Micro Persuasion

Search Engine Visibility and PR - An Edelman Digital White Paper

Regular readers here know that in addition to focusing on emerging technologies, I also have long taken an interest in how search engines are evolving. Fundamentally, I believe that Google is media and also every brand's home page. Therefore, search engine visibility (and all of the reputational concerns that go with it) are front and center an opportunity for the public relations industry to shine.

With this in mind, my colleagues and I have co-authored a 13-page position paper on Search Engine Visibility. We released it to our clients last month but now we are making it available to the public today at the Edelman New Media Academic Summit in Washington. You can download it here (PDF). It's also embedded below. This is the second in a series - the first is here.

In the paper we posit that today there are two primary search visibility tactics: Paid Search (more widely known as search engine marketing - SEM) and Optimized Search (e.g. SEO). Both of these are generally not managed by public relations professionals.

Now, however, there are two new disciplines emerging. And both sit squarely in the public relations professional's domain...

• Reputational Search - The premise and promise of Reputational Search is that any company, NGO or brand can apply a search mindset to tried-and-true PR tactics and, in the process, influence the search results around certain keywords.

• Social Search - With Google and competitors increasingly prioritizing social content from Flickr, blogs, Twitter and others in result pages, it is imperative that brands build out "embassies" in all relevant networks – places where employees work to serve the interests of the community, as well as their company.

If you read the paper you will see that we are convinced that search engines for the foreseeable future will have a critical impact on how brands are perceived - far more so than any single social network site, which tend to come and go. As always, we're interested in your views. Please share them below or on Twitter or Friendfeed.

Open publication - Free publishing - More steve rubel

The End of the Destination Web Era

Photo credit: Décoration du château de Versaille by Djof

For the last 15 years marketers lived like kings online. We built ornate palaces in homage to ourselves in the form of web sites and micro sites. Each acts as a destination that embodies our meticulous choice of aesthetics, content and activities.

We still put a lot of time, effort and money into erecting these palaces, much as Louis XIV did in planning Versailles. And, for the most part we have been rewarded handsomely for our efforts. For years consumers flocked to our sites, reveled in all we had to say, played with our toys and, sometimes, were motivated enough as a result to buy our stuff.

That's what life was like in the good old days. But now we're in the age of online enlightenment. People (rightfully) have reasoned that they too can be creators, not just consumers. Content choices became infinite and peers are trumping pros.

After years of erosion it now it appears the destination web era is drawing to a close. This a trend that digital thinkers like Om Malik have long noted. In fact, the numbers prove it.

In March the average American visited a mere 111 domains and 2,500 web pages, according to Nielsen Online. What's worse, our attention across these pages is highly fragmented. The average time spent per page is a mere 56 seconds. Portals and search engines dominate, capturing approximately 12 of the 75 hours spent online in March. However, people-powered sites like Wikipedia, Facebook and YouTube are not far behind, snagging nearly 4.5 hours of our monthly attention.

In the post-destination web era the secret to breaking through won't be advertising. A new study from ARAnet in conjunction with Opinion Research Corporation confirms what PR execs have known for years - we are far more likely to take action when reading online articles that include brand information (51%) compared to search engine advertising (39%) or banner ads (25%).

Unfortunately, digital marketing is still wired for the destination web era. To succeed going forward we have to change our thinking. "Earned media" through direct public engagement in the venues where our consumers spend time will become the only way to truly influence a behavior change. The greatest advantages will go to the first movers who embrace this shift. It's not too late.

Could Twitter One Day Replace Email PR Pitches? Maybe

Over the last few months as I travel the country I have noticed that lots of people in PR that I meet are giving out their Twitter IDs in lieu of their email addresses. Many feature it front and center in their email signature. There's even a site that will generate a graphical version for you, which I have embedded above.

On a related note, more of my inbound and outbound communication these days is in the form of Twitter direct messages or, sometimes, public replies. The direct messages arrive through email, but I find myself often reviewing or responding to these in one of my preferred Twitter clients - either Tweetie or TwitterGadget.

At first I despised the bacn. Now, however, I embrace it. What's more, I have come to see the benefits of direct messages and its potential for PR. It has me wondering: can direct message pitches become an accepted practice that journalists can live with? There is upside for them.

For starters, just like with RSS, journalists are in complete control of the relationship. A PR pro can't direct message a reporter unless he/she is following. This means we have to earn our way on to a reporter's screen by providing valuable content, which many of us but not all of us do. Robert Scoble alluded to this in his recent note to PR pros. 

The key benefit here is that a journalist can always un-follow any PR professional who abuses the relationship. Still, with spam weaving its way into Twitter though replies, it threatens to put the whole kibosh on the plaform's potential for media relations (I am drawing a distinction here from direct to audience engagement via Twitter, which is very different).

