Buffalo Communications Buffalo Communications is the premier provider of B2B marketing consultancy services to the outsourcing and high-tech industries.
With traditional communication channels disrupted by the disaster in Haiti, once
again social media’s importance was emphasised.
Minutes
after the catastrophic earthquake hit Haiti, the power of the internet
and social media started to shine through. Where more typical communication
channels were affected by the quake, Haitians and aid workers alike turned to
the likes of Twitter and Facebook to spread the word through the horrific scenes
captured on mobile phones.
Among
its multiple uses, social media in this case played a vital role in letting the
world know the disastrous extent of the tragedy and that help was needed
quickly in order to have the most positive effect.
Both
citizens and aid workers alike uploaded TwitPics, tweeted the
news and tried to find the whereabouts of loved ones on Facebook. The world
turned to the platform when all other forms of communication were not an
option. Even the landlines near the epicentre were wiped out by the quake, hampering
rescue efforts.
Next
came an outpouring of well wishes and support for the Haitian people as
thousands of Facebook and Twitter updates appeared every minute. Among these
updates were the appeals of the American Red Cross.
Even
if you were to type "Haiti"
into Twitter, Youtube or Facebook now, a few days on, you will soon encounter @redcross’s message of
appeal sent at 05:38 GMT on January 13, less than 48 hours after the tragedy.
In
such a short space of time the American Red Cross was able to both set up an
appeal and receive more than $35m in donations through the site.
Praise
has already been awarded by the American Red Cross to the social media platform
for “playing an extremely significant part” in spreading the word.
So this
got me wondering, what makes Twitter, Facebook and YouTube so accommodating when
communicating disasters quickly?
Well, when looking at
Twitter you need to address the key advantages of the site. The main advantage
is the initial barrier breakdown through the ability to communicate with anyone
and everyone from celebrities to your next door neighbour.
For example famous Haitian
musician, Wyclef Jean, managed to raise $1m for earthquake victims, after
appealing for help from his 1.3 million followers through Twitter. People like
Michelle Obama were also contacted by aid charities, first through tweeting
then retweeting appeals, further spreading the message.
Meanwhile on Youtube, there
was an influx in bloggers posting their own appeals and calling for donations.
On Facebook, awareness groups, such as Earthquake Haiti gained over hundreds of
thousands of members, linking them directly to charity sites.
These
examples show how social media is set on continuing to play an important role
in the communication of disasters, keeping the news at the forefront of the
public agenda whilst it starts to slip off of the front pages of the Tabloids
and fade out of the media’s spotlight.
In
keeping with the trend, please pass the word on and visit British Red Cross
In the wake of what people are calling the ‘mainstreaming’ (is that a word? better ‘mainstreamisation’) of twitter – Stephen Fry’s appearance on @wossy’s popular talk show – it draws ever closer to the moment that all social media start-ups inevitably; the ‘how the *!@£ do we make money out of it’ stage.
In an ideal social media world, of course, this moment would never occur and we could continue having fun in our ‘web 2.0topia’. But this is the real world and when something becomes a big success, founders inevitably want something for their hard work and rightly so. And so, the twitter founders crawl away from their computers after however many million tweets, and start looking for their holy grail – how to make millions from 140 word messages…
I say this stage is approaching, but the truth is that the wheels are already in motion with last week/month’s hiring of the first commercial twitter employee Kevin Thau. Interestingly though, it seems the founders aren’t in it for the quick buck after turning down a reported $500m purchase approach from Facebook late last year. Perhaps the contract was too restrictive in terms of future profits for them to accept, or perhaps they’re still loathe to see their grassroots social media site become another lumbering web 2.0 behemoth and all the restrictions that come with it – we can only guess. Either way, they’re sure to be planning something and it’s not likely to be long ‘til users find out what this is.
As is usual in these cases, if twitter does bow to a takeover eventually or continues to seek market-based funding for organic growth, it all comes down to how the thing is going to make money. How they do this is of course, the million/billion dollar question.
