two days has just under 15,000 views, just over 4,000 ratings (with an average of 5 stars), over 1,000 comments
Today, six days after it was posted on Youtube:
just over 2.3 million views
19,358 ratings (with an average of 5 stars)
12,250 comments
So the initial 15,000 views x 4 minutes of negative engagement is now 2.3million views x 4 minutes of negative engagement.
Since everyone seems to be hung up on using physical world ROI to apply to social media, let’s do this in the reverse situation.
Let’s use the lowest conversion/open rate possible (I’m thinking direct mail with about 1%), I’ll halve that for the internet at 0.5%, which is 115,000 people. If these 115,000 people say “I’m never flying United again”, how much does that translate in negative ROI over each customer’s lifetime at an average of say, one trip a year?
Of course, this isn’t a “scientific” way of calcluating anything. But that’s what we do isn’t it? Buy a million banner ads and hope for a 1% clickthrough rate. This is the same thing, working against you.
It’s all over Twitter but I picked this up via Dan York’s blog: a YouTube video by a band, Sons of Maxwell, singing the song “United Breaks Guitars” which in two days has just under 15,000 views, just over 4,000 ratings (with an average of 5 stars), over 1,000 comments and plenty, plenty, of bad press.
Seriously, wouldn’t it just have been easier (and cheaper) to pay for and replace the guitar? Hell, buy the whole band new guitars and maybe it might have been a positive music video?
Again let’s put that in perspective. 15,000 views at about 4 minutes each (the duration of the music video) = how much time spent on negative brand association? Buying up the equivalent amount of 30 second spots won’t save you. And nothing United Airlines does will prevent this video from being viewed again and again for many years to come either.
I bet many companies fear this happening to them.
Stop.
Mistakes are going to happen. It’s about solving them the first time and solving them right. Not about ignoring them and letting them blow up in your face.
Ogilvy’s Digital Influence team held another Open Room, titled “Journalism’s from Mars, Social Media’s from Venus” and after tonight, I think it’s clear that the problem they have is the problem everyone (businesses, schools, non-profits, the music industry, etc) is having. They were sitting on a model that was working for the last 50 or so years, have been blind-sided by the sudden tidal wave of social media and not only are they not scrambling to catch up, but they’re actually holding on to the old world for all that it’s worth.
As with panels, I was fully prepared for some of the audience to be un-accepting of some young (and even worse, enemployed) punk telling them what the world is like. And it was no different this time, which is fine with me, it makes life exciting! How awfully boring would it be if everyone just nodded their heads and agreed.
I think it was a really interesting discussion. There was as much uncommon ground as there was common, and it’s painfully obvious both sides have to learn from each other. Monetisation is not a dirty word, but neither is trusting a fellow blogger. I think we have to move away from our normal worldviews that content creating is done for passion (for bloggers) or that the man on the street (or the Tweeter on Tweetdeck) is less reliable and/or credible than the journalist.
Thinking about “journalism” from the point of breaking news and real good opinion pieces is one thing. But I think we need to think about where the money comes from. Thinking about subscription models and what not is fine (even though they won’t work), but as Thomas Crampton brought up, mainstream media has enjoyed the monopoly on reaching people and advertising for a very long time, and companies are just beginning to realise that they can bypass the “middleman” entirely, thus crippling the revenue model. Will it provide them the reach? Probably not. Will it provide them the influence? Barack Obama’s YouTube channel suggests yes (yes yes I know it worked in tandem with traditional media).
As a closing comment: someone said that old habits die hard, referring to the staying power of traditional media and being used to opening that Sunday edition of the paper over a slow and leisurely breakfast. Here’s a thought: my “old” habits from the old world started changing by the time I was thirteen, and many were gone by the time I was seventeen. Radio, once a nightly listen for the dedication show, is an afterthought, so are magazines. TV serves my purposes when I want it to, newspapers have flown out of the window, music exists in the form of mp3s, not cds. The only “old world” habit I maintain is the reading of books.
