commentary

Think before your click.

Social networking sites are now rampant with viruses and spam, according to the New York Times. For Viral Crooks, Social Networks are Prime Targets, is an important read for everyone who uses social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter.

Here are some scary statistics excerpted from that article:

Sophos says that 21 percent of Web users report that they have been a target of malicious programs on social networks. Kaspersky Labs, a Russian security firm, says that on some days, one in 500 links on Twitter point to bad sites that can infect an inadequately protected computer with typical viruses that jam hard drives. Kaspersky says many more links are purely spam, frequently leading to dating sites that pay referral fees for traffic.

The problem lies in the fact that people are much more likely to trust a link they think was sent to them by a friend.

Twitter sites can now be hijacked so that before you know it you’re broadcasting someone else’s message to your contacts.

Bottom line? Think before you click. Ask your contact if you’re not sure. And check your social networking accounts frequently to make sure you’re not inadvertently sending out the wrong kind of message!

YouTube Best Practices

So much of my attention is now focused on YouTube that I’ve launched a new site with my partner in this venture, John Samellas.  www.YouTubeBestPractices.com is a site that discusses how to get the most out of your enhanced YouTube Channel. It provide updates on the special features available only to Google Content Providers like John.

Of course, it also will address integration of YouTube with Twitter, Facebook and other social networking media. It just didn’t fit in the title.

Check it out and let us know what you’d like to see. We’ll be featuring the best (and worst) of YouTube along with tips and suggestions.

A life experience that I could have skipped

I’ve worked in the public relations industry since 1982, in my own consulting firm since 1991. I guess I’m lucky that until this past year, I’ve never had a serious problem with either a client or a vendor.

That has changed. I’ve been locked in a dispute with a web programmer that I hired to create a personal business (a fun website) since the beginning of the year.

One of my attorney friends has told me that everyone needs to live through a lawsuit once. That it’s part of life’s essential experiences. I must say that while this hasn’t progressed quite that far, it’s something I could have easily lived without!

I’ve always thought of myself as a fair person. I try to give my clients good value for their money and, if I sometimes underestimate the difficulty of a particular job, I live with it. When I’ve hired people for client work I’ve also tried to be fair. Many times I’ve gone back to clients and asked for more money when I’ve seen how hard people have worked on their behalf.

For several years I dreamed about building a website that would let me turn a favorite hobby into a small business. I didn’t have a lot of money to invest so I chose to hire a local web programmer who was known to several of my colleagues. He hadn’t built a site exactly like I wanted (it is a database driven site, so not as simple as a standard site), but he expressed his desire to expand his capabilities and collaborate with me on the development.

We agreed to proceed in phases. Each phase had a budget which was submitted to me in writing. I approved it. If something changed, he sent me an updated budget to discuss. This system worked fine.

Until it didn’t.

When we started the fourth phase of the project he gave me an estimate that gave me pause. It was considerably more money than I had anticipated and more than he’d originally told me I’d have to spend. We discussed it at length. He explained why he felt this phase of the work would be so expensive and eventually I agreed. The phase took several months to complete. There were frustrations when essential functions (such as search) just weren’t working the way they were supposed to.

Finally, those problems seemed to be solved. I started to talk to him about the final phase. The one that would turn my dream site into a real viable site.

Then I got a new invoice from him for the just completed phase. The amount was more than twice what I had agreed to pay. I was — and still am — stunned that someone, especially someone with whom I worked for a year, would send me an invoice for what represented more than 100 hours of his time without ever discussing it with me. I consider the work to have been part of the scope of the project. It was programming. Something that could have been outsourced to India and done for a pittance. Had he come to me and explained that he was having problems that he would charge me for . . . I could have taken control of the project and decided what it was worth to me. Instead, he said nothing. He simply handed me a bill.

I paid what I had agreed to pay. I even offered to pay 15% of the overage. It didn’t satisfy him and so far I’ve gotten no satisfaction, either. In fact, I’ve gotten the everything but. Every month I’ve received letters trying to intimidate me into paying the overage and demanding interest on funds (not) owed. I’ve been threatened that I’ll be liable for attorneys fees, collections fees, etc. I’ve received a letter from a collection agency. I’ve learned that despite the exorbitant overages (that I haven’t paid) and the amount of money that I paid, I was left with a website that was rife with errors . . . that I’ve needed to pay another firm to fix the problems. At that time I discovered that many of the changes I’d been told were not possible were indeed just simple programming. They’ve been fixed for a relative pittance.

By a professional.

I am embarrassed that after so many years of evaluating vendors that I so badly miscalculated on the skill and integrity of someone who was supposed to work on my own project, the one that I cared the most about.

