I like Syfy. I’m rooting for Syfy. But as a guy who has spent a lot of time in the Social Media space, I worry about these ads I see during Upfronts Week here in New York.

Syfy is suggesting that their audience is both highly engaged and influential. I’m sure they’ve got data that backs that up too, but these ads display either Syfy’s misunderstanding of social, or are willfully misrepresenting how social works. These ads may some pretty strong claims: Let’s take the images from left to right.

• 12,000 people heard me rave about your hotel
• I told 9,000 people what cell phone to buy
• 10,000 people re-tweeted my movie review

A few questions here. First, are these people credible/relevant voices in the areas of hotels/consumer electronics/movie criticism? Would I value her hotel review any more than I would value her thoughts on political unrest in the Middle East or the best nail polish color for beach season? In other words, what is their relevance as an expert in these scenarios? Second, what is their reach? How many people follow the guy on the right so that he can generate 10,000 retweets? Here’s the tweet for the last movie review from Roger Ebert, certainly the most famous movie critic in this country.

JE here: Roger Ebert's final review, of Terence Malick's TO THE WONDER : http://t.co/la9fj5P2Dk http://t.co/7mkLWyfMYo

April 7, 2013 5:13 pm via webReplyRetweetFavorite

@ebertchicago

Roger Ebert

It got 1,300+ retweets. Ebert had about 844,000 followers, so to generate 10,000 retweets our Syfy-watching friend would have to have somewhere in the neighborhood of 8-10 million followers. For context, Bill Gates has about 11+ million followers. So yeah, I guess it’s possible for him to get 10,000 retweets, but they are presenting this guy as just a regular Joe, not some combination of Bill Gates and Roger Ebert. Check out this interesting Quora thread for a look inside social media numbers. Now let’s move to the gentleman in the middle. He just told 9,000 people which cell phone to buy, and presumably if you were, say Samsung or Nokia, and you advertised on Syfy, that could be a good thing. But did his comments resonate with those 9,000 people? How many went to the cell phone brand’s website, or added the phone to their consideration set? How many of those 9,000 were even in the market for a new cell phone? Or as Rob Clark, Director, Insights and Measurement at Edelman Digital, notes:

The person who influences me regarding what to eat for dinner is different than the one who influences my purchase of computer #SMMeasure

May 2, 2013 12:22 pm via webReplyRetweetFavorite

@theelusivefish

Rob Clark

I get what Syfy is doing – they are selling their audience as a desirable target demo. They are selling them on the posters as a brand’secret weapon, “I’m your social media,” they tell the brand. I’ve made my share of ‘Top Influencers” lists, and I think they tend to be link bait for those creating the lists and an exercise in vanity for those on the lists. But things like relevance, reach and resonance are important. That’s why Traackr exists.

Here’s where I think Syfy is missing the boat: How are they creating an engagement strategy that ties the brands to the network’s programming in a relevant way? It doesn’t feel like they are connecting the dots. As an advertiser, I could reach the three above in a wide variety of ways, how is Syfy making my brand fit with the content that Syfy distributes? The logic they seem to be banking on is: Run an ad on our network, and our audience will tweet about you. But does it work that way? These people are fans of Syfy programming, not advertising from Syfy sponsors. If I’m watching Defiance on Syfy, I’m tweeting about the show – characters, plots, etc. – not about the latest spot from a hotel chain. That’s why context is so important.

If Syfy wants to sell Syfy viewers as a lever for advertisers, they have to make their advertisers contextually relevant to other audience memebers. Here’s where someone like Hyperactivate comes in. These guys are masters at building engagement around contextually relevant content. Entrepreneur magazine tabbed them as one of three startups to watch coming out of SxSW 2013. They’ve worked with brands like M&Ms, Ellen, Katy Perry, MLB and many more. They recently ran a social media-driven engagement campaign for a popular video game, and in some cases big engagement was driven by people who wouldn’t normally be called “influencers.” Hyperactivate explains:

“One user engaged through Facebook, where he only has 490 friends. From his single entry, he activated 25 people. From those 25 people, his reach grew to 6,077 with a total of over 200 clicks, and further people activated. Normally, this person wouldn’t be seen as any sort of influencer yet he’s activated a good amount of people and spread the brand message to an even larger audience.”

