This week one of my coworkers and I had the opportunity to attend the Integrating Social Media Conference at Kennesaw State University in Georgia. After flying to Atlanta, we programmed our destination in the rental car's GPS and drove the hour and a half in traffic to arrive to Kennesaw, located northwest of Atlanta.
The conference was hosted by the Center for Sustainable Journalism at university. Topics discussed during the two day event included social media planning and ROI, to the future of social media, web strategies, and unifying social media and public relations. The presenters I most enjoyed listening to at the conference were (in alphabetical order) Olivier Blanchard (@thebrandbuilder), Marla Erwin (@marlaerwin), Jesse McDougall (@catalystwebwks), and Shiv Singh (@shivsingh).
In addition to talking about social media, the conference attendees and presenters participated in the event via social media as well. Using the hashtag #SMIATL I joined the other conference participants and shared observations and insights on Twitter during the conference, continuing the conversation online.
While it would be difficult for me to relate everything I learned and observed at the conference, I would like to share a few insights. Over the next few weeks I will post a series of blog entries – #SMIATL Lessons – about what I learned in Georgia.
September 30, 2010
AP Accepts Bloggers
It is about time! Earlier this month the Associated Press announced that bloggers should be cited as news sources. As a blogger I think this is great news!
In a world where all media is becoming social, this is long overdue. This gives bloggers recognition for the work they contribute to the news media. It also sets the stage for news to become a more open conversation instead of a centralized distribution of content. I think this is an intriguing possibility! News is what is going on in the world around us. By nature, most people are social beings. With technology our social circle and interaction is no longer restricted by our physical location. We live in a global social community. World news should be compiled through the collective observations and contributions of many connected citizens from around the globe, including bloggers.
Another implication this change will have is to remind bloggers of their responsibilities. Just like traditional journalists, bloggers will need to be held accountable for what the information they post and the words they write. But, this is not a negative implication. Many bloggers have assumed this responsibility all along – this change gives these individuals the credibility they deserve.
Thank you to the Associated Press for adapting their policy to better suit our socially connected world.
In a world where all media is becoming social, this is long overdue. This gives bloggers recognition for the work they contribute to the news media. It also sets the stage for news to become a more open conversation instead of a centralized distribution of content. I think this is an intriguing possibility! News is what is going on in the world around us. By nature, most people are social beings. With technology our social circle and interaction is no longer restricted by our physical location. We live in a global social community. World news should be compiled through the collective observations and contributions of many connected citizens from around the globe, including bloggers.
Another implication this change will have is to remind bloggers of their responsibilities. Just like traditional journalists, bloggers will need to be held accountable for what the information they post and the words they write. But, this is not a negative implication. Many bloggers have assumed this responsibility all along – this change gives these individuals the credibility they deserve.
Thank you to the Associated Press for adapting their policy to better suit our socially connected world.
September 11, 2010
9 Years Ago - I Still Remember
Today is the ninth anniversary of 9/11. The horrific events that occurred that day changed my life forever. My friends and coworkers were among those who died that clear September morning. I remember that day. And the week, month, and year that followed it. Those times – all of them – changed my life and changed me.
But, that is not why I am writing today.
This year I am sad to see this day surrounded by tension resulting from religious and political divisions. Hate and anger. Frustration. These are not the feelings that we should have as we remember those that died. I wish if there was one thing that we learned from 9/11 it would have been acceptance. And I hope to someday – in the not too distant future – live in a world with great tolerance and understanding.
But, that is not why I am writing today.
This year I am sad to see this day surrounded by tension resulting from religious and political divisions. Hate and anger. Frustration. These are not the feelings that we should have as we remember those that died. I wish if there was one thing that we learned from 9/11 it would have been acceptance. And I hope to someday – in the not too distant future – live in a world with great tolerance and understanding.
July 14, 2010
Visual Honesty
Last week the New York Times Media Decoder blog posted an entry about The Economist recently edited a photo for its cover. The image in question on the cover of the magazine shows President Obama standing alone on a Gulf Coast beach looking at the sand. Behind him looms a large oil rig and the title adds to the drama – “Obama v BP, The damage beyond the spill”. But, in the original photograph, taken by Reuters photographer, Larry Downing, the President is not alone. Instead he is standing on the shore speaking with Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen and local parish president Charlotte Randolph. The magazine digitally removed the other two individuals from the image.
