Social networking is not just for kids

Gemma O'Reilly PR Week

The phenomenon of social networking has found a new audience in mums seeking support and advice. Gemma O’Reilly looks at three such sites and how the power of forum-posting mums took on Woolworths.

The Government's decision, a fortnight ago, to award £500,000 to parenting website Netmums - which has been dubbed the ‘Myspace' for mothers - has once again thrown online parenting forums into the spotlight.

This government backing highlights the growth in popularity that such for­ums have experienced over the past two years. The websites, which also inc­lude Mumsnet and Raisingkids, provide an opportunity for new and exp­ectant mums to share exp­eriences and receive advice on parenting issues. Indeed, it is Netmums' focus on invaluable advice that has earned it the government cash.

Such sites also create opportunities for PR professionals to promote their clients' products through rev­iews and for­ums on the websites.

Power to the forums
It is the forums, often full of lively chat between mothers, that PROs are particularly keen to monitor and influence. The power of a group of forum-posting parents was amply demonstrated ear­lier this year, when Woolworths was forced to withdraw its ‘Lolita' brand of children's bedroom furniture.

Mums posting on Raisingkids.co.uk railed against the retailer's poor taste. But the passion of forum contributors can sometimes go too far. Mums­net was forced to pay a five-figure sum to childcare expert Gina Ford last year after a post on its forum was judged to be defamatory.
Despite her brush with Ford, Mums­net's co-founder Justine Roberts rel­ies on users to flag up lib­ellous comment or free advertising.

But other website owners have bec­ome more vigilant in forum monitoring as a result of these high profile cases, with dedicated moderators checking messages.

However, for brands wanting to challenge comments about their products featuring on a forum, the opt­ions open to them need consideration.

‘Mums are a very captive audience. In some cases they are lonely and want adv­ice. The forums are often very honest. The last thing you want to do is charge in there and say "look at our great product",' says Frank MD Frankie Cory.

Melissa Talago, MD of Peekaboo Communications, an agency that specialises in targeting mothers, says one option is to be honest and reveal that you represent the brand under discussion and would like to contribute.

But she cautions: ‘An open approach might be a slightly risky strategy as some members of the public do not mince their words.'

There are not product reviews on every site and some expect payment for them. On websites such as Mums­net, where the reviews are written by the readers, it is understood that PROs have posted their own favourable rev­iews to counter the criticism.

A popular strategy for PROs is to joi­ntly plan parent surveys. For example, Netmums recently partnered Nivea to run a survey around Mother's Day. It found that the ‘yummy mummy' image is unattainable and puts too much pressure on modern mothers. The story was picked up by GMTV, Van­essa Feltz's radio show and national papers inc­luding the Daily Mail, The Daily Telegraph and Daily Star.

‘Mums love to give their opinion and surveys are a great opportunity for brands to get involved,' advises Siobhan Freegard, editor of Netmums.

Netmums was also app­roached by FMCG firm Aquados, to ask 100 members to trial its environmentally frien­dly washing powder Simply. After many positive suggestions, the brand decided to launch a sensitive skin product.

Expert advice
Other opportunities for PR professionals include competitions and newsletters. Providing experts to speak in the forums, or to give advice, is also useful. The sites can also attract wider
media coverage - Netmums is often approached by the media for case studies, including GMTV and BBC.

The website features a media request board and a ‘Netmums Media Mums' section.
Netmums also has a review section featuring reviews of the relative child friendliness of cafés and restaurants.

Alternatively, PROs can contribute to the ‘What's on' board, which inc­ludes the latest theatre, shows and movies that parents might be interested in.

While print coverage still holds court for most clients, it is clear that parenting websites are a valuable, if potentially risky, channel with which to engage.

TWO MINUTES WITH THE EDITOR
Catherine Hanly, editor, raisingkids.co.uk

What do PROs need to understand about Raisingkids.co.uk?
It gives members access to expert advice and covers parenting issues rather than promoting consumer goods.

Are there any sections that benefit particularly from help from PROs?
We do not do straightforward product reviews. If they give us a story about a interesting product then we may be able to use it as a news piece instead. We also work on a commercial basis with brands.