Second, for the journalists and bloggers that do encourage PR pros to pitch them via Twitter they can streamline the process by keeping missives down to 140 characters. That's less than the three sentence format some are embracing. It ensures people make their point quickly. This makes it more mobile friendly too.

Now some pitches could be public tweets, others will have to be private direct messages depending on their nature. And of course Twitter will never replace email pitching entirely. 

Despite all the growth and hype, Twitter is still small. Pre-Oprah, Harris Interactive found that in the US, even among the ever-wired 18-34-year-olds, only 8% of those surveyed said they use Twitter. Other demographics break out down as follows: 35-44 (7%), 45-54 (4%) and 55+ (1%). Net, email is ubiquitous, Twitter aint. 

Nevertheless, more journalists are using Twitter. So this makes it increasingly attractive to PR professionals. It also makes it essential that we behave ourselves. A few bad eggs will kill this fast.

What's your view? PR pros, have you built relationships with reporters and/or enhanced them using Twitter? Journalists, I am sure you're worried about any such trend, particularly since many of you use Twitter for both personal and professional communications purposes. Weigh in with a comment below or reply to me on Twitter @steverubel. If there are interesting responses, I will round them up in a subsequent post.

The Future of Advertising: Just Ask "What Would Google Do?"

Photo credit: WWGD & Jeff Jarvis at the Frankfurt Buchmesse

Jeff Jarvis' new book, What Would Google Do?, is a must-read and a real eye opener. Here is a Q&A that Jeff graciously participated in for my column in Advertising Age...

How Google is Changing Advertising Agencies

Jeff Jarvis Suggests Asking "What Would Google Do?"

In just a little over 10 years, Google has built a business that is impossible not to admire. In fact, its success begs the question -- what would Google do (WWGD)?

Media pundit and thinker Jeff Jarvis tackles this question head on with a new book by the same title. In "What Would Google Do?," Jarvis breaks down Google's practices into 12 distinct rules and then applies them to aging industries like media and advertising.

I interviewed Jeff by email on Google's model to get his thoughts.

Steve Rubel: Since you titled the book with a provocative question, I will start the same way. If Google were an ad agency, What Would Google Do? How would they run it?

Jeff Jarvis: I'd say we already know: Google is a new form of agency-as-platform.

As Publicis' Rishad Tobaccowala pointed out in my book, Google served an entirely new population of advertisers who didn't have agencies and that enabled it to set new rules. Google sells performance instead of scarcity (a lesson the rest of media must learn in this post-scarcity economy). Because it rewards relevance, it encourages better, more effective advertising.

Through search, Google enables any brand to speak with customers without advertising. Google still does business with the agencies, of course, because they hold the checkbook -- and that is delaying the tectonic change that will come to advertising as it has to music, newspapers, TV, and radio. It's coming.

Mr. Rubel: A book, however, is very un-Google, as you noted in several places throughout. It's ranking well on Amazon. How did you apply the lessons in WWGD to the way you wrote/marketed the book and what can digital marketers learn from your experience?

Mr. Jarvis: As I write this, the book is up in the 500 range (on Amazon) and, of course, I hope this Ad Age coverage gets it back up to at least 100!

I do confess that in seeking this old-media attention and in publishing an old-media book -- instead of just putting it all online, where it would be searchable, linkable, correctable -- I am a hypocrite. I did not eat my own dog food. Why? Because the book industry still works well enough to pay me an advance. Dog's gotta eat, you know.

My publisher, HarperCollins, is trying many new things. They had me produce a 23-minute, sitcom-length video version of the book. We put full text of the book online (in a widget that that Google can't search). I shared 30 days worth of excerpts on my blog. Most important, the book began on my blog a few years before it was published -- as I explored ideas there and got help, even an entire chapter, from my readers -- and the discussion continues there and in Twitter now (I love seeing readers tweet their reviews and quotes).

Where this should go: Readers should be able to buy access to an author's ideas in all media at once. I'm impressed that O'Reilly books offers a lifetime subscription to updates of its digital titles. By the way, I asked in my hardback edition whether the paperback should be ad supported; this wasn't met with a resounding yes.

Mr. Rubel: In the book you stress Google's relentless focus on the consumer. And you wonder whether focusing on the consumer over the client makes more sense. Isn't this what ad agencies already do? And if not, what needs to change?

Mr. Jarvis: In the book, I quote an Australian ad exec saying that agencies should pay attention to clients instead of consumers. Then I quote the ever-quotable Toboccawala saying that agencies should focus instead on their customers' customers. I'd vote for the latter. The real question is whether agencies -- ad or PR -- can truly act as consumers' advocates. If a company has great customer service, do customers need advocates?

