I was reading one of Gavin Heaton’s recent blog posts where he shared links to Forrester’s recent decision to not allow personally-branded blogs where analysts write about or comment on the research areas that they cover while under the employment of Forrester. Josh Bernoff offers reasoning that I think is spot on and respectable: 

"What people need to understand is that Forrester is an intellectual property company, and the opinions of our analysts are our product. Blogging is an extension of the other work we do -- doing research, writing reports, working with clients, and giving speeches, for example. As Sting said, 'Poets, priests and politicians/Have words to thank for their positions.' Analysts, too."

Josh and Cliff Condon, Forrester's VP of Social Media were very clear to point out that Forrester analysts will be able to blog on the Forrester blog and can still have their own personal blogs and Twitter accounts. They just can’t blog or tweet about analysis that they are being paid by Forrester to work on for paying clients. Based on feedback from their “time-starved” clients, merging all analysts under one blog roof helps to give them one “go to” location. Sounds fair to me. 

While some folks vehemently disagree, I am in total agreement. As a former Forrester client, I agree with their decision. Here’s why: 

Value.

Clients pay Forrester A LOT of money to access their research, pragmatic advice and thought leadership. The value lies in that you cannot access this information elsewhere—that is why businesses are willing to pay a premium. If I could access Forrester analysts and their opinions, thought leadership, etc. elsewhere, for free, why would I bother paying? Or, if I was paying Forrester in the tens of thousands of dollars and then realized I could have accessed the information (in some format) for free, I’d be ticked off.  Why would Forrester reduce the value of what they offer by allowing analysts to cover it at no charge? 

Social Media Isn’t Free.

People have some odd notion that social media is free and that organizations should give away their thought leadership for free too. Wrong. There needs to a cap because at a certain point once people have had their fill, demand will diminish. Or, in another term people readily understand: Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free. This point goes back to value. 

Personal Brand Parity.

As most folks know, I am not a proponent of personal branding. Why? Because I think if people truly understood branding and what goes into managing a brand, they would run far and fast away from it. It’s not work for the marketing weak or weary. The one thing that people aren’t talking about is personal brand parity. And it’s already happening. Everyone is an expert in marketing, social media, communications, PR, etc... When everyone is saying the same thing there is nothing different from the viewpoint of a potential hiring company, client, etc. Why would Forrester allow their analysts to be diluted by parity? 

Intangibility.

Services don’t exist until they are consumed. As a result most service-oriented businesses can’t offer a sample of the specific service they offer. With their blog, Forrester can. It makes smart marketing sense then to have all of their different analysts offer a “sample” of what clients can expect when they select Forrester as their analyst service. Again, why spread that around where it might get diluted and devalued?

Your thoughts? Agree, disagree? 

Loading mentions Retweet

I’ve been thinking about influence yet again. I think about influence a lot for a lot of reasons, but mainly because I think influence can be misinterpreted.

One reason because I think the notion of influence is misunderstood. Typically influence is determined by how many readers a publication or blogger has or how many follower/friends one has on sites like Twitter and Facebook. But that’s a flawed view of influence. Just because a publication or bloggers has readers doesn’t mean those readers read every single article or post. Nor does it mean that if they do, it will influence them to take action of some sort or share that information with others. The same thing is true with site like Twitter and Facebook. Just because people are talking about a particular brand or subject doesn’t mean that all of their friends or followers will see the discussion or be influenced in some way. So what we are discussing isn’t truly influence but potential reach. And that reach isn’t guaranteed. Ever.

The second reason is because I think the onus of influence is put on the wrong group of people. Influence doesn’t belong to the people with high reader counts or friends/followers it belongs to the people trying to and efficiently get their message out through a channel of established potential reach. What do I mean by this? If someone pitches me it’s their potential influence over me that will help me make a decision to help them…or not.

The second of the two, I believe, is the more important. For example, I get a lot of pitches because PR folks go down the AdAge 150 or some other list of “Top Whatever List” and find my name. They assume, mistakenly, that I have influence (they don’t even think about actual the reach). But what they don’t even consider is whether or not they have enough influence to affect how I will rearrange my time or priorities to write or talk about them.  And even if someone has taken the time to build a relationship or proven that there is value in what they are trying to share, they may misunderstand how much influence they truly have.

I’ll still be thinking more about this, but those are my thoughts. What say you?

Loading mentions Retweet

The other day I got into a discussion with no one’s favorite person @AmandaChapel (Brian Connolly) about, what else, social media. At the end of it he shared Bill Sledzik’s not so glowing review of Brian Solis’ new book “Putting the Public Back in Public Relations” with me and asked me if I read it AND the comments. (I had.) 

We then continued the conversation via DM where I said something like: “My PR 2.0 chat is NOTHING like what Brian Solis talks about” (paraphrased). I then went on to say: “I use the term ‘PR 2.0’ in my chat because it’s my backdoor entry to sharing traditional PR” (again, parapharased). 

[Regarding the statement about Brian, I didn’t mean it disrespectfully. It’s just that I don’t believe that PR 2.0 is only about the technology in this space what it can do to allow us to engage with publics. And I don’t believe in ghost blogging, which Brian is okay with. To me, PR 2.0 is a CHANCE to get ‘people relations’ right this time. Thanks to Kellye Crane for that term.]

