Business Storytelling

You Say You Want a Google-ution…

By now, you’ve probably heard News Corp.'s, Rupert Murdoch’s complaint that Google, and other high profile search engines, are making money by stealing his content.  The first question that comes to many peoples mind is, Mr. Murdoch, do you know how Google works?

It’s no surprise that the Internet is continuing to climb as the preferred way for people to get their news.  According to an article in the New York Times, “Web Passes Papers as a News Source,” even though 40 percent of Americans get most of their news from the Internet, this number doesn’t represent an actual decline in the popularity of newspapers – or even getting news via the television.

The funny thing is that Google doesn’t force Web sites to be included in its search listings, and in fact, it’s very easy to remove yourself from its listings.  For instructions on how to do this please see the blog post on Newsweek, “Rupert Murdoch Says Google Is Stealing His Content. So Why Doesn't He Stop Them?”

With the ability to find news articles and new publications/blogs from a simple search on Google, I find that I’m not only reading more, but that I'm also following numerous sources (rather than just one). Google does a great job of letting you choose the sources you want to read, so isn't it silly to think that making content less search-able will be good for business – especially online newspapers?

Let’s face it, we’re all a little bit curious about what would happen if Murdoch declined free traffic to his sites from Google.  Is it possible that publications like the Wall Street Journal have built up enough credibility that we’d still read the stories AND pay for them without being directed to them from our innocent Web searches? 

If you take Google out of the equation, exactly what is Mr. Murdoch's plan to drive Web traffic?  This will be interesting to watch.

- Contributed by Chantal LeBoulch.  Follow her @cleboulch

Will Online Games Replace School?

The internet has made it easier for students to learn in many ways. Students no longer have to spend endless hours at a library conducting research with old textbooks; now they can communicate with peers and teachers through email and even expand their education beyond the content that is taught within the walls of classrooms. Web technology is continuing to transform the way that teachers teach and how students learn, and with four adolescent brothers, I wonder what the remainder of their education years will look like. Will they read from Kindles instead of textbooks, like Case Western Reserve University students (via USA Today)? Will their schools provide 75 miles of internet networking cable, so that their out-of-town friends can access the classroom? Or will their teachers begin to add games such as Quest Atlantis, a science game that teaches students about water quality, to their curriculums? Technology is rapidly changing the way that we learn, but just how far will that go?

In Florida, one school has already taken online learning through the use of gaming to the extreme. Earlier this week, the St. Petersburg Times reported that there is a school where students attend high school “virtually,” through participation in a curriculum that revolves around online games. Experts believe that the Florida Virtual School “may be the only online game-based, credit-bearing high school course in the United States.” At this school, a game entitled “Conspiracy Code” is the curriculum. This “10-stage, two-semester game” currently has 240 students enrolled in the course and approximately twelve have already completed it.

If you’re wondering how this could be a successful learning model, you’re not alone. However, the game was created over a three year period, during which “developers studied brain-based learning with University of Central Florida researchers to ensure the game would get students thinking in the right ways.” The main concept behind the school is that educators are working to avoid the “invitation to disconnect” that is often given by traditional school models. Ultimately, this gives teachers an opportunity to “teach [students] on their own turf,” in the digital environment where these children have grown up.

Message Meets Media

My travels through social media expose me to a myriad of interesting online items, whether cute, useful, or weird.  But sometimes they bring to my attention shining examples of cleverness that warrant discussion.

Boone Oakley is an independent advertising agency based in Charlotte, NC.  They’ve done work for major brands such as Ruby Tuesday and HBO, but what they haven’t done is created a Web site as most people would think of one.  The agency is active in social media, but their official site is on YouTube.  It’s a string of simple animated videos telling the story of Boone Oakley, and not only is the execution perfect, but the message is clear and strong.

In addition to building awareness for the small agency, Boone Oakley achieves two major goals with their unique “Web site.”  First, they differentiate themselves from other agencies and essentially render their competitors’ sites generic.  More importantly, they illustrate their capabilities, both intellectual and technological, by doing, rather than showing.

The agency could have had a simple page with samples of their work, but now that page itself is an advertisement for Boone Oakley.  The entire string of videos is a piece of work, rather than just a place to find information, and it takes full advantage of the medium.  The videos' producers have a deep understanding of video’s ability to engage, and it even brings to mind a client that is doing something similar, VisibleGains.  VisibleGains, like Boone Oakley, understands video and uses it to build relationships with sales prospects.  Boone Oakley has already landed two clients due to their unique homepage.

