Author Archive

StumbleUpon LogoLast week, Jiannis wrote a great post called “Why You Shouldn’t Stumble Yourself” in which he brought up the seemingly little-known fact that the more you stumble pages within the same URL, the less effective your stumble becomes. The post stirred up a lot of great discussion and got me thinking a lot more about the Stumble algorithm and the important steps that need to be taken when using Stumble for social media marketing purposes.

A major point of the post was there is a mysterious ratio buried deep within the innards of the SU algorithm that compares your total number of stumbles to the number of stumbles you have given to any specific URL. This was brought to my attention by a comment on the post mentioned above. The comment is from Kimota, and I quote him here with many thanks.

I recently saw my stumble traffic plummet and my submissions from my own domain no longer get accepted. SU didn’t even respond to my enquiries as to why this would be. It wasn’t until days of research had gone by that I discovered a buried little paragraph deep down on one of the SU pages that mentioned the ratio of one domain to other stumbles being a factor and that if this ratio is tipped, SU prevents you from submitting any more from that domain and affects your entire traffic. No warning and no possible way of readjusting the ratio to repair the damage.

The most immediate application of this knowledge is that you have to be very careful when submitting your own content to StumbleUpon. If you submit all of your own stuff over and over again, it is going to get less effective. Kimota knows this first hand.

Of particular–even alarming–interest, though, are the repercussions of “tipping” this magic ratio. To better discuss this question, lets say there are two elements: the Offender (the user) and the URL (the URL that has been submitted too much). Is it simply that StumbeUpon stops counting URL submissions from the Offender, or is the URL blacklisted? In the same comment, Kimota goes on to say, “Even when someone else stumbles me, I’m not getting anywhere near the same figures.”

Could it be that the URL is punished for the sins of one overzealous SU user? Can your frequent self-submission ruin the SU traffic potential of your URL even if you never submit yourself again?

Of course, this is the kind of social media sensationalism that gets rumors started and some of you might think this is tantamount to tabloid journalism. Let me be clear right now, I do not know the answers to the questions. Indeed, when it comes to the mysterious web algorithms out there, we are all making our best guesses based upon research.

The ultimate takeaway here is to be overly careful when it comes to helping your fledgling blog through its baby steps. But I am very interested by the idea that a URL as a whole could be penalized for being submitted by the same users all the time. I can’t imagine that would be the case, because that would actually penalize a blogger for having a rabid fan base. I greatly welcome any input and discussion from those of you who can provide insight (anecdotal or, even better, factual). Have you noticed trends? Take a look at your own stats and share them with the community in the comments. As we get some good stuff together, I will round it all up into a follow up post. Let the learning begin.

38 Comments

Pandemic Labs is pleased to announce a new contributor to the writing staff here at PandemicBlog. Many of you might now him by this avatar, but for those of you who don’t, let me be the first to introduce you to Jiannis Sotiropoulos.

Jiannis

Jiannis Sotiropoulos is currently living and working in Berlin. He specializes in online media, approaching it from a theoretical and aesthetic perspective. His studies in sociology and media sciences are his foundation in understanding the functions of the web and how its users interact. With his Masters Thesis on the attention economy of the social web, he scientifically decoded the marketing rules of social networks in the online universe. He continues studying social networks and waits to see how (and if) the future semantic applications will change the current laws of networking. His personal blog, Changemod, is a fantastic resource and has long been a favorite of the editors here at PandemicBlog. Without a doubt, Jiannis will bring a much needed scientific perspective to our discussions and we will all benefit.

Our Ongoing Mission

As our readers know, PandemicBlog aims to be a resource for insight into Social Media Marketing, Viral Marketing, and other forms of new media marketing that haven’t yet been discovered. We have tried to deal intelligently with topics ranging from the paradox of self-promotion with social media, and the power of viral marketing for small business. Up until now, this task has been shouldered almost completely by the editors, Matthew Peters and Brennan White. But…

We strive to be more.

From the conception of this blog our goal has been to bring together a group of thinkers and writers who can contribute their insight, expertise, and opinions on the sometimes nebulous world of Social Media Marketing. Jiannis is the first of our new group of contributors and we hope that a proper writing staff will have a synergistic effect, raising the value of this blog above the sum of its parts.

