loopper’s posterous

Shutterstock

As we’re learning, many updates on Twitter, Facebook and other social networks are actually invitations for answers regarding brands. We’ve also discovered that 44% of users readily share brand-related information with others. And, as action speaks louder than words, 48% of those who came into contact with a brand name on Twitter and 34% on other social networks went on to search for additional information on search engines.

Does this information in and of itself serve as an invitation for brands to engage?

Most likely not. The invitation is delivered in the monitoring dashboards of those actively monitoring relevant conversations. Opportunities reveal themselves and also introduce a point of entry.

The data does, however, present a compelling demonstration of activity after the debut of a brand within the statusphere and channels a powerful revelation that companies not paying attention are missing an incredible transformation in consumer behavior. It is a migration that makes participation and engagement increasingly onerous the further it progresses and evolves. Nevertheless, do not despair. Your time is now.

The invitation to engage is evident in the conversations that populate the search results for keywords in any listening tool. But others, those that truly drive activity and ultimately affect the decisions of those seeking information and guidance, are obscure to those without a trained sense of detection and perception.

Before we are marketers, we are consumers. We make decisions based on our experiences, observations and research. We also heavily rely upon recommendations of friends, peers, and influencers, and they have embraced social media as their platforms for exercising authority. It is the convergence of online and real-world dialogue that leads to action.

This collective of voices across all subject matter represent the new influencers.

The buyology of consumers spans from awareness to consideration to purchase to experience to recommendation or discouragement.

As reported in a recent article in eMarketer, “The power of online brand interaction is not to be denied: A solid majority of connected consumers have had their opinion of a brand swayed, either positively or negatively, by an online experience. And more than 97% said that experience influenced whether they purchased a product or service from that brand.”

This data stems from the recent RazorFish “2009 FEED” survey that polled U.S. broadband users who had visited a community site, consumed or created digital media, and spent at least $150 online in the past six months.

The study found that consumers were not only connecting to each other, but also to brands directly.

Interestingly enough, just under 25% had produced content to participate in a brand-related contest. About one-quarter of those polled follow a brand on Twitter. And 40% had friended a brand on Facebook or MySpace.

Consumers reported that their primary motivation for following or friending a brand was to procure access to exclusive deals or offers. @DellOutlet reported $3 million in sales that derived from deals shared on Twitter.

However, here’s the writing on the online wall, quite literally. 64% of consumers reported that they make a purchase from a brand because of a digital experience via a Website, microsite, mobile coupon, or e-mail.

To read more please visit the original post .

Previously, I explored the intersection of social media and PR and explained why it is so important communications professionals leverage digital channels. In that post I touched on the following key points:

• Authenticity/personality – the world and web crave it
• It scales – popular brands just get more popular
• Long-term storytelling – build a permission asset
• Leverage – digital PR is your social proofing
• Intersection with SEO – links are by-product
• PR has changed – pull is now more effective

Next I’d like to explore a brief outline of how you can effectively use social media to accomplish your PR objectives. I’ll run through 3 key steps as a primer, however I challenge you to consider a unique entry point for your own brand. The social web is as flexible as you want it to be, and there is no single “right answer”. The following are learnings for how you could potentially approach a social media PR strategy.

1. Go platform agnostic

Social media is more than just Twitter

Everyone is buzzing about Twitter and it is without question the network du jour among PR and marketing professionals. And while we’re fond of Twitter as well, (follow us @TopRank) social media is far more than just Twitter. If Twitter is the extent of your participation you’re missing out with a myopic approach. Besides, you don’t get analytics with Twitter, no (direct) SEO benefit, and ultimately, you don’t control the network. To truly be effective at using social media for PR, treat Twitter as a feeder to something larger – as one piece to a much larger and elegant puzzle.

Own a niche across web platforms

Instead of putting all your eggs in one basket or network, focus on owning your niche across web platforms. There is little value in being a brand or person who is popular in network X or Y. There is far more value in being thought of as a leader of a niche. In other words:  your positioning should make you known as the definitive source for an industry. Going platform agnostic and putting a focus on a larger strategy that has nothing to do with any single web platform in particular is how you can accomplish this.

Have a destination and draw users back

Without some sort of destination to draw users back to and funnel subscribers, you’ll never achieve successful web community building that is protected from the rise and fall of social networks. If the history of the web has taught us anything, it is that networks can and will fall in and out of favor.  Friendster or Orkut anyone?  The greatest value exists in building your own community external of networks whose future can be unpredictable. Use them, but realize spending all of your time there is at the opportunity cost of contributing to your own destination where you stand to benefit most. In other words, consider the cost of focusing entirely on social sites such as Twitter or Facebook vs participating in those networks and sending traffic to social content on your own site such as a blog, forum or community.

Connect with power users/influencers

As noted in a previous posts on how subscribers are a vital element of your growth strategy, the ~11% of web users who know to use RSS include the users savvy enough to be web publishers.  Reaching out to this educated, technology literate group increases your propensity to connect with power users and influencers, or “contributors” as referred to by Jakob Nielsen in participation inequality. This will enable your ability to build an organic community of sneezers – those who share content like crazy and are linking up the web in meaningful ways.

2. Be ready for a long term commitment

To read more please visit the original post via toprankblog.com

For the third consecutive year, the Center for Marketing Research at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth has conducted a study that looks at the usage of social media among Inc. 500 companies. The 2009 results confirm that America's fastest growing private companies adopt social media marketing initiatives at much higher rates than other companies, and that interest in social media has grown since the first study was conducted in 2007.

