Do you know your citizen marketers?

April 12, 2007 • Joseph Thornley • No Tags

Blogger and author Jackie Huba was the keynote speaker at the CMA Word of Mouth Marketing Conference in Toronto this morning.

According to Huba, we live in an “amateur culture” in which consumers can, for little or no cost, produce content that shapes our brand image. These amateurs are pre-empting the traditional business model. Huba and her co-author, Ben McConnell, call these people Citizen Marketers.

This amateur culture has been empowered by ubiquitous technology like camera phones married with social media. Everyone can be a broadcaster. Anyone with a microphone and computer can produce and post their own podcasts. Anyone can upload pictures to flickr and video to Youtube.

And as people produce more and more of this content, it has gained influence.

Huba and McConnell have classified citizen marketers into the “4Fs”:

Firecrackers: People like George Masters and Brian Finkelstein. They create an explosive impact, a great deal of noise. They can have tremendous impact on brands – either positive in the case of Masters and the iPod or negative in the case of Finkelstein and Comcast.

Filters: These people are brand journalists. They have an overriding passon for a brand and they follow it incessantly. Mike Kaltschnee demonstrated the lasting impact on the Netflix brand that a group like this can have. Companies concerned about their brands should pay attention to and work with this group.

Fanatics: These people take the Filters one step further in their zeal for something. For example, Eric Karkovack had a passion for Surge. When Coca Cola eliminated the brand, he campaigned through savesurge.org for the return of the drink. He didn’t succeed. But when Coke began to test a new drink, Vault, Karkovack and others noted that its taste was very similar to Surge’s. He launched vaultkicks.org, a fan site for the new drink. Coke cooperated with him. And vaultkicks.org is the first Google search result for Surge soda. The fanatic has taken control of the brand online.

Facilitators: This is the most complex group in what they do. Paul Mullett with his mini2.com site is a good example of this type of person. BMW gave Mullett an advance peek at the second generation new mini prior to its launch in mid 2006. Mullett subseqently published photos, reviews and information about the second generation mini. And he reached a targeted audience interested in the mini with his message. On his own. At no cost to BMW. A marketers dream!

So, how are marketers starting to embrace these citizen marketers?

By working with these marketers to co-create content around a product or brand. For example, the Shakira fan video contest in cooperation between Youtube and Shaikira’s label helped reinvigorate the marketing around Shakira’s new album, which had until that point, failed to meet sales expectations.

By building community. Discovery, through its Discover Education subdivision and its United Streaming product, helps teachers to obtain valuable teaching content. Discovery created the Discovery Education Network to provide a focal point for teacher evangelists who wanted to use the product.

By Participation – The fifth P: Social media allows marketers to connect directly with customers.

The big question that all marketers should be asking themselves is how they can bring customers into their creative and brand process. If they can find ways to do this, they will inspire greater identification and loyalty for products. And that’s worth working for.

Has Inkless Wells been censored?

April 11, 2007 • Joseph Thornley • No Tags

Macleans political columnist Paul Wells never hesitates to weigh in with a trenchant comment or a jab at those who he feels need to be called out. And this makes him one of the more entertaining political bloggers. And he seems to be given free rein by the good folks at Macleans to take runs at just about anyone.

But has Paul met his match – in the IT Department at Rogers?

My feedreader picked up the following post:

Welcome, friends!

by Paul Wells

The good news is that, as part of the new bigger Rogers family, all A- Channel employees will be permitted to write blogs with atrocious software on un-navigable websites that will never, ever improve. Because that’s what working for Rogers offers us all. No, don’t thank us!

Well, interesting, I thought. Paul’s really biting the hand this time.

So, I wandered over to Inkless Wells to look at the original post … and guess what? It’s not there!

Yes, the headling, “Welcome, friends” appears. But when you click on the headline for the post, the following message appears where the text of the post would appear:

There are no entries at this time. Check back soon.

CensoredWells?
Only for this post. Click on the headline of any other post and you’ll see the full text of the post associated with that headline.

