Why PR is losing the social media battle: Day Three
Argh, is it really only 3 days since I started mobilising people to #fixPR?
Where did it go wrong and how can we fix it….?
Measurement
PR agrees to be measured by some really dumb things sometimes
Before I even continue I have to reference Measurement Camp as probably the best group looking at this issue and pro actively solving it with industry-wide collaboration. They have an excellent wiki and hold regular meetups. This will probably be more useful to you than anything you’ll read here.
So listen, PR is not a Google Adwords campaign. Yet time and again PRs agree to, and dare I say even suggest, that a campaign’s success hangs on whether it drove traffic to a website or microsite. While I’m not saying that social media measurement shouldn’t look to drive traffic, it doesn’t have to be the be all and end all for a few reasons:
- PR activity will never drive comparable volume traffic like Search and Advertising campaigns
- A link resulting from PR activity is online ‘forever’ so, unlike a Search campaign you shouldn’t be evaluated within a set time
- PR links don’t have conversion rates like online advertising does, that’s because they’re supposed to do very different things, so why apply the same measurement?
- Sometimes a website or microsite isn’t the core offering, so consumers ultimately aren’t very interested to go there
You'll never win comparing apples and oranges
I know it’s not uncommon for a Marketing Director to say “Well I’ll get more bang for my buck by putting money I would’ve given towards PR into online advertising and SEO.”
Come on PR! You don’t need to compete in that way. You are well versed in how to debate the old PR vs Advertising issue. You just need to update the script to a social media version. [In fact, one advantage to online PR activity is for the first time the traditional PR metric of word-of-mouth can actually be measured by a host of “buzz monitoring” tools.]
Ok, so what *should* you measure? Well you *should* set some objectives first. We know it’s bad practice but it’s amazing how many social media drives are initiated and then everyone gets to the end and isn’t sure (or even worse, disagrees) whether it was successful.
In addition setting an objective means that you may not know exactly what to measure but you’ll know what you want to achieve and can check a range of data to see if you’re doing that.
Let’s use an analogy that three different businesses wanting to start something in social media are like three people who decide to take up running.
Person 1 – wants to run a marathon
Person 2 – wants to be fitter for their 5-a-side team
Person 3 – has just moved to the city and wants to join a club to meet people
All three will approach learning to run in different ways because they have very different objectives (i.e. you wouldn’t all jump on Twitter and try and grow to as many followers as possible)
Imagine if we said at the end of a couple of months “Ok, who can run the longest and furthest. That person’s the winner”. Obviously Person 1 would’ve been trained for endurance and perhaps completed a marathon by now, it wouldn’t be fair to hold the other runners to the same measurement when they wanted to achieve different things.
Let’s say Person 2’s five-a-side team had won every game and they’d managed to play each game the whole way through without alternating with other players. W00T, they’re a winner!
Person 3 may not be a great runner at all, but have made lots of friends in the process, which was their key aim in running in the first place. Yay, they’re a winner too!
What about if Person 2 also found that they’d lost a stone and reduced their cholesterol? That would be a happy side benefit, no? You’d be mad to say “sorry, that’s not of interest”.
My point is…are you still with me… you have to measure what’s important to the business and you also have to include positive and unexpected benefits as part of learning what works in social media for a particular brand.
If you’re realistic about what’s possible from the outset (remember you wouldn’t measure offline PR directly by sales, don’t make the same mistake online) then you can define your own benchmarks and success metrics from a range of options.
Being facetious I propose the following social media measurement scale. I call it the “Ahrens Scale”a.k.a “The Good Thing, Bad Thing scale”
Here’s how you would apply it.
Drove traffic = Good Thing
Resulted a in a lot of negative commentary and formation of a hate group on Facebook = Bad Thing
Got a link from a blog or website = Good Thing
No increase in online conversation in any way = Bad Thing
Your online content re-purposed and re-used by online fans = Good Thing
Data capture = Good Thing
Rich media content like images or video was submitted by users = Good Thing
You created a Microsite = Bad Thing (Just kidding, I have a love/hate relationship with microsites)
Who could fix this?
- Monitoring providers: Need to sell their products based on measurement benefits “you can track and measure X, Y, Z”
- Agencies: Update your social media knowledge, study good practice, so you can lead on metrics
Solution? Become expert in what can be measured, then apply relevant metrics to pre-defined objectives. Shout about unexpected side benefits which result from activity.
