Even if your business does not have a social media presence, should it have a social media policy?

Many businesses don’t have a social media presence – I can’t think of a good reason why. I don’t think there are any good reasons why, but I’m happy to take comment on that.

But even if you don’t have a social media presence, do you need a policy to protect the business, the people who work for it and other people connected to the business?

Let’s start with this; if your business has a social media or web presence you need:

  • A social media policy – it doesn’t have to be detailed “Don’t be stupid.”  is perfectly good. But everyone has to know that’s the policy.
  • A social media strategy – “Listen think talk” will do – but you might like to fill it out a bit.

You should really have a few other tools, but those 6 words should see you through.

So to the question, do you need a policy if your business doesn’t have a presence?

Check out this toe curling story … it’s short and makes the point.

As it happens, the organisation and the individual (it would appear from the conversation) each have a Facebook presence. I won’t (and can’t) comment on the organisation in question – I have no idea whether they have a social media policy – and I don’t want to single them out. I offer this as an example.

As the article says – and we constantly experience – the private and public are no longer separate. If an employee, board member, owner, volunteer publishes something on a website under their own name, not only are they responsible for what they say, but it could impact on the business.

A social media policy should NOT be there to prevent freedom of expression. It should be there so everyone knows where they stand.

And – like the New York Times – it only needs to boil down to “Don’t be stupid”.

Online Surveys

Maybe it’s just the day, maybe co-incidence, maybe because it’s near the end of the financial year. Over the past two days I have been asked to take part in half a dozen web surveys (“in order to improve our service to you …”) as they say.

I’m normally sympathetic to web surveys; I have commissioned enough to know that the results can be very useful. But there is a balance to be struck between gathering relevant information and intruding on people’s time.

One I took yesterday was just one question. Took no time at all. The one that had me running to my blog was from PayPal. “This survey should take approximately 15 minutes to complete.”

Ya what? 15 minutes?? Do I care that I will might win £500? No.

Here are a few tips for web surveys:

  • On the opening screen do let people know how long the survey will take (just like PayPal did). It’s good manners and you will have fewer uncompleted surveys.
  • Time test your survey – will it take more than 4 minutes? Then it’s too long.
  • Are you asking questions just because you have an audience? Questions for questions sake are wasting everyone’s time.
  • Are you clear about the information you want to gather and how that information will be used?
  • Don’t waste your own time gathering un-needed and un-usable data. As yourself – “If this was a survey for a company I don’t really care about, would I spend the time?” Most people don’t care as much about your company as you do.
  • Can the people you invited to participate see the value to them?
  • Can you make the survey fun? Probably not – but try to make it a little entertaining.
  • Always put in a contact form or email (and answer queries, comments and questions).
  • Always say thank you.

UPDATE:

24 hours after posting this I’m delighted to see Seth Godin’s latest blog post “Too long”.

OK, enough.

Online Community Management – fixin’thoes spellins and tYpOs

I don’t have many strong views. I do have strong views on grammar and spelling. But those views are not uniform.

If I am writing something like this and there is a spelling mistake, typo or grammatical error, I am always grateful if someone points it out – even if they are wrong, which they sometimes are.

But this is where the lack of uniformity sets in – and it sets in hard. Facebook, Twitter and blog comments are not the place for grammatical dictatorships. When remarks are rattled off quickly when the meaning is urgent, the formulation is less important.

This is a considered piece – I’m thinking about the grammar and the spellcheck is doing what it should. In the past I have removed tweets and comments post publication when I spot an error, but only my errors – never – nevernevernever other people’s mistakes.

And now to the nub.

I manage online communities. People make comments, post ideas, add their thoughts and it is up to me to facilitate that, to help where necessary and advise when required. (Advice like “Your comment breaks our Terms and Conditions. On our site you cannot call someone “a stupid fucker”. You are making a point you clearly feel strongly about it. Please rephrase your comment within the Ts&Cs and your comment will be posted.)

But it is not up to the community manager to “edit” – fix the spelling, fix the grammar remove the naughty words. That is disrespectful and frankly plain bad manners.

You are standing in a supermarket and someone gets their grammar wrong. The “could have went”, rather than “could have gone” – like many Northern Ireland politicians, sadly. Do you shout at the top of your voice “You are wrong – what you should say is …”

It is unlikely that anyone would do it – even if we want to.

