Six exceptional ways to get your content shared today

If a trees falls in the forest and nobody is there to hear it, does it make a sound? Creating great content does your brand no good if nobody sees it. Getting your audience to share your blog, video or coverage to their online network is, clearly a great way to make sure more people see it, as well as see your brand.

I’ve combed the web for advice on getting content shared, as well as adding my own insights and experiences, to bring to you six exceptional ways to get your content shared today.

Pick the right social network

The Digital Buzz Blog looked at how articles on Mashable were shared over a three week period. As you can see from the infographic, each social network has a bias as to what type of content its users share. So, when you’re planning your digital marketing strategy, be sure to focus on the right channels.

Write like yourself, says Lifehacker

“There are millions of blogs on the web today, so it isn’t easy to stand out. However, if you notice, the top or most popular bloggers have large readerships because of their unique voices and perspectives and the interesting things they share.”

Make it easy and compelling

At university, my PR lecturer Bill Nichols drilled into us that everything we do must be easy and compelling. In digital, it must be easy to share your content, by including Like and Share buttons on the page. Your content must also be compelling. Think about what would make you want to share a post, of you weren’t connected to the company in any way. Is it of interest to your friends that like travelling? Or your colleagues in the sales department?

It’s not about you

Most marketers worth their salt know this, but when pressures set in from the powers that be to promote the company/product, or to create a certain volume of content, it can be hard not to give in. As ever, Econsultancy have written a great blog on content marketing, and their opening point is that your content should be about your audience, customers, potential customers, people you want to connect with on some level. And they probably don’t care about you all that much...

Talk to your otaku

Over the past 50 years or so, people have become very good at targeting the mass market, the majority. The thing is, they have become very good at ignoring marketing messages. They actively ignore TV ads, banner ads on websites, celebrity endorsements. So you need to find the people who are listening. Otaku is a Japanese term for a group who are obsessively interested in a certain thing, and Seth Godin advises you to find your Otaku, and talk to them.

People love pictures

It’s a well know fact that imagery helps engage people - from billboard advertising or a press release, to tweets and blogs. And social media platforms are changing to adapt to our love of all things visual. According to SimplyZesty,

“Images are easy to digest, immediately accessible, and don't require effort on the part of the viewer.”

To give you an example of something that has worked really well on social media, that I worked on a few years ago for HSBC. It’s called Expat Explorer, it is a tool based on survey results that lets you find the best place in the world for you to live, based on your priorities. Its blog was so shareable because it always had fresh content, cutting the survey results in different ways. It has a ready made otaku because a lot of people who move abroad create new communities online, and love to connect with other expats, which is what the blog and Twitter feed are all about. It increased its network by getting guest bloggers on to talk about their experiences. It was very visual, as you can see in the tool.

I’d love to hear about any other companies are people who do “shareability” really well.

Getting digital buy-in

In my previous post I mentioned the “we’re all marketers now” phenomenon, as outlined by McKinsey. It made me think about how daunting a prospect this could be for many marketing professionals out there. Making the transition from a sales-focused organisation to a marketing-focused organisation can be a painful process, so how, and why, do you do it?

Now, clearly this is not a particularly new idea, and there are plenty of companies out there who do it very well. The reason I wanted to focus on it in this blog, is because the rise of social media and digital marketing means that the marketing approach makes so much more sense in this new world. If your customer is always connected, your company needs to be prepared for that.

There are two predominant pain points in this transition, which to some extent overlap, and which marketers need to be aware of. The first is that when a marketer walks up to someone not in marketing and says “you’re now involved in digital marketing” it often doesn't go down too well. People are busy, and don’t want to be palmed off with other people’s work. Yet it needs to become part of their daily workload, and management and marketing need to work together to discover the best way to to this.

The second, connected, point is that the majority of people outside the confines of the marketing department don’t fully ‘get’ digital, and digital marketing. There is a huge internal communications campaign that needs to be done to get everyone on board and trained up to become a digitally enabled, marketing-focused organisation. We've all heard the “I’m putting a man on the moon” anecdote, and this even more relevant in today’s market.

For anyone struggling to get buy-in from their peers or seniors on the need for digital to be an organisational effort, I have two resources I think you need to be aware of. The first is a great little presentation called The Ultimate Guide to Explain Digital (To Your Colleagues). It breaks down how each department can (and should!) contribute to the digital marketing effort.

Secondly, my good friend Peter Thomson has written an excellent book on just this topic. It’s called Tickle: Digital marketing for tech companies. Although, it’s definitely not just for those in the tech sector. It goes into detail about how digital marketing-focused organisations operate, and how to achieve the all important buy-in from the top.

As a marketer, getting the whole company of board with digital can seem like an insurmountable task, but it is incredibly important to the success of the organisation. It is fast becoming expected that a customer will get the same experience of the company whether they are interacting with them online or offline. With the right support and resources, it can help catapult your success. Good luck!

Where does traditional end, and digital start?

The debate about digital communications versus traditional PR practices seems to ebb and flow, but I have seen quite a few people writing about it recently. To me, it seems like we need to take a step back and forget marketing for a moment, digital or otherwise.

