Will you accept this content ecosystem?

The ever-unfolding storyline of THe Bachelor Universe 

The Bachelor it isn't just a TV guilty pleasure, it is a thriving content ecosystem that many brands and marketers would admire. Its content universe has a PERPETUALLY UNFOLDING STORYLINE driven by ACTION, ASSETS and MICRO-STORY STREAMS that are both Produced/Owned and Earned.

POST-SHOW ACTION: ADDITIONAL PROGRAMMING THAT FACILITATES PROCESSING OF SHOW EVENTS.

Close to the end of a season there are two major specials. The Wo/Men Tell All gives the cast (sans the final two contestants) a chance to come back and discuss season highlights – conflicts, scandals, bloopers. It also gives any member who was "blindsided" (i.e. let go at when they thought that the relationship was progressing and that they would therefore be asked to continue on the "journey") a chance to confront the Bachelor/ette and get some needed closure (or more media mileage).

After The Final Rose allows America to come back to the final two contestants and the Bachelore/ette and discuss how the final decision was made. It is also a chance for host Chris Harrison to press the happy couple for wedding details, or in some cases, repeatedly remind them that both their families and a priest are on set in case they want to get married on the spot. Most of the time, the next Bachelor/ette is also announced, teasing Bachelor Nation before the next season begins.

In both specials there is a live studio audience that is shown reacting to the interviews. In some cases the story even continues on After The Final Rose, such as when Bachelor Jason revealed that he had broken up with the winner Melissa because he still had feelings for runner-up Molly. (He and Molly got married on a wedding special and are still together.)

Other reality shows sometimes have an all-cast reunion after the finale, but none of them milk the drama the way The Bachelor does, with additional programming dedicated to processing highlights and conflict. The specials are considered a part of the narrative and also feed the media and coverage cycles.

MINGLING ASSETS: CROSS-POLLINATION OF CAST MEMBERS ACROSS SEASONS.

When the franchise was launched, Bachelors seemed to be selected based on a level of professional success – they owned companies, or were doctors, actors, athletes. The Bachelorette was launched as a series for unsuccessful The Bachelor contestants to get a “second chance at love”. This trend has continued with more recent seasons’ unsuccessful contenders becoming the lead Bachelor/ettes. (e.g. Sean rejects Des who becomes the Bachelorette and rejects Juan Pablo who becomes the Bachelor and rejects Andi who becomes the Bachelorette and rejects Nick (hold that thought) and rejects Chris who becomes the Bachelor and rejects Kaitlyn who rejects Nick (yes, hold that thought) and rejects Ben who becomes the Bachelor who rejects Jojo, and then Nick becomes the Bachelor, who we already know will not end up with Rachel who has been announced as the next Bachelorette)

Bachelor in Paradise premiered in 2014, a summer getaway for previous contestants to get an nth chance at love. Bachelor Nation gets yet another installment of the show and drama continues as villains and fan favorites of various seasons mix and mingle as they try to stay in paradise by finding partners every week. The franchise storyline is sustained, and in Nick's case, even weaves back in to the lead show.

Nick Viall is (the only?) one contestant who has swum in all three Bachelor franchise lanes. As mentioned above he was on both Andi and Kaitlyn’s seasons. In both he was portrayed as a villain, and fans were shocked at how far he made it and then celebrated when, both times, he was rejected at the very end. Yet when he made an appearance on Paradise last year, he embodied a different persona. Sage to the ladies, still a significant part of the drama while remaining frank and honest, he suddenly seemed to be appealing and mature. And despite several fan favorites from the previous Bachelorette’s rejected roster who were rumored to be getting the next lead role, Nick was selected as the Bachelor.

The Chicago One of reality television, it is now part of the Bachelor universe for contestants/assets to move fluidly among shows thus carrying over the captive audience from one program to the next, all throughout the year.

MICRO-STORY STREAMS: CONTESTANTS' PERSONAL SOCIAL MEDIA.

Sure, most long-running reality programs now have staples of all stars (previous contestants). However the Bachelor franchise adds over fifty people to their roster every year (through one season each of Bachelor and Bachelorette contestants), many of whom run social media accounts that make the Bachelor-enabled lifestyle seem more aspirational.

Those who make it past a certain point in the show become micro-celebrities. They mingle with their cliques from the show, and then reveal on Twitter and Instagram who they are becoming friends with from other seasons. Going on the show seems to provide access to a new social club, and proof of bona fide membership is published on contestants’ feeds. They hang out together in between seasons (LA, New York and Nashville seem to be the main hubs), and make guest appearances in each other’s blogs, feeds and videos.

Social activity becomes a new lens for fans and media to view contestants and see whether or not they were portrayed fairly on the show. Fans sometimes discover that season villains (those disliked the most by others "in the house") are actually well-liked and maintain friendships with others from their season. Many have become influencers, endorsing retail and lifestyle products. Several start their own businesses or promote their professional, charitable or artistic endeavors.

