Because everything is new, and so much had to be done, we’ve all been working at a feverish pace to get everything ready. In the last few weeks the communications elements have rolled out. TV and radio spots are running, a new local website was launched, billboards and street pole banners were put up, an insert appeared in the paper, email marketing got hot and heavy, a text alert program was launched, airport multi-media displays at baggage claim began running. The list was long. And now the big event is about to kick off.

Yesterday was the official kick off press conference and even some of our interns got put to work. Joe Burke delivered some 20k information inserts for fans to area hotels and businesses. And both Joe and Jennifer Fisher acted as human easels today to make sure exhibits didn’t blow down during the press conference.

We had an entire crew down at the stadium for the press kickoff to work logistics. Pictured here are just a few. Interns Jennifer Fisher and Joe Burke and  staffers Emily Wenstrom and Laura Spaulding.

Just in the nick of time, literally with only 30 minutes to spare before the first team arrived on Wednesday, the airport welcome banners were installed.

Every year has its share of challenges. This year the big one is water. It’s everywhere. Even cropping up this week into parking lot D and giving officials some headaches. Flooding is also on the mind of fans coming into town and we’ve needed to provide information about road closures and suggested detours. This is the first time we’ve needed to add a page to the website to include updates on flooding and road detours. Challenges aside, everyone is powering through it and the show will go on. And it will be great!

Come on down and catch the free opening ceremonies and a game. Tickets are still available at the box office and the view is FINE!

Even before the switch, many companies neglected to include the hyphen. I know we’ve been using the non-hyphenated version for a long time, but continually had to tell our proof readers to stop trying to correct it to match the AP Stylebook.

Cellphone and smartphone as one word instead of two are also being adopted as new Associated Press style guidelines.

Changes that clearly indicate the terms are no longer merely abbreviations for things like electronic mail or cellular telephone — they’re words unto themselves.

So all you copy editors and proofers out there, take note.

The system dubbed “Google realtime” is as easy to use as any Google search. Simply type in your search term or wrap your term in quotes if you want an exact match, and click search. The system will then provide you hour-by-hour results for the current day.

What’s even more impressive is you can also select where the content was posted from geographically. So if you have offices or stores in different physical locations you can select the city and state where you would like to see comments.

This simple to use service provides a great tool for determining social comment trending for any organization.

If you see a Twitter @username at a restaurant or store, on a billboard or on TV, or if you hear one mentioned on the radio, you can simply text “Follow [username]” to 40404 and you’ll start receiving all of that user’s updates via text message. The service can simply act as an SMS-based newsletter or text alert program. This would be a great way for bars and restaurants to simply and inexpensively promote daily deals or special promotions.

Certainly this could become annoying really quick if you follow someone who tweets all the time. But it looks like you’ll have some granular control over SMS messages you receive. Even more control if you have a Twitter account. But with SMS, you can turn text messages on or off by sending ‘on’ or ‘off’ to 40404.

You can follow @twittermobile to keep up with the latest mobile developments.

OTHER TWITTER UPDATES:  Twitter is launching an official Tweet Button for sharing articles on websites and counting how many times a URL has been shared, according to documents Mashable has obtained. The Tweet Button could launch as soon as this Thursday. Read>

Restore the Gulf

UnF–k The Gulf

Neither spot is anything special creatively, but the star spot is little more than white noise. The other did take me off guard at first, but it made me listen. You may not like the language, in fact you may be completely offended by it, but I agree wholeheartedly with David Burn over at AdPulp in this post .

“Green messaging needs to evolve if it’s going to impact a larger segment of the American population. I salute UnFucktheGulf for bringing some righteous anger to the YouTube party and for understanding that t-shirts sell better than stand-alone issue-oriented outrage.”

I know the issues are extremely complex and I advocate protection of content, but I think this approach is like trying to drive forward by using the rear view mirror to navigate and hoping to arrive at the past. Innovation and creative thinking was what newspapers needed long ago and it’s what they need today.

News International, the British newspaper publishing company owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, which owns The Times (UK — not to be confused with the NY Times) withdrew in March from voluntary ABCe auditing, saying only that it had “suspended” public reporting of traffic for Times Online and the Sun and was working with ABCe to help evolve metrics related to engagement instead.

Reading this report about the impact at the The Times (UK) thetimes.co.uk …and statements like “Sabbagh goes on to calculate that the typical Times print reader is worth ‘at least two and a half times’ the average online reader” just made me shake my head.

There are also a tremendous number of tools out there that help us to manage, review, schedule and automate these communications. What’s important to remember is that while these tools are great for helping you manage your inputs and outputs, there’s still no substitute for true, authentic communication.

The introduction of all these convenience tools is what makes it increasingly apparent when you’re seeing an honest, real message versus an automated, robotic one. This was most recently illustrated to me by two responses I got to a tweet I made regarding my receipt of the book, “Delivering Happiness” by Zappos CEO Tony Hsieh.

I said:

I received two responses from that tweet. One from @Zappos_Service and one from @FedExDolores. Here’s what they said:

Guess which one was (most likely) automated? Sorry, Dolores, you lose.

If you look at the full Twitter stream for both the Zappos account and the FedEx account, it is immediately apparent which one is either manned by a human or at least manned by a human who doesn’t have a standardized response template. Zappos, you win. You can also see that the Zappos account is typically signed off by a person at the end of a day and then re-signed into at the beginning of a new day by announcing who is at the helm. FedEx has tried to embody a specific “person” into each named account instead of having a singular customer

I’ve experienced this with FedEx’s Twitter robots before. I posted a photo in which I used the term, “FedEx” and got a robo-response:

Given the excellent usage of spacing in that message, I felt it was safe to assume a human didn’t do it. Sure enough, when looking at the full tweet stream of FedExLina’s account, it looked very robotic to me.

Now, I know that FedEx is likely getting a lot more mentions on Twitter than Zappos is, so they have a lot more responding to do. Even so, as a customer, I really don’t feel any better about getting some message from you if it’s just some automated (or template) response. This type of communication is the same thing as a robo-call, a form letter, or anything that takes the true, honest, person-to-person factor out of a human-to-human exchange.

If you’re going to automate something, don’t try to make it appear human.