We recently teamed up with Cadbury's to create a corporate website called ‘Be Treatwise' to show parents how they can treat their kids to sweets as part of a healthy, balanced lifestyle.

We are helping to build traffic to the site and expect to have at least 100,000 page impressions by the time the campaign ends.

What else can you offer the PR industry?
There's a survey service, which allows PROs to ask our readership a question that would help to put a PR campaign together. This helps if they want to run an idea past mums first, to see what they think of it. We can also help create news hooks and can provide experts for radio and TV shows.

CONTACTS
Raisingkids.co.uk
Editor - Catherine Hanly
020 8444 4852
mailto:%20editor@raisingkids.co.uk

Mumsnet
Co-founder - Justine Roberts
020 7609 3370
mailto:%20contactus@mumsnet.com

Netmums
Editor - Siobhan Freegard
020 8427 1951
mailto:%20siobhan@netmums.com

A second coming for virtual worlds

Polly Devaney PR Week

When online worlds such as Second Life began, they captured the public's imagination. But the initial stampede of brands into 'immersive spaces' has slowed. Polly Devaney investigates

This time last year, the buzz around Second Life, the virtual world that enables people to create ano­ther version of themselves, was palpable.

Back then, IT research outfit Gart­­ner predicted that 80 per cent of active internet users would have some kind of a ‘second life' in a virtual world by 2011. The media were full of breathless
accounts of big-name brands claiming to be the first in their sector to set up virtual shop. These firms were riding the crest of a virtual wave, blazing trails in this new world by boosting their profiles and pulling in hordes of new customers.

The current reality
Fast forward a year and the virtual landscape is looking bleak. Shops are empty, ‘closed until further notice' signs hanging from their virtual doors. American Apparel, one of the first high-profile brands to open premises, pulled out after a poor summer of virtual trading, as did Pontiac and Amer­ica Online.

Is this the end of a phenomenon that never quite was, or is there hope for a second coming of Second Life?

One PR agency that is not selling the virtues of virtual life to its clients is onl­ine specialist Immediate Fut­ure. ‘We do not recommend it to our clients as we do not think it is the place for consumer goods and lifestyle brands,' says MD Katy Howell.

‘When Second Life first started and brands got inv­olved there was lots of chatter - but I don't think it is creating that word of mouth buzz anymore.'

Howell believes there are other, more effective ways to communicate with key influencers. Aside from that, it is a costly way to experiment.

‘Nobody I work with really talks about Second Life anymore,' she says. ‘There was a certain first mover adv­antage but nothing much has really come of it.' Howell points to the technical problems around Second Life, and the fact that only 60 people can be in one place at one time, as significant stumbling blocks to effective comms.

However, in terms of hard facts on Second Life, it could be argued that the trend is still positive. The number of hours spent ‘in world' by residents has more than doubled over recent times, leaping from 10.8 million in January 2007 to 28.3 million in January 2008.

The total population of Second Life over the same time frame almost quadrupled, to 12.2 million.

Brand boosts
Markettruths, a research firm that specialises in Second Life, ran a study into brands that jumped on the bandwagon last year. It found the number of people rating brands' involvement in Second Life as ‘mostly positive' grew from 49 per cent to 60 per cent during the first nine months of 2007.

Markettruths MD Mary Ellen Gordon believes this is because the original fears around big brands ‘squeezing out the little guys' has not happened.

Gordon also thinks word of mouth recommendation is alive and well in Second Life, with over half of people making recommendations to other residents, and half considering buying as a result.

The firm's research also found nine per cent of Second Life users bought something in real life, and eight per cent bought in Second Life, after getting ‘in-world recommendations' - something Gordon believes is ‘pretty impressive'.

In her experience, the PR campaigns that achieve high awareness levels are the ones that have a big, sustained presence, such as ‘Second Fest' - a three-day music festival run jointly by The Guardian and Intel last summer, that had virtual gigs over five stages and even included portaloos and mud.

Another PR agency that has not given up on Second Life is Press Dispensary. The agency has an office in Blue Horizon, a Second Life business park. It has worked on a virtual coffee morning for Macmillan and the launch of the drinks brand Oasis in Second Life.

