BLUF (Bottom Line Up Front) Using a carefully constructed combination of analytics, Google Ads and Landing Pages you can determine interest level, effective campaign approaches, and viral word of mouth for a new social media initiative.

In working with a recent client we discussed launching a new social media campaign.  However there was some resistance because it was significantly different than anything they had done.  The objections resolved into three issues:

1.       How do we know that anyone is interested?

2.       We’ve never approached our customers this way before, how do we know they won’t reject us?

3.       What approach will work best in this new way to get our customers attention?

After some discussion we were able to set upon a scheme that was able to answer all three of these important questions at the same time.  We designed a Google AdWords campaign.  It addresses the concerns in the following ways:

1.       AdWords is a user driven initiative, in other words the user has to enter the search words into the Google search box.  If no one is searching on these terms then no one is interested.  If people are searching for these terms we still need to qualify them as searching for them in the sense we mean, rather than for another use of the words.  This is done with carefully worded advertisements and with negative keywords in our campaign.  We also can control the volume of people exposed to the ads by limiting our daily ad budget to approximate the number of visitors we want to bring to into the program.

2.       Using a carefully built campaign we are able to control exactly what people are searching  for, which ads they see and then most importantly what landing pages they visit.  (Note: never run a Google campaign without landing pages, you are wasting  your money IMO).

3.       On the landing pages we designed the experience carefully to test different approaches.  We used a single ad (to reduce the number of variables) combined with Google Website Optimizer to do A/B testing on different copy.  Some pages pushed users towards a Facebook Fan pages, others towards Twitter accounts, and a third offered an equal choice of either one. 

Using Google analytics we can measure the number of people sent to the various social media sites.  A challenge now is determining the conversion rate of people sent to a Twitter or Facebook page who sign up.  This is confused by the viral spread of existing members telling friends about the pages.

 If you have a tool that can determine the web source of a new friend or follower on Facebook or Twitter let me know.

Throughout the process we are careful to maintain an alignment between ads, landing pages and social media accounts.  We ensure that we are not over promising or failing to deliver on promises.  So if the ads offer coupons we ensure that the social media accounts deliver.  This is harder than it seems, because the tendency is to want to promise the things you are planning for the future, not what you are prepared to deliver today.

Unfortunately, non-disclosure agreements prevent me from revealing much detail but the testing so far is a big success.  We are getting clear answers to the three primary objections. 

Give me 1 Good Reason why don’t think this approach will work with your social media needs.

Posted via email from ckieff’s posterous

I just discovered the newish app: Instant Tweetup thanks to the Next Web blog. And I'm intrigued and a little frightened by the possibilities of the app for advertising by bars, nightclubs, restaurants, and other retail establishments which can benefit by spur of the moment purchase decisions.  The app allows you to send a tweet to anyone or everyone up to 10 miles from your current location.

The App appears targeted at people who want to have an "invite anyone within a 10 mile radius" type of party.  Now I don't many people like that, at least not since I was 25.  But I know lots of businesses who would like to do that.  This type of app seems like a great idea for inviting people to your retail business by advertising a sale, special, etc.  How about a Twitter Only special?

A little bit of play with the App from my home just outside Manhattan indicates it is limited to 30 people in a single blast.  But you can keep pulling up lists of 30 different people in a large metro area like NYC without much of a problem.  I had it set on 10 miles which includes all of Manhattan about 10 million people and a few hundred thousand Twitter users. Dialing my range down to 1 mile brought up the same 11 people time and again.  The only people located would be the ones who enable their location on their Twitter profile, which is off by default.  So the pool is limited, but should be growing.

I'm not sure if that was what Twitter had in mind with their geo location implementation but I don't think it's far off.  This is the first app that I've seen that allows you to send bulk messages to everyone within a radius of your location.  But I know that if I had a business and an iPhone I would be using this bring people in if possible.

The question is, how will these retailers implement this app, and will they us it in a Social Media friendly way?  My guess is that many won't be subtle about it and they will find themselves labeled as spammers.  This will give rise to a new breed of social media experts, the reputation repair specialists.  (If they don't exist already.)

Give me 1 Good Reason why you don't think this is the future of Twitter advertising?

