March 2nd, 2009

Q&A with Jeremiah Owyang: Social business economy

Posted by Jennifer Leggio @ 1:15 pm

Categories: Corporate Social Networking, Fortune 500 Series, Marketing, Q&A, Social Business, Social Media, Social Media Economy

Tags: Technology Company, Brand, Recession, Social Media, Technology, Twitter, Q., Branding, Marketing, Jennifer Leggio

In December Peter Kim took to his network to crowdsource and create his 2009 social media predictions. One such predictor was Jeremiah Owyang, senior analyst with Forrester in the social computing group, who said “The recession will force revenue results out of social technologies.” The key word here is “force.” Meaning, that social technologies need to stand up to the expectations set for them and drive real ROI for businesses, and the truly good ones will be able to follow-through. The others, according to Owyang, will get weeded out.

While it’s still too early in the year to put any hard metrics against Owyang’s prediction — not to mention a lot of social tech companies are not disclosing revenue and a lot of their customers are not disclosing ROI numbers — it is a good time to talk about how this trend is tracking. Social technologies and social media in general are under considerable scrutiny due to the amount of emphasis put on it in 2008. In a related note, Owyang wrote last week about how the recession is going to purge out a lot of self-proclaimed social media gurus who may not be able to produce the quantifiable financial results that clients are demanding.

So on that note, I spoke with Jeremiah last weekend to pick his brain about this prediction, about what clients should be looking for as they sift through the bull, about which social technology companies are really proving themselves — and I even snuck in a bit about Twitter’s long-awaited business model.

Q. [Jennifer] When you say that the recession will “force revenue results out of social technologies,” what do you mean by “force?”

A. [Jeremiah] The companies that don’t provide any quantifiable results or don’t understand how they need to help brands develop profits… they are going to go away in one form or another. There’s been a lot of innovation primarily due to the influx of venture capital funding but not a lot of business models. We saw this in the last innovation wave before the dotcom crash. The recession will force these social technology companies to meet the needs of the market or they will dissipate. It hasn’t happened yet — people still have reserve capital to lean on. But the VCs are looking for business models NOW.

Q. Of course, the most famous social tech company with a mystery business model is Twitter. How does this apply to them?

A. Twitter has success and VC funding but their VCs are demanding that model. The architecture is ready and they have to figure out how to monetize the community. The VCs might not have cared as much a few years ago but now they need to look at these things pragmatically. Social media playtime is over.

Q. Everyone has their theory and interpretation of how Twitter might monetize. What do you see as their best path?

A. Definitely a lightweight customer relationship management (CRM) solution. An advertising model would be too potentially disruptive to the user experience (as seen with Magpie). Twitter is looking for ways they can meet the needs of brands without jeopardizing that user experience. Traditionally brands spend a lot of money on customer acquisition and many of these customers are already using Twitter. These brands also already invest countless dollars in CRM systems. Twitter has the “C” and the “R” but is missing the “M.” The missing piece of that is a tool for brands to track, look for mentions, determine who / what is influencing their customers. This data can be very helpful and right now it is tedious to try to track with Twitter Search and other third party applications. And there is much more intelligent data to be gleaned with the right tools.

Q. So if we’re talking lead generation and tracking via Twitter perhaps a partnership with a Salesforce.com?

A. Absolutely. A lot of CRM firms are already pulling in the Twitter API. Web analytics firms and brand monitoring firms are doing the same, trying to glean information. They know Twitter has the kind of traction that their brand clients are looking for. In time we’ll see more of a connection here.

Why social tech and why now? –>

November 17th, 2008

Zappos CEO: transparency helped employees during layoffs

Posted by Jennifer Leggio @ 11:20 am

Categories: Career Development, Corporate Social Networking, Marketing, Social Media, Social Media Best Practices, Social Media Economy, Social Networks, Twitter

Tags: Layoff, Employee, Twitter, Zappos.com, Public Relations, Workforce Management, Marketing, Corporate Communications, Human Resources, Jennifer Leggio

Just under two weeks ago Zappos.com, the online shoe retailer, very publicly laid off nearly 8 percent of its workforce. The truth is, the company didn’t intend for everything to be so public. It just was, due to the social media darling’s corporate culture of transparency.

Is this bad? Not according to Tony Hsieh, Zappos.com CEO.

“We’ve generally found it to be beneficial to be public online about everything,” he said. “And we will continue to do our best to be as transparent as possible.”

