Δευτέρα, 30 Νοεμβρίου 2009

Ένα από τα καλύτερα άρθρα για το πώς αλλάζει σήμερα η επικοινωνία μέσα από τα new και social media!!!

The future of media is all about conversations

by Marc Danziger


Every media brand in existence is working to build a community.

Most of them won’t succeed.

Many won’t succeed because the business organizations that are trying to implement the communities are themselves crumbling, caught in a downdraft of declining revenues, causing cuts resulting in declining quality which leads to declining audiences who pay less and are less valuable to advertisers – and so on.

And some won’t succeed because they are doing community wrong – treating it as an adjunct, a bolt-on feature, or a simple expansion of “letters to the editor.”

That’s not community, it’s not going to drive audience “engagement,” and it's not going to lead to sustainable new business models.

When I speak at conferences, I explain social media (the technological implementation of community) as being a part of a hierarchy:

•Traditional media: you pay, I talk, you listen

•Interactive media: you pay, I talk, and then you and I talk about what I just said

•Social media: I’m getting a cup of tea; you all start talking among yourselves and I’ll come join youFreestanding comments attached to stories are ”interactive” media, not ”social” media, and community doesn’t get nurtured in the context of interactive media.


Key word: Conversation


Let me make some general comments about media and community, and then try and make some specific suggestions that would apply both to individual journalists and folks running media companies.

The first is to understand that the key word for the next decade is going to be ”conversation.” Now, we all know what conversation is in our daily lives; as adults we have some greater or lesser skills as conversationalists – we understand context, we share space in the conversation, we show respect for the other participants, etc. Standing in our living room during cocktail parties, we don’t engage in long monologues, then leave the room so others can comment.

But in fact, that’s what many media companies do today. Not all of them – there are some good examples out there (the Guardian UK is doing a number of interesting things) – but too many of them.

And in response, the communities that spring up in the standalone comments sections often embody the worst of Internet behavior – from profanity to incendiary rudeness.

What’s the problem?

The problem is bad conversation. Where people don’t feel heard, they feel the need to scream.


Lack of authority


How do we go past this?

The first place to begin is by understanding how the rules have changed. Just as newspapers (and local TV stations, and magazines) are no longer advertising monopolies in their niche, they are no longer ”authority monopolies” there either.

It’s simple. The journalist used to be the authority; what was written in the New York Times or Washington Post was the authoritative take on the events of the day. That’s no longer true. In fact, it was never true, but we all acted as though it were.

People always talked back to their newspaper; it’s just that in the past their audience didn’t reach beyond the family members gathered around the breakfast table. Today, in a world of readers with their own blogs, readers may have audiences approaching the size of the newspaper itself.

And let’s finally admit that reporting has always been imprecise; reporters are not deep domain experts in everything, and perspectives on events change over time. Science accepts that concept, and it’s a given that there will be conversations about findings and that initial impressions may be wrong. Over time a consensus will emerge – and that over longer spans of time, that consensus will likely get overturned.

But up until now, the only one with a microphone (a microphone loaned to him or her by a media company) was the reporter, so that kind of open discussion has not usually been a part of journalism. But now all of us have microphones, and not only do we have them but we want to use them and expect to be heard when we do.

And, unsurprisingly, some of us know more about specific things than the journalists reporting about them.

This moves the reporter from being the authority to the role of an authority. This implies acceptance of the idea that that a one-way broadcast of information about something is less valuable (and less interesting) than two-way conversation about that thing.


Embracing new skills


Because that’s what journalism (and marketing, and advertising, and management, and a host of other disciplines) will become in this cycle: A conversation – ideally sparked and led by journalists who embrace the new skills necessary and taking place in and around media properties that can both push for excellence in journalism and embrace and orchestrate the voices of the communities that surround them.

What are those skills, you ask, and what do those media properties look like?

•Leading conversations will be the first skill, and it starts with the ability to tell a story without monopolizing the conversation – by including the knowledge and viewpoints of others who have something to contribute, and by respectfully dealing with those who are not as knowledgeable and leading them toward knowledge with a chain of facts and logic.

