For the past 20 years, Metzger Associates has been a leader in the art + science of communications. We appreciate your readership, and hope you enjoy our new blog format!

Share on Facebook

By now, it’s common knowledge that the news about Bin Laden’s death broke on Twitter and set new traffic records for the site. Donald Rumsfeld’s Chief of Staff, Keith Urbahn, was the first credible source to break the news last Sunday.

What is there to learn from this? Social engagement platform SocialFlow analyzed nearly 15 million tweets and bit.ly links to draw a connection between the news and the influencers. As the graphic above confirms, Keith Urbahn was the main influencer, as well as New York Times digital media reporter Brian Stelter, who shows up in the bottom right as the second hub of retweets. The conclusions you can draw from research, outlined in their blog post:

• While anyone can tweet, your bio does matter. Urbahn doesn’t brag about his insider connections, but enough people understood that he likely had good sources.
• It does not matter how many people follow you on Twitter or how often you tweet. At the time of the posting, Urbahn had a little more than 1,000 followers on Twitter. Stelter have more than 55,000 and tweets obsessively. Ultimately, his influence was less important that Urbahn’s.

SocialFlow alos pointed out that Urbahn was not the first to speculate on Bin Laden’s death, but he was the one that gained the most trust. “With that,” writes Social Flow, “the perfect situation unfolded, where timing the right social-professional networked audience, along with a critically relevant piece of information led to an explosion of public affirmation of his trustworthiness.”

Share on Facebook

posted by Doyle

Had a great time doing the OS Perspectives podcast with Esbjorn Larsen this week. We had a great discussion on the latest from both Microsoft and Apple. Check it out here.

Share on Facebook

posted by Doyle

I have subscribed to some magazines using the Zinio app for my iPad since, gosh, the iPad 1! Today, they sent me an email informing me they’d been having problems and it may have affected one of my downloads. Honestly, if it did, I hadn’t even noticed.

Nevertheless, they owned the problem before I even knew about it and are sending me a certificate for some free magazines.

That’s how it’s done. Hat tip, Zinio!

Share on Facebook

posted by Doyle

Mashable recently covered the story of a 10th grader in California who was suspended after calling his teacher fat on Facebook.

Well, actually, he posted that the teacher was a “fat ass who should stop eating fast food, and is a douche bag.”

Ouch. Tell us how you really feel.

Now, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has sent a letter to he principal saying that the Facebook post is protected speech and that the boy cannot be punished.

OK, done rolling your eyes? Fair response. However, this situation actually raises a number of interesting points.

First, let’s get the obvious out of the way: insulting your teacher (or your boss, or a co-worker, etc.) on Facebook is a bad idea. Without exception. Parents, help your kids get their mind around the difference between complaining to a friend (which we’ve all done) and posting something on a public website—and understand it yourselves. And don’t trust your privacy settings. Just learn where it’s appropriate to vent and where it’s not. Social media has made that more important than ever.

But adults have made the same mistake. This American Life, the fabulous public radio series, recently did a story about a guy named Joe Lipari. Seems that Joe was irritated with the Apple Store and decided to quote a line from Fight Club on his Facebook page. Sadly, his Facebook status was something like, “…is thinking of going to the Apple Store with an Armalite AR-10 carbine gas-powered semi-automatic weapon, pumping round after round into the Geniuses.” The status update seemed funny while he was laying on his couch, watching the movie, smoking pot and updating Facebook.

The FBI disagreed and showed up at his apartment. I think Joe is still fighting a legal battle over the post. Ooops.

Not being stupid seems to be one obvious answer, but we can’t count on that online or anywhere else. Cases like these raise bigger questions about free speech colliding with the right to be free from public insults and threats. For example:

• Let’s say the California student’s bonehead post (sorry, kid, but seriously…) is not protected speech. Does that set a precedent that makes me potentially liable if I post something like “sitting at Restaurant X right now. Haven’t seen my server in 20 minutes. Really bad service.” Could a lawsuit be in my future?
• Let’s say it is protected speech. Is it now open season on teachers? Kids can be cruel, and teachers are people and members of the community as well. Should teachers (or waiters or participants in a community theater production or… ) be forced to put up with personal or profane attacks from anyone with with an Internet connection? That extreme seems wrong as well.
• Today I can pretty much post what I want on sites like Facebook or Twitter, which can lead to situations like I described above. What if the pendulum swings the other way, and I get kicked off Facebook for swearing or criticizing people or businesses? That would be a pretty bland world with limited interest.