Even, sometimes, if transparency is hard. Zappos.com gained prominence on the social media radar earlier this year when Hsieh, his executive team and hundreds of the company’s employees created a one-brand army on Twitter. Those hundreds of employees reacted strongly to the news of the layoffs — online — on the company’s Twitter-focused feed. To some companies, this might’ve created bit of a public relations nightmare or a crisis to manage. For Hsieh and his team, it was something to embrace.

“We believe that transparency is important and have continued to encourage our employees to Twitter,” he said. “We also publicized on our blog the email sent to employees within minutes of it being sent internally.”

If you watched the Zappos employee Twitter feed post-layoff, you would’ve seen a few things:

• Centralized reaction, which allowed the company insight on how to best handle sensitive situations with both laid off and current employees
• An outlet for each employee to react in a way that they know they would be heard — by management, fellow employees, the media, and other listeners
• Public, thoughtful interaction between employees and management
• Laid off employees using the venue to plant seeds for future employment opportunities
• Communication with other laid of employees of other companies, and a new birth of networking

Zappos easily could’ve disbanded this (it’s simply an aggregation of employee tweets) but it chose not to do so, in favor of its transparent culture, and the benefit of its employees. And, according to the company, there is nothing to hide. The transparency didn’t stop there, either. Where some businesses might’ve counseled its CEO to stay out of reach during such a time, Hsieh continued his communications with customers and employees via Twitter, firsthand, and sometimes openly, addressing questions and concerns about the future of the company.

“Because of the large number of followers I have, I’ve always responded to questions through direct messages, as I don’t want to Twitter out replies that might be irrelevant to most people,” Hsieh said. “This isn’t anything new; it’s something I’ve always done.”

From a business perspective, this was risky, but beneficial to Zappos.com. Could this transparency be beneficial to a larger or public company such as Sun Microsystems or Citigroup? Perhaps not. For a consumer-focused company like Zappos.com, however, it was a risk worth taking. Employees appreciated it, management benefited and even in the wake of a layoff, customers see Zappos.com as a company from which they want to buy.

Now, it’s business as usual at Zappos.com and the company is as transparent as always. As Hsieh said in the latest note to employees last week:

Remember, this is not my company, and this is not our investors’ company. This company is all of ours, and it’s up to all of us where we go from here. The power lies in each and every one of us to move forward and come out as a team stronger than we’ve ever been in the history of the company.

Photo of Tony Hsieh by (CC) Brian Solis, www.briansolis.com, bub.blicio.us.

November 12th, 2008

Spoke resorts to fear tactics, loses credibility

Posted by Jennifer Leggio @ 9:49 am

Categories: Branding, Career Development, Corporate Social Networking, LinkedIn, Marketing, Reputation and Privacy, Snake Oil, Social Business, Social Media, Social Media Best Practices, Social Media Economy, Social Networks

Tags: Web 2.0, Social Networking, Networking, Internet, Online Communications, Marketing, Advertising & Promotion, Jennifer Leggio, Job, E-mail

Let’s face it, times are tough. People are pinching pennies due to the fear of potentially looming layoffs. Certain industries and governments are facing economic crisis. Pensions are potentially in danger. Folks who want to retire may need to hold off. It ain’t pretty.

Given the current state of things, companies and individuals alike are looking for ways to cut costs and try to attain sustainability. Regardless of how strong our companies may be, we’re all a little bit scared. That’s why I find it even more shameful when a company tries to blatantly exploit those fears and vulnerabilities.

Case in point: Yesterday I received an email from Spoke, a business connection engine (or as I sometimes refer to it, a “poor man’s LinkedIn“). I’ve never given the site much thought — I can’t even recall if I ever created a profile. So why is Spoke on my radar now? I’ll tell you. The subject of the email was:

“If you want to keep your job, use Spoke”

Insert record screeching noise here. It certainly got my attention. It didn’t get my attention in the “Oh, YES, finally a solution to ensure I keep my job!” way. It caught my attention in a “You’ve got to be kidding me?” kind of way.

Read the full email (click to enlarge):

I did my research to ensure it wasn’t some phishing attempt or a spam email. It was a legitimate email from Spoke (sent through Eloqua) trying to get me to use the site. The copy of the email itself wasn’t bad. It was the humongous thud of FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) that made me — and many others with whom I’ve spoken about the email — lose a bit of respect for the company.

