jump to navigation

Is anybody out there? January 16, 2013

Posted by Mark Hillary in Current Affairs, Internet, IT Services.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
add a comment

It is no secret that social media has become an integral part of any marketing department worth their salt. These tools are no longer a mere reactive contact channel, but as a means to obtain knowledge and map the needs of the target audience.

Businesses that jump on the social media bandwagon without a clear strategy in mind will focus on numbers: how many followers they have on Twitter, how many entries are posted on Facebook daily. More often than not, it is one big monologue of information flowing one way.

In fact, 56 per cent of customer tweets to companies are being ignored. So, no matter how much or what customers are saying about the brands they do business with online – most of them are just not listening.

Sharing positive and negative interactions with relation to customer service on social media channels is on the rise. This is because people know they can be rewarded for their loyalty, or demonstrate their disappointment to a large audience if they are not.

While the corporate silence on social media has the massive potential to damage a brand – as we have seen on the now classic United Airlines example – positive cases where brands were really listening can earn real kudos from the public and spread like wildfire. Companies such as Walmart, XBox, and even steakhouses are showing us how it can be done well.

What about your company, are you listening to what your customers have to say?

Steak, Up close and personal [Explored]

 

Photo by Allan licensed under Creative Commons

The Pope delivers his first Tweet December 12, 2012

Posted by Mark Hillary in Current Affairs, Internet.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
add a comment

Pope Benedict has sent his first tweet using the account @pontifex and he has continued to tweet throughout the day. But what use is Twitter to the head of a church?

The answer is really that it depends. I can imagine that the main reason for the Pope to be using a tool like Twitter is to engage with Catholics across the world, but the reality is that it would be very difficult for the Pope to actually engage with people.

Even on his first day of tweeting, the Pontiff already has over 700,000 followers. He can’t talk to them on a one-on-one basis or start picking out interesting comments to respond to – there are just too many.

So the Vatican’s use of Twitter would seem to be mainly just as a broadcast tool – to send out Holy messages to a flock prepared to listen in a new way.

It’s a shame to see that social media can be used essentially as nothing more than just a radio or TV broadcast via another medium, but in this case I can understand how difficult it would be for the Vatican to choose individuals to respond to online.

It does show that there is an interesting change in the concept of broadcasting itself. Lady Gaga has over 32m followers on Twitter. She doesn’t need a TV or radio station to get a message out to tens of millions of people – and if several of them share the news with their own followers it is reasonable to expect that she can reach hundreds of millions in a few seconds.

The concept of entertainment channels is being redefined. Fans of sports teams can just follow an online channel maintained by their team – there is no longer any need for a broadcaster. How will the growth of this online broadcasting change the broadcast world as we know it?

Pope Benedict XVI prays in front of the image of Our Lady of Fatima after arriving to catholic Fatima shrine in central Portugal, May 12, 2010

 

Photo by the Catholic Church of England and Wales licensed under Creative Commons

To Tweet or not to Tweet May 4, 2012

Posted by Mark Hillary in Current Affairs, Internet.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
add a comment

When the footballer Fabrice Muamba collapsed because of a cardiac arrest during a recent game most online fans were sending out messages of hope – pray for Muamba was a recurring message on Twitter at the time. But one young student at Swansea University, Liam Stacey, chose to send out abusive racist messages abusing the footballer just as he was fighting for his life.

Stacey was found guilty under the Racially Aggravated s4A Public order Act 1986 and was sentenced to 56 days in jail and his university told him to not bother coming back to complete his finals. So the messages we post on Twitter are not ephemeral. They do have meaning and can be treated as published words in the eye of the law.

But Twitter is still a free for all. Take a look at the profiles of many people where they state their company and job title. Often there is an extra line saying ‘these are my personal views, not those of my employer’.

Really? But nobody has ever tested this in court and isn’t it obvious that if you have announced on your profile who you work for then surely that company will have an interest in what you are publishing if it diverges far from what they would call their ‘brand values’?

And what of the retweet dilemma? Imagine you work for an Israeli company and you notice a news story about academics trying to make ‘Mein Kampf’ available in Germany once again. You retweet the story because it is interesting then someone in your company asks why you are endorsing the wider availability for the works of Adolf Hitler.

Who is right? Does a retweet merely indicate that this is something interesting you want to share, or is it an implicit endorsement of what you are linking to?

None of this has been tested in court yet so I am sure the coming years are going to feature many more Liam Stacey’s – lives ruined because of an ill-judged Tweet.

Fabrice Muamba Tribute

Photo by Ronnie MacDonald licensed under Creative Commons