Category Archives: SEO

HR/Security Hot Topic: Should you watch your employee’s personal Internet activities? (Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, etc.)

28 Thursday Oct 2010

Posted by in Branding, Business, Communication, Consulting, Crisis Management, Customer Service, Employee Retention, Ethics, Government Regulation, Honor, Human Resources, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Pride, Privacy, Public Relations, Re-Imagine!, Recreation, Relationships, Respect, Rotary, SEO, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Violence in the Workplace, Website

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by Paul Kiser
USA PDT  [Twitter: ] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Skype:kiserrotary or 775.624.5679]

Paul Kiser

One of the hottest topics in the world of employment is whether or not an employer should monitor his or her Internet activities. This is a subject I’ve written about before, but it is an issue that is still emerging and has yet to have any significant case-law to provide guidance to employers.

It is well-known that a large number of employers perform a ‘Google’ search on the Internet before they hire an applicant, but now companies are feeling the need to continue to monitor an employee’s Internet activities after hire. Many experts, especially those involved in employee liability prevention support an employer’s right to monitor an employee’s Internet activities even when those activities occur off-duty and offsite. The logic is that it is prudent to aware of anything an employee might say or do that could embarrass the employer, or any indication that the employee might take an action that might involve the company and its facilities.

These are rational arguments, but I believe that monitoring an employee’s activities is opening the door to bigger liability issues. Sound odd? Here’s the scenario I see happening in three Acts.

Should the Employer be Big Brother?

Act One: A busy-body employer or manager casually checks his or her employee’s Facebook, MySpace, and/or Twitter accounts. The employer might even do a Google search on an employee from time to time. When the employer or manager finds something that they see as objectionable they confront the guilty employee and take the proper action. It becomes known throughout the company (and the employee’s family) that the employer monitors its employee’s personal Internet activity.

Act Two: An employee has been reprimanded for content they have posted on the Internet. Six months later the same employee posts information on the Internet that he  is considering suicide and describes in detail how he is going to kill himself. Two weeks later the employee carries out the suicide as described. The family is aware the employer monitors the employee’s Internet activity and sues the employer claiming that the employer should have reasonably been aware of the planned suicide and taken action.

Act Three: Companies find themselves with two polar opposite choices. Either the company does not monitor their employee’s Internet activities or the company assigns resources to constantly monitor the Internet on every employee to insure they capture any relevant data for which the company should take action.

I was trained in Human Resources under the policy that what the employee did on her or his own time was off-limits to the employer unless it had a direct impact the job performance. That policy has had to be adjusted in a world where work and off-duty time can often be hard to differentiate, and where drug testing, researching credit scores and background checks have become standard operating procedure for many companies. However, an employee’s personal Internet activities is almost impossible to track in a society that is increasing involved in hours of daily online social networking. The question is whether an employer wants to be liable for monitoring its employees 24/7/365 and being held responsible for taking the appropriate action, or whether the employer would be better served by not being sucked into liability issues that can be avoided by simply not playing the role of Big Brother ?

I know which strategy I would recommend to my clients.

More Articles

Business: Public Relations, Management, and Social Media Related

Rotary Related

Science Related

Personal Experience Related

Our Country and History Related

2Q 2010 Social Media Tools: Facebook/Twitter sail on, LinkedIn/MySpace don’t

20 Tuesday Jul 2010

Posted by in Communication, Consulting, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Passionate People, Public Relations, Re-Imagine!, Relationships, Rotary, SEO, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, The Tipping Point

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by Paul Kiser
USA PDT  [Twitter: ] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Skype:kiserrotary or 775.624.5679]

Paul Kiser

Facebook Dragging Anchor?
Facebook hit 500 million users recently (Google Ad Planner puts them at 550 million as of June) and Twitter is hovering near 100 million. When you consider that Facebook doubled the number of users in about a year it seems like the growth of the giant will not stop, but something interesting has happened in the past three months. The growth in visitors (measured via cookies) has slowed; however, Facebook has gained 60 million users in the second quarter, so no one can reach a conclusion, yet.