Crib notes:
- It’s a no brainer: Set objectives before activity starts
- Don’t measure by non-PR measurables
- Look for side benefits and then perhaps use as benchmark or KPI for next time
- Don’t build microsites (Kidding again!)
Why PR is losing the social media battle: Day Two
Part two in a series of posts looking at PR’s bad rap when it comes to social media. Where did it go wrong and how to fix it…
PR doesn’t understand the internet
PRs, I love you, but you still don’t understand the internet. I don’t mean in the way that my mum doesn’t understand the internet, but basic stuff like Google.
A few years ago we worked with a national newspaper to get a write up on a client, this included that all important link from the publication’s website to the client’s website. Links are good right? Between patting ourselves on the back I called the client
Me: “We got [national newspaper] to write about you and they linked to your site!”
Client: “Meh. Yeah we only got about two traffic referrals from the article so big whoop. BTW I just spoke to our SEO agency, could you instead get us coverage from [other major news site] and [another niche site]?”
After smashing the phone in frustration while dying a little inside hanging up I decided to call my client’s Search agency. SEO is considered as evil, if not more so, than PR. I didn’t know what to expect but here’s how it went…
Me: “We do PR for CLIENT and I need to know what you need us to know”
SEO: “Wow! Thanks for calling! It’s so great to hear from a client’s PR agency. You guys do great work which is very valuable to us.”
The internet: Revolutionary but not evolutionary
I’m sorry - Great work? Valuable? The SEO agency went further than stroking our egos. They sent over a list of the top sites, ranked in order of importance, where it was important for our client to be mentioned or linked from. They also sent us a list of keywords we should be including in all campaign activity and offered to check over press releases and make sure they were optimised.
Basically they’d handed me an online media target list, tweaked our messaging, and profiled our target audience in some detail. And they weren’t just being nice [Incidentally they were nice but were mainly giving me the info to support their work].
That’s when I realised that for all my lofty ideals about social media and communities, influencers and engagement; I didn’t really know how the internet really worked, yet I was trying to harness it for clients.
At the heart of this point is Search, but also the ways people use the web to collate and share information once they’ve found it, and online purchasing processes where E-Commerce is in place.
Nothing illustrated more to me recently that PRs still don’t get important concepts like Search more than a recent PR week debate around SMNRs [SMRs. Worth they paper they're printed on?]
Some PRs were talking about SMNRs as if they were just a paper press release on the internet. Many looked at it with an old PR mentality without considering how they might be part of a wider online marketing mix. Of the six opinions captured, and a host of comments, only a few showed an understanding of how an optimized and online release might fit with new PR methodology (Adam Zand, Ian McKee, Mark O’Toole, Ann Krauss – you stood out to me).
Yeah, yeah, I’m no expert but I have tried to broaden my knowledge of the web and internet marketing over the years.
What I know now can still only fill the back of a napkin but here it is:
- When PR and SEO aligns they maximise each other’s value
- PR actually creates content (great for Organic vs. Paid Search) which is beneficial online over time - not just the duration of an Adwords campaign
- The internet is tracking lots of useful stuff, go find and use that data
- Social media activity can work with online sales [Just don't use it as the only yard-stick. More to come on measurement]
- Most social features aren’t just ‘nice to have’ web add-ons but powerful tools which serve important functions
- Knowing how to do even a basic Boolean Search has to be learnt I’m afraid
- There’s usually a tool, service, or application that can make your job easier. Example: Nobody has to read 50 blog posts a day, use an RSS reader people! (I’m not joking it still kills me how many PRs don’t know about this) Paid or free, 9 times out of 10 there is a tool you could be using – and where there isn’t, well, you might have identified a potential revenue stream by creating it and reselling to others
Who could fix this?
- Agencies: Invest in extensive internal education. Don’t stop there, create partnerships with specialist service providers who complement your expertise
- In-house: Internally, make sure you’re working with your web team. Externally, connect relevant agencies to work together
SOLUTION? Gone are the days of keeping everyone in their boxes. If we’re going to benefit from everything the internet has to offer, we have to use everything the internet has to offer.
Crib notes:
- At a minimum PR and SEO should be working together
- The data’s out there somewhere. Find it and use it
- The web’s a wonderful place, your PR team’s knowledge should reflect that
- You can’t do it all on your own: use good tools and work with good people
Why PR is losing the social media battle: Day One
Not a day goes by in my world without someone complaining about rubbish use of social media in PR and how we’re just not “getting it”.
