Mar 19 2010

Can Social Media Help Blunt “Mean” Greens Influence?

March 19, 2010 – 12:54 am

So, in the latest turn of events in the pell-mell race to “sustainable” and “green” and “post-consumer” products, we hear  from researchers that green people are mean people? C’mon!? The Guardian pulls this one out from the journal Psychological Science, quoting psychologists Nina Mazar and Chen-Bo-Zhong, who say that those who wear their green consumerism on their sleeves are likely to have something up their sleeves!

Do Green Products Make Us Better People? is in the current issue of the journal, and is based on a game and some other approaches that probably intrigue psychologists, but puzzle the rest of us. Bottom line: They say that you/we who are green are not as interested in sharing with others and will cheat on the game and lie about it afterward. In a variation on the found-money-on-the-street Candid Camera/wallettest.com bit, the team also let conventional consumers and green consumers decide to pay themselves from an envelope.  The greens? Six times more likely to “steal” than the conventionals!

A fellow psychologist commented in the post:  ”At the moment in which you have proven your credentials in a particular area, you tend to allow yourself to stray elsewhere,” he said. (John Edwards, Tiger Woods, David Letterman, anyone?)

Just what are all of our ” social” networks doing to shape good behaviors?  There are endless examples of their impact on voting, health, and even , as we’ve blogged about on these pages before. I’m hoping that other research will take hold here, with the help of good communicators, and bring these errant greens back to society’s fold.  University of Pennsylvania’s Michael Kearns believes a small minority can win over the majority, so why not believe the majority can affect the minority in this case? Kearns’ work seems to support the concept of “influentials” at work in our business, and the idea that extended networks can spread influence. The article quote: ” ‘Influential’ people can determine the outcome to their liking.” (lots of connections made a subject influential)

Can we continue to use social media to shape the discussions so that we don’t suffer the abuse of the green elite (think, Al Gore’s planes)? Or, for that matter, can the effective use of influence shape the sustainable or green landscape farther and faster so that behaviors are more uniformly noble and aligned with the ethics of doing right not only by the environment, but our fellow men and women?

An ongoing experiment by Dominion Virginia Power to attract consumers to buy into more renewable energy sources is proving that at least some greens are willing to put money in instead of taking it out. Over 6,000 customers have joined the Green Power program to purchase certificates from the power company to assure some portion of the bill is generated by renewable sources.

Network for Good, Zoetica and many others are making a dent in this goodness part, and if Dominion is making a dent in the sustainable part, I’m confident there is a way for these ends of the economic spectrum to meet and create even greater good for the environment. Maybe we haven’t hit the tipping point in our efforts to move toward sustainable behaviors, but the continued building of our networks to address sustainability as well as all-around goodness will go a long way to making our planet a better place.

 
AddThis Social Bookmark Button By Michael Whitlow | Posted in Internet Marketing | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments (0)
Mar 15 2010

PR has Social Media “Buffet” Problem

March 15, 2010 – 9:06 am

I heard a great analogy this weekend in a discussion about the online theft of music versus the continuing propensity of Boomers and Gen-Xers (almost alone in this) to still pay for their music in the form of CDs or iTunes purchases. The remark went something like this: “Just because you’re able to observe my behavior at an ‘all-you-can-eat’ buffet, your so-called research has no value in predicting my order in a fine dining restaurant.” People will sample a lot, but they won’t always buy what they sample.

Buffet or Fine Dining?

It go me to thinking about the value of virality. To extend the music metaphor, I want fans, but I really, really want supporters, frequent attendees at my concerts and, even better, evangelists. My client, for instance, may be enthusiastic about my ability to get folks to take a look at YouTube, but how do I make sure we both keep our eyes on the prize – conversion of samplers to proselytizers.

We eat a lot. I was not surprised, for instance, to read recently that each of us is consuming information at a clip of almost 12 hours per day on average and collectively we got in about 10,500 trillion words. Seems that the all-you-can-eat information buffett is just getting bigger, with each American consumer getting over 100,000 words per day on average, according to the 2009 “How Much Information?” report of the Global Industry Information Center of the University of California, San Diego.