Yes, everyone was going to quit Facebook on May 31, 2010, and that didn’t happen, but there may be a new temperamental wind blowing in the world of Social Media. It’s possible that Facebook’s bad press over privacy issues has had an impact on new users and/or it’s possible that Facebook has reached a point of saturation. Regardless, Facebook has hit a speed bump, which leads everyone to wonder if it is a temporary blip, or has the bubble burst?

Facebook Visitors 2Q 2010 (not users)

Twitter Whale of a Fail
Twitter has also seen a slight decrease in visitors over the last two months; however, Twitter gained 16 million users in the second quarter and it should easily exceed the 100 million user mark in the third quarter. Twitter may be experiencing fallout from the backlash at Facebook, but it is more likely that Twitters persistent ‘Fail Whale’ capacity issues are preventing the service from scoring big gains with new users. For several weeks in June, Twitter users experienced constant interruptions in service that were a major annoyance causing many to exacerbate the problem by Tweeting their complaints. The issues were similar to the days when AOL dial-up service lacked the capacity to handle the volume of users…and remind us of the risk an organization takes in failing to anticipate rapid growth.

Twitter Visitors 2Q 2010

From a position of potential demand by business-oriented users, Twitter is in the best position to grow into the Facebook of the business world, but it has to overcome the confusion by older users of the usefulness of the service; however, there is a ‘Tipping Point’ that once achieved could push Twitter into mega growth and a potential of becoming larger than Facebook in total users.

Twitter up-time seems to be getting better in the past two weeks, but continued reliability problems could have a significant impact on user happiness and that opens the door for another service to step up and prove that they offer more than twitchy connections.

LinkedIn Visitors 2Q 2010

LinkedIn Becalmed
The surprise in the 2nd Quarter was the loss of users for LinkedIn. Dropping from 41 million down to 38 million for the business networking website may indicate that it is in a market that is too narrow. LinkedIn encourages long discussions of business issues, and the formation of related groups, but the downside is that few care to read 257 posts of people’s opinions where the knowledgeable people are mixed in with the clueless. LinkedIn also discourages connecting to another user unless you already have a relationship with them, which means you’re talking to the same people you already know. Twitter’s advantage is a more rapid discussion that spins off to other blogs rather than an on-line list of opinions. Twitter also connects people in a way that allows the user to edit their followers, rather than depending on an existing relationship. This could be the signal of a trend and LinkedIn may come out on the short end of Darwin’s evolution theory.

MySpace Visitors 2Q 2010

MySpace: The Titanic of Social Media
MySpace is proof that failure is an option in the world of Social Media. Of course, they are a failure with 66 million followers at the end of the 2nd Quarter, but they had 80 million users at the end of the 1st Quarter. At this pace they will under 10 million users by next summer. MySpace is the Wicked Witch of the West and she is sitting under Niagara Falls …. ‘I’m meltinggggg.’

It is possible that by the end of the 3rd Quarter the field of Social Media tools could be clearly down to Facebook and Twitter. MySpace would need a massive public relations campaign and cool new tricks to stop its decline. It is the BP of the Social Media and it doesn’t have the finances to pull up before it noses into the corn field. LinkedIn is sitting on a house of cards. Being a ‘Business Networking’ service is not enough to keep it viable. If it drops under 30 million users by the end of 3rd Quarter I predict that it will be a race between LinkedIn and MySpace to be the first to dissolve in 2011. MySpace’s loss will be Facebook’s gain and LinkedIn’s loss will be Twitter’s gain. I still believe Twitter has more potential than Facebook, but they will have to overcome the misconceptions by older users of its purpose and value.

We wait for the 3rd Quarter…what will people do?