Mr. Rubel: Are customer service and peer-to-peer advocacy the new advertising? And if so, how does that change the ad industry?

Mr. Jarvis: Advertising is failure.

If you have a great product or service customers sell for you and a great relationship with those customers, you don't need to advertise.

OK, that's going too far. There is still a need to advertise -- because customers don't know about your product or a change in it or because, in the case of Apple, you want to add a gloss to the product and its customers. But in the book, I suggest that marketers should imagine stopping all advertising and then ask where they would spend their first dollar.

In an age when competition and pricing are opened up online and when your product is your ad, you need to spend your first dollar on the quality of your product or service. If you're Zappos, you spend the next dollar on customer service and call that marketing. If the next dollar goes to advertising, there has to be a reason -- and if the product is good enough, that reason may fade away.

Mr. Rubel: You also talk a lot about transparency. Google, however, isn't the most transparent company. What does the ad industry need to change here?

Mr. Jarvis: Google is not perfect. It expects us all to be transparent -- so we can be found in search, so we can benefit from our Googlejuice. But Google is not sufficiently transparent about its ad splits or its Google News sources. So, as our parents would say, this may be a case of doing what Google says more than what it does.

Online, it only makes sense to be as open as possible, to have answers to every possible customer question online, to join in conversations with customers as people rather than institutions. Transparency leads to trust. Transparency is just good business.

Mr. Rubel: How does WWGD apply to b-to-b marketing?

Mr. Jarvis: Customers are customers, communities are communities. In the mass of niches, there's nothing to stop every community -- moms or plumbers or chemical engineers -- from joining together online and sharing their knowledge and interests. See the success of blogs such as TechCrunch and PaidContent with targeted B-to-B content, advertising, job boards, and events. In the highly specialized world of online media, B-to-B represents a big opportunity.

Mr. Rubel: If Google were a Super Bowl ad, what would it look like?

Mr. Jarvis: It wouldn't. Google does not treat us as a mass. And it has better ways to spend its money.

Mr. Rubel: Can advertising become a platform?

Mr. Jarvis: In a sense, Google is that. It provides the means for anyone to reach anyone, whether through ads or through their own sites and conversation. This, I believe, is Google's greatest lesson for media, advertising, marketers, as well as government: provide a platform for your customers and communities to succeed and you, too, will succeed.

Is that advertising? Well, if we redefine advertising, it might be. Most every company and brand can become platforms for their customers and except for the means to accomplish that, there's nothing new in this. A great company always helps its customers do what they want to do. That's a platform.

Mr. Rubel: What parts of the advertising assembly line (e.g. research, creative, media buying, PR, direct, digital, etc.) has the greatest risk of getting Googled or the greatest opportunity to become Googled -- and why?

Mr. Jarvis: Everything is changed by the Internet, and not just by Google, of course: We have more means to learn more about customers today than focus groups or certainly panels, ratings, and samples ever told us.

Customers make the best creative when and if they recommend and talk about products. Media buying, I believe, will morph into network creation; in a mass of niches, there's opportunity in curating those niches to create critical mass and that work is being done today not so much by agencies but by technology, media, and network companies. PR becomes everyone's business in a company, which must have direct relationships with the public, person-to-person. Direct? The Internet is direct and we're still not done with the argument over whether it is anything more.

Everything in marketing is changed.

Mr. Rubel: Finally, in the book you wrote that "The agency and the advertising need to get out of the way in the relationship between customers and companies." This seems like it's an endorsement for public relations -- if it's done in such a manner. Yet, you are sour on PR and lump its future as questionable with the legal profession. Why? And what needs to change?

Mr. Jarvis: Though they can and certainly do use the Internet to improve their businesses, PR and law can't take on all the attributes of the open age because they serve clients and thus can't be transparent or consistent. The true test of a firm's willingness to prove me wrong would be firing a client that doesn't act Googley. I don't see that happening often.

Having said that, I know what you're fishing for here: If -- in my radical oversimplification -- advertising is failure and relationships are everything, is PR in a better position strategically than advertising?

Well, maybe, but there is this: A company and its employees must cultivate direct relationships with customers and communities without middlemen. So what is the role of the PR agency? It can advise and goad a company to build those relationships. But then, like a good consultant, it needs to get out of the way, to leave. I doubt we'll see that, either. The economics of agencies are built on getting clients to spend more, of course. So the real question is whether new economic models can support both agencies and Googlethink.

Customer Service is the New PR

Four years ago I wrote this...

"One day CRM systems will bolt in blog monitoring functionality so these posts automatically get funneled to the right place. For now, they need to be handled onesie twosie - but handled nonetheless."

Now today Salesforce.com has added Twitter customer service tools to its already formidable suite. Forrester Analyst Jeremiah Owyang sees Twitter's future as social CRM.