Combine that impact on each of our diets with recent insight from Barrucuda Labs about who is really using Twitter, for instance, and we might take away some important cautions for our colleagues who have fallen in love with social media. Percent of Twitter users with 10 followers or more by December 2009? 26. Percent of Twitter users following less than five people? 51. Those power users who are eating in the Twitterverse buffet are really chowing down! Are they your best engagement partners, proselytizers or customers?

The report also estimates that 34% of Twitter never have posted, and a huge 73% of Twitter’s users tweeted less than 10 times. So, nearly all of the tweets result from about 25% of Twitter doing all the writing.

Looking across social media, the same patterns are likely to hold to a great or lesser degree. And it’s also true that those who play the numbers game in social media can still point to the millions who came and fed at their particular buffett, thus potentially pleasing management or client. We should all be alert to two key points often stressed on The Buzz Bin.

First, the numbers don’t mean a thing unless you have a plan to affect the attitudes about your organization or client and, more importantly, create the behaviors critical to success. Views without  further engagement are only worth what they bring to your awareness, and don’t necessarily have an effect on the success of your new marketing efforts.

Second. and probably more interesting to me, is this notion of the difference between eating at the buffet and eating at a fine restaurant. In which place are you more likely to stop and really taste the food?

 
AddThis Social Bookmark Button By Michael Whitlow | Posted in Internet Marketing | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments (3)

SxSW Vibe: Enough Social, What’s Next?

March 15, 2010 – 4:29 am
3353708117_15117f31eb.jpg

by Geoff Livingston

This year’s SxSW had an interesting flavor to it (image by marcatsworld). You get the strong feeling that conversations and panels about social media have hit the wall. There’s an air of autumn to the conversations, and a consistent undercurrent revolving around what’s next.

Everyone knows that organizations are still rapidly moving towards adoption and there are still, MANY, MANY best practices to be adopted. Yet, there’s no longer a newness to the dance; rather an acceptance that it must be learned or a conversation about continuing to refine skills. From MysPace and Digg to Facebook and Twitter conversations, social media fatigue reigns in Austin.

The vibrant SxSW conversations focused on new technologies or new applications. From new contests and social good to GPS based activity and mapping, people were focused on what’s next. And for the heart of the interactive community, the early adopter community, this makes sense.

What does this mean for the average communicator? We are in a phase where it’s no longer hip to announce your new social capabilities. You either do it, or you need to quietly learn, adapt and get it. Further, it needs to be integrated within the larger offering.

At the same time, I sense we have a big mouthful to chew with social. Verticalization and specialization within social will be a huge factor. While mobility continues to be a big factor (FourSquare vs. Gowalla, for example) and is getting wrapped into the social conversation, there’s an unease as we seek what’s next. Maybe we already have what’s next, but there sure seem to be a lot of icebergs looming in the dark…

 
AddThis Social Bookmark Button By Geoff Livingston | Posted in Internet Marketing | Comments (3)
Mar 5 2010

The Trust Veneer Problem in Social Media

March 5, 2010 – 1:32 pm

Yet another trip. Yet another lost bag.

Finding Trust Amid the Crowd

I am increasingly aware of the challenges businesses face in earning real trust, and this week I was left (without a change of clothes) to ponder yet again just what is going wrong in this regard. My airline can’t get me and my luggage to the same place at the same time. My car has a mind of its own about braking and acceleration. My bank sees the issuance of credit cards as an opportunity to get in my pocket for more fees. Can the fall of capitalism be far behind?

I used to feed empowered by Tweeting about such things or writing a letter to the president of the offending company, but I’m just getting weary and resigned to a more old-Soviet-style capitalism (or is that socialism?). You know: learn your bag isn’t where you are; go find ”the line;” trudge up to a counter to be confronted by a disinterested clerk…things we used to poke fun at Eastern Bloc countries about.