And now we get to the Duncan Watts v. Malcolm Gladwell argument regarding what an influencer is, and that’s not my main point. My point is, regardless of how you define influencer, or if you even believe in that at all, Syfy is playing a bit fast and loose with the true mechanics of social media and they are potentially missing the larger point around providing contextually relevant content. If Syfy wants brands to play ball with them, they need to make sure they are integrating the brands around the content that the Syfy audience has come to enjoy.

Heading towards an Age of Onlinetenment

Last week Jinal Shah, a Digital Strategist at JWT, shared an essay with her friends titled, 2012: A Year of Digital Behavioral Shifts. It’s a great piece and Jinal puts together a strong case for changing the way we operate online, with a renewed focus on thinking, rather than just sharing, liking and retweeting. She believes this new era is upon us, calling it the age of enlightenment in our digital history. This transformation will be led by:

[...] thinkers, artists and storytellers not programmers and geeks. These are people driven by a vision that’s a bit more individualistic, centers more around exploring the tapestry of human opinions, intimacy and feelings instead of connecting the world into one large immutable being.

And what will this lead to? According to Jinal: a mindful web… systems that:

1. Are designed for constructive debate and dialogue by exposing us to different points of views
2. Are designed for quality and intimacy – not quantity. Where there is less immediate gratification.

It’s a compelling vision and one I wholeheartedly support. But it’s also a big task. The simple truth is that the vast, vast majority of people aren’t interested in changing their behavior. They enjoy the relatively simple gamification elements of Foursqaure and the ability to express their opinions view a digital ‘thumbs up.’  Even when viewed at the micro level, exploring just the world of marketers that both Jinal and I are part of, it’s evident that not everyone is interested in exploring the new possibilities.

And yet, I’m literally inundated by the highly intelligent thinking of people in our industry who are committed to building something better, to thinking deeper and exploring ideas that are challenging. From Tim Stock to Justin Briggs to countless others the issue is how do we build the type of web Jinal is talking about that will not only connect all these great people and ideas, but allow them to be connected in a meaningful way?  How does an idea I write about, say, The Cultural Singularity Paradox connect or build upon an idea like Interdependence, Chomsky and the crowbar by Eaon Pritchard, a winner of Neil Perkin’s Post of the Month Hall of Fame?

I think we still need the ”programmers and tinkerers and computer scientists,” the builders of the web’s Industrial Age according to Shah. We need them to continue to build, but this time to build a web that intelligently connects and combines the work of those that will create the Age of “Onlinetenment” (my term, not Shah’s).

In her book, Reality is Broken, Jane McGonigal relates the story of Halo 3 and the collaborative effort to record 10 billion kills by game players. How can the marketing industry create that sort of collaborative effort?  On the subject of games, a subject I’m passionate about, Shah says, “Gaming will have a larger role to play in the age of enlightenment, but perhaps not so overt. It’s job will and should become about elevating the meaning and importance associated with a like, number of friends and followers etc.”

And while that’s important, I think gaming can play a bigger, more important role in a different way. Games can solve bigger problems than improving the meaning of the quantitative issues Shah mentions. Games can be used to rally people (marketers?) to work for a common cause, to unite for a single purpose greater than themselves. That’s something I think we could use. Rather than everyone writing and thinking in isolation, we need to figure out how to write and think together. When that happens maybe we will enter the Age of Onlinetenment.

Early contender for 2012 Word of the Year

I ended 2011 by taking a look at the Millward Brown and Dynamic Logic (Disclosure: Both agencies are part of WPP, as is my employer, Y&R) 12 for 2012: Top 12 Digital Predictions for 2012 report and want to pick that up as there was a lot of good thinking in there. Prediction #5 takes a look at mobile marketing.

If nothing else, marketers love a catchy name.  If you don’t know SoLoMo yet, you will soon. As the report notes, “The most successful marketing messages will combine relevance and location with the right timing.” SoLoMo is a portmanteau of Social-Local-Mobile and speaks to the rapid advancements in geo-targeting and the equally rapid adoption of smart phones as the essential device of the 21st century.