If you are new to this blog, please subscribe to our RSS feed so that you’ll receive all PandemicBlog articles and be updated on the other exciting new additions to the PandemicBlog team that will be coming in the near future. As always, please feel free to contact us with questions, comments, or topic suggestions. We want PandemicBlog to be a resource to all concerned with these forms of New Media Marketing, and the more we know about our readers, the better we can do.

3 Comments

You have two choices:

  1. Begin utilizing social media as part of your overall marketing strategy.
  2. Don’t use social media and watch angrily while your competitors put you out of business.

Which do you chose?

47-social1-031708 We at Pandemic Labs have been preaching this evangel since the formation of the company. Don’t worry, we are not nearly so arrogant as to think that we were lone crusaders for the cause. Greater thinkers than us such as Seth Godin and David Meerman Scott have been on the bandwagon since before there was a bandwagon. However, I truly believe that right now we are in the midst of a shift in marketing dollars on a tectonic scale. This belief is not just entrepreneurial optimism; the signs are all around us. I can see proof of the change right in my own office as new clients are coming faster than ever before. And then I saw an AdAge article by Beth Snyder Bulik which further signals what I have been thinking all this time.

I’ll begin by quoting a great bit of the article which mirrors my own sentiments so much that I smiled while reading:

However, for marketers, it’s a better idea to first do the back-end work of research to decide what they want to accomplish, what they want to say and how they’ll say it. You’ll also need to either appoint or hire someone to write and monitor the blog posts and responses. Nothing is worse than a half-assed blog with infrequent updates and little customer relevance or connecting.

I could not agree more. I expressed the same sentiments in an interview for Knowledge@Wharton:

“People come to us saying, ‘I hear viral video is cool. How do we do it?’ That’s funny, because if a company wanted to do a TV campaign, they wouldn’t walk into [advertising agency] Ogilvy and say, ‘TV is cool. How do we do it?’” The first question companies should ask themselves, says Peters, is, “‘What do I want to accomplish from this form of marketing?

I do have one major disagreement with the article. Towards the end of the article Bulik says, “Social media is not, as yet, a great ad network, and it probably isn’t a great long-term traffic generator or brand builder.” I don’t think this is an accurate statement. While it is true that social media is not an “ad network,” I think it is certainly a long term traffic generator and most definitely a great brand builder.

In its various incarnations, social media is one of the most powerful ways to begin dialogues with consumers. Those conversations are absolutely building your brand. As we move forward, it will become clear that those brands which converse with and engage consumers will leave other brands in the dust. How can one claim that social media is not a brand builder? Even if Bulik were to believe that social media is not currently a “long-term traffic generator or brand builder,” her phrasing unfairly discounts the future potential of social media as it continues to evolve.

Overall, though, it’s a great article and I am happy to see it in AdAge. What are your thoughts on the reported growth of the industry? Let me know in the comments.

2 Comments

image credit: notsogoodphotography

When was the last time you were truly captivated? What was it that captivated you? Was it a performance? A charismatic speaker? A person’s eyes? A piece of music? There are many things it could have been, but I bet I can tell you what it wasn’t: a piece of marketing.

Let’s face it, marketing and advertising efforts aren’t usually the kind of things that capture your attention. Indeed, I cannot think of any recent marketing element in any medium that has held my attention hostage to the extent of the beautiful eyes in the picture above.

At this point, some older, traditional marketers are snickering at me. Too many in the outmoded marketing aristocracy think “captivate” is a nonsense word. “Captivate is a like Innovate,” they say, “easy to toss into your tagline or mission statement, but nearly impossible to truly achieve.” While I don’t agree that it is impossible, I concede that truly captivating your target consumers is difficult.

But that’s a lousy reason not to try.

So let’s try! Let’s look at some ways we can not only engage consumers, but how we can captivate them.

Engage Their Emotions

This is the element at which I fail most often. I fall into a trap which many often do: I engage my own emotions and expect that it will result in the same for my target consumers. If you’re a novelist this Image Credit: *MarSworks out OK because you can always fall back on “I don’t give a damn what others think, I write only for myself!” Alas, it might be just the opposite for marketers.

