For Social Media Marketing, it's the End of the Innocence

It was really just two or three years ago when many "traditional" public relations agencies and their business-to-business clients were wondering if social media marketing was just another shiny new toy, a passing fancy, an amusement for idle minds and hands that would have its 15 minutes of fame and then fizzle.

Since then the question has transitioned from "what if social media marketing is real" to "how do we maximize it for our business?" Add to the list "how do we make sense of the hundreds of social media marketing channels, applications, and analytical tools, etc., that are evolving and being ushered in and out on a daily basis?" And "which ones are right for us and our key stakeholders?"

Flashback:  excluding the early adopters, from 2007-2008 business-to-business public relations and marketing professionals started to kick the social media marketing tires in earnest.  At that time, many professionals and their organizations were signing on to LinkedIn and Twitter for the first time just to be there;   to see what the fuss was all about.  Yes, the great recession influenced the number of LinkedIn and Twitter newbies as these platforms are ideal for job hunters.  But a great many also were logging on to figure out how to begin integrating social media into their existing marketing efforts.

Then in 2009, providers of marketing services in the business-to-business world started their deep dive, en masse, into social media marketing.  And at the same time, PR agency prospects took stock of whether the agencies involved in their new business reviews were walking the social media talk. Do you blog and comment on blogs?  How many Twitter followers does your agency have?  What type of content are you generating and tweeting?  Do the managing partners tweet?  What should we do?  If they didn't ask, they were thinking it.

2010 was a watershed year for the marketing services industry as far as the impact of social media marketing is concerned.

Today, as 2010 winds down, if you live in a B2B world and work in public relations and/or marketing, you are likely (hopefully) well versed in social media marketing -- as a counselor and/or as a practitioner. Because the train has left the station.  In 2011, social media marketing loses its innocence and you better be planning for it.

10 Public Relations-related Discussions I Could Live Without

Everyday I look forward to the avalanche of creative ideas, links to information and news I wouldn't see otherwise, the levity, the quirkiness and the provocative conversations, blogs, tweets and posts and all that spills forth from my favorite social media networks.

Well, almost all that spills forth... 

We're probably a lot alike in that we start each day by browsing Twitter, Linkedin, Facebook, etc., and end each day pretty much the same way.  We want to know "what's new" even before we get out of bed (some of us).  And in just a few minutes, before we take that first sip of Sumatra or Chai, we have a pretty good take on the conversations that took place while we slept and about what's trending for the day ahead.

Unfortunately, however, much of the creativity and thoughtfulness that is shared within our social networks - I'm finding -- is being offset by the seemingly never-ending regurgitation of (too) familiar discussions.  I am specifically speaking of the conversations taking place within the world of public relations. And more specifically, technology public relations.  

This may sound a bit like whining to you.  I'm sure it would to Seth Godin, who blogged just today about whining.


Mr. Godin says whining is just a waste of time.  He's right.  Still, I believe everyone has the right to whine, albeit only once in a while.

Today, it's my turn.  

With that, I give you my short list of regurgitated, recycled and restated discussions which are taking place in a PR-oriented social media community near you. All are discussions we, 'er I, can live without:  

• Is traditional media really dead?
• Press release:  R.I.P.
• Who should own social media? Ad agency, PR agency, in-house team or social media agency?
• Why PR agencies missed the social media train.
• What journalists hate about PR people.
• 10 essential tools for measuring social media (especially annoying when they're tools you never heard of and when you click on the links half of them are already obsolete!)
• How to pitch bloggers.
• How many CEOs are actively using social media.
• How do you measure PR success?
• Is PR dead?

Phew.  Quite a list.  But I'm sure I missed a few, so please feel free to weigh in with your personal favs.  

  

Old Media is Dead, Long Live Old Media

Old media is dead. 

Isn't it?

Well, that's what many of the new media folks are saying, so it must be true.  That old media has been completely and utterly usurped by new media -- by all things digital and by what is "social."

If you don't believe me, just take a look at a handful of marketing or PR agency web sites, or take a look at the marketing job boards.  It's new media or die, no exceptions, no excuses.  If you still don't believe me, take a look at reports such as "State of the News Media 2010" as referenced earlier this week in a blog post by my esteemed colleague Bill Bellows.  5,900 newspapers jobs were lost in 2009 alone, Bill reports.  And since 2001, 450 jobs at the local TV level were also lost -- and lost forever more than likely.

So old media just doesn't matter anymore. Please don't waste time building relationships with journalists at the Wall Street Journal or Fortune or eWeek.  THEY SIMPLY DON'T MATTER ANYMORE!   Instead, spend 100 per cent of your time building relationships with and pitching only new media channels -- because old media is dead.

Well ... maybe not so fast.

There's a pertinent and lively discussion on this topic taking place right now on LinkedIn in the "Network of PR Professionals" group, of which I am a proud card carrying member.  Most of the communications professionals who have weighed in on the question, " Are the 'old media' relevant?" -- and they hail from all over the world -- believe that old media are still relevant and still play an important role in integrated public relations. 

