32 posts tagged “smo”

Tomorrow marks the 1 year anniversary of the publication of one of my most popular posts to date: "Using Social Media to Sell Products to Kids...Interesting but Potentially Dangerous."  In that post, I talk at length about how toy manufacturer Ganz is using the internet and social networking principles to market and promote its very popular Webkinz toys to 6-11 year old children.  I expressed concern that the FTC and Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) aren't enough to protect kids:

Companies are marketing to children, soliciting information from them on-line, and asking them to read legal agreements, which are beyond their level of comprehension.  It is difficult for parents to watch out for their kids in situations like this.  If a kid thinks it is okay to input their information onto, say, the Webkinz’s site without parental permission, what is to say that same child won’t think it is just as okay to give that information to a stranger via another website?  Nothing, unless their parents are involved.

In response to that article, I've gotten dozens of emails and a handful of comments from parents, internet professionals, teachers, and others, all of whom agreed with the concerns I raised.  I was also pinged by a nationally syndicated TV morning show who was thinking of doing a story on the topic.  And despite all of this 'concern', in February of last year, The Toy Industry Association awarded Webkinz the "Specialty Toy of the Year 2007," and Webkinz and Lil'Kinz (another Ganz toy) are still hugely popular (and now collectible).  In fact, as recently as January 8, 2008, a retired Webkinz "Cheeky Dog" sold on eBay for $735!

Today, I received a "comment" on my original post from a divorced dad of four who expressed concern that his ex-wife is using Webkinz to "babysit" their eight year old.  "Hank," who works with computers and the internet for a living, defines his eight year old as a "Webkinz Addict."  His son has lost interest in "normal" kid activities (Boy Scouts, Little League, etc.) in favor of playing entirely with his 55 Webkinz toys, a trend which is "encouraged" by his mother:

This past Christmas, [my ex-wife] "promoted" that all should buy a specific Webkin to assure no duplicates! In gross dollars, the child received over $700 worth of Webkins, less than $40 worth of other toys and less than $50 worth of clothing!

How does Hank know how much his eight year old's other presents cost?  It sounds like Hank was the only family member that bought his son something besides Webkinz for Christmas.  I encourage you to read Hank's comment in its entirety. It's both frightening and sad.  It also re-emphasizes the importance of good parenting and the need for every parent to understand the potential dangers of the internet and toys that encourage their young kids to use it.

Hank's comment also re-emphasized my believe that the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) doesn't do enough to protect young kids whose parents don't know how to protect them from the internet.  It's easy enough to point the finger at parents to say that they're at fault for exposing their kids to the net, but it's also not entirely fair.  Most parents don't understand the dangers of the internet as well as they should, and the landscape is constantly evolving, which makes it hard for them to 'keep up'.  Most parents think that the 'danger' is in their kids stumbling across porn or sexual predators on-line, but internet marketing should be a concern as well, especially since children under 13 are extremely vulnerable to suggestion. 

The Webkinz website describes the toys as:

lovable plush pets that each come with a unique Secret Code. With it, you enter Webkinz World where you care for your virtual pet, answer trivia, earn KinzCash, and play the best kids games on the net!

Parents must see the Webkinz marketing copy and think they're getting their kids a great educational toy.  And yet, after listening to the explanatory 'tour' on the Webkinz site, I can't help but think that that the Webkinz proposition encourages an unhealthy level of consumerism and the kind of compulsive behavior exhibited in gambling and/or shopping addiction. 

Kids are encouraged to make "Kinz Cash" by playing games in an 'arcade' and entering 'contests'. They can use this cash to 'decorate' their Webkinz's virtual room. If they don't take care of their Webkinz by going back to the site ton a daily basis, the "health" of the Webkinz will deteriorate. Kids are encouraged to 'chat' with their real-life friends' Webkinz on the forum and to buy more Webkinz so that they can have more fun on the site ("Collect them all!" says the tour).  Given what a time suck the Webkinz site appears to be, I can't imagine any parent having enough hours in a day to supervise their child 100% of the time on the site and still have the child complete all of the tasks/ things that there are to do on Webkinz.  More likely, parents are, as Hank describes it, using Webkinz's website as a babysitter, while they do other things around the house, assuming that the site is an 'educational' tool and perfectly harmless to their child's well being.

