Advertisers need social media triage

Image by Corey Templeton via Flickr

Supposition: Any time survey data is used to support "trends", be skeptical. In fact, you can ignore it all together. For all (yes, I said all) surveys are deeply flawed.

Take this report by the Association of National Advertisers. It's purports to tell us that "marketers [are embracing] new media platforms, social media and viral videos". Well sure. We know that. No big surprise. What is surprising are the numbers reported by the surveys. See if you can guess what is wrong here:

In 2009, the most effective newer media platforms were as follows:

* Search engine marketing (SEM) (65 percent)
* Own Web site (59 percent)
* Search engine optimization (SEO) (55 percent)
* E-mail marketing (45 percent)

I'm sorry -- newer media? That's more new that new, right? And even if it isn't, I'm pretty sure that it's 2009. We're well past the hump where things like having a website and being concerned about search engine positioning are "new" concepts.

Or maybe we're not.

Maybe we're really ahead of the curve. Maybe we live in the present, but the vast majority of the world is still living in the deep past, circa 2004. And we must remember that we cannot force everyone else to catch up. We have to be able to relate to them. To put it in words you'll understand -- be backwards compatible. Can you be?

I don't have to like everything about you

Image by Bobasonic via Flickr

Chris is a gamer and writes about it on his blog. A lot. I'm not a gamer, so I don't care. So in essence, I have to "put up with" Chris' writing about gaming.

Tyler likes to rant on his blog. A lot. I don't have the same passions as he does, so I don't care. So in essence, I have to "put up with" Tyler's ranting on issues that aren't important to me.

Teel loves to post long-winded personal exposes on his blog. A lot. As I only want to see where he's at with his latest project, I don't care about those posts. So in essence, I have to "put up with" super long posts just to get what I want.

But here's the bottom line: I don't tell them about what I don't like. The last thing I want is for them only to be, do and write the things I like 100% of the time. That's... boring. In reality, I'm not "putting up with" any of it from any of them. I'm letting them be who they are. Who they want to be. Occasionally -- often, in fact -- what they want and what I want align perfectly. And I quickly forget all those other things I didn't care about before.

In the immortal words of Billy Joel:

Don't go changing, to try and please me,
You never let me down before,
Don't imagine, you're too familiar,
And I don't see you anymore.

I would not leave you, in times of trouble,
We never could have come this far,
I took the good times, I'll take the bad times,
I'll take you just the way you are.

The future of serialized audiobooks: my interview on Bibliotech

w00t! My good friend Mark Jeffrey has edited and posted his interview with me on his video show, Bibliotech. We get deep into the history, present and future of the serialized audiobook. A podiobook, if you will. And we spend some time talking about the future of publishing, writing, reading, listening... and a whole lot more.



Thanks to Mark for having me on. Mark is already well aware of podiobooks, as his book The Pocket and the Pendant was one of the first five books we listed on Podiobooks.com. And be sure and check his show archives. He's only 8 shows in and has already had quite the cadre of high-profile guests discussing the technology and future of publishing.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Mark Jeffrey Hosts Bibliotech (podiobooks.com)
• Hutch appears on "Bibliotech" (jchutchins.net)

Why I tweet out when I eat out

Image by boutmuet via Flickr

Many of us have a habit of tweeting where we're eating. We use Twitpic to take snaps of the food we're eating. We tweet about the food, the service and the place in general.

We do this for many reasons. Some of us are compulsive tweeters. Some of us consider it a badge of honor, that we're fully exploring the tool. Some of us want people to come and join us. And some of you want us to just shut up about it already.

All are valid points. Even the last. :)

But sometimes this tweating (tweeting + eating, get it?) can have immediate benefits for the tweet-or. Take the case of Julia and Kabuki, recounted on Tyler's blog. Short version: Julia live-tweeted her experience inside Kabuki and received free lobster. There's more to it than that, but since this about Twitter, I thought I'd pay homage to the 140 character limitation.

