Author: Steffen

Yes, Twitter is worthwhile

As the Twitter craze finally hits Europe, I’ve come across a few posts such as this one questioning its value. My first response would be that Twitter can perform a really simple function that any web user would appreciate: finding content that interests them. If you invest a bit of time in finding the right people to follow i.e. people who are clever and are interested in the same things as you, they can point you to content you simply wouldn’t have found yourself. That’s enough justification in my book already. However, as Laurent rightly points out, Twitter is not mainstream enough to actually make this viable for anyone who isn’t into social media, marketing, technology or a few other niches: ‘If you want to target doctors, if you need information because you’re a fireman, if you just want to find interesting links if you’re “just” a normal citizen, you don’t find them on Twitter.’

Valid points for personal use of Twitter. As for the professional use of Twitter, I still think there is “hidden” value in using Twitter, even though it isn’t going to allow you to find reams of useful content or reach huge numbers of people immediately:

  • Being proactive rather than reactive i.e. understanding how it works while it’s still relatively unknown, rather than hopping on the bandwagon in two years time. It doesn’t have to be a drain on resources: set up an account now, play around, figure out how to build relationships, not annoy people, and who the smart people worth following are (even if they’re few and far between for now). A few minutes a day on your PC or your iPhone and you’ll be a bonafide Twitter expert in no time.
  • Impress people. Yeah, so it’s shallow, but frankly showing your boss, client, stakeholder etc. that you’re an early adopter of new technologies that can, in time, help you reach and engage with relevant people is valuable, even though you might not prove its worth immediately (but do spend 99% of your time on things that have a slightly higher proven ROI though.)
  • Quality over quantity. So your target audiences may not all be on Twitter, but maybe some of the brightest people in your sector are. Why not build relationships with them now rather than than when they have 3,000 followers?
  • Added value on key activities. The nature of the format (short, quick, updates from anywhere) can make it ideal for certain types of interaction, such as live-updating from an event or a Q & A  on breaking news.

And a last point: it’s not all in the numbers! You can add a feed from Twitter to a blog or a site, where people will be able to read your updates. You may only have 10 followers, but if the webpage your tweets appear on have 10,000 visits a day with people spending half an hour on that page, you can be pretty sure they’re seeing them.

Digital PR/PA: it's not all different

A running theme of this blog is that online communications need not be something entirely removed from that which PR and PA professionals have been doing for years. Although social media et al has changed the communications landscape and a new approach is required to make the most of it, the web can also help strengthen, but not necessarily change, age-old activities, such as basic content production.

In this post (including video interview), Sally Falkow explains this concept a little better than I’ve done i.e. that PR practitioners should still be producing content, because that’s where their expertise lies, but that what’s different is that they now need to be thinking of more formats and different distribution channels.

Obamamania

I probably shouldn’t be writing about Obama: my expertise lies elsewhere and so much has been written already (460,000 posts mentioning Obama in the last day, according to Google Blog Search). But sod it, I’m as excited as the next person and it’s my blog.

Some thoughts:

  • I liked the slip-ups when he was being sworn in: saying “I Barack Hussein Obama…” a little too soon and then stalling a few moments later. Being so accustomed to the impeccable delivery and unwavering confidence, it was refreshing and endearing to see him be so nervous.
  • Great that he highlighted science in his speech following 8 years in which it’s been maligned.
  • His constant references to the founding fathers is interesting. I guess he does it for a number of reasons: it’s an effective rhetorical device that gets people proud and excited, the founding fathers are revered and he wants to portray himself as an heir, and it sets the bar for the changes he wants to bring about. And perhaps because it “americanises” him in the eyes of the oddballs who don’t think he’s American enough? Why do European politicians hardly ever mention their countries’ glorious past and ancestors? Some reasons might be a political culture that’s a little less sensationalist, a more cynical electorate, and too many instances in most countries’ histories that can’t really be omitted but that nobody wants to talk about, so it’s best to just ignore history all-together.
  • There’s been lots of talk of sky-high expectations and the impossibility of solving all the problems in Obama’s “IN tray”. The insinuation being that many will be disappointed when Obama doesn’t manage to bring peace to the Middle East, solve the financial crisis, and reverse global warming in his first month in office. I’m not so sure. First, people aren’t dumb: they understand the extent of the troubles we’re facing. Second, he’s got so much goodwill to spare. Third, the nature of the man and his style is such that I doubt much blame will be able to stick: he’s surrounded himself with the best and the brightest, he’s a pragmatist, and he’s non-partisan. Combined I think it’ll mean that once it becomes apparent that he isn’t solving all the world’s ills in his lunch-break, most people’s response will be that he’s doing OK, and probably better than anyone else could, given the circumstances.
  • No post on Obama is complete without a reference to the web (in particular when the blogger in question works in online communications). As reported on Public Affairs 2.0, the first post on the new White House blog appeared at 12.01 last night! The implicit message being: we still take this web stuff seriously.