Looking at the list of symptoms for "Pathological Gambling" as defined by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) in conjunction with listening to the 'sales pitch' on the Webkinz site, I can't help but think that would be easy for a child to develop a Webkinz addiction like the one Hank described.  The APA says that having 5 or more of the following symptoms constitutes having a gambling problem:

• Preoccupation with gambling-related thoughts, plans or activities;
• Needing to gamble with increased sums to produce the desired excitement;
• Restlessness or irritability when attempting to cut down or stop gambling;
• Gambling to escape from problems or relieve an undesired mood such as helplessness, guilt, anxiety or depression;
• After losing money gambling, often returning to try to win it back (chasing losses);
• Lying to conceal gambling activities or consequences;
• Committing illegal acts to finance gambling;
• Jeopardizing or losing a significant relationship, job, educational or career opportunity because of gambling;
• Relying on a “bailout” (money from others to relieve a desperate gambling-related financial situation);
• Having made repeated unsuccessful attempts to control, cut back or stop gambling.

By supplying a unique cocktail of arcade games, necessary dependency on the site (your Webkinz will suffer if you don't take care of it daily by visiting the website), and ways to earn and spend cash, I wonder if the Webkinz site and product philosophy have the potential to encourage a child (like Hank's son) to rack up 5 or more of the above symptoms (or variations of them).  I don't have the same concern for 13 year old + focused social sites like Facebook and MySpace because:

• A user's online experience doesn't deteriorate if s/he doesn't check into the site on a daily basis.
• Users aren't required to earn money in a fake currency to purchase things on the site (though apps like AceBucks give users the option of earning/spending fake currency).
• The point of these sites isn't to play games (though users can do that). It's to stay in touch with friends.
• These sites are "free" and supported by advertising, which I'd hope 13+ year olds have at least some cognitive ability to filter.

(Though, there are other potential hazards for 13-18 year olds on some social networking sites.)

Thinking about WebKinz reminds me of the Joe Camel debate of the early 90s*  Just because something looks like it should be for kids, doesn't mean that it's good for kids.  In the constantly evolving world of social media and online marketing, it's tough for the average parent to tell the difference.  There's a fine line between teaching kids about the internet in a safe way, coddling them/ being over-protective, and exposing them to things online that could be harmful.  I'd love to hear what a child psychologist with a strong knowledge of web 2.0 thinks about Webkinz.

*According to Wikipedia: "Joe Camel was a controversial cartoon camel that primarily appeared in advertisements for Camel, but also appeared on "Camel Cash" and a number of origami Pop-up print ads. Joe Camel came under scrutiny as some considered use of the character to be advertising directed at children."

The Financial Times reports today that Central Office of Information (COI), the UK Government's "center of excellence for marketing and communications," has put a moratorium on advertising on social media sites like Facebook.   COI organizes marketing campaigns to promote issues of public importance (education, health, welfare, etc.) for various UK Government departments.  The organization announced that it is reviewing how it handles advertising on social networking sites fearing that its ads could appear on innapropriate user generated sites.  Alan Bishop, chief executive of the COI, explained the decision to the FT saying:

"We always have to keep a very close eye on the context. People are still getting to grips with this. We don't want to exclude the use of any of the new social media but we do have to have a very clear idea of what the context is going to be like."

COI's decision comes one week after New Media Age reported that Vodafone, The AA, First Direct, and others were pulling their ads on Facebook because they appeared on the Facebook page of the British National Party, a highly controversial political organization.  Last week, Vodafone released a statement saying:

"We advertise our products and services across a wide range of on and offline publications... In the case of online, bundles of space are purchased across a number of sites including the social networking sites. As a result we were not aware that a Vodafone ad would appear next to a British National Party group on Facebook.

Our Public Policy Principles state that we do not make political donations or support particular party political interests and therefore to avoid misunderstandings we immediately withdrew our adverting as soon as this was brought to our attention.

We are working with our media buyer OMD to ensure that more robust controls are in place before we agree to any potential re-investment," the statement added."

The concerns raised by organizations like COI and Vodafone are understandable and highlight the need advertisers to have greater control over when and where their paid ads appear.  As far as I'm aware, thus far, website optimization solutions and content delivery platforms are only helping advertisers and marketers understand visitor behavior, segment visitors into groups, and deliver targeted messages that are relevant to specific segments. I'm not aware of any optimization solutions or content delivery platforms that helping advertisers optimize ads and website content so that they're not only relevant to various segments of website visitors but that they're also blocked from appearing on pages that promote or discuss controversial topics.  I'm interested to see who will be the first to make this happen.

