Thomas Says | Search

Spending cuts are very much on-trend these days. Very few people would deny that spending cuts are entirely necessary but there is a lot of arguments about  what spending should be cut and when.  As is to be expected in England the general consensus seems to be that as long as what ever happens isn’t in your backyard then those effected should stiffen their upper lips and carry on.  One thing that a lot of people agree on is that spending on the Arts should be cut before anything else. In fact many agree with the Government’s Arts spending cuts and a one in five believes that the Government should not fund the Visual Arts at all.

It’s hard to argue that a painting should be bought instead of a brain scanner but that doesn’t mean that the arts aren’t essential. If nothing else the arts employ thousands and bring millions of tourists to our shores. Media taunting events like the Turner Prize (surely an agent provocateur planted by anti-arts types) do the arts no favours but it’s not all that daft.

The Arts bring communities together and provide an outlet for adults and children alike. These are the very adults who are struggling financially and the very children who are due to inherit an economy destroyed by the greed and mistakes of the generation before them. Organisations like the Friends of Redbridge Drama Centre are trying to ensure that vital community focused initiatives remain open. Its a struggle however any many need to rely on the generosity of companies and private individuals.

It’s interesting to note that the UK spent $58bn on “defence” in 2009. Defence spending continues to soar around the world despite the global recession. The Arts are more likely to criticize the interests of the ruling elite than support them so perhaps we need them now more than ever.

These days when people have something negative to say about a brand they don’t just moan about it to a few friends, they take to the internet to broadcast their displeasure. This is an issue for brands because bad news travels fast – the average person has around 120 Facebook friends (not to mention Twitter followers). Consumers are also becoming savvy about this, they know how to make sure the brand sees their tweets and they know that a complaint posted on a brand’s Facebook wall will be picked up more quickly than one emailed directly to the company.

Once the consumer has vented the brand must decide how to react. Sometimes the best plan is to ignore the complaint (if it seems unreasonable for example) but generally speaking, ignoring the problem will make it worse. Most brands will discreetly contact the consumer and try and sort out the complaint behind the scenes. Other brands however will try to turn a negative into a s positive which requires a bit of effort and creative thinking (or a free voucher).

Case Study: Glasses Direct

I recently had some problems I had with an order with Glasses Direct. I sent my sunglasses off to them to have new lenses put in but when they returned they were wonky, one of the arms had been damaged. I sent the glasses back but when they were returned to me they were still wonky. This annoyed me so I tweeted about it:

Glasses Direct replied, as I expected they would, with a tweet saying that they would look into my complaint. Then a few hours later they send my the following tweet:

Which contained a link to this video:

The result was 300 views, 20 retweets, a link from my Facebook page and a little boost of positive press. If you were being cynical you might suggest that the video might have been motivated by the fact that my Twitter account is linked to this blog with posts about Social Media but hey, it worked. The video put a smile on my face and turned a negative situation into a positive one.

The Secret (is not a secret).

The moral of the story obviously isn’t to make a video for every unhappy customer, but to carefully judge the situation. If the complaint was more serious a funny video might make it even worse (Stop making videos and sort my order out!). The secret is to:

• Acknowledge the complaint
• Apologize for the problem
• Take control of the situation
• Explain how you are going to fix the problem
• Fix it

These aren’t actually secrets of course, this is exactly what you would need to do if you worked in a high street shop. The only difference with Social Media is that you must be quick (time moves faster on the internet) and you must be seen to fix the problem. Social Media sites are public places, if you resolve a complaint make sure you make this clear (“Just checked your account – we’re going to sort out a new frame for you…”) so that everyone who sees the tweet/post knows that the problem is being solved.

It’s one of those phrases that makes me feel a little bit nauseous but it is good practice to “own the problem”. Introduce yourself and make it clear that you are going to be responsible for finding a solution and preventing it from happening again. Don’t pass the blame or get someone else to sort the problem – you are now the customer’s point of contact.

The Importance of Word of Mouth

The most important point is to fix the problem, whatever it takes as this is the only way to make the consumer trust you again.  If you don’t you risk losing more than just one customer. Consumers trust word-of-mouth recommendations from people they know more than any other factor when deciding what to buy:

When asked what sources “influence your decision to use or not use a particular company, brand or product” 71% claim reviews from family members or friends exert a “great deal” or “fair amount” of influence. (Harris Interactive, June 2010)

The average consumer mentions specific brands over 90 times per week in conversations with friends, family, and co-workers. (Keller Fay, WOMMA, 2010)

In a study conducted by social networking site myYearbook, 81 percent of respondents said they’d received advice from friends and followers relating to a product purchase through a social site; 74 percent of those who received such advice found it to be influential in their decision. (Click Z, January 2010)

between 10% and 24% of [US] social media users turned to social networks when making purchase decisions about various categories of products and services. (eMarketer, October 2009)

Stats via Bazaar Voice

It’s that time of year again (or rather it was a month or so ago) when everybody shows what great taste they have by going on about their ‘best albums of 2010′. I haven’t updated for ages so I thought I would jump on the bandwagon. Without further ado here are the albums from 2010 which most caught my attention:

King Night by Salem

Mixing Drone, Chopped and Screwed Rap, Shoegaze, Noise and even the dark otherworldliness of Black Metal this was the most interesting album of the year IMO.