So, in a triumph of form over substance via technology, I can now be told that my bag is resting comfortably in a plane’s belly in Chicago (when I am in Phoenix) and that the fix for my accelerator can be made in two months, but I’ll have to make a separate appointment for the fuel line problem that could cause a fire to occur at any time. And wait… the good news is that I can make the appointments online!

Trust is getting lost the deeper we move into the ersatz “connectedness” of the social media world. The importance of the things that can’t be seen from the ticket line when we are conducting our transactions — the intangibles – are even more key to differentiating these days, but peace of mind and confidence and trust and seem to slip farther away for many companies, even as they increase attempts to connect to their audiences.

Edelman’s research for the Trust Barometer seems to disagree with this on the surface, but amidst what the research touted as an increase in trust recently (who could forget 2009?), there was this killer point: 70 percent say that businesses will revert to old, bad habits once the crisis is over.  As my grandfather used to say of a neighbor who betrayed trust between outpourings of neighborliness, “I trust that man about as far as I can throw him.”

Here’s the plea (and I’m looking in the mirror on this one). Let’s all of us who are involved in marketing soon get over the shiny object of social media. We have created a way to hear customer feedback, and we have used it to solve problems. We have created communities around products and services. These are only good things if they contribute to genuine, solid change instead of the veneer of change.

The trust veneer has developed some significant dings. People are thinking that we can’t solve the issues we face. They are marching in the streets to protest programs that deliver healthcare to uninsured fellow citizens. They are saying that government should take control of executive salaries. They are worried that their financial advisors are getting rich at their expense. Whether we work for Obama or for Ms. Smith on Main Street, the importance of building and maintaining trust has never been greater.

Matthew May, author of In Pursuit of Elegance – Why the Best Ideas Have Something Missing,  wrote a good post on the subject recently, offering a roadmap for moving from the rational to the emotional in people with whom we are trying to engage beyond the veneer. He suggests zeroing in on several questions: “Will this waste my money?” (economic); “Will this work reliably well?” (functional); “What will others think of me?” (social); “Will this somehow be painful?” (physical), and ”Will I think poorly of myself?” (emotional).

Putting yourself into the minds of others with these questions (and keeping them in mind for yourself) will go a long way toward improving real trust by true engagement. These are the heartfelt questions not often articulated, but always in mind as people relate to one another.  Make it your business to answer them for your customers and others with whom you want trusting relationships.

 
AddThis Social Bookmark Button By Michael Whitlow | Posted in Internet Marketing | Tagged , , | Comments (0)
Feb 19 2010

PGA Shanks Tiger Woods Decision

February 19, 2010 – 2:49 am

Eventually, it had to happen. Tiger Woods had to speak in “public” about his, uh, situation.

But, did official golfdom have to provide the venue?

Tiger Mounts Comeback

Tiger Mounts Comeback

Enough has been said about Tiger to fill several PR crisis communications classes, and the true, sad fact of this matter is that too many of us still care too much about his plight. The most troubling aspect of the whole deal, aside from the obvious family matter, is that his catting about has cost golf, the game, a great deal. And, the money contributed by the tour to worthy causes, estimated at over $100 million by CNN, will similarly diminish, taking many recipients into this messy wake, as well. Oh, and this doesn’t even count the multitudes of ticket scalpers and corporate hospitality providers who have suffered a recession on top of the recession.

The reward for this family-professional golf-charitable cause demolition derby? The PGA invites him over for what Jeff Shain of the Los Angeles Times writes today is probably one of the most highly anticipated mea culpas since President Bill Clinton’s.

This is a bad PR move for the PGA. Even if, as TMZ reported, the association’s leader made a bit of a blunder in commenting on Woods’ rehab circumstances, that little slip should NOT have caused him to feel obligated to agree to this show/apology.

It’s understandable that the PGA is a bit nervous about their sugar daddy staying away from the game any longer, and the, well, commerce of the thing just may have figured a little bit into this decision to host the first of Tiger’s public amends. But, the public relations value to Tiger of delivering this monologue at TPC-Sawgrass has to be balanced against the lack of any real rationale (except commercial) to allow it to happen in one of the homes of professional golf.

