Phillip Nones

Social Media and the Internet: Click … or Clique?

Phillip Nones Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

All of the hype about social marketing and social media might make you believe that people are flocking to this new form of communications in droves.

Well, if you think this … you’re right. And now we have the stats to prove it. The Nielsen Company has just released web statistics for the month of August that report that time spent on social networks and blogging sites accounted for ~17% of all time spent on the Internet.

Compared to August 2008, this figure is nearly triple the percentage of time spent on social networks and blogging sites just one short year ago. Seeing as how there is an upper-limit ceiling on the total amount of time available to spend online in any given day, the increased attention on social media is coming at the expense of the more traditional use of the web as an informational tool.

This is not to say that text and video content don’t remain central to the online experience, because that is clearly the case. But the ability consumers have now to use platforms like Facebook and blogging sites to “connect, communicate and share” is what’s driving much of the continuing growth of the web and online engagement.

Because of this new emphasis, is it any wonder more online advertising dollars are chasing social media than ever before? Nielsen pegs advertising on social media sites as representing ~15% of total online ad spending in August 2009. That’s more than double its proportion a year earlier.

Along with the shift in online ad revenues to social media sites, we’re also experiencing a major change in clickthrough behavior as it pertains to online display ads. Research published recently by comScore shows that the percentage of people who clicked on one or more display ads during a monthly period of Internet interaction – in this case March 2009 – was only ~16%.

How does that result compare with earlier surveys? It’s dramatically lower, and dropping. Just two years ago in 2007, ~32% of people online clicked on at least one online display ad over a month-long period – twice the proportion as today.

What’s more, the comScore analysis reveals that a very small portion of viewers represent the vast majority of the clickthrough activity. Specifically, only ~8% of the people are responsible for ~85% of all clicks. Of course, we can be sure that the robust clickthrough behavior of these 8% translates into equally robust product sales … NOT!

Clearly, any company that is attempting to promote products and services over the Internet needs to carefully study the composition of its market and the behavior of its online audience targets before making extensive online advertising program commitments.

The reality is, with the dynamics we’re seeing such as the behaviors noted above, it’s more likely an online promo effort will fail rather than succeed unless a dispassionate review of the situation is done beforehand and a practical, realistic program put into place.

But that’s so unlike many of the web advertising programs we’ve seen implemented up to now, which could be best characterized as: “Throw a bunch of advertising at the web and hope some of it sticks.”

Condé-Nast Gets Real – and Reality Bites

Phillip Nones Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Conde-Nast logoThis week, magazine publisher Condé-Nast announced the closure of four magazines, including two bridal publications plus the prestigious and well-known Gourmet Magazine title.

It’s an indignity for a publishing firm that has fallen pretty far pretty fast. For years, the company seemed by-and-large unaffected by the winds of change in the publishing industry. Even as other firms were belt-tightening and divesting themselves of low-performing magazine titles, the storied “in-your-face” Condé-Nast business style – replete with jet-setting executives and seemingly endless clothing and expense accounts – appeared to remain intact.

It didn’t hurt that parent company, Advance Publications, also owns cable TV properties that could help prop up the print publication segment of the business – at least for a time.

But with plunging ad page revenues from its luxury goods advertisers on the order of 30%+ throughout 2009, it was only a matter of time before the day of reckoning would arrive. And the sense of impending doom was only heightened when McKinsey & Co. consultants started roaming the halls, poking around the company’s headquarters like a nosy relative, asking all sorts of questions and taking notes.

And now, a few short months later, we have this announcement.

Accompanying the news of magazine closures and personnel layoffs, Condé-Nast reported that it is shifting its priorities to digital properties even while focusing on a fewer number of “core” magazine titles.

Will it be enough? One unnamed company executive was quoted in The Wall Street Journal as saying, “We’re going to make a go of everything else.” But I think that’s doubtful. McKinsey has recommended that nearly all of the remaining publications cut their budgets by upwards of 25%. Whether or not that happens – or whether it will be enough to save the remaining titles – is something we’ll be able to judge pretty quickly.

UPDATE (11/7/09) — The New York Post is reporting that Condé-Nast has now hired Michael Sheehan, the famous crisis manager and media coach, to help the company with PR. Sheehan has coached presidential candidates from Clinton to Obama, as well as handling AIG Insurance’s PR during its financial meltdown in late 2008. Reportedly, Gina Sanders, publisher of Lucky magazine, prodded top brass to bring Sheehan in, citing deep morale problems at the company. Considering the dramatic events at the publishing house over the past year, this news is not at all surprising.