Conducted by researchers Nora Ganim Barnes and Eric Mattson, this year's study looked at 148 of the 500 companies on the 2009 list. As was the case in each of the past two years, respondents were asked about their usage and familiarity with six types of social media tools, including blogging, podcasting, online video, social networking, message boards, and wikis. According to the study, social media usage by companies on the Inc. 500 has grown in the past year, with 91 percent of companies reporting that they use at least one social media tool, compared with 77 percent of companies surveyed in 2008. Of the six social media categories covered in the survey, the one that continues to be the most familiar to Inc. 500 companies is social networking, with 75 percent saying that they are "very familiar with it."

To account for the rise in popularity of newer types of social media, the researchers also asked managers at these fast-growing companies about their interaction on sites such as Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, and MySpace. Not surprisingly, many of these entrepreneurs have already embraced these sites as part of their business strategy, with Twitter being the most widely used among them, drawing activity from 52 percent of the respondents.

While Twitter and other social networking sites have seen significant growth in comparison to previous years, interest in some older social media tools such as message boards and podcasting has declined. But despite a decline in interest in some tools in 2009, many companies that have not yet incorporated social media in their business operations say they intend to do so in the future. For example, 44 percent of companies without a company blog say they plan to start one, and 36 percent intend to use some form of online video.

Eric Mattson, CEO of a research firm named Financial Insite and one of the head researchers in the study, believes that the high reception to social media among Inc. 500 companies is significant for several reasons. "Inc. 500 companies are focused on doing anything they can to grow faster and social media is an innovative tool that may give them an edge over their competition," he says.

Earlier this month I came across a post on Brains on Fire called “Why You Don’t Need Social Media Consultants.” The author of the post basically says that social media is common sense and that you shouldn’t need to hire a consultant to help you essentially be yourself on social networks. From the post:

“If you listen REALLY closely to their advice, you start to realize that most of it you already know. Because you have all the basic tools you need: Your humanity. Your ability to communicate with people around you. And your intuition. Because when you think about it, using social media is just a natural extension of yourself. Asking questions. Listening. Responding. And remember, social media apps are tactics. And tactics are tools. Sure, you might need some guidance on how to use that bandsaw, but you picked up a hammer and pretty much got the gist after you hit your thumb a few times.”

I agree with the author…to an extent. I think social media is easy to grasp because I do it for a living and know the ins and outs pretty handily. However, as the post comments point out, you’d be surprised how many people have a problem with social media marketing, if not for themselves then for their business. It’s one thing to create an account on Twitter for personal use and update it with what movies you’re excited to see and what you’ll be cooking for Thanksgiving. It’s another thing to figure out the best approach and highest ROI for a company profile.

The best argument I can make pretty much echoes the one Danny Sullivan made last month when he countered Derek Powazak’s opinion that SEOs are b.s. We’ve all heard the “SEO isn’t rocket science” argument and that “all you need to do is hire a decent web developer.” In Danny’s post (read it if you haven’t yet — very eloquent), he points out various scenarios where people DO need SEO, like a real estate agent who doesn’t know how to rank for her local market, or a man who sells shipping cases and has dupe content/dynamic URL issues. Sure, all of these issues seem like a no-brainer to us, but for many business owners and webmasters, they’re hard issues to tackle without a little bit of guidance.

I think it was Danny who had a great analogy in justifying why you would hire an SEO (or SMM) consultant, which I’ll paraphrase here: “Everyone knows that you need to exercise and eat right to stay healthy and fit, so why would anyone hire a personal trainer or nutritionist?” Sure, everyone knows that in theory, but some people need the support and guidance of an expert to help them get on the right path to wellness. Other folks need a customized diet and regimen that works specifically for them and caters to their individual needs.

Look at that guy needing to hire someone to help him build muscle! What a sucker!

To read more please visit the original post via 10e20.com

As the war of words ramps up between Google and some news publishers, the latest spin seems to be how “worthless” the traffic is that Google sends. In reality, the traffic probably does have value, but the newspapers are likely doing a terrible job of monetizing it.

I’ll give some examples in a minute, but how about an imaginary story to illustrate the problem?

Let’s say a newspaper executive opens a store. They put some story headlines up in their shop window.

Now one of those old fashioned newskids comes along. You know, the type that you’d see in movies selling papers on the street. Let’s call the kid Google.

Google reads the headlines and then scampers off down the street, shouting out to people things like “Senate’s debating health care!” or “1 out of 4 homeowners are in the red!”

Some of these people are interested. They ask this Google kid for more information, and Google sends them back to the news store.

At the store, the news exec owner greets visitors by asking them what the hell they want. Perplexed, they visitors say they heard about these stories and wanted to know more. The exec shouts at them. “Get the hell out of my store, you freeloader! This is for members-only. We don’t need riff-raff like you in here.”

That’s a hell of a way to run a business, don’t you think? But it’s pretty much how News Corporation execs seem to view the world. Consider what News Corp digital chief Jonathan Miller said earlier this month:

The traffic which comes in from Google brings a consumer who more often than not read one article and then leaves the site. That is the least valuable of traffic to us… the economic impact [of not having content indexed by Google] is not as great as you might think. You can survive without it.”

Today, we got similar remarks from James Moroney, executive vice president of A.H. Belo, which publishes the Dallas Morning News and other papers:

“This is traffic that’s not being monetized to any great degree,” Moroney said. “It’s akin to a person who drops into town, buys one copy of your newspaper and leaves town again and yet you spend a whole bunch of time building your business around that type of customer.”

Let’s be clear about one reason why these statements are coming out. This is round two against Google. In round one, some publishers said Google steals our content. Google’s response was that it sends them millions of visitors for free. So in round two, it’s time to make out like those visitors aren’t worth much. That’s especially important if you’re an executive who, after floating the idea of dropping Google, comes under attack as stupidly cutting your own throat.