The better solution would have been to welcome Tiger back with open arms after the apology. The apology could have been staged in a major arena  or in a rehab center closet and still would have received worldwide coverage, questions allowed or not. The crisis for Tiger Woods is not the PGA’s crisis, even though his economic impact on the game is significant. And, if the public statement backfires, as James Moore suggests in his Tiger Woods’ Dumb Advisers commentary in The Huffington Post, then the PGA and Tiger both lose.

Without Tiger, there is still the game, and I can only wonder if the Royal and Ancient at St. Andrews would have hosted such an affair from their vantage point of over 100 years of governing the game. I hope not.

 
AddThis Social Bookmark Button By Michael Whitlow | Posted in Internet Marketing | Tagged , , , , , | Comments (1)
Feb 12 2010

Sharing Awe

February 12, 2010 – 2:45 am
I’m often asked by clients just what it takes to “go viral” or “get a million views.” It’s really quite simple, it appears. All you need is awe.
Courtesy SXC

Courtesy SXC

There is nothing more interesting than human relationships and responses, even in the virtual world, and humans use relationships to spread happiness. The British Medical Journal said that social networks may spread happiness from person to person after studying almost 5000 individuals for 20 years in the Framingham Heart Study. Happiness in this study was shared through close relationships (spouses, family, neighbors, group members),and seemed to spread more readily than unhappiness through the network. Generally, happiness spreads to those nearer the center of a network better than to those on the edges –  like a virus. So first, dear posters and sharers, spread happiness where you can. Positivity is a pre-requisite to experiencing awe.

In some interesting recent research, University of Pennsylvania researchers studied The New York Times list of most-e-mailed articles, according to science reporter John Tierney, and over six months, analyzed thousands of articles. Jonah Berger and Katherine A. Milkman found that people like e-mailing articles that struck positive themes, and also noted that intellectually interesting subjects stimulate sharing.

People, it turns out want to share articles that inspire “awe.” If your product or service or point of view contributes to or creates overwhelming feelings of wonder or admiration, you are well on your way to gaining traction in your social network. It’s a tall order, for sure, but just think if we started our conversations about our latest and greatest thoughts, services or products with the question: “Will this inspire awe?“  For my own protection, let me admit that this post will be at least one step removed from awe, but it does point out just how high the bar is raised for the truly viral event in the social networking world.

Virality is a challenge, of course, in that many expect “new” or “improved” or “different” or even “surprising” to drive the conversation. Seems they don’t. “More emotional stories were more likely to be e-mailed, the researchers found, and positive articles were shared more than negative ones,” Tierney writes. Longer also bested shorter, it appeared. (“Surprising,” by the way, did help, but there were factors in the most shared that exceeded mere surprise.)

I like the idea that we ought to hold up “awe” as the hallmark of something worthy of sharing. As authors Berger and Milkman suggested, an awe-inspiring subject prompts us to view the world in a different way. It opens up our minds. The “Awe Rule” could put me out of business, too, on some fronts, but at least I minght not have to read as many posts about the sleeping habits of Facebook friends.

Take a look at this research, and ask yourself how you can contribute to awe today. I’m damned if I can think of another post for next week that fills the bill, but I’ll be working on it.

 
AddThis Social Bookmark Button By Michael Whitlow | Posted in Internet Marketing | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments (3)
Feb 9 2010

Trust Me

February 9, 2010 – 7:00 am

 By Mike Mulvihill

 2667337875_0af24ec979_mPhoto: Exercise in Mistrust from Black wolf

Okay, so the last 18 months have been near cataclysmic for many Americans.  We lost our money in the stock market, our jobs and even our homes. We’re mired in a two-front war. We loaned money to save the very institutions that created the financial collapse of the Great Recession, only to have them thumb their noses at us by loaning little of our money to help small business and average American’s while they continue to pay out big bonuses.

 No, I’m not disillusioned (well, maybe a little).  But now the 2009 edition of the highly respected Edelman Trust Barometer reveals that we have lost trust in virtually every form of communications, most industries and all but a few people. To this, I feel I must quote Homer Simpson, “D’oh!”

