Archive for the ‘General business concepts’ Category
My good friend Aliza Sherman has a great post over on Web Worker Daily about the evolution of the blogger relations model.
The model of “blogger relations” is one that is constantly evolving. I think that both sides are learning what works best for them.
Ideally, the relationship is symbiotic. We pitch, they write. Our clients are happy, their audience is happy.
I think that by bringing up alternative ways to engage bloggers shows a couple of issues at work. First is the blogger vs. journalist argument. Sponsored posts and such don’t work for the bloggers that are considered journalists. Being mindful of that, there are still creative ways to engage. Take the “media tour” of old. Instead of setting up in a metro daily’s conference room, we are bringing clients to coffee shops, neighborhood haunts and home offices to chat with this new era of influencer.
But there’s still room for the “traditional” model. Working with people who blog as part of a news reporting organization (news paper, online media etc…) The goal is to drive coverage for our clients while providing elements that are genuinely “newsworthy.” (what passes for newsworthy is another discussion) We can do so by engaging in a genuine conversation with our pub targets. My advice? I think a solid model looks something like this if you’re able to do it:
- Obviously knowing your target is job one. Make sure they’re appropriate. If you have doubts, imagine what they’ll feel.
- The difference between “please write about this” and “I would love to hear more about what you’re working on and how this can fit in” is huge.
- Keep the relationship professional. This is hard. We know when our reporters get married, get fired or get scooped. But I think it’s important to keep the focus on the client and what your outreach brings to the table.
- Be brief. Be right. Be gone. Keep your outreach focused and to the point.
So, what do you think? How is this model changing and how are we changing with it?
Tags: blogger, ethics, friends, Pitching, PR Tips
Sometimes life flies by so fast you look around and it’s been more than a month since you’ve posted a blog post. Well, maybe it’s just me.
But as a PR person and marketer, I know that fresh content is essential to staying top of mind with those that you want to be thinking about you. So how does one get back on the wagon?
Back on the pony, err, horse
Like Nike says, “Just do it.” Reemerging from the blogging black hole is as simple as opening your content management system and adding a new post. Now, I know this is over-simplifying things, but as a writer, it is your job to, well, to write. So start typing and hit publish.
One from the vault
We’ve all started a post, hit save and then forgot about it. Perhaps you just didn’t like how it sounded. Perhaps you called somebody out and your brain/keyboard filter engaged. Perhaps you thought you might be wrong with your perspective.
If you’ve hit a blogging wall, open your drafts folder and pick one to post. Take a risk and put yourself out there. After all, this is the Internet. Everybody’s right on the Internet.
I’m going to put my blog where my mouth is this week to back this up.
Short but sweet
I love writing short posts because they’re, well, they’re short. Write a quick post with no more than a link to something and three sentences with your opinions. We spend so much time worrying about if we’re right or if we’re in line with popular thought. If you think a campaign is dumb, say so. If you think a cohort’s blog post is nothing but genius, then say so. By keeping it short, you can turn the discussion to your commenters and get something off your chest.
Make a list
My Top 5 Reasons I haven’t Blogged Lately:
- Busy
- Working
- Busy
- Nothing to say
- Busy
In all seriousness, a Top X List post is about as cliché as they come, but they just work. They get you back in the flow of creating content and are easy to post.
Betting back on the blogging horse is difficult. I’ve had several lapses in blogging and each time I resolve to get back into it. What’s the longest you’ve gone without posting? How did you get out of your slump?
Tags: best practices, lull, ponies
Having your blog or Web site rank high in search engine is essentially a guaranteed way to convert sales. But as a PR person, how can you help your clients achieve number-one ranking nirvana?
While at the recent BlogWorld Expo, I sat in on a session that proposed the creation of a network of blogs with content specific to the various products or services your client sells. Relevant key words in the blogs’ titles and content will help it rank so that it does not dilute the keywords in other articles. The strategic use of keyword specific anchor text and linking structures will help as well.
Now, I’m not an SEO expert, but as a PR person, I see the many benefits to this. But there’s a side of me that asks, “Is this genuine?” There’s two sides to this. One of them is black, the other is white. So, I think it’s a gray hat strategy.
The Black Hat
From what I understand, the bad side of this comes in how the blogs are presented. If a network of blogs all have different designs, branding/names, domain registrations and IP addressees, then the assumption is that they are not related. But if all links and referrals point back to a single vendor, this is blatant link farming and search engines look at this extremely unfavorably.
