The Flack

The VC vs. the PR Pro

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Wed, 28 Mar 2012 19:02:54 PDT

I recently had conversation with a New York tech entrepreneur about the growing ability of the top venture capital firms to drive media coverage for their portfolio companies.

He not only validated my sense that many tech and business journalists take their cues from prominent VCs, but explained that a company like Andreessen Horowitz directs its partners to reach out to "their friends in the media" when they ink a new deal. "PR is paramount there."

I ran these observations past the founder of one of the more esteemed gadget sites at an event this week in New York. He nonchalantly said that many of the more influential reporters attend the same parties and events as the VCs, which provide a fertile ground for story leads. Nothing unusual here. This is the way it has worked for years in business, politics, entertainment and any number of industries.

Still there's something gnawing at me about this dynamic, and specifically the advantage the better-known VCs have in gaming the startup PR game. It's not just catalyzing and amplifying media coverage of their portfolio companies, but it's the VC firms' execs' appearances as authorities in the same media coverage featuring the companies from which they stand to gain financially.

I don't blame the VC for wanting to do all they can to propel media buzz for their investments. And frankly many VC execs have media klout in their own right through their own social channels. But I do get the heebie jeebies when journalists give the VC a platform to wax subjective about the startup, even if they do disclose the fiduciary relationship.

Could it be that a good reporter can't find an independent expert or academic who can offer up an unbiased view of the startup's technology that's about to receive a moment in the media sun?

2012 SXSW (Photo: AP)

The VC's ability to catalyze a media meme initially caught my eye a week before South by Southwest when TechCrunch founder-turned-venture capitalist Michael Arrington tweeted about a new "prioximity" app in which his firm invested. Robert Scoble picked it up from there, and Highlight became the highlight of this year's SXSW. (Now there's an effective anti-PR strategy for you.)

Union Square Ventures' savvy founder Fred Wilson has used his blog and Twitter feed to tout his firm's portfolio companies. Wouldn't you do the same for your investments?

One can reasonably argue that the portfolios of elite VC firms like Andreessen Horowitz, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, Draper Fisher Jurvetson or Union Square Ventures actually merit the unabashed media attention they receive. But where does that leave the myriad other startups who have a meaningful story to tell, but who lack the editorial entry offered by the top VCs and a (shrinking) number of seasoned PR pros to the bandwidth-challenged group of the most influential reporters?

Fred Wilson's Twitter Avatar

This imbalance may get worse as the startup economy kicks into high gear with the passage of the jobs bill and its crowdfunding component. I don't take issue with VC firms using their "owned" spheres of influence to advance the interests of their interests. It's only when news sites take up their cause as was the case when Lost Remote editor Cory Bergman wrote about Airtime based on its funding pedigree in a piece titled "New social video startup ‘Airtime’ draws big names"

"Beyond the founders, the effort has attracted big-name backers, as well: Founders Fund, Accel Partners, Andreessen Horowitz, Google Ventures, SV Angel, Yuri Milner, Ashton Kutcher, will.i.am, Scott Braun, and Michael Arrington. Definitely, a startup to watch."

Or when The New York Times published a lengthy business feature on another Andreessen Horowitz-funded startup Factual, an admittedly ambitious company with a purpose and a neat back story. In it, Mr. Horowitz praised the founder of his firm's investment:

"Gil is pretty far ahead of the rest of us, the one entrepreneur where it takes a few meetings before I really understand everything he is talking about," says Ben Horowitz, a venture capitalist who backed Factual through his firm, Andreessen Horowitz. "Three years ago, he thought Factual was his biggest chance to change the world. Over time, the world has moved his way."

Maybe I'm just being naive. This is the way both early-stage companies and the news stories that inflate them incubate nowadays. The VCs are the new kingmakers, and the PR professional is given relatively short shrift. Most disconcerting was a comment another entrepreneur I know recently made to me last week when we talked about PR for his latest startup:

"My board read the Mark Cuban post [mis]advising startups against hiring a PR firm. I need to convince them of the value PR will provide."

Groan.

Maybe venture capitalist Seth Levine had it right in his post "I'm Getting Sick of All the Bullshit" in which he wrote:

"I’m worried that in all the hype, in all the “we launched our company” events, and “we changed our name again” parties, and “we redid our website – come celebrate!” shindigs, and the SXSW parties, and the hoodies, and everyone who is “killing it!”, that we’re losing sight a bit of the really hard work that is creating and building a business...So by all means, lets keep having fun. But let’s also remember that the goal is to build great companies. And please – my fellow venture capitalists – can we take it down a few notches and remember that our role is a supporting one. If you wanted to be the star you should have become an entrepreneur."

The PRoblem with Startups

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 18:52:35 PDT

A tweet from @ODwyerPR caught my eye this morning. It linked to a Forbes.com-contributed piece by New York PR pro Lindsey Green originally published in The Daily Muse, a site that describes itself as "a rapidly growing community of women who believe that kicking ass and taking names is all part of the job."

The piece, titled "What Every Start-up Should Know about PR," sets reasonable expectations for startups considering retaining PR representation.

It contrasts with the dashed expectations that Mark Cuban set for startups who also are weighing whether or not to hire a PR firm. His diss of the PR industry first appeared in his book, and then in a blog post that as likely prompted by my having called him out. I followed up his explanation with another post on which he posted a comment. Last week, Business Insider resurrected Mr. Cuban's POV whose title speaks for itself: "Startups Shouldn't Hire PR Firms."

Here are some highlights from the two pieces:

Lindsey Green: "...PR is no substitute for having a great product. Nor is it a guarantee of sales, sign-ups, or funding—if anyone promises you otherwise, be wary!"

Mark Cuban:"...I have no doubt that a smart PR person can add value to a startup. The problem is that all things considered, it’s not enough value."

Lindsey Green: "...don’t use PR to try and be something you’re not. Spend your time and energy getting to know your audience, and be honest about who that audience really is. The more honestly you can share this information with your publicist, the better they’ll be able to get you placement in the right publications that will actually help you build on your early success."

Mark Cuban: "The thing about PR people is this: while they may have great contacts and they can get articles placed, they are not capable of doing a vulcan mind meld. They don’t automatically know all the elements about your business that you want to convey to media, partners, customers, potential employees and even potential investors."

Lindsey Green: "...with so many new companies, and only so many spots to get media coverage, it’s tough out there. A good PR rep should be able to tell you early on how the press is responding to outreach before launch."

Mark Cuban: "...there is no way for a small company can break through the clutter to get the attention of media. If you are a startup that incorrectly thinks it needs to get on Letterman or Good Morning America in order to be a successful company, then they are right. But the reality is that for the vast majority of startups, particularly tech related startups, most of the media that is going to benefit you out of the gate is trade related or local media. And these people are ALWAYS looking for stories to write. They want to hear from unique companies."

Lindsey Green: "I’ve seen unexpected clients have smash launches, and I’ve seen star clients be met with little interest. It’s important to be prepared for either outcome—and to not get too excited (or too discouraged) by your first press. After all, launch day is just one day in the life of your company."

Mark Cuban: "It’s amazing how often a simple email to a writer for a trade publication or local media will get a response. The key to getting a response is being short, sweet , hyperbole free and to the point. You have to sell your differentiation in a paragraph."

Both of these pieces offer a much-needed reality-check on how challenging the discipline of media relations -- especially in the digital startup space -- has become in recent years. Digital beat reporters are besieged by overtures from way too many startups, while at the same time, have at their fingertips too many other sources for story ideas. (I won't mention the myriad misguided pitches in their inboxes that only serve to diminish every other PR pro's prospects for meaningful engagement.)

Nonetheless, Ms. Green's and Mr. Cuban's portrayal of PR for startups was surprising in its narrow (1980s?) focus on just the "earned" media part of the media equation, i.e., they made no mention of "owned" or "paid" media. Mr. Cuban went so far as to craft a sample "pitch letter" to school the profession on how journalists should be communicated with.

The New York Times's Jenna Wortham

While generating editorial coverage still remains a primary client-deliverable for most PR firms, media fragmentation and changed media consumption habits have diluted the impact of even a boffo piece in The New York Times. (That is if you can get Jenna Wortham to even notice your carefully crafted email among the hundreds she receives daily.) Even so, today there are very few, if any, stand-alone stories that have the singular ability to propel a startup toward profitability.

Hence, a better PRescription for startups should entail the constant and strategic application of selective media engagement over time, coupled with content-creation and an appropriate social and event speaking strategy. Together, these dimensions should ultimately pave the way for (differentiated) startups to build a wider digital media footprint, and eventually a healthy bottom line.

BTW, I'll be moderating a panel titled "PR at a Hot Startup" featuring the internal PR reps from Buddy Media, Foursquare, Etsy and Zynga as part of PRSA's "Digital Impact" conference April 2 in NYC.

12 Must-Know Media Sites

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Tue, 20 Mar 2012 08:01:22 PDT

In December 2006, I posted a piece titled "The Nouveau Niche Media" about all those new blogs and their growing influence over more traditional media, and commensurate allure to PR pros. Below are some of the sites I listed back then. They appeared on myriad blogrolls and in many an RSS reader:

"...as someone who's toiling in this new media reality, I'm finding that certain "outlets," which didn't exist five years ago, have supplanted many of the aforementioned in terms of PR desire. Forward-thinking pros view these new "influencer" outlets with the same envy as The [Industry] Standard (bearer) before them. They have names like TechCrunch, engadget, PaidContent, micropersuasion, perezhilton, TMZ, Blog Maverick, TV Newser, Scobleizer, TechDirt, Huffington Post, Gawker, the Moderate Voice, Daily Kos, Buzz Machine, and way too many others to list here."

I'm happy to report that most of these new media influencers continue to thrive in some form or another. Yet, a whole new nichified generation has emerged for those of us wallowing in the tech/media/digital startup bubble. Let's take a look at a dozen that either weren't around or were just ramping up back then:

PandoDaily founder (and TechCrunch alumnus) Sarah Lacey (aka @sarahcuda) described why she started Pando Daily this past January:

"We have one goal here at PandoDaily: To be the site-of-record for that startup root-system and everything that springs up from it, cycle-after-cycle. That sounds simple but it’ll be incredibly hard to pull off. It’s not something we accomplish on day one or even day 300. It’s something we accomplish by waking up every single day and writing the best stuff we can, and continually adding like-minded staffers who have the passion, drive and talent to do the same."

I took to these pages to elaborate here.

BusinessInsider/SAI - Henry Blodget has found his true calling in this most influential NYC-based chronicler of all things business with a particular penchant for the digital economy. In October 2007, the site wrote:

"Welcome! Business Insider is a fast-growing business site with deep financial, media, tech, and other industry verticals. The flagship vertical, Silicon Alley Insider, launched on July 19, 2007, led by DoubleClick founders Dwight Merriman and Kevin Ryan and former top-ranked Wall Street analyst Henry Blodget."

More here from this blogger.

The Verge, founded in 2011, Joshua Topolsky and his team already are making their mark on the rich tech media landscape. Here's how the site describes itself:

"The Verge is a technology-focused news publication founded in 2011 by Joshua Topolsky and Marty Moe in partnership with Vox Media and its CEO Jim Bankoff. The Verge's mission is to offer breaking news coverage and in-depth reporting, product information, and community content via a unified, modern platform."

The Wrap - Sharon Waxman covered Hollywood for The New York Times. In 2009, she started The Wrap with back from Starbucks' Howard Schulz among others. Here's how The Wrap describes itself:

"The Wrap News Inc., founded by award-winning journalist Sharon Waxman in 2009, has established itself as the leading news organization covering the business of entertainment and media. As a multi-platform media company, The Wrap News Inc. is comprised of TheWrap.com, the award-winning, industry-leading outlet for high-profile newsbreaks, investigative stories and authoritative analysis; ItsontheGrid.com, the most current, relevant film development database; ThePowerGrid, an algorithmic, data-driven ranking system for every person, project and company in the film business; and TheGrill, an executive leadership conference centered on the convergence of entertainment, media and technology.. The Wrap News, Inc. is backed by Maveron, a venture capital firm based in Seattle, Washington and co-founded by Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz and Dan Levitan."

DigiDay - Co-founded by Adweek alumnus Brian Morrissey (no friend to the PR industry), Digiday describes itself as:

"The Authority on Digital Media, Marketing and Advertising. Digiday is a media company and community for professionals who work in the digital media, marketing and advertising industry. Our mission is to connect the industry with insightful analysis and perspective, as well as each other. We provide key insights and information through our online publications and conferences that cover the changes, trends — and why they matter. The focus is on quality, not quantity, and honesty instead of spin. We cover the industry with an expertise, depth and tone you won’t find anywhere else. The entire team at Digiday is driven to produce the highest quality publications, conferences, and resources for our industry."

The Awl - I think The Awl's co-founder Choire Sicha once interviewed me for a piece on The Astor debacle for the New York Observer. Here's how his soon-to-be three-year-old site is described:

"Thank you for stopping in at The Awl, a New York City-based web concern established in early 2009. The Awl intends to encourage a daily discussion of the issues of the day—news, politics, culture (and TV!)—during sensible hours of the working week. We believe that there is a great big Internet out there on which we all live, and that too often the curios and oddities of that Internet are ignored in favor of the most obvious and easy stories. We believe that there is an audience of intelligent readers who are poorly served by being delivered those same stories in numbing repetition to the detriment of their reading diet. We believe that there is no topic unworthy of scrutiny, so long that it is approached from an intelligent angle, but that there are many topics worthy of scrutiny that lack coverage because of commercial factors. We believe that the longform essay has a home on the Internet, and that the idea of "too long; didn't read" is exactly as shortsighted as its TL;DR acronym."