I trust my dog and my mom less this year than I did in early 2008.  (I pick them not only to make a sardonic point but because neither has a computer or cell phone where they read this betrayal.)  As Richard Edelman said about the study, “The events of the last 18 months have scared people.” Damn straight it did.  And fear is the antibody of trust.

 Michael Bush’s article Monday (Feb. 8) in Ad Age about the Trust Barometer purports that the survey shows that social media waned in 2009.  The evidence?  The number of people who view their friends and peers as credible sources of information about a company dropped by almost half, from 45 percent in 2008 to 25 percent.  Not surprising given the general sentiment and how many more people are using – or, perhaps more accurately, misusing – social media over this same time period.

 Several blogs, among them Going Social Now, disagree.  They even go into great detail about what makes certain individuals more credible than others and that individuals are more credible sources of information about products than they are on companies.  I mostly agree with these points.

 But Edelman staffer Steve Rubel does a good job of putting things in perspective – “…for social media the Trust data shows that we’re desperately seeking out experts.  It means that we’ll have to work harder to build credibility through online thought leadership.”

Who is credible?  The sources we trust more this year than we did in 2008 include CEO’s (26 percent), government officials (27 percent), NGO representatives (44 percent), financial/industry analyst (52 percent) and academic experts (64 percent).  While increased trust in CEOs and government officials is, at least to me, surprising, their numbers are still relatively anemic. (And to put this in perspective, the study says I trust my friends as credible sources about a company on a par with the CEO?   I don’t think that’s saying much about the CEO.) Meanwhile, perceived independent experts – like analysts and academicians – carry some considerable credibility.

There’s a lot of noise in social media and a lot of companies using social media as part of their marketing mix.  Like any medium, perhaps those with the most knowledge and expertise in a specific topic will carry the most weight – and create the most trusted messages in the social media space.  There’s nothing new there.

 
AddThis Social Bookmark Button By Mike Mulvihill | Posted in Blogging, Branding, Internet Marketing, Social Networks, communications, market research, social media | Comments (3)
Feb 8 2010

Fragmented Branding – The 21st Century Reality

February 8, 2010 – 4:05 am

2674913829_fe491d7768.jpg

by Geoff Livingston

We live in a world where anyone can hijack a brand and put it on the Internet with their own views, positive or negative (image by Brent Nelson). Brand control no longer exists, in large part because of widespread fragmentation of traditional and citizen-created media. The resulting brand distortion creates a situation where communicators attempt to paint the abstract.

The abstract takes pieces and puts them together to create a larger picture. Sometimes the pieces are clear, other times they are not. In the case of fragmented branding, some pieces are issued by corporate, others are the expressions of stakeholders, positive and negative.

There’s no greater example than the current Pepsi Refresh campaign. A brief recap of the initial Buzz Bin post: Pepsi has opted out of the Super Bowl in favor of a $20+ million integrated campaign that features crowdsourced charitable giving, a contest form of corporate social responsibility.

Ironically, given the quality of this year’s ads, this may have been an incredibly brilliant coup. Both Richard Laermer and I dubbed the campaign an instant success on our podcast, simply because of the many conversations it has created. See Richard’s breakdown above in this video.

The conversations aren’t all positive. In fact, the nonprofit community has doubts and questions, many of which are legitimate concerns about the viability of the contests and the sustainability of the program choices. Pepsi acknowledges these criticisms and has engaged in dialogue. I like that they aren’t running, in spite of valid criticism.

And why should they? In spite of cause-based and marketing critiques, to the common American this is a huge investment in society and a big statement. The abstract brand picture, even with the smudges, is a pretty strong one for Pepsi. In fact, without the criticism one could argue that the conversation would be less believable and loud. Brand fragmentation in the form of generosity and community contribution works.

It should be noted that Pepsi did not just launch a social media campaign. The Super Bowl ads are missing, but the company has not left the abstract painting strictly in the hands of folk artists. There’s been serious PR as evidenced by stories like the CNN piece appearing in every major media outlet, as well as substantial advertising to notify citizens of Pepsi’s Refresh America attempts.

