Whatever...

Social Media Week 2010

It’s Social Media Week! To mark the occasion, Johnson King has teamed up with one of its Global Reach partner agencies – US-based Affect Strategies – to report on the latest from the annual global conference.  Read our collective thoughts on the week on this blog, or check out our LinkedIn discussion groups and JohnsonKingPR Twitter updates.

Has social media come of age?

By Tom Kirkham

The Johnson King Twitter Team is excited, and with good reason.  You see today marks the start of Social Media Week, a five day annual conference taking place simultaneously across three continents.  Twelve months ago I doubt I’d have been as excited, for while I appreciated the need for companies to investigate new media channels, I personally felt underwhelmed with Twitter and the whole social media experience.  However, over the past year and the events I’ve witnessed, I’ve undergone a road-to-Damascus conversion (except without the temporary blinding).

 

Most of these events have taken place on Twitter – surely the online phenomenon of 2009.  We’ve had Haiti and Iran and Michael Jackson and many other fascinating global trending topics, but the events that have influenced me the most have been UK-specific.  For example, in October 2009 The Guardian newspaper received a court gagging order, preventing it from reporting on a parliamentary debate over Trafigura, a company implicated in a toxic waste dumping scandal.  In obtaining the gagging order, Trafigura did not consider the Twitter-effect.  Twitter users and bloggers pieced together the various elements of the puzzle, and within 24 hours the whole story had spread across the UK – including to other national newspapers – rendering the gagging order meaningless. 

 

At the time, we asked whether this was the moment at which Twitter came of age, and just a week later further evidence suggested that indeed it had, when Jan Moir at the Daily Mail wrote a hugely controversial article on the recently departed Boyzone singer Stephen Gately.  Twitter users didn’t like this, and within hours Jan Moir’s name was social media mud; indeed, users submitted so many complaints to the Press Complaints Commission that its website crashed, forcing the commission to create a special page specifically for Jan Moir complaints.

 

The final part of my conversion occurred on Facebook.  In December 2009 we witnessed Joe McElderry, winner of the X Factor television series, going head-to-head with iconic rap-metal outfit Rage Against The Machine, in a music chart battle started by disgruntled music fans fed up with X Factor’s monopoly of the Christmas number one spot.  Jon and Tracy Morter launched a Facebook group and set about creating social media noise, through their efforts gaining thousands of group members, attracting significant media interest, and even getting the band themselves involved.  RATM’s eventual triumph marked the first ever download-only UK number one, with a song from 1992 that never would have re-charted without the power of social media.

 

Unprecedented?  Well, social media’s impact in general is pretty unprecedented.  Sure, there’s an element of the ‘angry mob’ about all this, but in each of the above cases, Twitter has been used to liberate and to enforce change, which bodes well for the forthcoming UK general election.  The main political parties will all be plotting their social media election strategies, and it remains to be seen whether they’ll successfully compete with the efforts of the general public.

 

But can social media channels really be exploited for business gain?  For giant multinational companies the answer may be obvious, but what about everyone else?  At Johnson King we’re regularly asked by small-to-medium-sized tech companies what they should be doing on LinkedIn, YouTube, Facebook etc. and there’s not always a straightforward answer. 

 

Earlier I mentioned Twitter coming of age, yet at the time of writing, the trending topics are ‘#HugATree’, ‘#desperatehousewives’, ‘#Ugly Betty’ and worryingly, ‘#itampon’.  Similarly, on Facebook this morning I was invited to become a fan of ‘Picking leaves off trees and bushes and ripping them up whilst walking’.  Managing social media outreach can be unbelievably time-consuming, and with so much pointless ‘noise’ out there, your company risks being completely drowned out unless you can plot an effective and viable strategy that ties into your existing marketing and PR activities.

 

It will be interesting to see how the various presentations during Social Media Week tackle this issue, because one thing’s for sure – social media isn’t going away anytime soon.

 

Victim of mobile fraud? T-luck

By Kathryn Mills-Webb

 

If your phone was stolen and the thieves racked up a huge bill, would you expect to be liable?

