Camcorder Selection Was More Than Just Camcorder Selection

EMG has, for years, created broadcast-quality films and videos for client institutions, and these are typically produced by our experienced (and award-winning) film crew.  But to maximize emerging Web 2.0 applications, we plan to do a lot more quick turnaround, low-cost videos than we’re doing now.  And if we’re going to do it, we want to do it right.

I knew I was going to enjoy hunting for a camcorder since I generally love researching tech stuff online. Even when I’m not in the market for anything I spend a lot of time browsing sites like techdealdigger.com and bensbargains.net just waiting to see an intriguing deal. It’s kind of weird since I so rarely pull the trigger on anything.

When starting to look for a camcorder the one thing I realized right away is that you really have to consider your entire setup when purchasing one. Everything from the computer you’ll be editing the footage on to the microphone (if any) you’ll be using for sound. You need to have a roadmap in place before pulling the trigger.

I started by taking the natural step of reading some tech guides right off the bat. This one from PCWorld I found to be the most straightforward and comprehendible, while still having enough of the necessary details. Another helpful resource, as always, was CNET with both their Camcorder Buying Guide and Quick Guide to HD Camcorders.

The first decision you should address is how you want to record your media.

• MiniDV tapes? Recording on actual tape nowadays might seem silly when you can record directly to a hard disk or flash card, but according to a lot of folks, it still provides the very best in standard and high definition quality.
• DVD? I have no interest in recording to anything on a disc, and this option is especially unattractive because the quality isn’t quite as good. In addition to the fact that the smaller discs in digital cameras won’t load in a slot-loading disc drive found on many newer computers and laptops.
• Hard disk or flash card? Now we’re getting somewhere. The two small drawbacks to a hard disk camera are that it’s slightly heavier and it has moving parts, which run the risk of going south. So that leaves recording to a flash card; and there seem to be only a few small drawbacks. The biggest of the drawbacks is the “perceived” challenge of editing in the newer AVCHD format. Other than that you are good to go.

I spent an unbelievable amount of time investigating online forums and camcorder reviews looking into people’s experiences editing AVCHD content, specifically in iMovie on a Mac. I was concerned about it working at first, but I found more success stories than horror stories so I’m confident this is a good choice, at least for EMG. If we are editing video files on a computer with enough horsepower to process/edit the video (which we do), we should have limited issues. It’s also important to keep in mind we are downgrading the video for the Web… we aren’t actually presenting anything in full 1080p quality.

EMG ended up choosing the new Canon Vixia HF200, the updated version of the popular Canon HF100. The HF200 records directly onto flash memory cards and has no internal flash memory (the Canon HF20 does).

The camcorder JUST arrived so we’re just beginning to play with it and learn the ropes. You will probably see some videos soon and I will do a follow-up post in a month or so once we get some videos under our belt.

Top Secrets to Turn Social Networks Into Amazing Marketing Tools

Marketers everywhere have grappled with how to actually make social networks worth the time and trouble.  Until now, it’s been unclear how to map out a step-by-step action plan that will turn social networking into a bona fide marketing tool.  But we’ve developed a 5-step action plan to do exactly that, and this post outlines the first essential step in that process.

In keeping with our “truth-in-blogging” principal, I have room in this post to outline the first step only briefly.  To learn the full 5-step action plan, I’m going to make a pitch that you join us for a 90-minute interactive KnoweldgeBuilder online seminar.  There is a fee for the seminar…don’t want you to be surprised.

So here we go:  The first step in turning social networks into amazing marketing tools is to inventory and organize your institution’s overall social networking presence.

Let’s make an important distinction right away.  We’re not talking about organizing all of the social network pages that reference your institution.  That would likely involve many hundreds if not thousands of pages.  You should not include independent groups that have, for whatever reason, created their own groups that are not officially connected to your institution.  Nor should you include personal pages of alumni or friends who list your institution as their alma mater or in passing.

We’re talking about inventorying and organizing the channels and pages that are sponsored and maintained by your organization.  The list should include all unit-sponsored pages:  Admissions, marketing, alumni, new student, athletics, development, college, department, club, and support unit pages, for example.

