Twitter Shows Real Value and Promise

There’s been plenty of articles and discussion in recent weeks that confirm the fact that Twitter has gained kudos and gravitas as a valuable – if not indispensable – communication platform. The tweets on the demonstrations in Iran are only the latest example of the unexpected value of the networking platform. Clearly, few would still designate Twitter as a silly, trivial fad (though it can be both). Probably the best article I’ve seen on the topic is the recent Time story, which has been making the rounds in recent weeks (via Twitter I might add). The Time article details the unexpected depth of Twitter and focuses on the value of the social networking elements – the ongoing conversations and updates which blend personal updates, guerrilla news, chain discussions and recommendations.

In the early discussions on the value of Twitter, some questioned how it could be monetized or give birth to the killer business application. They were missing the point. Though Twitter has certainly shown its value as an immediate and informal news network, it also provides for a social interaction platform that provides intangible but unique and important benefits to its users. Call it human contact…but in a virtual setting. The author calls this having ambient awareness about developments across your social network. It’s proved particularly useful as a communication platform around events or conferences, as noted by Time, where conversation can be captured, shared and dissected instantly by a fluid community of users. This human element – shaped by millions of users both near and far in a shifting sea or followers and friends – is one of the strongest assets of Twitter.

The article also points to the emerging power of the search function on Twitter – which allows users to jump on any topic and has fostered the rapid spread of “super fresh” news (blending informal updates and personal captions) on major global events – and use of links, which opens the door to sharing much more than the original 140 characters.  There are also accounts of how users have helped to shape the evolution of the platform – yet another example of the amazing wisdom of crowds. The article also raises very interesting questions about the eclectic definition of news and advertising on Twitter. But buried at the end of the article is perhaps one of the most important lessons about Twitters’s emergence – that Twitter reflects the incredible social innovation and creativity that fuels social media and related technology. That is the most lasting value rather than the platform itself, which will doubtless continue to evolve and morph.

Is Google Search Dominance Threatened?

As I immerse myself in my feeds and try to catch up on social media news and trends – after relative isolation behind corporate firewalls – one of the most interesting stories I’ve seen relates to the shift in search to social platforms like Twitter and Facebook. Check out this blog post by Steve Rubel on the topic, which documents the huge growth in search on Twitter. I’ve actually seen evidence of this trend in my own surfing habits…as I find increasingly find myself searching on whatever platform I’m on – whether it be LinkedIn, Twitter or Facebook – rather than jumping out to search on Google. Part of the reason this is possible is the expanded traffic for these platforms and the fact many of my “friends” or contacts are reachable through the social networks, but I’ve also found even general results can be more relevant and intuitive than the regimented data from Google.

Could this be the tip of the iceberg for the end of Google’s dominance as the world’s default search engine? Google itself seems to be aware of this trend, as per this article on CNET, though they define this trend as “social discovery” and posit that friends will increasingly help us find information or sites. It will be interesting to watch as this issue unfolds.

Unions Jumping on New Media Bandwagon

An article in the Los Angeles Times last week provided a good summary of union campaign tactics being used against Starbucks – apparently now a close second to WalMart as the favorite target of union organizers. The gist of the article is that unions are increasingly leveraging “new media” tactics to spread the word and gain traction for their organizing campaigns – with the central premise that the inherent communication benefits of social media (low cost, huge reach, networking and multi-media capability) is providing a boost to these programs. Examples of new media tactics in the Starbuck’s program include worker videos posted on a website, a guerrilla “hijacking” of a Twitter program and an on-line petition.

Despite the focus on social media, I don’t think these campaigns will be any more successful than previous ones just because of the Web 2.0 tactics. For one thing, authenticity and credibility are paramount in social media programs, and these efforts are clearly biased and polarized. Even the union organizers behind the campaign agree the ultimate intent is to promote the potential EFCA legislation, and attack critics like Starbucks. Even though these networking/viral efforts may theoretically “spread the word” – to use the language of the union organizers – I doubt they will engage many beyond the core supporters or interested pundits. For one thing, Starbucks is no rookie when it comes to social media and PR and has aggressively responded on the Web and on proprietary sites as well as traditional media. So this continues to be a “he said, she said” battle, with each side trying to promote it’s position and leverage the networking ability of social media. Yes, there are Starbuck’s employees featured in the campaign who are critical of management and pushing for union representation, but that’s not new and doesn’t seem to represent a widespread trend.

