I have been using Google + for a few days now (and no, this is not a post all about Google +) and have noticed an interesting phenomenon already. Everyone wants a “do-over” on social connectivity. Much discussion is happening around posts like, “Will you build your network differently here?” And the consensus seems to be that many people want to approach the whole concept of networking differently. Either they intend to be more selective in who they follow or add or they intend to be more rigorous in the groups (“circles” in + parlance) they form or maintain.

Another common thread is the desire to return to the halcyon early days of social networks when the novelty of connecting with other people – interesting people –was the driver behind the growth of Twitter or Facebook. You know, back before brands and marketing became the main focus of those old networks. Yes, that was a tiny bit sarcastic, I admit. Google + could potentially be much larger than Twitter given its much larger reach and the opportunity for even the most casual, non-networked internet user to be exposed to it every time someone does a search. Google + will be baked in to the search experience in a very seamless way by early indications (new “share” buttons have appeared in my gmail and my Google Reader apps already).

I remember the euphoria that accompanied my early days on Twitter, now nearly three years back, when someone new followed me. I long ago turned off “new follow” notifications because the emails were swamping my inbox. But I have the “notifications” from Google + turned on and that old feeling is back…. a little rush when someone adds me or comments on a post or shares something with me. Will it last? Probably not. Google + may end up being a better tool for personal connection, but professional networkers will soon be all over that platform and newly minted Google + jedi, knights, gurus and the like will be hawking their professional help. Soon, the who is following whom will become a game of sorts… social climbing for the 21st century.

Will anything be different in two years? Won’t Google + (or whatever is next) become what the users make of it and choose to do with it? Is a “do-over” really possible if defining relevance online via social cues – really the reason Google is doing this – will continue to be driven by who you know/are connected to and who’s talking about you, your brand, your company, your last presentation, slideshare, blog post or content bit? What do you think?

This is the framing post for the Wednesday, 2/9/11 #smchat on Twitter.

When you live in a social media fueled world, you sometimes forget to examine the larger perspectives out there. The more engaged in social media you are, the more likely this is to happen to you, your company, your clients or your brand. Social Media blinders are dangerous and marketers, PR people, brand managers and small business owners need to know the signs and how to look beyond.

Signs you may be wearing blinders:

1. You can’t remember the last time you watched an entire local newscast or read more than two stories from one issue of your local newspaper (even online)
2. You have no idea which local TV or newspaper reporters cover your business area or expertise
3. You get all or nearly all of your news from either your Twitter feed or your Facebook feed

What can happen?

1. Missed PR opportunities, missing trends or local shifts in perception that may not be filtering through to social media
2. Skewed view of your marketplace or your target audience’s wants, needs, problems or challenges
3. Giving up market share to competitors who are not constrained by blinders

How can you combat Social Media Blinders?

1. Use Google Alerts for more than just your name or your company name. Stay on top of key concepts or phrases in your industry or marketplace.
2. Stay in touch with what is happening in your local community by staying engaged with your local media.
3. Create content that is easily shareable beyond Twitter or Facebook. Think larger, think longer-term.
4. Get to know how much time your target market spends online, and where they spend it. Most importantly, figure out WHY they’re online. Posting coupons to Facebook is great if customers are there for coupons. If they are there for backstory and to find out about your corporate responsibility, you’ll need a different strategy.
5. Get out there… literally.

Got more? Other concerns about living to much in a hyper-connected world as it pertains to marketing, PR, brand, business or reputation? Anything you want to be sure we address in the chat? Post away in the comments!

Hope you’ll be able to join us this Wednesday, 1PM Eastern/noon Central for the chat. If you miss it, check out wthashtag.com for the transcript afterward. I’ll post the link in the comments on this post after we wrap the chat.

Twitter became meaningful for me two years ago today. Happy Anniversary, sweetheart

Today is the anniversary of the day I figured out the power of Twitter. I’d joined a few months before, in November of 2008. I’d tweeted some, and found and followed about two dozen people I respected in my industry… names I knew from MarketingProfs.com or from reading blog posts or articles. But mostly it was just for fun and a way for me to collect links and articles more quickly. I’d yet to really utilize a news/blog reader very well, so Twitter was serving that purpose. I’d first become intrigued after spending the previous year on Facebook, joining FriendFeed, and then hearing/seeing/reading about Twitter in industry articles. No one seemed really clear on what to do WITH it, just clear that everyone should be DOING it. I began to read… a lot. I didn’t follow anyone else and decided to start tweeting the good content I found, and commenting on it. I knew nothing of hashtags, really, other than that they existed. I’d never participated in a chat. I was determined to see if sharing good content was a strategy that actually worked, though…. so away I went.