Mediaite - It wasn't that long ago that ABC News legal analyst Dan Abrams launched Mediaite and a handful of sub-sites soon thereafter. (What happened to Mogulite anyway?) The original and aggregated media news site seems like it's been around much longer than its 32 months. Here's how it describes itself:

"Mediaite is the site for news, information and smart opinions about print, online and broadcast media, offering original and immediate assessments of the latest news as it breaks. Mediaite’s “Power Grid” objectively ranks media professionals across a dozen categories based on their real-time relevance. Power Grid rankings rely on an array of metrics, including anything and everything from circulation to Twitter followers to Google buzz depending on the category."

BetaBeat - The New York Observer's owners were smart to bring on Elizabeth Spiers as its editor who was even smarter to start a section devoted to the vibrant New York Tech scene:

"Our Mission. A decade after the dot-com bust, it all seems like a hazy dream, doesn’t it? Like maybe it never really happened at all? Look around: The New York tech scene is as exuberant and as wild-eyed as ever. What in God’s name are we all thinking? The last thing a scene like this needs is another tech blog rushing to aggregate the same overinflated hyperbole you can read all over the web. Betabeat isn’t here to bring you the fifth take on the day’s funding news or another rundown of the cool new features in the latest mobile app update. We’re about the characters who make this scene hum: the ambitious young angels, the eccentric hackers and the non-stop networkers. We’re here to take you behind closed doors for an inside look at how the deals really get done."

VB - Venture Beat's been around longer than most on this list, but it continues to exert influence in the media and social spheres. Maybe the new VB acronym on the home page contributed? (It worked for The Hollywood Reporter.) Great having former BetaBeat editor Ben Popper as east coast editor. Here's what they say about themselves:

"VentureBeat is a media company obsessed with covering amazing technology and why it matters in our lives. From the most innovative companies and the incredible people behind them to the money fueling it all, we’re devoted to exhaustive coverage of the technology revolution. You can read our ethics statement here. Led by Founder and Editor-in-Chief Matt Marshall and a team of experienced journalists, VentureBeat has grown into the leading source for breaking news and in-depth reporting on a range of technology trends — from social to mobile, small business to enterprise, clean tech, cloud services, games, and more. We also bring the community together several times per year through our own executive-level conferences, such as MobileBeat, CloudBeat, GamesBeat, and the VentureBeat Mobile Summit."

The Next Web has really ratcheted up its U.S. staffing and editorial output in the last year. Tech media vet Courtney Boyd Myers is the NY-based features editor for this UK-based company, which grew out of a 2006 tech conference. It describes itself this way:

"Founded in 2008, The Next Web is one of the world’s largest online publications that delivers an international perspective on the latest news about Internet technology, business and culture. With an active, influential audience consisting of more than 5.1 million monthly visits and over 7 million monthly page views, The Next Web continues to expand its global presence on its website with the addition of new channels and content partnerships, as well as through events in North America and Europe."

Vator.TV - I remember VatorTV founder Bambi Francisco when she worked as guest booker for Lou Dobbs "Moneyline" on CNN and her subsequent work for Dow Jones Marketwatch. I also remember when she started Vator.TV. I never knew her as Bambi Francisco Roizen, Mom to three kids. One could say she was ahead of her time by glomming onto entrepreneurs and the startup culture as early as she did. Vator is less of a media outlet and more of a community site/resource for entrepreneurs with a news section.

"Vator (short for innovator) is a professional network for entrepreneurs. Founded and run by veteran and award-winning journalist Bambi Francisco, Vator consists of Vator.tv, VatorNews, and Vator competitions."

Social Media Today -- If social media's your thing (isn't it everyone's?), then you'd be hard-pressed to find a more informative site than Social Media Today. SMT features some of the best thinkers covering a subject that pretty much envelopes the way we shop, vote, invest, market, mate...

"Social Media Today is an independent, online community for professionals in PR, marketing, advertising, or any other discipline where a thorough understanding of social media is mission-critical. Every day, we provide insight and host lively debate about the tools, platforms, companies and personalities that are revolutionizing the way we consume information. All of our content is contributed by our members and curated by our editorial staff."

Other must-follows include:

Finally, let's not underestimate the influence of those VCs with big Twitter followings. You saw my post on the send-off Michael Arrington gave to (his investment) Highlight in the week before SXSW. I was reminded of it when I saw Bloomberg's Emily Chang's tweet today:

@emilychangtv Taking a stroll through the Ferry Building with @Highlight CEO @pdavison http://www.bloomberg.com/video/88525362/

And a day doesn't go by when we don't see a tweet from one of Kickstarter's investors:

@fredwilson Kickstarter May be the Most Disruptive and Transformative Idea in our Entire Portfolio

The "media/influencer" landscape continues to evolve...for better or worse.

Firms We Love to Hate

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Fri, 16 Mar 2012 09:27:02 PDT

Lloyd Blankfein

Jamie Dimon

Pretty much anyone tooling in the PR biz is keyed in on the latest chapter in Goldman Sachs' extended trial in the court of public opinion.

James Gorman

What is it about this particular company that compels the media, regulators, legislators and general public to pounce on it at every turn? Are Goldman's standards and culture any different than those in its peer set? Is Lloyd Blankfein less ethical than Jamie Dimon or Jim Gorman? Is the company more deleterious to the future health of the nation than let's say Koch Industries? I doubt it.

In fact, anyone who knows anything about the business world -- in both the private and public sectors, academia too -- will tell you that Goldman Sachs is the gold standard among all financial institutions. It's the hardest finance job to land coming out of the nation's most competitive colleges and universities (even with the softness of the last couple of years).

Sure, the digital-social-startup economy offers college grads more options than ever before, but if it's banking one wants, Goldman is the ticket. (Startups still need financing, right?) And let's not forget that the financial services sector employs 300K+ in New York City alone.

The Poison Pen-Man

So one has to wonder why such an incessant media barrage against this one company. Why hasn't Goldman been able to claw its way out of this reputational rut? Time heels, right? Well, not for this company. Was Goldman too smart for its own good when it emerged relatively unscathed following the financial meltdown?

And how big a factor was the allure of fame in motivating the disgruntled (career-shorted) Brit who penned the caustic op-ed in The New York Times? (Its publication did calibrate so nicely with his resignation letter.)

Still, I'm scratching my head wondering why hasn't Goldman been able to shake this? Back in late 2009 when navigating another media onslaught, the firm pledged a half billion dollars (!) to help small businesses recover from the shattered economy. It made little or no impact on forestalling the anti-Goldman forces.

This time around, the firm finally decided to can its long-time PR chief who, while generally well-regarded, may not have been the most media-accommodating corp comms guy around. His Beltway-bred replacement didn't have time to smell the coffee before The Times bombshell hit. Talk about trial by fire.

Frankly I don't know how Goldman will break free of this PR-debilitating yolk around its neck. If I were a betting man I'd say that a change at the top may ultimately be necessary - a la Mike D'Antoni or Tony Hayward -- in spite of the fact that Messrs. Blankfein and Cohn have done pretty darn well for the firm's many stakeholders over the years. Taking one for the team tends to be an effective remedy.

When I started penning this post earlier today -- before some burp across the Internet erased all of it -- I really didn't wish to re-hash what every media outlet so gleefully echoed. I actually hoped to segue quickly out of Goldman mode and into the tech realm where I've observed certain companies wallowing in the same reputational rut as Goldman.

Consider these headlines and leads:

TechCrunch on RIM: "Clueless: RIM Releases The $120 BlackBerry PlayBook Mini Keyboard" Research In Motion announced the PlayBook 17 months ago. Then, eleven months ago, the company actually launched the product. It took them another 10 months to finally bring a native email and messaging app to the product. Now, almost a full year after the product hit stores, RIM is releasing a keyboard folio case for the struggling tablet. Oh, and it costs $120.

BusinessInsider on AOL: "The Real Reason Everyone Is Suddenly Quitting AOL Again" AOL CTO Alex Gounares is leaving the company. So is the top engineer in the Huffington Post Media Group, Tim Dierks, according to a report from Peter Kafka.An ex-AOLer speculates about the timing and says we should expect more departures:

Forbes on Groupon: "Whither Groupon And Merchants' Appetite For Daily Deals?" Despite differing opinions about the long-term prospects for its business model, Groupon has made a ton of money for its early financial backers. So whom do they have to thank for their newly found largess? Not the kind of people one might assume would be scouring their emails for daily deals ranging from cut-rate hamburgers to bargain Botox.

Wasn't Microsoft once known as the "Evil Empire?" Yet between its bloggers, the XBOX and The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, it somehow managed to break free of that yolk and (re)achieve a reasonable modicum of respectability.

Any lessons to be learned here?

Foursquare Rules SXSW

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Mon, 12 Mar 2012 10:31:39 PDT

If you've been keeping tabs on this blogger's Twitterstream, you're (painfully) aware that I finally made my way to Austin for the 2012 South by Southwest Interactive Festival. No longer a Newbie, I earned the 2012 SXSW Sophomore Badge on Foursquare upon arrival at Austin Bergstrom Airport.
Whooppeee! Let the games begin.

At last year's SXSW, I waited until the final day to opine on the single trend I felt permeated the world's premier gathering of entrepreneurial technologists. It was 2-D barcodes (or QR codes as they're now known). They were everywhere - from the Chevy Volts and pedicabs that shuttled attendees around downtown Austin to the coffee cups, t-shirts, mousepads and bodysuits with which festival-goers interacted daily.

I don't know just yet what cool product or killer app will emerge this year, though I did see that my friends at (the soon-to-be CNN sub?) Mashable are keeping tabs on the most buzzed-about SXSW startups. The list included Highlight, a geo-location mobile app that attempts to tackle the problem of capturing in real-time one's FB friends in physical proximity to the user. (It also allows randoids using the app to know your coordinates.)

The app benefitted from the Arrington-Scoble Effect. Mr. Arrington, the founder and former editor of TechCrunch -- and now venture capitalist who's invested in Highlight -- used his klout to set Twitter tongues-a-waggin a week before SXSW started, which include that of Mr. Scoble who took a more judicious approach. I'm sure others startups with competitive solutions are crying foul at the media kickstart Mr. Arrington heaped upon his investment.

No matter. Highlight is not highlighting this blogger's time here in Austin. Frankly, I was impressed by the prospects for LISNX (local instant social network) whose developer I recently befriended. It attempts to tackle the some of the same challenges but it is not at SXSW, nor publicly available...yet.

As for this year's winner, I would only ask one question: What would SXSW be without Foursquare?

The geo-local check-in service launched at the New York Tech Meetup in 2009 and then took SouthBy by storm. Back then, 4Sq and Austin-based Gowalla were going head to head. As of this week, however, Gowalla is no more. Don't feel sorry for them. Facebook just bought the company and swallowed their talent...just in time for FB's IPO.

Foursquare's Dennis Crowley Doing What He Does

This year, Foursquare is everywhere at SXSW. It is the perfect dopamine-releasing app that melds the physical and virtual worlds in real time. It's the ideal way to keep track of the whereabouts of SXSW's movers & shakers as they navigate the cacophony of panels and parties that abound. Company founder Dennis Crowley joined Shira Lazar and Zappo's Tony Hsieh on stage in Samsung's Blogger Lounge yesterday:

"We're part of the fabric of what goes on here. It's our third year here. We now have 100 employees and 20 million users. We're on a rocketship course."

The company also throws the hottest party at SXSW, which may or may not be relevant to its future prospects - but it sure can't hurt. Here are some of my 4Sq check-ins thus far (in reverse chronolgical order):

Late night snack w/ @howardgr @stevekrak @ #sxsw #cnn (@ CNN Grill @ SXSW (Max's Wine Dive) w/ 71 others) 4sq.com/Auz81g

Still the hottest party at #sxsw! (@ Cedar Street Courtyard for Foursquare Party w/ @brianstelter @tobyd) [pic]: 4sq.com/yEL0sp

At @mashable #sxsw w/ @adamostrow @stacygreen @rohitbhargava @cvvalencia @chaimhaas @julienemery 4sq.com/xoyvL8

At #NYTM w/ @innonate @jessicalawrence @rasiej @cassel @samgimbel @andymorris others #sxsw [pic]: 4sq.com/xlhxbx

W/ @briansolis @scottmonty @stevegarfield @johnchavens @adamkleinberg @shiralazar @darbtx @dave_blogworld 4sq.com/zc2oh7

Stashed: Himler, Bryan Person, Jeremiah Owyang, Richard Binhammer
W/ @jasonfalls @jowyang @andysernovitz @lionelatdell @richardatdell @cassel @craignewmark (@ Guero's) 4sq.com/zgxWYz (above)

Contently brunch w/ @benparr @kellyfaircloth @thisisparker and others (@ Paggi House w/ 7 others) [pic]: 4sq.com/Ahq6XTPress reg #sxsw (@ Austin Convention Center w/ 194 others) foursquare.com/peterhimler/ch…

W/ @paullyoung @maginfy @cyberjournalist @jasonkapler @sorayadarabi @garyvee? #secretwineparty #sxsw (@ Haven) 4sq.com/AnQJ

Big line, but walked right in. Go figure. (@ Hangar Lounge w/ 42 others) 4sq.com/yajJt2

W/ @howardgr @chaimhass @joeciarallo @rachelsklar (@ CNN Grill @ SXSW (Max's Wine Dive) w/ @howardgr @katefgold) 4sq.com/Ara8oQ

Arrived. #sxsw (@ Austin Bergstrom International Airport (AUS) w/ 57 others) 4sq.com/AyvRhO

SXSW is EXHAUSTING!

