Brother, can you share your content?

A woman's hand rose in the audience. "But what if you can't get your colleagues to share their content. How do you make them do it?" It wasn't the first time I had heard the question -- God knows I said it to myself often enough when I was running the interactive division of a media group in trying to get a feed from one of our two daily papers -- in a format we could use.

With all the discussions on digital asset management, the theorists often leave unmentioned the largest obstacle of all: internal politics. While I don't have numbers on how wide-spread it is, I do know that when I re-asked woman's question to the audience about whether they had dealt with this issue -- they were nodding and raising their hands. And while on a call on Friday with my co-panelists at the upcoming Create-a-Sphere symposium I suggested this as an obstacle --- and everyone chimed in, in agreement.

Like the filibuster option in politics, it seems the minority can just say no to sharing content -- and what are beleaguered colleagues to do? Running to the board and saying that so-and-so won't play nicely would certainly qualify as a CLM. But board members and senior management alike that don't provide tools and policies to thwart this very toxic power play ... will end up with the same disastrous stalemate seen today in government. Line managers won't complain they just won't get the job done. And the entropy can be costly.

According to the Butler Group, up to 10% of staff productivity is lost trying to find things.  And searching for something that you know should be there -- but just can't find is probably the biggest time waster of all. More recent research from IDC supports that and notes that a company that employs 1,000 information workers can expect more than $5 million in annual salary costs to go down the drain because of the time wasted looking for information and not finding it.

Is there a Holy Grail to this? Yes, and it begins at the top of the food chain. The C-suite needs to acknowledge that knowledge is power -- and therefore some people don't want to share. (And your most powerful managers -- may be your worst offenders.) Creating a Lord of the Flies environment is not the answer. Some people may thrive in that environment but the majority don't; they will either begrudgingly go along (and go without) or quit.  Instead there needs to be an enterprise-wide initiative to invest in technology that automates processes -- to neutralize the human gate-keeper. These technologies fall under the heading of DAM - digital asset management solutions -- but also are known more narrowly as BAM (brand asset management) and MAM (multimedia asset management) and sometimes more broadly as ECM (enterprise content management).

Technologies vary depending upon 

• the types of assets being stored -- largely text, photos, videos?  
  
• the frequency of searching for them -- everyday or once in a while? 
• the applications -- recombination and repurpose, or e-discovery?

These technologies need to be embedded enterprise wide into the workflow. Techniques include automating the ingestion of all assets into a single repository -- either physically or virtually and creating a method to standardize metadata (I'll dive into that topic on another day.)

A sane digital asset management solution eliminates the insanity of having employees dropping to bended knee saying "please sir, can you share your content?"

The New Age Farm Team

My kids' Apple laptop died over the weekend. It had been a trusty little MacBook -- mine for three years before I passed it onto the kids two years ago. When one had a paper due and the other had to jump onto Castle Learning to do, what would be, roughly two hours of quadratic equations, they both immediately vied for their parents' computers -- which were both in use doing bills and an informercial for Nstein -- I knew I had to break down and buy another computer immediately.

And while I am uncertain which Smart Phone to invest in (only because of network), I have no such trepidations about computers. I was upgrading the kids to the MacBook Pro -- the Intel version of the Mac -- precisely because I needed my kids to be on the same OS and applications as I was. It wasn't an issue of technical support so much as literacy. Apple is very good at backward compatibility, but the changeover to Intel a couple years ago did preclude some newer software from being available to the old computer. Which was a pity. I've been dying to create some really terrific videos -- but to sit down and take the time to learn the idiosyncracies of a new program (that wasn't my clients') was impossible. And I am horrible at Illustrator -- and would like to change that. My hope is that my kids can master these programs and get me up to speed. Let them be my R&D team and built in technical support. How full circle that technology actually could bring us back to a time when families worked and survived together.

Of course when it came to teaching me Madden football -- they put me in a punt defense -- when they were on 1st down.

Marketers' Credo: Thou Shalt Create Great Content

Content marketing guru Joe Pulizzi is a key believer in using great content to foment and cement relationships. He published what should be a marketer's credo with his 30 Content Marketing Truths. They boil down to the brand being a relationship -- not a tag line; and, that the customer relationship doesn't end with the payment.

Those two "truths" (#8 and #2, respectively) are the crux to what I call Persuasive Marketing. Persuasive Marketing is a process of identifying, targeting and communicating with key influencers throughout the industry. Key influencers being customers, luminaries, analysts, media, academicians, partners and even employees. When key influcencers vocalize their experiences -- their respective peers take notice -- and join in on the conversation.

The core to creating relationships is with good content. Don't believe me? Think about when you are at a cocktail party; people gather around those with compelling stories and anecdotes. Or when you are interviewing for a job; if the conversation is loose and flowing interest ensues. Think of your brand as a news magazine and create content that intrigues and interests your audiences. Give them a forum to talk about their challenges, create content that inspires, shares anecdotes, relays how-tos. Ultimately you are creating a mechanism to relate and gain trust.

