I found this interesting blog post on iMedia Connection about conversational marketing, and it made me think of how it relates to SEO…
Back in the old days of traditional marketing (which really weren’t so long ago), communication with the consumer was generally a one-way street. The consumer was told, “BUY THIS.” Period. End of conversation.
But, today’s marketers & businesses must keep that conversation going.
It’s called “Conversational Marketing,” a buzzword brought to global attention by 1999’s “ClueTrain Manifesto.”
Here is a simple example of conversational marketing: a business sets up a blog on their webpage. The blog is there to, of course, help sell the product -- but also to provide some good content and a place where customers and potential customers can engage in Conversation about said product.
Having something valuable to say and being there to listen – the hallmarks of a good friend, or at least somebody you’d want to hang out with. And that’s the key to conversational marketing, and of the sea change that has taken place in the world of marketing in general.
The consumer of today is tired of being talked down to, ordered around, and generally told what he or she should do with his or her money. He or she is also getting too savvy for the bells and whistles marketers and advertisers dream up to coax them into a purchase. No, what they want is not bells and whistles – but a person to talk to.
The meteoric rise in social media of all stripes – blogs, message boards, social networking, social bookmarking, news aggregate sites – have provided the perfect platform for this conversation between Business and Consumer to flourish. And, it’s incumbent upon every company, big and small, to make use of these resources.
Now, how does conversational marketing relate to a public relations firm that has transitioned to SEO?
Well, we can extend the conversation over to SEO pretty easily. In conversational SEO, you are not merely looking at a list of keywords, but really understanding how your audience is conversing – and then optimizing on the words they use to search! Again, the art of conversational SEO – like that of conversational marketing -- is a distinctly two-way, personal interaction. One-to-one (or many-to-many) versus one-to-many.Now certainly, one cannot live on “conversation” alone. However, making the most of social media in conjunction with a skillful SEO campaign is a winning combination!
Labels: conversational marketing, conversational SEO, Marketing, media, seo, social media, social networking
Christmas before Thanksgiving
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
The holiday season is upon us, yet it seems that in recent years, Christmas is center stage before turkeys are even bought or stuffed for Thanksgiving.
If we lived in most any other part of the country, this would be most evident in the malls, where sometimes even before Halloween, Christmas trees, wreaths, elves and Santas mingle with crazed shoppers. But we live in New York City, where instead of malls, we find ourselves in a stampede on 34th Street with Salvation Army volunteers incessantly ringing their bells for people to throw pennies into their red buckets.
And it’s not just a result of getting older and time seeming to pass faster, it’s practically a scientific fact. Heather Dougherty from Hitwise points out in a Reuters piece about Cyber Monday that, "The holiday season is starting earlier and earlier every year, which is what consumers joke about, but it's honestly happening.”
So what happened to Thanksgiving? It’s a holiday after all, so why does it fall out of line with the “holiday season?” Once our jack-o-lanterns are extinguished, and sometimes before they are even lit, the holiday “spirit” in the form of growing anxiety about what to buy loved ones sneaks up on us. Couple that with story upon ad upon story about shopping this holiday season, and we are thoroughly inundated with one message: BUY BUY BUY!
Thanksgiving thus becomes irrelevant. As I was looking through the top dailies today, I was unable to find much on the actual holiday. Rather, articles on Black Friday and Cyber Monday were abundant.
But don’t get me wrong. I am not knocking consumerism or even the media’s approach to greeting the holiday season. Chances are that I too would be less inclined to read a story about how the pilgrims celebrated the first Thanksgiving than I would about where to find the best sales on Friday.
Happy Thanksgiving… But more importantly, Happy Shopping!
Labels: advertising, Marketing, media
Google Phone
Friday, November 09, 2007
This week, Google
revealed their plans for what they predict will be a revolution for mobile telecommunications. It’s called the Android and it’s about as sexy as you might expect an android to be.
Google, along with 33 telecommunication companies, has created the Open Handset Alliance. Their aim, according to the
LA Times, is to “spur innovation by giving independent engineers the chance to write programs for phones, with no need for permission from mobile network operators or phone manufacturers.”
It’s a noble and hefty goal, especially when you take into consideration the current state of the mobile telecom industry in the States, which many deem to be a monopoly of sorts. The most recent news to hit this cord, of course, was that the iPhone can only be purchased if you have AT&T service. To put it lightly, we Verizon customers felt short changed.
The U.S. is one of the few, if not the only country to have this kind of set up. In other countries, cell phones are independent from service carriers and can be changed with a simple switch of a sim card.
