SociaLight Media Blog

Twitter Update

On Friday, the People Search funtion of Twitter was removed, and I can’t imagine why.  It was one of Twitter’s core tools, how else are you supposed to find people? Now, the only ways to find new people are to go through everyone who your friends are following or to do a regular search and scroll through to find the actual person’s Twitter account.

Not really sure why they would purchase Summize to enhance their in-tweet search functionality earlier this year, only to eliminate a possibly more important function of actually connecting with other people. It is a social network for pete’s sake.

And there you have it. Up until now, the most effective use of Twitter for business has been as a customer service quality control (hats tipped to Comcast, Zappos, etc.).  Here is a great example of a (huge) company listening to Twitterers’ tweets - Johnson & Johnson - about a new ad campaign and shutting it down in a matter of 48 hours.

Johnson & Johnson was attempting to build a Motrin campaign around a shared experience among women: childbearing and raising, and the pain it brings.  Apparently, J&J played the angle that women treat their young as fashion accessories, and that having a baby slung across their shoulder makes them look like an “official mom.” What’s interesting is that, without a doubt, J&J did some serious consumer research to arrive at these conclusions about women’s motives; why, then, did it encounter such swift and harsh recoil from that very market segment? Perhaps because there are things that may be true, but for which people don’t want to be glorified for.  I’m not saying that all, or even most, women feel that their children give them some clout in whatever community they belong to, but some must, or J&J wouldn’t have built an entire ad campaign around it.

What’s great about social media, and in this case Twitter, is that all of these people who felt attacked, called out, or insulted, were able to speak out, globally, and J&J listened.  Mommy Twitterers with thousands of followers were outraged and outspoken about the Motrin ads, and some even went cross-social-media and published YouTube videos (this one is called Motrin Ad Makes Moms Mad - 21k views)

This is so great; genuine conversation between Brand and Consumer. This was what my first ever post was about. Two-way communication. The ad industry is no longer about push, push, push. Consumers can talk internationally, instantaneously and companies are actually listening and acting.  Is it weird that this story makes me feel warm and fuzzy?

There are virtually no ways to misuse Twitter for personal use. Anyone who doesn’t like how you’re using it can just stop “following” you - so ignore them.  However, there are a whole slew of ways to misuse Twitter for businesses, both small and large.  Setting up a Twitter account for your business and then never tweeting is one. So is only tweeting about your brand and products.

Social media is about creating conversation with your consumers; consumers won’t follow your tweets if they are simply advertisments. One of the great tips that I’ve read from Chris Brogan (a social media superstar) is to ignore the famous Twitter prompt “What are you doing?” and instead answer “What has your attention?”  This promotes the sharing of relevant information among a community of brands, customers, users, etc. and can establish your company (or you, personally) as an authority in a field. Share articles, news, funny and interesting happenings that are related to your business - people will listen! Start “following” people that are hubs (people with lots of followers) to get your messages out to the largest array of people.

Comment on others’ tweets by using the @username function, use 1-to-1 messaging feature, share “Tiny URLs” with news about your industry, initiate polls and get opinions, and use the Twitter Search to keep tabs on people’s tweets about your industry and your company.  These are some of the fundamental ways to use Twitter correctly, and when I meet with clients to discuss the art of microblogging and Twitter, they always hit the ground running!  How do you Twitter? Tell us at blog.socialightmedia.com

Good news, SociaLight Media Blog fans - we’re back from our brief hiatus and ready to crank out the posts!

A number of times in the past few years, I’ve been asked the following question in one form or another:

“We want to get involved with the social networking scene [web 2.0] - should we start our own social network revolving around our brand?”

The answer is an invariable and resounding “No.” Bad idea for a few reasons. First, your target is generally folks who are computer savvy and are already involved in at least one social network (Facebook, MySpace, YouTube, Flickr, Amazon, eBay, Yelp, LinkedIn, etc.), and adding more social networks to their mix only convolutes things. Additionally, all of those above mentioned social networks revolve around an action. For Facebook and MySpace, it’s connecting with friends. YouTube and Flickr are for sharing videos and photos, respectively. Amazon and eBay are for buying and selling things. Yelp is for reviewing services. LinkedIn is for developing your professional network. All action words. Never attempt to duplicate these social network services without a similarly simple and effective action that online consumers desire to take. Services like Ning, allow you to create your own social network, but revolve around interests - essentially a group on Facebook - without offering any real value to its members. Why re-invent the wheel?

