Social Media Opportunities

Since starting a master's in PR I have learnt more about the role of social media within communication strategies. Before I looked at Facebook as a communcation tool for a person rather than for a business, but now I understand how powerful social media can be in influencing and informing people. As social media platforms are used worldwide, there are great opportunities for companies which operate globally.

Companies can now communicate to a worldwide audience via platforms such as Twitter and Facebook. A company such as Next use both these social networking sites in order to let their customers know of new the styles on offer and they upload pictures of these styles.

Video sharing sites such as YouTube have allowed companies to share videos of adverts and videos of how to use their products. Marks and Spencer adverts are widely available on YouTube, this enables people in other countries to view English adverts which wouldn’t be aired on television in their country.

Blogging allows companies to share information regarding their brand with people. This allows for two-way communication as people can post their comments and converse with the author of the blog as well as other people who comment on it.

While there are many opportunities for global brands using social media platforms, there are also threats. An example is the recent blogging backlash that Eurostar were faced with when some of their trains were trapped inside the tunnel. Many passengers used Twitter to talk of their experiences and the poor communication from Eurostar. Consequently, their reputation has been seriously damaged.

Any threats of social media to global companies are severely outweighed by the opportunities. The amount of users signed up to social networking sites is ever increasing and this allows for companies to expand on their existing communication strategies and reach a wider audience than ever before.

I know if I ever start up my own business I will definately take advantage of the use of social media.

Goodbye From Raj!

I have now finished my two weeks work experience at The Phoenix Partners, here is the final blog post I wrote for them.

If You Like Orangutans Then Don't Eat Chocolate!

Recently, I was watching a very comical documentary presented by Alex Riley called Britain’s Really Disgusting Foods. One of the topics that Alex investigates is the production of palm oil used for producing chocolate. To produce palm oil many South-East Asian rainforests have been cleared and this could cause the orangutan to be extinct within 10 years.

Mars Chocolate UK Ltd recently announced that the Galaxy chocolate bar will be Rainforest Alliance certified in 2010. However, while the cocoa they use in it will be 100% sustainable, the palm oil won’t be.

Alex decides to meet the spokesperson for The Rainforest Alliance and asks him why Mars are allowed to get the Galaxy certified by them when they are using unsustainable palm oil. Alex is told that in order to get The Rainforest Alliance seal of approval the cocoa needs to be from a rainforest certified farm, regardless of whether the palm oil is sustainable or not. One word now enters my head, 'greenwashing!'

Alex then decides to go to the Mars Chocolate UK Ltd Head Office with a lorry full of 'orangutan friendly' palm oil and a group of people dressed up in orangutan costumes. Alex tries to sell the palm oil to Mars; however they decline the offer. This is hardly surprising, would you a buy a lorry full of palm oil from a load of people dressed up in orangutan costumes? I very much doubt it.

A spokesperson then comes out and hands Alex a statement. The statement explains that Mars have now committed to using sustainable palm oil by 2015. You may be thinking that’s a fairly good outcome, but how many orangutans will actually be left in 2015?

Although the documentary was presented in a comical way, the issues raised were quite serious. It has all led me to think about the topic of greenwashing. Before you ask me what greenwashing is, no it isn’t like stonewashing jeans but with grass instead of stones!

Greenwashing is when companies mislead consumers to believe the environmental impact and sustainability of a product is more positive than it actually is. This is exactly what Mars have done with the Galaxy. Consumers see that it’s Rainforest Alliance certified and think that it’s environmentally friendly and saving the rainforest, what they don’t know is that the palm oil used in it is causing the extinction of the orangutan.

I wouldn’t say that I’m a 'tree hugging' type of person, but I’m all up for helping to protect the environment. I bet many of you could probably say the same? Whether you're a 'tree hugger' or not, the environment and sustainablilty is something we all need to understand in order to keep the world going.

Maybe, if more of us knew about greenwashing and how widespread it is then companies wouldn’t get away with it. But on the other hand, this wouldn’t be fair on companies whch communicate their CSR to the public and are making genuine attempts in being 'green', as we may think they are greenwashing' when in fact they aren’t.

Companies may then be put off from communicating their CSR in fear of being accused of greenwashing. Personally, I wouldn’t want to see this happen as I think companies have the right to let people know they are acting responsibly and as a consumer I would want to know when they are demonstrating CSR.

What do you think about all this? Should we find a way to prevent companies from greenwashing or should we let consumers work out for themselves whether they are undertaking genuine CSR or not?

