A few weeks ago I had heated debate friendly discussion with Nathan about whether Twitter is a social network or a social media platform. You can hear the discussion here. He said it’s a social network. I said it’s social media. As I have thought more about it since then I think we were both wrong. Twitter is both.

It would be limiting to Twitter to say it is JUST one or the other because it has so many aspects that are distinct to social media and social networking alike. For instance, social media is about user generated content, conversation, and sharing information. Twitter does that. Social networking, however is about connecting people together through shared interests, interacting,  and facilitating relationships. Twitter does that too. What I have realized is that Twitter as a tool/platform is distinct in that it covers both the social media and social networking.

I think Nathan and I were debating the wrong question. The better question is this: Do you use Twitter as just a social network or social media or do you use (and utilize) it as both simultaneously? The basis for my original perspective of Twitter as a social medium was because I only used it as a social medium. I hadn’t really been looking at it for social networking opportunities. Likewise, I suspect Nathan was using Twitter more from a social networking side and not as much for the social media opportunities.

So now the challenge is this: if we find ourselves on one side or the other, how do we incorporate the other side into our Twitter use? For me, I know I can use it better to interact with people who I don’t know (or don’t know well.) That’s not something I’ve done much, but I think I’m going to start…after all, that’s part of the social network aspect of Twitter that I’ve been missing out on.

Bonus Twitter related info: USA Today wrote an article about Twitter. Plan on some extra downtime over the next few days as more people (who hadn’t heard of Twitter until now) join and give it a shot.

I remember being totally enamored by the story of Mozart the first time I saw Amadeus. One of the things Mozart did was change the way the Austrians viewed operas. They thought they knew what an opera was and then they experienced Mozart’s operas. He built on the foundation of operas as they had been done but improved on it dramatically.

In many ways that’s how I see the new marketing opportunities with social media and social networking tools. They build on the foundation of old marketing for something better. The video below from Amadeus drives home the difference between the old and new. Be sure to listen for the quote, “It doesn’t really work, does it?” Seems like it fits the old marketing vs. new marketing analogy pretty well. Here’s the clip for the feed readers.

If you know me or have been reading this blog long you know I’m a firm believer in the idea of compelling content being the best way to use social media tools. That’s what the whole “Old McDonald” approach to good content is all about. If, however, it’s still not coming together for you, think about this: content MUST have value to the people you’re trying to reach. If it doesn’t, it’s not good content. It’s probably boring information that lacks something interesting or it’s marketing copy that’s just you talking about you.

So…let’s go back to the old McDonald idea. If good content that has value to someone contains at least one of the EIEIO elements (Entertain, Inspire, Educate, Inform, or Outrage) then you are creating content with value. If you’re still stuck though, add “me” to the end of the words. It would look like this:

• Entertain Me.
• Inspire Me.
• Educate Me.
• Inform Me.
• Outrage Me.

See what’s missing here? You. It’s not about you. It’s about me…the person you’re trying to reach. Now go write a blog post for the “me” you want to read your blog.

Yesterday I saw a term I haven’t come across in a while: Mass Media. Remember that term? Yeah, we don’t hear it much these days. The context for the term came from a professor friend who teaches at a college here in Nashville. She mentioned a class for freshmen this fall called “mass media and society” but I got hung up at the mass media part of the class title.

I asked the professor why that term is still being used and it sounds like it has something to do with the book selection or something like that. Maybe it’s a historical perspective of media and our society. I’m not actually clear on what it’s going to be but the term got me thinking…isn’t mass media dead?

Mass media was all about the big TV networks, major newspaper outlets, and terrestrial radio, but how massive does something have to be to be considered mass media these days? With the numbers declining in all three of those areas can we even still call them mass media? Is the term even relevant today? Mass media died as it related to television years ago around the time cable TV really took off.

One might say mass media is about the number of people you reach, meaning you reach “the masses” (which I assume we translate into millions of people) through the mediums. Yet, that doesn’t really work because there are blogs, podcasts, and even YouTube videos that reach millions of people and we wouldn’t classify them as mass media. They’re the opposite of mass media: user generated, freely accessed, open to everyone, micro media.

