Now that we are well into spring, I am stepping up my training for this summer’s Pan-Mass Challenge. I’ll be riding my fifth PMC in August, and I keep coming back because it’s such a well-run event, and raises money (over $30 million a year) to fight and cure cancer at Boston’s Dana Farber Cancer Institute. This has become an ever more important event and cause for me, after my father and father-in-law both passed from cancer over the last year and a half, and many friends and their families are also suffering from dealing with cancer.

Fundraising has gone well so far, thanks to many of you generous folks. Of course, we’re not done yet- as I type this, I have just under $5,000 left to reach my $7,500 goal for the event, matching last year’s total. Will you help? Please sponsor my ride at http://bit.ly/pmcdoug.

Meantime, I put together some footage from my early training rides to illustrate some of the things I typically see in Boston’s Western suburbs:

Also, after consulting many friends on Twitter and Facebook, I adopted use of the Strava app to track my rides this year. It makes keeping track of my training easier, and even shows how I do in certain segments of rides. So farm, so good. This widget shows some of my most recent rides. If you encounter this post (or this widget) later in the season, I hope you will see some greater distances- and faster speeds.

The original version of this piece appeared in Voce Nation, the blog by Voce Communications, a Porter Novelli Company

At PRSA’s Digital Impact Conference at the beginning of April, our (Voce’s) Monster.com client, Kathy O’Reilly, and I were honored to be asked to speak about how we manage Monster’s social media publishing program. The session, titled “Manage Multiple Content Streams Like Monster.com,” addressed the many elements of planning and executing a complex social media program from both the company and agency sides. What follows are some of what I felt were the more interesting parts of our talk.

Blogs are not dead

The “blogs are dead” meme didn’t rear it’s ugly head that I saw at Digital Impact, but the basic concept of a “hub and spoke” content strategy- the hub being on-domain content, usually a blog, and the spokes being off-domain platforms such as Facebook and Twitter- was prevalent throughout. Certainly our program with Monster.com, as well as with our various other clients, is predicated on this concept, but I also saw it outlined from different points of view. Most notably, Lee Odden’s session on optimization espoused Hub and spoke from the standpoint of search effectiveness.

Simple Hub and Spoke Model (image by Josh Hallett of Voce Communications)

“Hub and Spoke” is not Always that Simple

While we started from “hub and spoke” in our presentation we quickly noted that a simple hub and spoke is not always possible or ideal. In the case of Monster, there are three main blogs on the company’s domains. feeding several Twitter accounts and Facebook page, serving a variety of audiences (which nonetheless cross over), and being fed by other content platforms such as YouTube, SlideShare and Flickr. On top of that is the constant onslaught of new platforms that we research, consider and try (such as Google Plus and Pinterest). The image I created to express this, versus the clean and simple “hub and spoke” slide, purposely expresses the chaos which we work together to bring to order.

Monster.com's Complex Hub and Spoke

Personal Voice is Important, but Corporate Voice is Paramount

In this age of overemphasis on “personal brand” and the cliché status of terms like “join the conversation” and “engage,” it is still important to have voice- and voices. We covered the various people who represent the different sides of Monster.com’s personality, from the job-seeker focus to employers to the straight corporate voice. Monster stresses the identification of real people with names, faces and their own voices (this includes guest authors) but with a consistent company voice running through all the content. This isn’t easy, but constant communication among all those producing and coordinating the content results in a consistency that can survive the personnel changes that all companies must endure- even among their social media spokespeople. Monster is not immune to those changes, and we have helped them make a number of transitions.

Inter-Agency Cooperation is Not Just an Ideal

For years, I have dreamed of the perfect agency-client relationship where all the departments responsible for communication speak to each other and coordinate efforts to a single clear goal. It doesn’t always happen; otherwise we wouldn’t hear so much about “breaking down silos.” Something we have also learned is that the various agencies need to be brought into a unified planning strategy. Therefore, we work with Monster’s PR, branding, advertising, media buying, and any other outside agencies along with the larger internal communications people to coordinate long-term efforts and larger campaigns. It’s essential, and I fear that not every company thinks that way. The pain of coordinating so many moving parts (and squeezing too many people into a conference room) pays off on the other end

We Put Tools Last, But You Knew We’d Do That (Right?)

