Archive for the ‘Journalism’ Category
Will PRs and journalists own natural search?
July 23rd, 2008
You might say, “who cares?”, but for me this is a refreshing new angle on the ‘who owns online PR?’ discussion that has been going on within the social media industry for a while. Of course I’m going to like suggestions that PRs might be in line to own SEO, but setting my vested interests aside, this line of thought helps explain why it is crucial that journalists and PRs understand the long-term trends that are happening in natural search.
Guardian columnist Charlie Brooker made his own rather crude observations on the subject on Monday, in his overly optimised article, “Online POKER marketing could spell the NAKED end of VIAGRA journalism as we LOHAN know it.” He doesn’t say anything new - online headlines have always been important for driving traffic and natural links, and the only difference is that journalists are waking up to the impact optimised copy can have on their authority and popularity rankings - but the article drives home the SEO control that journalists have at their fingertips, should they choose to use it intelligently.
Similarly, Leon Bailey Green has today contributed a post to the E-Consultancy blog entitled: “Is the role of the SEO dead and should PRs own natural search?“, where he argues “off-site optimisation, link building or link baiting, should actually be in the domain of PR professionals”. He concludes “so if a web developer can build a search engine friendly website, a content writer knows how to write search engine friendly copy and an online PR guru can get blogs/websites/forums to link to that content, where does that leave an SEO?”
Regardless of who might own SEO in the future, or whether anyone will, it’s becoming more and more important for PRs and journalists to have a basic understanding of how relevancy, authority and quality of content will increasingly be the metrics used by search engines to rank sites. In addition, social networks are in some cases beginning to displace search, by creating trusted networks of relevant recommendations - which will make the role that PR plays even more important.
The tactics of PR and journalism don’t necessarily need to change, but individuals working in these sectors will have to be very good at what they do.
Natural search can appear very scientific, and I personally am on a mission to understand the techniques as well as I can…but ultimately, PR as an industry needs to focus on the quality of its output. There’s no place for fakers!
What’s wrong with digital agency comment?
July 1st, 2008
“Client side comment only please…no agency comment needed at this stage…desperate for brand-side comment – can you help?”
In recent weeks we’ve spotted a growing trend in such requests from digital trade journalists, either directly or through feature tracking services that we subscribe to. It seems journalists are increasingly less interested in digital agency comment, and more and more focused on brand-side opinion only.
As an ex-journalist for New Media Age, I can appreciate the need for big brand comment, but what I don’t understand is why those at the coalface, the specialists in digital marketing, creative and design, are being sidelined?
I thought a story always had two sides?
Reading between the lines, the problem is being compounded by an absence of readily available client-side comment on digital matters. From my experience this is either down to a brand not prioritising a digital trade comment opportunity, or acknowledging that the subject matter might be out of their depth.
At Liberate Media we’re always willing to do a journalist a favour and help out with these sorts of requests, but it’s getting increasingly frustrating to have to battle to offer the agency side of the story. If you want to talk to a brand about their digital investment, why not also speak to the agency in charge of their digital strategy?
I’d be really interested to hear what features writers/editors think about this. Is it a growing trend, or merely coincidence?
June 19th, 2008
So who caught Mike Butcher commenting on the AP content issue on Sky News last night? Mike has linked to a recording on his post this morning. Well done Mike!
When digital content issues reach the broadcast media you know it’s either big, or has been going on for a while, and in this case it’s both.
To recap, Associated Press has announced that it doesn’t want anyone quoting more than four words from its articles without payment.
I’m sorry, before we go any further, have I just entered a time warp? Have we shot back a few years to the early days of blogging when all these arguments were vaguely relevant? Don’t get me wrong, I fully support everyone who is fighting AP on this, but why do it? Why now? What’s the deal? Surely this can only end one way?
Even if AP is successful in stopping everyone that uses more than four words without payment, which let’s face it is financially and practically impossible, what do they stand to gain? Hold back the movement of content? Freeze the evolution of open communications? Become the new hate figure for digital media?
Help me out here.
I’m not going to bang on about the ‘why’ this is so ridiculous - many high profile bloggers have already put the argument across very clearly and eloquently , such as Arrington and Jarvis and as Mike Butcher said last night on Sky news: “It’s absolutely pointless!” Oh and: “Bananas”.
The one good thing to come out of this situation is to see some of the highest-profile bloggers united in a shared cause. Just watch them go now! AP, i almost feel sorry for you!
Metallica learn to love their web community
June 13th, 2008
It’s been one of the longest running sagas in digital communications. The story of a brand so unwilling to accept the thought of digital communications being at the heart of it’s future, that it has taken unusually harsh steps to avoid any sort of web involvement, especially in relation to its music.
The brand in question is Metallica - the world-famous metal band, and as i’m sure you know their hate-hate relationship with the web started in 2000 by taking legal action against Napster, accusing it of violating copyrights and instigating piracy, a course of action which other artists, namely Dr Dre, also pursued.
However, where as other artists have not only embraced the web but flourished on it, Metallica’s uneasy relationship with the web has continued with a seemingly unending stream of ill-advised decisions when it comes to utilising, or in fact doing everything possible not to utilise, the web.
Fast forward to this week and Metallica were at it again, or so it seemed. The story goes that Metallica set up a listening party of their new album with music bloggers in London. Seems like a good idea to me..and a step in the right direction. But then, of course, the bloggers dared to post their opinions and reviews of the new album and consequently the Metallica web police took over.
Metallica’s management company requested that the reviews were taken down because the listening party heard an early mix of the album, which seems very strange considering they were invited to listen to it, and the vast majority of reviews were actually good!
This whole process seemed to be very much in keeping with the script, leaving bloggers and fans frustrated and spawning such headlines as: Metallica goes diva on the Internet…again, Internet ignorance leaves Metallica looking like cyber bullies… again, Metallica: A Tale of Lost Fans and those were the nice ones! UK music blog The Quietus takes up the story.
But then, in a move straight out of the social media crisis communications book, Metallica stopped what they were doing, and quickly communicated with their community via their website , saying it was all a mistake by their management team, they had been out of the country touring when it happened and immediately reinstated all the reviews, even posting them on Metallica’s site. Simple, honest, friendly and open!
Suddenly, we see Metallica in a whole new light, either they’ve finally taken some advice, or they are actually mellowing to the power of the web, which they should seeing working only too clearly with headlines such as: Metallica apologise for demanding bloggers remove reviews, Metallica “ear spanks” management, reinstates online reviews, Metallica allows fans to read about new album.
In one quick and simple move Metallica have gone a long way to rebuilding the bridges that they’ve burnt over the years, and although they need to work at it, the new site and new found attitude show they are on the right track.
Well done Metallica and a nice social media case study as well!
Have i got news for you? The insider perspective…
June 11th, 2008
Last week, I was lucky enough to be one of the chosen few (well around 500) who demonstrated Olympian-grade precision queuing in order to gain access to the filming of “Have I Got News For You” in