Truthiness in Digital Media

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Thu, 08 Mar 2012 06:15:57 PST

Guess what? The Internet is full of b******t and its volume is rapidly replicating - mostly unchecked. Much of the spurious info we find on the Web originates from amateur "we the media" types. However, more and more mis/disinformation is purposefully propagated by partisan entities, some with nefarious agendas. A Google search on "Martin Luther King" produces a top five result, "Martin Luther King Jr. - A True Historical Examination." It was created by a white supremacist organization.

What's worse, the identities of those bankrolling the dissemination of such digital propaganda often are hidden...legally.

As the November elections draw nearer, the online explosion and public consumption of factually challenged news and information threatens the very foundation of our democracy. (Thank you, Justice Roberts.)

Craig Newmark & Colbert's Speaker Flag

With the (Herculean) goal of exploring remedies for an increasingly untrustworthy digital media environment, I ventured to Harvard Law School yesterday to participate in the first Truthiness in Digital Media conference.

Joining me were a who's who of media pundits, legal scholars, hackers, media watchdog and public advocacy groups, nearly all of whom were painfully aware of the dangers digital delusion holds in a democracy.

Craig Silverman, formerly of Columbia Journalism Review who's toiling since November for the Poynter Institute, re-posted the conference description here:

This conference will focus on exploring the many facets of this complex issue with an eye to crafting tools and strategies to ameliorate the negative impacts of deception, bias, and inaccuracy in the digital media ecosystem. We hope to come to a better position to take advantage of the benefits promised by digital media while appreciating the positive aspects of creative media-making and probing the blurred boundaries between nefarious and beneficial media shaping practices.

This blogger at left. (Photo: Craig Newmark)

And Cambridge-based Nieman Journalism Lab live-blogged the event here. More here on the Truthiness blog.

As someone who's made a career out of trying to wrap his arms around what makes a story meme catch fire in traditional news media, and more recently in the blogosphere and social channels, I had more than a passing interest in the conference's theme and purpose.

I also may have been the only PR professional there other than the PR Director for the Ford Foundation and Wendell Potter who outed an unfortunate side of the industry with his PR-antagonistic book about his work spinning for a giant health insurer. Most everyone else in that room were intensely smart and committed activists. Needless to say, many held the PR industry in relatively low esteem.

Fortunately, I still subscribe to PRSA's code of ethics (and Harold Burson). I firmly believe that quality journalism is even more essential today in an increasingly polluted news ecosystem. (Maybe it was my past work for The New York Times and The AP that cemented my stalwart POV on this.) Conference attendee Micah Sifrey said it like this:

"If the media is the immune system of democracy, as Craig Newmark likes to say, then the act of asking questions of the powerful might be thought of as the mitochondria, the energy source that powers the immune system."

Attendees heard from a range of esteemed presenters and were encouraged to hit the red button to liven their microphones to chime in. Some of the presentations that resonated for me included:

Wendell Potter, Cigna's former PR chief-turned-whistleblower who wrote Deadly Spin. He noted that the diminished news ranks have given corporations an upper hand in propagating their messages. He also acknowledged the increasingly important role fact-checking orgs play in the new digital/social media ecosystem.

What Influenced SOPA/PIPA's demise

Berkman Center's Yochai Benkler analyzed the underpinnings of the SOPA/PIPA defeat, and gave considerable credit to TechDirt and other influential tech media sites, though it was clear that they didn't act alone. Other "action-oriented sites" made important contributions to the demise of the proposed bills.

Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics (CREW), took her five minutes to (rightfully) castigate astroturfing king and PRSA ethics violator Richard Berman who serves as "executive director" of 25 non-profit stealth advocacy organizations, one of which purchased an anti-union commercial...during the Super Bowl telecast!

Next up was Filippo Menczer from Indiana University, which developed Truthy as means to understand how memes spread online. If you like this, watch Jake Porway's presentation on Cascade from The New York Times's R&D department.

Filippo was followed Tim Hwang whose presentation on the use of bots to influence the online conversation frightened the heck out of me.

Kathleen Hall Jamieson of University pf Pennsylvania's Annenberg School kicked off the next session titled "Elusive Objectivity: Finding the Truth is Hard," by showcasing FlackCheck.org, a sibling of FactCheck.org but focused on misleading political advertising.

I asked her why the term "flack," a pejorative term associated with PR (and the name of this blog). She explained its association with FactCheck and that its connotation would be readily understood. More importantly, she told me that TV stations airing misleading if not downright false advertising have no legal or regulatory obligation to not air them. Her hope is that public awareness and pressure will prevail in getting these ads pulled.

From one Ivy to another, Emily Bell of the Tow Center at Columbia Journalism School, formerly with The Guardian where she played a pivotal role in bringing the UK's most esteemed newspaper into the digital age, opened by showing the Guardian's Three Little Pigs video on the state of journalism today:

She then made a couple of observation that resonated with me:

"Allowing people to interact with news content will 'sustain journalism'"

and

"Very few news orgs have guidelines for consumer engagement, ability to analyze large data sets."

Dem & GOP Orientations (via Chris Mooney)

In the next session "Biases Abound: You Can’t Handle (or Don’t Want) the Truth," author Chris Mooney introduced the audience to the term the "Smart Idiot Effect" or ""There is a science of why we deny science." He shared research that demonstrated how the views of educated political conservatives will not change when faced with cold hard facts that directly contradict their intractable point-of-views.

Furthermore, facts alone for this particular demographic makes them even more emboldened in their thinking. (Not that birthers are educated, but I understood his point.)

He penned a post today on his experience at the Truthiness event in which he questioned whether there is an easy way to fact-check the vast amount of misinformation out their in the digispheres. He alluded to the above graphic of where these fact-checking orgs reside in relation to one another. He also penned a second post that sums up some of what was discussed yesterday.

I enjoyed hearing UMichigan's Paul Resnick present the Fact Spreaders and NewsCube tools, and Gilad Lotan demo SocialFlow, which purports to take "a scientific approach to measurably increased engagement."

Here are a few more tweets emanating from my Macbook Pro yesterday:

@PeterHimler @niemanlab's @jbenton cites @NPR's new ethics policy #truthicon News orgs need to make debunking a core purpose.

@PeterHimler @SunFoundation's @ellnmllr shows Poligraft, a way to see interconnections of entities in news articles. #Truthicon

@PeterHimler Regret the Error's editor @craigsilverman, formerly @cjr now @Poynter: U.S. newspaper errors at highest level #truthicon

@PeterHimler @Mlsif recommends @cjoh's new book The Information Diet. Also, ask better questions [to quell misinformation]. #Truthicon

Today, the conference moves over to MIT for a hack day, according to MIT Media Lab's Ethan Zuckerman, designed to take a "more experimental approach" to the problem versus Harvard's "more systematic approach." "We'll focus on 'tractable' vs. 'intractable' questions, i.e., little experiments that can measurably thwart disinformation."

As for me, I'd love to be there, but I'm tied up disseminating fact-based information to the many influencers in the digital spheres on behalf of my clients. Thanks Colin Maclay and the Berkman team for putting on a most elucidating day.

Facebook's Story Time

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Thu, 01 Mar 2012 14:27:46 PST

So it's settled (or so I thought). The forward-thinking marketing maven's media universe was neatly divided into three categories: paid, earned and owned. This was codified in a Forrester post a couple of years back, and updated (by me) to include "shared" media - not as a fourth category, but rather as the desired outcome of an optimized mix of any or all of the previous three.

So this train of thought was cool for a while, until Facebook decided to take a bite of the Big Apple yesterday and in so doing throw a giant monkey wrench into a marketing paradigm that many of us finally thought we had our arms around.

The company gathered its many friends, fans and followers from the tech, media, PR, and advertising spheres for something called fMC where its top execs, and a few clients, unveiled Facebook Premium and a few other newly branded products.

(So much for the SEC's pre-IPO "quiet period.")

Here's the mantra with which every Facebook executive presenting sought to inculcate the live and online audience:

"We are in a revolution from ads to stories."

Hold it a sec. No more ads on Facebook? And doesn't story-telling firmly live in the PR pro's domain and serve as the primary reason the industry has a leg up on its marketing brethren in the "owned" media category? Is Facebook now insisting that social advertisers get on the story-telling soapbox if they expect to play in the company's 800+ million-strong walled sandbox?As Clickable writes in a post today:

"Facebook appears bent on shifting the focus to Page stories and is providing Timeline features that draw attention to prime content. These features include the ability to pin a post to the top of Timeline, the ability to highlight posts which will expand to occupy the width of a Page, and highlighted friend activity surfaced on the right side of Timeline. It's clear that Facebook is using Timeline to help businesses craft a more personal, almost human-like, story, which, in turn, makes direct selling much tougher to accomplish."

What's more, once a brand marketer builds its home page and fills it with its own (and its friends') stories, Facebook Premium will charge a premium (get it?) to evolve that story before the eyeballs of 85% of the brand's friends (and their friends and their friends). TechCrunch notes that right now:

"Amongst all the business-related news at FMC, Facebook revealed that the average news feed story from a user profile reaches just 16 percent of their friends. Your actively shared links, photos, and status updates probably reach much higher than 16 percent of your friends, while more inane auto-generated posts about new friendships, wall posts, and articles you read may only be seen by your closest buddies."

So instead of "shared" media as a natural bi-product of a mix of paid, earned and/or owned media, Facebook's plan will take a quasi-owned/paid "story" and collect a premium from marketers wishing to secure a bigger footprint on the dominant social network. CNET said:

"At first-ever Facebook marketing conference, the social network announces three features--Offers, Reach Generator, and Premium on Facebook--to help marketers better connect their brands with customers."

Facebook's Sheryl Sandberg Shares Stories

I have only touched upon a small piece of Facebook's brave new marketing paradigm - and I'm sure I got half of it wrong anyway.

Maybe Facebook knew something we didn't when it chose to hold its confab at the American Museum of Natural History? After all, history has a way of constantly evolving, i.e., nothing is written in stone.

The company smartly posted info and video about its new approach for social marketers here. Finally, I feel bad for Nick Burcher whose new book "Paid, Owned, Earned: Maximizing Marketing Returns in a Socially Connected World" may soon be in need of a revision.

Don't revise just yet, Nick, the New York Observer's BetaBeat titled its piece: "Facebook Premium: Ads Everywhere, Ads Everywhere, Ads: Sorry, Zuck, an ad is not a 'story.'"

Cool PR Tools

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Mon, 27 Feb 2012 16:39:02 PST

I've been tinkering of late with several tools for PR pros, and thought I'd share my observations. No I don't intend to extoll the purported PR value of Pinterest. My ears did perk when I learned that the hyperbolic social-pinning site reportedly is now the biggest traffic driver to women's magazine websites. Mashable's Lauran Indvik notes:

"Beginning this summer, Pinterest became the top social referrer for marthastewartweddings.com and marthastewart.com, sending more traffic to both properties than Facebook and Twitter combined."

Not too shabby. Still, all those faddish pieces on Pinterest for PR have me scratching my head...for now. Instead, I took a look at three PR-centric apps: GroupHigh, ToutApp and Muckrack Pro, all of which operate as subscription models with each tackling a different dimension of the "earned" piece of the media equation.

GroupHigh describes itself as:

a "blog outreach solution" that "provides a simple, yet powerful platform for firms that build and manage relationships with bloggers. Our clients don't build spreadsheets of blog data; GroupHigh automates the research of SEO, Social, and Blog-Relatedstatistics for them..."

The site set out to catalogue, rank, and make keyword searchable more than 1.3 million blogs in the U.S., Canada and the UK. Its engine gives the user a tool to find (and engage - yes contact info too where available) those bloggers who often are missing or have incomplete info in the large media databases like Cision or Vocus.

Also, at my urging, the company recently cast a wider net to capture bloggers at mainstream news outlets to its already substantive database of independent bloggers. As for the name, your guess is as good as mine. (Pass the bong?) Possible competitor: Blogdash.

ToutApp describes itself as:

"an email management platform that allows users to create and save email shortcuts and track when recipients open email."

For any PR person left in the lurch wondering about the fate of his or her perfect email pitch (that would be all of us), it is a revelation. The browser-based app lets you create an email pitch template, send it, and track whether the recipient viewed it, and if so, how many times and from what ISP and browser.