Welcome to the fragmented brand marketing of the 21st century: A combination of mass campaigns featuring traditional advertising and PR mixed with corporate social responsibility efforts as well as authentic social media that enables both good and bad conversations. There’s no call to action beyond doing good, because Pepsi simply wants to refresh its brand. And in this case, it’s a win. I guarantee you that people — as in the people who walk into Safeway with a grocery list — will think about Pepsi again, and in a new light. Fragmented branding measures the composite view — not the individual wins or Monday morning quarterback complaints — to determine success.

Three Additional Musings for Those About to Experiment

1) Pepsi is relatively early in the crowdsourced social philanthropy game, but not the first. What was notable in this project was the size of the purse, as well as the opt out of the Super Bowl. Copy cat marketing efforts are sure to arise, and less successfully so. Less money + me, too copycat = a yawn.

2) Corporate social philanthropy needs to be authentic to the core of the company. Customer-centric efforts with crowdsourcing efforts are cool, but ultimately represent a novelty especially for niche brands that are not serving mass markets. They will be better served building programs around the corporate culture or strategy. For example, if one is a software company, one might focus on digital freedom, transparency, developing programming jobs in the U.S., as well as technical education in high schools and universities.

3) Contest fatigue is setting in. And criticism of cause-based contests is also on the rise. Make sure this is the right tactic as opposed to engaging your community in a different, more sustainable way.

 
AddThis Social Bookmark Button By Geoff Livingston | Posted in Branding, Case Study, Internet Marketing, communications, social cause, social media | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments (16)
Feb 5 2010

Toyota Took Risks. Did PR Know?

February 5, 2010 – 12:22 am

The recent massive recall at Toyota, aside from breathing new life into a moribund General Motors (an Obama conspiracy?), raises an interesting question for public relations folks. If your management makes a conscious decision to take more risks in manufacturing, is it also obligated to communicate this strategy’s potential impact to stakeholders, particularly customers and investors?

Toyota Taking its Lumps

Toyota Taking its Lumps

The Lean Manufacturing approach at Toyota puts standard parts into a wide variety of vehicles in their lineup, and by doing so raises the risk that failures will cause havoc to the company’s public relations, or worse, harm to its customers. So, how do you balance the additional profit per vehicle with the increased risk that if something goes wrong, it goes wrong big-time?

As Daisuke Wakabayashi reported in The Wall Street Journal last week, the Lean Manufacturing technique is seen as risky even by its promoters. David Meier, co-author of “The Toyota Way Fieldbook” and a consultant on the approach, was quoted in the Journal: “The cost may be decreased in the short term, but the risk is increased.”

Some experts say that Toyota’s perceived quality score could fall 20%, leading to a 4% drop in the residual value of its cars. The company could face difficulty borrowing for its operations (Fidgety Fitch put the company on negative watch recently).  Some analysts predict impact on sales of over $1 billion. Add to that the lawyers’ fees, the increased advertising and incentive costs, and you have the makings of a true corporate crisis.

Now, Consumer Reports has a dedicated page of blogs on Toyota issues.

Another overlooked-but-important question, then, is “How much is this going to cost me when I sell or trade my Tundra pickup?” Toyota had about 17% of the 10.7 million car and truck sales in 2009, according to WardsAuto.com. In recent years alone, their huge share increases mean that they’ve put millions of us at risk of experiencing a drop in the value of our vehicles. 

Does a company engaging in this risky business of Lean Manufacturing have an obligation to tell customers and investors of the risk? Or, is it caveat emptor? Toyota lists 10 risks of doing business in its 2009 annual report’s automotive section. Lean Manufacturing didn’t make the list. While it may not be material to Toyota in an accounting way, what about reputation and brand risks based upon exposing Toyota owners (both of their vehicles and of their shares) to such significant costs?

