Online Communications and Videos as Promotional Tools

The Internet offers so much to strategic communicators when it comes to connecting with specific audiences. Just think of how far communications has come over the millennia. Messages that were once transmitted by word of mouth can now be sent instantly through text messages, instant messaging services, and e-mail. People are able to gain valuable information within a few clicks of their mice or mouse pads versus having to sift through the stacks of a reference section in a library. Social media sites allow users to post real-time status updates about anything. Twitter is well known for its 140-character status limit, and users employ these 140 characters to tell some of the most riveting and/or some of the most mundane parts of their lives. With the technological advances that we have now, people can upload videos and give their reviews of products, movies, news stories, and current events with a matter of minutes. There was a time where people had to pray for survival during natural disasters like tornadoes and floods because they didn’t get an early warning. Now, storm chasers are now able to follow tornadoes and give up-to-the-minute status updates to the National Weather Service as the storm progresses, thus giving people the time they need to get to safety.

Communications has come a long way, and it can only get better from here, which leads me to my topic for this post: online communications and videos. My professor asked the class this question:

How can strategic communication professionals use online communications and videos to promote the image of their organizations?

Seems like an easy question, right? It is. Many people oppose the use of different online communication media, but these outlets provide strategic communication professional and organizations to reach out and connect with their clients and audiences. They afford strategic communicators a plethora of opportunities to promote the image of their organizations, and new and established organizations can use online communications to introduce their brands to the world through social media sites, like on Facebook and YouTube. One example of how online communication and videos work for organizations is Joseph Gordon Levitt’s new television show hitRECord (http://www.hitrecord.org/). I follow his page on Facebook, and he personally sent out messages through his page asking for submissions and ideas for the show. I have even seen commercials promoting the new show. I believe through using these online communication outlets, Levitt was able to create a relationship with his fan base and engage them by offering them the chance to participate in the creation of something unique.

This method of using online communications and video also worked for Eric Whitacre. In his TED Talks video titled “A virtual choir 2,000 voices strong,” Whitacre told of how he got the idea of creating a virtual choir after watching a YouTube video of one of his fans singing a part of one of the songs he composed in 2000. After watching this video, he in turn engaged his fans through videos he was able to create his virtual choir and create something completely original, amazing, and ingenious. Both of these men exemplified how to use online communications and videos to promote the image of their organizations. These two communication media can also be used by organizations to learn from their clients and audiences.

Several vloggers on YouTube post videos and ask their subscribers to post their “response videos” in reply to the topic the vloggers discussed. Strategic communication professionals can use the same method to engage the consumers and clients for their organizations. By doing so, they can learn from their respective audiences by getting first-hand feedback on what their audience’s needs are. Using this method, organizations can develop their brands and products to meet the demands of their target audiences. They can also use this method to learn from and gain feedback from their employees. Companies can employ blogs, social media, and online newsletters to communicate internally with their employees to see what works and what can be improved.

But, what about when strategic communicators don’t employ online communications and video appropriately or in a timely manner? How can strategic communication professionals help protect their organizations against viral videos that portray the organizations and/or staff members in a negative light? We’ve all seen how companies have had mishaps when trying to promote themselves but end up causing more harm than good. In the article “What’s Your Personal Social Media Strategy,” Soumitra Dutta (2010) wrote about the CEO of a tech firm who stated that he was “in favor of price discrimination based on content.” After his statement, there was backlash from the online community surrounding his statements (2010, p. 1). Even the employees of his company felt that the organization should issue a statement to smooth things over, but the CEO never gave the go-ahead. As a result, the company and the online community were left “feeling frustrated and helpless” (2010, p. 1). In cases like this one, it is imperative for an organization’s strategic communicators to be able to act swiftly to make sure that they their organization doesn’t lose its target audience.

Remember the Cheerios commercial featuring the interracial couple and their daughter. (You can view it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYofm5d5Xdw). This video quickly went viral, reaching 4,675,708 views as of today. This video went viral for a number of reasons. Many views loved the commercial and praised the brand for featuring a biracial family and embracing our diverse and changing society. Others were more negative, and even racist about the commercial. After seeing the mixed feedback from viewers, Camille Gibson, the vice president of marketing for Cheerios, issue a statement in which she said, “Consumers have responded positively to our new Cheerios ad. At Cheerios, we know there are many kinds of families and we celebrate them all” (Goyette, 2013). In this case, Cheerios was able to capitalize on their commercial and the statement they issued because they promoted something that people wanted and had been waiting to see: the reality of our modern society.

