Media Week

Bloggers have noticed that Google is running stories saying how disappointing Cuil is.

Is it just a coincidence these stories are appearing on Google's search results? Conspiracy theorists could have a field day. Can the mighty Google really be worried about this new search rival? Take a look at the post below. What's really going on I wonder?

http://www.chrisbrogan.com/is-google-putting-a-horse-head-in-cuils-bed/

A new search engine called Cuil (pronounced 'cool') www.cuil.com has just launched and it is hoping to take on Google.

It indexes 122bn web pages - about three times the amount covered by Google.

It is interesting that it wants to focus on privacy and content over popularity. The layout looks a bit weird but that is probably because I'm so used to Google. Still it's pretty brave to try to take on Google. Cuil by the way is apparently from an old Irish word called knowledge. Does Cuil though have the famous luck of the Irish. It would be interesting to know people's first impressions...

Tired of the US presidential election? Can Bush save his legacy? Will Obama's promise of change, change and more change work? Will Bill and Hilary be back in four years' time despite trying to dish the dirt on Obama? Will doddery McCain convince the electorate that his time in a rat hole in Vietnam means he's more suited to be commander in chief? Go to the post below, scroll down to bottom and watch the video of the US election and enjoy yourselves......they are all there singing and dancing. What's more you can slip in a photo of yourself...how about this for a bit of powerful viral marketing from Jib Jab...

http://www.scottmonty.com/2008/07/why-i-wont-make-viral-video-for-you.html

Gordon Brown was hoping for a bit of magic dust to be sprinkled on him when Barack Obama came over, but sadly it was not to be...

He may have left these shores but you can stay in touch with the presidential hopeful on Twitter. This underlines just how smart Obama's marketing team is in terms of using social media to connect with audiences and to get them to participate in his presidential bid. Gordon Brown twitters too but not with the same results. I wonder why?

http://twitter.com/barackobama

www.itsopen.co.uk

 The fact that so many companies are refusing to review their firewall policies has been compared to the many short-sighted agencies who had access to the web blocked because senior management did not understand what was going on during the early days of the internet.

Back then senior agency management thought too much time would be spent on 'idle' surfing, as Mark has pointed out in response to my Dell piece. And the same is now happening with large organisations. They cannot see what videos are on YouTube about them; they cannot see what blogs are saying about them; they cannot read  links which agencies send to them because of the firewall policies.

The same companies that prevent their experienced communications staff from viewing whole sections of the web are totally out of touch. They have their heads in the virtual fast moving sand like idiotic ostriches. Hiding behind the firewall and pretending that social media does not exist is not an option. The web is democratic. It is part of today's business culture. It is new and fundamentally changing that culture. Any company that does not understand this will go into terminal decline or be the subject of social media network driven rallies and boycotts which it will be powerless to see or pick up until it is too late.

Why do we allow dinosaur firewall policies to determine how communications staff can respond to social media? Bring down the firewalls and join the fast moving world of blogs and videos and photos now and see what people are saying about your company and do something about it!!! Stop pretending this world is just for digital natives or your children.

www.itsopen.co.uk

Dell has made the decision to open up social media networks like Facebook to staff. It is really refreshing to see a large company taking such a progressive step. There must be so many hard working and frustrated communications professionals out there who can still not read links you send them or watch how their brands are being portrayed on the likes of YouTube because they cannot get through the firewall.

Who sets these firewall policies? How long are companies going to kid themselves that they cannot let their communications teams access social media networks? What's going to happen when younger staff join - or don't join these companies because they are so hopelessly out of touch?

http://direct2dell.com/one2one/archive/2008/07/10/Dell-Opens-Up-Social-Media-Sites-to-All-Employees.aspx

Just watched a clip on YouTube which makes fun of the marketing stereotype of talking through messages without listening directly to the needs of the customer.

The video focuses on a couple dining in a local restaurant where he represents The Advertiser and she represents The Consumer. She complains he never listens or understands her needs. He says he declares his love with big TV ads, print campaigns and a billboard in Times Square. She insists she has changed but he hasn't, so he suggests 'coupons'!

It's good illustration of how not to engage with social media and how the online world of marketing and advertising is fundamentally changing. It is also a good way to challenge traditional marketing communications teams who do not understand the world of social media and feel that it is just a small thing which doesn't affect them. The clip has been around for a while but it hasn't lost its impact.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkOHsjZKBB0

www.itsopen.co.uk

Sprout has launched on the web. It's a new widget creation and publishing service. So you can create and publish widgets for free and share them with social media networks (http://sproutbuilder.com). It is quick and easy and will encourage more people to share content online without reference to traditional organisations.

www.itsopen.co.uk

Just finished reading a really useful book called The Open Brand by Kelly Mooney and Nita Rollins which I thoroughly recommend. The main argument is that old mass marketing push tactics are being superseded by the pull of an online population prolifically creating, sharing and influencing each other. The authors argue that it is now imperative that businesses open up to consumer involvement in their brand's messages and offerings.

