Will the iPad save the publishing industry? How can the iPad help traditional publishers reinvent themselves?
At the 2010 SXSW Conference, Bloomberg interviewed Pete Cashmore, the CEO and founder of Mashable. The interviewer asked Cashmore about his opinions on the iPad's potential impact on social media (the question is posed with around 1:37 left in the video). Although he wasn't directly asked if the iPad would save the publishing industry, I found Cashmore's response very telling:
* Besides consumers, the greatest beneficiaries are current publishers of books and magazines * He mentions how the magazine, Wired, is creating a special edition for the iPad * The iPad introduces an opportunity to charge consumers for content particularly because iPhone owners are used to paying for apps
Who's Developing Applications and Content for the iPad Major publishers and magazines reportedly developing applications and content for the iPad include:1,2
* Penguin * HarperCollins * Simon & Schuster * Macmillan * Hachette Book Group * GQ * Vanity Fair * Wired * Glamour * The New Yorker * The Associated Press
These organizations are literally banking on the opportunity to charge consumers for online content. But, what I find most interesting is Cashmore never mentions:
1. If Mashable is creating content specifically for the iPad or 2. If Mashable will ever charge consumers for its online content
Who Isn't Developing Applications and Content for the iPad Why didn't he? In my opinion, it's because new media players like Mashable don't need the iPad or a paywall to succeed. Mashable doesn't carry the high cost structure of traditional media firms. Unlike these larger companies, Mashable can sustain it's business through online advertising. Cashmore thinks Mashable has the opportunity to become a media powerhouse. They've competitively positioned themselves and have already gained considerable traction and critical mass with their audience.
1. The "new media" companies aren't investing a lot of time and resources to create iPad-specific content 2. It's the "old media" companies who are focusing on the iPad opportunity 3. Technology companies deal with and adapt to constant disruption (and he provides examples the succesful ones confronting it head-on)
Here are some interesting points from their discussion:
Can Professional Journalism Be Saved? No One Knows Yet. Paying talented writers well is a challenge because most online content is free. Brown said The Daily Beast pays its contributing writers but "they're not going to get rich from what we pay." When Rose asked her for the solution, she said the newspaper industry is "still trying to figure that out."
Paid Content Models Are Coming. Brown thinks one potential solution is a pay-for-content-model resembling what we see in cable television's premium channel market (i.e., think ESPN or HBO). The New York Times already signaled its intent to implement an online pay site next year. I've been a loyal subscriber to The Wall Street Journal Online ever since its launch. In addition, I pay a monthly fee to receive WSJ content on my iPhone. The only time I ever read a WSJ print version is when I conduct business travel because my hotel usually provides guests a free copy.
"We're in a Volatile Moment of Absolute Realignment." This is how Brown described the newspaper industry's current state. An industry shakeout is already occurring because traditional print costs (i.e., printing press facilities, trucks for distribution, etc.) cannot compete long term with the lower costs of digital operations. Brown is convinced that news will move completely online. To her, the speed and reach of digital media is a significant competitive advantage over the print model.
Brown Is Not Alone in Her Opinions Regarding an Old Media Shakedown. Check out this TechCrunch article from March 12th titled, It's Hard to Watch the Newsosaurs Turn a Blind Eye To Their Own Extinction. It talks about the newspaper industry's current reluctance to make the complete jump to digital because of the $30 billion in revenues it currently generates. The article makes a compelling case about how digital media's impact will be even more painful if traditional print media companies continue and to try and postpone the inevitable. Marc Andreesen, the former Netscape founder, gives his opinion in a March 6th Tech Crunch article on why print media should shift their efforts to pure digital. The article's title, Andreesen's Advice to Old Media: "Burn the Boats", says it all.
Google's Mindset I've written in a previous blog post what I've learned about how Google approaches innovation / reinvention. Google's attitude is to:
* Question everything * Ask "why does this have to be the way it is?" * Encourage engineers to push the envelope, to assume that their mission is to disrupt traditional ways of doing things
Facebook's Mindset According to the Fast Company piece, "hacking" plays a key role in Facebook's corporate culture. Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook's CEO) explains this process as:
* Being unafraid to break things in order to make them better * The root of the hacker mindset is "there's a better way" * Just because people have been doing it the same way since the beginning of time, I'm going to make it better
Here's a Facebook blog post written by Andrew Bosworth (a top Facebook engineer) called Working With Zuck. Bosworth describes four (4) characteristics about working with the famous twenty-something CEO:
* Zuck Expects Debate * Zuck Isn't Sentimental * Zuck Experiences Things Contextually * Zuck Pushes People
This shows how great minds think alike, and it's no surprise that Facebook and Google ranked as #1 and #2 respectively in Fast Company's list of most innovative companies.