 

Unfortunately this is all too often the reality.  Take my case for example.  An old phone was stolen when our house was burgled, and given that close to 100 other items were also stolen, we didn’t immediately notice the mobile was missing as we hadn’t used it for months.  The only reason we kept it was because it was cheaper to pay the nominal monthly contract than the cancellation fee. 

 

Or at least it was cheaper until the burglars spent £1,400 on calls to Colombia in just 72 hours, and T-Mobile told us we had to pay!

 

Apparently this is a common gripe against all the big mobile operators – there are hundreds of similar stories on the web.  Many people don’t have phone insurance (and even if you do, it often only covers the cost of replacing the phone.  My question is why doesn’t T-Mobile (and the others) have the technology in place to prevent this sort of crime from the outset?  While not compulsory, most banks have regular checking systems in place that alert them to any potentially fraudulent activity on the account) – surely this kind of technology could and should be easily transferred to check for unusual activity on mobiles too? 

 

In fact, I’d argue that mobile operators have a similar duty of care to their customers.  Just as banks can temporarily put a hold on credit and debit cards in the interests of fraud prevention, phone companies should automatically block the SIM card when the bill goes over a certain level or when the activity does not fit with general usage patterns. 

 

I’d certainly choose a company that offered me this peace of mind over a cheaper rival any day – it’s just unfortunate that there isn’t really any choice at the moment.

In the net of social networks

By Stefanie Nowak

 

Social networks are by no means a new phenomenon, but what strikes me these days is just how many of my friends are now utterly addicted to Facebook and other social networking sites in Germany. This begs the question, is it still possible for me to manage my social life without the help of web 2.0?

 

The beauty of social networks is that they help you get back in touch with people you haven’t seen in years.  But I’d argue these people aren’t really friends – you simply say hello, take a look at each other photos and that’s about it.  I’m also wondering why people feel the need to collect hundreds of ‘virtual’ friends.   I'm quite happy sticking with my real world friends.

 

To be honest, I find the the prospect of only having virtual friends (and always socialising in a virtual environment) pretty scary, but, if Facebook’s popularity is anything to go by, I’m in the minority.  However, as long as I can still hang out with my friends in the old fashioned way, I’ll do so without thinking too much about my web future.  

Google Waves goodbye to China

By Ben Roberts

 

Following a “sophisticated and targeted” cyber attack originating from China, aimed at accessing the Gmail accounts of human rights activists, Google has refused to continue to censor its search results and has threatened to leave China altogether.  Interestingly, when Google originally launched its Chinese service in 2006, the company argued that pulling out of the country altogether would be even more damaging to civil liberties than agreeing to state censorship.

 

There are many theories on the motive behind Google’s move.  An interesting question is whether the search giant would even be considering this if it had managed to capture a larger proportion of the Chinese search market – it currently holds around 30%, poor by its standards.  Or perhaps Google is trying to restore faith in its brand, as many saw the willingness to accept Chinese censorship as betraying its informal company motto, “Don’t be evil.”

 

Google is almost untouchable in its position as one of the world’s largest and most powerful companies, but surely even it cannot run the risk of alienating China.  With calls for other Western companies to follow Google’s example, it will be interesting to see how this all pans out.  Will Google have waved goodbye to the largest market in the world, or will it be credited with leading the cyber fight back against a surveillance super power?

 

Beginning of the end for the NLA?

By Mike King

  

It is good to see a company challenging the NLA’s latest attempts to squeeze more cash out of the PR industry.  Meltwater, a company that, among other things, provides online media monitoring services, is challenging the NLA’s right to charge a licence fee to allow it to forward links to free online news content.

  

Condemnation of the NLA’s latest money making scheme is pretty widespread across the PR industry, and has been since these new charges were first announced.  Not that being unpopular is anything new for the NLA.  It has always existed on the basis of an aggressive stance and threats of legal action against anyone that didn’t pay up. 

 

Even by its own standards, the NLA is taking things to a new level.   To me, it doesn’t appear that the NLA has much of a case in forcing companies to buy a copyright licence if they want to forward links to free content.  Particularly when the online news sites that the NLA represents already actively encourage their readers to forward the same content to other users via ‘share this story’ links. 

  

The NLA says that it draws a distinction between readers and ‘news aggregators’.  We’re not a news aggregator, we’re a PR agency that simply sends links to relevant news stories to our clients.  Of course, the NLA says we will also have to pay for the privilege of forwarding links to free content.