According to the authors there are now closed brands and open brands which have different worldviews and characteristics:

Target consumers (closed brand worldview)

Fostering communities of consumers (open brand worldview)

Monologue (closed)

 Dialogue (open)

Awareness (closed)

Engagement (open)

Push (closed)

Pull (open)

Created by marketers (closed)

Co-created with consumers (open)

Brand management (closed)

Brand Stewardship (open)

Apply that quick test to your clients. Using the above criteria, are they open or closed brands? Are they dialogue brands or monologue brands? Do they just aim to raise awareness of their brands or do they engage?

 There are so many so-called progressive companies who still refuse to accept this new model. They see social media as just another thing to deal with at the right time. Brand marketing is being re-written and many brands are going to be left behind. There are of course plenty of exceptions. Take Innocent for example. They are streets ahead of many brands in terms of how they are immersing themselves in social media, engaging with their customers. They realise the power of networks of influence and the fact that it is through social media that consumers are now going as they make their purchasing decisions and form their views of brands.

It's probably worth pointing out that the social media strategy consultancy I set up is called ItsOpen (www.itsopen.co.uk).

Just been sent a link to a great introduction to social media. It's quick, simple and packed with interesting facts.

 bonafidemarketinggenius.com

 www.itsopen.co.uk

There are plenty of very senior communications directors out there who talk about 'establishing the voice of the brand' online.

These people are dinosaurs. Wake up. A fundamental communications shift is taking place online. There are people talking about your brands on blogs; bookmarking articles on your brands, sharing them with their friends and making videos about your brand or editing your TV commercials. The days of carefully manicuring the brand image are gone. The days of top down pronouncements are not going to work in the buzzing, messy web democracy. You cannot impose brand guidelines on the babylon of voices talking about your brands on the web. Online you have lost control of your brand. So what do you do? You start to join in the conversations.

 Forget monologue. It is time for dialogue and for communications directors who are prepared to take risks and choose new business models.

 www.itsopen.co.uk

Primark is doing all it can to try to rescue its reputation after Panorama exposed supplier links to child labour practices.

The company has a sponsored link (www.ethicalprimark.com) which pops up whenever you do a search on Primark and Child Labour. It is packed with videos and statements on Primark's policies and its response to the original Panorama programme. It probably cost a lot to put together.

Will the online strategy work? Buying search links reflects a traditional broadcast mindset. It might do a bit to offset some of the controversy which was generated by the original programme. However long term Primark needs to be engaging with customers and stakeholders online in a meaningful way and having conversations. It needs to join the conversations about Primark. Aboveall Primark and its views on how it conducts business should be a natural part of the internet. They shouldn't have to try to buy attention to get their point across and buying attention is not sustainable as the web - through social media tools - is now so much more dynamic.Having a sponsored link will not stop people blogging about Primark and how is Primark going to react to those conversations if people can't be bothered to follow the link or refer to it?

Iit is interesting to see that underneath Primark's sponsored link is a site called Cleanupfashion (www.cleanupfashion.co.uk). It comes high up the search list on a natural basis and is all about issues in the fashion industry. It has a section on Primark and a discussion forum. If people go here first, they will not see any of the material on Primark's sponsored link and as far as I could see there was no involvement from Primark in that site to put across their views. Nor was there any evidence on that site that they have acknowledged Primark's sponsored link or the material it showcases.

The key point here is that companies can issue statements online and buy space to publish them. But there is no guarantee  that people will pay any attention to them. The best thing Primark could do is to develop a strategy to immerse itself in the online fashion consumer culture and start to listen to what is being said about them and join in, correcting mistakes and pointing and linking to their official policies. Buying space does not constitute a conversation nor is it going to enable Primark's messages to travel effectively through all the relevant fashion consumer networks.

 www.itsopen.co.uk

So what are the social media networks of the future going to look like? Charlene Li, author of the excellent book, Groundswell, has got out the Forrester Research crystal ball and made her predictions.

 In an interview with Fast Company, she says: 'Instead of going to a certain place like Facebook or MySpace to be social with your friends, your friends will go wherever you need them to be. If I'm reading a book review on Amazon, I'll be able to see my friends' reviews - even if those reviews are written on a blog someplace else. Theere will definitely be platforms, but the key thing is they won't be walled gardens.'

Charlene Li also makes the important point that banner ads don't work well within a social media network context because there is no way they can lead to a personal conversation.

That is the key point, everyone is having conversations online now. Anyone can create the news. The audience is taking over. They own the internet and they are sharing ideas, thoughts, views with each other without referring to companies or brands. Control is impossible within this context instead companies need to engage.

http://www.fastcompany.com/articles/2008/06/interview-charlene-li.html

 www.itsopen.co.uk

Barack Obama and Bill Clinton both ran into problems when they were caught out by 'citizen journalists' during the recent Democrats presidential nomination campaign in the US.  They said things to representatives of the Huffington Post (see below) which they would never have said to a clearly identifiable Fox News or BBC reporter.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mayhill-fowler/obama-no-surprise-that-ha_b_96188.html

The web audience is participating and creating their own news. The Huffington Post is advertising for more citizen journalists. How long before citizen journalists get some scoops over here?

 www.itsopen.co.uk