That’s where we get to authenticity. A robo-response that tries to appear as a human response is NOT authentic. A robo-response that is clearly an automated reply IS authentic. I don’t have a problem with automated responses. They can be very helpful. But when you receive an out-of-office reply from someone, it says so. It doesn’t say, “Brian – thanks for emailing me. I look forward to replying to your message as soon as I can. I appreciate you taking the time to send this to me. Have a great day!”

What I’m left with after these two simple responses is a better feeling form Zappos and a worse one form FedEx. Sure, this is little stuff in the grand scheme of things, but I believe this is the little stuff that matters. My gut reaction to Zappos moving forward is going to be a little bit better, and to FedEx, a little bit worse.

Decide what approach you’re going to take with your personal and business communication. Make sure it’s real and authentic. Just don’t try to be something you’re not.

I received these two responses approximately an hour later from my old friend FedExLina:

Seems Lina is still having punctuation and spacing problems. I’m going to ask @FedExLina how @FedExDolores sent me the first message today if she’s out of the office and see what she says. I think this helps drive my point in that it’s pretty easy to see through false authenticity. Stay tuned.

And her response:

I would be “happy to glad” if this whole thing didn’t make me feel bad for such a lost customer service opportunity.

We’re no longer in a world where the press release is the way to get trending stories. Today, the blogosphere and social networks are where the news is being made and broadcast. Bloggers and social media participants and their followers are criticizing and praising the brands and companies that they like. Since this is where the readers are, you must not be surprised that this also is where the reporters are.

Since 2004, the blogosphere has rapidly grown and whether you as PR professionals or marketers like it, it is providing a place for news, opinion and reviews that have not been “spun” by a PR professional. The most powerful and successful bloggers can clearly and articulately discuss their opinions on a product, service or company with credibility. They’re often well-known in their industry or seen as an influential person whose opinion matters.

As a writer, when I’m looking for a story idea, it is not uncommon to search online to find trending story ideas and potential sources from these credible bloggers. I can find ideas, sources and potential facts and figures (that, of course, need to be verified) easily all over social networks. I search for trusted bloggers, Tweeters and websites whose information I know is credible.

What this means for the PR and marketing professionals of the world is that you can no longer bank on the standard press release. Yes, press releases have historically been the PR tool of choice. And, in some cases, they are still practical, but only if the content is timely, relevant, news worthy and has lots of potential interview sources quoted and opportunities for video, photo and audio. And, ultimately, if the topic is of interest to the reporter’s beat, column, current issue, episode, show or publication.

You should instead be focusing your efforts on generating relevant and timely content in a variety of mediums including on corporate blogs and social media accounts in all formats: print, video, photo and audio. Find stories within your organization that bloggers and reporters and editors alike can grab onto. Provide sources and quotes. Be visual.

This week the company announced exclusively through Mashable, the 12 finalists for the competition. They are now asking customers to vote on the new creations in order to determine the champion and therefore the latest delicious product in the Dunkin arsenal.

The number of entries into the contest is truly amazing. Along with the company’s  decision to announce the finalists using a Social Media News website, it shows their understanding of the new media and it’s power to relay brand and promotional messages.

AT&T and technology outsourcing and consulting company Accenture have already ended their sponsorships, while others, such as Procter & Gamble Co.’s Gillette and Swiss watch maker Tag Heuer, de-emphasized him in their marketing — a move to distance themselves from the world-famous athlete.

The CEO of Procter & Gamble said earlier this week that he doesn’t know whether Woods will ever appear in another Gillette commercial, saying the company did not need the “distraction” of using him in its advertising.

Woods does more harm than good as public sentiment against Woods is even worse now than when the scandal gained steam in December according to a new analysis by PR firm Gregory FCA.

Gregory FCA used data from Nielsen Online’s BuzzMetrics to gauge sentiment towards Woods across blogs, message boards, media sites and Twitter. The following chart may be hard to read, but the trend line is clear.

This chart reiterates what a beloved figure Woods was as attitudes toward him were almost universally positive before his downfall. Sentiment fell off the cliff after revelations of his adultery, but then started to improve as Woods stayed in hiding. After Woods delivered his public apology, sentiment turned even more sharply negative. The score of -1.2 is one of the lowest that Gregory FCA has ever seen for a celebrity, brand or company. Via Forbes Blog.

One organization saw an opportunity in all the “distraction”.  PETA, a group always on the prowl for something to get ink for their cause, tried to leverage the scandal to push their agenda by creating a billboard with a photo of Tiger and the line “TOO MUCH SEX CAN BE A BAD THING” with a message that continues “… for little tigers too. Help keep your cats (and dogs) out of trouble: Always spay or neuter!”

PETA intended to post the billboard near Woods’ Isleworth home in Windermere, Florida, but the golfer’s attorneys stepped in with a cease-and-desist order, according to PopCrunch.

The fact is, we all make mistakes. So do brands. And we all learn the hard way that people never listen more closely than when you admit failure. While there are lots of examples, recently we’ve seen two big brands own up to problems and mistakes and publicly apologize. In very different ways.

Friday Tiger Woods’ abject, and very rehearsed, press conference/public apology came off as as a bit insincere to me. It sounded painfully scripted and the fact that he took no questions from the eager reporters who have been specially selected to see him speak made it feel even more stilted. I read a snarky comment somewhere that the same George W. Bush media advisers who gave us Mission Accomplished were hired by Tiger to present the world with Emission Regretted.

Watch full press conference here.

If you’re thinking Tiger is just a man, not a brand, read the transcript of Tiger’s apology and you’ll note he details the specific consequences of his actions: “I hurt my wife, my kids, my mother, my wife’s family, my friends, my foundation, and kids all around the world who admired me.” In case you’re wondering, that last one is code for brand.

As Sally Hogshead said: … the Woods brand “was founded upon prestige, mystique,” she added, “and an aura of elusive untouchability,” but now “we all suddenly know more about his bottom-feeding behavior than we ever cared to.”

And then there’s Toyota. Toyotas have long been considered among the most reliable cars on the road. But it has had major problems the last couple months and its failure to stem its widening safety crisis has stunned consumers and experts who’d come to expect only streamlined efficiency from a company at the pinnacle of the global auto industry. It is now trying to rebuild consumer confidence after a recall that has extended to millions of cars around the world and tarnished the company’s reputation.

