Disqus - Latest Comments for The Lovable Rogue

Re: Personal CPM: Quantifying star power on social networks

The Lovable Rogue — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 04:08:46 -0000

Interesting insight, Eric.

The benefit of measureability recognizable through such efforts is likely to prove a significant influence on those keen to explore their options for online brand building. One of the more obvious benefits thereof stems from the viral capacity of social networks; branded tools and widgets can quickly spread through entire friendlists, effectively bringing the brand message to the attention of millions. Arguably this is not the case with real world celebrity endorsements.

TLR

Re: louisgray.com: Not Everyone Reads Your Tweets, and That's Okay!

The Lovable Rogue — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 05:10:29 -0000

Hey Jesse. Interesting insight, but I'm not sure that I agree. Whilst I absolutely agree that social media in its entirety is about building relationships, can you ever really create a meaningful relationship with upwards of 1000 people? I'm dubious. The content that these users create on Twitter would, as you correctly highlight, prove near impossible to keep on top of.

For me, I don't think it is a case of politeness. The value of Twitter in my perspective stems from those I follow, hence I take great care in selecting only those from whom I feel I can benefit. Admittedly this may mean that on occasion I miss out on a golden nugget, but then surely this is no different from simply overlooking the nugget as one of thousands of posts which pass through your 1000 strong list of followers daily. Essentially, if there is something that a user specifically wants you to hear they will @reply you. The decision to stop following me by someone that no longer considers me to add value for them is therefore entirely understandable.

Admittedly, the number of new followers I receive daily remains manageable at present, however were this to increase, I am certain that my attitude would remain the same. We need a degree of refinement to ensure that we benefit most from the platform.

TLR

Re: Web 2.0 is a Result of Social Interaction not Technology or Marketing

The Lovable Rogue — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 15:49:06 -0000

Douglas,
I would suggest that Web 1.0 didn't originally have an issue. At the time, a static one way conversation with the customer was sufficient to convey one's point. The majority of people were perfectly happy to use the internet as a means of learning more about the organisation and leaving it at that. It was the social revolution, which I suggest represents Web 2.0 more accurately, that really drove technology companies to bridge the technological gap. Had there not been a demand for a two way conversation with the organisation, then it is unlikely that the Web 2.0 tools would have emerged.

I think this argument is essentially a what came first scenario. In my opinion though, it was consumers demanding greater involvement with the companies which affect our everyday lives that led to the demand for an 'electronic voice'. I would be happy to discuss your thoughts on this.

An enjoyable article, Jacob.

Re: Corporate Social Media, What’s the Problem?

The Lovable Rogue — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 03:39:30 -0000

My personal view is that by running social media strategies through business unit after business unit for approval, the content therein invariably becomes stale. Stale content is unlikely to appeal to anyone, and under such circumstances it may actually be worth foregoing a social media strategy.

I agree with the points made in the comments sections; social media evangelists are required to take ownership of the organisation's social media efforts. The organisation however must simultaneously be willing to allow the individual the space to actually do so.

I think this all comes down to transparency at the end of the day. If it is perceived that the content is genuine and transparent, then users are likely to embrace and engage with it accordingly. On the other hand, if the content is perceived to be merely a stale, overly regulated corporate offering, then the contrary is true. The social media allows organisations to represent themselves as human, and this is where I see the social media providing the greatest benefit to the organisation.

Re: Bad Advice from Wired Magazine, “Quit Blogging!”

The Lovable Rogue — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 15:48:32 -0000

I actually enjoyed reading the article. Essentially, I agree with what you're saying; the notion of pulling blogs when they are becoming truly mainstream is shortsighted, however I would definately recommend reading the article to anyone that has not yet done so. The problem with current social media opinion is that most people seem to agree with one another. Whilst agreement is good, we need controversial content such as that referenced here to stimulate debate. Only by recognising both sides of the argument can we expand our knowledge of the subject.

Re: Who Owns Social Media?

The Lovable Rogue — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 15:03:34 -0000

I think the problem with making someone responsible for the organisation's social media presence is that it can become difficult for the individual to make the rest of the organisation embrace the principles thereof equally. As such, it is possible that the social media strategy will become disjointed and may insufficiently represent the entire organisation. I think that it is important to make social media everyone's responsibility. Employees should be empowered to take ownership of the various social media types, and then represent their organisations accordingly. By imposing minor regulations on the employees (e.g. with regards to language and content restrictions etc), the organisation can ensure that the content doesn't get out of control, whilst allowing a degree of transparency. Such a strategy will help the organisation to appear more human.

Re: Should You Be Authentic? Maybe Not

The Lovable Rogue — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 03:53:58 -0000

I think transparency is a more appropriate term for what you correctly describe above, Jacob. Customers demand business transparency in order to establish that the company is acting honestly and in good faith. You are right to suggest that we do not always act authentically. In most cases this isn't a problem. In my opinion though, it is organisational transparency that truly matters when the organisation is looking to achieve a successful relationship with the customer. Transparency, created through an unfiltered dialogue, is amongst the best methods of creating transparency. That's where the social media steps in.

TLR

Re: Why You Need a Social Media Marketing Department

The Lovable Rogue — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 16:43:12 -0000

Jacob,
Further to our conversation earlier, I thought I would chip in! As Ashley suggests, I too beleive that the Social Media needs to be implemented on an organisation-wide scale. Every employee should be encouraged to participate in the Social Media if they so wish; either actively by creating content, or passively by monitoring the new media platforms If responsibility is refined to one department, I imagine that any Social Media output would feel manufactured. In order to adequately encourage employees to participate, the culture must be conducive to the Social Media.