Press Dispensary MD Robert Shepherd says being there is beneficial. ‘We have made a profit from our Second Life inv­olvement,' claims Shepherd. ‘People discover us there and see our expertise. The virtual park we are in has a nightclub and bar area, so we get passing trade that we would not usually get.'

Dotcom similarities
Shepherd admits that when big brands pull out of Second Life it does cause a ripple of ‘I told you so' reactions. But like many observers, Shepherd bel­ieves recent failures can be compared to the mistakes that led the dotcom bubble to burst in 2000 - the firms that struggled were the ones that overspent too quickly without thinking the process through.

Vic Keegan, technology journalist at The Guardian, says his feeling is that corporations are giving up on Second Life as a brand extension exercise bec­ause there are not enough regularly returning consumers.

‘They no longer get cheap headlines in the media for selling their wares there,' adds Keegan. That said, he bel­ieves wiser companies are still building a Second Life presence, because of ‘real benefits arising from collaboration and low-carbon international meetings'.

The next phase
Virtual worlds are certainly evolving and it is important to remember that Second Life is not the only virtual life out there. Other online worlds such as The Manor, There and Playdo are alm­ost as established, and new technologies to increase audience participation - the key problem for brands trying to create big events in virtual worlds - are being developed all the time.

Second Life may not be the media darling it once was, but this is not unusual for a web-based concept that generates a huge raft of early publicity. The brands seeking to piggy-back the initial buzz were always likely to tire of their commitments once the novelty value wore off.

But with visitor numbers increasing and IT developers working flat out to iron out logistical kinks, virtual worlds such as Second Life look here to stay.

WHO USES SECOND LIFE
-- Sixty per cent men, 40 per cent women
-- The majority of users are aged 25-34
-- Thirty-five per cent of avatars are from the US, with the next biggest population being Germans at 8.2 per cent, then British at 7.6 per cent
(source: Second Life: Jan 2008)
--Many regular Second Lifers spend an average of 20 hours a week ‘in world'. These users spend less than half the time watching television than non-users of Second Life
(source: Markettruths: March 2008)

CASE STUDY: COW ISLAND
PR agency Cow entered Second Life in June 2007, launching a Virtual Worlds Consultancy on ‘Cow Island'. Cow co-founder Dirk Singer admits he ‘did not really see the point' of a standard office, so asked their developer to build a nature reserve with only a small part given over to
company space.

The island has four domes, although these are currently empty as Cow has decided it has too much space for its needs, and is in the process of parcelling out part of the island to build tree houses for residents to rent.

Cow uses the space for internal meetings and as a showcase for clients, although Singer says he would not recommend Second Life to any clients simply wanting to sell virtual versions of real-life products.

One of Cow's key PR activities in Second Life was for Vauxhall Corsa in mid-2007. The ‘Corsa Guide to getting a (Second) Life' was designed to help new residents of Second Life find the ‘hottest, coolest, and most fun places' to visit in the virtual world.

Just over 2,000 votes were cast by residents in ‘Corsa kiosks' in Second Life and the resulting guide
was accessed by 25,000 people online.

While Singer admits that a presence in Second Life has not resulted in any leads from clients or activities beyond The Corsa Guide, he says the collaboration element of Second Life makes it worthwhile.

‘I have met creatives and designers from the US, Australia and New Zealand - and even London - that I would not have done otherwise,' he explains.

Singer believes it is a long-term investment and is vital for Cow to be there for the future. ‘We will see massive growth in the medium, even if not in Second Life per se.'

CASE STUDY: TEXT 100
In August 2006, Text 100 became the first PR agency to set up in Second Life. The three-storey office on a private island features a welcome centre, an information centre and an amphitheatre.

Although it is not unusual to find it completely deserted, as there is no staffing rota, the firm still believes it was a smart move. Text 100 COO Andrew McGregor says the rationale for entry was varied but much of it came down to being able to ‘experiment and explore'. ‘You cannot advise clients on these spaces if you have not had your own experience,' says McGregor.

