Category >> Social Media
I have been waiting to see who would be first to rock the social networking site Twitter, with an interesting and conversation worthy campaign. I can now announce that I am still waiting. This may not be a bad thing either. Skittles [Mars Corporation] have taken the conservative approach to the campaign and in doing so have not offended the throngs of Twitterers that are tweeting about the initiative. 
 
Mars Corp. have basically converted skittle.com in to a search aggregate of Twitter that displays the real time conversation of key words on Twitter that relate to the Skittles brand. They then seeded the refresh and are watching what happens. There is a little overlay that links off to other areas of the site for further exploration. It's a simple concept and in my opinion only relevant because they are first to market. This type of campaign is the 'little toe in the water' approach and is more exploratory than anything else. There is very little risk to this campaign and very little cost as well. So was it worth it? Sure if all you are trying to do it get some PR buzz then I can say it worked. There will be a little brand lift for a couple of weeks and maybe it'll hit the bottom line with a few extra boxes sold in Q2. For companies only planning from quarter to quarter its just fine. It's also just fine if you are trying to experiment with cost cutting marketing campaigns in this time of global economic bla bla.
 
Did it rock the social media world? Not from the posts and tweets that I have read. But that's not a bad thing either. Skittles are now on the radar of the social media elite and I hope that there is a part two to this so that I can stop waiting for that big day.
 
I guess that it does further push the idea forward that Twitter is very close to reaching critical mass and that there are now marketing efforts a foot by the larger brands to see what the benefits to marketing in Twitter will yield.
 
Mark this day on your calendar as the day Twitter turned. 

Here is a thought. Traditional newspapers are failing, and magazines are having their own "issues" to say the least. Trying to be relevant media in today's world can be a tough ride. One online blog service called
The Printed Blog is even attempting to provide targeted content based on location and user choices, via geo-targeting and content voting on their website. The idea is that the company custom prints papers for up to 100 unique locations throughout the Chicago area. The content published material will feature international, national, and local news, as well as blog content that is voted on by the web user base. The thought is that the content will be extremely relevant to its readers since each edition is uniquely created by users/readers for a specific area of town. I think that this idea is interesting and may extend the life of traditional newsprint. It's cool, but not game changing.

What if I told you that an even better system for creating custom content already existed and is being used by millions of people already? A system that has several thousand editors dedicated to providing you with a completely a unique reading experience for each and every user. This system provides highly relevant content either on demand or in a steady stream that you just skim through at any time. This system runs 24 hours a day and pays the editors nothing for their hard work.

Well that system is Twitter and it is already replacing traditional newspapers, magazines, tv, radio and web portals like Yahoo and Google IG as the first place to find content.

Let me break it down:

  1. I create a Twitter account.
  2. Then I start to search for, and follow people with similar interests either personally or professionally. or if you are like me, both.
  3. Download an application like TweetDeck that allows you to group the people you are following into categories. Not unlike sections of an newspaper; News, Sports and Entertainment, Technology etc.
  4. In each of these sections I follow people that are either experts in their field or have a passion for athe topic of interest. Either way the posts will be relevant.
  5. Now what do all of these people that you are following Twitter do all day? Well they post stuff. They post links to articles in newspapers and blogs, videos, music [http://blip.fm/all] and much, much more.
  6. Breaking stories are now hitting Twitter first and I no longer have to wait for the old world media publishing systems latency to get the stories quickly.
  7. The topics that are trending and are important globally can be easily viewed right in the TweetDeck application trending cloud tag.
  8. Now because I have selected people based on similar interests and passions, the content that is posted is for the most part very relevant pertinent to me. The Twitter base becomes my very own editorial staff picking only the best of the best and then posting it to your Twitterstream.
  9. Now add the NYTimes, CBC, Fox News, NPR and CNN into your Twittersteam and you have it all the topics and news covered.

It really is that easy and I must confess that Twitter is fast becoming my main source of all things to read, watch and listen to online. The other great thing about personalized content on Twitter is that if you throw out a question at your followers [editors] about a topic, you will always receive links and information that has been qualified by the user posting it. Let's say I am looking for an article on viral marketing best practices. Twitter works like a personal research assistant and within five minutes, give or take, there will be four or five messages for me with recommended articles to read. Now if I Google it I have to qualify each result myself. In Twitter, the users that post answers to my questions share the same interests and may already have looked for a similar article.  There are users (friends) who already know me and what I am all about, and therefore the four posts are usually much more relevant to my query.


