Boycotting a company is like being committed to something in a big way. It’s like getting married.

Like marriage, you are making a declaration that’s public. A formal representation of something you’re standing for. It’s no longer just a private aggravation. Deciding to actively, publicly boycott a company is a big deal. When you take that stand, and have a public presence that is noted by others, it’s even more of a challenge.

Just like marriage, everyone has an opinion on how you should do it. Whether they’re boycotting as well, or not.

Like marriage, there’s challenges. Some days you wonder why the heck you got into this. Why was it so necessary to you to take such a public stand? Couldn’t you have just quietly avoided those products? The challenges come from all over. There’s the ones that come from within, as you stand in the supermarket with a whining kid who really wants a chocolate bar and Nestle brands are what they’re reaching for.

When others who are not boycotting question you about your position, with a judgmental attitude, sometimes you wish you’d kept it to yourself.

This satirical plate from 1775 depicts Edenton North Carolina women's tea boycott. That's a cause I could never get behind.

When others who are also boycotting question you over things you say and do, it’s also something that makes you wish you’d kept it to yourself. Sometimes it seems too hard. It sometimes must feel there is very little solidarity in a boycott. You’re on your own path.

However, just like a marriage, when it goes well, it’s amazing. Someone thanks you for opening their eyes. People ask honest questions, trying to find out why you are boycotting and you feel heard. You sleep better at night knowing that you’re being true to something you hold dear. Some people respect you for your beliefs. The wise ones also respect your view even when they don’t share it.

The irony is, of course, that boycotting a company should feel more like a divorce than a marriage.

Oh please, not Nestle again…

Only for a second, okay?: Right now I feel very strongly for every woman who is trying to find her feet with their dislike of Nestle. While I don’t personally boycott the company, I, like many others, try to purchase alternatives. If you read my blog regularly, you’ll know the various battles Nestle has had over the last 30-plus years due to shoddy business practises. But boycotts have been in operation for many years – and whether it’s Proctor and Gamble, Segregation, or whatever other company or practice – boycotts gain a focus on the boycotters as well as whatever it is they’re boycotting.

So where do you stand?

There are other issues which are incredibly important to many, and are socially worthy, but which I just don’t pick up a placard for. Lots of good causes and social ills that need attention. Food, mosquito nets, pedophilia, gay rights, pollution…. it’s all too much.

So we each pick something. We must. If we don’t get irritated and active about something, then we get the world we deserve.

Boycotting KFC - made more difficult or easier when Susan Komen's cancer charity benefits when you buy a bucket?

Today I realised that we need all kinds of people. We need everyone to be aware of things that some feel important enough to be labelled as ‘activist’ about. Even if the cause is not one you personally agree with, having respect for those who do, and finding out why they hold such strong beliefs is key – it’s all about tolerance, understanding and respect.

If we all shared the same level of commitment, on the same exact causes, then many would go without attention. It’s not necessary for everyone to believe everything to the same level – but it IS necessary for everyone to try and understand, and appreciate other people’s positions and beliefs. Take out the judgment, and just get to know the other position. Only then can a conversation happen.

The harder facts: What your alignments say

Beyond Nestle, the greater lesson is that in 2010, the year of the Active Voice Blogger, the people who take a public stand on a cause have far greater social capital and value than any blogger with 50 or more brand associations on a seemingly endless telemarketing stream. The fact is, it’s easy to be popular. It’s easy to sell out. That’s not real social capital. When something really matters, nobody will take you seriously when you’re spouting about the wonders of bagels, cheese, Disney, baby wipes, orange juice… all before lunchtime. Bloggers are not the print Womens Weekly, with 20 pages of ads before you get to real content. Bloggers operate on credibility gained through authenticity. That’s a key difference to traditional media. More irony: bloggers can’t afford to be seen as similar to traditional media. That stream of freebies and short-term gains is drying up.

The alignments an organisation makes also reflects on its credibility. Perhaps BlogHer, in its 80 sponsor relationships, needs Nestle on board to run the conference it wants to hold. Perhaps it doesn’t.

I love knowing women who make a stand. Especially when it’s obvious that they’ll put their beliefs first, knowing they’re cutting off any future potential relationship with (ie income from) a company. Because when those people turn around and say something’s great, I’m more likely to believe them. I could not be more proud of the fact that my roomie for BlogHer 2010 is none other than @phdinparenting, who is the most authentic, giving and gracious boycotter who is typical of many I meet – her actions are fully considered and from the heart. I am sure we’ll be having long night conversations. And I simply can’t wait. Annie is smart, switched on, committed and continually self-examining – yet, not afraid to lead the charge and stand up for what she believes in.

That’s unusual.

Irony number three: It could be there is no greater brand ambassador than a boycotter – and these are the hardest people to convince to spout your messages.

Related posts:

1. Should some brands stay out of social media?
2. See student-focused New Venture Challenge startup finals at CU this Friday
3. Pew Report dispels the Digital Native myth

I’ve been asked why mom bloggers seem to have a fascination with laundry?

(What is the most polite way I can say this?)

Because it’s a pain in the arse. (There ya go. Actually, that was easier than I thought it would be.)

Just because we tweet/blog or otherwise about different detergents doesn’t mean we love laundry. (Exceptions are the psycho pretenders who say they love laundry because they’re getting a kick back, a la #gno. It’s not independent evaluation – and WE ALL KNOW IT. No woman is dancing in the laundry unless they’ve got a screw loose. Ha. I said screw.)

40kg of laundry at my place in Australia (5 loads). Yes, it gets sorted into smaller baskets for family members as it comes off the line.

We all have lives. Busy lives. And laundry gets in the way. It’s yet another ball we have to juggle because there’s nothing more annoying than a kid/husband complaining about the state of their clothes (no undies, ’swamp rat smell’, odd socks missing, etc) while you’re racing around trying to make everything just work at the same time as dressing so your butt looks a bit smaller and that brown stuff on the wall is totally Nutella and not anything else.

I don’t have time to wash things twice. In fact, I don’t have time to check whether the detergent worked. I just expect it to. And damn it, when a detergent seems to not do a job and in fact just sets a stain instead of getting rid of it, it pisses me off. A lot. It drives me crazy, because I find out about it when I’m putting the clothing on again, after folding it and putting it away.

I don’t have time for this crap. (See? Three references to time in a row. This is a big deal.) Finding out there’s dirt marks still on clothing when I thought it was washed, drives me nuts. So I tell people. And so do all of us. It so happens my main method of communication with all my mom/mum pals is social media. And in social media, I’m loud.

We’re not fascinated with laundry, dear advertisers. We hate it. And we just want your stuff to work. That’s all.

Your Free Focus Group

The impetus for this post?

Bloody hell, Sun. I thought I was going up a notch in buying your ‘All’ 3x concentrated laundry liquid. I think the damn stuff put MORE marks on the clothing than they had going in. They don’t even smell that good either. I hate you. I got a better wash out of the $2.50 cheapo Sun bleach powder stuff I got at Dollar Tree. I keep getting coupons for Tide (which is pricey even with a $1.50 off coupon), so maybe I’ll try that. I think I got a one-try sachet of Tide once and used it, but here’s a note – one time is not enough to really evaluate a laundry soap. I need at least three or four goes at it. So while I used it for one load, it wasn’t memorable enough for me to actually buy it, especially when the price point is so high. Do some freaking research. When we find a good laundry soap we stick with it. But it needs to freaking work. You might want to think about that. Or bite me. Your choice. I hate laundry. I just don’t have the TIME.

Related posts:

1. Airlines don't understand mums and marketing
2. Glade's sweet smell of good social media PR with Edelman

The ongoing antics of Nestle as it continually trips itself up in all forms of social media (Facebook, viral Greenpeace videos) have led me to ask if some companies should just stay out altogether.

Even Satan or Lex Luthor would have a better time on social media than Nestle. There are legions of people wanting to embrace evil.

Nestle Killer-Asesino Facebook page, one of many opened in response to Nestle's social media attempts

But Nestle doesn’t even have them on side. People are not saying that they’re willing to accept a company that has substantial long-term crappy business practises – because Nestle doesn’t admit to them. And that’s saying something.

For a company that is top ten worldwide in almost everything – size, employees, number of countries it operates in, number of brands it holds… no other consumer goods company has as much worldwide impact as Nestle…. and no company can boast as much obvious distrust from vocal consumers who have long-held issues with the company, and now have a means to share them with a new generation, and in new regions.

What doesn’t Nestle get?

The problem for Nestle is not just at the ‘I don’t like the company/product’ level. The issues are not just opinion. If it were, then they could be dismissed by many as trivial, personal or simply without foundation.

Instead, social media offers more than just opinion sharing. It gives every person with a web connection access to hard factual information, statistics and documented history including legal processes. The information is as deep as the user wants to go, and it’s all just a click away. Companies can’t hide it. That’s the nature of the web.

Getting it right

Chiat/Day’s Pepsi Refresh Project understood that there is something that resonates between a brand and the consumer, and that connection reaches far beyond the product.

Instead of using social media to focus on products, use it to focus on global issues – issues you and other multi-nationals contribute to, profit from, and can make a difference in. Involve the social web in gaining insights into how to fix these problems. Work with people, not against them. People want you to succeed when you demonstrate a commitment to things that affect their lives, their world.

If you spend part of your exhorbitant ad spend on social media that demonstrates real involvement with the community rather than talking about your products, you’ll begin to build some social capital where you have none.