TLR

Re: Why You Need a Social Media Marketing Department

The Lovable Rogue — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 16:05:28 -0000

Hey again, Jacob,
I agree to a point, but I still think that overall responsibility for the social media should remain with the marketing department. Let me explain. I think that the confusion we have here concerns whether the social media is primarily considered a marketing tool or a conversational one. Remember that the social media was originally developed as a means of connecting consumers, not as a marketing tool. As such, the benefits should reflect value for the consumer first and foremost; any additional marketing value should be considered icing on the cake. Whilst you mention that this dedicated department would run the social media in collaboration with broader business goals, this to me seems a far cry from a transparent conversation. It is my belief that the sole goal of the social media should be to converse with the customer, addressing needs and concerns as and when they arise. Whilst you may be able to sign up a thousand people to an organisational Facebook group, can goals such as these really be classed as recognition of an organisation objective? I'm dubious... Clearly, many organisations offer an organisational presence; as long as this is transparent, then that's fine, however I think that a 'human' contribution always offers more value to the consumer. This should be actively encouraged within the workforce.

Although I suggest that the social media should not be considered primarily as a marketing tool, due to the nature of the engagement with the customer, I believe that there is only one department in which the role would naturally fit; the marketing department. Whilst this may sound somewhat hypocritical in regards to my previous recommendations, I see the marketers as responsible for engaging directly with the consumer. As such, responsibilities for the social media seems a natural extension of their current job roles.

I guess what it comes down to at the end of the day is whether you regard the social media as a marketing tool designed to help broadcast a message, or as a conversation tool designed to delight the customer.

Thanks for the post, Jacob. Seems to have stimulated a lot of debate!

TLR

Re: You Don’t Have to Follow Everyone on Twitter that Follows You!

The Lovable Rogue — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 08:16:27 -0000

Couldn't agree more, Jacob. With the number of conversations occuring simultaneously across Twitter, a certain degree of management is required to ensure that you benefit to the greatest extent from the conversations in which following causes you to be come involved. Whilst I will, on occasion, follow someone outside of my area of interest, I do so because that person looks like someone I can benefit in one way or another from following. It's nothing personal when I don't follow someone; it's simply a case of ensuring that the conversations that are being followed are relevant to me.

TLR

Re: Facebook Fan Pages, I’m a Fan, Now What?

The Lovable Rogue — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 08:06:08 -0000

Hey, Jacob,
I think one of the other benefits of these fan pages, funnily enough, is the number of people who join with the sole intention of detracting from the brand. I have looked at the Coca-Cola page in the past, and the majority of comments therein were negative. Essentially, the majority of the content provided therein was clearly misinformed, whether this was intentional or not. By having a forum through which to appropriately address these comments and rectifiy misinformation about their brands, the organisation can essentially take the fight to the detractors whilst simultaneously energising already loyal customers.

TLR

Re: Are CMO’s Tracking Social Media and WOM?

The Lovable Rogue — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 06:47:06 -0000

Hey Jacob,
It has been a while since I last commented here, so I thought I would offer my thoughts on the subject! As an aside, I am still dubious of whether the social media warrants its own business unit. Whilst I agree entirely that there should be employees whose roles specifically revolve around the ongoing implementation and monitoring of the social media, I still think that these individuals should fall within the Marketing and PR department. To disassociate the messages conveyed through the social media from those messages conveyed through the more traditional media would more than likely result in messages becoming mixed. This could result in brand messages becoming confused.

With regards to your comments concerning measurement though, I couldn't agree more. It is inexcusable that firms are failing to monitor this data. Admittedly, the data is not as obvious as is the case with PPC campaigns, however it is there. I am reading a fantastic book called the Numerati at the moment. In it, Stephen Baker emphasises that each of our actions can be given a numerical value from which our actions can be both predicted and influenced. As I see it, these principles apply to both brand perceptions and word of mouth. Whilst some organisations are using this data to influence such things as our work efficiency, others should be examining the data to establish perceptions of the brand. Organisations should devise innovative, albeit transparent solutions for obtaining this data, using it to generate an insight into their customer's mindset. As I see it, this is one of the major challenges for which brands need to develop a solution.

TLR

Re: The commodification of everything and the attention gold rush

The Lovable Rogue — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 13:36:25 -0000

Interesting perspective, Josh. I particularly liked your comment that quality is slowly becoming a commodity. Hopefully this view will become the norm, and we will soon reach a stage in which absolute quality is the norm; not the exception. Admittedly, this does make differentiating one's product more difficult, but hopefully that causes the products and services that are truly exceptional to rise to the top.

I also like the comments you make concerning the winning of attention. As the creation of content as a means of differentiating one's products goes mainstream in the light of increased returns, the value of an ability to direct attention will skyrocket. Those able to demonstrate such an ability are likely to remain in a position of strength. In a recent article in TechCrunch, Mike Arrington questioned Robert Scoble's 'overuse' of such platforms as FriendFeed. Stating that the content created on someone else's platform offered limited value to its creator, Arrington suggested that Scoble should abandon FF for the purpose of greater focus upon his blog. Perhaps the directing of attention through links etc represents a means of monetizing such platforms?

Essentially, we are left with two options for success; either use the instruments and resources available to our advantage by adding value to our product and service offerings, or use our connections to direct attention. Whilst the second is likely to prove significantly more difficult to establish in the long run, it is simultaneously likely to remain more sustainable. The rising numbers of blogs and social media content solutions slowly being incorporated by a more mainstream group of users will invariably ensure that the need for on-demand visibility remains high.

TLR

Re: This whole internet thing could get big someday

The Lovable Rogue — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 15:27:36 -0000

Hey Josh,
There's an interesting article in this week's Marketing Week (UK version at least) emphasising the importance of building your own personal brand. As you suggest, in creating and developing your own personal online space through a blog or social presence, you are simultaneously carving out a name for yourself on the Internet. Certain individuals have already done so incredibly successfully; consider for example Seth Godin. I imagine that we will be increasingly identified by the reach and authority of our networks, with this information being used to specifically target content at us.

