Monthly Archives: December 2009

Media Bias against US Airways

On ABC World News Saturday, there was a bizarre example of the media’s hate/hate relationship with one of the nation’s largest air carriers, US Airways.

The story was about delays at airports, and a graphic of the average delays at America’s busiest airports was shown.

US Airways Graphic #1

The graphic was designed to look like an airport terminal, and a screen reminiscent of takeoffs and arrivals. But look more closely at the names on three of the bottom screens.

US Airways Graphic #2

For some reason, in this story about massive delays, ABC News chose to single out US Airways – in a story that wasn’t even about US Airways!

There are two possible reasons for this: One is a horribly misguided ad buy on the part of the airline, which I tend to doubt. Sure, they may have said, “yes, we’ll gladly pay for your animation if you put our name on it,” without asking what the context of the story was.

Now, if that is true, someone really needs to be fired.

Because the takeaway from this animation is that US Airways is consistently late in taking off at three of the nation’s major airports. The fact of the matter is US Airways was #1 in on time performance in 2008, and is predicted to keep this title in 2009.

Since the story was about the average delays for all airlines, people seeing this might think US Airways itself has this level of delay times.

Also, the three airports mentioned are the busiest in the nation – and all three have been in need of additional runways for some time. The reason these three airports have such lengthy delays is that not enough planes can take off – regardless of carrier.

And this all came after the story about an attempt this week to blow up a Northwest Airlines flight bound for Detroit. So people not paying too much attention came away with air flight terrorism, lengthy delays, US Airways.

If this didn’t happen because someone at US Airways was using up their annual media spend and didn’t watch where it was used, this story shows a strange bias against the airline that I don’t frankly understand. This is something their public relations department should definitely get on top of.

A Love Letter to Friendfeed

It’s hard to call Friendfeed a failure – a lot of people use it, and most of us love it. Still, it’s hardly one of the superstars of new media, not like Facebook or Twitter or YouTube.

What people share on FriendFeed

Friendfeed is the ultimate cross-post destination. Whenever you post something on any of your other networks, you can set up Friendfeed to post the message as well. If it’s a Facebook wall post or a Twitter post, a YouTube video you like… and actually anything that can be shared via an RSS feed. FF got the idea earlier than most on how to make RSS feeds work for people. Where Google Reader will get you feeds from established sources, Friendfeed does the same for anything your friends might be into.

What irks me, though, is that in so many ways it is better than its competitors. A lot if it’s ideas on how to have shared conversations were outright stolen by Facebook, which eventually bought it this year. If you like the way you get stories and videos and pictures on Facebook, that’s one of the things they took.

The difference is that your friends need to decide to share those things with you, where Friendfeed simply reacts to what they’re doing. It’s a more complete look at your friends’ lives. If they want to share more information directly with Friendfeed, it allows that too. And conversations take place in the comments, and these are much cleaner than what you’d see in a series of Twitter replies.

I dearly hope Facebook does not scuttle the Friendfeed ship. It just works so perfectly. It offers a much wider sampling of information that anything else available, and no one has managed to recreate it.

Microsoft Employee fired for improperly emphasizing the word, “Bing!”

I don’t know if this is a real former Microsoft employee or not, but I would love to know. If this story is true, Steve Ballmer is REALLY imbalanced.

And just because I’m such a 1938Media groupie, here’s Puppet Steve Ballmer’s reply:

A Collection of Things Not To Do With Your Landing Page

I saw this tweet a few minutes ago:

tweet

Which links to one of the worst landing pages I’ve ever seen:

Bad YouTube video, text that pushes past the right border of the screen, a lead form that matches the background color… He even misspelled, “effective.” Wow.

UPDATE: This webmaster has since fixed his border issue, respelled “effectively,” and called my blog “stupid.” You’re welcome! :)

Social Media Case Study: Ford Motor Company

As I said yesterday, this week I’m going to focus on finding the companies that have succeeded at social media by being social. In researching the short history of SMM, I found that there have been a number of individual campaigns that have helped brands create fans and drive purchases – what is interesting, however, are the cases where a company headed off a PR nightmare with it.

Scott Monty - Head of Ford Social Media

Case in point, Ford Motor Company. In the last year they’ve been hit as hard as any of the “Big Three” automakers in America. To make matters worse, an incorrect news story broke about their legal department demanding fan sites and forums to stop using the Ford name if their products were mentioned in them, and that they stop using Ford brands.