This is a disingenuous method of boosting your page rank. And it does a dis-service to your readers. This will also, if identified by the search engines, end up hurting your ranking and site more as a result of being viewed as manipulative of the search engine results page.
The White Hat
Creating quality content is never a bad thing. But there’s a right way to do this. The theory is sound, but the practice needs to be executed properly.
If you keep the branding and disclose who runs the sites, then the benefits should still come. The underlying premise here is that the content is valuable. Provide information that helps guide a purchasing decision and that will help convert the traffic to revenue.
Technically, there’s more to good content than the words on a page. Ensuring that your site (or sites) is properly optimized with the appropriate links and anchor text, page structure (tagging, linking structure, focused keywords, etc.) and linking out to other quality content are just as important to helping your client’s blogs rank.
Sharing your content is where a different side of blogger outreach comes in to play. Spend time cultivating relationships with other bloggers and sites for content distribution and linking purposes, rather than develop this network artificially yourself. Develop authoritative sites that are on topic and link out to more sites than just your own.
So, in the end, it all comes back to “write quality content.” What do you think of this model, is it unethical? How would you improve upon this model?
~ Extra special thanks to Kristy Bolsinger for her help w/this post. Always good to have a fact checker 
Tags: bwe09, ethics, execution, PR, Tips
I would like to welcome TechCrunch to the world of actual journalism. Find a story, verify info, interview sources, write story, fact check, publish, repeat.
Here’s the quick background: TechCrunch obtained multiple documents from an alleged hacker who had broken into Twitter employee’s email accounts, Google Documents (There’s a reason it’s not compliant, but that’s a different issue) and other documents and information. TechCrunch verified w/Twitter and its lawyers the accuracy of the documents and even interviewed them. Then they published some of the documents. They were even kind enough to redact personal information.
Journalism 101
From the days of muckraking and yellow journalism, obtained documents have been one of the best sources of great information for reporters. The methods and tactics used to acquire these documents range from the legal (Washington Public Records Act, Federal Freedom of Information Act) to the potentially unethical.
But here’s an important step that separates journalist from sensationalist: The journalist attempts to verify the information before publishing. The Sensationalist does not.
As a holder of an actual, real-life journalism degree, I sat through hours of press law and have filled out my fair share of information requests. I have also obtained information through anonymous sources or obtained information in other ways. And I used those documents. But after verifying on my own.
The right to publish
Now, the debate over whether or not TechCrunch should have published or not is broken into two parts:
- Is the information newsworthy?
- Is the information “off limits?”
The newsworthiness discussion is for another day. I am focused on the ethics involved in publishing the documents. TechCrunch absolutely acted within the boundaries of accepted journalistic ethics in publishing those documents. If it had simply published the entire .zip file without making an attempt to check facts or redact personal information, it would have been very out of line.
Instead, it looked for the information it deemed “newsworthy” and ran with it. To recap, it verified the information with Twitter, attempted to elicit on-the-record comment from Twitter and published the information that was applicable to the story it accompanied. TechCrunch even solicited comment from third-party companies named in the documents.
One could also make the argument that Ev and Biz and some of the Twitter team are “Limited Purpose Public Figures.” This means that some of their information is subject to federal and state open records laws and that their expectations of privacy are a bit different than the average citizen.
In this case, the combination of a good journalist and a good lawyer are difficult to beat.
Should they have published
Well, in my opinion yes and no. If TechCrunch wants to use this as a standard for applying journalistic ethics to its reporting (coverage?), then great. But the fact is that TechCrunch is a blog. Its writers express opinion and insert themselves into the stories they are writing. Independant sources are a rarity, as is interviews with the subjects they’re writing about.
I’ve written about the difference between blogger and journalist before, and I think it is completely applicable here. And this gets right to the heart of the debate. If the New York Times had published those documents, would we have even flinched?
I’m sure my opinion is different than some, so tell me what you think.
Tags: ethics, journalism, journalist ethics, TechCrunch, Twitter
In my last post, I raised the issue of what I call the Twitter Relations Model. Essentially, Companies are putting on events with limited invite lists ant the expectation is that the atendees will tweet about it. The net result is a super-effective word of mouth PR/advertising campaign.