Returning to the original topic of the post, this all seems to stem from the disintermediating capacities of the Internet itself. Middle men are no longer required. Despite ever more voluminuous amounts of information appearing online, the tools freely available to users have minimised the time required to locate desired content. Time constraints comprised the traditional logic for the ongoing presence of the intermediary. Now that time requirements have been minismised, it seems only logical that the intermediary will begin to be removed from the equation entirely. I think that all types of intermediaries will need to keep their eyes open over the coming years, ensuring that they continue to add value to the user.

TLR

Re: The Death of Public Relations. Will social media kill the beast?

The Lovable Rogue — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 06:14:52 -0000

One of the major reasons for the high volume of references to 'social media' is precisely the fact that it is has become such a widely recognised buzzword. Along with terms such as 'Web 2.0', the social media is often referenced by those who have heard the term, but are not entirely sure of its meaning. This clearly does not help either term become any more useful, and as per the comments by Bryan and Barry, the term social media has become reasonably ambiguous in recent times. These terms have become flavor du jour and are being dropped by everyone, whilst new media and PR terminology is arguably more refined in its usage.

An insightful article, and I found the stats most interesting.

TLR

Re: Twitter: Unfollow me, it’s not personal

The Lovable Rogue — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 10:48:55 -0000

To be honest, I really cant see the value of something like Qwitter. Alright, it allows you to attach a name to a missing digit, but what else beyond that? Unless you decide to specifically contact the individual following the identification of the unfollower, the information holds very little value.

Granted, you may decide to use their reasons to amend your tweeting, but then why would you want to do that? Platforms like Twitter should represent an expression of self, not a dialogue controlled by one's detractors.

I like to think that I get value from those people that I follow on Twitter. I have a carefully selected group of people that offer such value to me. These people highlight articles of interest, raise points of consideration, and develop my understanding of subjects which I may have a limited knowledge of. Hopefully the people that follow me achieve similar value through my tweets. If they do decide that I no longer offer value to them, then they are entirely within their right to take the decision to unfollow my tweets.

Those that are likely to turn away followers are the individuals that fail to actively converse and offer value; these most notably being the users that solely tweet about the number of followers they have. Such tweets offer little to no value to anyone If you do actively participate in the conversation though, then you really have nothing to worry about.

Re: Twitter: Unfollow me, it’s not personal | Web Business by Ken Burbary

The Lovable Rogue — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 10:48:55 -0000

Re: Selflessness and the True Meaning of Social Media | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 05:21:12 -0000

I think the reason for the above is that the social media truly facilitates the collaborative abilities of individuals. As collaboration becomes easier, people share knowledge based on the assumption that 'We' is more powerful than 'I'. I'm dubious as to whether the current uptake of social media is as high as reported by some analysts, however you are right; these platforms do offer a fantastic opportunity to collaborate and to provide solutions the likes of which would be completely unfeasible within even the largest organisations. Unfortunately, it is my opinion that at present there is still a reluctance to undertake such collaborative efforts because it makes profiting from the final product difficult. As collaboration really takes off though, organisations will be tasked with devising new means of profiting from the collaborative outcomes. I imagine that whoever devises an effective collaboration profit strategy first will create a significant competitive advantage for themselves in the Age of Social Media.

Re: Are There Too Many Social Media and Network Sites | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 17:23:52 -0000

Of particular interest is the fact that social media registration information requirements seem to be diminishing. Whilst traditionally registration processes were long and drawn out, a corollary of attempting to 'lock-in' the user, this no longer seems to be the case. Most communities now allow relatively simple sign up processes that take two or three minutes to complete. I assume that instead of relying upon lock-in as a means of reaching critical mass, social media platforms are instead opting for simple processes that either encourage multi platform use, or at least encourage users to try their offerings. Critical mass appears to count for very little in the current climate; sites like MySpace for instance are constantly losing ground to upstarts, at present the most notable of which is Facebook. If the registration processes remain as easy as they currently stand, I imagine that the number of social media sites will continue to increase.

Re: Are There Too Many Social Media and Network Sites | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 14:23:03 -0000

The difficulty in predicting the likely winner is made more difficult by the fact that all 'Web 2.0' platforms will invariably be superseded by 'Web 3.0' applications. Search is slightly different, as such sites represent informational 'gate keepers'. As such, these utilities are likely to remain a consumer imperative. Social platforms, such as social networks, are not as important to the user. As such, I can see social platforms quickly losing grounds to new applications as and when they appear. As far as I see it, the most important facet of 'Web 2.0' is the centrality of the conversation. Each of these applications offer conversational leverage. Web 2.0 is a social revolution, not necessarily a technical one. As such, I think that the next social applications are likely to reflect contemporary social thought.

Re: Building Your Brand with Social Media and Relationships | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 14:21:58 -0000

Another great article, Danny. It's becoming so easy for information about an individual to be trawled; I wonder how long it will be before Google becomes as important in one's resume as referees!

<abbr>The Lovable Rogue´s last blog post..Another Example of Consumer Power!</abbr>

Re: Building Your Brand with Social Media and Relationships | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 02:26:34 -0000

I was reading last week about a Google patent which it would appear allows influence tracking. If this is the case, one's influence may truly represent a real competitive advantage within the workplace. Clearly, those with large networks of acquaintances have a greater resource from which to mould a solution. By the looks of it, it wont be long before organisations truly embrace the social media within the recruitment and selection processes.

<abbr>The Lovable Rogue´s last blog post..Another Example of Consumer Power!</abbr>

Re: The Best Time to Post a Blog is Today | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 05:06:47 -0000

Danny, just to confirm, I am currently reading your blog tomorrow! Sort of! The tools currently available negate the need for optimal posting in my opinion. Feeds etc allow interested readers to follow the blog at their own pace. Whilst views may not be immediate, if the post connects with the reader at a suitable level then it will be picked up sooner or later. I personally think it all relates back to visibility. Once you have achieved appopriate levels of visibility, the need to post at specific times is overcome.