First came the apology.

Then the promise to fix it.

Can these brands survive the withering publicity? Will we forgive? Will we trust them again? After all, Toyota has made great cars and until recently was the most popular car brand on Earth. And Tiger Woods is a phenomenal golfer. Only time will tell. But in my humble opinion Toyota seems more sincere in their efforts to earn back our trust.

Aside from the fact that  the media can’t seem to get enough of another corporation caught short by the outraged tweeting masses, this should be yet another wake up call of the speed by which screw ups travel and escalate today.

As an instant viral publishing tool, Twitter is often the first place we hear a rumble of something big — where news (or rumors) break — so it’s followed closely followed by the mainstream media that then “vets” the info. This summer I was in a store in Tahoe when someone in the store read a tweet that Michael Jackson had died. We all headed for a TV or went to CNN on our phones to verify the info. Not everything trending on Twitter is accurate — remember Goldblum?

Bad personal experiences for people we like at the hands of corporations is David and Goliath stuff. And we consumers love those stories. We love to rant about injustice. We can’t get enough of it.

Twitter is the early warning siren and reaches well beyond those actively engaged on Twitter — it is closely followed by the media and bloggers and it can explode the customer complaint horror stories many times faster than what companies previously suffered just at the hands of a few irate bloggers (remember Dell, Kryptonite) to potentially devastating effect.

Southwest is a company that has been active and strong in the social space. They’ve handled difficult situations well.  But they’re not immune. They just found out what happens when you piss off a guy with a rabid fanbase and a Twitter account with 1.6M followers. Smith has a nimble intellect and savage wit and his tweets and SModcasts are entertaining.  One of his tweets had me laughing out loud:  “You [messed] with the wrong sedentary processed-foods eater!” But chances are Southwest didn’t enjoy this exchange as much as the rest of us.

If the arbitrary nature of this online customer movement seems unfair, too bad.  Get used to it. The genie is not going back in the bottle.

How companies succeed in the future will depend on how they embrace and navigate this new socially-empowered customer culture. The answers don’t lie in merely having a company Twitter account. And they definitely can’t be solved purely through social media monitoring. These are just tools. Tools that let you listen. And respond. The key is what a company learns from the listening, how it applies those learnings and then how it communicates those learnings to its customers that will rescue its reputation and make it a stronger company.

For Smith, the publicity may be a windfall given his new movie “Cop Out,” opens in theaters Feb. 26.

When I read the announcement here and here, my first thought was, big deal, how is this different from what anyone (not just Verizon customers) can do with Cellfire?  Giving them the benefit of the doubt that maybe there was something unique in the announcement, I went to check out the Verizon website promoted in its news release…and then I laughed! Hard.

I land on the Verizon site and what do I see? My Cellfire account that I registered with my Sprint number after my previous coupon guilt trip.

Verizon page (that I didn't log into) at top. My Cellfire account at the bottom. Hummmmmmm

I AM a Cellfire user, but I’m NOT a Verizon customer, I’m a Sprint customer.

So Verizon…can you hear me now? I’m still chuckling.

Great infographic in Mashable thanks to social media analytics firm Viralheat.

I’ll admit, I was shocked (and I’m not alone) about the price point. Starting at $499 for the base 16GB unit is about $200 less than I expected. The 32GB will run $599, and $699 for the 64GB. Adding 3G costs a $130 per model, so the most expensive model (64GB / 3G) is $829. The WiFi-only model will ship in 60 days, and the 3G models will come in 90 days.

There was so much speculation the last few months about an Apple tablet and the anticipated features (most of which were right).  And in the last few days factual nuggets leaked like those from McGraw-Hill CEO Terry McGraw.

So now it’s official.  The iPad is born.

And the name calling jokes have begun.  These tweets gave me a chuckle:

@twifftwin: the iPad sounds like a feminine hygiene product for robot ladies.

@KristinaWeise: The #iPad – too easy to insert a woman’s comment here. “Much more intimate than a laptop and more capable than a smart phone,” Jobs said.

We may get a laugh now from the name puns, but my bets are on Apple for the last laugh.  Combine a surprisingly low launch price with Apple’s marketing savvy…

Look out Kindle.

Oh…and BTW Apple is using the ePub format for iBooks.  That could change the game in that category. See previous post.

I’ve been following the pay wall discussions for months (see previous post) and still have the same question: Will consumers pay for news — in big enough numbers that it will offset the decrease in traffic that pay walls will create? Obviously, the declining revenue situation for newspapers is not getting any better.  In Q3 2009 The New York Times posted a loss of $35.6 million, as revenue fell nearly 17% from the same period a year ago. So something has to change. There’s certainly little chance print subscriptions will increase given changing consumer media behaviors. And the advertising venues and options continue to proliferate online. But I believe website pay walls, as currently positioned, are very risky bets. And seem like a backwards move. A push in forward-thinking and innovations in information delivery and customization seems less risky and a better potential source of long-term revenue.

For The New York Times the bet is especially big, because it not only runs the risk of TimesSelect 2 (the abandoned payment approach in 2007), it risks losing its mojo as top digital (non-aggregator) news site and could retard its digital ad potential if it fails. If readers run into pay walls and quickly move on to still-free (and top-notch) sources like the BBC, Reuters, NBC, NPR and many more — then the model could fall apart. And, The Times, as the leader in advertising revenue with more than 17 million readers a month in the United States, it has a lot lose if the move backfires.

There was one line in the release yesterday that intrigued me and provided a signal of some forward thinking. “NYTimes.com will be building a new online infrastructure designed to provide consumers with a frictionless experience across multiple platforms.” The concept of a frictionless experience is very appealing and could be a major move, IF The Times can pull it off well and quickly. In the age of ubiquitous smart-phones, Kindles, the long awaited Apple tablet, and eventually the Internet-mediated livingroom TV monitor, readers are already coming to expect easy, and smart, access to the their content wherever, whenever. They also will come to expect the stories they save on one device to be known by another; ditto email sharing lists, stock portfolios, favorite sports team preferences.

If The Times can provide such synchronicity, then readers who are asked to pay may accept the charge as, in part, an access charge — like their wireless access charge. And that perception change could change the game.

