Paul Chaney - Internet Marketing Social Media Consulting

Blog on a bit of hiatus until The Digital Handshake manuscript is written

I apologize for my latency in posting. It is only because my full attention outside of my day job is devoted to completing the manuscript for The Digital Handshake. 

I should have recruited several to assist with guest posts, I know. Alas, it won't be much longer before the manuscript is done and you'll see regular posts here yet again. Bear with me. 

Paul

 

It's time for a sponsored conversations summit

After waging a small war on pay-per-post for years, I've come to the conclusion that sponsored conversations, as they're now being called, is a blogging business model that is not going away.

Forrester seems to think so anyway, having just completed a report on the topic, reaching the conclusion that "this practice will take its place alongside public relations and advertising activities in the blogosphere." That's a pretty bold assertion, don't you think?

Rather than further marginalize myself as an idealist or blogging purist, I've decided to take a more pragmatic approach. That being, if you can't beat em...might as well make sure ethical standards and best practices are encouraged. 

How do I propose doing so? By convening a summit. 

I outlined my proposition in a comment on Forrester analyst Jeremiah Owyang's post. I repeat it here, hoping it will become somewhat of a rallying cry for those of us who cherish this industry and want to see its best interests protected. 

I’ve staunchly opposed the idea of "sponsored conversations" for years. I believe that editorial and advertorial should be distant relatives, if related at all.

I know this form of "journalism" pervades every type of media, so it’s not surprising that it has crept (or leapt) into new media as well.

Above all, however, I’m a pragmatist and realize that, like it or not, this new business model is not going away. Given that, I believe its incumbent upon those of us who cherish the dignity of this medium to come together and create an ethical standard by which we all can abide.

As you well know, blogger ethics been a topic of conversation for years, one that’s been met with equal shares of derision and ridicule by many.

We’ve feigned the notion that new media is a territory that exists outside the realm of governance, one where each person does what is right in his own eyes. Given that new media is becoming more and more mainstream, that argument is archaic.

I propose one of two tactics:

1. A workgroup be formed sponsored by an objective third-party which does the grunt work of creating such a standard.

 or more preferably

2. A summit be convened consisting of all the major players who would have a vested interest in the outcome.

As president of the International Blogging and New Media Association (IBNMA), I would have great interest in offering our organization to serve the role as sponsor. I think we are ideally-suited for a number of reasons, not the least of which is our only interest is in pursuing that which is best for the social media “industry” as a whole. We take no official position on this matter, so our judgment as an organization is not swayed in either direction.

Alternatively, I could see both IBNMA and Social Media Club serving in joint partnership, and maybe some other entities as well (Blog Council, SNCR for example.)

I also suggest that BlogWorld and New Media Expo be the venue where such a summit takes place. A day could be set aside in advance of BWE proper.

The bottom line: It’s time we come together and do the hard work of ensuring that transparency and authenticity, which, by many, are now considered nothing more than cliches, continue to be the chief cornerstones upon which the social media enterprise is built.

I truly appreciate the role that Forrester has played in shedding light on this issue. Now, let’s go the next mile by convening a summit or forming a workgroup. Frankly, I prefer the former and believe that the latter would follow in due course. 

I recognize that, like me, many of you oppose the idea of sponsored conversations. However, I think you would have to agree that the tide toward the more widespread adoption of this business model is advancing at a rate too rapidly to stop, especially considering Forrester has given it their blessing and that a number of highly respected, high-profile bloggers have endorsed it. 

I would ask that, in the best interests of the business blogging and social media industry, you be willing to set personal differences aside and help us craft a standard that everyone can live with. 

I am not asking you to surrender your convictions about the practice, but, rather, view it from a larger perspective, the health and welfare of the industry. 

Of course, the alternative is to do nothing and let market forces dictate the outcome. Perhaps that is the better course of action. My concern is that we have danced around this Maypole long enough and it's time to reach a conclusion.

So, in summary, I'm calling for a summit of all the major players from all sides of this issue: Ted Murphy, Chris Brogan, Jeremiah Owyang or Sean Corcoran, Matt Cutts, Michael Gray, John Battelle, Wendy Piersall or other blogger who is on the anti-sponsored conversations side of the equation, and anyone else who has a dog in this hunt...maybe even Jason Calacanis (OK, well, maybe not Calcanis). I suggest Blog World and New Media Expo as the venue (hold the summit the day prior).  

What do you think? Is it time to lay this issue to rest? Should a Sponsored Conversations Summit be convened? I would appreciate your feedback either way.

Related posts on the topic that add fuel to my fire:

Don't Mistake PR and Creatively Earned Editorial Links for Sponsored Conversations - Adam Singer

Matt Cutts vs Ted Murphy on Paid Blogging and Sponsored Conversations - Searc Engine Journal

An Open Letter to Matt Cutts - Ted Murphy

Joe Marchese is right. Google will buy Twitter.