The altered photograph and ensuing discussions in New York Times, the Guardian, and the blogosphere brings up some interesting points about the intersection of journalistic integrity, photojournalism, photography, and art.
We have always separated photographers from photojournalists. While there is an overlap in skills and many individuals have produced work that should earn them membership in both clubs, we have kept the distinction. In part I think this is to allow for creativity on the side of photographers. We have celebrated those who change their photos to tell us a story. The artist is given license to adapt reality through developing and manipulating, and now with software, to create the image in their eye. Not all photographers have taken this route. Many choose to present the world in its true, raw form. But, it is the artist's option. Photojournalists on the other hand are not allow license. They must present the world through the lens – accurate to the last detail. We charge them with recording history.
We are in the age of digital photography and photo-editing software. So, what about editing? Is it important for all news photography to be presented untouched? Or are some edits acceptable?
In response to the post on Media Decoder, The Economist pointed to their October 2008 cover when the magazine endorsed Barack Obama for president. That cover shows a photograph of the then presidential candidate striding towards the camera. The image background is bright white and the headline simply states “It’s time”. The Economist’s editor explains that in both images the magazine altered (or completely removed) the background to create focus on the subject – President Barack Obama.
The fact that the magazine has edited two recent covers of the same individual does not make the practice right – or less controversial. So, when is it acceptable to edit a photograph and when is it not? I do not think there is one answer to that question. Perhaps news sources and photojournalists should always alert viewers when an image has been edited. But, that would only be a band-aid solution and not address the controversy directly. The question would remain: Are there circumstances where it is acceptable for a news source or journalist to edit photographs? I think the best answer lies in the intent of the alterations. Obviously, altering an image to misguide the viewer does not coincide with the integrity standards we accept of all journalists – written or photographic.
The altered photograph and ensuing discussions in New York Times, the Guardian, and the blogosphere brings up some interesting points about the intersection of journalistic integrity, photojournalism, photography, and art.
We have always separated photographers from photojournalists. While there is an overlap in skills and many individuals have produced work that should earn them membership in both clubs, we have kept the distinction. In part I think this is to allow for creativity on the side of photographers. We have celebrated those who change their photos to tell us a story. The artist is given license to adapt reality through developing and manipulating, and now with software, to create the image in their eye. Not all photographers have taken this route. Many choose to present the world in its true, raw form. But, it is the artist's option. Photojournalists on the other hand are not allow license. They must present the world through the lens – accurate to the last detail. We charge them with recording history.
We are in the age of digital photography and photo-editing software. So, what about editing? Is it important for all news photography to be presented untouched? Or are some edits acceptable?
In response to the post on Media Decoder, The Economist pointed to their October 2008 cover when the magazine endorsed Barack Obama for president. That cover shows a photograph of the then presidential candidate striding towards the camera. The image background is bright white and the headline simply states “It’s time”. The Economist’s editor explains that in both images the magazine altered (or completely removed) the background to create focus on the subject – President Barack Obama.
The fact that the magazine has edited two recent covers of the same individual does not make the practice right – or less controversial. So, when is it acceptable to edit a photograph and when is it not? I do not think there is one answer to that question. Perhaps news sources and photojournalists should always alert viewers when an image has been edited. But, that would only be a band-aid solution and not address the controversy directly. The question would remain: Are there circumstances where it is acceptable for a news source or journalist to edit photographs? I think the best answer lies in the intent of the alterations. Obviously, altering an image to misguide the viewer does not coincide with the integrity standards we accept of all journalists – written or photographic.
June 8, 2010
Investing in Chocolate
While reading the New York Times last week I finally found the perfect financial instrument for me to invest in – bonds that pay dividends in chocolate. Chocolat Hotel, a UK cocoa grower and chocolatier, is offering ₤2000 and ₤4000 bonds to fund costs associated with the company’s ethical cocoa policy (including healthcare and farmer education). The bonds will pay investors the equivalent of 6.72% and 7.29% respectively in chocolate. These tasty dividends will be delivered in tasting boxes either six times a year for the ₤2000 bond or thirteen times a year for the ₤4000 bond.
