Organic SEO was once a meritocracy--not that long ago, either. 

Back in February, I talked about "the soulless algorithm" that defines search-engine visibility and how to accomodate its calculations while remaining creative.  My point was that an incisive choice of words that mirrors the common lexicon of a targeted market has the capability to generate visibility in search engines and excite and convince an audience about your offer's value in equal measure.  In simpler terms, I said smart writing delivers results.  

I mentioned, then, that search engines influence what we, as writers and marketers, offer them in concomitance.  I promised to tell you more about the syntactical evolution your offer requires to stay relevant in the market and to the search terms your targets enter. 

As it turns out, online marketing is trending away from that syntactical evolution, but only within the context of what creative marketers offer.  Where you may have been able to lead the majority of your market--and, thus, your searchers--into entering sequences of words you created for them, now search behavior leads the creative mind and the digital marketer more than ever.

Organic SEO is becoming a democracy--and that means you need a lot of people to prefer your offer in order to generate the results your position-based angle generated in the past.

Steve Rubel, SVP & Director of Insight at Edelman, the world's largest PR firm, writes for AdAge [account required] about how sites earn search visibility more than ever these days:

 . . . the search-engine landscape is shifting. Today consumers are far more likely to seek out and, what's more, trust what they read on other sites rather than anything we put out. The reasons are both technological and sociological. 

He cites two new kinds of search, reputational and social.  Reputational search isn't anything new to most of us, but it recognizes that as online media grants growing credibility to blogs, social-media pages, and aggregators through increased PageRank, writers and marketers need to apply SEO concepts to traditional PR materials that appear online.  His tactical triumvirate of research, content development, and measurement is old hat for SEO copywriters, but offers a new approach for PR professionals.  

Rubel breaks ground when he discusses the importance of social search, though:

As more searches take place inside social networks such as Facebook and Twitter, brands that are early adopters in building out "embassies" will be more visible.

There's no doubt that brand reputation today is incresingly shaped by sites we don't control.  This means that even a nascent field such as search-engine marketing must change in order to survive and thrive.

Rubel ends his thoughts with the mention of requisite change, undoubtedly so that readers engage with Edelman to learn more, but I like the idea of exploring the thought with you further here at Flightpath.  

Essentially, social search means search benchmarks are powered by the people.  SEO copywriters and digital marketers must meet the audience on its turf and on its terms, in all senses of the word.  We have to calibrate our message to keywords the masses use within their own worlds. 

As digital marketers, our traditional website and social-media pages must match the vertical and social engines' expectations.  Our blog posts have to satisfy the topical markers--the words--the audience promulgates.  Our tweets must integrate their hashtags.  Our voice is now the brand voice plus the voice of everyone in the world who already cares about our common interest, that is, our offer to them.  

The fine modicum of control we may have enjoyed as creative market leaders still exists in part--Google will never die, and natural search results will always matter--but, more and more, the future of search is in the hands of the people.   

I’d like to follow the President's example and post my own Fathers Day thoughts.   I don’t have Parade magazine but I do have the Flightpath Digital Insight Blog.  And I was feeling good Sunday after a nice brunch with the Lindgren Family. So here it goes.

My son, Travis and I watched the election with awe and wonder. I can recall the president calling out to fathers in America asking them to take more responsibility. We silently contemplated the meaning of that statement; as we watched the president speak in Denver from our respective couches in our dorm room like apartment. 

Like the president, Travis has grown up in a single parent household (with supportive grandparents). I wondered how life will change for him when he is a father one day because of the technologies that helped get President Obama elected.

I often tell people when I arrived at Penn State, in 1990 as a Freshman, I was not issued an email address. When Travis was born I set aside school and went in the Army. When I returned in 1994, everyone had an email account. I got mine jkb107@psu.edu. In many ways I was blessed with a son and email (which proved to be the gateway to my decade long career in the digital world).

