Social Media and Video As Conversation Agent – Speaking at DMAW Confab

You are kidding me right? Are YOU using it correctly? Heck yeah!

Your reports from Iraq and elsewhere truly open up old media to the rest of us. It shows that a brand (such as NBC) needs to embrace this change rather then squashing it like they could.

Can't wait to see you tomorrow!

CC really looking forward to our in-person, say over a HUGE vat of coffee to get us going LOL

If you watch nothing else on personal branding, watch Mitch Joel at PodCamp Toronto:

http://www.rcc.ryerson.ca/pcto2007day1/rcc361s0...

Big companies can use social media, where the "social" part refers not to their consumers, but to their employees. It's a way for people across the organization to get in better touch with one another.

Jim,

Your insights from behind the camera and out on the road have shown the realities instead of the show and that you care to. Companies pulling new media into their fold and really embracing it (to use CC's word) shows that they care about their consumers opinions and needs.

But being willing to learn to do it RIGHT is a huge deal to me. If businesses are genuine in communicating, then they will learn to communicate, not throw me a bunch of links.

You totally understand and grasp new media and use it well, no worries there.

-Chel

The key to this is how you create a conversation versus an obvious "marketing ploy" which only detracts from credibitlity.

Fox News, Engadget, and ZDNet are examples of some news organizations that use social media in a minimalistic, not "in-your-face" manner to draw folks to their sites.

In your case, you do an even better job of putting great content out there as a genuine blog. In this case, I often see contrived blogs that are clearly not written by the principal.

A really good blog is written by Greta VanSustern. Much like your work, it's obvious she does it herself. She verified this to me in an e-mail. "yes, i write my own blog...and sometimes neglect to spell check (ugh)...so glad you like it! greta" It just makes the behind the scenes aspect much more interesting to know it's not an unnamed producer doing the work.

The key: genuine work done by a named person vs ghost writers, attracts viewers to a more indepth experience in the media, whether it be old or new. It might also drag "old media" kicking and screaming to being "new media."

I guess a good analog is the "Extras" on a DVD. I love watching a movie, and then seeing how it was made, the personal stories behind the film, etc.... This is really what social media can add to any product. Maybe this is how a company could get people interested in products, not just media. For example, Ford might have an article or series of interviews of engineers, designers, and assembly line workers talking about how a new vehicle was conceived, designed, engineered, built, and shipped out to the masses.

Michelle, I think i get who we're referencing with the "throwing a bunch of links". You're absolutely right and your thoughts have been echoed on that. I think the "social" part is completely lost on some. Would you walk into a party, uninvited, and just start blathering on? Of course not! That's essentially what big companies do when they simply link-bot.

You are a example of someone who is using social media in a way that opens up their organization (in your case network media) to the public with a new perspective. Look at the conversations you start with your Twitter feed, blog posts, etc.

I think you should talk about it from your own experience and the SM tools you use each day, from DC to Iraq. It's such a unique perspective.

Of course you're using it correctly! You are in fact the link between old and new media. You reinstate our interest in old media - (NBC News) through the socnet, giving us the extra "must have it now and every aspect" that Americans demand with your behind the scenes commentary.

Heck yea - your posts are a great example of how to make this work!

My two cents:

1. The lack of editorial or "managed" content and the effective "live"ness of your conversation added credability to your message and its content.

2. You drove acceptance through information and interesting conversations and did not need to be driven by your sponsors or employers.

Just as an aside - I just got 2 Twitters from the Today Show on things that had happened earlier in the morning (probably now on the website). If you were there, I'd known about these events as they were happening and tuned in!

You're using social media "correctly" without a doubt, but I think the key point is that it's *you*. Could a "big company" do the same thing? I don't think so, but a person that happens to work for a big company certainly could. I can have a conversation with a person. I'm skeptical that I can have a conversation with a "big company".

The best thing a company can do is stay out of the way of its people who are making a personal effort to bring their individual voices to social media. I suppose a company could even encourage folks to make that effort, but they certainly won't be able to force it any more than they can "give a voice" to an employee. (It's funny, didn't this same question come up when "blogs" were a new idea?)

If someone's got something to say, let 'em say it. Otherwise, it's probably best to keep yer linkbotting trap shut!

For my point of view: yes, you are doing it right. You are keeping it authentic - and that's crucial with social media. In a sense, the social network is the true "reality" of media.
Interesting thought: the so-called "reality TV" is mostly totally scripted, whereas the reality of social networks only works if it is unscripted, unedited, and totally authentic...