This social activity adds fuel to the show’s word-of-mouth. During the season fans and media watch contestants’ interactions on social to get clues about season spoilers. Podcasts and recaps often refer to contestants’ tweets or photos to add dimension to season events.

***

Post-Action, Assets and Social Micro-Story Streams have made the Bachelor content universe a truly interesting media study. I wonder how media studies pros will ever be able to take stock of the always-growing expanse of content, from produced and owned, to social and earned. What the show has done brilliantly is to unleash several ongoing narrative-development engines that keep the storyline perpetually evolving, and all of us, highly committed.

"For posterity" overdrive

I've always been a documenter. Even as a kid using film, I always had a camera with me. I spent so much money getting photos printed and resized and giving them away and even taking orders from friends. I had, at one point, boxes and boxes of photos that my mom begged me to sort through and put into albums. Even then, I tried to be selective. Because of the limitations of the analog film roll you could only take twenty-four or thirty-six shots at a time. Now we can easily take dozens of photos of a meal, hundreds of any birthday party or night out, and thousands on vacation.

My tendency to document went into overdrive with digital cameras and then phone cameras. It sometimes bugs me that I'm now one of the cliche people who take photos of their food and extensively of concerts and museum visits or even plane rides. Which is weird because I've always had this side to me. (Side note: "Seflies" before they were called selfies, with Broadway celebrities and in front of beatiful paintings because there were no other tourists around to ask to take my photo? Been doing that since the aught's. And sort of not embarrased about it?) Granted, none of my old almbus include photos of dishes or drinks or coffee, but now I find myself both going into posterity overview, and questioning the habit at the same time.

I've been thinking about this through a concert lens. I've seen three this past month.

Most recently I've gotten to fulfill a music dream. Before I discovered Janet and Mariah the music of my childhood consisted of Disney musicals, and my parents' tape and then CD collection. We had a classic Broadway selection —  Les Miz, Phantom, Miss Saigon, etc. — lyrics I memorized before I knew they were about identity theft, severe mental illness and prostitution. We had several volumes from a Classic Experience series. There was a lot of jazz, the Marsalises being my favorite. And then we had a revered pair of John Williams CDs. Because we were trained in many of the movie classics, he was a favorite and beloved in our house.

I've seen promotions for the live verison of some of those very albums — John Williams plays his famous music scores with the Boston Pops Orchestra. This has been on the bucket list. When it was advertised that that a symphonic concert was coming to Singapore featuring his music, I was over 100% board. I booked tickets and couldn't wait.

The concert opened with the chilling and masterful two-note Jaws signature. Then they launched into the classic Star Wars theme which I was finally hearing live. It was glorious. They played music from Jurassic Park, Superman, Raiders of the Lost Ark, and more Star Wars. They even did three pieces from Harry Potter. I hadn't particularly noted the score but was thrilled by the live verison (cue Hedwig's Theme). I found my eyes darting across the stage, watching for which instruments were playing, the violins leading one moment, then the brass section, or the wind pipes, and then everybody! The same troupe could go from the scary beach to 1920s Japan and then to a galaxy far, far way, and the in the next number Isla Nublar.

This has been a delightful concert month. The Stars (an all-time favorite) and Bon Iver have also been to Singapore in the last few weeks and I gotten to see them both.

At concerts now, I am always compelled to take my phone out and start shooting. I leave with pages and pages of photos on my phone, most of which I never look at again. The funny thing is, I get really annoyed when people in front of me keep taking photos and videos. The worst are the people with selfie sticks or Go Pro's, who hold their cameras up in the air obstructing your view. And ruining your own photos.

    

I have stores of photos of different concerts. They're all pretty crappy because I'm never in the front row. However when I find one that is different enough or better-composed I can edit them enough to share on Facebook or Instragram. But the whole haul is really tough to sort through becuase they all look the same. I've taken some videos too, most of which I've never re-watched.

A few dynamics and motiavtions that could be going on.
// Susataining an emerging Attention Deficit Disorder? In which real focus on the action is not possible.
// An addiction to capturing a moment and saving it for posterity because it is a unique live moment?
// An over-obsession with capturing a compelling-enough image to share? #blessed

This relates to a previous piece on the post-digital. The term might be limited and too conceptual, but I wonder what the emerging reality will be once we've settled in to all this technology. Will the rate of innovation ever slow down again? One reaction seems to have been the re-emergence of the heightened, live, physical, visceral experience that will never happen again. Which has always been the appeal of live theater and music. However there is this weird dynamic now where we'll go to a live concert rather than stay home and stare at a screen, only to obstruct our own experience and use a screen to live-document it.

This is on my mind because I think we have to be mindful of the behavior created through what is only going to be an increasing attachment to technology. It's always in our hands now, and soon it will be all throughout our homes, cars, washing machines, clothes, offices, cities. I wonder if we'll ever find a way of being that we can hold on to that has nothing to do with technology?