Another issue Google aims to tackle through this endeavor is the inability for its ads to show up on many current smartphones. With Android, Google is creating a web browser for mobile phones that will show a website so that Google ads are visible and clickable. Google is then leaving it up to the companies in the Alliance to create the applications for their cell phones.
So, what can we, both the costumer and the marketer, expect? As a costumer, all phones with the Android technology will not look the same, so style and features will still highly depend on the manufacturer. However, we can all rest assured that surfing the web on the phone will become much easier and will resemble the experience we have on our computers much more.
As a marketer, it will mean the true beginning of mobile telecom marketing. Right now, we talk about it, but few truly consider it when developing a campaign. And for good reason, because for those of us without an iPhone, the Internet experience on a smartphone is frustrating, to say the least.
As the Android and its spawning cell phones develop, we marketers will be keeping a close watch. Overture (a former Connors client) and Yahoo may have brought us SEM, but it was Google that really made SEO popular. And now we also have Google to thank for the next step in MTM, mobile telecommunication marketing.
Labels: Google, Marketing, new media
More than just PR
Friday, October 26, 2007
It seems that the marketing giants like Interpublic and WPP Group are coming to terms with our Web 2.0 world. Just this week, Interpublic announced a partnership with word-of-mouth marketing company, BzzAgent. WPP Group has also partnered with them in the past. BzzAgent is a social networking medium comprised of marketers and an assembly of volunteers who try out products and/or programs in turn for their honest feedback.
After feedback is given, BzzAgent marketers interact with their volunteers, poking and prodding at their experiences. Common sense suggests that if an experience was negative, BzzAgents would attempt to rectify the problems and have the volunteers change their minds.
It's not so much an innovative idea as it is a natural progression of marketing research possible on the Web. Just ten years ago, this type of company simply wouldn't make it. It wouldn't be practical to get people's feedback via phone or snail mail and then redistribute it to the masses.
But in this day and age, it makes perfect sense. After all, BzzAgent deems that 80% of people believe word-of-mouth over advertising. Of course, now-a-days, word of mouth doesn't just happen face to face. Most of it takes place online, and it is essential for all companies to be involved in those conversations.
Labels: Marketing, Public Relations, Web 2.0
Google's Advertising Paradox
Friday, October 19, 2007
So here's an interesting notion: Google has built its empire on its Google ads yet Google itself, probably the most famous brand of our time, does not and has not ever invested significantly into its own advertising.
So in the olden days, before we "googled" everything, how did we find out about Google? Why did we use it instead of Yahoo or Alta Vista (remember them?!)? From what I can recall, it mostly started by word of mouth. I heard about Google from the mother of the children I used to baby sit. She told me that a silly little thing called "google.com" is the best search engine! "Google?" I asked. "Really? What a stupid name."
But the name stuck in my mind and when I came home that night, I gave Google a go. To my surprise, Google was fantastic. I told all my friends about it and we, along with the rest of the world, have been googling ever since.
I imagine that this was the experience most had and what lead to Google's sprint to the top of the search engine food chain. The AP's Michael Liedtke pointed out in an article on this topic that rather than throwing money into frivolous advertising, Google put its dollars directly to its actual business, which involved perfecting the art of search.
"This advertising aversion has freed up money for engineers, computing hardware and other resources that fuel Google's search engine while leaving plenty of profit to keep shareholders happy and lift the company's stock ever higher."
Google serves as an example for many aspects of business. Its unique approach to marketing, however, is worthy of exploration for any professional in this industry. The key lesson from this particular advertising model, or lack there of, is that quality will always overcome being bombarded with a company's message.
Back when I was baby sitting, literal word of mouth had much more longevity. Before I heard about Google, I would have to actually ask my friends' opinions of things in order to gain perspective on them. Now, all you have to do is go online and you can get the opinions of millions.
The bottom line is a company's main concern, in its beginning stages especially, needs to be the quality of its product or service. Once that is perfected, they can think about giving us a call.
Labels: advertising, Adwords, Google, Internet, Marketing, Public Relations, search
More on this Web 2.0 Thing…
Friday, September 28, 2007
Staying on the topic of the significance the Internet plays in our role as marketers, I came across this
article the other day from Mediapost. In it, Karl Greenberg sums up some of the opinions industry veterans expressed during the National Advertising Review Council's NAD Annual Conference on this issue.