So, I talked about the problem. Now, I’m here to offer a solution. Stowe Boyd is championing something he calls “microsyntax.” Essentially, a couple of characters that denotes a more involved meaning. For example, a forward slash before and after a city or address or location denotes that I am actually there: /Kent, WA/ for example.
So, my solution is a microsyntax for sponsored Tweets. I am proposing a four-character sequence that looks something like this:
My proposal for a sponsored Tweet Microsyntax
Essentially, it’s a $ at the beginning and end of a tweet. An extra step and the loss of four characters, but in the interest of disclosure, I think it might be worth it.
The effect
If you see a tweet with the dollar sign, then assume it is a sponsored tweet and the opinion being expressed has been bought. Omit the symbols and you are claiming the opinion as a true representation of your thoughts and feelings.
Some companies are blatantly sponsoring tweets, but that’s OK. Izea CEO Ted Murphy says that the company has strict disclosure policies and that participants will be disclosing their relationships. To me, this is no different than advertising on any other content broadcasting platform. So long as it is obvious what is a sponsored tweet, then more power to you.
The effect of the dollar sign microsyntax is simple: Force disclosure of what opinions belong to you and what opinions belong to the company paying for them.
What do you think?
Tags: disclosure, Izea, microsyntax, sponsored, tweets
As public relations continues its amoeba-like shift around social media, one of the things I’m starting to see is the practice of Twitter relations.
Twitter relations is similar to blogger relations, but eliminates the threshold of authority that comes with a blog. Brands, PR companies and marketing teams are beginning to provide limited access to everyday tweeters. Now, these aren’t your ordinary tweeters, these are people with at least 1,000 followers and who are generally quite vocal.
As you’ll see, I apparently fit this profile… But what I’m seeing is PR and marketing toeing the line between sponsored posts and actual brand evangelism.
Will tweet for food
Recently in the Seattle area, I saw Pemco flying across Tweetdeck. A group of local people had been invited to the top of the Space Needle and had a catered affair where Pemco debuted a new part of its “Northwest Profiles” ad campaign.
The people present had tweeted about being there and watching the commercial and hanging out with the Pemco CMO (who had “invited” his followers to attend).
Another example is an event that Alaska Airlines is sponsoring, called the Aviation Geek Night. A scant 12 people won tickets to take a ride in the airline’s flight simulator and have some further access to the company. This is not invite only and there was no expectation of tweeting on behalf of Alaska Airlines. Disclosure: I won a pass and will be attending.
Also, another invite I’ve received is to head to a location of a high-end dining chain called El Gaucho. It is opening a new location locally and is featuring a lunch menu. They hired a company to host a Taste and Tweet and local media and a few “average Joe” twitterers got to attend (again, disclaimer: I was one of them).
Are these sponsored posts? What about the media people in attendance at these events? I think those count as sponsored tweets and the media present must either disclose their receiving of free goods or food in their tweets. As a non-member of the media (anymore), I think that what I voluntarily posted to my Twitter stream also counts. But am I under a moral or legal obligation to disclose?
How to relate to Tweeters
So, is there a right way to engage with prolific tweeters? What is more important, having one person with 100,000 followers at an event or 20 people with 1,000 followers? I think the answer is pretty clear as the 20 people are more likely to be more vocal with their posts and opinions, resulting in additional mentions.
For small brands looking to boost the mentions in the Twitter stream, having a small, semi-exclusive event is a great way to do that. The problem is the discolsure dilemma. If the “average” person on Twitter is going to act as media at an event, then they should discolse the freebies. Would it have been acceptable for me to go to the El Gaucho event and not posted anything about it?
If PR and marketing companies are OK with people coming to the event and not tweeting at all, then they should not take credit for those that do. Mentions on Twitter as part of these events should not count as media mentions.
Measuring the impact
What value do these mentions have then? The word-of-mouth marketing that occurs from these is quite valuable. The mentions the above companies received helped boost their visibility and their reach. Did the events lead to more sales? Did they lead to actual press coverage? Those are some of the key metrics to consider.
What are your thoughts on this? Should PR take credit for bringing in assorted tweeters to an invite-only event? What are your best practices for tweeter relations? How do you see this trend evolving?
Tags: best practices, El Gaucho, marketing, soc, Twitter
ROI.
How do you measure the ROI for a Tweet? How do you measure ROI for a video posted to YouTube? How do you measure ROI for a blog post?
The concept of ROI in modern public relations and corporate communications has evolved from the old standby of column inches earned * ad rate. The common belief now days is that retweets, blog comments, saves to Technorati etc… are all forms of currency.