This frustrates me immensely as not only is it often true but I’ve always thought the PR industry has the most potential to rock social media strategy. PR is all about word-of-mouth right? [Reference great ad explaining the differences between PR, Advertising and co.] So, why the bad rap?
I’m dedicating this week to a series of posts on where it went wrong and how to fix it. Starting with…
Campaign strategy vs. Brand strategy
Social media has tended to be funded on a campaign by campaign basis – short term activity. Social media work by nature relies on building community and generating conversation – longer term commitment.
Traditional PRs cultivated their community, a.k.a. journalists, year round. A skilled PR could have a useful conversation any day of the week with a handful of key influencers they’d established a trusted relationship with.
Social media comes along and boom, the list of potential influencers suddenly grew by hundreds. The tools needed to identify, sort, and categorise them are slow to appear
Slow and steady wins the race
On top of that, categories fragmented further. Instead of being able to talk to people who broadly cover ‘Consumer Tech’, ‘B2B tech’, ‘Mobile tech’, or ‘all of the above’, you need to be able to recall contacts with an interest in location-based service applications specifically for Symbian devices with a love of LOLCats and such like. Sometimes there’s entire communities you’ve never heard of and it’s hard to define who, if anyone, would even be interested in a new Symbian LOLCat app.
It’s not possible to build trusted relations and have brand conversations in the short-term. Three months, the traditional quarterly budget or common campaign cycle, is not long enough.
If PR does succeed then what happens after the campaign has gone? Who looks after the abandoned profile or answers requests from a new blogger ‘friend’ who has suddenly moved down the list of importance?
The effort it takes to conceive and execute a social media campaign vs. investing in a longer-term brand strategy strikes me as a false economy.
I personally turn down a lot of short-term project work these days because I think it’s not possible to achieve much beyond securing a few blog posts. I also don’t like hearing from bloggers and community contacts that they weren’t looked after beyond the life-cycle of a specific campaign – I’m not in this industry for the short-term.
PR agencies with numerous mouths to feed don’t necessarily have that luxury but for their own sanity I hope they’re moving clients away from achieving short-term online objectives now. For in-house PR … what are you waiting for?!
Who could fix this?
- Clients: Stop giving piecemeal social media projects to agencies
- Agencies: Don’t let being competitive hold the industry back. Be brave and say ‘No’ sometimes
SOLUTION? Banish the term “can we get it out to some blogs?” from your vocabulary. Identify your most relevant communities [and not just blogs] from the start of your social media strategy and make that strategy brand-wide. Later you can build out to support campaign tactics.
Crib notes:
- Develop ongoing and long-term brand relationships
- Suspend traditional expectations like coverage
- Add value: Ask not what can my community do for me but what can I do for my community?
If your business needs to change direction and target varying communities manically throughout the year then your problems are probably bigger than social media.
Image: Rennett Stowe
Tiaras and Tears: The problem with the Female Social Media Guru UK Award
You may have caught my previous thoughts on women being under-represented at industry events. So while it’s fantastic to see Social Glue initiate a Female Social Media Guru UK Award it caused a few rumblings and raised some questions for me…
Couldn’t we just recognise these women amongst their peers [male & female]. I think this is the heart of the problem the award is attempting to address.
Jamie has justified thus:
This is a debate we have had over the last few weeks. You are right there should be no division on gender but if you look at speaker panels there clearly is. Hopefully this combats the problem.
The “you missed off so-and-so” outcry was almost certainly due to lack of criteria [it seems to be just something to do with the internet and having a vagina being female] and probably a misconception there’s only a small number of fantastic women in Social Media.
I also found the later ranking of all nominees, with number of votes displayed, in poor taste.
I don’t want to get too down on Jamie. It was intended to address a very real issue and was well intentioned but comparing these women across their diverse areas is bit like like apples and oranges.
Here’s some of my faves and the areas where I think they are Social Media gurus. I’m pleased some of them made the list.
Fantastic, it’s not just me ranting
rant, rant, mad women go home
Was pleased to see technokitten AKA Helen Keegan blogging that when it comes to the tech conference circuit women are invisible. I also tentatively griped about this with regards to a BBC media debate. (And appreciate Mike Butcher responded). I too didn’t want to be perceived as Keegan states, like a “bra-burning feminist” but this is all getting a little ridiculous based on the male to female ratio at non-speaking events in our respective industries.