The title, "Web 2.0: A Minefield Marketers Must Cross," is telling, to say the least. One of the panelists, Mark Serrianne, CEO of brand consultancy Northlich, is quoted throughout the piece, explaining that the challenge now for companies is control. Meaning, there is so much information available through the Web that it is impossible to have a hand in every blog, site, or what have you to create your ideal message.
So instead of trying to beat an infinite race, why not join in the running? By participating in the wealth of information through a blog or some other such voice, a company and/or brand has at least a chance of being heard and understood just in the way that it intends.
But to say that is, of course, an understatement. Because if the voice you create is interesting enough or even mildly entertaining, your company or brand has the power to become an influencer.
The beauty of the Internet is that it is a truly global platform. Its audience is in the billions, so even if you tap just a tiny fraction of it, you have already won. And accomplishing this is much easier than infiltrating the iron clad gates of the New York Times or Wall Street Journal, in which an article might still be prized, but its fame (especially these days) is short lived. So let us reiterate again that a solid footing online should be part of any company's foundation.
Labels: Marketing, Public Relations, Web 2.0
When will Marketers start to get it?
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
In 1996, I left a secure 9 to 5 job to work in sales and marketing for a "multimedia" agency - two guys who designed websites. At the time their biggest name client was Rollerblade Canada. The site was pretty advanced for the time whereby surfers could actually look at a 3D skate from all directions.
Once I got the lay of the land I opened my Rolodex and started calling the corporate headquarters of well-known companies in my city offering the service of designing a website. The response was overwhelming - 90% of the people I spoke to said they had heard about the World Wide Web, but were not ready to start the process and kindly asked me to call them back… in a YEAR!
This was amazing to me. Here was an opportunity for companies, with advertising dollars to spend, to take advantage of a new vehicle that could not only generate awareness and sales, but likely set them apart from their competitors. I assume that within that year they all had websites, but I left the company after three months because people just didn't get it…
In my current position, handling business development for Connors Communications, I feel like we are at the same crossroad. The Internet has changed the way that consumers research and buy good and services and, Search has become a unique marketing opportunity for companies to influence the landscape they ultimately control. From propagating positioning messages to gathering intelligence about the marketplace, Search Marketing is creating industry leaders that you've never heard of. For example, shouldn't the mail order business have dominated eCommerce? Instead of Sears, some no-name brand called Amazon.com ate their lunch. Procrastination at these crossroads can be deadly. Companies need to shuffle not only their budgets, but their mindset - the consequences are simply too great. Marketers: how and where your brand is found online is where the game is being played. It’s time to get in on the action.
Labels: eCommerce, Marketing, messaging, SEM, seo
Wikipedia's Ironic Taboo
Friday, August 17, 2007
The anonymity of Wikipedia is being put in question this week with CalTech grad student, Virgil Griffith, unveiling a tool called WikiScanner, which automatically identifies contributors to the user-generated site. Traditionally, the online encyclopedia grows with people just like me and you supplying information. Wikipedia also has a staff of "editors", who police the site and make sure the information added is not purely promotional or inappropriate.
The ease with which people's identities could be revealed is spurring a dialogue to which PR professionals should be paying attention. The AP's Brian Bergstein quoted Griffith in an article published yesterday as saying that with his new tool "he hopes 'to create minor public relations disasters for companies and organizations [he] dislike[s].'"
What does he mean? Well, even though it is quite obvious that companies are most likely responsible for their own Wikipedia entries, the notion of public relations teams being behind them is still taboo. So, if there was a tool that would call us out, so to speak, it might make the entries created seem less credible.
I have to wonder, though, why is this the case? Who, for example, has time or the urge to write a Wikipedia entry for a random company or individual, even if it might be of relevance to Wikipedia? I understand that there are enthusiasts out there who would perhaps want to contribute to a World War II entry or some other such topic, but for the types of entries we are talking about, there really is no realistic third party contributor available.
Yet, the information in those seemingly unimportant entries is valuable. If Wikipedia's aim is to truly be an encyclopedia, then it must have information relating to companies and people affecting our society.
Thinking about this more, I realize that it may just be the old problem of PR ignorance. The majority of people simply don't realize that PR, and marketing in general, shape the way we see the world. This is a reality and surely it would manifest itself in the world of Wikipedia
But it doesn't mean that we're trying to trick you and present a false image. On the contrary, PR professionals spend much of their time correcting journalists (see my entry from last week) and making sure that accurate information reaches the masses.