It's not fool proof. I've had replies from reporters I've pitched whose views Tout never registered. Still, if it's a read you want, Tout provides some relief -- for better or worse. The app, btw, was incubated in the 500 Startups accelerator program and includes Esther Dyson and Dave McClure as investors. Possible competitor: Silverpop.

MuckRack Pro has access to Twitter's firehose going back much longer than average Joes like you or me. Furthermore, Muckrack, founded by the same company that started Listorious and The Shorty Awards, focuses exclusively on big-time (i.e., mainstream) media and their journalists who are active on Twitter.

The site tracks, by topic, what thousands of reporters are saying or linking to. So if you're looking to learn in real time what reporters are tweeting about a company, client, issue or anything else for that matter, this is the place for you to search. It also has the ability to push tweets, by keyword, your way. Possible competitor: Bottlenose, though not exactly.

The Analyst Who Erred

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Tue, 21 Feb 2012 13:34:43 PST

I'm really liking my iPad 2, though perhaps less so now that it's a done-deal for a 4G-enabled iPad 3 come March 7. Oh well. Personal technology marches on, albeit too fast sometimes for my comfort.

The one significant drawback with the iPad -- something everyone seems to acknowledge -- is its inability to efficiently process words, crunch numbers or create presentations. I'm tempted to buy a bluetooth keyboard or even that plastic overlay to ease the burden.

Could this be the answer?

Nah. The problem seems much bigger than ergonomics. I need MS Office! Yes. I said it. I like Microsoft. (Bing excluded)

While I migrated away from Windows-based machines several years ago, MS Word, Excel and to a shrinking degree, Powerpoint, remain my default productivity tools.

Imagine my delight when I heard the good news this week from -- of all places -- Rupert Murdoch's "killer" iPad news app The Daily. Matt Hickey wrote:

"An exact launch date is unknown, but the design team has since wrapped up the project, meaning it could be released in the coming weeks."

Please please please be true. After the rumors first started swirling around the much-needed MS Office suite for iOS, some analyst decided to throw cold water on the whole meme. He set in motion a media frenzy wherein AllThings big and small followed his lead to kabash the idea. Here's the essence:

"If you’re hoping Microsoft might someday release a version of Office for Apple’s iPad, prepare to be disappointed."

Writing today for TheNextWeb, Alex Wilhelm sheds some light on the rumor mill and frankly, the sometimes misguided influence of a so-called influencer.

"Here’s the gist: nearly every analyst out there is just that – a person thinking and saying things. A few are fantastic, but they are the rare exception, the anti-rule, if you will. Mostly, analysts simply want to get their name out there, and do so by tossing trial balloons into the air.It wastes our time."

Piper Jaffray's Gene Muster

Maybe this also speaks to the speed with which journalists of all stripes nowadays are compelled to publish, and the commensurate likelihood of their mistakes metastasizing?

As analysts go, I think I'll stick with Apple-prognosticator Gene Muster. So, Gene, when did you say Apple TV will make its appearance?

Pinterest's Growth Scheme: Genius or Sleazy?

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Fri, 17 Feb 2012 11:27:27 PST

Pinterest. Pinterest. Pinterest. Yikes, the noise is deafening. But will the latest social sharing site have legs? In yesterday's fawning review in The New York Times, David Pogue cites Pinterest's claim to be:

"...the fastest Web site in history to break the 10-million-visitors-a-month threshold."

Fortune's Dan Primack asks

"How to slow Pinsanity. Nothing gets tech bloggers more hot and bothered than the next new social media thing, and right now that thing is Pinterest."

Dealbook's Evelyn Rusli chimed in with this tweet:

And the Wall Street Journal showered the site with a nice feature that rightly asks where's the money?

"Pinterest's Rite of Web Passage—Huge Traffic, No Revenue."

So how did this new darling of the social set catch fire so fast?

I'll tell you how.The site scours your Facebook friends. It then emails you with the news that one of them is now following you and suggests that you follow them back. (--->)

Here's the rub: your Facebook friend who "started following all your pinboards" is completely oblivious to the fact that he or she has done so.

You heard me. Pinterest has exploded its user base through a fairly deceptive means of email marketing. Brad McCarty observed this nearly a week ago in his Next Web piece titled

"Pinterest is spamming your Facebook friends’ email with fake connection requests."

Look. I get it. Every social startup needs some gimmick to ramp its user numbers. Spotify and Turntable.fm created cache (and demand) through their invite-only schemes. And how long did most of us everyday joes have to wait to get a taste of the "new" Twitter or Google+?

But the Pinterest scheme seems, well, a bit sleazy, if not outright unethical. I mean who ever gave the site permission to exploit one's Facebook friends for its own aggrandizement (and, incidentally, the boffo headlines that resulted)? Is it genius or simply scurrilous?

Didn't we just hear about Path's violation of Apple's TOS by accessing one's address book data? And today, the Wall Street Journal broke the story of how Google insidiously bypassed the iPhone, iPad's and Mac desktop's default settings for Safari that blocked access to one's browsing history?

After seeing Pogue's review, I dropped him a note about Pinterest's Facebook friends scheme. He wrote back saying he hadn't noticed. I then ran into Buzzfeed's Jonah Peretti just before he was to take the stage for his Social Media Week keynote yesterday. We chatted about Ben Smith's success in migrating his tens of thousands of Twitter followers from Politico to Buzzfeed. I then mentioned the remarkable hype around Pinterest and my observations about what's actually feeding that hype.

I attributed it to the questionable email marketing scheme and asked why he thought people weren't more vocal about this nefarious approach. He responded that unlike another startup that pushed the ethical bounds of email marketing -- Plaxo -- people actually like using Pinterest, and because of that, are willing to give it a pass.

OK People. Pin on!

Whitney, Twitter & SONY's Tin Ear

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 15:24:34 PST

Whitney Houston's untimely demise produced all sorts of fodder for those following the machinations of the media and marketing worlds. Here's a topline starting with a tweet from Mashable's Pete Cashmore:

@petecashmore Twitter Breaks News of Whitney Houston Death 27 Minutes Before Press RT @mashable From the Mashable write-up: "Twenty-seven minutes before mainstream media broke the news of Whitney Houston’s death on Saturday night, the story was on Twitter, reported by a man who tweeted the news out to his 14 followers."

Of course, Twitter broke the news. Mainstream journalists are neither omniscient nor omnipresent. Didn't some randoid in Pakistan unwittingly raise the first red flag when he tweeted about those helicopters hovering over Osama Bin Laden's hideaway? Or wasn't a man-on-the-street first to observe and tweet Captain Sully Sullenberger's miraculous landing of a jetliner in Hudson River? Get used to it.

As for the mainstream media, the AP's "official" tweet of Ms. Houston's sudden death was itself re-tweeted some 10,000 times, which is not too shabby by anyone's standards. Maybe AP's new social media editor Eric Carvin now has the ammunition to convince his bosses to lighten up and get in on the Twitter thang, which we'll be discussing Tuesday (2/14) in a session titled "Socializing the News." You can watch a live webcast here starting at 12:15pm ET. Topsy Media reported:

"2.5 million tweets an hour...with link accolades going to MSNBC for the most retweeted article after the news broke. It had 13,000 tweets linking to it. Friends, musicians and celebrities also took to Twitter: Rapper Lil Wayne held the record with over 29,000 retweets. Justin Bieber had 15,000, Nicki Minaj (8,739), Katy Perry (8,394), Mariah Carey (6,305) and Christina Aguillera (4,321)."

Grammys by the Numbers (via CBS/Bluefin Labs)

Whitney's death also helped the Grammy Awards oust the Super Bowl telecast as the mayor of all socially driven TV programs. Some 31 million people commented on the telecast. On the BostInno site, Bluefin Labs crunched the numbers:

"Super Bowl XLVI enticed people to leave 12.2 million social media comments about the game. I abstained because it hurts to type when you’ve chewed your fingernails off in anticipation. And then, just a week later, the Grammy Awards trumped the record set by those who watched the second worst Super Bowl ever. Thirteen million comments were made about the 54th annual ceremony, which represents a 2,280% increase from the year before."

If your keen on the second screen phenomenon (and in NYC this week for Social Media Week), try to stop by Hearst Tower on Thursday at 10am to hear a session I helped organize called "The Dawn of Companion TV." An executive from Bluefin Labs will be joined by execs from HBO/Cinemax, Bravo, Umami TV, and GetGlue in a panel moderated by Natan Edelsburg of Lost Remote, which keeps tabs on all things social TV.

Finally, on a more sobering note -- not that Whitney's passing could be any more sobering -- we learn that within 30 minutes of her death, SONY Music raised the prices for her music from iTunes to Amazon. Here's how VentureBeat led with its piece titled "Shameful...":

"As much criticism as record labels receive for how they treat artists, Sony Music might take the cake. The company pulled the ultimate in shameful activities this weekend by raising the price on Whitney Houston’s Ultimate Collection album on iTunes and Amazon within 30 minutes of her death on Saturday."

Wouldn't SONY have gained so much more by reducing the price of its Whitney Houston catalogue? Instead, the company, which has had its share of problems in recent years, will have to face the music once again for having a tin ear.

UPDATE (Feb 14): SONY MUSIC says price rise was "a mistake."

The Social Majority

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 09:04:51 PST

In a November 1969 speech, the much beleaguered U.S. President Richard Nixon borrowed a page from the Frank Luntz book of deceptive, but catchy phrases when he said:

"And so tonight—to you, the great silent majority of my fellow Americans—I ask for your support."

The term silent majority entered the American lexicon. It was a euphemism for all those domiciled Americans Mr. Nixon believed represented the prevailing sentiment on the issues of the day, but lacked the wherewithal to express themselves. Personally, I never believed that a majority of Americans -- silent or not -- supported the policies of this infamous President, especially as it concerned the Vietnam War. (The GOP had an uncanny way of misconstruing reality even back then.)

Surveying the current political landscape, I believe that today's silent majority -- the ideological antithesis of those Mr. Nixon imagined -- has found an effective means to have their voices heard, often from the comfort of their own homes. Three recent incidents have led me to this conclusion: the Komen reversal, the SOPA defeat & BofA's withdrawal of its $5 debit card fee.

As Congress debated both SOPA and PIPA -- two bills that could indelibly change the open nature of the Internet -- the social majority flexed its muscles. It produced a groundswell of popular defiance that manifested on Twitter, Facebook and Google+, which in turn migrated into mainstream news reports. The social majority produced such a loud drumbeat, it compelled any self-preserving lawmaker to withdraw his/her support for the bills.

SOPA Congressional Support: Before & After

A Huffington Post infographic-driven post titled "Stop SOPA: How People And Social Media Changed Lawmakers' Minds," asked:

"So what changed these politicians minds about the Stop Online Piracy Act and its Senate equivalent, the Protect IP Act? And what got other lawmakers -- who had previously said nothing about the two bills -- to suddenly come out against them?

A new graphic from visual.ly suggests both the blackout and pressure from citizens who became more aware of what the two bills could do to certain websites deserve credit for the reversals."

As for the Susan B. Komen debacle on which every PR pundit I know has already weighed in, it's significant to note how the social majority once again showed their strength via their keyboards and mobile devices.

This newly empowered plurality of Americans forced the organization into a 180-degree change in policy and its in-house Republican operative (who I suspect colluded with the Florida Congressman) to resign. Writng for Social Media Today, Glenn Gaudet warns:

"Brands beware. The era of social advocacy is here, and you better be engaged, or the good work you’ve done for years can be placed in jeopardy in a minute. Just ask the Susan G Komen Foundation which is reeling due to a backlash fueled by social media."

From Gaudet's post: Consider that a search of the “Susan G. Komen Foundation” on Facebook now yields a growing list of anti-Komen pages as the top of the search results.

Things did not fare much better over on Twitter. The Komen Foundation’s Twitter posting activity prior to the crisis was minimal, which is to be expected, but when the crisis hit, their reach grew to nearly 1 million.

These examples provide a glimpse of the power of the social majority to persuade and produce tangible results. This is especially significant as we enter what will be the most acrimonious election seasons in modern history.

In spite of Mr. Obama's shortcomings, 83% of Americans supported the policy proposals he floated in his State of the Union address. This fact alone bodes well for his political prospects -- that is, of course, if the social majority rallies behind him.

Facebook Search on Komen after its Fateful Decision

HuffPost's namesake Arianna Huffington weighed in on the phenomenon:

"The recent reversal by the Susan G. Komen foundation of its decision to no longer fund grants to Planned Parenthood has, rightly, been hailed by many as a victory for the galvanizing power of the Internet. This comes not long after similar instances of Internet-fueled wins, such as the reversal of Bank of America's decision to impose a $5 debit card fee late last year, and the derailing of the Stop Online Piracy Act in January."

Ms. Huffington continues:

"Of course, the social media element in this story can't be overstated. It's what gave the public the power to fight back against this overt politicization. In fact, the story is a case study in how radically social media have changed the way institutions relate to those they purport to serve. And it's not just by giving the public a microphone -- but also by serving as a real-time X-ray machine able to see through and vet motives and decision-making rationales."

Twitter Activity: Komen vs. Planned Parethood

It is my opinion that Mr. Nixon's once-silent majority -- to whom social media has now given voice -- are not whom Mr. Nixon envisioned when he called on them for their support. In fact, I'm sure he is turning over in his grave at the thought of who they actually are and what their new-found power of political persuasion portends. I imagine his progeny also are unsettled by this.