However, I don't think Twitter will be the only game in town. There will be lot of venues to vent, all of which can have an impact on brand reputation as journalists discover all of this conversation through Google, Twitter Search and other search engines. GetSatisfaction.com is growing. I wrote about this in our most recent white paper (see trend one).

In addition, I cover this in my first vlog on the Edelman Facebook page (forgive the acting!). My takeaway is that this isn't just a CRM concern, but rather it requires close coordination between customer service and PR. There's a great study on this from SNCR. What's your view?

Forrester Says Paying Bloggers is OK Provided There are Disclosures

Forrester Research is out with a new brief this morning by analysts Sean Corcoran, Jeremiah Owyang and Josh Bernoff that says that sponsored conversations on blogs - akin to what how Chris Brogan partnered with KMart - are going to become more commonplace. Further, they recommend the tactic provided that there are clear disclosures all around.

Sponsored posts are nothing new. Although the tactic always raises a fair amount of controversy. Daring Fireball, one of the most popular Mac blogs, regularly runs sponsored posts inside its feed. Techmeme has them on the site too. However, where these are different is that they act more like advertorials. Where it gets prickly is when bloggers themselves write about their personal experience with a product (usually balanced) in exchanged for compensation.

Forrester makes five recommendations in the brief: mandate disclosure, ensure freedom of authenticity, partner with relevant blogs, don't talk and walk away. All good advice. Further, as you can see from the chart below they sit sponsored conversations somewhere between advertising and PR in the matrix.

Source: Forrester Research, Inc.

The report misses something, however. This is nothing new. Magazines have run advertorials for years. And radio stations run promotions where the DJ gets involved. What is new is that on many of these sites the editor and publisher are the same individual. There are no hard church/state boundaries as there are with other media.

The way to get around this is to write and submit your own content as a sponsored post. Have the blogger run the copy but with an advertorial label. This has worked in magazines for years. 

Further, I would suggest working with an organization that represents bloggers and has experience running such programs - such as Federated Media. In addition, sponsored conversations work best when you integrate tactics across the spectrum that Forrester has here. Sometimes, earning media can lead to additional opportunities to get to know the personalities behind a blog and then additional opps. down the road.

However, on the whole, I agree that we're going to see more of this in the future. I am hopeful that everyone, publishers and sponsors, will bring their ethical A-game.

Ads in Google News Turn it into a PR Playground

The Google News team blogs that contextual ads are now running alongside of news search results...

"What this means is that when you enter a query like iPhone or Kindle into the Google News search box, you'll see text ads alongside your News search results--similar to what you see on regular Google searches or Google Book Search."

Read between the lines and guess what that really means: Google News is now a PR playground. Given the relative ease of launching a simple Google Adwords campaign we're going to see a lot of companies - some legit, others not - buying up real estate on Google News solely for influence, not clicks. Google may bounce these ads if they don't perform - time will tell.

It's already happening. Here's a case in point. Last week an eagle-eyed reader alerted SEO blogger Barry Schwartz that one advertiser tried to use Google News sponsored links as a way spread fake news - in this case a false rumor that President Obama was killed. The ad, Schwartz notes, was pulled down. But you can bet there will be more. And clearly some people saw it.

On the whole, I am bullish about ads in Google News. The PR industry largely missed the first search engine marketing wave and I believe that, at least when it comes to smaller campaigns, we still have time to catch up. Richard Edelman, our CEO, is also thinking the same way (see point #3). For more, see this post from my colleague, Marhsall Manson, on how good SEO is an outcome of good PR. Ads on Google News will serve as just another log on the fire that will encourage PR pros to boost their search knowledge. 
However, the ethics issues around contextual news ads and search overall are huge, particularly on sites like Google News. It will fascinating to see what Google deems as kosher/not - and to what degree people in PR and outside may try to push the boundaries.

Will the Economy Put the Kibosh on Generous Knowledge Sharing?

PSFK notes that the web has historically rewarded individuals and companies that share their knowledge regularly and liberally...

Skimming through Forbes list of the Top 25 Most Influential Personalities on the Web Today, we were struck by the common thread running through some of the best blogs today. Pundits like Guy Kawasaki, Jeff Jarvis and Steve Rubel have all led the pack of aspiring bloggers by sharing a similar approach: they share all they know. From a professional standpoint, sharing your newest Marketing or PR innovations freely on the web doesn’t make a lot of sense. Any competitive advantage you may have had is lost to the public once these ideas live online, right?

Good question. In the past you couldn't argue with this approach. For decades knowledge sharing and thought leadership have been a winning PR strategy. The folks at Hubspot talk about this a lot when they talk about "inbound marketing."

However, as I look over this short list of folks (thanks to PSFK for including me!) I wonder if people who work for larger companies - both those who are well known and others - will be as willing to share knolwedge so readily in a recession.