Other companies, especially Web 2.0 and social networking companies, can learn a valuable lesson from Spoke’s antics. Resorting to fear marketing during the downturn is dangerous. Customer education and outreach is still critical, and by all means we have to try to grow our businesses. But in Spoke’s case, its approach merely showed me that it does not understand the needs of the individual who is scared to lose his or her job. It did not give me comfort that it might have a networking solution for me should I need one. And it certainly did not make me want to recommend it to my friends or business partners.

October 14th, 2008

Keeping the dream alive - bootstrap your way out of the death spiral

Posted by Jennifer Leggio @ 1:21 pm

Categories: Branding, Career Development, Social Business Analysis, Social Media Best Practices, Social Media Economy

Tags: Dream, Network, Yahoo! Inc., Start-up, Jennifer Leggio, Ryan Kuder, VC, Angels, Networking

Jennifer Leggio is on the road.

Guest editorial by Ryan Kuder

I was very publicly laid off from Yahoo! back in February. It’s a gut-wrenching experience for anyone who has gone through it. At the time, my choices were to get a new job, try my hand at consulting, or start the company that I always wanted to start. I chose to build a company.

Unfortunately, the past few weeks haven’t been the greatest time to be an entrepreneur. TechCrunch is calling it the death of Web 2.0. Jason Calacanis wrote about (The) Startup Depression. The VCs are circling the wagons. The Angels are harkening back to the last bubble. There’s some optimism coming from a few people like Brad Feld, but most of their focus is on startups who have a round in the bank and need to conserve their cash.

I am not one of those startups.

Typically, entrepreneurs will work their idea at night and on the weekends while they slog through the 9-5 shift. But when there is no 9-5 and money stops flowing, there’s a sense of panic that steps in. There’s the “Oh Shit” moment when you realize that the dream may die well before you intended. You can abandon the dream, or you can bootstrap it.

We’re going to keep chasing the dream. Here are the five things that we’re doing to bootstrap our startup and keep the dream alive.

Refigure everything
You need to assume that it’s now going to take you twice as long and cost you twice as much as your craziest outside prediction. When you bootstrap, your startup takes a backseat. It’s a necessity. With your focus and your money diverted, you lose the economies that you’d have if you were working on it full time. Make your best guess as to how long it will take and how much it will cost you, then throw it all out the window.

Reprioritize
It’s critical to get to market as fast as you can to start pulling in revenue. Figure out what you need to launch and cut everything else. You won’t have the resources to build everything you want. Take a look at your feature set and for each feature you have on your list, decide if your product would still be usable without it. If yes, cut it. Repeat.

Next: Network, network, network… –>

September 26th, 2008

Twitter's Election 2008 - more than a mashup; it's a revenue model

Posted by Jennifer Leggio @ 7:58 am

Categories: Branding, Election 2008, Internet Search, Mashups, Microblogging, Social Media Economy, Social Networks, Twitter, Uncategorized

Tags: Revenue, Twitter, Mashup, Topic Page, Collaboration, Jennifer Leggio

Twitter announced last night that it has kicked off its own Election 2008 mashup, creating a central hub on all popular political issues being discussed throughout the site. According to the blog:

During the first presidential debate in Oxford, Mississippi and each subsequent debate leading up to and beyond election day, Twitter will be performing real-time algorithmic analysis on millions of unedited public reactions. These trending topics along with a live ticker of continuously fresh opinions are available now at election.twitter.com.

By leveraging the power of its Twitter Search trend and search capabilities, Twitter has taken this mashup much further than the current third-party Politweets mashup. Twitter’s Election 2008 is a live, real-time feed of all political commentary streaming through the microblogging network and it also includes sub-categories for some of the most widely discussed trends. There is no need for the popular hashtags approach. There’s no need to manually create your own trending topics and create an RSS feed in order to join the conversations. Hot topic pages are already created and it’s all automated. For example:

Biz Stone writes about the Election 2008 features in the Twitter blog:

• Hot Election Topics are determined by a variety of search queries
• The topics at the top of the page are updated every 15 minutes
• Clicking at topic filters the content based on that particular word or phrase
• Obama and McCain’s Twitter accounts are updated whenever they update
• People can participate in the box under “What do you think?”
• The main timeline is a live ticker—new updates appear every second or so
• Clicking the sidebar tabs filters the main timeline by candidate name
• We’ll be featuring notable Twitter accounts in the sidebar
• Updates made at Twitter E08 will link back to election.twitter.com

This is the first time that Twitter has gotten into the mashup game, and a good place to start considering the thousands of political posts occurring each day. The mashup is being promoted via a quick frame at the top of the Twitter main site and I’ve seen several people in my network promoting it via word-of-mouth this morning.

