Survey This: Bloggers and Advertising

In hopes to not influence responses, I will withhold my commentary on why I am inquiring about the topic: advertising on blogs. Instead, I will refer SB readers to the quick, 10-question survey I created, and look forward to sharing and discussing results. All responses are anonymous, unless designate your blog’s URL.

Click Here to Take Survey

Feel free to share, as the more people that share their experiences, the bigger picture we will receive. Feel free to share with friends and colleagues as I am depending on a snowball sample for this informal survey. Gratzi

Liked what you read? Feel free to share with others:

Obama Online – More than Social Media

With the launch of Change.gov, commentary on Obama’s social media strategy and success have been made here, here and here. Yup, here too. Some are even calling Obama and the government integration of new media tools through Change.gov the Digital New Deal while others wonder about the extension of the Obama brand and community – post election.

*******

Social media is awesome. Grand. Influential. Amazing. In my professional role working with government agencies, I must admit that my first reaction to Change.gov was, “Sweet, I can’t wait for this priority on social media to trickle down among other government agencies. Man, that would make our job so much easier.” Or, would it?

Because now, instead of talking about why to do it, the opportunity to implement may [hopefully] increase, meaning we must show results. And, Obama set the bar high.

Granted, Obama’s campaign is an amazing case study that aided in achieving an important end objective – getting Obama elected. However, Obama’s online success is due to more than social media.

• Obama’s campaign was newsworthy as according to a study conducted by the Pew Research Center Project for Excellence in Journalism. This encourage the public to be interested and engaged. The study found that:

“Overall, the presidential campaign filled 54% of the newshole as measured by PEJ’s News Coverage Index from Oct. 27-Nov. 2. That represents a slight uptick from the previous two weeks when the election was at 52% (Oct. 20-26) and 51% (Oct. 13-19). The race for the White House was the dominant story in all five media sectors, most notably in cable, where it accounted for 84% of the airtime studied, and on the radio airwaves, at 65%.”

• Obama created the Obama-brand. If you work in government, you may understand some of the government’s sensitivity to the word brand. And from the outside, how the public might react to the government branding or marketing itself. (Hence, the whole debate back when to transition from health communications to health marketing.) However, the Obama-brand has become widely accepted and adapted while maintaining a consistent message to diverse audiences across a range of platforms.

• The number of resources available. Obama’s fundraising numbers were out of the roof. Not every project is as fortunate. This is why highlighting and emphasizing ROI is important and critical.

• Obama was the first, and it was sexy. Being the first is always advantageous. In the government 2.0 sector, Obama led the way in showing how to leverage a comprehensive social media plan to create an online presence that connected with the overall program’s mission. Not only did he do it, but he made it sexy by implementing creative elements that encouraged not only online users, but also online ambassadors.

• Obama and his team understood the essence of social media online and off line. This is the biggest one I think. Obama’s message tapped into the cornerstone of social media – help me, help you, help me, empower America. Did you get lost in that? Web 2.0 is about the conversation and Obama is encouraging conversation with him and among each other. The Change.gov Web site communicates it best:

“Share your vision for what America can be, where President-Elect Obama should lead this country. Where should we start together?”

He took the essence of social media tools and made it his mantra. He is change, but he needs you to help create that change. You want change, but you need him to lead that change. Brilliant.

In your opinion, what other factors outside of social media helped mold Obama’s online success?

Liked what you read? Feel free to share with others:

The Purpose Driven Campaign: Social Marketing as the Possible Link Between Journalism and Advertising

After reflecting from the World Social Marketing Conference (which I promise updates eventually) and reading Craig Lefebvre’s recent post “Social Marketing: Hard Power and Soft Power in Social Change,” I want to finally share some tidbits from my thesis paper that I presented as a poster session at the conference. As, I think it rounds out and puts a lot of themes together as I studied: the elusive concept of influence.