I’ve looked at the laws in Massachusetts and am contemplating whether it’s worth the emotional energy and the additional funds to consider a suit against him. I’ve gone through the exercise of consulting a lawyer and am fully aware of how quickly legal fees would add up. Mostly now I want him to go away. I want to put my project aside until I can look at it without feeling betrayed. I’d like to get my dream back.

Anyone in the Boston area who would like to avoid the problems that I encountered are welcome to contact me so that I can share the name of person with whom I am in dispute.

What’s happened to customer service? Adobe disappoints.

I am now on day 8 of an ongoing technical issue with Adobe.

I use Adobe Contribute. Or, should I say, I try to use Adobe Contribute. Contribute is a software platform that allows you to edit web pages from your browser without the need to know html. When it works, it’s a great program. I use it to make changes to a client’s website so they can review the pages before they are published.

Right now it’s not working.

No problem, I thought. Adobe is a company with the resources to provide appropriate technical support. So, I went to their Website and, like many companies, discovered that it’s far more difficult to find a phone number for a live person than it should be.

I know it’s more cost effective for them to send customers to technical support via an email submission form. I typed up my problem and sure enough, they got back to me in a few hours with a proposed solution. My real problem started when that suggestion didn’t work. I emailed them back and was promised that they’d have a new set of recommendations within 48 hours. That was on November 10th. Maybe they meant 48 days.

Now my issue is that I need that program to work. My client’s website is dynamic. They have new information that needs to be posted on a regular basis. After a few days I called Adobe again. This time I stuck it out. After being on hold for about 15 minutes I was connected to customer service. That person then transferred me to someone in technical support. Five more minutes of jarring on-hold music I reached a live person and explained my problem again. He didn’t know anything about Contribute. Five more minutes of on hold music and I got to another person in technical support. I explained my problem again. I was put on hold again. Seven minutes later I’m told that Contribute isn’t eligible for phone support and that I have to use the online submission form. Once again I explain that I’ve waited six days already and that I need some answers. Five more minutes on hold and then I’m promised that they will have an answer for me ASAP. The person on the other end of the phone in — maybe — India predicts an answer within 2 hours but certainly no more than 24 hours. Total time on the phone 32 minutes. Results? Nothing.

That was 2 1/2 days ago.

Yesterday I sent several emails and got no reply. I braved the phone system again yesterday afternoon. This time it took me only 8 minutes to reach my first live person. Once again I was transferred up and down the food chain and took a phone tour of several countries. Once again I’ve been promised that they will solve my problem and that this time they will call me. I just need to wait another 48 hours. No problem, I’ve just invested another 25 minutes or so on the phone. Total time talking to Adobe is now at about 55 minutes.

That’s not counting the time that I spent searching the user support forums or the time spent trying different solutions with my client’s IT director. It doesn’t include the time I spent rebuilding preferences, reinstalling the software or clearing the connections and installing new keys.

At this point I’m wondering if they simply don’t have anyone in the company who knows anything about Contribute. Is it possible that those people have vanished from the face of the earth?

Perhaps it’s time to learn DreamWeaver.

Analytics saving California Social Services Agency Millions

I know lots of companies that don’t measure the performance of their websites or enewsletters. On colleague of mine told me that he had a “gut feeling” about what works for his company.

However, when you look at what you can learn from studying your stats, it’s eye-opening. Many of my clients are truly surprised to find out what information their constituencies find most interesting, which pages on their sites get the most traffic, and which of their pearls of wisdom are generally ignored!

Now the Alameda County, Calif., Social Services Agency  has found that using analytics can save taxpayers a lot of money.

In July of 2009 the county agency launched a $1.5 million business intelligence and analytics package from IBM that integrates six systems in order to give caseworkers a nearly real-time look at how and when clients are using various social services.

Bingo! This is the beauty of information shared on the web. You can measure it. You can track responses, view traffic patterns and look at referring urls.

Now, you don’t have to spend $1.5 million to do so. In fact, for someone just starting out, a free program such as Google Analytics is a good start. I use it for several of my own sites and for client sites.

As a result of what we’ve learned from collecting data over a period of time one of my clients redesigned their site and changed the type of information that they presented. For example, we found that the FAQs section of the site drew the most visitors. As a result, we started putting the information that we felt was most important for customers to know in that section. We also found that there was an enormous need for basic educational information which drove us to create several tutorials.

As for e-newsletters, knowing which topics attract the most readers is valuable from an overall perspective but critical for sales people who want to learn more about the customers in their territories.

I think that one of the greatest barriers to installing analytics programs is that people are afraid what the measurements will show; that their programs aren’t performing as well as they should. My take on this is different. To measurably demonstrate the value that public relations and marketing communications adds to a company you must be able to provide the data and you must establish a benchmark for your current success. After all, you can’t improve your outreach if you don’t know there’s a problem.