I know there's a lot currently being written about future businesses that Facebook and Google may compete in (i.e., vertical search), but I think the fiercest area of competition will be in the war for talent. Check out this recruiting video Fast Company posted as part of the article. There's no question both firms are targeting many of the same talented engineers:
Last week, Google announced real time search and additional innovations to it core search offering. These announcements received significant media coverage, and I find the various viewpoints highly interesting. After reviewing a variety of publicly available sources, I've summarized my observations and opinions on the strategic implications for Google and the battlefield for search dominance.
Observation #1 - Real Time Search is a First Step in Addressing the Threat of Vertical Search Via Social Networks
I recently wrote a blog post about this challenge in Charlie Rose's Conversation with Ken Auletta: Innovation, Efficiency, and Future Challenges at Google. The partnerships with Twitter, Facebook, and MySpace enable Google to include updates from the Big 3 social networking sites into its search index. Previously, it took a few minutes for updates from social networks and blogs to filter into Google's search results (not the case anymore). By offering real-time social networking updates in a Google Search, they're decreasing the threat of users using these sites to conduct searches (particularly Twitter Search). Which leads us to search relevancy ...
Observation #2 - A Killer Combination: Real Time Search with Google's Search Relevancy
According to the New York Times article, Biz Stone (one of Twitter's co-founders) think Google is better at providing relevancy to a search user's questions. In addition, TechCrunch hammers home how relevancy is a major strength of Google searches. MG Siegler, the author of the TechCrunch article made some great points:
* "Relevancy is perhaps the key to making real-time search a pillar of the web."
*How Google Fellow Amit Singhal positioned Google's relevancy advantage: "It's Google relevancy technology meeting the realtime web."
In Adam Ostrow's Mashable article, the partnerships with Twitter and Facebook are a concession by these companies that they can't outbuild (or outspend) Google when it comes to search. Just ask Carol Bartz, the CEO of Yahoo ...
Observation #3 - Google Continues Expanding Search to the Mobile Space
Christina Warren (another of my favorite Mashable writers) made some intresting observations about the implications for Google's competitors:
* Microsoft's Bing: They're now going after a moving target because Google will continue to innovate in search.
* Yahoo: Even though it's has more market share than Bing, Yahoo is conceding real-time search to Google and Bing. Search isn't a focus for them. Their niche is as a service provider.
In addition, The Wall Street Journal points out that Bing has gained market share and credibility in search. Naturally, Google is going to protect its core business. These announcements show Google is still on the cutting edge of innovation and will continue to introduce new advancements.
Therefore, it's not surprising that these advancements focus on the mobile space:
* Google Goggles: Allows users to pull up information about a landmark or product by taking a picture from their cellphones. This service is currently only available on cellphones running Google' Android OS. According to Vic Gundotra, a Google VP of Engineering, the end goal is to "visually identify any image over time, merely by pointing a mobile device to it."
* Google Voice Search | Google Translation: Allows users to conduct search based queries by speaking into your phone (supports Mandarin, Japanese, and English). When you speak into your phone in English, your query can be auto translated into another lanaguage (i.e., Spanish) and the query can can be spoken back to you out loud -- your phone becomes a Universal Translator.
* Google Local Search / Location-Based Search: Allows users to get information about locations and user ratings of nearby restaurants and shops. It will also provide "contextualized" suggestions relevant to the current location you're in.