Has the IT Department at Rogers managed to do something that Prime Ministers, Deputy Ministers and politicians of every stripe have long wished they could do – muzzle Paul?

Now we know where real power resides.

Buzz Canuck is 52-faced

April 2, 2007 • Joseph Thornley • No Tags

Sean Moffitt is set to start a series of 52 interviews with Canadian word of mouth leaders on his Buzz Canuck blog. Sean says that he will call on

“the headline stealers, rainmakers, buzzstarters, gurus and mavericks from the 8 corners of Canada’s word of mouth world:

– buzz/experiential marketers
– cause marketers
– consumer generated marketing/media players
– community builders
– grassroots influencers/product seeders/evangelists
– social media/network activists
– viral/new media advertisers
– word of mouth researchers/trackers/academics”

Sounds like it should be interesting. If you haven’t already, subscribe to Buzz Canuck and meeting the Canadians.

Windows Vista – The horror! The horror!

April 1, 2007 • Joseph Thornley • No Tags

MS Vista As I write this on my notebook at 11AM Sunday morning, I’m watching my the black screen of my Dell 9200 Desktop as it attempts a clean install of Windows Vista Business.

I started to upgrade from XP on Friday at 6PM using the Upgrade Assistant disk supplied to me by Dell along with the Vista upgrade also supplied by Dell. I’d been waiting since late November to receive these disks. And although I was impatient to upgrade, I was happy to wait two months after the consumer release of Vista in the hope that Dell would have matched all the drivers to my system and I would have a smooth upgrade.

But it didn’t work out that way. So, 41 hours after starting the upgrade and three support calls to Dell, here I am, doing a clean install.

This is not a “Dell Hell” rant. The system seemed to work OK upon first being upgraded. At least until I shut it down and then tried to start up again. Actually, the Dell support centre people were great. They helped me work through all possible problems that might result from a Dell-installed driver before opting for the last resort – a clean install.

It just appears to me that Microsoft released software that simply wasn’t ready for prime time. One of the drivers on the software I had installed on XP – Adobe Acrobat 8; Adobe Phososhop Elements 5; Adobe Premiere Elements 5; Mozilla Firefox; iTunes; Canon ip6700D printer; Linksys-G Broadband router; iomega USB Hard disk drive – must have conflicted with Vista. And that’s it. Two days and I’m back to square one. A clean install and adding the peripherals and software one at a time.

So, if you’re planning to upgrade to Vista. Beware! Beware!

UPDATE: Chip Griffin emailed me to tell me that he has worked through similar problems. Only not with an Upgrade, but with OEM Vista from Dell.

A model use of Social media to increase government accountability

March 29, 2007 • Joseph Thornley • No Tags

I believe that social media can be used to enhance our sense of connection with government and to increase the accountability of our elected representatives.

Ian Ketcheson posts about Theyworkforyou.com, which, according to Ian, “blows the doors off of any other project I’ve seen for shining the light on what happens within a public institution.”

I’d love to see something like this introduced in Canada.

SNAFU of the Week – PR briefing given to journalist

March 28, 2007 • Joseph Thornley • No Tags

Our craving for titillation is satisfied today by the coverage of a memo from Waggener Edstrom intended to prepare a Microsoft exec for an interview with a Wired Magazine writer but which found its way into the hands of the reporter.

As I read the comments on sites covering this story, I see many expressions of disapprobation at the fact that a public relations firm would invest a significant amount of energy in researching a reporter, his predispositions, interests and past writings. I can’t agree with this sentiment.

An interview with a reporter and a news outlet is a conversation. Bad media relations comes from people who simply spout their message repeatedly and endlessly without regard for the interests or perspective of the journalist they are talking to.

We should communicate to be understood, not simply to be heard. And we can be better understood if we communicate in terms that make sense and are of interest to the reporter writing the story.

Every news outlet has different readers and a unique perspective. A well prepared interviewee should be familiar with a reporter’s previous writings, the topics she has covered, the issues that interest her and the perspective she has on them.