But there are a few things that need to be worked out beforehand to make sure any roll-out goes smoothly and avoid the frosty reception received by Facebook’s Beacon system:
·The technology – Drew Benvie of Hotwire commented on the latest failure of twitter to cope with big peaks in demand. Not counting on the weight of British support on twitter, they were not awake to the inevitable usage peak that would come after Stephen Fry’s appearance on Jonathan Ross’s chat show. The old PR faux pas occurred where thousands wanted to check out the website and due to sheer numbers, nobody could. Quality and continuity of service need to be foolproof before any thoughts of cash are had
·Understanding uses – twitter is a boon to marketing types and journalists but there is still a massive portion of web-savvy consumers that don’t use it. Twitter is amazing for information sharing and that’s why we all love it, but some people still simply can’t see the point. Many now-advocates of twitter (including me) dismissed it on the first try and many others will inevitably join, but some will never get involved. Stephen Waddington, MD of Rainier PR looked at the tech adoption lifecycle in his blog. Twitter and marketers using twitter need to understand this if they are to do anything profitable with the site.
·Understanding users – people are often put-off when new media sites are ‘tainted’ with the corporate dollar. Twitter needs to tread carefully, understanding the who, how and why of using the site before anything is even beta tested on the site
·Innovation – obviously advertising money has to come into the bargain at some point, but an innovative service demands innovation in monetisation. So many sites just slap on a load of banner or flash ‘slide over’ ads in a quick stack ‘em up and pile ‘em high selling mentality. If twitter is to carry advertising, it needs to develop something non-intrusive and useful whilst addressing any data privacy concerns that arise. Although, the fact that everything uploaded to the site is public anyway may negate certain problems from the outset.
There’s definitely a fair way to go before twitter makes any significant cash but they’re bound to start trying soon enough. For the when and how we’ll just have to wait and see…
BEBO is breaking into new markets like never before. Rather than limit itself to Europe or even the Earth, it plans to build the social networking phenomenon Gliese 581c.
In a classic PR stunt, the networking site has announced plans to send 500 messages, to the nearest planet able to support which happens to be Gliese 581c, a mere 20.5 light years away.
Whether the market conditions are right for this hubris-laden move is yet to be ascertained. However, it is hoped that the iPhone will be well-established on the planet, vastly enhancing the chances of starting one or two BEBO communities, when the messages finally get there in 2029.
To sum up a rather ridiculous post I can only say it’s nice to see the old PR tactics are still going strong in this time of change – well done to the BEBO comms team.
Interesting to see another big company dive into a costly YouTube copyright lawsuit without fully assessing the opportunities that may be at hand. Mediaset, an Italian media group is suing Google for 500m Euros for alleged "illegal commercial use" of copyrighted clips on YouTube.
While Buffalo in no way condones dodgy copyright dealings and thinks it’s wrong for others to benefit from other people’s hard work, Mediaset could really benefit from taking a more ‘laissez faire’ approach. In a similar vein to my previous post 'A word on music piracy' there are obvious unexplored avenues that could turn situation into a great opportunity.
As with most forms of Social and Web 2.0 media it can often be great marketing to simply let go of the message. Doing so in YouTube is likely to be the best policy. This doesn’t mean just giving in, rather attempting to turn a bad situation into something really profitable.
There are also numerous benefits to be had by doing this. For example: why doesn’t the company strike a deal with Google for instant click-through purchases where its clips are featured?
It’s also true that many YouTube users check out the latest trailers, view an episode of a programme or even listen to music before moving onto an actual legal and profitable purchase. In this sense the site becomes a showcase and ‘try before you buy’ mechanism, complementing rather than negatively affecting the company’s sales.
While the likely recompense for Mediaset, should they win the lawsuit, is large, the rewards could be much greater if they tried a more canny approach…
News reports today on the launch of Cuil, a new search engine set up by a band of Google defectors, in a bid to challenge the domination of their former employer. Apparently Cuil boasts a page index three times the size of Google, but this unsurprisingly is denied by its big brother.