Abstract: This research project looks at the concept of influence within social marketing as compared to journalism and advertising. This includes examining these professions’ definitions, ethics, standards, and agenda-setting capabilities. Through in-depth interviews, a further understanding of how these three practices relate within the gray matter of the media landscape is pioneered, as well as better defining the role and influence of social marketing.

Excerpt:

The Question of Influence

While the Information Age leaps into the Connected Age, the power of a free press is offered daily to start-up bloggers. Newspapers are downsizing. Amateurism is becoming the new professionalism. Online media producers replace today’s broadcast directors; all making the gray shades of influence between the information and its consumers a thunderstorm waiting to happen. Social marketing is in the business of change, whether it is behavioral change or attitude change, social marketing can also be described as the field for social change. But, how? In today’s world, who holds more influence to create these changes, a journalist, advertiser or a social marketer? How can one tell the difference? Is there a difference? And, do the professions work together? Could they? Should they? This research hopes to add to the discussion on the evolving definition and role of social marketing, using agenda-setting relationships to examine its influence and attempt to determine its position between advertising and journalism in the media landscape.

Literature Review

It is 1961. A time when questions were raised and hope diminishing as borders became gray and a rise of an international community emerged. Two Portuguese students were imprisoned for declaring a public toast towards their dream, rooted in an idea – freedom. Having their freedom stolen from them for displaying a human right of expression, a newspaper article was written, and with it, a movement spurred. This movement would form Amnesty International (www.amnesty.org). Social change is possible, and it begins with an idea. Social marketing is an increasing movement currently being expanded because of its foundation in ideas about positive change for the welfare of the public.

Though specific definitions differ, social marketing achieves social change objectives by applying the marketing mix of product, place, promotion and price. Currently, social marketing is used mostly in public health communications and is expanding in the realms of environmentalism, civil rights, urban renewal, public service and raising awareness of international issues.

Conclusion: The conclusion of course I can’t share here, but it involves what I found consistent between journalism and advertising, but interestingly, the field of public policy was drawn into the mix through the research as well.

Liked what you read? Feel free to share with others:

Good or Bad: NY Times and LinkedIn?

Read, Write, Web announced that the NY Times is announcing a content partnership with Linkedin that allows:

LinkedIn users to be shown personalized news targeting their industry verticals on the Business and Technology sections of NYTimes.com, where users will then be prompted to share those stories will professional associates.

I agree with RWW that this move is inspiring…especially to us social media marketing types. However, pausing in the excitement to reflect, I am reminded again of my recent trip to the Newseum.

Does providing the public with the information they WANT….take away from providing news the public NEEDS, whether we know we need it or not. As an extreme example, what if all I want to read about are the latest and greatest events in Hollywood. Not to knock Hollywood, but isn’t it important that we also try to reach these individuals with messages about public health, the environment and world events?

Pausing in the grandeur social media environment: are we on the verge of OVER-segmenting our audiences?

With journalistic big dawgs, like the NY Times, takes this step: is there greater good? or is it dangerous?

I understand journalism organizations, especially newspapers, are trying to find a working online model, or any working business model for that matter, but…is this idea of giving people what they want…dangerous?

Public Service, Journalism and Business: Standing for Freedom

Today, I saw a very amazing man I once interviewed a year ago: John Siegenthaler, Sr., civil rights activist and founder of the First Amendment Center. During that interview, he demonstrated through his own life and experiences how he has, and continues, to stand up for freedom.

I saw him on display actually when I visited the Newseum in Washington D.C. this past Saturday, which might have just edged out the Smithsonian’s American History museum as my favorite museum in Washington.

I will forever consider myself a journalist. Let me explain.

Walter Williams, esteemed Journalist and first dean of the world’s first journalism school, created the Journalist’s Creed. An excerpt:

I believe that the public journal is a public trust; that all connected with it are, to the full measure of their responsibility, trustees for the public; that acceptance of a lesser service than the public service is betrayal of this trust.

Sadly, with international bureaus decreasing, freedoms of speech being revoked, the modern day multi-media corporations….I feel as if journalism is becoming more of a business and less a public service.