Me, I see visitors as opportunities. This is the internet, where you can tell far more about a visitor to your web site than you can in print. You can tell:

• They’re visiting for the first time or on a repeat basis
• They came from Google
• They came from a specific page, or using specific search terms
• The geographic area they’re located in

And the “visitor” who buys your paper printed on a dead tree out of a newsstand? You can tell you sold a copy. And that’s it. That regular subscriber? You know they live in a particular area, maybe some demographic info, but you can’t custom your dead tree version in any way to target for that.

Can you imagine what would happen if the Wall Street Journal did a one time promotion where for a day, they gave away 1 million copies of their paper? Since there’s a real cost to doing so, don’t you think they’d figure out a way to make that promotion count? They’d sell special ads? They’d have a super attractive subscription offer?

But on the internet, where they’re not paying anything for all that traffic flowing from Google, there just doesn’t seem to be any effort. Millions of people are just written off as worthless. If they’re watching The Simpsons on Murdoch’s Fox TV network, they’re valuable (see “Free” Isn’t A Four-Letter Word Offline, So Why Does The Media Hate It Online?). Put the exact same people on the internet, and suddenly they’re “net neaderthals.”

The problem isn’t with the people. They didn’t suddenly change when sitting in front of a computer keyboard. They don’t suddenly have less money. They aren’t suddenly less attractive marketing prospects. The problem is with how you’re targeting them.

Remember what Miller said? That most of these visitors read a story once and then leave? Well, clearly the WSJ has some analytics running to understand that. Someone, somewhere has churned a report to arm Miller with that information. But that same data can be used to target those visitors better.

Time for a real life example. Today, at lunch, in the hard copy of the Wall Street Journal that I pay $100 per year for, I read a story bout how 1 in 4 US homeowners are “underwater” or owing more than their homes are worth.

I guess I have at least $100 per year in value to the Wall Street Journal, since I’m a subscriber. But that’s gross revenue. Someone’s being paid to deliver the hard copy to my door. There are print costs involved with producing it. I doubt the $100 I pay per year covers all that. But the WSJ also convinces advertisers that I’m somehow valuable to them, which is why they pay to place quality ads in the WSJ like this in front of me:

Now that same story is currently being featured on Google. The minute I click from Google to read it, I’m transformed. My $100 per year value is lost. Instead, I become one of those people who Miller says that he doesn’t make any money from.

Well, let’s see what I get:

That’s the beginning of the story. It is EXACTLY the same thing I see if I read this story by clicking through to it from a link on the WSJ’s home page (they’ve made it free to anyone from there). It’s also the same thing I see when I’m logged in using my paid account.

Why is the WSJ treating the one-time / first-time visitor the same way as a regular reader? See those two big arrows I’ve drawn pointing into the story? I’m pointing out that one of the top goals the WSJ would have for  first time visitors is to get them to take that 2 week free offer to subscribe or to take one of the free “stay connected” via email or RSS options. And yet, these things are shoved off to the top and side of the page.

To read more please visit the original post via daggle.com

Is online social networking largely a waste of time? Is it a form of idle entertainment that distracts you from more important things in life? Does it make any sense from a productivity standpoint to spend time on social networking sites, or is this just another form of online addiction?

I began considering these questions in the summer of 2008 when I first started using Twitter and Facebook. Presently I have more than 10,000 Twitter followers, and I’m maxed out at 5,000 Facebook friends with a waiting list of 600 more friend requests I can’t approve until some people drop off. I’m active on both sites and usually post multiple status updates each day. Some people have commented that my Facebook page is like a discussion forum because there are so many comments posted.

In this article I’ll share what I learned as I wrestled with the challenge of balancing productivity and social networking.

Can social networking be productive?

This depends on how you define productivity. I’ve already written a fairly deep article on defining productivity, so I’ll simply use that definition here: Productivity is value divided by time. And you’re free to determine what value means to you.

Value is subjective. What’s valuable to me may not be the same for you. What’s valuable in your professional life may not be the same as what you value in your personal life.

As I got deeper into online social networking, I kept a fairly open mind about how I would define value. I simply asked myself, “Is this pursuit making a positive difference in my life and in the lives of others?” If the answer was yes, then I had to consider whether the value created was worth the time investment.

Sometimes I found it difficult to justify all the time I was spending on social networking. But in truth I’d already been doing social networking for years, at least since 1994 when I started chatting with people on local computer bulletin boards. Using Twitter and Facebook were simply the latest incarnations.

Upon reflection I can see that social networking has been incredibly valuable for me, although the benefits have been more personal than professional.

Results

Here are some of the results, both tangible and intangible that I can attribute to social networking during the past year.

1. Scouting

Your extended social network can act as your online eyes and ears, making you aware of new opportunities, information, and contacts that could benefit you. This works especially well if you have a strong personality and people know what you’re looking to experience. This alone can save you a tremendous amount of time and enhance your life immeasurably. One good contact can send your life spiraling in a fantastic new direction.

2. Sharing

This is a deeper level of mutual assistance than scouting. Friends you make through social networking can actively share resources and advice with you. For example, when I began writing about my recent separation from Erin, many friends I made from social networking contacted me to offer advice and share stories about their own relationships. This deepened my connections with certain people who shared a common experience. Some of the advice was also very practical and useful.

3. Personal growth

Social networking can greatly accelerate your personal growth if you apply it to that purpose. It’s not that difficult to meet people with compatible goals and values, and then you can stay in touch and help each other grow.

For example, I’ve connected with hundreds of raw foodists through social networking sites. We’ve shared many recipes and health tips with each other. It’s nice having an easy connection to so many people who share a common interest, so we can help each other grow.

Some of the more interesting growth experiences come about when you turn online relationships into offline ones. I’ve met lots of interesting people face-to-face that I originally met online.