In the meantime here is to managing concert clicks and camera use.

Film to Television

Changing tastes based on social media behavior

This was Oscar week. Leo finally won. Most of the skits referenced the absence of any African-American nominees in major categories by being all about African-Americans. There was a big emphasis on not asking ladies who they were wearing, though as Chris Rock mentioned in his monologue maybe guys would be asked the question too if they weren't all wearing the same thing. There was a Girl Scout cookie feature.

In recent years I've watched the Oscars with more and more detachment. I still see the show every year out of tradition, having done it ever since I was a kid. But the habit has moved from being a huge family practice to one of more detached monitoring.

We were a huge movie family, a passion passed down to us from our father. We were schooled in all the necessary trilogies, many of the classics, a lot of musicals and a healthy dose of Disney. Even when I was too young to see the nominated movies, my older sister followed industry news and I caught the bug. We knew the actors, directors and films nomintaed every year. For a long time I watched the ceremony looking forward mostly to seeing how the year's Disney offering would be represented, usually a major variety number, and one year with extra pride as it featured our very own Lea Salonga. On Oscar mornings (because of the time difference) we would all gather to watch the red carpet interviews and then track the winners. One of dad's best gifts was a movie journal which included a listing of all the historical top category Oscar winners, with spaces for upcoming years. Every year I would diligently fill in the blanks as awards were given out. We even started printing out the New York Times Oscar ballots as a family challenge. (I was terrible at picking winners.)

Over the years however our interest in film has waned and television programs have become a bigger passion point. We all still watch movies, but starting with the (pirated) DVD revolution going to the cinema became less appealing and was suddenly saved for major blockbusters. We started joking with a way to review movies by deciding if they were worth going to the theater for, "pang DVD lang" ("DVD at home will do"), or worse, "pang treadmill". Huge movies still get me excited - Avatar was one of the most captivating theater experiences I've had in recent-ish years. The family waited for me to come home last year from Singapore so we could all watch Star Wars: The Force Awakens together.

But when we Skype on Sunday nights, what always comes up are updates on what TV we've been watching. I have a few programs in common with my sibilngs and parents, and those are always hot topics. Recent debates in our family have included whether you're on Team Mama Pope or on Team Papa Pope, which house you fall under whether Stark, Targaryan, Lannister, or worst of all Greyjoy, etc. When Heroes was new and still good out my sister, brother and I would crowd around the computer together to see the latest episodes. We watched quite a few seasons of Top Chef that way also. There was one weekend where my younger sister and I, who shared a room and TV at the time, watched The OC all night until three or four in the morning, went to bed, and resumed the season as soon as we woke up and all throughout the day. She and I have also done this thing where we "trade" TV pilots to try and get the other person watching a favorite show. I succeeded in hitching her to Mad Men, while I didn't take as well to her offering (Band of Brothers). Reacting to major TV moments and trading recommendations continues to be a running thread on our family Whatsapp.

After I moved away from home I became a 100% cord cutter relying on streaming and digital options completely, and becoming my own content programmer. That habit continues to this day. I follow maybe 20+ shows at a time, with varying degrees of attentiveness. Some shows like Mad Men are watched strictly mobile-free, while other programs are on while I monitor e-mail and Facebook, cook, clean, etc.

Even among wider social circles, in person and on social media, TV watercooler moments seem to have become the buzzier topic than film. I'm looking for stats to validate this. But even by virtue of the number of hours in a given TV season, and the length of time a season runs, compared to the 90-120 movie minutes, there is more to react to on TV. I still watch movies, but I would give up movies forever over TV, any day.

Outside of my own personal behavior, I can't validate for sure that TV has overtaken film. It certainly isn't an apples-to-apples situation. But the preoccupation with television has grown for sure. It is now a strong writers medium, and attracts even movie talent, while catapulting fresh new faces to fame, whereas TV used to feel like the poor man's silver screen. I remember, going back to when I was a kid watching award shows, the Golden Globes seemed like such an awkward ceremony becuase the TV actors were just so clearly on a lower fame and cultural acceptance level compared to the movie stars. But watching the Globes now, I cheer even more for the TV categories than for the film ones.

I plan to look in to this, but it seems plausible that we can use some of the new behaviors created by new social and digital habits that have impacted the preference for television.

• Through the social media feed, audiences have been taught to consume more content, in smaller chunks. Although digital takes "byte-size" to a new extreme, with Vine videos for example now down to six seconds, this theme fits with television versus film. TV is cut into episodes that build the story over time, instead of investing in one single longer-form piece of content.
• Social has also taught us to express and appreciate a depth of personality. Digital celebrities have built their fame on their personas, while today's actors and actresses, even musicians and models, are forced to show theirs through personal content feeds. Films have still been able to create iconic characters, but nowhere near the same way that television characters are not just established but tested against so many different situations. I'm sure there are arguments that TV's episodic nature doesn't necessarily lead to more character depth, but if I think about the evolution of someone like Walter on Fringe, Tyrion on Game of Thornes, even Lady Mary in Downton Abbey, there is potentially more to a character when there are more hours of potential screen time to get to know - and become attached to - them.
• Not just social but the whole digital space is catered to exploring and going deeper in to our passion areas. Whether you're intersted in knitting, citizen science, sous vide recipes, YouTube musicals, or almost literally whatever, you can find communities and spaces online to explore and express those interest areas. TV plays on this by potentially adding complexity with every episode. It's always a case-to-case basis - there are crap shows just as there are crap films. But based on the medium potenial, this is better achieved with TV. 