After getting over my initial euphoric reaction to this investment opportunity started thinking about positive and negative issues that about this offering.
I do think it is an extremely creative way for a company to seek financing. And whether or not Chocolat Hotel successfully raises their desired amount of capital, this campaign has great marketing potential. It has already increased the company’s exposure in the media. Several online news portals have posted stories about the chocolate bonds, including New York Times, The Independent, Daily Mail, CBC News (Canadian Broadcasting Centre) and Australian Food News. Several blogs (including this one) have commented on the story as well (see links below). The campaign is also creating buzz on Twitter and other social media networks.
The campaign will increase brand exposure among loyal customers. In addition, the campaign might create awareness of the Chocolat Hotel brand among individuals outside the company’s traditional target audience. The international news coverage and social media buzz will increase the company’s brand awareness around the world. This could help the company expand internationally or draw visiting foreign tourists to their London shops.
So, will I buy a chocolate bond? I am not sure. It is not a practical investment for retirement accounts (like IRAs or 401Ks) – I want to eat my chocolate now, not wait until retirement to withdraw (eat) my earnings (chocolate). I could invest money from my savings, but for me ₤2000 a rather large sum to invest without monetary return. That said I will definitely visit a Chocolat Hotel shop next time I visit the UK!
After getting over my initial euphoric reaction to this investment opportunity started thinking about positive and negative issues that about this offering.
I do think it is an extremely creative way for a company to seek financing. And whether or not Chocolat Hotel successfully raises their desired amount of capital, this campaign has great marketing potential. It has already increased the company’s exposure in the media. Several online news portals have posted stories about the chocolate bonds, including New York Times, The Independent, Daily Mail, CBC News (Canadian Broadcasting Centre) and Australian Food News. Several blogs (including this one) have commented on the story as well (see links below). The campaign is also creating buzz on Twitter and other social media networks.
The campaign will increase brand exposure among loyal customers. In addition, the campaign might create awareness of the Chocolat Hotel brand among individuals outside the company’s traditional target audience. The international news coverage and social media buzz will increase the company’s brand awareness around the world. This could help the company expand internationally or draw visiting foreign tourists to their London shops.
So, will I buy a chocolate bond? I am not sure. It is not a practical investment for retirement accounts (like IRAs or 401Ks) – I want to eat my chocolate now, not wait until retirement to withdraw (eat) my earnings (chocolate). I could invest money from my savings, but for me ₤2000 a rather large sum to invest without monetary return. That said I will definitely visit a Chocolat Hotel shop next time I visit the UK!
June 5, 2010
The Value of Foursquare
If you are unfamiliar, Foursquare is a location-based social network. About two months ago I signed up and decided to try to figure it out. I checked in at a couple restaurants where I was having dinner with my husband. I added a few friends. Then I checked in at the marina where my dragon boat club practices. I earned two badges – a “Newbie” badge and an “I’m on a boat!” badge.
When I start using most new social media applications and services I get excited and become preoccupied with the new experience. Not so with Foursquare. The idea behind the application – continually sharing your location with others – did not appeal to me. I enjoy sharing information and staying in touch with friends and colleagues via Facebook and other social media networks and I often read information on Twitter; but, I do not need to tell the world where I am in real time. Foursquare did not get hooked me. It did not add value or entertainment to my life. So, I stopped using it and decided it was not for me.
Until now… I read a post on the New York Times Lede blog about how Chinese bloggers and activists are using Foursquare to mark their presence in Tiananmen Square and create a virtual gathering on the 21st anniversary of the government’s brutal killing of student demonstrator in that location on June 4th, 1989. A silent, virtual gathering! What a powerful idea!
Soon after the check-ins at Tiananmen Square began, the Chinese government censored Foursquare and blocked the application in mainland China. So, the virtual gathering made an impact!
I still may not choose to use Foursquare very often, but now I definitely see its potential value.
