Tierney Rocky's Blog

This video is similar to the Did You Know video released in 2009. However it has facts for 2012, some of which made me laugh or think.

All of these facts express just how deep-rooted social media is reaching into our lives. It can start our next relationship, teach our kids what we learned on paper, or disrupt our lives by being too transparent.

I recognize that with such a young global population (50% of the world’s population is under the age of 30), social media has extremely strong staying power as newer generations will embrace and not fear it. But a part of me also worries that many of us will not fully comprehend just how dangerous it can be if we are too easy to trust the online world. If put in the wrong hands, our lives can be flipped over and highly disrupted. Now this is not to say that the events from Die Hard 4 are going to occur; Bruce Willis will (hopefully!) not have to save us from cyber-terrorists that can hack into any government database or citizen’s computer, and threaten to take control of everything in the country. However (and even that doesn’t seem too unlikely, unfortunately) the threat of cyber stalking, identity stealing, and blackmail is out there; as the late Amanda Todd, from Port Coquitlam, represents (she committed suicide last month due to extreme long term bullying and physical assaults from classmates, all which spurred from someone who was blackmailing her over the internet and turning her friends against her).

I think the point of this post is just to remind marketers just how integral privacy issues are to this wonderful tool of online media. I love the free reigns we are given in terms of creativity through this medium, and I am excited for it will take us in the future, but it is stories like this that also remind us of the customers and what they need, ensuring that privacy laws are maintained and strengthened in this technological world.

Nov. 27, 1996 – Oct. 10, 2012

With many reports, group presentations, and assignments coming to their deadlines this month, some of use may be losing some faith in the importance of blogging. We may be putting off our weekly (supposedly) blog to work on other assignments we consider to be bigger priorities. I certainly considered doing so. But then, the thought of pushing back my blog and doing it at a later date inspired me to write a post about why blogs add value to our lives, as marketers or even just as people who want to voice themselves.

This brief video of Seth Godin and Tom Peters captures the sentiments that I want to share.

So for some, maybe your blog doesn’t add value to your life in a profound way, and maybe you dread writing them. But when you think about it, the thought process and critical thinking you force yourself to go through, about topics that matter to your future career, is rather useful!

Yes, we already spend more than half our current daily lives being students and writing assignemnts that prompt us to think about similar issues and force us to answer with our opinions and knowledge – but still, blogs are different. Blogs let us be free to write whatever we want, with the concept that no professor is going to mark them, and yet that anyone can read them. We no longer worry about hitting the right points or including the right terms, but rather we can write something that truly reflects who we are and how we think, because we are not trying to impress a select person. We are also free to follow less structure and allow our personality to shine through much more brightly. Although there is uncertainty of who (if anyone) is on the other end reading, somehow just the possibility that someone is there intrigued or genuinely impressed by what we have to say, is motivation enough to put effort into these posts. In this way, blogging is really a better judge of who we are as individuals, and who we are becoming as professionals. And I think that’s pretty cool.

Tim Reis, head of mobile display for Google, explains why mobile ads are the next big thing. Please watch the video at the link below! I am unable to post the video directly as it uses Flash.

Source: http://www.businessinsider.com/a-googler-explains-why-mobile-ads-are-the-next-big-thing-2012-8

In summary, Reis says that cell phones are “extraordinarily personal devices” and therefore must be treated as such by advertisers, to maneuver around the protective and guarded attitudes that consumers have towards their phones. Reis calls this the attempt to break into a consumer’s “circle of trust”.

To successfully do this, mobile advertisers can’t spam or mislead its targeted audience, otherwise they will become defensive and thus unreceptive to any further mobile advertising attempts. Instead, marketers have to offer mobile-users content that is seen as relevant and eye-catching; whether that be through humour, education, or incentive (like a contest). By making material that is deemed relevant, the convenience of viewing or interacting with it on one’s phone on-the-go, or even while sitting in one’s room next to their computer, becomes the selling point, as mobile content is even more easily and more often shared. Although it appears tough to reach through these consumers’ defense mechanisms, once accomplished, the user is more likely to be a repeat customer as they enjoy the convenience of on-the-go, in-their-pocket engagement. They are also more likely to view the same content or visit the source’s website, on their computers at a later time.

As Reis notes, many consumers actually sleep with their phone right beside them, if not under their pillow, as well as take it with them to the washroom. These facts represent just how attached users are to their phones, and we all know what happens when you take away a baby’s security blanket; major damage control is needed to clean up the mess of crying, screaming, and flailing. As marketers, let’s not allow this to happen to our consumers.

Ever wonder how effective “likes” on Facebook actually are at estimating the impact a post has had on users? Even worse, what about the impact of an ad that is next to that post? Recently, the term viewability has become a common metric of success for social media. However, although viewability captures one component of ad effectiveness, when used alone, it can lead to a step back for marketers rather than a step forward.