Travis and his generation have always been associated with advancments in technology, as opposed to Gen X’ers like myself. I had a walkman, an analog TV, Atari and the Commodore 64. He has two ipods, an HDTV, a Wii and an Xbox.  And of course; he has grown up with the internet. We had a land line growing up he has had 4 mobile phones.

And they use all this technology at once: these kids can play xbox online, speak to the other players via a headset, text message via cellphone and use Facebook, all the while listening to a video on youtube.  They can even text message with their phone in their pocket while pretending to pay attention to a conversation with an adult.
 

Parenting in this fast paced world of technology is challenging for two parents, let alone one.  I participated in a study while at Penn State that became a book: The Single Parent Resource by Brook Noel (to date this is the only book in which I have been quoted – page 230). The book was designed to provide guidance to single parents on everything from how to save a little money, to getting back into the dating game, and how to juggle work, play and family time. The book never contemplated the explosion of the internet and its partners in crime at MTV Networks. 

Freud said that technology creates the necessity for its own conveniences. He would need no telephone if there were no trains to take his son hundreds of miles away. We would need no telegraph if there were no ships for overseas voyages. What would Freud have to say about text messaging, Facebook, Twitter and the places those technologies take our sons and daughters?

One of the key jobs of a parent is to help keep their kid focused. When my son messes up, I try to use the ancient technique of grounding him. However, I forget there are so many access points to circumvent this archaic notion of punishment. For example, in school they have computers in the library with access to Facebook and Myspace. Not to mention, most kids now have access to the internet on their phones.
 
But there are pluses to this technology. I can often be found showing off video of my son playing soccer or hoops via my own Facebook account. Some parents actually “monitor” Facebook to see what their kids are up to. As a Gen Xer, this seems too big brotherish for me, but I understand the temptation. I have also participated in conversations with him and his friends on Facebook, which is always fun.

We spend a lot of time at soccer tournaments. This weekend for the first time I saw that Twitter announcements are being used at a major tournament.  While I won’t be Twittering or sending a Facebook message to my own father, who will get a phone call (on his cell phone) I suspect it won’t be long before we will all be following and communicating to our millennial children primarily through digital means. 

Hopefully we can find ways to enjoy life with them as we all ride the groundswell. Like the children themselves, the digital technologies they are growing up with are consternating and amazing all at once.  We love both and yet they frustrate us at times.  I feel fortunate to be working at an organization that is focused on "Bringing It to Digital" because I am involved in helping brands leverage the technologies my son uses everyday. 

PS - Son, I love you and I admire your courage. Being your father has been a great joy and the most rewarding challenge of my life.

PPS – Dad, thanks for being there. No matter what stupid stuff I did in my analog world.
 
Happy Father’s Day!
 

Flightpath regularly shares the opinion that social media is exceptionally well-tailored for furthering the interests of non-profit organizations.  More than for many for-profit brands, non-profits can benefit from a strong presence on places like Facebook, Twitter and Youtube for reasons including:

• Participants in social networks often share common interests
• Social networks are a great forum for sharing altruistic goals
• The immediacy of social networks allows for rapid organization and easy dissemination of breaking news
• Tools built into many platforms allow for turnkey advocacy around issues and instant fundraising

Last month, we presented a NY Social Media Roundtable event dedicated to the topic of Social Media and non-profits.   With this background, it’s fascinating to see protesters in Iran, adopting these same media in order to meet similar needs and achieve comparable types of goals. 

Yesterday’s New York Times included a fascinating article, titled “Social Networks Spread Defiance Online,” detailing how Iran’s opposition forces are utilizing Facebook, Twitter, et al to pursue their interests.  (Required reading for anyone interested in this stuff.)  Today’s paper followed up with fascinating commentary from Thomas Friedman, portraying today’s Iranian adopters of social media as members of a virtual mosque, with the caveat that guns may still trump tweets.

While we hope for the flowering of democracy and the rule of law, it’s still unknown how things will shake out in Iran.  Nonetheless, the events of this week clearly mark a sea change in how dissidents interact with each other and with their governments via the intrinsic power of social media.   This situation is certainly being monitored by regimes the world over.  If I were one of the Castro brothers, I’d be very concerned about my future.

