Winning Online

Two members from our Winning Strategies ITS team - myself being one of them - went over to a search engine marketing seminar today at the Gateway Center in downtown Newark, NJ, a virtual stone’s throw (that is, if you’re George Washington) from our offices.  Picked up a few new pointers and reaffirmed much of what we have come to know in our implementation of Search Engine Optimization and marketing.  This is always important to keep the mind fresh on the objectives that can sometimes get lost in the minutiae of our daily undertakings.  SEO comes down to being as visible as possible (most importantly on page 1) when an internet user searches for a term associated with your product, campaign, or company.  Some terms are obvious, but too vague and will not yield results in such a crowded marketplace.  But, using qualifiers (like a location) with your search phrases can get you on the road to great results.  You need to put yourself in the minds of your target audiences, or rather, searchers.  Use those phrases and terms that you think are associated with your company but it is almost more important to put yourself in the shoes of those looking for your company.

In the ever-evolving online world, things can change quickly too.  While this morning, the seminar keynote recommended using meta keywords particularly for “fat finger” iterations of Web searches.  For instance, the mistaken typing of “Wonning Strategies” for our company.  I reach my desk to find in the New York Times that Google is rolling out a tool that suggest - and in some cases - fixes web searches. 

Best laid plans go oft awry.

Around this time last year, a potential client was referred to us. They were launching a product that would give parents the ability to monitor their children’s online activities, including the content of their e-mail and instant messages. No matter what you think about respecting your child’s privacy, we’ve all read the stories about kids who were contacted online by a predator. Those stories often don’t end well.
But I digress. When the client approached us, we put together a launch plan for them. They opted not to retain us, but I recently checked their Web site and I wish they had because I am itching to edit their content!
Here’s why: Their product is marketed toward parents of teens so the audience skews slightly older. A lot of people in this age group are not tech-savvy.
OK, that’s a generalization but, believe me, their teenagers will back me up!
So … a product that allows non-tech-savvy parents to monitor their child’s safety online should be described in very simple terms. But the content on their site is filled with confusing jargon.
If I am desperate to know whether my daughter is IMing with perverts, do I want to spend any time thinking about what a “value add” is? Am I stumbling over words like deploy and phrases like mapping functionality?
The point is: Know Your Audience and target your communications toward that audience. And remember that no matter who your audience is, simple and straightforward is always better!

With technology making the world a smaller place day by day, television networks are starting to follow the trend. They are rewriting the way they produce and distribute their news items - via geographically distributed journalists who act “as their own producer, cameraman and editor, and sometimes even transmit live video.”

The New York Times did an interesting article on this. It seems as if this ‘one-man band’ mentality is the way to go - especially in lieu of the many cutbacks in news outlets across the board. The ‘one-man band’ is both an inexpensive and practical solution compared to having a full-fledged news bureau. Furthermore, the overall reach of the news outlet can be extended to multiple cities throughout the country (instead of being nestled in one, single location).

And why not?

If a journalist can write his or her own story, have the ability to videotape and edit the material and then produce a final product (all without the smoke screen of another set of eyes of a person who may not have an overall stake in the story), wouldn’t that provide the viewer a better overall experience? Who better but the reporting journalist to be able to have full control over what he/she produces.

And it’s not just about control - it’s about the overall results. Take me and my role at Winning Strategies, for instance. I AM the ‘one-man band’ - but that doesn’t mean that I work alone. I DO have a wonderful team of individuals who help me coordinate, plan and execute my video projects, much like a traditional news bureau (and funny enough, our office is even set up with the look and feel of a traditional newsroom).

But as I mentioned earlier, the advantage of me being the ‘one-man band’ is that the client gets the best results in the quickest, most cost efficient way. I have an immense stake in the overall quality and output of my work, and I ensure that this attitude and overall result carries over to the client. I storyboard, script, direct and develop all of my work (on top of the aforementioned assistance from our WS team).