The time we spend on tools is disproportionate to t their importance to the strategy. We need them, but only after we know what, why and how we are doing. We feel one of the agency’s jobs is to know what we can about tools so we can:

• Recommend the best tools for the job
• Know how to use the tools- not every client uses the same systems
• Be able to recommend and jump in with the various “point solutions” on a short-term basis when needed for quick turnarounds

Tools are in their place.

Illustrating the system as “complex” is not the same as saying it is too “complicated.” It was a pleasure for us to talk together in front of a crowd of peers and validate our approach to content publishing.

In Social Media Marketer-Land, we often make sport of the constant ego-building, attention-mongering activities that are all too prevalent. I do it, you do it (oh, I know you do don’t act all innocent), and it’s great that we call each other to account for being egomaniacal jerks.

Sometimes, though, we’re just having fun. For example, on our recent vacation in Phoenix, we noticed that at Chase Field, home of Major League Baseball’s Diamondbacks, fans could get Tweets displayed on the big scoreboard in center field. All you had to do was include the #godbacks” hashtag.

• Ego gratification? Check
• Gratuitous hashtag use? Check.
• Publishing message on Twitter that everyone can see, not just people at the Diamondbacks games, for maximum lack of context? Check.

So, do I promise to be less cynical when others do silly attention-getting things in social media?

Nah. Probably not.

A version of this post originally appeared on the Voce Nation Blog

In February, I attended Boston’s Social Media Breakfast 26: “The New Rules of Content Marketing.” Since much of what my colleagues and I at Voce Communications/Porter Novelli do  centers on content, I figured I would hear a lot of interesting things, and I was not disappointed. Among the potential social media bingo games (claim your prize if you had “Infographic,” “engagement” and a Marshall McLuhan quote on your card) was a useful discussion of what content means in this world of the expanding notion of “publisher.” The panel, moderated by Social Media Breakfast’s own Robert Collins is listed here.

Here are some of my own takeaways:

First of All- None of These Rules are New

What is new are some of the channels involved, and the people making content may often be people who weren’t in that game (or, like me, had gotten out of the traditional media content game at some past point). So, are we really talking about new rules for content? No. What we are doing is indoctrinating new people into an expanded notion of the “content producer.”

Nobody Reads Long-Form Content

At one point, one of the panelists remarked that nobody reads white papers. I don’t believe this for a moment. It depends on the audience. In fact, when the question, stated more broadly about “long-form content,” was asked to the panel, CC Chapman, to his credit, said as much: “It depends.”

While digestible (ok, someone said it: “snackable”) content is often desirable to draw in audiences without taxing them, the notion that nobody wants long-form content because our attention spans are crippled in the Internet age is nonsense. Certainly, pundits said the same as radio, television, and other popular forms of entertainment came to be. The truth is, you may better serve your audience with long-form content such as whitepapers. The key questions to ask have to do with identifying your audience and matching them with your end goals for putting content out there.

Always Remember that “Infographic” Begins with “Info”

Speaking of taxing your audience, the headlong tumble into infographic-mania has made people like me grumpy. We have been assaulted by a new form of so-called infographic that neither imparts information nor is a particularly compelling graphic. Panelist Joe Chernov of Eloqua said it best when he admonished us to remember that “Infographic” begins with “Info.” He also quoted noted statistician Edward Tufte; “It doesn’t matter how cool your interface is, it would be better if there were less of it.”

How do you balance “less is more” and actually imparting something valuable? It’s a hard line to walk, and sometimes it’s just a judgment call. As a Boston guy, I’ll refer to my favorite recent infographic (which I have definitely posted here before, so apologies): the Boston Bruins’ bar tab at Foxwoods Casino after they won the NHL’s Stanley Cup last spring:

This infographic fits in one viewing screen, imparts the main thesis at a glance, and provides optional details which can be gleaned quickly through the visual, with “fine print” that is merely optional. Why can’t more (all?) infographics be more like this?

Zero Out the Brand in Content Marketing?

This topic follows along the ‘balance” theme I mentioned above. I’ll agree it is important not to be in “hard sell” mode all the time, turning off potential audience members through incessant hawking of your products and services. However, the notion of “zeroing out your brand” in content raised by the panel makes very little sense to me. In the end, you have goals, which probably involve driving leads, customers, and/or sales to your company. At some point you need to have that ask in there. Whether you are simply but obviously sponsoring “neutral” content or more pointedly laying out a point of view that leads to your company as solution but also espouses your founding values, there needs to be some value to you as well as the audience.

