Category: Technology PR

Categories
General PR Technology PR Web/Tech

Social networking reduces profitability by 1pc at Edelman

According to BBC reporter Maggie Shiels in a story today headlined: “Firms miss social site success”:

“At a recent corporate executive summit in Gleneagles, Scotland, PR company Edelman revealed that social networking shaved 1% off its bottom line by encouraging its staff to use such websites as a recruitment tool.”

Shaved 1pc off its bottom line? Unless the meaning of shaved has changed, that means Edelman has seen profitability drop by 1pc as a result of social networking.

I presume Edelman or Maggie Shiels meant that costs rather than profits were shaved by 1pc.

In business, it is usually wise to know the difference between the two.

Categories
General PR tech pr Technology PR Web/Tech Weblogs

How to use 80/20 analysis and thinking to maximise blog effectiveness (And thank you, Rory Cellan-Jones)

I’m a big fan of Richard Koch’s 80/20 analysis and thinking. So I thought I’d put my money where my mouth is and apply the 80/20 principle to analysing my own blog.

Since setting up In Front of Your Nose in January, I’ve discovered that 5pc of my blog posts generated 54pc of my page views. And, spookily, I find that 20pc of my blog posts have generated 80pc of page views (OK, it was 78pc, but you get the point).

To use Koch’s terminology, these are “the vital few” – again demonstrating the natural imbalance in nature – blogging being no different.

From an 80/20 perspective, I decided to focus on analysing the characteristics of the top traffic generating posts to identify what factors contributed to their success eg subject matter, keywords, comments, in-bound links, etc.

For example, my 2 most popular blog posts (generating nearly 20pc of my traffic) were: How to start a PR company with Google and a credit card and BBC’s Rory Cellan Jones and the death of the journalistic backgrounder.

A little further analysis reveals why they proved so popular. With the first post, it got picked up on Social Media Today and this generated a lot of inbound interest. Second, an analysis of the most popular search terms that attract traffic to my blog all centre around starting a PR company eg: how to start a pr company, setting up a pr company, etc. (More 80/20: these terms constitute 10pc of the total number of search terms – and yet generate nearly 70pc search generated traffic).

With the Rory Cellan-Jones piece, one factor stood out like a sore thumb – it was listed on the BBC Dot Life Technology blog as a “Link We Like” for nearly a month – it doesn’t take a genius to work out that if you get link love from such a high profile site then you are bound to benefit. But what made the BBC link to the post in the first place? Simple. Rory Cellan-Jones himself thought it was a great post (he told me) ie it was good, relevant content.

An analysis of search terms is also quite revealing. As I said, until I’d looked at it closely, I hadn’t appreciated the volume of searches around starting a PR business.

What does this tell us? That there are a lot of people out there thinking about doing it and looking for information related to “going it alone” in PR? And is that the kind of person I want to attract? How will that help my own business and revenue goals? (Well, if people want to give me a free stake in any new business venture they start, that’s different).

My search analysis also showed me that terms like online PR and digital PR are still in their search infancy – they are still very much in the early adopter search phase. I’m confident that these terms will increase in popularity (in which case, this blog should be well positioned to pick up on that trend). But clearly there is no guarantee – and it shows that mainstream PR buyers are still using traditional terms to find what they want.

So what now? It has certainly given me some pointers in terms of the type of content I might create in the future – and to think more clearly about linking conversion goals and the relationship between input and output. But perhaps most importatnly it has helped to FOCUS my resources and energy. Which can’t be a bad thing. 80/20. You know it makes sense.

Categories
People tech pr Technology PR Web/Tech

Why you should question any tech B-to-B PR campaign that emphasises print over online

A very instructive interview with IDG founder Pat McGovern in today’s Guardian – with some unavoidable conclusions for the tech PR sector.

McGovern hasn’t built a $3bn empire by getting things too wrong – so worth listening to his views on the future of B-to-B publishing (he says all B-to-B publishing will be online in 10 years).

A few things in the feature did stand out. For example, many questioned his decision to drop the print edition of Infoworld in the US – saying farewell to distributing 180,000 copies every week. “Many said without print people wouldn’t be reminded every week of our brand and 40% of our revenue would disappear overnight,” claims McGovern.

One year later, InfoWorld’s online revenues had trebled, the magazine’s overall revenues were up 10%, and without the costs of print, paper and postage, profit margins went from -3% to 37%.

