I have blogged a few times lately about attempts publishers are making the price of content on the internet (here and here, if you’re interested). Traditional media sources and content producers have always struggled with creating a profitable online model, and the rise of the smartphone and the tablet both highlights the issues they are facing, and presents new opportunities for a solution.  Two more attempts at this solution have been getting publicity recently. First, Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp has announced it’s plans for a new, national US publication designed specifically for the iPad. The publication is will feature short, snappy news stories (take this to mean lots of pictures, little in the way of analysis) and has been created with the goal of “having young people read newspapers”.   The second thing which got me thinking about it was a story about a series of new magazines created specifically for tablets, called Nomad Editions. Basically, the idea behind is that they’ll produce 5 “editions” around specific topics (food, movies, surfing, viral video, etc), published weekly, which users will be able to subscribe to. It will be built using an interesting technology called Treesaver , which allows users to view ther same content, using the same addresses, on their desktop or mobile device.

These are both nice ideas, but they both seem inspired by a premise I’m not sure I agree with. Mark Edmiston, CEO of Nomad, claimed that Nomad was borne of that fact that “…people reading on their iPads, they’re reading a different way”. Rupert Murdoch made similar claims about his national newspaper concept. The implication in both cases is that the new technology necessitates new content, as well as new content delivery. (more…)

As a Digital Producer one of the most common questions I’m asked (after explaining  that no, I don’t make movies) is “what’s the deal with Twitter?”  Clients  in particular will acknowledge Twitter’s importance as a tool for their organisation, but express a slight bewilderment at how or why it is useful to them on a personal level.  Someone recently said  “I can see why WE need to be using it, but why should I be using it?”pretty much summing the conundrum up. Almost as common are people who flirt with it for a few weeks, then lose interest. The most common reason?  “Oh, I started using it, but couldn’t think of anything to say so I stopped.

In Australia,  the stats back up the anecdotes. There are currently around 277,000 users, or roughly 1.5 % of the population. In the US, the following is far greater(a detailed breakdown of the numbers, with an incorrect headline, here), but still nothing like the level that Facebook’s are or MySpace’s were. The uptake experience of people I’ve talked to mirrors the stats as well. An estimate 40% of users drop off in the first month.

For professionals and businesses, there’s not really much debate anymore about Twitter’s worth. It has proven itself  an outstanding means by which to build a brand,  for business to business communication, and to speak directly to those interested in your band. If you’re already a celebrity, all the better – the opportunity for to connect with fans and to build your fame by giving them a taste of your fabulous celebrity lifestyle, at no cost to yourself, is just outstanding.  If you’re a tech person, or a media professional, or work in an agency, again, the benefits and uses are obvious and immediate.

But what about the average person, you ask? How do they make Twitter more than just “that website with the bird”? Pretty easily. Here are igloo’s tips on making Twitter work for you:

1. Don’t assume you have to say anything.

As  I mentioned, people often express their reservations about Twitter by asking “But what would I write about?”. The answer I usually give is don’t write anything.  (more…)

It was just one remarkable factor in a remarkable campaign, but it’s still surprising just how effectively Barack Obama was able to utilise social media and digital campaigning in his 2008 presidential campaign. He pushed his message and brand, generated support and mobilised financial backers. He attacked and diminished his opponent, without cheapening himself or tarnishing his image. Through this success in the “new media” he was also able to highlight the age difference between himself and his opponent, and add credence to his message of being the harbinger of change and innovation.

In considering the lessons this offers for the upcoming Australian election, there are a few qualifiers. The Obama social media campaign, particularly My Barack Obama, were primarily fund raising exercises. As well as financial factors, the length of the American campaign and the reliance on volunteers to facilitate their campaign rallies (occasionally quite elaborate affairs), so mobilization of supporters is vital just to keep the campaign running smoothly. As well, the Australian campaign is (mercifully) significantly shorter than it’s American equivalent and at a set time, which brings significant planning advantages.

