Thanks to Chris Brogan (@ChrisBrogan on Twitter) for this link to a blog post by Clay Shirky. It is a thoughtful, interesting and informative post on the challenges that Amazon faced this weekend. It is worth a read.
#Amazonfail
Would You Like Some Cheese With That Nose Hair?
There seems to be a new issue online every day. Over the weekend, there was the Amazon issue where it seemed the online bookseller had removed thousands of gay and lesbian themed books from their listings and search results. Social media guru B.L. Ochman has a very good post about this issue.
And then there is the Domino’s video that showed up on YouTube yesterday. The company quickly took it down. But you know that sneaky Internet…there is always another copy somewhere that gets put back up.
According to this piece in Advertising Age, Domino’s corporate headquarters was reacting cautiously to the kerfuffle about this disgusting video. It turns out the two Domino’s employees have several videos – check out what The Consumerist has managed to track down, if you can stomach it.
It’s always easy to be an armchair quarterback and say what should be or could be done about the situation. Without knowing what went on at Domino’s, it’s hard to say whether for their situation their strategy is sound. I just have one question – given these videos and the “cautious” response from Domino’s, how quick will you be to order from them? (Even knowing that your local Domino’s store isn’t the one in the video.)
What Social Media & The Grieving Process Have In Common
There is an interesting gap in knowledge and acceptance when it comes to online/social media in some organizations. I have seen a range of emotions about it from some senior executives (including communicators). And it hit me the other day – it’s not much different than the stages of grief that are often cited.
First we have denial. – Oh come on, this is just a trend. It will all work itself out and go away. Look at the dotcom boom and crash. This is all just a bunch of technology that has no business case for our organization. None of our stakeholders are using social media, right?
Then anger. – How are we supposed to add this to our plate? What do you mean our competition has 10,000 followers on Twitter and the CEO blogs everyday and LOVES it! What next? I just can’t keep up! How are they making money anyway…and why should this matter to us?!!! I will just pass this off to an intern and it won’t matter.
Followed by bargaining (or as we liked to call it the “pilot project”). – Ok, I will approve a small budget to try it this once. But <INSERT your supreme being here> (God, Universe, Board of Directors, Shareholders, etc.) if I do this – and it works, you need to give me help. And by the way Director of Communications, I think this falls under your department, don’t you?
Onto depression. – Well, it worked…(sigh). We got responses from our stakeholders – and they’re excited about this opportunity to have an authentic conversation with us. I am beginning to realize the value – and what it all means (sigh). For the next month or two, I am not going to look at the report on the pilot project and just let it sit on my desk because I know there is so much to do and I don’t know where or how to start.
And finally onto acceptance, which can even lead to hope! This is by far the most exciting and rewarding stage – both for the organization and the individual. Realizing that not only is social media here to stay, but used strategically there is real value in it. The understanding that there are communities of people – decision makers, influencers, supporters – that want to interact with people in their organization dawns and it is exciting. Here is where you begin to embrace the fact that the world has changed and start to recognize the opportunities that come with this paradigm shift.
Below are a few random examples of how the world has changed.
In this report, a judge in the U.S. had to recently rule on a juror’s use of Twitter during a trial.
And here are some stats on the growth of Twitter and Facebook.
Can Big Media Control Google Content?
TechCrunch has a very interesting article entitled “The Whining Sound You Hear Is The Death Wheeze Of Newspapers.” It’s well worth a read.
The article discusses how some large media organizations are accusing Google of “stealing” their copyrighted content. It also links to another TechCrunch post about the Associated Press declaring that it will now police the Web and “develop a system to track content distributed online to determine if it is being legally used.”
There is a huge challenge in trying to police the Internet and, while I am not a copyright expert, it seems to me that some of these large media conglomerates are spending an awful lot of time, energy and money on trying to control the Internet instead of focusing on creating a new, interactive and collaborative business model.
I read a lot of blogs, follow a lot of people (but not too many!) on Twitter, spend time on Facebook, use Google, and spend far too much time on Mashable. From my perspective, content creators online are quick to credit and to link to others – including media outlets. Doesn’t this drive traffic to the media sites? Isn’t that a good thing? And – according to the TechCrunch article – there is a way for these big media moguls to stop Google from listing their content and it’s just one line of programming. So why don’t they…because they WANT people to find the news and click that link. It seems like they want to have their cake and eat it too.
One of the few “grown ups” in journalism that I think really “gets it” and is investigating how journalism and the Internet can create a mutually beneficial relationship is Kirk LaPointe of The Vancouver Sun. His blog is also worth following.
I love journalism. I grew up at Maclean’s and I have a huge respect for how the mind of a journalist works. We, as a society, need journalists to ask the tough questions, to research and fact check, to make complex subjects more understandable to those of us who are not experts in the field, and to bring perspective and balance to an issue. In my opinion, journalists are an important part of the fabric of our society. It’s not the journalists doing this…it’s the big business that has been behind the media for all these years.
The Newspaper Association of America is meeting in San Diego this week and according to a blog post by Jeff Jarvis, author of What Would Google Do?, he says that Google CEO Eric Schmidt will speak to them. That will be an interesting discussion.
This is an interesting time. I hope the business of the big media companies doesn’t get in the way of true journalism and that the big dog media conglomerates can find a way to see the value of the Internet, bloggers and Google and the fact that this wide open approach to information, sharing and a global conversation is a really good thing. And if they put half as much energy into finding a way to make money from it as they do trying to control it, their world would be much less stressful.
Can’t Touch This
I heard a little bit about the kerfuffle last week when First Lady Michelle Obama “touched” the Queen – which, according to reports, is a horrendous break in protocol. It slipped my mind for a few days, until I sat down to write today’s blog post and thought about what news events happened last week that are relevant to our Bridging Two Worlds blog.
Time ran a piece on it, as did countless other media outlets. I haven’t even checked the blogs yet. It seems to me that this is a perfect example of the old paradigm (respect because I said so, do what I say or you will be in trouble, etc.) and the new world colliding.
Michelle Obama reached out and touched the Queen in a gesture of affection or warmth. I certainly don’t know her motives, but Michelle Obama seems like a pretty touchy, hands-on kind of person – and the Obama Whitehouse is one that we aren’t used to. They blog, they’re on Twitter, they’re being as transparent as possible, they are doing their best to touch the people and—oh my goodness—encourage them to touch back, all from that big powerful place in Washington, DC. Who would have thought it could happen; human beings in powerful positions acting…well, human.
Times are changing—and as much as I appreciate the tradition and history of the monarchy—why is the rule still in place? Why is the Queen untouchable unless she extends her hand first? Who says she gets to go first? Why does she want to be removed from real people? What is the point of this piece of oh-so-serious protocol?
The world is changing and this style of “you should know your place and mine (which is better than yours) because I live and breathe rarified air above the commoner” status isn’t acceptable anymore. The same thing is going on with the brand reputation of your organization. If your organization stands back, aloof and out of touch, it is going to hurt you in the long run.
People want leaders and organizations to interact with them on an equal footing. We “commoners” are tired of being told what’s available to us and what isn’t. We want to work for and with organizations that become a part of our community, not ones that believe they are “untouchable” or “unreachable.” Control belongs to the consumer and good organizations will benefit greatly from this. It provides an opportunity to authentically connect with stakeholders, to hear the good and the bad, and to learn from both. Not so good organizations can use this as an opportunity to improve. As for the organizations that still believe that they will tell us what to do, how to do it and when to do it instead of engaging us in a conversation…well, let’s see where they sit in a year or two.