•Curating will be the next skill, because it implies the ability to find stories told by others and bringing them forward to a broader audience. Remember the “It’s not news because it’s not in the Times” attitude? That is changing, because there is a lot of news out there and no news organization – even in the heyday of news organizations – can afford the staff to cover all of it.

Now the citizens and readers – going about their daily business armed with phones that can take pictures and post to blogs and Twitter – are the front line of news.

How do you build a media property based on leading conversations and curating outside content and still cover important stories (that don’t involve wardrobe malfunctions or planes landing in rivers)?

Let me make a suggestion.


The niche factor


Let’s just focus on the City of Los Angeles for a moment – not just because I live here, but just to make the example somewhat clearer.

Politically, there are 15 Council districts in the city, and five supervisorial districts for the wider county. Geographically, there are probably 10 ”districts.”
So imagine for a moment, a part-time blogger/journalist who covers only the politics within one council or supervisorial district. It’s a niche product, of interest to residents of that district, political activists and the professional lobbyists and political staffers who have business there. Daily they post three or four (or more) short stories and occasionally a longer, more in-depth piece. Readers will comment and authors respond in an ongoing dialog as stories develop or are uncovered more deeply.

At this level, the readers and the journalists can have an ongoing conversation – and need to, because the journalist is going to be farming readers for story leads, knowledge about story topics, and as critics who will help identify the weak points in any story.

Once in awhile – maybe three or four times a week – a story develops that is of wider interest. That story might get published on a site covering a neighborhood – one of the ten neighborhood sites managed by the Times – or even on the main site for the Times itself. It might lead to more resources being put into it, to dig deeper, based on an editor’s judgment or popularity.

That model can be extended past politics to local news, culture or lifestyle. There’s cycling, cars, movies, visual arts, exercise, health, dining out, education, etc.

What used to be called ”beats" that competed for a four-inch column once a week in the main paper now become standalone sites, running multiple short stories each day, each competing in a kind of evolutionary explosion to create stories that gather wider interest – but each one sustained by the interest of the niche followers.

Beats will be added and dropped, some writers will fail and some succeed, and all of it will take place not hidden behind the walls of a newspaper building orchestrated by a cadre of editors, but in public, with the audience ultimately driving topics and the hard work of curating and orchestrating all of this falling to a new breed of editors in a new kind of news organization.



Being there


How do you get there from here?

A few concrete steps:

1.Start with the idea that comments on stories are not for other readers only; they need to be continuously engaged by the journalists who wrote the story. Talking to the audience is as much a part of the new journalist’s job as writing the story. That kind of dialog will lower the tone of vitriol in the comments sections, as they are valued and seen to amount to something. On my blog, I talk about ”Quality as a community metric” and there’s a great article in Slate about how MetaFilter improves community quality.

2.Allow stories to ”evolve” and grow over a few days as users add content and comment; update the core stories (while keeping the older versions – dropping things down the memory hole is seen as dishonest) and highlight the changes and corrections.

3.Develop a journalist culture that values shaping conversations over standalone storytelling; don’t monologue us to death and get offended when we want to say something back. Don’t become defensive when corrected; scientists welcome correction as moving science toward truth – journalists should as well.

Every day, media businesses see the ground under their feet eroding away. Every day journalists and other media professionals feel more and more insecure. Some advocate a path backward to what looks like safety – behind pay walls and a belief that we can somehow go back to the journalism we had for a generation or more – but that path is riskier than the path forward because the audience to support it has left the building.

The path forward moves journalists to the center of conversations that are already happening in places where customers are already gathering and toward a journalism that will, once again, matter. As a consumer of journalism, I look forward to it.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Marc Danziger has been envisioning and implementing technology to solve business problems for more than 15 years, and evangelizing for social media and peer-to-peer production for over three years. His clients have included Toyota, Manpower, Inc., Fast Company, Warner Music and other large companies, as well as startups in media and eCommerce. He lives in Southern California with his wife Grace, is appropriately proud of his three remarkable sons, and thinks Italian motorcycles are the solution to most of the world’s problems.

