Thanks Arthur for you thoughtful post…I think you rightfully point out many of the dangers. I do think software/services like what Visible is developing (I’m setting up time to see it in order to further understand) could be used for good as well. I don’t want to sound anti-marketing as that really is not me, but at the same time, it is the marketing and PR function I would worry most about how/if they might use technology like this…whereas, as as support and customer service guy, I can see some good potential for this.

either way, thanks for futhering the conversation on this.

sean

There was a point some years ago that someone developed a method of placing graffiti over websites. This wasn’t a hack against established websites, but a service one could subscribe to which would run the “overlay” graphics on a separate server, which would only be visible to those who wished to see it. I don’t know what ever became of that experiment.

Corporations seem to think that it is just fine for them to propagandize us with advertising through every form of known media, without asking our permission, to the point where we now have companies buying rights to use of private vehicles, signs above urinals in toilets, floors and ceilings of stores and people’s bodies and clothes are real estate for ads. We buy a DVD and it comes with advertisements we are obligated to sit through to get to the main attraction for which we paid the license.

As I stated, somehow, all of this is “just, and good and fair”. But the moment the balance of power for the minds of others goes to the individual (blogs, email, webcasts, you-tube movies, etc.) suddenly the lobbyists and PR people are panicked. They want to not only know exactly what we have said, when we have said it, but they want to be able to respond, influence and evangelize, overtly or covertly.

I find it quite ironic. I am a consumer advocate. I try to carry on discussions, usually “in camera” with corporations about things I feel could be changed or improved upon, whether its marketing, design, construction, packaging, pricing structure, nature of the manuals, environmental issues, or whathaveyou. In most cases, the corporations ignore my issues or concerns. If I bug them enough about it, they may respond, usually begrudgingly. While they are paying hundreds of thousands to their own internal people to “seek and destroy” these types of errors or failures, when it comes from a clients or knowledgeable user, suddenly, they clam up and use any manner of slight of hand to try to dismiss the matter. And yet, if the new services being discussed come to exist, they will be prepared with their cyber-PRmen ready to jump upon the first public comment made on the internet that is deemed in some manner negative.

I have a radical idea. Instead of spending money on hiring automated cyber-lobbyists, why not rehire the customer and consumer service people and have them address issues that come directly to the company from clients? I know the idea of carrying on a real, intelligent discussion with a real end user of a product sounds scarey and old fashioned, it actually can give a company insight into what’s going on out there. Why businesses would rather spend money of advertising, lobbyists, damage control and surveys when their customers are willing to provide direct feedback, is beyond me.

Most individuals who are now using methods of communicating with the public and to corporations via blogs, emails, and other cyber-methods likely started out using the letter writing campaign to the company strategy only when they found direct communications with the corporation futile and ineffective.

Rather than scanning the internet looking for detractors, why not hire some customer service people who have listening and problem solving skills? I am always intrigued by watching how “industry” responds to a shift in the balance of communication power.

There was a point some years ago that someone developed a method of placing graffiti over websites. This wasn’t a hack against established websites, but a service one could subscribe to which would run the “overlay” graphics on a separate server, which would only be visible to those who wished to see it. I don’t know what ever became of that experiment.

Corporations seem to think that it is just fine for them to propagandize us with advertising through every for of known media, without asking our permission, to the point where we now have companies buying rights to use of private vehicles, signs above urinals in toilets, floors and ceilings of stores and people’s bodies and clothes are real estate for ads. We buy a DVD and it comes with advertisements we are obligated to sit through to get to the main attraction for which we paid the license.

As I stated, somehow, all of this is just, and good and fair. But the moment the balance of power for the minds of others goes to the individual (blogs, email, webcasts, you-tube movies, etc.) suddenly the lobbyists and PR people are panicked. They want to not only know exactly what we have said, when we have said it, but they want to be able to respond, influence and evangelize, overtly or covertly.

I find it quite ironic. I am a consumer advocate. I try to carry on discussions, usually “in camera” with corporations about things I feel could be changed or improved upon, whether its marketing, design, construction, packaging, pricing structure, nature of the manuals, environmental issues, or whathaveyou. In most cases, the corporations ignore my issues or concerns. If I bug them enough about it, they may respond, usually begrudgingly. While they are paying hundreds of thousands to their own internal people to “seek and destroy” these types of errors or failures, when it comes from a clients or knowledgeable user, suddenly, they clam up and use any manner of slight of hand to try to dismiss the matter. And yet, if the new services being discussed come to exist, they will be prepared with their cyber-PRmen ready to jump upon the first public comment made on the internet that is deemed in some manner negative.

I have a radical idea. Instead of spending money on hiring automated cyber-lobbyists, why not rehire the customer and consumer service people and have them address issues that come directly to the company from clients? I know the idea of carrying on a real, intelligent discussion with a real end user of a product sounds scarey and old fashioned, it actually can give a company insight into what’s going on out there. Why businesses would rather spend money of advertising, lobbyists, damage control and surveys when their customers are willing to provide direct feedback, is beyond me.

Most individuals who are now using methods of communicating with the public and to corporations via blogs, emails, and other cyber-methods likely started out using the letter writing campaign to the company strategy only when they found direct communications with the corporation futile and ineffective.

Rather than scanning the internet looking for detractors, why not hire some customer service people who have listening and problem solving skills?

Interesting perspectives on brand management and social media engagement. The importance of listening and engaging to what people are saying is critical with the emergence of this new form of communication.

More organizations should start listening to what people are saying about their brands, products, and services. With respect to engagement — its key to be transparent and why I think more and more firms are adopting WOMMA (Word of Mouth Marketing Association) Ethics Standards, of which we are members.

Visible Technologies solutions enable companies to better manage the process of engaging and ensuring that the best people within their companies are responding.

Blake Cahill
Visible Technologies