Another example – a Northern Ireland politician is being interviewed on TV. Do you not think the interviewer wants to stop them and correct their grammar? Should they? Seriously? Of course they shouldn’t. It would be bad manners and disrespectful.

But that’s what you are doing when you “fix” someone else’s comments. There is also a legal argument about the ownership of the comment of you have fixed it – but that is for another time.

You might disagree.

Normally I listen to people who disagree. Not on this. Have your own opinion if it differs from mine – but I don’t care, because you are wrong.

Oh --- forgotten about Posterous

It's near the end of January and I have just remembered that I haven't been near Posterous since my New Year Resolution (see previous).

And I'm not sure that I have missed it.

I've been spending more time on my own blog (links below), too much time on Facebook, but mainly for work rather than entertainment) and playing around with Google+. I'm not a fan, yet.

I've been spending a lot more time on LinkedIn and warming to it. It's not as gossopy or light as Facebook nor is it as quick and digestible as Twitter. And nothing like Google+

It's - to some extent - about audience differentiation. Yes a good proportion of people I am linked to on Facebook are also linked on Twitter. But it is not a 100% match - neither should it be. Some of the people I'm linked to on Google+ are also on Twitter and/or Facebook.

But rarely do I send out the same message on more than one platform - and I'm pretty sure never on all three. It annoys me a bit when I see someone send the same messages on Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn.

And I do appreciate seeing people posting different sorts of messages on different profiles.

The blog? The blog I suppose is about being more serious. I used to post exactly the same stories here and on the blog. But I'm moving on from that. I know very few people read the blog - I'm not sure who they are. But I really don't know who reads Posterous.

But if you do and somehow you've missed my wit, insights and ---erm --- ahh -- oh yes --- decisive writing. He's what I've posted on the blog recently:

PSNI Arrest a man for Facebook Comments

I thought that story would have go a lot more interest.

I want a video to go viral

And finally - after seeing too many people post the same message too often on several different platforms a heartfelt

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Help your staff be more creative

I have copied this almost verbatim from the February edition of WIRED UK. You can get your copy for £3.99 from all good magazine vendors. Better still, have it delivered to your door on day of publication by taking out an annual subscription.

Hopefully that massive plug and credit will prevent any legal action ☺ Just joking

This is a really useful overview on supporting your staff to become more creative. There are four points here to remember; in my experience it can be a little more complicated, but I don’t disagree with any.

The tips are taken from work by Edward Deci and Richard Ryan of the University of Rochester, New York.

Here’s what WIRED says.

1 – Give them space. Deadlines are important, but hourly check-ups are not. According to creativity researcher Arne Dietrich, working memory and a buffer against distractions are essential. Creativity involves linking concepts, which means holding several things in your working memory – a balance that can be disrupted easily.

2 – Don’t micromanage. Allow free time for employees to work on anything they want; intrinsic motivation (working on something just because its interesting) leads to creativity. Companies such as Google build free time into the work week – and back in 1974 such a scheme at 3M heralded the emergence of the Post-It Note.

3 – Open your mind. Getting stuck in a hyper-focused, linear thinking pattern can stall finding a creative solution. Hoe can you keep your mind open? Jonathan Schooler, psychologist at the University of California, says letting your mind wander periodically can increase the chance of creative insight.

4 – Tolerate Creativity – Reward creative thinking, not with financial encentives, which alone have been shown to decrease creativity, but by promoting the conditions that permit it. Tolerate the occasional failure and allow rules to be broken when there is a social benefit. Finally, give workers space to say when they are unhappy.

I want a video to go viral

It hardly seems like two years ago – but according to YouTube it is.

The BBC Radio 4 programme decided to make a video to go viral . As I write it has had 70101 views – it is a really shite video. I don’t know who made it (actually I don’t care enough to try to find out). I don’t know the number of people who listen to Today on Radio 4 every day – but close on 1,000,000 a day would be a fair guess.

Friends School Lisburn launched a video seven days ago. Within 24 hours it had 10,000+ views. Tonight it has 285,411 views on YouTube. This is one small school in Northern Ireland – that, my friend is viral.

How do you make a video go viral?
1 – Make sure the content is better than great – make sure it is fantastic.
2 – Make sure everyone involved is really, really, really proud of what they have done.
That is all.