This campaign sounds to me like similarly clumsy attempts by some PR and advertising firms to generate “buzz” by releasing “viral videos” on YouTube. I have no reason to believe it will spark any more public support or tangible policy change than previous efforts in traditional PR. Campaigns like this only generate genuine interest and momentum when they are legitimate grass-roots efforts that touch a nerve with a large community of consumers – like the infamous “Comcast must Die” website, which recently shutdown in the wake of apologies and concessions from Comcast. Otherwise, they are little more than manufactured “astroturf” campaigns destined to generate limited attention and change.

TV is not Dead

Analysis of the TV viewership of the Olympics in the U.S. seems to reaffirm that television retains a prominent role in major global events. The stats, as per this article in US Today, appear fairly robust given all the distractions available to people seeking information or entertainment. But the real story here is the growth of coverage and viewership on-line. Millions tuned in to websites and blogs to watch the competitions (live and replays), peak at results or comment on the drama. The same pattern seemed to hold true for the recent political conventions in the U.S. – huge numbers for the keynote speeches but plenty of traffic and chatter online before, during and after. And the online political fundraising continues to be strong.

One conclusion to these developments is that network (or cable) TV is far from dead, particularly when it comes to seminal, high-profile events. But the other is that the Web has become a critical complement for coverage on major events, offering an array of advantages and options that are much richer than television. That lesson – that it’s often not one or the other but probably a mix - is valuable for PR professionals, who can sometimes ride bandwagons and be dogmatic and impulsive about the next big tactic – or as my friend calls it the “shiny new thing.”

Enabling Employees Key to Competitive Edge

A study by the Economist Intelligence Unit suggests that giving people (employees) the information technology tools, infrastructure, and support they need to do their jobs effectively will help your company outdistance the competition. The study’s main conclusions are:

• The more a company empowers its employees to make decisions, the more likely it is to perform better financially and competitively.
• True enablers use technology to improve collaboration, encourage risk-taking, and optimize decision-making.
• Companies categorizing themselves as “true enablers” are three times more likely to be more profitable than their competitors.
• Compared with other types of firms, companies described as “true enablers” have a higher proportion that are more profitable than their competitors.

The study defines enablement as the organizational structures, informational technologies, and other resources that make it possible for employees to make decisions. In other words, trust your employees to make the right decisions. Not surprisingly, the study found that when it comes to IT, there is a significant “enablement gap” in most companies. Sound familiar?

Though many CIOs might disagree, most IT departments are strongly risk-averse not yet prepared to give employees the leeway they need to find information, indulge their creativity and collaborate with peers. It’s hard to feel “enabled” when you can’t get access to the Internet, or even download the latest version of Visio or Firefox. Though IT has valid reasons to be cautious in terms of loosening the controls and providing new tools – notably security – this new study suggests there is far more reason to take a leap of faith and give employees the technology platform to reach their full potential. IBM and Sun are two companies that have embraced this approach, to their benefit. Let’s hope other follow in their footsteps.

Innovation Driving New Metrics on Web

One of the most fascinating elements of the Web 2.0 revolution is the scope and speed of innovation driving new developments on the Web. Witness the creation of new measurement and search tools related to tracking content on Twitter. This post by Brian Solis discusses the merit of Summize, one of several new monitoring tools. This one includes a “sentiment” tracker that breaks down the content according to positive or negative connotations – sort of like the typical “tone” tracking for news media content. I admit I’ve not been using Twitter much these days and have not used any of these monitoring tools, but based on what I’ve seen these should be added to the toolkit of all PR professionals involved in social media. Yet another example of the dynamic, creative environment on the Web.