Frame the conversations – it gives you some control. But ensure you’re framing them in spaces you’re willing to go, and that people will support you in.

Related posts:

1. NestleFamily, breastfeeding and social media
2. The three steps to being influential in social media
3. Why your small business needs a social media plan

Mass media (and some mom bloggers) would like to lump all mom bloggers into the same shoebox. As a result, it’s hard for marketers to navigate these waters without recognizing the differences between bloggers in the space.

Just as there are different types of magazines and newspapers, so there are different types of mom blogs. I’ve been researching the sphere of mom blogs for more than six months, and can generally classify them by three distinct types. I’ll describe them, along with providing some foothold references to traditional media, in the hopes of dispelling some questions. Comments from you are (of course) more than welcome!

1. Pitch Me – The marketing-focused mom blog

This is the blogger who says, “think of me as an extension of your marketing department.” The blog front page usually includes a “PR Friendly” button. This blog typically features lots of competitions, and wants to promote as much stuff as possible. Much like an advertorial-focused trade publication, there can be much value in the blog content, it can be very professionally done, and have a wide distribution.

Pitch Me blogs are keen to work with companies. (Pic credit: Flickr army.arch)

The blog owner may have ideas which extend to a complete campaign – they are like independent specialist creative agencies, but with a blog. Sometimes they will even want to negotiate a fee for their work with a brand and product (reflecting their role as being focused on marketing with your brand rather than an independent publisher). This is not new – there are older traditional publications that have done this type of thing – charging a company to have an article included.

The negative side of this is that while popular, the audience of these blogs recognizes that most of the content on the blogs comes from a marketing alignment (just as happens with traditional advertorial-focused magazines) and their purpose in visiting the site is to win stuff. Any kind of stuff. It is this type of blog that MSM (mistakenly) classify all mom blogs as.

For brands, it may appear easier to work with these bloggers – they are eager to develop a relationship with most PR representatives that have taken time to craft their pitch and do a little research on the blog and their style. This is not unlike pitching any kind of magazine, including the marketing-oriented advertorial ones. However, you should be ready to be asked for compensation for the inclusion of your material, whether you write and develop it or they do. These relationships are probably best suited to FMCG (fast moving consumer goods) products. The relationship is fast, and shallow – any belief that long-term resonance with the community will be achieved in this high noise space is fools gold, unless you run continuing promotions across a wide number of them (keeping it at high level is important here because your brand will be tarnished by a relationship with a Pitch Me blog that is low quality).

Prediction: These are the sites that are fast growing in number. There will remain a few high level blogs in the category, and these will develop to possibly being the best looking sites on the web – a necessity from sheer competition within the category. Sheer traffic numbers, however, do not demonstrate the readership’s commitment to the blog but rather to the range of competitions and giveaways. Because they tend to use passive voice, unless the blogger is in the top tier of these blogs, they are only of passing interest to the large readership and are not in themselves memorable brands to associate yours with. For deeper resonance on higher priced items, best find another outlet.

2. My Magazine – Multi-niche magazine-style blogs

These blogs reflect far less of a marketing approach and more of an individual, active voice. The blog will cover a variety of areas, generally reflecting special personal interests of the blogger (who may actually be a specialist or expert in one of these areas). These bloggers are open to receiving information about products/services/companies/brands across the realm of interests they cover, but nothing beyond that. In fact you’ll annoy them if you try – sort of like pitching a wedding venue to divorce magazine. Not only is it a waste of everyone’s time, it’s actually unprofessional and demonstrates a lack of understanding and/or basic research. And these bloggers are likely to call you out on exactly that.

The premise of providing compensation of some form to these bloggers depends upon the type of product, campaign and information you have. If you are looking for particular amount or style of coverage to be guaranteed, then it’s advertising and you need to pay whether you provide all the content, or if the blogger develops it themselves. Depending upon the blog (and its hosting location in the world), disclosures of these arrangements will be necessary. If you are willing to offer a product/information and hope that you’ve got enough nouse (and the blogger is interested enough) to hope to get something written, then you don’t pay. Of course, you’re familiar with this – it’s the same as a traditional general interest magazine and the writing ethics are reflective of a traditional journalist (even if the writing style itself is different). They have a more active voice and agency on their blogs, and do not focus primarily on competitions or marketing. They reflect more of the traditional journalistic standards in their writing, and will develop distinct areas of advertising and editorial to ensure adequate compensation and understanding is achieved for all parties, including their readers. They will sometimes actually feature boycotts and dissention rather than promotion (something you will not find in a Pitch Me blog). You will have a better idea of the readership of this type of blog, allowing better segmentation for more specialized products, or more specialized market segments – great for brand extensions or highly targeted mass consumer campaigns in the blogger’s interest category.

Prediction: These bloggers will align themselves with a few brands and have some short-term campaigns that will be highly effective for all concerned. Some of these bloggers will become more and more celebrated within their segments, through MSM outlets. While there are fewer of them, their range is wide and a somewhat varied audience of people find them to be ’sticky’ sites that they will regularly return to.

3. Niche specialized blogs

These bloggers are becoming the new version of traditional specialized (or event trade) magazines. Focusing on a single general area such as health or politics, these bloggers have detailed knowledge and understanding in their field, and have enough passion and/or specialised expertise to blog authoratively about it. While they are moms/mums, they do not focus on product reviews, competitions and giveaways – however they might run them occasionally if it complements their niche. These blogs have far lower readership numbers overall, but the readers are influencers in the category, and are very loyal to the blogs in the space. These blogs are very sticky to those who are influential in the subject matter. The readership also has deep respect for the blogger’s expertise and looks to them for specific recommendations.

Niche mom blogs have one particular area of expertise. Pic credit: Flickr Mike Licht, NotionsCapital.com

These bloggers are also the ones least likely to enter into a variety of advertorial-style campaign deals. They will want to work with specific brands only, and develop a ‘brand ambassador’ relationship that is more akin to a spokesperson role. Through that relationship, some form of compensation would be negotiated, that would not necessarily guarantee coverage on the blog. These blogs are better suited to high-end, or specialized products with a defined niche target audience.

Prediction: This area will be growing in breadth and depth over the next year as more women with specialised interests and expertise decide to blog, and as some early entries to the competition-focused FMCG field move on and develop a loyal base focused on competitions in one category.

Summing up

Over time, the tiers of influence to be found in each of these areas will prove themselves. In much the same way as you already use your media monitoring forces to discover influencers in traditional media, you should utilize the same strategies for blogs and bloggers. Just like journalists, they have their brand passions – and their brand dislikes. More and more often, they have their story needs and deadlines that will see you gain the most favourable treatment when you can help them at the most appropriate time (just as you do with journalists). Some already have editorial calendars – you should ask for them, and use them. The only difference is that the internet works on dog years – the field changes seven times a year, not once. It’s a challenge to keep up, but everyone should at least try.

Finally, it would be a mistake to trash any of these three types of mom blogs. Each of them have a place – and there are great and not-so-great iterations of all three types. Depending on the brand, the best relationships will be had by aligning with the best blog (and blogger) for the objective – and these decisions need to be made with consideration of more than traffic numbers, google rankings or other shallow metrics in mind.

Related posts:

1. 2010, the year of the Active Voice Blog
2. Resonance, Not Reach
3. Glade's sweet smell of good social media PR with Edelman

The hot thing at SXSW is location-based anything. (I’m so cool, I don’t even need to be there to know this.) But I’ll bet every single geek pushing a location-based app at SXSW is missing the point. You should sign up for location-based social media. So cool people can avoid you.

Here’s the deal – there are some people I’d rather not see. (Oh come on, don’t get all judgy. Like you’re happy to see every single person, every time you see them? Yeah, right). Some people always ask you for money. Maybe they repeat the word “dude” too often (that’s really annoying). Or they’re smelly. Or don’t wear shoes (I have this thing with shoes. Blame flylady.). Perhaps there was a drunken evening in a toilet stall you’d rather not be reminded of (don’t look at me, but if you’re blushing right now, well there you go).

These are people who you cross the street to avoid.

If an axe murderer checks in at Starbucks, best you go elsewhere for your mocha. (Pic credit: Flickr Creative Commons Jin.Thai).

Social media today gives everyone the ability to only ever run into people you like, and avoid all the weirdos. Yes, even if you’re at (Woodstock for geeks*) SXSW.

Location-based social media is the gift that rewards everyone. You can see where the people who will negatively effect your groove are at all times, and avoid them. And people who actually like those dodgy losers can find them.

It’s a win-win.

Real-world example right here

Over a year ago, I requested all mountain lions around the Boulder area get on Brightkite. It was a reasonable request. I just wanted to know where they were so they wouldn’t eat my kids, Brightkite is a local startup (ie, the mountain lions need to support local industry), and it would allow us all to avoid an awkward confrontation.

The old-school way of keeping track of mountain lions. Social media would be far more effective. (Pic credit: Flickr Creative Commons pst)

Well, none of the mountain lions took me up on it. Maybe they don’t follow me on Twitter. Anyway, I found it very disappointing. It was all about mutual respect. Live and let live. You lions do your thing and we’ll do ours, and if you let us know by checking in at North Boulder, maybe even with a cute pic of you with your cubs, then we’ll be aware you’re about to eat our terriers. Or kids.

But no, they didn’t do it. And so we had a spring and summer where little dogs were chewed, and the owners had no idea. That’s just disrespectful when Brightkite was right there, all free and stuff.

