ChaosScenario

Your Brand is Not My Friend: SXSW Extended Content

Awhile back I nominated Alan Wolk's seminal work on branding through social media for a panel at South by Southwest in Austin, TX. They selected his topic for inclusion into their extended content.

The panel is moderated by AdWeek's Brian Morrissey.

Panelists, besides Alan, are Ian Schafer, Noah Brier, and Michael Lebowitz.

Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be any way to embed the video directly, so I'm just providing a link to it from here. It's less than 20 minutes, long, but well worth the time.

Check out the SXSW Panel Discussion (Extended Content): Your Brand Is Not My Friend. - Cam Beck

3 Ways to Build a Good Reputation

1. Do something notable.

Today.

If you wait until tomorrow, someone else will have done it, and your doing it won't be as notable.

Who was the second person to walk on the moon? The third?

By any measure, just breaking the earth's atmosphere is quite an accomplishment, but we give extra credit to those who impress us first.

2. Do something good.

Each day. Every day. For a lot of people.

Add value to each person you come in contact with. Don't worry about what they can do for you. Assume nothing. What can you do for them?

3. Fail.

Someday soon, if not earlier.

It's inevitable. You're going to fail. But take heart: A little failure (or even a spectacular one) can be a good thing.

Failure is a great instructor. It builds perseverance. It teaches us different ways to look at things. It necessitates developing alternative solutions.

It also brings us humility, which keeps us from being so confident in our beliefs that we can't see other perspectives. We can empathize with those who disagree because each person may, in Benjamin Franklin's words, "doubt a little of his own infallibility."

But don't give up just because you failed once. Or twice. Or three times.

Or even 6,000 times. Like Thomas Edison's successful invention of a marketable incandescent light bulb, your next try might produce the breakthrough you seek.

- Cam Beck

Can they make it to profitability?

In a recession what's real in terms of sustainable business models comes to light. I lived through the dot com boom and there were any number of companies that were "changing the rules" or creating a new economy. Economics, unfortunately, is a lot like gravity. It's pretty difficult to change the rules.

YouTube and Facebook have changed the world online. It's hard to remember how hard it was to post a video online before YouTube.  Facebook has successfully created the first global scale online community and seems to becoming one of those sites that just about everyone visits and engages with on a daily basis.

The problem is that neiter one is profitable. Although YouTube has seen tremendous growth its still yet to come up with a way to monetize that growth into profitability. The number of ads that Facebook would have to display based on their own tool is staggering. Both are in desperate need of a new advertising model that can either show direct correlation to sales or one that proves that brand awareness can be built on these site more effectively than through other vehicles, say TV.

At the peak of economic growth, like in 2007, companies are willing to invest in what hasn't been proven. In the depth of a recession, however, the hard questions get asked and just like during the dot com boom, many companies cease to exist.

I don't think this will happen to either of these companies. However, something has to change with both of them in order for them to be sustainable for the long term. I'm just not sure that anyone, including those inside the company, know what that something is.

- Paul Herring

What have you done for me lately, social media expert

Since being on Twitter and following some of what I think are the greatest minds in social media, I've been overloaded with conversations and opinions. Some of are worthwhile, but I wonder whether or not they are tweeting just to tweet.

Those of us who work in this area, I have some news for you. We're not rock stars, even if we dress like them. Creating conflict for conflict's sake is not productive -- and sometimes it's just downright rude. Speaking in conferences, having your own podcast, pontificating about "new media" without providing specific examples, it's all good but of little value.

Maybe CMOs at big companies are impressed by books that you've published, conferences that you've spoken at. I'm not. Show me examples of where your ideas have been applied or better yet, show me where YOU have been part of the team who did it. I'm done with the fluff.

- Paul Herring

How to reach your audience without getting in their way

With all the criticism that Facebook received for appreciably changing their terms of service, it's interesting to note the positive way they responded that probably prevented any mass exodus.