What’s the Benefit?
Organizing all of your institution’s pages on Facebook is a win-win.  It will become a huge benefit to your audiences by allowing them to find the different channels through which they might tie into groups of interest and access others connected to your institution.  The nature of social networking is to offer linkages with old friends, new acquaintances, and groups that share the same interests and pursuits.  Your job is to facilitate those useful tools for audiences.  At the same time, you’ll be laying the groundwork to advance your brand among thousands and thousands of interested audience members.

What Do I Do?
So first you’ll want to inventory your organization’s presence on the major networks, and place each group, fan page, and channel on a “Social Network Brand Map.”

It’s easy.  On Facebook, for example, search for all listings that reference your institutional name, then filter for just the group and fan pages.  List any group and fan pages that are sponsored by the institution itself, including all departments, units, and officially sanctioned athletics and alumni fan pages.

Be prepared.  Even though you’re honing in on just your institutional pages, there will likely be dozens of them on your list.  Now you’ll want to “map” these sponsored pages in a matrix chart, like this (partial list of Indiana State University’s pages):

Institutional Pages	School/ College	Department../ Program	Student/ Alumni	Athletics	Other
Indiana State U.
Experience ISU
	School of Business
		Theatre Dept
		MBA Program
		Tech Mgmt. Prog.
		Honors Program
			ISU Alumni
			Student Govt.
			Class of 2012
				Football Alumni
				Sycamore Club
					Sigma Kappa

Once you have completed the brand map of social network pages – for most organizations, this only takes an hour or two – you’ll have the strategic foundation and you’re ready to begin organizing and populating them for maximum impact.

OK, here’s the sales pitch I told you about:  We’ll be discussing this foundational step in full detail and the four remaining social networking secrets in our upcoming KnowledgeBuilder 90-minute interactive webinar on May 14.

The action steps we’ll cover that will make your social network strategy start to sing include:
1. Micro-targeting audience segments
2. Using all quadrants of the Facebook page
3. Motivators that generate participation
4. How to manage the milieu

Our interactive online seminar (you’ll be involved and can ask questions so that you can apply action steps directly to your organization) will give participants step-by-step plans that they can implement right away.  You’ll find this social networking training session indispensable!  Sign up today.

Say It Ain’t So: Marketers Blunder into Negative Networking

We posed an important question in Monday’s post Responding to Lies on Facebook and last week’s poll question: Should you directly answer derogatory or misleading statements on social networks?

We got a surprising response. Doggone it, but 78% of respondents said that yes indeed, they would respond directly to negative social networking comments! Wow, say it ain’t so, Joe!

More than one in five of those voting said they would respond directly to any and all negative commentary on social networks, while half of the respondents would answer, but only if the comments were false or misleading. Another 6% would respond only if the comments were derogatory or demeaning.

Only 22% said categorically that they would not directly answer negative statements on social networking sites. Here’s the breakdown:

In reality, there are a couple levels of damaging social network content that we think need to be treated differently:

1. Occasional false, misleading, or derogatory comments either on your networking channels or on channels that are generally supportive or at least benign
2. Social network channels that are created specifically to criticize or deride the institution or someone connected to it

We recommend extreme care in directly answering occasional negative comments on an otherwise supportive site. Unless approached carefully, your responses can come across as over-reactions or unduly defensive. We’ve even seen this lead to escalating back-and-forth duels between those involved. For those watching from the sidelines, the exchanges leave a bad taste. If corrections or your “talking points” appear often, it feels like Big Brother is watching everyone’s social network behavior and it discourages participation. So responses to negative comments should be given only when absolutely necessary, they should be measured, and should gently or obliquely correct misinformation without attacking or offending audiences.

On the other hand, we suggest never directly responding through network channels that are created specifically to criticize. It’s a lose-lose in all cases. Check out Bob’s blog for ideas on how to better respond to critical and harsh comments on social networking sites.

Also, be sure to respond to this week’s poll in the right-hand column – it’s on your biggest challenges in brand development. We’ll recap how you and your colleagues answer that question next week.

Something Branded This Way Comes

About a two or three years after I started working for EMG, several of the senior staff come back and tell a story of how they were giving an open-campus presentation about the school’s branding initiative. They mention several students walked into the busy presentation with “I am already branded” written on their foreheads and had several brand logos taped on themselves.