With that said, establishing your firm within each of those social networks (or any network that makes sense for your brand) is a fantastic idea for developing your web presence - especially because it costs so little. And it’s also, ahem, something that SociaLight Media is rather good at.

However, in the case of Group M, creating a social network may not be such a bad idea. Well, sort of. It’s not really a social network; just posing as one. Mspace (a play on MySpace) is actually a “training program that mimics social networks to build digital skills” for their 3,600 employees. The interactive media company has many different shops with separate digital experience and talent and wanted to tie everyone together to disseminate that knowledge and experience. They positioned 10 fake people as experts, behind each of which was a real person at Group M, to give online lessons in fields including digital media processes, strategy, planning and buying, ad serving, and search and analytics, all delivered via video, audio, and games like crossword puzzles (which can be downloaded as podcasts).

Seems to be working quite well - Mspace was launched earlier this month, and at the time of the article, 500 employees had used the program. I tend to agree with John Montgomery, the COO of Group M Interaction, when he says, “this is the way we’ll be training in the future in most disciplines.”

Thoughts? Feelings? Stories? Anecdotes?  What do you think about companies misusing social networks to build brand awareness?  How do you feel about Group M’s leveraging of the social networking concept for employee training?  Inquiring minds want to know!

I have to say, I was a little surprised by this article from BusinessWeek, Has Facebook’s Value Taken a Hit?

It talks about how “dozens” (according to this guy) of Facebook employees, including Zuckerberg himself and departing vice-president Matt Cohler, have been selling off some of their common shares - and their prices haven’t been implying the $15 billion price-tag originally set by Microsoft’s 2007 purchase of 1.6% of the company. More like $5 billion. The article also mentions that once Facebook employees got wind of Zuckerberg and Cohler’s stock partings, there was some general dissension. Zuckerberg then sent out a company statement saying that the would allow employees to sell stock as a “onetime program to enable employees to realize some liquidity.” Read into that as much as you want.

So not good news from the Facebook front, however what really surprised me were some of the comments below the article. Here’s one:

May Aug 14, 2008 12:40 PM GMT “Not surprised Facebook is falling flat on its face! The ads don’t make sense. I haven’t clicked a single one, despite spending countless hours on facebook. Any mention of charging users a fee causes an uproar and many would abandon their page for somewhere free like myspace. How exactly do they expect to make any money? Who in their right mind would buy these shares right now?”

Heck, I’m buying some when they go public! Facebook IS the social network powerhouse! MySpace is dead; there’s too much spam. MySpace counts “active” members as someone who has logged in once in the past YEAR! I log into my Facebook account probably between 5 and ten times a DAY. It seems like people aren’t using MySpace anymore/nearly as often as they used to or it’s just a spam haven now. Or both.

This one actually made me laugh:

Midwest Aug 14, 2008 2:09 AM GMT “Potential advertising revenue is the only possible reason for Facebook’s $15 billion valuation. What other reason could there be? There’s no monthly user fee or membership charge so the only reason for the hype is ad $. But guess what? Nobody looks at the ads and the click through rate is laughable. Advertisers might as well take their money and throw it on a fire. At least they can use the heat to grill some dogs on. Advertising on the web is a joke but it remains viable only because it’s so cheap. Hey advertisers, save your money and buy some print, radio or tv spots. Get some real results for your spend.“

Yes, Facebook is having some problems with monetizing their technology and user-base, however to simply say that advertisers should pack it up, quit online advertising, “take their money and throw it on a fire”?? Talk about absurd! Yes, banner ads aren’t the solution. We KNOW that. They never have been! I can count on one hand the number of times I’ve clicked a banner ad - the only times were are for a store that was already on my to-do list. Good job, Facebook, for correctly targeting my interests and providing me with a reminder. However, this minuscule traffic isn’t going to cut it - I agree. The money is in the built in advertising, I think. Here’s a great article from Tech Crunch (back in 2007) called MySpace v. Facebook “It’s Not a Decision, It’s an IQ Test.” The money is in the widgets & applications, like Where I’ve Been, and social ads, where “advertisers provide the text, and Facebook pairs it with a relevant social action that your friend has taken. Social Ads mean advertisements become more interesting and more tailored to you and your friends” (from Facebook). This is relevant stuff in my newsfeed that I’m bound to take notice of, at least I think so. What do you think?