So the big takeaway is to get into location-based social media. It means I can avoid seeing you. Then everyone’s happy.

*This (apt) description of SXSW was originally coined by @nsquared but I pushed him for it. He’s a nice guy. Don’t go hatin’.

Related posts:

1. The three steps to being influential in social media
2. NestleFamily, breastfeeding and social media
3. Glade's sweet smell of good social media PR with Edelman

Dear SXSW attendees:

I know you’re all excited. You’re going to spend a whole heap of time being all geeky and fun, and drinking and stuff. Talking about startups, design, innovation, music… ooh I’ll bet you’re all tingly.

My husband is one of you. He’s kid-at-Christmas excited. He loves Texas and had a ball there last year. As a startup geek guy, he can’t wait for a whole week of indulgence.

Good on him. I hope he has a great time.

But now to the point of this post – apart from his blue eyes and salt-and-pepper hair, my husband has an Australian accent.

I have seen the way females respond to a male with this shrimp-on-the-barby quality. It’s a little over the top. During SXSW women go a little nuts for startup guys – add the accent, and it’s all downhill for the startup widow wife.

Unlike some other (better known) startup guys who think it’s okay to flirt and carry on while away from home, as long as they “don’t go home with anyone at the end of the night,” (I’m not naming names, but you freaking well know who you are – and people do talk about you, by the way), it’s not going to cut it with me.

Stop whining, woman. What’s the point?

I’m not going to SXSW (someone has to stay here and look after the kids and write a thesis), so… I’m running a Where’s Waldo-style competition on my husband for attendees of SXSW. Let’s call it my little contribution to citizen journalism.

Ooh, a competition from a mom blogger? (Who’d have thought, right?) But how do I WIN?

This is Jed. Print it out. Keep it handy. (Note the wedding ring.) Some call it stalking, I call it love.

All you have to do is find my husband, Jed (gorgeous guy – see the pic – with accent). Take pictures of him, and post them on whatever social network you use (Brightkite, Twitpic, Flickr, whatever). Tag them ‘Jed’. You can then tweet me the link (@Mediamum), or post them in the comments for this post. Each entry will get a number, and I’ll draw a winner using the Random Generator tool. The winner will get a $25 gift card from the place of their choice. The more pics you take, the more opportunities you have to win.

I love my husband. If I squint a bit, he looks like Mark Harmon, and that’s something too good to lose.  I’m sure you understand.

Thanks, and I hope you rock the world at SXSW. (Don’t make me come down there.)

*Jed has given his blessing for this competition to happen. He thinks it’s funny. That will be the case unless everyone there starts taking his picture. Then I’ll be the one laughing.

**Do not chew me out for being a loser wife. I love mah man and no biaitch is gettin’ in mah way (hair flick). That said, he has my blessing to drink and talk and stuff. Just as long as his hands are in plain view at all times.

Related posts:

1. How to avoid people using location-based social media
2. More than deputies: A definition of journalism for the 21st Century
3. Where's the vision in your startup?

An American woman named Angie Jackson has decided it was a good idea to share her experience of aborting her pregnancy with the world, via YouTube and Twitter.

A mother of a four-year-old who goes to the trouble of outlining the reasons why she decided on an abortion with RU486, Angie says her social media posts are her attempt to “demistify” the process, and let everyone know that for her, the whole abortion thing “isn’t such a big deal.”

Here’s the video of her saying she is “having an abortion  (insert dramatic pause) right now.” (Don’t worry, there are no gunky parts, which is not what the Sydney Morning Herald would have you believe in its reporting of the story, with the warning the paper placed at the beginning of the video.)

She also twittered the entire process. You can see the community response by searching the hashtag #livetweetingabortion. And there is even a twibbon. Yes, just when you thought all the really terrible twibbon ideas were had, this one leaves nothing to the imagination.

This is a story with so many news hooks in it, a news editor would begin planning a long lunch. Front page … done. Abortion, methods of abortion, social media, social media plus abortion. Oh, and atheism. Check the mainstream media stories on this, and you’ll see it all – surface level crapola about all the obvious news angles, lots of sensationalist eye rolling and no depth.

Look at the blogosphere reactions and you see some insightful commentary. Feministe, for example, reminds us how many women go to get abortions all the time, and how veiled our usual discussions of the subject are.

Deep breath.

Now, I personally switch between being pro-life and pro-choice (knowing that my choice will always be pro-life, no matter what, for me, but recognizing others may not feel that way. I actually have trouble with this whole stance – if I feel so strongly about it, then why am I not ready to instill my thoughts on others? I do it with breastfeeding, don’t I? And for some this means I can’t be a feminist. Feminists are not Sarah Palin. Feminists are not pro-life. People look at me and don’t think feminist. Oh really raised eyebrow? But I digress.) This is not something I throw around a lot, because as Feministe correctly states, it’s a heated debate that I don’t choose to enter. However, I have my views and I respect other people their rights to theirs. I am kind of okay with that, but I don’t know if I always will be. But for now, it’ll do. Until you judge me and be really nasty and call me names, and say horrible things about the size of my arse. Then you’ll push me over the edge and I won’t share my Aussie accent with you any more. And we all know who loses in that equation.

While I disagree with Angie’s views on the subject, I think her decision to speak about it in a very open conversation is a great one. (It’s okay. I’ll wait while you pick yourself up off the floor from shock.) I believe everyone should endeavour to hear every side of a conversation, especially views that don’t mesh with their own. Especially when you have a passionate belief on one side.

In fact, to take it even further – I wanted to hear what she had to say, even though I knew her decision would not have been mine. And I think other people should be brave enough to do that without a knee-jerk reaction (‘jerk’ being the operative word).

So instead of looking at the mainstream media stories reporting the incredulity of using social media to talk about such a politically incorrect subject, I think we can all learn more from reading and seeing personal stories about the subject, from all sides. Only then can we be truly educated and tolerant – if not understanding – of each other. Each to their own.

Related posts:

1. Why breastfeeding is like abortion for feminism
2. MSM journalism and Twitter
3. The future of print journalism is social

Company A says, “Let’s create an event, sponsor some bloggers, and they’ll create a hashtag around it and we’ll give out some prizes. It will be great, Twitter will be buzzing with our company’s name.”

Or a group of bloggers might come up with:

“Every week we’ll be ‘meeting’ on twitter, using this hashtag.”

Sound like good ideas? Sure. And for many it’s been working. But what works right now, or yesterday, won’t always work. And that’s something you need to be aware of, whether you are a direct representative of a brand – or one of the moms who decides to use a hashtag, even as part of a simple discussion.

Just because you begin a hashtag, doesn’t mean you control the hashtag and what happens within the conversation it starts. It’s out there for everyone to engage in. The etiquette is still evolving. What is seen by some as polite is to allow people to push products or messages using hashtags. What is seen as others as polite, is to not fill their twitter streams with obviously sponsored messages with little real value. We’re all still working out the middle ground.

No company or individual is too big in social media... to fail. Pic credit: Flickr C.C. goldberg.

If your followers allow you to bleat positive company messages without interfering, it’s because they’re respecting your space and you’re not stepping on their toes enough to aggravate them. If, however, you flood their streams with inane garbage that really doesn’t invite balanced conversation, then you will most likely get what you deserve.

Everything you’re connected to in social media, both messages and people, says something about who you are.

The use of hashtags have some calling back to traditional methods of advertising messages. Social media is not controlled media. This is not your space. It doesn’t matter if you’re a company or an individual, you can’t control the use of a hashtag. You can pretend to control the conversation by making a hashtag a metaphor for a flag of membership to a particular perspective or even a particular conversation point – but if the general population decides to discuss something else, or bring other things into the equation under that hashtag, then that’s what social media is all about.

Ironically, the things you can control are the words you use, the images you use, and the connections you make. These three-dimensional aspects of your brand are far more telling about you than simple two-dimensional things like a single targeted message in a broadcast campaign. People expect you to have a variety of connections. I’m proud of mine – from .. ahem adult entertainers, through to famous musicians and academics. I’m known for my mulitplicity (do not call me Sybil). But inauthenticity is not.

If you want a fully controlled message, use traditional advertising in a mass media you’re familiar with – where you have the opportunity to blast one-way, two-dimensional controlled messages to the public. It gives you all the control, and if done really well, can create a semblance of a personality for your brand.

If you are ready to really engage with your target audience, then social media provides you with an opportunity to demonstrate a complete, three-dimensional personality for your brand that consumers can really connect and find resonance with. When done well, it will result in brand loyalty and brand ambassadors that you don’t have to buy off.

On Twitter the use of a hashtag organizes conversation around particular things. But it doesn’t organize the thoughts of those in the conversation, unless they’re willing to have it that way.

Don’t forget you’re dealing with conversations in an even playing field now. The old rules do not apply.

Related posts:

1. The three steps to being influential in social media
2. I'll pay for content when there's Twitter with penguins
3. Why my research is in Twitter

Word of Mouth has always been a double-edged sword for small business. I remember the saying  a local fish and chip shop had on their wall. “If you like our food, tell your friends. If you don’t like it, tell us!”

Once upon a time, the worst that could happen would be a letter to the editor of the local paper. With a 24 hour news cycle, the bad news would pass and your business could weather the storm.

In today’s social media world, it’s different.