One word of caution: don't tweet out what you wouldn't say out loud. They're listening. :)

The time-sink is in the details

Image by Clover_1 via Flickr

Details matter. And I suck at them. My posts, updates, emails and damn near every form of communication is littered with typos. I go fast. I'd like to slow down. I'd like to catch them before they get published. I know I need to. But...

Time, you know?

Speed to market is important. Some bloggers post 10x a day. I'm working on going daily and seriously considering multiple posts per day. But if I do that, I'll have to go even faster. It can't take me an hour to write, edit, and correct if I'm going for 2 - 3 per day.

But I need to. I need to find the time to not only write, but to edit. Tools only go so far. People who don't know me will judge me based on my attention to detail... or lack thereof. There's no excuse for not taking the time to do it right.

Dammit.

I know I won't get there immediately. And I'll probably stumble. But I'm trying.

The Next Big Thing

Image by Crystl via Flickr

On Sunday, I was interviewed by a reporter for the Phoenix New Times. I've done a fair share of interviews over the years, and you never know how the final piece will turn out. Sometimes the journalist has a slant, sometimes things get edited down to just sound bites, and sometimes quote are taken entirely out of context. All of that has happened to me in the past. But I don't sweat it. It is what it is. Not to say I think that the PNT piece will be anything other than spot on. I'm #justsayin'...

During the interview, the following question came up:

"What's going to replace Twitter".

I think that question has an unknowable answer. And not just because we can't predict the future. But because we don't know what we need -- yet. Before Twitter, none of us knew we needed an web/SMS/IM mashup that limited you to 140 characters.

Before Flickr, we assumed you had to know HTML and FTP in order to share your photos with family and friends.

Before Facebook, we didn't know that we needed private profiles, or that value was to be had allowing fellow students and co-workers access to said profiles.

Before YouTube, we didn't know we could create mini-movies and get them to our friends with ease and speed, so they could spread them around for us.

So the question of what's going to replace Twitter is as silly as it is unknowable. I use all of the networks above. Neither one replaces the other. Sure, I could use Photobucket, MySpace, Vimeo, or Dodgeball, but I don't. Yet plenty do. They don't need to switch to my tools, and I don't need to switch to theirs. They get the same benefits I get with my preferred tools.

So don't try and build a "twitter killer". Try and build something entirely new that lets me do things my current toolbox won't. That's going to be The Next Big Thing.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Social media should make your city communicate better (funanymore.com)

Going beyond takedown notices

Image by stevegarfield via Flickr

It's an understatement to say that digital publishing causes concerns for traditional publishers. Having a digital version of media available -- regardless of who did the digitizing -- effectively eliminates the control of distribution. Digital files are inherently copyable and sharable, and any business model that relies on the prevention of digital files being copied is doomed to fail.

A much better expenditure of energy is answering this question: what new methods of compensation can be created that allows monies to flow to the rights-holders? Take the case of R&B star Chris Brown. His song "Forever" was the inspiration behind the Jill Peterson and Kevin Heinz's wedding party video that has had over 14 million views on YouTube -- so far. Chris received no direct compensation for these plays, as he would have had they been played on MTV, radio or other "traditional" distribution venues that pay into various clearinghouses and ultimately compensate rights-holders for airtime.

Not long ago, Chris' (or more likely the label that owns the rights to the song) only recourse would have been to exercise his copyright and demand YouTube take down the offending video. Yes, there could also have been a suit filed against the couple due to copyright infringement. It's been done before. But that's not what happened.

Instead, Chris (or his label) was able to monetize the views on YouTube, thanks to some innovative thinking on the part of YouTube. You can read about the short case study here. Is this the be-all-end-all solution? Nope. But it's smart. And it shows a new type of thinking that embraces the digital work, rather than attempting to shut down a Good Thing.

Let creative people create. Let rights-holders monetize those creations. Seems a win-win to me. What do you think?

Related articles by Zemanta

• Oh Look, Viral Video On YouTube Boosting Sales... And Reputation For Chris Brown (techdirt.com)
• Battling Copyright Ignorance (plagiarismtoday.com)
• Copyright wish lists (cbc.ca)