Observation #4 - Personalizing Search is Going to be a Major Factor in Establishing Search Dominance
Silicon Alley Insider highlighted what Google considers The Four (4) Biggest Challenges in the Future of Search:
* Challenge 1: Modes - how and where people type in a search query * Challenge 2: Media - how people manage and consume content * Challenge 3: Language - how to help people conduct searches without communication barriers * Challenge 4: Personalization - enable customized searches re: tastes, preferences, and locations
ComputerWorld emphasized the importance of Challenge 4 in the search rivalry between Google and Microsoft. Search is becoming more indvidualized and that includes finding relevant and applicable content from images, video, tweets, and blog posts. According to Dan Olds, an analyst with The Gabriel Consulting Group, search is "looking more like the dynamic lives of its users" because:
* Search is becoming more personal and granular * Search results are now drilling down to include a single people's observations or opinions (whether you're famous or not)
Observation #5 - These Innovations Bolster Google's Competitive Advantages in Advertising and Cloud Computing
Real-time search and the mobile innovations naturally support Google's vision towards cloud computing. Google wants users to spend more time on the Internet searching for information (specifically with their search engine and subsequently looking at more of their ads). By performing more Google searches, we'll provide more information on our online behaviors. This data gives Google the advantage in delivering more appropriate advertisements (and that increases the value of the ads it auctions).
I've started reading Googled: The End of the World As We Know It by Ken Auletta. There's no question Google is reinventing and transforming the world of traditional media. If you're an online strategy nut or corporate strategy geek like me, you'll love this book.
I discovered this book from a Charlie Rose interview conducted on November 5, 2009. After watching the original broadcast and studying the online archive, I had to write a blog post about the key takeaways from their conversation. I also purchased Mr. Auletta's book from Amazon because I love learning how Google:
* Approaches and dissects problems * Views business opportunities * Drives and sustains innovation throughout its organization
Furthermore, Charlie Rose is the television industry's best broadcaster and interviewer. Check out this Fortune Magazine article: Why Business Loves Charlie Rose. The outstanding content and insights shared on Mr. Rose's nightly show make it required viewing. I also learn from Mr. Rose's preparation, questioning, and listening. He possesses that rare ability to comfortably engage guests and non-threateningly ask difficult questions.
Without further adieu, here are the seven (7) insights I learned by studying the conversation between Mr. Auletta and Mr. Rose. If there are additional viewpoints or lessons you think should be included from the November 5th interview, please share them in the comments section.
Insight 1: Ask Why Does It Have to Be This Way?
Google asks this fundamental question whenever confronting a problem or business opportunity. Their engineers challenge the status quo by starting with a basic assumption -- the traditional analog world is inefficient.
Advertising. Wouldn't you want to know if people are reading your ads? Wouldn't you want to know if the people who buy your product(s) do so because of your advertising?
Packaged Computer Software. Why does computer software have to run from our hard drives or a computer desktop? Why can't it run off a computer "cloud" accessible through our web browsers?
Newspaper Publishing. Isn't there a more efficient way to publish and distribute newspapers?
Bottom Line: Google finds a way to drive out inefficiencies. This "engineer's mindset" is the core capability Google brings to solving all traditional problems.
Insight 2: Google and Microsoft are Different -- and Alike
Cold Engineers Versus Cold Businessmen. Google isn't out to destroy the competition. Their engineering goal is to drive out inefficiencies. Contrast this mentality with Microsoft in 1998 (when it was investigated for antitrust concerns). Here, the US government questioned the company's intent to compete fairly with Netscape and Sun Microsystems.
Both Share an Inability to Anticipate Other People's Fears. Both Google and Microsoft are brilliant in solving problems. However, both firms don't understand why the US government and public would question their business motives. In Google's case, people now fear them the way people feared Microsoft in 1998. The recent legal proceedings between Google and the publishing industry regarding the digitizing of books is a prime example. Here's a recent article about how Google is attempting to smooth over relations with the publishing industry from The Washington Post titled, Google Allows Publishers to Strengthen Pay Walls.
Insight 3: No One Saw Google Coming (Not Even Bill Gates)
You Can't Anticipate What You Don't Know. In 1998, Mr. Auletta interviewed Bill Gates during Microsoft's antitrust trial period and asked what worried him the most. Gates replied: "I worry about someone in a garage inventing something that will displace Microsoft." Ironically, Larry Page and Sergey Brin are now Microsoft's most significant competitor particularly with their push to establish cloud computing and Google Chrome OS.
2006 was a Tipping Point: The $1.65 Billion YouTube Acquisition. Before this acquisition, it was unclear if Google was making money. With the YouTube acquisition, traditional media finally realized Google's broad ambitions and imminent threat as a future media company. Mr. Auletta said it best during the interview (paraphrasing): "Wow, they're coming after me (e.g., traditional media)."