If people have made something fantastic they will be proud of it and tell their friends. If it is fantastic their friends will tell their friends.

That’s how you make it ‘go viral’.

The idea is simple.

The creativity is the hard bit.

UPDATE: 16 Feb 2012

I’ve just come across this fantastic infographic which gives a fascinating  analysis of what makes content go viral:

http://www.problogger.net/archives/2011/12/11/infographic-what-makes-content-go-viral/

Social Media and Journalism

A strategic overview of new media in journalism, the relevance of digital skills and why it’s important to embrace new technology.
Short talk given to the National Council for the Training of Journalists.

Here’s the long version.

Holly Came From Miami, Fla
Hitch hiked Her Way Across The USA.
Plucked Her Eyebrows On The Way
Shaved Her Legs And Then He Was She – She Said:

Hey Babe, Take A Walk On The Wild Side,
Said Hey Honey, Take A Walk On The Wild Side.

Holly, Candy, Sugar Plum Fairy, Little Joe, and Jackie
Characters, storyline, a vivid description of a world most of us had no experience of.

When I started out in radio in the late 70’s in my mind journalist reported the news. I was a dj. In the radio station where I worked, there were journalists – and the rest of us.
Then in the early ‘80s, a time when Radio 1 had magazine programmes about music on Saturday afternoons, I heard someone describe Lou Reed as a journalist. A light bulb above my head went ‘Bang’.

LOU REED – A JOURNALIST?
Lou Reed had the eye for a story, the skills and talent to tell it well. He had a means of distribution and – with record producer – a sort of editor.
Of course he was a journalist! He was reporting his world to us.

Whether we are in an analogue world where I’m cutting audio tape with a blade and waiting for the postman to deliver the information I requested Or in a digital world where communication is faster than ever and where there is so much information it’s hard to filter, The key journalistic skills pertain;
- Listen
- Confirm
- Analyse
- Report

The digital tools journalists need to support those skills are cheap, available to everyone and they allow everyone to report the world around them.

Once the means of distribution was the bar to entry, now it is the starting point. As consumers (the readers, listeners, viewers) learn to filter the noise, how do you ensure what you have to say is being heard?

As a journalist how do you report the Tower of Babel that digital technology has created?

TECHNOLOGY
The fundamental shift in technology has happened in the last 10 years. And it is accelerating. The Post PC Era is dawning. Gartner predicts that sales of Smart Phones and Tablets will overtake the sales of PCs and Laptops this year.  But that is to put laptops and PCs in the same category. By their very nature Laptops can be fixed but are more likely to be mobile. Therefore Mobile Computing has already overtaken fixed home and office computing.
Delivering the story from the scene of the action – as it happens rather than reporting post-fact, is not the preserve of the TV or radio outside broadcast anymore. If the journalist has the training – and the kit (an iPhone and web connection) the story can be delivered as it unfolds.

With Twitter in particular, but also Facebook and Live Blogging, a journalist can report the Meta-Story – reporting on the reporting of the story. A lot of journalists’ time is spent waiting. But that story – if told well in a Twitter feed or Live Blog – can be as compelling as the main story.

In October 2011 The Economist reported that HTC shipped more than 22 million phones in the first half of this year more than twice as many as the first half of 2010. Gartner Research estimate that 1 billion will be sold in 2015.
IN 2020 where will we get our news – from a broadcast network – or from our personal network?

VIDEO AND NEWSPAPERS:
Once newspaper journalist took notes in shorthand, typed the report and delivered it by hand or by post. The radio journalist recorded on tape, spliced to edit it. The TV journalist’s technology was so complicated, a whole team of specialists was needed on site.

The New York Times and other newspapers – have been producing video for years. The New York Times now has scheduled news programming every day at 1.00 pm.

The Wall Street Journal is training journalists to shoot video on iPhone and how to tell stories in video format and then to send the video to the desk.

SEAMLESS MEDIA
Clay Shirky – author of Cognitive Surplus – asserts that even the most inane forms of creation and sharing are preferable to the hundreds of billions of hours spent consuming television.