Media from just a few years ago was controlled. I couldn’t even get a letter to the editor published that called someone a fat ass or a douche bag, but now I have a pretty big microphone. I can call anyone anything I want. As a business owner, I consider the ramifications of my posts. As a sophomore in high school—or even someone with a lower level of understanding of social media—I might not.

Here’s the bottom line: some people just don’t know how to act in public and we probably can’t expect them to act any better online. Sweeping rules about protected speech or libel are slippery slopes that can lead to unintended consequences like I noted above. Instead, we need to treat social media outlets like the very public conversations that they are are simply adapt some common sense reactions that have worked for decades.

• In the case of the California student: he would have faced suspension of he had used the same words in the hallway and been overheard by a member of the faculty. He would probably have been forced to apologize to the teacher he called names. Applying the same rules, this student should face punishment for inappropriate behavior and perhaps even be forced to post an apology on his page. After all, even though he made the comment on his home computer, it carries back to the school. Honestly, such a comment from one of my kids at that age at the dinner table would have earned that child a talking-to.
• Using the same logic, if I’m overheard complaining about restaurant service, there’s no potential for lawsuit (assuming it’s both reasonable and basically accurate). As such, a post to Facebook, Twitter or Yelp should not put me at risk.
• Although I certainly don’t have all the facts of the Joe Lipari case, it may very well be appropriate for authorities to investigate the source of such a post. What if Joe was an unstable guy and showed up at the Apple Store armed? However, upon finding the post was made by a stand-up comedian with no legal record watching Fight Club and smoking pot, perhaps a stern warning is more appropriate than engaging an already-overloaded legal system for months. I know I’d think twice about what I posted if several armed cops came to my house. I hope Joe thinks things through better. Again, common sense on both sides.
• Putting the management of social media sites in the business of monitoring posts will break the entire system. Much like the Digital Millenium Copyright Act puts the burden on the copyright owner to inform the carrier or website of a violation, we must rely on established chains of authority. Let’s not make Mark Zuckerberg and his staff the parents of a half billion people, some of whom are just plain knuckheads.

Of course, anyone can hire an attorney and sue anyone else for just about anything. But with the continued rise of social media and access to very public forums, such lawsuits can quickly spiral out of control on both sides. With freedom of speech comes responsibility. Let’s hold users accountable and our communities—online and offline—will benefit in the long run.

Share on Facebook

The Top 5 Most Interesting Hashtags of Mid-December 2010

Has anyone else noticed what has been trending this week on Twitter? I think we all need to take a minute out of our busy day and become aware of what the world is thinking about.

For some odd reason, for two days this week, #textsfromastalker was trending. My question is why and how…oh, yeah, WHO is a big question, too???? (isn’t stalker a stealthy profession? Why tweet to the person you are stalking on Twitter? Doesn’t that defeat the purpose?) Is there someone out there mass texting people creepy messages and then those people all get on Twitter to talk about it?

Here are my top 5 favorites for this week:

1. #textsfromastalker

“PLZ slow down, it’s not easy to keep up while trying to take pictures at the same!” #TextsFromAStalker

2. #somethingaintright

Paying full price before Christmas? #Somethingaintright with that. Comparison shop & save on almost anything @Nextag! http://next.ag/fY04gM

(Promoted tweet by Nextag.com)

He said he gotta get his eyebrows done #somethingaintright!

3. Elephants

WATCH: Robert Pattinson Woos Reese Witherspoon in ‘Water for Elephants’ http://bit.ly/hwDCrL

Most elephants weigh less than the tongue of the blue whale

4. Covered Anything

Yesterday was “anything covered in chocolate day” … today … its “Maple Syrup Day” ! Pancakes anyone ? Barry

5. Finding Nemo

they got the real life finding nemo fish.. i dont know how to twitpic from this phone tho.. theyre cool

I have also noticed that hashtags are getting longer and longer. Remember, there are only 140 characters to say everything you need to say. Soon someone will create the 140 character hashtag. It will go something like this:

#TodayIwentforawalkoutsideinthesunshineitmademydaysomuchbetterbecauselastnightmy       boyfrienddumpedmeandnowiamaloneionlyhavemytwitterfriendsleft

Yes, Twitter trends can keep you up to date on the happening of the world. They tell you all the important news, like nation holidays (December 15^th was National Cupcake Day…who knew? I would never have known that without Twitter). Twitter trends are awesome and entertaining because you never know what you will learn.

Share on Facebook

posted by Doyle

According to this study, young adults (18 to 34) are more likely to care about many issues, including various civil rights and environmental concerns.