Insight 4: Google Views Itself as a Media Company Not a Search Company
Become the First $100 Billion Media Company. Eric Schmidt says this is the ultimate goal. Currently, Google hasn't significantly monetized their product portfolio beyond search. However, you can't bet against them because of their involvement in a vast number of areas:
* Advertising: Google AdWords, Google AdSense * Telecommunications: Android OS * Television: YouTube * Books & Publishing: Digitized Books * Software: Cloud Computing, Google Docs
Make Money But Not at the Expense of Violating User Trust. Mr. Auletta finds this insight or clarity of thought extremely telling. At a young age, Brin and Page recognized the value of building user trust because they've received plenty of opportunities to make "easy money." For example, they declined Visa's $3 million offer to place a banner ad on the Google Home Page. Brin and Page declined becaus they thought the ad would be intrusive and disruptive to the user experience.
Insight 5: Google's Simplistic Home Page is a Nod to Steve Jobs and Apple
Google's founders admire Jobs' passion and his vision to simplify with "elegant design." The simplicity and clean look of the Google home page reflects Jobs' and Apple's influence.
Insight 6: How Will Google Handle Current and Future Challenges
Challenge 1: Expanding Revenues Beyond Search (aka The One-Trick Pony). Mr. Auletta points out how Steve Ballmer, Microsoft's CEO, criticizes Google's reliance on search-related revenues. But, I liked Mr. Auletta's anecdote that Eric Schmidt, Google's CEO, replied: "Yeah, but it's a pretty good trick." Still, Ballmer has a point. AdWords and AdSense accounts for $21 billion in revenues (out of $22 billion total). Mr. Auletta puts this number in context and explained that $21 billion is roughly equivalent to the advertising revenues for allU.S. consumer-related magazines. Also, Google's revenue is also equivalent to two-third's of U.S. newspaper advertising revenues.
Not too shabby for a one-trick pony ...
Here's a video clip from the CNBC Original: Inside the Mind of Google. It talks about how Google is looking to expand its influence into the mobile market with its Android Operating System:
Challenge 2: Google is Concerned About Vertical Search Via Social Networks. I can personally confirm the power and appeal of search via social networks like Facebook or Twitter. I've commented on other blogs that the reason I find Twitter so powerful is because the people I follow on Twitter are often a better source of content than my own Google search. The authority of your Facebook Friends or who you follow on Twitter is why Google wanted to acquire Twitter.
In many ways, real-time search or conducting a search through Twitter is what Google would ask or propose to threaten their own offering. Google is asking themselves: "Why should you conduct a search through Google when you can solicit the trusted opinion of friends or people who share your common interests?" This idea is captured in one of the best articles I've ever read on Facebook as a potential threat to Google: Wired Article - Great Wall of Facebook: The Social Network's Plan to Dominate the Internet -- and Keep Google Out.
Challenge 3: Convincing Top Talent to Remain at Google. Mr. Rose and Mr. Auletta discussed the challenge of employee retention especially when your top engineering talent (1) has no shot at attaining the top spot because you have young founders and (2) the opportunity for a big pay day has already passed. A prime example is Marissa Mayer, Google's VP of Search and User Experience. Even though she's achieved significant wealth as one of the original team members, she may want to forge her own path by leading her own company. Here's an article about Marissa Mayer from the New York Times titled, Putting a Bolder Face on Google.
Challenge 4: Trappings of Your Own, Phenomenal Success: Arrogance and Hubris. Right now, Google is not concerned about Microsoft Bing. They respect what Microsoft has accomplished with Bing and are aware of the Microsoft-Yahoo combination. However, Mr. Auletta thinks Google looks at Microsoft as "an old company" that won't move as quickly as Google.
Furthermore, when you're young and you've become successful so quickly, you begin to question why would anyone question your business motives (e.g., why's the U.S. government giving our company grief for wanting to digitize all books)? In 1998 and 1999, Bill Gates had the same attitude when the U.S. government investigated Microsoft for anti-trust concerns. Christine Varney, Head of the U.S. Justice Department's Anti-Trust Division, is investigating all concentrations of power and the tendency of Democratic-led administrations is to introduce more government regulation. As a result, Google has been beefing up its Washington office with legal talent. Check out this June 2009 New York Times article titled, Google Makes a Case It Isn't So Big. The story profiles Dana Wagner and his significant role in Google public relations on Capitol Hill.