Make your video shoot successful

Recently I responded to an RFP to produce a “virtual plant tour” video. As part of the proposal each team was asked to identify best practices to follow and pitfalls to avoid. Here’s some of what I wrote:

Best Practices

  • Plan well: the videos that are the most successful are the ones that are planned properly. This means using storyboards and shot lists to plan out exactly how each portion of the script will be illustrated.
    Shoot additional b-roll while you’re on site. Today’s viewing audience is used to fast-paced video with many transitions. You never have too much video but it’s easy to end up with not enough.
  • Spend enough money to make the video look good. Your video will be around for a long time. Many of our clients are still using videos that we shot a decade ago. Hiring a cinematographer who knows how to light properly and use equipment that will produce a quality product that will warrant your investment.
  • Shoot in High Definition. Some clients believe it isn’t really necessary but we disagree with you. HD is now the standard – even on YouTube. If you shoot it in another format you immediately label your information as dated. Even when shown in smaller formats it is apparent as HD is a different aspect ratio than standard video.
  • Think small as well as big. YouTube is now the second largest search engine and one of the largest broadcast channels for video in the world. When you plan your big corporate video, think about how you can break it into modules and show them on YouTube. This approach will help you reach a broader audience very quickly. If you don’t have your own YouTube Channel, this would be a good time to set one up.

Biggest pitfalls:

  • Not hiring a professional scriptwriter. Conveying information via the spoken word is different from writing articles or brochures. Including a scriptwriter on the team – someone who is familiar with how to meld words and images in a package that is easy to listen to – makes a huge difference. I know many folks think they can do it themselves but if you’re hiring a camera crew and spending the amount of time necessary to do a video, don’t skimp on the writing.
  • Trying to shoot it yourself. Don’t kid yourself. Your customers can tell when you shoot your own video and they are generally not impressed. Think about the message that it sends: we don’t (or can’t) invest the money in doing this professionally. Flip videos are great but unless you’re going for that Blair Witch Project effect, will backfire.
  • Shooting “from the hip”: if you don’t plan your video shoot it’s easy to end up in the editing suite with not enough footage to illustrate your script.

Video is definitely making a comeback now that the bandwidth exists to watch it online. With some pre-planning and vision, your next video project will be a success that lasts for many years.

YouTube hits 1-billion views per day

YouTube is putting the broadcast TV channels to shame. According to http://www.marketingcharts.com:

YouTube routinely serves up more than 1 billion video views per day around the world, far surpassing its next-closest rival Microsoft and helping the site continue its strong growth, especially since being acquired by Google three years ago, according to a blog post by Chad Hurley, YouTube’s co-founder and CEO.

In August, comScore reported numbers for YouTube’s US market to be in the neighborhood of 10 million videos watched per month. Google represented 40% of all videos viewed online, while YouTube.com accounted for 99% of all Google videos viewed.

comScore also said that Microsoft Sites ranked a very distant #2, with 547 million (2.2%), followed by Viacom Digital with 539 million videos viewed (2.1%) and Hulu with 488 million (1.9%).

However, the latest figures from YouTube, which include global estimates, reveal that comScore’s numbers may be a significant underestimation, writes MarketingVOX.

The milestone has spurred YouTube to create a special “1 BN” logo to highlight occasion.

Trends for online video viewing show that both the number of viewers and the numbers of videos viwed continues to rise. According to a recent study by Ipos MediaCT, more than two-thirds (67%) of online Americans now report that they have streamed or downloaded digital video content from the internet, and most feel it’s reasonable to watch embedded ads in online TV and movies if the desired video content remains free-of-charge.

Nielsen also found that the the audience for mobile video viewing grew 70% in Q209.

Weber describes YouTube as a “juggernaut”

Thank you, Larry Weber, for helping me sell the idea of corporate YouTube channels. With your new book, Sticks & Stones: How Digital Business Reputations are Created Over Time and Lost in a Click, and your subsequent tweets, you’ve given the stamp of credibility to YouTube and made it an acceptable tool for corporate America.

For the past year I’ve been talking to my clients about the necessity of managing their on-line reputation by taking control of such viral elements as video. Now that Larry has chimed in and devoted an entire chapter of his book to YouTube perhaps they’ll pay more attention.

Maybe now people will understand that YouTube is no longer just college students lighting farts. Okay, that’s still part of it, but in general there has been an on-going shift on YouTube to more professional content that is an integral part of a company’s (or college’s) outgoing message.

Maybe now people will understand that by not participating in YouTube they are giving the control of their online reputation to the masses. Just because YOU haven’t put anything about your company on YouTube, don’t assume that there’s nothing out there.  Type your company name into YouTube and see what you find. I did that for a client of mine and showed them that there are three videos that come up. The first two were a rant from a former employee that started with the statement, “They want to shoot the president and black children at my job.” Just what you’d like your customers to find when they are looking for information about you, right?

