Facebook marketing: Effective but picky

We recently administered a Facebook campaign for one of our clients with a social ad directing users to a fan page and a microsite. The results have been terrific.

But getting the thing set up was a bit of a comedy of errors.

When I first submitted the social ad copy, I was told it was awaiting approval. I was worried it might get rejected because it had the word "sucks" in the headline. It did get rejected but for an entirely different reason. This particular client spells its brand name in capital letters as a point of style. But apparently this is not allowed by Facebook.

I received the following e-mail from the Facebook Ad Team said:

The text of this ad contains excessive or incorrect capitalization. All ads must use appropriate, grammatically correct capitalization. The title of your ad, as well as the first word in each sentence, must begin with a capital letter. Lastly, all proper nouns and acronyms should be capitalized. As per section 4 of Facebook's Advertising Guidelines, all ads should include standard and proper capitalization.

I resubmitted writing our client's brand name with just a single upper case letter. But again, the social ad was rejected. This time the culprit was a period I had placed at the end of a URL.

The text of this ad contains improper or unnecessary punctuation. All ads must end with a form of punctuation. As per section 5 of Facebook's Advertising Guidelines, all ads should include logical, correct punctuation.

I removed the period and the ad was accepted.

For those of us who live and breathe social media, Facebook is viewed as, like, soooo 2007.

But the truth is that - despite its pickiness on points of capitalization and punctuation - it remains the most important social network for Canadian marketers by a massive margin.

Happy Easter all!

Does your job suck?

We've been crazy busy here at com.motion over the last few weeks. And now we can talk about why.

We're helping STAPLES Business Depot to launch Staplesville.ca, an online recruiting Web site that is totally unlike any other.

The launch is being supported by a social media release, a blogger relations campaign, a Facebook fan page and a YouTube video.

The following video features Ben Miner, a Toronto stand-up comedian who hosts a XM Satelite Radio's Laugh Attack channel:

"YouTube no place to discuss ideas"

What do you get when you take a land claims dispute, a politician, an iconic Canadian doughnut shop and mix in a little social media? An innovative if somewhat hokey YouTube video.

Here's one of a series of five videos released last week by Michael Bryant, Ontario's minister for aboriginal affairs, to mark the two-year anniversary of the Six Nations dispute in Caledonia.



And here's what NDP Leader Howard Hampton had to say about it:

YouTube is not the place to communicate either policy or to communicate government messages.

To me, Howard's comments show a complete lack of appreciation for the social media and the cultural revolution behind it.

Joseph Brean, a fine reporter at the National Post, called me up to get my thoughts on the tactic and did to me what I did to hundreds of others in my years as a reporter -- he boiled our ten minute talk into a dozen or so words.

Fortunately, I got the chance to expand on my views in the latest Inside PR podcast, which will be released tomorow. After 100 episodes, co-hosts David Jones and Terry Fallis have turned the show into a round-table format and invited me, Julie Rusciolelli and Martin Waxman to join them.

In episode 101 we discuss the thorny question of why PR people are somtimes seen as slimeballs and the Bryant YouTube video.

THIS JUST IN: Bloggers make mistakes

It was the kind of story that social media bloggers love. Lawyers at an old economy company were ordering fans to "cease and desist" from showing their love for the brand in user generated content. In this case, Ford was barring Mustang lovers from using pictures of their cars in a calendar.

Great story. Except that it wasn't true.

As Shel Holtz wrote, Ford denied the report, saying it was actually the supplier, CafePress, that wouldn't print the calendars. But after one blogger published the initial report, dozens more piled on in judgement, without ever calling Ford for comment.

Holtz writes:

If I were working for a newspaper today, I would still call Ford. If I had opted to blog about this over the past couple days, I would not have. I’m as guilty as anyone else. (And thank goodness I passed on this story.)

Another example over the weekend: Fred Wilson calls out a couple of "journabloggers" for quoting people without checking the facts, then Michael Arrington of TechCrunch goes after Wilson for saying his own post was "conflicted and wrong."

Do bloggers make more mistakes than journalists?