Hiya Jim...

Here is a cut and paste of my Tweets to you on the topic...

STARTS...

Big companies MUST open up to FaceBook. It's one of the most powerful tools I know of for quick sharing of important stuff.

The confluence of Facebook, Google reader, and Twitter means instant info distribution by and to trusted parties.

The fact that I was able to respond to your Tweet is BECAUSE your infrastructure is open to such things. [Means that you're] Using it well, then.

Places that accuse their workers of squandering company time on social apps have NO idea that biz is conducted in conversation[.]

I've been using Flickr as both a portfolio for visual facilitation (http://snipurl.com/visualfacilitation) and a storage house[.]

I upload pics as I finish them, and they become available immediately to net-savvy delegates. Works very well for me.

My girlfriend teaches ten year olds. One came to her crying cos her mom was putting pressure on her to excel at math[ematics.]

Jennifer [my girlfriend] had a meeting with the mom. And said, 'Preparing your child for the jobs YOU know is useless. When she grows up...'

'...There'll be jobs we can't even IMAGINE!!! So stop the maths pressure. And let her be herself.' THAT'S why Web 2 is [so important!]

...ENDS

Blue skies
love
Roy

Jason, I think the key for companies is not to create a social media position or title, but rather to identify someone who understands these tools. I'll say this NBC is WELL aware of my online activity. As of this writing, they neither approve or disapprove of what I do. That is always subject to change.

Companies who identify a brand champion who understands social media will be much better positioned than those who simply try to mimic or ape what they see happening in this space.

Yo Jim...

Here's my answer to an email interview by Arthur Goldstuck, a media/web analyst in South Africa.

When he refers to SABC, that stands for the South African Broadcasting Corporation. This is the 'official' state broadcaster. It has a history of being politically biased in favour of whichever ruling party happens to be in power. When apartheid was still around, it was a Nationalist organ. With the ANC in power now, post-apartheid, it's being accused of being very much an ANC mouthpiece.

In my answer, I talk about working at SABC3. That's one of the three tv channels in the corporation. It's a sort of high-end entertainment channel, aimed at top earners.

I think my musings in these answers deal a little bit with the topic you're handling.

Blue skies
love
Roy

STARTS...

10. Getting specifically to your role at SABC, do you foresee any intrusion there of Web 2.0 practises, principles or platforms?


I used to work at SABC3 for a long time (three years -- for me, that's a VERY long time). I was a promo-producer there. Basically, that meant that I would create teaser 'commercials' for shows like SURVIVOR, DARK ANGEL, AMAZING RACE, and try and addict viewers to the box. The station succeeded if I succeeded. Because they measure the ratings for every show.

Web 2.0 comes along, and the world is a different place. Because now there's the possibility of a community of viewers, rather than the old fashioned 'viewer'. Digital set-top recording means that the old-style television revenue model is finished. Dead. Fast-forwarding live tv means that the channels have to reinvent themselves as more compelling entertainment deliverers than things like YouTube and the porn versions like YuVuTu.

Sadly, I think the SABC lacks the necessary vision to even understand the new paradigm, let alone take measures to stay compelling. Just last night, after Survivor (yes -- I addicted myself to the show I made promos for), one of the promos gave away the storyline for the episode of LAW AND ORDER that was coming up. It told me that the 'overprotective father' was the culprit. So I switched off in disgust.

If they can't get something as basic as a promo right, how the heck are they going to 'get' viewer communities? How are they going to understand that you've got to speak to people in your own authentic voice, not that of the 'official spokesperson'?

The only joy I get out of this is that the propaganda potential of South African television is plummeting. Its life as an organ of government control is being snuffed out by vaster technologies.

11. Will blogging replace traditional journalism? (yes, you're right, it's a trick question, but you still have to answer it)


It has already replaced traditional journalism. For me, at any rate. I read almost ALL of my news via my Google reader. I aggregate about 80 blogs there. Robert Scoble, who used to be Microsoft's evangelist, aggregates around 800 feeds. That's THOUSANDS of stories a day. With skillful ears and eyes picking out the great stuff.

Journalism actually died the day Princess Diana died. On that day, the world's journalists proved that they have no objectivity, that they serve the gluttonous appetite of public taste. They DON'T serve news. They serve entertainment. And they have no self-reflexivity. They cannot turn the cameras or observing eye upon themselves. They're manufacturers.

