Corporate Blogging? Make It Great, or Don’t Bother
November 13, 2009
Hard to believe it’s been over a year since I bookmarked this post on the Sitepoint blog: 15 Companies That Really Get Corporate Blogging. But now that I’ve come across it again, the information is still interesting. The author referred to a then-recent Forrester study that looked at 90 blogs from Fortune 500 companies, and found that “most corporate blogs are ‘dull, drab, and don’t stimulate discussion.’ Sadly, two-thirds hardly ever get any comments, 70% stick strictly to business topics, and worse 56% just republish press releases or already public news.” I would imagine there has been a little improvement since then, but I doubt it’s much.
Anyway, I went looking for the report, found that it is paid content and the original post got its information from a Wall Street Journal article that is no longer available. But I did find a newer—and freer—Forrester paper on corporate blogging, which you can get with a fairly painless registration.
Highlights:
“Only one in six consumers trust company blogs.”
“Like any other marketing channel, blogging can work. But it’s not about you; it’s about your customer.”
“Honest and transparent blogs will get noticed.”
So–what’s special about those 15 companies that “get it”? The answer is absurdly simple: They provide interesting/useful/meaningful content. Or as Sitepoint put it—“informative, fascinating, and a joy to read even for people who aren’t die-hard fans of the company.”
I actually visited every one of the 15 companies, although not every one of their blogs, which would have added up to dozens. I covered at least 20 blogs, though, and at each one, I applied a simple test: “If I were thinking about a career at this company, would their blog(s) encourage me to apply?” Here’s what I decided:
Yes, in almost every case.
At Southwest Airlines, I found “BlogSouthwest,” with some great Halloween posts extolling the fun quotient of that SWA-perfect holiday. (I can testify—it’s all true.) At Lenovo, I discovered a smart, wide-ranging blog called “Design Matters,” which I would probably subscribe to if I had any time left for more feeds. BBC has a substantive blog called “The Editors,” offering a behind-the-scenes view of current events. The “Fast Lane Blog” at GM looks like paradise for a techie auto junkie. And it was oddly seductive to read the supposedly inner thoughts of Marriott’s apparently tireless CEO at “On the Move.” Even Quicken’s “What’s the Diff” was fairly charmful, with its mission of “exposing the gap between average and excellent.”
At a couple of companies, the blogs seemed perfunctory—lacking enthusiasm and/or substance. A couple of others offered blogs so super-technical that I couldn’t make a connection (though they probably have appeal for their target audiences). But on the whole, my cruise through this group of corporate blogs was more interesting than I expected.
And I’m sure there are many other good examples out there. Plenty of bad ones too, though! So I’ll close with another highlight from the Forrester paper:
“If your strategy is to create a blog about your company and its products, give it up.”
But if your strategy is to offer something of value to readers—information, ideas, insights, inside intel, or just plain fun–then it’s worth the effort.
(Thanks to Jason Rogers for sharing his trip to the Grand Canyon.)
Continental Airlines Teams up with Winstar Interactive to Display Third-Party Ads on Continental.com
November 13, 2009
We all know that airlines are struggling financially. Apparently, charging passengers for baggage, taking away meals, and adding all kinds of fees isn’t enough even though fuel costs have fallen significantly from a year ago. Still, those airline companies are feeling a pinch. What to do … what to do?
Never fear! Naturally, someone came up with a way to bring in some revenue. Don’t worry, you won’t be charged for the oxygen you use while onboard. Although, don’t rule it out.
Continental Airlines hopes to make some money by displaying third-party ads on its Web site. The company is teaming up with Winstar Interactive to monetize its site through ads that will complement the site and feed into the travel/buying mode of Continental.com visitors. But what does this say about the Continental brand?
What say you? Brilliant or pathetic?
What do you think of Continental.com’s strategy to sell ad space to third party advertisers?
I wonder what’s next. Selling ad space on the inside and outside of airplanes like ads on subway trains and buses? Or maybe flight attendants should wear uniforms covered in sponsors logos like NASCAR drivers? Should I be charging for these ideas?
How do you think airlines should try to bring in additional revenue? Leave a comment and share your thoughts. Don’t be afraid to think out of the box. When they bait you like this, it’s hard to resist.
Image: Flickr
XBRL Gains Asset Management Support
November 12, 2009
I have children. Do you have children? I have children. Welcome to my Parents’ Anonymous meeting. What, I wonder, is the most annoying trait of your child?