How a blog is better than a newsletter

I spoke to someone recently who was busy writing the latest issue of their company’s newsletter.

Me: Why don’t you blog instead?
Them: We work in a really traditional industry, nobody would read a blog.
Me: Why would they read a newsletter but not a blog? If it’s because you think they’d only read something they can find in their inbox, that’s OK, you can subscribe to posts by email.
Them: Maybe, but my boss wouldn’t want us to blog, we work in a traditional industry.

First, I understand the implication. It’s that blogging is somehow not cerebral enough for a traditional or “serious” industry. That’s plain wrong: it’s a medium just like a newspaper is, but no one would say newspapers aren’t serious because of the drivel that tabloids publish. It’s the quality of what you publish that matters.

Beyond that, I think there are a few reasons why a blog may actually be plain better than a newsletter.

  • For a “traditional” industry like my friend’s, if blogging really is that unusual, then being the first to do so is a fantastic opportunity. Blogging is so common now; but imagine the chance to be viewed as ground-breaking and innovative simply by publishing one? An opportunity not to be missed I’d say.
  • I think the blog format is a lot more appealing. It’s less daunting for readers who don’t have much time, enabling them to focus on one article at a time rather than have a whole load thrust at them at once. Plus I’d argue that the momentum you build up with a stream of posts is worth more than a one-off monthly bang when your recipients receive your newsletter.
  • With a blog, all your content is in one place. Sure you can have a newsletter archive, but it’s a lot harder to browse through material by clicking on Edition 74: January 2006, looking through it, closing it, then opening Edition 75 and so on, than it is to scroll down ablog in search for titles that catch your attention.
  • On accessibility, again, a blog makes it a lot easier for people to access specific content, using categories and tags (you could have a complex search function for newsletters, but it’d cost a fortune and probably not work; tags and categories are standard and always work).
  • Interactivity. It’s a lot easier for people to leave comments on a blog than it is to give feedback on a newsletter, even though newsletters can have feedback functions. Plus in a blog, with comments published underneath posts and your responses in the same place, you’re in practice having an online conversation. So what? 1) You have the opportunity to explain yourself to doubters/naysayers and to showcase your expertise further; and 2) you become the company/person that’s hosting an informed conversation on the issue, and that’s valuable.
  • There’s an online community for everything, even the most traditional of industries. Engaging with it may not be your priority from the off – your focus may rightly be on making sure you publish good content. However, having a good blog will make it easier to fit into that community if you choose to do so, and will give you more leverage when engaging with the other experts in your field (or even prospects) that are part of it. If you think your industry/sector isn’t representedonline, check on Technorati or Google Blog Search. You’ll be surprised.
  • Marketing a blog is easier than marketing your newsletter, but I’ll save that for another post.

Just to be clear, I think newsletters are an excellent medium for showcasing your expertise, keeping people informed, and even attracting new business. I’d ordinarily make them part of the communications toolkit, but if I had to choose, it’d be blogging every time.

Interview: online communications in Brussels

One of my very favourite clients, Helen Dunnett, was interviewed last week by Euractiv. She spoke as eloquently as ever about the state and potential of online communications in the Brussels bubble. Read it here.

A PR nightmare

us-airways One of your planes about to sink into the sea, name clearly visible on the side, with passengers in life-vests being rescued from a wing. Worst possible nightmare PR scenario?!

Photos like the one on the left are doing the rounds on the web and in newspapers around the world. The Guardian has a whole 18 of them.

I checked the US Airways site quickly to see how they were communicating around this. The story is on the homepage, they’ve got a number for support, and a statement from the CEO. So a few boxes have been ticked. I do think they should have hidden their flight booking form though, just to highlight that their focus now is on getting to the bottom of this rather than selling tickets.