The first thing I did when I heard about the Haiti disaster was search for a quick way to help. I found the American Red Cross mobile information on my first search and within seconds I made a donation via my cell phone.

You can donate $10 to Haiti relief by texting “Haiti” to 90999

Online and mobile giving is quickly becoming the growth engine for non-profits.  And for good reason. Using the latest technology, non-profits are able to reach out quickly to wider audiences and solicit smaller donation. Technology advancements now enable non-profits to efficiently and effectively reach donors they’ve not been able to connect with before. Online giving continues to grow and now accounts for 5% of total giving, 16% of new donors and 27% of new revenue.

In mid 2008, the Mobile Giving Foundation was formed to open the mobile donation process to a wide range of qualified 501c3 non-profits. Through deals with the major cell phone carriers, a $5 or $10 donation is added to a phone bill when someone pledges by using a special short via an SMS (text) message. The money is collected by the carriers then passed on to the non-profit.

It’s simple. And mobile phones are ubiquitous. Text-based fundraising is all about immediacy. You don’t need to wait until you get home and turn on the computer. It’s all so quick and convenient, you can give in the moment. There’s no chance of you forgetting to do it later. So mobile giving has rapidly taken off. It’s growing faster than online giving and more and more non-profits are adding a mobile giving option.

Reports I found estimated that over $2 million was raised via mobile in 2009. In the first 14 days of 2010 we’ve already surpassed that level. And that’s just from the money raised by the American Red Cross.  There are several other companies that have mobilized giving as a result of the earthquake in Haiti. And the mobile giving information has gone viral as people tweet and post on Facebook and encourage their friends to help those affected by the earthquake.

Read more about the The Changing and Challenging Nature of Fundraising in the story I wrote for our November 2009  Thinking newsletter.

In addition to mobile giving, people who want to help those affected by the Haitian earthquake can also make a donation to the American Red Cross International Response Fund at Redcross.org or by calling 1-800-RED-CROSS. Plus you can donate up to $200 to the Red Cross via iTunes: http://bit.ly/84kljT Check out 20 ways to help Haiti.

1/18/2010 UPDATE:  Americans have pledged more than $21 million to the American Red Cross for Haitian relief efforts via text messages on their cell phones as of Monday according to The Chronicle of Philanthropy — an unprecedented amount for mobile donations.  In contrast, it raised $200,000 from texts during the 2008 hurricane season.

Six days after the massive earthquake struck, donors have contributed more than $210-million total to major U.S. relief groups, a Chronicle tally finds.

Social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter as well as mobile phone technology have made it easier for charities like the American Red Cross  to raise these needed funds.

 HBR 11-13-09

Social media 101 tells us that you have to get in there and know what is being said about your brand.  And it just makes sense that a company would be part of the dialogue about their own brand.  But I can state with absolute certainty that there’s a whole hell of a lot of leeway in what you can blog, chat or write about, or directly to, a company without ever hearing a peep back from them.  I know since I have personally skewered many a company on www.marketinginsideout.com and a few on www.menologues.com and have yet to hear a thing from one of them.  I’ve also written directly to companies with valid and genuine commentary and in response: nada.

And let’s face it, with all of the technology available to us I know that these companies are following our commentary – we track it.  So why aren’t they interacting with me?  Is it possible that the negative commentary is too overwhelming to acknowledge, or maybe they’ve read my brilliant diatribes and are cowering in a corner somewhere.  Let’s face it – there’s no positive spin for not taking advantage of the ability to interact with your audiences and not following up on what’s being said about your business.  Don’t be so quick to boast of your social media program if you’re just out there saying stuff – and not responding to what’s being said – because that would mean you’re only using ½ of social media – and it’s the easiest ½ at that.

There are some companies that have stockpiled answers to FAQs which they send out instantly as a query is made.  Too bad they generally don’t match the actual questions being asked.  Does the term interactive media mean nothing to you capitalist giants?  Don’t you see the value in a dialogue with your public?  Well, by missing that obvious opportunity you’re giving the edge to those of us who are not arrogant enough to insult the intelligence of our followers by wrapping everything in a neat little box of faux-interaction.  To those of us who get that real life is messy so real communication is bound to be messy too.

But try they might.

According to a new survey conducted for the American Press Institute, more than half of newspaper publishers believe readers will pay to access online newspaper content.  The results from the first survey are being presented at API’s Newsmedia Economic Action Plan Conference this week.

Newspaper companies including News Corp. and MediaNews Group are among those that have already said they will begin charging for online content. News Corp. chief Rupert Murdoch says the company will charge for all of its news sites, including FoxNews, by the middle of 2010.

One approach favored by many is to erect a pay wall around virtually all stories. Print subscribers are often—but not always—allowed to read articles free of charge. Everybody else must pay, either on a story-by-story basis or on a subscription plan. The Newport Daily News, a small Rhode Island newspaper, recently began charging $345 per year for online access to stories (that’s more than the print version).  (Interestingly enough Google is now developing a micropayment platform and pitching newspapers… which seems at odds with what Google CEO, Eric Schmidt told publishers at NAA in April that “consumers won’t pay for most online news”.  But based on how I read the proposal from Google, it sounds like they might also get a share of sales, which could explain the approach.)

Another option is to charge for just some content and make other content available free. The best example of this approach, with more than a million online subscribers, is the Wall Street Journal. Roughly half of its articles—generally financial news and business reports—sit behind a pay wall, although they are free if accessed via Google News.

This approach is much harder to emulate than it may appear. Between 2005 and 2007 the New York Times charged a subscription fee to read the paper’s most popular columnists online. It ended the experiment exactly two years ago because it seemed to be cutting traffic to the site and harming advertising revenue. The Los Angeles Times dropped an attempt to charge for arts coverage for the same reason.  A newspaper that wants to follow the Journal’s approach must produce copy that is both narrow in its appeal, highly valued and useful.

Paralleling these approaches are two other news content initiatives that could further impact the industry:

First is a content-management approach by Associated Press which includes plans for a system to detect unlicensed use of its content and potentially create new ways for the news cooperative to make more money online.  AP will bundle its stories in an “informational wrapper” that will include a built-in beacon to monitor where stories go.   This news registry will debut in November and will later expanding to videos and photos. Starting in 2010, newspapers that own the cooperative will be able to put their material into the registry as well.