Commander in Control

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 16:51:31 PST

One of the points I had hoped to emphasize in my last post was that Twitter, blogging, Facebook and Google+ offer an even more controlled communications environment than what a fastidiously prepped/messaged executive might face in a media interview.

David Carr may give Rupert Murdoch props for his more authentic Twitter persona, but it's Mr. Murdoch who's thumbing his nose at Mr. Carr and his colleagues in the Fourth Estate whose journalistic scrutiny Twitter has allowed him to sidestep.

This week, we're witness to another example of this "command(er) and control" approach to making one's POV heard in a less fettered manner. Our President participated in a Google+ Hangout. In her piece titled "Obama finds virtual end-around to bypass the White House press," Amy Parnes wrote in The Hill:

"The virtual interview is part of a larger effort by the White House to connect directly to Americans without going through the news media."

In his defense of Mr. Obama's ~~media~~ public availability, White House press secretary Jay Carney said:

"I know we’re not picking the questions," then quipped: "Would that we could."

Journalists were not too pleased:

"I worry sometimes that the administration subverts the Wild West appeal of new media by rather scrupulously scrubbing and screening questions — like they have done in various new media town-hall settings," said Julie Mason, a talk show host on Sirius-XM.

Here's the full hour-long session:

Truth be told, communications pros have more options available to them than ever before. I, for one, am not discounting the value of "earned" media, especially when one considers the still-dominant digital and social footprints generated by stories originating in stalwart news orgs such as The New York Times, Bloomberg or Reuters. Didn't HP's study of some widely shared stories on Twitter validate this?

On the flip side of the coin, when was the last time Google subjected itself to a media interview? When it wants to make news, it simply posts what it wishes to say on one of the company's blogs. Those that stalk Google soon are tweeting away until the world knows what Google wanted it to know.

This "owned media" strategy for delivering unfiltered prose is especially effective when it emanates from a company in the media spotlight or a recognized newsmaker or newsmaking enterprise. As Tom Foremski astutely noted, all companies are media companies today. Now we just have to figure out how best to call out those who use their new-found platforms-to-persuade for nefarious ends.

Then again, most don't. I'm looking forward to CNBC's Darren Rovell's Google+ Hangout on Monday following the Giants victory over the Pats this weekend!

Communications Slop

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 13:17:02 PST

"The modern chief executive lives behind a wall of communications operatives, many of whom ladle out slop meant to obscure rather than reveal."

David Carr

-- David Carr of The New York Times lamenting the way many CEOs have long interacted with members of his profession. Not surprisingly, he lays the blame on communications professionals. The quote appears in his must-read column today on Rupert Murdoch's sudden embrace of Twitter. More on that below.

He's right, and wrong. Yes, the PR pro is charged with advising C-Suite executives on what to anticipate in a media interview, and how best to respond to journalists' questions. Frankly, why should only the reporter's editorial agenda be met? Shouldn't the company also use the opportunity to advance its agenda? If not, why grant the interview in the first place?

And just as a good reporter will do some homework in advance of engaging a newsmaker, the better PR people among us will strive to wrap their arms around where a reporter's journalistic proclivities will take the conversation. In fact, there is no shortage of ex-journalists making their livings as "media trainers," though few of them directly interface with reporters to ensure that the goals of both sides of the media relations equation are met. (We take special pride in pegging reporter's questions in advance.)

Obfuscation? Maybe in the eyes of the journalist, but from the perspective of the CEO, C-Suite or Board of Directors, this is a necessary step for advancing a company's POV, let alone enhancing its reputation.

Mr. Carr does make a good point when he infers that the CEO has traditionally hidden behind the company's communications (or general counsel as was more likely the case). This began to change a bit as corporate blogging took root. The CEO of Sun, vice-chairman of General Motors, founder of Zappos were just a few of the corporate chieftans who embraced blogging early on as a means to share their (mostly) unfettered musings. It was also a way to bypass journalistic scrutiny to speak directly to core constituencies.

UMass Study of Corp. Blogging Among Inc. 500 ('09-'11)

Ironically, it was probably the company's PR department that nudged their CEOs into this brave new medium, though a new study of the Inc. 500 by UMass Dartmouth indicates that corporate blogging may now be on the wane:

"Small businesses are backing away from blogging as a marketing tool and shifting to other social media outlets. Bye-bye, company blog—and hello, Facebook? The number of Inc. 500 companies maintaining corporate blogs has dropped."

Rupert Murdoch (graphic via Gawker)

Are they being replaced by shorter-form, and less time-consuming tweets? Perhaps. The catalyst for Mr. Carr's piece was the unlikely embrace of Twitter by the octogenarian (and lately much beleaguered) CEO of NewsCorp, Rupert Murdoch. Carr writes:

"But, Twitter has the potential to cut past all that clutter. Given its ubiquity, there’s a chance to get a glimpse into the thinking of otherwise unapproachable executives, and sometimes even have a real dialogue with them. No one can be forced to use Twitter, but some people, even captains of industry, cannot resist."

What's ironic about Mr. Carr's take on the PR profession is that the "flacks" he accuses of masking the company's real CEO are again the same folks who advised Mr. Murdoch to take to the Twittersphere. The strategy was simple. After Murdoch was hammered in the media stemming from his appearance in the British courts and subsequent revelations, someone on News Corp's comms team had an epiphany: let's use Twitter to humanize him. It worked like a charm. Mr. Carr end his piece with this:

"Mr. Murdoch’s desire to be seen as a paragon of civility in any media realm, old or new, is rich. But give him credit for engaging in the world we all now live in and for not losing sleep over what pops out."

Ironically, News Corp's top communications officer resigned today. Was it the phone-hacking scandal or Rupert unleashed on Twitter? We'll probably never know for sure.

Those Five-Star Reviews

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 10:01:36 PST

How important are consumer-generated reviews in your purchase-making decisions? If you're like me, the answer is VERY. When assessing hotels, the write-ups on Virtual Tourist and Trip Advisor invariably make or break my booking. The reviews on Yelp play the deciding role in tipping the restaurant scales. Same with Fandango for movie reviews.

Then there's the granddaddy of them all, Amazon, which recognized the intrinsic value of its customers' reviews early on in the game. It even applied for and was granted a patent.

As I think about it, nearly all of the big-branded retail websites today allow customers to weigh in -- good, bad and ugly. More importantly, these "peer" reviews have attained such influence, they've pretty much usurped the influence of professional gadget, restaurant, and film reviewers at media outlets like CNET, New York and TIME magazine, respectively, who do this full-time for a living.

One, two, five stars...how ripe are these reviews for gaming? Wouldn't an enterprising marketing executive fork over some dollars to elevate the ratings for his company's product or service? A computer scientist at the University of Illinois tells The New York Times:

“More people are depending on reviews for what to buy and where to go, so the incentives for faking are getting bigger,” said Mr. Liu. “It’s a very cheap way of marketing.”

A few years back, I wrote about how one cruise line (smartly) cultivated some prolific bloggers whom they identified as rabid fans of the cruise line. Consumerist cried foul, implying that the company was resorting (excuse the pun) to a pay-for-positive-play scheme.

The ubiquity of consumer reviews on e-commerce sites has given rise to more sophisticated methods to manage this increasingly important determinant of purchase decisions -- from the perspectives of both retailer and manufacturer. When it was learned that an author of a book being sold on Amazon had pseudonymously written a review of his own work, Amazon stepped up efforts to shore up the sanctity of its reviews. Or so I thought at the time.

A piece in today's New York Times lets shoppers know that there's still some gaming going on. One firm made a business out of selling rating stars for $10 a piece.

"By the time VIP Deals ended its rebate on Amazon.com late last month, its leather case for the Kindle Fire was receiving the sort of acclaim once reserved for the likes of Kim Jong-il."

Of course, it's one thing for the retailer to monitor and moderate the reviews posted to its site -- if that's even scalable at Amazon given the number of reviews it hosts -- and another to put the kabash on companies outside its control who seek to capitalize on this new "very cheap way of marketing" that permeates the world of e-commerce. The Times alerted Amazon to its findings, which prompted Amazon to reply that:

"...its guidelines prohibited compensation for customer reviews. A few days later, it deleted all the reviews for the case, which itself was listed as unavailable. Then it took down the product page itself.

Asked why Amazon did not seem to notice that at least a few consumers called into question the VIP deal on its own site, a spokeswoman declined to comment. Nor would she say exactly what happened to VIP’s other products, like the Vipertek VTS-880 mini stun gun, which also disappeared from the retailer."

If the world's largest online retailer can't fully get its grips around the duplicity that exists within its consumer reviews section, just think about the myriad other online retailers hosting such reviews.

Maybe I'll rethink my blind reliance on these reviews when I purchase my new video camera, and head back to CNET or gdgt whose motto is "Reviews from people who actually know." As for pricing and interface, Amazon, you still rule.

Update: Received a link to Big River Review via email after my post appeared.

Pando's 'Cuda

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 14:23:28 PST

In case you hadn't noticed, a very refreshing bi-product has risen from the ashes of the rather acrimonious breakup between TechCrunch founder Michael Arrington and his wealth-creating nemesis, AOL. The tech/social news-savvy site PandoDaily, led by former TechCrunch ed-at-large Sarah Lacy (aka @sarahcuda on Twitter), burst onto the scene only a week or so ago and already is a must-follow in my stream.

PandoDaily's Sarah Lacy

Some initially dubbed it TechCrunch II, but I'm finding PandoDaily to be less of a mix of frenetic, short breaking news stories about the latest start-ups to land notable VCs' millions or the coolest new apps and gadgets. Ms. Lacy offers a more thoughtful take on the issues swirling around the whole media-tech-social-finance ecosystem.

The jury of course is still out, but based on the posts emanating from the keyboard of the seasoned Ms. Lacy, PandoDaily is destined for greatness -- which today means influence.

Google chief Larry Page

Take for example her post today. It delves a little deeper into the whole Google-Twitter-Facebook smackdown wherein Google finds itself fending off allegations that it has gamed its vaunted organic search results in favor of its own socially generated content.

Search Plus Your World (or SPYW for the digital cognoscenti) supposedly surfaces Google+ postings to the exclusion of those generated relevantly from Twitter or Facebook.

"I’ve heard from several Googlers who are embarrassed and unhappy with the company’s silence the last two days as the core of the company’s values have been called into question," Lacey writes.

I mentioned this perniciuous PR problem in a post last week, which prompted a call from Google PR -- not about SPYW, but rather to ask me to update the company's position on some ethically challenged third-party operatives in Kenya hired to build Google's local advertising business. (I already had.)

Ms. Lacy pegged her post to Google co-founder/CEO Larry Page's internal "ultimatum" on Friday to fellow Googlers:

"This is the path we’re headed down – a single unified, ‘beautiful’ product across everything. If you don’t get that, then you should probably work somewhere else."

Ms. Lacy peppers her post with links to Business Insider's Henry Blodget, Chris Sacca and former TC colleague MG Siegler posting to Pando. She didn't link to this TechCrunch-posted video interview with Brad Noble on the subject:

She continues:

"The quasi-ultimatum caught our source by surprise and underscores just how important this new direction is for Page. It also helps explain why Google’s PR was so silent since evidence of the Don’t Be Evil toolbar came out yesterday. If this is the future of the company and it flies in the face of Google’s stated values, what can they say?"

Now we know how Ms. Lacy got her Twitter handle . (Hint: it wasn't derived from her last name.)

My Big Messy Social Life

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Mon, 23 Jan 2012 07:49:04 PST

My social life is a mess. And I know I'm not the only one mired in the digital muck. Here's the lowdown, which stands in contrast to just two years ago:

I'm feeling pressure to bolster my presence on the red hot Pinterest even though the app (on Chrome) couldn't find the image of Danny Meyer's new downtown dining spot on the home page of Eater.com, which I had hoped to add to my hot NYC restaurant board.

I still get daily emails from Empire Avenue even though it's been months since I've traded in anyone's personal stock.

Someone just started following me on Google Schemer. Geesh. I forgot I registered for that one.

I continue to use Google's Blogger as my primary blogging platform, but the lure of Wordpress and Tumblr grows.

I have taken a few photos using Instagram on my iPad, but it's a bit clunky and the utility remains a mystery to me. (I suppose it's really made for the iPhone.) I guess I'll wait for the next-gen social media-enabled DSLRs.

Twitter is a lifeline. I say this in spite of the spousal grief I endure when checking the stream at the dinner table. It is the one channel I actively manage. I also have it linked to Ping.fm, which syndicates my tweets to other social channels. Also, the advent of social news aggregators that auto-curate content from those I follow, such News.me and Zite, is proving a wonder.

Bit.ly's been great to gauge the traction of my tweeted links and blog posts. 2012 will be the year when this dominant URL shortening service will do something big-time with all that data it collects.

Plancast is another channel to which I pay a fair amount of attention. It lets me know the events for which my friends in the social spheres have registered. NEWS rthios weekend is that its CEO may let it go by the wayside. Here's a must-read on Plancast's fate. I suppose it has replaced Dopplr, even though Dopplr's more geared to travel.