In an ideal world, truth is objective. But in our complex world, truth is often multifaceted. Should the FBI, CIA and companies like Diebold be allowed to edit their own Wikipedia entries to serve their messages? Of course! But so can you! The very nature of Wikipedia depends on its readers paying attention, and the transparency added by the Wikipedia Scanner might push those PR folks with not the most honest intentions in the right direction.
Labels: Marketing, Public Relations, Wikipedia
Is Any Press, Good Press?
Friday, July 20, 2007
Probably the most anticipated book in history is being released tonight and fans are actually avoiding the Internet and newspapers at all costs so as not to get wind of what happens to Harry, Ron and Hermione.
J.K. Rowling’s books have achieved a level of fame so immense that it can be argued that the promotion is now counteracting sales efforts. How is this possible?
An online retailer, DeepDiscount.com, sent copies of the preordered 7th and last installment of the Harry Potter series on Tuesday to buyers. Once Scholastic, the book’s publisher, got word, calls were made to the book buyers, requesting that they remain mum on the ending. Gift cards and Harry Potter t-shirts were offered as incentive. One of the early receivers was Baltimore Sun reporter, Mary Carole McCauley’s brother-in-law, who gave the book to Mary, who wrote a review, which was published on Thursday. The New York Times was also able to receive a copy pre-launch and published an early review.
To add to the mayhem, several versions of an ending have been leaked on the Web causing an uproar among fans. I will admit that even I was cautious in reviewing articles on the topic as I plan on reading the book and don’t want the ending spoiled.
It is without a doubt that Harry-obsessed devotees will be buying the book anyway, but what about those who have yet to be sucked in? If they know the ending to the entire series, why would they read it?
These circumstances raise the question of whether it is really true: Is any press, bad or good, beneficial?
From one perspective, it is; especially, if your company or product is not very well known. In our diverse world, there are bound to be people who will disagree with the negative coverage, gaining your company positive impressions. From another, however, bad press can cause serious damage.
In the case of Harry Potter, there is probably no amount of bad press that can drive people away. The 5th movie, for instance, got mixed reviews, but it is still topping the box office. It has become almost cliché, but I have to say that Harry has cast a spell over us all.
Labels: Marketing, media, Public Relations
The Popularity of a Website
Friday, July 13, 2007
This week, Neilson/NetRatings announced that website hits will no longer count towards the popularity of a website. Instead, the amount of time spent on a site, termed “Total Minutes” and “Total Sessions”, will be analyzed to determine rank. Why the switch? Many sites now use technologies like online video and programming languages like Ajax, which require a visitor to spend more time on a site in order for their visit to count.
Neilson is of course not the first to recognize time as a factor. Hitwise and comScore have long been measuring it along with page views and others. comScore spokesperson, Andrew Lipsman, explained,
We have a host of metrics, and you can theoretically rank on any one of them. It’s just important to examine the space that you’re looking at and maybe determine what the most appropriate metric to use would be.
That makes sense, and I am not the only one who seems to agree. Online advertising experts quoted in Louis Hau’s Forbes article voiced their concern about Neilson’s bold move citing that while more than just page views are relevant for Web 2.0, it is not to say that the measurement is all together irrelevant.
Hau goes on to address the growth of the online advertising space (up 28% from last year), but reminds us that it is still just 6% of the entire industry. Not surprisingly, our eyes on the Internet are more easily monitored than for any other medium and it might take years to sort through all the available data and figure out what metrics are truly valid.
In the midst of all this talk about advertising, PR is inadvertently part of the dialogue. We also need to know the popularity of a site, just as we need to know the circulation of a print publication.
A distinct science for this is still clearly in the making. In the meantime, we are advancing in our knowledge of reaching an audience online. In our world, we would argue that page views, for example, still hold a lot of merit as reading a blog or a 500 word article can take no time at all.
Labels: advertising, Internet, Marketing, pr, Public Relations, Web 2.0
An Explosion of Faces
Friday, July 06, 2007
After allowing any type of email to be used for an account last Fall, Facebook was able to truly capitalize on the success of its industry. This week, news from comScore indicated an 89% growth in unique visits to the site from May 2006 to May 2007.
The numbers get more interesting when examining the age range of the visitors, the majority of which falls outside of the 18-24 range. Underage teenage traffic rose by 149% and the 25-34 range by 181%. The most surprising is the jump for those older, which was tallied at 98%.
So what does this mean? For starters, it’s fair to say that this phenomenon is no longer a trend. With the late adopters getting on board, social networks are being sown into the fabric of communications.
Love it or hate it, if you’re not on the boat, you run the risk of losing touch.