Then, I recently had an email conversation with someone in corporate America who seemed taken aback by the fact that higher education marketers are being called brand managers and actually manage brands.

Also, many university presidents, including the president at my alma mater, are under scrutiny for running their organization like a business.

Then I recently came across this video.

Watching this video brought back the memories of the blurbs above and also the still prevalent notion that higher education should not be branded or should not be run like a business.

To many people’s surprise and whether they like it or not, universities and colleges are businesses. It is hard, even for me, to think of them like this too, but it helps for this discussion. Some are private non-profits, some are public non-profits, and some are for-profits. They have consumers, marketing departments, governing boards, and executives. Like every business, institutions of higher ed have revenue, expenses, salaries to pay, and a bottom line to watch.

Many people also forget that before a potential branding initiative, their university or college was already marketing themselves. They forget that they picked up viewbook or saw a TV commercial or even checked out the website of the university. They also forget that this stuff takes money.

And as many in the industry are figuring out, higher education branding can oftentimes make marketing more effective and cost efficient as well as produce a greater return-on-investment.

In looking for a way to finish this post off and out of great coincidence, I turn the TV channel to find one of my favorite South Park episodes “Something Wall-Mart This Way Comes” (not a typo for Wall-Mart in this case). The boys of South Park find that the new Wall-Mart is making the people in their town crazy and they go on a mission to destroy it. In their search they find that they have to destroy the heart of the Wall-Mart which turns out to be a mirror symbolizing that Wall-Mart is the desire of you the consumer. Watch the clip here.

If you are to start a branding initiative, you often have to educate your stakeholders about the benefits of having a brand so they have the desire to brand your institution. If you are struggling to get a branding initiative started on your campus, you may need to start at square one and do some internal education marketing and consensus building on what it means to have a brand and what it means to each of the stakeholders.

The benefits?  To the president it may be the overall bottom-line and return on investment, to faculty it can be consensus building, to students it could be the prestige that comes from graduating from a well-known institution. And the tricky part:  these benefits for stakeholders can change from campus to campus.

The danger in not doing some education on the branding process before the process is started is that the whole process may implode like the Wall-Mart of South Park.

Responding to Lies on Facebook

Should marketers respond to derogatory, damaging, or misleading information on Facebook and other social networking sites? If you haven’t dealt with this issue yet, you probably will have to soon.

Before you read this post, answer This Week’s Poll question on the right. Then stay tuned for next week’s recap of how colleagues responded.

Here’s the scenario:

You are the communications director at a public university located in a large metropolitan area. Your institution is being plagued by a crime wave – some of it violent – in the towns surrounding campus (not on campus). Several students have been assaulted, robbed, and raped on their way to or from campus. The university has launched number of safety and public information responses to deal with the problem. Meanwhile, a group of student activists launches a Facebook page lambasting your president and institution for not stopping the crime. Alumni and others join in. Criticisms include false, misleading, and wildly exaggerated gossip. Vitriolic comments are laced with blame and innuendo, often based on misinformation. Leadership is increasingly frustrated by the unanswered criticism, and worries that the media, students, prospects, and politicians might believe some of the outrageous claims on the Facebook site.

Interesting and serious problem (real, too!) with lots at risk. What’s your counsel?

Organizations in the public eye face increasing instances of disparaging social networking sites. These sites hone in on a variety of topics using the Internet stage to anonymously broadcast anger and criticism: alumni disgruntled with coaching choices; students dissatisfied with campus rules; faculty upset with leaders’ decisions. The problem includes negative comment threads on individual pages as well as social network sites that are created specifically to criticize or embarrass the institution.

Should you “correct” misinformation by posting rebuttals directly on the offending Facebook page? Should the CEO submit the “facts” with an appeal for restraint? Should you blast ‘em back with comments from your own anonymous third party?

What if the criticisms are true as well as embarrassing? Do you still defend the institutional point of view? Explain how you’re addressing the situation? Or ignore them and hope they go away?