Here is another example, except this is one in which online communication failed. Remember the craziness surrounding this past Black Friday at Wal-Mart stores. Countless videos were uploaded to YouTube and other social media sites depicting how barbaric people acted over the deals they hoped to get on electronics. Search YouTube for “Black Friday 2013” and you’ll see just what I mean. How did Wal-Mart’s public relations team handle these viral videos showing how “safe” Wal-Mart stores were? They didn’t respond initially, but later posted a statement that decried the reports of violence in their stores. (Read here: http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2013/11/29/walmart-on-pr-offensive-as-thanksgiving-fights-go-public-with-protests-scheduled-for-black-friday/). How effective was this statement? Not very effective at all. Why? Because Wal-Mart’s public relations team was (and still is) dealing with the company’s workers protesting for higher wages. In this case, the company failed to “save face” and the online community and many of its consumers continue to bash the company and its stores for any flaws it has.

Online communications and video can and are very effective when used appropriately and fully. Strategic communicators must be able to use these outlets in a manner that benefits both their organizations and their target audiences, or risk getting backlash from the consumers and clients the companies wish to reach. Even worse, they could lose potential clients and consumers solely on the reputation bad representation brings. Effective, strategic communication is key to any company that wants to provide a solid brand and product while staying in touch with its current and potential customers. It is up to strategic communication professionals to remain “in the know” about consumers’ attitudes concerning everything, even the simplest of things, because when they aren’t in touch chaos ensues. In an era where digital communications reigns supreme, it’s imperative that these professionals know how to maneuver across the different social media outlets so that they can employ online communications and videos effectively and appropriately.

References

Soumitra Dutta. (2010, November). “What’s your personal social media strategy?” Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from http://i2ge.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Your-social-media.pdf

Goyette, Braden. (2013, May 31). “Cheerios commercial featuring mixed race family gets racist backlash.” The Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/31/cheerios-commercial-racist-backlash_n_3363507.html

Opinion Leaders and Social Media

In my previous post, I discussed Everett Rogers’ Diffusion of Innovations (2010), and I mentioned the importance of opinion leaders and their roles in the social system. In this week’s discussion board in my Leadership and Media Strategies course, our professor asked us to answer the following questions:

• Does the existence of social media make it easier or more difficult to for someone to be an opinion leader?
• Opinion leaders know that their words and actions are under a higher level of scrutiny today because of the wide spread adoption of mobile cameras. A growing percentage of people always have a video camera on their smartphones and they are quick to post interesting (and embarrassing) items to YouTube. Should opinion leaders craft their messages for the social media with the thought of how it will play on YouTube?
• How can opinion leaders use the media, both traditional and social, to convey their message to the public?

Thinking about these questions got me thinking about the about the advantages and disadvantages of social media. Social media has come to play an important role in our lives, whether we want it to or not. All around us are advertisements and publications featuring the logos of the major social media websites, enticing us to “Like” a certain brand or product on Facebook, share a website through Google+, or view a video clip on YouTube. To the chagrin of some, social media is here to stay, and it’s up to society to take it and use it to its fullest potential. This is where opinion leaders come into play. I think opinion leaders have the greatest advantage with using social media because the other members of the social system look to them when deciding whether to adopt or reject an innovation.

To answer the first question, I believe the existence of social media makes it both easier and more difficult for someone to be an opinion leader. According to Rogers’ diffusion of innovation theory, opinion leadership is “the degree to which an individual is able to influence other individuals’ attitudes or overt behavior informally in a desired way with relative frequency” (2010, p. 27). Opinion leaders, in turn, are those who “exemplify and express the social system’s structure,” because they are better qualified, they are better aware of our changing society, and they are more innovative (Rogers, 2010, p. 27). With these facts in mind, we can see how social media can be both beneficial and detrimental to opinion leaders.  