That’s the PR person’s job. We research news outlets and reporters as thoroughly as they research their interviewees.

And let’s remember that regardless of how much preparation Microsoft/Waggener Edstrom did, the Wired reporter still had his fingers on the keyboard. No respectable journalist ever writes a story off only one source. Wired’s readers would expect it to develop perspective on the story through independent research and by interviewing a number of different sources.

I can understand the fascination with this issue. It concerns big names – Wired, Microsoft, Waggener Edstrom. And there’s an element of schadenfreude in many of the comments.

What’s really interesting here is that we get to see behind the curtain. And we’re fascinated by how things really work. So, it’s only natural that it should draw an audience. And many people will not like what they see going on. (Have you ever gone into the garage while the mechanics have the parts of your car engine spread around like so much flotsam?)

But at the end, what the Microsoft memo shows is people doing their jobs. And with one big exception, they are doing them well. That exception, of course, is that the memo ended up in the wrong hands. A pretty big mistake. But not the end of the world. And not a great scandal either.

*Thank you to Thomas Hawk for having pointed this story out earlier today.

UPDATE: Posts on this topic that are worth reading: Giovanni Rodriguez, Jon Udell, Mathew Ingram, Eric Eggertson, and Steve Cody.

Michael Geist on the power of blogging and issues that should concern every netizen

March 27, 2007 • Joseph Thornley • No Tags

Dr. Michael Geist, blogger, columnist and Canada Research Chair of Internet and E-Commerce Law at the University of Ottawa was the featured speaker at this month’s Third Monday social media meetup.

Michael led off his presentation by remarking that blogging had taken on increasing importance for him in the past two years: If you’d asked me this time last year, I wouldn’t have known which I’d give up – the blog or my print column. This year, I know what I’d keep. I’d keep the blog. Because of the people who read it and the interaction I can have with them.

Blogging has enabled Michael to engage a broader community in discussions of significant issues, including Access Copyright’s Captain Copyright and erstwhile Canadian Heritage Parliamentary Secretary Sam Bulte’s relationship with the traditional copyright lobby. Time after time, he has found that people would become engaged in the issues he addressed and respond to his positions. And in doing so, they would advance not only his thinking but also have potential for broader impact.

Project Cleanfeed is a good example of the potential for blogging discussions to flow over into real world impacts. Project Cleanfeed is an initiative to block access to child pornography. The idea is that the group alerts ISPs to the existence of child pornography images so that the ISPs can block access to them. Michael wrote a post that supported this initiative. This prompted about 60 comments in a few days. Not all agreed with his position. Many offered suggestions for change. Soon after his post, Michael received a call from the Director of Project Cleanfeed. And he was able to make several suggestions that flowed directly from the suggestions that came in on his blog.

This ability to have impact makes blogging highly attractive to anyone who has something to say.

So, what are the big issues that Michael is concerned about these days.

Connectivity: We need a strategy to ensure access to broadband for more Canadians. Michael noted that even a best case scenario will leave 5% of Canadians without access to broadband. At one time Canada stood at #2 in the world in access to broadband. Unfortunately, Canada’s access ranking is “sinking like a stone” and we are now around # 13.

Net Neutrality: This is fundamentally important. And it’s not just a U.S. phenomenon. It affects Canadians. The worst case scenario will come if parties like Google and Amazon decide to pay ISPs for top level service. They can afford it. The ordinary citizen can’t . And to be on the slow lane will hold back the access of those who cannot afford to pay. That will degrade the potential that many of us see in the new media. Canadians should press the government to address net neutraility at the same time it moves forward with telecom deregulation. And it’s the online community that has the opportunity and means to raise this issue.

Sidenote: Amber Mac and some of her friends started Canadians for Net Neutrality group in Facebook. When I looked today, 499 people had joined.