The Movie Rental Business: Blockbuster … or Blockbusted?

Phillip Nones Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Blockbuster logoWhat’s going on with Blockbuster? For several years now, business analysts have wondered whether the company’s movie rental stores could withstand the competitive pressures from alternative delivery systems such as Netflix’s monthly subscription program, or the growing popularity of movie downloads direct to the customer’s own computer.

The latest announcement by Blockbuster’s management seems to suggest that we may be entering into an endgame phase for the company. Blockbuster reported that it will be closing as many as 40% of its stores over the next two years. This figure – nearly 1,600 of its ~3,750 total store population, is significantly higher than had been signaled by the firm earlier in the summer.

Blockbuster seems to be caught in a situation where its business model is no longer attractive – or even relevant – to a large and growing chunk of movie consumers. The company has nicely appointed, well-stocked stores scattered all across the United States. But these outlets are an expensive way to rent movies when compared to Netflix’s “movies by mail” program or Coinstar/Redbox’s $1 movie vending machine kiosks. The Blockbuster stores are losing money – and customers.

Come to think of it, Blockbuster has been playing catch-up ball in the movie rental game for quite some time. When Netflix introduced the idea of “no late fees – ever,” Blockbuster resisted following suit for a time … until it became clear that charging late fees was becoming a deal-breaker for many consumers. And with the end of late fees, a major source of revenue and profits dried up.

Blockbuster has also tried to compete with Redbox, but the latter is expected to have nearly ten times more kiosks than Blockbuster (~20,000 versus ~2,500) installed by the end of this year.

Blockbuster has even tried to compete with Netflix by introducing its own monthly mail-order subscription program. But that program, which had grown to ~3 million customers, sank back to ~1.6 million once its aggressive promotional program for the service had run its course.

And then there’s the direct download business – the proverbial “elephant in the room” that is a threat not only to the Blockbuster model, but also to aspects of Netflix and Redbox’s business as well. Blockbuster is taking a stab at this segment of the business by working out a phone-download program with Motorola plus a TV-download program with Samsung, but it’s not clear at all that these efforts will help preserve Blockbuster’s market dominance.

Looking at the current volume of business done by Blockbuster compared to its competitors, the casual observer might think that the company has nothing at all to worry about. After all, its customer base numbers more than 50 million compared to just shy of 11 million for Netflix. But these point-in-time figures belie the fundamental problems facing the company. Blockbuster – the lumbering ocean liner – is losing upwards of $40 million each quarter, while its rivals – the swiftly maneuvering speedboats – are making profits.

Wonder how much longer that can go on?

Who are ‘Wikipedians’ … and what makes them tick?

Phillip Nones Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wikipedia logoBy now, most web surfers have had first-hand experience with Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia to which anyone can contribute. As a quick resource for gaining knowledge, it’s hard to beat; it’s fast,and it’s comprehensive.

Speaking personally, fewer than 10% of my queries on Wikipedia come back empty. So I find it a great resource for getting a quick handle on most any topic.

Of course, it would be unwise to consider Wikipedia an unimpeachable resource because its content is not vetted in the traditional way. Volunteers author the articles, and it’s up to the community of Wikipedia readers to call out and correct errors or omissions to the entries.

Just who are these volunteers, and what motivates them to devote time to Wikipedia? As it turns out, while there’s no pay, there’s a strong mixture of altruism and ego gratification associated with being a Wikipedia contributor.

This is borne out in an international research survey conducted jointly by the Wikimedia Foundation (the not-for-profit group that operates Wikipedia) and United Nations University’s MERIT tech research project. A whopping 175,000 responses were collected. Of these, approximately one third reported that they contribute Wikipedia content in addition to consuming it.

So what makes those people want to become a Wikipedia contributor? Three-fourths of them agreed with the statement that they “like the idea of sharing knowledge and want to contribute to it.” Two-thirds also reported that they “saw an error I wanted to fix.” Nearly half would contribute more often “if I knew there were specific topic areas that needed my help.”

The survey also uncovered some fascinating demographic statistics regarding Wikipedia contributors. It comes as no real surprise that the median age of Wikipedia contributors is in the mid- to upper-twenties … or that one-fourth of them have post-graduate degrees.

But the gender breakdown is curious. In fact, the survey found that only 13% of Wikipedia contributors are women – a startling finding. And even among those who have edited others’ entries rather than contributing full articles of their own, only 31% are women. The researchers steered clear of suggesting any reasons for the gender skew, which was more than likely a cop-out.