Is the burden of accuracy different?

Are the consequences of making mistakes in a blog any less significant than in a newspaper or TV report?

These are some of the issues I'll be discussing this weekend at Podcamp Toronto in a seminar with my former Globe and Mail colleague Mathew Ingram. Since we are both bloggers who have also worked as journalists, we may be coming at this from a particular point of view. In the meantime, I'd love to hear your thoughts on these questions.

Why podcasts will take over the world

In February of 2005, I wrote a story in the Globe and Mail about how leading edge marketers were using a new technology to reach consumers -- The podcast. One example: Warner Bros. was releasing a daily podcast from Paris Hilton to promote her new film House of Wax.

I called a bunch of smart people at various ad agencies and branded content companies. Most had no idea what a podcast was.

In a year-end piece at the end of 2005, I opined that podcasts were a waste of time for marketers that were jumping in. People wanted to listen to music, not words, on their iPods, I wrote.

I was wrong.

As the months go by, I am increasingly convinced of the power of podcasts. In the spring of 2006, I recorded twice daily podcasts from the Cannes Lions Advertising Festival. I was still skeptical. I still hadn't begun listening to podcasts myself. But I came home to tremendously positive feedback from ad agency folk who had visited the Rivera vicariously through my podcasts -- some of which I recorded on the beach in Cannes, complete with ambient wave sounds.

Now I listen to five to ten podcasts a week dealing with marketing, public relations, social media, and, um, fantasy baseball.

Podcasts are growing like crazy -- an estimated 29,114 per cent in 2007 according to one estimate. And that growth will continue. Cars of the future will automatically download your favourite podcasts and have them ready for you to listen to at your convenience. There will be high-quality on-demand programming, targeting each and every interest and hobby -- and that will take a serious toll on traditional and satellite radio.

We're big believers in the power of podcasts at com.motion. That's why we're proud to sponsor Podcamp Toronto on Feb. 23 and 24. It's a free unconference dedicated to this exploding medium. You can find more information and register for the conference here.

The inspirational quote I would have shared

I messed up.

Each Friday, we finish up our weekly staff meetings with an inspirational quote. For the first time it was my turn. And I completely forgot.

I was going to use a quote from Bill Bernbach -- the "B" in ad agency DDB. I like the guy. I refer to him and his legacy when I'm trying to help clients and prospective clients understand and appreciate the way social media is redefining the entire marketing communications landscape. Bernbach is given credit for helping to launch a creative revolution in advertising around 1960, one that would forever alter the way in which marketers speak to consumers. The impact of social marketing is just as profound. I describe it as the second major revolution in marketing, with Bernbach's being the first.

Bernbach was also a quote machine. Here are some of his gems:

"A great ad campaign will make a bad product fail faster. It will get more people to know it's bad."

"Advertising doesn't create a product advantage. It can only convey it."

"In communications, familiarity breeds apathy."

"Nobody counts the number of ads you run; they just remember the impression you make."

"Our job is to sell our clients' merchandise... not ourselves. Our job is to kill the cleverness that makes us shine instead of the product. Our job is to simplify, to tear away the unrelated, to pluck out the weeds that are smothering the product message."

Today the quotes are a little dated. They came from an era when the best way to sell stuff was through TV ads. There were only three or three television stations in most markets and people watched shows in groups at predetermined times. The Internet wouldn't come to people's homes for another 35 years and digital video recorders were still 45 years away.

But replace the words "advertising" with "social media" in his quotes and they are just as relevant as they were in 1960.

How to get Social Media Smart

I just made a presentation to business and marketing students from across Ontario at the Queen's Marketing Association Conference.

My topic: How to get Social Media Smart. My thesis was simple: You're into marketing. You want to work in marketing. Social Media Marketing is huge and growing and if you're not already active in this space you'd better get there fast.

Before I get to my seven tips on How to Get Social Media Smart, a few quick observations...