Share on Facebook

In an agency environment, I’m tasked with representing a number of different clients. This often includes managing a brand’s social media presence, which I am happy to do. But how does one draw lines between multiple online identities for profit and self?

Should I speak up as Client XYZ? That’s mighty impersonal. What about as Mr. President of Client XYZ? That seems downright deceitful. One solution we’ve been playing around with is the concept of being “Amy at,” as in Amy at Client XYZ, Amy at Client ABC, Amy at Client Inc. This allows me to be a “real” person, posting as myself on behalf of any number of paying clients.

Some would argue the problem with this method is that I may be “found out” by some skeptical troll who makes the connection that “Amy at” represents a half dozen or so different companies and that I’m being paid to speak on their behalf. Scandalous! Who does this wolf in sheep’s clothing think she is? It’s true. I’m a wolf. I’m a wolf skilled in the art of client services and public relations. I can speak as intelligently in a conversation about craft beer distribution as I can in a conversation about minimally invasive hysterectomies; is that a deal breaker? Does it make my voice in the conversation less genuine than Susie Salesperson, who speaks exclusively on behalf of one company, but only ever replies with a “Hi! Great post! Click here to go to my website!”? Knowing we’re both being paid to engage in the discussion on behalf of a business, whom do you trust more?

For me, the problem with being “Amy at (insert client)” is finding an appropriate time to just be Amy. Certainly these identities aren’t mutually exclusive, and I’m taking measures to be more transparent when mixing personal and professional content. For instance, if I share a link or RT a client tweet, I’ll use #client. I only RT content I think may be interesting or useful to my own followers, but I want to be clear before anyone accuses me of selling out that yeah, this link is from a paying client of my firm. Big whoop, wanna fight about it?

Our list of clients really makes this kind of transparency conundrum a non-issue. I am lucky enough to work at a firm with a sense of integrity. I’m never worried I’ll have to shill snake oil or name my first born after a high-paying brand. We work with our clients because we believe they have a good story to tell. This means I never have to tweet at gunpoint that “Client XYZ is the bee’s knees! #callthepolice” because I, “Amy at Myself” find value in this client’s message.

So how do you manage identity, trust and brand engagement? All the Amys and I want to know.

Share on Facebook

Frito-Lay announced today that “The Loud Sun Chips Bag is Dead” thanks, in part, to a crack-team of investigative journalists at The Wall Street Journal who couldn’t ask a single question nine years ago about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but dedicated 900 words and a two-minute video to a snack bag (that’s right, I said it). The other culprit in the death of the biobag appears to be a Facebook group called “SORRY BUT I CAN’T HEAR YOU OVER THIS SUN CHIPS BAG” with 44,421 members.

Hungry people of the world, there is a lesson to be learned here. On second thought, no. However, if you are lucky enough to not be starving, and you don’t worry about tripping off IED explosions on your way to the market, then you probably have time to think about how loud your snacking is. And there is a marketing and PR lesson to be learned here:

All of the product development, expensive ad campaigns and custom-built websites will not do a thing for you if you don’t listen to your customers.

Frito-Lay made three mistakes here:

1. They assumed everyone cares about the environment.
2. They listened to the wrong people (those who aren’t willing to make any minor sacrifice for the sake of the environment).
3. They tried to make everyone happy.

Frito-Lay saw the negative response building over a month ago before the WSJ article initially ran and that Facebook group only had 20,000 or so fans. Realizing there was no escaping the noise, Frito-Lay featured it in some of their marketing. In stores, the company posted signs that read: “Yes, the bag is loud, that’s what change sounds like.”

Cute a clever though it may be, they weren’t responding to their market in any way that was engaging or meaningful. What they should have said was, “We believe there are more people that care about saving the planet than there are people that are inconvenienced by noise. We’re still working on making the bag better, but we think this is an amazing start.” No, it’s not a poster slogan, but it’s a conversation starter. (Maybe the poster should have read, “GET A BOWL.”) What they did was talk at their customers instead of listen to them. People were complaining. They responded with sarcasm. Sales started declining.

It took four years to develop the compostable bag for Sun Chips.

The key to being successful in social media is not attention or clever one-liners, or even a viral video. It’s engagement. It’s getting people to buy your product and then tell their friends about your product. It’s getting in front of the right people with the right message. They had a pretty good message. They just responded to the wrong people.

