I was surprised to read e-Marketer’s article today titled, “Who Doesn’t Use the Internet?” The article references Pew Internet & American Life Project report on Information Searches That Solve Problems, and details that 24% of American’s don’t have Internet access.  This is critical for marketers to be aware of.  As important as integrating digital into marketing campaigns is, it is also critical that marketers understand where digital won’t work and allocate efforts appropriately to reach an entire audience. The Pew report identifies those with the least access being the ones who are less affluent, less educated, and older.  That has implications for specific industries, most notably health care, as older Americans with less money often are most in need of health-related news and information. I think there are also implications for government agencies who continue to rely very heavily on the Internet to distribute public education materials.
Have a look, it is a quick but good read and provides demographic details on those not online.

The Financial Times published an article last week advising companies that they could manage the web without the help of PR firms. I agree with my colleague Charlie who runs our digital business in Asia/Pacific who responded to the FT with letter detailing some of the challenges, opportunities, and skills required to navigate the web. Now, admittedly I run the digital business for a PR firm, but whether or not clients pick us, I’d hate for them to go it alone. The Internet is still in very early stages, a digital wild wild west of sorts, and I don’t understand why any company want to risk figuring all of this out for themselves. PR advisers bring unique perspective to digital challenges, just like other professionals do within their respective fields.

From a public relations perspective, think about context - in the era of open communications facilitated by the Internet, your consumer messaging will affect corporate reputation, and vice versa. It is not possible to say one thing to one audience and something completely different to another, at least not without them hearing both sides of your story. PR advisers are uniquely situated to provide context and help guide messaging that creates dialogue with stakeholders while building and protecting a company’s position. Next, think about content. There are so many options for where to participate. Are companies really prepared to figure out what messages are appropriate for different types of sites on their own? What about community, which gives companies the opportunity to build loyalty around their brands based on shared values. Then, think about control. Companies are used to completely controlling their communications messages, but the Internet prohibits that. Instead, companies need to figure out what their most important messages are, and then figure out where they can control them, and where they can influence them, and then participate accordingly. Lastly, there is the very important fact that online chatter dramatically influences offline communications. Having a qualified PR adviser is one sure way to straddle all of these, and many other critical elements of navigating digital media.
Companies may be able to figure all of this out on their own, but why wouldn’t they want a communications adviser who can share broad-based experiences that cut across sectors, stakeholders, and platforms to help clients make the right choices the first time around?

E-marketer reported on a study conducted by the Deloitte Consumer Product Group that indicated that consumers are accessing and trust consumer-generated product reviews. The data is very convincing, indicating that 99% of respondents find consumer-generated reviews somewhat or very credible. However, only 62% read consumer-generated reviews.  I find it surprising that that 99% find the information credible but only 62% actually access in the information, but either way 62% is a big number. The eMarketer article states, “More than eight in 10 respondents in the Deloitte study who read consumer reviews said that the reviews had affected their buying intentions: either they became more determined to buy the product or they changed their minds and bought a different product altogether.”

As if we needed more proof, this is yet another demonstration of the big stick that consumers now carry, and further proof that marketers need to participate in online conversations with consumers.  Knowing that online reviews are influencing other consumers makes them a critical source of marketing data.  Talk about immediate and actionable feedback. Marketers need to track online feedback, and have a great opportunity to use it to facilitate real-time branding and even impact product development and potentially business operations. CPG companies have it pretty good being able to get this feedback.  I wish we had a system like this for agencies!

Burson-Marsteller’s global CEO, Mark Penn, recently published a book titled Microtrends. The book details the small trends that are generating big change in America. Early buzz from clients and media is very positive. I am fascinated by this thinking, and am especially interested in the implications for digital communications. Given how online communications make the world a smaller place it will be especially interesting to identify personal microtrends. Have a look at the Web site, and send a chapter to a friend.  It will be interesting to discuss which microtrends we all find most interesting.