Despite this, there’s a lot both sides can learn from Obama’s campaign, and from what’s happened since. Here, then, are the 5 tips we would give both parties, should they ask, about how they should conduct themselves digitally during the campaign. We are offering the advice to both parties because we are wise and benevolent like King Solomon and Quentin Bryce.

1. The Normal Rules of Twitter Don’t Apply (for the campaign period only)

I’m going to get slightly controversial with this one. For the next week or so, before the campaign hots up, expect to see several stories about Gillard and Abbott’s presence on Twitter. 90% of these will be bookended by a quote from a “social media expert” of some description, who’ll advise them that they are “broadcasting” too much, and that they need to “engage in conversation” (never “have more conversations”, for some reason) with their followers. Ordinarily, fine and sensible advice. Post-election, it’s just what they should be doing.  But right now, I’m not so sure. (more…)

In my post last week, I mentioned a report which blamed the lack of spending on internet advertising in part on the low quality of online advertising campaigns. It’s a claim that you hear from time to time working in the field,  either in the form of stray”I hate those pop up things” comments,  or from serious sources like this 2009 article from TechCrunch, which claims that “the internet is about freedom… and a truly free population will not be forced to watch ads”

The comment stayed with me through the week. I knew it was wrong and could thing of a lot of reasons, but didn’t post about it as I couldn’t think of a succinct way to explain it. Then the Old Spice Man exploded, and it dawned on me. It’s wrong because people LOVE internet advertising.

If you’ve been in a sleeping pill induced coma for the past week, the Old Spice Man is a deodorant campaign which has exploded. It’s mildly amusing bit in the Chuck Norris/ Barry “The Cougar” Dawson vein (you could almost call the humour Anchorman-lite)  which has exploded across the internet. It has 55 million YouTube views, and the campaign’s been given legs with the having the character uploading personal responses to users from various social media sources, answering questions on Yahoo, and so on.

The campaign’s not a great one, but it shows just how deeply internet advertising can penetrate if it is popular – or more correctly, how deeply a popular campaign can disseminate with proper integration and some momentum. This is advertiser created content as a legitimate entertainment source – people are engaging because they like the campaign in and of itself, not the product. Advertisements – not advertiser funded content, advertisements – are now a legitimate form of entertainment. (more…)

When you hear the phrase “Queen of the Internet”, you’re probably inclined to think of Lady Gaga or, if you are a traditionalist Tia Tequila.  But the title’s also been given to Mary Meeker , a Managing Director at investment bank Morgan Stanley. Meeker, who heads up the bank’s global technology research team, earned the title after the publication of her ground breaking  if unimaginatively titled  The Internet Report in 1995. The report successfully predicted much of the dot.com boom, and despite the bubble’s bursting in 2000, has been highly regarded and closely followed by investors and the tech industry every since.

Meeker’s 2010 Report was released to the public last month, and again, it’s full of fascinating information.  It’s particularly strong on the rise and rise of mobile computing and the flow on effect this boom is having on innovation and customer expectation. It finds:

- The growth of mobile internet is unprecedented, with the inflection point where the number of smart phones shipped surpasses PCs predicted to be reached as soon as 2012. Smart phones shipments have already overtaken feature phones in the USA. They have been the biggest growth drivers of computing devices in history. The report notes that wireless options are growing rapidly to meet this demand, and that the demands of wireless consumers have expanded massively year on year since the device’s launch. (more…)

Igloo CEO and Co-Founder, Andrew Englisch, was recently interviewed on Q Radio for Qantas by Ita Buttrose. If the mile high club is not quite your thing, take 5 mins to hear his Andrew’s take on digital, social media and how igloo came about. The perfect way to pass time when flying Melbourne > LAX … only 15 hours to go!

Listen to the interview

We had a server failure today.

It was caused by some faulty 3rd party code.

I submitted a server reboot request.

It didn’t work.

I submitted a support ticket.

They didn’t respond quick enough.

I tweeted the hosting company.

Within 4 minutes the problem was fixed.

