Winner's Edge

Focused on strategic communications

Breaking through the noise of social media

Proven sources like academics and experts gain influence as people become more skeptical of peer recommendations.

Way back in the 20th century, “buzz” was the je ne sais quoi of the marketing world. Every company wanted it, but few presumed to know how to get it. Back then, corporations generally lobbed their products into the marketplace, bombarded consumers with repetitive messages and sat back and prayed that buzz would magically appear.

That, of course, changed as companies learned how to harness the Internet. And, as social media like MySpace and Facebook emerged, marketing became less of a monologue and more of a multiparty conversation. It suddenly wasn’t enough for companies and their spokespersons to speak down to consumers from the mountaintop. The new challenge was how to get consumers to say good things about a product to one another.

The rise of social media has been part and parcel of the devolution of authoritative information and the flowering of a million cacophonous voices. It not only changed the way companies looked at consumers but how consumers looked at each other. By 2005, surveys showed that when it came to the marketplace, Americans were beginning to trust their peers more than well-known authorities and experts. The following year, according to the Trust Barometer Survey conducted by Edelman, an international public relations firm, saw the emergence of “a person like me” as a credible spokesperson for companies and products.

By 2010, nearly four in five corporations were planning to move money they once spent on television advertising to some sort of social media campaign. Two weeks ago, Pepsi chose to forgo a high-profile TV spot at halftime of the Super Bowl for a social-media-driven charity campaign that will award the nonprofit organizations that muster the most votes through virtual social networks. Could there be any better proof that social media is the future of marketing?

But hold on, now comes Edelman’s 2010 Trust Barometer. The latest findings fly in the face of that formerly new conventional wisdom.

According to the survey, since 2008 the number of people who view their friends and peers as credible sources of consumer and business information dropped by almost half, from 45% to 25%. Similarly, in the past year, the number of people who view peers as credible spokespersons also slipped. Even more strikingly, however, after a precipitous decline earlier in the decade, informed consumers have regained trust in traditional authorities and experts.

What’s going on? Are Facebook friends turning on each other? Did we lose faith in ourselves? Is social media just a fluke?

None of the above, says Gail Becker, Edelman’s Western regional president. After sifting through the data, she concludes that consumers are merely rebelling against all the noise and reflecting the effects of uncertain times.

A few years ago, when peer-to-peer trust was at a peak, social media was still relatively new and its circles were manageable. But since then, the number of friend networks has exploded and every kind of business, for-profit and not, has sought to harness — we might say, exploit — them for their gain. That, according to Becker, has made people more skeptical of peer recommendations.

“Social media is more professionalized now and less organic,” says Becker. “It’s harder to know who to trust.”

And in troubled times, such uncertainty is magnified. All of this explains the rise in the number of people willing to pay attention to sources like proven academics and experts. After indulging the thoughts and opinions of anyone who was “just like me,” it seems that people are now looking for a firmer guarantee of clarity, objectivity and accuracy.

Although these findings are mostly about business and financial matters, they surely also have broader significance. They suggest that the flattening of authority may not go on forever, and that there are limits to Americans’ belief in Everyman.

I’d like to think that this bodes well for one of the old, authoritative sources of information, the traditional media. Unfortunately, so far the survey also shows that the credibility of television and radio news and newspapers continued to take a beating over the past two years.

Cacophony and crisis prove the need for objectivity and expertise. What a relief. Call it old-fashioned, hierarchical or elitist, but in an era in which issues are only becoming more complicated, it’s about time.

(reprinted from Los Angeles Times. OpEd by Gregory Rodriguez)

February 17, 2010 Posted by | Uncategorized | , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Public Opinion: Offshore Drilling

While public opinion on offshore drilling may still be somewhat divided, recent survey research shows increasing support for its expansion, both in California and in Florida, which have been known for their opposition to offshore drilling.

A series of surveys conducted in Florida during the summer of 2008 found support for offshore oil drilling to be around 60 percent. More recently, surveys in California have also shown support for offshore drilling to constitute a slight majority of public opinion. For example, a July 2009 Public Policy Institute of California survey found 51% of Californians in support of expanding offshore drilling, the same as in their July 2008 survey.

