There are a couple of complimentary pieces up by two Canadian blogging journalists, Mark Evans and Mathew Ingram, which, in their own ways talk about what I believe are the cornerstone ideas behind blogging… authenticity and feedback.

Mathew brings up a great point about idea marketer Seth Godin who is not leading by example in building relationships with his customer base. Seth has decided, by disabling comments on his blog, not to engage his community in conversation. The irony of this of course is that Seth is renowned for talking about engagement… If Seth has a site, he should be talking to his audience on a fairly regular basis. That’s part of the job of blogging. I need to be able to give direct feedback to the person who’s opinion I’m reading. It’s a conversation. This is a mistake corporate blogs can make as well, broadcasting vetted communiques out and expecting consumers to care…

Take away: leave the comments on and talk to those who would take the time to engage with you, otherwise it’s just a press release or a lecture.

It’s interesting that newspapers are starting to get this basic concept, which both Mathew and Mark can atest to:

We added comments on every story at the newspaper I work for, the Globe and Mail, because we would like to hear from readers — some of whom, it must be said, seem to like shouting or criticizing just for the sake of criticizing, but many of whom have intelligent and thoughtful things to say. The BBC has its “Have Your Say” feature for the same reason. In many ways, it’s the evolution of the letters section, or a more civilized version of call-in radio shows. We benefit from it, and so do our readers, and I would argue blogs do the same.

And from Mark:

At the end of the day, many journalists will have no choice but to blog if newspapers are going to survive and thrive. I think these blogs will be written differently than newspaper stories with a bit more personal colour. Blog are also going to be important tools to build a closer relationship with readers, which will means the “conversation” will go both ways rather than reporters broadcasting to readers.

I mentioned after the mesh conference that I was concerned about the impact of declining readership, declining ad revenue in print and online as consumers use news aggregators like Google News or RSS feeds. I wondered how newspapers could continue to pay the bills. Consumers being able to engage directly with the reporters can be a great way to provide a reason for the person to visit the site or blog of the paper… and ideally generate revenue. By being authentic and open for direct and honest feedback the newspaper has become part of the conversation. People will respect that and, hopefully, reward it monetarily over the long-term.

Technorati tags: Mathew Ingram, Mark Evans, newspapers, Seth Godin, Blogging Cornerstones

The panel, moderated by Tyler Hamilton of the Toronto Star, featured Tom Williams of givemeaning.com, Dave Pollard & George Irish of Amnesty. The topic, albeit a lofty one, was well covered in the lively discussion between the passionate and engaged group.

It was a thought provoking conversation that had social responsibility themes, but consistent truth about human nature and community interactions.

Some thought starters:

• Blogs, as they stand now, are “Web 1.0″ according to Tom. Traditional word of mouth is still required (sending an email, an IM, posting a link, etc.). Where “Web 2.0″ can work is if the tool becomes the disseminator.

• Tom: There is a danger of online philanthropy… anyone can start a project and generate interest in an instant. There is also the danger that only projects that are saleable will get the ‘buzz’ and become funded, not necessarily the projects with the greatest need. We should ask the question with each program we introduce – “Is this needed & is this best. Does it solve the real problem?” {my take on this is, yes, but, this is not much different than traditional fundraising and projects, there is a need for caution, but also an opportunity for determining best practices and communicating them to the public at large right now, before it becomes too late to bridge the gap of trust vs. marketing}

• George brought up an anthropological point that I think speaks to both the non-profit, fundraising community, but also to marketing as a whole as it is the basics of human interaction and community building. Online we act as individuals; offline we act as a group. The need is to learn to bridge the gap and Web 2.0 helps facilitate and plays a transitional role. There will be limitations and then new growth. The technology may not be all things & address all needs at this point. This insight is an important one for marketers as well as for fundraisers and community/ activism building – online we are only an individual until we are motivated into an action or behaviour that brings us into a social network & spurs action. That is the power of the internet, innovation and integration. The internet can motivate and drive individuals to take action as a group. The group will then continue to interact with their “offline” community and network and the idea, or action, will spread (hopefully positively if you have a good message or product to begin with… whole other story)

• The panel had a good exchange about what engages and motivates people in this media saturated environment & agreed that in the end non-profits need to “make what’s important, interesting”. Tom coined it the “Return on Generosity” and argued that web 2.0 tools create the connections that provide the ROG. He gave an example of a woman working in Niger and blogging about her experiences in the village, doing the work, for the sponsors and donors who funded the project. Check out his blog for more information about the work he is doing with Givemeaning.com, it’s well worth the click.

• An interesting question from the audience summed up the problems with proving the web 2.0 case at this point without specific measurements and standards in place, which is: is the audience expanding with 2.0 or are we just talking to the same engaged 1.0 people?

• And finally, George discussed the very issue with the ‘newness’ of the blogging and online activism movements with the question “do boots on the street matter more than online petitions?” Does a petition signed by 1000 people mean as much as 10 people holding signs on the street with the local news present does? [I have an additional question - does the ease with which we can submit an online petition then make us lazy to take 'real' action? Or is it a stepping stone to connect with like minded others and spur 'real life' participation?]