Bringing social media content together in one place: the Intel benchmark

I recently wrote about how Friendfeed could be a useful tool for organisations who publish material on a number of social media sites but want to bring it all together in one place. In a similar vein, but this time with content published by 3rd parties, I came across this post by Jim at Insight, in which he showcases a site – Consumer Electronics Insider – which his team has built for Intel. It’s a simple, nice-looking, custom-made aggregator which picks up relevant material from blogs, Twitter, YouTube and Flickr and presents it on the one site.

There are admittedly some limitations to Intel’s site:

  • There should be more basic information: what exactly is Consumer Electronics Insider; how is the various content collected – is all material picked up via keywords and RSS or are the content producers hand-picked?
  • The material is split by platform but not content topic, so it works OK for browsing but not if you’re looking for anything specific.
  • They are not fostering a community by enabling comments and conversation on their actual site, just showcasing material in loads of other places. Although I’m sure this is deliberate on their part, I think it’s a lost opportunity, as aggregators can be a good way to build a community.

Nonetheless, I like Consumer Electronics Insider. The web is a big and daunting place, and aggregators can facilitate access. So for organisations who appreciate that endorsements or even just mentions by 3rd parties in social media provide valuable word of mouth marketing for free, making it easier for people to find relevant content online is a smart tactic.

Adapting media relations to the Internet age: more to it than bloggers

Most PA and PR professionals have understood that the web is important, which is great. However, they often get very excited about bloggers and then seem to stop there, as if the web had nothing more to offer. This is a mistake. No only do they lose track of the many other online tools at their disposal, but their lack of a “bigger picture” focus also results in them treating blogger relations as nothing more than an extension of media relations.

I’ll be writing about this again in future, but here’s a first few points I’d highlight. Simply treating blogger relations like media relations, and approaching bloggers like you would journalists, is a mistake. Sure, there’s room for building relationships with bloggers just like there is with journalists, but whereas journalists write for a living, bloggers write because they want to. What’s the difference? Journalists have deadlines, and need to satisfy readers and editors, and thus appreciate good pitches. On the other hand, bloggers write about whatever they want to in their own time. Result? While a good, relevant and tailored pitch is likely to interest a journalist, it’ll hardly ever interest a blogger. It might even annoy them, and worse, they could publish your email address on their blog accompanied by a rant about how annoying PR people are.

To entice a blogger you’d need much more time and patience. In short, you’d need to listen and engage in their community i.e. comment on their blog (relevant comments – not “here’s a link to my press release”) and perhaps even have your own blog which taps into and contributes to that same community. Or an alternative would be to seek bloggers’ expertise to enrich your story i.e. involving them, whether by testing your product, completing your experts survey, or whatever. That’s more likely to get them interested than a mere press release. Read my previous post on this for more detail. Or even better, read Brian Solis’ book on blogger relations.

Moving beyond blogger relations, what I think can actually add more value to your communications efforts is the integration piece i.e. how you can use online tools to improve media relations and vice-versa. What could this mean in practice?

You can enrich your press releases: rather than just giving your take on an issue and providing a quote, have a more complete press offering where you have video interviews with stakeholders that you’ve filmed with a basic hand-held camera and uploaded to YouTube, and include hyperlinks to other relavant material.

In addition, you should look more at the “pull factor” i.e. making it easier for the press to receive updates from you automatically rather than simply pushing it to them when they might not even be interested. The standard functionality here is RSS, which is now available on most sites, and allows people to subscribe to updates at the click of their mouse. In future, Twitter is also likely to take off, so journalists can simply choose to receive tweets from PR professionals (and vice versa). To anyone not acquainted with Twitter, it’s a microblogging platform that allows you to issue short entries (140 characters max.) which will automatically be picked up by anyone who “follows” you i.e. who has linked to you on Twitter.

There’s also another element to the “pull factor”. The web empowers individuals and organisations, meaning that they’re less reliant on intermediaries, like say journalists, than ever before to find the content they want. Online, you’re the publisher, so PR and PA people should shift some of their focus from pitching stories to the press to actually making it easier for people to find the story if they actually go looking for it. This first involves producing good quality content that people would want to find, link to, and even spread. Second, you should then bring in a techie who can tell you how to produce content or adapt existing content so that it is optimised for search engines i.e. SEO (Search Engine Optimisation), meaning that your content will appear high in Google and other search engines if a user enters a relevant search item. Many people underestimate the importance of SEO. It sounds dull, it’s techy; surely nothing to do with good PR? No, in truth over 90% of sites accessed online are done so via a search engine, so having a high ranking in Google is invaluable. And a lot of it you can do yourself, by using the right keywords and titles in your content.