Intermediaries: Michael recently received a legal notice relating to a comment on his site. This points to the legal protections and obligations of bloggers who allow others to comment on their blogs. In the U.S., parties that host content that is essentially not their own, are free of personal liability. In Canada, our situation is much different. The lack of clear protections creates an incentive for bloggers to delete contentious content. If we are concerned about people coming together to speak out on issues, then our legislators must advance legislation that will provide protection for people who speak out.

Copyright: Digital Rights Management (DRM) is a foundation issue. Think what will happen in a world in which we have all-digital TV that can be “locked down.” We are literally locked out of replicating the digital content for the purpose of ongoing conversation and comment. These discussions have implications beyond whatever you think about peer to peer file sharing. The U.S. already has legislation that tilts in favour of locking down content. Canada is being pressured to fall in line with this regime. Canadians should resist this pressure.

Fair dealing: The Canadian approach to fair dealing differs from that in the U.S. The current 1984/Hillary Clinton mash up would not be legal in Canada. This is another area of policy and law that requires review and updating.

One aspect of fair dealing is the right to share and distribute content that has been created by our government. The U.S. Congress has begun to distribute some content under Creative Commons licence. In Canada, the rights of sharing and republishing Crown Content – that is content that has been created by the government – are not as clear. Under current Canadian law, the Speaker of the House of Commons seems to be able to determine use on an individual basis. From the perspective of fair dealing, why should we have to ask for permission on a case by case basis to use content generated by our own government? The issue of Crown Copyright is an important issue that should be dealt with to give Canadians free access to the government-generated content that they themselves have paid for.

All in all, an interesting presentation by Canada’s leading expert in e-law. Thanks to Michael for spending an evening with the Third Monday social media meetup group.

Blogging for dollars

March 22, 2007 • Joseph Thornley • No Tags

Stuart MacDonald chaired a panel tackling the issue of monetizing blogs and podcasts. The panelists were Ryanne Hodson, co-author of The Secrets of Videoblogging, Michael O’Connor Clarke, Vice President of Thornley Fallis, Mark Evans, Vice President Operations of b5media, and Shel Israel, co-author of Naked Conversations.

What is the motivation for bloggers? Is it dollars?

Mark Evans argued that the first requirment for bloggers is passion. Shel Israel added that the best blogs are started by someone who has something they really want to say. However, once a blogger starts a blogger they will inevitably come to the realization that they are putting tremendous effort into and ask what they are doing it for. Michael O’Connor Clarke pointed out that there is a distinction between making money from blogging and making money because of blogging. Google doesn’t actually make money from search. They make money because they are a great search company. And the same thing applies to blogging.

Ryanne Hodson agreed that blogging can help achieve other objectives. She hasn’t made a great deal of money directly from her vlog. But she has received job offers because she is a vlogger.

Mark Evans suggested that he is finding that established bloggers now are talking more about receiving a fair return from their blogging.

Shel Israel pointed out that the people who produce content have historically been the most poorly compensated relative to aggregators, distributors and exhibitors.

Ryanne Hodson indicated that many creators are seeking aggregator sites like blip.tv that provide a return to creators and show respect for creators’ rights over their content.

Mark Evans said that b5media is trying to follow this course by defining a compensation plan for b5 bloggers that give them a share of the success along with a minimum monthly payment.

What about Lonelygirl15 or Bridezilla? These are examples of advertising thinking trying to find ways to fit social media into traditional marketing think. Stuart MacDonald suggested that the concern with them seemed to be more about driving traffic than building community.

Ryanne Hodson argued that its a fine line. You can do multiple things. Ryanne is making a living from video blogging.

Stuart suggested that the best monetization model may not be to derive revenue directly from blogging, but to instead look to monetize the activites as they support other enterprises. A means to a job (Ryanne Hodson). A means to position a corporation (Microsoft and Scoble).

Michael O’Connor Clarke suggested that Bridezilla and Lonelygirl are examples of where things are going wrong – the attempt to create something artificial in a medium that is all about genuine, open and transparent communications.

Mark Evans said that b5media is trying to do online what trditional media companies have done online. To be a one stop shop for advertisers.