I still enjoy movies and haven't given up on film, that isn't the point. (As I write this I'm listening to my Movie Themes playlist which features scores from Star Wars, Jurassic Park, Little Women, Mighty Ducks... more of my chidlhood favorites that make anything feel epic.) But it is interesting to note how alive the medium has become and how our tastes and preferences are evolving in a way that I think is more affected by our growing exposure to social and digital media. As these habits evolve, it will be intersting to see any the new dimensions and levels of craft in television, but also whether, as we leave the confines of the programming schedule and even potentially geographic boundaries of IP contracts, what new channels and formats will be created.

social media tonality

Brands ride on trending hashtags to gain views and interactions. Participating in a high-traction topic increases their chances of getting attention from people who wouldn't otherwise have been exposed to their social presence.

This has served brands well in many cases. Oreo's spontaneous response during the Superbowl power outage and, a little closer to home, KitKat Philippines' tweet while Facebook was momentarily down both impressed fans and drove global PR pickups.

 

But not every hashtag is appropriate for brands to participate in. The trades were abuzz when DiGiorno pizza tweeted using #WhyIStayed, tying it to pizza consumption without recognizing that the hashtag was actually being used by people opening up about why they had stayed in abusive relationships.

John Oliver took note of this and shared his very strong feelings that brands shouldn't try to participate in every possible conversation, and that most people don't want them in regular conversations:

DiGiorno's hasthag use was obviously a mistake an oversight that the company has apologized for. There are lessons to be learned about thorough hashtag research as well as troubleshooting to see if they might be hijacked by trolls and with the brand eventually included in a thread of unsavory messages.

That's common sense though. Should, per John O., brands just shut up online?

In the Philippines and I suspect many South East Asian countries consumers have a much higher openness to brands and branded conversations. In one focus group I did with lower-SEC moms they described billboards and Facebook social ads as sources of information on important product news to pay attention to. Our consumers don't hesitate to like brand pages and interact with brand posts. In which case I think it doesn't turn anybody off to see KitKat commenting on Facebook being down. After all, KitKat's consumers are experieincing the same thing and in that context it tells current and potential consumers that the brand knows what they're about, that it has a personality and that it can be witty and have a sense of humor.

Still, it will be worth it to measure if consumers feel like brands are putting their noses where they aren't invited or shouldn't be involved. And even in the open web, maybe brands need to self-restrict.

social media on tv

I am a TV nut. I watch about fifteen shows a week :P

Over the current season social media seems to have gone extra American TV mainstream. This post is going to be a running list of social media mentions on my favorite shows.

• Gossip Girl: Juliet can't afford dresses so she gets her wardrobe from Rent the Runway
• Grey's Anatomy: Twitter in the OR
• Big Bang Theory: 
• The Good Wife: Take on Social Network (among others, to follow)

Facebook is the new WWW

Last week I noticed that the Philippines had become the fifth most represented country on Facebook, with (then) just under 21 million Pinoys registered. I just checked again and less than a week later, that number has ballooned to 21.7 million.

That constitutes 24% of the total Philippine population. Not bad, especially for just one URL.

These staggering numbers have made Facebook a go-to channel for many brands and, ahem, ad agency strategic planners. Why not? We can reach a captive, engaged market and can geo- and age-target our drive-to-page materials. Even better, when consumers like our content, they can share them on their Walls and elicit an exponential number of eyeballs and views.

But as obvious as Facebook seems to have become as a standard digital channel recommendation, a new barrier seems to be emerging: Are brands that get on Facebook only now already too late in the game? Do they risk appearing like me-too's? Worse, will agencies that recommend branded Facebook pages appear uninsightful and lazy?

After all our marketing culture is fond of “owning” things – colors, seasons, occasions, time slots, entire mediums. I once got a brief that demanded a strategy that would allow our brand to “own the Internet”. (Not a joke!) Who owns Facebook, and if we can’t own it then should we even bother?

The answer is yes.

A few years ago we recommended branded web presence through websites that opened with WWW. All that has changed is that now we are recommending branded web presence through pages that open with FACEBOOK.COM.

In that sense we just need to re-frame our thinking and look at Facebook as a microcosm of the larger web. We had websites once but now that everybody is on Facebook, doesn't it make sense that we build a presence there?