When I start using most new social media applications and services I get excited and become preoccupied with the new experience. Not so with Foursquare. The idea behind the application – continually sharing your location with others – did not appeal to me. I enjoy sharing information and staying in touch with friends and colleagues via Facebook and other social media networks and I often read information on Twitter; but, I do not need to tell the world where I am in real time. Foursquare did not get hooked me. It did not add value or entertainment to my life. So, I stopped using it and decided it was not for me.
Until now… I read a post on the New York Times Lede blog about how Chinese bloggers and activists are using Foursquare to mark their presence in Tiananmen Square and create a virtual gathering on the 21st anniversary of the government’s brutal killing of student demonstrator in that location on June 4th, 1989. A silent, virtual gathering! What a powerful idea!
Soon after the check-ins at Tiananmen Square began, the Chinese government censored Foursquare and blocked the application in mainland China. So, the virtual gathering made an impact!
I still may not choose to use Foursquare very often, but now I definitely see its potential value.
June 4, 2010
The Global PR Phenomenon
Last week I started following @BPGlobalPR, the spoof of British Petroleum public relations on Twitter. Reading these tweets offered a brief reprieve from reality on what has turning into a rather depressing news month (oil spills, Middle East violence, and economic instability in Europe). I was saddened and frustrated by the fact that oil had been spilling into the Gulf of Mexico for over a month and the repeated failures by BP to end this horrible environmental disaster. While the traditional media was doing their due diligence and covering the story with updated reports and live webcams, there was not as much online discussion or outcry as I felt the situation deserved. There seemed to be a void. Then I started reading @BPGlobalPR. The satire and outright frankness of the tweets offered the shimmer of a smile on an otherwise dismal situation without downplaying the travesty of what was going on.
When I began following @BPGlobalPR the account had just over 50,000 followers. Today their follower list is 123,000 and still growing. It is a testament to how fast information, news, and trends can spread virally. This is also an example of how, with the internet and a little creativity, anyone can affect public perception of a brand or entity.
And now, a phenomenon has begun. Following the Israeli attacks on the flotilla on May 31st, 2010, two new spoof Twitter accounts appeared – @IsraelGlobalPR and @HamasGlobalPR. Then soon after @UNGlobalPR, @GSGlobalPR (Goldman Sachs), and @ShellGlobalPR started tweeting. Now, @IranGlobalPR, @FIFAGlobalPR, @USAGlobalPR, and others have joined the fray.
@BPGlobalPR posted their first tweet on May 19th, 2010. In just over two weeks, not only has their influence in the Twittersphere exploded, but the phenomenon they started has also taken off. It will be interesting to see if it is a trend that gets incorporated into the social media culture or if it only remains in vogue briefly before disappearing into the bytes of the past.
But regardless of the longevity of this trend, it has proven one thing – public relations is no longer about one-way communications and controlling the message. In today’s interconnected world public relations also includes facilitating conversations and participating in the social web.
When I began following @BPGlobalPR the account had just over 50,000 followers. Today their follower list is 123,000 and still growing. It is a testament to how fast information, news, and trends can spread virally. This is also an example of how, with the internet and a little creativity, anyone can affect public perception of a brand or entity.
And now, a phenomenon has begun. Following the Israeli attacks on the flotilla on May 31st, 2010, two new spoof Twitter accounts appeared – @IsraelGlobalPR and @HamasGlobalPR. Then soon after @UNGlobalPR, @GSGlobalPR (Goldman Sachs), and @ShellGlobalPR started tweeting. Now, @IranGlobalPR, @FIFAGlobalPR, @USAGlobalPR, and others have joined the fray.
@BPGlobalPR posted their first tweet on May 19th, 2010. In just over two weeks, not only has their influence in the Twittersphere exploded, but the phenomenon they started has also taken off. It will be interesting to see if it is a trend that gets incorporated into the social media culture or if it only remains in vogue briefly before disappearing into the bytes of the past.
But regardless of the longevity of this trend, it has proven one thing – public relations is no longer about one-way communications and controlling the message. In today’s interconnected world public relations also includes facilitating conversations and participating in the social web.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)