Δευτέρα, 23 Νοεμβρίου 2009

Seven Tips for Making the Perfect TV Pitch

Εάν είστε επαγγελματίας του PR διαβάστε τις συμβουλές μιας έμπειρης τηλεοπτικής ρεπόρτερ για το πώς δεν πρέπει να κουράζετε τους δημοσιογράφους με λανθασμένες επιλογές για TV stories. Εάν είστε δημοσιογράφος παρακαλούμε επιβεβαιώστε ή διαψεύστε!

Τhe difference between a good pitch and a poor one is not the writing, it's the content. Many pitches are too long, not focused enough or lacking the right information. As someone who's had experience working in television, I know firsthand what a producer will consider and, more importantly, what they won't. Here are some tips that can make your pitch stand out from the crowd.

Παρασκευή, 20 Νοεμβρίου 2009

Ανακριβείς οι ειδήσεις για τα δύο τρίτα των Αμερικανών

Από την Ketchum έρχονται οι πληροφορίες για την τελευταία μέτρηση της εμπιστοσύνης της κοινής γνώμης στα ΜΜΕ. Και μιλάμε για ΗΠΑ, όπου ο κοσμος και βλέπει και εμπιστεύεται τα μέσα του πολυ περισσότερο απ' ό,τι εμείς.
Public Trust in Media

This item below from Media Daily News feed about the latest measure of public trust in media - adding dimension to previously published data points and perspective (including Business Roundtable/Arthur Page Society special report this year) on flagging trust in corporate and government institutions of all kinds:

Nearly two-thirds of Americans think the news stories they read, hear and watch are frequently inaccurate, according to a poll released Sunday by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. Plus, just 29% believed news reports had the facts straight. The term "news media" was inclusive -- it counted bloggers and reporters employed by newspapers and broadcasters. The stats, from 1,506 adults, were compiled in late July. Worth noting: 63% thought the media info reported was off-base -- up from 53% in 2007.

This underscores the need to initiate discussion relative to each of our practices and client situations. At the broad view is re-building trust with stakeholders in an environment where there's precious little left - no belief that the news media is "watching" or "dogging" anymore. Within that is the consideration and investments by clients to "own your online media channel" and take advantage of the opportunity to generate and circulate content that's more credible (and compelling!) than what's generated by media "covering" you. This crystallizes the opportunity - influencer strategy meets media strategy meets content generation, and it starts in your own channel!

-Jerry Thompson, Partner, Senior Counselor, Atlanta

Πέμπτη, 19 Νοεμβρίου 2009

It's big, it's Grand, it's very creative

Οι Αμερικανοί ξοδεύουν λιγότερα για φαγητό, οι ελληνικές εταιρίες του κλάδου πρέπει να ετοιμαστούν

Μια νέα έρευνα δείχνει ότι οι Αμερικανοί καταναλωτές μειώνουν τις δαπάνες τους για φαγητό, κάτι που κάνει τον ανταγωνισμό της κατηγορίας σκληρότερο και την ανάγκη της επικοινωνίας ανάμεσα στα brands μεγαλύτερη. Είναι μια τάση που έρχεται σε Ευρώπη και Ελλάδα, αναπόφευκτα λόγω κρίσης και αλλαγής παγίων καταναλωτικών συνηθειών.

Ο ανταγωνισμός στις τιμές και τις προσφορές έχει ένα όριο. Από εκεί και πέρα είναι θέμα brand loyalty, liftyle και τελικά, επικοινωνίας. Πόσες εταιρείες στην Ελλάδα είναι έτοιμες να κρατήσουν τη θέση τους; Και πόσες εισηγμένες είναι έτοιμες να αντιμετωπίσουν το κύμα της μείωσης μεριδίων έναντι των μετόχων τους και της χρηματοοικονομικής κοινότητας;


Americans Look To Spend Less On Food
October 14, 2009

As the recession continues to wear on consumers, a new study shows that Americans are determined to spend even less at the grocery store. Not only do 74% now shop armed with a list, but 65% think grocery items are overpriced, and 49% find the experience so unpleasant they just want to "get in and get out." In fact, the Synovate survey finds, 48% would gladly shop online, if they thought online grocery shopping was both secure and that they would get high-quality food.