What we like about this particular social network –

• Built-in community-building features
• What: Users can easily like a brand page and individual pieces of content or share their own.
• Where else you could get it: Your web developer can tell you how long it would take (very) to design a website that would duplicate the level of community engagement that already exists Facebook. And how much it would cost! (A lot.)
• A captive audience
• What: 21 million Pinoys & counting, who regularly visit. According to the Facebook fact sheet, 50% of their active users log in on any given day. One study claims that users view an average of 22 pages per visit. The best part? Users can immediately click on anything they find interesting.
• Where else you could get it: On TV or radio? OOH? Minus the click. Your media agency can give you more information.
• Share-ability
• What: Users can easily share content they find interesting – today the Cebu Pacific flight attendants, tomorrow the “California Girls” balikbayans who had too much Pinoy food (“Katy my lady, gutom ka na baby?”). Never 100% sure, but definitely viral potential.
• Where else you could get it: Through bloggers and YouTube, maybe Twitter. Check with your Digital Influence consultant. But I don’t think you could say that something has “gone viral” if it hasn’t passed through Facebook.
• Good Pages abound! (Will update with an actual list shortly/eventually.)
  

What we need to avoid –

The trick is not to rest on Facebook’s community features. A wall and an information page won’t do anything for a brand without regularly updated content and conversation. Just as if we were planning a brand website we need to create a reason that anyone would care to visit our (profile) page.

Whether on Facebook or not, consumers will look for a compelling reason to engage with us – something useful, entertaining or informational. That bit of digital strategy hasn't changed, only the entry url – from www.YOURBRAND.com to facebook.com/YOURBRAND. This might sound obvious but it recently helped me open the minds of a few clients. Maybe this kind of explanation can help you, too.

say vs. DO: how digital strategy should be like product development

what brands should SAY 

vs. 

what brands should DO

One of the biggest challenges I have with strategic planning

is that we are set up 

to figure out

what brands should

SAY.

When in fact,

digital

is,

or should be,

more about

what we want people to

DO.

What can we get them to do?

Share a video? Sign up? Tag?

What do they need help doing?

Getting free books?

Planning their garden?

Getting their kids to school on time?

Digital strategy

needs to become more like 

PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT.

Insight + Function

Whether we are creating 

a website,

an app,

even a Twitter feed

or Facebook profile,

we need to think about

what we want people to do.

The web is action-based,

and people want to 

click,

zoom, 

play,

share.

But we need to make stuff that helps them DO stuff,

instead of continuing to tell them "who we are", what is interesting "about" our product and "where to buy" it.

Digital Strategy = Insight + Function

What do we think?

Go! Do!
(Just kidding.
We don't need another ad.
Or another Cylon.)

brands in the webvolution

Wired's latest buzz piece boldly declared that "The Web is Dead". Not the Internet, but the world wide web that is currently the main medium of transaction - linked web pages accessed by browser. They argue that the web is declining as we move toward a browser-less internet - "think apps".

This is right in line with the evolution of Webs 1.0 to 2.0 and soon, Web 3.0.

If 1.0 was about information and static pages, 2.0 is characterized by user participation and real-time data streams. The singular thesis of Web 3.0 has yet to be determined but it will center around portability, cloud computing, semantic and intelligent data.

For brands, especially local Philippine brands, where are we now and how are we ever going to keep up? This is something I've been thinking about and hope to write more about in the next few weeks:

• Which key Web 3.0 developments will have the biggest impact on brands
• Which (or are there any) brands are poised to win in 3.0
• How to move forward and who should spearhead the movement

Keeping track of where we are and where we need to go...

Mobile social networking primer: Foursquare

(Or, a starter guide for my dad — He has never belonged to any social networks, not Facebook, Twitter or even Gmail. So I was very surprised to receive an invite to become his Foursquare contact. I wanted to welcome him to social media and help him get started in the space.)

Hi Dad!

Congratulations on making it to the social graph (that's what they call our virtual social networks on sites like Facebook and Twitter). Still think it is interesting that you've gotten online via Foursquare, and not through a more obvious platform like the aforementioned Facebook or Twitter. But I think you've chosen a good place to start.

Thought I'd give you a few tips to maximize your Foursquare membership.

(Am going to do a follow-up on getting started with Twitter, since I think you'd actually have an even better time with that. But first things first.)

Ever wanted to be mayor? Foursquare is the way to go

What it is. A social mapping service that allows users to update their profiles with their whereabouts. Users can manually enter their location (e.g. New York Times Building, Times Square), or select for 4sq's list of venues nearby.

How to use it

• Access: You can download an app (for iPhone, Android or Blackberry) or log on to the mobile site.
• "Check-in": Using the app or mobile site, check-in to different places - Ayala Tower (office), Lumbang (home), Greenbelt Theater, Salcedo Market, Fully Booked, etc.
• Add a Tip: You give Tips about what to do, eat or see at different venues, or browse others' recommendations.
• A note on accuracy: You're only supposed to check-in when you're actually at the place you're checking in to. But Foursquare's GPS isn't very strict and you can check-in from across the street or up to a few blocks away. It can tell though if you're not in the area at all and won't give you points.
• Get points!: Foursquare keeps a leaderboard of your points earned (by checking in, going to new places, etc) vs. your contacts'. You do want "quality" check-ins because only those will earn you mayorships and badges.