To better appeal to consumers’ emotions, it helps to remember one thing: emotions are not logical. I am incredibly moved by Beethoven’s 9th Symphony, but my reaction has nothing to do with the mathematical precision of its counterpoint. In fact, my music-major business partner once began to explain some of the theory to me, and I realized I didn’t care….I didn’t want to know. Similarly, I feel an emotional response when I see an Aston-Martin Vanquish, but it has absolutely nothing to do with what’s under the hood or the fact that it is an utterly impractical car for New England winters.

In final illustration of this first point I present an example from my own recent experience. Last week I wrote a five-page proposal for launching a client’s new company blog. I covered everything, showing not only what we could do, but how we would do it. Upon reading the proposal, the client called me and said, “I just read the first paragraph of the thing you sent me and I’m sold. What the hell is all the rest of this crap?” Not only didn’t he read the details, he didn’t want to read them. For him it was all about my first paragraph, a high-level, impassioned preamble that answered not the how/what/where/when, but the why. It captivated him, his attention held such that he didn’t even need to keep reading. He wanted to move right to the services. The details (which engaged me) were worthless.

Use Multimedia:

I laugh when I hear the term multimedia because it reminds me of the 1998 Encarta Encyclopedia CD that announced proudly it was a multimedia encyclopedia. Multimedia is now taken for granted…it’s just the way things are. But I’m surprised how many marketers are not using or misusing audio, video, and images in their efforts.

image credit: Dan ZenA picture may be worth a thousand words, but the right picture is priceless. Great visuals have been a staple of advertising for decades and using imagery is one of the easiest and most touted methods for captivating consumers online. Pictures often evoke an emotional response more directly than a paragraph of text. Imagery removes the burden of processing a long string of alphanumeric characters, leaving the consumer’s brain free to feel. Please note that I am not claiming imagery evokes a better emotional reaction than text, simply that it evokes a quicker reaction. And in the age of ten second attention spans, quicker sometimes means better.

Video is another way to appeal to the powerful emotional responses of your consumers and hold their attention. I daresay that if you believe in the power of pictures then the power of video is self-evident. The “moving picture” has been the dominant form of advertising for decades and that’s not an accident. Video engages…it captivates. Enriching your site, your blog, your news release with video hits your consumers with a 1-2 punch; the video captures their attention and your copy answers the details they might need to finally decide to buy.

Last, but certainly not least, is the power of audio. If you’re not sold on the power of sound then go rent “The Lord of The Rings: The Two Towers” and try to watch the Helm’s Deep sequence with the sound muted. It’s nigh unwatchable. Why? Because sound is the foundation from which the tower of human emotion rises. Sound conveys inflection, timing, harmony, melody, and activates a wholly different area of the brain than the text and imagery perceived through the eyes. Even the simple act of putting blog posts into podcast form can be powerful. The narration of your podcast will allow you to convey emotional elements of your text to listeners in a captivating way, often enabling you to hold their attention for longer periods of time.

Be a Human:

It is difficult to establish a rapport with a faceless corporate monolith. I, for one, would much rather speak to a person than a logo. I doubt that I’m alone in this.image credit: TheArtfulBadger Blogging and marketing gurus spend a lot of time talking about developing your “voice.” At it’s most basic level, your “voice” is the digital representation of your personality. Notice the important root of “personality:” person. It is difficult for a company or brand to have a personality with which people can engage.

The transmission of a person’s personality into the digital space is not easy, and there are few things that make it harder than writing by committee. Perhaps your shiny new company blog is still viewed as an experiment by the fundamentalists in charge of your company’s marketing department. As such, the task of writing the weekly blog entry falls to some junior staffer fresh out of college. Although the higher-ups won’t deign to write the blog posts, they are still unwilling to publish a post without running it through the editorial wringer which is so often the bloody battlefield from which press releases and corporate statements emerge mutilated and impotent. By the time the post is published it lacks any semblance of an individual voice and falls flat with any consumers who happen to read it.

Don’t fear the voices of the people who write your company blog. You’ve presumably hired these people because they are smart. Let them out of the box. Let them connect with consumers and maybe–just maybe–you’ll find yourself the proud recipient of a captive audience that genuinely respects the honesty of your online ambassadors. People are smart enough to realize that Microsoft cannot have a conversation with them, but people within Microsoft certainly can.