Instead of building a presence with the already established hundreds of eco-friendly bloggers who would happily become prophets of the blessing of the Sun Chips bag, Frito-Lay dumped a truckload of money into developing a website about Sun Chips’ compostable packaging and then developed a separate social media community on “Composting 101,” featuring videos from Sophie Uliano, a bestselling green author. This is a tactic that although features a social media method, is still old-school marketing that involves talking to your customers and expecting them to sit quietly and listen. Who did this site attract? I doubt the Sun Chips site got as much traffic as Sophie’s personal site. Apparently, it didn’t get as much traffic as the Facebook group.

Frito-Lay tried to force a conversation by talking at people. When the people responded with criticism, they shut it down because the narrative didn’t fit the construct of their opinion. You can never be everything to everyone and as soon as you try, you will fail, as apparent by today’s announcement. When you begin listening only to your critics, you make the dangerous mistake of making a minority opinion seem like the majority. People will always complain. You shouldn’t ignore them, but by focusing on the people that will actually buy your product, you make your detractors appear to be exactly what they are – the small minority.

When the narrative doesn’t fit, evaluate your narrative. Maybe you’re not saying the wrong things. Maybe you’re just not listening to the right people. Trying to make everyone happy just means wasting four years of product research and a multi-million dollar ad campaign.

Share on Facebook

Copy that is attention-grabbing, relational and sells is a part science, part creativity. Whether you are trying to sell something or build traffic by gaining links from outside advocates, good copy inspires action and stays with the reader. You not only build awareness of your message, you motivate your readers to buy, click and spread the word.

Some so-called social media experts and online content champions believe firmly in the “squeaky wheel gets the grease” theory of marketing.  The more you yell at people, the better your odds are that someone will hear you and pay attention.

My friend Sonia Simone at Copyblogger calls these types of internet marketers the yellow highlighter brigade, and I think that’s a good way to describe them. They are known for very aggressive, attention-grabbing tactics like putting yellow highlighter over intro copy and write entire sentences in all caps and sometimes bold font. They do this because they don’t have a relationship with their audience. They don’t have anything valuable to offer, so they scream and jump up and down. Odds are, someone will stop and look eventually.

Although I don’t see a lot of copywriters (thankfully) encouraging this practice, there’s plenty of bad copy to go around. So here are three warning signs that you may need to take another look at your copy and make sure you are talking to your customers in a way that gets you noticed, but in a good way:

Warning Sign #1: Adjectives, adverbs and superlatives, oh my!
Are you the “best” software company on the market, or the “very best?” It doesn’t really matter because neither is effective. “Fluffy” language is typically used when you don’t understand the value you are offering to customers. Tell me how you will solve my problem. I don’t need you to tell me how great you are. I can decide for myself how great you are later after I use your product. Stop writing jargon that impresses your CEO and the engineering team with your industry knowledge. Start writing to impress me, the customer. Remember me? I keep your lights on. Gobbledygook Grader is a helpful free online tool to keep you in check.

Warning Sign #2: Your copy feels good but it doesn’t do good
Are you meeting and exceeding your customer’s expectations? What does that mean? Do you even know what your customer expectations are? Do you have a staff full of “experts” that “share knowledge?” You get my point. Testimonials, case studies and customer satisfaction quotes called out on your website can do wonders to build advocates for your brand, but only if you do it in a way that is results-focused.

Here’s an example of what not to do:

“Working with XYX Corp. was like a dream come true! Their expert staff is always helpful and friendly. Their integrated technology is fast, flexible and scalable.” – Woody B. Boring, CFO, ABC Corp.

Here’s an example of something that works:

“At Snapfish, your satisfaction is 110% guaranteed. If you’re ever dissatisfied with your film developing, digital prints, or merchandise for any reason, we will provide you with a full replacement or a full refund, plus 10% off your next order.”

That last one was quoted directly from their website. It’s specific, results-focused, and actionable. You order something from Snapfish and you know exactly what you are getting. And they said it in two sentences.

Warning Sign #3: Your copy is afraid of SEO
Focusing on your company talking points, and not on your customer’s search capabilities is a huge waste of time for everyone involved, including your customer. The quickest way to lose a potential customer is to ensure they can never find you. This isn’t keyword dropping, but keyword-rich, relationship-building content. Web usability studies prove people don’t read web pages like they do a magazine article. They first scan the page for headlines, images and words in bold. Then if it appears to be something they are looking for, they go back and read the paragraphs. So make sure your paragraphs back up your headlines and subheads.

Good copy talks about how you are solving the customer’s problems. It is clear, concise and anticipates objections and draws the reader to take the next step. Follow these simple rules and you’ll be doing less yelling, more selling.

Share on Facebook