And what are the reasons why people don’t contribute to Wikipedia? Predictably, “time constraints” were cited by many respondents. Another factor cited was not knowing how to create or edit the Wikipedia pages. But a substantial percentage (~25%) cited being fearful of making a mistake and “getting in trouble” for it.

So one takeaway from the survey is that it takes certain traits to be a Wikipedia contributor — like being a self-proclaimed “informed expert” looking for validation, affirmation and recognition … or even being narcissistic?

Come to think of it, perhaps it’s not so surprising after all that Wikipedia contributors are over 85% male!

Farewell to an Audio Hi-Fi Pioneer

Phillip Nones Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

1812 Overture

Wilma Cozart Fine, audio Hi-Fi pioneer, operating the controls at Mercury's classical record division in the 1950s.
Wilma Cozart Fine, audio Hi-Fi pioneer, operating the controls at Mercury's classical record division in the 1950s.
This past week, the world lost a legend in the audio recording field with the death of Wilma Cozart Fine, age 82. The name may not be familiar to many. But if you grew up in the 1960s or 1970s, chances are your family owned at least one of the recordings Ms. Fine produced for the Mercury label – perhaps the 1812 Overture sonic blockbuster featuring the Minneapolis Symphony Orchestra (and also featuring real cannons and bells) that would become the first classical album to sell more than one million copies.

A native Mississippian who grew up in Ft. Worth, Texas, Wilma Cozart graduated with college degrees in Music and Business, then went to work in the late 1940s for the newly reorganized Dallas Symphony as personal secretary to the orchestra’s new music director, the fiery Hungarian conductor Antal Dorati. The Dallas Symphony managed to secure a recording contract with RCA Victor – highly unusual for such a young ensemble – and proceeded to release a number of praised recordings including the Bela Bartok Violin Concerto #2 with Yehudi Menuhin.

When Dorati took up a new position as music director of the Minneapolis Symphony Orchestra, Cozart decamped to there as well. Shortly thereafter, she was retained by Mercury Records in New York City to manage the label’s newly formed classical record division.

Using her orchestra management acumen, Cozart, all of 24 years old, snagged a recording contract for Mercury with the lauded Chicago Symphony Orchestra – the first of several exclusive contracts she would negotiate with orchestras in Minneapolis, Detroit and Rochester.

The debut classical recording produced by Mercury’s sound engineers led by C. Robert Fine was Mussorgsky’s Pictures at an Exhibition, and it caused a sensation in the music world when it was released in 1951. It was widely praised as the best-sounding classical recording made up to that time, with the New York Times reporting that the realism and clarity of the recording made it seem as if the listener was “in the living presence of the performers.” Sensing the marketing power of this description, Cozart would adopt the “Living Presence” moniker for the entire Mercury classical catalog.

The secret to making the Mercury classical records was simple in concept yet quite challenging to implement: A single microphone was painstakingly tested for positioning in the auditorium above and in front of the orchestra at the precise location where the sound would “bloom” most naturally. (Later, when stereophonic disks were introduced, three microphones would be used during recording and then mixed down to two channels.)

Cozart, who married Robert Fine in 1958, learned the craft (and art) of record production from the ground up. In the end, she and her team would release several hundred Mercury classical recordings before the label was acquired by Dutch-based Philips.

It is difficult to cite another instance in which a classical record producer such as Ms. Fine has had such a positive impact on the reputations of the conductors and performers being recorded. Indeed, the enduring popularity of conductors like Antal Dorati, Paul Paray, and Frederick Fennell and his Eastman Wind Ensemble would not be nearly as potent without the documentation of their art as taken down by Fine and her production team.

As the years have ticked by – with new technical innovations introduced and thousands of new classical records produced – the Mercury recordings have retained their reputation as examples of exceptional clarity and realism in sound. For many, these recordings remain the audiophile standard against which all other sound production quality is judged.

But the story doesn’t end there. The pioneering efforts of Ms. Fine would have an interesting “second act” more than three decades later. It was to her that Philips turned in the early 1990s to undertake the endeavor of remastering and transferring nearly the entire Mercury classical catalog to CD. And this was no mere “symbolic” or cameo effort on Fine’s part, either. The original Mercury mixing equipment would be repaired and brought back into production for the project. Ms. Fine performed the digital editing herself – nearly 50 years after she had done it (in analog) the first time around!

And again, the critics swooned.

What is the legacy of Wilma Cozart Fine? It’s not just that she was a pioneer in classical music’s Hi-Fi wave – or that she was the first woman to break into a male-dominated field. It’s that she and her team brought the world some of the best classical recordings ever made …and set a standard for excellence that has yet to be surpassed nearly six decades on.

