PR Squared

About

Blogroll

PR 2.0 Tactics

PR Squared

This has been an absolutely incredible year.  We’ve been privileged to talk to some household-name companies about PR & Social Media.  We’ve even won more than our fair share of FORTUNE-level engagements. (w00t!) 

But, as the brand names got bigger, I sometimes caught a whiff of something unsavory in those oaken conference rooms. 

I was beginning to smell a rat. 

In some select cases we found our prospective clients more interested in paying lip-service to Social Media ideals than in true change.  They were looking to mark off the check-box, as in, “Social Media? Yep, we got that.”

Merriam-Webster defines “bastardization” as “(reducing) from a higher to a lower state or condition.”  Here’s an example… 

One company we talked to had already added basic Social Media elements to their web properties.  Permalinks, embed code, even some blogs and remixable multimedia content.  At first glance, most any social media schmoe would laud the company’s savvy. 

But when we dug deeper, we only saw problems: 

• The blogs only spoke to tiny special-interest niches of the brand’s humongous audience… 
• Many of the company’s previous forays into Social Media had been both disjointed and blithely abandoned (and yet were still easy to find)…
• The company’s name was being abused by SEO scammers…
• Some of their best stuff was simply hard to find…

Ultimately the company seemed more than happy to allow people to share their content, but was unwilling to do anything to engage with them 1:1. 

They didn’t want to be part of the conversation; they wanted to be the topic of the conversation.

We pointed out the difference.  We lost.  (w00t!)

Posted by Todd Defren at 10:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (12)

The question has been raised by Jeremiah Owyang, “Should brands Join or Build their own Social Networks?”

Today, the bulk of our social networking online happens within vast networks like MySpace and Facebook.  Yet many have suggested that the future might belong to verticalized, more personal approaches (a.k.a. “microcommunities,” as seen in white-label approaches like Ning; demographic nets like Eons; or trade-focused networks like MyRagan).

“Facebook and MySpace are just too huge,” pundits argue.  “There’s no differentiation.  It’s too impersonal to share the same space with millions of strangers.  Most people can only maintain about 150 people in their network before they experience an attention crash.”

But I think the vastness of the larger socnets is part of their strength. 

People who invest hundreds of hours into cultivating their socnet presence want some assurance that their chosen networks offer long-term viability! 

Moreover, these Big Socnets offer a shared, common experience for friends/followers; those who connect via these platforms know what they’re getting into, know how to use the apps, etc.

And in any case, from these big, horizontal platforms, niches naturally emerge.  ‘Cuz it’s probably true that we can’t reasonably sustain more than 150–odd relationships, we self-select our Top Friends (so to speak).  We become fansumers of brands in order to interact in an ad-hoc but focused way with people who exist outside our core socnet group, creating tangential niches.

I look at my own groups of Friends/Followers on Facebook and Twitter, for example, and I see 300–ish people who tend to be in Marketing/PR/Tech, in either Boston or the Bay Area. 

Of those ~300 people, I probably have met and interact regularly with less than 1/2 of them.  These ~300 contacts grew organically from my public presence on this blog and as an agency principal. 

From the hordes, a niche emerged. I don’t concern myself with the millions of people I don’t know, even though they exist in the same socnets.

That’s not to say that vertical socnets like Eons or MyRagan aren’t viable.  Just not as necessary as some have suggested. 

Give us the big, nebulous social network: we can make of it what we want, thank you very much.

Posted by Todd Defren at 11:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)

No, “Twitter Offers An Advertising Model” is not a news headline.  It’s a proposition. 

Today I saw this tweet from @DellOutlet: “We (know) that you all want to see more coupon offers. Sorry we’ve been so quiet – our inventory has been a bit low.”  Checking @DellOutlet’s historical tweetstream, I guesstimate that they tweet once every 7 – 10 days. 

Low-key.  Value-based.  No one else on Twitter seems to mind.

I also read this blog post from Albert Maruggi, in which he plays out a dialogue between a Social Media enthusiast and a diabolical marketer.  From the nefarious marketeer in Maruggi’s post:

(Twitter is) the greatest freakin’ opt-in Ad server on the planet, these people are agreeing to follow companies just to get ads pushed at them.”

As expected, and rightfully so, Albert sides with the fuzzy-wuzzy Social Media zealot, protesting this marketer’s mindset with talk of Twitter as “idea exchange, social hang-out,” etc.