You can bet that the folks named (myself included) and independent thought leaders like Charlene Li will continue in this tradition. In my case it's part of the culture at Edelman. But what about people who work for companies that sell their IP and whose livelihood depend on it? For example, industry analysts like Jeremiah Owyang who work for Forrester. Will they continue to rely on a strategy that to date has sparkled? 

In tighter times my bet is that an iceberg of information that last year was unlocked might now remain more submerged.

I share a ton of content online with you. Much of it has moved to my Friendfeed page. However, these days I am now also producing more stuff for internal use - exclusive content for our staff and clients. This has allowed me to add value everywhere. I am just more strategic about it than I was before. That's what comes with the territory of working for a big global organization. I am lucky that Edelman is incredibly liberal here and they are great to work for. The leave it to me to judge. But what about others who aren't so lucky?

What's your view? Should all information be free? I don't feel that way. To a large degree it's what keeps information workers employed. There will always be limits. They just might be tighter now.

Five Digital Trends to Watch for 2009

This has also been cross-posted on the Edelman Digital blog.

In my role as Director of Insights for Edelman Digital I am writing monthly white papers for clients on key trends. Sometimes we will release these broadly. For the first one, I drew on members of the Edelman team, as well as third party research, to highlight five digital trends to watch for 2009. Each includes specific recommended actions.

Even though the economy is slowing, all signs show that audiences are still spending a lot more time on the web. Marketers need to invest to meet them there. However, what's changed today they are smarter about where they focus their time, dollars and energy. Experimentation is giving way to tactics that deliver ROI. These include public engagement, search and social networking — three themes that connect the major macro trends.

There are five trends covered in this white paper...

Satisfaction Guaranteed - Customer care and PR are blending as consumers use social media to demand service

Media Reforestation -  The media is in a constant state of reinvention as it transitions from atoms to bits

Less is the New More - Overload takes its toll. Gorging on media is out. Selective ignorance and friends as filters are in

Corporate All-Stars - Workers flock to social media to build their personal brands, yet offer employers an effective and credible way to market in the downturn

The Power of Pull -  Where push once ruled, it’s now equally important to create digital content that people discover through search

You can download the full paper here(PDF) or simply browse or read it below. I look forward to hearing your feedback.

Publish at Scribd or explore others: Research Business & Legal marketing media

The Newspaper Reporter of the Future is Here Today

The word newspaper is really a misnomer today. Or at least it will be soon. Increasingly news is delivered digitally and it's interactive. People are certainly writing newspapers off for dead, but I think they have a bright future (in digital form) and it's right in front of them.

Everyone's looking for a solution to the newspaper problem. But the answer is right under their nose. The picture is slowly evolving through the breakthrough work of individual reporters who are using social media to build a stronger connection with their audience (and their own personal brands in the process).

There are tons of examples. Dwight Silverman is one. But here's another that's also near and dear to my heart. It's so spot on that it's noteworthy as an example of where the news business is heading - or where it needs to go.

In the US baseball spring training is getting underway in full swing in Florida and Arizona. I am a Yankee fan and have been paying close attention to what Peter Abraham has been doing. He should win awards for breaking ground in sports journalism.

Abraham is the Yankees beat writer for the Journal News in Westchester county (a NYC suburb). According to Burrelles Luce, it's the 94th largest newspaper in the US with a daily circ of 100,000 readers.

Abraham is on the scene in Tampa where the Yankees are training and he's doing it all - in addition to filing regular reports for the paper that appear in print. Here's an inventory of his social media footprint....

First, he has a blog with a full-text feed that includes several posts/day and hundreds of comments/day from readers. It dates back to 2006.

In addition, Abraham has a Facebook group that has about 1600 members.

He is posting photos from spring training using his iPhone. Note the gear the others are using by comparison.

There is a podcast up on iTunes that right now is updated daily with audio.

FInally, today he was using both CoverItLive and Mogulus to have a live video/text chat with readers.

All Abraham is missing is Twitter, YouTube and maybe Flickr but he seems to be doing just fine with what he has here.

Now imagine for a moment that Abraham wasn't a Yankees beat writer but instead covering your company or industry for the business section. Or imagine she is the newspaper's food columnist. This multi-platform method of engaging is right for all of them. If every reporter did this on staff they can build not only a more engaged audience, but also redefine local media since it's all potentially global.

For PR professionals, this is a boon. More content creates more opportunities for us to tell our stories and to also engage journalists using these same channels. If we're not there as individuals and companies then we won't be top of mind.

What Abraham is doing represents not only the future of journalism but also what PR professionals themselves need to do to build connections in the years ahead.