Oh be quiet! My children’s most annoying trait is their inept duplicity. The way they try to be clever and get around to asking you a question in a way in which you’ll say “Yes” rather than “No”.
Sometimes I feel like taking my hand and, in that classic scene, sweeping the chess board clear of pieces and saying “Just spit it out will you, what do you want??” Ah, the conflicting demands of society, intelligence and hormones!
In the convoluted and mixed up world of financial investments, the role of asset managers can sometimes appear to be as confused as such children. Not through any fault of their own, but because they are similarly caught between several different priorities.
XBRL could help to solve that headache, and in a letter to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) the Asset Managers Forum (AMF) has embraced the new technology for this very reason. Read more
News Corp Wants to Block Google
November 11, 2009
Rupert Murdoch and News Corp came out swinging this week with eyes on Google. It’s not a secret that News Corp has been struggling along with many traditional news organizations. It’s just easier to hop online and get the latest news than it is to pull out a newspaper where you’ll only find news that’s already old. News Corp has been losing ad revenue, and earlier this year Murdoch announced the potential for News Corp to charge people to access news on its Web site in the future — a move that flies in the face of the future of communications and information sharing.
Now, Murdoch wants to ban all News Corp content from Google search results claiming that Google is violating fair use laws by republishing titles and snippets without permission. My first reaction to this was to actually laugh out loud. I’m just glad I wasn’t drinking or eating at that moment or I could have been in serious trouble. Again, News Corp is failing to see the long term evolution of information sharing and communications. Blocking content from online searches is the equivalent of keeping your company’s phone number unlisted decades ago. It’s laughable.
Of course, one can speculate that Murdoch would be happy to allow Google to republish its content titles and snippets in return for a fee. No one has come out and said that yet (as far as I know, correct me if I’m wrong), but I think it’s safe to assume that’s what’s coming.
The problem with this strategy for Murdoch and News Corp? I doubt Google cares. Not only that, but I doubt many consumers care either.
Instead of embracing new forms of communication and information sharing and finding a new business model that will actually work for the next 10 years, Murdoch and News Corp are relying on a bullying tactic. Actually, it’s more like a tantrum (“we’re losing, so we don’t want to play with you anymore”). Unfortunately, it’s not going to work and it certainly doesn’t put the News Corp brand in a positive position.
Your thoughts?
Image: Flickr
Corporate Communications and Social Media: Genie Will Not Return to Bottle
November 11, 2009
Google’s new Sidewiki application lets web visitors share their opinions right next to any online content. Visitors who turn on Sidewiki (which has to be downloaded from Google) can see what other Sidewiki users have said about the site they are viewing.
There’s a lot more to it, but the first main point is—it’s caused quite a stir in some quarters. The estimable Jeremiah Owyang titled his post Google’s SideWiki Shifts Power To Consumers –Away From Corporate Websites, and outlines a scenario about what’s to come (and what social media strategists should be doing about it).
Media strategist John Zappe follows up with Google Gives HR Something New To Worry About. Salient quote: “Just imagine the mischief a disgruntled job seeker or employee can wreak by posting their story directly to your site. Side by side with your video of happy employees talking about the fun and interesting work they do is a post — or multiple posts — from current and former workers denouncing your message as bogus.”
The concept of community commenting is not actually new—there have been boutique apps that provide the same functionality. It’s just that Google has such a huge reach. And Sidewiki integrates with the popular Google toolbar. So the potential impact really is worth considering . . .
If you’re wonk-ish, the Doc Searles Weblog offers a good start at outlining the debate with Whose Side(wiki) Are You On?
It’s interesting that the Sidewiki launch came along just days after a post in which HR thought leader John Sullivan declared: Your Employer Brand Is No Longer Owned by Your Firm. His picture is a lot bigger than just the potential impact of Sidewiki—and the title conveys the one fact everyone needs to be aware of.
In two words: Done deal.
Did companies ever have the control over messaging they imagined they did? Probably not. But that doesn’t matter now. What matters is that Genie has left the bottle, and won’t be going back in.
(The luscious illustration comes from Aladdin und die Wunderlampe, a German children’s book by Ludwig Fulda, with ilustrations by Max Liebert. Thanks to Project Gutenberg for making it available.)
Get our updates
 |