Posted via email from ckieff’s posterous

I use TweetDeck to follow my Twitter conversations.  I have over 5500 followers so it can be a challenge.  There is no way that I can possibly keep up with what 5000+ people are saying.  I’m going to share of the things I do with TweetDeck that help me with Twitter.  In a later post I’ll do the same with Facebook.

One of the main reasons I choose to use TweetDeck over the other fine products on the market is the cross platform compatibility.  I can create search columns with complex searches on my PC and then get the same search on my iPhone with  couple of clicks.  Saving my searches to the TweetDeck server is a great advantage in my opinion.

·         Column Arrangement:  The first 4 columns are the ones you can see on a typical screen so they are the most important.

o   #1Mentions #2 Direct Messages- I want to first see if anyone is messaging me and expecting a response. 

§  Important Note- Tweets with @ckieff anywhere in the body of the message will end up in my Mentions Column.  If you put @ckieff at the beginning of the message, only you & I and people who follow BOTH of us will see the message.  Power users often start a message with period + user name, like this “.@ckieff” this is so that all of their followers will see the message, not just those following both users.

o   #3 Group BFFs- These are people who I often communicate with and whom I respect.  I get much of my news from them.  I also add people here who have great suggestions for blog posts to read.

o   #4 Current Search- I usually keep the 4^th Column on a search for a topic I’m watching now for a client project.  Here it’s the #140Conference

o   The second group of 4 columns is variable based upon your priorities

o   #5 All Friends- this is the fire hose of information.  With my 5000+ followers I can only occasionally dip my toes into this stream to see what’s up.  If you want to get my attention or the attention of any Twitter user with over 2000 followers you need to mention our names in your tweet.

o   #6 LinkedIn Network Updates #7 Facebook Status Updates- I encourage you to use the LinkedIn and Facebook connectivity to collect all of your messages in a single place.  I’ll cover these capabilities in later posts.  Thanks to  @dariasteigman for this tip.

o   #8 New Followers- This is a great place to see what’s happening with your account.  You can also do some basic analytics to see what types of tweets gain you new followers.

·         I have a few other columns, following multiple accounts which I manage, and some running specialized searches for clients.  But these first two screens are where I spend the bulk of my time.

·         Create Groups or Lists

o   I prefer groups to lists, mainly because I found the list creation so tedious on the web page.  Now TweetDeck supports lists in the same way the support groups so it’s just as easy to make either one.  (But I still make groups out of habit.)

o   @nwjerseyliz is the king lists in my book and she wrote an excellent FAQ on lists for Mashable.

·         Little known features in TweetDeck:

o   Show Follower Count in Tweets- Notice the “5113” below Amanda’s avatar?

You can turn this feature on in Settings>Twitter>”Show follower count in tweets”  Unfortunately it only works for people you are following, not in search columns.

o   Look up user profile and recent tweets- Click on the User’s Name in the information line.
>>>>

o   Look up a single Tweet on Twitter’s website- Click on the Date time in the information line.
 >>>>

o   Review a conversation between two or more people-  this is my personal favorite because if you missed the original question you can catch up quickly by clicking the “in reply to…”
 >>>>

o   And finally Amanda’s tip from the tweets above: Click your name off, before you start writing a tweet, this way you won’t send it till you’re sure you are ready:

o   The last tip is to keep in mind that these functions in TweetDeck, and others like previewing links and photos all use your API quota.  Twitter only allows each user to access their computers a limited number of times each hour.  This is to reduce their work load and to slow down spammers.  They recently increased the number of times (# of API calls) your computer can talk to their computer but it’s still not unlimited.  So use these features with a little prudence or you could find yourself shut down till the next hour passes.  If that happens you can always go to  www.Twitter.com and use that, there is no limit there.

I hope I’ve given you some good ideas on how to use TweetDeck and Twitter more effectively.  If you’ve got even 1 Good Reason on to use it better please leave a comment here.