U.S. Workforce Trends: Revenge of the Gray-Hairs

Phillip Nones Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A new study by the Pew Research Center’s Social & Demographic Trends unit reveals that when it comes to working, U.S. senior citizens aren’t ready to leave the stage. Instead, they’re staying on for encore after encore.

Incredibly, the Pew study forecasts that nearly 95% of the growth of the American labor force over the next eight years will be among workers age 55+.

What’s behind this interesting demographic development – one that has actually been taking shape for some time now? I think it’s three things:

Americans are living longer and staying healthier longer
Most seniors wish to stay active and productive as long as possible
The economic climate

This last factor has been particularly acute with the current recession that has caused the loss of retirement investment balances and real estate values. This is underscored in the Pew survey, where nearly two thirds of workers in their 50s reported that they might need to push back their expected retirement date because of the current economic conditions.

But the Pew study also makes clear that once the recession lifts, it’s highly unlikely that the aging of the workforce will reverse. That’s because many seniors find that working satisfies fundamental social needs like “being with other people” (56%), “feeling useful” (68%), and “giving me something to do” (57%).

By contrast, the other workers surveyed by Pew (ages 16 to 64) see themselves working “to support myself and my family” (88%), “live independently” (78%), and “to qualify for a pension or Social Security” (65%).

All of which proves that as people mature and move through the cycle of life, many of them make a shift in their perspective: “Work to Live” becomes “Live to Work.” For someone just entering the workforce, that might be laughably hard to believe … but the Pew survey results bear it out.

And another takeaway message to younger workers: Don’t expect your older colleagues to exit the scene anytime soon … the competition’s still hot ‘n heavy.

It’s official: Clickthrough advertising effectiveness on mobile devices is somewhere south of atrocious.

Phillip Nones Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

As usage of the Internet on mobile devices like the Apple iPhone has become more prevalent, many businesses have been wondering how important it is for them to cater to these users through the creation of web sites that are optimized for mobile display.

Although creating a mobile version of a web site doesn’t have to be a major undertaking, it is “yet another task” to add to the marketer’s never-ending to-do list. So, just how important is it?

Chitika, Inc., a Massachusetts-based online advertising network, has analyzed the behaviors of “mobilists” and found some interesting results when it comes to their viewing of advertising and taking action. In tracking more than 92 million ad impressions served up by browsers, it turns out that mobile internet users clicked through at a far lower rate than those viewing ads on desktop machines.

How much lower? The overall clickthrough rate for mobilists was 0.48%, compared to a clickthrough rate of 0.84% for non-mobile users. That’s a serious difference, and gets about as far in the basement as you can go.

But why are the numbers so abysmal? More than likely, several factors are at work. First, consider the ways people use their mobile devices. It’s usually because they want to know something immediately … and it’s at times like those that folks are less inclined to get sidetracked by clicking on advertising links. By contrast, the “immediacy” factor with non-mobile devices often isn’t as acute.

Also, consider the load time on mobile devices – rather much slower. For that reason, mobile web content tends to be less informationally rich — or compelling in its appearance — thus decreasing its “stopping” power.

What this means for advertisers is that the key for succeeding in the mobile space is catching consumers at just the right time, not happening to catch them at any time. Easy enough in theory … but would anyone care to volunteer for putting this into practice? Best of luck to you.

From the perspective of the media purveyors, the Chitika findings certainly won’t make their task of attracting additional advertising revenues in the mobile sector any easier. Perhaps that’s why The Wall Street Journal announced last week that, beginning in November, it will be charging mobile users a weekly fee to access its content on mobile devices – and those fees will be charged to WSJ subscribers and non-subscribers both.

It’s further proof that relying on display advertising revenue simply isn’t cutting it as a practical business model in the mobile environment.

Dealing with all those blankety-blank ads.

Phillip Nones Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In a world awash with advertising messages screaming at consumers from seemingly every nook and cranny, some companies go to great lengths to stand out from the crowd.

The most recent "extreme" example of this comes from Hyundai’s financial services subsidiary business, which purchased $2.2 million worth of advertising space recently in a new subway station in South Korea — essentially all of the available real estate — then populated the large white panels with … practically nothing.

As transit passengers move through the new station, they encounter giant advertising spaces on the walls that are covered by 95% white space, with only one small photo image plus the company logo to hint at what is being promoted.