On one hand, social media provides opinion leaders outlets to reach larger audiences from different demographics. When we look at the power of blogs, we can see how bloggers develop a loyal readership through their abilities to relate to their readers’ lives. I’ve seen how people will read blogs and, because it relates to something in their own lives, make an effort to change a part or all of their lives to line up with what the bloggers write. I follow several natural hair, health, marriage, religious, and fitness bloggers and personalities, and many of the topics I’ve read about or viewed I’ve tried to incorporate into my own life. One of these blogs, Marriage Works! (http://www.marriageworks.us/blog.html), appeals to my desire for a healthy, Christ-based marriage. The writers, Kevin and Cetelia Bullard, write posts that are Bible-based and feature current issues that plight marriages along with advice to spouses on how to tackle these issues together as one. After reading the articles for this week, I better understand why I gravitated to blogs like this one and others: it was because they were trustworthy and credible, and they appealed to my interests. If it weren’t for social media, I wouldn’t have been as aware as I am about many of the issues I care to know and learn about. Social media allows opinion leaders to disseminate information to readers and consumers in a personal, relatable way versus in a didactic tone.

On the other hand, social media exposes opinion leaders to much criticism from members of the social system who don’t want the norms to be challenged or changed. In the article “Networked Narratives: Understanding Word-of-Mouth Marketing in Online Communities,” Kozinets, de Valck, Wojnicki, and Wilner explore how word-of-mouth marketing works in blogs. In their study, they found that when bloggers deviate from the established narrative of their blogs (i.e. the norm), many people feel alienated and betrayed, and they become critical. Unless the blogger can employ the appropriate narrative strategy, they risk losing their readers. They must “exhibit a consistent character narrative and conform to forum standards and communal norms” (Kozinets et al., 2010, p. 83). This article showed the importance of opinion leaders’ positions within the social system. It also showed how easy it is for opinion leaders to lose their positions if they don’t accommodate their readers’ own positions within the system. This leads me to answer the second question.

Because opinion leaders are at the center of the public eye, they must watch how they present themselves to the social system lest they jeopardize their credibility and trustworthiness and alienate their followers. With this in mind, I don’t believe opinion leaders should craft their messages for the social media. I know that I would readily spot a scripted message from one of my favorite bloggers or social media personalities, and this would cause me to look at them in a different light. I’ll use the article I mentioned in the previous paragraph. In their study, the researchers determined that when the bloggers deviated from their character narrative when marketing the product in question without any justification, their readers react negatively. They found that bloggers “need to balance inherent commercial-communal tensions while being consistent with the character elements of their ongoing narrative” (Kozinets et al., 2010, p. 86). In other words, the bloggers need to remain consistent with their blog’s style, namely when introducing new information to their readers.

When I think about the third question, the TED Talks video “How great leaders inspire action,” which was filmed in May 2010, comes to mind. (http://www.ted.com/talks/simon_sinek_how_great_leaders_inspire_action.html). In the video, Simon Sinek explains how great leaders like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Wright Brothers were able to persuade their followers to believe in their innovative ideas. He discusses the “golden circle,” which explains how our society communicates “from the outside in” (2010). He asserts, “People don't buy what you do; they buy why you do it and what you do simply proves what you believe” (2010). I thought this video was very effective and relevant to the plight of traditional media outlets in remaining relevant. I say this because Sinek laid out the diffusion of innovation theory in such a way that explained how opinion leaders could work to convey their messages to the public concerning the problem of connecting traditional media and social media in an innovative way. As a society, we tend to focus on selling the “whats” and “hows” instead of the main product—“the whys” (2010).

Starbucks is a prime example of how opinion leaders can bridge the gap between traditional and social media to convey messages to the public. In the article “Starbucks Gets Its Business Brewing Again with Social Media,” Emily Bryson York (2010) shows how Starbucks rebranded itself in a sense by creating “a consumer relationship-building environment” by offering customers outlets of expression on its social media sites that would then lead these customers to its brick and mortar stores. Starbucks was able to influence its customers’ innovation-decision processes by becoming relatable to its customer base. Opinion leaders must be able to act as a mediator between the consumers and the businesses, understanding the needs of both sides and being able to cater to each one in way that is profitable to both sides. They must also be able to present the “whys” of traditional and social media and show how they can work together to communicate information to the masses.