Challenge 5: What Happens to Privacy? Will Google Continue to Not Be Evil? With every Google search we conduct, we leave a digital fingerprint or footprint (i.e., our individual IP address). Everyday, Google collects millions of data points about our online habits and tendencies. This is the reason why advertisers partner with Google. Advertisers want access to that information. What happens if advertisers make significant financial offers to Google to access to that information? This concentration of personal information on Google's servers is the biggest reason people fear it is becoming too powerful.
Here's another video clip from the CNBC Original: Inside the Mind of Google. It talks about how this very subject and includes Marissa Mayer's opinion on this issue:
* Why do you blog? * Why do you read blogs and other content to learn more about social media? * Why do you invest time in tweeting, monitoring conversations, connecting on LinkedIn, sharing stuff on Facebook (and the list goes on and on)?
I'm listening to one of my favorite musical artists, Sara Bareilles, and I had an epiphany during her song, "Bottle It Up," from her passionate live album, Between the Lines: Sara Bareilles Live at The Fillmore. The opening refrain of this song is "I do it for love. Love. I do it for love ..."
At First, It was Something Else ...
When I first started blogging, a good friend asked me why are you doing this?
Initially, my answer centered around all the commonplace reasons you read from executive search experts and personal branding gurus:
* It's never been more important to establish your individual thought leadership * If you're not visible online, "you might as well be invisible" * The Internet is "the great equalizer" in proliferating your expertise and helping you find better professional opportunities * A resume is not enough to differentiate yourself in an employer "buyer's market" -- You Need a Blog!
There's a good bit of truth in those aforementioned reasons. And in these uncertain economic times, differentiation and fighting for your corporate survival have never been more challenging. I know this first-hand because I believe/feel like I'm fighting like hell to remain relevant and employed in Corporate America.
... but I Realized that I Do It For Love
I spent the past week putting together a multiple piece series on what I learned from the very smart and savvy, Tina Brown, Editor-in-Chief of The Daily Beast. It was during this writing process that I learned something very important.
There is something incredibly liberating and empowering about blogging. I'm not a professional blogger by any stretch of the imagination (and I hold zero delusions of grandeur of ever getting paid to do it). The reasons why I love to blog include:
* Participating in a creative process and creating "something from nothing" * Experiencing the freedom and autonomy of complete editorial control * Seeing that other people actually read what you publish (thank you Google Analytics) * And most of all, learning from simple trial and error
Yup, I do it for love. It isn't sexy, but it's the truth.
Fellow bloggers, if you've taken the time to read this post, please let me know your thoughts. Thank you for reading if you made it this far.
P.S. Sara Bareilles is performing in New York City on October 26th at Feinsteins @Lowes Regency according to her tour schedule. I wish my wife and I could be there ...
David Meerman Scott, author of The New Rules of Marketing & PR and World Wide Rave, talks extensively about defining, identifying, and personally talking with your target buyer personas. Understanding your buyer personas guides and informs the choices you'll make in executing your online marketing strategy.
I don't know if Tina Brown or members of The Daily Beast team follow or study David's work, but it's clear they understand their audience's time constraints, desire for entertaining engagement, and digital channel preferences (i.e., articles less than 900 words, video mashups, smartphone viewing, etc.).
If someone as high-profile and accomplished as Tina Brown personally meets and interacts with her audience, perhaps we should too (and that's regardless of whether our organizational focus is B2B or B2C).
Understanding Your Audience Starts with Personally Meeting Them
When Brown was the Editor-in-Chief of Vanity Fair, she invested significant time and energy in high-profile marketing events such as the A-List Only Vanity Fair Oscar Parties. These annual events successfully generated and powered the buzz and upscale image of Vanity Fair.
In the New Media world, Brown also attends and participates in events that enable her to directly interact with important buyer personas to The Daily Beast. To her credit, she's personally meeting and conversing with key segments of her target audience.