Social Bookmarks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
]]> http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/05/can-web-20-change-the-world-mesh-panel-day-1/feed/ 0 http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/05/mesh-day-2-wrap-up/ http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/05/mesh-day-2-wrap-up/#comments Wed, 17 May 2006 16:42:20 +0000 tamera http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/?p=10 mesh ‘06 is officially over and what a great time it was. The conference had it’s ups and downs, but it was by far the best I’ve been to in a long time. The relaxed format and discussions with the audience were perfect.

The final days focus on marketing was an interesting mix of ‘traditional’ and ‘rogue’, with a healthy dose of entreprenuers and old fashioned business sense thrown in. I have been a bit worried about the ‘bubblet’ aspects to 2.0, but it sounds like if we keep the channels of communication open and are willing to share ideas and missteps we can make an impact in the long run.

A few key take-aways from two of the final sessions (Building a brand online & Engaging the blogosphere):

• It’s still a conversation. Only now the customer isn’t mute. It’s a two-way one.
• If you are a corporation, sooner or later you’ll hit the blog radar. It’s up to you if you choose to engage as the conversation will take place with or without you.
• It’s no longer enough to have a ‘brand identity’ each of your products needs an identity as well. The message should be built into the design (i.e. the first 2 “i’s” – innovation and integration)
• It is all about the experience. But not in the traditional sense anymore. It’s not enough to throw up a flash piece that showcases your product: you need to make the product and the interaction come to life and be relevant and engaging.
• Corporate blogs, if done in an authentic voice, with sincerity and humility can be a huge brand builder. But the company has to be prepared to take its lumps if necessary… and participate in the ensuing conversation.
• New metrics systems are needed to track the power of the medium in all its facets. Click-throughs, immediate conversions and impressions won’t cut it anymore to judge the success or failure of a campaign. Tracking conversations started, trackbacks, comments, site traffic and referrals must start to be measured.
• The companies who will succeed in this new age will be the ones with a clear mission (ala Google, Apple, etc.) vs. the ones whose mission is to make The Street happy each quarter. Innovation will happen there first.

Lots of food for thought and great ideas flowed out of those panels. They really felt like conversations vs. lectures. The success of the “unconference conference”.

I do have a couple of suggestions for the next go round… one of the things I found a bit disappointing was the lack of leveraging the power of web 2.0 within the conference itself. Why not have the participants submit questions for the panels and enable a voting system to determine which ones get asked? I know the audience was just chomping at the bit to get involved, why not take it to the next level and involve them right from the beginning?

I also would have liked to see dedicated channels for each panel (i.e. the IRC in the final panel of the day). Unfortunately, the way it was implemented, with the board being open for regular chats, as well as the live blogging became too confusing to keep track of while the session was happening… there’s a place for free form and a place for info presented in a somewhat linear fashion ;)

Great job to the Five Amigos who organized the event: Stuart, Mark, Mathew, Mike & Rob. Looking forward to next year!

Social Bookmarks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
]]> http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/05/mesh-day-2-wrap-up/feed/ 1 http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/05/meanwhile-at-the-cma-convention/ http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/05/meanwhile-at-the-cma-convention/#comments Tue, 16 May 2006 16:33:21 +0000 tamera http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/?p=9 So while the ‘rogue’ marketers (hat tip to Tara Hunt) are meshing in Toronto, the big boys of marketing and advertising are doing the annual Canadian Marketing Association convention in Montreal.

And just what are they talking about? Well, being exceptional. Leveraging the influencers. Un-massing media.

- Marketing Magazine (Sub req)

Roberts [Kevin Roberts, CEO worldwide, Saatchi & Saatchi] said we’re now in the “attraction economy,” which is all about consumer engagement. “Today’s market research is asking the wrong questions to the wrong people at the wrong time, and it is not asking questions around engagement,” he said. The only question marketers need to ask about a piece of advertising is, “do you want to see it again?”

“If you’ve engaged (her) and she wants to see it again, then you’re probably going to be successful.”

Roberts also said he’s “sick of hearing about” ROI. “For me, ROI stands for return on involvement. And that’s what we need to be measuring, not return on investment.”

Which consumers should marketers try to engage? Roberts said ‚Äúinspirational consumers: the bloggers, the people who are viral, the people who have a point of view. Old school marketing is about heavy users and early adopters. It‚Äôs all rubbish. It‚Äôs all gone. You‚Äôve got to find those people to connect with. They‚Äôre out there, they want to interact with you… these are the people who are going to make brands live or die going forward.‚Äù

It’s also key to make brands not just irreplaceable, but irresistible, Roberts said. For example, “you can replace the Apple iPod with any other MP3 player that’s cheaper and probably has a longer battery life, but do you want to?”

Sounds like Roberts has been reading his Seth Godin.