The second approach, by start up Attributor, called the Fair Syndication Consortium includes Reuters and more than 1,000 publishers.  This one looks to be more of direct revenue-generating tactic, but still faces technical and legal hurdles.  Rather than trying to merely corral copyright-protected stories, the consortium hopes to take a slice of the ad revenue collected by an unauthorized Web site. However, to do that, it needs the cooperation of the big networks like Google and Yahoo, who so far have reacted coolly to the proposal. If a split can’t be agreed upon, the consortium will demand that the advertising running alongside the copyright-protected material be removed.

The issues are complex. I get that.  Newspapers pay their reporters to write stories and then many sites republish those stories and make money via advertising using content someone else paid for.  I get the angst.  But personally I don’t think the pay for content model is going to restore the news (and particularly the newspaper) industry to its level of previous profitability or even save it.  I think it’s short sighted and even misguided thinking.  Given the nature of the net, “news” won’t stop because news organizations wall off their content.  While I have all the respect in the world for a good, thorough reporter, they no longer have a dominance on reporting and analyzing the events in our world. My concern is that this move will only further marginalize the profession of news reporting with large segments of the population.

The hand wringing is about the art of journalism, but isn’t all of this really about advertising revenue? If you think about it, I mean really think about it, our subscriptions to the paper never really paid for the creation of news.  You can’t tell me monthly subscription revenue even came close to paying for the costs associated with producing a paper.  As a percentage of revenue, I wonder if subscription costs even cover the cost of paper and the home delivery.  In reality, advertising dollars underwrote the cost of journalism and those shrinking dollars are the cause of all the hand-wringing and why newspapers are in a world of hurt.

Not too long ago, we had the publisher of our local paper publicly say in a speech at a function that the paper wasn’t in the journalism business, it was in the ad business.  Many were shocked, but I gave him a lot of credit for having the balls to come out and say it.  To me it’s innovation newspapers missed and innovation they need.  Rather than trying to return to what they were, they need to face what is and get on with it.  And there are some very progressive thinkers in the industry with some great ideas for how newspapers can build community on and offline and regain a more progressive, leadership role.  But the train on pay for content has left the station and seems unstoppable at this point.  I just hope no one in the industry thinks it is a magic bullet.

By no means are the issues or ideas being discussed in the industry simple or unanimous. Opinions are as heated as they are varied.  Yet the simple question remains:  Will consumers pay for news online?  Will you?

I doubt I will.  At least for general news. I have too many other choices.

Some very insightful and thought provoking commentary has been written on this subject. If you haven’t followed the subject, here are some posts worth a read:

• Veteran alt-journalist Bill Wyman, in a piece in the web magazine Splice Today (headed by New York Press founder Russ Smith) summarizes the challenges of the newspapers in five easy pieces. His two-part essay, Five Key Reasons Why Newspapers Are Failing (one here and two here) takes aim at claims of civic virtue.
• Chris O’Brien, a business reporter at the San Jose Mercury News, contributing to the MediaShift blog, wrote one of the best explanations I have ever read about the inherent fallacy of the paid-content issue.
• In response to O’Brien’s post, and in further exploring the concept of the so called “original sin” committed by newspapers, Steve Buttry C3 Coach at Gazette Communications in Cedar Rapids, Iowa wrote a thought provoking post that basically summed up why the original sin in the newspaper model was more about failing to innovate rather than about failing to charge for content.  I agree with him wholeheartedly.
• In another post from Chris O’Brien, he advocates more of a anecdotal and observational approach to problem solving and innovation rather than a pure numbers approach which can often obscure the important lessons of the way people behave.  This struck a chord with me.  While I certainly value data and models as part of the analysis and planning process, I have found that anecdotes often provide me better insights into how to creatively solve a problem than numbers do.  In his post,  he states: ” I don’t believe there’s a magic data set waiting to be assembled that will lead us to the big “Ah-ha!” I don’t think we’re one reader survey away from figuring it all out. We live in an era where people turn to data as a crutch, leaning on it to give themselves a false sense of certainty. The facts don’t lie, right? Except we know that they do. A lot of such data is formed by the biases and frames through which the questions are formulated, asked, and then interpreted. The newspaper business has failed to recognize its own flawed frames. To this day, no matter what you hear from a newspaper executive, they still believe their primary purpose is to get people to read them in print. It’s why newspapers still spend so much money propping up circulation by subsidizing a large number of people through persistent telemarketing.”

It’s like no one has taken the time to realize that the menopausal woman is a person.  She doesn’t see herself as “menopausal” or “aging” and she’s not trying to write a thesis on the effects of menopause.  So don’t throw a bunch of charts and graphs at her.  Don’t find a special “old lady” font so that you can talk to her in a way that she can relate – because she can’t.

Instead, talk to her like you would a person.  Because that’s what she is.  Tell her what she might find inconvenient about menopause, and make her laugh with anecdotes of how other women have coped.  Assure her that just admitting she’s in menopause won’t make everyone who meets her look for white hair in a bun, granny glasses and a frumpy old house dress with sensible shoes.  Don’t make her feel old and ostracized like some kind of freak. Especially if you want to engage her.

On May 22nd we launched a blog on menopause, www.menologues.com.  It came about because so many friends and acquaintances have asked for some kind of painless guidance through the trials and tribulations of the dreaded and feared menopause.  Some of the most intelligent women that I know are embarrassed to admit they don’t know the basics – but they admit that they should.  So I started jotting down my thoughts and my experiences with the hope of making menopause less menacing.  I shared my initial post with my partner – who is just beginning her quest for information on the subject – and she was adamant that there is a huge need not currently being met.  That was the birth of Menologues.  And judging from the overwhelming response from menopausal, peri-menopausal and post-menopausal women I feel confident that we have uncovered a way to talk and connect with a sizeable segment of the menopausal set.

And the moral of the story is – first and foremost treat everyone like a person.  And the odds of connecting with them will increase dramatically.