Blogging exposes the manufacturing industry that journalism has become. When a journalist says something, several million people around the world, including better placed people than the journalist, are able to analyze and pick apart the errors -- philosophical and factual. And give readers a new truth. A new way of perceiving the very notion of truth.

...ENDS

I must add that I've left out 'on the spot' media like Twitter.

I think the answer to your question "Do YOU think I’m using social media successfully? has been answered by sheer volume alone. You twitter, we follow. I'll do my best to think this one over and come back later in the day, when things slow down, with some positive feedback.

My fear with the "brand champion" title has to do with what it would look like when done poorly. Hire the wrong person and now you've got someone whose job it is to "mimic or ape what they see happening in this space". Also, if your job is "brand champion", then what interesting stories do you have to tell to the rest of us? "I championed our brand today", snooz. I'd rather hear from reporters, etc. (People doing real work in real jobs with traditional titles.)

Maybe the brand champion is the silent partner that makes it (politically) possible (within their organization) for those "real people" to make their voices heard? (Someday that task won't be necessary, it's just freedom of speech, we'll collectively have that "duh" moment eventually).

You got a lot of great feedback here. Don't forget to mention your outstanding use of Twitter.

You wrote, "I think the key for companies is not to create a social media position or title, but rather to identify someone who understands these tools."
I totally agree. But I think that's a hard person to find- someone who understands how to use social media AND the business that wants to use it AND has the skills to pull it together in a way that is appealing to outsiders/clients/consumers. Bringing in an outsider who has social networking skills and training them about the business might be a better solution if that person can't be found among the currently employed!

Hey Jim...

A quick thought... did you ever follow the McDonald's blog? I was following it on Bloglines, and only ever got three or four posts. And then the feed stopped. I don't know if that's cos the blog died, or cos they cut the feed.

It was one of those corporate embarrassments. Strictly partyline. And spokespersony. With no freedom for the writer/blogger to actually respond realistically to the flood of comments.

Proof that when it's done badly, as a misunderstood corporate strategy, it backfires. (Actually, 'proof' is a big word. Maybe it's not proof. Maybe it's a hint at something.)

Hugh Macleod's work with Stormhoek, a previously unknown South African wine, is exemplary as to how to do it right. He showed them the blogging tools and strategy, and they now kick Britain's wine-market ass! (That's arse in Britain.)

Blue skies
love
Roy

trust your employees, train your employees, break down the imaginary silo walls, let their humanity free...

trust the conversation, participate, contribute, connect people for their mutual benefit

The heartbeat of new media is relationships. It’s about authentic dialog that doesn’t feel the need to portray an “image.” The ability to engage in 2-way conversation and the ability to be authentic creates a valuable trust relationship between you and those you reach. When I was in broadcasting, feedback seemed to be confined to the negatives. People only went through the hassle if they disagreed with you, often with very little constructive feedback. In new media, because the wall of 1-way communication is broken, more constructive feedback is received because it’s easier to engage. The company appears more open, pliable, human, and as a result you develop that trust relationship between you and those you reach.

As a company, would you rather blast 100,000 people with a message and hope 40 people pick up something from it, or would you rather engage in dialog from a pool of 1000 and have 100 be fully engaged and have many champion the message for you? Would you rather have a respected person make a recommendation of your product or service, or do you want to simply run a hands-off advertisement that most people tend to ignore or be suspicious of? Relationships matter.

Case in point? I can EASILY say that following you on Twitter and your blog has given me a new respect for NBC news. Thank you for being willing to take the step Jim.

Jim,

Like everything else in the world, it comes down to people, and how well or poorly we communicate. YOU make this thing work, not NBC. Same would be true for any other Big Media company. Or any other company, for that matter.

Twitter; nothing else like it. Nothing. Your Tweets and live video from your handheld at Kennebunkport and then your Tweets from Down Under, were genuine, interesting, timely, and discreet to your necessary OPSEC when traveling with the POTUS.

When the bridge collapsed in Minneapolis, Twitter peeps were there, camera phones e-mailing pics to blogs, blogs were immediately updated - and this was just people 'reporting' their lives. First Tweet from MN that day on my Twitter feed? "MSP Tweeps, any news on the bridge collapse? Hoping my brother hasn't left work yet. omg." Real, relevant, accurate. Pieces came together later. All on new media before the breathless Old Media could catch up.

Perhaps old media will be able to aggregate the viral aspects of Twitter and direct their resources for more in-depth reporting, but these days, they can forget 'breaking' a story.