More Articles

Epic Fail: Media/PR ‘Experts’ don’t get Twitter

13 Tuesday Jul 2010

Posted by in Branding, Communication, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Information Technology, Internet, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Passionate People, Print Media, Public Relations, Re-Imagine!, Relationships, Rotary, SEO, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, The Tipping Point, Traditional Media

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by Paul Kiser
USA PDT  [Twitter: ] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Skype:kiserrotary or 775.624.5679]

“I just don’t see a way to monetize it” – Local PR Company Owner

Paul Kiser

Some of my best friends are Media/Public Relations (PR)/Marketing Experts…okay, maybe not my best friends, but I do have several people I consider friends who have been/are major players in the PR industry in their market and almost all of them either reject Twitter or are mystified by it. The three questions/comments I hear most from my PR friends are as follows:

  • How do you have time to do it?
  • I don’t see how to monetize Twitter.
  • I just don’t get it

The first question requires that a person accept that Twitter can be something of value to their (or their client’s) business. Unfortunately, many ‘experienced’ business people have a misconception of what Twitter is (or is not,) so they are already under the presumption of guilt on the charge the Twitter is a waste of time. They have to be convinced that it has value, thus deserving it merits their ‘time’. But for many ‘seasoned’ PR types the only way they will accept Twitter as worth their time is if it has an immediate dollar return, which leads to the second comment.

The fact is that Twitter a communication tool leads the experienced Media/PR person to fall back to the concept that it can be used for advertising/spam purposes and when Social Media users respond by unfriending/unfollowing them, they decide that Twitter is a waste of time. All their training and experience tells them that Social Media is a billboard that if they can just find the right ‘trick’ then Twitter can be used to manipulate the public to buy whatever they (or their client) is selling. That is what they know and thus it leads to the third comment, that they just don’t get it.

Twitter is a new variety of the PR Cherry

Twitter is not a spam tool. The idea that you can make revenue directly from Social Media demonstrates a lack of understanding of the environment. It would be like trying to add spam to someone’s personal email. People would not accept their personal message being overshadowed by spam for Sam’s Plumbing and it would be annoying to the receiver. Spam/advertising (all advertising is spam) is an affront to people’s intelligence and when people can turn it off they do, and that means Twitter has no value to many ‘experienced’ Media/PR people.

The failing is in the concept of trying to ‘sell’. Any reputable business does not need to ‘sell’ their product or service. I’ll say that again. Any reputable business does NOT need to sell their product or service. What they need to do is educate the public on their product or service and why it will improve their life. Educating is not selling. Selling assumes that you can manipulate people to buy whatever you’re selling. Selling is a function of greed and greed is unethical.

The Social Media environment exposes selling and rejects it, but it loves educating. Social Media is a learning environment and the PR professional that doesn’t understand that will not understand Twitter. This opens the door for those who can reject the old ideas of PR and accept a new strategy of service/product management.

Meanwhile, we should create a new Social Media tool for those who love to sell. They can all join it and try to sell to each other. Maybe we can call in ‘Spinster’?

More Articles

War Declared on Social Media: Desperate Acts of Traditional Media

02 Wednesday Jun 2010

Posted by in 2020 Enterprise Technologies, About Reno, Branding, Communication, Customer Service, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Public Relations, SEO, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Website

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by Paul Kiser

Paul Kiser - CEO 2020 Enterprise Technologies

(NOTE USE AND REPRINT INFORMATION BELOW)

For the most part, the people in the traditional media (newspapers, magazines, TV, etc.)  have seen the tidal wave of Social Media coming for years. They have typically adopted an if-you-can’t-beat-them-join-them strategy. The editors of our local paper have pushed their reporters (from here forward I’ll refer to them as journalists) to use Twitter and to blog in order to keep pace with the millions of reporters online that inform the world of everything from the cute thing their toddler did this week to the world event that everyone will be talking about in tomorrow’s newspaper.

Social Media has given voice to everyone and now journalists are but one voice among many, which is a problem if your living comes from your ability to be paid to have people read your stuff. In the days before blogs and Twitter, publishers and editors had the ability to control who could be heard and who could be silenced, but Social Media took away all their power and at least one publisher is mad as hell and he’s not going to take it anymore. He has declared war! He is going to sue!