What I’m enjoying right now is the proliferation of the satirical online personality and the conversations these folks are starting. It’s really interesting that we have a public forum (the Internet) and multiple means of communication with an audience (Twitter, Facebook, Blogs to name a few) where one person can create content and deliver a message and in turn, build an audience. People are now not only commenting on current topics and events, but getting involved on a more personal level by creating a whole persona through which to potentially get a point across. Or at least be funny.

One of the most widely publicized examples of this is Barack Obama’s Teleprompter’s Blog. “Totus” the teleprompter offers up blog posts from the perspective of Obama’s teleprompter. Classic. (Well, maybe not yet – it’s only been a few months that this blog’s been up.)

Obama’s taken a lot of heat over his extensive use of the teleprompter. OK – so what. Whether you’re a fan of a president or not, pay attention to what is said and not how it’s said. That’s not my point. The interesting thing about this story is that someone out there decided to become Obama’s online personality of the teleprompter. Now that’s funny. And they’ve built an audience and received extensive coverage for doing so.

A Google search for “Barack Obama’s Teleprompter’s Blog” – the official name of the blog – done today returned about 36,800 results. That’s not too bad for a blog that’s been online since mid-March and isn’t making a blatant case for self-promotion or monetization. In addition, a Google link search reports that 3,060 pages link directly to the official teleprompter blog. Nice work, Totus. You’ve created original content on a regular basis, stayed true to your form, and generated a good following. That’s how to blog.

A little bit closer to home, and the impetus for making this blog post of my own, is a new satirical personality that is taking advantage of the local newspaper’s website redesign.

The Omaha World-Herald just launched their new website at Omaha.com this week. They’ve taken countless hits over the past several years due to issues with their previous site. It’s no surprise that their new site is getting blasted as well. I doubt they could have released anything short of a direct emulation of CNN.com or NYTimes.com without taking some flak.

Sure, there are some things I’d recommend doing differently. Again, however, that’s not the point of this post. I’m more interested in the conversation that’s now taking place over the new site launch. There aren’t many relevant search results available for “omaha.com redesign” yet – several point to articles that contain those terms or were part of the old Omaha.com website. (Unfortunately, none of the old Omaha.com URLs redirect to the new paths.)

The current chatter is more along the lines of people not liking the design, not liking the layout, and being generally displeased with the new site. OK. Everyone gets their opinion.

But the most interesting development for me is the Twitter account for @NewOmahaDotCom. Here we have another satirical personality that is acting as the “official” Twitter stream for the new Omaha.com. There’s currently a lot of chatter going on, with direct replies going out to all the commentors. The latest, “I’m tired… Spent the whole night resaving my JPGs. thought it might help with the so called ‘errors’” points to the user comments about images, browser crashes, and general problems with the site.

This is another good example of someone with an obvious concern or interest generating content – even if it’s just for laughs – that’s getting picked up within the local community and generating buzz.

Like we’ve said many times before – people are out there talking about you, your brand, and what you’re doing. You can participate in the conversation or not. But if you listen, you’ll have a lot of the answers that your customers are already telling you.

I wonder if NewOmahaDotCom and Totus are related…

The big question posed in the story is:

“As bloggers have increased in numbers, the number of journalists has significantly declined. In Washington alone, there are now 79% fewer DC-based employees of major newspapers than there were just few years ago. At the same time, Washington is easily the most blogged-about city in America, if not the world...How long can nearly 500,000 people who are gradually replacing whole swaths of journalists survive with no worker protections, no enforced ethics codes, limited standards, and, for most , no formal training?”

His stats were culled from the Technorati poll and Bureau of Labor Statistics, but based on the comments on the story, many bloggers question those stats or the presumptions of the dollars earned via blogging.

Thought provoking and obviously controversial, but worth a read because it makes you think about how the news model is rapidly changing around the world.

Potentially this puts Facebook side by side with Twitter in all of the desktop and mobile client applications where a lot of the real-time conversation is happening and lets it compete head-to-head with Twitter.

Yet few are talking about the real difference between Facebook and Twitter — like the fact that the services are fundamentally different in how connections are formed.   Facebook requires friending: Twitter doesn’t.  It only requires following. This is a big distinction and a difference in how much can be shared.  Getting Facebook users to share their data with a third party could be a major challenge based on the reaction to the TOS issue a few months back.

Twitter had 9 million users last month, while Facebook has 200 million members.  Yes…Twitter is the media darling of late. It has grown in popularity largely because of the all online services that have sprung up around it to help organize messages, such as TweetDeck, create mini communities around a single theme, such as StockTwits; and track trends about what people have posted.  But is Facebook really reacting to or worried about the popularity of Twitter or are they focused on something else…like what TIME is calling the AfterWeb?  AfterWeb (or after the browser) is about unbundling web-site-based business and allowing developers to turn them into a bunch of discrete services that can be delivered over a variety of devices (from PCs to Smartphones) far more easily than via the website.

I sure hope Facebook is being strategic and looking forward, because they are running some pretty big risks in this latest move because if people get too accustomed to accessing “the stream” off of their web site, the company will lose out on the advertising revenue.  And currently Facebook at least has a revenue model (albeit advertising), Twitter does not.

Twitter Users by Age
The majority of Twitter users are 35 years old or older. And 45-54 year olds are 36 percent more likely than average to visit Twitter, making them the highest indexing age group, followed by 25-34 year olds, who are 30 percent more likely. Look at the index of 65+.  It’s higher than 18-24.  In fact, in February, 5.2 percent of users were 65 or older.

And the older demos are the ones fueling the growth.  And growth it is.  After months of double-digit growth, traffic to Twitter.com jumped dramatically in March, growing a staggering 131% to 9.3 million visitors. That’s 5 million more visitors than in February!  Fueled in part by celebrity “tweeters” like Oprah, who just started,  as well as substantial mainstream media attention, Twitter ranked as the top-gaining property for the month of March according to comScore.

Twitter Unique US Visitors
The media focus on Twitter the last few months has been heavy. It seems you can’t get through a typical newscast anymore without some mention of Twitter.  Tweets are all over CNN. Some have incorporated Twitter into the live broadcasts.

It’s become part of our culture. Our vernacular.  Tweet. Tweet this.  ReTweet. It’s even become part of talk show monologues. David Letterman spent 5 minutes talking about Twitter (and of course making fun of Ashton Kutcher’s Twitter success) on his April 24th show. He called it the beginning of the end of civilization.