Marketers can already test and optimize ads and web content so that relevant messages are delivered to different audiences i.e. (Audience segment A "High value customers" sees Ad #1, Audience segment B "First time visitor" sees Ad #2, etc.).  Similarly, search technology makes it easy to identify controversial key words on web pages (i.e. "BNP," "Political Party," etc.). I can't imagine that it would be too difficult to combine these two technologies to create an ad optimization and delivery network that allows advertisers to deliver blank ads on social media pages that have potentially dubious content, or 'sublease' that ad space on controversial social media pages to less discerning advertisers. 

Instead of simply segmenting users, the ad publishing optimization solution I'd like to see would also segment content.  The ad delivery platform would scan social media pages at regular intervals for controversial words.  If dubious words or phrases that go against a given advertiser's rules of engagement appear, the ad slot could display nothing at all or an ad from another, less discriminating advertiser, who subleases the ad space in cases where the primary advertisers chooses to bow out.  Having a solution like this would allow social media platforms like Facebook to offer a two-tiered advertising platform that offers the ultimate control to Tier 1 advertisers who are willing to pay for it and exposure to Tier 2 advertisers with a smaller budget.

Could this work?  Post a comment with your opinion, and if you don't have a Vox account, email me with your comment, and I'll post it manually.

The Guardian reports that Reuters will soon be launching it's own financial social networking site, aimed at fund managers, traders and analysts.  Reuters has some 70,000 subscribers to it's messaging service, which is the first social feature of its site.  Given this large number of existing subscribers, I suspect that Reuter's forthcoming social network has strong potential to influence the financial community. 

Reuter's Chief Executive, Tom Glocer says that the site will only be open to subscribers and it will enable "financial services users the ability to post their research or if they are traders, their trading models."  I'm curious about why fund managers/traders would want to share strategic information with potential competitors, but I can see how this social network would be useful for discussing market trends, etc.  I'll be interested to see whether members of the financial community use this tool for genuine sharing, or whether they use it in an attempt to influence the stock markets and financial markets to their advantage.

Italy-based social networking company, Dada S.p.A., is partnering with Google AdSense to pay users for allowing ads on their space.  Dada's new Friend$ is an opt-in revenue sharing program that rewards users for adding friends and updating the content of their Dada space.  According to Dada, Friend$ is, "the only program that rewards you both for keeping your personal space updated (blog, video, profile, etc.) and for spreading the word by inviting friends to do the same."  The idea is that users keep their Dada space updated and invite friends to participate in Friend$.  In exchange, Google posts ads on their site/friends site, and pays users and their friends a percentage of the money generated by click-through on those ads.

I wonder how advertisers feel about this? It seems like an easy system for Dada users and their friends to exploit for revenue purposes.  If I were an advertiser, I'm not sure how excited I'd be by having people click on my ad with the express purpose of extorting me for their own/ friends' financial well being. 

Similarly, I find this whole concept a little disconcerting in that it encourages social networkers to talk about specific topics for the express purpose of generating revenue.  I feel perfectly okay about the idea of hiring paid spokespeople to talk about companies, so long as the public knows that they're being paid.  However, I take issue with situations like this, where there are blurred lines of distinction between people talking about what they're genuinely interested in versus talking about things they're being paid to discuss.  It's not Dada and Google are talking about sponsoring corporate blogs...  In a way, they're steering kids (and adults) towards discussing specific topics their conversations, blogs, profiles, etc.  If a social networker wants to make money through Friend$, and they know which companies use Google AdSense, I suspect that it will be very easy for them to exploit the system.

What do you think?  If you're unable to post a comment, email me, and I'll post it for you.

Today, on Webpronews, Steven Bradley addresses some interesting questions raised in a couple of other blogs - namely:

• Is there an optimal post length?
• Will shorter posts help to retain readers and even lead to more links?
• What makes you unsubscribe from a blog’s RSS feed?

Bradley’s ultimate conclusion is that the best blogs have a mix of long, medium, and short posts.  He’d “prefer to focus on quality and let the length of the post be what it is… to find [his] blogging voice than consciously attempt to stifle it.”