Listen: King Night by Salem

Glass Eights by John Roberts

A beautiful collection of minimal piano House which is subtle yet engaging.

Listen: Glass Eights by John Roberts

The Suburbs by Arcade Fire

I never really liked Arcade Fire before but this album really grew on me. On this album they stripped down their sound which really worked well.

Listen: The Suburbs by Arcade Fire

My Father Will Guide Me Up a Rope to the Sky by Swans

This album is epic, troubled and dark but with some surprisingly catch tunes. My favourite Swans album yet.

Listen: My Birth by Swans

King of the Beach by Wavves

The perfect summer album. Less fuzzy and lo-fi than his previous albums this even reminds me of Green Day at times. the whole album is shot through with a sense of self loathing which makes Nathan Williams more likeable this time around.

Listen: King of the Beach by Wavves

Abuse by Wormrot

This sounds like (better produced) early Grindcore of the kind you might find on Earache records. It is actually modern Grind from Singapore… on Earache records.

Listen: Set to Kill by Wormrot

Shut Up Dude by Das Racist

Smart, pop culture referencing hip hop with a sense of humor. This free mix tape has more great lyrics than most bands manage in their whole career and some pretty great beats also.

Listen: All Tan Everything by Das Racist

The release of Google Instant last Wednesday caused quite a stir in SEM circles. Some so called “experts” announced the imminent “death of SEO” but most people recognised that Google’s new direction was more of a user interface change than a completely new system. Having said that Google Instant is likely to have a big impact as it is rolled out around the world. Below are some of the changes we may see over the coming months.

1. Users may see a greater number of irrelevant results.

Google Instant continually updates its results as you type based on what you may be looking for according to Google’s data. This means that users may (briefly) see lots of irrelevant results before they find what they are actually looking for. As Craig Danuloff points out on Search Engine Land this can make it feel like you are performing multiple searches where you used to only need one:

At this point I’ve typed 8 characters (including the space) and been shown five different sets of results, none of which have a thing to do with the subject I’m looking for. I’m sure they’ve all been statistically sound probabilities. But as a user it feels a little bit like talking to someone who won’t let you finish a sentence even when you have not provided enough data to reasonably make any response.

While users are probably more likely to find what they are looking for now, they will see more of what they are not looking for along the way. The effect may be reduced when the user’s search history is taken into consideration.

2. Search patterns may become less (or more) diverse.

Since the launch of Google Suggest we have got used to Google predicting what we are looking for. We are now comfortable typing in the beginning of a phrase and allowing Google to fill in the gaps.

Now that the results for Google’s suggestions are displayed below the search box it seems that users may be more likely to find what they are looking for via a popular keyword than via a less generic keyword. If a user starts to type a long tail keyword they may find what they are looking before before they finish typing. The result could be increased search volumes for generic keywords (if they are picked up by Google Suggest) and less searches for less generic and longer keywords. On the other hand users may continue to type until they see what they are looking for leading to higher volumes for longer keywords – time will tell.

3. Users may reject Google Instant.

In his write up about Google Instant on the LBi Blog my colleague Simon pointed out that not all of Google’s innovations have been well received:

When Google recently promoted their homepage backgrounds, such was the underestimation of the dislike for the new ‘feature’ that Google was not prepared for the backlash of disgruntled users. Not only this, but other products and services have failed to deliver, notably in the social arena where ‘Google Wave’ and ‘Google Buzz’ were not well received by the online community.

If users don’t like Google Instant they can disable the service or switch to a different Search Engine. If enough users reject Instant Google is likely to change back to their old user interface. Even if this doesn’t happen some users will continue to use browser based search boxes or browsers which do not support Google Instant.

4. Google Instant may make time run backwards.

As Big Mouth Media’s blog post on the topic pointed out Google Instant is expected to save users between two and five seconds per search query. Google says that this means they will save their worldwide users 11 hours per second. If my Maths are correct this means that Google Instant will actually be moving backwards through time.

Ask anybody to name a successful Social Media campaign right now and they will probably mention Old Spice. Old Spice’s The Man Your Man Could Smell Like campaign staring Isaiah Mustafa certainly got a lot of attention online but how successful was it? The graph below showing the rise in Google searches for “Old Spice” suggests increased interest but is this enough?

Shortly after the campaign finished many blogs including Time.com’s News Feed were reporting that sales of Old Spice body wash had actually fallen by seven percent. This figure spread quickly and created a lot of debate. Had Wieden + Kennedy’s campaign not increased sales at all? Had it actually had a negative impact on sales? In actual fact the sales figures quoted were out of date, revised figures (which have yet to be confirmed) suggest a 107 percent increase in sales.

Is online buzz enough without increased sales figures?