Reinforcing this point of view is a report released just today, "2010 Edelman Trust Barometer," which reports that next to a stock or industry analyst report, articles in business magazines are deemed to be the most credible.  Thanks to Mike Holland of Smye Holland Associates for sharing this report.  "So, 'old media' seems to be doing ok," Mike says.

Studies aside, plenty of senior PR pros from around the globe seem to agree with the "Barometer" and with Mike, who adds, "People tend to value information that they pay for. So coverage in paid-for 'old media' is still regarded as having a higher value than coverage in free 'new media.'"

A media advisor at NaoriComm International takes the point a step further.  "Ye Olde media is now going back to be more relevant than ever.  Many people are looking to the good ol' media to get in-depth coverage on a topic that would otherwise get a Tweet of 140 characters or less, missing the actual point," said Sharon Levy-Matzkin.

Yes, new media channels are turning our industry on its head and are playing an ever increasing role in the reputation of companies.  And yes, newspapers and magazines and radio and Cable TV are struggling mightily against the tsunami of new media challengers.

But to declare old media dead before its time?  Well, it's just not right, if for no other reason that coverage in  old media channels just might keep you in your job for a while longer, and that's worth much more than any number of tweets.  "No CEO will want to frame their Twitter stream or blog postings...a CEO values the validation that coverage in a newspaper or magazine provides," says Brian Kennedy of Allen and Caron.

In terms of integrated public relations campaigns, old media can and should co-exist with the plethora of opportunities provided by new media.  I believe the facts and the opinions and experiences of PR practitioners bear this out.

At 3Point, we believe in the intersection of traditional media and new media. Maybe that's why so many tweets include references to traditional media articles.

Is Cloud Computing Bringing us Back to the Future?

ThoseinMedia, a web site where media professionals connect and blog, has a group on the social networking site LinkedIn where it promotes itself as "THE group for Media Professionals." Its membership includes people working in social, online and broadcast media, advertising sales, PR, SEO and pretty much every other media category you can think of. It's a popular LinkedIn group with thousands of members and as you'd expect, its members are highly engaging. If you work in media and you're not a member, you'll be doing yourself a favor by checking it out. In the spirit of full disclosure, I'm a member.

Exactly three weeks ago, an online marketing and social media strategist for a U.K. provider of domain names and Internet services -- GroupNBT -- posted an open ended question to the ThoseinMedia group on LinkedIn: "Cloud Computing - What's your take on it?"

Three weeks later, group members continue to post responses to Francois Hotte's seemingly innocent question -- though the question isn't that innocent since Hotte's company sells a "Virtual Private Server" which, he says, is a "similar product to Cloud computing." Ok, so he's selling a bit, but I give him credit for engaging the group's membership on a very interesting topic.

What's really interesting to me is that responses to the question are coming from all corners of the world and from a broad range of industries and professional disciplines; and from the very young and the not-so-young. If it takes a discussion of cloud computing to get Gen Y talking with Baby Boomers, then it's a good thing.

One year ago, McKinsey&Company published "Clearing the Air on Cloud Computing" and in it claimed there are 22 separate definitions of the cloud. One year later, and based on some of the opinions reflected by ThoseinMedia group members, it isn't clear if we're any closer to a unified definition. But what is clear and what is important is that the discussion around cloud computing is at a fever pitch. It's become a lightening rod for some of the most stimulating and provocative thinking in technology in recent memory and marketers and communicators everywhere are spending cycles trying to help their customers find clarity in the clutter.

I hope the thread on ThoseinMedia continues. If we keep working on it together, I bet we get to the point where we can agree on what cloud computing is.

Here are a few of my favorite comments from the thread:

"Like many others I hate the term 'cloud computing'. It's BS. The cloud is just the internet."

"I've seen EMC cut huge checks for not being able to protect and serve remote data. IBM shovels cloud computing services like they're going out of style, and they're no experts either."

"The term 'Cloud Computing" may have a marketing connotation, but its widespread adoption by companies offering web-based applications means the 'cloud,' as it were, really is different than just the plain-old Internet."

"The simplest cloud computing I use is zumodrive. It is easy to use and it allows me to access my files regardless of where I am."

"Cloud is not the internet...What Cloud is, is the business model that takes virtualization and makes it a profitable opportunity for infrastructure providers on a 'one to many' basis -- build it once and sell it to many uses."

"Think of the Cloud Server as the mainframe, and each computer connected to it as a 'smart terminal' capable of processing its own data. ...Today's Cloud Computing almost brings us full-cirlce, back to the mainframe-terminal relationship."

"With iPhones, iPads and other devices like these for on the go and on the spot information, 'Cloud computing' is only going to increase. Welcome 2010 (grin)."

And this one from the head of a NYC-based marketing and advertising firm: "With all due reverence to the interesting insights offered above, I would just like to point out that the term 'cloud' in 'cloud computing' is a decades old reference to the original cloud-like diagrammatic representation of Public Switched Telephone Networks."

Is that really true?