I struggle with the same questions when writing my own blog.  Plenty of my readers tell me that they appreciate my more in-depth (translation: really long) posts.  But, I seem to get just as many comments (if not more) on short posts as I do on long posts.  Bradley’s blog made me realize that we still have a lot to learn about social media and web 2.0 optimization:

• What are the best ways for companies to engage customers through social media?
• How should individual bloggers and social media mavens (i.e. those who set up social networks/ groups on sites like Ning, Vox, Gather, etc.) structure their content to best engage with their peers around areas of mutual interest?

There are certainly a lot of assumptions to test.  So far, it seems that marketers and bloggers are throwing ideas against the wall and seeing what sticks. In time, there will more scientific ways to answer these questions.  Marketers are only beginning to understand the "science" behind web 2.0, social media, and targeted delivery of information to customers.  As web 2.0 and social media evolve, there is a growing buzz about:

• Search Engine Optimization (SEO),
• Social Media Optimization (SMO), and
• Website Analytics/ Testing/ Website Optimization, which includes things like A/B Split Testing and Multivariate Promotion Testing, Targeted Content Delivery based on the profile of a specific visitor, Landing Page Optimization, and Predictive Delivery / Cross Selling, etc.  

These three topics are closely intertwined...  When a company spends money on SEO to ensure that their websites and/or corporate blogs/ social media properties are well placed in search results pages, their efforts won't result in customer conversion if the person who lands on their site can’t immediately find relevant information they’re looking for.  Similarly, if corporations are writing blogs that are too long or too short for their desired audience, they’ll lose that audience.  With that in mind, I think that concept testing, website optimization and analytics are the key to answering the key questions about the value of social media.  These topics will be of growing importance in the coming years as marketers strive to better understand and target customers to capture greater returns on web-based investments.

There are a some interesting players in the testing and optimization spaces (Offermatica - which, in the interests of full blogging disclosure, is a company that I recently interviewed with; Optimost; Touch Clarity, which was recently purchased by Omniture; Kefta; to some extent Google; and others).  If you are a marketer with experience working the products/services of any of these (and similar) companies, I'd love to hear your thoughts on their usefulness.  In my opinion, web marketers are only just starting to realize the value of testing and web optimization.  It will be very interesting to watch this space as web 2.0 and social media continue to grow. 

If you're interested in web optimization and testing, the following are links to blogs that you might like: Optimize & Prophesize, This Site Is Dead, Out of My Gord, Thinking Aloud. 

I read a great review of Ning in yesterday's TechCrunch.  So, today, I thought I'd give it a whirl myself.  Michael Arrington's review was right on the money... Ning is pretty cool!  It lets you create your own customized social network - complete with RSS feeds, blogs, forums, and more.  Almost everything is customiseable - colors, logos, style, etc.  Check out the Social Media Network I created on Ning to see what I mean, and give it a try yourself!

If I'm being really picky, I've only got two complaints about Ning so far:

1. If you pick a username (e.g. "Social Media") you can't call your network the same thing.  I joined Ning not knowing that, and so I had to pick an alternate social network name once I'd set up my profile.
2. Once you set it up (which is exceptionally easy), it is difficult to navigate your way around the editing features if you want to change placement or content.  I'm sure this will get easier as I become more familiar with the service, but initially, editing isn't as intuitive as I expected.

If you're into Twitter, try Nowthen.  Nowthen is the newest brainchild from the folks at Blinkx.  It's everywhere messaging like Twitter, but besides written updates/broadcasts, you can also send pictures from your mobile phone using MMS.  You can set up privacy features to use it with specific groups of friends or with the world.  You can also get it to send you notifications via SMS/ MMS on your mobile phone (if you've got an unlimited messaging plan) or your Nowthen mailbox. I'm curious to know what Twitter fans think.  If you try it, post a comment and let me know what you think.

One thing I think is particularly cool is that they're already starting to think globally.  There are separate numbers you can MMS your NowThen photos to depending on whether you're in the US or UK.

Web 2.0 is changing the way that people publish, access, and spread news.  Newspaper subscriptions are down, and the number of bloggers is up.  Six Apart and other companies are making it easy for everyday people to self-publish on-line “blogs”.  Gone are the days when journalists and authors were the only ones who could voice their opinion.  Now, anyone can do it.  At the same time that conventional newspapers are struggling to keep up subscriptions and bloggers are growing in numbers, the book market remains stable.  There’s something special about books beyond the words printed on their pages and the stories they tell.  For me, it’s the way that they look together on a shelf, their unique smell, their simplicity and tangibility. Laptops and Sony Readers haven’t replaced coffee table books.  Bookshelves still sell well, and bookstores are still profitable.  The problem with books is that until now, it has been difficult and expensive to self-publish books.  San Francisco-based start-up Blurb is changing that. 