Mass media is just a term that used to mean something that we don’t even think about anymore. It’s like the 8-track tape. It had a good run for a while but simply has no use to us today. Perhaps mass media didn’t actually die but simply disappeared in the shadow of so many other things that we use today.

The bottom line is that we kind of know that mass media doesn’t really stick like it used to. It doesn’t have the teeth it did even ten years ago. The real question as a marketer then, is do you still act/plan/execute like the mass media is still massive? There’s a new “MASS” you should be thinking about if you’re not already.

Incidentally, the mass media and society class at the college will have a blog. How’s that for irony?

I have almost finished reading an excellent book on social media and the way it’s changing business and marketing. The book is called Groundswell by Charlene Li and Josh Bernoff. This book has a really solid perspective and methodology for identifying the type of people you want to reach as a social media marketer and then building your strategy based on that information.

I regularly tell people that it’s not enough to know what the social media tools are or even how to use them. You must also know the context with which to use them. That’s why I’m so adamant that content must be your marketing strategy if you’re going to use these tools. Content is a big piece of the context you need to grasp.

What Groundswell helped me refine in my thinking is that we cannot look at everyone we want to reach with a social media campaign the same way, meaning some people are more likely to participate in a social network than others or comment on a blog, or listen to a podcast. Likewise, some people can be tapped to join you in making content whereas others will simply be spectators.

Handy Profile Tool

On the Groundswell website you can play with the very handy “profile tool” which essentially let’s you get a sense of age, nationality, and gender demographics and their relative relationships to social media technology. For instance you will find that:

• 39% of American men and women ages 18-24 are at the top of the social technographics ladder in the Creators category (that means they publish on blogs or websites and upload audio and video files they created.)
• The percentage is lower in the Creator category as the people get older.
• In the 25-34 age group the number of Creators drops a bit to 30%.
• The percentage drops sharply to 17% for ages 35-44.
• It continues to decline to 11% for ages 45-54.
• The percentage of Creators finally bottoms out at 5% for ages 55 and older.

This is the kind of good information you can have to make informed decisions for social media marketing. If I wanted to create a contest where people upload their videos to win a big prize then I might see some pretty good success among the younger two groups (18-35 year olds) but much beyond that the number of people who would create a video is slim. Depending on the company and who you want to reach, this can make all the difference. With more information comes better decisions and many times better decisions lead to more success. Check out the entire Groundswell book for a lot more on this. It’s certainly worth the read.

I missed posting about my two year blogging anniversary a few weeks ago so this is my post to make up for it. In my very first post for this blog two years ago on the topic of social media I wrote:

Everything available to you through web 2.0 takes time to get off the ground. Some people will be fine with that, but for those of you with mandates and timelines you’re going to come to a fork in the road of whether you want to do something that people can see soon (old marketing methods) with something that will have an enduring impact (web 2.0 methods). Consider it your own little blue pill vs red pill. One will take you to a world you couldn’t imagine and the other…will keep you right where you are.

So, do I still believe this two years later? I sure do. In fact, I think this blue pill/red pill decision is one that more marketers are deciding on today than they were two years ago when I first wrote this. I had lunch today with some people from a company who are deciding right now which way to go. I had a similar lunch meeting yesterday. The tide seems to be coming in on social media.

Some people thought social media was a fad (and have since admitted so to me) but now see the communication/Internet/marketing world has changed and they need to change with it. Other people just weren’t paying attention or maybe were paying attention but didn’t take the time to get their hands dirty in the social media sandbox. Whatever the case, there’s is a rapidly widening awareness of the choice that needs to be made.

So which will you choose? If you choose the blue pill (blissful ignorance) then congratulations, you don’t have to do much. You can relax knowing you won’t have to go through the possible discomfort of change and new learning. I also hope you’re planning to retire in the next 12-18 months, otherwise you may regret the choice. If you choose the red pill (hard truth) then congratulations, you’re about to enter an exciting and unsettling journey. If you feel like the rules have changed you’re wrong. It’s the game that has changed and it has its own rules…but now you’re choosing to play, and that’s the best place to start.

I’m always interested in the latest social media stats that come. So is my friend Aaron Linne. Aaron pulled some stats together for a meeting at his company recently. There’s great info here if you haven’t seen any social media stats in a while.

