Interesting research by Marketing Charts into the power and influence of social media in making a purchase decision.

Thanks to Michael Seaton at the Client Side Blog for the heads up and link.

What it is shows are the two most important reasons for using social media are:

·         ‘wisdom of the crowds’ (53%)

·         the ability to engage in conversations. (24%)

Both of these are usually unavailable via traditional media product reviews.

As you have breakfast this morning how many of you will wonder if what you have just seen, heard or read is really accurate and fair?

The International Centre for Media and the Public Agenda at the University of Maryland, USA has produced a report looking at public trust in broadcast media outlets. They studied 25 print and broadcast outlets to see how transparent they are.

The Guardian newspaper came top with the BBC and Financial Times both in the top 10.

Research such as Edelmans Annual Trust Barometer shows decline in trust of politicans, press and the broadcast media by members of the public.

The reseach by the ICMPA looked at global news sites that are most transparent about their operations.

They considered 5 areas and the news organisations policies to them

• Corrections - admitting errors and making corrections
• Ownership - disclosing ownership and policies effecting editorial control
• Staff policies - covering conflict of interests
• Reporting policies -disclosing any
• Interactivity - allowing readership comment and feedback (The FT was one of only two in the top 25 to score full marks in this area)

Interesting post here. According to HitWise Web 2 sites now account for 12% of all web traffic.  This is a rapid increase during the last 12 months.

Why the popularity? The majority of people are social. They like inter-acting, talking and exchanging information with other people. But what sort of people?

Research has shown we tend to congregate into communities where we can engage with people ‘like ourselves’. These are people we feel we can relate to. People who we feel share our interests, ideas and beliefs. The more we feel we know them the more we feel able to trust them.

We know from other research that people today are more distrustful of ‘authority’ and will more readily seek information, advice and guidance from ‘people like me’. We know that traditional media – print and broadcast – is having trouble maintaining its audience share. Partly because people want to take content as and when they want to and have a wide choice today but also because people are less trustful of traditional information sources. They are happier seeking advice and information from their community sources - from ‘people like me’. Web 2 and social media tools allow people to become content generators. Not everyone wants to. Most people are consumers or commentators on content and not generators. Forrester has completed research into this area and has interesting data and observations.

An article by Dr Paul Marsden also has interesting observations. One comment caught my eye relating to research into the effectiveness of advertising. Although completed in the USA over 60 years ago it has subsequently been supported by further research.

‘... the Columbia University research found....that advertising had absolutely no influence on the vast majority of voters – most people were far more likely to be influenced by the people they knew than by advertising. ‘

So what does this mean in terms of targeting marketing messages?

1.      Engage in conversations with your customers using Web 2 and social media

2.      Identify those who want to act as your evangelists (they will be the ones most receptive to the idea of a conversation with you)

3.      Support those evangelists with special programmes, materials and information (treat them as a VIP fan club)

4.      Identify those people who will also become ‘influential contributors’. They are only slightly less important than evangelists.

5.      The combination of evangelists and influential contributors will drive WOMMA (word-of-mouth/mouse marketing)

6.      The concept of Social Networks will rapidly ‘kick-in’ especially if some of your evangelists and influential contributors are super-connectors (people with lots of social contacts)

Interesting post here. According to HitWise Web 2 sites now account for 12% of all web traffic.  This is a rapid increase during the last 12 months.

Why the popularity? The majority of people are social. They like inter-acting, talking and exchanging information with other people. But what sort of people?

Research has shown we tend to congregate into communities where we can engage with people ‘like ourselves’. These are people we feel we can relate to. People who we feel share our interests, ideas and beliefs. The more we feel we know them the more we feel able to trust them.

We know from other research that people today are more distrustful of ‘authority’ and will more readily seek information, advice and guidance from ‘people like me’. We know that traditional media – print and broadcast – is having trouble maintaining its audience share. Partly because people want to take content as and when they want to and have a wide choice today but also because people are less trustful of traditional information sources. They are happier seeking advice and information from their community sources - from ‘people like me’. Web 2 and social media tools allow people to become content generators. Not everyone wants to. Most people are consumers or commentators on content and not generators. Forrester has completed research into this area and has interesting data and observations.