In addition, one of the research firms I frequently partner with, Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin &Associates (FMMA), recently conducted statewide research in California regarding a new offshore drilling project proposal. Fifty-three percent of respondents indicated that they would favor the project, with just 36 percent opposing it and 11 percent undecided.

Interestingly, while there has been speculation that support for drilling is being driven largely by high levels of concern about dependence on foreign oil imports and high energy prices, the results of the FMM&A survey showed that support was strong across the board, regardless of whether respondents have a high or low degree of concern about foreign oil dependence.

Other attitudes and factors may be at play in both California and Florida – two states where the current economic downturn has played havoc with balancing state budgets – such as the desire to capture a portion of offshore drilling revenues for state coffers. For example, in the California case, mention in the survey of billions of dollars in new state government revenues from offshore drilling drives the numbers for support for the California offshore drilling proposal to nearly two-thirds. Further, there is simply the passage of time. It has been 40 years since the Santa Barbara oil spill galvanized offshore drilling opposition nationwide. Perhaps as memories and concerns fade, economics are taking over.

February 13, 2010 Posted by | Uncategorized | , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Telling Your Story: Translating Tech Talk into Plain Talk

You know you’ve got the facts on your side. You’ve spent millions on a world class environmental study, investing in top notch science and data collection. Or, perhaps your team has spent thousands of hours compiling exacting documentation of the law and economics that support your regulatory case. Whatever your situation, you’ve put major resources on the project because the upside potential — and perhaps the downside risks — could be enormous, maybe even a game changer for your organization.

Having made the up-front investment to get this far in the game, and with so much at stake, it’s time to ask yourself whether you’ve done everything possible to enhance your chances of success and reduce the risk of failure.

Here’s the question: Can you tell your story in a way that’s so compelling that you will win the day? Policy makers, legislators, regulators, juries, the general public — these decision makers control the destiny of your project, but they generally do not have the technical background to understand massive volumes of data and reams of argumentation. You must help them understand and believe in your case — in your story.

Every set of facts can be summed up by a compelling story, a logic train that makes clear why your efforts – your facts – should matter to those making a decision. A compelling story opens up a gateway of understanding, making it possible for your audience to easily grasp the gist of your case, and to achieve emotional buy-in.

Finding the story behind volumes of technical information and crafting that story into compelling words, diagrams, charts, pictures and video — while remaining true to the underlying facts – these story telling skills are the essential element in the process of persuasion.

How do we go about developing and telling your story? It’s a multi-step process, customized to each client’s needs, but based on some fundamental principles developed over decades of work on hundreds of complex and challenging public affairs situations.

To begin, we study and absorb all the details of your fact case. Only when we understand the nuances can we craft the most compelling story that will win over sometimes very skeptical audiences.

Next, we use our understanding of your information and your story, on the one hand, and the interests of your audiences, on the other hand, to bridge the gap between you and them. Every communications situation, no matter how dry or technical, offers themes that help us forge this bond.

We do this by weaving your facts and themes into a story that is designed to appeal to your audiences on multiple levels and lead to understanding of your efforts and agreement with what you are trying to achieve.

Finally, in presentations, fact sheets, white papers, brochures, website materials, speeches, documentary films and other communications tools we tell your story in a manner that optimizes for success and protects against failure.

December 29, 2009 Posted by | Uncategorized | , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Reputations at Risk in Web 2.0′s ‘Global Village’

Explosion of User-Generated Media in the Age of Social Networks Creates Important New Reputation Management Challenges

pic1

Today, two thirds of what Nielsen Online calls “the world’s Internet population” visit social networks or blogs, which have become the fourth most popular online sector after search, portals and PC software applications (Nielsen, Global Faces and Networked Places, March 2009). Enabled by Web 2.0 technology*, this thriving new type of user-generated media, often designated as social media, is proliferating on public and private virtual spaces at an incredible rate. Blogs, wikis, podcasts, message boards, virtual communities and networking tools flourish every day, challenging traditional outlooks on how issues are framed, messages are circulated and reputations – brand, corporate and personal – are managed.