The White House is Liveblogging

This isn't your father's White House. The Obama administration's communication team - as I write this post - is live-blogging a speech the President is giving in Florida today on the economy.

This is a big deal. The new administration, unsurprisingly given its history, is slowly opening up the White House to the new world of media. It's not that they don't get it. They do. It's just hard to turn around a giant institution like the government. But slowly, it's happening. Posting the weekly addresses and more on YouTube, inviting The Huffington Post to ask a press conference question (a first, which Obama did last night) and now live-blogging are all baby steps in the right direction.

I wonder if the White House will revive Obama's old Twitter account next.

Banner Ad Quality Sinks to New Lows

 

Seen a lot of big bellies on the web lately - like the ad above? How about ads you might normally see running on low-ranked blogs, like for Snorg tees (also above), popping up on mainstream news sites? Feeling like your credit might be in trouble, even if it's not? I would have the same feeling too judging by how many time trashy appeals for credit score reports are showing up on high-quality news sources. (Note - I am not picking on these products. For all I know they might be good.)

This is just an observation since I don't have hard statistics, but it seems like a lot of the banner ads from quality Fortune 500 advertisers have vanished as the economy shrivels. This despite signs that online advertising is alive and well. 

In some ways it feels like we're a time warp back to the early 2000s when mainstream brand marketers had yet to invest in digital advertising in a big way. That all ended mid-decade but now we're back in the dark ages for banners.

If ad revenues are up, so what's going on here? The investment may be shifting to higher ground.

Some will argue this is cyclical. Brand marketers will be back using banners once ad spending increases. But you can argue the opposite might be true depending on how long the economy remains in a recession. 

Banner ads have a notoriously low ROI. They are good branding vehicles but terrible for direct response and they require a significant investment to really be successful. You need to blanket the web with them. I'm inclined to believe that as marketers look for ROI in these times they will find success through search ads, public relations, email marketing and some, but not all, social networking programs. 

If they get comfortable with other tactics beyond display ads - and the ROI is proven - then it could spell even more trouble for media companies that depend on banners for the bulk of their revenues. Reduced investment increases inventory, reduces the prices (and quality) and creates a vicious cycle. 

So will quality banners be back? Yes, but not at the rate of adoption we saw before the economy began to sink. The money will have moved by then into other areas.

All Media Is Social, All Social Is Media

The following is another excerpt from "Five Digital Trends to Watch," an Edelman Digital insights white paper that will be released on February 17.

Companies have done a decent-to-good job adapting to the new era of democratized media. For example, bloggers today are considered an important part of the ecosystem. The best in PR view them as a sounding board that can help shape or even re-shape strategies.

Unfortunately, some of what we’ve learned these last few years may need to be unlearned — or at least modified.

Where once journalists sat on one side, bloggers on the other, today all media is social and all social is media. Yet many, particularly in PR, still treat ordinary citizens, traditional journalism and branded content as distinct islands of media. Going forward, it’s best to see them as a contiguous archipelago.

Consider that in 2008 some 58 percent of newspapers featured some form of user-generated content on their sites, according to the Bivings Group. This is up from just 24 percent in 2007. The mix includes: user-generated photos (58 percent), homegrown video (18 percent) and articles (15 percent). Meanwhile, the number of newspaper sites that are allowing readers to comment on articles has more than doubled to 75 percent. 

On the other side of the coin, we've seen time and again that social networks like Facebook, Friendfeed and Twitter are now essential sources of news and information for millions. This is particularly true around big events and breaking news.

The upshot is that today it's impossible to draw a line between social media and traditional media - it's all one. We need to take a bird’s-eye view of the entire landscape and conceptualize it in the broadest context when planning, executing and measuring campaigns. Anything short and we're operating in a vacuum.

Marketing Authentically with Personal Brands as Corporate All-Stars

 

Photo credit: Orangeneko on Flickr

In my role with Edelman Digital I am curating and writing white papers for clients about key trends. The papers provide clients actionable insights and strategies they can apply in PR and marketing programs. 

We're making one available to everyone the week of February 16. The 30-page paper covers Five Digital Trends to Watch. Here's a preview of one of the trends - what we're calling "Corporate All-Stars." It's also my column this week in Advertising Age.

Personal branding, while not new, is hot. In these uncertain times, many workers are flocking to social media in an effort to build their own brands.

But just as perennial all-stars Derek Jeter and Alex Rodriguez help the Yankees sell more tickets, businesses also recognize that having a few "corporate all-stars" on staff can help them market in an authentic yet cost-effective way. (This is one of five trends we at Edelman have identified for 2009; the full list will be available on our website Feb. 17.)

Dan Schawbel is one example. Online he has established himself as an expert on personal branding. However, Schawbel is also a social-media specialist at EMC Corp., one of the world's largest tech companies.