An article by Dr Paul Marsden also has interesting observations. One comment caught my eye relating to research into the effectiveness of advertising. Although completed in the USA over 60 years ago it has subsequently been supported by further research.

‘... the Columbia University research found....that advertising had absolutely no influence on the vast majority of voters – most people were far more likely to be influenced by the people they knew than by advertising. ‘

So what does this mean in terms of targeting marketing messages?

1.      Engage in conversations with your customers using Web 2 and social media

2.      Identify those who want to act as your evangelists (they will be the ones most receptive to the idea of a conversation with you)

3.      Support those evangelists with special programmes, materials and information (treat them as a VIP fan club)

4.      Identify those people who will also become ‘influential contributors’. They are only slightly less important than evangelists.

5.      The combination of evangelists and influential contributors will drive WOMMA (word-of-mouth/mouse marketing)

6.      The concept of Social Networks will rapidly ‘kick-in’ especially if some of your evangelists and influential contributors are super-connectors (people with lots of social contacts)

Seems that Country Living continues to upset its blogger community bearing in mind this comment on my earlier post by one of those bloggers... 

The saga continues - it seems that the columnist job was now only for the one month - September - another rule change. No where in the rules that we all read did it say put your heart and soul into the competiton and you will be rewarded with one column. One column does not a columnist make, in my magazine anyway!!

Some people are now looking at Sales Promotion and Competition legislation and best practice guidelines and asking County Living how they applied such rules to this competition.

I feel that this one still has a way to run but for many bloggers they are now ex-readers of the magazine.

I was always told 'if you make a customer a promise - treat it as a contract'.

Another story of competitions and loss of trust? This time it is in the upmarket glossy magazine market. Country Life Country Living recently ran a competition to find a new columist. They had announced that that the readers would be able vote for the winner from amongst the magazines blogger community. Midway through the competition the editor changed the rules and decided the winner would be selected by magazine editorial staff and not the readers. Worse was that those shortlisted by the editorial staff were not necessarily recognised as being valid by the blogging community.

Not sure what is going on there but seems a real 'own goal' to get an active part of your readership interested, change your mind and then seemingly rubbish peoples skill and judgement when justifying what you did.

Story source: Press Gazette

Cambridge University has just published extracts from the latest European Social Survey into well-being which started in 2002. Every 2 years 20,000 people across European are interviewed. The objective is to see how happy people are and their longer term satisfaction and what factors influence this.

The result? The UK is 9^th out of the 15 EU members in 2004. The Danes are the happiest. The UK is less happy now than at the last survey. The Cambridge researchers speculate that the reduction in the UK's happiness could be due to declining trust in Government and other institutions. These are also highlighted in the latest annual Edelman Trust Survey and the CIPD 2006 survey on Employee Engagement.

Dr Luisa Corrado, who led the Cambridge research said ‘The countries that scored highest for happiness also reported the highest level of trust in governments, laws and each other’

For governments the challenge is to work on policies that promote social inclusion and not exclusion.  

For businesses it is to work on the psychological contract and communication policies and programmes that enhance employee trust and engagement as well as enhance relationships with customers.

I know this is old news but I have been in shock for a week or so.

So Blue Peter (UK children's TV programme) has been found to have cheated on a competition telephone phone in. Somehow we expect it from politicians, business people and others but this was for many of us a painful discovery. A sort of 'Is nothing sacred moment?'.

It reminds me of the time when you first realise your Mum or Dad are not infallible. That Santa Clause is not real. That the Tooth Fairy is infact your parents. Your world is turned upside down.

That is the sort of relationships many organisations and brands want with their customers. Maintain the magic and everything is fine. A slip and the spell is broken. What is a real issue is that what can take years to build can be broken in a short time.