Now, I am not claiming that newspapers and magazines will vanish in the next couple of years but rather how you find relevant content that interests you might shift. You will always need to have the source articles for the Twitteratti to refer to in the tweets. In fact upon further review this might also affect how some folks use Google. Some may use Google for broad and generic searches and use Twitter for highly qualified and refined ones. What are your thoughts on the idea?


I will ask that anyone that chooses to say that Twitter does not work like this will need to qualify the comment by proving that they have at least 100 followers and are following the same on Twitter. If you can't then the comment is purely speculation and not from first hand experience. I ask this because that is the threshold of usage where this phenomenon takes effect.
Thanks


I was sent a link today for a product that I thought at first glance was a joke. I was fooled last week by an elaborate hoax site on a fictional smart phone that was actually a tourism ad for Nova Scotia. So forgive me if I was a bit reluctant to bite on this one. The product is called Go-Girl and after careful examination of the site I determined that it was a real product and that I would put it out there in the twittersphere and ask the question: "Ok so I am not sure whr 2 go w/ this so I am just putting it out there. I had no idea there was a demand 4 this? http://www.go-girl.com/". Now normally I would have either pasted the URL in the TweetDeck URL shortening field or posted the site via The Hootsuite javascript button in my Safari Bar and it would have looked like http://tinyurl.com/btp55y. This is pretty much the norm for a lot of links in tweets so that users can add as much context to the posted link as possible [remember 140 characters maximum]. Now because I did not do that, the URL went into the Twitter stream as is and un-compromised. Sending in the raw URL meant that if the fine marketing folks at Go Girl had a Twitter alert service activated and actively searching for the branded url they would be notified of the comment. They then could asses the comment and take action. Well the do and did just that. Within minutes I received the following: "Go_Girls: @jaypiddy you better believe it! The women have spoken! Over 40,000 visitors to our website yesterday! It almost crashed! xx" So they were able to talk about the brand and maybe change my mind on it.

Conversation

I call this Twitter Search Engine Optimization and it will become more and more important as the Twitter base grows in the coming years. In fact the real time search functionality twitter is so powerful that I suspect that Google is trying to figure out how much the acquisition is going to cost and whether or not they have more in their war chest of cash to fend off Microsoft in the in the deal. But the Twitter Search Engine Optimization of your branded URL only works if clean un-shortened URL or your brand is mentioned by name in the tweet stream. Quite often tweets only include the URL and not your brand name in order to save the precious characters for the tweet comment.

Now if I had posted this from a tiny URL service like this "Ok so I am not sure whr 2 go w/ this so I am just putting it out there. I had no idea there was a demand 4 this? http://tinyurl.com/btp55y" there would have been no response from the company. My post and the subsequent conversations with others would have gone completely un-noticed by the Go Girl team that was monitoring the conversation on Twitter.

Companies and brands will need to figure out ways that their brands and branded URLs get into the Twitterstream the same way that they are concerned about key words getting picked up by search engine crawlers if they are to take full advantage of Twitters search capabilities. 

I have one idea but would like to open the floor on the topic and see how others feel about the situation. The idea that I have for companies is to place their own "Tweet this" buttons in stories and articles, like Digg and Share this etc, that would invoke their own branded tiny URL service so that the Twitterstream would receive a shortened yet TSEO link back to the original content. Sony would have http://sony.com/A34f and I would have http://powershiftermedia.com/34E etc. I am not totally sure how it would work but I know that through javascript and an API key there would be a simple way to create this for your site.

The floor is now open. What are your thoughts on this and who will step up and create this application if it's needed. If ya make a million or two off of the deal then you can buy me lunch.

tags:// Untagged 

What happens when someone asks a question about your brand the social media space? Well, that's a riddle that many brand, marketing and pr folks have been trying to answer for a few years now. If the question raised about your brand is by someone with a substantial amount of online clout, or has a large influence of social media sites like digg and buzzup.  The conversation about your brand can lead to bigger things than you probably wouldn't expect. Measuring the impact of a social networking conversation has on your brand is not easy and there are only a few high powered, and expensive, search tools that can do with any sort of accuracy.