The mashup itself, while cool, isn’t the most interesting piece. What’s cool about this is that I believe it could give us a sneak peek into Twitter’s plans for a potential revenue model — about which speculation has abounded since it closed it’s last round of funding. While selling ad space on the main feed could be seen as obtrusive to its users, and beyond a Google AdWords-type of approach, difficult to trend toward each user, advertising on a mashup would be profitable and potentially well-revered if done right.

Take at look at the layout of the main Election 2008 site. There is a lot of unused real estate that could be given to advertisers. Twitter has also designed the Election 2008 site so that even nonmembers can take in the content (but you need to be a member to participate). While the mashup streams content from throughout the Twitter network it behooves individual users who truly want to engage beyond their current networks to “tweet” directly from the mashup page. If Twitter clocks this traffic and can put some page view metrics into an ad kit, that could stand to be quite profitable for the company.

It’s bigger than that, however. The trends don’t stop at politics. Ever notice how many of your Twitter friends talk about professional sports? Music? Fashion and television shows? AMC could’ve easily sponsored a Twitter mashup that featured all of the “Mad Men” characters and allowed them to promote other shows and even bring in network sponsors to tap an entirely new Web-based audience.

What do you think? Could this be the start of a new revenue model for Twitter?

September 18th, 2008

Pandora opens up: Q&A with Tim Westergren

Posted by Jennifer Leggio @ 12:35 pm

Categories: Internet Radio, Q&A, Social Media Economy

Tags: Internet Radio, Radio, Pandora, Advertising & Promotion, Marketing, Jennifer Leggio

In August, Pandora founder Tim Westergren told the Washington Post that the future could be bleak for the Internet radio station due to high percentage of its revenue being forced to go to royalty fees. Now, one month later, Westergren is shooting down rumors and socialsphere speculation about why Pandora is facing potential extinction.

“One of the falacies that is floating around is that Internet radio is poorly monetized — that is not true,” Westergren said. “We’re just being charged more than other forms of radio. At the current pace if we did our projected $23-$24 million this year we would be paying $17 million in royalty fees. That’s 70 percent of our revenue. Someone explain to me how that is fair when satellite radio is charged only about 7.5 percent for its music. It’s really ridiculous.”

The other rumors? Some bloggers have written that in order to survive Pandora needs to get more social, more akin to competitor Last.fm, which has a more interactive quality. But this issue isn’t about site traffic or a lack of reasons for advertisers to invest.

“Advertising is steady for us,” Westergren said. “And the commentary around our needing to be more social shows the ignorance in understanding the economics of Internet radio. Anyone who does Webcasting has these exact problems. I think we’re being more open about the challenge so people may think it’s use, and we’re also the largest pure play Internet radio station so we’re going to get more attention on this subject.”

Fired up about the issue but still holding steady ground, Westergren is deep in the trenches of leading Pandora’s negotiation with Sound Exchange, the entity that represents artists and record labels, but is understandably quiet on the current details.

“We’re currently still negotating and nothing material has changed, but we’re hopeful that all will be resolved in the negotation,” Westergren said.

The news of Pandora’s potential demise sent a shock through music lovers on the Web. Some even went as far to create an “I Heart Pandora” widget for people to show solidarity through their blogs and social network pages and several bloggers have written urging their readers to take action and urge Sound Exchange to settle in favor of Pandora and Internet radio. It was just 18 months ago when Westergren himself put out a call to Pandora listeners sign a petition urging their Congressional representatives to act in favor of Internet radio. Are those actions needed again? Maybe, but now isn’t the right time.

Next: Why listeners should hang tight…for now –>

August 20th, 2008

Identity theft for the hip blogger on-the-go?