Like it or not, Twitter is changing many things,  including the way the news system operates, further blurring the lines between average citizens and journalists. Timely tweets from those on the scene of events like Flight 1549′s landing in the Hudson have turned average citizens into journalists.

Beyond the fact that social media services like Twitter and Facebook are becoming entwined with the business segment, is the fact that the knowledge to understand and use a micro-blogging service like Twitter is no longer confined to the young as a greater portion of the population has grown older using the Internet in the past 15 years.   And it could be that a comfort level with technology will continue to change the way new technologies leap the chasm to reach critical mass.

Have a great week! Sylvia

One question that I hear a lot, goes a little like this: I want to get our company blogging, but how can I convince the c-suite that this is a valuable source of their time and money during these tough economic times?

First, I would try to sell them with successful blogging case studies from similar size businesses. Second, I would refer to this list of benefits that blogging can provide to your company.

1. Increased Exposure: Reach millions for no pay-for-play cost.
2. Sales Leads: Connect with buyers searching for your keywords online.
3. Make Yourself an Expert: Let the world know that you are an authority on your category. Become a resource for the media and consumers hungry for information.
4. Build Business Connections: You never know what connection could lead to a new business partnership or referral.
5. Build Search Engine Ranking: Google loves content and links, blogs let you develop a lot of both in a quick and easy way.
6. Beta Test Marketing Strategies or New Offers: find out if consumers like your new marketing or price offer before you pay to advertise it.
7. Respond to Controversy on Your Own Turf: Respond to online criticism in the safe and controllable environment of your own blog.
8. Recruitment: Publish a lot of positive information on the work/life balance at your company. The best candidates will be do online research into your company before they accept a position.
9. Media Relations: The media use the blogosphere as a source of story ideas, expert information and contacts. Take advantage of this opportunity to promote your business.

I hope that this short list of blogging benefits will help you convince your company to get out there. Remember the golden rule though: blogs are a conversation tool, not a publication tool.

Best of Luck,

Bill Flavell

Forrester’s report states that it makes sense for some marketers to pay bloggers to write about their experience with the brand. It lumps sponsored conversations as a subset of general marketing practices like advertising and PR activities. The author of the report, Sean Corcoran, said in his blog post explaining the report, “For these low buzz brands sponsored conversation is another way to increase discussion about your products.”

Corcoran said as a matter of market forces, there was no turning back with paid posts: there’s a demand and there’s a supply. Bloggers want to be paid and marketers want to pay them. Indeed, the paid blogging market is real and vibrant. Many major brands already engage in the practice. And given that the number of people reading blogs has grown 50% in the past year and continues to grow – one in three Americans online read a blog at least once a month, more marketers are considering the tactic.

Whether you agree or disagree with the concept (I admit I’m waffling on the issue because I know how hard it is for some “non sexy” type of companies to get anyone to even give them the time of day, but also worry about credibility), the release of the report sparked a quick reaction from Matt Cutts, head of Google’s webspam team. Cutts reminds everyone that paid posts with sponsors behind them not only need to be disclosed as such but also must also bear “no follow” tags so as to not fool the Google spider that crawls the Web for ranking purposes. Google is pretty religious about its guidelines and has and will penalize violators because, as Cutts puts it, they “pollute the ecology of the web.”

The premise behind “no follow” tags is to tell the spider that a post shouldn’t count toward a site’s search ranking on Google, because that would constitute buying links as a way to try to increase ranking — something not tolerated by Google.

According to a story on AdAge.com, “Forrester’s Sean Corcoran, who authored the report that set off Mr. Cutts’ finger-wagging, said he would follow up with a blog post that deals with Google’s demands, including spelling out the need to include no-follow tags in paid blog entries.”

Here’s some advice for marketers who may be considering this approach as part of their blogger outreach programs:

• Follow the “no follow” guidelines to the letter and understand the paid post won’t help your search rankings
• Be completely transparent and disclose all financial relationships and understand that any blogger worth his/her salt will follow guidelines to the letter
• Just because you pay doesn’t mean you control. It’s not like advertising. Bloggers need to speak in their own genuine voice, not yours. They are not your mouthpiece and they are free to say something unflattering about you if that’s what they think or feel
• Learn about the blogger first and make sure his voice and audience is relevant to your company/product. Just because a blogger has a big audience doesn’t make him/her a good fit for your company. It needs to be a good fit for both parties.
• Listen before you act

Photo: voxeros on Flickr.

In these rough economic times, it is easy for marketers to put their faith in quick rising new tools (Twitter is currently the fastest growing social media tool according to Wired). But the truth is that it is no magic bullet. The truth is that great customer service, a good product offering and interesting content will lead to good word of mouth recognition. There are some great tools in the social space to spread your content. But unless you have good content based on strategic planning, you will not succeed with any of the social tools. A big part of that strategic planning is knowing your audience and addressing their relevant concerns online, providing them a wanted service.

But, you say there are some companies out there who have been very successful with their Twitter accounts:
Dunkin Donut, Dell, Comcast… Yes, but this is because they have embraced the tool and used it in a natural way. And all three use Twitter as one small part of the marketing presence or for one small part of their business. The big reason for their success is that they used Twitter to address an existing customer need/concern.

It seems like everyday there is another article published online feeding the belief that Twitter is the new cure all. Below are two very interesting articles on the pervasiveness of Twitter. Please use them for good, not as an excuse to sell the cure-all.

Twitter First Real Threat to Google

11% of Americans Read or Post Status Updates

There’s confusion, trepidation, and a general feeling of being overwhelmed.  Add to that the pressure to get more bang for your marketing buck in today’s economic climate and the anxiety increases.

More and more companies need or want to expand their visibility online.   To be found where people look.  That often means tapping the potential of social media, but they don’t know how to enter the conversation or are paralyzed because of a stumble.  We’ve heard tales of being banned from Digg, kicked off Facebook, deleted from Wikipedia, stumped by Twitter, slammed by bloggers or caught off guard by employee comments in cyberspace.  We hear the the same question over and over, “What do I do?” And the dozens of books, hundreds of articles and thousands of web pages dedicated to the subject only seem to make it feel more overwhelming.