Click here to download:

image001.emz (152 KB)

Click here to download:

oledata.mso (445 KB)

Click here to download:

image004.emz (170 KB)

Click here to download:

image002.emz (17 KB)

Click here to download:

image008.emz (17 KB)

Click here to download:

image007.emz (17 KB)

Click here to download:

image011.emz (17 KB)

Posted via email from ckieff’s posterous

It seems that I’m not the only one who is accusing the News Business of sensationalizing their natural disaster coverage:

http://www.newsy.com/videos/fear-mongering-in-natural-disaster-coverage

Posted via email from ckieff’s posterous

The breathless news anchor reports that Tsunami warnings are out for Hawaii following the devastating 8.8 magnitude earthquake in Chile.  For those of us who have been in larger earthquake (I lived in San Jose in 1989 during the Loma Prieta earthquake a.k.a. the World Series Quake) they are a truly frightening and sobering event.  The fear and terror felt by those affected is real and reinforced with every aftershock.

However, this morning CNN, MSNBC and Fox News were all reporting the Tsunami danger to Hawaii.  I’m not an expert but it would seem to reason that California, Mexico, the entire South Pacific, New Zealand and few other places are closer and in more immediate danger from that Tsunami than Hawaii.  I’m not trying to say that Hawaii wasn’t in danger, but rather that people who are not trying to sensationalize this event for ratings points would stop to think, isn’t there a better way for us to understand the true danger here? 

Then the respected Washington Post runs their sensationalist headline:

Tsunami strikes Hawaii, extent of damage unknown WashingtonPost.com 2/27/10

It turns out that Ensenada, Mexico, Santa Barbara, CA, Auckland, New Zealand, and American Samoa all had earlier arrival times for the Tsunami waves than Hawaii.  The source for this information, a graphic linked to in the same WaPo article.  (BTW WaPo, I believe that San Diego and Los Angeles are south of Santa Barbara so they would have been devastated first…) 

Why did they pick Hawaii for their sensationalist target?  It’s exotic and picturesque and part of the US.  It’s a great place for us to think of as being destroyed, yet it’s remote enough to not be close to home.  Oh- and by the way, it was early morning there and it’s not likely for them to have caused a panic.

That’s the real reason they choose Hawaii.  It’s 3AM there so we can speculate about how Hilo will be erased from the face of the earth and we won’t cause panic in the streets.  If they had speculated about San Diego, and LA, there would be panic in the streets and chaos. It would be irresponsible of them to do so and cause people unnecessary harm.  They could  and would be sued, and possibly lose their license.  However, with everyone in Hawaii asleep there is no panic, so no harm done. (That would be an interesting test law suit)

The problem is sensationalizing events for ratings points.  The same thing happens when a storm is brewing in your neighborhood.  The 7PM teaser for the 11 o’clock news reports breathlessly on the eminent danger you face, you must watch the 11 o’clock news to learn if you will die in the deluge to follow.

I’m not a journalist, I’m a marketer.  And I don’t know the ethical rules in journalism.  But I do recognize marketing when I see it.  And this the worst kind of marketing. If was in an email everyone would hit the SPAM button.  It is much ado about nothing.

The problem is that when journalists become marketers they can’t be trusted any longer as journalists.  This sensationalism will only lead to the further erosion of the field of journalism and hasten the demise of the print and video news organizations.  So not only are they failing to adapt to the changes in technology and consumption habits of their audience, they are accelerating their own demise with empty promises and crying wolf too many times.

Oh, the Tsunami that hit Hilo? 1 foot.  And LA wasn’t destroyed either.

Give me 1 Good Reason why today’s journalist/marketers deserve to stay in business.

Posted via email from ckieff’s posterous

BLUF (Bottom Line Up Front) Many ask what is the Return On Investment of social media.  They forget to ask the question, what have we invested in social media to gain a return?  Too often that investment is college interns who are guiding the social media efforts of your organization, and you get exactly what you (don’t  have to) pay for.

I was in a highly respected publication’s offices yesterday.  I’ll not name names, but you could check my Twitter stream or Four Square to find out where I was.  And the Director of Social Media for this organization talked about how they are depending upon their absolutely brilliant INTERN to guide them on social media.  I’ve heard this so many times recently I could just puke.

Times are tough for many organizations today.   Which results in a conversation that  goes something like this:

VP, “We need to get into this new social media stuff.  But there’s no budget, what can you do?”