But, really, what’s wrong with using Twitter as an opt-in ad server?  A 140–character advertisement, no silly graphics, just the straight-out offer, from my favorite brands…?  I don’t see the harm.  Plus, only those who opt-in to receive the ads would see them: the ads wouldn’t impinge on our Twitter friends’ own tweetstreams.

I dig it.  As long as the offers or notices were infrequent and of-interest … if they were too frequent, of low-value, or annoying, I could “unfollow” ‘em with a click. 

Certainly Dell’s gotten lots of credit, of late, for getting it right with Social Media; their @DellOutlet Twitter presence has been hailed as a pioneering attempt. 

As a die-hard Twitter junkie, am I too quick to cede ground to the marketeers? 

As a marketer yourself, do you see the opportunity here?  Would you be able to walk the line?

Posted by Todd Defren at 06:17 PM | Permalink | Comments (6)

It takes a lot of ego to rise to the CEO spot.  You need to be confident and charming, smart and articulate.  These are excellent qualities in a blogger, too. 

I can understand why you’d be interested in “joining the conversation.”  It’s an interesting conversation – after all, it’s a conversation about topics of interest to you and to your company, and the people you’ll interact with will self-identify themselves as being interested in what you’ve got to say. 

Done well, you’ll get both personal satisfaction and bottom-line results from your foray into blogging.

Ha!!  Caught you.  You were nodding in agreement all the way through my li’l speech.  Well, sorry to burst the bubble, but you should have raised a quizzical eyebrow when I used the word “foray.” 

A “foray” is nowadays thought of as an experiment; more tellingly, the word’s archaic meaning was “to ravage in search of spoils.”  Is that what you want to do?  Are you hoping to exploit the blogosphere?  (Good luck with that!) 

Too many would-be CEO bloggers treat their new toy as little more than a weekly newsletter.  They expect that simply because they are the CEO, naturally people will be magnetically drawn to their words.  And then they are crushed to see “Comments (0)” after each post, and are mortified to see a wan, unbudging Technorati ranking… 

And then they give up, poo-pooing the ballyhooed Blogosphere as they munch on some sour grapes.  Because they couldn’t tame the blogosphere, they lost interest.  Now, all other blog-related projects at the company become suspect – after all, if THE CEO couldn’t hack it, who dares think that they could do better?

And thus a company loses a golden opportunity to engage with their customers & prospects.

But you’re not like that?  You truly want to engage?  Cool.  Start by NOT blogging. 

Don’t blog for at least one full month following your decision to start blogging.  Instead, spend that time finding OTHER blogs in your industry.  Read them.  Comment judiciously.  Leave your “agenda” on the coat-rack.  Just get to know a few folks.  Introduce yourself. 

As the CEO, you’re probably accustomed to being noticed when you walk into an industry function.  You may even have handlers to squire you to the centers of power in a conference hall.  But, you wouldn’t presume that level of recognition and clout if you walked into a block party in a new neighborhood, eh?  You’d hang back a little, insert yourself mildly into a wedge of conversation, ingratiate yourself.  You’d be a gentleman.

And yet there might still be moments of awkwardness.  All the neighbors know each other.  There are cliques.  There’s context, politics and in-jokes to figure out.  You wouldn’t expect to be the life of the party right away.  But, you knew that going in… so, to help grease the skids, you brought some nice bottles of wine and some of your killer BBQ ribs.

Same with blogging, Chief.  Think of it as an extended block party.  You’re certainly invited, but please don’t expect to be Mr. Popular right away.  Giving freely of your attention in the form of commenting & linking liberally to your peers’ blogs is the equivalent of handing out your BBQ goodies.  It could take YEARS, but sooner or later your neighbors will come to respect, expect and love your contributions.

Up for it?  Awesome.  Cover up the keyboard, lay aside your ambitions, start reading, and join the fun. 

Posted by Todd Defren at 07:27 PM | Permalink | Comments (11) | TrackBacks (1)

It’s easy for us, as marketers, to hyperventilate about how Social Media represents a “revolution.”  It’s not revolutionary, though; we need to apply some Big Picture perspective.

Last night I watched the “Walking with Cavemen” special on Discovery.  (You reach a certain age, the Discovery Channel looks better and better.)  It was a well-produced and fascinating look at the evolution of Man.

One point struck me, in particular: for about a million years, Man’s use of technology didn’t move an inch.  The height of our inventiveness began and ended at the “sharp stone.”  Our forebears literally couldn’t even make the imaginative leap to consider attaching their sharpened stones to a stick, to make an axe or spear. 