 

Interestingly, some legal opinion states that there is no copyright over hyperlinks.  Maybe, just maybe, the days of the NLA are over.  We can only live in hope.

Does filesharing help or hurt the music industry?

By Caroline Invaco

 

In light of the new legislation proposed by Lord Mandelson, music file sharing has come back into the limelight.  Regardless of whether or not this bill should be passed, it does bring up an interesting debate to further explore:  does file sharing help or hurt the music industry?

 

The arguments from both sides of the discussion are logical.  From the music industry’s point of view, illegal music downloads hurt the industry because the artists and record labels are losing money.  Alternatively, from the artists’ point of view, downloading helps the industry because it opens up a much bigger audience, which in turn generates revenue through concert ticket sales and legal music downloading.  Consumers appreciate this better access to a larger base of music than previously possible.  Both sides make valid cases, but which side does the research support? 

 

The big problem with determining what to believe is that there is no way to figure out what revenue is actually lost or gained due to illegal file sharing.  If people can’t access the music for free, would they download it in the first place?  Therefore, the music industry needs to wrap its head around the fact that profit losses or gains may be irrelevant—it’s really all about the exposure gains!  Right now the industry needs a boost, and it will not get that through witch hunts that do nothing but cast the industry in bad light.  The music industry needs to work with the file sharing networks rather than against them to promote further sales.  If you can’t beat them, join them.

 

The way to stem losses from illegal file sharing is to encourage legal alternatives that are at a price most people are willing to pay.  Sites such as Pandora or Spotify are cheap, convenient substitutes to both illegal downloading and more expensive physical sales.  If the music industry could only work with certain websites to give more of these types of options, they would be able to reap the benefits from both the sales of the music and from the larger audiences that file sharing provides.  And if consumers such as you or I saw the record labels promoting sales for the sake of the music rather than the sake of a profit, maybe we would be more willing to pay for songs instead of using the illegal sites.

Worried about your e-reputation? Then pay someone to wipe your past

By Alexandra Radius

 

Anyone looking for a job these days will live in fear of their prospective employer unearthing some dubious photo on Facebook or dodgy blog post that could jeopardise their application. But never fear, new businesses are now beginning to appear that promise to repair your online reputation for you.  Indeed, here in France, the online reputation management sector is particularly hot, with numerous firms now focusing on this emerging market.

 

One example is Reputation Squad, which specialises in "e-reputation" management and is staffed by IT specialists, lawyers and communication professionals. It identifies the authors and publishers of ‘offending’ web content and asks them to delete it (or at least to modify it, by replacing the name of their client with his or her initials). If they are unable to contact the owner of the website, they simply “drown” the embarrassing story by posting SEO-enabled content that pushes it down the search engine rankings.

 

Even though I find this concept very intelligent, I also find it a little dubious. If someone can change your past, who’s to say they won’t also improve your online reputation by fabricating some positive stories?

  

For me this new trend makes the internet less democratic, as it allows those who can afford it, to manipulate their reputations to their own advantage.  Too bad for those who can’t afford it.  But I guess that’s a story as old as time.

  

However, it is difficult to see how this concept will catch on completely.  There will always be those who stand up for the freedom of the press, freedom of speech and who are prepared to  speak out against censorship of any kind – particularly in a country like France!  If we can’t believe what we read, then what is the world coming to?

Apple shakes up the app market in more ways than one

By Dana Hashem

 

Stop press.  Just a month after it announced 85,000 apps loaded onto the App Store, Apple has reached a staggering new milestone.  Yes, 100,000 apps are already here, and they're drawing iAddicts through Apple's legendary virtual doors like moths to a flame.

 

This impressive figure seemingly leaves the Android app market paling in comparison, but can Apple really afford to rest on its laurels?  According to a recent study, if an app doesn't make it into the top 1000 listings on the Apple website, the chances it will be downloaded onto more than 1.67% of iPhones is pretty slim.  While this may not present much of a hurdle to Apple's business model - after all, nobody points the finger at Tesco when a new product won't shift from its shelves - it certainly puts the figures into perspective, and raises the ominous question of whether Android will stay in the rearview mirror for long.