I am a member of Yelp, and have even reviewed a restaurant or two. I suppose if the eating establishment is exceptional good or atrociously bad, I'll take the time to contribute my opinion. Otherwise, it's a great resource to find local dining spots. I'm liking its iPad app too. Same deal with Virtual Tourist and TripAdvisor.

The consumption and socialization of music has its share of channels. Spotify allows one to tap my and my friends' iTunes files and listen on the go. I had signed up for the lowest-level premium account, but didn't see any added value so I scuttled that. Also, the UK-birthed music site just restricted the ability to experience free unlimited listening. Of note, Ticketmaster's new Facebook app has Spotify baked in, while Facebook just bowed its own Listen With feature.

The other site I played with for a while until it became too much of a time sync is Turntable.fm. I created a standard avatar, found the room with the music genre I liked (yes, I did find some rooms with deeper cut from classic artists), then queued up to take one of the five turntables on which I could expose the other avatars in the room to my taste. Tunes came could be uploaded from my own collection or gleaned from the site's massive archive. Spending four hours/week as a progressive FM radio station DJ in college was cool. Today? Not so much.

If you thought the socialization of music was big news, keep an eye on what's happening in the TV-viewing space and how mobile devices are bringing the promise of interactive TV to life. Sites like GetGlue, Miso, Umami, IntoNow and others have added a new dimension to the TV viewing experience -- one that benefits viewers, programmers and advertisers. I've checked in a few times on GetGlue, but I'm a little skittish about sharing my sometimes pedestrian viewing tastes on Twitter. Also, no dopamine released for me when getting a badge for watching a particular show.

I also like the synchronously-delivered content and conversation model of Umami TV (a client). Social Media Week plans a panel on the topic Feb 16.

One can't help but be impressed by the success of Quora, at least in terms of the size of its user community and the amount of original content it produces. I hear the site is planning a Pinterest pivot and will keep an eye on that. How do I know the site is successful? Try posting a question not already posed (and answered) by its members.

After meeting the founders of vYou, the social video startup at SXSW last year, I registered for an account. VYou is kind of like Quora for the moving image set. I set up my page, but only received one question (out of left field). The NY-based company just did a major update to the site, so we'll see where that nets out.

After Delicious melted down, I quickly migrated all my past links to Diigo, only to re-migrate them back to Delicious after it was acquired by AVOS, led by YouTube founders Chad Hurley and Steve Chen.

Talking about YouTube, I find it useful to post video I shoot (e.g., #2 and #3 sons' sailing regattas and lacrosse games). More recently, it's been a great outlet to upload (and link to) video clips from the industry events I cover, e.g., NYTM. Right now, my YouTube page is not all that social, but I suspect 2012 may bring some changes in this regard.

Having ignored Farmville, I have been liking Zynga's Words with Friends -- Scrabble for the social set. It's a total time sync. When you play with strangers, however, the lack of a time limit for adding letters can be frustrating. I just wonder how Hasbro missed the boat on this one. (Shades of Scrabulous?)

I continue to post to Google+ with its 90 million regular (?) users, but wish there was an easy way to merge my Google-hosted business account with my free GMail (to which all my Google tools and apps are linked). Thank goodness for my #2 son's roommate who works at Google. He introduced me to GMail's Incognito window.

I like what LinkedIn has done with shared updates on profile changes, and the channel's new ability to add "skills" to one's profile. I also signed up for Job Change Notifier, a nifty little third-party app developed by PaperG co-founder Roger Lee. It tells me when anyone in my LinkedIn network has changed jobs. Now I just need to figure out how to take all the business cards I've scanned via CardScan and merge them with LinkedIn's newly acquired CardMunch.

Foursquare still gives me that dopamine release, especially when collecting new badges or leap-frogging one of the digital influencers I follow. I'm, not too happy with Blackberry's Foursquare app and its frequent inability to find venues. This frustration may very well be the straw that sent this camel to iOS.

Facebook, the elephant in the social room, has so many bells & whistles that one would be hard-pressed to find anyone fully utilizing them. Maybe one day I'll collect and digitize all my life's media assets and add them to timeline? Should I try to accomplish this Herculean task in time for FB's IPO, which may also coincide with the one billion-user milestone? Then again, do I really want Facebook monetizing my life for its own aggrandizement, let alone that of its advertisers & marketing partners?

PR for Startups: Deconstructed

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 06:34:45 PST

Blog Maverick

It turns out that my post last week about item #11 on Mark Cuban's list of 12 Rules for Startups -- "Never Hire a PR Firm" -- set off a firestorm that prompted a more nuanced response from Mr. Cuban.

In his expanded view, Mr. Cuban did not disavow his disdain for the PR industry. In fact, he even attempted to school the PR community by drafting a sample pitch letter. More on that in a moment.

My first post mentioning Mark Cuban came in August 2005 during the nascent days of this blog. A then-ascendent New York Times business reporter named Andrew Ross Sorkin had just published a less-than-flattering profile piece on the founder of Broadcast.com and owner of the Dallas Mavericks. As a fellow blogger and admirer of Mr. Cuban, I dashed off an email to him early that morning offering some free advice on what he might do to set the record straight.

Andrew Ross Sorkin

I didn't hear back, but about 90 minutes later, a line-by-line retort of Mr. Sorkin's story appeared on his blog. It turns out the interview was conducted via email, so Cuban simply reposted the unedited Q&A, adding his own clarifying remarks. (Very cool early example of "We the Media.")

Taking a page from the newly crowned NBA champ, I thought I would deconstruct his less-than-ebullient take on the PR profession, at least as it relates to providing value for the startup community.

Mr. Cuban:

"The first problem with hiring a PR firm is cost. Cash is always in short supply in startups. Given all the potential places that you need cash in a startup, is the company better served having that cash available to potentially keep the company alive another day, week or month ? Or hiring a PR person? I would rather have the cash."

In effect, Mr. Cuban is correct. When should a startup consider retaining PR counsel and why: for initial positioning, funding news, product launch, partnerships...? The cost, however, will vary from agency to agency, and often is considerably less compared to other marketing disciplines. A small consultancy can run as little as $5,000/month, solo practitioners even less. Mid-sized agencies tend to go for $10K+/month, and larger agencies $15-20K+. (I'm generalizing here.)

Mr. Cuban:

"The next issue is time. The thing about PR people is this: while they may have great contacts and they can get articles placed, they are not capable of doing a vulcan mind meld. They don’t automatically know all the elements about your business that you want to convey to media, partners, customers, potential employees and even potential investors."

Tipping Point's Art Chang Judges Ultralight Startups

Yes, it's can be a time sync to have to continuously educate a third-party vendor on a startup's underlying technology, its audience, business goals, etc.

However, as I said in the comments section of his post, the startup should hire a rep who's a quick study and will take the time to fully understand the competitive landscape, what distinguishes the startup’s product or service, and most importantly, what keeps the founders up at night. This is where most firms fall down.

The very best in our business will fully immerse themselves in the client's DNA, freeing up the founders to build the business, while leaving the communications piece to the communications professionals.

Mr. Cuban:

"But the reality is that for the vast majority of startups, particularly tech related startups, most of the media that is going to benefit you out of the gate is trade related or local media. And these people are ALWAYS looking for stories to write. They want to hear from unique companies."

Shoutem Showcased at Ultralight Startups Event Jan 12

Not necessarily. Tech trades, bloggers and even local media are not "always" looking for stories. And if the are, they tend nowadays to be primarily influenced by those whom they follow on Twitter and Google+, their Facebook friends, and their RSS readers and social news aggregators like News.me and Zite. An email from the founder of a cool new tech start-up, no matter how cogent or compelling, will rarely be opened. In-demand tech journos received hundreds a day.

A seasoned PR professional may have represented many startups and thus be known by the reporter. Who stands a better chance of gaining traction: an unrecognized founder of an unbranded and untested company or the PR person with whom the reporter has worked before?

Mr. Cuban:

"It’s amazing how often a simple email to a writer for a trade publication or local media will get a response. The key to getting a response is being short, sweet , hyperbole free and to the point. You have to sell your differentiation in a paragraph.

Subject : Tracking Traffic to Reduce Vacancies

Dear Real Estate Industry Writer,

My name is Mark Cuban. I would love to tell you more about our company motionloft.com. We have internally developed a sensor that when placed on the side of a building can track in real time the number of people and cars that pass by. Motionloft is being used by building owners in San Francisco and New York to lease space by showing potential tenants the exact amount of foot traffic in front of a store location. Its being used by tenants to determine the best time to open, close and to offer specific products in services.

In one test case we would love to share with you, a tenant decided to rent a store front and go against the conventional wisdom of the area and open for lunch…with great results. They made this decision based exclusively on the data provided by motionloft.com

If you would like to see more information about motionloft.com and how your readers could benefit, just let me know!

all the best

mark

Nice pitch, Mark, but it ain't happening for you. Yes, if that pitch were coming from the owner of The Dallas Mavs, as opposed to Joe Startup, it might get an airing. To your credit, there's much good in the query including a lack of hyperbole and rhetoric, brevity and a positive, conversational tone. These are sorely missing in many of today's PR pitches.

Robert Scoble & Michael Arrington

Still, the reality is that tech journos are drowning in hundreds of daily story suggestions -- mostly irrelevant -- but many from pathbreaking companies whose products or services actually merit editorial consideration.

The ability to capture the limited bandwidth of a tech or startup beat reporter takes time, trust, perseverance, ingenuity and frankly, a little luck. Clearly a company's co-founder has better things to do with his or her time.

Mark Cuban:

So back to startups hiring a PR firm. Yes, you can get there from here with a PR firm, but im a believer that you accomplish much, much more with direct relationships than by using an intermediary. And that cash you keep in the bank can be the difference between staying alive as a small business, or not.

Spotted at Ultralight Startups Showcase in NYC

As I said in my initial post and in the comment section on your blog, it matters little who’s opening the doors to reporters and digital influencers. In fact, I agree that it's preferable to have the client interface directly with the journalist. We're perfectly happy to remain in the background, providing advance prep, positioning and the narrative. We're also there for the client who's not familiar with the delicate dance that exists between the newsmaker and journalist, and more importantly, what it takes to tango.

What value can one place on the PR counselor who prevents a journalist from skewering the client's business or POV, or one who is so passionate, articulate and infectious that the client can sleep at night knowing that his or her interests are well represented? What would you pay for that, Mark?

Don't Be Evil

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 15:44:54 PST

Scott McNealy

In March of 1998, the straight-talking CEO of Sun Microsystems travelled to Washington to testify before Congress on the then-monopolistic ways of one famous tech company out of Redmond, WA. Scott McNealy, with whom I sat the following morning in the green room of NBC "Today," had this to say:

"The only technology I'd rather own than Windows would be English," McNealy said. "All of those who use English would have to pay me a couple hundred dollars a year just for the right to speak English. And then I can charge you upgrades when I add new alphabet characters like 'n' and 't.' It would be a wonderful business."

That testimony is reminiscent of the battle brewing in social circles between Twitter and Google, which this week, changed its indexing algorithm to capture the content generated on Google+, to the apparent exclusion of Twitter's hundreds of millions of tweets per day. Obviously, Twitter was not pleased. Its general counsel tweeted this example:

"Folks asked for examples,” he wrote. “Here’s what a user searching for ‘@WWE’ will be shone on the new @Google."

Results of Google search of @WWE (via Mashable)

Google shot back saying it does not index the @ symbol. The Electronic Privacy Infomation Center (EPIC), for its part, wrote the FTC requesting an investigation:

"Google is changing the results displayed by its search engine to include data from its social network, such as photos or blog posts made by Google+ users, as well as the public Internet," EPIC wrote. "Although data from a user's Google+ contacts is not displayed publicly, Google's changes make the personal data of users more accessible. Users can opt out of seeing personalized search results, but cannot opt out of having their information found through Google search."

Dick Costolo

It was only last October that Twitter CEO Dick Costolo seemed to shrug off the challenge by Google+ and Facebook:

"We think we can reach every person on the planet, we think the way to do that is to simplify it," he said. "Over time, Google+ and Facebook will be more and more different than the experience we want to pass onto our users."

Now that Google has flexed its search muscles in the social spheres, Twitter is crying foul:

“Bad day for the Internet,” tweeted Alex Macgillivray, Twitter’s general counsel. "We think that’s bad for people, publishers, news organizations and Twitter users.”

We will keep a close eye on developments in this epic battle given the implications it has for any person, product or service hoping to build a bigger social footprint.

Separately, Google has another PR controversy brewing that may pose an even bigger affront to the search/ad monopoly's informal motto of "Don't Be Evil.' In an effort to establish a beachhead of ad/website business in Kenya (of all places) from small local merchants, Google's sales teams insidiously tapped the customers of a Kenyan company called Mocality for its business leads.

Mocality set up a sting and soon learned that Google operatives were behind the sales overtures to its customers, and in the process, had misrepresented themselves. Business Insider reported:

"In September Google decided to replicate some of what Mocality had already done. It launched a program called, Getting Kenyan Businesses Online (GKBO). After Google launched GKBO, Mocality started getting what it calls 'odd calls.'"

Apparently caught with its finger in the Kenyan cooke jar, a Google rep could only say this:

"We're aware that a company in Kenya has accused us of using some of their publicly available customer data without permission. We are investigating the matter and will have more information as soon as possible."