Some people use that creativity to produce journalism – some produce LolCats. They are not formally trained; most don’t do it particularly well. They use text and video and photos and music to describe the world around them, to ask questions and to challenge authority. Oh and there is opinion. Lots and lots of opinion, often poorly informed, often with a particular agenda, often transmitting noise rather than light. Like a lot of traditional media.

In their book The World in 2020 Tim Jones of Future Agenda and Caroline Dewing of Vodafone write about Seamless Media. By 2020 – they predict that our PCs, mobiles and TVs will have merged and become integrated with a host of new devices that allow us to access a global library of information and data. They surmise that your technology will know you and fetch information that it understands you want.

If consumers become even more passive in their media consumption, what challenge does that present to journalists? Will we – the public – just have an echo chamber of media that supports our prejudices and petty obsessions? How can the dissenting or challenging voice be heard?

RETAINING CONTROL
There are some people who say that the internet will change journalism the same way that My Space has changed the role of the record companies’ A&R departments. Having come up through the ‘alternate’ music of the late 70s and the 80s I say that’s wishful thinking. Which has had more impact on the UK music industry – My Space or X-Factor? Which has more impact on the Newspaper industry, come to that?

Myspace was owned by News Corp for 4 years and is now owned by Specific Media. Who are Specific Media? It says on their website – “Specific Media is an innovative global interactive media company that enables advertisers to connect with consumers in meaningful, impactful and relevant ways.”

Yes, new threads of journalism will develop through new and social media. But the big players will still be there – and that is likely where the investment will come from.

IT’S ALL SOCIAL MEDIA’S FAULT
Social Media makes a great scapegoat for some journalists and politicians. Unquestioningly they blame social media for the ills of society.

You remember the riots in England? Starting in Brixton, they moved to Southall, Toxteth, Nottingham and Manchester. There were also smaller pockets of unrest in Leeds, Leicester, Southampton, Wolverhampton, Coventry, Bristol.

This was not the riots of this summer. 30 years earlier in 1981 when these events occurred, there wasn’t even 24 hour TV.

The 2011 London riots were not the fault of social media. Blaming social media on social unrest is like blaming the brick that breaks the window.

Whether Arab Spring or London riots – social media speeds up the communication. It’s people who make change. Journalists need to understand social media – even if they are reluctant to use it.

There are a lot of social media tools – how do you choose them? Beyond Twitter and Facebook, don’t get caught up with shiney new toys.

If you don’t already know Kevin Anderson – ex BBC, once the Guardian’s Digital Research Editor – then get to know him – @Kevglobal on Twitter.

KEVIN’S KEY QUESTIONS when choosing the right tool for journalism:
• Does it make a journalist’s job faster and easier?
• Does it help us make money or save money?
• Does it help bring audiences to our journalism or our journalism to audiences?
• Does it allow us to tell stories better, more easily or more engagingly?
• Does it build audience loyalty and keep people engaged with our journalism longer?

Strategy used to be the domain of senior executives in business. As we become our own publishers, we become our own editors and strategists. We all need to think about not just the tools but about our social media strategy.

What’s yours?

Download docx file

Over and Klout

Klout – don’t worry if you haven’t heard of it – if you’re on social media it has probably heard of you.

This from Financial Post

Over the past few weeks, several reports have surfaced which indicate Klout was creating “shadow profiles” of non-users, without their permission, based on publicly accessible online information.

In some cases, Klout’s algorithms would scour the Web for new users, and wound up creating profiles for minors.

In a post last week, GigaOm’s Mathew Ingram posed the question: “Is Klout crossing the line when it comes to privacy?”

Klout was accused of abusing privacy when a mother checked her Klout account to find that her children (in their early teens) had been added to Klout even though they had not signed up to the service.

Considering this Klout is intended to be (to a degree) a ‘reputation’ service, this isn’t the way you would expect the site to operate.

And there’s more. Under the headline “Lies, Damned Lies and Klout Lies” Hollis Tibbetts writes:

This issue I have with this is the complete lack of honesty and transparency coming from Klout.  At almost every juncture, Klout chooses obfuscation and dishonesty, rather than transparency and good citizenship. A constrant stream of PR-speak, half-truths and misdirection.

I’ve never been quite convinced about Klout. Now I’m pretty sure I don’t want to have anything to do with it. I’d delete my profile, but it appears I can’t.

Here’s what one website (Social Media Today) has published on the subject recently.