ROI = $$$
Yes. A return on investment can only be measured in actual dollars. An increase in reach and “authority” are great. But how does the use of social media affect your or your clients’ bottom line?
Using social currency or “whuffie” or any other social metric is icing on the cake. But the cake needs to be a financial impact of the marketing or communications program. This applies to consumer goods just as much as it applies to enterprise software or discreet manufacturing. The units may change, but the affect to the bottom line is still what matters.
The concept of attributing a sale to the use of social media has become relatively easy. Marketing automation companies such as Marketo or even URL trackers such as bit.ly have made it much easier to follow a lead through the process of becoming a contact to becoming a customer.
The bottom line
As Olivier Blanchard over at The BrandBuilder reminds us “ROI is always financial.” Lots of people are beginning to pontificate on that stance. That it’s time to make some money on social media. There’s no reason for the consultants and gurus to be the onws making all the money. But nobody’s offering a solution.
Now it’s time for me to offer a solution. Instead, I am going to try and offer a mathematical problem, so bear with me.
The first item I’ll tackle is twittering a link to a product purchase form. First, let’s define some variables. X= my hourly rate, y = the amount of time in hours it took me to get to the point I can publish that tweet, z = the final cost of publishing a form. So:
(x * y) = z
Now, let’s continue. Lets try to determine the ROI of you publishing that tweet. More variables 
If you have a = number of people that fill out the form and b = the cost of each unit sold and c = the number of new customers we can use the answer from above to find the ROI of that tweet campaign.
(b * c) – z = ROI
I know this is beyond over simplifying. How do RTs or word of mouth affect this calculation? I’m hoping you all can help me out with that. Can somebody check my math?
Tags: business, consultant, formula, ROI, social media
Disclaimer, I adapted this from my blog for Etelos, as one of our executives will be speaking there.
Do you know what South by Southwest is? Sure, it’s a great music festival, but did you know it is also one of the best tech conferences around?
SXSW Interactive is a compilation of some super quality speakers and panels as well as some of the best networking (read: parties) around. It is by far one of the best events I’ve attended.
Loading…This year’s event, however, has a different appeal for me. I was able to secure a pretty powerful panel for Etelos founder & CEO Danny Kolke. OpenID, OAuth, Data Portability and the Enterprise will explore the challenges enterprise class companies face over data ownership.
Featuring Joseph Smarr from Plaxo, Kaliya Hamlin, AKA “Identitywoman” and Bob Blakely from the Burton Group will join Danny to discuss if OpenID and OAuth are good for the enterprise and how to implement them.
Shifting the focus
I think this will be an excellent topic for this year’s event. Layoffs are piling up, mandatory furloughs are being enforced and startups are folding. As the emphasis shifts from true innovation to a successful business model, the debate over identity and data ownership becomes essential.
A prospect or sales lead is an invaluable commodity, and this is even more true in today’s economic climate. But who owns that relationship? Who owns that customer’s contact information?
Meetup Tweetup Restup
Lots of exciting parties have already been announced and dozens more will undoubtedly pop up as March approaches. I have an awesome idea for a smaller, more intimate meetup opportunity if anybody is looking for an opportunity to host something.
I look forward to meeting you all out there and discussing some public relations goodies. As an extra bonus, Kaliya is organizing a lunch that will follow the panel. Come, join us there too!
I’m in the process of building up a schedule, but I want to get your input. What sessions have you excited? What speakers must you see? What parties are already on your list? Fill out the handy-dandy form or post a comment.
Tags: Add new tag, conversation, Enterprise, friends, Kolke, OAuth, OpenID, party, relationships, revenue, socialmedia, SXSW
Do you work for a company that hasn’t yet adopted social media practices? Perhaps you are the one implementing a strategy to stay connected to your audiences. But, what rules are there?
As I mentioned recently, social media and social marketing are in their infancies and we are defining the rules. But defining these rules is especially important for companies. Having clear guidelines makes a social media program versatile and transferable. Plus, it will make the lives of compliance officers a bit less stressful.
Don’t be an idiot
Sounds simple enough, right? If you are acting as a representative of a company anywhere that is visible to the general public, act as if your boss is reading over your shoulder (If you’re the boss, act as if your leading investor is over your shoulder). Having a little conscious whispering in your ear while you type should keep you clear.