Think about that: You are in a very competitive consumer industry, and a group of people are not only brand champions of yours, but have gone to the trouble to make fan sites about your product. It’s the kind of word-of-mouth some companies pray to get.

The problem is, the site in question had been selling counterfeit Ford parts labeled as actual Ford parts. The move wasn’t designed to wrestle control of their logo, but to protect consumers from products they hadn’t made themselves.

How Social Saved the Day

Scott Monty is Ford’s Community Manager. He maintains a Twitter account the way I wish all top-level executives would:

  • It’s in his name.
  • He’s openly representing his company.
  • He shares internal details of his company.
  • He isn’t flushing out messaging and ad copy.
  • He is responding to people.
  • He posts daily.
  • If you bring up an issue with him, he’ll address it, not talk about what he’d rather you talk about.

As it relates to our PR fiasco story, this allowed him to explain just what had happened with the legal team, as it was happening. There was no spin to his posts, just someone trying to explain what was really going on. He was also maintaining several conversation threads at once with several people on Twitter who had heard the story of Ford burning Ford fans, answering their questions individually and honestly.

For PR professionals, this is unheard of. To actually share with the outside world what is happening internally would appear to serve nothing and no one.

The PR Disconnect at Work

This is where traditional public relations and new media split widely. PR professionals are either woefully unaware or refuse to accept that people today are cynical. We have all faced so many spin doctors at work that we can almost smell someone’s bullshit before they even start saying it.

So continuing to spin more of it, with the help of a legal team, days after the first mention of a problem, is completely ineffective.

Mr. Monty shows that using social media isn’t about spraying out everything you want said about you, and never reading the pulse of what they really are saying. Failing to do so makes you look worse than simply outdated. It looks like you don’t care. Ford could have easily shrugged off the outcry from their fans. They could have simply said, “well, we’re in the right – saying anything will only make it worse.”

This example shows that, in fact, doing nothing would have made this situation worse. Openness and being willing to answer the concerns of others is today’s smart approach to both public relations and social media.

Stop trying to control the message

This week I’m going to concentrate on sharing case studies of companies that have actually had real world success because of social media, and in spite of ignoring traditional dictums like, “control the message.” I hate that concept. Is there another phrase that could possibly be more totalitarian or fascist?

Keep in mind: When the Chinese government arrests, tortures and executes dissidents who want to tell the rest of the world about abuses, they are also “controlling the message.” I don’t hear too many people saying that’s a good thing either.

It’s not easy explaining to people why it is good to talk to your customers.

That’s something I’ve been having some trouble understanding. Maybe that’s very Gen X of me. But I’m used to assuming that advertising is evil, and if anyone tries to “sell” me on something, they must be trying to screw me. Social media is a company’s way of saying, “here’s the real us!” so cynics like myself can get to know them, and maybe buy some stuff.

However, there are still people who insist only on sharing canned messages from boiler plates, and ignoring ANYTHING said about them. The thinking, perhaps, is that the risk isn’t worth the reward. If you get to know five customers, you may have to actually talk to them. Maybe there’s even a fear of having to answer someone publically with a complaint.

There are a mass of articles on, “Five steps to social media engagement” or “Top 10 reasons you need to be on Facebook.” But there’s still precious little advice for getting an old world communications team to learn new world tricks. There’s still a fantasy that all this Internet stuff is a sideshow in marketing budgets, and that the real thing happens in poorly written press releases, commercials and print ads.

People who don’t get it can no longer simply be patted on the head and looked at with sympathy. They are now, officially, in the way. These are the people who invariably try to push new media away because it isn’t something they personally control in their office fiefdom.

The good news is you don’t need to fight them on their ground, using their college textbook and what they learned when they interned. There are more case studies of stellar success from people using SEO, social media, e-mail, and more than there are companies knocking it out of the park with press releases.

When these people argue against social, they almost always do it with examples of some company that used Twitter to spew more one-way ad copy, more nonsense that is, essentially, “Web 1.0″ thinking. When you can point that out, that someone slinging four messages a day on a company’s Twitter page while never saying anything back is not social media at all, then yes – failure is to be expected. The success stories don’t do that.

These stories are all you should have to bring to your boss, the one who only wants results. All you need to ask is, “Who do you want to be – Wolworth’s or Zappos?”