The power of social media.

A recent social media nightmare exploded for Nestle last week in the face of a recent Greenpeace campaign. The result has been a lesson to any corporate committed to engaging in the social media space.

Greenpeace launched a campaign featuring a graphic video to highlight the use of palm oil in Nestle products. (If you love Kit Kat, avoid this vid) The video soon went viral with hundreds of thousands of views on Youtube and significant exposure in facebook and twitter. With 92,000 facebook fans and a global media machine hungry for mess ups like this, Nestle chose to do just about everything they possibly could to make the situation worse.

Rather than following in the footsteps of progressive companies such as Starbucks (who set up a blog to hear the concerns of their customers), Nestle broke some of the golden rules of the digital world. Firstly, they have tried to remove the video (on the grounds that it was improper use of their brand!) and subsequently deleted negative comments from their facebook fan page. Obviously hearing, addressing and ‘engaging’ with the concerns of their ‘fans’ and followers was just not a priority. Maybe the social media team at Nestle thought that status updates on how sweet chocolate is was enough. The result? Not only have they lost the trust of many of their customers, a subsequent global media backlash has seen a boycott of their products in the lead up to Easter. Only then has the company implemented change and canceled its contract with the palm oil supplier.

The opportunity missed here was massive. Firstly, Nestle could have engaged with their global community and made the change before it became a PR nightmare. (Lets just forget for a moment that they were using palm oil in the first place) If Nestle had reacted in this way, it would have showed them as being interested in the concerns of their customers, the well being of the planet and it would have been a big win for crowd sourced (or in this case, ‘crowd forced’) change. Blogs like this would be referencing Nestle as a great example of how they listened to the people. Instead, they have become a figurehead for corporate social media neglect.

If you are committed to social media, breaking some of the rules can have enormous consequences. Consider the following.

- Engage with negative feedback like you do positive. Don’t delete, edit or hide from negative comments (unless abusive)

- Be part of the conversation and don’t try and ‘control’ the space.

- Listen to the crowd. They are probably your customer.

This also throws some obligation back onto the consumer or follower. If you would like a company to respond to your feedback, be polite, honest and play nice. I personally believe a company has a right to not respond to anonymous, abusive and rude attacks much like you wouldn’t respect a person in the street approaching you the same way. It’s a great world we live in when an organisation like Greenpeace can start a global movement that gets a huge corporate to change its way by posting a video on Youtube.

What should Nestle do now?

Its still not to late for Nestle to engage with their following. They will need to be transparent, open and prepared to be exposed to a barrage of negative commentary around their brand. At least they have the opportunity to be part of this conversation. As for regaining trust in the social media space? I don’t think canceling a few palm oil contracts will do the trick.

Last Wednesday night (St Pat’s) Social Media Club Melbourne (SMCMelb) ran their second event “Building Brand Buzz” And with not a single green t-shirts or sloppy green hat to be seen, the 80+ strong crowd were given an insight to the how three Melbourne entrepreneurs have used social media to build significant communities around their business. On hand to share their stories were;

Scott Kilmartin from Haul, Steve Sammartino from Rentoid and Sahil Merchant from Magnation

An interesting debate emerged from the panel around the concept of who should, can or is, the person behind the social media voice of a brand. The panel were quite divided in their opinions. One side trusting all involved with the company to be contributors whilst the other believing that the voice of the brand needs consistency and can therefore not be managed by anyone other than the main man at the top. It was an interesting debate that raised a number of significant issues around social media and its relationship with a brand.

What do you think? Do you let people tweet etc on you or your brands behalf?

Well done to SMCMelb for putting on a great, free (yep you heard me, free) event. The location worked, the food was good and “Dirty ‘Ole Town’ wasn’t being blasted to the crowd.

If you are interested in getting down to the next SMCMelb event, and you should, make sure you follow SMCMelb for updates. (#smcmelb to follow the tweet stream)

Now, time to put the iphone down and head out to join the green, drunk rabble.