I am reminded of a anecdote related to me by Larry Weber. His daughter came downstairs one day, laughing. Larry asked her what was wrong. Barely containing her giggles she said, “Coke wants to be my friend.” To her, and millions of others like her, the idea that Coke wanted to be her friend on Facebook was absurd. Her friends are people, her friends can go to the movies with her. A brand does not fit any definition of the word and she knew it instinctually. Be human or be laughed at.

Conclusion:

There are undoubtedly many other ways to captivate your consumers, but this post is getting long and the flight I’m on is about over. I suppose the value of this post is found not so much in a rigid adherence to the three methods, but in an increased receptivity to new marketing ideas. Every company is different, and no two brands alike. As such, the exact method of your new marketing endeavors can take many shapes. What’s important is to realize that the internet presents everyone–startups and Fortune 500s alike–an unprecedented avenue through which to converse with consumers. Captivate them. Engage them. Or lose them.

2 Comments

Paradox-Vertical

On February 19th I posted an article called “The Paradox of Self-Promotion with Social Media.” I was honored by the success of the article. The post made the front page of Digg, became popular on Mixx, and sat atop a couple of keyword lists on StumbleUpon. This attention was valuable not just because of the traffic driven to this blog but because of the conversations which resulted.

I have spoken with many people via email and social sites about the paradox of self-promotion. Agreements were offered, disagreements put forth, and from these discussions I realized that the original article is not actually complete. Or perhaps it is complete, but engenders another question. That question is:

“When do I stop promoting myself?”

This question is just as important as any of the questions tackled in the original post. In the first post I argued that self-promotion in the social media world is not only possible, but necessary in the early stages of your blog/video/website. But what did I mean by “early stages?” At what point are your done with the early stages? Unfortunately, there is not sign post along the road to give you an incontrovertible landmark by which to travel. To know where you are in your journey, you are going to have to experiment a little. These experiments are not hard, they just require some willpower on your part.

But why bother to experiment, why not just keep promoting all of your own stuff? This is also a valid question. The answer is two-fold. First, self-promotion can be time consuming. The labor might not break your back, but think of all the time you could save if your readers and fans had assumed the mantle of promotion for you. Second, if you continue to rigorously submit all of your own content to sites like Stumble, Digg, Reddit, and Sphinn then you lose the possibility that a more powerful user will submit your content. Think about it, MrBabyMan might have submitted your awesome new video to Digg and that would have counted for a lot in both viewers and chance of reaching the front page, but if he were the second to digg it after you, you would have lost all that potential.

So when do you stop promoting yourself? When do you perform this little test? Right now. If you are anything other than brand-spankin’-new, then take a chance and don’t promote you next post/video at all. You won’t know if anyone likes you enough to submit you to social sites if you don’t give them a chance. I see so many people submitting their own content to every site right after they publish it. I too have been guilty of this. So take your next post, suck it up, be willing to forego the 100 stumble visitors that you would have gotten, and see what happens. If the experiment fails miserably and after 3-4 days nobody submits your content anywhere, then you know you have more work to do. Go back to your content creation, work on building subscribers and fans, and go back to helping yourself along by promoting yourself. But don’t forget to take a chance once a month and see where you stand. You never know, next month you might have twice as many subscribers and realize that TheNanny612, Zaibatsu, and DoshDosh all think your stuff is great. You wont know if you don’t stop for a second and take a look.

1 Comment

We work very hard with our clients to determine not only if viral marketing is the right social media strategy for them, but also to determine which form their viral marketing campaign should take. The internet is fluid and there are various forms of media within it with the potential for viral spread. In speaking with a client the other day about ideas for a new campaign, it occurred to me that in some ways it is easier to describe what viral marketing is not rather than what it is. Indeed, people like neat orderly lists that clearly—albeit incorrectly—assign boundaries to otherwise amorphous concepts. Perhaps in the near future I will write a nice neat list of the many ways one could implement viral marketing, but right now I am more interested in discussing how not to do it. Certainly, knowing what a thing is not will help us to know more clearly what it is.