What you get

• Be crowned Mayor: If you have the most check-ins at a given venue, you are automatically crowned "mayor" of that place. What's the point? Who doesn't want a virtual crown? Some establishments are starting to give mayors special freebies or privileges. Not sure if that's true for Manila Mayors yet though.
• Get badges: Even better, Foursquare rewards usage with badges. This is where it gets fun - you get these badges for completing different levels of usage - when you check in 1, 10, 25, 50 times, when you check in 4x in a week, etc. There are location-specific badges, like one for making it above 59th St. in NY or riding the Bart in SF 7x. There are branded badges - I have one for hitting five Starbuckses. My badges are proudly on display on the left side of this page!

Why to use it (or not)

• Why not: There are privacy concerns - people wonder if they're asking to be robbed by broadcasting to the world that they aren't home. The game also gets tiring after you've acquired several badges.
• Why: IT'S FUN! Especially if you like games, and it really hits a sweet spot for digital or competitive people like me.
• Why, when more people are using it: Assuming people use the service regularly, it would be a great way to keep track of friends and family members. It's also a good way to discover new places through friends' check-ins.
• Why, if you were a business-owner or brand guy: It is a great tool to find and interact with customers. It’s also a nice platform to get people to interact with your brand – Bravo puts listings of their recommended restaurants (e.g. by Top Chef chefs) that people can check-in to, to get Bravo badges. Jimmy Choo just launched a new shoe with a 4sq scavenger hunt!

And guess what - you can sync your Foursquare to your (upcoming?) Twitter account. But more about that in an upcoming post.

See you on the square!



Bea  :)

the search is on for cute boots

I love this because it reinforces my point about Facebook-as-news-source.

real-time social media stats

Awesome! Via Socialtimes.com

#140conf: it's about the people

140: the maximum number of characters in a tweet. 

The 140 Conference brings together industry professionals who have found great ways to share their passions using Twitter and social media.

Found out about the #140conf by accident through a tweet by Ashton Kutcher and quickly got a ticket with the help of event planner Jeff Pulver (@jeffpulver). What a great day.


A few themes from today


we can't only focus on numbers  

the disadvantages of a web that is so dependent on data

Chris Weingarten (@1000timesyes) claimed that the algorithm-based search engine results have ruined music writing - online publications are more concerned about keyword optimization than quality articles and artists are consumed with constantly producing new content over creating good music. All in the name of rising to the top of SERPs. The result is terrible writing and the loss of stumble culture. He was very explicit about his feelings; his closing sentiment: "Fuck the numbers, fuck math."

Even from the education industry, Chris Lehman (@chrislehmann) also asked that we rethink numbers. As an educator, a big frustration is that while technology is helping kids learn and experiment more than ever before, the only results that "matter" are tests. He challenged data this way asking why we trust a test given on one day, instead of testing learning everyday. He pushes this even further by claiming that technology must be "like oxygen - ubiquitous, necessary, invisible; when was the last time we took kids to a pencil lab?". The best soundbit: "What if we dare to think that school isn't about preparing for the real world, school is the real world!" He got a standing ovation.

And everyone from Gary Vaynerchuk to David Carr (@carr2n) warned that we not to be so preoccupied with the number of followers we have. Said Garyvee, "Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit!" (It seems the social media bunch is very self-expressed... surprise?) We need to realize that value of Twitter is in relationships.


power to the people  
social media & twitter as enablers

One of my favorite speakers of the day was Jay Rosen (@jayrosen_nyu), Journalism professor at NYU. He gave an interesting snapshot on the evolution of news: self-informing small villages > larger communities with increased opacity > trade and private intelligence > birth of the public and birth of the modern press. His take is that Twitter extends the press (and essentially empowers) since it goes back to allowing us to self-inform. "We're now experiencing a revolution in the near-ness of things." Loved this (and probably paraphrased too much... would love to take a class of his).

This was my first time to hear Gary Vaynerchuk (@garyvee) speak. His main spiel was about feeling and being "obnoxiously lucky", that we are experiencing this innovative and creative time. One of the guys in the Q&A said that he was from Brittany and asked why Gary has never featured any products from that region, why not cider? To which Gary replied, "Dude, f*ck me, get your own show!"


the power of one  
via this one-to-many medium

Of the panel on Emergency Communication in the Real-time Web, Luke Renner (@firesideint) was in Haiti during the recent earthquake and was still emotional about his experience. After the quake he tweeted that he was an American in Haiti and that he was available for calls. "The first call I got, was from Ann Curry." Ann (@anncurry) was also on the panel and was on the ground covering the quake.