Then there’s a college that I’ve been talking to. Type in their name and one of the top five videos was of a student, drunk, with his friends writing all over his body with black magic marker. It perhaps did not accurately convey the image of the college that they had intended.

YouTube should be evaluated and handled as part of every organization’s public relations strategy. Because, guess what? Every day more of your “public” is finding their information right there.


No one reads anymore . . . The future lies in video.

Has anyone else noticed this? Because it seems glaringly obvious to me that people no longer read. Not us PR types. We still read. It’s the people we are trying to reach that have given it up.

I am assuming this is why when someone is given written instructions, the task is inevitably done wrong. Or why when you email or text a question to someone, the response is not an answer. At least not an answer to the question you asked.

The alternative is that people are mostly stupid and I don’t think this is true. Reading, especially reading for comprehension, is just too time consuming.

That leaves us with a conundrum. How can we tell the stories we need to communicate in a way that appeals to our target audiences? The answer is video.

Ten years ago corporate video was widespread and elaborate. Web-based communications made video unfeasible until recently because of bandwidth restrictions. Now, it’s back and it’s more important than ever.

YouTube is now the most broad-reaching broadcast channel out there. It’s bigger than any of the network channels and soon will reach a larger audience than all of those channels combined.

To best serve our clients, we must now embrace the use of video as a communications medium.

Who’s Using Which Browsers? And why does it Matter?

Browser compatibility is one of the trickiest issues in web site design. Just because a site looks great in Firefox (which is apparently programmer-friendly) or IE7 doesn’t mean that it works well (or even at all) in IE6 or IE8. As for Safari, Chrome, Mozilla and Sea Monkey (!), you have to decide whether the number of visitors requires compatibility testing.

You would think that blanket compatibility, at least of the major browsers,  would be top of every web designers list of “Must Haves”. Sadly, I found this isn’t always the case — it’s something that needs to be written into the contract and then tested, tested and tested again.

Last year I worked on a Website for a client where the site looked great in Firefox and IE7. The problem was that they used IE6 in their office and in that browser, they couldn’t see the entire page so important information appeared to be left off. The programmer’s initial response? They need to upgrade their browser. I think not!

This year I had a client who had a Website that worked perfectly in everything except IE7. If it was an obscure browser like Sea Monkey, maybe it wouldn’t be an issue but according to my own tracking, IE7 is still the most popular browser on the market. The programmer’s response? We’ll fix it in the next phase. I think not! Browser compatibility is integral to the success of your clients’ websites. It’s not something you get to later. I understand that each version of Internet Explorer has specific programming requirements, but absolute conformance just needs to be part of the completed job.

Who uses what browser depends a lot on your target audience. Consumers tend to upgrade their browsers frequently than large corporations, where IT departments generally standardize the use of a particular browser company wide.  I know several companies that still use IE6 (with no immediate plans to upgrade) even though IE8 is gaining market share.

While there are mass statistics that dictate browser share, I monitor the visitors on my own and my clients’ sites to give me a finger on the pulse of the industries that I serve. I’ve found that my figures are not much of the mark as those reported in Wikipedia.

For example, here are the trends I’ve seen over the past year for one of my clients, which is in the telecommunications industry. The people viewing their site are fairly technical, international in scope, and many work for larger companies.

Here are the stats for visitors to their site during the past 30 days:

Browser share over the past 30 days

This chart shows browser share over the past 30 days. IE is by far the most dominant browser. More than 63% use IE with Firefox at just under 30%.

This graph shows the breakdown of the different IE Versions.

This graph shows the breakdown of the different IE Versions. No surprise -- IE7 is the predominant browser with 48.5%, but IE6 still enjoys heavy usage for an "old" browser at 33%, and IE8 adoption is up to 18%, a significant increase since the beginning of the year.

IE8 usage has grown considerably since the beginning of the year.

Look at the stats from Jan '09. Just six months ago, fewer than 2% of our visitors were using IE8. Interestingly, IE6 usage is pretty consistent; IE7 had a larger share of the browser market.

So, what’s the bottom line? Don’t underestimate the longevity of the major browser versions. Make sure that your clients’ websites work on all of them. Browser testing should be done by your web designer or firm, but it’s a good idea to check for yourself. I generally have the current versions of Firefox and IE on my computer but there are resources on-line that can help you look at some of the versions not immediately available.

Here are two that I’ve used:

Browsershots.org lets you look at your website in a large number of platforms (some of which I’ve never heard of!) You can look at a limited number of screen shots for free.

Browsercam.com lets you see your website using any browser and any operating system.