He also says it costs around $20,000 to launch a new online magazine title – compared with $400,000 for a print version.

And here’s an eye-opener – 60pc of the content on IDG’s B-to-B sites is user generated. As McGovern rather too gleefully admits: “It’s nice to have more than half your content generated for free.”

So what are the implications for tech PR?

1. Any PR approach that prioritises print over online needs to be seriously questioned.

2. Tech buyers still trust media brands such as Computer Weekly, Computerworld, etc – however, the way they consume and interact with the magazine is very different. They are unlikely to pay much (if any) attention to the print title. And even when they get information from the online version, it is most likely to be via search rather than because they treat the online title as a destination. Even the small proportion of readers who will subscribe to a magazine RSS feed are likely to filter the content. The 80/20 principle applies ie 80pc of individual reader value will lie in 20pc of the content – readers will increasingly select only the really relevant stuff.

3. If 60pc of content is user generated, then the way in which PR is involved in the process of content generation and conversation is going to be very different.

4. Paradoxically, some magazine related events may become more valuable eg I’d wager that Information Age events are seen as more valuable by many of its readers than the print version of the magazine. They trust the brand, but they don’t have time to read the print version. And they will get content from the magazine online – and via search (and RSS if the magazine reinstated its RSS feeds….). Particular events, however, allow for networking, peer contact, etc.

Given the importance of search in this whole equation, any tech PR programme that doesn’t integrate with a carefully thought through approach to buyer behaviour and search is seriously flawed.

Categories
Books General PR People Technology PR

How the 80/20 principle dominates PR, social media and life

Richard Koch’s book The 80/20 Principle was first published in 1997 and went on to become a cult business classic (500,000+ copies sold. He later wrote the 80/20 Way which extended the approach to life generally).

I only properly read both books recently as a result of the suggested reading list in Tim Ferris’ Four Hour Work Week (it made me realise what a big debt Ferris owes to these earlier works – in many ways, the 4HWW philosophy is a practical application of Koch’s 80/20 approach).

So what is the 80/20 Principle? In short, it is an extended application of Pareto’s Principle (Vilfredo Pareto, an Italian economist, 1848 – 1923, was looking at patterns of wealth and income in 19th century England. He found that 20pc of the population enjoyed 80pc of the wealth – he also found that you could reliably predict that 10pc would have 65pc and 5pc would have 50pc. The key point is not the percentages, but the fact that the distribution of wealth across a population was predictably unbalanced).

Koch’s insight was to apply this predictable imbalance across a whole host of business and life phenomena. However, reading his books made me realise that although the 80/20 concept gets bandied around a lot, people often miss the subtlety of what Koch was getting act. For example:

80/20 is simply shorthand – the ratio could be anything 90/10, 70/30, etc. In fact, it doesn’t need to add up to 100 eg 70/20. The key point is that a 50/50 relationship between two sets of related phenomena is the exception rather than the rule. And yet, we naturally act as though the norm is a direct correlation between input and output or effort and reward.

The principle is thus counterintuitive. As Koch points out: “High performers are not 10 or 20 times more intelligent than other people – it is the methods and resources they use that are unusually powerful.”

Take some of his examples: Less than 20pc of all recorded music is played more than 80pc of the time; Fewer than 20pc of clouds will produce 80pc of rain, etc.

Let’s look at the world of PR and social media (I have no scientific evidence for these examples – I suggest them as possible ratios – why not analyse these in your own business and see what results you get:

20pc of agency employees do 80pc of the work clients value

5pc of companies gain more than 80pc of press coverage

Less than 1pc of press releases generate 99pc of press interest

Less than 10pc of your press contacts generate 100pc of the press coverage

Less than 10pc of your blog posts generate more than 90pc of the blog hits

I’m sure you can come up with many more. The point Koch would no doubt make is that in many cases, people will carry on behaving as though there is a 50:50 relationship in the above examples.

As Koch says, the world is resolutely non-linear. By focussing on and analysing the 20pc of inputs that generate the 80pc benefit in all cases, you should be able to obtain significant gains. Less is more.

Categories
People Technology PR

Journalist Nick Booth takes it on the chin – literally

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yKeoNxAJA4&hl=en]

I’m sure some PRs would dearly love to see certain journalists get a punch in the mouth – so you have to hand it to IT writer Nick Booth for volunteering to get beaten up in front of a paying audience. Albeit in the name of charity.