Yes, I'm a shameless Twitter fan/addict. There's nothing like its means of access and distribution. It's so easy. Now, if they could fix the reliability and run it like a business instead of a hobby. :)

Very best,

-- Mike

Jim,

Wish I could be there for your talk & just to see you and C.C. Chapman and Geoff Livingston all in the same room. Gonna be a ton of energy right there.

Echoing what others have said -- it's not about social media tools ... will never be about the technology ... it's about people. Period.

Months ago, when we dreamed up the tagline for our blog Every Dot Connects -- connection through conversation -- I had only an inkling of just how important that would come to be in my business. More than a tagline, it's a business model: as social media/PR consultants, we connect people through conversation; we build relationships.

You're one of the amazing people I've connected with through social media tools -- first Twitter, then LinkedIn, then Facebook ... and best of all ... in person at our Crawford TX Old-New-Social Media Summit Tweetup.

Personal branding? Jim Long / NewMediaJim -- the name stands for something. (So does NewMediaJimBob, but that's another story! LOL) The brand happened as you reached out, just being yourself, and connected with people across the world through the tools at hand.

My session notes from BlogOrlando are up on the blog. If there's anything there you can use, feel free! Just don't ask to borrow my boa. Then I'd have to hurt ya. :)

I pretty much sit back and watch the show of social media. Presently, I see multitudes of wanting to become "rock stars", which (to me) is an agenda to become more successful in life. More money, more power. An invisible ladder, which people are "virtually" climbing their way to recognition. Basically "sales". For the record, I am not saying that is a bad thing.

Out of all the people that you mentioned above, I believe Scoble does "social media" best. He presents all information with humanity and makes it look effortless. Since Scoble is "inviting and inclusive", he is respected by many, and is geniunely cared for by those who follow him. I don't get all his techno talk, but I have "wowed" a few friends by what I have learned from listening to him. I don't know the man, but he made me look good. :)

In my humble opinion, conversation is a two-way street. To me, that includes discussings topics, asking questions, but most importantly, listening. If you are in the business of "social media", enjoy the diversity of those who want to listen to you by listening to them. If you want to be exclusive, then it is possible to wind up excluded.

I enjoy your Twitters and wish you much success!

Hi Jim!

IMHO, your use of social media is highly effective because you're quite simply a likable guy! 8-)

Personally, I couldn't care less that you work for NBC (especially since I don't get to see NBC's network news in my part of the world -- at least not with my cable TV package). Sure, it's occasionally fun to get behind-the-scenes snippets into where you're at or who you're rubbing elbows with, but I would have stopped following you on Twitter long ago if you had not been the sociable, likable, down-to-earth, approachable guy that you are (or seem to be).

I may be the exception to the rule, but frankly, I became interested in your work only because I found you interesting. I feel like there's a genuine person behind the computer screen, and that's makes a world of difference for me.

Jim, I know you mostly via Twitter. Like many others, my Twitter feed is "tuned" to my tastes. Some of it is tech headlines. Some of it is self-promoters who I tolerate because amidst their flood of tweets I actually do see a jewel here and there. Some are using Twitter and other channels to assert themselves as "thought leaders" (tolerable to a point). And some are just plain folks who have a way with words.

Some of my favorites are actually well-known authorities in their respective disciplines, but they don't feel need to pontificate or show off their authority. They just pop up with simple comments about what's going on their lives and some of them are very entertaining, like @zeldman and @cwodtke .

There's another category which I think you and most of other my favorites fall in - sharing their everyday lives punctuated with observations and commentary about the process itself. There's also something unique about your particular niche in what you do for a living. More than once I've flipped on the TV when I knew your shot was going live.

I still share the story of the sequence of events that happened via Twitter in the span of a few minutes when you and the press pool were in the outdoor cafe in the shadow of the Sydney opera house (request for "live" photo, debate over exclusivity for @kawasaki, upload to Flickr, question about demonstrations, Flickr link to demonstration photos back to you).

These little chains of events happen all the time on Twitter, but with your unique connection to a mainstream media channel, it gets verrrrrry interesting. ;-)

Wow. I sure showed up late to THIS party. : ) I think you're using it great, Jim. I really honestly could give a rat's ass about world news, except that your participation in bringing it to mean means that I've got "feet on the street" where a lot of it is unfolding. That, your kindness, your ability as a natural connector, and your ability to talk within your organizational brand and also outside it as a personality and spokesperson for what new media does best, means you've got it nailed.

Jim, I hope you post a follow-up on what actually happened with your presenation.