Compare that million-year stagnation to the last 150–odd years of human history.  Yes, these have been bloody times but the pace of technical change has been breathtaking.  Cars, trains, airplanes, warships, computers, nuclear fission, the Internet…

According to the theory suggested by the show’s producers, the pace of technological innovation quickened soon after cavemen harnassed the power of fire. 

No longer did the night bring horror; now the cave people were warm and safe… with the luxury of leisure time, the cave people could engage in flights of imagination and speculation; they could finally engage their sense of wonder…”

We’re still evolving.  Look at Marketing.  In the last few years alone, the Live Web has emerged – empowering all online denizens to publish/share/influence with the same speed and efficacy as any multinational marketeer – and lo’, the top-down “broadcast” model which dominated Marketing for the past 75 years has been turned on its head. 

But, it’s a wave that’s been coming.  First came the semiconductor, then the mainframe, then the minicomputer, then the Personal Computer, then desktop publishing, then the Web (online publishing), then search, then blogs … This so-called revolution has been brewing for 50 years!  I think that’s called Evolution.

It’s sure as hell exciting, though; it feels like a spurt of evolutionary progress.  Blogs, Word-Of-Mouth Marketing, Social Networking: these are terms that barely existed 5 years ago yet they have become part of the bedrock of virtually every marketing program now under consideration.  There are a lot of really smart people thinking very hard about where this is all headed.

What a great time to be on this planet.  We’re benefiting from all the great stuff invented during one of Mankind’s most productive periods (including Stage One of the Internet, the first technology with the capacity to link the ideas and voices of an entire planet).  And now we stand perched on a precipice: “What’s Next??” – it’s okay to wonder, again.

My skull hurts from wondering where all this innovation will take us.  Is that a headache I feel? – or the nascent stirrings of evolution?

Posted by Todd Defren at 10:52 AM | Permalink | Comments (6)

This video was created by our client, The Rubicon Project.  It is hysterical.  Here’s the write-up on YouTube:

(Rubicon Project CEO) Frank Addante directly confronts the myths of starting companies in Los Angeles versus Silicon Valley. Recapping his 5 previous startups, he also describes the genesis of his latest online advertising venture.”

You can watch this video for the pure entertainment value (watch for the nuances; there are some clever sight gags), but afterward, think on this: 

How many CEOs with Addante’s track record would have the guts to put themselves out there like this? 

I’ve too often seen successful people grow ever-more worried about protecting their legacy, and in the process lose some of the edge that made them stars in the first place. 

This video is risky for Addante.  But risky + smart + funny = successful.

Posted by Todd Defren at 04:34 PM | Permalink

Via Scoble.  Others have also posted it, but if you haven’t caught this video yet, it’s chuckle-worthy.

Do I think we’re in a bubble?

Nope, not really.  While it is true that there is a growing number of companies, many of which may be more “feature” than “true business,” the risks have become far lower.  Many of these start-ups make do with much smaller VC rounds, as little as $250K, and take advantage of far cheaper tech resources such as online storage, offshore coders, etc. 

The flame-outs will be more frequent but less spectacular.  The price of failure is minimal.  Having tried and failed in Tech (and in Silicon Valley in particular) is a badge of honor here, not a mark of shame… which means “starting all over again” is no big deal and is often the road most traveled.

All of which makes the Tech industry far more resilient, robust, and more fun than it ever was.  Maybe it’s because we’re having fun while working this hard that people are worried about the jinxies?

Posted by Todd Defren at 10:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Several PR bloggers have talked about the “Customer Service is the New Marketing” theme.  (I can’t add much but I recommend you click the many links you’ve just skimmed past, when you find some time.)

This idea came up again in a meeting of the Advisory Board of the Society for New Communications Research today.  We were discussing “what WILL happen, what MIGHT happen, in the next 12 months?” and this intersection of Corp Comms & Customer Service was widely agreed to be an emerging trend of interest.

It’s the essence of what we talk about in the Social Media geekosphere:  for the first time in HISTORY, every customer has a voice that can be heard worldwide, if they choose to chime in online.  That’s HUGE.

The old comms method was reactive.  “Dell Hell” was a picture-perfect example of how Corp Comms was disconnected from Customer Service and had to react to the fast-growing outcry against the company’s lame support systems.

The emerging comms method will be proactive.  In order to avoid “Dell Hell”-style situations, savvy companies will find ways to interact with their customers on an on-going basis; to monitor outlying conversations for signs of discontent; to respond almost instantly – and meaningfully – to challenges raised online.  And to be “meaningful” will require that the Customer Service group has a tight degree of interaction with Corp Comms.