Additionally, with current technology at my disposal, I can also get videos out faster to news outlets (in high quality to boot). For instance, a few months back, I shot a groundbreaking event for one of our clients. I had to prepare, shoot the video, shoot the photography, edit the footage on my laptop, export it and FTP it to local news stations - all within a 4 hour period. Was the quality and integrity of the work diminished? No.

I just got everything out (one-man), in a short period period of time - the only way it could’ve been done. It’s either that or miss the opportunity. And I wouldn’t let that happen on my watch.

On Wednesday, Google launched its online-publishing service that, at face, is a potential competitor to Wikipedia.org, the highly-trafficked and ubiquitous user-generated reference Web site. 

This is all quite top of mind, as Wikipedia has become yet another spot to monitor for our clients.  Those in the public eye can easily have an entry pop up at a moment’s notice.  And with Wikipedia’s preeminence in the search engines, that entry can be right at the top of search very quickly.  Suffice to say, the real-world application happened here; it was nothing to be alarmed about - the entry was straightforward and honest - but it was something we found in our regular monitoring of the online chatter, the blogosphere.  And it was something we needed to educate our client on and put together a plan moving forward.   Most of the time, that plan will come down to taking no direct action. 

You see: Wikipedia has had a trail of companies caught in the act, after having changed true information detrimental to their greater good.  The online world is becoming one where everyone is involved yet everything is transparent: IP addresses, the fingerprints of your network, are easily indexed and traced back; signed-in users - who have the ability on Wikipedia to keep their IP address hidden - can still be “flagged” quickly for an entry that seems self-interested.  Discretion - but active monitoring - can be the better part of valor.

The blogosphere is magnified and can be intensely territorial; if its users perceive that somebody is “wagging the blog”, this can make a benign offense quickly much worse.  We tinkered with the idea of simply adding a link to our client’s Web site in the reference section of the Wikipedia entry, a tactic that makes no perceived subjective content changing - and in our minds seems an open, fair part of being part of the conversation.   Again, discretion however leads you to at times to eschew entering this conversation.  Wikipedia does have a “talk” section, though, which is the recommended way for an entity that even has the slightest potential self-interest in the entry to put something out there for consideration and which lets the editors decide.  With this tact, transparency is still the best choice: say exactly who you are and recommend your idea or revision with a clear reason why; If you are not comfortable with that, it may be the decider that you should not proceed with an active addition/retraction.  Just this level of thinking shows how much goes into an online plan, and this, for something that to this point has yielded no discernible action.

Which brings us back to Knol.  Google’s newest application is something to monitor.  It seems close in nature to Wikipedia but differs in several areas, most notably that it is written by someone, right now mostly experts, and allows users to recommend revisions/edits but not necessarily edit entries in real time.

For a company that seems to corner the market on almost everything else, don’t be surprised if this new service becomes a new part of the modern vernacular.  Be out in front and look it over, get a feel for its lay out and its aim, and see if there is any potential for action - or simply just monitoring - on the part of your company.  New applications can breed new angles and new ideas for your product or campaign.

Facebook, the super-popular social networking site, underwent a bit of a facelift this week.  The site, which began as a sort of online college-specific community tool, has made some, in look, subtle changes.  Navigation is more user-friendly and logical, there are not overburdening “apps” - third party applications - overtaking profiles and internal pages and in some ways, it feels almost as though the site has been stretched wider.  The focus is on “feeds”, which show updates of everything that revolves around you on the site, as well as what all your friends are up to - they can offer the information up through the “what are you doing right now?” option or you can see a log of most of their footprints and movement through facebook.  Facebook has always been really easy to use  and it is intriguing in its ability to branch out and find people, automatically most of the time, that you may know.  It is a great friend aggregating tool and a living, breathing update of how everyone is feeling at that moment and what is going on in your “network”.

Check out the updates  and think about signing up if you haven’t yet. | New York Times Review of Updates

That is the question.  And for Macrumors.com’s Arnold Kim, he chose blogging. 