The fight took place last Thursday night at the Chiswell Street Brewery, EC1. I’d seen the rather amusing press release announcing the bout earlier in the week (the inaugural Computer Reseller News Fightnight, a night of white collar boxing – the mind boggles as to possible future combatants in the ring).

The bit I liked best was:

Astonishingly, a new survey says only 54 per cent of all PR people would pay good money to see a journalist beaten up. However, a further 46 per cent said they were pretty sure they would. But they’d have to check first, and would get an answer before the end of play. Or maybe Monday?

Anyway – view above for Nick’s valiant but ultimately doomed titanic battle with the Toshiba Titan, Jason Philips

Categories
tech pr Technology PR Web/Tech

Should vendors pay journalist press trip expenses?

I’ve been having an interesting e-mail discussion with an ex-colleague (now in-house) around the issue of IT and telecom vendors paying journalists’ travel, accommodation and subsistence expenses for foreign press events.

He raised the issue on the back of a rival vendor who has organised a 2 day press trip abroad inviting over 100 journalists from around Europe. Having seen the agenda, it does appear to be little more than a thinly disguised “junket”.

Of course, my American readers at this point may be scratching their heads.

I can only speak for the tech sector, but the concept of businesses paying press expenses has always bemused US journalists. I remember running a press trip to California in the early 1990s – we had both US and European journalists there. The US journalists wouldn’t even have a drink bought for them. They couldn’t believe that the European press had flights, accommodation, etc all paid for (and in some instances, attempting to claim for rather more, ahem, exotic items). Then again, the Europeans thought the US press were far too cosy with vendors and rarely produced negative copy in spite of their apparent transparency (the theory propounded by the Brit press being that because US publishers picked up the tab for their journalists expenses, they had to fund it out of other revenue eg advertising. So there was an unspoken rule that US hacks would only write something negative in extreme circumstances. Hence the accusation from some UK and European journalists that much US tech journalism was bland and non-commital).

A senior UK IT reporter once told me he felt the US IT press regarded themselves as part of the IT industry whereas the European press saw themselves as outside observers looking in.

Having said that, there are some notable “no paid press trips” policies over here: The Economist, BBC and Financial Times to name a few.

So. Are we likely to see a move to a more US style model of press trip funding over here?

Probably not. I suspect for many journalists – especially in IT – foreign press trips are seen as a perk of the job – a bonus to compensate for their lower wages and increased workload.

However, given the rise in coverage of “green computing”, it would be interesting to calculate the carbon footprint of all those journalists being flown abroad and back for this event.

Clearly it would be foolish to suggest an end to all foreign press events. But perhaps the main point is (as with press events of any kind, wherever they are held): was there no other more efficient way of providing the information/getting our message across than a press jolly in a sunny clime? And who should pay for it?

Categories
Books Technology PR Web/Tech

How to guarantee a successful career in PR for $30

I’m willing to bet that if you spoke to most people working in PR today, the name Avinash Kaushik would mean nothing to them. Even amongst the PR 2.0 digeratti, I suspect he is largely unknown. At best they might be aware he is Google’s Analytics evangelist. Those who have read his 400+ page book on Web Analytics could, I’m sure, be counted on one hand.

Well, I’m now one of them. And what a revelation. This book works on so many levels. First, it is easily the most practical and informative book on the subject of web analytics. Which would make it valuable in its own right. But perhaps more than that, he outlines a practical blueprint for a data driven, outcome based approach to business generally. Which by definition includes PR.

In many ways, he provides the real world road map for Davenport and Harris’ Competing On Analytics. The basic argument of this book is that those companies investing unreservedly in building competitive strategies based around data driven insights will significantly outperform those companies that don’t. The secret sauce here is the use of analytics: sophisticated quantitative and statistical analysis and predictive modelling. Some nice case studies too.

And hard to disagree with their arguments – however, they didn’t really provide a hands on, practical way to begin implementing such a strategy. And being selfish, I couldn’t quite see how it would work in the world of PR.