Sweetest speaker was definitely Alon Nir (@TheKotel). He put up a Twitter account that invited people to send in their prayers, which he promised to take to the Kotel in Jerusalem (where people customarily insert slips of paper with their prayers into the wall cracks). After just two weeks he was overwhelmed by thousands of responses. Seriously, overwhelmed! But he turned to those same followers to find help to translate the tweets into a printable format, cut and roll the prayer strips, then actually put them into the wall. Check out his blog for the full story, a photo of his "prayer printer"!


HOW ABOUT BRANDS?  
that is my day job after all!

I spend a lot of time trying to figure out how we can or should be more engaging and innovative in the digital space to "really engage consumers". Today was an eye-opener.

Social media, Twitter included, is already complete without brands. The web was created for free-enterprise! The web's DNA and hardware go against "strategic communicaton" and branding. It was meant to be stealthy, to strike hard and fast anywhere and for whomever could figure it out. Yes we need to monetize, yes these are businesses. And there are definitely business opportunities. But this space is occupied by people, not consumers. And these people are making things happen on their own.

As marketers who have things to sell, we need to understand and *respect* how people are engaging on social media, how people are maximizing this technology for human enterprise! To come in and merely sell not only won't work but it would be disrespectful of the people who have made social media valuable through connections, interactions, innovation and experimentation - seen through the real life examples shared by speakers at the #140conf.

When we bring brands online, especially to the text-only medium that is Twitter, we need to be sure that they are ready (and excited!) to engage in real conversation. If possible, do something different, provide a service. We don't always approach social media from this point of view.

The speaker that I will close with is former ad man Hank Wasiak (@hankwasiak). He gave a lot of great insights but key is that the new P (in the formerly? 4P's) is PEOPLE - brands need to have People strategies to make an impact.

So, an awesome day. Feel bad that I won't be able to join tomorrow's session, but am excited that work calls. Hope to enact a few People strategies!

what is social media?

There are  so many articles about this online, but this video explanation from Common Craft is one of my favorites:

be your digital best !

I am pressing replay on this blog.

I haven't been very serious but now that I have begun a "digital immersion", I am re-thinking a lot of how I do things... including the grand opinion piece that is (supposed to be) this blog.

I have a lot of opinions, in general I think I overthink! But that doesn't mean that I cannot categorize and catalog my digital thoughts into a coherent, focused hub on Philippine digital marketing.

The local digital practice is blooming. Filipinos have found their way online and are some of the most engaged in the world - blogs, social networks, social media. But, as is symptomatic of digital business, monetization is still a challenge. Everyone is scrambling to gain "expertise", partnerships are being formed, AORs are being selected. But who, really, has a handle on things?

I am no expert. Given that the space changes every second I don't think anyone can really claim to be. But we can definitely learn from each effort and try to get a handle on upcoming trends. And this blog is one of the places where I plan to do that.

www.beyourdigitalbest.com will run the gamut of topics involved in building a digital media marketing practice. This will include Philippine digital marketing issues and challenges, digital strategy, local and (relevant) international trends, traditional agency life and sometimes my perspective as a consumer of both products and content.I might include a little bit of branding and general communication also.

And one day who knows! Let's see where this goes.

improving our online outreach during times of distress

When Ondoy hit I was, very fortunately, safe in a house that didn’t even experience a black out or power fluctuations. It was only on that Saturday afternoon, when I started seeing frantic photos, videos and status updates on Facebook, that I realized that something was really wrong. I stayed tuned to my social network that weekend to keep in touch with what was happening, not once checking the news.

People were calling for help and sharing ways to reach out. Facebook and Twitter were abuzz with shoutouts and calls-to-action. Very quickly, the links to Google Maps (with updates on the flooded areas) and Google Spreadsheet (with the ways to help) were spread via social media.

No doubt that citizen journalism and volunteerism were able to exceed the efforts of traditional mass media outlets. Real-time updates and responses, more credible because they were done by people in my immediate online network.

Unfortunately the Philippines has become a sort of hotbed for tropical depressions (after Ondoy there was Pepeng, and several others) and we could easily be hit by another catastrophic storm.

So how about next time? Is there anything we can do to improve our online outreach? Is there anything that can be improved on the design or user interface side?

Came across an interesting article that addresses this on Threeminds. (The title makes it sound like it is about design, but it is more about content and use of the right platforms. Still, very helpful.):

When Good Design Could Save Lives

"On September 26, 2009, Typhoon Ondoy brought a month's worth of rainfall to Metro Manila and nearby areas in just a few hours, causing severe flooding which resulted in the loss of many lives and the displacement of hundreds of thousands of people. 8 days later, Typhoon Pepeng struck the northern regions causing more damage. This site compiles relevant information about the disaster, including a volunteer-maintained map of persons needing rescue and a list of relief organizations accepting donations, so that more help can be provided where it is needed."

