Below the Fold

Communities of Intent: The New Bing Tries to Resuscitate the Web

2012-05-12T09:53:44-07:00

THE WEB IS BACK. Or at least Bing, with its new social-focused interface, is trying to make the Web relevant again – while making Google less relevant in the process.

Over the coming weeks, Bing users will not only get search results, but social recommendations from multiple sources including Facebook and Twitter (and yes, Google Plus.) Search will transform into conversation, tapping your friends and other “influencers” to guide your actions. So for example, if I’m looking for a good sushi restaurant in Los Angeles, Bing will find Facebook friends who posted about sushi in LA and may have a recommendation for me.

It’s search with a pulse. It’s not even a search anymore – it’s discovery.

But most of all, the new Bing is a call to arms against the modern, siloed, fragmented Web.

Planet of the Apps
The World Wide Web is now the Planet of the Apps. Bing wants to be the unifier, to break down the silicon walls and be the one-stop shop for people, places and ideas. There are still some blind spots, but Bing is at least trying to be the Master Curator of All Things Social online.

And let’s also be honest – Bing, meaning Microsoft, wants to kick Google’s ass in the process.

Google’s “Search Plus Your World” approach delivers results from its own Google Plus social network pages more prominently than other Web properties like Wikipedia. This is supposed to make search more personal and relevant – who you know and what your friends like, or share, or do, will have a greater influence on what you see in your search results.

The problem, at least for now, is Google focuses primarily on Google Plus, and even then still delivers results as part of a list entwined with static pages. Google provides links but doesn’t necessarily spur conversations. And it’s still a walled garden at least in term of the broader social web – Google in fact is becoming less like the web and more like an app.

Communities of Intent
Bing isn’t perfect either and still has a long way to go to catch Google in terms of market share and ad dollars. Bing merely won a battle in what will be a long war.

But this battle also represents a significant shift. What true social or conversational search does is move us from interest to intent.

Facebook is great at revealing interest – whether I like cars, for example. Seeing this, an advertiser may target me with car ads. But just because I “liked” the Mercedes page doesn’t mean I want to buy one. I may already own a Mercedes, or maybe I just liked a video they posted. I have an interest in the brand, but uncovering my intent is a far more difficult proposition.

But what if advertisers knew I was looking to buy a Mercedes very soon, and could target me at the very moment I expressed that interest? I’d be a more valuable lead, and therefore media or search properties like Bing could charge a lot more for the pleasure of reaching me.

Communities of Interest are broad and largely static, but “Communities of Intent” are specific, focused, and fleeting. The more that search moves away from providing static results and toward providing fluid conversations that lead to identifiable actions, the more that Communities of Intent will give advertisers quality prospects – and give people ads that they may actually want to receive.

(Disclaimer: Microsoft, which owns Bing, is a client, however I don’t work or communicate with the Bing team.)

Why Most Brands Will Suck at Storytelling

2012-05-07T10:33:48-07:00

"STORY" IS THE NEW "CONTENT."

As buzzwords go, story isn’t entirely bad -- for years I’ve pushed clients to be storytellers. I’ve berated the descent of story into a furtive sea of “content,” stripping all emotion from human pursuits.

So I’m good with story. But let’s be honest, success lies not in the idea but in the execution. And the truth is most brands will suck at storytelling.

Why? Because most brands won't do what good storytelling requires.

Stories – real, honest, emotional, transformative and inspirational stories – have conflict. They have villains. They have winners and losers. They have personality and flaws, great highs and severe lows.

In other words, stories have many of the things that brands don’t want anyone to know about. So the content – err, sorry, the “stories” they create – get sanitized. Every story ends with “and they lived happily ever after.” That’s great for fairytales but not for real life.