The New York Times did an interesting article on Kim and about how his hobby Web site in which he wrote about Apple rumors - while simultaneously becoming a doctor - turned into his actual calling.  In it are the ways that he can sustain himself: through a combination of Google text advertising, banner ads and commissions on product sales.  The power quotient in the web world does not typically come down to buzz, great advertising, or who can talk the biggest about their product.  It usually comes down to one simple thing:

“building traffic,” says Kim. “That’s it. If you have a site that attracts a lot of visitors, you will be able to make money. On the Internet, traffic equals power, which subsequently equals money.”

With the furor over Apple’s launch of its new Iphone 3G last week, the hunger for information for those who currently hold an earlier Iphone - like myself - was ravenous (maybe a little dramatic).  The 3G version boasted, in short, a faster connection (where available), a cheaper price, a full-scale proprietary application - “apps” - store, and several key but smaller upgrades over its predecessors.  As someone who owns a predecessor, i was especially interested in what i would get out of the deal. 

So where did i go: online.

And online provided me most of everything i would need to know…As i read through early reviews, transcripts and analysis of Apple conference calls, and the words of those bloggers who got their hands on the 2.0 update - as it is called - and traded notes through the blogosphere.  I even found myself coming to grips with a decision when a link was provided for the rogue update in one of the blogs (of course with the caveat that for some it had crashed some iphone systems): to download now or just wait a couple of days until the official rollout (I waited).   As i scoured the search engines and read through the most prominent articles, entries, and forums - the search algorithms telling me what all of the internet’s users deemed the most important - I amassed a comforting 360-degree view of what was to come.  And i mostly came away - without even trying the updates, that would come in a few days - content with my older-version Iphone and assured that the newer updates i would enjoy would more than whet my app(le)etite. 

And when D-Day, Download Day, came, i was all set.  After trying to do it at work - unfortunately Iphones can only keep their content and be updated  on the native computer (found this out online too) - i went home and successfully updated my Iphone to 2.0.  It was a heavenly moment whereby Microsoft Exchange E-mail was officially added to the e-mail listings (along with a host of user-friendly e-mail updates), and a new icon - linking to the applications - was added to the home screen. 

After a day of downloading free games and Iphone-specific applications for FaceBook and MySpace - i have not made the plunge to any paid apps - i wanted to know what everyone else, outside of the early rogue downloaders, felt about the new updates — and the newer Iphone for that matter.

So where did i go: online.

There were plenty of recaps, early returns, and reviews from professionals, bloggers, and Iphone owners.

The power of the online sphere - the internet - is right at everyone’s finger tips.  Brands, campaigns, projects, etc. are defined in moments; they can be buoyed or taken down just as quickly. 

Not every company is Apple, with a built-in loyalty base that can give it its own legs 24/7, but do you have a communications plan online that befits your goals?  Do you monitor the chatter in the blogosphere about your company?  Are you even taking the basic steps, through things like Google Alerts?

These are the kinds of questions we ask and build plans around at Winning Strategies.

I’m just back from maternity leave and I’ve been catching up on what’s happened in the office while I was out. In the past few days, I’ve looked at wedding pictures, gotten updates on the babies that are expected this fall and even managed to get a handle on the current projects! But what have I missed?

I’ve written about this before – how hard it can be to keep up in the fast-paced online world. And while I did have some time each day to get the latest from my favorite blogs (Shh! Don’t tell my husband who has been led to believe that I never got a minute to myself!), there’s no doubt that there are things going on out there that we should all know more about.  So take a minute to help out a sleep-deprived new mom and drop a line with a link to recent developments that deserve some attention. Thanks!

Or should I call it ‘new media’? From traditional video to webcasts and streaming video, either way, we truly have a wonderful world out there to experience.

My job here at Winning Strategies is to give these experiences life –web life that is.

When someone said that a picture is worth a thousand words, I couldn’t even imagine what that person would say about video. I could be silly and try doing the math: at 30 frames per second (that’s 30 pictures a second), you’d have 30,000 words every second to decipher –true sensory overload.