Viral Marketing Is Not:

 

  1. Butterfly Marketing: I was aghast when, reading through some marketing forums, I found a user claiming that the only “real” form of viral marketing was butterfly marketing as presented by Mike Filsaime. What’s worse, there were other users agreeing. I vehemently disagree with this statement. I don’t know how Butterfly Marketing works, but I can tell you for sure that there are numerous examples of successful viral marketing campaigns for companies like BMW, Trojan, Office Depot, and Coke that have absolutely nothing to do with a $1,497 program that can earn you “$60,341 in 7 days.” Butterfly marketing is not viral marketing. I am not sure I even want to dignify this scam with further comments.

  1. Repurposing Content: Creating a TV commercial and then putting it on YouTube when it has finished its run is not viral marketing. One of the biggest causes of failure in early viral marketing campaigns was the belief that a funny commercial would automatically viral around the internet. This is clearly not the case. There is now research and data showing the differences of viewing habits online when compared to TV. Marketing content that was originally created for success on television rarely meets with such success online. Coincidently, successful online content would likely fail miserably on television. In marketing, successful viral media must be created with the internet in mind just as successful TV commercials must be created with television in mind.

  1. Bribing Consumers: I fully expect to meet with some resistance on this point and I suppose I will just have to learn to live with the knowledge that some people don’t agree with me. The source of disagreement on this point stems primarily from the fact that I am not claiming this method is “not viral marketing,” but that it is “not the right kind of viral marketing.” Offering existing customers incentives to get their friends to sign up may, in fact, encourage person-to-person to spread. But, I maintain that this practice results in a sort of “one-off” viralness, sacrificing quality of engagement for quantity of new customers gained. For instance, a user of PartyPoker.com may take advantage of the $20 he gets for every one of his friends he convinces to join, but this method appeals to him only financially. I worry that a company-customer relationship built solely on mutual financial gain is fleeting and inherently weaker than a relationship built on trust, loyalty, and engagement. Again, I stress that this is a legitimate marketing tactic which can achieve results. I warn only against the belief that it is the only form of viral marketing that works.

  1. Adding Share Buttons: On this blog, we use the ShareThis plugin to allow readers to more easily share our content on their favorite social sites. There are other ways to do the same thing: FeedFlare, Sociable, or just adding the site-provided buttons of your favorite places. Creating ease of shareability is crucial to the viral spread of many pieces of online media. That being said, putting share buttons on traditional sales documents or web pages will not make them viral…in fact, it will not even help. Yesterday I found the website of a social media optimization company which will here remain nameless. That company had sociable-style buttons for Digg, Stumble, Del.icio.us and a few others on every page of their site. Their “About Us” page was two paragraphs of dense copy that read like a web 1.0 sales brochure and sung the praises of the company in every possible way. But wait! What’s that? Oh, I have the chance to share this page with my friends on Digg…great! It was even possible for me to Stumble their contact page. This is absurd. People share content and it is unlikely that your corporate history page is worthy of sharing in the way that DoshDosh’s new blog post is. Furthermore, in the case of services like Digg, the button is virtually useless after 24 hours following the first Digg. Once that mark is passed you won’t get on the front page and you are not going to get any real traffic from Digg. I have seen similar instances of adding share buttons to things are just not going to be shared. Sure, Stumble might send each of your pages some traffic, but you could achieve that without placing a Stumble button right there on top of each one. There is a lot of great content out there so “shareable” content often needs to be written with that goal in mind. Adding buttons to things willy-nilly will not make them viral.

This is clearly not a comprehensive list of all the things which are not viral marketing. Who knows, there might even be some people who disagree with me and think that putting a Digg button on your site is all you need to market virally. As I mentioned at the beginning of this post, I think this list almost requires a companion list of some examples of what viral marketing is. I will tackle this next week and hopefully we can start a discussion of the forms of viral marketing and share some more examples of things which are labeled “viral marketing” but really aren’t.

 

 

7 Comments

One of the top users on Digg is supernova17. An amazing 49% of all stories he has submitted have made it to the front page. Below is an interview with supernova17 about what’s going on at Digg and what he sees in the coming months for Digg and the world of social media. This is the first in a series of interviews which PandemicBlog will be conducting with movers and shakers in the worlds of social media and marketing.

supernova17

How long have you been a Digg user?

