One to Watch for 2012: The Social TV Convergence

There was a time, a long long time ago before the internet, The X Factor and Pringles existed, when the phase ‘water-cooler moment’ was coined. This was a moment of community and shared experience, where the tele-visual event of last night was watched by the majority so they could be involved in the conversation. Then, as time passed, the number of channels grew and digital recorders such as Sky Plus and online catch-up sites like 4oD and iPlayer evolved, and the relevance of the event diminished to a point where advertisers withdrew and ratings dropped.

Now, however, an online revolution is changing all that, it’s no longer the water cooler but the social media moment, and it happens live, as the programme is broadcast. Suddenly a two screen revolution is under-way as internet access and multi-platform applications such as Twitter and Facebook are used in unison with the television to analyse, discuss and ridicule the exploits of soap characters, reality ‘stars’ and world events. No longer does it take any great effort to access the social media platforms for the average viewer, of a certain demographic, has mobile phones, tablets and laptops at their sides while they watch TV. There are even services like Zeebox springing up that embrace this trend and give users a one stop social media stop.

This is a sign of the future where all forms of media channel (YouTube, ITVPlayer and Sky TV) are viewed within a web environment that is not confined to the window of that company. So what does this mean? Well, for the consumer it means more feedback which could lead to better programming but also more power to those who air their views. For the businesses involved, the broadcasters lose control over image but have more metrics by which to show value to advertisers and these advertisers will no doubt be the target of the social media platforms collecting opinions.

The times, they are-a-changin’

Kaiser Chiefs did it in June this year.

Burberry did it in September.

And finally, Lord Sugar did it too.

We all know that social media is the buzz word of the hour. Or rather this era, if I may be bold enough to claim that. Oft conversed about with unbridled enthusiasm but rarely implemented in combination with innovative strategies. But all the above British brands mentioned – Kaiser Chiefs (yes, I consider a band a brand too), Burberry and Lord Sugar (brandividualism, anyone?) have created a glittering new avenue for harnessing the power of social media and hacked away at the traditional method of doing a ‘launch’. To explain further:

Launching their music album  (ironically named  ‘The Future is Medieval’ ) via social media, Kaiser Chiefs allowed users to upload their own cover and even make money for themselves by becoming sales people for the band and earning £1 per album they sell via social media channels.

At London Fashion Week 2012, Burberry launched their 2012 spring collection on Twitter. They “live tweeted” the show from backstage, tweeting pictures of outfits just before the models hit the runway.

Most recently, Lord Sugar has revolutionised the all familiar book launch by delivering the world’s first live book signing for his book ‘The Way I See It: Rants, Revelations and Rules for Life’ on Twitter too.  He invited his Twitter followers (more than a million) to tune in to www.lordsugar.tv at 1pm and suggested that they could tweet their own rants to him, using the hash tag #thewayiseeit.

End result?

Kaiser Chiefs became the first band in history to launch an album via a digital platform and garnered enviable amounts of media attention as well as diversified their fan base.

#Burberry was the third most popular hash tag trending globally on their launch day and the fashion industry was set ablaze with their idea.

And Lord Sugar? The hash tag #thewayiseeit trended worldwide in the number one spot over 20 hours; saw around 350,000 tweets over the course of 24 hours; and over 2,500 rants directly to Lord Sugar. (Source – the Wallblog)

These brands have set a trend (pun intended), and they have definitely fully utilised the amazing firepower of social media platforms. Now to see who does what next!

Twitter for Business: Myths Busted

Who would have thought only a few years back that we would all be sitting here broadcasting to the world and its mother what we ate for lunch? Who would have thought we would have the outlet to do so and who would have thought anyone would care? Flash forward and we are obsessed with Twitter. We use it to publicise ourselves and our work, we use it to get information (whether that be actual worthy information or, perhaps, what someone else deems worthy), and sometimes we use it merely to kill some time. Whatever our reasons, Twitter can no longer be ignored, but certain myths about the best way to use it for your business can.

Myth 1 – The longer you are on Twitter, the more influence you have

FALSE! No one cares if you joined three years ago or three weeks, so long as what you are saying is interesting and valuable. Businesses joining Twitter now are not late if they are engaging with their followers and showing them 140 characters that no one else in the industry can. People will take notice and will follow – regardless of if you joined in 2009 or just this month.

Myth 2 – The more you say, the better

FALSE! In terms of the workplace, as exciting as it may be to you to talk about what your office ate for lunch, the truth is, your followers are probably more interested in what your office thinks about its industry. Your followers want to know what events you will be attending and what you are doing to stand out from your competition. They do not want to know if you all need a coffee as it’s been “one of those days”. The truth is you need to think about what you yourself would want to read with your precious time. We live in a world where self promotion is easy and self indulgence is even easier, but if you are using a social network to get ahead, promotion should beat indulgence at all times. This means 3,000 tweets a day are not necessary and, if anything, a hindrance that could result in people clicking “unfollow” just to stop hearing about how your coffee machine is broken.