After a couple of months, my following had grown to several hundred, based on luck and retweets of the content I’d created or shared. I still wasn’t actively following anyone, but I’d begun to talk to the followers I did have and with those I’d initially followed. Cool… but still not earth-shattering or profoundly game-changing. Then came Superbowl 43. I sat down to watch with my family, with my laptop… and started tweeting about the commercials (Hey, the Dolphins weren’t in it, and growing businesses is my profession). Suddenly, as the hashtag for the ads connected me to a slew of people across the globe all seeing and reacting to the same thing I was, at the same time, through a single medium, the power of Twitter (indeed, of all social media) became crystal clear to me. The conversations and engagement were infectious and addicting. I debated, agreed, challenged, tweeted and retweeted though the entire game, and have been actively engaged ever since. Because life is always happening, everywhere, all the time, and people are talking about it. Online, offline, all the time. The power of Twitter is not that I can talk to you, or you to me… it’s that WE can talk to EVERYONE else out there, anytime we want, one conversation at a time. Even if all we have in common is a love of Superbowl commercials, for today, it’s enough. Let’s connect.

What was your moment like? When did social media hook you?

I was pretty fired up and then wrote a veritable novel over at the Journal Record PR blog today. Thought I’d post the link here for those of you who read this blog but not that one (the content on the Journal Record is paid, EXCEPT THE BLOG… that is free!) If you want to read my take on the Doubleshot Coffee / Breastfeeding and/or the Iguana Mexican Grill v. Taco Johns and #TacoTuesday twitter and PR dustups, here’s your chance!

I’ll have additional content here soon… working on some context and relevance posts to continue the thoughts and discussions from last week’s post.

Many thanks to Doug Stewart, a guy dedicated to helping small businesses dominate their space on the web, for asking me to talk with him for a few minutes about effectively using social media and PR together to market businesses. If you’ve never heard me speak, here’s your chance If you have and you’re game for more… bless you, firstly, and secondly, enjoy the interview!

Have a topic you want to see me cover here? I’ve been toying with the idea of breaking my no-video style… what would you most like to see/hear for the first vid post on this blog?

The most overused business phrase from 1995 through about 2005 was “increase shareholder value.” It appeared in more corporate mission statements, vision statements and annual reports than “be environmentally responsible” does today. The worst part wasn’t the monotony (litany?) of corporate speak during those years… it was that the strategy wasn’t really a strategy. It was a result.

The best companies didn’t focus on creating shareholder value. They focused on their customers, products, services… delivering what people wanted, in the way they wanted it, in exchange for fairly valued compensation. The right focus and smart execution drove success, which ultimately increased shareholder value. Regardless of its inclusion in any mission statement, I might add. Do you think employees can all rally around the idea of doing their very best so they can increase the value of stock owned by someone else? Or even their own stock, which generally is a tiny portion of their compensation or retirement? Doubtful. Employees rarely care about shareholders.

Today, companies are urged to be responsive, engaging, transparent and social. Employees tweet or manage facebook pages for themselves and for businesses. There are videos, photos, review sites… so many ways to share information. And the customers are out there… tweeting, facebooking, reviewing, too. The companies who are engaging, who are social, who are transparent (which is just to say, HONEST), build this army of fans or friends. When something negative is posted to the facebook wall, fans defend the brand. When a tweetstorm erupts over someone’s negative experience, the brand responds, the followers defend and retweet, and all is rosy and well in the social sphere. Until… a major crisis hits, and those fans want answers.

They have been trained through interaction to feel like part of the team. Fed a diet of transparency and access, they feel entitled to answers, honesty and truth in short (very short) order. And they are correct. Those fans you’ve been cultivating? They are your businesses’ social shareholders. They have an (emotional) stake in your company. They defend, but they also demand. Just like in the old days of increasing shareholder value, creating raving fans is still a result, not a strategy.

Serve the customers…. in the immortal words of Becky McCray at the recent Get Social conference in OKC, “Customer service is all you’ve got.” She didn’t mean just the basic idea of customer service (being nice, greeting them, sacking the groceries correctly, etc.); she meant truly serving them. Putting those customers first, in all ways. Then, right after you take care of those customers and create those loyal followers, friends and fans, go take care of your social shareholders. They deserve it, too.

My big takeaways from the conference?

The Context / Content stuff is going to come together for another post soon

What do you think? Do you believe in the idea of social shareholders?

Thanks to Blake Jackson… the inspiration for this post came from his opening discussion at Get Social.

A few weeks back, I posted then original PR People, Tips & Resources post. Several of you submitted additional people, espectially, whom you thought should be included. I’ve vetted, added and here, for your enjoyment, is a new and improved list of PR goodness.

Again, please use the comments to let me know if you have a submission for the list. I will periodically update… though it’s approaching the size where a formal list of some sort might make more sense.