In all cases, and despite the inclination to “correct” misinformation and defend organizational decisions, participating in antagonistic social network threads is a lose-lose decision:

1. You can’t win a debate in which you have no control over the medium or the ground rules. While you are bound to act ethically and honestly, nothing suggests your critics will, too.
2. You set a bad precedent by demonstrating that you’ll react to social networking slams. Defensive or conciliatory posts tend to motivate detractors. Do you really want to do that on a regular basis?
3. You lend credibility to negative and misleading comments by responding on their turf. If you want to keep from getting splattered with mud, don’t step into the gutter.

So how should communicators respond to slamming sites?

Ignoring social network criticism is like ducking your head in the sand. Marketers need to monitor what’s being said about the institution on social networks – through Google Alerts and periodic searches on popular sites, including Twitter. This gives early warning about potential issues and concerns simmering beneath the surface.

Valid criticisms need to be treated seriously – it could require internal discussion and decisive action regarding policies, programs, and services. From a communications standpoint, valid issues are best addressed in forums of your own choosing rather than on offending sites themselves. Your own website and social network channels are the obvious places to start, supported by traditional platforms when helpful. Focus on the positive – what your institution is doing to solve issues – without responding to the social network commentary.

For example, in the scenario above, the university launched an aggressive campaign (website, on-campus signage, PR, social media, and hand-circulated one-sheeters) to promote the initiatives under way to ensure student and public safety (which were considerable).

But they did not respond to or reference the negative Facebook site. Unless you want to advance misinformation and spur more of the same, it’s unwise to refer to or validate offending sites and critical commentary threads.

The Rise of Twitter

All of a sudden, Twitter has exploded. This week it was released that the number of Twitter users jumped 131% in March alone according to a Network World article. In the same article, it mentions Twitter jumped from 5 million users to 9.3 millions last month and that Twitter traffic also rose 700% from February 2008 to February 2009.

In the same article it also mentions a surprise… it is not the younger age groups using Twitter. It mentions “people aged 45 to 54 are 36% more likely than other age groups to use Twitter, making them the highest-rated age group, followed by those aged 25 to 34, who are 30% more likely to Tweet out updates about their life and work.” People often associate the use of social networking with the younger crowd, but that is no longer true.

Big Twitter news also happened around midnight last night. I got a CNN Breaking News email in my Inbox saying “Ashton Kutcher is first to reach 1 million followers in Twitter”. Yes, the same person married to Demi Moore and the same one who played Kelso on That 70’s Show and the same one who Punk’d many celebs.

According to an E! Online article CNN Breaking News also crossed over the million follower mark about 29 minutes later. Britney Spears was also in the race to be the first with 1 million followers and may still pass the mark very soon, if not today.

Other big Twitter news, Oprah is going to start tweeting too. In fact, her first tweet went out around 11am PT this morning.

So what does this mean for us in higher education. Well, EMG was in close coordination with Ashton, Oprah, and Britney so we could release the results of last weeks Brand Manager’s Notebook weekly poll with this big Twitter news today (ok, ok… I could barely type that with a straight face). Last weeks question was Which social media website do you find most useful for higher education marketing, communications, and recruiting?

It seems that all higher ed marketers had already known the demographic news from second paragraph above and stayed away from Twitter for reaching the target audience for college recruiting (usually around 16-18 years old). There was a tie, 40% of the poll takers use YouTube and 40% use Facebook for higher education marketing, communications, and recruiting. While 20% use LinkedIn for the same function. To some surprise, no one mentioned Twitter or MySpace or any other social media website for higher ed marketing, communications, or recruiting.

Be sure to answer the weekly poll for this week – on the right side of this page. Also, watch out Ashton, Britney, Oprah, and CNN Breaking News – @emgonline will be the first to a billion followers!!!

The New and the Innovative

The last couple of months in random newspapers (yeah, I sometimes still read the hardcopy version of the newspaper) and in various people’s Tweets, and in online news, I have been seeing an awful lot of some new and innovative products. Disclaimer – EMG does not endorse these products, I just wanted to share some products that are floating around to make a point (below). Also,  some examples are a bit odd and strange, but were picked to get a good laugh. By now I am sure many of you have seen many of these products floating around.