Up to now, it’s been easy for small businesses to say social media was something they’d like to dabble in, but it wasn’t necessary to really put too much time into. It was a fun thing, or a sideline to their other communication tools.

Today businesses of all sizes need to be examining their online presence. Think of your customers. How many of them do you think have Facebook accounts? All it takes is one status update that says negative things about your business, and suddenly you’re suffering. How about this status update, posted by someone with 30 friends who lives in a rural area with a tiny population:

“Ugh. Feeling very sick after greasy fish and chips from Big Joe’s.”

Picture credit: Flickr Creative Commons http://bit.ly/dg3sD2 http://bit.ly/9NHDJC

How many of that person’s 30 friends do you think live in that same rural area? The same rural area that Big Joe’s counts on customers for? And how much weight do you think those 30 friends put on the opinion of the person who posted the status update?

A lot.

Word of Mouth (or WOM) carries the most powerful advertising impact of all the different forms of promotion you could use. And it spreads like wildfire.

“Sorry to hear about Big Joe’s big grease up.” “Get well soon, buddy.” “Won’t be going there again.”

Imagine now, that you are the proprietor of Big Joe’s, and you are one of the friends of this status poster. Not only would you know the negative post existed, but you’d also have an opportunity to find out more about why they were feeling ill, and possibly begin a conversation that made people think you were interested in doing good business, instead of thinking you’re a shop dealing in food poisoning.

Today, everyone is on social media. And everyone has influence. Time to claim yours.

Related posts:

1. Should some brands stay out of social media?
2. How to avoid people using location-based social media
3. Birthdays, connectedness and social media

While many people align technology adoption and use with age, the facts show it’s not all that easy to stereotype the creators of content in the online media.

Today’s Pew Report on Teens and Social Media amplifies a very real issue in the US. Our teens and young adults are engaging in “new” media, but on a very limited level.

The majority of them are not creating new content.

In fact, the number of them who blog themselves (just 14%) or even who comment on blogs, is dropping.

Many of us celebrate the new democracy offered by the Web. However, when so few of our young people are engaging beyond watching viral YouTube videos or speaking within a small realm of personal IRL friends (or believing that’s who they’re talking to) on the small stage of their individual Facebook accounts, we have a problem. Democracy isn’t served unless people use their voices.

Picture Credit: Creative Commons cartoon by @gapingvoid.

Access is one thing. Content creation intended for a public audience is entirely another.

I’m around a lot of students every day. When they’re asked who has a blog, from a room of 150-200 students, only a handful of hands go up. In a Journalism class.

What are they waiting for?

We need courses that teach young people (and everyone else) that they don’t need a university degree to have a voice. And that every voice deserves to be heard. We need to show young people how to use the simplest of tools – the mobile phones and cameras they all hold – as citizen journalists, not just for sexting (they figured that one out all on their own). We need to show them how easy it is to set up a blog, and just as importantly, how to get people to read it.

Our young people need to be encouraged to be brave, honest, and opinionated – in a public forum. We need to respect their right to speak, and engage with them when they are used.

Until then, democracy is not being served.

Related posts:

1. A completely new form and hope for democracy
2. More than deputies: A definition of journalism for the 21st Century
3. The chick flick of startup founders

Usually, I don’t consciously pay for content. I say ‘consciously’ because if I click on a link and there’s a paywall, I won’t do it. I also don’t subscribe to any newspapers or magazines (online or in ‘dead tree’ format). Basically, the quality of the content I’m seeing doesn’t make me want to pay for more of it.

Mr Murdoch does have the right idea. Getting people to pay for content is definitely a way forward. But News Corp. is missing the biggest opportunity they have. It’s a global organization, and while about 1% of their content producers are the best in the world, they are still.. the best. Why doesn’t News identify that globally based 1%, and put it in a paid-for format? At a really, really high price?

If Mr Murdoch thinks that I, or anyone else, will pay for the other 99% of his writers who are complete crap, then he’s mistaken. I’d rather read the far more professional blogs, with the diversity of opinions and transparency News cannot offer.

After freelancing, creating content for a few different publishers it also appears that organizations don’t like to pay their contributors. Waiting six months for a payment on any work done is not a viable business model. I don’t know why some people think it’s all hunky dory. And it’s been this way for many years.

So I don’t pay for content, and I’m wary of accepting any freelance job at all these days. Because I simply don’t like waiting to be paid when my time is better spent on more pressing things.

But my kids? That’s another thing entirely. I currently pay for three social network memberships. And while I’m a member of about 15 social networks, none of these payments are for me. They’re for my kids. My kids totally expect to pay to get access to information, community and technology. They’re growing up with a pay-for-it frame of mind. At the moment it’s a mum-pay-for-it model, and I’m fine with that because the quality of content accessed by my kids on networks like Club Penguin is really worth $5.95 a month. It’s a vibrant community, with great quality stuff. If organizations continue to treat them this way, by the time they’re my age they’ll be paying for content, and believing they should.

But a key part will be getting rid of the 99% of crap for adults and creating something worth subscribing to. We need a Club Penguin for grown ups.

Sidebar: For the “something shiny” HCI people: Twitter with penguins. Now we’re talking.

Related posts:

1. More than deputies: A definition of journalism for the 21st Century
2. Disrupting the barriers of media in the 21st Century
3. The three steps to being influential in social media

This week I was happily invited to join some other Colorado-based bloggers for a few adult snacks, refreshments and the opportunity to build a basket of goodies to take home. It was a great evening, put on by Glade’s parent company, S. C. Johnson’s wonderful PR team from Edelman in Chicago, to promote their Sense & Spray product.

This event demonstrated Edelman actively identifies good people for brands to work with, and can put together an event that suits all parties. Edelman has fantastic staff, for a start. The company also teamed with social media expert, Ann-Marie Nichols, to ensure they are hitting the right targets.

If you ask me, Ann-Marie and Edelman are smart operators. After meeting/catching up with them on the evening, my belief is that the bloggers were hand-picked to represent ethical, good quality content providers who actively engage with their readers. Women who are authentic. At a time when companies are seeking out mommybloggers more than ever, there are now bloggers who do nothing more than run around the USA for the opening of every envelope. Smart companies, like Glade and Edelman, see beyond what I’ll call “the usual suspects.” (Yes, I’m biased. I was invited.)

Edelman’s staff were well equipped with plenty of information for us to take home in the best format – a USB drive. The activity of putting together our basket of goodies allowed us to chat about the product informally, and we also had fun coming up with possible names for a new Glade scent. (Yes, someone said Bacon. I said Aussie Bush. Ambiguity FTW.) I was so lucky to have Jen Goode so kindly say yes to drawing by freehand (magic marker) one of her lovely penguins on my mug.

It has pride of place on my desk and reminds me how special women entrepreneurs like her are. I have always loved Jen’s designs and you can check the penguin ones out on her blog, and buy a whole range of stuff featuring them. She also does other designs too. She’s an amazingly talented woman in so many areas. I feel so lucky to have actually met her too now.

The event was a great success for Glade. The bloggers discussed myriad issues beyond and including the product, and we all came away feeling positive – and that associated value rubs off. Edelman gets it.

But the goal kick for me was the extra mile Edelman went for me. Here’s the thing:

We were all offered a basket to give away on our blog. Awesome. However, I asked if it would be okay for me to give it away to anyone, anywhere – given some of my readership is in Australia. Glade is a global brand, but I completely said I understand if that’s not okay. I just needed to be clear on my blog. On the spot, the Edelman ladies said “Absolutely, we will make it work. We will send the basket to anyone who wins.” So I’m stoked. I love that foresight and appreciation of my needs.

And I’m excited to give away this lovely basket of goodies to you, even if you’re an AUSSIE!

What you'll win! (The mug will be a fresh one that you can draw on. Great if you're like Jen Goode!)

The basket contains a snuggly IKEA blanket/picnic rug, Swiss Miss mix with mini marshmallows, eye cover, ceramic mug and some permanent markers to decorate it with, and the wonderful new Glade Sense & Spray plus a refill that we have had now in our bathroom for a few days. It smells great and with the refills costing under $4 each (USD), and them lasting about a month each, even graduate students and startups can afford it (ahem).

HOW TO WIN!

To enter is easy – Leave a comment below with your recommendation for a new scent for Glade, focused on Australia. It can be funny or serious. The winner will be picked by Harry and Charlie on Wednesday and I’ll contact you via Twitter/email (make sure you leave contact details). I’ll also announce the winner on the blog. Go for it!

Related posts:

1. NestleFamily, breastfeeding and social media
2. The three steps to being influential in social media
3. Should some brands stay out of social media?

I have a great amount of data from the recent NestleFamily twitterstorm. Luckily, I was able to see the storm coming. As a few of the attendees began tweeting about meeting up a few days prior to the start of #NestleFamily, I could see that there was going to be some fallout. My interest had been piqued a few months earlier with the Nestle “What’s for Dinner” junket that received some backlash (which I was a part of, albeit briefly).

Even though I was prepared for it, I doubt anyone saw the enormity and longevity of the community’s outrage. The tail of it is still going. This was a key happening on Twitter, and it had far more impact than the Motrin Moms speedbump. I would argue that Twitter’s community has morphed again as a result. Focus on the types of junkets mommy/daddybloggers who call themselves “PR friendly” accept, and what it says about who they are doesn’t happen in a vacuum. There were real responses from the community. Many negative. This great post by cynematic discusses this responsibility further.