Manager, “I’ll find a college kid who will work for credit, we don’t need to pay them anything.”

VP, “Great, get it going and report back on your progress.”

Manger, “Will Do!”

Jump forward 3 months:

VP, “Why is everyone doing spending so much time on social networks?  We need more productivity!”

Manager, “We are learning about how to use them and starting to see some positive results.”

VP, “What’s the ROI of the time we’ve spent so far?”

Manager, “We’ve… ummm… got the training wheels on and are just starting to understand how to use social media.  We don’t have a formal ROI measurement system in place yet.”

VP, “Well it’s clear that all this social media crap is over blown B.S.  I’m telling IT to shut down Facebook and Twitter so people can get back to work.”

Where could this possibly have gone wrong?  You don’t think that using an Intern who’s still in school and doesn’t understand business as your guide into the world of social media has anything to do with it?

In this case you get exactly what you pay for.  Paying nothing for someone who understands the technology is foolish. It’s like hiring a mechanic to guide you to on the roads instead of a GPS.

Someone who understands how children use social networking to talk with each other will not guide your business into the social media world.  If you use children as your guides in the social media world it will work- only if your business is trying to sell to children.  If you are trying to sell to adult business people, you need someone with business experience telling you how to use social media for business purposes.

There are a great many businesses today struggling to understand why they can’t use social media effectively.  And they are depending upon college aged interns for their guidance in the world of social media.  And they wonder why they can’t find the ROI.  Unless you are lucky enough to find a Bill Gates, Sergey Brin or one of the other wunderkind as your intern, you are not going to make much headway in social media without hiring someone with some experience in business and social media.  You can of course hire me.

So before you ask the question what’s the RETURN on my investment, ask what you have INVESTED to earn that return.

Give me 1 Good Reason why an intern is a good social media investment?

Image credit:  Flickr Uploaded on September 21, 2009 by Symic

Posted via email from ckieff’s posterous

This doesn’t need anything from me, so I’ll just shut up and say watch the video.

Posted via email from ckieff’s posterous

I was watching the TED video below and I learned a few things but one of the ideas is very important to marketing.

The important idea, offering choices isn’t always a good thing.  I’ve known this because I’ve studied web site design and optimization.  Many websites offer people too many choices and too many decisions on what to buy.  Many people are overwhelmed with the choices offered and simply can’t make a decision because of the myriad choices. 

But this video offered a new perspective on the “I’ve changed my mind” guarantee that is so pervasive in industry today.  In the video they offered people the option to change their minds for several days after the initial decision.  The experiment in the video showed that people who were offered the opportunity to change their decision worried over that option and were ultimately much less happy with the resulting decision.  They were less happy regardless of the decision they made, to change their minds or keep the original choice.  People offered the option to change their minds later were never happy because they had a nagging doubt that they had made the incorrect choice.  This resulted in long term dissatisfaction for those offered the option to change their minds later, compared to those who had to live with their immediate decision.

Many businesses offer customers this choice.  We’ve all seen the “90 Days No Questions Asked Guarantee.”  Most recently car makers with their no questions asked return policies last summer.  But the results of the experiment indicate this policy may be short sighted.  Are they actually sabotaging their customer’s happiness by offering a deal where the customer will most likely be plagued by their decision later?  It seems that is the inevitable result of such a policy.  I wonder if anyone has done any studies on how this works in the long run?  I for one will definitely carefully consider that option in the future considering long term customer value.

I also learned what simulated happiness is, that it exists and is real and can make you happier in your life.  The idea is that the guy who says he’s happy with just a little, really may actually be happier.  If you don’t know what simulated happiness is then take the 20 minutes and watch the video- it could just change your life.  I think it may change mine. (We’ll have to see how good I am at simulating.)

So now on to my guarantee, if you feel that you’ve not spent the last 3 minutes reading this blog please let me know in the comments below.  I will do 3 minutes of your work- provided that I can do that virtually.  I will write letters for you, read your emails and decide which are junk and which are important for you to read.  I’ll write Tweets for you.  Anything that I can do for you via computer.  So if you feel this blog post wasn’t worth your time tell me below and I’ll make it up to each of you personally.