The first being the iPhone app called iFart. It is so popular, it is listed on the Top 20 Paid Apps in iTunes. The iFart app brings up a button on the iPhone that when pushed sounds like someone has “cut the cheese”. It has also ended up on the Today Show (see below).

Of the three products mentioned, this one is the newer than the other two and hasn’t gotten as much “play”. This one is a device called BakerTweet and it sends a Tweet to a specific Twitter page so customers will know when a fresh batch of cookies, cakes, buns, scones, etc. have been pulled from the oven. Check out Albionsoven, the first to install this device. This bakery has over 543 followers and BakerTweet has been mentioned on Twitter many times in the last couple of days.

Another Twitter tool is the Botanicalls. Place a device in your favorite plants and it sends a Tweet to a specified Twitter page that it needs water. You can check up on their demo plant pothos – last time I checked it was in urgent need of water. This plant’s Twitter page also had over 3,222 followers.

Apparently these products are very popular and becoming more popular. These products are becoming so popular first because these products are new and innovative, but secondly, because they have created a buzz which has been spread first by word-of-mouth. People like to talk about the strange and unusual new products. They have come out of nowhere and are becoming well-known in a matter of months. Obviously, the word-of-mouth buzz has also been facilitated through the use of social networking.

While some of the products may be a bit inappropriate, these examples still makes me wonder, what products, research, or service on your university campuses can be marketed through word-of-mouth advertising that can create this much buzz? What is new and innovative thing on your campus that can be released with this much excitement? Especially for free!

Of Taglines and Brands

A great tagline (1962) that helped Avis triple market share in 4 years.

Last week I was counseling a university brand manager who confided her concerns that the internal stakeholders of her organization – faculty, staff members, students, alumni – were beginning to believe that their tagline was, in fact, their brand.

She was right to be concerned.

Taglines aren’t really required for great campaigns. Lots of organizations that have effective marketing programs don’t use them. But a strong tagline can do wonders for a brand campaign by offering an enticing and memorable preview of what differentiates your brand.

Maybe even more importantly, they provide a rallying cry that internal stakeholders use to help articulate a shared vision: A clear focal point, a source of pride, an intriguing introduction to the value your organization provides for its audiences.

I’m thinking of Washington State University’s tagline, which was developed in 2000 and is still being used nine years later: “World Class. Face to Face.” For this statewide organization, it has been an internal statement of pride about the unique value that WSU provides students, and a declaration of what truly differentiates the organization in the marketplace.

Another really successful tagline is “Defy Convention,” used by Clarkson University for more than five years. It grabs attention, it’s intriguing, and it hints at the unique attributes and attitude of this, the smallest nationally ranked research university in the nation.

Then there is “what’s your dream?” that has inspired thousands of Corpus Christi students (as well as legislators and donors!) for more than nine years and while enduring through the changes of successive presidents at Del Mar College.

My personal favorite is still The University of Maine, Presque Isle, “North of Ordinary” which has served this tiny campus in the North Maine Woods well for about ten years. It certainly gets noticed – an important function for a tagline – but at the same time it defines the organization’s fierce pride in excellence in what they do, based on one of the defining characteristic of their brand – it’s geography.

Because good taglines are compelling, it’s easy for internal stakeholders to begin thinking that the tagline IS the brand. But in each one of the outstanding examples above, the tagline only hints at the brand, and doesn’t encompass the fullness of what differentiates each organization, and the unique value that each provides for its audiences.

So it’s important to constantly reinforce the brand platform – which states not only the brand promise, but the primary attributes that allow your organization to deliver on your promise better than anyone else – among internal constituencies. It’s easy enough to do: posters outlining “Our Core Values” throughout campus; periodic articles on the intranet and the faculty/staff newsletter that simply state your brand platform; internal awards that honor those who exemplify the brand attributes.

Our clients have also come up with some unusual and incredibly fun, interactive ways to make the brand platform come to life for faculty, staff, students, and alumni, and we’ll recount some of those in upcoming posts.

Packaging Makes Perfect

A couple weeks ago Bob posted on the topic of brand evolution, I followed up with a post on Dora the Explorer’s transformation mishaps. Here is yet another recent example of a brand evolution gone wrong.