Although this is an advertising example, it pertains to PR as well.  As the media landscape changes, creative thinkers stand the best chance of promoting their message, not just through what they say but how they’re saying it.  Promoting brands, building relationships, and generating conversations are activities that require a skillful weave of creativity, messaging, and media expertise.  Boone Oakley’s convergence of media and message is a lesson that marketers shouldn’t soon forget.

Contributed by Jim Fay.  Follow him @JGF3.

Follow all Greenough team members on Twitter by clicking here.

Is Email a Thing of the Past?

I recently read about the book, Obsolete: An Encyclopedia of Once-Common Things Passing Us By, by Anna Jane Grossman. It got me thinking about the things in my life that have become obsolete, what I’ll miss and what I’ll happily wave goodbye to. On the miss side: cassette tapes, camera film and cursive writing. On the time-to-say-goodbye side: getting lost, manual car windows and handkerchiefs; no explanation needed. But is email now a thing of the past? The Wall Street Journal says it’s true.

In the world of communications, email is now thought to be second fiddle to the likes of Twitter and Facebook. The always-on mentality has brought about these new ways to communicate that are much faster than email, and much more fun.

Jeff Teper, vice president of Microsoft Corp.’s SharePoint division believes, “people were very dependent on email” and with the influx of new-age communication services, “people can use the right tool for the right task.”

However, many argue that Twitter and Facebook are making us less productive because we now have an array of ways to send messages and update statuses, so we spend more time doing it during the workday. It is also thought that the messages being sent are not as important as emails because they are mixed with trivial personal updates.

I think there needs to be a balance. Email will never fully be on the outs, but it is important to recognize the shift in communication and the value and rapid adoption of the new services. You don’t have to share what you are having for breakfast in your Twitter status, but it is important to understand that Twitter and Facebook are the primary communication tools of this generation.

P.S. What ever happened to picking up the phone? Or talking to someone face-to-face? Let’s try to bring that back.

Contributed by Jena Coletti.  Follow her @jmcoletti

Sour Tweets

It would seem strange for a man who has the internet to thank for much of his publicity to refer to it as a “fever swamp,” but that’s just what Daniel Lyons has done in his latest article for Newsweek.  If the internet is such a lovely place, what does that make social media sites such as Twitter?  Not a place you’d like to be, that’s for sure.
 
Lyons contends that most of Twitter is “garbage,” and deems it “even stupider than TV,” which as we all know is nothing but “fat people dancing, talentless people singing, [and] Glenn Beck slinging conspiracy theories.”  Yikes.  Lyons continues to reveal that Twitter owes its stupidity to those who populate its ranks, people such as Ashton Kutcher, Ashlee Simpson, and Dane Cook, who spout nonsense via their Twitter streams to millions of followers.  Although I agree in some cases, Lyons is missing the point on several levels.

Lyons represents the not-uncommon closed-minded view of Twitter that dismisses the site as providing nothing more than vapid updates from vapid people.  There are certainly some vapid updates out there, but the site is what you make it (it’s clear that Lyons tried real hard to understand it – his stream  boasts 23 followers and a single tweet).  For many, it serves as an RSS feed, updating users with information from a variety of thought leaders and publications.  The networking and job hunting uses of the site can’t be denied either, as noted in this Mashable article.  For others, it keeps them in touch with friends and family while opening them up to new people and things.

How Happy Are You Today? Facebook Can Tell you.

Facebook has been dominating the social networking scene since 2004, with over 300 million users as of September 2009.  Taking a step beyond enabling online social butterflies, now the the site is telling people exactly how happy they are.  The Facebook blog says it’s In an effort to “help people better understand the world around them.” Facebook scientists developed an index, called the “Gross National Happiness Index,” which quantifies the happiness levels of people on Facebook.  Put simply, they’re saying that the more I say words such as “happy,” “yay” and “awesome,” instead of “sad,” “doubt” and “tragic,” the happier I am that day.

In Monday’s blog post, Facebook said, “Every day, through Facebook status updates, people share how they feel with those who matter most in their lives. These updates are tiny windows into how people are doing. They’re brief, to the point, and descriptive of what’s going on this week, today or right now.”

