Getting attention has always been “a commodity”. Companies pay for their products to be advertised in newspapers, on television or in Google’s keyword ads. In the past year, companies have also been able to pay for their discreet pop up in Facebook feeds.

But what if the same was true with our private lives? What if those of your friends with money could buy themselves more attention than the rest of us?  What if popularity became the force that controlled our actions?

Welcome to the new reality of Facebook. Facebook has made it possible to pay money to promote private Facebook updates, which means that you can get your update to reach more of your friends than usual… If you pay of course.

Pros and cons

On one hand, there are those who believe that the move is a natural extension of the fact that companies have been able to do the same for some time now. Why should it make a difference that we are individuals, not companies? With the rise of SM, are we not “selling our selves” in life in more or less the same way? On the other hand there are those who are strongly against the whole “buy popularity”-spirit. Pushed to the edge; The rich become popular and the poor get to die anonymous and unnoticed. Good old Habermas would laugh his ass off, as this confirms his theory of the evil capitalism taking over our lives.

Reflections

I WOULD DEFINITELY NOT pay to be popular. That said, the first part of the sentence is what I have been saying for a long time every time a new trend entered my world. I was the last one of my friends to get an Iphone and the one who disapproved whenever people were making updates about their fabulous lives on Facebook. I did not get it. Now I have been spending time learning SM and digital marketing from another perspective, and while I still have a fundamental belief questioning some of the aspects, I begin to see how these tools can be charming and not just persuasive and seductive. Maybe I should start embracing. Let me rephrase; I have begun to embrace SM and digital marketing tools. I can proudly say that I am the first of my friends (or third after Louise and Mads) to create a Twitter profile, I cannot help myself from looking at Hootsuite whenever I turn on the computer and when I get e-mail I am almost disappointed that it is not Google who wants to alert me with news on Odd Squad Productions. From my point of view I have done “the groundbreaking” and Social Media as one of my competences on LinkedIn. Thank you.

McD’s innovative and integrated marketing campaign; Your questions. Our answers made me think of customer relationships and ways to include customers in brands. Transparency and hence customers’ true perception of the brand is essential when building and maintaining a strong and solid brand. At the end of the day it’s the consumers who hold the key to your success so why not listen and learn?

I came across this singer’s Facebook page the other day. Now you might ask what John Legend has to do with building a strong customer relationship? To be honest I am not quite sure myself. I know that he has won nine Grammy awards and was named one of Time magazine’s 100 most influential people. And then he managed to transform himself into an ordinary guy just like you and me (or maybe not me, I am a girl though), after starting to care for his fans and communicate with them in “eye level”. I guess Sandy brought some good. The hurricane was the trigger point that started conversation. On one of the roughest nights John Legend posted the following on his Facebook profile;

Within a few hours he got 440 answers and more than 4000 people liked his post. During the last couple of weeks I have been following his profile and throughout the week John Legend himself has begun to do these Q&A’s where he answers questions from fans.

If John Legend equals company this is an example of how consumers can leverage a message. Legend makes the consumers articulate their favorite piece of music, which singer they want to see Legend performs with and so on and hereby he creates this appealing down-on-earth personality. This is an example of a flipped funnel, and I wonder how even more popular this man gets in the future. He surely captures essence of SM that great companies haven not figured out yet. He is listening and his “customers” are in return transformed into committers. What would you do with 1.876.465 fans?

There is hardly a definite recipe for how to make the perfect speech, but there are tools that can help you improve and boost your speech abilities.  One of the tools that can be helpful when developing and aligning your company voice is the concept called TED. TED is a concept where ‘Ideas worth spreading’ are filmed at two annual live events and afterwards get uploaded online at ted.com, so everyone can see them. Basically it is the world’s most fascinating thinkers and doers who are challenged to give the talk of their lives in under 20 minutes and TED’s goal is hereafter to give everyone on-demand access to the world’s most inspiring voices. As of November 2012, TED Talks have been viewed more than one billion times. On ted.com you can find online speeches about everything from brain activity to space exploration, management, architecture, health, culture and the moments that changed everything in a person’s life. Since the non-profit organization was founded in 1984 it has expanded with a multitude of initiatives. Hence when you see a video/event ending with an x, it means that it is arranged independently of the TED, but after TED concept. In addition a TedYouth channel and Youth events have become a part of the project.

These videos can be used for inspiration and as guidelines to improve your own speaker abilities, as well as for companies to elaborate a consistent and convincing voice. After looking through some of the most popular videos I find that there is a trend of humility, symbolic descriptions, emotional work, presence, personality and of course good advices in the videos. This can give you an idea of how to do a perfect speech online as well as offline. Maybe you should drop the Power Point and tell us something real, without a filter? Do not hide. Involve your audience. Speak to their hearts. Go home elevator speech and sandwich model. TED is here.