References

Kozinets, R., de Valck, K., Wojnicki, A., & Wilner, S. (2010, March). “Networked narratives: Understanding word-of-mouth marketing in online communities.” Journal of Marketing, 74(2), 71-89. DOI: 10.1509/jmkg.74.2.71

Rogers, Everett. (2010). Diffusion of innovations. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?id=v1ii4QsB7jIC&source=gbs_slider_cls_metadata_2_mylibrary

Sinek, Simon. (2010, May). “How great leaders inspire action.” TED Conferences, LLC. Podcast retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/simon_sinek_how_great_leaders_inspire_action.html

York, Emily Bryson. (2010, February 22). “Starbucks gets its business brewing again with social media.” Retrieved from http://adage.com/article/special-report-digital-alist-2010/digital-a-list-2010-starbucks-brewing-social-media/142202/

Rogers' Diffusion of Innovations: What It Is & Why It Matters

Have you ever heard of Everett Rogers’ book, Diffusion of Innovations, or the theory of diffusion of innovations? I hadn’t until I began my first week of classes this semester. In his book, Rogers defines diffusion as “the process by which an innovation is communicated through certain channels over time among members of a social system” (Rogers, 2010, p. 5). He defines innovation as “an idea, practice, or object that is perceived as new by an individual or other unit of adoption” (2010, p. 11). Why am I giving you all of these definitions, you ask? Because they are important to understanding why society accepts or adopts some ideas while rejecting others.

I’m sure you’ve had an incident where you wondered why someone didn’t accept your idea or purchase a new product that would better their lives when it made sense for them to. Take, for instance, the movies and television shows in which a teenager is trying to explain to their parent or grandparent the importance of a smartphone or tablet. The teenager explains all of the benefits of using these devices, but their older counterpart is left wondering why the teen can’t just use a book to get the information they need. Diffusion of innovations explains this process.

According to Rogers, there are five different types of members in the social system: innovators, early adopters, early majorities, late majorities, and laggards. Innovators are “visionary” and “imaginative,” but they are dangerous to those in the system who are more “pragmatic” in their thinking (Robinson, 2009, p. 3). Early adopters are the “trend setters,” and “what [they] say about an innovation determines its success” (2009, p. 4). Early majorities are pragmatic, but they are willing to adopt an innovation only after getting “solid proof of benefits” that the innovation can provide (2009, p. 5). Late majorities are those who are the most pragmatic of the majorities. They “hate risk and are uncomfortable with your new idea” (2009, p. 5). Laggards are those members who “hold out until the bitter end,” only jumping on board with the innovation because they have no choice (2009, p. 5). I’m sure by now you’ve tried to place yourself into one of these categories. I did too, and I believe I’m in the early majorities group.

So, now that you have some background information about what diffusion of innovations is, you’re probably wondering why it matters. Trust me. It matters...A LOT! Just think about all of the different innovations that have been presented to us and adopted or rejected over the years: organized religion, ethics, laws, the written language, the automobile, the computer, the Internet, etc. How did our society come to adopt these ideas and products? The answer is opinion leaders. Opinion leaders are those members of the social system who “exemplify and express the [social] system’s structure” (2010, p. 27). It is through opinion leaders that innovations are adopted.

Now, let’s look at how diffusion of innovations applies to strategic communication, particularly when it concerns the asset-light generation. In his article, “Why Digital Natives don’t like newspapers,” Alan D. Mutter defines the “asset-light” generation as that which “travels light,” meaning it prefers technology and all of its useful trappings. It prefers “renting over owning, flexibility over commitment and convenience over cost” (Mutter, 2013). When dealing with a group of people with this mindset, it’s hard for communicators to convince them that things seemingly so archaic like the newspaper can be a part of current innovations. So, the question for strategic communicators is this: how can they meet and exceed the standards of the asset-light generation?

The asset-light generation possesses younger, more innovative minds that are looking for the next big thing. The majority of this generation has grown up in the digital era, enjoying technological advances like “televisions, computers, Xboxes…Androids and tablets” (2013). Because of this upbringing, they are looking for innovations that will trump the latest ones. Take, for example, laptop computers. They were once the hottest new tech toy on the market, but now there are tablet computers that can do the same things as laptop computers but with a mobility and convenience that laptops can’t offer. It’s up to strategic communicators to appeal to the needs of this generation, and to do this, they must present innovations in ways that the asset-light generation uses, such as blogs, smartphones, and social media outlets.