Full disclosure: I have to mention that I completely empathize with their predicament. While their membership is growing by leaps and bounds across the world, they've had difficulty implementing an effective means to monetize that takes advantage of their unique data mining methods.

The market is fickle. People don't care that they're getting this awesome platform without any membership fees. When Facebook tried to monetize and launched one of its first initiatives, Beacon, the public revolted. Their 2008 ad revenue, in spite of the vast numbers of people using the platform, is less than that of MySpace.

By the time I got word that Facebook revised their terms of service, people had already started revolting.

Facebook then did two good things well. The first was in direct response to the outcry and threat of lawsuit from the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), and the groundwork from the other was laid long before this was even a blip on the EPICs radar.

1. They recanted the policy and solicited feedback from the audience
2. They communicated directly with the members without the normal lawyer-speak.

(To show how fickle the marketplace really is (and what an itchy trigger finger people have),the executive director of the EPIC, Marc Rotenberg, withheld filing the his complaint with the FCC but promised to keep it in his back pocket.)

As for the other issue, here is the message Facebook sent out to all its members at the top of their member home page:

Notice the "Close" call to action in the upper right hand corner?

If the users don't really care about what's going on behind the scenes, they can just close out the message, and it won't return. I imagine Facebook can use this method to communicate any message they need to communicate to their audience about their service.

They kept it short and to the point, and it speaks directly to the people who were raising the fuss in the first place. In 4 short sentences, the Facebook team was able to explain

• Why they're sending the message.
• What they're going to do about it.
• How to get more information.
• Instructions on how to participate in the conversation.

That's all well and good. But here's the question:

If Facebook can communicate issues before the fact in a manner that provides an easy way to ignore it, if the users wish, can't they just have let their users know, in the same way, that their terms of service were going to change, and have solicited feedback before they pushed it live?

It seems getting feedback from the community before they blow up might be the best way to avoid these sorts of situations in the future.

And in the meantime, they might want to keep Marc Rotenberg's number on speed dial. Especially in a space where privacy is a huge concern, bringing in a privacy advocate (even if he does represent only the most privacy-conscious) for advice just seems smart. - Cam Beck

Navigating Muddy Social Waters

The topic I took on today at MP Daily Fix had so many contributors that it was difficult to settle on the ones I did. As I was formulating the article, I got to bounce some ideas off of friends and colleagues alike, all of whom noticed or agreed on the existence some of the same dilemmas I did:

1. More people were coming out of the woodwork to connect with them on various platforms, and
2. They weren't certain how this would impact the way they (or others) used them.

Alan warned that Facebook might be the new AOL, and Paul remarked (half-jokingly, I presume) that Facebook was becoming the dread of young early-adopting hipsters -- MySpace.

So with this information as the backdrop, I encourage you to read this piece at the MarketingProfs: Daily Fix. I look forward to getting your feedback. - Cam Beck

Alright, Amazon. I'm sold on the new Kindle. Now can you deliver?

When the first Kindle was launched, I admiringly took a look at the features it offered and considered some ways it could be improved. Others had some of the same ideas.  Although the next-generation Kindle that Amazon announced today doesn't implement all of the suggestions, it improved in two ways that convinced me that I could really use this device to become more productive.

2007 suggestion:

Enable audio and ability to listen in car. This would kill my need to buy a traditional book again, and would be well worth the cost. In fact, I'd pay three times as much for each book if the audio version were included, in spite of the difficulties above. Then I could listen to books on my commute and read and reference books elsewhere. I'd even repurchase the books I'd already bought just so I could listen and/or read on my own terms, in my own time.

Kindle v2 improvements

Read-to-Me Feature - Now Kindle can read to you. With the new Text-to-Speech feature, Kindle can read every book, blog, magazine, and newspaper out loud to you. You can switch back and forth between reading and listening, and your spot is automatically saved. Pages automatically turn while the content is being read, so you can listen hands-free. You can choose from both male and female voices which can be sped up or slowed down to suit your preference. Anything you can read on Kindle, Kindle can read to you, including books, newspapers, magazines, blogs and even personal documents. In the middle of a great book or article but have to jump in the car? Simply turn on Text-to-Speech and listen on the go.