For example, a marketer could tell its client that it is putting its ad display on a  publisher site where it is 100% ‘viewable’. But just because it is viewable does not mean the ideal publisher was chosen, or that the ad has influence amidst the clutter on the page. Therefore, when accumulated across good and bad sites, viewability stats can be manipulated and misunderstood.

These issues, among others, are the reason for skepticism about Facebook advertising. Many companies question whether their money will be well spent if they choose Facebook as their channel for promotions, and the way I see it, this suspicion is well-deserved. As a marketer, I would like to believe in the power of targeted sidebar advertising, especially on a site with such high traffic and continual conversation as Facebook. However as a user of the site, I have a hard time truly believing in the effectiveness of viewability, as I too am guilty of ignoring ads (even when they are relevant to my personal tastes) when I just want to creep my friends’ photos in peace!

Source: http://www.adexchanger.com/data-driven-thinking/optimizing-for-viewability-know-the-risks/

Brian Solis compares social media platforms to bars in attempts to explain how they can create a quantifiable return on investment. He says: “What is the secret of bars? Why do we happily pay four times as much for beer in a bar as in a store? We pay this brand premium to be with friends. The secret to bars is that they convert our quality time into cash. Like bars, social media are places where friends meet.” As I have continued my marketing studies over the past few years, I frequently ask myself how do I know this will actually be an effective strategy? How can I prove that my tactic holds more substance than just being my fluffy opinion?”  As a result, I found this article rather helpful. To elaborate, Brian emphasizes how each touch point between consumers represents value to the brand. I think this makes sense, since every conversation between consumers, every link that gets shared and passed on from one fan to the next, and even every like, is a signal to new potential customers who have yet to discover or appreciate a company’s brand. From there, awareness ideally creates more than a spark of interest, but rather a grip on some part of that consumers mind, so much so that they begin to consider this brand to be one that is worthy of notice and worthy of investing their time into experiencing.

Although it is difficult to create a formula that can specifically assign one number to define the value that is derived from social media efforts, the overall benefit is very much existent and viewable, and can be measured in terms of a successful brand community.

To see Brian’s blog post, see: http://www.briansolis.com/2012/10/calculate-the-roi-of-social-media/

It is becoming apparent that I have started to actively read Brian Solis’ blog. He writes about various topics, and I am enjoying thinking about his ideas and prompts. Here is another one of my posts based off his.

In Brian’s post “Social Slacktivism” (see here) he points out how there have been many debates as to whether or not social media promotes activism or actually fosters a lazy form of participation. Indeed, Retweets and Likes don’t bring about change. I find this topic very interesting, as I am the marketing director for the Commerce Community Program (CCP). Writing tweets and Facebook status’ to raise awareness and try to create a convincing call to action for Sauder students towards social issues is exactly what I do – or try to do.

In his post, Brian interviews David Batstone, co-founder and president of NotforSale which is a company leading the movement to end modern slavery and human trafficking. They discuss how society overestimates the power of social media. Although it is good to create awareness, all too often it stops there. Awareness isn’t enough. The true measure is in the act of giving a solution to the problem, as this is what has impact. Unfortunately, today’s younger generation has come to believe that their tweets of awareness hold more value than the donation itself, with the naïve assumption that if only people would become aware things would change. But as David states, assumption has its place but its limits. Our generation is exposed to so much and we know what’s going on, but what do we do about it? In other words, how do we prevent “slacktivism”?

According to David, to build a movement you need to combine the best of social media with tangible things that make a difference. For example, if you create a band (similar to the Livestrong bands), that’s good- but it must add more than shallow tribal identity to the issue. It must lead to something you can message about. In attempts to describe this, he has created his own term to challenge slacktivism, called “tracktivism”.

To see the way NotforSale tracks its impact, watch the interview here. It really is interesting and led me to my thoughts below.

This got me thinking about how we could do more trackable initiatives in CCP. So far, I think we do a good job of encouraging actual change. For example, our Operation Christmas Child urges students to fill a shoebox with toys and school supplies for the age group of their choice, which the CCP then mails to the original organization, Samaritan’s Purse. Another initiative called 5 Days for the Homeless Team has students spend a whole 5 days in the winter living outside with only the clothes on their backs. It is up to them to ask for food and alternative methods of warmth, while telling their stories and those of the homeless, spreading awareness as other students approach them. This is effective because they stay on campus and others who walk by may recognize them and wonder why they all of a sudden appear to be homeless. Throughout the lead up to these 5 days many donations come in, which gets sent to shelters for downtown Vancouver’s homeless.