During the past ten years CSR has become a word that is nearly on all marketers lips. In the concept’s original form an assumption exists that companies are obligated towards doing something for society beyond just being a business. As the phenomenon expanded CSR became something that marketers were speculating in and in a slightly cynical sense; “just another tool in the ongoing struggle for attention”. I remember this case where MTV spent more money on doing advertising around their sustainable efforts than the amount of money they actually invested in the efforts. As technology and the digital world expands in to what is known as the information society companies are constantly looking for new ways to strengthen their brand’s image avoiding communication noise. But is this still the reality?

Josefine Cambell discuss in an article on markedsføring.dk how “meaningful marketing” has become the new marketing mantra. Her key point is that consumers have become more critical in their perceptions of companies CSR-initiatives. She argues that consumers have “developed an almost allergic reaction to the excesses and false promises” and that it is no longer sufficient to communicate statements about social marketing and green initiatives. Consumers want visible results, so companies are almost forced to ensure that social marketing initiatives are the core of the brand and thus the company’s identity. When I was reading through her article I came to think of digital media’s impact on this development. With the rise of SM eye-catching topics can be spread as a virus within a second. If companies are telling untrue stories about their brands the chances are that this will come to the surface sooner or later and when it does the price is high. A multitude of examples of such marketing disasters can be identified which amplifies how transparency has become a thing you can’t avoid. And therefore should not. If you do not provide the transparency, the chances are that your customers will.

With a reference to my entry about social customer service and the topic conversation discussed in E-marketing, this post will address leveraging conversation through clever social customer service. If managed well critics can be turned in to beneficial conversation, but it can be a tough act to find the right balance between delivering “boring”, clear and factual communication and the more “fun”, surprising and out-of-the-box communication.

Well-organized Customer Service is a result of ongoing monitoring and a thoughtful response plan. When YouSee, a Danish TV- and Internet supplier recently was met with a “break-up” on Facebook from one of its customers, they grasped the opportunity to frame the conversation.

An excerpt of the conversation:

Alexander, the customer:

“Dear YouSee. I don’t know where to start. In the past couple of months I’ve been struggling a bit with some things, and I’m afraid that the two of us don’t fit together anymore. I don’t think we’re in the same place. And now I have met someone else. She’s called Netflix and we fit perfectly  together. I’m really sorry, but I have to break up with you. This isn’t working. But you should know that it’s not you, it’s me.Take care and goodbye”

YouSee’s response:

“Dear Alexander,

I’m sorry that you’ve found someone else. I’m not stupid, and I knew, it was coming, for you have semmed so detached and indifferent to me recently. It was almost only when you and the guys were watching football, you’d be interested in me. When football was on there was no limit to how happy you were to me – or angry if just wasn’t there when YOU absolutely needed me.

But I have not been blind to the fact that you often would rather sit behind the small stupid computer screen. You were more interested in jumping from one more blurry and tacky home video on YouTube than me and my HD channels. And when I recently found a used Netflix coupon between sofa cushions, I knew it was over.

I’m not the first to experience a man who falls for a younger model, and probably not the last. I also know that I’m not 17 anymore, and that I’ve probably got a wrinkle or two. But I’m not ashamed of myself. I know a lot about men and women and children. I know how to care for a family and make sure that there’s room for everyone in a household – including the youngest and the oldest.

Goodbye Alexander”

One thing that can be very crucial when answering critics is that your response easily can be hidden as one of many comments. This is a thing to think about when replying to unsatisfied customers. YouSee did not need to post their reply in a separate update; the message was already widespread by entertained customers, within the first hours. After seven hours YouSee’s response had close to 35,000 Facebook-likes  and more than 950 had commented. Only a portion of them on YouSee’s own page. Several others had shared the correspondence, as well as uploaded pictures and separate statuses cheering for YouSee. Soon the story spread to other Media who created articles about the incident.

Why did this become ‘one to like and share’?

This is clearly the result of brilliant conversation and good monitoring. YouSee’s response was surprising, instant and used humor as the main theme throughout the correspondence, two themes that contributes to the chances of going viral according to the ComMotion framework on virality by Brainjuicer.