The rationale for the suit is legitimate. A certain publisher (let’s call him, Elmer) at a certain Nevada newspaper (let’s call it The Old Conservative Times) has called out the demons (let’s call them lawyers…on second thought, let’s stick with demons) and is going after any website that uses copyrighted material of the The Old Conservative Times. What’s more, Elmer wants everyone else in the traditional media to get on the bandwagon with him.

I agree that anyone who steals an article from another website without crediting or revealing their original source of information is wrong.  If possible, they should also link back to the original source. That’s the way Social Media works. We share information and let our friends, followers, readers know from where we got the information and, in turn, help publicize their work. Journalists, for the most part are professionals, and to steal their work and claim it as your own is unethical.

But that is not what this issue is really about for Elmer and the methods being used by The Old Conservative Times demonstrate that this is not an act of preserving the work of professional journalists. Elmer and his demons have decided to sue first and ask questions…never. Rather than contacting the offender and telling them to remove the copyrighted information, Elmer and his demons are going for the throat and filing suit with the intention of stealing the domain rights of the organization. That’s right, Elmer is using the nuclear option. No warning, just show up in court and turn over everything to Elmer. Freedom of Speech be damned, Elmer is here to tell us what we should think!

I should note that according to Elmer’s blogs he is a conservative. He hates President Barrack Obama and he takes any opportunity to spin a situation to cast a negative light on our President, or Democrats, or the elected government of the greatest nation in the history of the world. It seems about every third blog is pounding home the conservative dribble that proposes hate for our government, hate for our elected leaders, hate for the citizens of Mexico, ….you get the picture.

So Elmer is lashing out at Social Media, which is composed of people who want to be informed, but not by just those who hate, but those who can love, and everyone in between. Elmer wants traditional media to regain control of people’s hearts and minds and this Social Media thing is not acceptable! So Elmer and his demons are not seeking to correct the issue of copyright infringement, which could be done with a phone call or an email, they want to take away the voices of the Social Media, one domain at a time. Elmer also wants all his publishing friends to join him as he strikes a blow against freedom of speech for all and raises a flag on the land of the uninformed.

Hey Elmer, let me know how that works out for you…but don’t quote me, or I’ll sue you.

(Any use or reprint of part or all of this article is expressly ALLOWED for anyone,-except The Las Vegas Review-Journal, its staff, Stephens Media Group, or any affiliates, or any conservative-based organization that has made derogatory remarks about President Barack Obama, Senator Harry Reid, or Speaker Nancy Pelosi,-providing credit is given to Paul Kiser and, if possible, a link to this web address is included with the appearance.)

More blogs

Browser Wars: Internet Explorer losing, Google Chrome gaining ground

26 Wednesday May 2010

Posted by in 2020 Enterprise Technologies, Communication, Customer Relations, Customer Service, History, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Public Relations, Rotary, SEO, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, The Tipping Point, Website

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by Paul Kiser [Twitter: ] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Skype: kiserrotary or 775.624.5679]

Paul Kiser - CEO of 2020 Enterprise Technologies, inc.

Browsers are simply a platform that facilitates our access to webpages on the Internet. They are a vehicle that takes a user to the places they want to go on the Internet. Using the auto analogy, Internet Explorer (IE) would be a utilitarian type of car….a white, 4-cylinder sedan with no air conditioning and an AM radio. That may sound like a biased description, but it is not meant to be derogatory. IE’s browser has served us for 15 years (version 1.0 was launched in 1995) in the capacity it was designed; to get us around on the web with no frills or flash. But many people are no longer satisfied with just getting there. They want more, and IE is losing market share as customers learn to expect more from their browser.

In May 2005, ninety percent of website hits were via Microsoft’s Internet Explorer. It was the 800-pound gorilla of the Internet, but by April 2010, IE users only made up about half of the Internet browser market and one group (w3schools.com) showed IE’s share down to almost one-third. The past two years have seen a major change in the industry with Mozilla Firefox’s browser in a commanding second place and Google’s new Chrome browser successfully gaining market share.

