Paul Chaney

The Proprietary Web

I'm seeing a trend develop toward an Internet that is proprietary, differentiated and splintered. Quite the opposite of the homogeneous platform we were hoping it would become.

The differentiation itself takes several forms. For example, one is device-oriented, dependent on proprietary operating systems and applications, while another has to do with divergent social networks.  

Allow me to cite four subject-matter experts who testify to the reality of this phenomenon:

Josh Bernoff

In his most recent post, Forrester analyst Josh Bernoff heralds the "end of the Web's golden age."

"As we all gird for the launch of the Apple Tablet, take a moment to step back and realize what all these new devices are doing. The whole framework of the Web (and Web marketing) is based around the idea that everything is in a compatible format," says Bernoff. "Now with iPhones, Androids, Kindles, Tablets, and TVs connecting to the Web, that's not true."

Michael Killian

Avaya engineer Michael Killian adds his own spin to this idea: "The explosion in device technologies and types is a major part of the communication revolution and the challenges it presents to us."

"Device overload is nearly as impacting to me as communication and information overload and the social impacts of the communication revolution that I've written about before," he adds.

Geoff Cook

Geoff Cook, CEO of myYearbook, refers to another type of differentiation, which he calls the "stream wars."

"Over the coming decade, at least two types of winners will emerge from the stream wars. The first set of winners will be the creators of proprietary, differentiated streams."

Rich Tehrani

TMCNet CEO, Rich Tehrani, was one of the first to call attention to the "splinternet" over two years ago. 

"In the good old days having a website was good enough. This was your portal to the world -- your customers and everyone else. But slowly but surely a wealth of new communities are being created and if you aren't part of them, you could risk losing tremendous market share. In other words, a single homogeneous Internet is no longer what marketers can count on."

Do you get that? There is no longer a single, homogeneous Internet. We have none other than the likes of Steve Jobs, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, Ev Williams and others to thank for that. 

So, sports fans, as Michael Killian said, no longer do we merely suffer from information overload (as if that weren't bad enough), thanks to the introduction of a wide variety of mostly mobile devices, operating systems, social networks and apps, we've got a whole new ballgame. We can either view it as a problem or an opportunity. For certain, one thing we can't do is ignore it.

What do you think our response should be?

How to Use Social Media for Lead Generation

How to Use Social Media for Lead Generation

View more documents from HubSpot Marketing. via www.slideshare.net

The folks at Hubspot coined the phrase Inbound Marketing and they have mastered the art. They've even written a book about it!

This presentation outlines in clear detail how to go about using attraction-based marketing techniques to turn visitors into buyers. If you're in sales or marketing, take time to review this. 

Let me suggest some other resources:

Can Social Media and Lead Generation Coalesce - post by Chris Sietsema (on Jason Baer's blog)

Best Fits for Social Media in the Sale Cycle - post by Chris Brogan

Increase B2B Lead Generation Using Social Media - Social Media B2B

LinkedIn: 22 Ways to Dominate - post/presentation by Jason Baer

The Complete Guide to Using Twitter for Business - ebook by moi (needs updating, but basic content is cogent)

The Digital Handshake: Seven Proven Strategies to Grow Your Business Using Social Media (I know, I'm pimping my own book, but there's good stuff in there that applies to this topic.)

How about you? What resources dealing with social media and lead generation would you recommend?

The Age of the Stream is Upon Us

via farm3.static.flickr.com

As you may know, Steve Rubel has ceased publishing to his long-tenured blog Micropersuasion, in favor of using Posterous to lifestream. According to Steve, lifestreaming is where it's at, and I've no reason to argue otherwise.

If that's truly the case, then where does that leave the rest of us? Steve has admitted he's out on the bleeding edge because his clients expect it of him. A lot of the people I deal with everyday are no where near the edge. For some, blogging is still new.

Where does that leave me? I've decided to incorporate lifestreaming into my publishing mix using Friendfeed as my primary source for aggregating content. But, I'm still going to blog long-form at The Social Media Handyman site and on Marketing Profs Daily Fix, as long as they'll have me.

Frankly, there is something to be said for sitting by a stream watching it go by. There's something even more to be said for being in it. My brain is trying furtively to philosophize about the idea, but I'm not quite there just yet. Maybe I need to actually go and sit by one to really bring the analogy into focus. 

Of course, for some, it's not a gently flowing stream, but a rushing river fraught with class 5 rapids. Only the most stout-hearted may want to jump in. Either way, it seems like there's something organic about it...something natural (see, told you I was attempting to wax philosophical...). 

Does the Web have to be nothing more than a series of 1s and 0s, or can it have a more human feel? Can we extend a digital handshake and, if so, how does lifestreaming fit into that? 