My research

I manually copied thousands of tweets using the #NestleFamily hashtag. I also created an online survey that people were invited to complete during the twitterstorm. I’m very excited to have that data. The 66 completed responses are authentic, grabbed at the time it was all happening, and the qualitative survey responses are about as true to real emotion as you can get – people were telling me what they were doing at the same time as doing it. That’s not easy to get when questioning people about their about online activity. When I write it up it will be a chapter in my thesis, and probably a paper/conference presentation as well. I’m going to write up a short version of the results and post it here on my blog soon.

The most positive outcome has been the amazing work done by Annie, aka @PhDinParenting, who took the opportunity to ask some very pointed questions of Nestle. Nestle has been responding to her questions, so good on them. And Annie has posted their responses in the best, most transparent means possible. She then adds her own analysis and research, with links that are exhaustive, informed and inspiring. It is her work that represents the future of real journalism. It’s why I say that the future of journalism is social.

My question to Nestle

I kept largely out of the limelight on this twitterstorm so as not to taint the data I was collecting. I did, however, want to find out Nestle’s views on the dismal rate of breastfeeding in the USA. Nestle promotes its substitute milk in the USA, and with the USA’s very low rate of exclusive infant breastfeeding at 6 months of age, I wanted to find out what they thought about it all. I submitted the question as follows:

As a premier substitute baby milk manufacturer and marketer in the USA, I’d like to know what your opinion is about the fact that the rate of exclusive breastfeeding in the USA lies at just 12%, when the WHO says it recommends 100% exclusivity for the first six months.

Your Nestle site states that WHO is the “gold standard” so I’m assuming you would agree this statistic is troubling.

Why do you believe this statistic exists? Do you think it can change? And if so, how?

It took a few weeks (I think Nestle lost my question, and then located it when I enquired again about their response), but their response is here:

Thank you for contacting us. We apologize for the delay in our response and we appreciate your patience.

At Nestlé Nutrition we support the positions of the American Academy of Pediatrics and WHO that exclusive breastfeeding for the first 6 months of age is best. The most recent statistics from the 2008 CDC Breastfeeding Report Card (2006 data) show that the national average from exclusive breastfeeding is around 13.6%, which is below the Health (sic) People 2010 goal of 17%.

According to the CDC Infant Feeding Practices Study (IFPS) II (http://www.cdc.gov/ifps/ , there are many reasons why mothers might stop breastfeeding, ranging from difficulty with sucking and latching to worries about producing enough milk. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/122/Supplement_2/S69#T2

We believe that optimal infant health is truly the goal and we advocate for more infant feeding support and education for mothers, regardless of whether they breastfeed, formula feed or both.

We are encouraged by the improvements reported in breastfeeding initiation and duration and will continue our efforts to educate and encourage mothers to give their babies a healthy start. That includes providing education and resources for her, and if she cannot or chooses not to breastfeed, or chooses to supplement her breastmilk, we provide high quality, iron-fortified infant formula-the only safe and healthy alternative to breastmilk.

Robyn Wimberly RD,LD.
Nestle Nutrition Contact Center

So there you go. I have my own thoughts on this response. The final paragraph, to me, is just disgraceful – it’s written very poorly. It seems to be saying that Nestle’s substitute formula is the only “safe and healthy alternative to breastmilk.” I know that those words “safe and healthy” are definitely not something I agree with. But I’m a breastfeeding advocate, ex-journalist and PR queen, and am used to spin. I have done the research. I know what I know and have made up my own mind. The US Government has initiated the Healthy People plan, but where breastfeeding rates are concerned it is failing – and it doesn’t reflect the WHO “gold standard” referred to on Nestle’s own site. There are holes all over this response. The last paragraph made me wince. I think Annie does a brilliant job of dissecting these responses and calling out the holes. I’m not going to do that here. I recommend you read all of Annie’s work, and if interested in more, you can read my short research blog piece on Breastfeeding in America, see the Ignite presentation, or email me for the full papers to see how the numbers stack up. And then make up your own mind.

So what does all this mean?

Now, I know that this storm has ended up being thrown in the “too hard” basket by many people on both sides of the fence, as well as those who sit on top of that same fence. Statistics are being used pragmatically. Manipulation of data is rife. There’s aggravation, and it becomes personal for many who feel attacked by even discussing it. For many, it sucked the ‘fun’ out of Twitter.

But the fact is, this milestone proved the resilience of the microblogging community. It’s opened a conversation that will bind the community even more solidly. It’s given us a view of people that we didn’t know before. People to both connect with, disconnect from, and understand better, even if they disagree with us. If Twitter were really nothing more than messages about eating candy and frozen dinners, then this storm wouldn’t exist. People have taken it upon themselves to get better educated about something they might not have known about before. They were provided links and questions. They had the opportunity to follow up, and go deeper into the issues than they have ever been led by mainstream media, and Nestle ended up without the buffer of media to spin their messages to.

Key Learnings

For the community: Mainstream media is no longer an excuse for not knowing about stuff. The depth of information you have is up to you and your attention span. That’s a hard responsibility to own. In Nestle’s case, I congratulate anyone (including some attendees) who tried to find out more information or followed it up, no matter where you ultimately sit on the ‘issues’. I challenge those who simply sought an easy path and blindly continued tweeting Nestle-friendly inane statements on Twitter, without addressing any of the twitterstorm. It won’t, in the longer term, help your credibility in the community. The really influential people in this equation can be easily identified. And that’s awesome.

For companies: You don’t get to own your messages any more. Social media represents a revolution, not an evolution. It’s another tool in your promotional strategy, but you have to be ready for the real conversation. The one where your comments get called on. The one you don’t direct. And you will never have the last word unless the community deems it to be okay.

Related posts:

1. The three steps to being influential in social media
2. Breastfeeding in America
3. For mommybloggers at Nestle, the medium was the message

To be influential in social media takes effort. It doesn’t just happen. You can’t buy it. It’s not advertising.

So if that’s what it’s not, how can organizations and people get to be really influential? Here are the steps to influence. When you and your brand get it right, that’s when you get to influence others.

Find Relevance

Your first mission is to produce content that is relevant to the people you’re seeking to influence. That sounds pretty obvious, but so many people and companies don’t really have a great snapshot of their target market. They’ve spent so long with basic demographics that are ballpark indications of who their market is that they’ve lost touch with the real personalities of these people. In social media we’re no longer talking about eyeballs, or about mass market publications that look after great big segments of a market. Instead, you’re looking at individuals. Yes, those individuals tend to move in packs – they’re communities of similar people. And those communities have some people with bigger voices. But that can change in an instant, and one bigger voice doesn’t mean they influence everyone in that community. They are individuals first and they are all powerful. Some will love your brand, others won’t care much, and others might detest your brand. Spend some time working out who they are, what their interests are, and what they really think before even trying to produce content for them. Be relevant.

Find Resonance

Readers of my blog know I love to talk about resonance. You can create all the good quality content in the world but if it’s not hitting the mark and connecting with people in a solid way, you’re not getting social media right. It’s a massive error to think that simply creating good content leads directly to influence. You need more than that. You need to produce content that makes people talk about you. Retweet you. Post the article to their Facebook account or write about it on their blog. When they do that, they’re demonstrating their personal involvement with your content, and that’s what you want. Not just for the eyeballs to hit your page, but for the message to be meaningful to them. To the extent that they’ll tie their name to it and go talk about it elsewhere.

You need to create resonance.

One caveat here, particularly for brands and companies running them, is to be aware that to achieve resonance you need to really understand your audience, and remember everything you say reflects on your brand. I wasn’t kidding before with step one. These people have opinions, are smart, engaged and want to work with others in this space – but don’t think you can control the conversation or give half-assed engagement or try to pretend you’re not the person representing the brand, even if that’s not your intention. A great example is the furore surrounding Nestle right now on Twitter. The good news is that while you’ll get called out for crappy behavior of any kind, the social media community wants you to get better. They will celebrate with you when you do, and they’ll be your loudest proponent. If you really listen, and really work with the community instead of trying to manipulate it you’ll get there and find resonance (I’m kinda hoping Nestle eventually realises that.)

Nirvana – Influence

When you’ve achieved the first two steps, that’s when you can seek to be influential. And you’ll see results. You can invite people to play with your new stuff and be confident that because you have resonance with them, the brand will be welcomed enough for people to want to try it out.You can be a thought leader. You can gain a few minutes of peoples’ time to talk about stuff, and they’ll really listen to you.

It doesn’t matter if you have a personal brand or the biggest brand on the planet. Everyone wants to be influential. Using social media is a great way to discover influence through resonance with a target audience you may have forgotten. Rediscover people. Don’t treat social media like other forms of promotion. It still sits in your toolkit, along with other areas like advertising and sales promotion, but it works differently. Get it right and you’ll find the opportunities you are looking for, with the people who matter most.

Related posts:

1. Don't think influence, think resonance
2. NestleFamily, breastfeeding and social media
3. Disrupting the barriers of media in the 21st Century

PT Barnum is recognised as being one of the heavyweight players in the history of advertising. He was also the father of personal branding. While you may not agree with his tactics, he has inspired masses of advertising practice and his stamp remains.

