land. Understanding them requires more patience than many of us are exhibiting, the wisdom to recognize the linits of tools that too many lack, and the ability to back off judgments and admit you don’t know all the facts.