<abbr>The Lovable Rogue´s last blog post..It's all about Growth... Or is it?</abbr>

Re: Why Closed Comments Discourage Social Media, Not Encourage | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 12:45:55 -0000

What frustrates me more than anything is when a fantastic blog really draws debate, but then insists on making commentators sign up before comments are allowed. You know what? It's them that loses out. I benefit from their knowledge, but they won't benefit from mine. If I feel really strongly about an article, I may post it to Digg or one of the other news communities, but this requires significantly more effort on my behalf, as I have to effectively 'sell' someone elses' story to a new community. I would assume that very few people would be willing to undertake such action for someone elses' gain.

I remember reading about Versioning years and years ago (was it 'Blown to Bits', or 'Information Rules', I can't remember). Why isn't this principle being used effectively here? If the blog or site absolutely insists on registering users, do so with the offer of giving something back in return. Don't deter people from imparting their knowledge on your debate; that's just daft!

<abbr>The Lovable Rogue´s last blog post..It's all about Growth... Or is it?</abbr>

Re: Why Closed Comments Discourage Social Media, Not Encourage | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 01:32:01 -0000

The thing with blogs etc is that there are so many of them that it makes signing up for each one of these communities impractical. At present, I follow around 35 blogs or so, which I imagine is a small figure in comparison to some people. If I had to register on each of these communities simply to donate my insight I am certain that the number of blogs which I were following would drop considerably.

Picking up on Keren and George's points, perhaps the 'closed community' approach is an attempt to not only hold onto the old media approach, but also to retain a connection the early web. As George mentions, registration has been obligatory for forums since their creation. Whilst registration can help build a profile of a user, thus helping to confirm authenticity, pushing users away through the implementation of a registration form jeopardises comments from interested observers.

<abbr>The Lovable Rogue´s last blog post..It's all about Growth... Or is it?</abbr>

Re: Why Closed Comments Discourage Social Media, Not Encourage | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 11:33:18 -0000

I agree Susan. I hate to throw around a somewhat outdated term, but Web 2.0 saw an evolution from the static to the dynamic; the tools which allowed participation were created and made available so that people could really collaborate and create progress together (this is discussed well in Wikinomics by Tapscott and Williams). I believe that what is commonly termed Web 2.0 was simply the point at which these technologies were made available, the driving factor behind which was a changing social pattern which revolved around connectivity and creativity. Interesting stuff!

<abbr>The Lovable Rogue´s last blog post..It's all about Growth... Or is it?</abbr>

Re: Social Media, Blogging and the Idea of Snobbery | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 15:30:12 -0000

I actually read the comments referenced above last week. I was quite surprised by the content. They reminded me of comments made by Keen in his book 'Cult of the Amateur'. Both seem to suggest that information generation should be left to the professionals. I believe the phrase 'elitist', as used by Keen best defines this attitude. Whilst Keen is admittedly more open to his rejection of user generated content, RS is less blatant. The value given to the opinions of each of the authors will invariably depend upon the recipient, however this seems to me to represent a step backwards.

When I blog, I like to think that I am contributing to existing knowledge whilst simultaneously developing my own understanding of the medium. I am young, and have never profited from the social media, so there remains a lot to learn from social media giants such as RS. I feel increasingly less inclined to do so however when my contributions are discounted by such authors purely because I lack the reach which they achieve through their efforts. Arguably, I would love my thoughts to be more visible, but it is unlikely that such visibility will be quickly achieved.

In any case, I am happy in the knowledge that people are able to see my thoughts on social media and perhaps even learn from them. Perhaps RS should remember the reasons why he started blogging and recognise that maybe, just maybe that is the reason why the social media has taken off the way it has.

Thanks again Danny, another great article. Keep up the good work.

<abbr>The Lovable Rogue´s last blog post..To Regulate or not to Regulate? That is the Question...</abbr>

Re: Social Media, Twitter and the Quest for Superiority Amongst Friends | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 15:10:46 -0000

I guess it depends what you're after; popularity or utility. As I see it, Twitter has ridiculous potential for creating effective networks within an industry. Conversely, it can be used in a similar manner to the traditional televisual media; i.e. create huge networks and then 'shout' at them. At the end of the day, it depends on the intended outcome. If you want more qualified solutions, then smaller more personalised networks seem to be the way forward. Alternately, if you are simply trying to raise 'brand' awareness, then reach may be more beneficial. Twitter is an interesting tool, and although i'm still reasonably new to it, I think that it holds real potential as an organisational tool.

<abbr>The Lovable Rogue´s last blog post..The Future of Social Networking; What Future...?</abbr>

Re: If Only the Twitter Status Bar was Interactive | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 04:10:36 -0000

Agreed. There is one particular chap in my followers list that I am actually contemplating unfollowing, as all his posts seem to simply indicate numbers of followers. This adds no value for me. Some form of influence monitoring system, perhaps similar to that used on eBay to evaluate user contributions, should be implemented to segment the users that offer no value to the network. Could be interesting, Danny.

<abbr>The Lovable Rogue´s last blog post..Think Social Media is a Quick and Easy Way to create a Relationship? Think again...</abbr>

Re: Time to Say Thank You for Being a Friend | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 12:01:58 -0000

Danny,
I must admit, my reasoning for 'friending' you on the various platforms has been for selfish reasons; to benefit from your knowledge! Friending is a hugely important element of the social media, as it does truly allow one to develop an understanding of fresh perspectives Hopefully, despite sharing points of view on a number of topics, we also differ in other thoughts. This stimulates debate and helps us to extend our knowledge accordingly.

Thank you for continuing to share your insight.