Jennifer Okula, the essay’s author, also notes:

We will see increased SoLoMo marketing prevail in existing geo-social apps like Foursquare, Shopkick and Yelp. Retailers will experiment more with geo-fenced mobile marketing with companies like Placecast. Social buying companies like Groupon and Living Social will become more app-focused and provide push content and alerts on real-time local deals.

This is where I see the real value. Brands need to make themselves relevant in the existing behaviors of people. Getting discounts at places I’m already going through mobile apps I’m already using is real value.  However, Okula goes on to state:

Brands will create more of their own apps that tap into both geo-location services and social networking.

This is where I get nervous. When brands try to create their own apps they can run into several problems. First and foremost, they aren’t in the app business.  The resources, both human and financial, that go into creating an app is something most companies don’t have. Then, once you create and publish the app, you have to promote it heavily. Second, brands need to think long and hard about whether people really want an app from them. What real added value is there? Is it enough to get me to use the app in addition to the other ones I’m using?

SoLoMo will be a buzzword in 2012, but like most buzzwords, it’s likely to be misused or misunderstood. The opportunities here are great, but a thoughtful strategy is required.

Greg Burney's #DrawMyFollowers Project

If you’re an artist, and by artist I mean that in the broadest sense, how do you stand out in a world where everyone is an artist and has the ability to distribute their work easily and broadly? It’s a tough question, one that every artist grapples with and answers in a way that works best for them. For Greg Burney the answer was making drawings of his Twitter followers. For free.

I grabbed a few minutes of Greg’s time to ask him some questions about this project:

Rick Liebling: How important is personalization in something like this? Do you think you would have had the same response if you had offered just an original drawing, as opposed to an original drawing of each person?

Greg Burney: I think it’s absolutely essential that the drawings are of each person. This project is all about connecting to people in a personal way, and that would be totally lost if I offered them just an original drawing.

Rick Liebling: How important is “the story” in this? One guy trying to draw all these Twitter followers. That’s a different dynamic than artist sitting at the cafe, charging $10 for a quick sketch.

Greg Burney: I guess its a very simple premise. I’m not asking for anything, but offering something. I’m one guy, I’m not an illustrator, I’m rubbish at drawing, I’m working from home. I like to think its a nice, honest project that makes people smile and takes advantage of today’s immensely powerful social media.

Rick Liebling: I’m interested in the value exchange of this project. The followers receive a unique, personalized piece of original art. What are you getting from this project?

Greg Burney: A sore hand. No, it really is a buzz seeing people’s reactions. I like to think the little bit of happiness I give with every drawing accumulates to a massive impact. I also get many supporting messages every day and I have cool conversations with many of my new followers. It’s fun to be part of a huge project. The thought of it being finished is very exciting.

Rick Liebling: What would have been your response if a brand had approached you to be part of this in some way? Would you have been open to such a proposition?

Greg Burney: I’m not sure how I would react. I’d like to think I would say no. As soon as there are third parties involved, I no longer have 100% control of the project, and the premise stops becoming so simple. It might also lead people to be suspicious of what the real intention of the project is, fun or money. Saying that, if the right brand came along, perhaps one that supports illustrators, or large scale internet projects such as the wonderful Ze Frank, who knows.

Greg brings up several issues that perfectly illustrate why so many brands struggle with connecting with people online.  How many brands can create personalized engagements with each person? How many brands can create simple, honest engagements? How many brands looks to create engagements where the value generated goes to the consumer, not the brand? And what brand is willing to take the time to do more than just slap their logo on an idea, and really support the content creator?

I’m not saying it isn’t or can’t be done, I’m just saying that it is rare. But I think it’s a solid recipe for success.

I’ll be speaking at Social Media World Forum today as part of a panel entitled, Incorporating ‘gamification’ into your social marketing campaign and long term loyalty strategy. I’ll be joined by Omar Divina, Director of Sales,Badgeville; Nancy Friedman,  Owner, KidzVuz.com; Rebecca Levey, Owner,KidzVuz.com; and, Esteban Contreras, Social Media Manager, Samsung.

It should be a lively discussion, in this the “Year of Gamification.” I’m a believer in game mechanics, which I define as the integration of game elements into a system, whereas I’m a little leery of gamification, which to me is the act of merely layering game elements on top of an existing system.  I see a lot of social platforms, tools and services which fall into the latter category.

