Disqus - Latest Comments for Kerrymg

Re: The Social Web | Social Marketing & PR 2.0: Why Social Media News Releases Aren’t a Waste of Time

Kerrymg — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 07:17:16 -0000

Grey comments? I thought they were a tad harsher than that ;-)

The historical perspective is useful, strange to think that we've been talking about SMPRs since pre-twitter days. While I can see the discoverability argument. Could you share some analytics about how much organic search traffic SMPRs tend to pick up?

Re: The Social Web | Social Marketing & PR 2.0: Is the Social Media News Release a Waste of Time?

Kerrymg — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 18:40:02 -0000

sorry, think jetlag has impacted my filters, plus social media press releases are a bugbear of mine and have been for years. I certainly agree that providing a well organised set of extra information, images, footage etc, is great for both journalists and for SEO purposes. Though the latter is somewhat negated if you don't host them on your own site. Ideally it would sit on the companies website, news would be sent by plain text email with links to the SMPR, which really just makes it a very good and useful news room.

I think my real issue, aside from that of distribution, is that the original call to shake up the press release was in terms of content, and the SMPR is format over content.

It could be worse though, I have one ex-client who inspired by the SMPR craze wanted to re-invent it again. His favourite idea was to deliver press releases as small executable files, that once run would scroll the content for the journalist. It took a long time to persuade him that it might not be the best way to get information out.

Re: The Social Web | Social Marketing & PR 2.0: Is the Social Media News Release a Waste of Time?

Kerrymg — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 11:02:22 -0000

The social media press release to me was the absolute epitome of social media bollocks. I agree that for SEO, sharing across sites they have their uses but as a way of getting information to journalists, and bloggers, they are pants.

I wrote this piece, http://niffnaffntriv.com/?p..., a couple of years ago on how I just didn't understand the SMPR and despite some valiant argument from core proponents both in the UK and USA, I still think it's a load of old tosh. Mainly because every wire service that tried to flog me SMPR distribution had to admit that it went out as a plain text email with lots of links to the SMPR online.

Re: COMMS corner: Are "Content Counsellors" the next big thing?

Kerrymg — Fri, 18 Feb 2011 09:25:04 -0000

I'm not sure. I think you may have just come up with a pretty & modern skin for what the previous agency/client relationship was - the only thing that had changed was the channel.

PR agencies didn't create the news, well not hard news. It came from the client and the agency helped them to shape it for the best possible delivery by the client to the audience. Yes PR agencies created soft news, the surveys, the polls, the formula and these are more likely to be dissembled through social media channels, as well as the more traditional PR routes.

The skills you list above are all key but that was equally true pre-social media (whenever that actually started)

However, I don't think you are crazy ;-)

Re: The Social Web | Social Media Strategy & PR 2.0: Why PR Has to Chill Out and Accept Online Criticism

Kerrymg — Wed, 19 Jan 2011 05:40:23 -0000

You can't please all the people all of the time, I went on an excellent course while at Porter Novelli, one of the lessons was you can go out of business quickly by listening to the wrong type of customer. It may hurt that not all businesses want all people as their customers, but it's the truth. Thus the danger with listening to online criticism is that is possible the people doing the complaining aren't actually your customers or indeed people you want as customers.

If I were Gap or Starubucks I'd have taken an in-store poll and asked if A) they had noticed the logo change, B) If they cared and C) would they no longer shop/buy because of it and pay fare more attention to that data than the online stuff.

Re: COMMS corner: Opinion: The social media bubble will burst in 2014...

Kerrymg — Thu, 07 Oct 2010 10:11:42 -0000

I have one brief period of lucidity a day, seems I hit it on when I read your post :)

Re: COMMS corner: Opinion: The social media bubble will burst in 2014...

Kerrymg — Thu, 07 Oct 2010 09:26:42 -0000

Not sure if the bubble wil burst or just deflate. Much like every year since 1999 until this year was slated to be the 'The Year of the Mobile' and this year, when mobile internet has really taken off it's almost been an anti-climax. I think by abou 2014 social media will just be media, a different type, with different rules of engagement but it will be just what we do.

Rather as the great, late, Douglas Adams said "Technology is a word that describes something that doesn't work yet." Social media is a term that describes something that doesn't quite work, yet"*.

*I understand that I am laying myself open to many people stating maning examples of how amazingly Social Media works and has worked, my point, much like Douglas Adams', is that it does not yet work ubiquitously.

Re: Viral videos CAN be created

Kerrymg — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 13:08:17 -0000

Am so falling for the bait here.

Viral's are unpredictable without a decent amount of seeding spend behind them. I'd also argue your figures, though would be happy to be proved wrong.

Our networks are clumps of ppl who tend to know each other. For example take my facebook social graph, the ppl on their tend to fall into school friends/uni friends/rugby friends/work colleagues/social media ppl and family. If I send a video to every person in every group, most of them will not pass it on as they will assume most ppl that they would send it to within their group will have already received it. Of course they may pass it on to friends outside of the group and from there it may pass on to other social clumps. The person you are after is not necessarily the most influential but the one with the most betweeness, the one who bridges the most clumps if you will.