What is journalism? Who is a journalist? We can all practice journalism. We can all follow the ideals and ethics a journalist applies to his or her craft. We can all be journalists, and in ways we may not realize, already ARE journalists.

I asked this very question to NBC’s News correspondent Pete Williams today during his interview at the Newseum. It was fascinating, covering topics from FOIA, government and press relations, bias and more. I left remembering why I went to journalism school and why I will always consider myself a journalist. He advised that to support the pillars of journalism, we should continue amazing reporting – showing others good journalism. I agree. But I also think, we can do more.

The other week I was live on Jonny’s Par-tay. One of the viewers asked each of us what particular cause might be our favorite. I said journalism. Journalism – as a profession- is largely under attack at times, largely criticized, largely…in debate. Journalism…is the conversation, the dialogue, the public sphere, the public agenda. You can’t NOT have journalism in a free society. Journalism, at its root, is the idea that you have the freedom to know, to be informed, to educate yourself and others, to learn, to ask, to question, and to speak.

Thus, I will always be a journalist. Like, Mr. siegenthaler, I will always stand up for freedom and for truth. Won’t you join us?

*I got inspired this weekend and worked on my paper more. Lots more where this came from. =)

Consumerism. What’s Your First Reaction?

My guess is that it might have caused a slight wrinkle in the face and a sigh of stress? confusion? frustration? I offer that more and more…it should bring a smile. Consumerism is not just about what you consume, but about the choice (and power) you have as well.

Been meaning to post on this topic for a while, but a discussion I had at a friend’s gathering the other day prompted me to post. (Plus, a recent article regarding the optimistic power of consumerism found by a colleague of mine). The conversation circled around consumerism and capitalism….leisurely, get-to-know you chit-chat right…lol

But I was listening to two new friends, acquaintances really, debate consumerism versus capitalism:

• Are they the same thing?
• Does one breed the other?
• Is one better than the other?
• How to stop it, can we stop it?

Etc., etc., etc….you can only imagine. How many of us have found ourselves in these slightly awkward conversations over the weekend, when all you want to do is relax and make friends. Truth is, I secretly LOVE these conversations. Yup, I’m one of ‘them.’ I love the people who are open to talking about how they feel about the things that really matter, especially those amongst my generation. We do DO more than check Facebook 10 times a day, .

Onward. Fact is, I enjoy listening to these conversations because they get my mind tinkering and fueled. After each person shared their viewpoint, I offered this:

Nowadays, the power is transferring from the organization or company to the consumer. Consumerism in today’s terms is increasingly more powerful than it’s given credit. We are all consumers. We all have a choice in the types of services, types of products, types of media we support. Think about the power we have as individuals, let alone when communities and groups surround a movement!”

The best I’ve heard what I’m trying to communicate was at my grad school graduation where Ken Paulson, Editor and Sr. Vice President of USA Today, told my class:

“You are not going to change the world…You already have.”

He went on to explain how the Millennial generation changed the world when they decided they didn’t want to have to pay for music. Or, when they made new phrases like brb, lol and ttyl become common. He also went on to describe the danger we in the media landscape – from advertisers, to journalists, broadcasters, etc – create by referring to ourselves as: The Media. What IS that anyway? The media.

Mr. Paulson, I applaud your speech and would love a copy if you ever read this. It very much reflects what my own master’s research reiterates. There was a time when ‘the media’ (whatever that is) was not a business…and when it was a public service. If you don’t think so, research 1776 or the first newspaper, Publick Occurances. Or, recall Walter WIlliams’ infamous Journalist’s Creed. Or, email/comment me, and let’s have a conversation.

Thus, I leave you with this: What’s your choice? Where do you stand?

Skeptical? Check out Joseph Jaffe’s post and what his power as a consumer is doing to Delta Airlines…at this point, not sure who I feel worse for: Jaffe, or the PR mess Delta is now in, lol. Wow.