My point is this: as much as old habits die hard, to the new generation, new habits form at an alarming speed that the world has never seen before. When, if ever, has a generation been influenced so quickly and successively like from the transition to Friendster to Facebook? That’s not just the speed of platform change, but the speed of diffusion from half a world away. When and how fast did we take up texting to replace calling? The speed of change is crazy. Geographical boundaries barely exist anymore. And I would ask people who believe in the “old habits” to take a look at their children, their nephews, their nieces or anyone under 20 and tell me how many of their “old habits” they see replicated in them, and ask how different the world will be in five or ten years, and if now’s the time to think about that change, or cling on to “old habits”.
Last week I got a Facebook message to sign an online petition against bringing in whale sharks as part of the Marine Life Park at the integrated resort by Resorts World Sentosa. For non-Singaporeans, Sentosa is an entertainment island that is a huge tourist attraction. Apparently whale sharks just don’t live well in captivity, and people are showing concern by signing this petition which apparently has over 4,000 people to date.
By the end of the week, an email reply was sent out (understandably it was a mass email because they were replying to more than 3,000 people) stating that they are listening to the concerns, but the whale sharks were part of the initial proposal years ago, and they are “bound to deliver the integrity of the bid”, which I guess is understandable. On top of that, they referred everyone in the mailing list to their website (which has a full copy of the letter) to keep up to date with developments with the whale sharks.
I personally think this is a pretty good move, but is it enough? Given that the petition was executed online, and that at least some of us got involved via Facebook, it suggests that the audience involved is at the very least, internet-savvy. While Resorts World Sentosa has chosen the right medium to engage (email and a website), I do wonder if other alternatives could enhance this.
If they have to bring in the whale sharks because of the proposal, the next best thing would be to continually assure the public that they are well looked after, right? So how about:
A blog with regular updates on steps taken to give first priority to the whale sharks’ welfare
A YouTube channel to visually show how they are taken of, with interviews with different people (the care givers, audiences, management etc) to talk about the different ways in which they are taking care of the whale sharks
A Facebook group to interact with concerned people and serve as a point to upload pictures, links etc and keep everyone informed
Basically, do everything possible to create a “Whale Shark Welfare” media channel that would be impossible to miss and that could really help their public image. Will they? Why wouldn’t they?
I was previously blown away by HBO’s level of personalisation with their outreach attempts, which was really the catalyst for me to meet Karen, Angela and Yin Qi for lunch awhile ago.
What They’ve Done
The first time I met anyone from HBO, was at Social Media Breakfast | Singapore 3 way back in August of 2008. Yin Qi was there and the first casual connection was made. Stemming from that, there was an event for one of HBO’s shows, “Flight of the Conchords“, and ended with a regional contest which was well-talked about.
The Inspiration
When I asked them about who/what prompted the dabble in social media, surprisingly, there didn’t seem to be an “Eureka!” moment, but rather something that grew organically. Ultimately, it all came down to fit: “Flight of the Conchords” is very heavily viewed via online channels like YouTube, they resonate with the younger audience who is online, and the very nature of the show made it the perfect talking point.
Obstacles
From our discussion, the difficulty faced wasn’t so much organising something in Singapore, but organising something regional. This is something agencies should definitely take note of in Asia, because differences between countries within the region can be pretty big, and at the minimum, a basic understanding of that would be added value.
Metrics
As their first foray into social media, it was as much an experiment as anything else, so hard metrics were not particularly the focus. However, they were sufficiently satisfied with the online discussions and conversations to be convinced it was a worthwhile avenue for future efforts. Even though no hard metrics are available, just looking at the YouTube videos produced on the “Flight of the Conchords” blog from all over the region, the comments and the links, it looks like it certainly did not go unnoticed by the blogosphere.
What’s Coming Next
I got the benefit of discovering that a second blogger outreach event will be happening this year, this time for a different show, “True Blood“. Given that I missed the “Flight of the Conchords” event as I wasn’t in Singapore, I’m looking forward to this
What do you think are they key points from HBO Asia’s social media journey? Is it an issue that agencies don’t have regional capabilities as yet? What do you think HBO Asia could do better? Comment away!