There has been a lot of talk at the conferences and panels I have been attending lately about the convergence of PR, marketing, branding, communications and, well, you name it, online. While presenting her case study on peoplepets.com at the recent Business Development Institute Social Media Communications Leadership Forum, Kimberly Miller, VP of Consumer Marketing at People.com, talked about how social media could become a vehicle for gathering usability feedback for one of their new social networks. That was something I had not heard lately. 

Before Kimberly presented, JetBlue’s Morgan Johnston, a regular BDI presenter and all around good guy, highlighted JetBlue's policy change to not charge the same 50 bucks for fold up bikes that fit into a carry on bag. This policy change was made based on  feedback from JetBlue's twitter followers.  Seems pretty obvious, but why not listen to the people using your social media to help guide your design?  Next thing you know someone is going to actually ask the good folks in the corporate call centers what people are complaining about regarding the websites when they call in!

As my regular readers know I love to talk about the ultimate value of usability (Momma Said Knock U(sability) Out, and Can't afford usability testing? Think again) I applaud Time Inc’s recognition that listening to the users is what matters most and then combine this social media driven feedback with a traditional battery of usability testing to make the appropriate adjustments after six months of operation. 

Way to go Kimberly! And you too Morgan… I need to get myself one of those fold up bikes. Then I guess I can finally take those ugly bike racks off the top of my Jetta and put the bike in the trunk.

Earlier this week, Mediapost came out with an article entitled "Social Media Fails to Manifest As Marketing Medium, Report Likens Twitter To TiVo: More Hype Than Reality". According to analysts from Knowledge Networks, "social media is having a profound impact on the way people connect with each other, but that it's not becoming a very meaningful way for people to connect with brands, or advertising promoting brands." While I understand where they're coming from, I have to say that I disagree heartily with many of the assumptions and statements made in the article, for the following reasons:

1.) Knowledge Networks separates word of mouth advertising and social media. I find this to be a serious error, because most interactions in social media consist of word of mouth. Main example: crowdsourcing. People looking for any product— a restaurant, tax accountant, hotel, even a pair of shoes—often crowdsource on Twitter, Facebook, and Tumblr. Last week, I was trying to decide between Jet Blue and Virgin America for an upcoming flight to Los Angeles. I polled my Twitter followers, and received an overwhelming response that Virgin was the right choice (including a response tweet from Virgin America itself). Largely because of this, I ended up choosing Virgin. If that's not a powerful example of word-of-mouth, I don’t know what is.

2.) It seems to me that Knowledge Networks is looking at social media marketing as an end-all and be-all solution-- in a sense, giving in to the hype that they claim is the problem. I think it’s the wrong attitude. Having a presence in social media isn't about shouting at your target audience to "buy! buy! buy!". It's about being there for the consumers who want to reach you in the environment where they feel most comfortable—like having another webpage. If someone is looking for you on Facebook or Twitter and you’re not there, it’s a huge opportunity loss.

3.) I also take issue with the notion that because Twitter is used by the “coastal digerati”, it some how loses value as a markting tool. Sure, Twitter may not be used by a lot of suburban late adopters, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t really valuable. In fact, there are entire brands who are desperate to reach the elusive upscale, tech-heavy, urban consumer who spends a lot of time on Twitter. As I’ve said many times before, social media is not one-size-fits-all. Brands need to consider whether or not their audience is using these tools extensively enough to merit an investment—just like any other medium.

4.) I think that, overall, this is a correct statement: " Twitter is less a way to directly reach customers, and more a way to reach passionate voices who may influence perceptions of your brand." The problem with the way that this statement is phrased is that I feel that Knowledge Networks' analysts are discounting the immense value of those passionate, brand perception-affecting users.

Social Media is a fairly new phenomenon, and as such, it's going to take a while for everyone to understand how exactly marketing is going to fit in as part of the equation. However, I find it to be short-sighted and premature to wholly discount social media as a marketing tool so early on in the game.