What Was Not Discussed?

Context. Part of the solution to the question of balance is in creating a context around every piece of content you publish, from a Tweet to a white paper and beyond. I wish context had been mentioned more in the panel, because it is important.

Context is what leads people to react in a certain way to your content. To some extent you can’t control your audience’s surroundings and mod at the time they consume your content. However, the more information you give them – say, repeating a link in a follow-up Tweet or response on a topic, or reframing the overall theme in each episode of a multi-part video series, the more successful your content. You have to make and remake context constantly. Even the most renowned content creators in the social media world screw this up from time time- that’s how hard it is.

It is hard– that’s why we keep bringing people together for events like this.

in my cynical, skeptical way, I have spent the last several months heaping doubt and scorn on Pinterest and Instagram, mainly as a hedge against the people who seem too excited about either of these being the “next big thing.” I have, some of you will like to hear, since started truly enjoying these services. But I did have real doubts. Both are based on images, and don’t allow more complex expressions of text, video and audio. Neither is focused on housing things on your own site- they are really spokes in the hub-and-spoke world of social media content, aren’t they?

Instagram, in particular, seemed limited to me. Not only was it only available to iPhone and iPad users until the beginning of April, severely limiting the availability and alienating Android users (again, they solved that), but the content was limited as well. It’s basically a preset group of filters meant to shock and abuse your photos’ color and lighting to hide the limitations of smartphone camera. Yes, it was fancypants doo-dahs masquerading as art.

As I has recently been involved in a family photo scanning project, I liked to joke about the limited appeal of making fresh photos look like they were shot in 1962. Quick, which of these is from Instagram?

I should note I thought about this post before Facebook announced they were buying Instagram for $1 billion. Um, wow.

Pinterest? Again, the content is limited to images. It’s not a be-all social network. It would be nice to embed these pinboards into your own sites (something I expect will become a real feature at some point); then, it would be a nice complement to your own content on your own domain (yes, your blogs. Blogs are awesome).

For my snark, I started boards dedicated to my personal bete-noire, infographics. Items from my board on “Infographic Crimes Against Humanity” (yes, I blogged about this recently, sue me) have been repinned without regard for context to “Sexy Infographics” and “Great Infographics” boards, sometimes with my withering remarks intact. Suit yourself, I guess. I should also mention the seeming lopsided appeal of Pinterest to women and the more obvious utility to retailers of “stuff” over people trying to convey “ideas.”

Limited.

However, in actually using these, I found one thing to be true that shook my skepticism, almost wiping the sneer off my face. When I posted content? People shared it. Almost instantly. While I still chafe at the limited type of content, that very simplicity along with the attractiveness of the visuals creates an instant, addictive, appeal (even with the rather ridiculous lack of context in some of the repins as mentioned above).  That makes using these tools more fun than research, and backs up the contention- to a point- that these are the “next social networks.”

That’s great- but how can I apply this to the primary content hubs yeah, those blogs that are supposed to be dead), to spice up the activity, make them less stale, and re-energize our whole streams of content? That, I suppose, is the next step.

While at the PRSA Digital Impact Conference this week, I sat I in on Pierre-Loic Assayag of Traackr’s presentation on “influence.” Aside from approaching influence as a common sense topic – eschewing single scores for a more well-rounded view of finding influence that is, honestly hard work – he also talked about “signal-to-noise ratio.” Despite SNR being a bit of a hackneyed phrase in social media, my ears still perk up hearing it due to my long history in audio and radio.

It also struck me that the traditional SNR social media definition talks about balancing your content, but I realize it’s not so simple; it’s a two-way street.

Before I finish the thought, I’ll step back and review the term’s definition.

First a simple, but still quite technical, definition, from the ever-useful PC Magazine Encyclopedia:

The ratio of the power or volume (amplitude) of a signal to the amount of disturbance (the noise) mixed in with it. Measured in decibels, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR, S/N) measures the clarity of the signal in a circuit or a wired or wireless transmission channel.

And here is a content publisher’s definition, courtesy of UrbanDictionary (NSFW content throughout this site, by the way):

The ratio of useful information to useless information in any given statement.

From the social media/content marketer perspective, Signal-to-Noise Ratio is typically a rule to follow to limit content about you. Perhaps you have eight tweets/status updates/blog posts about neutral topics, other people or companies, or simply responding to people to every two about you, your company or products. I pull that number out of the air, so figure your own.