Audiobooks - With Kindle, you are able to download and enjoy more than 50,000 audio titles from Audible.com, including bestselling audio books, radio programs, audio newspapers, and magazines. Due to their file size, audiobooks are downloaded to your PC over your existing Internet connection and then transferred to Kindle using the included USB 2.0 cable. Listen via Kindle's speaker or plug in your headphones for private listening.

I should mention that a couple of my 2007 criticisms were off the mark. For instance, owners would be able to access their entire library online, so if they lost or destroyed their Kindle, their library wouldn't be at risk.

Although I still recognize the social nature of discovery and therefore believe in the utility of temporary book sharing (peer-to-peer and library-to-user)  the practical side of me says that publishers will never agree to it as long as they fear poaching, which is always. However, their Whispersync technology may eventually prove me wrong.

All said, even with a $356 price point, the Kindle may be the must-have device of 2009. Hopefully Amazon will be able to overcome the manufacturing difficulties that plagued the launch of their first device. - Cam Beck

Blog, Facebook, Twitter and Myspace: Managing Your Profile and Hedging Your Bets

As they say, the only two things that are certain are death and taxes. The rest is open to interpretation. This includes the suitability of a candidate for any given position. Therefore, whether you're looking for a job or looking for a good person to fill a job, you're putting something valuable at risk -- either your time or your money. If job hunting is a gamble, then why not hedge your bets a bit?

The following is part of an exchange between banking guru J.P. Morgan and a member of a congressional committee in the early 20th century.

Congressman: Is not commercial credit based primarily on money or property?
J.P.M.: No, sir. The first thing is character.
Congressman: Before money or property?
J.P.M.: Before money or anything else. Money cannot buy it.

Long résumés and walls full of degrees and commendations have their place, but in the pantheon of qualifications, I wouldn't rank them the highest. Like Morgan, I would put a premium on character. In fact, here's how I would rank the order of importance.

1. Character
2. Intelligence (general and specific)
   
3. Specific experience
4. Education

Why you should be all over the 'net

The problem is that character and intelligence aren't easy to put on a résumé. Some people get by with listing experience (especially pro bono work they've done) and education, but that will only get you so far. Although they're often a good starting point, companies know the story doesn't end there.

And increasingly, they know how to use Google.

Knowing this, you really have only two choices:

1. Ignore it and try to fly under Google's considerably effective radar, or
2. Embrace it and influence it as much as you can

Number 1 may work only if you have no friends or a name like "Abraham Lincoln." In the first case, even if you try to fly under the radar, your friends may have other ideas about your desire for anonymity, and if you're not actively telling your story, someone else may be. In the second case... let's face it... Companies would be hard-pressed to find information about you when they have to navigate through all the information about that other guy.

Number 2, on the other hand, gives you an opportunity to tell your side of the story before anyone else does. If you're a private person and are uncomfortable with being "out there," you have the ability to moderate your level of personal disclosure.

If you're prolific, you can ensure prospective employers (or clients, if you're self-employed) can become convinced that you may have the qualities they seek in a candidate. If they don't value those qualities, they're probably not a good fit for you anyway.

That way, if there are any issues (fairly or unfairly) that call your character into question (Remember those parties you attended when you were 25?) they will be drowned out by the story you'd rather they see.

Just make sure your online persona is consistent with the way you want others to see you. - Cam Beck

Can anyone kill the killer social media apps?

This morning I saw an interesting question on LinkedIn from José María Gil about the role of email marketing and social media platforms to "build your brand." It was a question I know a lot of people struggle with as they seek for ways to capitalize on the growing adoption of social media, so I decided to post the question and answer here.