Recently a raw foodist friend (someone I originally met through a social networking site) was at my house. We were making some raw food dishes together, and she asked me where my composting bin was, so she could toss the produce scraps into it. I told her I didn’t have one because I don’t compost. (I honestly didn’t know anything about composting.) Then she said, “Alright, I’m gonna have to kick your ass for that!” And she proceeded to give me a quick course on composting as she pulled veggie scraps out of my trash and put together a makeshift composting bin right there on the spot. Suffice it to say that now I’m actively composting thanks to her. She also helped me plant some mixed greens, parsley, and cilantro in my garden.

There are lots of growth experiences like this that have enriched my life as a result of connections made on social networking sites. Sometimes it’s easier to meet compatible people online than it is to meet them locally.

With a large enough online social network, face-to-face meetings can happen often. Almost every week someone from my network is visiting Las Vegas, so there are abundant opportunities to get away from the computer.

4. Accountability

When you post about your goals publicly, other people in your social network can hold you accountable. For example, I posted on my Twitter and Facebook accounts that I was writing a new article, so now I feel more accountable to finish it and get it posted. Otherwise people will keep asking me, “When is the new article gonna be done?”

You can also use social networking to hold your friends accountable to their commitments. I recently used Twitter to challenge a friend to a public bet. If she accepted the bet, she’d be publicly accountable for creating and posting an original new article by the end of the month, and I’d be on the hook as well. She took the bet. Obviously this takes some discretion since you could easily piss people off if you abuse it, but when used honorably, it can be an effective way to help your friends enjoy a little extra motivation. Knowing that the public eye is upon you can be very motivating.

When you commit to something publicly, you’re more likely to follow through, especially if it’s a difficult task. Social networking makes it very easy to post a public commitment. Try tweeting something like, “If I don’t have a new blog post up with 24 hours, I’ll post a tweet that I failed, and I’ll PayPal $20 to the first person after that who responds.”

5. Getting better, faster answers

Social networking sites make it easy to take advantage of the wisdom of crowds to get quick answers. Although each individual answer may not be that impressive (especially when they’re limited to 140 characters on Twitter), the big picture that emerges from dozens of replies can be quite illuminating.

For example, when I first got my Macbook Pro last month, I needed to acquire some software for it, including an HTML editor and an FTP program. I asked for suggestions on Twitter and Facebook, and within an hour I had lots of replies. I checked out a few of the most popular suggestions and ended up going with Coda for web editing and Transmit for FTP. Transmit is built into Coda though, so I can get by with just Coda. Before I tweeted about it, I’d never even heard of these applications. Being able to consult with my social network saved me a lot of time, and that same day I was already using the new software productively.

Another time I asked my social network for a good raw pesto recipe, and again I received lots of replies within hours.

In many ways this works better than a search engine.

6. Emotional support

Social networking can create a lot of loose connections, but it can also lead to some deeper connections that you may not even be aware of.

I’ve been particularly impressed by how much emotional support I receive from my social network when I’m going through major life changes.

When Erin and I announced our separation last month, we both received a lot of support from our online social networks. Despite the separation, I felt more socially integrated than ever. I never went through a period of isolation or disconnection. There were too many people in my life who would check in with me and offer advice and encouragement. I’ve never experienced such a high volume of personal communication as I did during the past month. I even bought a new Droid smartphone last week to help me keep up with it. (I really love that phone by the way.)

In some cases the support I receive from my online friends is greater than what I receive from my in-person friends who don’t connect with me online. My Twitter and Facebook friends see my daily updates and have a good pulse on what I’m up to, but my in-person friends can actually drift more out of touch if I don’t see them that often. This has really shifted my understanding of relationships. In some ways I feel like certain people I only know online are more like family to me than the family I grew up with.

7. Activity partners

Finding activity partners is fairly easy to do with social networking sites, especially a site like meetup.com.

Pretty much anything I want to do now, I can use social networking to find at least a few people who share that interest, so if there’s something that interests me, I know I don’t have to do it alone.

In Las Vegas I often go to raw food potlucks. I went to one last weekend that had a Hawaiian theme. A year ago these potlucks were held once a month and would draw 15-20 people. Now they’re having such potlucks almost every week, and 25-40 people are showing up to each one. Everything is coordinated online through meetup.com.

I think it’s especially great to meet people through social networking who offer to teach me new things that I’ve always wanted to learn. It can be a lot faster to learn from someone in person than to sign up for a formal class or read a book about it.

8. Meeting interesting people.

Sometimes it’s nice to meet interesting people through social networking. This adds more variety and spice to life.

One day I got a postcard from a traveling couch surfer who was passing through Vegas, and he wanted to meet up. We got in touch via Twitter after midnight one night, and it turned out he was leaving Vegas early the next morning… in a matter of hours. Since I normally get up early anyway, I invited him to stop by my house before he left town. He came by just after 5am, and we talked for about 30 minutes. Then I gave him some bananas for the road. It was a quick connection, but it was fun to hear about some of the other cities he had visited and what he learned about them. And it was a unique way to start the day.

9. Making money

Although it hasn’t been my focus, I have made some extra money as a result of social networking. I did a few small business deals with people I met on social networking sites, all of which were profitable. I’ve also done at least a dozen interviews for people who found me through those sites, so I guess you could consider that free PR.

The total money that I can directly attribute to social networking contacts isn’t much… maybe an extra $5-10K in the past year with ongoing residual income of $200-500 per month. I use those sites primarily for personal networking (i.e. making friends), not to make money, so I regard these business deals as a side bonus. I’m sure I could do more in this area if I used those sites primarily for business reasons, but that doesn’t interest me right now. I derive more satisfaction from a good friendship than I do from a profitable business deal. This year my priority has been my social life, not my business.