TLR

<abbr>The Lovable Rogue´s last blog post..Social Media - Who gives a Tweet!</abbr>

Re: 5 Annoying Things About Twitter | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 16:41:52 -0000

There's nothing more frustrating than those whose tweets follow the lines of:

'I have 500 followers!', 'I have 600 followers!', 'I have 700 followers'....

You know what? I don't care how many followers you have! Trust me, if you solely post tweets detailing the number of followers you have, you will offer no value to those following you. I consider one of the most valuable aspects of Twitter to be the information you get from those you follow. If you increasingly alienate your followers, they will invariably stop following... This may actually damage your brand equity as a further corollary.

<abbr>The Lovable Rogue´s last blog post..The Social Media: Are You Open to Interpretation?</abbr>

Re: Would Less Choice Take Social Media into the Mainstream | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 03:04:30 -0000

Danny,
This is a tough one... As you mention there are more and more social media applications popping up on a near daily basis, yet the number of people that adequately understand the marketing potential for these platforms remains constant. Whilst I think that the level of choice is reasonably good from a customer's perspective as the likelihood of finding something that appropriately meets their needs is increased, for a marketer this can be a statistical nightmare.

From a marketing perspective, I think that the solution is to ensure that a greater number of marketers recognise the value of the solution media. I myself have attempted to highlight the benefits of such platforms as Twitter to marketing collagues in the recent past with very limited success. Unfortunately, I think that what it comes down to at the end of the day is ROI. As soon as some clever sort comes up with a means of attaching a real, measurable ROI to the social media it will explode. Whilst I think that this is a shame, and that it may signal the end of 'caring' social media, this is how I see things turning out. It's just nice to be involved herein whilst the social media is still concerned with being social.

TLR

<abbr>The Lovable Rogue´s last blog post..Who 'Owns' the Social Media?</abbr>

Re: Would Less Choice Take Social Media into the Mainstream | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 16:29:47 -0000

Agreed, Danny. Too much choice confuses people... At this rate, we may find that it gets to the stage where our customers each have their own social network. Now that would be interesting!

<abbr>The Lovable Rogue´s last blog post..Who 'Owns' the Social Media?</abbr>

Re: For Those About to Bob - We Salute You | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 13:02:26 -0000

Danny,
Glad that you enjoyed the post. It is such a shame that so many companies are still overlooking the potential for the social media. I read Chris Brogan's piece; that some organisations still condemn their employees for talking to the customer is absurd. It would be interesting to see if that same organisation has a 'manufactured social media presence'... That would be the icing on the cake...

The social media does not belong to the marketers; it belongs to the customer. As you point out, in order to use the social media effectively, we must connect with the customers and help them in any way we can. This means we must avoid 'shouting' at the customer under all circumstances.

TLR

<abbr>The Lovable Rogue´s last blog post..Who 'Owns' the Social Media?</abbr>

Re: Celebrating the Mountains | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 04:36:39 -0000

Fantastic insight, Danny. In the social media, turning molehills into mountains will without doubt be what differentiates the ordinary from the extraordinary. Those organisations which observe the 'molehill' issues conveyed by their customers, engaging them as if they were of 'mountainous' importance will be the companies that the customer remembers and positively identifies within the social media. We all like to feel that we are special. Having great importance placed upon our concerns will inevitably allow us to create an enhanced connection with the organisation.

TLR

<abbr>The Lovable Rogue´s last blog post..Who 'Owns' the Social Media?</abbr>

Re: 5 Things You Never Knew About Me | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:04:11 -0000

Danny,
Point 2... Sheer brilliance! And as a big Bond fan (saving up for my DB5 now...!), I was also very impressed by point 3.

TLR

<abbr>The Lovable Rogue´s last blog post..Who 'Owns' the Social Media?</abbr>

Re: 5 Things You Never Knew About Me | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:55:30 -0000

Well it is definatly one of the most unique USP's i've ever heard of, that's for sure!

TLR

<abbr>The Lovable Rogue´s last blog post..Who 'Owns' the Social Media?</abbr>

Re: Remember When Customer Service Actually Meant Service | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 10:50:35 -0000

One of the things that these companies often forget is that it is far cheaper to retain an existing customer than it is to find a new one. As you mention Danny, this is more pertinant now than it has been for a long time. With the conversational tools available to the organisation at present, it is absolutely inexcusable that firms continue to keep the customer at arm's length, effectively excluding them from issues which affect them.

Picking up on Jason's point too, absolutely. Never has there been a time when the customer's opinion was so easily conveyable. Customers must use this to their advantage, ensuring that organisations are unable to provide goods and services that fail to meet the high standards we demand of them. It is up to us to ensure that their 'best practices' become even better.

TLR

<abbr>The Lovable Rogue´s last blog post..Avoiding the Manufactured Social Media Presence</abbr>

Re: Making Plans for the Social Media Winter | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 10:19:24 -0000

Danny, I think my plans for the social media Winter involve engaging more with other blogs. I have found my time being so incredibly restricted recently, and unfortunately my engagement on other blogs has been cut back somewhat. My intention is therefore to contribute more to the blogosphere by engaging more through the creation of more comments.

Re: Paid Blogging and the Art of Transparency | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 03:52:18 -0000

I think that many of the people challenging Brogan's actions are overlooking the fact that he was not paid per se. He was simply invited to spend a designated amount within a specific organisation and asked to express his experience. As many of the comments here correctly establish, Brogan could have experienced a negative experience just as easily as a positive one. The transparency of the post was made incredibly clear, and I fail to see where the problem lies. We all know that Brogan would be the first to highlight any service failure, and I see no reason why sponsorship would influence this in any way.

An insightful piece as always, Danny.

<abbr>The Lovable Rogue´s last blog post..The Importance of Creativity within 21st Century Business</abbr>

Re: Choosing Bus Stops | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 14:05:43 -0000

Danny, I'm glad you used a bus analogy and not a train; I've had just about enough of trains today...! But that's beside the point!