This year, Brown attended a Chicago conference targeted to women bloggers. She personally interacted with several of the 5,000+ attendees and learned firsthand the daily issues influence their blogs (i.e., child-rearing, husbands, women's health issues, empty nesting, etc.). She said the personal experience from attending the conference helped her better understand:
* "Who these people really are" * The audience for female-focused content was bigger than originally dictated by conventional wisdom * The audience's needs, desires, and concerns so The Daily Beast can credibly earn "inbound links" from these female bloggers
"Read This, Skip That" and "The Daily Cheat Sheet" Focus the Attention of a Busy, Overwhelmed Audience
The " Read This, Skip That" editorial mantra is driven by the fact that The Daily Beast's upscale and well-educated audience is already "information-overwhelmed." To Brown, focusing the audience's attention is a significant challenge. If you want to successfully compete in an online world, focusing the audience's attention is critical.
The Cheat Sheet quickly and simply displays The Daily Beast's viewpoint on what is the day's essential reading. Brown and her team know they're competing for our fleeting time and attention. During the Q&A session, Ann Handley, Chief Content Officer of MarketingProfs.com, highlighted this clever curation strategy of The Top 10 Stories. Brown acknowledged how this curation strategy "makes people's lives easier" versus "adding to the existing noise."
In addition, Brown cited their weekly, Sunday morning video mashups as another time-saving feature for her audience. These mashups summarize the week's events in mainstream news, entertainment, and politics. It's a convenient and efficient option for consuming news highlights so the audience member can spend more time enjoying other weekend activities after a long workweek (i.e., time with family and friends or a round of golf).
Thank You to MarketingProfs.com for The Digital Marketing World Fall 2009 Virtual Conference
For the past 6+ months, I've been a Premium Member of MarketingProfs.com. I am incredibly grateful for the outstanding content and services that Ann Handley, Allen Weiss, Beth Harte, and the entire MarketingProfs team GENEROUSLY deliver and share with the professional marketing community. MarketingProfs does an outstanding job in ensuring that all marketing professionals continue learning and improving their professional performance.
One of the many services they graciously provide for free is The Annual Digital Marketing World Virtual Conference. The Fall 2009 Conference was stellar and a phenomenal example of the collective excellence The MarketingProfs Team consistently delivers. The MarketingProfs Digital Marketing World Conference is available as an onDemand archive until December 16, 2009. I highly encourage you to check it out and let Ann, Allen, and Beth know what you think.
The Tina Brown Keynote Address
Tina Brown, the renowned magazine editor, best selling author, and founder of TheDailyBeast.com shared her insights and experience on successfully competing for the attention and engagement of online audiences. I found Brown's observations highly instructive, and Ann Handley deftly facilitated the thought-provoking and entertaining Q&A session.
I've written a series of five (5) posts detailing my interpretation of the many applicable business lessons from Brown's keynote address. They're hyperlinked from this home page so you can easily access the different topics of greatest interest to you. In addition, I've added some of my own commentary from studying the content on The Daily Beast website. If you're strictly looking for the highlights here you go, and I hope you'll jump in the conversation and add any additional lessons you picked up.
Executive Summary of the Key Lessons Learned from Tina Brown and The Daily Beast
Tina Brown candidly described her first two months in online publishing as bewildering and challenging. She learned the new vocabulary and terminology of social media "on-the-fly." To her credit, she invested the time and commitment to "figure it out.". In addition, she continues learning about social media from her talented employees (particularly the twenty-something employees).
If someone with Tina Brown's experience, savvy, and past achievements is willing to reinvent her thinking to successfully compete online, shouldn't we embrace that solution-oriented attitude also ...
In the Online World, We Are All in the Business of Sharing
The New Media model of freely sharing content took Brown a relatively long time to understand. According to her, "it took her awhile to get it." Keep in mind, her previous frame of reference originates from the Old Media print world of dog-eat-dog competition. The rules of engagement required you to "scoop your competition" and ensure that no one got a piece of your story.
Contrast that attitude with the social media principles of "being in the business of sharing." Brown finds this concept of freely sharing content as "fascinating science," and it's this trait of online publishing that she finds enormously interesting.
Social Media is How You Invite the Audience to Join the Conversation
Old Media strategy relies on a "push model" or as Brown refers to it "the old binary way of traditional media." In this model, the news agency writes the story and announces it to complete the communication transaction. Today, publishers and their organizations must engage with their audience in conversation about topics in news and culture.