The first thing is that it’s great to see some kind of new life is still left in the search industry, where AltaVista, Ask, MSN, and Yahoo, while representing fair-sized companies, have still failed to capture a decent portion of the market. There has also been little sign of a challenge to the incumbent from these existing players – the proposed Microsoft-Yahoo deal, that could give it the scale and cash to mount a real challenge, continues to blow hot and cold.
However, while search mutineers obviously have the inside track on the invincible Google, it remains to be seen if they’ll ever be able to truly lock horns with such an established player. Technology and algorithms they may have, but Google grew up in a time where it was obviously far ahead of its rivals. At the time those customers demanding quality and relevant search results were there for the taking and Google took the opportunity.
Cuil is attempting to steal a march in what is a veritable monopoly in the search space. ‘Googling’ is well engrained in the mentality of today’s internet user and will be a hard habit to break – anybody fancy ‘Cuiling it’? So to have any chance of success Cuil needs to offer something substantially different and substantially better than Google – a mammoth task.
Whether a group of ex-Googlites have the scale, investment or the technical knowledge to do this still remains to be seen. For all we know they could be sitting on something that could blow the industry wide open, of they could just be another ‘me-too’.
What I will say, is that for an industry desperately needing some healthy competition, I wish Cuil all the luck in the world.
News in the Guardian today reports on a government-backed drive to crush internet music piracy by targeting severe offenders parents.
The move, backed by BT, Virgin Media, Orange, Tiscali and BSkyB, will see stern ‘disist or face the consequences’ type letters dropping unhappily on to people’s doorsteps in hope of simply scaring kids out of the illegal downloading game.
Of course illegal music sharing is a bad thing and does lose the industry large amounts of money each year. However, I can’t help thinking that this is approaching the problem in the wrong way.
Yes the problem is rife amongst young people but generally this kind of thing is frowned upon in adult society. The result is that that kids usually graduate from the world of Bittorent and other P2P file sharing into the paying and legal world of marketplace of iTunes.
Microsoft has the right idea in this area – it actually uses the proliferation of illegal Microsoft software to inform its future strategy and seek out new markets. Growing use of pirated software in a developing country can then be developed into a paying and profitable customer base.
Adopting a policy of fear to get kids out of illegal music, rather than turning the situation into an advantage, runs the future risk of losing possibly long-term and lucrative customers.
An interesting Slashdot post today notes a new deal struck between Amazon US and TiVo (the popular US advert-zapping set top pox much maligned by the advertising community). Rather than partnering to deliver video content from Amazon or something similarly innovative, it seems that TiVo has sold its soul doing a full circle and become a product pushing device in its own right.
The deal it appears is to serve up instantly buyable merchandise around certain top US shows so that viewers can watch and buy right away. Of course this is better than simple scattergun advertising but will TiVo users see it this way? After all, they bought the box to escape from adverts only to find themselves being served adverts through the very same device.
I have heard chatter about some new and more exciting developments in the IPTV advertising space. One such example is being able to provide targeted ads alongside web delivered content relating to their content and previous purchasing tastes. Such a service could technically serve different ads to different people even thought they were using the same IPTV service and watching exactly the same show.
This is a great idea and is likely to garner greater response and be much less intrusive than traditional methods. However, the way this kind of IPTV ad is delivered and the data used to target consumers obviously will have to be implemented smartly to avoid flak from internet privacy advocates.
Either way, surely this is where the market should be looking? Somewhere infinitely more effective than an advertising killer starting to provide adverts..
A giant leap for BT; a medium-sized step for the internet
Just weeks after Ofcom’s announcement that it plans to back up companies that need to make ‘risky investments’ in next-generation broadband networks, BT has confirmed itself as the first on the scene. The announcement? That it plans to invest £1.5bn in the rollout of fibre optic networks to 10 million homes by 2012.