I like the comparison of the day to day operations of the business as a journey; indeed, as the importance of efficient operations increases ever more steeply due to the economy, our ability to undertake several actions simultaneously is challenged. It is our responsibility to ensure that not only are we able to 'deliver our fare safely', but to ensure that we are able to do so whilst navigating the thousands of obstacles placed in front of us on a daily basis.

Insightful as always, Danny.

TLR

Re: When Does Embellishing End and Lying Begin | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 02:10:07 -0000

It's incredible that such an issue can be 'overlooked' by the organisation whose brand equity is being damaged, arguably Rolex in this case. The creation of blog content concerning the subject will invariably cause the brand's name to become increasingly visible for all the wrong reasons. As the content continues to be updated, even a basic brand search will highlight the blogs discussing the negative content. Through the implementation of Internet monitoring, the brand in question should quickly become aware of any threats to the brand's equity.

Can organisations really be this naive towards the potentially detrimental effects which the Internet can have on the brand. I guess so...

TLR

The Lovable Rogue's Recent post...Keeping the Conversation Alive

Re: Conversation Is Good | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 08:01:18 -0000

Danny,

You know that I am a big fan of diversity of opinion, but the comments made by Mr. Paul Seaman seem somewhat backward. Whilst he is certainly entitled to his opinions, I feel that he would find it a considerable task to defend many of his statements to the professionals that engage their efforts into defining and discussing the social media on a daily basis.

Whilst there is significant distaste towards the term 'social media', there is little denying the distinction between such platforms and the more traditional media. Whilst traditional media is charactised by the undeniably one directional capacity of its messages, the social media encourages discussion through the provision of an electronic voice. By allowing users the capacity to respond, the media has moved from static information to dynamic conversation.

Arguably, the clue is in the name...

TLR

The Lovable Rogue's Recent post...Keeping the Conversation Alive

Re: Why Scott Monty of Ford Motors Has My Respect | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:41:37 -0000

Hey Danny,

I actually first became aware of Mr. Monty several months back following a discussion on one the podcasts which I download. I got the impression at the time that he was very much on the ball. I find it encouraging that an organisation so often defined by the founder’s ‘you can have any colour you want, so long as it’s black’ mantra is reaching out to engage customers. If only they had adopted these principles several years back, instead of pushing their products onto the customer. Imagine how different the situation might be now.

Additionally, I think it’s great that Scott has addressed the comments made herein. It really hammers home the point that these social media enthusiasts are listening and are determined to make their presence known. Whilst we are all likely to have our own opinions of such organisation’s, the actions of those such as Monty can only improve our perceptions thereof.

TLR

Re: Internal Communications: A Social Media Freshman Among Upperclassmen | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 18:50:04 -0000

Jason, that's an interesting analogy. Let's hope that social media adoption rates do follow the pattern which you describe above. Unfortunately, in the UK at least, firms seem particularly reluctant to recognise the potential thereof. Even though many of these platforms have been specifically designed to develop the conversation, fear of the 'new' continues to represent a major deterent to organisational implementation.

Whilst your post specifically addresses internal communications, it is also directly applicable to communications which the organisation has with external stakeholders. Essentially, I think that the problem falls upon organisational mentality. At the moment, I don't think that genuine customer satisfaction is at the foremost of organisational thinking; or at least not to the extent that it should be. If it were, then greater attention would be placed upon addressing the customer's needs in whichever forum which these customers deem necessary.

At present, even those firms which do employ some social media strategies tend to follow a platform checklist (blog, Twitter, etc). Indeed, they seem to lack the foresight to adopt emerging platforms before they become mainstream.

TLR

Re: Internal Communications: A Social Media Freshman Among Upperclassmen | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 12:53:04 -0000

And let's not forget that energising the employees to willingly engage in social media initiatives can produce an extra channel for engagement with the customer. Such a channel can be implemented for almost zero cost, whilst encouraging the employee to feel passionate about their organisation.

TLR

Re: Email IS Marketing | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 11:04:00 -0000

Interesting stuff, Danny.

It is amusing how companies still fall into these traps despite the obvious flaws thereof. It would be interesting to hear their responses were they to be asked whether their propensity to engage such emails was as high on a Monday or Friday, as on a Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday.

Unfortunately, this would appear to be yet another example of traditional marketers attempting to drag their ‘old marketing’ mentality into the 21st Century. It is no longer appropriate to ‘dictate’ a message, principally because we now have the capacity to reject anything that doesn’t instantly capture our attention. Old marketing simply doesn’t cut it anymore.

TLR

Re: It's Not All About The Blog | danny brown

The Lovable Rogue — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:58:56 -0000

Hey Danny,
Again, I fear that this all boils down to the dreaded Social Media Checklist... Organisations are hearing these terms thrown around and are then adopting the instruments regardless of whether their customers are using them. Scary stuff.

Whilst it is fantastic that organisations are keen to get out there and talk with their customers, a targetted approach remains the best course of action. Creating a presence on each and every platform available is likely to leave the company too thinly spread. In such a case, the message is likely to become either diluted, or repetitive. Either outcome will reflect negatively on the organisation.

Focus your efforts and target your message where it is likely to be best heard.

TLR

Re: Line Dancing

The Lovable Rogue — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 13:46:05 -0000

Hey Danny,
It's definitely an interesting issue, and one that is becoming increasingly relevant as interest in the social media expands. As I see it, there are two sides to this argument; these being that of the community and that of the professional.

In one respect, the majority of what we know about the social media is a product of collective knowledge development therein. Questions are frequently collaboratively approached and addressed, and whilst the individual posing the question benefits from having their issues answered, the information recorded is a valuable resource for whatever comes afterwards.

On the other hand though, many of those engaged in the social media are either marketing or PR professionals for whom these platforms represent a livelihood. Any information given away freely within the social sphere has the potential to jeopardize the professional's business; though arguably such actions may help to build perceived integrity at the same time.