True to their word, Google adds Twitter results to search

Today I found Twitter results in Google’s SERPs, and I have to congratulate them on coming up with a smart way to post this stuff:

Google Streams Twitter Results

A lot of people I know – including myself, whom I’ve known longer than anyone – thought that when Google announced they’d include this information, it was insane. It seemed if individual Tweets were given the same weight as web pages, nothing would stem the tide of spam that would result.

As you can see here, though, the results are held in their own result area. Here tweets flow past in real time, they don’t appear alongside the other pages Google has found. (In this case, for AT&T.)

It also creates a much stronger defense of posting REGULARLY to Twitter, as older posts will float by quickly. Of course, if you’re the only one talking about your product, your tweets should stay visible here for quite a while. If you sell basketball shoes on the other hand, this probably won’t do you much good.

I’ll be interested to see if they roll this out for all search, not just major brands. Two years ago when Google said “integrated search” was the church all we SEOs would soon be praying at, they only did it for select searches. As a result, integrated search was nice, but hardly anything professionals needed to worry too much about.

If they maintain the same attitude with this, only giving Twitter results for Darth Vader, Nosferatu and their intellectual father Steve Balmer, this will be a fun gimmick for brands that don’t need the help, and make smaller ones justifiably envious.

Is it fair to compare Farmville to Twitter?

Facebook revealed their user numbers this week, and the biggest talk of the town is that, according to them, the number of people playing the Facebook game Farmville has exceeded 350 million, and that this is more than the number of people using Twitter.

Farmville - A farm sculpted to look like John Lennon

This is probably true. Facebook games are highly addictive. I’ve got a Mob Wars habit that just won’t quit, no matter how much the makers of the game keep screwing it up.

The problem with this comparison is, when you’re playing one of these games, you aren’t technically socializing. You can send people weapons in Mob Wars, or go to your friend’s restaurant in Cafe World, but you aren’t exchanging ideas or information. You’re not even carrying on a conversation. The only connection to social here is that it’s on a social network.

An aside, this is why I hate Facebook: It’s a bunch of neat tools, but hardly the best way to interact with others. “Social” on Facebook is an afterthought. It’s one of a dozen other things going on there, none of which are done terribly well.

Twitter on the other hand is all social and no filler. In that way it’s a little hard for some to get their heads around, as it doesn’t do any of the work for you. It’s only as useful as you make it.

Which is why people who use APIs or Twitterfeed to create their posts for them are such jerks and not worth following. They want to get some of that Twitter magic to rub off on them, but they don’t want to use it the way it’s supposed to be used: To talk with others.

What this all really says is that the average person doesn’t care about being social. The majority of people don’t care about keeping up on news or events. They simply want to be entertained. I think those of us who work in this industry tend to forget that, as we’re too close to it. We may kid ourselves about the number of people en masse using social networks, but the majority of them don’t use them the way we think they do. They aren’t all out there talking a storm up with each other, or shooting hilarious YouTube videos. They are largely consumers of media, looking to kill some time right now, and will talk to their real friends on the phone afterwards.

Disneyland Knows Branding

Just got back from Disneyland this week, and if there’s one thing the Disney Parks people know, it’s branding. When I say, “branding” I don’t mean signs and logos, either. Sure, you see a lot of those about. But those are just creatives – they aren’t “brand.”

Buzz Lightyear 2009

Me and my Girlfriend on Buzz Lightyear Astro Blaster

What’s brand? In Disneyland’s case, it’s being “The Happiest Place on Earth.” Just saying it doesn’t make it so. To make that true, the people who come there have to experience it for themselves. When they innovate new ideas for engaging their customers, it comes from an understanding of what they think would be fun, and therefore what would be the most fun to a visitor.

That’s why everyone who works at Disneyland is a “cast member” – calling to attention the fact that these people are more than simply watching a line or selling you candy. They’re part of an overall experience devoted to making you happy, and having fun.

If you’re a cynic, you won’t get it. I don’t blame you if you are, and there’s no shame in that. It isn’t for everyone. The point is the people there don’t just say, “Happiest Place on Earth” and hope enough people get suckered into coming.

It’s about believing in your product. Everyone I have ever met who worked at Disneyland has said it was the greatest job they ever had, because they had fun being there too. Similarly, if you want people to enjoy what you have to sell them, you need to believe in it.  You have to tell them about it from a place of awe. You have to be so into what you are selling, you exude that kind of enjoyment in it yourself.

In short, it takes a whole lot more personal investment than simply saying your stuff doesn’t have any trans fats.