The conversation has been on my mind ever since. Because, whoa!, I feel like I betrayed myself and where I stand on both topics. I engage in both AND I have issues with BOTH. I haven’t been quiet about it.

For 15 years I have had one thought when it comes to PR: It’s about people and the relationships established with them. It’s a two-way, respectful & ethical engagement that helps to establish mutual understandings and it should happen whether it’s a journalist, an employee, a person in the local community or a shareholder. And that’s how I have handled and taught PR.

In my mind, if a company needs to have a journalist “police” that kind of activity as a third-party...well, they have more issues than I can ever address.

My opinion is that journalists, reporters, & editors carry multiple biases (personal, editorial and business) with them that often affect their integrity. I also know that some organizations will absolutely manipulate any interaction they have with publics should they get the opportunity to do so.

What am I saying here? Perhaps I beat to a different drum. I am educated and experienced in both and I believe that gives me the ability to make up my own rules for what is right and what works. Arrogant? Perhaps. Successful? So far. My success isn’t based on arrogance; it’s been based on having the guts to put people first and taking the time to build relationships with them.

That said, I am almost positive my position on PR has landed me on the very tippy top of a “lay off” list more than once in my career. Trust me, I have pissed off more than one executive siding with a journalist and ticked off more than one journalist by not giving them the scoop they thought they deserved.

So... If you are engaged in the PR 2.0 Chat I moderate on Twitter, know this: I AM BIASED towards my own PR beliefs. I am trying to influence people to see PR a different way. I am persuading people to buck the system. I am hoping we come to some mutual understanding of today's best practices. And no matter what, I always enjoy our two-way conversations. (How's that for a good sprinkling of buzz words?!)

I guess for all my bitching, I am a PR gal at heart. Just not a typical one.

Loading mentions Retweet

I love it when I stumble upon a really smart, thoughtful blog post. It's like platinum to me [platinum is better than gold in my book and my favorite. ;-)]. But what I am really starting to be frustrated with are the issues I've been bumping into recently (only in the past month or so it seems, which is odd to me in and of itself) when it comes to blog commenting.
 
It seems like every time I take time out of my day to write a thoughtful comment and hit send inevitably there's a sudden suction, a bit of silence and then **POOF!**  It’s gone...forever.
 
Unfortunately, for me it’s been like a smack in the face...or a dose of reality (why did I waste precious time?).
 
What's worse is when I see the comment post and then when I go back later it's gone (gremlins?). Or even worse than that is when I leave a comment only to be told it's under moderation and then never appears. WTH?
 
I know, I know... CONTROL-C just in case. As a safeguard I have been trying to write blog comments in Word first and then copying & pasting them. But sometimes when a post is that great, I go to town in the comments and then pray that I don’t have a moment of regret immediately afterwards (sorta like those bad date experiences, you know?).
 
I can't believe I am the only one going through this... Am I? (Reality check please!)
 
I am just thinking aloud here, but doesn’t it seem that continuing down this path of frustration might keep us from wanting to participate? (Maybe it’s just me...)
 
Questions to ponder:  

• Whose responsibility is it to make sure these issues don't occur and that comments can be left seamlessly?
• And are bloggers not keeping up with the maintenance of their blogs? Could that be an issue too?

Loading mentions Retweet

If you read my blog you'll know I am taking a break from it. But those of you who know me know that I can't shut up for any real length of time (an issue since childhood...note passing was my #1 detention crime). As well, I have a ton of stuff spinning around in my head that never seems to make it to my blog for various reasons. Mainly perfection and time.

I was talking with a few folks about my blog hiatus and the reasons around it and they thought Posterous might be the place for me to jot down my thoughts. And if they never make it to my blog at least they made it out of my head. So there you have it: A Marketing Notebook.

Consider 'em marketing doodles, half-baked thoughts, random ideas, etc. that are...IMPERFECT.

Hopefully the ramdom thoughts will come together to help me formulate smart, analytical blog posts.

As well, I am working on trying to make my 'professional' writing style, more 'personable.' However, 15 years in corporate marketing has unfortunately left an indelible mark. We'll see what happens with time. (Can I curse here?! Does sarcasm translate?!)

And NO, I am not jumping on the "lifestreaming" bandwagon. It's such a ridiculously silly term (there I said it!). Really, it's a buzzword that makes people feel better about being on the "cutting edge," which is ironic since the term lifestreaming was supposedly coined in the mid-90s. (Uh, we're talking about 14+/- years too late to be hip.) And NO I don't think blogging is dead or archaic. Just like I don't think traditional marketing is. Besides, I am months behind on being cool enough to be an early adopter here...

You're all welcome to read/comment on my notebook or not (and yes, it will also be shared on Twitter & Facebook). This time it's not for you, it's for me. Really. I mean it. I dred the day someone comes up with a "ranking" for the best Posterous accounts. I am beyond tired of being ranked, judged, pedestaled. I just want to think out loud...freely & unencumbered. [Crap. Was that just one giant whine?! Kinda sounds like it. ;-) ]

P.S. Do people really want one more place to connect? No, seriously. Aren't we ALL overloaded?

Loading mentions Retweet