Mat Morrison, from whom I have nicked most of the above knowledge, can explain this far more eloquently than I.

I'd also argue with method 2, that is not seeding (and I assume this is why you have used inverted commas'. that's uploading and the equivalent of sticking an ad in the phonebook hoping that someone will chance upon it by accident.

Re: Google knows EVERYTHING about you

Kerrymg — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 11:51:23 -0000

Thank god it's got a self-declared remit to do no evil - eh?

Oh.

@Marijean - I can never find the exact quote but I do believe Schmidt has said that Google's aim is to know you so well that if you type in 'What shall I do tonight?' it can give you a very relevant answer.

Re: Is KFC expecting too much?

Kerrymg — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 08:57:43 -0000

Just seen the the new CMO on stage with Martin Sorrell and he used the teenage sex analogy around digital, lots of talk, very few do and those that are, aren't sure they are doing it right.

I know Starbucks and Dominos are bothinvesting, and I did like the Jimmy Choo campaign, but I just don't yet see meaningful numbers in the UK, not outside of the PR/Social Media group. It is possible that it will tip but it could remain life Friendfeed, which at one point was predicted to kill twitter and has remained a geek plaything.

As ever would be happy to be proved wrong.

Re: Is KFC expecting too much?

Kerrymg — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 08:30:20 -0000

Understand your loyalty point - it is the chain not the location, although location will play a big part in the store's success.

And why not FourSquare - just don't see the evidence that its getting near mass-market pick up yet. I've been at the Cannes Lions festival all week and am yet to check in with more than half a dozen people at the same time. This despite advertising apparently realising that digital is where it's at. I think penetration with Nokia Ovi maps would be far more successful, although less digi-geek-chic cool.

Re: Is KFC expecting too much?

Kerrymg — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 11:39:45 -0000

I think the barrier to entry is a bit too high, although perhaps just for London. Apparently wearing your PJs is acceptable day time attire in other parts of the country, so it may do better there. Not sure I agree with the assessment that fast-food eaters aren't loyal, witness the Whopper freak-out from a while back (http://legacy.bk.com/en/us/...

Also not sure that Foursquare would work, I'm really keen to see Domino's success rate with its promotion and pizza is more akin to geeks than fried chicken. Also based on the check-in numbers I've seen this week at Cannes, Foursquare is no where near mainstream.

Personally I'd suggest going for proximity based advertising as part of the campaign instead.

Re: Can PR survive competition from management consultancies?

Kerrymg — Fri, 18 Jun 2010 04:41:19 -0000

It's not unknown for management consultancies to dabble in PR. Way back in the day, well the mid 90s, PA Consulting handled the PR for HP in the UK.

Re: Social media traffic tops search, but how much do milestones matter?

Kerrymg — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 10:55:54 -0000

Think there's a bit of wishful thinking at the end there, of course they will appear in countless decks as a proof that social media is the future, all other forms of communication are dying if not dead and that whatever form of business you are in, you need to be fully engaged with everyone at all times.

Re: Why PR just doesn’t need journalists anymore

Kerrymg — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 06:03:11 -0000

hmm, dunno if it is PR agencies are of have been that blinkered. I think that its the outsider view of PR agencies, we all know that it can be difficult to explain what it is we do, and the PRs talk to journalists is an easy concept to hang on to.

Re: Why PR just doesn’t need journalists anymore

Kerrymg — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 05:28:37 -0000

Think you've got two words the wrong way round in your title there, should it not read 'why PR doesn't just need journalists anymore'?

There's also an argument that PR never needed just journalists, they are just one group of stakeholders, or influencers that we worked with. yes, their influence potentially is on the wane, but in a democratized media world, a lot of people will still look to names they know, like the BBC and Bloomberg to give them information they feel they is reliable and trustworthy.

perhaps but there are many interesting discussions to be had about

Re: PepsiCo takes lead from Wispa for Mountain Dew

Kerrymg — Tue, 18 May 2010 11:50:48 -0000

I thought the jury was still out on whether the Bring Back Wispa campaign was actually a true grassroots movement or something well seeded by Borkowski. Certainly the objective, to investigate the possibility of bringing back a classic iconic product, Wispa, as stated in its own case study would point to the former.

http://www.borkowski.co.uk/....

Agree there doesn't seem to be much evidence of fan demand for Mountain Dew in the UK but its FB page already has 23k plus likes (god I hate that phrase) compared to the Wispa 14,000 although I believe that finally grew to nearer 800,000 - with some help, so who knows what Mountain Dew might achieve.