How about corporate blogs? Shel Israel pointed out that companies don’t blog, people do. And one of the problems with corporate and CEO blogs very often is that the people are afraid to expose themselves in an open and honest fashion. So their blogs end up being boring and not widely read.

Citizen Journalism: Weapon of 'Mass' Destruction?

March 22, 2007 • Joseph Thornley • No Tags

The second day of ICE07 opened with a panel of Michael Tippet, Founder of NowPublic, Paul Sullivan, Editor-in-Chief of Orato.com, Mark Evans, VP Operations of b5media and Angus Frame, Editor of globeandmail.com discussing citizen journalism.
According to Angus Frame, Globeandmail.com expects to receive 100,000 comments in March from readers. Frame feels that this greatly enhances the online paper’s relationship with its readers and adds an additional dimension to its coverage of news.

Paul Sullivan talked about dealing with the “wing nuts.” Orato exercises some editorial control by pushing better stories and contributions to the front page. Other stories “that only their mother could love” languish in a back corner.
Michael Tippet indicated that NowPublic does not edit material. It counts on the community to police itself. He has found that members keep each other moderate through comments. NowPublic’s group of 30 to 40 volunteer editors attempt to demonstrate leadership in this area by flagging both good content and bad content.

Mark Evans argued that very few people are citizen journalists. Most people would be better called “citizen observers.” They write about events but they don’t practise journalism. Michael Tippet agreed with Evans, noting that NowPublic sees itself as a news gathering site, not a citizen journalism site.

Paul Sullivan says that he thinks of people as “citizen correspondents.” We’re giving people who would otherwise be voiceless access to the public discussion. “The whole idea of citizen journalism is dangerous in the same way that citizen dentistry would be dangerous.” There is a place for amateur journalism. These voices add something unique and something new.

Angus Frame said that the conversation is really one about what the pool of the masses have to contribute and how they can participate in debate. It’s a new world in how many people can participate and the instantaneous fashion in which they can do it.

And what of concerns about libel laws? Mark Evans indicated that insurance is a necessary element of b5media’s business. Michael Tippet takes the view that NowPublic is not a publisher, but is more like a telephone common carrier. They simply provide the channel for the content. Angus Frame indicated that the Globeandmail.com uses a mediated moderation process. Comments go directly to the site. However, readers can flag content they find problematic and Globeandmail.com editorial staff will then review the comment in question.

Paul Sullivan suggests that he has tried to keep people focused on writing stories more than comments. From the outset, Orato has encouraged people to communicate first person stories. That enables people to talk about things they know best. And in return, they are given final control over their content.

And what of violent and questionable content like the Saddam Hussein beheading video? Angus Frame suggested that globeandmail.com would treat this the same as its current text contributions, relying on its community and staff editors to make the call about the suitability of the content for the site. Michael Tippet argued that as questionable as some content is, it is important to get the information out. Paul Sullivan added that it is a matter of taste. The content is already available on numerous sites. So removing it from an online news site will note eliminate access to it.

Paul Sullivan added that the content on Orato comes “from a different place” than the content generated by professional news organizations. It reflects the interests and the background of the contributors in a way that professional journalism tries not to. It also comes from places that have fallen out of the catchment patterns of traditional news organizations. Remote places and places in which front page news is not being generated.

Angus Frame acknowledged that the new engagement of readers in conversation with the news outlet has led to much more feedback on the quality and content of the coverage generated by the news organization. This is humbling. But it also makes the news organization better as it receives and incorporates this feedback.

Back to the question of whether it is citizen ‘journalism.’ Michael Tippet says whether ‘it’ is journalism is not important. What is important is that people want to do ‘it’. They are writing. They are videotaping. And they are uploading new content. What is important is that it’s happening – whatever it is called. Angus Frame asked, if it’s of value and used by the audience, why does it matter what it is called? If we can achieve a discourse between citizens, then that is what is important. Webster’s dictionary can decide what to call it.