Would we still consider this campaign a success if the original reports about reduced sales figures had been correct? Is increasing awareness of you brand a reasonable ROI for a campaign this large? Personally I would still have considered this campaign successful although Old Spice might have, depending on what they were looking to achieve. It certainly got people talking about and engaging with the brand. The viewing figures of the videos, Twitter mentions, video embeds etc. were at the levels most brand created ‘viral videos’ could only dream of. It will be interesting to see what Old Spice do next to capitalise on the brand’s improved reputation.

The campaign was forward thinking, fun and clearly created by people who understand how the internet works. Creating videos for internet celebrities such as Perez Hilton and Digg’s Kevin Rose was a cunning plan, how could they not share the content with their readers when everyone had gone Old Spice mad? The videos made Old Spice seem like a cool, modern brand if even if most of were left wondering if Old Spice body wash still smelt like our granddads.

Converse‘s Domination campaign showed a fresh approach to Google Adwords which proved that not all PPC campaigns need to target relevant keywords. Instead they targeted high volume yet good value keywords such as “first day of summer” and “how to talk to girls” which meant they had little to no competition.

The ads they used had a conversational tone and linked to fun single serving sites such as outofyourleaguegirl.com which were designed to engage young people rather than shift trainers. Many of the sites sent users back to Google with specific search terms to find the next site in the series.  This video explains the campaign nicely:

Having attended the Internet Advertising Bureau’s Social Media Party last week  I thought that it might be a good idea to kick things off on this blog with a summary of what was discussed during the event.

The day took the theme of a party with each of those presenting following this theme to some extent. This helped to tie together the different elements of a successful Social Media campaign although it did lead to a few over-stretched metaphors! I will cover two of the six talks in detail today, for a great overview on everything presented head over to Roberto Kusabbi’s blog rktalks. For another perspective check out Johnny Gedye’s post on the subject.

Inviting the cool kids: getting the right people to talk about your brand in the right way.

This was the discussion I was most interested in beforehand. Working in Natural Search my job often involves engaging with bloggers in a number of different verticals and I was keen to know how they feel about being approached. As a blogger myself I am well aware that unsolicited contact can be viewed with suspicion and that bloggers are very protective over their online presence and their readership so this is a tricky subject.

This discussion was chaired by James Whatley who is the Director of Engagement of 1000heads. Three bloggers joined him to talk about their experiences: Mr Holy Moly of holymoly.com, Ewan MacLeod of Mobile Industry Review and Rowena Fan of Cosmetics Candy. Here are some of the points raised:

• Bloggers like free stuff. This one is obvious but it is a good reminder that people respond to incentives of all kinds. Personal incentives are also worth considering: flattery is always worth a try.

• Bloggers want to be contacted personally (by name) by people who have a good understanding of their blog and their audience. Generic press releases about irrelevant events or products will largely be ignored.

• Bloggers will reply if they want to. Don’t keep hounding people and getting in contact too often, if you haven’t had a reply it might be for a good reason.

• Bloggers (like Ewan Maclead) might have day jobs. Consider when you are contacting them and be aware that they might be working to a different timetable than you.

• Bloggers like Social Media press releases. These should contain blog ready content such as images, quotes and a link to more information. The less work the blogger has to do the more inclined they will be to get involved.

• Bloggers (at least those who were present) are happy to be contacted via Twitter. This is probably best done once you have formed a relationship with them.

• Bloggers want to feel special. Exclusive content shows that you value the blogger you are engaging with and don’t just see them as a host for your press releases. If you are sending video content considering giving different clips to each person you contact.

• Bloggers (or perhaps just Mr Holy Moly) don’t care about embargoes and enjoy breaking them.

Picking the right venue – how do you decide the best social media property for your brand?

This talk was given by Ted Hunt of Innocent drinks whose laid back presenting style was free of marketing jargon and quickly won over the audience. Innocent approach their Social Media campaign with the same humor and imagination their offline marketing is known for and with an emphasis on communication.

Ted told us that Innocent are happy for their Social Media presence to grow slowly, gaining followers in a sustainable way. They aren’t interested in quick wins and traffic spikes, they want to engage with people over time. They find that their social media campaigns gain interest slowly but constantly build rather than peaking and fading away as traditional campaigns might. Ted used the metaphor of a pair of trainers which look better as they age, wearing in rather than wearing out.

Wear in not out

Innocent primarily use Twitter, Facebook, Youtube and Flickr as well as having their own blog. With the exception of blog hosting (and presumably Ted’s wages) they spend very little money on Social Media, everything seems to be done in house. I got the impression that they don’t try to track ROI, they simply treat Social Media as a vital part of their marketing strategy.

Innocent see their blog as a window onto their company letting customers see what is going on behind the scenes. They operate in a transparent manner that lets people feel that they know the brand and this leads to them feeling a connection.  It’s clear that Innocent want to engage with people and don’t just have a web presence because they feel like they should. Listening to Ted talk I got the impression that Innocent’s Social Media campaign evolved naturally rather than being mapped out in advance but this might just be part of the plan. What is clear is that their campaign fits their brand perfectly and works well for them.