Posted by Jennifer Leggio @ 10:56 am

Categories: Reputation and Privacy, Security, Social Business Analysis, Social Media, Social Media Economy, Social Media and Security, Twitter

Tags: Financial, IM, SMS, Twitter, Blogger, Xpenser, Text Messaging/SMS/MMS, Telephony, E-mail, Financial Management

I was minding my own business on Twitter last night when I saw a tweet from Laura Fitton that said, “totally stoked i can now tweet expenses to myself at the point i incur them (and IM, email, SMS too).” I did an immediate double-take. I think my audible reaction was, “Eek!”

Turns out that Fitton was talking about a free service called Xpenser. Here’s a quick snippet in the company’s own words:

We were fed up with how painful expense reports and tracking were. After many experiments we found a workable solution: record expenses as soon as they happen and forget about them.

Xpenser lets you do just that - record expenses via whatever means are available to you quickly and painlessly. Send them in via Email, SMS, IM, or voice (call a number and say your expense). From your Blackberry, email “Lunch 78.50 with BigClient” and it’s recorded. From your phone, SMS “exp groceries 27.13″. From your computer, IM “Equipment 889.19 backup server”. From your phone, call and say “taxi 39 office to airport”. Use the Web interface to edit and finalize them or export them to your favorite financial management software. No more forgetting your cash expenses, no more half-day expense entry sessions.

I’m not against online expense services as a whole (I know a lot of people who use and love FreshBooks). My concern with Xpenser is the data in transit from other Web-based services, some of which have been notoriously insecure at times. Users can send these expenses via instant message, Twitter, SMS, Jott, etc. From what I understand all of this feeds into a simple hosted spreadsheet that appears from the demo to only include dollar amounts and expense types, but that’s just the demo. Since true expense management includes relating your expenses to the type of account you used to pay them, isn’t there a risk that some users would list their account numbers or account types? Hard to tell from the demo — and nothing is written on the site to address this concern. Nor is there anything written that tells less-than-savvy Internet users how not to use this service in order to protect themselves.

It’s akin to writing private information on a piece of paper and throwing it in the trash can. There’s a very slim chance that anyone will find it — but there is still a chance.

Some people might say that Xpenser is an OK service if one knows better than to include account names and numbers but, quite frankly, I don’t want to put out there even the slightest bid of information that could allow a hacker to financially profile me, or even my small business, and give them added incentive to compromise any other part of my financial life.

This, to me, is one scary step away from the “Twitter as a PayPal killer” mumbo jumbo that was circulating around the Web a month or so back. As progressive as I feel about social networking tools I still feel we are a long way from trusting them with our financial records.

When I threw this over to a couple of security friends via email last night, one of the replies I got back was, “Good gravy, Xpenser sounds terrifying.”

When I commented on my continued shock this morning, Twitter pal Grant Beery, of the hockey blog Daily Deke, said, “Identity theft for the hip blogger on the go” (and thus the inspiration for my headline).

These folks get it. I don’t even know that Xpenser gets it. I dug through the site’s FAQ and blog and found nothing relative to security. Are people not asking these questions? The thing is, that Xpenser may be able to secure its site to the hilt (well, to some degree) but it cannot assure security of the services transmitting the data. So why trust it?

 Loading ...

August 19th, 2008

PitchEngine revs up public beta, puts the social in PR

Posted by Jennifer Leggio @ 8:10 am

Categories: Cool Tools, Corporate Social Networking, Marketing, Public Relations, Social Media, Social Media Economy

Tags: Brand, Public Beta, Media, Social Media, PitchEngine, SMR, PitchEngine SMR, Newsroom, Public Relations, Marketing

Last week I wrote about how bloggers could better work with public relations folks. While I won’t to get into the habit of writing about PR I think we’d all agree that, like it or not, there’s a direct correlation between it and social media, especially when we’re talking about business strategies. Before I silence myself on the matter, let me introduce PitchEngine. It’s the first service I’ve seen that provides simplicity for social media savvy PR people need and potential relief for media who need to reduce their inundation of unsolicited pitches.

PitchEngine, which already has more than 300 brands in its alpha, opens up for public beta and introduces its Social Media Newsroom, both this week. What does it do? There are three key features thus far:

• Social Media Release Builder — PR pros can build SMRs with a very quick tool that allows for publishing via the PitchEngine site as well as in an iframe on a corporate site. These releases can be posted directly to Twitter, FriendFeed and Facebook from within the actual SMR and can include multimedia.
• Social Media Newsroom — Automates the corporate newsroom development and maintenance process.
• PitchFeed — Allows bloggers / reporters to choose which pitches they will receive based on a customized RSS (it even allows the media to block brands that might be spamming them).