I’m looking forward to hearing what the other panelists have to say as they are all smart folks with some real experience in this area. I’m interested in speaking about how social networks can better use game mechanics for the benefit of community members and the network itself.  I’ll look to post an update later in the day after the event as well.

UPDATE: Great conversation with some really smart panelists. It was good to hear how much thought everyone was putting into their programs and the realization that gamification is easy to do badly. You can really see that a change is coming and future activations will be more nuanced and immersive.  I have high hopes for what gamification can become and will continue to report on what I see happening.

Changing the LBS experience.

This has been a hectic year in social media. It seemed every week a new app, service, tool, platform or metric was being introduced. Perhaps as a result of this, I’ve been feeling some social media fatigue. One of the places I’ve most acutely felt this fatigue is with Foursquare. Sure, finding discounts for free chips and salsa at Chili’s is nice, but the vast majority of the time I’m just checking-in to check-in. Becoming a mayor or earning a badge has lost its appeal.

Part of the problem is the loss of the novelty, but another part is the lack of emotional engagement. There’s something missing for me with Foursquare because it’s not touching me on a deeper level. Perhaps it’s a lack of narrative or story. There’s really no connective tissue between my check-ins, or between my check-ins and those of my friends. This lack of emotional pull leaves me feeling that if Foursquare were to go away tomorrow, I really wouldn’t miss it.

But this post isn’t about Foursquare, it’s about Gowalla, another Location Based Service that is usually compared to Foursquare.  A month or so ago Gowalla announced several changes to the service. These changes were necessary for Gowalla to move forward and evolve – a smart move to help it move away from Foursquare, yes, but also to change the nature of the user experience. I reached out to Andy Ellwood, Gowalla’s Director of Business Development to find out more about these moves and here’s what he told me:

“The basic idea that the newest release of Gowalla centers around is the idea that has always been at the core of what we are doing here with Gowalla: your phone as your passport. How do we help discover the world’s most loved spots and share the stories that people create when they are exploring the world around them? How do we incentivize people to tell better stories, not just check-in for some gamified electronic reward? What is the underlying action that we want to bring to the forefront of the conversation and that works for EVERYONE not just the early adopters… These are some of the questions that we asked and that influenced this latest version. The goal is to encourage discovery, exploration, and sharing the best that you see with those that you care about and inspiring them to GO as well.”

Andy perfectly articulates the very issues I’ve been talking about. Stories, taking action, exploration. Those are powerful things to leverage. I hit Andy up with some follow up questions:

Rick Liebling: I’m starting to develop check-in fatigue. Gowalla, GetGlue, Foursquare… There has to be more to it than that, doesn’t there? Is that where the new Gowalla is headed?

Andy Ellwood: Gowalla is, and has always been, about discovering the world around you, sharing it with your friends, and having a record of the places that you go. The narratives that Gowalla documents are much more than a check-in, it is a story that has the potential to inspire others.

Rick Liebling: Gowalla is always compared to Foursquare, but do you guys see the landscape differently?

Andy Ellwood: The visions for Gowalla and Foursquare have always been different, but the technology through which we’ve each used had enough similarities for comparison that in the nascent industry, we were often in the same sentence. Gowalla is about going, doing, and sharing the new places your go. Foursquare is about unlocking your city and loyalty to the places you go most.

Rick Liebling: I’m believe that not enough sites/apps/platforms are infusing emotion into their offerings. How is Gowalla trying to leverage the emotion and passion of travel?

Andy Ellwood: We recently added the Love button (because love is more awesome than like) and have Highlights to subjectively describe why a certain place is awesome. People are emotionally attached to the places they go and, if given the right platform, inspire others to go there too.

Rick Liebling: How can brands engage consumers in new ways via the updated Gowalla?

Andy Ellwood: We ask two questions of every brand that we begin working with: 1) What is the experience that you want to create? 2) Where are the places that you want that experience to happen? Once we understand that, we are able to use the multitude of features from Gowalla to craft an organic experience for those going out with Gowalla that allows the brand to be a part of the story in a natural way at places that are important to their brand.

Rick Liebling: Complete this: Gowall: Come for the ________, stay for the _________.

Andy Ellwood: Come for the exploration, stay for the story.

If you haven’t yet, give Gowalla a shot. If you have tried it, tell me what you think of the changes.