Marketing Roadmaps

Archives for May 2006

The beleaguered press release has a new form,maybe…

by

Today Todd Defren and the Shift team announced their social media press release format. Using of course their new format 🙂 I’ll add my well-done to the chorus with some but’s:

– I still wish we weren ‘t so focused on the press release… in whatever form … and instead worried more about news value.Worthless announcements will still be worthless, even in a new format. The root problem isn’t the format of the press release, however odd. It is the use of the press release for stupid stuff (edited — the first version of this post used stronger language).

– The press release is just a document. The real work is in the conversation with reporters. Call it the pitch, call it whatever you want. Our job is to tell interesting stories that other people want to repeat, whether in a newspaper or  a blog.

–  I am still concerned that this need/drive for a new announcement format is driven by the tech sector. There are boatloads of folks in other sectors (media and clients alike) who just are not as net savvy… yet. We need to remember them, and continue to talk to them in whatever language makes sense.

It’s all about stories. Tell good ones.

Tags: , ,

Powered by Qumana

Technorati-Edelman joint project: It’s a good thing!

by

Information may want to be free, but most often it isn’t. There is a cost to just about everything. In this exciting new media world, we tend to forget this. In particular we tend to forget that many (most?) of  the companies providing the goods and services that power the new world are for-profit endeavors.

Such as Technorati, which experienced a little PR blogger backlash today after the details of its joint project with Edelman were revealed. Folks were concerned about Technorati having such close ties with a PR agency. What would that mean for all the rest? Will the blogosphere be damaged somehow by this deal? To which I say, respectfully: Come on, folks.

It’s a business deal. I highly doubt whether anyone is in anyone’s pocket, now or ever. Each participant had a good business reason for doing the deal, both benefit, and lucky for the blogosphere, so do we.

Let’s start with the Edelman. This is one of a series of smart business moves by Richard Edelman. He is establishing his agency as the premier PR agency for social media. Doesn’t really matter yet whether they’ve delivered anything yet or that there was a flap over Wal-Mart or even whether there is a real competitive advantage in the short 6-8 month period that they’ll have an exclusive over the new localized stuff. The perception is that the agency has made a commitment to blogging and is willing to do what it takes. And it’s not just lip service or having a blog or recruiting well-known bloggers. With this deal, they’ve made an actual investment in the blogosphere. And that is one smart PR move.

Whatever competitive advantage this exclusive period gives them depends on their execution. And quite frankly I don’t think it really matters. Six-eight months is nothing. The real competitive advantage is owning the position of  "the" social media PR agency. Big company clients who want to look into "this stuff" will know where to go. Eventually, the agency will have to deliver on the perception, but from his speech at Syndicate last week, sounds to me like Richard Edelman is ready for the challenge. Is that hard for PR agencies to swallow? Probably. Bad for the blogosphere? No, because it seems we will get the localized Technorati far faster in this scenario.

Now to Technorati. I may be over-simplifying, but it just seems like a smart business move. After all, Technorati is a for-profit business, not a public service. Good for them that they’ve made the service so central to our blogging experience — at least if we speak English or Japanese. But… Technorati has a business problem — it needs to deliver  localized versions of its service FAST or risk losing first-mover advantage. However the deal materialized and whatever the terms, having a customer to fund the development makes everything a lot easier for Dave Sifry and team.

From what I’ve read, it also sounds to me like Edelman’s interest is in the monitoring of global blog conversation. I may be naive, but I didn’t get the sense that Edelman was involved IN the development, simply funding it and reaping the initial benefits. I wouldn’t call that a Technorati sell-out. I call it a business deal.

Technorati may be the most well known RSS search engine but it is by no means the only one. If some of the nefarious deeds speculated upon elsewhere did happen, it wouldn’t take long for the crime to be discovered.

I’m sure both companies weighed the potential blogstorm of their announcement, and determined that the benefits outweighed the negatives. The good news for us is that no matter how much Edelman and Technorati benefit (and no question, they will), in the end, we all benefit, because we will have these localized Technorati services next year. And that is indeed a very good thing.

Disclosures: None. I have absolutely no inside information. This is just my opinion.

Update: Andy Lark has a good post, updated with some additional info from Steve Rubel. 

Update 2: Stowe Boyd makes some good points.

Tags: , , , ,

Powered by Qumana

More detail on Technorati initiatives announced at Syndicate

by

Technorati and Edelman — this is the joint project Richard Edelman mentioned in his keynote. Technorati is accelerating development of fully localized versions of its service in Chinese, Korean, German, Italian and French, available to public in early 2007. Edelman will have access to the localized services during development.