The Latest Talent

After a busy first week at my work experience placement I've got involved in a wide range of hands on experience, including blogging, writing press releases, writing letters to clients etc. Check out this blog post I've done for the Message Merchants, who are part of The Phoenix Partners. There may be more to come in the weeks ahead.

Ooh isn't it Dark in Here

Take a look at this....

I have done a news post about Eurostar while doing work experience at The Phoenix Partners.

Simon Cowell Must Hate Facebook

On Sunday the whole nation was shocked when it was announced that Rage Against The Machine’s single, Killing In The Name was Christmas number one. The single was released in 1992, so how come 17 years later it becomes Christmas number one? It is all down to the power and effectiveness of social media.

A man named Jon Morter started a Facebook group called ‘Rage Against The Machine For Christmas No.1.’ The Facebook group asked the question, ‘Fed up of Simon Cowell's latest karaoke act being Christmas No.1? Me too... So who's up for a mass-purchase of the track 'KILLING IN THE NAME' from December 13th (DON'T BUY IT YET!) as a protest to the X-Factor monotony?’ It started off fairly small but then began to take off and the group now has just over 500,000 members. As the group started to attract attention in the media one of the bands members, Tom Morello used his Twitter page to encourage fans to purchase the single. This along with lots of word of mouth campaigning is what resulted in this incredible shock to the nation.

I actually remember coming across the group on Facebook when I was invited by several of my friends to join. When I saw it I just thought of it as one of the many groups on facebook that is nonsense. I regarded it in the same category as the types of group which you see that are called ‘If 100,000 members join I will tattoo my name on my forehead.’ I was shocked when I saw people on my facebook started posting comments about how the single has become Christmas number one. I then turned on to the news to check if this was real.

I along with the rest of the nation expected X-Factor winner, Joe McElderry’s single to become the number one. For the past four years the winners of The X-Factor have released cover songs which have made it to Christmas number one, partly due to the final being held just before Christmas. Maybe if Simon Cowell and the rest of The X-Factor crew had worked harder on promoting Joe's single then it may have made it to number one. This year may be the turning point where The X-Factor is no longer as popular as it once was.

This is an example of social networking used in exactly the right way. It has worked well because along with the campaign having a clear goal, Facebook and Twitter were both used to speak to fans directly to create a massive buzz and this in turn has created media hype.

All this has reminded me of other occasions where social media has been used effectively. An example is the film Paranormal Activity, which was recently released in the USA and UK. The film was originally shown in the USA in just 13 towns, but Paramount later announced that they would use social media platforms to promote the film and if the film received over 1,000,000 demands then the film would be released nationwide. The film hit 1,000,000 demands and was then later released nationwide across the USA and then the UK and it has been a huge success.

It has been proven once again that social media is becoming more and more powerful in influencing people’s decisions. If the recent success story of Rage Against The Machine doesn’t encourage more businesses to start using Twitter and Facebook, then what will?

Will People Pay For Online News?

A couple of weeks ago, one of the UK’s biggest newspaper firms, The Johnston Press started charging for access to its online content. It is the first regional publisher in the UK to do this and although the company owns over 300 papers, it has decided to run a trial with just six of their papers charging for its online content. The Johnston Press websites are asking their readers to pay £5 for a three month subscription.

It is expected that many national newspapers will follow and also do a trial with their online content as they look to find a successful business model to offer a solution to the decrease in revenue that they are faced with. I can possibly see this business model working for the regional newspapers but I can’t see it working for the national newspapers.

My local newspaper, The Malvern Gazette hasn’t got any competition from other local newspapers within the area. In this case, I think if The Malvern Gazette charged for their online content then their online readers would be prepared to either pay a small fee or switch to the traditional paper form as they have no other substitute to choose from due to the papers monopoly position within the area.

The problem for the national newspapers is that it’s so easy to find free online news on the internet and unless every single news source in the country decides to start charging, then people won't pay for online news and they will get their news from other free news websites. If a newspaper such as The Times, started charging for their online content then other national newspapers that are in competition with them may not follow in fear that they will lose their readers.

With television broadcast companies such as the BBC and Sky News, I can’t see them ever charging for their online news as they are not faced with the financial trouble that the newspaper organisations are faced with and then this could help prevent the business model of charging for online content ever succeeding.

Some kind of solution needs to be thought up quickly, if journalism is to have any sort of future. Many jobs are being lost within the occupation and with the increasing influence that public relations practitioners have within the news agenda, journalism is under a lot of threat.

What are your views on this?