David Alston is the VP of Marketing of Radian6, a social media monitoring company based in Canada. David recently commented on my blog post about social media and customer service. Through that comment we struck up a conversation in Twitter which led to David’s gracious acceptance of my interview request. The full Q&A is below.

One thing to note here before the interview is that David’s interaction with me though a comment on this blog is exactly what all marketing people should be doing. There are three camps that marketers are in, but only one where we all should be:

1. Some marketers don’t monitor what people are saying about their company or topics related to their industry.
2. Other marketers are monitoring the discussions but aren’t joining the conversations. This is better than the first camp because at least they’ll know when something is said about them, but it’s a very reactive posture as well. The monitoring seems more akin to just keeping an eye on social media to put a fire out rather than to serve to expand awareness of the company proactively. Monitoring potential fires is one thing, it’s just not the whole thing when it comes to social media monitoring.
3. A few marketers, like David, are raising awareness of their company by finding the conversations they wouldn’t otherwise know about and influencing people who wouldn’t otherwise know about them.

So consider this a case in point for the right way to do not just monitor social media, but to engage it as well. Here’s the interview with David…

MicroExplosion: Do you think companies are simply not monitoring their brand at all (meaning across all media…traditional and new) or is it more a neglect to pay attention to social media only?

David: Well, if you look at the 1000’s of companies that have been using traditional media monitoring companies (TV, print, radio) I would have to say that it’s probably more of an awareness thing. For example, if a company decision maker didn’t read the newspaper, watch TV or listen to the radio he/she probably wouldn’t consider monitoring traditional media channels all that necessary. The same goes for social media (blogs, online video and images, forums, opinion sites, micromedia). It’s usually when a company decides to dip its toe into social media from a corporate or personal level that the need finally crystallizes. Conversations about brands and issues are happening all the time online in social media with or without brand owners. Its probably best to be at least aware of these so engagement can be considered.

MicroExplosion: In large companies do you find that any particular departments are more interested in your services than others? For instance, is the corporate communications office more interested in social media monitoring than the marketing department or vice versa?

David: Each department has a different reason to be monitoring social media.

• Public relations – crises breaking online, monitoring effective of outreach campaigns
• Marketing – tracking brand voice vs. competitors, tracking a marketing campaign’s effectiveness, looking for possible trends, understanding the most influential sites to partner with or advertise on, discover competitor initiatives or positioning
• Customer Care – discover customer complaints and reach out, help with those clients requiring how-to assistance
• Sales – discover potential leads based on posts that declare “a need”, respond with offers of assistance for clients of competitors having difficulty
• Legal – uncover potential misuse of copyrights or patents, stay on top of any issues regarding inappropriate communications from an SEC perspective
• HR – discover potential employee candidates based on the expertise they are demonstrating or the comments they make about looking for work in a specific area of expertise/location
• Business Development – uncover potential channel partners

MicroExplosion: You mentioned in a comment on my blog that companies should “answer the social phone.” I think that’s a great phrase. Do you see organizations viewing this new task of social phone answering as something else to put on employee(s) full plates or are they carving out time and/or hiring new personnel to do this?

David: It is still early in the game for many companies deciding where the “social phone” should be primarily answered. The key thing would be at least assigning it to someone as a start. This could be someone in PR, marketing or customer care. Once a company gets a feel for the types of “social web calls” coming in and the volume they could better assess the best fit for this role within their company. Radian6 is working with leading companies now to help determine the best approach for them and how our platform can best serve each of their own unique situations.

MicroExplosion: How do you recommend a client respond if they have found their brand to be unfavorably mentioned in a blog, podcast, or some other social medium?

David: I guess it entirely depends on what is said, who is saying it, and whether or not the company has developed a relationship with that individual or with the community that individual belongs to. Generally I would say that the response needs to match up with the company’s brand promise for all other communications with clients and potential clients. Responding quickly in an appropriate way can also show that you care to listen and you want to help out. Not only will this buy a company credibility with the person who posted but it will also with those who read this person or are part of his/her network. In the end its about developing and maintaining relationships with people.