There is no denying that Google's efforts are admirable and for a great cause. So it's hard to suggest that the site they developed to rally people around the Typhoon Ondoy cause could benefit majorly from improved design and usability. Normally, as marketers, we get the benefit of a specific demographic we are trying to address and for a defined product. In the case of large scale disasters, the demographic really is everyone, and the emotions you are trying to illicit is everything from awareness to action.

Knowing the need for action is great and the design challenge is real, I sent the site around to some colleagues. Together, we tried to come up with a few of best practices for making cause-based sites more effective...

1. Provide clear direction on needs, goals, and progress. Help users understand where the need is the greatest.

"I often feel a little helpless when massive events like this happen, if for no other reason than I don't even know where to begin helping. Is sending cash the right thing, do rescue workers need provisions that can't be locally sourced, etc?" James Vreeland

The current page leaves the user with too many questions. What's already been donated? What are the areas of need? What could my money be going towards? Is there something that needs to be donated besides money? Giving user a list of numbers to call only makes them feel overwhelmed, not motivated.

2. Use stories, not numbers. Stories make the user feel closer to the cause, while numbers often do the opposite.
The current Ondoy page isn't organized to elicit a reaction... not emotional or actionable. With so many charity stories and good causes out there competing for attention, incorporating a story of an actual person affected does more good than stats and charts. People need to be moved and then lead to action.

3. Harness the power and reach of social media to generate interconnectivity and spring users into action.
Google has seem to forgotten the "share this" button. No tweet this, no Facebook that. While links are simple and becoming ubiquitous, that simple addition could have made all the difference. Google could have also considered something like http://micro.ilist.com/ for quickly bringing folks together, especially now that Twitter is rolling in geolocation data.

#ihave a spare bedroom for up to 3 nights
+
#ineed a place to sleep, my house burnt down

It works best for big events, not one-off needs, but it is still an interesting way to connect at a personal level, those who have with those who need.

- Marta Strickland


{Original post here.}

"Log out, shut down, go out!"

"Log out, shut down, go out!" ...is the motto for the members of Social Media Addicts Association, a sort of AA for people who can't stop tweeting, posting, chatting.

That there are now people who just never want to be disconnected not just from their face-to-face contacts, but from their virtual identities, is I think a powerful insight captured in this ad by Sony VAIO.



Do you belong to this group? :)


(Shared by Ethel!)

Boomerang award finalist!

We submitted two campaigns to this year's Boomerang Awards - Globe's Paramihan (which means, if you will, "plentify") Challenge and UN WFP Coins. Both were declared Finalists - Coins in the Cyber Boomerang category and Paramihan in the Best Innovation category.

Coins - The UN World Food Programme is doing great workin Mindanao. I got to see them in action when they invited us down south. It is amazing that so many people go hungry and that so many children end up missing school because of it! And finding out that feeding someone only costs P5 ($0.10) made it seem silly that hunger exists at all. I mean, anybody has a spare five bucks! You probably have 5 pesos on your desk, in your car, in your wallet, in your couch, etc... And so the wonderful creatives came up with this.

UN WFP "Coins"

Accounts: Maricel Pangilinan-Arenas, Bea Atienza

Creatives: Budjette Tan, Shirley Tan, Giselle Bautista

UN WFP Page takeover

Project Management: Jay Chiu

Creatives: Jay Arellano

Paramihan - What this campaign was supposed to do was inrcrease awareness and creatively engage the target to rise above the clutter.

There was an above-the-ine campaign but it took awhile before we reached the paramihan ("plentify") idea. Once that was finalized, it was important to give it legs. Given that there was above-the-line but no above-the-line support for online... social media was the answer and Johnny Stunts was born. This was our first social media character, so "first" that he was casted interally. But what makes me so happy about this campaign is how social media really pushed the participation to great results. We were afraid that the concept would be "paramihan" ("plentify") but nobody would join. Thank god it was quite the opposite. A good look at the campaign.

GLOBE "Paramihan Challenge"

Accounts: Maine Gatbonton, Rose Natanauan, Andrea Santos, Bea Atienza

Creatives: Budjette Tan, Shirley Tan, Norman Ramos, Jay Pangilinan, Sunny Dumayas

Project Management: Jay Chiu, Zinzi Culalic

Social Media Marketing: Kankan Lim, Elaine Uy

Content Production: Yehey team

We were happy to accept our little Boomerang Finalist trophies at the awards held earlier, right after IMMAP Day 1. Congratulations to all the finalists and winners. Here's to even better results next year!

Wtf is social media?

Nicely crafted presentation on social media and why markters should give a rat's ass.

What the F**K is Social Media: One Year Later

View more documents from Marta Kagan.

Link to the original presentation.

Conversation Prism

Beautiful infographic on social media - the key to which is the multi-way conversation between B2B, B2C, C2C.

Click for larger view

I've been looking for some great typography to fill the last bare wallspace in my bedroom but this migth do nicely...