While the timeframes of the move means that the man on the street may not see the benefits of the move for some time, the announcement will be celebrated widely and rightly so.
The UK is currently lagging behind many other countries on network infrastructure but has a burgeoning music download and IPTV industry. These companies increasingly use more and more of the UK’s limited available bandwidth. As a result, iPlayer (mentioned in the BT announcement release), Joost, 4OD, Kangaroo (if it makes it through competition investigations) are all on course for a collision in the fight for bandwidth.
Ofcom’s support and BT’s move couldn’t have come at a more fortuitous time. While fairly late in the day where Europe is concerned, this move will do much to kickstart further investment in infrastructure from those telcos and ISPs that don’t want to be left behind in the fibre optic stakes.
The move is also the first step in shifting the super size brick that looms ominously on the horizon of IPTV providers, paving the way for next generation web services. Streaming personalised music stations comprehensive on-demand video, increased take-up of online ‘games’ such as Second Life and Google lively and many other services that require a lot of bandwidth should all result.
While we could be talking years for some of these developments it should be an exciting time for the internet as a whole.
As if to confirm Gartner’s assertions about the growth of business social networking/CRM applications, covered in a recent post, BT has snapped up Ufindus, a popular social directory, for a mere snip at £20m.
While the valuation of these types of businesses is always shaky, BT’s move marks another interesting development in the drive to truly engage customers in a purchasing process.
However, while the intentions are good and buisness case for the purchase sound, it will be interesting to see what kind of interface will be used by BT and the other companies that start to dabble in social network-type interfaces.
The worry is that with so many different sites doing this kind of thing, trying to get information out of customers via sign-up mechanisms could become increasingly difficult. Indeed, the company and service-specific social network could become the online equivalent of the much maligned store loyalty card. Recent research from Pigsback.com, an online cashback company, found that people are increasingly disengaged with cards due to the sheer number that they have to manage and the poor rewards that are usually offered.
Companies investing in social networks are usually going to be looking for ad revenue. However, in the drive to create increasingly specific user profiles and thus more attractive databases for advertisers, they may be in danger of putting people off. Consumers only have a limited amount of time, patience and enthusiasm to give over personal data. As a result companies will need to become increasingly savvy about exactly what they need out of customers and manage the implementation of their social networks very carefully.
Although I will inevitably get one in the not too near future, I plan to come fashionably late to the 3G iPhone party. A couple of weeks or a month should do it.
While I appear a little blasé about the launch of Apple’s latest big (updated device), I am still filled with admiration for the immense power of what is one of the biggest brands in the world.
One cannot help but be impressed by a brand that brings queues this morning, to the door of every O2 shop in the country. As a marketer it has to be an awesome feeling, knowing you’ve done a pretty damn good job as the sales come flooding in.
However, after below-projected sales of the initial, slightly slow iPhone (are they offering trade-ins now?), Apple executives may well be a little less relaxed than expected.
Still going with the limited distribution strategy (O2 and Carphone Warehouse) it is easy to wonder if Apple is doing enough to capture that lucrative business market that it secretly covets.
The iPhone’s kudos with the coolest of execs is undoubtedly growing but is it doing enough compatibility-wise for the more mainstream business user? Difficulty of linking up with traditional business programmes – Outlook, Microsoft Office etc – means Blackberry is likely to maintain its edge for sometime yet.
However, doing too much to covert the business market could also spell trouble for Apple’s traditional trendy heartland – will they be increasingly turned off by an overly business-centric iPhone?
The possible and likely future solution to this conundrum, after an inevitable period of fence-sitting, is likely to be some sort of tie up with someone like Google. A move away from workstation-specific, Microsoft-dominated applications, towards web-delivered, cross-compatible programmes, like Google Apps, is likely to be more palatable to both audiences.
This would also mean that Apple wouldn’t really have to choose between audiences and could continue its mission to be top dog in the cool and innovative company stakes – a title which it unquestionably owns outright. Ah, c’est la vie!