But here is where that two-way street comes in. The theme here is simpler than I originally imagined it: what you consider good SNR may not be the same as the audience’s definition. And it’s important to consider both points of view when mapping out content:

1- Define signal and noise both ways (and know what audience/influencers definition is): For example, you may have an idea of a good ratio of “signal” content to self-promotional “noise.” However, your audience may think differently. Depending on their makeup, tolerance for noise may be a lot lower than you anticipated– on the other hand, they may be receptive, and you risk leaving some call-to-action on the table. Feedback from audience will tell you a lot about how you are doing there.

2- Put into practice and adapt: While you do want to consider the audience point of view, you might be best served making a semi-educated decision and seeing what happens. The best part about content is it’s ongoing, not a one-shot campaign. You can always change your ratio as you see what works.

3-Measure and figure out best ratio: I mentioned feedback above, but how you actually measure your program will really make a difference (in other words, here is how you “see what works”). Nothing says your SNR is off like adding more “noise” and seeing your numbers drop.

As I wrote this, I feared I was losing sight of the “two way street” image that came to me during Pierre-Loic’s talk. The truth is that there is only one content stream, and you must serve your audience (whether of a personal blog, a commerce/retail site, a b2b tech forum, or what have you) without giving up your own vision. That’s the intersection.

Make sense? You tell me.

I have been reading lately about employers asking for job prospects’ (or even employees’) Facebook passwords as a part of the interview process. I’m not going to try to judge the legalities or ethical implications of all this, but I will put myself into the position of someone being asked to do so. What would I do? I want this job, I want to work for this employer, and I get asked this. Would I do it?

Turns out this whole thing reminds me of something that happened when I was 17 and 18 years old. I shouldn’t be an Eagle Scout, but the way things went down, I am.

When an older friend in my Scout Troop went for his Eagle Scout Board of Review (the Troop and local Council representatives interview the prospective Eagle Scout upon completion of merit badges and other requirements), he reported back that they asked him the following question: “since part of the “Scout Law” is “A Scout is Reverent,” should a Scout who doesn’t believe in God- an atheist- be allowed to be an Eagle Scout? His natural answer was to say “of course,” but a well-placed kick under the table from a well-meaning parent got him to change his answer to the BSA-accepted “no.”

I couldn’t believe this. I determined “reverent” to mean not only “respectful of your own beliefs” but also respectful of others.” Apparently some folks thought the Powers that Be in the Boy Scouts of America begged to differ. I swore that if I were asked the same question at my Board of Review, I would answer it my way, even if it meant giving up the Eagle award. I could live with that.

I steeled myself for my review a year or so later, and… they never asked the question. Or any other question I was uncomfortable with. Damn you, Boy Scouts, for robbing me of the chance to take a moral stand. I shouldn’t be an Eagle Scout- by the standard set forth in that question- but I am. Just as well, I would make more nuanced decisions as an adult, weighing my disgust of the BSA’s ban on homosexuals with setting a more practical example for local youth. Everything’s a choice.

But back to the point- what would you do if an employer demanded access to your social networking passwords?

Photo Credit: StarrGazr (thanks Tracy!)

1) Don’t Kill All the Lawyers

I enjoyed this short piece on managers and lawyers by Ted Weisman of Lois Paul and Partners. The truth is, between bigger brand with their own established standards and practices getting better at social media, and regulations piling up, having to deal with lawyers – not stonewalling, avoiding or scrunching your eyes in the hopes they will go away – is the norm. I deal with clients’ legal departments (directly or indirectly) regularly, and the positive far outweighs the negative.

2)  Homeless Hotspots: Two Sides of the Story

I was happy to be following South by Southwest Interactive from afar this year. One of the most talked about stunts was the marketing firm BBH’s Homeless Hotspot campaign, in which homeless eople in Austin were equipped with portable wi-fi for SXSW attendees, who would make suggested donations. It was easy to mock the campaign’s apparent dehumanization of the homeless (a Hotspot? How about human patio furniture or piggyback cab rides? You bet I had fun with it).

But yet, was it a laudable attempt to get people to talk about the homeless problem, including and talk to homeless people? There were reasonable arguments on both sides. Kneejerk reactions from people like me (whether you were there are not) often oversimplify the story.

Read.