Blog conversations happen over hours and days and spider off via comments and trackbacks etc. You track some them by using Google alerts and then dispatch either legal, PR or the customer service department depending on the level or kind of attention that the situation requires. For the most part brand managers are able to keep a lid on most bad conversations or attempt to leverage the good ones going out there in the socialsphere, but it is a pretty unsophisticated affair.

Now let's add Twitter to the mix. Twitter takes the conversations that are happening in the social networking world and accelerates them to a breakneck pace. Those very same conversations are now happening at real time by a powerful network of influential bloggers and social media connectors. They can propel the brand conversation into the stratosphere within minutes. I bet this scares the pants off of most traditional brand, marketing and PR folks. In the old days [oh say last year] you could find the social networking conversation that was happening about your brand, set up a meeting with internal and external personnel needed to either quell the negative impact on your brand or fan the flames of the positive ones. Then walk out of the meeting and execute the plan over the period of a week or two.

Well those days are going quickly! Today a conversation about your brand can go from zero to .5 million in less than two minutes and last a total of 6 hours then disappear as quickly as it arrived. That is pretty hard to get a handle on for most.

Here are a couple of examples:

Let's take the story of Chris Brogan's question the other week. Chris posed this question: "What's the difference, to you, between BMW and Audi? Which do you feel more strongly about and why?" For those of you who don't know who Chris Brogan is let me give you a little background. Chris is one of the top social media experts and has a huge following of loyal readers, fans and clients like Panasonic. His current RSS feed shows 17,315 subscribers, 5000 Facebook fans [5000 is the most tht FB will let you have on any one account] and 39,144 followers on twitter. Now I am sure that there is some overlap in the numbers but you get the idea. Not only is are the number of folowers that Chris great in numbers but they are also powerful in their own connections and followers. The ripple effect is huge here. So back to the case at hand. One question from someone like Chris and you can hear the collective inhale of people that are going to weigh in on the subject.

So for around 4 or five hours on twitter there were no less than 24 thousand conversations in 140 characters or less that where all discussing the pros and cons of BMW and Audi. I am sure that both of the respective car companies are aware that this event happened by now. I have a feeling that stats in this post made it into a few Powerpoint decks. So what does that mean to the brand and what can be done with this kind of data. Well there are a few things that if I was BMW or Audi that I would have looked in the data.

  • Problems with your product.
  • Problems with your competitors product.
  • Likes and dislikes about your the product.
  • Likes and dislikes about your competitors product.
  • Possible flaws or manufacturing defects that may not be big enough to report but enough to tell someone about.
  • Links that people post about your product.

These are just a few of the research strategies that I would have recommended if I had be consulting to either one of these brands during this battle of the brands. Now what to do with this kind of conversational blitzkrieg? If you are ready for such an event then like any attack good or bad you roll out your own pr/marketing plan and take advantage of the situation. The first line of defence would be the corporate website. The conversation is happening online and the Google searches are probably linking to your corporate home page right? Well if the comments are positive and are specific to a curtain make of model of your cars then make sure that the web team has a prominent link or CTA to that make or model that users can easily find. It could mean more sales if you act quickly enough. If there is a negative conversation happening then hold back for a bit and see where it is going. Can your loyalty and retention team "jump" into the conversation to address concerns? The could if they were ready and actively participating on sites like Twitter. There are actually a multitude of other methods that BMW or Audi could have done to take advantage if the situation had they been ready for it. Soon this type of brand blitz will not be a once in a lifetime event. I predict these brand spikes will happen on a weekly basis and that those who learn how to harness them will come out ahead.

Here is another recent example. When Steve Jobs announces the other week that he was stepping down temporarily from Apple due to health issues, the social networks erupted with the news. In fact I had found out about the news many times over on Twitter before I heard about it from traditional news outlets. It was 24 minutes before the NY Times finally broke the story. I know that there needs to be fact checking and such but I am sure that fact could have been checked and pushed live to the NY Times home page sooner than 24 minutes. The news of Steve Jobs went to almost have a million posts in a just a few seconds. Now what if the PR and Corp Com team had not been responsible for the news and it was actually was untrue. Not responding fast enough would mean your stocks are going to take an unnecessary hit.

So the question is are your brands duking it out in the hyper-paced world of microblogging? If so what are you doing about it. From my experience with working with large brands, I suspect not much. There's probably not enough resources on the marketing team to handle it and the agency with the account is just not equipped the know what to do. This maybe a small concern for a lot of people today today but not for long. It is my strong recommendation that marcom teams around the globe start to focus on issue like this. Companies like JetBlue and Whole Foods understand the importance and have huge beach heads in this space already. What are you doing?