Americans are fiercely focused on price, says Synovate, a Chicago-based market research firm, which polled 6,700 people in 10 markets around the world. Some 39% of shoppers in the U.S. say they are spending less than they did 12 months ago, and 78% would happily switch one food brand for another if it were a better deal.

"It's maybe only once or twice a decade -- if that -- when events occur that make the consumer rethink everything they do related to virtually all of the money they spend," the company says in its release. "Of course, this means they are rethinking or considering all the products they buy or don't buy. This runs the full gamut from big decisions like cars and TVs, all the way through to frozen food, water or coffee."

Interestingly, despite their concern about prices, 89% say they are most likely to shop at supermarkets, and only 10% of Americans say they do their grocery shopping at superstores, which typically offer lower prices. Some 57% of Americans still do a big weekly shopping trip, and 58% buy in bulk.

The survey also asked about changes shoppers would like to see in stores, and found that once again, Americans care more about cash than other amenities. While 62% of the total surveyed say they would go out of their way to shop at an environmentally friendly supermarket, Americans -- at 22% -- are among the least interested. (About 86% of Russian respondents, 85% of Malaysians and 18% of the Dutch agreed.) Americans also turned thumbs-down on ideas like al fresco shopping, playgrounds, and community gathering spots in stores, although 72% agreed it would be a good idea for stores to include recycling facilities.

The news comes as many supermarket stocks are taking a bruising on Wall Street, as investors anticipate that the earnings reports due in the next few weeks will reflect the tight-fistedness of U.S. consumers.

Παρασκευή, 13 Νοεμβρίου 2009

Πολύ κουβέντα γίνεται για τα Digital Agencies και ότι ηγούνται (πιά?!) στην αγορά επικοινωνίας. Είναι έτσι;


Η τεχνολογία και η δημιουργικότητα στο internet από μόνα τους απαντούν στις ολοένα αυξανόμενες στρατηγικές ανάγκες brand και corporate navigation των επιχειρήσεων; Το internet καταργεί τις υπόλοιπες μορφές επικοι...νωνίας ή απλά αναδιατάσσει το communication mix των επιχειρήσεων; Πάρτε θέση...


Why Digital Agencies Are Indeed Ready to Lead

They Understand the Technology, the Speed of Iteration and Analytics

Over the past 18 months, a great debate has consumed our industry: Are digital agencies poised to sit at the head of the advertising table? Depending on whom you ask and what you read, the answer seems to flip flop -- with a majority of people still having reservations and making claims that digital agencies aren't ready to lead.

So why does the debate continue? Does offline or online really matter to an oblivious consumer who's only interested in "no-line" communications? Are we spending too much time focusing on who should lead and not enough asking: What's next?

Ana Andjelic's DigitalNext post, provocatively titled "Why Digital Agencies Aren't Ready to Lead," mentions several reasons why digital agencies aren't ready to lead, one of which was their lack of experience in the business (as compared with the "decades of experience" that traditional agencies are known for). I'm sure there are instances where decades of experience can directly translate into success, but there are certainly instances (uh, Lehman Brothers?) where deep roots had no bearing on their ability to produce -- and produce well. Furthermore, a certain percentage of the individuals now working and thriving in digital agencies came from traditional agencies.

Additionally, most of the world's most ingenious inventions were not created overnight, but took years of hard work, research, observation, trial and error, and collaboration to fine tune. The digital ecosystem has required much of the same exploration -- and, in most cases, into technologies that are new to all of us. As James March himself said, "Exploration involves being an amateur for a while, but only as a step on the way to being a professional."

And while the structure of an interactive agency may often mimic "one big crazy family" (by the way: Whose family isn't crazy?), how could making sure everyone's opinion is heard be a bad thing? Most interactive agencies subscribe to the notion that you never know where the big idea or concept will come from. Sometimes the big idea can come from the exploration of a new technology or method that enhances consumer connection.

Here's why:

•That was then, this is now. Like it or not, the days of the ingenious, 30-second TV spot are over. Today's creative ingenuity lies within the idea, the technology, the concept, the innovation and, perhaps most important, the Holy Grail: consumer connection. Word of mouth is more prevalent than ever and interactive communities have an increasingly louder and more influential voice and are stronger (and sometimes the only) sources of breaking news stories. No one understands this better -- nor is better equipped to handle the swift demands required -- than the digital agency.