In my experience, it takes three well-publicized controversies in a short time span to create a crisis tipping point that could indelibly hurt a company's reputation. Right now, Google is navigating two (that we know about).

Update 1/13/12 1:30pm ET: Google "apologizes unreservedly" to Kenyan firm. Here's the statement from its Europe and emerging markets product and engineering VP Nelson Mattos:

“We were mortified to learn that a team of people working on a Google project improperly used Mocality’s data and misrepresented our relationship with Mocality to encourage customers to create new websites.

“We’ve already unreservedly apologised to Mocality. We’re still investigating exactly how this happened, and as soon as we have all the facts, we’ll be taking the appropriate action with the people involved.”

"Never Hire a PR Firm"

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 05:35:03 PST

Maverick Mark Cuban

That NBA champ, author, and billionaire blogging maverick Mark Cuban offered up some mostly sound advice to the startup community this week in a post titled "Mark Cuban's 12 Rules for Startups" on Entrepreneur.com.

I say mostly because his #11-ranked recommendation read as follows:

"Never hire a PR firm. A public relations firm will call or email people in the publications you already read, on the shows you already watch and at the websites you already surf. Those people publish their emails. Whenever you consume any information related to your field, get the email of the person publishing it and send them a message introducing yourself and the company. Their job is to find new stuff. They will welcome hearing from the founder instead of some PR flack. Once you establish communication with that person, make yourself available to answer their questions about the industry and be a source for them. If you are smart, they will use you."

Mark, you're right in some limited sense. Many (PR-beleaguered) tech journalists have developed an inherent distaste for a profession that peppers them with inane pitches that are mostly irrelevant to their editorial interests.

In reality, many bad pitches emanate from the lazy ones in our profession who rely exclusively on those automated services to build their media lists, but who never take the time to properly vet them. (They've also been know to originate from junior PR types whose bosses don't take the time to vet their prose.)

It's no wonder that some reporters take glee in publicly posting these spammy overtures.

Please know that not all PR people fall into these unfortunate categories, though at times it may seem so. In fact, an informed and conscientious PR professional can be a great asset to a time-challenged journalist looking for a lead on a hot new startup or one simply trying to find timely answers to his or her questions.

Moreover, Mark, you're not wrong in recognizing that many journalists -- especially on the tech beat -- would rather hear directly from the expert or executive within the company versus the account exec at agency of record. Certainly, you above all can appreciate that startup CEOs wear far too many hats to take on the blocking and tackling that goes with engaging reporters, industry analysts or trade show programmers.

At my firm, we prefer to open the door for our startup clients, then step back to let them directly interface with the journalist. We're hardly divorced from the process, but we defer to reporters' desire to let the newsmaker be front and center. We're perfectly happy to remain in the background providing counsel. Invariably, the reporter will come back to us for varied informational needs.

Most importantly, we are there for the client who may not understand the nuances of the dance between the newsmaker and journalist. I've had clients who've demanded a reporter's questions in advance, final copy approval, or that their story appear in a certain section. (Groan.)

Trust me, Mark, many startups, especially those on the brink of losing their media virginity, will derive and be thankful for the considerable benefit a smart PR firm can bring to the mix.

Wikipedia & PR: Friend or Foe?

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Wed, 11 Jan 2012 16:58:12 PST

WIkipedia founder Jimmy Wales

Shortly before Christmas, I ran into an old friend who oversees social media for one of the big-branded management consultancy firms. He confided in me that he was having an issue with Wikipedia.

Wikipedia wouldn't grant him editing privileges, as a PR person, even though the information on the site about his employer was inaccurate. His question to me: should he pose as someone else to make the necessary changes?

I immediately said no. As untenable as the situation was, I thought it was clearly an ethical breach to misrepresent himself. (BTW - he was advised to do so by a reputable professional.) I then referred him to a friend in the biz who was much closer to the machinations of the world's largest crowd-sourced encyclopedia.

As for the tension between this Google-juiced, crowd-sourced repository of information and the PR community, here's what Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales had to say about it in 2006:

"I think we need to be very clear in a lot of different places that PR firms editing Wikipedia is something that we frown upon very very strongly. The appearance of impropriety is so great that we should make it very very strongly clear to these firms that we do not approve of what they would like to do."

Wikipedia's bias against PR pros (as bona fide site contributors) speaks to the challenge our industry faces as it seeks to redefine itself in a world where myriad other reasonably credible information sources abound.

Who's to say that PR people have the most timely, accurate and unbiased information about a company or topic? What's preventing PR people who represent clients with nefarious social, political or business agendas from tainting the site?

Edelman's Phil Gomes

As it just so happens, I coincidentally received a Facebook message last week from another friend in the biz John Cass inviting me to join a new group called "Corporate Representatives for Ethical Wikipedia Engagement" (CREWE), which was started by Edelman's Phil Gomes, another old pal from the digital PR trenches. Phil penned an open letter to Jimmy Wales in which he asserted that:

"A truly serious conversation needs to happen about how communications professionals and the Wikipedia community can/must work together. Since recent events have thrown this issue into sharp relief, I’d like us to have an open, constructive and fair discussion about the important issues where public relations and Wikipedia intersect."

Jack O'Dwyer

CREWE now has 72 members, including -- in the same forum no less -- long-time industry chronicler Jack O'Dwyer and his nemesis, PRSA, the industry's U.S. trade association. (Jack's interest deviated a bit from the others' in that he's lobbying to gain for his newsletter "third-party" status and thus the means to validate the acuity of what's posted about PR.)

For PRSA's part, the association's newly anointed chair & CEO Gerry Corbett had this to say:

PRSA's Gerry Corbett
"Public relations and corporate communications professionals are a resource, not adversaries when it comes to working with Wikipedia on behalf of clients, and employer companies and organizations to correct for inaccurate or missing information. Ultimately, that is one of the many valuable roles of public relations: to help organizations better connect with and inform stakeholders. And few can argue that there is any greater a stakeholder in the digital age than the hundreds of millions of people around the world who use Wikipedia as a source for information.

The effort by Phil Gomes and the group he has started on Facebook, is a critical advocacy activity that the Public Relations Society of America wholeheartedly supports. It is our intention to assist this effort however and wherever we can, and with the resources we have available. Doing so, we believe, will augment a timely campaign that will benefit the entire public relations and corporate communications industry, while helping to establish better relationships with the Wikipedia community, which clearly has an influential role in modern research for people of all professions.

One outcome we hope will come of this initiative is a better understanding by those from Wikipedia and others that PR is not about "spin," but about accurate and truthful information in accordance with an established code of ethics, such as PRSA’s Code of Ethics.

It is an initiative we hope will be taken up by many and used as a catalyst for an open and honest discussion with Wikipedia and its editors regarding the role and value of allowing corporate communications and PR professionals to responsibly and transparently make necessary edits to their employers’ and clients’ Wikipedia entries."

For my part, I suggested that the group, and its more prominent members, engage directly with Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales and others in a decision-making capacity. Sure enough, members Shel Holtz and Neville Hobson called out Mr. Wales on the issue on Twitter and elsewhere, and John Cass invited him to join the group. He accepted and has been posting his POV with promises for a full airing shortly. Here are some of the exchanges:

Phil Gomes:

For one client (multi-billion-dollar U.S. company), there was frustration about the gross inaccuracies and old data on the company's entry. She created a login for herself and, in the interests of full disclosure, included the name of the company in her login name (e.g., JudyACME). She then went to the talk page and suggested some changes to bring the entry up to spec. Her login was summarily banned because someone felt that using the company name in her login was overtly promotional. (!) The items mentioned on the talk page went untouched for some time. They were eventually let through, but subsequent requests went ignored. (One unhelpfully leaves it as, I'm paraphrasing, "You have a conflict of interest.")

Summary:

- So, here we have someone going out of her way to be above-board and is banned on the slimmest of justifications. This provided some initial rationale, I guess, for ignoring what she had to say.

- The corporate representative made the entry *better* than it was, despite accusations that people in her line of work are buzzword-spouting automatons.

Jimmy Wales

Phil, send me the example privately so I can study it? [sic]

Jimmy Wales

I've got Marshall's example and I'm looking at it. If you can get me yours in the next 12 hours or so, I can look at it tomorrow morning. I hope to post something about these tomorrow afternoon.Obviously I won't mention particular clients publicly, that isn't the point. The point is discovering what went wrong and what could have been done better.

Elsewhere others chimed in:

Jack O'Dwyer

John: here is the correct link to my WP blog: http://bit.ly/v0Ndc7. If that doesn't work free user/pass for odwyerpr.com for Jan. are happy & year. What I mostly know about WP now is that the PR entries are woefully insufficient and lacking coverage of major topics. When I tried to post five entries, they were all removed by people without much knowledge of PR as far as I can determine. I assume this is true with all your subject areas--editorial judgments being made by inexperts. WP's reliance on "reliable" published sources is naive since no media are reliable on everything. Also, truth is hammered out in vigorous pubic debates and WP does not like controversy.

David King

I'll be damned. I went to check the policy to prove you wrong and there it is. "The principle of verifiability implies nothing about ease of access to sources: some online sources may require payment, while some print sources may be available only in university libraries"Which is interesting, because an editor was just telling me I may not be able to cite a book that is difficult to find and I've been told in the past not to use articles that require paid access.

Jimmy Wales

David, that's an easy to confusion to clear up. Easily available sources are naturally preferred, but if a hard to find source is better, then that can outweigh that initial preference.

Derek DeVries

Jack - If it's important to have your thoughts on the PR pages in Wikipedia, why not make your web content publicly-available for free to all? That would solve the problem.

Jimmy Wales

Derek, that's absolutely correct. Many brands should consider freely licensing a LOT of content so that Wikipedians can easily use it. But what I'm recommending goes a lot further than that. If you think a page should say something, write it up, and post it on the talk page. That actually works wonders in virtually all cases - I think the people claiming that it doesn't will be hard pressed to prove their case, although of course it is always possible to find rare cases where things have slipped through the cracks.And in those cases, there are clear and highly workable avenues for escalation. There is never a need for PR people to directly edit articles

We have to give Mr. Wales credit for re-engaging with the PR community on this topic. I firmly believe that the vast majority of professionals abide by ethical rules that strictly prohibit the willful spread of disinformation. As for the spreaders of misinformation (Frank Luntz?), they too are no small consideration, especially as the industry seeks to reestablish its credibility.

Others who have thoughtfully weighed in include:

Phillip Sheldrake "Reputation and Wikipedia"

Stuart Bruce "Wikipedia & PR Have Got to Work it Out"

Jack O'Dwyer "WIkipedia Desperate for Input on PR Subjects"

Serge Reuter "PR, Ethics & Wikipedia"

Stephen Waddington "Not All PRs are Rogues"

Let's keep an eye on this, especially since Mr. Wales appears to have listened and may be poised to make some concessions to the PR industry.

Why CES Matters

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 12:36:35 PST

Just as my Twitterstream is about to be overrun by hangover-induced tweets from the Consumer Electronics Show in Vegas, former tech scribe for The Journal Nick Wingfield who's now toiling for The New York Times, yesterday presented a sobering view of the last standing major consumer electronics confab on the planet.

In his Times piece, "A Tech Show Loses Clout as Industry Shifts," Nick questioned the value of CES as a platform for launching major products:

"...the show is unlikely to be where any blockbuster products of 2012 are introduced. Many of the hottest new gadgets in recent years — including Apple’s iPad and iPhone, Microsoft’s Kinect and Amazon’s Kindle Fire — were first announced at other events, even though C.E.S. remains the world’s biggest consumer technology convention."

He talked about the changing nature of personal consumer electronics:

"...the most important developments in the electronics business are no longer coming from the makers of television sets and stereos that have been most closely identified with the show since it started in 1967."

True and true, but I believe that CES still serves as a valuable venue for product introductions, not unlike how the Super Bowl is a showcase or ad creative or a catalyst for countless game-related sidebar stories. First and foremost, the show continues to draw a captive (and maybe even its largest-ever) contingency of credentialed journalists, each of whom is tasked with filling his or her editorial pipelines with gadget-driven stories. Clutter, yes, but a very large firehose to fill.

Muckrack, btw, offers a decent way to identify CES reporters without pissing any off through misguided overtures. Moreover, a cursory look at the first day's tweets will give you a sense of just how much editorial content (i.e., earned media) will emerge from the show, and frankly, why CES remains an important factor in one's marketing plans:

Jessica Vascellaro, The Wall Street Journal: Doing 2 interviews via hotel landline because cell service doesn't work at Trump Hotel at #CES. Crazy. At least wifi is good. #its2012folks

Tim Bradshaw, The Financial Times:My brave @FT colleagues @chrisnuttall @richardwaters & @mattgarrahan are at #CES - follow their exploits at http://www.ft.com/ces2012

CNET News:LG's #CES TV news rundown: Thin, 3D, and Googley #CES2012 http://cnet.co/yGa6IK

Joshua Topolsky, The Verge:Our girl @joannastern is killing it at Intel keynote #CES2012 The Verge

Andrew Wallenstein, Variety: Rovi announces tech at #CES that lets you convert your DVDs into digital copies for Ultraviolet. #nice

Los Angeles Times:Following developments at #CES? Follow our tech reporters, @nateog, @dsarno, @jcahealey, @DawnC331, @byandreachang, @emamd, @mmaltaisLAT

PSFK:At #CES this week? Just a reminder to look out for PSFK's @piers_fawkes and @JGWeiner who are flying in today.