 

With so many apps storming through its approval process, Apple has to tread carefully if it's to maintain the brand integrity that forms the foundations upon which its mighty empire stands - and the road to app domination has not been without its hiccups.

 

You all know what I'm talking about.  Whatever possessed the powers that be to pass the infamous Baby Shaker app will always remain beyond the comprehension of any self-respecting PR, and the subsequent media fallout serves as a lesson to us all in how the tides of social media can turn in an instant.

 

The alarm bells were ringing in the blogosphere just hours after the app went live, and thanks to the rapid viral online spread of the story, it was hard for the national media to miss.  Somehow, reassurance from developer Sikalosoft that 'no babies were harmed in the making of this application' didn't quite seem to cut it, and Apple came under heavy fire for approving the app. 

 

Of course, Apple has since learned to take a more cautious approach to vetting its apps, endeavouring to position itself as more 'moral watchdog' than 'heartless corporation'.  Rest assured everyone - since the Baby Shaker blip, the company has valiantly saved us all from heresy by rejecting the Me so holy app, and also saw fit to deprive us of the tempting opportunity to part with $999.99 by banning the intentionally dispensable I am rich app.

 

And lo, the world is a better place.  Rather than passing the buck, it paid off for Apple to acknowledge its mistake and take corrective action as soon as the story broke – leaving the somewhat less contrite Sikalosoft to take the worst of the flack.

 

So will Apple lose out to Droid in the end?  Only time will tell, but with a wisened PR strategy and unstoppable momentum, it doesn't look like this app giant will be giving up its lead anytime soon.

 

Has the recession saved us from the surveillance state?

By Richard Ratcliffe

 

Prior to the start of the economic downturn there was significant concern that the UK was drifting inevitably toward a nightmarish dystopian future made up of CCTV, detention without charge and Big Brother style databases.  Outraged editorials asserted this was an assault on our civil liberties whilst official sources claimed it would make us all safer in the long run and simply a case of sacrificing a little liberty for additional security.

 

While the furore over 90/42/28 day detention periods eventually subsided, databases have continued to be controversial.  However, the news this week suggests that, for a while at least, two Government databases will be significantly scaled back.  Plans to store details of every phone call and email have been ‘kicked into the long grass’ while ministers are expected to announce that, rather than holding information indefinitely, the DNA records of innocent people arrested in England and Wales should be held for no longer than six years.

 

We have all been complaining about sub-prime mortgages, short selling and bankers for over a year now, but I wonder if we’ve at last found something to thank the recession for.  The proposed communications database was predicted to cost up to £2bn over ten years, while the DNA database would need hundreds of millions of taxpayers’ money, pretty steep when you consider it has helped to solve only 0.7% of all crimes and most investigations don't use DNA at all.  

 

With an election coming up and the bank bailouts still fresh in people’s minds, it would surely be political suicide for the Government to spend such vast sums on already unpopular projects.  One thing I'm sure of is that it will have been economics and politics, rather than any genuine concern for public opinion, which have been the primary factors in these decisions.

Internet for all – claims and the reality

By Juliana Wimmer

 

For years now the UK, France and Germany have been working on their broadband initiatives. In Germany, for example, the so called “Breitbandinitiative” was founded in 2002 as a common project of governmental and economic bodies and has since tried to improve broadband coverage in the country.

 

More recently, these national initiatives have been backed at a European level.  In 2007 the European Parliament voted for the development of a European Broadband Policy while the European Recovery Plan states that “broadband connectivity is a key component for the development, adoption and use of information and communication technologies in the economy and in society.”

 

The importance of broadband as a means of improving business processes and communication is also underlined by a recent OECD study measuring that, by 2011, broadband communication will improve the productivity of developed states by as much as a third.

 

In Germany, at least, the reality seems to be a long way off the OECD’s prediction. Many German regions still have unacceptable broadband access. Indeed, five million Germans have no access to the internet because no provider is able to give them access. To add to this problem, the economic crisis has negatively impacted investment levels into German broadband initiatives, which are now considered too costly. There’s also infighting between Deutsche Telekom and its competitors about VDSL usage and only a few cities have fibre networks.

 

Having said all this, Germany (and France!) seem to do better than the UK.