Do you know of a company that should be featured on this column? Would your company like to be featured on this column? Comment below or send me an email at uniquefrequency [AT] gmail (dot) com.
But… You didn’t pay for it!
This seems to be a recurring comment when such applications die. We didn’t pay for Sandy or Notebook, why should we be upset that they’re gone? Perhaps the internet has fundamentally changed the way we think of consumption. Just because we don’t contribute directly to Google or MSN or Facebook when we use Gmail or Live Messenger, doesn’t mean we’re not contributing at all. Without the network effect of many users congregating around a certain service, where would the ad dollars be?
On the flip side, just because you paid for a service, doesn’t mean it won’t go under. It happens in the physical world, the online world is no different.
Portability
When Google Notebook announced it would be discontinuing support for the service, Evernote quickly rose to the occasion to provide easy exporting of users’ Notebooks to Evernote. Perhaps the issue of service shuttering wouldn’t be as tragic if such movements were the norm, but what do you do when your data is lost, as in the case of Ma.gnolia? How often do you want to do a sync between Google Bookmarks, Delicious and Ma.gnolia? Especially considering their ways of tagging bookmarks are different? Is there a need for a common “standard”?
Looking forward
I feel a little more comfortable with companies like Google and Evernote because unlike Sandy which was a one man team, they’re actual companies with a team or teams of people. But that doesn’t put my mind totally at ease that one day, a cloud service I rely heavily on will lose stuff of extreme value to me, and I would have no idea what to do next.
What are you doing to safeguard yourself from such an occurrence? What would you do if Gmail lost half your emails? If Remember The Milk lost all reminders more than a month into the future? What if your videos chronicling your life over the last six months disappeared on Vimeo or YouTube? Do you avoid such situations entirely by still relying on paper and/or a local hard disk?
There was an allusion to “Tribes” a couple of times in yesterday’s post, listen to Seth Godin talk about it for more than an hour in this special edition of the Marketing Over Coffee podcast. It took me a long time to finish it because my daily commute is five minutes, but so worth it.
Generation Y, Digital Natives & Millennials
Workplace 2.0: Motivating and Managing Millennials – Very short (12 pages total, about 8 pages of content) PDF file on managing millennials (aka: us). It doesn’t actually give much of a “how to”, but it does lead you to understanding us more. I must say he is right on about fervour, hard work and tireless labour. I’d work overtime, for free, for a job that’s rewarding in an industry I’m passionate about.
Digital Natives are here by Mitch Joel – Again, great post to help the people in management understand the digital natives. I feel a lot of people still aren’t ready to accept that our generation is a little bit different and that being constantly connected is more of an empowerment than a distraction. But those organisations who do grasp that, are going to be able to channel us much more efficiently.
Social Media Strategy
The Strategist and Social Media by Kami Huyse – Great slides in there that you should read if you’re beginning to think of a social media strategy, especially points about risks of social media engagement, and the Sea World case study.
MTV to MySpace: Post Our Content, Please – you might remember in my review of the book/rant Cult Of The Amateur by Andrew Keen that he called Viacom (parent company of MTV) suing YouTube a “powerful message”. I say the partnership between MTV and MySpace is a) a more powerful message b) a sign that at least one player in the industry waking up to reality.
The Top Ten Reasons iTunes Sucks – I agree with every single point mentioned here, and it absolutely sucks that Apple obviously doesn’t care what people are saying, with similar issues existing in 2006. At this point I hate iTunes so much, I’d pay money for a programme that would solve these problems.
As always, share your links with me in the comments, or you can find me on delicious.
If needing to take notes is my personal benchmark for how good a book is (like Joseph Jaffe’s Join The Conversation), then Andrew Keen’s Cult Of The Amateur falls firmly in the opposite category. To be honest, for the first half of the book I was waiting for the “haha gotcha!” moment, because no one could be this blind towards the benefits of Web2.0 and community and collaboration.
But I soon discovered it would never come.