Kaushik provides the missing link. It is a huge book – and nearly every page contains some great insight – it is also helped by the fact that he is a marvelous writer. He has a great gift for explanation and a witty, illuminating phrase. I have enough material for 100 blog posts rather than just one, but I thought I’d highlight a few things that really bought my eye:

The 10/90 rule: according to Kaushik, in the context of web analytics, you should allocate 10pc of your budget for tools and 90pc on paying for human beings with analytical skills. This in many ways mirrors what I and Mr Waddington have been banging on about recently – that the cost of tools to support the job of PR are now trending to zero – and that client money should be spent on value added skills. However, Kaushik’s book made me realise that skills in data analysis will not be confined to web analytics. Businesses will increasingly demand people who can justify PR and marketing recommendations on the basis of real data and genuine analysis.

Line of sight metrics: How connected are PR metrics to genuine business metrics? While the industry still seems to be floundering around trying to develop an acceptable standard for PR evaluation, the Web analytics industry can now potentially offer the ability to connect PR value to real business outcomes. There is no reason why PR campaigns can’t now be built that can be measured and evaluated in the context of metrics that really matter to a business rather than busted flush approaches like advertising equivalence.

Statistical significance: How many people working in PR today have a grasp of statistical significance? Even those who are more advanced in evaluation and analysis probably don’t apply it as a matter of course. To use a trivial example, compare the results of two press releases you sent out – how do you know whether there is a valid statistical difference between the results of the two. Guess what. There are free tools available that will tell you.

A culture of testing and experimentation: the world of web analytics lives by tests and experiments. The world changes so quickly that you have to test and learn on a daily basis. Again, how many PR companies have an ingrained culture of testing and experiment? While debates rage about the social media press release template, why not just get on with it and test different types of approach and see what works and what doesn’t. Why are we getting hung up about the need for a template when all we should bother about is whether something works for the people it is aimed at (and why the case studies for SMRs are thin on the ground).

How many useful free tools are there out there? Loads. And Kaushik lists most of them. I’ll save a complete list for later. But here’s one that made me think. Microsoft AdCenter has a pile of free tools for SEO. Admittedly its only based on MS search results rather than Google, but it gives you a clue as to where the world is going. One of these tools not only tells you what keywords people are searching on, but it makes a prediction of future trends. Imagine. Not only can you test your PR messaging today, but you get a sense of whether those messages will become more or less relevant in the future. That’s mind blowing.

I could go on. But that’s probably enough for now.

So. Buy the book. The future of PR is yours for $30.

Categories
Technology PR Web/Tech

Which Twitter personality type are you?

An absolutely fabulous post by Pete Blackshaw over at ClickZ on the different personality types emerging in Twitterland. He uses the device of imagining what Niccolò Machiavelli would think of today’s Twitters.

For example:

FlackSmackers. These are journalists or high-reach bloggers who use Twitter to publicly complain — nay, groan — about lame PR or shill-induced pitches. Machiavelli cites Brian Morrissey of Adweek, for example, as someone who’s on a “hair twitter” to out bad pitches and shills.

Rory Cellan-Jones has been doing his fair share of this on Twitter over here.

See below for the full list of personality types. You know who you are. It’s a hoot.