Drawing on his personal branding experience, Schawbel has revolutionized the way EMC communicates and collaborates with its stakeholders. He is driving the company's Twitter, Facebook, social-media press release/newsroom, social bookmarking and blogging strategy all by leveraging its corporate all-stars. 

Not every company will want corporate all-stars on the team. But those that cultivate them will be in a strong position to be heard in the noisy social sphere. Here are three considerations: 

Use blogs to connect customers and corporate all-stars

Blogs are fast becoming a key part of many brand communication plans. However, according to Forrester, only 16% of online consumers who read corporate blogs say they trust them. To mitigate this, turn boring product blogs into communities that connect customers and corporate all-stars around their shared passions.

Give all-stars independence, yet ensure they stay focused

To be successful, employees with personal brands need to carefully balance their roles as semi-independent thought leaders while maintaining a clear connection to their employers. The ideal situation is when the individual's and company's goals are aligned, the subject matter overlaps, and transparency reigns.

Equip and support personal brands in becoming active listeners

The advantages of having authentic online all-stars go beyond relationships, branding and overall visibility. These people also become active listeners. Equip them to act on potential crises and issues, and enable them to identify new ideas and unmet needs.

IBM Turns Old NYT Editorial and PR Into Ads

What the Internet does - and quite well - is blur lines.

Where once there was social media and media, that's no longer true. All things social are media and all things media are social. Where once there was PR and advertising, the lines of influence today are grey thanks to new paradigms. And where once there was display advertising and editorial, today things are not so black and white anymore. 

Here's one example that certainly got me thinking.

Last night when I was on the New York Times web site, a new ad campaign from IBM jumped out at me. It was startling not because of its imagery or messaging but for its unique approach.

The campaign is different in that the ads curate archived editorial on the environment from the Times and displays it right in the unit itself. The reader doesn't need to leave the page he/she is on to peruse the articles. Branding is light and the focus is on content. Needless to say, since all of the articles are by star columnist Thomas Friedman, the writing is strong. 

As you can see from the screen grab below, the Times calls the program "Sponsored Archive." Some of these articles highlight IBM media coverage. So in effect, IBM is turning positive PR it generated with the Times - in some cases two years ago - into fresh advertising.

Disclosures make sure the campaign is indeed totally ethical. At the very bottom of the ad unit, you'll note, that the Times clearly says that the units are ads, that the reprinting was paid for by IBM and that the editorial staff was not involved.

Now you can argue this isn't anything new. For years magazines have featured advertorials that are written by journalists on staff but paid for by advertisers. Still, this feels different to me. It opens the door to future where earned media becomes effective paid media.
It essentially takes PR and recycles it into a paid format that is quite effective. However it competes with more current editorial a reader is likely visiting the site to consume.

Like similar programs from Google, efforts like these unlock the hidden value in thousands of articles deep inside archives. It takes what's old and makes it monetizable. All of it has me thinking that this could be the beginning of a new era where archived content is turned into a form of advertising that's more credible than static, generally poor-performing banners.
More importantly, it takes the work that PR professionals do - earn media - and gives it even stronger legs than before and for years to come. And that's exciting.

Frustration with PR Sites Kills Media Stories, Usability Studies Say

In his latest newsletter, usability guru Jakob Nielsen studies corporate newsrooms and found that, generally, they aren't doing a good job to say the least.

"As 3 studies of journalists show, they use the Web as a major research tool, exhibit high search dominance, and are impatient with bloated sites that don't serve their needs or list a PR contact."

The most fascinating passage in Nielsen's report, though, is this one...

Another journalist described what he'd do if he couldn't find a press contact or the facts he needed for his story: 

"Better not to write it than to get it wrong. I might avoid the subject altogether."

The press, much like consumers with customer care reps, want to be able to get a hold of corporate PR contacts quickly and easily, otherwise they won't bother doing business. That should be a wake up call for most. Bloggers, meanwhile, all expect us to be present in their spaces and I suspect don't even bother going to our immaculate corporate PR sites. So PR pros increasingly need to be present and available all around.

If you think it's just big companies that are at risk here of being forgotten, Nielsen debunks that myth. Startups, he says, pepper their sites with buzzword-filled, fatty text. Also, he makes it clear most newsrooms are built for push not pull.

In the near future all corporate media/PR sites will need to emulate the more progressive customer service sites. They will need to showcase how someone can get a hold of you in a hurry, either via IM or Twitter and not just email or phone.

I bet we'll see IM boxes like the one below from Google Talk making their way into corporate newsrooms. Access to humans begets trust and many companies are not prepared to engage 24/7. SImply put, that's the way we increasingly need to operate in a globalized world.