3) My Version of Diving Into the Pinterest is Craze (such as it is)

I like Pinterest. I really do. I do counsel caution to companies wanting to jump in (why are you doing it?) and am cynical about breathless quoting of growth statistics, but understand the addictive nature of visually sharing things we like.

I jumped in, but on my terms. I have spent the last year or so commenting on the sometimes horrifying trend towards producing “infographics” for any possible,sometimes grotesque, application.

To be fair, I have spent time trying to find infographics that work and I like as well as those I hyperbolically deem “Crimes Against Humanity.”

4) Bloggers: Stop Trying So Hard

After scrolling through post after post in my RSS feeds, one thing is clear: bloggers are trying too hard. I’m a big fan of writing to publish on personal blogs rather than fussing too much about perfection and format. However, does that mean everything is a top ten list? That we can find social media lessons in everything from the latest unrelated news event to (to pull an email ample from a friend) pole dancing?

Sometimes I think we try to hard. Not everything fits neatly into a Top 5 list, not even this weekly blog post series (which you might notice is far from weekly).

There is no 5).

Photo Credit: Robert Thomson on Flickr

Yeah, nobody’s reading this fresh because everybody’s at SXSW Interactive, right? Except those that aren’t.

“Humanize” – Rush to Publish Causes Confusion

The fact that publishing tools are plentiful and easy to use does not excuse mistakes made in the rush to publish- though it does cause them. On the other hand, the self-correcting nature of social media is another, more positive side effect- if people are willing to communicate. An example of this came this week when social media monitoring /analytics company Radian 6 published the eBook “Building Stronger Customer Relationships: How to Humanize Your Company with Social Media.”

The problem? A book with similar themes was published only a few months back. “Humanize,” by Maddie Grant (a friend) and Jamie Notter, is a good read, a worthy book, by the way- recommended.

Was there a trademark issue? I actually don’t know for sure. But with the book being current, confusion between the two publications was a real possibility. rather than public passive-aggressive putdowns (though some folks, including myself, did make references on Twitter), mutual acquaintances alerted Radian 6 to the issue, and within minutes (seemingly, it was probably an hour or two)- the title of the ebook was changed to “Building Stronger Customer Relationships: Making Your Brand More Personal with Social Media.” Crisis averted- or at least minimized- by simply talking to folks.

Humanize, indeed.

Is the Marketing World (Too) Facebook Centric?

Just a simple question that came to mind after being invited to a Facebook discussion group on social marketing. An overwhelming amount of the threads were about Facebook. There are several reasons this could be true:

• It is a Facebook group, so natural to discuss Facebook there (that could be true)
• Facebook IS dominant , silly, so that’s what we need to be talking about (I’m not so sure, but can agree to an extent)
• The group is filled with Facebook experts (true), who seem to be among the more active members
• We are being shortsighted by isolating ourselves to the current hottest platform

Community Manager vs Community Analyst?

Chuck Hemann (another friend) wrote an interesting article in the Spredfast blog: “Ditch the Community Manager, Hire the Community Analyst.” First off, after reading the article, I’ll add “Ditch the Headline Writer” too, as that is misleading. Chuck is not saying the Community Manager function should go away, but that the need for people who know data and analytics is more urgent than ever in social media marketing. As someone who crunches numbers and analyzes trends for clients, I would say the same thing. Whether or not that person is also the community manager is something to be answered by availability of people and the resources to hire them, but the pendulum of need, I agree, swings in that direction. I would caution against letting it swing too far, to the point that we don’t have community managers- or quality content producers- to fill that end of the social media process. Chuck is an analytics guy so take that into account, but I agree with the need.

An Infographic to Like – For Once 

I often complain about bad infographics in this blog, but with good reason. The idea that infographics should be pleasing to consume and convey actual information has been lost. I often tout the Boston Bruins’ Foxwoods bar tab as an example of a good infographic, but thanks to friends (thank you Amy Vernon) I have found a new one. It conveys info without making me scroll, there’s not too much into it so I can grasp it in one look, but yet it is still useful. An excellent example. I wish more people would do it this way, instead of the tiresome, unreadable graphics we are being subjected to.

Rain at SXSW

My word (phrase, rather) of the week is “Schadenfreudian slip,” as when I accidentally make references to the apocalyptic rain storms greeting SXSW Interactive arrivals this weekend. Someone should be able to get some good publicity handing out ponchos. Wonder if that happened?