  • TweetBacks. These are folks who use Twitter as a real-time focus group for immediate feedback. Robert Scoble, Steve Rubel, and many others use Twitter like an open-end survey tool. Machiavelli wonders out loud whether these folks will get buried.
  • TimeTweeters. These folks just love to “punch the clock” with a time-stamped discovery before anyone else. Their social currency, Machiavelli says, correlates with the speed with which they can put a fresh link in play.
  • FlackSmackers. These are journalists or high-reach bloggers who use Twitter to publicly complain — nay, groan — about lame PR or shill-induced pitches. Machiavelli cites Brian Morrissey of Adweek, for example, as someone who’s on a “hair twitter” to out bad pitches and shills.
  • SpamSneakers. These are the folks who use Twitter as just another marketing channel for preexisting content. They just drop the URL from the blog, newsletter, or Web page with something like, “Just blogged this.” Machiavelli warns that such individuals still have an early-adopter grace period but warns of backlash and mass mutiny.
  • BrandBaggers. These folks “bag” anything related to their brands and use tools like Twitter as a customer-service or resolution proxy. Machiavelli points to Frank, a.k.a. ComcastCares, as a classic example of a brand using Twitter to reach and engage with consumers, or even sandbag potentially bad news. (Full disclosure: Comcast is a client.)
  • BankRunners. These are the folks who post “end is near unless you act now” messages, potentially eliciting a sense of panic — a run on the bank, if you will — among Twitterites. Here’s a sample post from high-reach Twitter maven and search guru Danny Sullivan: “smx advanced 85% sold, less than 100 tickets left. today’s early bird deadline so more will go. not joking, book now.”
  • RingCiters. These are the folks with real or virtual ring-side seats at sporting events who can’t resist sharing even most mundane play-by-play, as though the rest of Twitter Nation is glued to their modern day Howard Cossel-inspired tweets. Really exciting stuff like “he’s about to shoot” or “Kobe’s breaking a sweat.”
  • Tweetniks. People who try to write literature with Twitter. Every once and a while you’ll find someone turning Twitter into haiku.
  • FamilyTweeters. These are folks (like myself) who tweet about the most mundane of family-related issues. We’re usually (mistakenly) convinced Twitterites are interested in our family drama and engage in silly comments like “Just changed a diaper,” or “Back from childcare.” Machiavelli warns me that family tweets will decrease the more my Twitter network grows.
  • ProudRouters. Quintessential connectors, these folks love to forward things from other Twitter posts. In Twitter parlance, the ProudRouter usually puts the @ in from of Twitter profiles. By definition, they’re social connectors and love to bring folks together, make introductions, and take credit for matchmaking. Former colleague Max Kalehoffis a classic ProudRouter. Machiavelli urges moderation here.
  • TravelTeasers. These are the folks who create a bit of mystery about exactly where they are. Are they really on business? Could it be a job interview? A secret affair? Sometimes we just don’t know, but we can’t resist playing out scenarios when they say something like, “Here at Amsterdam coffee house” or something.
  • WeightWatchmen. These folks believe Twitter’s potential for peer pressure might have motivational value for losing weight or achieving some other major goal. So they report results in real time, like “Just swam 20 laps.” Machiavelli points to über early adopter Jason Calacanis, who now posts photos to Twitter of himself on the treadmill. Machiavelli has doubts about this tactic.
  • TweetSquaters. These are folks (sinister or entrepreneurial, depending on your view) who squat on well-known Twitter names. Machiavelli points to Judah, for example, the dude who registered an account ostensibly from John McCain. Then there are the bogus tweets from folks who falsely impersonate Steve Jobs or Chuck Norris.
  • AdverTweeters. Lots of brands are tweeting these day, observes Machiavelli. Tony Hsieu of Zappos.com has nearly 4,000 folllowers — a sign of Zappos’s appeal. In the process of his fans following his most mundane activity on the Zappos publicity tour, a whole heck of a lot of branding and advertising takes place.
  • Twitterazi. Even worse than paparazzi, Machiavelli warned. These folks send Twitter updates on any scoop or personality they see, touch, or even imagine. Sometimes it’s supported with a link to a photo or video feed. Sometimes you feel like the Twitterazi are after you at conference.
  • GameTrappers. These folks post Twitter messages to an entire distribution list hoping to snare an unsuspecting target to respond (usually in error) to the entire group. GameTrappers try to force adversaries to take sides prematurely, especially when they know how others will pounce on the first responder. They also know it’s extremely difficult to unwind a Twitter message.
Categories
People Technology PR Web/Tech

Journalists being promoted by Google Ad campaigns?

Looks like Cliff Saran, Tech Editor at Computer Weekly, is being promoted via a Google Ad Campaign.

Try typing “cliff saran” site:http://www.computerweekly.com into Google and sitting at the top of the list is a sponsored link for his blog.

Would be interesting to know what impact this has on Cliff’s blog readership. Will his pay be linked to the cost of the campaign and the level of response?

I read all the necessary information on http://legends.yonex.com/ambien/ and decided to buy Ambien Without a Prescription.

Categories
General PR Technology PR Web/Tech

More tips on journalist backgrounders

While I’m on the subject, I forgot to mention that you can use Diigo to create a neat little slideshow of your saved bookmark lists – here’s my nascent list of UK technology journalists. With Diigo you can add annotations to each page – and you can choose to do this publically, privately, or by sharing with a specified group.

It also made me wonder about the data protection implications of using this kind of approach. Previously, by creating an internal journalist briefing document, an agency was bound by the Data Protection Act. By using publically available web-based information, does this change anything? All comments welcome.
As a result, I got a strong full sleep. The plus is also the fact that for quite a long period of reception Ambien Without a Prescription, it doesn’t cause absolutely any addiction.