I agree. We need to connect with people and give them something exceptional in return for their click, purchase, time, information, etc. What I take exception to is the assertion that all marketers need to ask about a piece of advertising is “do you want to see it again?”. No, I want to ask… will they buy my product or service and then tell all their friends about it? I’d rather make the sale the first time they see the ad… probably save the client some cash on the media buy to if we were aiming for exceptional products vs. exceptional advertising. Sometimes the two go hand in hand, like the iPod, but in the end, if the product was subpar to begin with all the killer graphics and clever double-entendres in the world ain’t gonna make it the next big thing.

At least we know the ‘traditional’ marketers are trying to get it. And that’s a good thing.

Social Bookmarks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
]]> http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/05/meanwhile-at-the-cma-convention/feed/ 0 http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/05/mesh-day-1-thoughts-impressions-and-media/ http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/05/mesh-day-1-thoughts-impressions-and-media/#comments Tue, 16 May 2006 04:14:30 +0000 tamera http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/?p=8 It was an interesting afternoon at the mesh conference. I regret I missed the opening two keynotes, as the focus on media (new vs. ‘traditional’) was a decidedly interesting one.

To start off the afternoon, I sat in on the “Are bloggers journalists?” panel with Om Malik, Michael Tippett, and Scott Karp, moderated by Mathew Ingram. Although the conversation focused mainly on political bloggers and “breaking news” a few key thought starters emerged…

Om brought up a great analogy between the traditional print media format online (e.g. msnbc, biz2.0, etc.) and blogs. The ‘magazine’ format of the traditional layout and subject matter seeks to reach the largest audience as possible and believes they need to educate, or explain the concept of the piece, to them. Therefore their articles can lack the passion and direct focus of the blogs. The blogosphere on the other hand comes at the medium as an intimate conversation between knowledgeable friends. The assumption when you engage in a blog is that you get the authors premises and theories.

This meandered back into my thoughts when I was in “The Future of Media” discussion later in the day. The conversation centred around the instantaneous feedback journalists now receive via email or comments vs. the almost complete lack thereof in the years pre-net. Now journalists can immediately hear direct criticisms or corrections from an audience who may be much more knowledgeable about a particular subject than the journo who wrote the piece on it. Prior to the e-volution, the expert would have needed to have read a piece in a particular paper on a particular day and sat down to write and post a letter to the editor. Or called the switchboard and had their message transcribed. That’s a lot of work just to express a different opinion. That doesn’t breed engagement and change. The internet enables ‘real time’ feedback, day or night, any corner of the world. That’s the conversation that the ‘net has started. Everyone’s a critic. (I jest. Sort of.)

Another interesting item to come out of “The Future of Media” panel (Angus Frame, Tomer Strolight, and Tomi Poutanen), was the notion of commoditizing and diversifying news as the newspapers are losing readership daily to aggregators, blogs and alternative outlets. My first thought on this is: well of course you have no revenue stream… you decided 5 years or so ago that you’d give all your content for free to Google and Yahoo! to aggregate and distribute free of charge. The argument back then I’m sure, was that the wider the reach the bigger the audience back at the mothership. Except, just like email and preview panes, consumers are skimming and moving on. All in the comfort of their Google news homepage or RSS reader. This is a prime example of a real need for forward thinking. Of which I have none at the moment. It’s a challenging spot for the papers to be in. Giving content away for free, losing ad revenue in the process and paying for the staff to produce all that free content. Main take away: mass reach does not always equal healthy ROI, so plan carefully.

The highlight of the day for me was the ‚ÄúCan Web 2.0 Change the World?‚Äù panel with Tyler Hamilton, Tom Williams, Dave Pollard & George Irish. The discussion touched on so many key points that relate not only to the non-profit world, which was the focus, but to our interactions online and offline as people. I‚Äôll have a post on it tomorrow… the focus on day 2 is marketing and Web 2.0. Looking forward to a lively discussion. ;)

Social Bookmarks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
]]> http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/05/mesh-day-1-thoughts-impressions-and-media/feed/ 1 http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/05/mesh-conference-today-welcome/ http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/05/mesh-conference-today-welcome/#comments Mon, 15 May 2006 16:39:54 +0000 tamera http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/?p=7 Ahh, the joy of a first post!

Welcome to my new interactive and integrated marketing blog where change is a good thing and Web 2.0 isn’t scary (or as revolutionary as you think). For those who are curious as to the meaning of (3i) or who I am (I suppose there are people in the world who haven’t made my acquaintance as of yet), please check out the “about” posts for the scoop.

My goal with this blog is to gather and disseminate new ideas and strategies for innovative and integrated marketing. I anticipate having irregular guest posters pontificating on their areas of expertise, be they creative, tech, QA, project management or marketing. We so often seem to work against each other in agencies or large companies my goal is to allow us all to speak, learn and challenge each other in a provocative and creative setting and truly integrate, or mesh, our ideas. We’ll all be the better for it. And so will our clients. I won’t always agree, but I will always speak my mind… I hope you will too.

And on that note, the mesh conference is happening today in Toronto… I’m trying to catch the afternoon sessions today and will be there all day tomorrow. Stay tuned for updates on the gathering of enlightened intellects and journalists… ;) Should be a good one.

Social Bookmarks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
]]> http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/05/mesh-conference-today-welcome/feed/ 0