‘Social Media Is’, a poem by Google. And you.
Posted: December 10th, 2011 | Author: Erica | Filed under: Social Media Marketing | Tags: Google, search poem, SEO | Comments OffGoogle is but a mirror.
I newsjacked newsjacking!
Posted: November 21st, 2011 | Author: Erica | Filed under: Brand Journalism, Interactive Marketing | Tags: balance, Google, newsjacking, search | 3 Comments »More proof that David Meerman Scott’s newsjacking approach works just fine: my moral quandry over newsjacking has been the #3 & #11 Google result for “newsjacking” for 2 days. Feels a little keyword-stuffy, but the unintended effect is that I brought the ethical question up to the top of search, hopefully giving marketers pause to make sure they’re not being evil. 
I’m sure there’s another name for this tactic already (like “writing blog posts”), but it’d be a good way for brands to bury negative content about themselves on Google.
Ooh, I wonder if I have Klout in “newsjacking” now‽
Don’t make me sign out, Google.
Posted: September 20th, 2011 | Author: Erica | Filed under: Social Media Platforms | Tags: animated arrow, desperation, Google | Comments OffAn animated arrow now desperately dances for your attention when you visit Google. When did The Social Platform Wars get so clingy?
Free hand-drawn Google+ icon.
Posted: August 23rd, 2011 | Author: Erica | Filed under: Social Graphics, Social Media Platforms | Tags: download, free, Google, hand drawn, icon | Comments OffUse this image to illustrate articles on, presentations about & screeds against Google+. It’d be swell if you linked to my portfolio.
Social search: this is no way to run a search engine. Or is it?
Posted: August 20th, 2011 | Author: Erica | Filed under: Social Media Platforms | Tags: Google, social search | Comments OffA guy I don’t know (who seems arty & lives where there’s palm trees), who had me in an unreciprocated Google+ circle, shines some light on how social search on Google is going to be weighted towards your G+ peeps.
I’ve been fretting over social search since been pimpin’, and the reason is mainly that I don’t want Google to compromise great search for social. My friends don’t necessarily know the most about the subjects they talk about, and the links they share might not deserve a place on The Vaunted First SERP (Me totally included. I was horrified this guy was getting my recommendations in a Google search).
In this case, though, I seem to have shared a link that was actually exactly what the person was looking for. The morale may be: choose the right friends and social will be a nice layer on top of search.
I’ve since circled the guy, btw. He totally earned it.
How does it feel to run a livechat, anyway?
Posted: August 10th, 2011 | Author: Erica | Filed under: Social Media Platforms, Winnipeg | Tags: CoverItLive, Google, journalism, Lindsey Wiebe | 5 Comments »Yesterday I livechatted my butt off with fellow panelists Matthew Ingram (GigaOm), Modern’s Earth‘s Ian Rountree, and 416 other interested parties.
The topic: Google+. The pace: frantic!
Hosted at the Winnipeg News Cafe by Free Press social media reporter Lindsey Wiebe, the chat used CoverItLive, a nifty live participation tool journalists use to update realtime from events, take questions, curate tweets by hashtag and liveblog.
The stream moves turbo, questions fly, and it’s a lot of fun. After, I asked Lindsey how she thought her first totally-on-her-own live hosting for the Free Press went.
Me: Were you nervous!? I totally was, until we got rolling & got swept away by the speed & the fun!
Lindsey Wiebe: I totally was! (But) I was really happy with the overall level of engagement and participation. According to the CIL data we had 416 readers total & 156 reader comments.
There are a few things I might do differently in future, based on suggestions and feedback. Numbering the questions, for one, would have helped (thanks for that, Matthew Shepherd!), and I think soliciting for questions prior to the event would have allowed us to target the conversation a bit better, and narrow down the number of similar questions.
The chat tended to veer off in different directions, which was fine with me, but I’m not sure how easy it was to follow for readers who weren’t used to live chat formats.
Me: We went about an hour – did we talk about everything you hoped to (in the depth you hoped for)? If not, what would have made it work better?
LW: I had a few questions I didn’t get to, or that didn’t really get taken up by the panelists, and there were some areas where I think we could have gone into more depth. But the unasked questions didn’t really bother me – the chat was for the benefit of participants, and if their questions are addressed, I’m happy.
Me: I’m curious about how the comment moderation works. Did the moderator hold back a lot of reader comments to keep it making sense, or let everything through except unacceptable stuff?
LW: The goal of moderation was mainly to guide the conversation and make it easier for readers to follow along.
Since a lot of the comments were in the form of questions, we tried to stagger them a bit so there wasn’t a question deluge. But I realize this might have been confusing for people who posted questions and wondered about the lag time, and for our panelists (like yourself), who might not have been clear where they were meant to direct their energy when new questions popped up.
I’m still thinking on how we could fine tune this in future, and whether it was the best approach: would it have been better to allow a commenting free-for-all? To close comments entirely until a designated period? To set clearer comment rules?
I find that live chat conventions tend to favor the speediest typists and thinkers, and the pace and rhythms (plus keeping track of various question threads) can be a little daunting if you’re not accustomed to it. But it’s always going to be a challenge to keep the conversation moving quickly enough for more active participants, while making sure it stays coherent and well-paced for newcomers.
What do you guys (participants & lurkers) think? Was it fun and satisfying from an audience perspective? Any suggestions for improvements?
Update: some tweeted replies, in the interest of keeping all the feedback in 1 place for Lindsey
@EricaGlasier @mediacircustv I think giving panelists the first couple of questions in advance would help. 1 or 2 answers could be ready
@anglibubs
Donald McKenzie
@EricaGlasier Sometimes I didn't know who was a guest and who was a panelist, would be nice to have a way to tell the difference.
@mediacircustv
Scott Carnegie
@EricaGlasier Totally fun! I sent it around the office, but I think I was the only one who was intrigued!
@redsaidfred
Sara Maximus
@EricaGlasier No doubt. But I like to be able to passively listen to these types of things better than reading, personally.
@loridyck
Lori Dyck
Twitter fights back against G+’s fancy features; adds instream images.
Posted: August 9th, 2011 | Author: Erica | Filed under: Social Media Platforms | Tags: competition, Facebook, Google, images, Twitter | Comments Off[edit 1] Yesterday Facebook’s news feed got all circley. Today, Twitter launches an in-stream image. G+ competition is making everyone step up their game!
[edit 2] Boo, the image appears as a link, not instream. Too little…
[edit 3] Well, it kinda appears instream. If you click on the tweet it shows like any media in the right-hand column, and if you link directly to a tweet it shows there too (I’m talking Twitter web interface here). This is the anticipated photosharing feature announced/leaked in May.