Admittedly, I have been skeptical in the past regarding SMRs as I worried that, if mishandled, they would further the divide between media and PR (and, let’s face it, nothing beats relationships). But PitchEngine is doing just the opposite by bridging the gap with its innovative approach to SMR distribution and pitch management. Wanting to dig a little bit more into the service, I interviewed founder Jason Kintzler.

Q. [Jennifer] How do you see this competing with the offerings of PR Newswire, Business Wire, Marketwire, etc. Or is it complementary?
A. [Jason] Since we don’t provide distribution (at least not the same form), I don’t see us as competing. While those services offer varying forms of social media integration, our goal is to be more of a tool for PR firms and brands. The social aspects are superior already — direct tweets from within the SMRs, and the ability to “follow” a brand on Twitter from the release is pretty innovative. I’m also guessing that “free” is a bit cheaper than those services as well.

Q. How do you plan to monetize this as a PR tool?
A. People think it’s crazy, but the Social Media Release Builder aspect of PitchEngine is a free service and I plan it to keep it that way. This week, as we roll out public beta, we’ll be offering a customizable newsroom feature. Since PitchEngine SMRs are active for 30-days once created, users who subscribe to the service will be able to host and archive their SMRs in these newsrooms. Each newsroom is hosted by us, but mapped from your corporate Web site for a more seamless feel for journalists and consumers visiting your site. The subscription fee will start out at $600/yr per brand.

Q. How about as a tool for media?
A. This side of PitchEngine will be a free service as well. Media are inundated with “spam” pitches sent via traditional methods. Everyone keeps telling me there is NO way to cut out spam. They may be right, but we’re sure going to put a huge dent in it. Media users will set up a personalized page within the site by simply answering a couple questions — they will then be provided with a PitchFeed (RSS/SMR feed) specific to their industry, news beat, etc. Media users will be able to filter content in their custom PitchFeed, even be able to accept/deny pitches from specific brands outside of their feed. If a blogger is using this service, it becomes increasingly harder for them to get spammed.

Q. With Reg FD requirements now satisfied with corporate blogs, do you think companies will pay for SMRs when they can simply post content in their blog? Or is there a connection between what you are doing and the corporate blog?
A. Posting press content to a blog doesn’t necessarily make it easier for a PR person to deliver all the content and assets for media to do their job well. It’s definitely easier for bloggers (no need for high res images), but that’s still just a piece of the puzzle. I believe having a consistent format will be an advantage for PitchEngine. Media want, and perhaps more importantly, need this to be easy. Stepping into a more social form of media relations will take some coaxing, the majority of media and PR aren’t there yet. I think this will be an easier, more friendly transition for the industry. It’s not going to solve everyone’s problems, but it can certainly take some of the guesswork and out of it.

Next: What is the Social Media Newsroom? –>

August 12th, 2008

Lijit secures $7.1 million series C round

Posted by Jennifer Leggio @ 12:02 am

Categories: Internet Search, Life Streaming, Social Media, Social Media Economy

Tags: Network, Analytics, Blog, C, Lijit, Blogging, Internet, Jennifer Leggio

Lijit Networks, which provides search and analytics engines that benefit both bloggers and their readers, announced today that it has closed a $7.1 million series C funding round. Foundry Group, which was a late investor after Lijit closed its $3.3 million series B round last year, led this round. Existing investors, Boulder Ventures and Colorado Fund 1, managed by High Country Venture, participated in the series C as well.

Todd Vernon, founder and CEO of Lijit, said that the company will use this financing to further enhance its search and analytics offerings as well as launch its search-powered advertising network. The company — which currently has 22 employees — hopes to ramp its head count to 40 in 18 months, with a focus on building its engineering, operations, marketing and publisher recruitment teams.

Chris Wand, managing director of Foundry Group, said in a statement that the firm re-invested in Lijit due to the company’s rapid growth:

“Publishers leverage Lijit’s services to capture more page views and increase reader engagement. Our investment in Lijit comes on the heels of an impressive growth trajectory in 2008. Over the past six months the company has tripled the reach of its network, doubled its average publisher size, and provided measurable value back to those publishers.”