Technorati and Paramount Classics — this is the project Dave Sifry mentioned in the Tuesday session. Technorati will be providing the blog conversation about selected films, and Paramount will be including the conversation on the film’s website. First film is the Al Gore documentary An Inconvenient Truth.

Tags: , , ,

Powered by Qumana

Syndicate Wed. Afternoon: Building a Business Case for Podcasting

by

Building a Business Case for Podcasting. Eric Schwartzman, moderator. Panel: Heather Green, BusinessWeek, Mikel Ellcessor, WNYC, and Jeff Burkett, Washingtonpost.com.

Podcasting: "Makes sense. Do we do it now or in 6 months?"

Schwartzman’s opening remarks are on his blog.

This panel did a great job covering how clued-in big media companies can integrate podcasting (and blogs) into their mix.

Mike Ellcessor from WNYC covered how his station saw podcasting as a response to the increasing fragmentation of radio. They initially viewed as podcasting as an experiment. They had a number of programs that they thought might reach beyond the usual geographic WNYC audience; in particular, On the Media, nationally syndicated by NPR, is produced by WNYC.  They also podcast segments from some of their daily talk shows. Primary goal was to increase their 1:1 relationships with their audience, which makes sense for viewer-supported television 🙂

Jeff Burkett manages the online properties for the Washington Post, Newsweek and Slate. His group builds online vehicles that must meet the needs of both the edit and advertising sides of the business, so figuring out how to do advertising within the podcast was one of the objectives.  He commented that he is in the mass media (versus long tail) so a different set of economics applies.

[Comment:  In fact, all three of the panelists here are mass media. They have both different resources and requirements than an entrepreneur or hobbyist considering a podcast as a revenue or brand opportunity or just something fun to do.]

Back to the panel. Burkett says that they just appended traditional radio and tv spots to the pod- and vid- casts, a solution that he hopes to replace with something more tailored to the new media as time goes on.

Heather Green from BusinessWeek,one of the co-authors of the well-known May 05 BW cover story on blogging,  then talked about her involvement with blogs and podcasting. Since she is on the editorial side of the book, her perspective was slightly different from the previous two speakers. . The economics, at least vis her own podcast,  aren’t  her main interest [Comment: although it might be the publisher’s 🙂 ] For her, podcasting is an experiment; "you have to try it." She considers podcasting a disruptive technology that changes the landscape whether or not it has a business model.

Schwartzman asked the panelists how they built the business case for podcasting.

Ellcessor said they knew there was interest outside the NY area for their radio programming. Podcasting was cheap and easy for them. They also kept it in an experimental context, which let it succeed without high expectations.

Burkett related much the same thing — podcasting was considered an experiment.

Green didn’t have to build a business case. She talked about how she viewed the three publishing vehicles she has available for her content: her blog, her podcast and the print publication. She mostly uses the blog for random stuff that doesn’t fit into the print story and to report on interesting  "meet and greets" that don’t fit into any current projects. On the podcast, she interviews interesting people, including past interview subjects. One dilemma: how much does she hold back for a story, how much does she put out there.

The entire panel talked a bit about the valuation of podcast advertising.  Prevalent models,  CPM and sponsorship. Green said she thought podcasts will be sold as part of a package of multiple media. This makes sense to me. She also commented that very few people are going to make any money at podcasting. My opinion: I think it will depend on how you define "make money." If we define it as purely ad-supported, she’s probably right. If we look at podcasting as part of a larger package (or brand), I think it can substantially contribute to revenue. Just hard to measure.

Questions from the audience.

Sam Whitmore asked if they knew what percentage of audience listened on an iPod or MP3 player versus a computer? No one did, but there was a lively exchange about the value of knowing how the audience is listening. The iPod listener is potentially more valuable than the multi-tasking PC listener.

Someone asked WNYC, how do they prevent podcasting from damaging their fundraising efforts. The answer was pretty much, we can’t completely, but we went into it with our eyes wide-open, and try to live by the creed, "first do no harm."

What’s the ideal length? No answer to this one, not even from these experts. The WNYC podcasts are created from radio inventory; On the Media is its normal 59 minutes and the talk show segments range from 20-40 minutes.

For Burkett (WaPost)  it depends on what the podcast is about. For example, he hates that Onion Radio News is only 30 seconds, feels it should be 5 minutes.

What instincts do you have about the listener, common traits? Mike: time pressed; Jeff: agreed time pressed, therefore harder to reach on radio and TV; Heather: classic early adopter, highly educated, high income/net worth, more women than we thought.

Finally, can the little podcaster compete with mainstream media? Panel thinks yes. Mike: talent will prevail, as long as you master the basics, offer a certain level of sound quality. Jeff: it is all about people and their passions.

The last question was an off-topic question for Heather Green related to a recent article "Is it 1998 again?"

Tags: , , ,

Powered by Qumana