PR Etiquette on the Web…Not.

I just read an interesting account of the latest dust-up between PR agencies and two disgruntled journalists who have shutout PR pitches or outreach of any kind. I guess it was wishful thinking that the worst abuses by the PR industry – which continue to tarnish the reputation and many of its professionals – would not be exported to the Web. The Seven Promises proposed here by Todd Defren - essentially a checklist designed to avoid egregrious PR practices around “pitching” a story - make a lot of sense. Anybody starting out in the business should paste these rules on their cubicle wall. In the meantime, don’t be surprised if you get called a hack or publicist. You are paying the price for the mistakes of others.

AOL Still Kicking and Breathing

AOL’s recent announcement that it was launching a number of new “micro-sites” marks another step in the evolution – and struggle for survival – of one of the initial mega-portals on the Internet, which for many was their first connection to the Web…sort of a digital first kiss. Check out this article on Wired for details. AOL’s experimentation was caused by the implosion of their original business model about ten years ago – charging millions of subscribers for access to the Web (via dial-up!) within the context of a closed environment. That was fine while it lasted, but the model became irrelevant when dozens of competitors began offering cheaper and faster connections and users made it clear being behind firewalls was no longer acceptable.

This latest move reflects the ongoing strategic exploration that seems to vacillate between a focus on prominent portals – be they Google or Yahoo – or building numerous sites designed to reach ever smaller on-line communities of interest. Clearly, AOL is moving as fast as it can towards the latter. The strategy can work, but the challenges of drawing (and retaining) an audience and somehow making money remains. In fact, it may be harder to draw users to these smaller sites given the increasing number of blogs, sites and online forums competing for traffic. As an aside, Kudos to AOL for finally opening  the door to links to/from their sites, which will allow them to spread their networking reach and make their content much more credible and dynamic.  Anything that presents a hurdle to users – be it a registration process, entry cost or difficulty getting information – is a very big negative in the increasingly free-flowing and inter-connected Web.

The Last Breaths of TV Advertising?

Chalk up yet another example of the wide reach and lasting impact of the Internet on traditional marketing. This report on the annual advertising purchasing by the major American TV networks has two main headlines: the ratings continue to plummet, and the participants continue to look for alternatives to the typical TV advertising blitz. More marketers are purchasing advertising “bundles” that go beyond the 30-second ad to include other media and placements. The new buzzword is apparently integration – buy a few ads, stream the show on select websites, place the product in the program or script, etc. Just to make things more exciting, the companies and networks are also trying to figure out how to measure the popularity of their programs – and the related advertising – in the new world of streaming (both free and pirated), iPhones and Tivo. Welcome to the brave new world.

The Free Web Economics (Redux)

For me, one of the most fascinating elements of the Web 2.0 revolution is the proliferation of free or almost free applications and services available on the internet. I know my last post was on this topic, but bear with me….I haven’t really heard a clear and convincing explanation of the phenomenon until I read this article in the Globe & Mail (a plug for Canada’s best newspaper) featuring an interview with Wired editor Chris Anderson.

Anderson argues that the new economics of the Web – where it is very cheap (and becoming cheaper every day) for anybody to establish sites and reach millions and bandwidth, storage and processing power are increasingly affordable – has fostered a new age of free economics. Anderson suggests that the obsession with finding a way to “monetize” online services and applications may be misguided, and is not a pre-ordained outcome for all companies on the Internet. He posits that the new model is a “freemium” where less than 1% of heavy users can subsidize free use for the other 99%.

I’m not an economist, but I found this discussion really compelling. And from what I’ve experienced, this trend is a definite reality and it’s had a very positive impact on the reach and impact of the Web. The implications for personal users are mind-boggling, but this is also relevant to professional communicators. The move towards freeware provides huge opportunities for those of us trying to build blogs or create and distribute digital content, but as I’ve argued before the concept is anathema to most IT departments, which are inherently risk-averse and susprisingly unfamiliar (from my experience) with social media. It will be interesting to watch when this trend towards free services enters the realm of corporate IT…if ever.