Pete Cashmore, Mashable:Vimeo Brings New Apps to Android, Windows Phone and iPad - http://on.mash.to/zbh8sL #CES #CES2012

Veronica Belmont, Tekzilla:Sitting behind Team @Engadget at the Sharp press conference, they're getting ready to rock their liveblog: http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/09/live-from-sharps-ces-2012-press-event/ #CES2012

Robert Scoble:My first CES report: New Toshiba tablet is mighty thin: https://plus.google.com/111091089527727420853/posts/6LSwdVWa15r first video look.

And then of course there's this. (Be careful what you wish for, Roy.)

Roy Furchgott, The New York Times: Packed and ready for C.E.S. Then I realized I have no meetings set for Monday morning or afternoon. Oops. Not liking the down-time.

Sure, the big guys - Apple, Amazon, Google -- already have their captive media audience for any of their big or small product or corporate announcements. But what about the rest of us? Getting one's start-up on the docket for TechCrunch Disrupt or an O'Reilly Ignite event can provide some decent media fuel to set tongues a wagging. But that's a big if.

The Onion's Baratunde Thurston at 2011 Mashable Awards

It's no coincidence that Mashable chose CES as the venue for its Mashable Awards show and networking party. Other than SxSW, CES remains a vital venue for virtual connections to get physical, and there are scant few in the tech space who'll argue the value of that. As Scoble recently wrote on his Google+ stream:

"One reason I love traveling is because it is a people-meeting affordance...It always amazes me at how often I'm sitting next to someone interesting in trains and planes and how rarely people even introduce themselves. It's one of the things that makes travel interesting. The randomness of it all. It also makes me realize that great tech stories can just be sitting right in front of you. You just have to figure out what they are. Do you have a story of when you were traveling and met someone interesting?"

While I wish I was out there in Vegas right now - who doesn't? -- I am looking forward to my several days in Austin for SXSW Interactive. I'll be at the Courtyard Marriott next to the Convention Center, if you care to say hello.

NYC Ratchets its Tech Cred

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 13:14:34 PST

It's a new year. The ebullient New York tech community picked up where it left off with several notable events: the first New York Tech Meetup of 2012, a Zaarly-sponsored Startup Crawl, and the auspicious piece in The Economist on Mayor Mike's goal to see New York City give Silicon Valley a run for its VC money.

First, that Economist piece "Reimagining the Future" in which this paragraph sums up the great expectations the city has at this moment in time:

"The city’s embrace of high-tech has already begun. Tech clusters have emerged in Manhattan’s Flatiron District and Brooklyn’s Dumbo, home to firms like STELLAService and Etsy. Venture-capital firms and angel investors have been looking at New York more seriously than they once did. Henry Blodget, of Business Insider, notes “the financing ecosystem has also gotten very well developed, from late-stage private equity right down to angel investing.” Some $1.2 billion was invested by venture-capital firms in New York in 2010. The Big Apple even overtook Massachusetts in venture-capital funding for internet and tech start-ups, making it second only to Silicon Valley. And in the third quarter of last year, it surpassed it in venture capital in all categories. Between 2005 and 2010 employment in New York’s high-tech sector grew by nearly 30%. Google alone has about 1,200 engineers in the city."

And let's not lose sight of that audacious announcement that will eventually herald in a new era of technology innovation: the joint plan from Cornell University and Israel's Technion Institute of Technology to build a $2 billion campus on Roosevelt Island. Here are more details and a flyover:

I did make it to the first New York Tech Meetup of the year, held before (another) sold out audience of 800 or so at NYU's Skirball Center. The event attracts the dominant share of notables from the city's tech, academic, media and venture funding communities. I've seen former NBCUni chief Jeff Zucker, financier Donald Marron, and entrepreneur Craig Newmark milling in the audience.

And as you know, the NYTM played host to many of today's successful tech-driven companies including Foursquare, GroupMe (recently sold to Skype), and Tumblr, which is on fire right now. So much so that moderator Nate Westheimer announced that Tumblr was joining the ranks of Google and Microsoft BizSpark as NYTM's third "annual sustaining sponsor." In the news release, company CEO David Karp said:

"Our NYTM demo back in 2007 was a pivotal moment in Tumblr’s history, and we’re really excited to give back to this incredible organization. As Tumblr has grown over the years, so has the NYTM, and we could not be more thrilled to support the monthly meetup as well as the larger mission to promote the NY tech industry. This thriving community has been so welcoming and encouraging through every step of Tumblr’s life, and we're honored to be a part of it."

As for the January 2012 presentations, nearly all have some redeeming value, but typically a small handful capture the collective imaginations of this - a most discerning New York audience. Among those that did were:

Deaftel -- a very early stage smart phone app for the hearing impaired that allows audio-to-text without operator intermediation. Westehimer noted that it generated a decent share of Twitter buzz, indicating the audience's growing proclivity for technology that makes a difference in people's lives.

The next technology (that also makes a difference) was called ObscuraCam. I had a personal interest in this smart phone app that makes it easy to remove meta data from digital images captured while documenting public protests, as an example. Faces and location-identifying objects can be obscured.

The technology's development was supported by WITNESS and The Guardian Project. For two years, I had handled PR for the Reebok Human Rights Award, which partnered with WITNESS early on to provide much-needed video equipment to activists in countries with media-repressive governments. REM's Michael Stipe and Peter Gabriel were just two of the rock stars (literal) rock stars who supported the program.

Tara Hunt presents Buyosphere

NYTM vet Tara Hunt opened her (show) case for Buyosphere by taking the audience on a search for a pair of shoes that would complement her gold dress. It was soon apparent how frustrating and overwhelming the typical product search can be. With a few filters, Buyosphere's model taps the crowd, a la Quora, to help surface the exact item one is seeking. A Google search on Buyosphere reveals the tagline "People helping people." Right.

In spite of the squeamish similarities to Chatroulette, YouNow proved to be another crowd favorite. It's a website on which ordinary people (with perceived extraordinary talents) can subject themselves to the scrutiny of the viewing audience.

The audience, for its part, rates the "performance" in real time. The worse the rating, the quicker the proverbial ax. Here's a short video clip:

Terry Jones of FluidInfo

Terry Jones of FluidInfo was next up. Brilliant for sure, but perhaps a bit Quixotic in his mission to literally tag verything in ther physical world. Loved the idea. Not sure of its practicality. (I'm still getting over QR Codes.)

And finally, we heard a very cogent and relatable presentation for Chat&, a B-toB startup that offers consumer-facing online retailers the ability for their customers to derive product information from a customer service rep via a live video feed.

To my left, Personal Democracy Media founder and NYTM chair Andrew Rasiej thought there were some potential synergies between Chat& and YouNow (i.e., rate the customer service rep for starters), but Sim, the VC guy to my left and his pal and I debated whether a visual interface (versus text-driven chat) would result in higher conversions.

Finally, I was fortunate to nab a ticket for New York's first "startupcrawl, sponsored by Zaarly (which had mounted one in SF). About 40 of us started the evening at (former client) Unigo where the founder of the three-year-old company Jordan Goldman gave a brief overview of his site, the most comprehensive online resource for prospective college students (and their parents). All the content on the site is student-generated, i.e., it's authentic. What's new there? A service matching prospective students with bona fide college counselors or college students at a cost that's minuscule compared to the expected going rate.

Gary Vaynerchuk

We then crossed Park Avenue South to check in on everyone's favorite oenophile turned social media marketing guru Gary Vaynerchuk and his Vaynerchuk Media. After the group had a few minutes to kibbutz, Gary took the chair, as he's prone to do, and cajoled the crowd to lose their obsession with that piece in Mashable or how many retweets you're getting. Stay focused on what's real and redeemable: your users and customers. If you do this, you'll be able to live your dream another day.

I had another obligation, so I unfortunately missed visiting the last three offices on the crawl: Adaptly, Spotify and Zaarly, though I did get a chance to meet some folks from those vibrant startups. All in all, a busy first week of a new year for the New York Tech scene. Next week, I expect to make it to the Ultra Light Startup showcase, so keep an eye on this space.

PR, Social Validation & The X Factor

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Wed, 04 Jan 2012 12:03:12 PST

The PR industry has come a long way from the days of measuring a campaign's success by the number of media impressions it generates or how they might equate into an ad spend (i.e., "ad equivalency"). Truth be told: too many practitioners and client organizations still rely on these increasingly outmoded metrics.

Today, the industry is more focused on tangible actions that result from either elevated brand awareness in the editorial and owned news channels or friend-shared/endorsed recommendations in the social spheres.

Anyone keeping tabs on the burgeoning social TV/second screen phenomenon wherein TV viewers receive program-related content and conversation on their mobile devices via apps like GetGlue, IntoNow, Miso and my fave, Umami TV (a Flatiron client), will be familiar with the near-daily reports touting the week’s “most social TV programs.”

Companies like Trendrr, Bluefin Labs and Social Guide are crunching Twitter's and Facebook’s data streams to determine which TV shows generate the most buzz.

One recent week's winners were "WWE Raw” on cable and “The X Factor” on broadcast. As for the most "social" TV networks of 2011, Fox led the way with "The X Factor," The Super Bowl and World Series, followed by ABC ("American Music Awards," "NBA Finals," "Dancing with the Stars"), and MTV ("Video Music Awards," "Jersey Shore," and "Teen Wolf.")

In predicting where the PR industry may be headed, I’m beginning to believe that a campaign’s ability to produce buzz in social or shared media may become the holy grail barometer of one’s success plying the “earned, owned and paid” media channels. Six months ago I said as much in a blog post that re-configured the oft-quoted Forrester Research infographic showing the new “interactive marketing paradigm.”

There are now a myriad apps, channels, platforms and devices on which our clients’ messages might reside and spread. This new measure for success will gauge our ability to create original and sufficiently compelling or edgy content to catalyze shared, aggregated or curated conversations.

The new currency of success will take the form of tweets, retweets, likes, and favorites on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and Google+, and may eventually play out in an entirely new ecosystem of personalized social media news aggregators like Storify, Paper.li, News.me, Flipboard, Storyful, Google Currents, Pulse, Zite, Livestand, and Instagram, among others.As The New York Times's NY tech reporter Jenna Wortham recently wrote:

"Most important thing of the year: the retweet. 2011 was the year that retweeting became less about achieving value and followers and more of a new form of cultural and information currency — not unlike a viral version of the bit, self-propagating units of information."

In spite of all the changes and challenges we’re witnessing in our industry, a core (and bankable) competency still entails building a positive client-branded presence in the media – one that directly and measurably enhances business and reputation.

Buzz in the social spheres, I believe, will be the desired bi-product of this earned, owned and paid media presence wherein digital denizens gladly share client messages with their friends, family, fans and followers across a growing multitude of digital and mobile apps and channels.

PR/Social Predictions: Who Got it Right?

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Mon, 02 Jan 2012 14:13:12 PST

I decided to take a look back at the PR/social/marketing pundits' predictions for 2011. Fortunately the wiki I created a year ago to crowd-capture the more prominent of these prognostications remained intact.

Below are those skewed to or posted by PR professionals (even though I admit that PR, as a discipline, has bled across the entire marketing communications spectrum):

"Big Social Media Trends for 2011" (Dec. 22, 2010)
Jeremy Woolf
Hypertext

"11 Public Relations Trends for 2011" (Dec. 22, 2010)
Keith Trivitt
PRSAY

"My Predictions for 2011" (Dec. 26, 2010)
Shel Israel
Global Neighbourhoods

"PR to Face Myriad Challenges in 2011" (Dec. 29, 2010)
Ronn Torossian
MediaPost

"The Top 15 Marketing and Social Media Trends to Watch in 2011" (Jan 2, 2011)
Rohit Bhargava
Influential Marketing Blog

"Eleven Digital Trends to Watch in 2011" (Jan 5, 2011)
Steve Rubel & David Armano
Edelman Digital

"10 Ways Social Media Will Change in 2011" (Jan 6, 2011)
Ravit Lichtenberg
Ragan.com

Ogilvy's Rohit Bhargava

While each of the above includes some very worthwhile, if not prescient take-aways, hindsight has made me appreciate the clairvoyance of my pal Rohit Bhargava, one of the founders of the 360 Digital Influence Group at Ogilvy.

Here's Rohit's list, which is accompanied by a slide show:

Likeonomics
Approachable Celebrity
Desperate Simplification
Essential Integration
Rise of Curation
Visualized Data
Crowdsourced Innovation
Instant PR & Customer Service
App-fication of the Web
Reimagining Charity
Employees As Heroes
Locationcasting
Brutal Transparency
Addictive Randomness
Culting Of Retail

I was able to add my own two cents as part of an industry round-up titled "#PRin2012: 12 Trends That Will Change Public Relations," compiled by trade association PRSA a few weeks back. I plan to post my full submission, "PR in 2012: Social Validation," on these pages shortly. Happy new year, and thanks for hanging with me in 2011.