No doubt, the goal of this “way-less is more” approach is to draw attention to the advertising precisely because of its minimalist message.

After all, it’s different. Unexpected. Even irreverent.

But is it working? Viewing photos of the subway station interior reveals that the largely blank advertising wall signs do attract attention to themselves in a kind of perverse way. They convey a sense of something unfinished, unbalanced, and perhaps a bit unsettling.

I’m reminded of 20th Century American composer John Cage’s famous work titled “4 minutes 33 seconds” which is — you guessed it — four and a half minutes of complete silence. Perhaps not surprisingly, this work got more media attention for Cage than any of his previous compositions ever had — even as one critic quipped that while the quality of the piece itself was simply outstanding, the premiere performance itself could have used a bit more vivaciousness on the part of the players.

What all this shows is how people try to “cut through the clutter” today is the same as has been done for years: Run as far as possible in the opposite direction while lassoing some valuable publicity along the way.

Based on those criteria, it looks like Hyundai has scored pretty well on this one.

Companies are Concerned about the Risks of Social Media

Phillip Nones Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

As blogs, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and other social media tools have moved into the mainstream in a big way, managers at many companies are responding with interest … as well as concern. On the “interest” side, social networking is seen as having great potential for enhancing relationships with customers and promoting brand affinity. But there’s also “concern” that social media has the potential to damage a company’s reputation through the dissemination of information that is unflattering, taken out of context, or simply wrong.

Now, thanks to a July 2009 national survey of nearly 500 management, marketing and HR executives conducted by Minneapolis-based firms Russell Herder and Ethos Business Law, we have a more quantitative idea of the collective corporate thinking about pluses and minuses of social media.

Four out of five respondents in the Russell Herder/Ethos field research believe that social media can help build a company’s brand. In addition, nearly 70% see social media as a viable employee recruitment tool, while two out of three recognize its potential as a customer service tool.

But the survey also found that over 80% of respondents believe that social media poses a corporate security risk. Similarly, half of the respondents consider social media to be detrimental to employee productivity.

These findings show that senior company managers are somewhat ambivalent about social media. They see its positive potential … but at what cost? On the other hand, is shutting the door on social media a wise response (or even a viable one)?

One solution to this dilemma is to be found in dusting off an old standby – the employee handbook. In many companies, policies have evolved over the years to cover pretty much every kind of issue – from what constitutes approved and non-approved workplace activities, attendance policies, and conducting personal business during office hours to policies regarding alcohol consumption, gender/age/racial discrimination, and sexual harassment.

Why not incorporate new guidelines outlining the company’s philosophy toward social media and what constitutes appropriate company-related social media activities on the part of employees?

While it may also be a very good idea to conduct meetings or training sessions on social media as well, this a good first step that will give employees a sense of the “boundaries” they should observe when commenting on company-related issues in the social media realm.

The alternative is a “Wild West” atmosphere in which a problem is destined to arise sooner rather than later. And when that occurs, if no formal social media policies are in place, the company will have no cause for defending itself in the court of public opinion – as well as little recourse for disciplining in addition to counseling the employees involved.

Surprising Findings about Smartphone Apps

Phillip Nones Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

iPhoneWith the explosive adoption rate of Apple’s iPhone smartphone since its release a little over a year ago – more than 25 million phones to date – it couldn’t be long before researchers would start examining user behavior and study the most popular applications that are being used.

Indeed, there are already hundreds of “for free” and “for fee” applications that are available for use on smartphones.

So what are most popular iPhone apps? You’re to be forgiven if you think of music or games, because that’s certainly where most of the press hype has been. But in fact, the most popular iPhone apps are all about … the weather.

That is right. In a recent report issued by online market research and analytics firm Compete, staid and unexciting weather apps were cited by ~40% of respondents as one of the three top iPhone apps they used.

The next most popular application cited? Facebook (by ~25%). By contrast, game applications were cited as a top three-category by only ~20% of respondents, and music apps even lower still.

So much for iPhone users demonstrating cutting-edge online behavior!

In a related analysis, online analytics firm Pinch Media found that most iPhone apps aren’t setting the world on fire in terms of their popularity. The Pinch analysis found that iPhone users are quite fickle: Only ~20% ever return to a free app after downloading it. And a month later? The return rate drops to a paltry 5%. (The percentages are even lower for paid apps.)

These stats have implications for third-party advertisers on smartphone app programs. For many, it may make more sense to advertise on The Weather Channel or other less flashy but more frequently used apps than going with high-sizzle gaming applications that might be used only a handful of times before they’re replaced by the “next new thing.”