April 2010 Market Share (Ave. of data by Wikipedia)

According to a report by Net Applications, Firefox had 18.3% of the browser market in May 2008, which grew to over 24% (Wikipedia’s average is 28%) by last Fall; however, Firefox’s market share growth has been flat (most survey groups actually indicate market shrinkage) during the last seven months while Google’s Chrome browser (introduced in December 2008) has had a steady half percent growth in market share each month during the same period. It is clear that Google’s new offering is still not on the radar of most browser users, but it seems that it is nearing a Tipping Point that could create a major jump in market share by the end of this year.

May 2008 Browser Market - Data courtesy of Net Applications

Dissatisfiers Driving the Change
Internet Explorer has had the advantage of being the product of Microsoft and as such it was the default browser for most Internet users. Several attempts have been made to usurp IE but none were successful until Firefox managed to gain a foothold in 2004 and started a march to capture almost a quarter of the browser market by late last year. During its growth Firefox exposed the increasing dissatisfaction of IE users with Microsoft’s product.

The most common issue for users has been the slow response of IE browser. As everything else in the world has sped up, Internet Explorer has been slowing down. It can take a minute or more for the IE browser to load up pages. Also, many of the Internet Service Provider (ISP) services like Yahoo have embedded advertising (spam) in prominent places on the page and they don’t allow the user to delete or move the ads. These ISP pages have become the home page for many IE users and they associate the spam with the IE browser even though it is a function of the ISP, not Microsoft.

Google Chrome App Page

Chrome ‘s Speed  and Apps Capturing IE Users

As people become more educated about browser alternatives, IE is likely to lose more market share to newer, flashier options. Google has used Firefox’s success with a new concept of an Internet tool to advance web browsing to a new level. Users are pleasantly surprised with Chrome’s a 15-second response time versus IE’s 30 to 60 second wait. Google’s browser also offers a wide group of applications for an easy build-it-yourself home page that doesn’t include any spam. Firefox also offers apps, but it does not have the ease of drag and drop page construction of Chrome, which makes Google’s browser feel more like an Apple product in the sense that it seems more user-friendly.

That brings up the question of where is Apple in the mix? Apple has attempted to duplicate Microsoft’s model of forcing it’s Safari browser on users of Apple’s iPod/iTunes users. In over three years in the market and despite it being included in every update of iTunes, Safari (not so goody) has failed to make any headway with consumers. Google has managed to leapfrog Apple’s product, which has to be a source of irritation for the company that wants to be the primary thorn in the side of Microsoft.

The rest of 2010 will be important to the three leaders in the browser market. Google is positioned to capture a significant percentage of the Internet users and if they end the year with a market share of 14% or more it is likely that Internet Explorer and Firefox could be in a battle for survival in 2011.

More articles

Rotary Magazine Dilemma Reveals Impact of Social Media

12 Wednesday May 2010

Posted by in 2020 Enterprise Technologies, Branding, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Information Technology, Management Practices, Membership Retention, Public Relations, Rotary, Rotary@105, SEO, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, US History, Website

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by Paul Kiser

The Rotarian magazine

Last week the Washington Post Company declared that it could no longer handle the losses of the 77 year-old Newsweek magazine and announced that it was seeking a buyer. This comes as no shock to those who are closely involved in the industry. Print media in general is under siege by competition from the Internet and there is no bottom in sight. The impact of the Age of Omni Communication is being felt by all the traditional media, including guaranteed circulation magazines like Rotary International’s The Rotarian magazine.

(Age of Omni Communication? Click here.)

Traditional Media Too Comfortable
For most of the 20th century the traditional media sources of newspapers, magazines, radio and television had settled into their respective niches. It was a balance that allowed all of the traditional media to control their share of the advertising revenue.

Print media has been accustomed to measuring success based on circulation, which means they offer numbers to advertisers that measure output, but don’t really measure effectiveness. Traditional media uses the broadcast (one-way) communication model which tends to overlook the questions of whether expensive print media ads are: 1) actually noticed by a reader, and if noticed, 2) do the ads increase sales? The analogy that print media has lived by: if you throw enough goo at a wall something will stick. It was a model of business that worked because there was no better alternative. No one had any reason to believe it would ever change.