So we’ve developed this series of seminars, starting with social media marketing, to go beyond theory and platitudes to practical applications to answer your questions and give you tips you can put to work immediately.  We also have sessions scheduled that will focus on increasing your visibility on search engines and on smart marketing tips to turn data into intelligence and insights. You’ll take away not only a better understanding, but also a little peace of mind  and some tools to get you started.

Why the Sausage Factory name?  Because it fits (and it sounded better than Bozell Seminars).  People once referred to marketing like a recipe for soup — a little of this, a little of that, add a little seasoning, simmer it for a while and you’ve got a meal.  Now it’s not nearly so neat or orderly and time to simmer…fat chance.  It’s all about now.  And piecemeal doesn’t cut it anymore.  It has to all be ground together to create something cohesive and tightly integrated.  It really is like making sausage. It’s messy.  But at the end of the day, it’s much tastier and more popular at parties because it’s centered on the consumer.  Could the name Sausage Factory raise a few eyebrows?  You bet.  But that itself is part of what the marketing game is about today.  To have a voice, a point of view, something that might be worth talking about.  Check it out:  www.sausagefactoryseminars.com or on Twitter at www.twitter.com/SausageFactory.

We were able to take this lesson one step further when we were interviewed last night by a reporter from National Public Radio (NPR) Marketplace. At Bozell, we utilize both free and paid services to get connected with writers and editors from across the country. On a whim, I responded to an inquiry for parents who are using these difficult economic times to teach their kids about finance. My son was able to experience the “pre-interview” call and the waiting game to see if we made the cut.  Even though she thought it was cool about us being in Omaha and the home of Warren Buffet, we weren’t sure if we could find a time that worked with all of our schedules and the school day. We ultimately had to schedule the interview after I came home from Des Moines yesterday. Due to technical requirements, they sent a sound technician to our house as we were interviewed by the reporter over the phone. Alexander was nervous, but ultimately settled down and it was a great interview. So, besides teaching him about the wacky world of finance, he was able to get insight into some of the challenges that I face on a daily basis in dialogue relations. We do not know when the segment will air, but it has truly been a bonding experience for the two of us. Who knows if he will be the next Warren Buffet?  It doesn’t matter. What matter is that we will talk about this adventure for many years to come.

Until later, Sylvia

Personally I’m a little torn on this because I think it absolves people of taking responsibility, but YouTube today announced a feature that gives you the ability to delete comments you’ve made on videos — at any time. So if you made a dumb, typo-ridden, or grammatically horrific comment 2 years ago on some stupid video from your work-related email, you have a chance to clean it up.  You can now delete any and all of your idiotic YouTube comments.  Simply find your comment and click “remove” to pretend your lapse in judgment or grammar never happened.

Maybe next they can work on a way to help people be more lucid as they leave comments.

We all struggle with the measurement of success or return on investment (ROI) in social media. Most executives want to know how many conversations do you need to be a part of before you make a sale? We all intuitively know that that is difficult to measure. I would challenge the same executives to quantify the relationship and goodwill developed over a round of golf with partners, prospects, influencers and customers. You are building important relationships and participating in dialogue as you walk along a beautiful green, empathizing with that terrible shot and rejoicing that Tiger Woods moment. In social media, you are doing the same as a golf game, developing dialogue, experiencing events and building relationships but in the online world.

The second gem was the classification of audiences in social media. It puts into perspective the different social media audiences:

• Spectators – Read, watch and listen to conversations in the online world.
• Creators – Participate in the conversation by writing articles and blogs. Create content in videos, podcasts and blogs. They publish lists and directories of relevant products, services and companies.
• Critics – Provide comments, rate content and provide reviews.
• Collectors – Tag information, subscribe to feeds and vote on their favorite articles, videos, podcasts and photos.
• Joiners – Participate in social networking sites such as Facebook, MySpace and LinkedIn. They participate in demographic and interest specific social networking sites.

Effective social media campaigns can target one or more of the social media audiences. It is knowing how and when to communicate best with your target audience.

This was truly an agency wide effort since we received awards in the areas of blogger outreach, web sites, special event/outreach/educational and/or tradeshow event, news conference/publicity stunt, integrated marketing communications campaign, word of mouth, internal newsletter magazine and annual report. It is not all about us, we have great clients such as Catholic Charities, DOCCENTER/www.doclanding.com and the Men’s College World Series (CWS), that allow us to do great work.

Happy Holidays!

Sylvia

Here it is.  Pretty interesting.

We wanted to nominate Tom Giitter for the Public Relations Professional of the Year. We were quietly collecting examples of his work over the past 24 years. He has been involved in many high profile cases such as the new downtown stadium, a new bovine hormone controversy and worked with ENRON. Using his Pulitzer prize winning writing skills, he has ghost written more articles, white papers and case studies than many have written in a lifetime. Unfortunately, he found out our plans as he was finishing his PRSA Paper Anvil entries and found his nomination form on our server. We quickly received an email requesting that we not nominate him since he would not accept the award if he won. Again, he wants his work to speak on behalf of the client, rather than himself. Even though our plans were thwarted, Tom Giitter is the PRSA Professional of the Year in our eyes.

Have a great day! Sylvia

The Dialogue Relations / Public Relations blog is designed to be many things. A forum on the latest developments within the marketing communications industry and at Bozell. We will have members of our team contribute to our blog, including our Social Media Specialist, Bill Flavell..

The first topic of discussion is why we are transitioning our department name from Public Relations to Dialogue Relations. Over the years we have been described as communications, public affairs, media relations, community and public relations. It has been a struggle for professional communicators to quickly and succinctly describe our role.

At Bozell, we feel that it is our responsibility to facilitate a dialogue between key stakeholders such as the media, community at large, employees, customers and influencers. With the advent of Web 2.0, individuals want to be part of the dialogue, rather than only receiving information. It is our job to engage in and facilitate the conversation between companies, their customers and between consumers.  As a result, public relations no longer is broad enough to describe our role in the marketing communications mix. As we transition to only Dialogue Relations, we will include “Public” since this is the most recognized description of our department (for the time being).

Please let me know your thoughts on our name change to Dialogue Relations.

Have a great day, Sylvia