Keen fancies his book a polemic, but what it really is, is a rant. After reading the first chapter, every subsequent chapter was merely a repetition of what was said before, albeit with different examples and/or research.
Speaking of research, that is the one thing that Keen does well. I enjoyed reading the statistics, but not the conclusions drawn. for example he gives a timeline for the decline in music sales and says something to the effect that is no coincidence that this happened at around the time of the internet’s birth.
Keen loves the old world. He loves the “cultural gatekeepers” like reporters, news anchors, editors, movie reviewers and the like. Maybe crowdsourcing doesn’t always work, but I would almost always rather determine whether I want to watch a movie based on what people say online, than that one singular review in the newspapers by a “cultural gatekeeper”. In fact I’m working on a deck talking about “The New Gatekeepers”, so obviously I am in direct opposition with Keen here.
One thing Keen does do well, is highlight the problems the internet has brought. Online gambling addiction, pornography, plagarism, not watching one’s online identity. I’m in agreement with these social ills, but the way he writes the book, it sounds like these eclipse everything good about Web2.0 (democratisation of media, more choice than ever via the long tail, experiences that we’d otherwise never have, collaboration, discussion, community, the list goes on). And he makes it sound that these are so terrible that we should just get rid of the internet entirely, although he stops just short of saying that.
Keen also points to Viacom suing YouTube as a “powerful message”, but my bet is that Viacom (who owns MTV, VH1 and Nickleodeon) is wishing they had bought YouTube instead of Google. Just think of the possibilities if Viacom owned that media channel.
All in all, I did not enjoy reading this book at all. Not just because it goes against everything I believe in about social media and community, but because the arguments are one sided. He talks about the money lost by Frito-Lay choosing to go with an amateur advertising campaign, and makes it the fault of social media. But is it anyone’s fault that “professionals” failed to deliver better content and creativity than the “amateurs”? He simply takes one side of the coin and runs with it.
For people already in this space, I wouldn’t recommend reading this book because it isn’t going to change your mind. The arguments are just not strong and/or compelling enough, and your money will be much better spent going towards a book that will help improve your social media life.
But hey don’t take my word for it, check out visual bookshelf on Facebook for many similar reviews, or just check out at this user-generated content by another reviewer (which I found while looking for the cover image). I bet Mr. Keen hates all these “amateur” review and wishes it were all done by a “cultural gatekeeper” instead.
If you use social media in any way (blog/podcast/use Youtube/use Flickr/use Facebook/etc), come for Social Media Breakfast: Singapore next Saturday, 29th of March 2008!
This is a little experiment that Derrick Kwa (from Adventures in Social Media #1) thought of doing, and was generous enough to invite me along for the ride. The objective of the breakfast is simply to meet like-minded people who are into the social media scene, expand your network and of course have fun. It doesn’t matter whether you’re interested in social media from a business standpoint or a social standpoint, everyone’s invited because you never know who you’d meet!
Currently Derrick and I have two rules:
Everyone’s equal. When it comes to Social Media Breakfast, there’s no difference if you’re a CEO or a student. Everyone has something of value to contribute and everyone should be treated that way
Law of Two Feet applies. If a particular conversation or discussion is not getting you what you want, feel free to move on.
Both are nods to PodCamp rules and we’re sure they’re not hard to follow!
Finally, we will be borrowing an idea from Jeff Pulver regarding personal tagging. I’ll let the man explain it himself:
The venue we’re looking at is either going to be TCC at SMU or Frujch. Either way it will be in the SMU area, so it’s pretty convenient. Also, because it’s our first time trying this out there are no sponsors involved, so you have to pay for your own breakfast and we hope that’s not too big a problem! We’ll clarify the final date and time within the week.
So if you’re coming, leave me a comment or drop me an email: uniquefrequencyATgmailDOTcom or message me on Twitter and we’ll see you on the 29th!
I kept these till the end because I was toying with the idea of creating something like this, but decided I simply didn’t have the time. Here are 2 video guides to using Twitter. Enjoy!
If 