The New World of Media
Newspapers were the first to feel the effects of the Internet. By the new millennium people were bypassing them and linking directly to news websites. Soon circulation dropped, and once circulation dropped then advertising revenue dropped. Next to go was the newspaper’s major money-maker; classified advertising.  It was swept away almost overnight with the appearance of websites like Craig’s List. By 2003, newspaper revenue began a free-fall and hardest hit were investor owned newspaper groups that could not afford to lose money because they were already being trimmed to the bone in order to harvest higher dividends.

Magazine sales of Time, Newsweek and US World News Report

Magazines didn’t really see a major impact until blogs and Social Media tools like Facebook and Twitter began to dominate the world of information and communication. People began to speak for themselves and listen to raw information from sources that weren’t filtered through a small group of editors. The magazine staff saw this as heresy. How dare the public read stories that they haven’t approved! They believed that the role of the publishing world was to decide what the public should know and the Internet was full of information that they hadn’t approved.

Comfortable in their arrogance, magazine publishers thought they would survive where newspapers failed, but in 2007, popular magazines like Time and Newsweek had the floor drop out from under them.  Advertisers had discovered that people were basing purchasing decisions on what other people were saying about the products/services in the Social Media. Mass advertising was losing the battle to customer reviews and person-to-person online interactions. For the first time magazines had a competing alternative that exposed the fallacy of mass advertising.

The Rotarian Meets 2010
Highly specialized magazines and membership magazines have been insulated from the fate of the rest of the print media world, but it really is a matter of time until all print media see the reality of Social Media.  The official magazine of Rotary is no different and the first sign of change happened two weeks ago.

During the last week in April, Rotary International convened the 2010 Council on Legislation. This is a body of senior administrative Rotarians (all past District Governors) that review and approve changes to Rotary International policies. Among the over 200 proposed changes was a request to allow the internal Rotary magazine to be offered in an electronic format option and allow members to cancel the delivered hard copy magazine. No big deal, right? But it is a big deal.

The Rotarian Magazine is a monthly magazine with a guaranteed circulation. Every member of Rotary is required to receive it. That allows Rotary International (RI) to reach every member once a month, but it also allows RI to guarantee circulation to advertisers. No one really knows what percentage of Rotary members actually read the magazine, but in the world of advertising it is circulation that counts and it seems certain people at the 2010 Council on Legislation knew an electronic version could drastically reduce the circulation of hard copy of The Rotarian.

An electronic option is a bigger issue than just circulation numbers. This issue of electronic versus print is an example of the bigger conflict between traditional print media and Internet media.  Beyond advertising revenue this is an issue of format and content.

Magazine Format versus Electronic Format
Currently, The Rotarian is a 64 or 80 page magazine (80 pages when there is a multiple page supplement). The first 30 or so pages are a mix of departments and Rotary and non-Rotary advertisements. At about page 30 the magazine starts three or four ad-free feature articles for the next 21 to 26 pages. The remainder of the magazine is small item articles, classified ads, and mostly Rotary related ads. This is a format that works for print media.

The two significant characteristics of The Rotarian print version that conflict with most models of electronic media are: 1) ads intermixed with the substance of the magazine and 2) long articles.  In the most recent edition of The Rotarian (May 2010) there is one article that is 18 pages long. Internet-based reading has rejected advertising (called spam) and most information is delivered in three to five paragraphs (except, of course, my blogs which violate all the rules.)  Blogs/articles that violate the rules are ignored.  Therefore, to be read in an electronic format The Rotarian would have to eliminate the ads and severely trim the articles, which means a print version would either have to change or two different versions would have to be created.

There are two other options. The first is to create a version that would work with the new iPad, but that would mean members would have to purchase an iPad.  The second option is to not change the format for the Internet, which would mean that most people would not read it.

Square Peg in a Round Hole
In the final analysis, a magazine is based on traditional media concepts and they do not translate to the Internet format. Social Media is focused on connections between people and sharing of ideas. A print magazine is a broadcast of information where no one cares if anyone reads it as long as the circulation numbers are good. But advertisers are getting smarter and stingier about throwing money at broadcast media.