By anonymously monitoring Facebook status updates, this program is able to generate a graph that shows peaks and dips in users’ Gross National Happiness Index. The application allows users to zoom in and out, focusing on specific days.  The application has the ability to track trends, such as slumps in happiness levels during tragedies (the death of Michael Jackson), and drastic increases (President Obama's election). The graph was able to show that Wednesday, November 5, 2008 “was over twice as happy as the average Wednesday.”

An article in TechCrunch notes that, “With over 300 million users and 40 million daily status updates, Facebook has an immense amount of data that could potentially be used to gauge any number of things, from the hottest up-and-coming bands to the most discussed political issues.”

People have now recognized the possibilities that could come with aggregating Facebook statistics, and some are beginning to wonder why this information isn’t available to the public. In Read Write Web article, “Facebook Now Tracking Gross National Happiness; Continues Hoarding Data,” Marshall Kirkpatrick expresses his frustration with this application. He says that it’s an “example of just how much value Facebook is withholding by not allowing everyone access to the anonymous, aggregated activity and conversation of more than 300 million people.” Kirkpatrick wrote about the potential Facebook had to utilize all of the valuable information that can be found within the site back in February, saying that the site had “interesting and potentially valuable data that could be, for the first time in history, available in near real-time. Just by listening to what people are talking about in status updates and comments.” He noted that when Google publishing the top searches during the Presidential debates, they proved that significant results can come from analyzing basic statistics.

So, what's next?  I hope we'll be able to use the massive data stored on Facebook to track something beyond happiness levels.  While the stats are interesting, they're not surprising.  You could easily guess that people are upset on Mondays and happy on holidays.  Regardless of how you feel about this particular application, you have to agree that Facebook is on to something.  When will they pull back the covers and give more of us access to the information they're holding back?  And how will users react when they do? 

- Contributed by Katy Rohlicek. Follow her @katyroll

Media World A-Twitter Over Washington Post’s Twitter Policy

Newspapers, the heralded vanguard of free speech, are currently embroiled in a heated debate about how that freedom applies to them.  About a week ago, The Washington Post responded to an editor’s Twitter posts with an organization-wide memo with guidelines on social media. 

Narisetti took down his Twitter account, but Google’s caching function lets one see what it looked like shortly before it was taken down.

The guidelines, which were not initially made public, have since been posted on paidContent.org and focus primarily on preventing public announcements of bias, opinion or preference.  Excerpts include:

"When using these networks [Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and MySpace are mentioned], nothing we do must call into question the impartiality of our news judgment.  We never abandon the guidelines that govern the separation of news from opinion, the importance of fact and objectivity, the appropriate use of language and tone, and other hallmarks of our brand of journalism."

And:

"All Washington Post journalists relinquish some of the personal privileges of private citizens.  Post journalists must recognize that any content associated with them in an online social network is, for practical purposes, the equivalent of what appears beneath their bylines in the newspaper or on our website."

While the paper likely took action because it feared an outcry in response to Narisetti’s tweets (which most agree could be viewed as biased, or even offensive), it has been the response that has generated outcry.  Journalists, media pundits, PR folks and engaged readers alike have all jumped in to debate The Post’s response.

A Day of Social Media Discovery

Maybe you’ve experienced this: you’re at your desk tweeting away and all of a sudden, your tweople start referencing some foreign hash sign. As they get louder and louder, it becomes clear they’re sharing thoughts from a conference or event, so you quickly put in a search and try to follow along.  If you’re like me, you realize that the nuggets they’re spouting off only contain half the story, and you still want to know more (this is why they charge you to attend conferences). 

Having been in that position too many times, I’d thought I’d reverse the roll for you.  I recently attended the Social Media Strategies event in San Francisco (@SocialMediaConf).  As I tweeted throughout the day, I tried to share the best-of-the-best by way of 140 character comments.  If that left you wanting more, here’s where you’ll find the full story.  I’m interested to hear what you think, and I encourage others to do the same following valuable events and information-packed conference sessions.

Here’s @gbender26 from #awsms09

When the Mattel team took the stage, they talked a lot about how they wanted to incorporate their brand image into all social marketing efforts.  Everything from owning Barbie’s signature pink to finding someone who could consistently be the voice of the doll was important to maintaining the image that grown-up girls had grown up with.  The lesson here was that you can’t abandon the tenants of your brand when you jump into the social realm, but you can engage new audiences.  Barbie’s Twitter followers, for example are decidedly older than the girls playing with the doll today.

For Barbie’s 50th birthday, Mattel also incorporated social media – microsites, social network fan pages, videos, etc. – into live events.  I was struck by their use of traditional media as a barometer for the success of their social marketing efforts.