The US Department of Labour looked into the changing workforce in the 21st Century, and highlights the difference not only in the job roles available today, but they way people search for jobs. Looking at this real world example of the changing way people live helps us piece together how to market to them.

So how does this apply to the PR profession? First of all, Pete Hendrick, managing director, at agency Rocket Communications, said the following in an article on PR Moment:

“I think it's widely recognised that the traditional PR agency of old is on its way out”  

I think key point is that “we’re all marketers now”. Sales organisations are transforming to marketing organisations. And the role of marketing will have to be distributed out across the company, to ensure a clear and consistent message is being sent out from every angle, and we as professionals will need to be able to support this. Whilst in the past, traditional communications channels enabled the marketing department to tightly control the medium and the message, digital is fracturing this, and marketing needs to find a new way to retain control of the message.

In essence it’s about helping our clients find the core message, and identify the channels appropriate to convey that message to the audience. It’s about creating touchpoints, creating the journey or narrative, and creating engagement.

The ability to identify and analyse the needs of others is still key, whether you’re looking at digital or traditional comms, says Social Media Today. I would go as far as to say, you must to be able to understand the needs of others regardless of whether its digital or traditional. In today’s fractured media landscape, we as marketers must be able to guide our clients to their target audience, whether they live their lives on Twitter and get all their news from Google Reader, or still have a Nokia 3310 and have never heard of LinkedIn.

A PR Learning Curve

I love hearing about people's experiences of working with PR companies, they vary so wildly. Most people, regardless of whether they have worked closely with PRs or not, consider it to be an industry full of one-sided agendas, manipulation and what my PR lecturer called The Dark Arts of PR. One such complaint has recently come to light from a Tech Crunch journalist talking about the Facebook PR team. He goes as far as to say:

How do I know when Facebook PR is full of shit? Their mouths are moving.

That's a pretty strong statement, but from his experience of them, probably a fair assumption. And Facebook PR is giving the whole industry a bad name, considered the smear campaign against Google. But I'm not here to judge what the Facebook guys are up to. I'm interested in what journalist MG Siegler, or parislemon as he goes by in his downtime, thinks of the PR industry in general, rather than his experience with the Facebook in particular.
In Siegler's post he starts out by bemoaning the fact that there are now 3 PRs to every journalist, citing this source. There is a simple misconception of the role of PR straight away; being a press agent is only one function of a public relations department/agency. With that in mind, 3 PRs to every journalist doesn't seem like such a shocking figure, in fact it is pretty much irrelevant.
But for all of his slating of PR, there are some important lessons to be learnt here, especially for someone like me just entering the world of PR. To many journalists/bloggers PR people are seen as pushing their own agendas, that must be kept in mind when selling stories. You are starting from a standpoint of negative reputation within the writers world without opening your mouth.
Journalists/bloggers will also be likely to be loyal to their own rather believe what you have to say. And many will check their facts/loyalties with others in the industry before writing a single word.
There are so many things that Facebook appears to have done wrong in this case-study, of course it is only one side of the story, but it seems important to highlight a few aspects, it would be interesting to hear other views on what Facebook did. Trying to deny to journalists that you are working on a project that you will later launch, and probably need those same journalists to help you launch, seems pretty counter-productive to me. It might buy them some time in the race against Apple, but it will mean a lot more work with other stakeholders in the long run. And not to mention damage to the overall reputation of the company.
Denying to comment when they were reached out to also seems like it was not the smartest move. It seems that Siegler would have, at that point, been fairly open to writing about what they had to say. Not any more. So from the lessons learnt from listening to the journalist side of the wall, and what not to do from Facebook, what are the main Dos and Don'ts for someone just entering the PR arena?

The Next Chapter in the Facebook Saga

I'm sure most of the people reading this post will have heard something or other about the barrage of bad press that Facebook gets for the way that it deals with privacy issues. The latest onslaught comes after Facebook revealed yesterday that it is rolling out its facial recognition service across the globe. It appears that many people, including Sarah at PCWorld, are angry with the lack of communication about the change and the fact that, yet again, you must opt-out rather than opt-in to the service, meaning that unless you know it is coming it is unlikely that you will find it.

For me this issue is not as cut and dry as that, for the solution to this problem would simply be for the public (if Facebook itself won't) to communicate to everyone else on Facebook that these options are out there. Easy. The problem that I have is the terms of the opt-out. If you disable the recognition option Facebook will no longer suggest to your friends that you are in pictures. Great. What it does not do is stop collecting the data about you in the first place. It will still look at pictures that you are tagged in and create a profile of what you look like. Naughty Facebook.

On the other hand I am so relieved that Google has come out and said that they will not be creating a specific facial recognition database. That is such a relief to me when we know that they are investing hugely in technology that can identify all things visual. One can only presume that this includes faces. Thanks Google, you have saved the day again.

So once again it is the Facebook vs Google privacy fight, and who will come out triumphant? Well, that's like asking if in a fight between Hitler and Stalin who you would like to win. Maybe that's a bit melodramatic, but you get the idea.

