Jason Bedell - Interactive Marketing & Technology Blog

Speak With Them, Not At Them

I usually present this idea to clients in terms of 'At', 'To', and 'With'.

For years advertising has been dominated by the approach of crafting a mass communication (a 30-second spot) and delivering via mass media (network TV) to the masses (people watching M.A.S.H. or Three's Company). The message we sent was (is) static, direct, and to the point, "buy my product and your life won't suck (anymore)".

With direct, and ultimately interactive, we have the opportunity to talk to the consumer instead of at them. We can greet them by name. We know what their past purchases were. Where know where they live (or at least their zip, we don't have to be creepy about it). So we can deliver a message that doesn't just fit their age demographic, but is relevant to their buying behavior.

With social media we have the opportunity (or privilege as it should be treated) to speak with the consumer. This has various implications.

• Tone down the sales pitch and take a conversational tone
• Fight the urge to promote. You can simply agree with people who "get it" and contribute information where they don't.
• Use the vernacular of the community.
• Be clear and transparent regarding your connection to the brand or business

So why care? By joining the conversation, you have the opportunity to raise awareness of your brand (be careful here), shed light on questions and issues surrounding your brand, and identify and confront false rumor and conjecture. But most importantly, it is about incubating a forum of discussion with your consumers.

Social Meda and PR

If you are thinking about making your foray into social media, you need to be thinking PR.

That's right. Just because its on the Internet doesn't mean its all up to your interactive team. Social media is first and foremost about talking directly to your consumer. And the person on your side of the conversation better be responsive, on topic, and conversational (that means not a sales guy). When's the last time you put a programmer in front of a customer?

And it's not a copywriter from your creative staff either. Don't get me wrong. I'm sure there are plenty of great creative copywriters out there that can do the job. But this is really about public relations.

We talk about Interactive Public Relations with respect to social media in terms of three steps that all build on top of each other: Monitor, Analyze, Engage.

There are many great monitoring tools to help you get an idea of what conversations are happening out there with respect to your brand or product. Google Alerts, while very basic, is a free and effective way to get started. For those who are ready to take the next step in monitoring, I would suggest taking a look at Radian6 (check out my past post on Radian6 here).

While monitoring is mostly going to be handled by an automated service, you will have to handle the analysis yourself. This is where you take a look at the conversations taking place and derive your insights. Who and where are the most vocal communities? What are they saying? Do they like you? Are they looking for different offerings you are not providing?

Finally, engagement is your opportunity to get in the game and where your PR team comes front and center. They will help you respond to these conversations that would otherwise happen without you. They can address false rumor and accusation, provide insight into products or services, enlighten an interested community, and ultimately be the live ambassador to your brand.

Wiki Wompus

The mood on Wikipedia is mixed right now to say the least. But, I find it interesting that the only people I hear criticizing Wikipedia tend to be industry people. I've never heard a student, family member, or anyone other normal person looking for a simple yet fairly comprehensive answer to a simple question, do anything but sing praises for Wikipedia.

Yes, the nay sayers have some valid arguments. However, I think in general that most of them are just uncomfortable with yet another form of information democratization. If you are struggling with your own Wikipedia issue, here are some tips you may find useful before you go edit crazy.

The cardinal rule is to maintain a clear and open relationship between your connection to the content being edited and any commercial affiliations you may have. You are right for thinking that you need to be monitoring your Wikipedia entry for submissions of incorrect or biased information, but you cannot be the source of biased information yourself.

Here are some measures you may take to increase the odds of your edits being accepted:

1. Make small edits rather than sweeping changes. If just one word of your edit is found to be vandalism or bias then all changes submitted with that word will be reverted. In other words, it's all or nothing.
2. Site all sources used for claims made. These sources should reference other non-bias sources.
3. Make sure additions to content conform to their Notability requirements. The content has to be of significant, from a NPOV, and be encyclopedic in nature.