• While these university students get social media, their experience is largely limited to Facebook, YouTube and reading blogs. Only a couple wrote their own blogs. Most didn't know much about Twitter or LinkedIn; few used social bookmarking tools or feed readers.
• The exception was one guy who put up his hand for everything -- he blogs, he Twitters and Jaikus, he uses feed readers and social bookmarking. If I were hiring for a marketing job, he's he guy I would want.
• They also told me that Facebook is still gaining in popularity on campus. It's easy to get stuck in our tech geek bubble where Facebook is, like, so 2007, but it's worth remembering that Facebook is still, by far, the No. 1 social network in Canada. Marketers who don't have a Facebook strategy are behind the 8-ball.
  

That said, I offered them seven tips on How to Get Social Media Smart. Here they are:

1. Join another social network. Facebook isn't enough. Try LinkedIn or Twitter, or another social network.
2. Read blogs, lots of blogs.
3. Listen to podcasts. My favourites include Marketing over Coffee, For Immediate Release and Six Pixels of Separation. (Come to think of it, I'm probably somewhat indebted to Mitch Joel of Six Pixels for this list; he did a similar list in his New Year's Show).
4. Join the conversation. Don't just lurk. Blog, microblog, post comments on blogs, leave comments on podcasts.
5. Use a feed reader. (I use Google Reader.)
6. Use a social bookmarking tool. (I use del.icio.us.)
7. Manage your own online brand. Google yourself. Try to develop a consistent online persona. And remember that everything you post online (even in a closed community like Facebook) can live on forever.

The "New Marketing"

"I'm arguing that something just shifted -- that the New Marketing isn't just about technology, is not just an online phenomenon, and isn't wacky. Not anymore."

All friends are equal but some friends are more equal than others

In my 2008 predictions post last week, I predicted (somewhat hopefully) that social networks like Facebook would start to understand that not all friends are created equal. Watch for increased ability, I wrote, to tag friends based on relationships and set privacy settings accordingly. This would mean that a Facebook user could chose to share certain photos with current friends, but not the grade four stalker from 20 years ago.

Well, the Inside Facebook blog reports today that Facebook will enable that functionality in the first quarter.

Also coming in the next three months: Facebook in other languages and the toppling of the rule that prevents groups larger than 10,000 members from being able to send messages out to its members.

Thanks to Rob Cottingham of Social Signal for this image.

Twittersquatting targets General Motors

General Motors unveiled a major, global social media campaign last week to mark the company's 100th birthday. The platform, called GMnext, includes a commitment to allow/encourage its employees to participate in discussions about the company though blogs, wikis and discussion forums.

In a blog post about GMnext, Shel Holtz refers to the recent discussion about whether brands or organizations can actually participate in social networks -- or only people representing those brands or organizations. GM, he notes, won't try to participate as a brand, but will let its own flesh and blood employees represent the company. That obviously comes with risks, but it shows that General Motors understands that the communications landscape has changed radically over the past 18 months or so.

It's particularly interesting to me that -- for such an important anniversary -- General Motors has decided to write its history through social media instead of commissioning an official biography. GM has set up an internal wiki through which employees and retirees will collaborate on an online company history.

This is all great.

But Dutch blogger Marco Derksen noticed that the company had failed to stake out its ground on various prominent social networks. So he went and secured GMnext branding on networks including Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, del.icio.us and Flickr.

He's done it to prove a point and says he'll gladly surrender the identities in exchange for a cup of coffee with GM execs in New York. The point is this: Just like it's best practice to guard against cybersquatters by securing domain names similar to your own, it's also a good idea to protect against twittersquatters (or MySpacesquatters or Facebooksquatters) by securing user IDs in those space.

I don't disagree, but I think this raises an interesting issue. Most companies -- even big ones like GM -- don't have the resources to participate in every social network. Best practice would say you pick the big ones (like Twitter, Facebook, MySpace) and join the conversations.

But, what if you don't have the resources (or the commitment) to truly be part of that conversation? Yes, you could set up Twitter so it would update with blog posts, but what if there's nobody available to really participate and discuss in this forum? Is it better to secure the Twitter ID so nobody else can use it, even if you aren't really participating? Or is a disengaged presence even worse than no presence at all?