Any time you see something promoted as “jumbo” size, that word comes from Barnum. The term “white elephant” is also his. The story goes that Barnum had found success with a circus that included elephants. A competitor, trying to outdo him, got hold of a rare white elephant for his circus. Barnum’s response was to whitewash one of his own elephants and advertise the life out of it, not only eliminating the “unusual attraction” the competitor had, but also reducing the reasale value on the rare elephant itself.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2dTZMP_nSY]

Barnum’s the father of hype. He’s the guy that began the whole idea of the limited edition. The panic of missing out. He said “Once in a lifetime opportunity.” “Be the first to see…” and “Last time ever!” Think of all those music artists doing their ‘final’ tours. They leverage that messaging. It creates a sense of urgency.

Some of the more ugly aspects of Barnum’s advertising involved the sideshows and unusual freak shows he liked to use with his circus. He’d attract people to see the bearded ladies, the midget called Tom Thumb, and the dog-faced boy, to name a few. He sought to profit from the abnormalities of others. He saw that people would pay to see it, and he made the most of that opportunity.

Barnum is world-reknown, even today. He created The Greatest Show on Earth! And that name has stuck through all these years. Even in Australia we know of the Barnum and Bailey Circus. Of course, these days it looks a little different to the Barnum circus of old. There are still elephants, but they’re not painted white and in fact the circus has its own Center for Elephant Conservation.

Happily, I was invited with my kids to experience the Barnum and Bailey, Ringling Bros. Circus here in Denver courtesy of Feld Family Entertainment. I really wanted to see what this world-famous circus was like. Having animals in a circus today is still controversial, so I chatted with some friends beforehand and was really very pleased when I believe about 80% of the circus acts were not animal related at all.

I remember being brought up with Disney stories and Little Golden Books where the elephant in the circus is unhappy. These elephants were lovely to see. And they smelled of animal wash. They smelled a lot. So did the tigers for that matter. I’d happily help wash an elephant, but you can sort someone else to do the tigers thanks.

The boys and I had a really great evening at the Circus. There was one reference during the show to the Big Top, but we were in the Denver Coliseum, so part of the magic of that is lost. I did expect sawdust and perhaps to be a little closer, but the acts were spread all around the “ring” so it meant we got a good view and for some things we were really close up. While Harry was sitting there hoping someone would fall (he’s 11 and he’s a boy), Charlie was just loving all the circus antics. They loved the dog tricks in particular – which reminded Charlie of our own dog training experiences – and the humour of the tigers and trainer had him in giggle fits.

It really was an evening out for the boys and I that we enjoyed thoroughly. Charlie was asking the next day if we could go again, he enjoyed it so much. A tip if you’re going to head down there, is to of course eat well before you go. Eating at Denver Coliseum means you get really crappy food for an incredibly expensive amount of money, and of course they don’t let you take in your own food. To save you some money, you know I’m a coupon queen, so thanks to Feld, to finish up the post I’m giving you a discount code so you can get in cheaper when you book your tickets through ticketmaster. The show runs until October 11. You can see all the details here at Ringling.com and scroll to the bottom here to see another video we took on the night, of the female human cannonballs!

Ringling Bros. Coupon Code Details

• The coupon code is MOM — four tickets for $44 Monday-Friday, and $4 off tickets for all weekend performances.
• The tickets can be purchased from ticketmaster and by entering the MOM code in the “MC promotion” box when purchasing tickets.
• Minimum purchase of 4 tickets required; additional tickets above 4 can be purchased at $11 each during the week and $4 off on weekends.
• Offer not valid on Circus Celebrity, Front Row, or VIP seating.
• Cannot be combined with other offers. Service Charges, facility & handling fees will apply .

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxhKdm9Zt8o]

Related posts:

1. Win family tickets to Disney on Ice in Denver!
2. Our day at the Colorado Chocolate Festival 2009
3. Disney on Ice, Worlds of Fantasy

After the Creative Revolution in the 1960s, advertisers began to try to find communications that gave people a reason to buy their product. That developed into the Unique Selling Proposition or USP – the ‘thing’ that makes people choose your product. It still applies. Every successful product has a USP. Over time this went from features to benefits. You’ve probably heard ’sell the sizzle, not the steak’. Sell the benefit. In a marketplace full of things that do the same operation, to stand out from the crowd you need to have something that sets you apart. And that’s your sizzle.

The USP for M&Ms: Melts in your mouth, not in your hand.

For example, there are heaps of dishwashers. They all wash dishes. It’s hard to be known as a product, based purely on that. It doesn’t set them apart. But sizzling benefits like being ‘whisper quiet’, or ‘economical’, or ‘green’ will make the difference for the consumer in a target market. Make no mistake, these benefits might be common to more than one product – but the first to market with it as a sizzling quality, to make it a USP, will get to own that benefit.

In the 21st Century, if you are one of the many who believes you, personally, are a brand (do a search on personal branding and you’ll see what I mean) then the USP has never had more importance.

How do you sell yourself? What’s the one thing about you that makes you different and desirable? What’s your USP?

There are no doubt lots of people who can fulfill a good bit of your job. Code a website, write a story, answer a phone, collect a debt, change a nappy.

But there needs to be something about the way you do it that sets you apart. What’s your USP? Too many people don’t easily identify the things that they’re really great at – better, in fact, than most others. It’s time you did. What’s your sizzle?

It’s harder for women to get to recognise their sizzle than for men.

Research has shown women, in particular, are bad at identifying the things they’re really great at. A female A grade math student will say she’s “okay at math”. Whereas a B or C grade male math student is more likely to say they’re “great at math.”

It’s ironic that in the 1960s, Mary Wells, the first woman to own an advertising agency, was the first to think of branding beyond an obvious USP in the four walls of advertising.

Mary Wells, image from www.wowowow.com. Their photo essay on Mary Wells is great.

She extended the branding across all the marketing effort, so the flavour of that USP was on the lips of everyone experiencing any part of it. Ms Wells decided communication was something that happened all across the marketing effort. Of course she was right. The first step is identifying your USP. The second is to celebrate it across everything you do. The way you behave, dress, communicate. It’s all your own brand.

A good number of mommybloggers have accomplished this. They can sell their sizzle. But far too many very deserving women are not doing it.

Grab your sizzle, sell it up. Because you’re awesome. You have a USP. Time to identify it, claim it, and use it.

Related posts:

1. Should some brands stay out of social media?
2. How much is the Aussie brand worth?
3. Glade's sweet smell of good social media PR with Edelman

A goal is a dream until you make a plan. And the plan needs to be strategic otherwise it won’t work.

A strategy is a direction – a way of heading. This is not something that already has the tactics in place. Think of a chess strategy, or war strategy – these don’t have any step-by-step procedures in place that if a single thing goes wrong the whole strategy falls apart. That same thing is true of any strategy, including your promotional one. The strategy isn’t a tresure map. It simply outlines the direction. A strategy will rarely change, but the tactics you use to implement the strategy might – and probably will – depending upon what happens along the way.

No matter what kind of business you’re in, you need to operate strategically, and that includes the promotional activity you undertake. Too many times a ‘promotional plan’ is hit and miss. It’s buying an ad somewhere or running a competition. If there’s no strategy behind the tactics, then it’s like throwing fistfuls of money into the air. Here’s an outline of the basic steps for creating a strategic promotional plan. It will ensure your promotional activity is targeted, reflects the overarching goals of your marketing plan, delivers awesome ROI, and gives you the best opportunity for success. It works for every kind of business, whether you’re a CEO of a startup, a Fortune 500 company or a mommyblogger wanting to take the next step.

Step 1: Situation Analysis:

If you’re an operating business, you’ll probably have done a SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) as part of your business or marketing plan already. That’s where you’ll have looked at the overall place of your product and its distribution in the marketplace. If you’re smaller in scope, you might not have thought too much about it before. That’s not a problem – this is where you start to think of yourself as a company! In your strategic promotional plan you’ll want to do a specific SWOT analysis on how your promotions are working, should work and how you want them to work. Look purely at the SWOT of your product’s promotions and its relationship to competitors promotions. Remember that promotion is a communication, nothing else. It’s about messages and activity directly tied to those messages. Outline what is great about your communications, what isn’t, what opportunities there are and how these could be threatened.

The second part of the situation analysis is identifying, in the most specific way possible, who you are as a company and product, what budget you’re able to work with, who your audiences are and where you’re at in the market and as a business. The more information you have at this point, hard as it might seem to face at times, the easier the other steps become and the more likely you are to reach your objectives. You’ll probably need to do quite a bit of research.

Step Two: Identify Your Objectives

Once you’ve identified where you’re starting from, then you need to identify where you’d like to go. In the strategic promotion plan, you need to have an promotional objective in mind (click on that link to define what types of things could be considered promotional objectives). You might have one or more objectives.

Because promotion is a communication activity, in developing your promotional objective don’t make the mistake of aligning it with anything other than a communication goal – something you can see as being directly tied to communication. If you fail to do that, and you’re employed as a communicator then you’re creating an environment in which it’s hard to prove ROI (return on investment). And to put it bluntly, you’ll need to prove ROI to keep your job, let alone get a bigger budget or more business from the client.

For example, don’t say a promotional objective is to increase sales. There are far more factors in play in your marketing plan than just communication that impact sales (such as what the product is like, the price point, your competitors, the economic environment, and so on). In your promotion plan, we’re only looking at things you can directly achieve with communication.