Since the opening, Text 100 has created virtual media spaces as add-ons to real world events and used it for global internal meetings. One of the most successful Text 100 events in Second Life was for the non-profit humanitarian MacArthur Foundation.

The agency ran a virtual extension of a real-life launch of a US$50m Digital Learning Programme. Within 72 hours more than 1,400 postings on the topic could be traced back to individual avatars who began blogging while attending the launch event in Second Life.

That may have been back in 2006, but Text 100 says activity has by no means wound down recently. For Text 100 client Cisco alone, it has organised 30 separate community building events over the past year. These are typically forums and attendees have included the chief executives of Cisco customers.

As to the future of Text 100 and Second Life, McGregor says the agency is ‘keen to see where the potential of immersive environments can go'.

Virtual teen community launches in UK

VizWoz, an animated virtual world for teens, has launched in the UK with the backing of a number of high-profile investors.

The site, at www.vizwoz.com, provides a virtual world were teens a can create their own avatar and interact through chat, games and user generated content.

VizWoz was founded by entrepreneur, Daniel Laurence who also founded School Stickers, UK’s largest sticker company and MyStickers, a school incentive and reward initiative.

The Flash-based site does not require any downloaded software, instead running directly on a user’s browser.

VizWoz includes a variety of worlds in a theme park style. Users can create and customize their own character avatars all of whom move on futuristic ‘hover boards’.

The site is aimed at boys and girls, and caters for a range of tastes and interests in the teen sector including film, music, sport and fashion.

To keep the site safe for children, VizWoz site is policed by key word screening, artificial intelligence and human moderation. Enforcement is either automatic (3 strikes and out), or by the VizCops – an online VizWoz ‘police force’ who patrol the community.

Daniel Laurence, Founder of VizWoz, said: “VizWoz, a stimulating, interesting and safe space for kids and teenagers to explore and ‘hover and hang out in’ whilst stretching their imagination and creativity, is set to become the future of chat and gaming. With the combination of unprecedented flash animation and innovative technology, created by our strong team, the service aims to produce a catalyst for interaction and virtual entertainment in its most realistic form.”

Basic membership is free and allows users to enter and explore with others; send messages to friends; play games and earn the site currency; Viz Dolla.

Meanwhile, VIP membership (from £2.95 a month) provides access to additional rooms and games, clothes and accessories for the avatars plus additional room on the VizWoz servers.
The site also has partnerships with numerous companies, which will run branded content on the site.

VizWoz is backed by a board of Directors including Chairman Doug Richard (entrepreneur of Dragon’s Den fame, Chairman, Library House, Co-Founder and CEO, TRU TAP), IQ Capital, Bridges, David Murray (Propel), David Mayman (Chairman, Local Search Technologies Group) and Andrew Straw (DatingDirect).

Doug Richard, Chairman of VizWoz Ltd, added: “Having been a seed investor in successful software companies and hearing a host of business pitches including those on Dragon’s Den, it is rare to find an inspirational entrepreneur of Daniel’s calibre in the children’s and teen market.

“It is an opportune time to invest in online communities and drawing on Daniel’s wealth of knowledge and success to date in this sector, plus his vision for VizWoz, we are confident that it has the right combination to make this online offering a huge hit,” Richards concluded.

www.vizwoz.co.uk

Google in trouble over data security

Written by Iain Thomson vnunet.com,

US laws could invalidate user privacy elsewhere

Organisations and individuals using Google's applications suite have no right to data privacy, a case in arbitration has shown.

Lakehead University in Canada was one of the first large-scale adopters of Google applications, but a storm has broken out after staff were told not to use it for personal or sensitive information.

The problem arises because the information is stored on Google's servers in the US where authorities have the right to read everything Google stores under the Patriot Act.

"The [university] did this on the cheap. By getting this free from Google, they gave away our rights," Tom Puk, a former president of Lakehead's faculty association, told the Globe and Mail.
"You would have no idea what they are up to with your information until, perhaps, it is too late. We do not want to be subject to laws of the Patriot Act."

Puk has brought a complaint against the university because his contract guarantees private electronic communications in line with Canada's privacy laws.

Darren Meister, associate professor of information systems at the Richard Ivey School of Business, said: "If I were a business manager, I would want to be very careful about what kind of data I made accessible to US law enforcement."