Now, don’t get scared. No one said that the ‘wonderful world of video’ was going to be easy. But the true beauty of video is that the viewer never sees the difficulty that goes behind the making of a video. From filming to editing, to even exporting the video to a workable format, all of these steps are vital to making a video work.

Let’s take Adam Dvorin for instance. Adam is the media supervisor at Winning Strategies, he is a veteran journalist, and first and foremost, Adam is a great guy. Now, the question is: “How do you get all of these aspects of a person’s life across to someone else in just 40 seconds?” You can! You first have to capture Adam while he’s in his element:

This sample, 40 second piece (43 seconds to be exact) is a part of one of our internal projects here at Winning Strategies, but surely, you can see how it is applicable to other companies and organizations. Insight –this is the key. You have to provide the viewer insight into a world he or she may or may not understand. Only when you get the viewer to look from the inside out, you can truly relate to that person.

From this small video, you get a glimpse on how (a) Adam communicates to broadcast newsrooms; (b) reads up on his news items; (c) encourages his colleagues to better themselves; and overall, you see how (d) communication is truly his life. Not to mention, you (e) see how laid back and easy going a person he is; notice his mannerisms and the types of shots used. This was all done on purpose. Boy, all that in 40 seconds –ok 43 seconds, but who’s counting (me apparently)!

In any case, I hope that I conveyed to you how important video is to not only represent your goals and ideals internally, but also how important it is as a marketing tool. You can simply get your message (or several messages, as shown in this sample video) across the world with a click of a button.

All this through the wonderful world of video.

Web site technology and development is unbelievably important, especially when it comes to logically and logistically arranging sections, building content management systems, and making a site map that is intuitive and user-friendly in its navigation.  But — you can build the most beautiful shell with the most amazing looking Flash and the greatest bells and whistles, and without alluring and regularly-updated content, that Web site will be a one-off.  A one-visit wonder, if you will.  With the internet and your web site in many ways being defined by search, without filling that shell regularly and with a solid content stream, your site will fall by the way side.  Without direct traffic - which most of the time is predicated on name appeal or a viral effort behind it - no one will find your site.

If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, did it make a sound?

On the web, that answer typically is no.  Having an official Web site is integral to doing “business as usual” but to be found, to be relevant, and to be worthwhile, content - whether it be the written word, video, or audio - needs to be streaming through; People need a reason to come back to your site.  If it is just a brochure on the web, one visit is all that is needed and then abandonment will be your buzzword du jour. 

Our team was sitting with a client last week, discussing this very fact.  They have a very clean, nice, and user-friendly Web site.  But since the site launched, updates have been minimal.  So we tried to show them - through a typical Google search - why regular content updates and “movement”, even if it is the allusion of, coming from their Web site was important.  This is a client who in many ways is okay with not coming up prevalently in search (and is probably just fine with keeping a low profile publicly), but, those who might speak against what they are doing - as well as their competitors - come up on the first page of search.  For the search term we used to show them as an example - what you would assume a typical web user would search - they came up deep down on the second page of search.  This was keeping them almost completely out of their own conversation!  There was no real voice on their behalf.  Regular content is critical to their communications.  A dialogue is happening already and their Web site, while clean and pretty, is not there to balance the debate.

And while approval of regularly-updated, NEW content may not be feasible for this client, there are plenty of ways to get around that: By simply repurposing previously approved content, time-releasing large content pieces into smaller digestable updates on a schedule, or utilizing good materials from news sites or comparable industry web sites.  Before you know it, regular updates within that pretty shell can at least put them - and you - in the conversation.  

Search engines ostensibly determine Web site relevancy by the amount of updates you make and the amount of sites linking to you, as well as the targeted use of key words.  Two out of the three are in the administrator’s control.

When that tree falls, make sure people are there to hear it because a dialogue is always happening in this forest.