I’ve been a member of Digg for over three years. I first registered back on February 2nd, 2005.

Are there other social sites that you are active on?

I have user accounts on probably all major social media sites out there. However I try to focus all my time and energy on Digg. I’ve been trying to be more active on StumbleUpon more recently.

If Digg is your favorite, why is that so?

I first heard about Digg when Kevin Rose was presenting a segment about the site on TechTV back in fall of 2004. I loved the idea of user generated content and lurked on the site for a few months before registering, so you can say that I’ve been following it since day one. I think the reason why I keep coming back to Digg is the uniqueness of the content. Also, over last few years I became friends with a lot of users on the site and I still talk to most of them almost daily. I know what kind of story submissions to expect from each one of them.

Seth Godin says that Digg has no “real-world” equivalent. It is a completely new thing. Do you agree with this? If you do, what needs and desires do you think this “new thing” has filled in people?

I think he hit the nail on the head. Digg was probably the first site of its kind. Digg is kind of like your own little New York Times edition that you can pick up and read on the subway; the difference here that the ordinary people like you and me find and promote content to front page. In traditional “old school” media outlets, you have half a dozen people who get to pick what will be read and seen by readers or viewers. On Digg, it’s impossible for a couple of people to pick what gets on front page each day. If everyone thinks that it’s something cool or interesting, only then will it reach homepage for all to see and enjoy.

What are the most profound changes that have seen taking place on Digg within the last 12 months?

There are two major things that changed the way Digg functions today. I think it’s no longer a site where geeks or nerds came to read technology related news. Over the last year or so they have been adding all sorts of new categories like politics and entertainment. Politics is the second most popular category on Digg. At any given moment during the day you will probably see two or three political stories on the front page. Another big change that took place just recently was the complete overhaul of the promotion algorithm. The staff wanted to give more power to newer users because the so-called “super” users were controlling almost fifty percent of all front page content according to some sources.

What would you say is your biggest issue with Digg? What do you want to see changed?

The biggest issue today is the new promotion algorithm. The change resulted in stale content on the front page. Digg originally wanted to give more power to the regular members and encourage new users to submit stories. However, the change backfired and now it takes up to 100 diggs to reach homepage. This change made it harder for regular active users to promote their stories. I think Digg should trust the old time users who are known to provide good content and not make them have almost 200 votes on each story just to hit front page.

What could happen that would make you stop using Digg?

I think I would stop submitting stories if the site ends up being bought by a huge media company. The new owner will most likely try to implement its own content into Digg and that goes against the site’s core idea of random user-generated stories.

In your time on Digg, have you seen an increase in the number overt marketing attempts?

The number of people visiting Digg each day grows bigger and bigger every single day. Marketers and SEOs want to capitalize on that huge free traffic. It only takes just a few clicks to reach homepage if your story is interesting enough. It’s just a matter of how you present it to the members.

How do you think the Digg community feels about marketing attempts on Digg? Why do they feel that way?

You will never see stories about marketing or making money with blogs on Digg. I think the users look down upon those who try to promote such things. They want to see general news, humor, pictures and videos instead of guides on how to monetize your site.

What are the mistakes that you see people making when they are trying to market or promote something using Digg?

If you want to promote or market something on Digg, don’t do it the obvious way. Try to present useful information in the post related to your content. For example Top 10 lists or top reasons about a particular thing always get more votes.

What do you think the next 12 months hold for Digg?

It will be interesting to see how the 2008 Presidential elections will be perceived on Digg. The politics section will never overtake technology, but it will come pretty close. Also, I’m eager to see how the site will deal with the huge number of users. These days you have to check at least 10 or so pages in the upcoming section to find good stories.

What do you think the next 12 months holds for social news and media?

Social media will continue to grow, more and more websites are implementing “Digg this” or “Stumble” buttons. New York Times online technology section now has a similar engine that promotes stories based on user votes. I think more major news websites will follow this trend of giving little more power to the users.

______________________________

We’d like to thank supernova17 for agreeing to this interview and sharing his unique knowledge of Digg. Keep an eye out for future interviews from the social media world.

3 Comments