A Brief Look at Packaging....

Last month saw the announcement of the 2011 DBA Design Effectiveness Awards, which got me thinking about the role of packaging in the marketing mix. When I think about packaging there are three elements that spring to mind immediately, and I have so far failed to think of many that have successfully achieved all three.

The first and most obvious role of packaging is Function. Does it hold cereal? Does it ensure that the cereal doesn't go stale before it is bought? Is it easy to get the cereal from the packet into the bowl? And so on...

The Visual aspect comes second. Does it look appealing to the target audience? Is it on message? Does it stand out from the other "noise" on the shelf? Is it quickly and easily identifiable?

And lastly, Environmental. These days most people feels guilty stuffing a plastic bottle into the rubbish, rather than the recycling; so, is it recyclable/reusable? Is it made from recycled materials? How many airmiles does it have? How many chemicals were used in creating it? Is it going to leak mineral oils into my food?

Everybody's current favorite example of packaging that hits all the boxes it Kenco's new design. The packaging is not simply aligned with the marketing, but the marketing is centered around the packaging. The look of the packet still has the legacy of the Kenco coffee jar image on the front. And it has 97% less packaging that a jar of coffee. And it is more functional than other ways of reducing packaging, as can be seen in the amusing adverts.

Of course reducing packaging is not the only way to make the product or even the packaging more eco-friendly, but it is probably a good place to start.

Digital Native vs Digital Immigrants

At the start of a project I always do research. I don't go to the library. I rarely start by talking with an expert. I don't read a book or find an industry magazine. I don't even search Google.

I go straight to YouTube.

I read recently that the average time spent on a task is only 11 minutes before attention wanders. YouTube fits my need perfectly. It is a wealth of knowledge, from a multi-faceted range of people, fed to me in short, visually interesting pieces.

I am a digital native.

There is a lot of talk at the moment around how to combine the four generations in the working world; the Silent Generation, Baby Boomers, GenX and GenY. These definitions seem redundant to me.

The classification is based on the idea that people who have gone through similar experiences will have similar values. This idea, I think, holds water. The assertion that everybody who was born between 1978 and 1998 have been through similar experiences, however, is ridiculous.

We are working in a global world. Which by itself creates a whole load more issues. You want to learn more about the cultures people come from so you can better understand them- but you don't want to pigeonhole them with stereotypes. You want to be sympathetic of their values and life goals- but you don't want to presume you know what they want.

Most of the research I have come across is around how to accommodate this new generation of Digital Natives into the workplace, another ridiculous thought. Digital Natives, by definition, are adaptable and will create their own space in any work force.

It is the Digital Immigrants who are having trouble dealing with this.

I saw a interview with a bunch of GenY kids. They were asked why they expected to go on holiday two months after starting a new job. That was the first time that it had occurred to me that a holiday was seen as a reward. It was a luxury not a necessity. This simple statement, for me, optimizes the difference between the generations, the natives and the immigrants.

For me the reason to work is twofold. Firstly, to earn money so that I can do the things I want to do. Secondly, by not working I am limiting what everyone else can do. If nobody worked there would be no way I could go on holiday without walking, as there would be no pilots, no hotels, no shops, no phones- no internet. So I work.

There is a popular statistic going around at the moment that it took radio 38 years to reach an audience of 50 million, television 13 years, the Internet just four and Facebook three. The world is evolving faster and faster. Facebook gained 50 million new active users in first three months of this year.

The modern workplace needs to catch up with Digital Natives, and Digital Immigrants need to know how to adapt.

New teams will be virtual and temporary- doesn't this benefit the Immigrants as much as the Natives?

By being comfortable using online, collaborative software baby boomers can put off retiring, which many can't afford to do anyway. They can work in a virtual team from wherever they are.

So they want to move abroad? No problem, as long as there is internet. So they want to have long holidays? No problem, join a temporary team. Want longer weekends? No problem, job share.

The industry is so focused on hiring the younger generation because they are "tech savvy" they miss out on the potential of the baby boomers.

It is estimated that by the time I am 38 I will have had 10-14 jobs, I have already had 5 (I am 21 now). So if you want to invest training and resources into someone who is in it for the long run, I suggest someone from a more mature age group.

It is true that baby boomers have had quite bad press recently; The Pinch: How the Baby Boomers Stole Their Children's Future, The Baby Boomers Have Totally Screwed Us Over, and other such titles fill the Internet. But they must still be able to bring something to the table, right?

According to HR Management baby boomers are great project managers, they have focus and drive. They want success and they expect the same from the rest of their workforce.

In my experience this is what is missing from the Digital Natives, whether they want it or not. With so many distractions, and the blurring lines between information and entertainment, a good leader to keep the team on task will be a great benefit.

For all this segmentation the only thing left to say is that you must treat everyone like an individual. If you are struggling with a person- talk to them. Every single person has different expectations from work and different ways of working so embrace the difference.

You may just find that your differences complement their differences.