I recently spoke with Luuk de Jager, Senior Director, Central Marketing Office Online for Philips Consumer Lifestyle. He shared with me that Philips content is split between customer centered and product centered content, with the former being more important to all audiences save for business partners -- which is why the Philips' sites are peppered with articles on ambiance, designing with light, finding the right fixture, finding the right bulb.

Philiips has invested literally millions of dollars on content that has nothing to do with selling product but rather is about engaging the customer. Unfortunately this "soft" approach is foreign to most companies, and hence, as Pulizzi opines, more than 90% of all Web sites "suck" because they go on and on about how great the company is. Really? As my writing coach used to say, "show me, don't tell me."

There is a tremendous opportunity right now for enterprises to take advantage of the missteps and misfortunes of the traditional media. People are hungry for information that solves their problems. The media used to be where people turned, but with cutbacks, scandals and the search engines, people are finding corporate content to fill their needs.

The enterprises that recognize that great content (not just articles, by the way, but illustrations, videos and photographs) leads people to experience your brand -- and in turn, spend the time influencing others. Building your sphere of influencers has to be a key goal for 2010 -- and having a steady stream of great content will help your sphere grow quickly.

If a Phone Doesn't Ring -- is it an iTouch?

I received an iTouch for Christmas.
I haven't taken it out of the packaging yet.

Not because I don't love the Touch -- but because I can't imagine schlepping both my Blackberry and my Touch everywhere -- when God knows, all I would want to use is my Touch. So why is it still sitting on my kitchen counter staring at me out of its sleek, plexicase, the ends still hermetically sealed? 'Cause I really want to ditch my Blackberry and eliminate the need for the Touch by getting the iPhone. And I can't do that because Apple has tethered its fortunes to AT&T. You have to wonder what Steven Jobs thought when AT&T announced, in a brilliant marketing move, that the iPhone would not be available for sale from its Web site to any customers in the New York City and surrounding areas.

Most of us in the digerati were head-shaking shocked when we heard the news, broken by the Consumerist, that rationing the iPhones was AT&T's boneheaded response to the fact that its data network is just to jammed to handle any more traffic. According to TheiPhoneBlog, AT&T PR responded that it reserves the right to "periodically modify our promotions and distribution channels." But a later statement from AT&T, reported by All Things Digital, said that it was guarding against online fraud.  Puh-lease.

AT&T has been behind the technology curve since the breakup, and while its partnership with Apple has been a boon to the brand, it has also been its bane. The iPhone is a data gobbler -- the 100k apps are the reason for its popularity -- and a factor in AT&Ts sagging network. It's gotten so bad that everyone is taking potshots. During his Weekend Update for SNL, Seth Meyers noted the growing rumor of Google's new smart phone. He quipped:  "You know what also is a challenge to the iPhone -- making phone calls." You can just imagine someone at AT&T saying -- enough already, just stop selling the damn thing there.

This type of co-marketing is not what Jobs had in mind. I'm praying that the New York City bungling means Apple can cite breach of contract -- and make an announcement in February that it is opening the phone to other networks. Otherwise, I just can't bear signing a 2 year contract and I just might have to take the shrink wrap off my iTouch ... which is basically what the iPhone is in NYC.

Can't Find Foundem - Conspiracy?

Saw an interesting Op-Ed piece written by Adam Raff, founder of Foundem, a vertical search firm in the UK that provides comparative pricing on electronics, airline tickets, home & garden items, etc. The crux of Raff's opinion piece is that online search provided by behemoths like Bing, Yahoo -- but in this case, in particular Google -- need to have oversight. He is so passionate about this need for adult supervision that he has dubbed his quest "Search Neutrality" and is hoping to generate enough interest so that the discussion on "Net Neutrality" will incorporate search as well.

Net Neutrality, is a principle whose proponents include activists, consumer groups, many technology application providers (including Google) who are pushing for a law that gives all people equal access to the Internet broadband on a first come first-served basis. SaveTheInternet.com states that

Net Neutrality prevents Internet providers from blocking, speeding up or slowing down Web content based on its source, ownership or destination.

Opponents say the whole issue is much ado about nothing and could prevent Internet Service Providers (ISPs) from taking needed action during denial-of-service (DOS) attacks,  The Net Neutrality movement is being addressed country by country, and in the US, the FCC is open to comments at this time. And besides, say a cadre of net engineers, the Internet isn't perfect anyway, and this law may prevent a new one from emerging.

Translated, the fear is that without the law ISPs could possibly discriminate against some websites by slowing packets to and from the server. While opponents fear that legislators could never possibly create a law that would be fluid enough to yield to innovation.

Back to Raff, his own site's treatment by Google, which is detailed here, has made him aware of the phenomenal power search engines hold over Commerce. Raff believes he has evidence that Google did penalize Foundem -- simply for being a vertical search company. He further contends that Google's own products are given preferential treatment at the top of search results. With 90 percent of the search market, Raff argues, Google needs oversight.