PR tips and PR People

Twitter hashtag #PRtips and one of the main contributors, @CyndyHoenig

@Kristen_Okla (Kristen Turley, Oklahoma practioner and PRSA leader)

@techpr (Marivic Valencia)

@dustinpyeatt (Dustin Pyeatt)

@rcrissinger (Rob Crissinger)

@wiredprworks (Barbara Rozgonyi)

PRSA on Twitter

PRSA web site

@SternalPR (John Sternal)

@HowellMarketing (Amy D. Howell)

@AnneDGallaher (Anne D. Gallagher)

@SueYoungMedia and her website (Sue Young)

@Barb_G (Barbara Gibson)

@PRMoxie (Mary Lower)

@MarisaCorser (Marisa Corser)

@worob and his blog (especially great for students, young PR pros and those transitioning in) (Andrew Worob)

@ShannonPaul and her website (Shannon Paul)

@ConversationAge (Valeria Maltoni) and her site

PR wonderfulness

PR Sarah Evans web site

The Fight Against Destructive Spin

PR Squared site (and also @TDefren on Twitter)

Ragan Communications (and also @MarkRaganCEO on Twitter)

Brian Solis web site

The 360 Days in a PR Life blog

PR Breakfast Club blog

Arik Hanson’s site, Communication Conversations

For how not to do PR

The Bad Pitch Blog (not always work suitable, but always targeted and often really funny)

I spent some time this week editing my feed reader and was reminded again about how much good information exists out there on the interwebs. Also a lot of bad, really bad, information… and I want to make sure to share the good stuff with you guys.

I compiled a beginning list on the Journal Record’s PR blog (yes, I write that one, too) and am asking that you add your thoughts to the list. We’ll all be better together, and I am definitely about connecting people and ideas. I hope you find some (new to you) nuggets of PR goodness and that you’ll share your favorites with us.

Please feel free to either comment/share here or over on the Record’s site, as you wish I’ll gather submissions from both sites and prepare a more in-depth list of resources and people based on everyone’s shared links.

PR tips and PR People:

Twitter hashtag #PRtips and one of the main contributors, @CyndyHoenig

@Kristen_Okla (Kristen Turley)

@techpr (Marivic Valencia)

@dustinpyeatt (Dustin Pyeatt)

@rcrissinger (Rob Crissinger)

@wiredprworks (Barbara Rozgonyi)

PRSA on Twitter

PRSA web site

@SternalPR (John Sternal)

PR wonderfulness

PR Sarah Evans web site

The Fight Against Destructive Spin

PR Squared site (and also @TDefren on Twitter)

Ragan Communications (and also @MarkRaganCEO on Twitter)

Brian Solis web site

The 360 Days in a PR Life blog

PR Breakfast Club blog

For how not to do PR:

The Bad Pitch Blog (not always work suitable)

(NOTE: this is by no means a comprehensive list… I follow and interact with LOTS of great PR-types, especially on Twitter. For more, try this Twitter list.) Remember… better together. Leave your favorite resources/tweeps/sites in the comments

Yeah… bubbles. Stay with me… you’ll see

After another furious #blogchat on Twitter where smart people were discussing the differences between passion and influence as it pertains to blogging and why (if?) it mattered, some things I’ve been thinking about began to crystallize. And because it’s what I do when that happens, here I am writing about it.

Before we dive in, thanks to @spikejones for inspiring some of this, @MackCollier for #blogchat (and lots of inspiration over time) and @edosegal, who wrote the ambient streams post I read recently.

First, some definitions (well, mine, anyway):

Passion (in the marketing sense) = commitment to/attachment to a brand, product, idea or position regardless of compensation.

It’s a feeling, an internal condition. It cannot be manufactured or externally created. Passion is a choice the individual makes… I choose to love Godiva dark chocolate. Godiva hasn’t asked me to love it, paid me to love it, and doesn’t particularly care that I do so… I, on an individual level, am not influential in their marketing planning. (Oversight on their part? Perhaps… )

Influence = ability to affect other’s perceptions or awareness.

Influence CAN be purchased/created. It’s an external perception… Billions of ad dollars are spent every year trying to influence the awareness and perception of potential customers. Is it possible for an individual blogger to have influence in a space he or she is not passionate about? Long term, I think the answer is no. Bloggers who have influence in a particular space usually have earned that right through good information, solid community, earned respect. Not always… because, as we’ve already said, influence can be purchased. Programs and tools and schemes exist to “grow your blog” and “get thousands of followers” to jump-start influence.

At least initially. Some of the current “stars” of the social media world, for instance, may not be around in a year or two. If they aren’t passionate about the relevant, interactive web, they will run out of things to say that resonate with the community marketers are hoping to reach through their influence. If they stop resonating, they will lose influence, and their relevance.