On Monday, Hyatt's CEO announced their new Twitter strategy - a concierge-Twitter service @HyattConcierge. As of the time of writing this blog post, they have 1,211 followers (including me). 

So what's this service about? Just think of an online concierge at your service 24/7 ready to answer your travel questions and requests before, during, and after your stay. You can ask for restaurant recommendations near the hotel, schedule a massage appointment, and more.

I think it's a spectacular idea. A hotel concierge listening and actively helping its guests (and even potential guests). It's more convenient to just send a tweet (via a mobile device, app, or the web) than to pick up the phone and dial an 800 number. And you can also view the @HyattConcierge public timeline to see if your questions have already been answered, or if you need ideas.

Other hotels that have a Twitter account to tweet everything from room renovations to responses to customer inquiries to rate specials include Marriott (@MarriottIntl), Tablet Hotels (@TabletHotels), DoubleTree (@doubletreehtls). What makes Hyatt Hotels Twitter account stand out amongst other hotel chains' Twitter accounts is the understanding of the use of different Twitter accounts. There are several Hyatt Hotels Twitter accounts - one on a specific chain location, one on Careers, and one for their Concierge. As what our Social Media Manager, Kate Miltner, has pointed out in last week's BDI roundtable, your Twitter account can't be a one size fits all. People may tune out, or even feel spammed. If your business is a large company, you need to create a different Twitter account for each type of product you have. For example, one for PR, Customer Support, News Releases, etc. 

Read more about Hyatt and their Twitter: http://content.usatoday.com/communities/hotelcheckin/post/2009/05/66927973/1

So is Social Networking maturing?

Abbey Klaassen and Beth Snyder Bulik write in their Ad Age Article (http://tinyurl.com/c7e347): “While social networking used to be the domain of the under-30 crowd, its use among older adults is skyrocketing. As of January 2009, more than 50% of Facebook users and 44% of MySpace users in the U.S. were over 35 years old, according to ComScore estimates. The single biggest age demographic in the U.S. on both Facebook and MySpace is between 35 and 44. Indeed, Facebook says its fastest-growing demo is 55-plus.”

I'm hearing the question more and more these days. Isn’t Facebook just for the young kids?

Well, everything comes of age, including myself. Now even I am on the cusp of the ripe old age of 37, which puts me in that 35+ category when I fill in online forms, and perhaps more importantly when I sign up for the rec basketball league at the NYSC. And of course right smack in the middle of this facebook question.

At the ironically named, AdAge Digital Conference in NY recently, Sheryl Sandberg, COO of Facebook told the audience that older generations are some of the most rapidly growing segments of Facebook and a common question she fields at events is, "how can I get my kids to be my friend on Facebook?" (You can review our Tweets from Ad Age Conf. twitter.com/FlightpathNY with #aadigi)

Fortunately, when I got started on Facebook, my son became my very first friend. But I had to hoodwink him into it by telling him my boss made me get into facebook because I needed to know it for work. I’ve since been friended by a few of his buddies (we all talk a little friendly trash) but I can recall the comment from his girlfriend at the time: "How could you friend your DAD!?#$%."

And I have to admit, when I first got on Facebook and I friended my son, I thought I was very hip. Then more and more “friends” came streaming in. As my dear friend and colleague Ryan Kitson wrote in his blog post To Friend or Not to Friend (http://tinyurl.com/cddo4d), sometimes it's hard to determine who is and isn’t a “friend.”

And then I got to wondering about who my own friends are on Facebook. My HS “friends” are definitely on Facebook. My younger family is there and active, my parents are not there yet (at least I don't think they are), and then there is my hoops crew. Only a few of them are on Facebook.

The over 35 Hastings-on-Husdon hoops group is a little social network of its own and we recently got to play hoops in Madison Square Garden to celebrate one of our member’s 50th birthday! Now that I think of it, the invitation for this party unlike most of the others I’ve received lately didn't come out on Facebook. Nor have the pictures been posted on Facebook to my knowledge….yet. Don't get me wrong, guys, I'm not calling you all seniors!