Furthermore YouSee managed to forward the message in a tone that fits with the “user-language” of social media. If they had just responded in a regular “boring” way, the customer would have won the price as the creative one and the users and customers’ perception of the brand would not have changed, at least not to the better. Additionally YouSee are using a vulnerable approach by putting their brand in the question zone. By mentioning Netflix entry in Denmark and acknowledging some of their advantages this could lead to more harm than good for the brand. This is a fine line. According to Joel Yashinsky, who was the guest speaker at our E-marketing class today “being vulnerable is how great marketing rises” and maybe why YouSee succeeded with their honest and transparent response.

But it’s not easy and what it all comes down to is single words. Framed in another discourse YouSee could have been the bad guy by crossing the line or by being this big company that does not care for the customers. Both could lead to disasters of dimensions.

Be wise. Monitor well. Know your customers AND your organization. Reply away!

Yesterday Felix Baumgartner broke the sound barrier after skydiving from 38 km above the earth. While Felix was heading towards the ground, the stunt drew another record: YouTube recorded that more than 8 million people worldwide tuned in to the live stream. More than 40 TV stations broadcasted live from the event and several media live-blogged. After he landed, Red Bull posted a picture of Baumgartner on his knees on the ground to Facebook, generating nearly 216,000 likes, 10,000 comments and more than 29,000 shares in less than 40 minutes.  On Twitter, half the worldwide trending topics had something to do with the jump.

Red Bull, who sponsored the daring venture, managed to transform the event in to “breaking news”. Even before it was confirmed that the jump was going to be a reality, the stunt largely circulated on social media. Red Bull identified an audience and provided information and relevant content to the viewers through multiple channels, including redbull.com, Twitter, Facebook and offline briefing sessions with media. The stunt emphasizes not just Red Bull as a brand associated with action and adrenaline rush, as it is widely known for, it furthermore gives Red Bull the predicate of being a global brand. Felix, a human being like you and me, was literally looking down on earth ready to put it to the test while the whole world was watching. Now that takes power and adrenalin to another level.

The flying Felix is an example of how marketing has reached new heights. According to several marketing experts, including Christian Strand, innovation director at media agency IUM, this is a prime example of future media stunt  and certainly something we are going to see more often.

The conversation on social media is not silenced yet and several bids on the advertising value can already be identified throughout the web. One advertising executive guessed the exposure could be worth £10m in the UK and as much as £100m worldwide.

When looking through articles and blogposts I find it interesting that several points out the low level of consequences related to brandvalue for Red Bull if the experiment had went wrong. This made me think of marketing as a conceptual tool. How far can we take “extreme” marketing? Are there simply no limits in the fight for profit?

In this light, Red Bull is certainly defining what “experimental marketing” is all about. After the event yesterday this type of marketing could just as well be named “Red Bull marketing”. Red Bull is by far in the front seat.

On the 6^th of November the American people will decide who will win the 57^th presidential election. The U.S. election will be largely fought on the web and social media represents a heavier part of the U.S. presidential election than ever before.

During the past couple of years political actors have become far more sophisticated in their use of social media and this applies to the whole range from communications to and with the voters to attempts of collecting money for campaigns. 90 percent of all senators and members of congress are on Twitter and/or Facebook  and both Republicans and Democrats use “data mining”, which through careful monitoring and analysis of consumer behavior ensures that the campaigns “micro-customize” messages to voters, according to what they are searching for on Google, and what they have in their “digital basket”. As an example campaign strategists try to customize the emails they send out with their message to potential voters. A housewife with children will therefore get a different message than the working mother.

Although both parties are in the race, it seems like democrats remain in the front position in the digital arena. According to a new survey by “Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism”, the Obama campaign uses social media four times more often than the Romney campaign does. The Romney campaign tweeted once a day in June, while the Obama campaign tweeted 29 times. The Democratic candidate also had twice as many blog entries on its website and more than twice as many YouTube videos compared to Romney.

When it comes to the battlefield, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube are well represented. According to a report from eMarketer Twitter’s growth is twice as big as Facebook but there is still some way to go. Twitter has only about 24 million active U.S. users, while Facebook has almost 133 million. In addition YouTube is widely used for posting videos, speeches and campaigns.

With social media as a relatively new arena, it is interesting to follow this election. In the end there could be a link between how well the two candidates perform in social media and the final outcome in early November.

“Remember playing on people’s emotions, do not over-advertise, make your campaign easy to share and give users that something extra”. Heard those guidelines before?

A quick search on Google will highlight the multitude of online guides advising strategies on viral marketing. “This Is How You Make Something Go Viral: An Impractical Guide” and ”How to Improve Your Chances of Going Viral: 11 steps – wikiHow” are just two examples.

But can your message actually go viral? Yes it can.