I went to the grocery store today and I got to the orange juice aisle. I saw two different versions of Tropicana’s orange juice carton. I then remembered hearing all of the news the last couple days about the new Tropicana carton design that was replaced with the older design. Why? According to an AdAge article, Tropicana and PepsiCo released data earlier this week illustrating sales for the orange juice fell 20% during the almost 7 weeks the new packing was on store shelves.

The old and returning package design is on the left. The new and now scraped Tropicana design is on the right.

The 20% drop in sales gave proof to Tropicana, PepsiCo and Omnicom’s Arnell Group (packaging designer) of the poor performing packaging and another round of bad news. Around the first of the year, Tropicana began to release its newly evolved packaging design for its orange juice cartons. It removed the traditional orange with the straw sticking out of it for a new more modern look. It also got a new sculpted orange-like cap. The first round of punches and bad news came on February 23 of this year when the New York Times wrote an article about Tropicana receiving a lot of consumer complaints. The article says that consumers “described the new packaging as ‘ugly’ or ‘stupid,’ and resembling ‘a generic bargain brand’ or a ‘store brand.’” And “‘Do any of these package-design people actually shop for orange juice?’ the writer of one e-mail message asked rhetorically. ‘Because I do, and the new cartons stink.’”

This article also announced that Tropicana would be reverting back to its old design, however keeping the new orange-like cap. With the news of the 20% drop in sales, it was probably a wise move on Tropicana’s part to go back to the old carton design.

Below is the CEO of the Arnell Group, Peter Arnell, defending the new packaging in a February news conference.

This brand evolution blunder may have been preventable. I am sure Tropicana and the Arnell Group focus group tested the new package design with its target audience. But I wonder if they misread the results of the testing or did it get a large bias in the focus groups to skew the data. Also, as suggested in the New York Times article mentioned above, the new Tropicana design may be the latest casualty of the technology and consumer’s ability to blog, tweet, chat, or post their dislikes and opinions almost instantaneously for everyone, including marketers, to see. The use of technology is allowing the world of consumers to real-time focus group test almost everything nowadays.

Networking News: Slow the Stampede!

Here’s a take on social networking I’ll bet you haven’t heard very often in recent months:

“Whoa, New-Media Cowboys, hold up there!”

By reading the blogs and talking to marketers, you get the clear sense of a headlong stampede into social networking. It’s amazing. At conferences (where I’m speaking on the importance of new media) I ask audience members to raise their hands if they’re involved in some of the top social networks, Twitter, YouTube etc. The majority of hands – more and more every time – shoot up right away.

Then I ask folks to tick off their results, and it’s a different story. Rarely a measurable bottom line among them. Most managers are at a loss to explain exactly what objectives, if any, each initiative is going to accomplish. Social networking has become a tale full of sound and fury, signifying precious little in the way of results.

The downside of all this circular running is that a number of really important activities – that can actually deliver results – get shunted aside for the new flavor of online babble.

Don’t get me wrong – social networks can be amazing marketing tools. But it’s better to understand how each tool on your belt is best used before whacking away at new-media nails with a trusty Allen wrench.

The first step ought to be to identify specific, measurable objectives for each activity. “Creating an online community,” doesn’t cut it because it’s altogether too vague and generic. On the other hand, “Getting prospects to link from your YouTube page to the prospect microsite landing page,” works. It’s targeted, measurable, and an effective strategy to begin moving a target segment from prospect to suspect to customer. Using social networking to pull audiences into engagement with the website is a worthy goal.

A helpful strategy in identifying bottom-line objectives is to listen to the kinds of results others are getting. This will be a huge benefit from the May 14 Online Knowledgebuilder. This will be a “real-world, how-to” seminar laser-focused on identifying – and achieving – bottom-line results from social networking. The presenter is a colleague, a fascinating speaker, and one of the real pros of new media marketing, Ineke Caycedo. There is also an opportunity for you to win a free connection to an Online KnowledgeBuilder, see the details of the drawing.

I know that two of the questions she’ll open up for discussion are: “How can we manage/leverage social networking done by multiple units?” and “What bottom-line results should we expect from social networking?” I can’t wait.