Re: Blogger outreach: why you should do it

Kerrymg — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 05:20:21 -0000

I think this is a topic that bears a bit more scrutiny, so ever one for crowdsourcing opinion I've posted a poll on my blog to guage the general feeling - it can be found here --->http://ow.ly/15Okl

Re: Blogger outreach: why you should do it

Kerrymg — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 14:17:41 -0000

Sorry - with the long term comittment comment I was being unneccesarily flip. I also think I owe Darika an apology, it was me that brought up the idea of not doing proactive blogger relations, which was an idea sparked from her post about not treating social media as a series of short campaigns but as a long term thing. I completely agree with her but have seen/heard/been asked to recommend short term engagement strategies to do exactly that. This is because social media is still thought of by some as a tactical bolt on and not a strategic or intrinsic part of any comms campaign.

My original post was aimed at stirring up some discussion, prolly should've actually flagged that in the post itself. I should also have made it clearer that perhaps we should push back on clients or call out brands who do take a short term view and suggest a more reactive approach - again make it easy for assessts to be found or contact to be made.

Ian - am intrigued about your statement around PRs not getting paid as much to do the social media schizzle as they do 'proper' press as that's definitely not something I've come across.

Re: Blogger outreach: why you should do it

Kerrymg — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 07:38:49 -0000

A fine rebuttal there Mr Hallam but there are a couple of points I'd like to clarify.

I agree with you, and disagree with Darika, that there is time to build relationships with bloggers over a three month period. However I'm not sure we should being doing that if we know that it's going to be it and that after three months they'll dropped like a stone as we move on to the next campaign dictated target audience. That said perhaps we should be upfront, tell the bloggers invovled that we can't offer them a long-term commitment right now.

As for the niche feeding the mainstream, both media and bloggers. You are right, again, yes they do but not exclusively and not every niche blogger has influence. Though they potentially have great influence if not popularity which makes it even more important that we don't piss them off.

Finally remember that this is a discussion based on whether you can/should engage bloggers for a short term campaign. If you are working on a long term strategy/plan with a client then building long term relationships with the key influencers, both on and offline, is vital. As Darika pointed out in here post, if you're in-house then what the hell are you waiting for.

Re: Why PR is losing the social media battle: Day One

Kerrymg — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 05:06:47 -0000

This is potentially the most useful set of blog posts I've ever read on the topic of Social Media and PR. I say potentially cos it's day 1 but if they're all up to this standard then wow.

Enough fawning :)

I have a question, who do you think we are losing the battle to, or are we just losing the battle against ourselves to make social media the natural remit of PR and/or to get the most out of it?

Re: Has crowdsourcing become a lazy cliché?

Kerrymg — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 12:39:24 -0000

I think crowdsourcing has always been a lazy cliche and I agree wholeheartedly that it is individuals within the crowd that drive it. Weirdly I've been talking a lot about community to our (Porter Novelli) clients this month and for most it seems that the rule of 1:10:100 of creator, interacter, lurker holds true. That is of course for using crowdsourcing for content creation. When it comes to using the crowd to listen I am more in favour, though the question is how do you make sure that you are listening to the right people?

Re: The Social Media Guru

Kerrymg — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 14:08:29 -0000

That was indeed super-f'cking awesome

Re: Social Media Lessons learned: a retrospective guide

Kerrymg — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 05:35:06 -0000

Sorry Lee, thought I'd done a response to this on Friday, but obviously didn't hit post.

To answer your last question first, people have always been more influenced by their peers than any other source. The issue or PR is that the amount of peers people now have access to is increasing dramatically. The Edelman Trust barameter tells us every year that we most trust people like us. The question for PR is how do we define what people mean like people like us? It's not just a case of those people we know in real life, we make judgements on people in the media and about how like us they are, think of all those people who claim passionate hate or love for celebrities who they have never met. They form an image and make decision from what they see of them in the media.

Back to your first question, people are looking for answers. Think how many of your little trips on the internet start with a search page, I have heard a figure that 80% of all internet journeys (horrid phrase) start with search but I don't have the reference so lets take it with a pinch of salt. And I think they are looking to obtain information from a site that they think is trustworthy. For some they are outsourcing that trust check to google, a recent study showed that most British teenagers think that Google ranks on truthfulness.

Personally how I react to branded content depends greatly on my experience with the brand. I use a certain internet bank, which I have the warm fuzzies for due to the way they have treated me, so would trust its content. Another rather large sporting brand gave me a bad personal experience and so I'd distrust its content.

For other people it will be different. I think the harsh reality that we have to face as PRs is that the best PR a company can have is excellent customer service, if you have that at your core then it is easy to amplify and capatilise on both through traditional channels and newer ones.

Re: Social Media Lessons learned: a retrospective guide

Kerrymg — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 12:43:34 -0000

Hmm, not sure if PR is evolving into a pull methodology. PR to me is about getting your message to the right audience, we worked with the media as they were the ones with the audience. Today the audience has fragmented but we continue to put our content where the audience is already, or possibly more accurately where the audience is looking for information. Obviously we can use SEO to pull those searchers to a single site but it's far more effective to have a cohesive presence in multiple places.