How about you? How does lifestreaming fit into your publishing paradigm? Feel free to wax philosophical yourself if you'd like. 

Authors using Facebook Fan Pages or Groups to market their book

I just created a Facebook Fan Page for The Digital Handshake and, in doing so, spent a great deal of time seeing how other authors are using the vehicle to market their own books. 

Though I did not find that many, I decided to start a list of authors who are either using Fan Pages or Groups. You are welcome to add to the list by leaving a comment with your entry. And it can be any genre or category, not just Web 2.0/tech/marketing books. Fiction, business, history, whatever, are welcome too. Here's the list as of today. 

Facebook Fan Pages

The Facebook Era by Clara Shih

Here Comes Everybody by Clay Shirky

Groundswell by Charlene Li and Josh Bernoff

Trust Agents by Chris Brogan and Julien Smith

The Whuffie Factor by Tara Hunt

Who's Your Gladys? by Marilyn Suttle and Lori Jo Vest

Facebook Groups

Content Nation by John Blossom

It's Not What You Sell, But What You Stand For by Roy M. Spence, Jr. with Haley Rushing

Made to Stick by Chip Heath and Dan Heath

Personality Not Included by Rohit Bhargava

Twitter Power by Joel Comm

It's my suspicion that these authors chose Groups over Pages due to the fact that Pages only recently came into vogue as the premiere marketing channel. I could be wrong, of course, as there are reasons for choosing this option. I'd be interested to hear the author's rationale for why they went this route. 

The other issue, though, is groups can be started by anyone, not just the author. At least with Pages there is some requirement that the person creating the Page be authorized to do so. 

I get the impression that, with the growing prevalence of Pages as the marketing channel of choice, we'll see more authors moving in that direction and less creating Groups. Still, that's not to minimize the effectiveness of Groups as an option. 

Other

There are some authors who use neither Pages or Groups, but instead link to their personal profiles. These include:

David Meerman Scott

Pam Slim 

Paul Gillin

Finally, I'm a bit surprised that some authors who've written books about Facebook have neither a Page or Group. Facebook Marketing for one; Facebook Marketing Bible for another. And, come to think of it, I don't see Paul Dunay's new book, Facebook Marketing For Dummies represented here either. Eat your own dogfood guys! 

More evidence the destination era of the Web is over

My latest post at MarketingProfs...

When I wrote about the experiment Mars did with its Skittles.com site a few months ago, some people turned up their nose considering it little more than a rip-off of something advertising agency Modernista tried a year earlier.

Basically, Skittles.com itself is a "widget." Links in the primary navigation go to Facebook, YouTube, Wikipedia and Twitter search. In other words, it links to sites other than itself and does so as part of its architecture.

Guess what, it's not a rip-off, it's a trend, and at least two more such sites have entered the landscape: Sharpieuncapped and Building43. 

Read full post at MarketingProfs

Social media advertising: Does it work or doesn't it?

My latest post at MarketingProfs...

The term "social media advertising" is, to some, an oxymoron. They will tell you it doesn't work for the simple reason that people don't visit social networks to view advertising, but to interact with their community. It's a mindset issue. 

You may be familiar with the recent report by Knowledge Networks, which found that less than five percent of social media users say they regularly turn to social media for guidance on purchase decisions, and only 16% say they are more likely to buy from companies that advertise on social sites.

Read the full post

Twitter a business tool...count on it!

I just returned from 140 | The Twitter Conference, held in Mountain View, CA, last week. BTW, despite indications to the contrary, it was the first Twitter for business conference. (Not exactly the same focus as TWTRCON, but business-centric nonetheless.)

The main takeaway for me is that Twitter IS a tool businesses should and will be using. There are ample case studies all along the continuum, from small businesses such as Naked Pizza, a New Orleans pizzaria that gained notice in local and national press, to enterprise-level companies such as Dell. 

If you had any doubt, allow me to reference a recent MarketingProfs poll which reported that "more than eight in 10 Twitter users, most of whom represent small businesses, expect their company's use of the popular microblogging tool to increase in the next six months."

One indication of Twitter's coming predominance as a marketing tool are the number of conferences about it, which now number as many as six. This leaves me to wonder why Facebook conferences aren't following suit. I mean, its value as a marketing tool is being proven even as we speak. 

You have to hand it to Twitter founders Biz Stone and Evan Williams. Whether they envisioned the app taking on such major importance as a marketing tool or not, I don't know. Considering their previous success with Blogger though, I'd have to say "once you're lucky, twice you're good." 

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

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. 