Executing inbound marketing and social media is how The Daily Beast invites its audience to interact (e.g., a pull model). When Brown and the team acquire a story, they immediately decide how to socially market it. These marketing tactics include:
* Identifying and contacting the Top 25 websites obsessed with the news story * Tweeting the story on Twitter * Commenting on influential blogs that are also covering the same story * Encouraging Facebook Fans of The Daily Beast to post the article on The Daily Beast Fan Page. * Feeding the Beast: This tactic represents a smart way of inviting audience participation
Participation is the Currency of an Audience-Driven Marketing World
As mentioned earlier, the social media world is about sharing content. According to Brown, you need to:
* Identify "where your audience lives" * Pitch them "where they care" and * Pitch them what interests them
Engaged audiences actively participate in the conversation and publish her/his won content. Brown emphasized how you have to be inventive, enterprising, and open to the people and places you market to because "the old ways just don't work anymore." She summarized this observation by saying: "People don't want to participate in passive marketing."
Brown is absolutely correct. I'm a good example of her insight regarding active versus passive marketing because I:
* Wrote this blog post series about what I learned from Tina Brown and The Daily Beast * Chose to follow the Daily Beast on Twitter (@thedailybeast) * Posted a story on The Daily Beast's Facebook Fan Page (the article describing how Paul Shaffer got his job with David Letterman) * Bookmarked the mobile URL for The Daily Cheat Sheet on my iPhone * Embedded The Daily Beast Widget in my iGoogle Homepage * Subscribed to The Daily Beast Email Newsletter
"If you don't have a budget, get yourself a point-of-view."
Tina Brown shared this credo as a major learning from her early, publishing career. This was my "eureka moment" while listening to her keynote address.
Her insight applies to any highly, competitive arena whether it's online publishing, running a small business, or writing an amateur blog (like this one). Simply stated, your individual POV defines and differentiates your competitive advantage.
The Daily Beast Defines Its Point-of-View Around "Where News and Culture Collide"
According to Brown the online news available before The Daily Beast comprised two segments (1) "eat-your-peas" news aggregation or (2) the extremes of tabloid-related entertainment news.
The Daily Beast Team does aggregate news but further defined an organizational goal to create original, editorial content with "clarity, sophistication, and seduction." Brown wanted to create an online forum that:
* Showed "this is the place to be" and "we aren't a tacky organization" * Produced differentiating content that was "clear, time-saving, but still provided glamor and seduction" * Displayed the raw and visceral power of the World Wide Web
To Brown, the web is not just a sophisticated medium. It's a visceral medium that provides all members the opportunity to participate in being entertained, provoked, and seduced. These unique properties of online communication are what The Daily Beast looks to opportunistically exploit.
Emotion Further Differentiates a Point-of-View
Brown repeatedly emphasized the importance of finding and touching the human side of a story. You want to personally and emotionally reach people.
One of the best examples she cited was The Daily Beast Cheat Sheet article titled Hillary's Rough Patch. The article touched upon how Hillary Clinton still battles the long shadow cast by her former, president husband. Brown noted that the "I am not channeling my husband" statement from Mrs. Clinton represented how many influential, professional women want to distinguish themselves individually.
It was a major news moment where the conversations of culture and news converged. More importantly, it provided The Daily Beast a timely opportunity to provoke their audience in an engaging conversation. This Daily Cheat sheet article generated 24 reader comments. After reading them, I think that The Daily Beast successfully accomplished its mission in provocation and engagement.
Generating the News Drives Audience Engagement. Aggregating It -- Not So Much.
Brown made a strategic choice to employ a hybrid news strategy: News Aggregation Coupled with Original Editorial Content. In her opinion, authentic audience engagement cannot occur if "you're just picking up other people's news stories." That's why she genuinely believes in "generating the news."
It's hard to argue with this observation. After all, personal blogs and their reader-associated comments are the ultimate example of individual, POV and online conversation (or in my case, just hearing the sound of my own voice - I'm kidding). When you write a blog post, you participate in the overall conversation and express your view. Millions of us read blogs for the personal enjoyment of agreeing or disagreeing with another person's POV.
Isn't that the point of any enjoyable conversation whether or not that dialog takes place in-person or online ...