But, hmm, what do you think of this? A site which names and shames tech conferences with “a ridiculously high percentage of male speakers” [More at this post by Dori Smith]
Really wanted to keep away from this one. It’s the age old argument that talking about it perpetuates it, then people start “pandering” to inferior candidates etc., but this was something I’d noticed all by my very self. I think it would be unfair to my peers and colleagues who astound me every day with the wonderful things they have to say, to avoid writing;
I think they are not getting the soap boxes they deserve.
Media debate: Where have all the women gone?
At the risk of being controversial, I saw Techcrunch live blogging the BBC debate. The picture struck me funny – where have all the women gone?
This isn’t a “why aren’t there more women in tech” question but a much broader question about the new media industry in general; an industry where many women are employed. Are none of them up to debating the issues around whether the BBC should open up their platform.
Am I being unfair?
[Apologies any women who were part of this debate and I haven't picked up on it]
Who’s using social media and are you too shy to share?
When i lived in Italy I visited the Benedictine monastery in Subiaco. It’s built around a cave where St Benedict supposedly lived in solitude for three years fed by a shepherd or monk (I’ve heard both versions) who lowered a basket of food down at intervals. The cave is surprisingly peacefully and, depending on your temperament, kind of appealing.
My positive response to the environment demonstrated that people feel different degrees of being intro- or extroverted and it’s something that crops up in questions when I run social media training sessions: who are ‘these people’ ie bloggers, tweeters, social networkers et al and why do *they* feel so comfortable broadcasting their lives?
I’m not sure I know the answer. At a basic level, once you and your friends start using something like Facebook it becomes more standardised and natural, you find yourself adding more personal updates, posting photos etc.
But honestly I still feel a bit like a social media “observer” using tools like this blog and Twitter to engage with my community from professional more than personal desires. As a pretty private person being publicly online makes me feel exposed and I contemplate deleting my accounts to run away to my Benedict’s cave. (Although I wonder if after 30 mins there I’d discover a compulsion to tweet “sitting in cave waiting for @Romanus to stop by with the food basket”).
Is Ghost Blogging wrong?
I added my 2 cents to this article by Brendan Cooper the other week. It’s been interesting watching the discussion develop and it’s worth checking out to see the range of arguments for and against.
Simon Collister wrote a good response post which is closer to what i think. He also raises a great point that it’s probably a matter of personal perspective as well.
What’s your perspective?
When will I hang up my hammers over the anvil?
I’ve always been aware that specialising in social media is not going to be special forever. But now Steve Rubel has spotted that Web 2.0 jobs are already declining and he says it’ll soon go the way of the blacksmith – once a big job area, now, not so much. (Although if all smithies looked like Russell Crowe I’m sure we’d find more use for them). But I’m personally not as freaked by this assertion as the first time I heard Charles Arthur say social media will kill off the PR.
The point where “everyone will be expected to know how to navigate the online landscape if they want to have a thriving career” as Rubel states,is some time off. There’s still a lot of digital education required and people needed to facilitate that learning, luckily for me. (BTW I also think PR will just evolve as comms specialists in the new digital landscape).
He’s right though in that the next generations of workers are naturally going to be more digitally focused. Read more
Reviving London’s West End: Social media at play?
Having somehow found myself watching ‘I’d do anything’, a TV show which aims to find the next music theatre stars of Oliver, I realised this canny idea to reinvigorate the West End is built on the same principles which have driven new media growth.
While the reality TV star search shows, and recent PR stunt which saw the new Sound of Music lead play a crossover character in TV soap Hollyoaks, weren’t web based or digital ideas they did bring social media elements into play.
Interactivity, creating a deeper audience engagement, and challenging the traditional process to provide a platform for new talent, are key differentiation points for web based media.
TV is still an extremely powerful medium but Lord Lloyd-Webber* has adapted his ability to appeal to popular culture to innovate, from Broadway to broadcast.
*I’m aware ideas like this are usually collaborative rather than solely attributable to an individual but nevertheless think his willingness to even try it shows great understanding of the opps where it might otherwise have been seen as too risky.
About:
I'm Darika Ahrens and I help brands develop marketing strategies for Social Media.
My background is in Public Relations for companies like Orange, Microsoft, Philips, HTC, Yell.com, and Estee Lauder. I've worked with and trained some of the UK's top agencies.
In 2009 the Financial Times referred to me as "a new breed of business matchmaker" due to my network of contacts and way I work creating bespoke teams to deliver projects.