Last week, I watched the movie Paranoia (2013), which stars Liam Hemsworth, Gary Oldman, and Harrison Ford (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1413495/?ref_=nv_sr_1). In the movie, Liam’s character, Adam Cassidy, presents an innovation to his firm’s president, which is smartphone software that would change the way users employ social media to stay isolated yet connected. His boss rejects his idea because it isn’t innovative enough to market to the masses. Later on in the movie, Adam works with another firm to develop a social media app that the military would later endorse to combat friendly-fire casualties. I thought the ideas presented in the movie were cool, because they presented innovations that I thought were profitable to our society. But, what happens when there are instances where innovations aren’t innovative enough for the asset-light generation? How do we capture their attention? How can publishers create products that this generation would adopt?

Rogers’ theory shows how innovations are adopted into mainstream culture. To capture the attention of the asset-light generation, strategic communicators must exploit the five-step process that innovation-decision requires for diffusion to work, which includes knowledge, persuasion, decision, implementation, and confirmation (Rogers, 2010, p. 20). Here, I’ll mention the movie Paranoia again. When Adam pitched his idea at the second firm, he remembered all five steps of the innovation-decision process when he explained his idea. Because he kept his audience in mind (one that was looking for the next best thing in smartphone technology), he was able to succeed in getting his boss and later the Department of Justice to adopt his innovation.

Strategic communicators and publishers must also use this five-step process to capture the attention of the opinion leaders, who are the epicenter of social systems (Rogers, 2010, p. 27). Because of their roles in social systems, opinion leaders need to be the target audience when creating products for the asset-light generation. They must also target the change agents, who “influence clients’ innovation-decisions in a direction deemed desirable by a change agent” (Rogers, 2010, p. 27). When these members of the social system are the focus, strategic communicators and publishers have a better chance of getting their innovations adopted into mainstream society. These two entities are important because they have the most influence within the social system. They are able to see the benefits of innovations readily and use their authority within the system to appeal to the different segments of the system.

Let me take you back to the scenario I gave you in the beginning of this post. Remember that person who just wouldn’t accept your idea or recommendation? How would you go back to them and pitch your idea/recommendation now that you know about diffusion of innovations? I’m sure this time you’d be more successful in persuading them to adopt your idea. Now that I know about Rogers’ theory, I willing to bet that I can be a better persuasive communicator both professionally and interpersonally.

References

Mutter, Alan D. (2013, February 6). “Why Digital Natives don’t like newspapers.” Retrieved from http://newsosaur.blogspot.com/2013/02/why-digital-natives-dont-like-newspapers.html

Robinson, Les. (2009, January). “A summary of Diffusion of Innovations.” Retrieved from http://www.enablingchange.com.au/Summary_Diffusion_Theory.pdf

Rogers, Everett. (2010). Diffusion of innovations. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?id=v1ii4QsB7jIC&source=gbs_slider_cls_metadata_2_mylibrary

Let’s Talk About Leadership and Media Strategies!

Hello again, everyone! Before I go into detail about this blog, I want to share a little bit about myself for those of you who are new to the blog. I graduated from Troy University in July 2013 with my bachelor’s degree in English (Professional Writing Emphasis), and I minored in Criminal Justice. I was accepted into Troy’s Strategic Communication graduate program in August 2013, and expect to complete the program in December 2014. I’ve been debating whether to pursue a second master’s degree in Technical and Professional Communication from Auburn University, which would round out my studies across the communications spectrum.

My graduate classes have started again and this time I’ll be discussing different aspects of leadership and media strategies. In my blog posts from my previous course, I talked about the various changes and new developments in the field of strategic communications and emerging media. My new blog posts will encompass many of these topics and will show how strategic communicators use current and emerging technologies to convey messages to their audiences. To be specific, some of these topics will include diffusion of innovation, word-of-mouth marketing, social influence, and viral communication.

I’ll post a new blog entry each week here at satoyarclanton.blogspot.com. Please feel free to post your comments on the topics that I discuss, because there are so many different aspects and types of communication, and people communicate in different ways using these different aspects and types. Because the communication and media fields change so rapidly, communication methods that were once considered new and innovating, like e-mail and cell phones, can now be considered “traditional” forms of media. In our changing society, it’s important for us to know about and understand these changing trends in the fields of communication and media so that we will be able to communicate effectively. I hope you all enjoy reading my blog as I post new entries, and I look forward to your feedback.