After watching this interview I felt inspired because I realized that the CCP is indeed doing its part to create trackable results. Donations are actually sent in, and photos of the charity work in action are taken, to be later posted on Facebook. Lastly, the CCP takes the time to comment on the walls of those who helped donate or who came out to support their various events, further promoting involvement and tracking successes as they come. One area in which I do think we could improve however, is to encourage more discussion of the events, after they occur. Anticipation beforehand lends itself well to starting discussion, but often when an event is over, that charity and social issue is not discussed again for the rest of the year.

Brian Solis’ blog on how businesses are not making the pivot from lip service to social customer service, explains that while intentions to improve customer engagement and relationships via social run high among executives, the reality is that businesses aren’t putting their investments where their aspirations are. (See his full post here.)

That being said, where is this misalignment coming from? Why doesn’t top management not take social media seriously? When we enter the business world, how can we convince our bosses not to make the same mistake? To answer this, I would like to bring in some key points from an article I read in the summer, by the Globe and Mail.

Chief executive officers are accustomed to measurable results.

This is the fault of society’s pressures, and as I have come to learn from other classes, it is also the reason why operations management is seen as below the CEO’s level of responsibility, as something that can be pawned off onto employees to make more efficient. Because social media’s impact cannot always be clearly defined and measured, CEO’s do not want to waste their time on work that won’t result in praising news articles or glamorous awards.

So how do we change this once we get out there?

The article suggest seeing what you can do with a social media campaign, and setting objectives. More importantly, making sure these objectives tie back to the company’s overall growth objectives. I think this is the step many marketing enthusiasts/experts forget. To really convince upper management to believe in your tactics, you need to be able to communicate their relevance to the business.

The article also suggests defining:

• A clear definition of your target market
• A clear understanding of the problems you solve, and the benefits of your products or services
• A description on how you will position your products or services
• Your company’s unique selling proposition; what sets you apart from everyone else
• Marketing tactics – direct mail, advertising, social media, etc.

Although these concepts are indeed important and need to be thought through, the article does not delve into the how. It is not easy to define your target market, or to truly understand your unique selling proposition. Companies must invest in market research to find the patterns and behaviours that are most characteristic of their most interested demographic. To do this, surveys or focus groups can be designed. To ensure customer participation, small incentives like free giveaways, trials of your product, or gift cards are a good idea. Research will also help you understand the perception your customers have on your product and specific brand, which will allow you to identify the company’s issues through the eyes of consumers, as well as which benefits of your product are most appreciated by customers. Only then will you have a better understanding of your target market and can position yourself properly, above the competition. Even then, training or brand ambassadors may be needed to get these key points across to your sales team and to ensure the entire organization understands your product and its benefits, as well as your consumers and their expectations.

Clearly, convincing top exec to accept your marketing initiative is not as simple as the article makes it appear. It does not occur in well-defined steps (as the bullet points suggest) but rather each point leads into the next, and builds a foundation for accomplishing the rest. It requires an entire strategy within itself of identifying issues and recommending solutions, before you can even begin to discuss your well-laid out specific marketing plan. But if you lay these issues and solutions out first, it will be clear to your managers that you understand how your marketing initiative can relate back into the business model, and compliment its success. This is the real HOW to win over top management.

The article does give a few other suggestions, such as “winning over the audience” and “using analytics” but I believe these are the most pressing, and where I feel I could add more value. (See article here for more info.)

Since I grew up in a baseball family, I am a big fan of the game. This fact, coupled with my degree specializing in Marketing, meant I naturally found Brian Solis’ interview with the social media director of the San Francisco Giants interesting. Here are a few of the highlights, and my insights on them. (And I have to add: my dad would be proud of this post!)

Baseball is probably the most traditional sport out there, with strong roots in its past, typically slow to adopt changes. It is America’s beloved past time. Yet despite this, it has managed to adapt in today’s changing environment, making powerful use of social media. Why? Because as Brian Srabian said: baseball is inherently social. Fans have always enjoyed taking pictures of them selves in the stadium, and discussing game strategy or player performance with each other. Now, this sharing and conversing has progressed onto Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, where there is actually so much user generated content that teams must have their own social media managers to help compile, guide, and contribute to the online discussion.

As is expected from user-generated content, fans are the ones sharing their photos, videos and updates for the team, adding more value and credibility than if its source was strictly from the team’s social media manager. However Brian Solis urges viewers to think further about how sports teams can realize and leverage this, and how the value is not from the fact that fans can control the content, but because they feel they need to share it. Fans feel compelled, to share because they want people to be a part of it with them. I think this reality raises a good point about the need for community. People want to share their experience with others who understand the true value behind what they feel passionate about, so they have someone to relate to, or even show off to. These psychological reasons speak volumes as to why brand communities are so important. With these loyal communities now posting and discussing online, it has become that much easier for the team (much like a company) to monitor them and identify who their main influencers are that build up the rest of the community. This can be valuable information for detailed segmentation and targeting, as well as knowing which fans to converse with to continue the online discussion and attempt to engage other less-involved fans.