Google has declined to comment on the specific allegations. However, Peter Fleischer, global privacy counsel at Google, has called for unified privacy standards around the world to protect user data.

Building a website: Who uses your site?

Sue Fidler,Third Sector, 26 March 2008

Sue Fidler recommends thinking carefully about who will use your website.

Once you have defined your objectives for a new site, you need to consider who your audiences are. This means thinking about both types of audience and age groups.

Defining your audiences is critical because you need to find a way to get people to the content you want them to see. Audience types vary according to the type of organisation. They may include service users, supporters, clients, campaigners and many more. But they will probably also include groups we tend to forget, such as peers, decision-makers, advocates, the media, trustees and staff. Each of these audiences is a group you want to direct to specific content.

When you have defined your list, think about activities and internet skill levels. This will help define what you can expect people to do and what you need to provide for them.

If your key audience includes groups under 25, then the site needs to be bright, lively and full of interactive content - opportunities for them to get involved and contribute.

If your key audience is over 55 then the tone and design may be different and the functionality may be toned down. Offering RSS news feeds and user-generated content to older audiences may be a waste of your budget and a distraction on the site.

Offering the wrong content and functionality to the wrong audience will put people off, discourage their involvement and may even alienate them from the cause.

The media want quick access to news stories and a public relations contact. Teachers want lesson plans and teaching aids. Donors want ways to donate and campaigners need content that sparks their interest.

Each of the audiences you define needs to be able to navigate quickly and easily to relevant content, and should be presented with an appropriate tone and functionality.

- Sue Fidler is an independent charity ICT, database and internet consultant.

Building a website: Who uses your site?

Sue Fidler,Third Sector, 26 March 2008

Sue Fidler recommends thinking carefully about who will use your website.

Once you have defined your objectives for a new site, you need to consider who your audiences are. This means thinking about both types of audience and age groups.

Defining your audiences is critical because you need to find a way to get people to the content you want them to see. Audience types vary according to the type of organisation. They may include service users, supporters, clients, campaigners and many more. But they will probably also include groups we tend to forget, such as peers, decision-makers, advocates, the media, trustees and staff. Each of these audiences is a group you want to direct to specific content.

When you have defined your list, think about activities and internet skill levels. This will help define what you can expect people to do and what you need to provide for them.

If your key audience includes groups under 25, then the site needs to be bright, lively and full of interactive content - opportunities for them to get involved and contribute.

If your key audience is over 55 then the tone and design may be different and the functionality may be toned down. Offering RSS news feeds and user-generated content to older audiences may be a waste of your budget and a distraction on the site.

Offering the wrong content and functionality to the wrong audience will put people off, discourage their involvement and may even alienate them from the cause.

The media want quick access to news stories and a public relations contact. Teachers want lesson plans and teaching aids. Donors want ways to donate and campaigners need content that sparks their interest.

Each of the audiences you define needs to be able to navigate quickly and easily to relevant content, and should be presented with an appropriate tone and functionality.

- Sue Fidler is an independent charity ICT, database and internet consultant.

Yahoo, Google, MySpace form nonprofit OpenSocial Foundation

Caroline McCarthy

It's like the Justice League of social media: Google, Yahoo, and News Corp.'s MySpace.com announced on Tuesday that they have formed the OpenSocial Foundation, a nonprofit group to support the OpenSocial initiative that Google kick-started last year to promote a universal standard for developer applications on social-networking sites.

The OpenSocial Foundation is expected to be formed within 90 days, with more OpenSocial partners from across the Web on board in addition to the three responsible for the announcement.

The specific purpose of the new nonprofit, according to a release, is "to ensure the neutrality and longevity of OpenSocial as an open, community-governed specification for building social applications across the Web." It's a particularly crucial move for Google, which has been eager to emphasize that OpenSocial is a community standard, not a Mountain View project.

"OpenSocial has been a community-driven specification from the beginning," Joe Kraus, Google's director of product management, said in a joint statement from the three companies. "The formation of this foundation will ensure that it remains so in perpetuity. Developers and websites should feel secure that OpenSocial will be forever free and open."