The non-fiction story about a company is inherently more interesting than any fiction created for the purpose of earning friends, followers and customers. It’s what has always worked for marketers and still does:

Tell a great story
Create emotional impact
Embrace your friends and respect your enemies
Acknowledge mistakes, then fix them
Don’t ask for trust or loyalty, earn it

Notice I didn’t use the word “strategy.” That’s essential, of course, but too often companies create a strategy first, and then the story. A better approach is first to have a story – not a mission statement or a press release, but a real story. The strategy is the easy part.

Brands aren’t buildings and companies are not logos. There are human beings behind them all, not a great and powerful Oz.

Just tell us a good story, we'll listen. And if you still just want to produce “content” that's fine, as long as you keep calling it “content.” Leave story alone.

A Living or a Life: Preparing for the Second Grand Entry

2012-04-07T15:31:44-07:00

I'M SOMETIMES ASKED WHY, back in the early ‘90s, I wrote a book on the death penalty. There were the obvious reasons, from my work as a reporter covering capital murder cases to the resurgence of executions in the United States. But the real reason I wrote the book had nothing to do with anything so complex.

My reason was simple. I wanted to know what it was like to know when you were going to die.

I was never too sympathetic toward any of the inmates I met, but I was intrigued and maybe even a little envious of them. Death Row inmates not only knew when they were going to die, they knew how and why. They knew how many days they had left and what they would do in those final moments. They had time to plan.

There are two key moments in life, moments I call the “Grand Entries.” The first Grand Entry is when we are born – we are not and then suddenly we are, just here, sucking air and frantically trying to figure out what’s going on (this feeling continues long into adulthood.)

We can’t plan for this Grand Entry. We just start living and keep on going until time or circumstance forces us to stop.

Then there is the second Grand Entry. Most of us don't see it until it’s too late. But if we choose, we can enter on our own terms.

We can either live to make a living or live to make a life. We can choose to leave an imprint on the world, to leave a legacy, to get affairs in order and prepare for the second Grand Entry.

We still can’t know when this Grand Entry will happen. But if I learned anything from my time with the denizens of Death Row, it’s that the “when” doesn’t matter if you’re ready to go.

The first Grand Entry is a gift. The second Grand Entry is an opportunity.

Don't waste yours.

Why the New Facebook Matters for Marketers – and Why it Shouldn’t

2012-03-06T09:47:14-08:00

(The following post originally appeared on the Velocidi.com blog.)

Remember the days when Facebook would launch new features and then announce them? What a difference an impending IPO makes.

Now Facebook not only tells us what’s going happen, it has day-long events to educate and court marketers, as evidenced by last week’s Facebook Marketing Conference in New York City. And make no mistake: Facebook is all about marketing now. This isn’t a bad thing or a good thing; it’s just the natural order of things. Welcome to adulthood, Facebook.

But perhaps the clearest sign of Facebook’s power is that the decisions Facebook makes as a business have far-reaching implications for other businesses. What Facebook did last week was nothing short of making every other company that wants to advertise on the platform rethink its own business model, not to mention forcing them to dedicate more resources (i.e., money) to “content development” and engagement.

There are three key reasons why Facebook now matters more than ever to brand marketers:

1) A Tougher Sell: Facebook is rolling out more paid products, but the format will make it harder for brands that don’t have compelling stories or “content” to share – harder still for those who just want to sell you something. I’m fine with the latter, as I’d rather have a brand be honest about the fact that it just wants me to buy something vs. a brand that tries to tell me a “story.” Regardless, some brands will need to change how they connect with customers, which leads me to reason number two...

2) No More “Random Acts of Content”: The Timeline format places storytelling and a new narrative structure, the “layered narrative,” front and center – brands can no longer get away with pushing random and reckless pieces of content through the channel.

Layered narratives allow space for interaction, sharing, collaboration and contribution. Every unique layer makes the source material stronger and the story more engaging. Many brands, however, haven't done this very well. The “early days” of social media marketing -- you know, 2005 or so -- saw brands simply putting their commercials on YouTube or posting press releases on their blogs. The "stories" were meant to be consumed, not shared. Narrative became lecture and story became content.