Lijit differentiates itself as a “social aggregator with intent,” giving blog owners a way to provide readers with customized searches, which in turn gives the reader more quality content and helps reduce bounce rates. The entry point for Lijit is a widget the blog owner posts on his or her site, which can be loaded up with the author’s social network pages, blog roll and other trusted content. The widget also provides a search box — but it’s not a Google search box or a built-in blog search tool. The important differentiator is that the readers will be able to search all of the author’s trusted content.

For example, I am an avid reader of Chris Brogan and I often visit his site to take in his views on social media. Sometimes, however, I want more than just his opinion if I am really researching a topic. Since he is a Lijit user, I can search for a keyword in the Lijit search box, which will give me more content options from his blog, content options from his preferred social networks or content options from his broader trusted network. Now, for me the reader, Brogan’s blog has turned from a destination for only his blog content into a go-to resource whenever I want the views of his trusted network. I will have also spent more time on his site.

Return blog visits and reader retention are not the only benefit for blog publishers; the Lijit widget includes an analytics tool that allows authors to view trend reports on what searches are being done on the blog as well as the click-through rates. This helps them better analyze what readers are truly seeking and can potentially help them better tailor their content accordingly, thus growing readership.

“We provide a lot of data on the search,” said Micah Baldwin, vice president of business development for Lijit. “We can help publishers learn the behavior of their readers, where they are coming from, and so on. And for readers, they can go to a blog that they trust and find a social stream directly connected to their interests.”

For more reading about Lijit and its history view the Techmeme discussion.

July 30th, 2008

SEC unanimously approves use of corporate blogs to meet Reg FD requirements

Posted by Jennifer Leggio @ 5:02 pm

Categories: Corporate Social Networking, Legal, Marketing, Reputation and Privacy, Social Business Analysis, Social Media, Social Media Economy

Tags: SEC, Blog, Social Media, Jennifer Leggio

The Securities and Exchange Commission today voted unanimously to provide new guidance that allows public companies to use their Web sites and corporate blogs to meet Regulation FD’s public disclosure requirements.

The guidance, which will be effective upon publication in the Federal Register, does imply that there are certain stipulations that public companies must meet in order to take full advantage of the guidance. And, as with any disclosure, the companies should tread carefully in determining what should be disclosed, where and how. No matter, this is definitely an advancement that positively impacts companies, investors and social media pundits.

According to the SEC’s official statement, the SEC last issued guidance on the use of Web sites and electronic media in 2000 — which is almost like decades ago in Internet years. The official statement from SEC chairman Christopher Cox said:

“The last time the SEC issued guidance in this area, the idea of ’social networks’ hadn’t yet been developed, and creating a social network where shareholders could meet and exchange views was barely imaginable,” said SEC Chairman Christopher Cox. “Ongoing developments in technology have increased both the markets’ and investors’ demand for more timely company disclosure on the Web, and in turn, raised new securities law issues for public companies to consider. The guidance issued today clarifies the rules of the road so investors can gain — quickly and in a cost-effective manner — the benefits of Internet disclosure of the latest information on the companies they own or are considering buying.”

Dominic Jones of the IR Web Report calls out that companies will have to use extreme caution when considering whether or not to leverage Web site copy or blogs to try and meet disclosure requirements. However, with this move forward by the SEC this could mean even more advances in terms of how public corporations use social media.

Many companies have long recognized that pushing out a traditional news release via a wire service (such as PR Newswire, Business Wire, Marketwire) is an almost antiquated approach to try to obtain news coverage. Simply, many have been forced to issue via news release only to meet Reg FD requirements. With the rising costs of commoditized basic news wire distribution (not to mention additional charges for public companies to meet Reg FD requirements) if leveraged cautiously public companies currently using this method could see some significant cost savings in their marketing budgets.

More than that, the social media news release (SMNR) that Brian Solis has spoken very publicly about has been caught in a bit of the crossfire between “old school” public relations and business professionals and the social media pushers who desire to make news releases more interactive. This guidance by the SEC could make the SNPR more relevant — especially since it can be issued solely via corporate blog — allowing marketing teams to even further cut back on spend via traditional wire services. As an aside, some of these wire services charge more for a SMNR than a traditional press release.

Bottom line? If used carefully, this new method of disclosure could be a boon for social media allies, as well as public company marketing budgets and Web presence alike. However, the wire services are likely going to suffer a bit of a loss.

Thanks to Shannon Whitley for alerting me to this news. For further reading, be sure to dig into the IR Web Report which includes current and ongoing in-depth analysis of the issue.