Indeed, the OpenSocial Foundation will be an independent entity with its own intellectual property and governance policies. Related assets are expected to be in place by the beginning of July.

Google first announced OpenSocial in October as a response to the plethora of announcements on behalf of social-networking sites that they would follow in Facebook's footsteps and create developer platforms of their own. With so many disparate developer strategies, the social-media landscape could grow even more fragmented, and Google launched the OpenSocial API (and later the Social Graph API) as a means to provide some connectivity. Major players like MySpace, LinkedIn, Bebo, and Plaxo, along with a host of smaller social networks and many that are unknown in the U.S., all opted to participate in the new initiative.

Some OpenSocial platforms, like foundation partner MySpace's, are already live. Others are still in testing phases or have yet to make any kind of debut. Despite delays, the OpenSocial developer community appears to be unfazed.

The only major social network not to commit to OpenSocial in one way or another has been Facebook, the site that started the social-networking platform craze in the first place.
And Facebook won't be joining the OpenSocial Foundation, either. "As the largest contributor to the memecached system, Facebook has long been a leader and supporter of open source initiatives but will not join the foundation," a statement from the company read. "The company will continue to evaluate partnership opportunities that will benefit the 300,000 Facebook Platform developers while improving the Facebook user experience."

At the core of the new foundation will be the practice of upholding OpenSocial's tenets: that specifications are available under a Creative Commons license, that it's shaped by the developer community and social networks' user bases rather than corporate decisions, and that it will be committed to the development of the new Shindig open source reference implementation, part of the Apache Software Foundation incubator.

Open standards like OpenSocial, OAuth, and OpenID have been some of the most heated subjects of discussion in the social-media developer community over the past year, nearly dominating the conversation at conventions like the Future of Web Apps conference in February. With some of the biggest names in technology now noticing and jumping on board these formerly grassroots projects, they've gained a newfound legitimacy--not to mention the financial backing of a Yahoo or a Google.

But in a conference call with press and analysts Tuesday, executives from Yahoo, Google, and MySpace asserted that the OpenSocial Foundation will be a standalone body to the point that Google will relinquish its trademark on "OpenSocial" and the ownership of the Web site.
"This is just the next evolution in where OpenSocial needs to be heading, because it is a community-driven specification," Google's Joe Kraus said in the call.

How to build community: Start with the individual

Rafe Needleman

I'm here at the SNAP Summit in San Francisco. Most of the people in the overflow crowd are trying to figure out how to make their sites more social--how to tap into the viral effect that's busted companies such as RockYou and Slide into the big leagues.

Joshua Porter, who runs Bokardo Design, launched the day by offering up five principles for effective social design. The undercurrent of his talk: Serve your users and they'll keep coming back. That's a simple thing to say, of course. Here are Porter's five tips to making it real:

Personal value precludes network value: Paradoxically, to make a strong social site, you've got to start by making a good personal site. If the features you offer don't serve a solo user, it's unlikely your users will stick around long enough to become social. Examples: YouTube and Flickr both work as utility sites for individuals, even without the social component. Most users on Deli.cio.us start by using the service as a bookmark saver. The social angle comes later.

Tie behavior to identity: In other words, what you do on the site should describe you more than what you say about yourself in your profile. Amazon and eBay aren't Web 2.0-era social sites, but users' identity on these sites is very strong, based on feedback they leave on products and sales.

Give recognition: Digg leveraged its users' competitiveness to get on the front page of the site. Its top users eventually formed cliques to get and hold these positions. It was a good strategy to get the community going, but eventually Digg turned off the recognition feature since it was reinforcing the influence of the grandfathers of its network, and making it too hard for new people to rise up in the rankings. The challenge with recognition programs, Porter implies, is that you have to make them meaningful and desirable, but also temporary. Once a user is recognized as a top contributor, let them fall off the map if they don't stay active.

Show causation: If you're going to ask people to participate, make it clear what participating does for them. Netflix, for example, gives users better recommendations when they rate DVDs.