To watch the video: Brian Solis Interviews Brian Srabian

As marketing students, we are often asked by aunts/grandpas/friends/ __(name your skeptical acquaintance here)__ “Why should I take social media seriously?” Usually I know what to say, like: it can make your company stronger by allowing you to listen to consumers, react, and build faster and more efficiently. It gives you constant visibility with an audience, and allows you to create and build a community surrounding your brand, increasing loyalty. It even helps lower the time it takes to convince customers to desire your brand; when someone from social media lands on your site to make a purchase, they do it faster.

But I have to admit; at times I am at a loss for words, especially when the conversation takes a turn towards some specific social media sites. For example, Viddy, a new social network that is catching on, is an example of how the value added by social media tactics is not always readily apparent. Viddy is like Instagram for 15 seconds (or less) videos. Take a look at a campaign 6S Marketing (click here) attempted to test out Viddy’s effectiveness. Personally, I see little value in their $5 To Pay It Forward campaign. I understand the sentiment behind trying to spark the trend of random acts of kindness, where others follow their lead and make their own Pay It Forward video clips. However, 5-second clips do not seem like the most powerful way to do this. Longer videos would at least allow for more explanation to each story, and recognition to those paying it forward. Although Viddy is clever to cater to our short attention spans, let’s face it: people usually need more than a quick example to embrace the sentiment of charity (like a specific cause they relate to from their own experiences, or a longer story they can build up sympathy towards).

In general, the purpose of creating a promotional or entertaining video is to hope that it goes viral, spreading awareness and likability of your company, brand, or cause, as far as possible. This is why Youtube became so popular. But a five second video? Anything that can go viral on Viddy, can go viral on YouTube. I fail to see the differentiated benefits. One can argue that any picture posted on Pinterest can be posted on Facebook, yet Pinterest is now considered to be a well-known social media platform– Why can’t Viddy do the same? However, Facebook is perceived as a way to share personal photo albums, to show off your life to friends and family. Although some do post static images with words and designs, that was never a part of Facebook’s original purpose, and it is not necessarily what customers expect from it. That is why Pinterest was able to differentiate itself, by creating a platform specifically for sharing bulletins of images. Alternatively, I believe Viddy will struggle to convince consumers that a platform for sharing tiny video clips will be of long term benefit.

To check out more examples from Viddy yourself, go to www.viddy.com

When discussing the psychological side of online searches, the subject of consumer behavior appears to be forever changing, even faster than our textbooks can keep up with. But is it really changing?

One blog that caught my attention was from Brian Solis in his reference to “Generation C”. (Refer to Brian Solis’ Blog) In one post he associates Generation C not to the Millenial, (those who were born after Facebook and tablets became a way of life, and who can’t fathom a world without them) but to those that live and breathe online searches. He describes them by saying:  “They’re always on. They rely on the shared experiences of strangers to guide their actions.” According to him, this is the group of people that will dictate the future of how marketers reach, advertise, and connect with consumers.

Right now, the social norm is to have a Facebook account, Twitter account, perhaps a Pinterest or Yelp account, and maybe a blog. But for the everyday majority, our social media existence does not reach far beyond these platforms. What Brian explains is how this norm is going to advance. The way I picture his idea is like this: more of us will become more like the one or two friends we deem to be “tech-savy” because they use online customer reviews for what seems like every purchase they make, and they enjoy posting their opinion about products or services they’ve used in the past. He goes on to say that as long as a company is not too reactionary, but instead is pro-active in planning future marketing tactics, then this new and improved majority will create a great opportunity. As Brian reminds them: “You’re not competing as much for the present as you are for the future”.

Although I find the concept of Generation C interesting, and I agree that online trends are constantly changing and improving, to me, this type of person will not become quite as widespread and prevalent as he discusses. I think technology will continue to evolve, but the everyday person will not. The average Joe will remain uneducated. Joe does not search for the best downloading torrent site. Joe does not search for online forums that discuss improvements for the latest version of computer programs. These topics are over Average Joe’s grasp, and will only continue to be as technologies advance. Indeed many people still don’t know how to properly write search parameters (like putting a + in front of the most important key word) and think that writing a full sentence into the search bar will get them the most accurate results. I think the majority will continue to be made of those who remain ignorant about the possibilities of the online world, simply because they only go online to download music, or find an essay topic, or shop for clothes, or fix their printer, or pick a nearby restaurant– and that’s it. They use it for rather menial tasks, and they do not use it as a channel for communicating their opinions or finding advice.

The Internet will not become a tool that everyone uses to make every decision. Society will remain dominated by those who do not actively participate in the online community, and who trust few, preferring to take recommendations from the word of mouth of friends instead of strangers identified only by an online username.