Someone who is passionate about an idea or product or brand keeps on learning, and loving, and sharing experiences and interactions born of the love affair. And those shared moments will typically only resonate with those who are interested in the same brand or idea. Maybe the audience isn’t in love yet… maybe just experimenting or looking for a first date. That’s where passionate people and influence intersect.

I can be influenced only by those people or messages I choose to pay attention to. Repeat… I can only be influenced by those people or messages I choose to pay attention to.

Why do I care what TechCrunch thinks in general about [insert brand here]? I don’t. I don’t care about what TechCrunch thinks about a lot of things. But I <3 Apple products. I tend to pay attention to what TechCrunch says about all things Apple… I am passionate about that brand and TechCrunch’s opinion is more relevant to me when they are talking about Apple than when they are talking about XBox360. I choose to pay attention… and then TechCrunch has a chance to influence me and my opinion.

What is missing from all this influence and passion is a way to filter relevance. It’s a fact that humans filter information and stimuli all the time. The web’s current model is based on active search:

Random thought triggers question…

Brain can’t supply answer…

Enter phrase into Google, or more typical for me, Twitter (or your weapon of choice)…

Scan results… (FOR WHAT… ?)

Click on choice that seems THE MOST RELEVANT to me (I trust the source/know the source or believe Google’s method for determining importance and value)

The future of the web, I believe, won’t be based on active search, but on ambient streams. Already, who I choose to follow on Twitter creates ambient streams that bubble up the information I care about. As more and more of the web dabbles in relevance… more information will find us rather than us going to look for it.

Who we choose to be influenced by (who we let control our information streams) will matter a great deal more than it does now. I suspect we’ll get more picky, too. More fragmented as a marketplace, more determined to know what we want to know and not see the rest. How will we determine who makes the cut? Passion… who we believe. Influence… who we trust. And relevance… who we perceive to “understand who and where we are in life.”

Already, the web can tell where I’m located, who is tweeting or geotagging near me, what sites/locations/stores I’ve visited recently (and if I positively or negatively reviewed them), and who I’m choosing to be influenced by (who am I connected to on Twitter, Facebook, Ning groups, LinkedIn, etc). How far off is that one app/program/site that will analyze that info, assign relative relevance scores to the possible streams of info, and show me what is relevant to me based on ME, not on Google’s basic algorithms?

Heady, and scary, stuff. What do you think… what’s next?

Google's Real Time Search is the "oh, Shiny!" topic we need to talk about.

I don’t claim to be an SEO expert…. But I DO know something about marketing. This post is about the future, the possibilities, and what people who are using any form of online marketing need to be thinking about NOW to get ready for what is coming. And it’s coming much faster than you might think.

Buzz is beginning about Google’s search integration deals with Facebook and Twitter… here are a couple of other people’s posts with more of the details, if you wanna know the specifics:

Info from Mashable

More, especially about Facebook

What does it mean for marketing? It means “integrated marketing” can’t just be about cross-platform and multi-channel. It now has to be about timing and velocity, too. If enough people on Twitter and Facebook are talking about your company’s product release, blog post or other shiny new thing, will you achieve the golden Google award of auto-real time search? What drives Google to choose which search terms/items get an auto real-time feed? I (obviously) don’t know the algorithm. But I bet it’s got everything to do with velocity and relevance. If Mashable tweets a post, and lots of people retweet it, is that out of the ordinary? Or a “blip” in the search world? Not really. If I tweet a post, and two hundred people retweet it, is THAT out of the ordinary? uh.. yes. Quite. It makes a blip on the search radar. It means something that WASN’T relevant a short time ago (my blog) is now relevant to (proportionally) many more people. Maybe I get my own Google live feed for a bit while people are tweeting, facebooking and commenting on the post. And then it goes away… rather like the auto live-feed for “Tiger Woods Mistress.” Was there… then not. May be again when another “revelation” breaks from someone else.

The point? “Buzz” has another dimension now. Real time matters because it gives the whole world (well, the whole Google-ized world, anyway) a snapshot of what’s important to EVERYONE, right now. Think of it as Twitter trending topics, writ large. Companies need to be ready…

Imagine a major hail storm hits the midwest in the United States. Guess what would suddenly start being very relevant?

“Roofing damage”

“Hail damage”

“local roofing in [city]“

These searches would all gain immediate, non-characteristic, traffic. They would form a blip, and the real time, relevant web will respond with live updates. If you’re a local roofing company, will your tweets/FB page/web site/blog be ready to take advantage of the traffic potential?

What do you see as the dangers? Benefits? Strategies needed? Future? So much to discuss here… looking forward to your thoughts!

UPDATE >> the number of results on Google for “Mandy Vavrinak” has jumped by about 1,500 since I last searched, about a week ago. THAT is what adding results from Facebook and Twitter means…