******************

As an FYI: My research is being presented at the 1st World Social Marketing Conference this upcoming September in Brighton, England. There’s more to it than this paragraph, and it’s not quite publication ready yet. Let me know if you’ll be there, and hopefully, we can meet! =)

Blogger Outreach Series 2: Law Issues Part A, Defamation and Negligence

Continuing in my blogger outreach series, this post will focus on law that addresses issues bloggers need to know, understand and be conscience about when deciding how to go about starting a blog, conduct blogger outreach or a blog marketing plan.

As the democratization of journalism increases, many bloggers can be considered journalists. One issue with the current Shield Law being debated in the Senate is that some would like there to be a definition on who/what is a journalist. Indeed, bloggers are recognized by the Supreme Court as having the same protections as media individuals and organizations since they engage in similar activities. (Since the Shield Law is currently developing, it is important to note that Shield Laws do not necessarily always protect bloggers). As of now, no such definition exists and the implications of such a definition, could be, well…interesting….and perhaps, dangerous.

But enough about that, as I admit, I’m no politician and I haven’t been following the case the whole three years it’s been going on. My point –> it is important for a blogger to understand some of the issues the law addresses .

As a disclaimer, I am not a lawyer, but these are concepts that must be considered in the broader media industry. There are many, but this post will focus on defamation and negligence, while part b will cover copyright and privacy.

1. Defamation

A person or organization can file suit for ‘defamation of character.’ For content to be considered defamation, a private plaintiff must prove:

• falsity (this includes insinuation or implication)
• about or concerning the plaintiff filing the suit
• exposes the person to hatred, contempt, aversion or introduces an evil or bad opinion about the plaintiff

In addition, the law is written differently when the plaintiff is a public official or a public figure. A public official or figure must prove: actual malice. A public official is defined as someone who has been elected, appointed, presented to a position. A public figure is someone who is either known to the public already or someone who were drawn into the issue. Actual malice means that the false statement was published “with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.” To determine actual malice, courts will look at the process and extent of pursuing the truth.

Other way defamation occurs comes from misidentification.

Defamation Lessons:

• Be conscience of legal terminology. (i.e. accused vs. alleged)
• Take extra measures when any content involves a minor or a private citizen.
• Double-check names or contact the person to fact check names mentioned in posts.
• Before publishing an address, phone number or email, be sure it is the correct contact information for the individual/organization.
• Be wary of depended on internet sources and search engines. This includes wikipedia. =)
• If you do realize a mistake, correct it, and write a retraction. A retraction acknowledges the mistake and re-iterates its correction.
• If you are faced with this issue, truth can act as a defense.
• Satire, parody and hyperbole are not considered defamation.
• Opinion is not considered defamation. But, whether you and the plaintiff agree that the statement in question can be classified as ‘opinion’ is another story.
• Corporations are not public figures. They are judged like private figures.
• There is such a concept as defamation insurance, even for bloggers.
• Each state has a different statute of limitations for how long someone can sue after a posting has been made.
• See here for more extensive details about issues of defamation and libel as it applies to bloggers.

2. Negligence

Negligence means that the author acted recklessly beyond that of a reasonably, responsible person would have. Private figures – friends, coworkers, people at the bus station – only have to prove negligence to win their case; whereas, public officials and public figures must prove actual malice.

****************

If you are filed a law suit for what you blogged, the Electronic Frontier Foundation advises you to seek an attorney who is knowledgeable about Anti-SLAPP laws. SLAPP stands for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation, and the Anti-SLAPP laws are enforced to help people who get sued for making legitimate, protected speech about public issues.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation offers a link to the The First Amendment Project, which has a helpful FAQ on Anti-SLAPP laws. Please note, that Anti-SLAPP laws currently don’t exist in every state and tend to vary.

Stay tuned for my continuing series on Blogger Outreach, issues to address when developing blogging outreach plans.

Next week: Law Issues Part B, Copyright and Privacy

Helpful Source: 12 Laws Every Blogger Should Know provided by Aviva Directory