The digital world expanded but brands did not expand with it. Facebook is now forcing the issue by treating all content – whether a traditional display ad unit or a comment in a new feed – as related chapters in an overall and evolving brand story.

3) End of the “Ownership” Debate: It’s the number one issue inside most companies and agencies – who “owns” social? Is it PR or Marketing? Is it corporate or the business units? The product teams or the customer service folks?

I’ve said for years and to deaf ears that no one function can “own” social media any more than someone can own the air you breathe. And now Facebook has made it official.

With premium advertising now originating from the brand page, it’s essential that earned, owned, paid and shared media are closely coordinated. Think about it: Facebook page community managers create content but are not the same people who create or buy ads – but ads are now, well, “content.” At the very least these two groups need to talk to each other.

PR, marketing, customer service, creative, product, analytics, corporate – everyone needs to work together or the results will suffer. New models and processes will be needed – for example, creating an “audience engagement team” with people from all these areas represented and led by a “quarterback” who calls the plays and ensures that the team plays as one cohesive unit. There will be many new approaches I’m sure, but what’s clear is that the days of the marketing and PR “silos” are over.

One Reason Why the New Facebook Shouldn’t Matter to Marketers at All

There’s a classic Chris Rock routine in which he ridicules people for being proud of things they are supposed to do anyway. “I take care of my kids,” he says, imitating his subject. “You’re supposed to take of your kids!” Rock screams in mock response.
Rock was right – you don’t deserve credit or kudos for things you are supposed to do. So why should we praise brands who, thanks to Facebook, are now dedicating themselves to having deeper relationships with their customers?

I have a question for every brand marketer on the planet: Are you so out of touch with the digital consumer that you needed a technology company to teach you how to talk to your own customers? Really?

You needed another company’s advertising products to convince you to tell real stories and connect with your customers? And now you want credit as an early adopter and trailblazer? You’re kidding, right?

Brands should have been doing this anyway, Facebook or no Facebook. The unfortunate reality, however, is that Facebook’s decision to change its own business model will result in a lot of crap being produced, as everyone will try to become a content marketer, err, I mean “storyteller” now.

Do yourselves and your customers a favor: Don't make the new Facebook a clarion call for creating content, make it a wake-up call for getting back to the basics of listening, learning, and communicating with people as people, not as data.

Do this not just for Facebook or because of Facebook – do this because it’s the right thing to do.

Social Media Won't Kill Listening, But It’s Getting Harder to Hear

2012-02-26T09:59:18-08:00

Not all that long ago – albeit longer than we may care to admit – families gathered around large living room radios and listened to news, dramas, comedies and live music. People read newspapers and heard the words spring to life in their heads.

We watched and listened to television. Along came the Internet and we listened, the words and pictures and videos grafting onto our collective consciousness with immutable force.

We consumed, we thought, we learned and kept listening, listening, listening.

Then, one day, we found a voice. We always had one, of course, but now with social media, our voice could be heard.

So we talked. A comment here, a blog post there – a video, a photo, a review, a status update, a tweet, a pin, a question, a commentary, a discussion; an argument.

Everybody talking, everybody “engaging in conversation” and “creating content.” It sounds wonderful, and by and large it is – in fact it’s one of the greatest advances in human culture since moveable type.

But now that we all have printing presses, we all believe we can be writers. Now that we all have a radio and a TV network, we feel the need to develop and distribute “programming” (or re-distribute others’ programming as is more often the case.)

We are talking so much that we have stopped listening – or at very least it’s getting harder to hear, so we compensate by talking louder and more often, hoping some of us will get the message between rushed breaths.

The more scarce and precious something is, the more valuable and important it becomes. But there is so much talking, so much “content,” so many aggregated and curated echoes that there’s no longer any value or meaning. Ideas get lost in the binary fog, swallowed whole by the cacophony of endless creation.

The truth is, the less you contribute the more value you add.

So contribute less. Create less. Talk less.

Listen, once more.