| wildfire |

The business of blogging

Blogging has been the catch-phrase for at least the past year among marketing and communications professionals, so it may be surprising to find out that even in the US, fewer than 14% of Internet users read them and less than 10% of businesses blog.  This and other contradictions are covered in a new report from eMarketer that looks at the business of blogging.

As much as I am big fan, and constantly trying to convince businesses to blog, there is something about the current business blogging scene that is reminiscent of the late 90's.  I'm not saying that I  predict a "blogging crash", but I am thinking about that gap that occurred between the provision of online services and the existence of a mainstream online audience.

Now, like in the late 90's we have those of us who have the vision.  We know what is going to happen.  In this case, consumers / stakeholders / voters / employees will expect to be addressed in a different way; one that is more interactive, more conversational, more collaborative, more transparent.  We understand that channels like blogging will help organisations communicate in this new way.

However, just as in the 90's, we visionaries forget the fact that it takes time for changes to fully manifest themselves.   

We are surrounded by people who know what a wiki is.  Naturally, we expect organisations to have fully aligned and integrated digital communication strategies.  We think that it is easy for an organisation to blog - because from a technical or process perspective, it is.  But actually, it's not.

While there may be visionaries within any given organisation, chances are they are the minority. Besides a few tech empires and new media gurus, most enterprises are dominated by those without the vision.  To the non-visionary, status quo communications are just fine and blogs are scary - they represent a loss of control.  While us visionaries understand fully that control no longer exists, non-visionaries are still fighting to cling to it.  Therefore, fewer than 10% of business are blogging. 

So, despite my daily efforts to get to 11%, I predict this number will not skyrocket, UNTIL the majority of audiences  (consumers / stakeholders / voters / employees) are reading blogs on a frequent and engaged basis.   Only when the necessity to reach audiences overrides the internal politics of resistance, will business blogging come of age.  Therefore, the eMarketer numbers - 14% users and 10% business blogs - seem pretty well aligned for now.    

Although I didn't purchase the full report, I'll guess that eMarketer come to pretty much the same conclusion:

"Over time, as consumers come to expect to be addressed directly in a way that cannot be done through traditional corporate communications, a majority of businesses will blog, work with bloggers or, at least, monitor blog content."

I'm curious if anyone would like to predict when this critical mass will occur.

Selling "content" to your marketing leaders

In my experience many business leaders, (at least the ones with ultimate budget control), don't understand what the term "content" means, let alone its significance in their business strategy.

The trouble is, even if there is a clued up web team in an organisation, this team still has to go to leadership to get budget sign-off for web expenditure: headcount for content editors or in-house web designers, budget for web enhancements, development, what have you.  Each time they have to explain exactly what the expenditure is, and why they need it.

This is often where the communication fails.  The clued up web team uses web jargon and web-centric justifications for their budget request.  (i.e. to improve content quality and freshness, to increase unique visits, to improve SEO, and so on).  The business leaders have NO IDEA what any of this means, and certainly no comprehension of why it is important....  thus web content remains on the periphery.

Imagine a meeting with director level marketing leaders and a web team.  The web team tries to present a report on the status of the organisation's website.  They refer to "content items"... and the marketing leaders' eyes glaze over in boredom.  Chances are traditional marketers have no clue what a "content item" is.  Nor do they see how this had anything to do with their own marketing strategies. 

A better approach is to speak their language: "copy”, “articles", "press releases", "product details", or other jargon that they already understand.  And, always bring it back to their objectives.  Spell out why online content matters in terms of brand, sales, marketing,....

Using a Google example is always powerful.  Ask them what they would do if searching for a service/product/business like theirs?  Then, show them where they are (or are not) in the Google rankings.  (In my experience traditional marketers react really well to this exercise), and discuss why their web content is problematic.

I also found using practical stats, like: x% of consumers use the web to research products/services/businesses prior to making purchases, or x% of FT100 business leaders use the web for their business information, or x% of job applicants visit a company's website before accepting a job offer, and so on.  Then say, so, if you were to visit your website as a consumer/client/prospect, etc., what would your impression be?

Then walk them through how to improve their "brand" by improving the information they have on their website.  When an organisation starts to make the link between their brand, the quality of the content they have on their website, and their actual business objectives, they start to rethink the way they manage (or don't manage) their content.  It finally clicks that this is NOT a technical issue, nor a peripheral one!

Of course, for those of us who make our living from companies who can't seem to get the online content issue right, maybe we really want to keep our mouths shut!!

Internet Companies Aid Political Censorship

Human Rights Watch has released a scathing report on Corporate Complicity in Chinese Internet Censorship.

“Yahoo!’s role in the Shi Tao case and Google’s decision to turn censor in order to curry favor with the Chinese government show the extent of corporate capitulation to China,” said Brad Adams, Asia director of Human Rights Watch. “But Internet companies are learning they can’t become partners in political censorship without provoking outrage and a loss of trust by users, including those in China.” 

Human Rights Watch called the United States, the European Union and other jurisdictions to pass legislation prohibiting companies from storing personal user data on servers in China. The aim of this legislation should not be to prevent U.S. or other international companies from operating in China. Rather, the goal should be for companies in the business of disseminating information and ideas to adhere to these goals in China, not to participate in or facilitate censorship or the arrest of individuals involved in peaceful expression, and to set a strong example of ethical corporate behavior. 

“Laws are needed....so that the Chinese government can’t pick off companies one by one,” said Adams. “Otherwise the standard set will be that of the company trying the hardest to please the Chinese government.” 

http://www.humanrightswatch.org/english/docs/2006/08/09/china13940.htm

Web launch delays blamed on lack of content

Web launch delays blamed on lack of content. A survey of digital agencies reveals that website launches are delayed by as much as three months because content isn’t ready or suitable. 

This finding doesn't surprise me at all.  In my experience, many organisations underestimate the significance of content when planning a website.  This can even include websites that are meant to be content-rich!

“Agencies and their clients must put content at the centre of their web strategies,” said Barry Monk, director of Next Communications, the digital marketing content company that conducted the survey.

This survey came from the agency perspective, but the unfortunate truth is that it doesn't get much better post-launch (after the 3 month delay), when the responsibility shifts client-side.  Even if the organisation puts effort and investment into initial content, it is not uncommon for there to be little planning or structure for sustained content.  Websites then end up with stale content, or too little content, or under resourced content professionals within the organisation who are overworked and undervalued, (and possibly underpaid).

Early 2005, I hosted a roundtable discussion on web content strategy. I remember it being a lively group - very smart and passionate about web content, but at the same time frustrated.  A common complaint was how organisations viewed web content as an IT issue, Dispel the Myth that content strategy is an IT issue. As a result, web content suffered.  Content professionals were chosen for IT skills, rather than marketing or communications ones.  Web content wasn't integrated with other messages, nor was it aligned with organisational strategy. Investment was too focused on technical issues.  And so forth....

....Today we have a flourishing digital industry, Web 2.0, the rise of user generated content, etc.  Investment in the web is increasing, as is the recognition of that web does not equal IT.  So, is it possible that organisations still are struggling with how to manage web content and content professionals?  And how can we help change this?