It is an interesting arguement -- more so, because of the ubiquity and popularity of search. We all have an expectation of being indexed by search engines -- for free. Conversely, do we have an expectation when we search, that all information that is relevant -- is being presented to us? Are these anti-trust issues? Or communication ones? Does Google et al have the right to block or discriminate certain sites -- when no money is changing hands?

It is quite possible that by virtue of its supremacy, Google has put itself in a situation where, like Microsoft before it, it becomes a victim of its own success -- and people just don't trust it.

Happy News Year!

When I started this blog about a year ago, I wanted to provide advice to all the businesses who found themselves in the odd position of being a news source. I say odd position, because most businesses aside from the media, don't consider themselves as such. They are retailers, consultants, researchers, financiers, professionals, teachers, etc. But more and more, all of these groups are finding that their secondary position is as online publisher, publishing news or maybe more appropriately, publishing information that people find valuable.

I got away from my original mission as more and more traditional publishers, aka news organizations, were hitting the wall. On the last day of 2009, Editor & Publisher, the 125-year old, self-acclaimed "bible for the newspaper industry," stopped its presses for good. The reality was, there just were not enough newspaper (or vendors who served the industry) left to make it economically feasible to survive. And while there is tremendous hand-wringing at the realization that the industry is periled, there is still good reason to be optimistic.

Steve Outing, who was a columnist for E&P, as well as with the venerable Poynter Institute, wrote his look forward in his final adieu. He foresees a world where pulp is saved and news is transmitted electronically to handhelds. One of Outings most prescient hopes is that surviving organizations  embrace making sense of the commentary of the crowds.

I have become a huge fan of reading what the populace thinks. Oh, to be sure the cacophony isn't always pretty. The unwashed mob rears its ugly head time and again. But if you weed through the inane and boorish, you can find reasonable discourse. It would be nice if the inane and boorish might be toned down or even eliminated. One of the best ideas I have ever heard was from Jeremy Gilbert, Associate Professor at Medill School of Journalism, who suggests that sites adopt the authentication api from Facebook. Gilbert explains that with a preponderance of the public on Facebook (and growing everyday), "the Facebook authentication may yield a better behaving audience if they know that their aunt or grandmother may view the comment too." (I could see a lot of nervous businesses who are opening their sites to user comments benefiting greatly from this.)

You see the difference between old media and the new media is that news is in the eye of the beholder. Old media decided what was news. New media leaves it up to the crowds. That doesn't mean there is not need for aggregators, pundits, journalists and paid commentators. It just means that at the end of the day, it is the individual who decides what type of news is most valuable. Non-traditional news businesses need to learn this too. If I am trying to install a new Plasma TV, the site that provides my answer is a valuable news source -- and has a chance to influence me on another topic as well.

So while the 2000s will be viewed as the end of the road for the pulp-based news industry, news itself is enjoying a rebirth. As a new decade dawns, Happy News Year -- from whatever that source may be!

Collate Info from Spy Agencies -- the Way Marketers Do

This Holiday Season, as we all dish on whether we will be forced to go commando on flights in order to prevent any more undie bombers, or whether we will inflict terror on poor TSA agents by parading starkers through body scans, I can't help but wonder why our spy agencies aren't enlisting the same tools marketers have at their disposal.

For instance, folks at Nielsen's Buzz Metrics and Evolve 24 have been collating what people say and do in media and blogs, with how product sales and/or stock prices will perform. They ingest literally millions of articles and blog posts every single day, parse by clients (and their competitors), and look for sentiment toward each subject. They then can predict, with a fair degree of certainty, the outcome of key performance indicators. By semantically analyzing and collating "buzz" about brands -- can't these same agencies do this with "chatter" about targets?

Maybe I am missing something here, but if Amazon has powerful relational databases to know that if I bought a Sony Minicam a year -- I just might want a tripod this year, why can't our spy agencies put together that studying Arabic in Yemen + attending a highly-watched Islamic Center in London + buying a ticket (extra points if paid with cash) + traveling with no baggage on a trip to the US (Detroit, I might add, where the average temperature is below freezing -- did he even have a coat?) -- adds up to "likely candidate to blow up a plane?" At the very least, he deserves extra screening. (I cross at the US/Canadian borders at least monthly and have found some very well-skilled interrogators who ask off-handed, yet key questions focused on my rationale for crossing: what will the temperature in Montreal be this week? Who pitched for the Yankees and Blue Jays? If I don't have an answer -- I should be pulled over.)

While screening air passengers to that level of detail may be difficult (if keeping the airline industry aloft is at all a goal), certainly we should be able to winnow the list from the millions who fly to the thousands who deserve extra scrutiny. Where are the econometricians, the semantic analysts, the library scientists that do Boolean queries?  Maybe the TSA needs a CMO to show how to really build a profile that is predictive.