Dell’s figured it out, at great cost.  Will other corporate citizens learn from their example? 

Posted by Todd Defren at 06:46 PM | Permalink | Comments (8) | TrackBacks (0)

Hi, I’m Fake Mark Zuckerberg.  My alter-ego couldn’t be here today; I think he’s  consulting with (read: ignoring) his PR team. 

I’m here to get a few things off my chest in the meantime.  I’m here to tell you what The Real Mark Zuckerberg ought to be telling you … when he’s darned good & ready:

Hi guys.  I want you to know that we’re very much aware of the hubbub our Beacon approach has caused.  As you know, we’ve already scaled it back, in response to your concerns, and made a statement to that effect, all of which has been widely covered.

But I also realize that the firestorm still burns.  I know that even while the vast majority of our users are probably still unaware of Beacon and its challenges, there are many influential folks who are upset about suspected violations of privacy.

We’re working on it.  When a young company like Facebook grows this quickly, mistakes are going to be made.  Hopefully we’ll not only make mistakes quickly, we’ll fix them quickly, too; certainly that’s our goal.

But meanwhile, let’s be clear: in Facebook we’re building a world-class social network that’s “for the people” but also “for profit.”  We need to either monetize the community or else shut-down Facebook and think-up other ways to pay our mortgages and car payments, just like everybody else.  We think we’ve got a pretty smart team of execs and advisors, of all ages and backgrounds, so when we do hit on a great idea for making Facebook more profitable, we’re going to roll it out.  We respect our users but can’t get their thumb’s-up on every decision; that’s a surefire way to hobble our growth.  “Too many cooks,” and all that…

We may have made some mis-steps with Beacon, but we do believe that the basic strategy is unique and promising.  Everyone says “Word Of Mouth” is the most powerful marketing approach; we think that the growing prevalence of online activity in social networks means that the “Word Of Click” approach enabled by Beacon will be even more powerful.  We’ll see!

I admit that we could have been more thorough in our processes, in terms of how Beacon worked as well as how our advertising partners used it.  It’s got to move to a clearly-labeled Opt-In model across the network of partner sites; and yes, we’ll have to figure out a way to let people Opt-Out (even if it means we disable certain aspects of their Facebook experience as a result of opting-out of Facebook’s premier monetization strategy).

This is a work in progress, folks, and we appreciate your patience and trust as we figure out the smartest way to move forward.  In the meantime, again, the challenges to Beacon have registered loud & clear.  We hear you and we’re hard at work on making things ever-better for our users, partners and investors.

XOXO,

Fake Mark Zuckerberg

UPDATE: The Big Guy stepped up.  Didn’t know he was subscribed to this blog!

Posted by Todd Defren at 04:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

It’s easy to get caught up in the excitement. 

To go from managing relationships with 50–odd journalists to monitoring & participating in conversations with 1000’s of users is an exciting challenge for the PR pro.  Discovering uses for Twitter, Flickr, YouTube, etc., in the process just adds to the fun. 

Lots of clients get excited about it, too.  We just signed up a FORTUNE 50 client, for example, who “just knows (social media) is the future” and is embracing it.

But onto each parade a little rain must fall.  There comes a time when a client archly suggests that “blogger relations is not right for us” or who nonsensically wonders whether “those LOLcats might be secretly racist” (!?!) or who thinks social bookmarking might be a good idea … but not on del.icio.us, “because the name sounds like it might be pornographic.”

In my experience these reactions tend to fall under the category of “Seagull Management” … The manager swoops in, surveys the scene from on high; makes a snap judgment without regard for context (a.k.a. pooping on your ideas); and then swoops off, leaving others to clean the mess. 

I’ve been in situations where a mid-level manager brings in “the social media guys” (because they, too, are excited about the possibilities) … but they then spend more time strategizing with us on how-to avoid getting crapped on by The Seagull than on how to better engage with their communities. 

It’s a shame, really, but it’s part of the evolutionary process.  No “big idea” can expect a big, carefree embrace from the business world.  A headlong rush into Social Media will only result in half-witted approaches, whereas the tentative & slow adoption of Social Media tenets will benefit all.

There are those who suggest that the language of business is mostly the language of commerce and contracts.  And there are those of us who believe that tomorrow’s business leaders will recognize major advantages from scraping the seagull crap from their brows and engaging candidly & often with their customers, employees, and partners.

Be the turtle, slow & steady.  Not the seagull, quick to crap.

Posted by Todd Defren at 02:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)