News Corp Blames Digital Again

News Corp's CEO Robert Thomson has been out attacking Google, Facebook and Linkedin once more, this time accusing them of "Kleptocracy, Piracy and Zealotry".

Yes, the organisation that: breaks into voicemail, publishes fiction as truth and plays politics with its publications...has claimed that online social networks are spammers that help themselves to content without paying for it.

He also publicly stated that “The words Intellectual Property don’t appear in the Google alphabet."- but far be it for me to tell a journalist that you can make any words from the alphabet.

Thomson went on to further attack the new media sector by saying "None of them actually create content, and they certainly have little intention of paying for it, but they do redistribute the content created by others – they would argue that such redistribution is a natural extension of their role as social networks. I would argue that much of the redistribution is an unnatural act”

All this smacks of hypocrisy... especially given News Corp in 2005 bought MySpace, then a leading social network that in June 2006 surpassed Google as the most visited website in the USA... before watching over its decline and its sale in 2011 for less than 8% of its purchase price.

Also... given that News Corp has only recently decided to change the direction of its WSJ and Dow Jones publishing sector to focus on digital media efforts and that its own Social News Agency Storyful is responsible for finding and redistributes news stories (and apparently hiding Rebekah Brooks in their offices)... methinks they need to keep their insults to themselves.

Full story here:
http://mumbrella.com.au/news-corp-ceo-lashes-google-for-piracy-zealotry-and-kleptocracy-at-lowy-institute-event-312252 

Watch out, watch out, the Social Media Gurus are about

My post last week on how anyone can be a Social Media Expert got a fair amount of attention (it was one of my most visited blog articles so far). However, I realised after writing it, that I had missed out the other title that these self-promoting social media individuals give themselves.... gurus.

Yes, you only have to sit in a few industry seminars or supplier presentations to know the Social Media Guru’s are in town, and they are here to sell you their wonderful wares and services. They all seem to have appeared overnight, to not only tell us about ‘best practice’ and ‘industry leading examples’, but also to publicly state that they have “been into social media for years” and “have always worked in social media”.

They cite examples such as:

1. Creating forums on websites
   (didn’t we already have newsgroups and bulletin boards back in the 90’s? I guess these were a little too nerdy for these ‘guru’ types)
2. Building websites for years that have linked to social media
   (putting a hyperlink from your linkedin.com profile to your MySpace account in 2005 doesn’t make you an expert!)
3. Working in ‘engaging’ media
   (but being a runner for a shopping channel five years ago isn’t exactly a great expertise needed to run a blogger outreach programme now is it?)

Perhaps there needs to be a qualification for these people to pass. At the very least there needs to be list of things to check before you even consider the services of these people…..

Creating a company 'Group' in a Social Network

So why should a company get involved in Social Networking? These are sites where people build relationships with other people and create groups of peers who share interests. So should a company or organisation at least consider the possibility of entering into these sites?

If your target audience is already using Social Networking sites (Bebo, MySpace, Facebook, etc.) then its a good bet that they are already discussing, commenting on and interacting with your products and brand. They are doing this in their own way, without your company's control/influence. They are probably also asking questions about your products that are not getting answered, or making statements about your brand that are incorrect (either purposefully or not).

If your employees are also on such sites, they are possibly mentioning your products or services and some may well be answering questions on behalf of you. There is therefore a likely demand for the 'official' line, the answers to simple questions (easily provided by links to content such as: FAQ's, branch locators, etc.)

There's also an affinity created by users who share a liking for a product or brand. They will want to 'bond' with your company and would be likely to consider information from your company within these spaces.

So who does this well?

Drambui:
Following their sponsorship of 'The Drambui Pursuit' (an annual race, involving extreme sports, that takes place in Scotland), the Drambui 'Clan' have created their own Group in Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=585084206

This fulfills two major roles:

1. To increase awareness of the actual event amongst likely participants and other inactive but highly aspirational potential customers (e.g. training tips, event questions, etc.)

2. To provide a social area where other Drambui-supported events can be shown. The most recent being a set of Scottish-themed 'Den Parties' around the UK, paid for by Drambui.

So does this work?

Well....

a) The Group has 694 member so far (up from just over 500 a month or so back) and we should expect more to join as coverage of the event grows towards Spring 2008.
b) Hopeful teams are uploading their 'audition' videos to the site and members are commenting on them
c) One other company has already started offering Group members discounts on its outdoor clothing range: http://www.chilledturtle.com/

Food for thought?