•Teaching an old dog new tricks. The "new trick" is immediacy. It's about faster response times and the concept of immediacy. E-mail, IM, Twitter, Facebook, cellphones -- all of these technologies set the stage for consumers wanting and expecting immediate responses, not to mention, immediate access to products and services. Traditional advertising agencies are not adapting to this mentality because they are still working with processes and organizational structures that were developed in a time when the internet and the concept of immediacy simply did not exist.

Digital agencies understand that brands are being held to higher-than-ever consumer expectations. The plethora of data we can garner from a $50,000 media buy can leave traditional agencies' heads spinning with insight and analysis. The truth of the matter is: Interactive agencies are forcing traditional agencies to integrate with digital media to better track and measure campaign results through custom URLs, short codes, etc.

•Kickin' it old school. Not only are the days of the 30-second TV spot gone, so too are the traditional advertising agency gurus like David Ogilvy and Bill Bernbach. Today, those figures have been replaced, instead, by financially backed entities. Rather than exploration and exploitation, digital agencies need their own gurus and legends that can lead by example.

Five or 10 years ago, I might agree with the argument that digital agencies weren't ready to lead, but after sitting at the table with other agencies for the past decade -- traditional, branding, public relations, marketing -- it's clear that digital agencies have proven their value, not to mention their ability to innovate, inspire, and create the big idea.

Perhaps the synergy and balance between exploitation and exploration is off kilter for digital agencies, but more and more we're starting to see the agency structure itself change with new hires in technology and social media. And marketers are noticing:

•According to Media magazine, AKQA was named the lead agency for Nike India earlier this year.

•Precor named Ascentium its agency of record in October 2009. According to Forrester's Q2 2009 Interactive Agency Wave, Ascentium "received the highest client satisfaction scores in this year's review." The assignment with Precor includes strategic planning and execution of all offline and online campaigns.

•McAfee hiring Tribal DDB as its agency of record in 2008. This assignment included all TV, print, outdoor, and digital.

The balance may not be there today, tomorrow or next month. The truth of the matter is digital agencies have earned their right to sit at the head of the table because they've brought what consumers and marketers are looking for: new innovations in measurement; flexibility and nimbleness; and, most importantly, ideas that bring what a magazine spread or 30-second TV spot cannot.


ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Now president-CEO of Nurun, a global interactive marketing agency, Jacques-Hervé Roubert began his career in advertising at Havas Conseil and subsequently held senior executive positions with BDDP and Young & Rubicam.

Πέμπτη, 12 Νοεμβρίου 2009

Grand ERMIS 2009 και 2 ERMIS GOLD, 3 ERMIS SILVER, 1 ERMIS BRONΖE




What is the meaning of RSVP that is so often seen in invitations?

I hope that this week's tip will benefit hosts and guests alike, because there seems to be a lot of confusion about the meaning of the above term.

Lack of RSVPs - A Growing Problem

I hear more and more often, and have found in my personal experience, that hosts often do not receive firm indications whether guests plan to attend their parties, even if RSVP is clearly printed on the invitation. This could mean either one of two things. First it could mean that rudeness is a growing trend in our society. Or, as I would prefer to believe, people no longer understand what the term means. Assuming the best, and that the decline in RSVP's can be attributed to ignorance and not rudeness, I will clarify this for the record.

What RSVP Means

The term RSVP comes from the French expression "répondez s'il vous plaît", meaning "please respond". If RSVP is written on an invitation it means the invited guest must tell the host whether or not they plan to attend the party. It does not mean to respond only if you're coming, and it does not mean respond only if you're not coming (the expression "regrets only" is reserved for that instance). It means the host needs a definite head count for the planned event, and needs it by the date specified on the invitation.

Why It's Inconsiderate to Not RSVP

An incomplete list of respondents can cause numerous problems for a host including difficulty in planning food quantities, issues relating to minimum guarantees with catering halls, uncertainty over the number of party favors and difficulties in planning appropriate seating, among other things.

So the next time you see RSVP on an invitation you receive, please call your host and respond promptly.