• Barbie turned 50 social media style. Learning how Mattel incorporated play time into comm strategy.
• Barbie had a web site in 1997. In 2009, she's into social networking. Now she's really my hero.
• Mattel uses 80/20 rule for international social media. 80% remains the same, 20% customized per region

MC Hammer appeared with significant fanfare via the show’s Twitter feed.  His lesson for brands, media moguls and the music industry, centered on finding your audience where it already lives.  Social media afforded him the opportunity to rebuild his brand, and he sees the potential for younger artists and emerging brands.  Interestingly, he didn’t have many good things to say about MySpace, despite its focus on the music market.  He seemed to think no one wants to sort through that mess in search of new music. 

• @mchammer says he can make me a star in Hollywood. But in social media, the community creates the star. It's about push vs. pull marketing.
• Taking out the middle man builds stronger connection to the brand. Tell your own story. @mchammer
  

Representatives from the Gap were on board to highlight their social media success, which included fan pages, microsites, video and smartphone apps.  Being featured in an iPhone commercial was a huge win!  Bookending the campaign were traditional marketing research (in-home focus groups) and social media measurement.  Again, Gap mentioned using press coverage as a way to determine social media success. They also tracked user behavior and engagement, all of which was attributed to driving real sales and revenue.

• Gap went into homes to talk about jeans- the first step in better connection to consumers. Didn't use traditional focus groups.
• Don't forget to optimize all your social media content for search! Tagging is a powerful tool.

Lessons from Amish Country

A New York Times article from this week, "Exploring News by the Amish Online," takes a look at Amish communities to show that perhaps our Twitter-esque approach to crowdsourcing and local news is not such a "2.0" thing.  The reporter interviewed 22-year-old Jessica Best, a journalist who spent time in Ohio at the The Budget, the largest newspaper serving the Amish.  Jessica explained that The Budget sources news from "scribes" from across the nation, and that the majority of scribes do not want the news to go online, mainly because of privacy concerns.  Her study revealed interesting observations about the similarities between our Web 2.0 world and the offline model that has served the Amish for so long.  For example:

"By assembling detailed reports from around the country, Ms. Best said, the editors of The Budget 'have been doing for 100 years what we have only been doing recently — looking at news on the hyperlocal scale and asking each person what is on your mind...They are looking at the individuals to make a bigger picture. With the Internet, the power has shifted to many hands, but they have done that for a long time.'"

Jessica's experience proves that crowdsourcing is not unique to the blogsphere and new media, but more just innate to how humans prefer to share news and tell stories.  As storytellers, we fall back first and foremost on "word of mouth" updates and local information that comes straight from the source.  It's just the information delivery method that changes over the years.  So -- should The Budget go online? It's online at the local level now, but not nationally.  Further, will the online shift do away with the traditional print format? I think the Amish Scribes passion for pen and paper tells us that there is a time and a place for print, just as there is also a time and a place for online news.  Why does the proliferation of one medium have to lead to the extinction (or endangerment) of another? I don't think it does.

Contributed by: Susan Wise.  Follow her @swise

Twitter TMI?

There is no denying that our society is much more transparent than that of previous generations. Those of us that grew up in the MTV era watched season after season of the Real World and saw the shows’ “stars” become famous simply by revealing their innermost thoughts to the camera lens. The Real World spawned a slew of reality shows, some more morally questionable than others, and now it’s common to turn on the TV and find people dating, marrying, divorcing, you name it.

A shy culture we are not.

But Facebook, Twitter and other social networking sites have brought this trend to a whole new level. Compelled to answer the question, “What are you doing?,” we find ourselves sharing information that would once have been considered either too mundane—or too private—to communicate to outside parties. Take, for example, Sara Williams (the wife of Twitter CEO Evan Williams) who tweeted this week about her impending labor and child birth from her hospital bed.

When CNN first reported on the story, Sara Williams had approximately 14,000 followers. A few hours later, over a thousand more tweeps were following her updates. And this wasn’t just some crafty publicity stunt cooked up by the Williams’; the CNN article also quotes some regular Joes (and Janes) who tweeted from the delivery room to update their followers on every contraction.

While the idea of sharing such a personal experience with a group of relative strangers may seem bizarre to some, there is clearly a market for this type of information. And what does this mean for the business world? In today’s culture of over-sharers is there such a thing as too much information?