I’m sure there has also been a boost in workshop registrations as a result of my presence on social networking sites, but I have no way to quantify that. If I had to guess, maybe it was an extra $5K or so for the first workshop (less than 10% of total registrations).

Your mileage here may vary. Obviously I didn’t have to start from scratch with social networking. I was able to “cheat” by leveraging my blog to build sizable networks on other sites. But I’m also in a nice situation where I don’t need to make any money at all from social networking. It’s enough for me if all the value is on the personal side; anything that happens on the professional side is gravy. That said, I think there’s enough potential in social networking that if you really wanted to, you could probably make a decent living from it.

Drawbacks

Social networking isn’t all roses. Here are some drawbacks you may experience if you get a little too involved.

1. Loss of privacy

When I first started blogging and my blog became popular fairly quickly, I was still able to keep my private life separate from my public life. I had a certain degree of online fame that was linked to my name, but in the offline world I was just Steve.

With each passing year, however, that line gets fuzzier. This shift noticeably accelerated as I became more active in social networking circles.

There are many photos of me on my Facebook account, and other people have posted photos with me on their blogs or Facebook accounts too. We recently added avatars to our online forums, so my picture can also be found next to every message I’ve ever posted there. And my Twitter account shows my photo too. A lot of people know me not just by name; they also know what I look like.

Consequently, I’m getting recognized in public more frequently. This doesn’t happen when I’m just walking down the street, but it often happens when I’m at some kind of group gathering. Chances are that someone will recognize me even if I don’t introduce myself. In September when I was at Six Flags Magic Mountain (a theme park in California), someone actually recognized me by the sound of my voice while I was chatting with a friend in line for one of the rides, and we weren’t even talking about anything related to my work.

This doesn’t bother me since I’m a very social, open person, and I’m very welcoming of new connections. However, it does create consequences for my relationships with other people. In some ways I think it makes it a bit harder for people to connect with me because it’s becoming increasingly difficult for me to keep my public and private lives separate, and some people would prefer to hang out with me without having to worry that it might end up on someone’s blog or Facebook page the next day.

As a result I’ve had to establish some boundaries, especially with respect to what I’m willing to share publicly and what I’ll keep offline. For example, if I have dinner with someone, should I tweet about connecting with that person? Well, it depends. In some cases no one would be bothered by it, and the people in our overlapping social network may respond with something like, “Cool… nice to see that you two finally got together in person.” But on the other hand, if people would interpret that dinner as a romantic date, and it leads to online rumors to that effect, then it has a potentially unwanted impact.

Unfortunately I’m not very good at making these distinctions yet. I tend to underestimate how intuitive or observant other people are. But I can see that it would be naive and unwise to subject various private situations to public feedback and hope for the best. Nevertheless it’s still unclear how to best handle these situations, so I’m always making decisions on a case by case basis. I don’t value my own privacy much, but I do respect other people’s desire for privacy, so when in doubt I simply ask the other person how s/he feels about it, and if there’s any doubt, I just keep quiet about it.

That alone isn’t enough though. It’s one thing for me to keep certain details offline, but the rest of the world doesn’t always cooperate. On some level I think there are really no secrets and that privacy is a bit of a delusion. Quite often when I share something private with a close friend, it turns out they already knew about it, either by intuition or keen observation.

Interestingly though, this is an area where my social network has been of great help. By sharing these challenges with select individuals who’ve been through something similar, it helps me see the big picture and make more intelligent choices. So even though some privacy may be lost, something else is gained.

Another side effect is that my loss of privacy becomes yet another area of compatibility to explore with certain people. I feel a certain kinship with those who are in the same boat as me, such as other bloggers who struggle with similar challenges. I’ve had some pretty deep discussions about various ways to handle it, but there doesn’t seem to be much of a consensus. My most promising approach seems to be to favor connections with people who can accept and handle my situation and be as forgiving about it as possible. People who are very private don’t make good matches for me because my lifestyle isn’t compatible with high levels of privacy.

The point is to be aware that active social networking is going to reduce your privacy, possibly in ways that surprise you. On balance I think the pros outweigh the cons, but this comes down to individual preference. If you share a great deal of your life online, realize that other people will begin to notice things about you that you thought were private, and this degree of transparency may push you beyond your comfort zone. You may feel more naked and vulnerable than usual. That takes some getting used to.

2. Social resistance to change

Active social networking opens you up to being heavily influenced by others. In a way it subjects you to a new form of social conditioning. Once your network knows you a certain way, it may resist some of your attempts to grow and change.

When you announce to your network that you’re making a big change, you can expect some resistance in response. When Erin and I announced our separation, some people reacted as if we’d just destroyed their reality. A couple people unfriended me on Facebook because they couldn’t handle my not being married anymore.

Fortunately social networks tend to be very adaptable. While you may lose some friends who were only friends with you conditionally, you’ll gain new friends for similar reasons. I seemed to have made some new divorced friends, for instance.

In the long run, I find that the closest friends in my social network become more unconditional over time. My path of personal growth and exploration naturally weeds out the conditional connections, i.e. the people who are only willing to have me in their reality if I align with their particular prejudices.

Yesterday I was talking to one friend by phone, someone I initially met online more than a year ago. We were talking about conditional vs. unconditional friendships, and she said to me, “Steve, there’s nothing you could say or do that would make me want to kick you out of my life.” I was really touched by that. I feel the same about her too. It’s nice to have people in my life who can accept me completely as I am, regardless of how I may grow and change over the years.

Even though dealing with social resistance can be difficult at first, the long-term benefit is that the friends that can survive your ups and downs, your crazy experiments, and your major life upheavals will likely be the greatest friends you could ever wish for. They’ll be people who know you better than you know yourself.