Thanks to Web 2.0, tweets, posts, and other forms of digital communications are redefining the way people and organizations communicate, opening the door to a new world of free and easily accessible information sharing, unedited and uncensored contents, and global – borderless – interactions. This is exemplified by the ability of citizens in Iran breaking through government censorship to communicate with the outside world on civil unrest in the country through Facebook and Twitter posts.

Worldwide reach in seconds
For organizations and individuals who value their reputations, this development creates new and increasingly serious challenges. In fact, in the Web 2.0 global village – where anyone can initiate a worldwide controversy almost instantaneously, frame an issue positively or negatively, or feed international debate with a simple blog post – every reputation is at risk.

For example, social media tools such as blogs and social networks enable anyone frustrated with a company’s practices, products or services to spread their complaints virally and potentially stimulate a local, national or global campaign against the company. For consumer activists and special interest groups, these tools have become powerful instruments to stage attacks on companies and rally support for their positions.

Companies like Amazon, recently faced the anger of thousands of bloggers for its re-classification of gay and lesbian themed books as “adult” books. Even Apple, a favorite of the wired crowd, came under fire from Greenpeace bloggers for its alleged lack of involvement regarding environmental issues. Starbucks, the “socially progressive” coffee giant, is currently dealing with a media campaign rooted in social media which alleges the company as anti-organized labor.

In today’s digital world, disgruntled workers, distraught ex-workers, whistleblowers and digital spies are now one click away from spreading confidential information, classified reports and/or stories on questionable practices they might have encountered. On websites such as http://www.wikiLeaks.com, http://www.thesmokinggun.com, or http://www.sharesleuth.com, they are now able to gather and archive leaked information, which then becomes searchable and printable by anyone at anytime.

The risks to reputations are real, and because there is no such thing as a digital eraser to remove individual attacks and negative publicity, every polemic growing in the Web 2.0 global village can potentially become an exponential threat to corporate – and individual – interests worldwide.

Using Web 2.0 to your advantage
However, as much as social media creates risks, Web 2.0 can also be a valuable tool for those who want to understand and potentially manage the actions, trends, and opinions that shape their reputations. As a borderless window to millions of minds around the world, Web 2.0 offers the opportunity to better understand global trends and opinions in the making – a knowledge which is critical to anticipating issues and/or crises and developing effective response strategies.

That is why organizations and individuals who consider their reputation a valuable asset should invest the time and resources needed to understand today’s global digital village and actively engage with its burgeoning pool of bloggers, twitters and social networkers.

Protecting reputations and maximizing opportunities in the world of Web 2.0 involves three basic steps:

1. Monitor

2. Analyze

3. Engage

Blogs and social networks can be global focus groups, borderless suggestion boxes which gather the first formulations of business, cultural, political and social trends and evolving developments. To leverage the benefits of social media, one must, first and foremost, put in place a system to MONITOR online word-of-mouth interactions, using various tools to listen and dig through myriad tweets, posts and blogs to find insights into public opinions and actions.

Organizations must then ANALYZE their findings; evaluate the meaning of aggregated individual thoughts and reactions; assess the evolution of online networks and communities; and locate and map trends and their initiators.

Ultimately, organizations must actively ENGAGE with the millions of digital minds which aspire to discuss, debate and influence the decisions being made about the products they purchase, the services they use, the environments in which they live and the issues they care about.

Whether it is by blogging, tweeting, linking, or creating their own forums, organizations must be proactive online if they want to maintain control over their reputations. They must engage with online communities, be aware of participant concerns and, when appropriate, develop responses to those concerns. In the Web 2.0 global village – where people live and learn through uncensored dialogue and near instantaneous interactions – traditional external communications utilizing earned and paid media are no longer enough.

Managing issues and enhancing the reputations of our clients has been the highest priority of my firm, Winner & Associates, since its founding in 1975. Our global Advanced Reputation Management System gives our clients a competitive advantage in the constantly evolving world of Web 2.0. For more information, please contact Zach Winner at zwinner@winnr.com.

* Web 2.0 refers to a second generation of web technologies and applications that facilitate communications, information sharing, and collaboration online in ways previously unavailable. Examples of Web 2.0 applications include social-networking sites, video-sharing sites, wikis and blogs.

June 17, 2009 Posted by | Uncategorized | , , , , , | 1 Comment

   

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.