Keeping a positive focus on the actions of the company should be a priority for the social media practitioner. It shares the spotlight with fostering discussion of the company’s activities.
Maintain your voice
When you operate as the voice of the company, it will be difficult to keep your voice out of the materials you generate — learn to embrace that. You will create “better” content if you keep true to your personal writing style and voice. Copy will come more naturally and your audiences will be able to better relate to it so long as you are being genuine.
Write what you know; write how you know and you’ll be surprised at the results. Plus, you will avoid the leading, unique tendencies to be a ground-breaking leader in your content vertical i.e. “marketing speak.”
Active or passive
When you are creating a content channel, make an overt decision on whether it will actively participate in any discussions that may or may not occur. Of course, I would recommend being an active voice within the community you are trying to create around your service or product. But it is sometimes necessary to broadcast.
What I would avoid, however, is simply being one or the other. If you only broadcast, no discussion, no community occurs. And that defeats the purpose of social media/marketing as a whole. If you are only responding to comments or external discussions, the audience controls the conversation. And, while it is important to participate, it is necessary that you lead the discussion as it relates to your product or service.
To delete or not to delete
Regardless of how you engage, be it broadcasting or conversing, I would strongly advise to proactively react to negative comments and feedback. Deleting the critical material is ultimately up to you, but I feel that addressing the issues is important. Unless the complaint is patently wrong.
Keep it current
Post, create content and keep it up to date. Not much to say beyond that.
Make it good
Making content that doesn’t suck is generally a good idea. If your job is to blog, make sure you read some of the popular blogs and see what makes them popular. Are they funny? Do they use lots of word play? How many links do they use? And so on. The point is to provide value to the people that pay your company money and the people you want to pay your company money.
Your tweets, blog posts etc… should be checked for grammar/spelling/typos. Your videos should have decent sound quality. Your podcasts should have a quick edit done to kill dead air or pregnant pauses. Posting solid content makes for a happy audience. It is frustrating to read through a post that is rife with errors.
Setting up social media rules is a difficult challenge to say the least. The problems compound when you add in the layers that are natural in a company. But I think that perhaps the most important rule should be “Don’t be afraid of change.”
What has worked in your company? How do you participate? What rules do you have? Share them in the comments.
Tags: genuine, Participate, relationships, socialmedia, Tips
There is no etiquette, there are no rules. Make your own and make them known.
Do you find yourself facing social media overload? With Twitter followers, Facebook friends, Flickr friends, LinkedIn connections and countless other social networks to manage, sometimes I just find myself a touch overwhelmed. Do you?
All of a sudden, I found myself with more than 800 followers on Twitter, which compared to some isn’t a lot, it is a daunting number to me. I can’t follow everybody back and feel like I’m making genuine connections. And this is leading me to make my social media rules.
Be genuine
The old standby is back again. If you’re putting a false impression of yourself out there, people will associate you with that and not respect the “real” you. Don’t be fake.
Twitter is disturbingly Google friendly. I spent a few years as a reporter and most of my articles have been over taken by Twitter musings, blog posts and a video interview I did more than a year and a half ago. It is vital that anything you put out into the public be representative of your talents, skills and opinions.
Be visible
If you truly want to foster genuine connections, don’t sign up for every shiny new bubbly social network that pops up. Unless you can actively spend time there and create a community. If you neglect connections and networks, they will quickly dissolve. I like to say that the best part of social networking is that it is a passive technology — you get out what you put in.
By focusing your efforts/connections into fewer places, you are able to have more quality interactions that are more beneficial to both parties.
Be flexible
The other day, I unfollowed about 50 people on Twitter, but since then I’ve followed just as many new people. There’s a sociological theorum out there called Dunbar’s number, which states that a human is only capable of so many stable connections at any one time. I think that social networks have greatly expanded that capacity, but your brain and attention are still finite resource that require flexible management.
It’s important to know that you can’t connect with everybody and you can’t manage 1,000 profiles. By being flexible with your interactions, you are able to provide a more genuine social interaction.
In a nutshell
Here are my rules in a nutshell:
- I will be myself
- I will not follow, friend or accept everybody.
- I will engage, interact and participate
- I will not be disappointed by a lack of response
- I will ask for you to read this blog
- I will not force this blog down your throat
- I will look at your profile.
- I will be genuine.
What are your rules? What are your social networking guidelines? I would love to know.
Tags: conversation, genuine, Participate, relationships