A very astute client forwarded a link to a video on YouTube that I think is a must-see for every client.  We are getting to the stage where companies understand that consumers have lost interest in one way marketing messages but are willing to having conversations with marketers.  However, companies are still struggling with how to maintain some semblance of control while creating a participatory marketing framework.  This funny video, created by an ad agency in Belgium, does a great job of poking fun at the problem while showcasing the potential impact of continuing with marketing business as usual.

Nice job, and thanks Julie and Vickie for the link.

We’ve had a few questions from clients about the new feature that Google introduced within its news service on August 8th. The a new feature allows participants in stories to append a comment to the story. Comments are verified as being submitted by a relevant participant in the story, and then published in full. The service is currently experimental and only available in the United States.

Google’s new feature is representative of a larger shift in the media landscape. As consumers shun one-to-one information sources in favor of many-to-many participatory streams, traditional news outlets and PR agencies must adjust their respective avenues of information shaping and sharing. Sure, most news services allow anyone to comment on articles, but this feature is unique in that story participants can add comments that stay with the story. We believe that clients need to embrace a more integrative way of communicating, and encourage them to participate in online dialogue to ensure they have a fair share of voice. However, as with most digital media, one size does not fit all or apply to every client situation.

Clients have a great opportunity to extend the story, clarify their point of view, or correct misinformation when commenting on articles aggragated within Google News. However, given that manual intervention is required to facilitate the comments being published, a lag time may be experienced. Additionally, posting a comment may extend a story, which may or may not be desirable. Lastly, Google reserves the right not to publish all comments. Therefore, clients should not rely solely on Google News comments as their only means of responding to published news reports.

Clients deciding to comment on stories aggregated by Google News should:

• Evaluate the opportunity carefully on a story-by-story basis, considering the following:
  • Is there misinformation that needs to be corrected?
  • Have critical facts been omitted from the story?
  • Can I extend the story in a meaningful way for readers?
  • What are the implications to this story gaining prominence and being extended in other consumer-generated forums?
  • Is the comment I plan to post completely true and defendable?
• Be completely transparent when posting comments, being clear about who you are and your connection to the story. Google will make efforts to confirm identity prior to publishing comments, but it is very important that commenters are sincere to avoid backlash.
• Be entirely unassailable in your comments as misinformation will be challenged and potentially used to create a larger news story.
• Consider the ramifications of the comment you post, especially in competitive situations, or if other story participants may take issue with your point of view.

Clients wishing to have comments appended to a Google news story should review Google’s guidelines and follow them carefully.

First blogs, followed by vlogs, and m’logs.  Now we have splogs (spam blogs) and clogs (corporate blogs.)  What will they call annual blogs?  Analogs?  That would be funny.  Actually, annual blogs have been around for a while, but they are gaining traction and there are a lot more of them of late.  Basically, an annual blog pops up to cover an annual event, starting in advance to cover preparations and ramp-up, and stopping shortly after the event concludes. 

AdWeek has launched an annual blog for the International Advertising Festival at Cannes.  They are just getting started, but already have some impressive industry insiders as guest contributors.  BloggingSundance.com covered, you guessed it, the Sundance Film Festival.  And BloggingMilken.com covered the Milken Institute’s Global Conference and included a wide variety of topics. 

What is the opportunity for companies?  With the proper time commitment and elbow grease, I think they should consider blogging tradeshows and conferences, especially where they have significant new product or service announcements.  Annual meetings are another prime opportunity to create conversations with stakeholders about a company’s future.  From an internal perspective, blogging leadership summits or annual planning meetings would likely be interesting to the rank and file.  And, companies in trouble could certainly use a blog to tell their side of the story, provided they are completely truthful and transparent in their blogging efforts.  Lastly, within different industries there are set times of the year that provide opportunities - Fashion Week, tax season, and back to school, for example.  Any other examples pop into mind?

The reality is that more companies should be using blogs, even v1.0, to create dialogue with their target audience groups.  Maybe annual blogging can provide a way to experiment to encourage more frequent communications and let companies ease into the blogosphere?  What do you think?