Inside Obama's Social Media Toolkit

Edelman's Digital Public Affairs team in DC has authored an awesome white paper that takes you inside the Obama campaign. You can download it here (PDF). The white paper imparts several lessons: start early, build to scale, innovate where necessary and more. You can find other Edelman white papers on our site. This includes 9 on 9 - key consumer trends for 2009 (also in PDF format).

PR Pros to Get a Database of Twitter Users by Mid-Year

PR Newser reports that Cision, a very respectable company that runs a media database used by thousands of public relations professionals, will expand its reporter and blogger data to include Twitter user handles by mid year. It's unclear if they will only link existing profiles to their Twitter handles or if Cision will also replicate the broader set of tools that Twitter already offers.

Regardless, while this is hardly unexpected given Twitter's growth (and it's the right move for CIsion and the industry), it may mean changes for the more influential users of the micro-blogging service. For starters, Twitter users may soon see an influx of in-bound pitches from PR pros. Most likely these could come in the form of 150-character direct messages (DMs) since most Twitterati don't usually post their email address.

My advice to those of you in PR is to participate first, pitch later (this is counsel my colleague Phil Gomes regularly teaches). Ideally I would love to see everyone in PR be on Twitter but only if we add value. This means that we must transparently and openly participate in conversations, always respect the community and build relationships. Do this (and do this well) and most everyone will be happy to hear our pitches. 

Hopefully when Twitter data arrives on PR professionals' desktops by mid-year it won't encourage us to pollute Twitter with DM pitches. Rather, we'll use the info to be smarter. Then again, alot of this data is already out there so maybe this is all moot.

Google Adds Time Stamps, Inches Closer to Real-Time Web Search

(UPDATE: Note comments from Google's Matt Cutts, which came in after I posted. It appears none of this is new but it is certainly worth watching and perhaps more noticeable to me than it was before.)

Google has quietly started posting a small time stamp next to news stories and blog posts that have been recently added to their main index. In the screen grab below note how one such search lists the hours that have transpired since my recent blog post and Robert Scoble's were first indexed. The same holds for news-related searches too, as you can see here.

As of right now you can't sort Google results by time. From the advanced search page, however, you can limit results just to those that have been indexed in the last 24-hours. You can't get more granular - at least yet. Date-filtered advanced queries are not a new feature but I believe the time stamps are.

 

As Louis Gray notes, the real-time web is going to be a critical trend to watch this year. As more content is generated from social networks, Google is going to feel heat from Friendfeed, Twitter and Facebook as they beef up their algorithms. Already, lots of people go to search.twitter.com to search for breaking news just as we did first when Google News launched a few years ago.

Real-time Google search is something I have been predicting would come for almost four years now. I think we're finally just about there. This will have a major impact on PR as companies recognize that Google is the primary lens by which they are judged.

Why Text Remains King of the Web

My friend Robert Scoble has a problem. He produces terrific videos on technology companies for Fast Company. They're a little long sometimes, but they're almost always interesting.

So what's Scoble's problem? Well a lot. The videos don't generate a lot of in-bound links from bloggers, conversations on Twitter or mentions on aggregators like Techmeme. "None of my 1,000+ videos has ever made it to Techmeme," Scoble said. 

He's right. A quick analysis reveals some get no links, others get a couple. However, when he surrounds them with text, it's a different story. Why? Text! It provides context and I suspect for many it's a proxy for the video.

I am starting to believe that despite all the hype around online video, text remains King of the Web. Why text? There are at least five reasons...

• It's scannable - according to Jakob Nielsen users have time to read at most 28% of the words during an average site visit and 20% is more likely

• Three letters: SEO - For all that Google Universal Search has done to elevate video, search results are still largely made up of text and everyone wants better SEO

• The workplace - It's much easier for cube-based workers to read text on the screen and get away with it vs. watching long videos. Watching videos (even work related vids) screams "slacker"  

• Mobile Devices - Yes, of course you can put a video on an iPhone. But it's work and requires planning. Text is easier to pull up in a nanosecond  

• Distribution - Nothing flies like text. It's so easy to cut and paste it and send it somewhere or to clip and re-syndicate it via email, RSS or social networks

I don't know about you but I love text. Now I have always been a reader. Today I am a scanner. So for me it comes natural.

Still, think about just how much of what you consume and share online remains text-based. Twitter - it's all text. Friendfeed - mostly text, but augmented by images. Facebook - a mix but certainly a ton of text. Even what makes YouTube hot is the metadata and commentary around the vids. So I don't see any big threat to King Text. 

So what does this mean? Well, if you're creating video you better pay attention to the text you put around it. Without text, you're dead. You won't be found. Further, if you want to influence you must have a command of the English language and know how to write for the web in sound bites. More on that in a subsequent post. I believe marketers and PR pros are well positioned to succeed.

What's your view?