Ensure your objective is SMART – Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Time-focused. Something like “Achieve 1,000 people to log onto the website and sign up for the alpha invite before 10 August, 2009″ is a good promotional objective. Ensure your promotional objectives are directly achieved with communication, and that they support the overall marketing goals. Never think you’ll be able to prove your promotions were directly responsible for an increase in sales – unless you can prove nothing else changed in the environment, business or marketplace. However, your promotional activity should be one aspect which contributes towards an increase in sales. And that activity should have SMART attributes which allow you to prove they were successful promotions (even if other stuff goes haywire).

Remember that Achievable and Realistic are two different things. Sure, sending out 500 samples a week to people in the mail might be achieveable if you never spend time with your family, but is it realistic? Begin with brainstorming some objectives that you’d like to achieve and then start adjusting and tying them down with the SMART criteria.

Step Three: Choose your Tactics:

Think of tactics as tools in your kit that will allow you to implement your strategy, and get to your objectives. There are four general categories of tactics, these are: PR, Advertising, Sales Promotion, Personal Selling (which includes Word of Mouth and online communities – take some time to review each of the links). Some of these have cross over points and grey areas, and when done well, you should use some in combination or at different points in order to achieve your objectives. For example, very rarely do you use a single way of transport to get from one place to another (you might walk, then take a bus, then walk again for example), and the same is true of choosing promotional tactics. You need to select promotions that are directly aligned with your strategy. Think of what each of them will do for you, and then put them together so they become a plan.

Begin with the four big categories and the links I’ve attached to them. Then make a list of what reasonable types of activity you could consider to use, given your budget and situation, that will help you implement your strategy and get to your objectives. PR could include conferences, speeches, media activity, etc. Sales Promotions you might consider are sampling, competitions, etc. Personal Selling includes training your internal staff, internal recognition programs, and these days, word of mouth and user community. Spend some time brainstorming different things. Let me repeat, these four different areas of tactics are very broad and do not have defined constraints. They are, however, foundational points for sparking your thoughts about different activities you can do to communicate messages to different target audiences, and receive information back.

When you have chosen some tactics, put them in order of when you’d like to undertake them. There has to be real consideration given to when is the most effective time to use a particular message and a particular tactic with your market. Remember that promotions are defined as short-term activities. Ads get old fast. So do competitions. Happy Meal toys get rotated every month. Effective promotions don’t run for an extended period. Make them short, targeted and focused for great results.

That’s how you create a plan that is strategic. If you needed to go from your house to your kids’ school, you wouldn’t take an aeroplane, even though it would probably work. It’s not a well considered tool for the job. In fact it could backfire – how would your kids’ friends feel? Your neighbours? Choose the correct tools for the job, to move you along the strategic path toward your goal.

It is really very useful to use a timeline for this. Put a beginning date and the end date (which will align with achieving your objective). Then mark in what activities you’re planning to use, and when you’ll use them. Again, the more specific you are with activities, how they’re going to work with each other and especially, what each of them has been chosen to achieve as part of your strategy, the more likely you are to be successful. Don’t do something just because it’s easy, or the latest trend.

Step Four: Monitoring and Evaluation

This is the trick step. I should probably have started with it! From the very beginning of your planning to after the objective has been achieved you’ll be monitoring how your plan is going. That way you’ll know if you’re sliding off the path at all. It’s far easier to identify where things are going wrong if you do it regularly than looking back over the experience at the end and wonder what happened. You’ll also be able to make alterations to your tactic selection to get back in line with your strategic path if that’s necessary.

When you choose your tactics, it’s based on the information you have on hand right now. Also, it’s done with some expectations about how effective other tactics you choose are going to be. Just say you decided to run a competition as one tactic to get yourself an additional 100 people to try something or visit your blog – and it ended up falling flat. Well, when you’re actively monitoring and evaluating your plan on a regular basis, you could decide to change your next tactic to pick up the pace and get you back on track. You’ll also probably review future competitions and see what you need to change about them or whether to ditch them altogether. You’ll be listening to your audience, but keeping your eye on what your objective is. Your strategy won’t change, but your tactics might – and probably will – as you move along.

Planning your promotional strategy plan will take you some time, energy and thought. Far more so than simply placing an ad somewhere, or running a random competition. But the outcomes will be infinitely better. So what are you waiting for? Get strategic!

Related posts:

1. Get serious about objectives – and reaching them
2. Why your small business needs a social media plan
3. The three steps to being influential in social media

By now even your grandma knows about the race to a million. Ashton Kutcher, old-media celebrity turned digital insider with various multimedia projects and Twitter groover challenged CNN to a race to a million followers on Twitter.

And after a nice little campaign, last night he won.

It was really fun to see the video of him crossing the victory line. He was really, truly excited. That’s impressive.

What’s more impressive is that Ashton (I can call him by his first name, ‘cos you know… we’re both Twitter sluts ) decided to use the opportunity to do two things:

First, promote the charitable cause (Malaria No More). He got a bank cheque made out in readiness for the win, and showed it up close on U-stream. He is knowledgeable and focused on his charitable work. (Granted, in his excitement over his win the splashing of champagne on a bank cheque for that amount of money is a little… well… off).

Secondly, and more importantly, he made the race into a statement about the democratization of media. About the power of the people. About ‘big media’ no longer determining who gets attention. Ashton repeatedly says that the revolution is happening. That we can change the world. We own the tools to create the content, consume the content and connect with each other. Anyone who can get to a computer with the internet is playing in the same playground as CNN – and they no longer have a guaranteed audience. And old media can just *suck it*.

Some naysayers and skeptics doubt that Ashton truly represents the ‘little guy’ in this equation (after all he’s a movie star right?). For example, Mark Glaser, otherwise known as @Mediatwit said: “This was NOT about the little guy at all. It was about a celeb getting little guys to follow him. If a real nobody got 1m that would be big.”

What Mark’s missed is that a key part of Ashton’s victory rant was his comment that ‘Hey, you can unfollow me. And that’s cool.’ Ashton gets that’s what happens. That’s what this is about. Six hours after he logged off last night, he was recording a segment on Oprah and said these things again … and again. Let’s not forget he’s also always talking directly to the Twitterers sending him messages. He’s authentic, transparent, on the ball and insightful. (So’s his dearly devoted wife, but that’s another post.)

So while the focus on playing tag for Followers on Twitter gives a bad impression and certainly doesn’t reflect the overall scheme of things in social media, the goal and opportunity for further influence created by Ashton and the point he’s made are undoubtedly positive in ways no other old media celebrity could achieve. He’s gained my respect, and the respect of other commentators. And I’ve never actually been a fan of his at all.

Now if only he’d teach all those other celebrities. You know the ones who need to get rid of their clueless PR hoons and tweet real conversations with other real people …. Are you listening Hugh Jackman? Oh that’s right… no you’re not.

Related posts:

1. Why I Stopped Following Guy Kawasaki
2. Who's talking about whom?
3. More than deputies: A definition of journalism for the 21st Century

There are some very interesting psychological theories used in Marketing and Business which explain why people behave the way they do. Put simply, people buy different brands and products to fulfill external and internal needs. These needs reflect their sense of self. And people can generally be placed in one of three categories:

1. Affiliation needs – people who primarily want to ‘belong’. For example, think of teenagers and their need to buy the latest fad.

2. Leadership needs – people who want to be seen as innovators and want to be seen as cutting edge. A good example is all those people looking for the latest and greatest new phone!

3. Achievement needs – people who buy things to demonstrate they’ve ‘made it’. Often, buying that sportscar or a First Class plane ticket fulfills that need.

My current research on discourse analysis on Twitter suggests you can identify people working to fulfill these same needs on Twitter! With just text to convey how we want to be seen by everyone, the things we decide to Tweet and whom we tweet with demonstrates us ‘working’ to fulfill one of these needs.

Someone with an affiliation need on Twitter will use lots of hashtags. Ways of belonging. They will identify themselves as part of popular movements on Twitter. They want to be part of a particular crowd. Mommy bloggers. Lots of RTs and @ conversations with people they want to be associated with.

Someone with a leadership need will probably not ‘life stream’. Instead they’ll stay on one topic and tweet links to specific cutting edge stuff in their field. They will talk with just about anyone as long as it’s on the topic they want to be seen as a leader in. They don’t stray from that path. It’s like they’re almost the Twitter expert on a particular subject.

Finally, someone with an achievement need will want to be recognised as having ‘made it’. These, I claim, are the type of people who un-follow bulk numbers of people so they can appear accomplished. They’re more likely to be focused on follower numbers than anything else. They might life stream about their accomplished lives, and even lead calls to donate to ’people less fortunate’, to further identify their separateness from them.

The way we behave on Twitter reflect identity work where we want to be seen by the community as one of these types of people.

What Twitterers can you think of that fits one of these categories? Where do you fit?

Related posts:

1. I'll pay for content when there's Twitter with penguins
2. Why I Stopped Following Guy Kawasaki
3. Why my research is in Twitter

Twitter is a curious beast. It has morphed as it grows, due to the community of people who use it. And in researching the online social sphere for my graduate thesis, there are some key aspects of how people use Twitter that are indicators to how this is going to go.

Twitter is a tool used by a community. The tool of Twitter is no different to any other tool. The tool of Twitter exists as an infrastructure, and becomes what it is because of how the community uses it. Just as a knife can be defined as a weapon because people sometimes kill very effectively with it, so Twitter is a community because people interact on it.

Over time we’ve seen Twitter move on from being a post-modern, Web 1.0 Facebook-style status update of ‘what are you doing’. That whole status update thing had the whole broadcasting ethos of me! me! me! It was about telling the world about me and not really caring that much about what everyone else thought of it.