Now Channel 5 has been found to have used studio staff posing as winners on premium rate competitions....!

Source: TimesOnline

Is it really a surprise that in their rush to replace declining advertising revenues broadcasters have not really been totally clear about what viewers were actually paying for or what they were getting? Premium rate telephone call services can be a big earner especially when added to popular series. It seems not everyone at the broadcasters actually understood what was happening and they are now moving fast find out what happened. Things like lines kept open although the competition had closed so netting more cash. Pretend winners being made-up when no one had won in case calls reduced as people became demotivated as they thought the questions were too hard. Incredibly obscure answers to questions. My personal favorite - I heard it on a radio report yesterday. Question - what common objects do women have in their handbags? Answer - Rawlplugs!

(A transparency statement: I have never been employed by Rawlplug or any of their operating companies. The mention of this company was purely in the interests of illustrating this story. I have used a number of their products in household DIY projects. To my knowledge my ex-wife and daughter do not carry this or any similar products in their handbags.)

Services have been suspended and investigations launched as reported in The Register to find out the facts.

Manipulation of voting or influencing choice is not new. I remember a few years ago the 'payola' scandal hit radio stations where records were paid not because they had been requested or specially selected on merit alone (as the audience thought) but because of a payment being made. Paid for content is not an issue - as long as it is identified as such. Print media is full of advertorial. Written to look similar to an article it is in fact an advert that has been paid for. It should clearly carry text to identify it as such.

A number of recent blogs and reviews have been shown to be misleading as reported by Jack Schofield in the Guradian Unlimited. Businesses have been caught writing positive reviews for themselves and posing as others. Some PR agencies have been working for clients without disclosing the content they have been generating has been paid for. When found out the blogosphere - and others - has exploded with indignation and damage has been done to the brand reputation.

Shortly this will be illegal. The snappily named EU Directive 2005/29/EC will be have to be implemented into UK legislation shortly. Among other things this will outlaw any practice of false positive reviews and allow other business people and local consumer authorities to take legal action. In the UK we already have trade description and unfair business practice legislation. When enacted this new legislation may be even more comprehensive in its application.

However it is implemented those web sites that have glowing reviews of products and services that been self generated or paid for by the business and do not declare this fact will be illegal.

Very interesting post regarding trust from Edelman PR following their conference this morning. Thanks Hugh MacLeod for mentioning this in his blog. 

It appears that research is showing traditional media and sources are being trusted less and less. No real surprises that the 'masters of spin' are past their sell-by-date. What is shocking is the rate of decline is so fast. Trust in Government fell from 33% to 16% this year. Trust in the media was only slightly ahead at 19%. Trust in business was over 40% but not so strong for CEO's themselves.

Social media enabled 'communities' have come to the fore as trusted sources of information. The concept of the independent reviewer has been around for a long time - look at Which. Certain individuals can build 'personal trust'. Richard an Judy and their book club for example. For the last couple of holidays and trips abroad I have used TripAdvisor (feedback from ordinary people - not PR spin or paid travel writers). I found that the input was honest but like all opinions - coloured by that persons experiences, beliefs and values. If mine were a close match to theirs I could see immediately what they meant but if not I did not always agree with them. 

Edelman found that -

"A ‘person like yourself’ and a doctor/healthcare specialist are the most trusted people in the developed world (both 52%).

In the UK, the credibility of a ‘person like yourself’ is influenced by shared interests (72%), while same gender (7%), religion (6%) and race/ethnicity (2%) are far less important."

The challenges for companies is how to engaged an increasingly sceptical audience. One that does not always trust them, their CEO's nor the media they use to communicate with them. In addition the traditional marketing communication platforms of TV, radio and print are not as impactful as they once were.

What are companies to do?

They need to fundamentally re-think their communication strategy. Instead of the heirachical, command and control infrastructure that de-personalises the communication into corporate speak they need to empower their employees to show that they are 'just like the customer'. Social media provides tools to enable this to happen.