Here's the question (modified for formatting):

In the last year I have seen a big euphoria about the opportunity that social media is for companies as a marketing tool. There are a ton of articles and posts out there lately about how to use Twitter, Facebook, Myspace, etc, to build your brand, establish relationships with your users, and much more. Within that euphoria, I have heard voices claming that social media y the new king, and that email marketing is dead.

However, since the moment you need an email address to sign up for any social network, that is completely false. Email and social media are good friends and not enemies. Both of them have an important and different role within our online marketing strategy.

I see social networks as a party, where you meet a lot of people and get in a lot of conversations. That is a really good way to build a community and to find an audience. But, the people that really care about what you do, is the people who are going to sign up to your email list, and the people you are going to start a more direct and personalized relationship with, engaging them with the value given through your emails.

What do you think?

The cost of entry is low, but cost of effectiveness may be steep

José -
With the current social media platforms available, new entrants into this market need to be something more than parties where people can "interact with a brand."

Typically, they don't care about the brand, and they don't care about the problems or needs of the company. They just want something that rewards them for their time, or else they'll not feel compelled to give it, email or not.

Thus, social media sites must provide some unique value that people can't get on Facebook or Myspace, and with new apps being added to these two growing platforms that generate revenue, the cost of entry is constantly increasing. It pays to be a first mover.

However, it is possible to build a reasonably priced platform that addresses the needs of a niche audience, and email marketing (if you can really call it that) can and probably should play a critical role in building relationships. The goal, though, isn't necessarily to build a relationship between the brand and the individual, but rather to help them build relationships within the platform.

This requires a lot of restraint, because the temptation is to put some backwards sales techniques to use and try to keep convincing the users that your platform is the best platform and they should abandon what they're already doing.

Instead, hosts need to be fairly passive and message users when something has happened that they've asked to be notified about. (LinkedIn, for instance, lets you know when your profile isn't complete, or when someone attempts to connect with you).

The message must be simple and to the point. Make it (in a friendly way -- or whatever way showcases a likable personality) and get out of the way.

Hope this helps! - Cam Beck

Do they know how good they have it?

Near the end of my freshman year in high school, my family moved to Berlin, Germany from Havelock, North Carolina. During my three years there, I kept in touch with several friends by mail, and through those friends several others by proxy. It was tough to keep it up, though, because the lag in communication was so long. Eventually I lost contact with most of them. Facebook and Myspace give us all the tools to get back in touch and catch up, but I wonder how many take advantage of it in a meaningful way.

Let's look at the past and the present by the numbers:

1991

• 1 - 2 hours: Time it took to draft an informal personal letter to a good friend.
• 2 weeks: Time it took to send a letter from Berlin, Germany to the U.S, using the U.S. government postal system.
• 1 month: Minimum amount of time it took to receive a written response to a letter.
• 3-6 months: Amount of time between speaking with good friends across the ocean.
• $25: The approximate cost of a phone call lasting less than 30 minutes (that's about $50 in today's dollars).

Today

• 1 -15 minutes: Time it takes to draft an email.
• 30 seconds: Time it takes for a friend to receive an email after it's been sent.
• A few minutes: Time it takes to receive a response.
• 1 week: Amount of time between speaking with good friends across the ocean.
• Free: The approximate cost of a 30 minute phone call, using the right technology (ISP fees excluded).

A word of caution:

As the cost of communication decreased and the speed increased, the frequency of trivial communication increased. Now it's easy to write a few words and send it off. While it may be quicker and more immediately gratifying, with the types of information we're typically sharing ("Hey, check out this link...What a L00ser") we can't say we're forming very meaningful interactions.

While these tools hold great promise, as Pope Benedict XVI said, they also pose risks that should not be ignored.

It's not altogether bad to keep in touch with a lot of people at a superficial level. After all, I found out years ago how hard it is to consistently hold a lot of meaningful long-distance friendships over a long period of time when you don't have the tools people have today.

However, we shouldn't forget that these tools should complement our relationships, not replace them. A status update on Facebook is good. A friendly conversation over lunch or a cup of coffee is better. - Cam Beck