Myth 3 – Following celebrities will make you a celebrity

FALSE! Okay, this should go without saying, but if you are a business, it’s probably unlikely that following a celebrity is really going to bring in a large amount of interest for you (unless the celebrity is part of the cast of The Only Way is Essex and your business is in fake tans). On the whole, you would be better spending your time finding relevant people to follow. This can include important members of your industry, thought leaders, companies, and, most importantly, potential customers. It’s all fine and good to follow people that you find amusing or tell the best Twitter jokes, but if they aren’t going to buy your product, they aren’t the people you really want to engage with.

FACT!
At the end of the day, as with everything in business, Twitter should be about adding value. You would not call up a potential customer and spend half an hour telling nonsensical jokes. Fine, put the odd joke. Afterall, it’s important to show some personality (just as it would be on the phone). But just like you would on the phone, you should use your time on Twitter effectively – talk to the right people, promote yourself in a professional capacity, and tell your customers what the benefits are to them. People are busy – even 140 characters can be too much to read if time does not allow, so make sure that your 140 characters are saying something useful and it will be irrelevant how long you have been on Twitter or whether you have Stephen Fry following you – you will have customers who are interested. And we all know, the right interest leads to sales. Which is why you are on Twitter in the first place, right?

Technology, Life and our addiction to smartphones

Last Saturday evening I had the misfortune (or luck) to place my low-battery mobile phone in a “safe place” at home (I think). Mid-way through the week and I still hadn’t managed to locate it but as a persistent and positive PR I refused to give in and report it lost.

Coincidentally, this also happened to be the week that RIM went into meltdown, leaving millions of Blackberry users without access to the internet so at least I wasn’t suffering alone. An Ofcom survey released this summer highlighted that a quarter of adults and nearly half of teenagers admitted to being highly addicted to their smartphones. We spend hours with them and rarely have them out of arm’s reach (even if we are in the bathroom). A Sheila’s Wheel’s survey found that partners love their phones more than their partners and on the average night out 48 minutes are spent on these techy toys. I, for one, admit to spending an unnecessary amount of time with my phone, whether it’s keeping up with the latest news, looking at Twitter, playing games and emailing not to mention normal calls, texts etc. Pre loss I was checking my phone for news in the bath, slept next to it, checked it in bed once the alarm went off in the morning, in the bus on the way to work, on the way home, at lunch with colleagues and the list goes on. This is not a unique situation and though colleagues say that checking my emails in the bath is a little on the extreme side, most admit to being unable to cope without their mobiles.

So what is it like not having a smartphone? I have to say, after the initial feeling of missing a limb wears off, it’s actually not that bad. I had to use landlines, traditional maps, be on time and started to read again. My tech hits were limited to laptops and my work PC, but I noticed a sense of freedom, better concentration and that my eyes weren’t as strained. I also talked to people without worrying about what my trusty little electronic pal was up to. I went to an event in Shoreditch called Slow Tech last month, which examined ways to detach from tech for a while. Whilst recognising that technology plays an important part in our lives, the event also looked at our inability to not check phones every few minutes. Interesting solutions included the Tamagochi style living plant which is looked after when your phone or iPad is plugged in and not touched, the innovative pulley system which lifts your phone out of reach until it’s fully charged and a tech blocking gizmo which blocks signals and apps – very handy when you’re having a dinner party. A friend and I had dinner the other night and I found myself increasingly irritated with his need to reply to texts and check his phone. Slow Tech speakers argued that no one’s going to die when you don’t look at your phone for a couple of hours – something that I agree wholeheartedly with. I may have caved in and finally ordered a replacement phone, but I certainly think it helped me realise our obsession with being constantly connected is unnecessary. I wonder how many Blackberry users feel the same?

Leveson Inquiry: Tabloid Witch-Hunt or Hunt for Media Standards?

As the first seminar of the Leveson Inquiry into media standards and ethics began yesterday morning, it saw the start of what would be a lengthy debate into the controversial matter of the phone hacking scandal. This inquiry has brought forth many key issues: The treatment of individuals as a mere ‘story’ rather than as people in their own right; the constriction of free speech and sharing of information; or can the ‘pressures’ journalists are facing justify their illegal actions?

I agree that journalists are constantly under pressure to get a story published quickly, especially as they are up against such competitive social media platforms and a decline in circulation. However, this ‘pressure’ has seemingly led certain journalists to take shortcuts in their practice which is, in effect, damaging to the institution of journalism, especially in the public eye.

I have to admit I was hooked reading the live feed of the seminar as it happened. Although, the battle between the tabloids and broadsheets as to ‘who said what’, and the fear that Leveson was out to get the tabloids, did seem to steer away from the objective of the inquiry. They understood that what happened was illegal, but I am not sure that the defence was strong enough; especially as one line of defence was “good journalism at times breaks all these [moral] codes, and breaks the law maybe in a small way.”

Leveson concluded that the seminar had “achieved what I hoped it would achieve”, giving the viewpoints needed to help shape its direction further. I know that there was an array of perspectives, but I am not sure that the focus on the point of ethics was made clear enough. I am looking forward to the next instalment which will take place on Wednesday 12th October 2011, but I do hope the fundamental value of genuine journalism is remembered in order to ‘shape’ the future of media standards.