Blurb is capitalizing on the rising interest in on-line self-publishing (e.g. blogs) and the continuing popularity of books.  In their beta release, they’ve made it simple and inexpensive for people and businesses to self-publish hardback and paperback books in both small and large quantities.  Blurb allows people to self-publish all types of quality books up to 440 pages– blog books, photo books, text and picture books, cookbooks, poetry books (coming soon), personal portfolios, novels and dissertations (coming soon), and more.
 

My favorite Blurb concept is the "Blog Book".  Bloggers, who use TypePad and WordPress (and soon Blogger, LiveJournal, and Moveable Type), will find Blurb’s “Blog Slurper” technology particularly useful.   Blog Slurper imports and maps blog text, comments, images, and links into a draft book, which can then be customized. I sent a note to Blurb yesterday asking whether VOX will be a supported platform for their Blog Slurper, and I’ll update this entry if/when I hear back.

I also like how easy it is for everyday people (non-bloggers) to easily create books with full-color pictures using Blurb’s BookSmart application (compatible on both Mac an PC).  Blurb offers templates for a variety of different types of “ready made” books – baby, dog, cat, and more.  Imagine what the ease of self-publishing means for families, friends, students, professors, small businesses, and more!

The best part about Blurb from a Social Media perspective is that it offers users the ability to promote and sell their books to others via Blurb’s on-line bookstore. Blurb is making it possible for aspiring authors to leverage the Internet to start their own publishing empires – just like musicians Clap Your Hands Say Yeah  and others did on MySpace.   I wish there was more of a community aspect to Blurb, where users could join “groups” like Vox and Gather and talk about their favorite “blurb” books written on specific topics.  Who knows, since the current version of Blurb is a beta, that functioanlity may come in time. In the meantime, I like how easy Blurb makes it for everyday people almost anywhere in the world to self-publish books, inexpensively.  Pricing starts as follows, with 10% discounts for 25-199 books, 15% discount for 200-400 books and larger discounts for even bigger quantities:

Barack Obama just launched a social media/ social networking website to further his presidential campaign in 2008: my.barackobama.com. While I haven't made any decisions about who I will support in the 2008 presidential election, I signed up for a "test account" on My.Barackobama.com to test the social media functionality of Obama's website.  The features/functionality of the site are robust. Users can:

• Write a blog
• Help Barack fundraise
• Discover events nearby/ Create events
  
• Network with other supporters
• Invite friends
• Write messages to "friends" (e.g. fellow Barack Obama supporters)
• Join groups/ start groups (just like VOX or Gather)
  

If you're a Barack Obama supporter, the site looks like a great way to interact with other supporters.  If you don't support Obama, the site looks like a good way to get the inside scoop on what his supporters are saying.  I didn't find any noticeable bugs, which is a good sign.  It looks like the site uses a customiseable white label social media platform - ala Five Across or Social Platform, though I couldn't find any sign of which solution was used.  I did notice that the blogging feature disables adding  hyperlinks, which is a little frustrating, though it's not difficult to understand why disabling hyperlinking would make the site easier to administer.

I'm looking forward to seeing what role social media plays in the 2008 presidential election.  So far, Barack is the first candidate to launch his own on-line social network.  Hillary Clinton launched her campaign using an on-line video to announce her candidacy and has a blog.  Her campaign supporters are also using 3rd party social networking sites like MySpace to make waves.  However, at the time of writing this blog, Clinton has yet to launch her own social network.  Two different strategies from two different democratic candidates.  One thing is clear - the forthcoming election campains will provide interesting case studies for anyone interested in social media marketing.  I expect that by 2008, social media marketers will discover a lot more about how to properly target and ignite a winning word of mouth campaign fueled by social media.

Here's some great food for thought- especially the last minute of the video:

Web 2.0 is linking people...

...People sharing, trading, and collaborating...

We'll need to re-think a few things...

copyright

authorship

identity

ethics

aesthetics

rhetorics

governance

privacy

commerce

love

family

ourselves