It's an interesting discussion and one that is likely to draw many differing perspectives.

TLR

Re: Would You Trust Google With Twitter?

The Lovable Rogue — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 02:47:33 -0000

Chris, I agree to an extent that Twitter is more than likely a fad, but then again, so are many of the tools of the social media. I honestly can't see Facebook being around in a few years time, but then that's the neature of this media type; things evolve, people move on and the cycle repeats itself. What the developers can do is ensure that they are at least able to keep on top of developments by having access to the capital required to continue growing; not necessarily in one direction, but growing none the less. Arguably this is a pattern that Google itself has followed in recent years to remain one of the world's most successful organisations.

Would Twitter be detrimentally affected by Google's ownership? I'm not sure. I agree with Tim; Gmail is a very useful email tool, whereas FeedBurner has lost credibility in recent times. Is this a result of Google's ownership, or simply one service being replaced by others that outperform it? If Google were to assume ownership of Twitter, the only concerns that I would have would gravitate around developments to the service. The beauty of the platform lies within its own simplicity. I fear that the capital available to Google may encourage them to 'enhance' the service, causing the simplicity thereof to become diluted.

TLR

Re: Connecting the Dots

The Lovable Rogue — Sun, 12 Apr 2009 05:20:14 -0000

I've been using BackType for ages now, originally following a recommendation from you I believe, Danny. Although I have experienced some of the small limitations discussed above by Marty in the past; a couple of missed posts, these have been very few in number, and have hardly detracted from the user experience. One of the strongest pros of the service stems from BackTypes focus upon the community; they always seem determined to enhance their service to meet the needs of the community. I think Christopher's presence in these posts emphasises their 'ear to the blogosphere' approach. A good little service.

TLR

Re: Talking Twitter with CityNews Toronto

The Lovable Rogue — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 13:31:22 -0000

Danny, it has just occurred to me that having being speaking to you for about six months now, that's the first time I have actually heard you speak! Crazy. A good little video though which covers most of the main points of Twitter. Could be a good one to point out for anyone that is new to the Twitter arena?

TLR

Re: Virtual Stalking - A Real World Problem for Social Media

The Lovable Rogue — Wed, 06 May 2009 14:05:36 -0000

Another interesting post, Danny.
My suggestion would be that perhaps the answer to these issues isn't social media related per se. I entirely agree that platforms such as Twitter do have an obligation to remove damaging content, but perhaps these virtual outbursts are illustrative of real-world problems. Perhaps the solution involves the joint development of some type of service specifically designed to target those creating this disparaging content with the intention of identifying the reasons behind these actions. This would only work however in collaboration with ongoing efforts from the social platforms themselves I feel.

Chris
TLR

Re: Bob- The Next Chapter

The Lovable Rogue — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 01:50:24 -0000

I was discussing this story with Danny Brown earlier this week. It is incredible that organisations still fail to adequately understand the necessity of the social media. Although many of these organisations do admittedly recognise the social media as a simple marketing tool, this is ridiculous. Bob was taking the right action in recognising that his organisation could offer value to the customer by creating a presence in the social media. I would be interested in seeing whether or not the organisation in question had a 'manufactured' organisational social media presence at the same time as it was condemning Bob's actions.

TLR

Re: Differentiating Between Blogger Relations and Sponsored Content

The Lovable Rogue — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 02:19:37 -0000

Chris,
I think that most of the animosity towards marketing products thus stems from the nature of blogs themselves. Blogs are inherently social conversations, so as soon as marketing is implemented therein, arguably a degree of the transparancy disappears. Whilst bloggers such as yourself may openly identify any sponsorship or outreach contracts, others may be less inclined to disclose such sources. This is likely to detract somewhat from the openness of the social media, don't you think?

Whilst I fully understand the marketing potential for engagement with blogs, the success thereof depends entirely on how open the blog's author is with their community. With the anonymity afforded by the Internet however, I am sceptical as to whether full disclosure will always be the case. Whilst I would hope that many a blogger would place the value of their community and their integrity over the price of a sponsorship deal, I wonder how many would adapt their principles were the right price to come along?

TLR

Re: Differentiating Between Blogger Relations and Sponsored Content

The Lovable Rogue — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 03:43:12 -0000

Admittedly, blogs as a 'movement' do seem to have become somewhat swept up in the social expectations that have come to be aligned alongside them. The problem as I see it though is whether there are more bloggers that are community driven than are finance driven. As you emphasize, there is very little money in blogging itself, however the attention required to create and maintain a community is significant.

I fear that whilst many bloggers engage therein because of a real passion for blogging, the time requirements for the creation of a decent community can prove decisive in some of their decisions to accept sponsorship. As the number of bloggers who, despite being passionate require an income to appropriately support themselves whilst maintaining their blog increase, I imagine that sponsorship standards adopted will slip.

TLR

Re: Stories You Can Tell

The Lovable Rogue — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 03:16:13 -0000

One of the interesting developments of late is the introduction of user generated 'stories' as ads. Although this idea is nothing new, I think that many organisations have historically been somewhat reluctant to place the storytelling responsibility directly into the customer's hands. The most recent example that springs to mind is the case of Microsoft's 'I'm a pc' ads. By encouraging the submission of UGC along a general theme the customer was given the opportunity to tell their own stories. The result, whilst simple, is an incredibly powerful message. Although the Microsoft ad doesn't really explore these opportunities to its fullest potential, it is a positive first step into letting the customer create the brand as they see fit

TLR

Re: Aligning Social Media Within Companies

The Lovable Rogue — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 02:08:59 -0000

Essentially, I agree with all the comments above highlighting the importance of retaining a clear strategy. It is important to ensure that you have some degree of direction when engaging in social media related activities; whether this be to encourage discussion or to simply encouraging conversation with your customers. I feel that it is very important that the opinions of the community are closely considered when devising such a strategy. It is completely inappropriate for an organisation to develop an engagement plan which will be rejected by the community and result in damage to the brand equity.