The proper question is whether you can construct and implement certain measures that raise the chances for viral success. Can you actually create viral marketing or is it just a random beneficial effect that can happen if you’re lucky? A clear answer is hard to find.

From my search on Google I found that a positivist tone was widespread in many of the articles acknowledging viral success. These articles’ approach to viral marketing includes quantitative answers for the users. When looking at the more skeptical articles, it’s obvious that it’s just not that simple. If viral marketing is defined as “content passed from one person to another, including images, videos, links, applications, games, stories, emails, documents or virtually any other type of digital content that one person passes to another”, it’s obvious that you can’t actively make your message go viral. According to blogger B.L. Ochman, who argues against viral marketing as a conscious effort, viral marketing is about timing and well-fitted content appealing to your target audience. That said you could try to be creative and original and thereby maybe improve your changes of making your message go viral.

Examples of successful viral marketing:

Thai Health Promotion Foundation – Smoking Kid

“People are calling it the most effective anti-smoking ad ever.”

Instead of telling people that smoking is bad, this new ad from Thailand uses little kids to trick smokers into saying how bad the habit really is.

Coca-Cola Happiness Machine

Coca-Cola’s Happiness Machine video was launched on January 12 and topped a million views two weeks later based solely on people sharing the video through Twitter, Facebook, blogs, and word-of-mouth.

Customer service is important for most service-based companies as a way to keep customers satisfied. Customer service centers around the world answer phones when customers call complaining about your product or in-store service, answer e-mails and maybe even reward the response with a free gift. But why doesn’t a company respond when customers use Facebook and Twitter?

After conducting a worldwide study on using social networking for customer service a few months ago, DMG Consulting estimated that 63% of enterprises already use social media for a variety of activities. This includes some form of customer service. That said only few organizations have figured out how to use social media effectively to achieve and ameliorate their profit margins. What do you think?

With the proliferation of social media today, I find it paradoxical how service-based companies ignore their true ‘selling point’ or brand image on the web. Is there an explanation? Maybe the best practices, which are essential to facilitate the process just don’t exist yet? Apple, Best Buy, Google, Dell and HP are examples of companies developing dedicated “social care” channels, but their strategies are conducted in many different ways. Could it be that social media platforms just simply isn’t the place to solve service-related problems? Social media doesn’t always allow for enough detail, and companies might be frightened that certain unfortunate subjects will go viral and therefore create negative publicity. That said I think it’s just a matter of time before ignoring to react on customers complains on social media is as far out as if companies didn’t pick up the phone.

When I logon to Facebook almost every tenth update I see in my newsfeed is questions asked from my friends who need answers. It could be my sister posting: “how do you feel about taking your 7-year old out of school to go on holiday outside the school holidays?”, my friend who needs to know which car to buy or my mom who wants to know which restaurant has the best “moules frittes”.  As new search engines develops it seems like we become lazier. Is it too hard to navigate in the different search engines or are we just more trustful with the people we know? And how should that affect what marketers need to do with all these different types of social media? In my first blogpost I would like to discuss how YouTube manage to serve as a search engine on many levels, as an example of a search engine that may be offering the perfect combination of information from amateurs, friends, experts, marketers and companies in different constellations.

YouTube was found in 2005 with the intention to serve as a video-sharing website for a wide variety of user-generated content. I find it quite interesting how YouTube has evolved to become an actual search engine. You want to know which mobile phone to buy? Go to YouTube. You want fancy princess-curls for your prom? Go to YouTube. YouTube connects the information you need with visual pictures, that makes it easy to navigate in and therefore fall in love with. Yesterday I tried to install R-Commander on my Mac. I looked it up and Google showed me all sorts of pages telling me what to do. I clicked on the first link and was taken to a page with 20 points on how to install the software. The result? The non-technical-me could not grasp the information. Instead I searched on YouTube and immediately found an instructional video that showed me in details what to do.

I started thinking about how these new ways to find information influences us as human beings. Last year a read an article about the technical instructions that comes with technical devices. Unfortunately I do not remember who wrote it. I found it interesting that the success rate for installing the device correct was more than doubled in the senior-category than for the young generation, for that simple reason that the seniors actually read the instructions. How did this happen? Did we become impatient, or did the new ways to find information made us impatient? There is no doubt about it; social media and the new ways to use search engines has changed the way we as human beings and consumers search for information, whether we want to know how to solve a technical problem, want to know which peanut-butter is the best or want to learn to decorate our nails in the most fashionable way. With that in mind it makes sense that 36% of US marketers are estimated to use YouTube in 2012. YouTube could be one of the search engines that actually provide the perfect combination of information from user-to-user, expert-to-user information and the other way around.