Roger Vincent and Ken Bensinger, reporting in The Los Angeles Times this week, focused on the “public relations blitz” begun last Sunday, quoting some PR professionals saying that the recent communications represent a “too little; too late” approach. In their reporting, Vincent and Bensinger characterize CTS Corp., manufacturer of the pedals, as apparently “taken by surprise” by the recall.

Was the Toyota PR team surprised, also?

Regardless of what happens to Toyota sales, it is important for the company to look at this incident with its legendary attention to detail. While the recall certainly has an impact on the seven wastes that are so high on the Toyota Production System radar screen, there is an even better reason to analyze and address the circumstances that led to this foulup.

The confidence of consumers can be a fragile thing. The discipline of disclosing risks to consumers and investors has to include revealing risks like the one coming from Lean Manufacturing practices. This means that a very deep look into operations should be married with a propensity to overdisclose; both to the company’s public relations, risk and sustainability professionals, and other, external stakeholders.

Toyota will survive and even thrive. The bigger opportunity here is to rewrite the book on how a manufacturer tells the rest of us about our risks due to its way of doing business. Toyota is in a great position to change the rules in favor of such transparency.

 
AddThis Social Bookmark Button By Michael Whitlow | Posted in Blogging, Branding, Internet Marketing | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments (10)
Feb 1 2010

Five Tips for Aspiring Internet Communicators

February 1, 2010 – 12:06 am

Patagonia: The Road to the Perite Moreno Glacier

This post is for the youth who aspire to become Internet communicators. In an era when fame and follower counts are overemphasized, it seemed apropos to offer what I consider the best assets of an Internet communicator. Guides to attain optimal personal brands and the most amount of Twitter listings represent red herring pursuits as compared to the cultivation of these skills. I would suggest focusing on where it matters most; the development of timeless strengths that transcend media. Here are the five tips:

1) Become a Great Writer: Writing well still represents the most important skill set of a communicator. The two paths to great writing (in my opinion): The ability to creatively convey great ideas and crisp grammatically-correct prose (I know I’m one and not the other!). Whether you prefer Dostoyevsky (ideas) or Turgenev (prose), you need to be a master of one and/or the other online.

Great writing also necessitates storytelling. Without writing excellence it will be hard for people to consider your content worthwhile. Even videos and games require scripts… Master writing and you master the essential cornerstone of communications. In that sense, I value an English or Literature degree as much if not more so than a Communications degree.

2) Subject Matter Expertise: This represents my greatest hope for younger communicators. One must develop substantial experience in a communications area or vertical market segment to truly become a master. The great bloggers and influentials out there not only know how to communicate, but they also possess subject matter expertise. That’s how they rise above the pack. Their experience clearly distinguishes them.

For me, over the past 16 years I’ve cultivated experiences in the technology/telecom vertical market, the nonprofit vertical market and the communications profession. I don’t stray beyond those areas of conversation, because frankly I don’t have substantial experience to draw upon, and could only wage a mediocre conversation at best.

3) Passionate Creativity: While creative skill with words can be intermingled, one still needs a muse. Passion inspires creativity. If you love what you write/talk about then it will ring through like a red shirt in a sea of grey.

When one has passion, brilliant metaphors, unique perspectives and emotion all interweave themselves into communications. You can see this from 140 characters to long form. Passion manifested in creative expression exudes itself attracting interest and conversation.

4) Other-Centric Thinking: Beyond all of the Cluetrain rhetoric about no market for messages, etc., truly great Internet commmunicators serve their stakeholders. One could debate whether this is intentional or an act of natural instinct. Regardless, the great ones know their stakeholders and give them what they want regularly.

5) Develop Consistency: Whether you are simply a conversationalist or a content creator, you must offer a consistent presence. There are plenty of self-proclaimed experts and there are others who demonstrate flashes of brilliance, but they rarely stand the test of time. The great ones deliver regularly and frequently over time.

Leading Internet voices become known for their consistency over the years, and build reputations around it. A word of caution though: Regularity doesn’t equate to brilliance. This skill is listed last for a reason. In the words of Emerson, “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.”

 
AddThis Social Bookmark Button By Geoff Livingston | Posted in Internet Marketing, communications | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments (28)