With regards to the marketing or PR question, my answer would be both; to a point. The social media is a conversation, and as such I think it is inappropriate to restrict its scope to a single team or function. Different situations will invariably require a different response. As the purpose thereof is essentially to encourage conversation, it is important that a number of different perspectives are sought. Although my opinion on this matter has developed somewhat over the recent months, the importance of perspectives is undeniable. The difficulty is finding someone who is able to appropriately orchestrate these various functions successfully, producing a solid social media engagement as a result.

TLR

Re: Life in the Labs

The Lovable Rogue — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 08:21:19 -0000

Mr. Brogan,
I still have a question; where do you find the time to do all this?! Seriously though...

I think many people choose to visit your page precisely because of the interactions which you offer. I've noticed over the past few months that the conversations which develop on your page, often facilitated by the initial posts, are fantastically insightful for developing the subject. The solutions which both you and your community collaboratively develop are first class. This is often directly attributable to your 'conducive' attitude.

Keep it up, buddy.

TLR

Re: We're Not Always Superheroes

The Lovable Rogue — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 03:16:53 -0000

Chris,
Personally, I feel that the apology is secondary to the action which you take as a direct response to the issue at fault. Whilst aggrieved customers need to have an apology following a service failure, it is the action which you then take that is of critical importance.

Let's not get too caught up in the words here, Chris. It is implementing appropriate action to guarantee as far as is possible that the problem will not reoccur in the future which will truly influence repeat customer purchase decisions. We are all human and we are all fallible. It is learning from these mistakes that allows us to grow and to develop.

TLR

Re: We're Not Always Superheroes

The Lovable Rogue — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 04:18:45 -0000

@Ricardo,
It's also important to demonstrate though that the action which you say that you intend to take has been. Implementation and subsequent demonstration highlights that you value them as a customer, and that you are sincere in your word. I fear many organisations are quick to apologize and 'discuss' a solution, but slow in the implementation thereof. Failure to adequately satisfy the customer following the discussion of their concerns will produce a more detrimental outcome than would have been the case if no attempt to address the issue had been made.

TLR

Re: Social Media Is Not a Life Raft

The Lovable Rogue — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 13:43:14 -0000

For the sake of debate, I would suggest that at present there do exist occasions when the lack of a social media strategy is borderline acceptable. The goal of organisational participation in the social media is to create an ongoing dialogue with the customer. If the customer genuinely isn't involved with the social media though, it makes more sense to invest these efforts elsewhere for now.

We are living in age when the Internet (and social media for that matter) is still in it's relative infancy. Whilst current adoption rates are huge, at present they are not total. Whilst it would be naive to suggest that their exist demographic segments entirely averse to the Internet, it is undeniable that certain groups are significantly less likely to engage therein. Within those target audiences where Internet usage is already incredibly low, the number of users engaging in social media platforms is likely to be lower still. If your organisation specifically targets one such segment, then the effort involved in implementing a social media strategy could almost certainly be better spent elsewhere; for example, in targeting the channels that these customers do actively engage in.

Admittedly, this will change as Internet adoption becomes even more widespread. For now though, I do honestly believe there exist rare occasions when the creation of a social media strategy is inappropriate. Listen to your customers. If they are using the social media then a social media strategy is an absolute imperative. If on the other hand customers aren't using the social media, focus your efforts on those platforms which the customers are using; but bare in mind that a social media strategy will almost certain become an imperative sooner or later.

TLR

Re: The Subtle Art of Linkbaiting

The Lovable Rogue — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 02:14:57 -0000

In my opinion, the acceptability of linkbaiting depends on where your priorities lie. If linkbaiting is employed as a means of encouraging links with little concern for the quality of the content, then criticism will invariably be drawn sooner or later. On the other hand, if you are using linkbaiting in an attempt to draw attention to high quality content, then arguably it is perfectly acceptable. The acceptability of linkbaiting revolves around whether your priority is in the provision of value to your community, or simply in the careless aggregration of numbers.

As you suggest, Chris, linkbaiting is essentially the creation of content that incites a reaction from the community. As long as this is done subtly and the content remains strong, then linkbaiting as an activity doesn't seem overly questionable. I would suggest that as long as community and content remain the focus, encouraging visibility through link baiting seems like a viable option for drawing attention to content specifically designed to be developed by the community.

TLR

Re: Chasing the magical experience

The Lovable Rogue — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 14:47:36 -0000

A few things sprang to mind when I was reading this post. Firstly, I entirely agree with your comments concerning the power of the small group. As you suggest, there is a very different feel between the engagements of small group and those of larger groups. There are still places for the latter engagement types in my opinion, though whether we can classify these as 'conversation' is something else. Does Ashton Kutcher 'converse' with the 1,000,000+ people following him? I don't think so. There are a lot of people that would get something from his tweets, but in my opinion, this is actually more reminiscent of the one way communications of the old media.

To be honest, i'm quite surprised that marketing guys haven't pushed harder for platforms that encourage engagements between smaller, more focused groups. Highly specific groups would allow for more appropriate targeting of ads. Admittedly, there will be significantly more of these groups as a result of smaller group engagements, but it is more likely that member purchase intentions will be predictable as a result.

TLR

Re: How I got my blog from Google PageRank 0 to PR4 in two months

The Lovable Rogue — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 16:15:11 -0000

I started my blog back in September, and having read about the PR update, I thought I would check it out. I was pleasantly surprised to find that I now have a Page Rank of 3. As you point out, Marko, the best way to improve your visibility is to ensure that your content remains relevant, interesting and useful. I have found that the easiest way to do this is to write about a subject which you are passionate about.

TLR