3. Emotional dependency

Social networking can lead to some very deep connections. You can get pretty wrapped up in other people’s lives and share a lot of intimacy with certain people. This isn’t likely to come about merely by posting status updates, but it can happen as a result of individual connections you build with people in your network.

I have made some pretty deep friendships with people I’ve met online. Many of these have led to offline connections. We talk by phone and/or meet in person when possible. A lot of intimacy can be shared, especially if we have a great deal in common. In general this is a wonderful thing to experience.

But sometimes I get so wrapped up in other people’s lives that I find it hard to disconnect at the end of the day. Since their status updates keep me informed of what they’re up to each day, I start to live vicariously through them. I have to remind myself to let go, re-center myself, and get back to living my own life.

I know that some people have this with me as well. They become a bit too dependent on what I’m up to. If I don’t post a status update for a while, they may contact me directly to see what I’m up to.

Social networking can blur the boundaries between our lives and those of others. At some point you may have to remind yourself that you’re still an individual, and you need to live your own life. Let social networking enhance who you are, but don’t allow it to define who you are.

How to use social networking productively

To read more please visit the original post via stevepavlina.com

If there's anyone out there left who says you can't measure social media, here are a hundred answers.

 

At most of the events I've been to lately, measurement continues to be a hot topic. The first question that comes up is, "What can I measure?" That's where this cheat sheet can come in handy: a list of 100 thought-starters.

Some entries here can be interpreted several ways. Depending on how you define them, some of these metrics may seem redundant, while others may seem so broad that they can be broken out further. Many of these can be combined with each other to create new metrics that can then be tracked over time. It's a start, though, so dive in and consider which ones may apply to programs you're working on.

1.     Volume of consumer-created buzz for a brand based on number of posts

2.     Amount of buzz based on number of impressions

3.     Shift in buzz over time

4.     Buzz by time of day / daypart

5.     Seasonality of buzz

6.     Competitive buzz

7.     Buzz by category / topic

8.     Buzz by social channel (forums, social networks, blogs, Twitter, etc)

9.     Buzz by stage in purchase funnel (e.g., researching vs. completing transaction vs. post-purchase)

10.  Asset popularity (e.g., if several videos are available to embed, which is used more)

11.  Mainstream media mentions

12.  Fans

13.  Followers

14.  Friends

15.  Growth rate of fans, followers, and friends

16.  Rate of virality / pass-along

17.  Change in virality rates over time

18.  Second-degree reach (connections to fans, followers, and friends exposed - by people or impressions)

19.  Embeds / Installs

20.  Downloads

21.  Uploads

22.  User-initiated views (e.g., for videos)

23.  Ratio of embeds or favoriting to views

24.  Likes / favorites

25.  Comments

26.  Ratings

27.  Social bookmarks

28.  Subscriptions (RSS, podcasts, video series)

29.  Pageviews (for blogs, microsites, etc)

30.  Effective CPM based on spend per impressions received

31.  Change in search engine rankings for the site linked to through social media

32.  Change in search engine share of voice for all social sites promoting the brand

33.  Increase in searches due to social activity

34.  Percentage of buzz containing links

35.  Links ranked by influence of publishers

36.  Percentage of buzz containing multimedia (images, video, audio)

37.  Share of voice on social sites when running earned and paid media in same environment

38.  Influence of consumers reached

39.  Influence of publishers reached (e.g., blogs)

40.  Influence of brands participating in social channels

41.  Demographics of target audience engaged with social channels

42.  Demographics of audience reached through social media

43.  Social media habits/interests of target audience

44.  Geography of participating consumers

45.  Sentiment by volume of posts

46.  Sentiment by volume of impressions

47.  Shift in sentiment before, during, and after social marketing programs

48.  Languages spoken by participating consumers

49.  Time spent with distributed content

50.  Time spent on site through social media referrals

51.  Method of content discovery (search, pass-along, discovery engines, etc)

52.  Clicks

53.  Percentage of traffic generated from earned media

54.  View-throughs

55.  Number of interactions

56.  Interaction/engagement rate

57.  Frequency of social interactions per consumer

58.  Percentage of videos viewed

59.  Polls taken / votes received

60.  Brand association

61.  Purchase consideration

62.  Number of user-generated submissions received

63.  Exposures of virtual gifts

64.  Number of virtual gifts given

65.  Relative popularity of content

66.  Tags added

67.  Attributes of tags (e.g., how well they match the brand's perception of itself)

68.  Registrations from third-party social logins (e.g., Facebook Connect, Twitter OAuth)

69.  Registrations by channel (e.g., Web, desktop application, mobile application, SMS, etc)

70.  Contest entries

71.  Number of chat room participants

72.  Wiki contributors

73.  Impact of offline marketing/events on social marketing programs or buzz

74.  User-generated content created that can be used by the marketer in other channels

75.  Customers assisted

76.  Savings per customer assisted through direct social media interactions compared to other channels (e.g., call centers, in-store)

77.  Savings generated by enabling customers to connect with each other

78.  Impact on first contact resolution (FCR) (hat tip to Forrester Research for that one)

79.  Customer satisfaction

80.  Volume of customer feedback generated

81.  Research & development time saved based on feedback from social media

82.  Suggestions implemented from social feedback

83.  Costs saved from not spending on traditional research

84.  Impact on online sales

85.  Impact on offline sales

86.  Discount redemption rate

87.  Impact on other offline behavior (e.g., TV tune-in)

88.  Leads generated

89.  Products sampled

90.  Visits to store locator pages

91.  Conversion change due to user ratings, reviews

92.  Rate of customer/visitor retention

93.  Impact on customer lifetime value

94.  Customer acquisition / retention costs through social media

95.  Change in market share

96.  Earned media's impact on results from paid media

97.  Responses to socially posted events

98.  Attendance generated at in-person events

99.  Employees reached (for internal programs)

100.  Job applications received

There you go. I welcome other entries in the comments. It's also just the start of the answer to the broader question: "How do I measure it?" Ultimately, you need to start with figuring out your business objectives and then apply these metrics accordingly.