As for the other side of the coin, using media relations to improve your online content, at the basest level, this can simply involve showcasing news stories other than your own by hyperlinking to them. But you can also take it a step further. This may be a bit unconventional, but why not get the journalists you have an established relationship with to help improve your content via a comments feature? Or even interview them and put a video snippet on your site? I’ve interviewed journalists for a client, and they tend to really appreciate being on the other side for a change, they have a good take on the issues, are effective communicators, and are often well-respected (depending on the publication they work for).

In the near future, I’ll be writing more detailed posts on what a PR/PA professional can do to a) produce more appealing content online; and b) how to lead people to it.

Showcasing your expertise through ebooks

Some posts by US marketer David Meerman Scott on free ebooks (i.e. books available in their entirety online , whether to be read online or printed), which he’s also written about in more detail in The new rules of viral marketing (itself an ebook), have got me convinced that organisations should be publishing a lot more of them. Not reams and reams: 15-30 pages is enough, nicely laid out both for reading online or if printed, and easy to read.

What’s the point? Like any publication, ebooks can showcase expertise. Done well, they can enable stakeholders to understand your position on a given issue – imperative for the array of companies, agencies, associations and pressure groups in Brussels – and perhaps even win them over. Or if you’re looking to win new business, prospects who have read a relevant and high-quality publication you’ve produced are more likely to trust that you’re capable of producing good work for them. And so on.

Expertise can be showcased in a number of ways, but ebooks have some great benefits:

  • Like any publication, they’ll always be available. Unlike books and reports however, they won’t gather dust on a shelf, but can be sent time and time again, be uploaded to any site anywhere by anyone, and be saved on social bookmarking sites so other users find them easily.
  • Unlike traditional publications, they’re free to publish (apart from the time to write them of course).
  • What’s more, they’re easy to publish – type it up, get someone to brush it up to look decent, and upload it.
  • As alluded to in the first point, they’re free and easy to distribute. Put download buttons on your site, send a link around – and if the content is good, it may go viral. David Meerman Scott’s ebooks have been downloaded hundreds of thousands of times and he states that he’s never spent a penny on promoting them.

If you’d like to see what a few ebooks look like, take your pick from this list of ebooks on social media compiled by Chris Brogan, or wait until February, when an ebook I’m writing with ZN on online communications in Brussels should be available!

Why I like Nespresso (not just the coffee)

I made a coffee using an old Philips Senseo machine this morning.  The coffee was OK, but I know Senseo will be obsolete in a few years, as the machine looked dated and the experience of making the coffee was not especially memorable (should it be, some might say?) Others have tried to produce coffeemakers with the aim of becoming the standard-bearer (Lavazza, Saeco) but I’m guessing they’ll fail too. Nestlé, with their Nespresso brand, have however been spectacularly successful. What have they done right?

  • Quality. No question, the coffee tastes awesome. It could perhaps be a little stronger, but it’s better than or as good as anything else on the market.
  • Variety. Not only is it good, it caters to all tastes. It’s dead easy to make an espresso, but just as easy to make a bigger coffee, and hey presto, get yourself an accessory and you can bang up a cappuccino in a minute.
  • An affordable luxury. It looks better and more expensive than other machines, but the pricing approach is clever (for the machines, not the capsules the coffee comes in). They’re priced just about high enough to be deemed a luxury good, but not quite high enough to be too expensive for most middle-class buyers (and there are ways to get money off when buying one).
  • Most of all, the story: the branding effort has been really clever. Not necessarily the ads featuring George Clooney, but the rest of it (although the self-deprecating, yet effortlessly cool and urban Clooney is a good choice). What is the story? Basically, that drinking Nespresso is about as unique an experience you can have drinking coffee, and that you’re part of an elite group if you drink Nespresso. Why? Most of all, the gorgeous little capsules. Having scores of dinky looking, brightly coloured capsules with classy Italian names is clever, because it makes a coffee so much more than just a coffee. Each coffee is an experience in itself, you get to know the colours and names, establish your favourites, and can share your stories with other Nespresso drinkers. What’s more, most people join the Nespresso Club after buying a machine, which makes it really easy to buy capsules and allows members to get freebies at the Nespresso shops dotted about most major cities. What this all does is make Nespresso drinkers feel a bit special.

Moral of the story? Very basic and repeated by scores of marketers every day: if you’re the purveyor of a good or service in a competitive market, make your product as good as it can be, and be sure to build a story around it so as to differentiate it from your competitors.