The National Rotarian magazine

The fact is that The Rotarian is living on borrowed time. Eventually, the reality that circulation doesn’t measure anything that is relevant will cause advertisers to focus their efforts (and money) on real connections with real people. Without outside ad revenue the cost to maintain a print publication will force RI to move away from broadcast media and seek better options. The best option will be for RI to create a series of mentored blogs that allow people to read and discuss the Rotary issues that are important to them. Rotary International is already experimenting with this through Social Media tools, but there is and will be resistance to giving up traditional media.

Next year will be the centennial celebration of The Rotarian magazine. It may also be the celebration of the end of an era.

More blogs

Social Media Book Review: The Zen of Social Media Marketing

10 Monday May 2010

Posted by in 2020 Enterprise Technologies, Book Review, Branding, Consulting, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Information Technology, Management Practices, Passionate People, Public Relations, Re-Imagine!, Rotary, SEO, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Website, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by Paul Kiser
USA PDT  [Twitter: ] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Skype:kiserrotary or 775.624.5679]

  • Book Cover

    Book: The Zen of Social Media Marketing

  • Author: Shama Hyder Kabani
  • Publisher:  Benbella Books
  • Published: April 2010
  • Audience: Primary: Message professionals involved in organizational internal and external communication. Also, individuals seeking to create a personal brand. Secondary: Seekers of enlightenment regarding Social Media and Professors and Teachers in many fields (e.g.; business, arts, education, communication, etc.)
  • Rating: (Out of 5*)
    • Overall ***** (5-Must Read)
    • Content ***** (5)
    • Relevancy ***** (5)
    • Style **** (4-down to business tone)
    • Readability *** (3-read on a Kindle computer download)
    • Value***** (5)
  • Thesis:  A presentation of key aspects of Social Media and how it functions with organizational marketing.

Social Interactive Media is a very complex and variable subject.  It is unreasonable for anyone to expect one book can adequately cover this topic because the Social Media tools and their use are changing daily. It is akin to asking someone to explain Art in one book….and the request is made after the Renaissance. There is much to discuss and there is still more to come. The reality is that we are still in early childhood of Social Media, but even today it can make or break governments and businesses.

Shama Hyder Kabani

Despite the impossible task the author, Shama Hyder Kabani has not only written a great book on the subject of Social Media, she is offering a solution to the problem of keeping her book relevant by updating and revising the book on the Internet.  It is truly a book born in the Social Media era of handling difficult problems with New World solutions.

Teasers

  • Introduction – Nice comparison between Social Media and the spoon lesson in the movie ‘The Matrix”.
  • Chapter 1 – a) Learn how to A-C-T using a great B-O-D in Social Media. b) Strangers to Consumers to Clients.
  • Chapter 2 – a) What is Website 911 EMS? b) What a blog does for your website. c) Relevancy versus Content…or not
  • Chapter 3 – Use and abuse of Social Media.
  • Chapter 4 – Facebook, the coffee shop of the Internet. (I love that analogy!)
  • Chapter 5 – a) Twitter, it’s about the dialogue, not about you. b) What #ff means.
  • Chapter 6 – LinkedIn, the conference room of the Internet.
  • Chapter 7 – Video on Internet: a) About, b) How to, c) Why.
  • Chapter 8 – Social Media meets Corporate Policy.
  • Chapter 9 – Icing on the Social Media cake.

I discovered new information on Social Media through Shama’s book, but mostly this was a great read because she validated what I have learned, read, and witnessed in my exploration of Social Media. For me, it allows me to say to someone, if you don’t believe me, read the book. The Social Media Doubting Thomas’ need a hard copy book for information to be legitimate and that is what Shama Hyder Kabani provides to the world. She also confirmed for me that age does not equal wisdom in the world of Social Media. My experience has been that the older the Social Media ‘expert’ the more cynical and off-target the information. Shama knows her stuff and people of all ages should sit up and listen….or just leave.

More Articles