While U.S. newspapers are losing subscribers at a staggering rate, a few dailies stand out because their circulation is rising. But they aren't necessarily selling more copies.

Here's why: Since April 1, new auditing rules have made it easier for newspapers to count a reader as a paying customer.

These looser standards are especially helpful to a newspaper if it sells an "electronic edition." That can include a subscriber-only Web site, such as what The Wall Street Journal has, or it can be a digital replica of a newspaper's printed product. Several dozen publications, including USA Today, sell access to these daily "e-editions" that show how the news was laid out in print.

Under the new auditing standards, if a newspaper sells a "bundled" subscription to both the print and electronic editions, the publication is often allowed to count that subscriber twice.

If not for these rules, the industry's numbers would look even worse. Average weekday circulation at 379 U.S. newspapers fell 10.6 percent during the six months ending in September. That was the steepest decline ever recorded by the Audit Bureau of Circulations, the organization that verifies how many people are paying to read publications.

It's not clear what the numbers would have been under the old auditing standards. But the effects of the new rules were widespread. There were 59 newspapers that listed at least 5,000 electronic editions in their weekday circulations, according to an Associated Press review of the figures filed with the ABC for the April-September period. In all but a few instances, the number of electronic subscribers was substantially higher than a year ago.

The decline in newspaper circulation has several causes. Many publications have intentionally reduced the range of their deliveries, cutting out exurbs or distant parts of their states where they sold relatively few copies. Higher prices for home delivery and newsstand copies also have driven some readers away. Publishers are betting they can keep their most loyal readers and are charging them more to help offset their crumbling ad sales — the main source of newspaper revenue.

Nevertheless, many newspapers are still offering discounts to bolster their circulation so they don't risk losing even more advertising revenue. The size of the audience is one factor marketers consider when they buy ads.

The Las Vegas Review-Journal was among the newspapers whose weekday circulation rose from the same time last year. Nevada's largest newspaper saw its average weekday circulation rise 6.6 percent, or nearly 11,000 subscribers, to 175,841. It was a remarkable improvement, given that weekday sales of its print edition fell by 12,000 copies and Las Vegas ranks among the cities hardest hit by the Great Recession.

How did it happen? The Review-Journal's circulation this year included 23,132 electronic editions compared with just 511 at the same time last year.

The big difference didn't occur because that many more people suddenly decided to buy the Review-Journal's digital replica of its print edition.

The change happened because the price the newspaper was charging for the online replica — it costs print customers an extra 50 cents per week — hadn't been high enough to qualify as paid circulation until the ABC's April change. That let newspapers define their paying readers as anyone who spends at least a penny for a copy. Previously, a newspaper copy had to sell for at least 25 percent of the basic price to qualify as paid circulation.

The ABC said it changed the rules to reduce its auditing costs and "provide greater pricing and marketing flexibility" for publishers.

Steve Coffeen, the Review-Journal's circulation director, said it makes sense to count the bundled subscriptions twice, as well as other people buying the electronic edition at a sharp discount, because it provides a complete picture of the newspaper's paying audience. Advertisers generally prize readers who pay for a publication, reasoning they are more likely to peruse it.

"It's important to show advertisers we are fighting the good fight and using other platforms to reach readers," Coffeen said.

That rationale makes sense to Randy Novak, director of newspaper strategy for NSA Media, one of the nation's largest buyers of newspaper ads. He doesn't see much difference between readers who are getting the newspaper at a deep discount or the standard price. He wants to reach people who care enough about the newspaper to be willing to pay for it at all.

However, another big buyer of newspaper ads says the new ABC rules made the reported circulation numbers less credible.

"You really have to do your homework now and ask newspapers about how much double counting is going on," said Allison Howald, U.S. director of print investment at PHD Media.

A surge in digital sales propelled the York Daily Record in Pennsylvania to a 16.5 percent increase in weekday circulation — the highest among dailies selling at least 50,000 copies. The Daily Record listed 10,073 electronic editions in its latest circulation of 55,370. At the same time last year it counted just 42 electronic editions in its circulation of 47,549.

In most cases, the electronic edition is a replica of the printed product, right down to the ads. The technology even makes it possible to simulate the act of turning the pages of a paper edition. Most electronic editions are sold at a small fraction of the price for the printed edition, partly because publishers don't have to pay for newsprint or fuel to deliver the copy.

Web subscriptions were pivotal in The Wall Street Journal's growth over the past decade. The digital sales are the main reason that the Journal surpassed USA Today as the top-selling U.S. newspaper in the April-September period. USA Today, owned by Gannett Co., still holds the edge in print circulation.

The Journal charges its print subscribers an additional 40 cents per week for unrestricted access to its Web site. Journal spokesman Robert Christie wouldn't comment on whether the new rules for counting subscribers contributed to a 14 percent increase in the newspaper's 407,002 digital subscribers. Including the print side, the Journal's total circulation edged up by just 0.6 percent to 2.02 million.

"We followed the ABC's rules and methodology," Christie said.

Some newspapers that posted circulation gains say they are picking up readers who feel abandoned by bigger publications. Cutbacks at newspapers in Atlanta, Charlotte, N.C., and Nashville, Tenn., contributed to most of the 2 percent increase at the 70,000-circulation Chattanooga Times Free Press in Tennessee, said Publisher Tom Griscom. "We are keeping an eye on print and not letting it drift away," Griscom said.