Social network advertising...my ambivalence is showing

Before I delve into this post, I should mention that, in my previous post I used the term "social media advertising," when, in actuality, it is better stated "social network advertising." Thus, I refer to it here in that manner.

If you're a fan of advertising, raise your hand. Come on, raise em high. Anyone?

In my last post, I raised the question of what the new advertising model for social media (er...networks) will be. In this post I want to express my ambivalence over the viability of advertising in general, especially in its relationship to social networks.

As you will soon plainly see, I have a love/hate relationship with it (maybe "love" is too strong a word; hate, too, for that matter... "disdain" might be more accurate).

Oops, my ambivalence is showing

Even though I run some banner ads in the lower right-hand column of this blog, the fact that I run them in the lower r-h column tells you I'm ambivalent about running them at all! (That's not counting the Kindle 2 ad. I'm hoping to make some quick cash off of it. Hence, higher placement, but we'll see.)

It's not that I'm ambivalent about the products themselves. In fact, I feel strongly about everyone of them, and have used most of them too. I even created a page called Recommended Resources which contains those and other products I hold in high regard. 

It's just that advertising is interruptive, and I hate interrupting anyone for any reason, least of all to view an ad. It's not in my nature. I'm hoping someone will just "happen" to see them and sort of be "led" to click on one. (Lame, I know.)

It's Seth Godin's fault

Ever since Seth Godin wrote the book Permission Marketing a decade ago, I've pretty much sidelined advertising as a viable option, which may explain my ambivalence to run ads on this site. If you want to talk to me, ask my permission, don't just stick an ad in my face. Once I grant it, we can have a conversation and you can advertise to me all you want. 

The exception to this (for me at least) are pay-per-click ads. I'm okay with those since I'm searching for information anyway. But, only in search, mind you, not otherwise. 

Advertising in social networks

Let's cycle around to social networks. If people visit a social network for the purpose of interacting with friends and followers, doesn't it seem imprudent (not to mention impolite) to embed an ad in the sidebar, or, worse, in the conversation stream? 

I rue the day when we see them in our twitterstream, though I don't think it will take long for us to become blind to them. Either that, or ditch Twitter altogether in favor of a less offensive option. 

Observations about social network advertising

Click-thru rates are abysmally low, anywhere from .003 to .011. While CPMs are low as well, it takes more impressions to generate anywhere near substantial activity. 

Buddy Media CEO Michael Lazerow said in a comment to a post on social network advertising at Marketing Pilgrim that, "At Buddy Media we believe the branded application...will be the new ad unit." 

That same post remarked about a study done by Razorfish which said, "Content, in our view, will become advertising." 

That reminded me of something Dave Winer said, "When they finish the process of better and better targeted advertising, that's when the whole idea of advertising will go poof, will disappear. If it's perfectly targeted, it isn't advertising, it's information."

A new company set to launch in Q2, uVizz, says it will solve the social network advertising dilemma once and for all. The company is not yet revealing what it has up its sleeve though. 

The virtual general store

I favor a comment made by Wayne Hurlbert in our recent Blog Talk Radio podcast. He likened social networks to the old general store, which was much more than a place to purchase goods, but a gathering place, a watering hole, a community center where news, information and gossip was shared among neighbors (and sometimes about them). 

I wonder if there's a way to recreate that environment via virtual social networks and online communities. Have the goods and services nearby and handy for when people need them, but don't put an ad in the middle of the checker board.

Reflecting on that idea, I wonder if niche social networks aren't the way to go. You offer only those products and services you know will appeal to the community because you are a part of it. 

For example, one of my Twitter friends, Marek Eby (@trilobitten) is a huge fan of paleontology, so much so that he's created his own community around the topic, including a store. Since only those who are interested in the paleontology would be routine visitors, it stands to reason they won't be put off by relevant advertising. In fact, they may consider it a value-add.

Another great example is the Womens Wisdom Network, started by my friend Terri Murphy. It's a place for businesswomen to gather to discuss whatever businesswomen discuss. There is a book store associated with the site, along with some other resources, but it is tangential. Community comes first.

Now, I think THAT is a social network advertising model worth emulating! 

Conclusion

One thing is absolutely certain -- advertising in one form or the other will always be with us. We may call it content, app-vertisements, or something else, but it will be here. The trick, then, is to make it as unobtrusive as possible, even welcome. 

It is also certain that there will be continued experimentation with social network advertising models until we find one (or more) that resonate with the community. In the meantime, those of us who frequent social networks will have to become used to the Frankensteinian monstors that pass for such models. 

Be patient though. If Facebook Beacon taught us anything, they won't be around for long before another takes their place. Over time, it will get better. It has to. Money is at stake.