On the marketing side, it is still fuzzy how we can use Facebook. For example, promoting on MySpace is a no brainer with tons of its pages devoted to movies, characters and celebrities. Facebook, though, does not allow you to view a profile in the same way and all the poking and messaging makes it more difficult to draw people into a profile that is not for an actual long lost friend.
The opportunity, I am sure, will present itself eventually and when it does, it can hold more potential due to the vast age range of people signing up for Facebook.
Labels: Marketing, Myspace, Public Relations, Web 2.0
i want an iPhone
Friday, June 29, 2007
But not as bad as some, apparently. In NYC, people were lining up as early as Monday morning for the Friday debut of the iPhone in stores. I understand the anticipation, the excitement, and the sheer want of having a new gadget, but it makes me wonder: How can someone sit outside on a New York City street for 5 whole days? Never mind that this week, there were thunderstorms coupled with hot and unbearably humid weather.
I hope the iPhone meets these people’s expectations.
The propensity of it not meeting expectations, of course, is unlikely. Read any review on the phone, and you will find yourself in the mind of a child in a candy story. CNET reviewers, New York Times’ David Pogue, and Wall Street Journal’s Walt Mossberg all hail the phone to be the greatest thing since sliced bread – or maybe the iPod – while glossing over some of the limitations AT&T, its sole service provider, creates.
The utter mania the iPhone has generated reminds me of a time before anything “i”. It all began with iMacs, which came onto the scene when computers were purely functional and void of any artistic characteristics. Its cuteness led us to look at our desktops as decoration or “computer couture”, as my fiancé, the IT guy, calls it. Then came the iPod, which completely revolutionized the way we experience music and so reason would suggest that the iPhone possesses huge potential.
The success of Apple’s technologies is of course two fold. It was not only due to great design, but also to fantastic marketing. The build-up for the products is managed just right, the news touches upon all the desired messages and the advertising is right on point. I couldn’t have imagined the iPod experience better than it is portrayed in its ads and the Mac vs. PC commercials created the personalities we will forever attribute to the brands.
But while Apple is the frontrunner, articles on the wireless industry reveal a grim reality. Take Marty Graham’s article in Wired. In it, Marty talks to seemingly clueless wireless service providers about their thoughts on the needs and wants of their customers. Brian Finnerty, Director of Device Development for Sprint Nextel, said:
"What do customers want? We have no idea. As an industry, we're like robots -- we go toward the light and we pile up on it."
What a sad state of affairs. Thank iGod for Apple.
Labels: advertising, Apple, buzz, Marketing, Public Relations
Google’s Public Voice
Friday, June 22, 2007
This week, Google launched a public policy blog on which Andrew McLaughlin, Director of Public Policy and Government Affairs, shares his thoughts. And for this blog, Google is facilitating a conversation by permitting comments.
McLaughlin blogged:
Yes, we're a multinational corporation that argues for our positions before officials, legislators, and opinion leaders. At the same time, we want our users to be part of the effort, to know what we're saying and why, and to help us refine and improve our policy positions and advocacy strategies.
Looking at this from the PR point of view, one has to wonder how much of this dialogue is driven by the negative press Google has received lately on issues of privacy. Whether or not I feel Google is truly a culprit, comments on blogs are an excellent PR tool and I commend Google’s efforts.
The blog itself also creates a great buffer zone for allegations by providing Google with a distinct voice that can comment almost instantly. Only time will tell if Google is truly proactive in its crisis communications; yet, something tells me that we will not be disappointed. I predict a chapter on Google in PR 101 text books of the future, if there is not one already.
From the other PR perspective - that being the emergence of new media - it doesn’t take a fortuneteller to foresee that if Andrew keeps up with relevant news and posts with a consistent frequency, this blog has the potential to become a true authority on public policy matters. So this could very well be the birth of actual media being generated by Google. For example, news could be broken right on this blog.
So the outcome of this blog clearly holds vast possibilities for us PR folks. In the meantime, we’ll be keeping tabs, taking notes and offering insight as this experiment unfolds.
Labels: blog, crisis communications, Google, Internet, Marketing, media, new media
The New Rules of Marketing & PR
Monday, May 14, 2007
David Meerman Scott just finished his new book,
The New Rules of Marketing & PR. Connors (and HitTail) is one of the organizations he interviewed in the course of his research. We haven't read the book yet, but we have one on order. Can't wait. Yes, Connors Communications is partcipating in re-writing the rules of marketing and public relations.
Labels: Marketing, PR firm, PR firms, Public Relations