I’ve heard 40 is the new 20, so that means I can look forward to lots more hoops and lots more Facebook. And next year when we play at the Garden we’ll have to send the invite and post the pictures on Facebook.

I’m pleased to report that Flightpath will be participating in the upcoming conference: Social Communications – The Case Studies.   According to the website, this event will showcase the best examples and case studies from leading organizations including B2C and B2B global 1000 and emerging growth companies as well as non profit, educational, and government entities. 

Flightpath’s Social Media Manager, Kate Miltner, will be moderating a roundtable on the topic “Making Sense of Social Media Platforms for your Brand.”  We hope to see you there.

Aside from a few exceptions, the currency of the web (or at least, social media) is social capital. You know, the number of friends you have on Facebook, your 2 million views on YouTube, your “SuperUser” badge on Foursquare, your hundreds (or thousands) of followers on Twitter and Tumblr. None of those things have any direct monetary value, although some people are trying to cash in on them through things like the Twittad network, or a good old fashioned TV deal-a-Tequila. As things currently stand, money can’t buy you love or Elite status on Yelp; the only way to get that is by earning it through creation of “compelling content” and/or being an “influencer”.  But something is in the works that’s going to change that, and potentially the way we view social currency in the online world.  

Picture this: you’re playing an online game. You run around and interact with other players of the game, and get points for everything you do. You can buy things with these points, and give these points to other people. You can spend real money to get these points, or you can just earn them (although to get the really good stuff, it’s going to take a while). Sounds familiar, right? It’s Second Life, or World of Warcraft, right? Wrong. It’s Facebook. Or it will be, in about 6-12 months.

Last week, a sales rep from Facebook came to Flightpath to have a discussion with us concerning the most recent changes to the site. During the course of the meeting, he revealed that Facebook will soon be allowing users to earn Facebook Credits by simply engaging with their friends, whether it’s by “liking” a status, adding a friend, or posting a video. People will also be able to gift Facebook Credits to others, along with using credits to purchase gifts. In short, Facebook is going to have a currency. Holy Terms Of Service.

According to the calculations of Lightspeed Venture Partners, Facebook made $35 million on Facebook Gifts in 2008 alone. That’s right. Those tiny little icons for $1 (or 100 credits) netted Facebook tens of millions of dollars last year (which is paltry compared to Zynga's $50 million). Ok, you’re saying to yourself, so what? I don’t care about little icons on my profile. Facebook isn’t going to make any money off of me. Well, you’re right—for now. You’re also probably over 25. And while you may not care about a teddy bear icon or some other form of digital embellishment, there are at least 27 million other people who do. They’re kids under 12, and they’re the people Facebook is ultimately planning for.

Maybe not all of you have kids. But those of you who do, or who have ever been around a kid who’s 12 or under, know about Webkinz and Club Penguin. For the uninitiated, Webkinz and Club Penguin are sites that are essentially Facebook for the under 12 set, only instead of a picture of yourself and your dog, the kids are COPPA-compliantly represented by animated animals. A social network combined with a game, they can play for free, but the really good stuff (digital furniture, digital pets, special invites, etc) goes to those who fork over the dough.  And fork over they do: with only 12 million registered members, Club Penguin made $35 million in profit ($65m in revenue) last year.

So what does this all mean? Well, it basically means that Facebook has the potential to make a lot of money. Kids who grew up having online access from an early age don’t have as many mental barriers between the online world and the real world. They don’t have problems spending a lot of (your) money to make their online room just as cool as their physical, brick-and-mortar room. Talking online for them is just another extension of talking in real life. So by attaching an actual value (10 credits, 15 credits) to the various actions one takes in the course of a 20 minute (or 4 hour) session on Facebook, Zuckerberg and Co. are actually monetizing social capital, which is pretty revolutionary. If you can get a special invite to a new Facebook feature by possessing a certain number of credits, you’ll essentially be able to buy your cool—which, ultimately, isn’t that different from the real world. But it’s certainly going to be a profitable revenue stream.