 
Mediapost columnist Joe Marchese makes this assertion in today's column:

"Google has cornered the market on searching the Web for information, and monetizing that behavior. Twitter is introducing the world to a new type of search, and with the perfection of this new type of search will come all the riches of search marketing. This, in my opinion, is what will make Twitter worth billions -- and why Google will (or at least should) buy Twitter."

Joe is right. Google will buy Twitter. Here's how I know.

1.  Google is about search. 
2.  Twitter is becoming more and more about search. (Here's two more.)
3.  Google bought Biz and Ev's first business, Blogger.
4.  Google doesn't provide real-time search. Twitter does.

Follow the logic. Still not convinced? Here's more.

1. Jaiku is like Twitter.
2. Google bought Jaiku. 

Jaiku's Google Q&A page contains this statement: "Activity streams and mobile presence are important areas where we believe Google can add a lot of value for users." 

Still not convinced? Time will tell, but I heart Joe's perceptions, which are infinitely more keen than mine. So, let me leave you with a bit more of his rationale, which uses quasi-programming logic, "if" and "then":

"Google has proven that if you can provide a useful search experience, then you can provide useful marketing. If you can provide useful marketing, you can return amazing ROI for marketers. If you can provide amazing ROI for marketers, you can make a lot of money. If Twitter perfects the search of current discussions, monetization will be right around the corner. "

SXSW bound, excited and anxious at the same time

I have a confession to make. While I'm very excited about attending SXSW (The last one I attended was in 2006), I'm very nervous at the same time. 

Why? Because of all the parties, which I refer to as "non-structured social situations." (Not that I'll be invited to many, mind you, but I know of at least one I'll be attending.) 

Despite any indication to the otherwise, I am a complete and total introvert lacking even the most basic social skills. If I'm not on a platform speaking, or in a more structured environment, I'm a complete wallflower. Sucks to admit it, but true. 

Perhaps that's why the virtual world works so well for us introverts. There is safety there. Buffers are in place. No so in RL.

So, if you see a guy sitting by himself in a corner, saunter on over and make him feel welcome would you, because that will very likely be me. :-)

Will age play a factor in social network advertising success?

Two facts are in evidence: 

1. Advertising in social networks like Facebook doesn't work (doesn't work well at least). Conversion rates are some of the lowest in the industry. 

2. Social networks are getting older. MySpace and Facebook are seeing growth rates among those 35 and above as some of the fastest. 55 year-old females, for example, are flocking to Facebook in droves. 

Do you think the latter fact will influence the former? Face it, we oldsters are a bit more obsequious when it comes to advertising. I think we warm up to it more easily than our younger counterparts. 

Or, in the social context, maybe not. 

Regardless, it will be interesting to see statistics when such are available. 

What do you think? Will age play a factor?

Skittles.com social media experiment, what's really important

Yesterday, everyone was buzzing about what Skittles.com has done with its Web site.  Instead of directing people to a traditional destination site, Skittles created what amounted to an online "remote control," something resembling a widget that resides in the upper left-hand corner of the browser. If you ask me, it was designed in such a way as to fit nicely in the alongside Twitter search in browsers 1024 and wider.

The interface contains tabs that, instead of linking to pages on its own site, link to social media properties where the brand has a presence - YouTube, Flickr, Facebook, Wikipedia and Twitter search. In fact, the index page, if you want to call it that, opens to Twitter search for #skittles.

Tweets were flying left and right with sentiment ranging from "What an incredible idea; I LOVE THIS! Website nothing more than aggregate of what everyone is saying about u," (my sentiment) to "What do Skittles.com and Modernista.com trend indicate at meta level in regards to SoMe?" IMO, it's fashion. No more, no less." 

(Skittles is not the first attempt at such a creative approach. Branding agency Modernista started the "trend" more than a year ago.) 

What is of most importance?

First, Skittles bucked conventional wisdom about what corporate brand sites should be, especially those of packaged goods companies. Compare, for example, Skittles to Tide, Clairol, Iams and more relevantly, Jelly Belly and Reeses.

Second, this move pays homage to the importance social media has on building a brand's reputation. Mashable's Stan Schroeder said it best: "We won't see all corporations do a complete social media makeover [à la Skittles] anytime soon, but we will see them give more and more importance to the various social channels out there."

Keep in mind, this is not a complete abandonment or acquiesence of control over the brand. After all, links go to sites where Skittles does maintain some level of governance - YouTube, Facebook (fan page) and Flickr to name a few. It is an acknowledgement that the brand and its consumers can and should partner in co-creating brand reputation and buzz.

What is most important is that Mars recognizes that the strength of a brand relates to how much conversation there is about it. And, right now, there's a lot being said about Skittles. 

It's a risky, gutsy move that some will pass off as gimmicky and unoriginal, given that Modernista has already "been there, done that." However, I think the real lesson here has little to do with the execution, and much to do with the philosophy behind it. 

Whether it will prove to be a win for Skittles remains to be seen. What it is is a win for the importance of social media and the impact it is having on commerce and culture. Thanks to Skittles the cat has been let out of the bag and it can't be put back in.