Give me 1 Good Reason this blog post wasn’t worth your time.

Posted via email from ckieff’s posterous

BLUF(Bottom Line Up Front) I feel Google Buzz is only attractive to the Twitteratti who use Gmail (only 11% of the online email market).  Therefore I feel it’s going to make a big splash but die just like many of the Google’s other social media attempts.

Over the years Google has tried numerous new social media products to seduce the world away from their more successful rivals in that arena.  You may remember:

·         Picasa- Challenger to Flickr, photo editing posting and sharing

·         Google Video- Challenger to YouTube, they subsequently bought YouTube

·         Orkut- Challenger to Facebook, only successful in Brazil

·         Wave- Challenger to… well, that’s a good question

·         Google Talk- challenger to AOL IM, and Facebook Messaging

·         Google Docs (not really social but collaborative) Challenger to MS Office

·         Google Lively- Challenger to Second Life- now closed

Many think that when Google introduces a new product that it must be an instant hit because Google is so dominant in online technology.  I remember a very similar mindset at the beginning of the PC era.  When the PC was first becoming popular IBM ruled the market but only briefly.  Then along came Gateway, and Dell and all of the Asian imports that rapidly took the market away from the computing giant.

Google dominates online search.  Because of that, it is present in most people’s lives on a daily basis.  However in other markets it is in third, fourth or fifth place.  In online email Google trails in market share behind Yahoo 56%, and Microsoft 19%, at a poor 11% (Hitwise Feb ’09). 

An informal survey of social media experts reveals many of us use Gmail as a primary mail program.  The reasons are many, integration with Google Voice (free telephone follow me service) and simplicity with access from any web attached device.  But nerds like me use Gmail because a lot of other nerds like me use it. (we travel in packs)

Therefore, when Google announces a service like Buzz there’s a lot of buzz about it especially when it’s tied to the email most of the Twitteratti use.  Buzz will get lots of press, blog posts and people trying it out.   However, I feel it’s just a nerd parade and won’t take off until Gmail can crack at least second position in the race.  But Google is increasing share and apparently taking it from Microsoft according to the above chart.

To succeed in social media you need to overcome inertia of the people who have developed their current personas online.  With only a 10% market share of email users Google Buzz and it’s integration with Gmail simply doesn’t have the non-nerd following to do that.  So my prediction is that it will follow Lively, Wave and Orkut into the bit bucket of failed Google ideas.

And I hereby apologize to my readers for yet another blog post all a-buzz about Buzz.  I’ll not write about it again anytime soon.

Posted via email from ckieff’s posterous

I am very pleased to announce that Jeff Pulver has asked me to assist him in finding sponsors for the 140 Conference in New York April 20 & 21.  The 140 Conference last year was an unqualified success and one of the most sought after tickets in the social media scene in New York.  This year Jeff has vowed to create an even better event with more people and better speakers.  And it will be streamed live on the web for everyone who can’t make it to the live event.

You can’t charge people to sit in the audience and charge people to sit on the stage at the same time and make them all happy.

One of the reasons that I believe the 140 Conference is so exceptional is that Jeff has a belief that you can’t charge people to sit in the audience and then charge people to sit on the stage at the same time.  That is the way that most conferences are run today.  The people in the audience pay to attend and most of the speakers are sponsors who have paid for the privilege to speak to the audience.  This results in speakers who are often not very inspired, or particularly knowledgeable about the subject.  And they are often there to sell the audience their products or services so the speeches are a little bit about the subject, and a lot about sales.  This type of compromise leads to poor conferences where everyone is looking for the WIIFM (what’s in it for me) and coming up empty.

But at the 140 Conference things are different because the speakers are people with something interesting to say, and not just a few of them, but every one of them.  For this reason the conference is uniquely exciting and engaging. But don’t just take my word for it read a few of these posts by other bloggers. Therefore I am proud that Jeff has asked me to be a part of making this event a success.

If your company or someone you know is interested in becoming a sponsor for the April 140 Conference in New York, please contact me Chris@140conf.com or via this blog post.

Give me 1 good reason why I won’t be seeing you at the next 140 Conference?

Posted via email from ckieff’s posterous