Being genuine about monitoring social media

BusinessWeek recently ran an interesting piece on how multinationals are hiring others to monitor social media to see what people are saying about their company. (Click here for full article.)

The article, by Dexter Roberts, focuses on Daqi.com. Specifically, Daqi.com helps multinationals monitor their reputation online in China. The article has a few good examples and is a great example of how companies recognize the impact of social media.

But two things stood out:

• The article points out a case of a Toyota customer upset that his car wasn't delivered and venting about it on a blog. The customer was finally taken care of but the Toyota's PR agency then refused to comment on the complaint or provide details.
• Some of these agencies hire people to post positive things about clients on various blogs.

Seems to me if you're going to play in these arena you should be open about it. In the first instance, a golden opportunity was missed. It was a chance to talk about a problem and how it was solved. That, in turn, builds trust. In this case, Toyota dealt with this the old fashioned way -- doing what it could to make the customer happy and then saying nothing about it for fear, I presume, it would make the company look bad.

In the second instance there's a pretty good chance such actions will be found out pretty quickly. And then the world knows you are not being genuine. And then you have a real problem.

Conclusion -- if you're going to go this route you probably better off going the whole way.

The future of newspapers

Jon Fine, columnist for BusinessWeek, has a great post on how newspaper executives feel about the current state of affairs. (Click here for full article.)

LA Times Sunday magazine

A lot of energy is being exerted over the decision by the Los Angeles Times to have the Sunday magazine run by the business side, not the editorial. (Click here for one such example.)

There's no point in summarizing or rehashing any of this except to say -- I am willing to bet a ton of money that the readers won't even notice the difference. Not one iota. And when that happens the editorial department, which is ranting on endlessly about this, will have even less credibility.

8 reasons magazines are in trouble

Jon Friedman writes a regular column for CBS Marketwatch. His thoughts aren't always leading edge but he seems to have a few good ideas here and there.

This week Jon posted a column on how magazines can embrace the web. (In typical magazine cover line fashion he lists "8 simple rules for succeeding on the Web.") (Click here for full article.)

I won't go into too much detail here on his points but it strikes me as sad that he made these points to a gathering of media executives. The fact that magazine executives still fear the Web or can't find ways to exploit it says tons about the state of the industry.

Nothing new in the WSJ

Is it just me or is there less to read in the Wall Street Journal these days?

Every day, when I read the paper, about half of what's in there has either been online for a while or already appeared in the New York Times. I recognize that News Corp., is trying hard to compete with the New York Times but publishing articles about subjects the reader has already heard about does not seem to be the answer.

Examples from today's front page:

-- Lead article about inflation growing around the world. (I have seen that and similar pieces in countless places.)

-- Manhunt for convicted hedge fund manager. (Seen that all over the New York Times and the local Connecticut paper.)

-- Secretive associate of Putin emerges as oil czar. (Finally, something new. But it's below the fold.)

-- Robotic vacuum cleaner fights for territory from family dog. (There we go. Something new and interesting. Again, at the bottom of the page.)

I am certainly not suggesting a heavy emphasis on robotic vacuum cleaner articles but I am suggesting they either cover more business or find a unique twist on these stories, twists you can't get anywhere else. Right now, most of what I see on there is old news.

Don't just listen, include others

Sprint Nextel's CEO, Dan Hesse, recently posted his email address in a series of TV commercials. It's part of his effort to improve their well-deserved reputation for poor customer service. (They also have a well-deserved reputation for lousy coverage but that's another story.) This effort was reported in this morning's New York Times.

It all strikes me as a well-intentioned, but flawed, attempt at reconciliation with its customers. Right now it's a one-way conversation. Granted, it's from the customers to the top executive. That's a start. But for this to really work, and to gain trust with clients, the conversation needs to be a lot more transparent. Starbucks (http://www.mystarbucksidea.com/) and Salesforce.com have set up site where customers can not only suggest ideas, but other customers can see it and, even more impressive, vote on the ideas. I don't know if Sprint Nextel needs to include voting but if a customer sees other comments from other customers and, most important, sees them acted upon then you have something to talk about.

Now there's nothing to talk about since there is no clear indication anything is being done about these problems.

Never forget -- newspapers are a business, part 432

If ever you need to be reminded that newspapers are a business, read about Sam Zell's planned cuts at the LA Times, Chicago Tribune and others. In short, they plan to print fewer pages and reduce head count. What's interesting is how they are approaching this: by figuring out the number of column inches created by each journalist. Randy Michaels, COO of Tribune, has concluded they need fewer journalists because some are not producing as much as others.

From the New York Times:

Mr. Michaels said that, after measuring journalists’ output, “when you get into the individuals, you find out that you can eliminate a fair number of people while eliminating not very much content.” He added that he understood that some reporting jobs naturally produce less output than others.

Later on in the Times article is another interesting tidbit:

... Mr. Zell wrote that Tribune papers would be redesigned, beginning with The Orlando Sentinel, on June 22. Surveys show readers want “maps, graphics, lists, ranking and stats,” he wrote. “We’re in the business of satisfying customers, and we will respond to what they say they want.”

A few comments:

• You're going to see more of this approach, not less.
• This is how most businesses behave. However, newspapers and some magazines have not caught up with the times.
• Everyone is blaming the Internet for the demise of newspapers. That's only hastened their demise. At the core is an inability by many to understand that they need to produce useful content. If you don't give your readers what they want, you're out of business.

Some are sure to disagree. Jeffrey Weiss of the Dallas Morning News is one. (Click here.) But it ignores the basic problem facing newspapers -- fewer people are reading them because there's less content that interests them.