Knack Bags earns 5 star rating on TrustPilot

I'm very happy today that a Press Release for our client Knack (https://knackbags.com) has just gone live.

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/knack-bags-reviews-earn-5-star-rating-300906864.html

Knack have (justifiably IMHO) gained a 5 star rating and some great reviews for their website, service and products. 

Online advocacy - is it balanced?

Have you noticed nowadays just how many advocates there are for products and services online?

And I'm not just talking about your 'Apple fanboys' who will buy anything that flies out of Cupertino regardless of its quality or perceived incremental improvements over a previous version. It happens across nearly every product category, from stain removal powder through to IT equipment. Plus it doesn't just stop at products.... Services (e.g. Those provided by local tradesmen on 'rate my plumber' type sites ) have their own advocates, as well as critics.

I've also noticed that those who provide recommendations on some items tend to be the ones who do it for others. In short, there's a hardcore bunch of online reviewers out there who provide significantly more than their fair share of feedback and ratings.

Note: I'm deliberately not covering the area of fake reviews and astro-turfing here.

So my question for today is... does this minority of online advocacy really reflect the opinions of the masses, or merely the view of the few? If so, should we really put as much faith in these digital praises or rants as we do?

Fake user generated video content

Question: What is fake UGC video and what is not?

1. A fan of a brand receiving a free clothing product and wearing it (and reviewing it) on their video blog
2. A company freely asking for video clips of their customers eating one of their products and the posting the silliest ones online?
3. An online marketing person recording his girlfriend (in very little clothes) using a Nintendo Wii Fit computer game, and then uploading it to YouTube for millions to view

The answer is... it depends. There's a thin line between posting honest and dishonest content. In my opinion, the deciding factor is transparency & disclosure. In my examples given, this would be OK...

1. As long as the fan states they got the product for free. Its then up to the video blog audience to decide if they accept that
2. As long as the company makes it clear that they are requesting content from customers and the purpose they will be put to. Its then up to the customer to decide if they want to submit video
3. As long as Gio & Lauren were doing it in their own time and there was no genuine link between the agency who they both worked for at the time and Nintendo (which they both deny)
   Note: http://laurenbernat.com/ has now moved agencies, but still champions cyber fitness - Its then up to you the viewer to decide if you want to visit this site again and again....

User Generated Content must stay that way

If the recent reports are true that http://www.yelp.com/ (the Web2.0 online city guide that allows user to review particular businesses), is offering to tamper with negative comments to sell adverts to advertisers.... then it casts a significant shadow over their authenticity and credibility.

It beggars belief if the claims of several business in the San Francisco area are true [more detail found here] . Mary Seaton, owner of the Soft Outlet in San Mateo, claims:

"I didn't receive a phone call from Yelp until I received a negative review," Seaton said. "A week after I received a negative review, a sales person contacted me and she said...'We noticed that you have some very positive reviews. We can push your negative reviews to the bottom, so that your positive reviews will come to the top.'"

This activity is clearly different from moderating your comments or any form of user prioritisation (e.g. my favourites, "was this useful?", etc.) and clearly runs against the whole idea of transparency and openness, key qualities for any company relying on user generated content for its business model.

You hope this is just the action of a single disillusioned employee....... and in no way linked to the allegations that Yelp have previously paid people to provide reviews.

AMA : Another Meaningless Acronym

The technical world is filled with Acronyms (I nearly wrote Anacronyms, but that's probably the basis of another posting). Features, processes and innovations are usually given TLA's (Three Letter Acronyms) to make it quicker and easier to communicate.

However, one assumes when you use them, that the other person knows what you're talking about and understands the acronym the same way you do. Here's a few terms you may well hear being used more recently, their official meaning and an alternative suggestion:

UGC
Official: User Generated Content
Suggestion: Uncomplimentary Griping Comments


RSS
Official: Real Simple Syndication
Suggestion: Reading Senseless Subjects


CRM
Official: Customer Releationship Management
Suggestion: Costly Repetitive Marketing


Has anyone got any other suggestions for TLA's alternative meanings?

River Island creates UGC site for Graduate Fashion Week

I don't usually mention clients by name (usually as either there’s an NDA in place or I don't want to involve them directly in my blogging) however I did want to mention this new micro-site by River Island:
http://www.gfw.riverisland.com/

This site, to accompany the company’s ongoing sponsorship of Graduate Fashion Week, has some key Web2.0 functionality such as:

Blog:
This is updated daily so far and by several different members of the River Island / GFW team. Each gives a slightly different perspective, but all are real people, each with their different perspective and stories to tell.
(According to eMarketer: Blog postings do Influence Female Customers)

UGC Competitions:
Themed user generated content-based competitions to encourage users to upload images of themselves in different River Island stores. It will be interesting to see how these competitions vary over the weeks and how virally they are adopted by the web community.

Video clips:
There are already several clips on their ‘insider-tv’ section, showing what its like to work at River Island (not bad at all thanks!). Expect more and differing video content here as the campaign progresses.

So, does it do the job? Yes, I think it does.

• Its aimed directly at their target customers (primarily younger females), who are the most prevalent users of social media
• It satisfies visually, by use of photography and video, this media-hungry demographic
  It provides a reason for re-visiting by the competition idea
• It ties the work of River Island and their sponsorship of GFW, without unnecessary hype or overt pushiness.

Note: Thanks to Debs for the swift review of article.

When working with UGC...

... make sure its actually real people creating the content, and not some video production company.

The recent video from Expedia, apparently created as part of a UGC campaign, looks decidely professional..... and people have noticed..
http://travolution.blogspot.com/2008/04/expedia-videos-look-bit-dodgy.html

Just like the term "flog" has come into usage for a fake blog, I wonder what the term for a fake UGC campaign is... a FUGC?

Barriers to UGC adoption

I've been speak ing with a company about a potential UGC site and accompanying marketing campaign. One of the concerns is the potential lack of popularity of the service. They are well aware of the motto from the film Field of Dreams

"if you build it, they will come"

... and that this doesn't work for the web unless you have some mystic force supporting you.

Brian Oberkirch's post on 'Really, We Don’t Want to Join Your Social Network' puts forward the case (and well made it is is) for not building your own Social Network, especially when there's so many of them going up all the time.
With the bar to build a compelling community site rising all the time, its becomming very difficult now to stand-out from the crowd and its all looking a bit 'Me Too' isn't it?.

So has the door shut on this opportunity now?

The New Influencers : Part1

Having said I was going to buy it in a previous post, I recently started to read Paul Gillin's book The New Influencers, about Social Media Marketing. He writes about how the general trends in media are transformed by the new way that people communicate & engage with others & companies. His statement that social media is the “greatest change in market dynamics since television.” will be worrying to a lot of traditional marketers, but ring true to others.

His book immediately resonated with my own thoughts on individual/company influence and his words have moved my own understanding on somewhat.

His book has proved instantly value for come consultancy work I'm doing for one of my current clients. They are considering a large video UGC campaign and wanted to understand the current market situation in a nutshell (pros & cons, including reading Jim Kaskade's article on 'Who's afraid of UGC'). As well as providing them with a breakdown of the landscape, barriers to adoption, etc., I lent one of them the book over the weekend to thumb through.

It seems its done the trick, they are now planning their approach and the book has been ordered by them as instant reference material.

I daresay I'll be writing some more about this book in subsequent postings (and finding some way to make some commission on sales with any luck)