But Web 2.0, and beyond has seen Twitter’s ‘what are you doing’ develop to people actually asking each other ‘what are *you* doing’? And ‘doing’ for the Twitter community now really means ‘thinking’ and ‘wanting’ and ‘needing’ and ‘hoping for’, etc.

The community online uses social media to really connect with each other. To connect with people who you feel an affiliation with, or can learn from, or just feel close to. Not to broadcast.

And this is why I’ve stopped following Guy Kawasaki.

I’m sure Guy is a nice guy (sorry). He’s done a lot of good stuff, written some books that people rave about and stuff. He also gives a good party by all accounts. He certainly believes he’s extremely influential, and some other people do too.

so where’s the problem? A while back on Twitter @Guykawasaki was really him. He’d tweet stuff and interact with people. But as time has gone on, Guy’s Twitter account has morphed – much like most of Twitter. However, I’d argue the morphing that Guy has sought has been detrimental to his personal brand, and non-reflective of where the community of Twitter is heading. He’s introduced ghost twitterers, for which has received a lot of criticism – and he doesn’t seem to get what the issue with that is. He spends a lot of time on Twitter defending himself over this (it gets tiring). He’s also focused on the numbers and believes that putting out what he terms “good content” (ie: links to stories and ‘interesting things’ on the web that he has located and simply aggregates, not that he’s created) is all Twitter needs to be.

All of this means the stream of “Guy Kawasaki” really is about as authentically Guy Kawasaki as the fake accounts of myriad celebrities. When I started following Guy, that wasn’t the case.

And Guy, the fact is we use Twitter differently. I’m into conversation. Looking at my stats, I tweet an average of 13 times a day, and 70% of those are @ tweets. Connections and personal resonance is my focus. I’m not as into the numbers as you and all those traditional marketers and journalists and old-school bloggers with ‘number of eyeballs’ perceptions are. I have a relatively large number of followers and am extremely happy about that because it gives me the opportunity to talk with lots of different people, find out what they’re doing, how I can assist them, and vice versa. (To clarify: I gain followers in the old-fashioned way. No 3rd party tools, or requests for follows being broadcast. You won’t see me tweeting about my following as being a big thing for me.)

I’m interested in people individually. And I sincerely believe that’s where the future of online communication lies. Not in trying to elevate your own name by broadcasting what you think is ‘good content’ (no matter who created it), but by having conversations with people, everywhere. We’re not living in a Web 1.0 environment any more.

So time will go on and Twitter will continue to morph. I feel old school. The general real life community has heard of Twitter. People talk about “getting a Twitter” (which is strange phrasing to me). Mainstream traditional media is not only covering Twitter but is getting stories from its community.

The thing that’s driving everyday people to Twitter though, is not to just receive traditional mass media. The thing the people want is connections with other people, and real life celebrities such as Ashton, Demi and Kevin are using Twitter to connect with their fans. They have conversations with them. Really. That’s why they’re coming. That’s why Twitter’s growth is 30% a month. Connecting individually with resonance is everything.

Related posts:

1. Disrupting the barriers of media in the 21st Century
2. A win for the little guy? Ashton Kutcher plays tag with CNN.
3. More than deputies: A definition of journalism for the 21st Century

Creating a brand LoveMark in the 21st century has never been easier. Yet, the concept seems to be alien to so many companies.

Many brands think they’ve got a loyal following. But what they really have is passive brand loyalty. People who buy the product all the time, but don’t really have a loving, committed relationship. It’s a marriage of convenience. Your brand is not a LoveMark. And you’re fooling yourself if you think those sales figures are just going to continue without putting some work into your relationship. There’s always something shiny coming around the corner, or a challenge to be met and if your customers aren’t willing to go the extra mile for you, then you’re DOA.

Advertising used to be about reaching as many people as possible with your message. Reach. CPM. It was all about how many eyeballs you could get to. And that’s what brands thought would bring them some sort of relationship with people. But it’s a flawed system that doesn’t work. The old “50% of my advertising works and 50% doesn’t – but I don’t know which 50% is which” simply isn’t good enough for today’s effective marketer, working on a slashed budget and still needing to demonstrate real ROI.

I put it to you that Reach is not what you should be focused on (in fact, it was never the real focus, but we got lost because that’s all traditional media could measure and create sales on). It’s not primarily about Reach.

It’s all about Resonance.

To explain Resonance to students, I say it’s like hitting the sweet spot on a tennis racquet. You get the best power, best direction, best result – with ‘just-right’ input. Hitting a ball with the sweet spot on the tennis racquet is Resonance. And the perfect chord on a guitar is Resonance.

Social media offer brands an opportunity to create a LoveMark because they offer a capacity for Resonance that traditional formats, focused on CPM, could never offer. CPM tries to achieve Resonance by throwing lots and lots of tennis balls at a racquet, and hoping one or two make the sweet spot. There’s stacks of lost message. And stacks of lost money.

Resonance in advertising is all about making your product the perfect and only fit that the buyer can see for them. In fact, it shows the product as being built specifically for them. It’s all about the individual consumer. It’s not about how many thousands of people you can get your message to. It’s about getting it to the right people.

By using social media as a tool, Resonance happens when your brand speaks to people online. Personally. As part of a conversation. When you’re speaking to someone it says you care about them. How do you think rock stars get so successful? Name any teen heart-throb: David Cassidy, Robbie Williams, Jesse McCartney, even (good grief) the Jonas Bros make girls feel they are performing just for them. They sing songs that say “hey, I’m so lonely and you could be the one.” Rock stars who do that have Resonance down pat. And now it’s easy for any brand to do the same.

Social media offers brands the opportunity to become a LoveMark for people and eliminate a great portion of the passive brand loyalty that they’re built on. Good brands, like Zappos.com are in the space, making personal relationships with people a priority. As time goes on, I hope more companies rediscover the importance of Resonance over Reach. If you build resonance with one person, then they’ll be singing your praises day in and day out to people who care about what they have to say. And that’s a CPM you couldn’t put a price on.

Related posts:

1. Don't think influence, think resonance
2. The three steps to being influential in social media
3. Disrupting the barriers of media in the 21st Century

This is just one instance of an American company trying to cash in on the good name Australia and its people have within the US. And it sucks.

As an Australian, I’m really disgusted by Procter & Gamble’s obvious attempt to mislead consumers by producing and promoting a range of haircare products as Australian.

What do you call an Aussie brand that's not Australian?

The brand is ‘Aussie’ – and you know what? It’s not. You can see the associated website here (of course, it’s using simply www.aussie.com).

You should know the following:

a. This brand does not exist in Australia.

b. This brand has no money going to Australia.

c. This brand, featuring the kangaroo on its logo, and the hyperbole saying it’s part of “the latest wave from down under” actually has NOTHING to do with Australia.

d. This is NOT an Australian product.

This is intentionally misleading by Procter & Gamble. The ad, which you can see on their website, uses an Australian woman’s voice-over to reinforce the message they have something to do with Australia.

It’s a total rip-off of the Australian image and brand.

Now, whether or not the product is any good is not my concern. I believe it is obviously unethical to present a product or brand as being something it’s not. In this case, the Australian brand and people are being used to sell a product which has nothing to do with them.

So I approached Procter & Gamble with my concerns. Here’s the (cut and pasted) email response:

Thank you for contacting Aussie. Aussie® was founded in 1979 by Tom Redmond who had over twenty years experience in the professional salon industry. Tom visited Australia and was inspired to develop Australian 3 Minute Miracle, an intensive conditioner that produced real results in only three minutes. 3 Minute Miracle is now a top selling conditioner with more than 45 million bottles sold. This was followed by Sprunch Spray, Instant Freeze Hair Spray, and a complete line of hair care and styling products.

While Aussie products are not made in Australia, many of the beneficial ingredients come from Australia.

We hope we’ve been helpful. If we can assist you in the future, please let us know.

The Consumer Relations Team

013958415A/EGS

Mail sent to this address cannot be answered.

If you have additional comments about this issue, please click here:

http://www.econsumeraffairs.com/cla/contactusfollowup.htm?F1=013958415A

This is a company that really needs to learn a few lessons in social media and customer service. Not only is the response comprised mainly of PR crap that NOBODY would have wanted to read, and that wasn’t relevant, it was deliberately vague and even said “mail to this address cannot be answered.”  P&G is such a big company, it doesn’t want to actually converse with anyone. Pfft. Oh, they’re into Social Media – they have a Facebook Fan Page for Aussie. You can access it here. I’m going to leave a little message for them on it… I invite you to do the same.

But back to their response…I was obviously particularly interested in the claim that “many of the beneficial ingredients come from Australia.” I looked on the bottles of Aussie products in the supermarket. Nothing is listed as being from Australia. The product is completely made and produced in the USA, according to the bottles.

So I sent them another email, asking them what ingredients come from Australia and that I wanted to get it right because I was going to be blogging about this. Two weeks later, I’m still waiting for a response.

Now, I’m not expecting my American friends to be too upset over this. After all, it’s not your brand that’s being used to sell something. But I wonder how a company can get away with this shameless lying  unethical behaviour?

I’m contacting the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) about P&G’s sham and will let you know what eventuates. 

Related posts:

1. Should some brands stay out of social media?
2. Personal brands and the Unique Selling Proposition
3. Glade's sweet smell of good social media PR with Edelman