A reduced emphasis on print at The Detroit News and the Detroit Free Press, which now deliver to homes only three days a week, also helped Michigan's Oakland Press increase its weekday circulation 7 percent to 68,067. But electronic sales were the main factor. The newspaper listed 6,500 more electronic editions in its latest circulation numbers than it did a year ago, offsetting a slight decline in print.

Growing and Monetizing News Media

 

Is it possible? How can news media businesses both grow and monetize their online properties? Tough questions mainstream media publications need to ask themselves at the moment.

This past week the media announced massive staff layoffs that hit its own - AP, BusinessWeek under the new Bloomberg ownership, AOL, and Time Inc.

Meanwhile, a survey conducted by The American Press Institute (API) with ITZ Publishing and Belden Interactive finds that more than half of newspaper publishers believe readers will pay to access online newspaper content.

You've probably heard about News Corp. working on online news charges. Earlier in the month, in an interview, Chief Executive Rupert Murdoch talked about considering blocking Google from being able to search its Web sites. He's with 68% of publishers who believe that, even if readers object to paying for content, they would have a difficult time finding that information in other places.

The original post is :

via conversationagent.com

As social media has grown in acceptance within companies over the past few years, one debate never seems to go away – whether agencies should be involved in social media communications, or whether the only way to maintain an “authentic voice” is for companies to undertake it all themselves.

Agencies can help

Not surprisingly (given that I work for a PR agency), I sit in the camp that says that agencies have a significant role to play for many companies. For sure, companies can do some or all of these things themselves, but there’s no reason agencies can’t help without compromising the company’s efforts.

Here are 15 different activities an agency can undertake – legitimately and effectively – to help companies engage in social media.

Getting started

1. Baseline audits

One of the first steps in any communications initiative should be an online audit to both understand the current environment and to set a baseline for measuring results of future activities.

2. Audience research

Alongside an initial audit, learning to understand your target audiences is a foundational piece of a communications strategy, be it online or offline.

3. Corporate policies

Whether your company is engaged in social media or not, it is important to set boundaries around social media. If you are engaging in proactive outreach online, it becomes a somewhat  more involved process covering more areas (for a quick start, check out this ebook on corporate social media policies)

4. Workflow processes

What happens when you spot an issue? When someone asks a question? When someone discusses your company with other people? When someone criticizes you? Who is involved in the response? What will you (and won’t you) respond to?

These are the kinds of questions you need to consider before the occasion arises, and which experienced agencies have encountered often enough to help you answer.

5. Social media training

While it doesn’t take much expertise to send a tweet, the norms of communicating in social media channels can require education and explanation. Social media can require a bit of a departure from the way companies have traditionally communicated. It doesn’t mean anarchy, but traditional “messaging” approaches don’t fly so well in these informal channels. Agencies can help to transfer the necessary knowledge around this to clients new to the social media realm.

6. Social media scoping

You don’t need to be everywhere online. Twitter and Facebook might not be the right places – perhaps your audience is primarily hangs out on forums or message boards. An agency can help to scope-out the right places for your company to establish a presence online.

Strategic planning

7. Strategic development

Agencies can bring together a wide variety of communications experiences and expertise that make them well placed to assist with or lead the strategic development process for social media for their clients.

8. Campaign ideas

Right now my perspective of the ideal approach to social media is a foundational long-term strategypaired with well thought-out campaigns that provide spikes in attention and engagement. As above, agencies can bring together creative minds to design those campaigns.

9. Campaign extension

Unfortunately, PR is still often at a point where it is called-in last minute to support other initiatives, whether it’s announcing something that’s already decided or supporting a marketing/advertising program. At those points, it can be difficult to come up with anything effective that benefits the organization. Agencies aren’t a silver bullet, but again they can contribute ideas.

Execution

10. Ongoing monitoring

Monitoring can be very resource-intensive, especially if your company has a significant footprint online or in peoples’ minds. Agencies are well placed to help deal with this pressure.

11. Online engagement

This is one area that I’ll rarely recommend the agency take on. It’s a lot of work and requires a thorough understanding of the online environment, but it’s something that (in most cases) should be done in-house. It allows for shorter approvals processes (important in a fast-moving conversation) and a more authentic voice.

Still, sometimes companies either can’t or aren’t ready to take this on. It may be resource issues, uncertainty over the medium, trust issues or a variety of other legitimate reasons, but there are times when an agency can undertake this work, as long as it’s transparent. It’s not ideal, but it’s possible, with the goal that, over time, the company will in-source this work.

Regardless, agencies can help to advise companies on their outreach – be it advice wording and norms or on whether in fact to engage or not with specific people.

12. Influencer outreach

I used to call this “blogger outreach” but online influencers are so much broader than just bloggers nowadays. Just as agencies undertake media relations activities in traditional public relations, so they can also reach out to online influencers in the new form PR has taken.

13. Issues management

If your company is interesting and matters to people, they will talk about you. That talk won’t always be positive. Sometimes it’s something you’ve done; sometimes it’s something about your product; sometimes it’s “news.” The list goes on. Regardless, monitoring for issues, identifying them early and coming up with suitable responses isn’t easy.

Full-service

14. Design and creative

More often than not, you’ll need some kind of design work done for your social media properties. Maybe it’s a Twitter background; maybe it’s a Facebook page or YouTube channel design; maybe it’s something more involved such as a stand-alone site. Either way, a full-service agency can help if you don’t have the in-house resources to undertake this work.

15. Development

Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and their ilk are tremendously powerful sites, and they may well be where your audience hangs out. Still, there are times when they just may not suffice, or where you want to build on top of the platform they provide – Facebook or mobile apps, for example.

What do you think? Are there other areas I’m missing?

Posted in: pr, public relations, social media