****UPDATE**** Here is an update on the metrics of the converation. Mike Troiano at the Scalable Intimacy blog has further anylized the impact of such conversations with a simple yet clear estimation of the impressions made:

24,000 conversations, folks. If on average the participants in those conversations had 100 followers (Chris alone has 40 thousand followers), that's 2.4 million impressions. There's no doubt in my mind these impressions are higher impact than passive, anonymous media equivalents... but you know what? Screw impressions. They're the artifice of dying media. What's the impact of a couple million affluent, college-educated, major metro-concentrated thought leaders being exposed to each other's positive and negative views of a brand in a 24 hour period? I’d say pretty high. Maybe I’m just new fashioned.

As you can see from the above analyisis and comments below there are more than a few of us looking at this in 2009.


I read an article calling Twitter the next Second Life! The article went on to discuss the wasted branding and marketing efforts that still lay waste on virtual islands of Second Life. Now that Second Life was no longer making the headlines of the various marketing rag as the "Next Big Thing". SL is a space that I do know first had having been involved with an effort to build an in world TELUS Mobility brand store in in back in 2006. Tami  Gillespie, the project lead, at TELUS informs me the store is still active in the community and that the residents still are after here for all the latest virtual hand sets that the real world TELUS sells.

Now, that got me thinking about how every new social networking site that comes online continues to erode and fragment the digital entertainment space like cable did in the late 80's and 90's. With every new social networking superstar there are the forgotten heros from days gone by. Remember Classmates.com [1995]Friendster [2002], MySpace.com [2003], and Orkut.com [2004 Now owned by Google] just to name a few. Ya I thought you might. You probably even have an old login or two for those sites that still works don’t you? So that said, are they actually forgotten or just left behind by the marketers and advertisers for all things shiny and new? The real fact is that Myspace is still the biggest in the US with 76 million unique visitors a month. It's odd with that type of high traffic why I have not had a client request a unique myspace campaign in at least three years isn't it? What impact and sway do those sites still have on brands and business? What are the collective numbers I wondered. Well the number of active users are actually still quite large and when you throw a new social network onto that pile like Facebook or Twitter, they really do start to add up. Marketers are in such a hurry to find the next thing that reaches critical mass that they quite often forget that there are many users that feel forgotten in the social networks of yore! 

So let's throw Twitter into the mix now and see where we are going with this in 2009. I don't think that Twitter will ever become a Myspace or a Facebook in relation to adopted users or complexity of interactions. In fact at the current growth rate it would take Twitter approximately 30 years to catchup to Facebook alone and that’s only if you were to lock in the current user base and not allow for further growth. Twitter however continues to grow and become more and more integrated with other online sites and services and may impact brand and business in ways we can only imagine. Social networking is what “search” was in the 90’s Yahoo, Excite and Lycos knew they could get the eyeballs but it took Google and Overture to figure out the business model that worked. It’ll come and currently it looks like the two likely ones to do so are Facebook and Twitter.

There are pundants that say blogs, myspace and podcasts and many other social networking site and services are dead. They are not and although they may have flat lined out in growth. The various services retain a large number of users and continue to fragment the attention and eyeballs of millions. As each new service comes online and gains in popularity the fragmentation continues. In fact Friendster, long thought dead, has 61 million unique visitors a month globally. Second life had 1,445,444 users logged in in the last 30 days and Twitter has about 4-5 million active users. You start to add that up and you are talking about a lot of people not watching tv, listening to the radio or reading newspapers. Even if the Twitter numbers drop there is going to be a large base left behind that will have a great influence on products, services and brands. Brands should not continually jump to the next big thing abandoning the last one but actually maintain campaigns and a presence in each of the services to maintain a global presence. Sure you can throw a media buy of display advertising on those sites as they are probably covered in your network buy and it seems easy enough to do so, but really is that the love that your once shiny social network deserves? Why not rotate unique and innovative campaigns though a couple of those spaces a year. Absolutely make sure that the numbers are there and that the audience falls within your target, that only makes sense. 

Just because the creative team at your agency thinks that the current social network ing or media darling has become dull and tiresome does not mean that it has. Take a good look at the number of active users there and leave no brand loving money spending social networking fellow behind!