MicroExplosion: What does Radian6 do for a company that Google Alerts doesn’t?

David: Certainly most people usually start out this way. It can at least give them a snippet of what’s out there involving their brand. Our clients generally tell us that Google Alerts don’t get them the entire coverage they need across all social media types, don’t allow them to understand which posts and sites to pay more attention to, and can’t show them which trends are happening. They also find that Google Alerts don’t always get delivered in a timely way – which is important if you plan on engaging on a post with a majority of commenting and viewership happening in the first two days.

Our solution covers all types of social media (not just blogs) and delivers findings in real-time as discovered. It tracks conversational dynamics on each post (viewership, total comments, total unique commenters, and calculated engagement) which enables sorting ability to zoom in on the most viral conversations. With all of the posts on a topic in one place, users can then run ad hoc analysis charts and graphs based on keywords. Analysis capabilities like this enables a client to see trends and potential issues (ex. “forest for the trees”). Finally we can also determine the top influential sites on a topic based on a user-defined formula that includes conversational dynamics as well as total on-topic posts and on-topic inbound linking. Determining influencers allows a client to focus their engagement and outreach efforts for the best ROI.

———-

David, thanks for the interview. You provided some great insights here. Check out the Radian6 website to learn more about their company and services.

Becky is a marketing strategist for a large company here in Nashville. One evening she was planning some snacks for an evening with friends when her search for a snack led her to purchase a book she didn’t know she wanted. Here’s the email Becky sent to her director the next day:

“I Googled Chili’s because I wanted to find out how much it would cost to get chips and salsa to go. When I Googled Chili’s, this link came up that said “Brand Autopsy: Would you miss Chili’s?” That intrigued me, so I clicked on it and found the blog of a marketing guy who used to work for Starbucks and Whole Foods. He, in turn, raved about this new book that is all about marketing and social networks. I thought it might be something that our whole team would benefit from. Isn’t it ironic that I was looking for chips and salsa and found a marketing book? But it hit the right audience at the right time!”

I really like this story at a number of different levels because:

• It shows the power and influence of blogs even in the most unlikely of connections.
• It reminds me that people trust blogs that seem trustworthy.
• It reminds me that your target audience cannot be segmented so neatly all the time because Becky the marketer wasn’t looking for a book but she found one and bought it (and will likely buy one for the entire marketing team at the company) when she was Becky the snack shopper.
• It reminds me of the power of a Google search and how blogs could make (or break) the positioning of your brand.

The book Becky found was called “Groundswell: Winning in a World Transformed By Social Technologies” by Charlene Li and Josh Bernoff. I’m reading this book now too but I found out about it through Twitter via Jeremiah Owyang.

I’m keenly aware of the irony here (and also the affirmation of the power and influence of social media) that a book called Groundswell benefited from the groundswell in at least two cases I can point to directly (mine and Becky’s) and I’m sure countless others. So the question is, what are you waiting for if you’re not getting in yet? Don’t fight the groundswell.

I was challenged recently to think about customer service representatives as part of an organization’s social media response and tracking team. I had never thought of using customer service reps to keep tabs on blogs, Google Alerts, and any other social media that may be talking about an organization but it really makes sense. After all, customer service reps serve as a front line for companies already and they know the ins and outs of the company about as well as anyone, so why not pull a rep or two aside for social media monitoring?

What if a company started allowing its customer service reps (or any other employees for that matter) to be proactive in engaging prosumers? Why not monitor and respond to complaints voiced in Twitter? Why not leave a comment of thanks from a blog post that had something nice to say about your product or service or company? Why not leave a video response to a YouTube video that discussed your product? Why not join a social network group or entire social network that was dedicated for (or against) your organization? Why not have your reps start a blog on the company website?

The new world of customer service is going to be proactive engagement unlike what the average customer service representative is paid to do today. It’s going to require as much trust from the company as they have in their reps now but with more freedom. It’s going require the legal department relaxing just a bit. It’s going to require the marketing department working closer with the customer service department. It’s going to require customer service being a part of your social media training. It’s going to require rethinking the roles of marketing, public relations, and customer service. Perhaps a “customer relations department” is more in order. Whatever it may be, it’s going to change