Leverage reciprocity: This is Porter's fancy way of saying that you want to appeal to people's narcissism. People contribute to social sites in large part because they want to see what other people say about their contributions. Make it easy for people to interact on that level--by leaving feedback, compliments, awards, and so for each other.

Facebook says no to OpenSocial, yes to taking your money

Josh Lowensohn

There was a strange moment this afternoon at the Snap Summit 2.0 in San Francisco. Dave Morin, Facebook's Senior Platform Manager was fielding some audience questions after spending the better part of an hour giving a very broad overview of Facebook's development efforts to a room full of mostly developers. For many, the event was the highlight of the day in a conference whose very promotional materials were made to emulate the look of a Facebook profile page.

An audience member in the back called Morin out on preaching openness despite the fact Facebook is one of the largest social networks not a part of OpenSocial, an initiative that was designed to compete with Facebook's system by letting user data cross-pollinate between sites and services using a single API.

Morin shrugged the question off saying simply "It's pretty interesting. We've made some pretty interesting commitments to openness as well." Not to cut off the chances of Facebook joining the project in the future, Morin followed by saying that Facebook would continue to "evaluate OpenSocial and Facebook's potential place in it." Audience members let out a few sighs and Morin ended the Q&A session immediately.

As it stands Morin and company seem to be quite happy with Facebook's open yet closed platform that's has more than 300,000 applications. Morin nostalgically noted that when he was first brainstorming the platform project with others on the Facebook team, he had hoped they'd get 5,000 applications in the first year, and had no idea it would grow to be what it is today.
So what's next for the platform? Commerce. More specifically, integrating a payment system into the developer tools so application developers would be able to get cash from users instead of just advertisers. Morin says the tools will be in the hands of developers within the next two quarters. Facebook users have already been christened into the idea of giving Facebook money with its first-party gifts service, which lets users spend real world money on virtual gifts friends can display on their walls. The service represents a very early play on what developers would be able to do with their applications using upcoming commerce tools.

Also in the works is application localization for different countries. Facebook's grand scheme is to use specialized markup tags to let users localize applications by language without having to do any of the translation themselves. The result would be making one application work in every country Facebook can be found. The company has already been using a similar system on its own international sites by having users do the heavy lifting when it comes to translation. Morin didn't give a time frame on this feature, but noted that it would come later on.

Coming back to what Morin said about OpenSocial, I honestly don't expect Facebook to join the newly created OpenSocial Foundation or movement anytime soon. The company has a very powerful upcoming strategy of letting people spend money quickly and easily with micropayments (a la iTunes), and spreading the Facebook's presence internationally with the help of users who are willing to do the work for them when it comes to translation.

Opening up Facebook user to data, or giving up the system that's clearly been working very well isn't in the company's interest at the moment. In the meantime it's worth watching developers of both platforms closely, as they've got two big platforms to launch applications, and the opportunity to attract users and make money is only getting bigger.

Call for ban on employers searching social networking sites

Jennifer Whitehead Brand Republic

A group of children's charities has written to the government to ask for a ban on employers and universities looking up social networking websites for information on young people who have applied for positions.

The Children's Charities' Coalition on Internet Safety, backed by charities including NCH and the NSPCC, has raised concerns over the practice of looking for information about potential employees on sites such as Bebo and MySpace, comparing it to looking at someone's diary.

In the letter, sent to Labour MP Margaret Moran, the coalition secretary John Carr writes: "When young people put up their personal profiles they are not thinking about job applications or university applications. Typically they are simply talking to their mates. Employers or admissions tutors who delve into these places are being highly and inappropriately intrusive."

He goes on to ask Moran if she would raise the issue with the government, and consider a Private Member's Bill, saying: "We believe the practice should be outlawed or, at the very least, major employers...should make clear that it is an unacceptable practice in their own organisations."

Research published by the Office of the Information Commissioner last November found that 71% of people aged between 14 and 21 would not want colleges or employers to do a web search on them before they had removed some material, and a report in The Times this year found that it was commonplace for employers to check social networking site profiles.

Building a website: Who uses your site?

Sue Fidler,Third Sector, 26 March 2008

Sue Fidler recommends thinking carefully about who will use your website.

Once you have defined your objectives for a new site, you need to consider who your audiences are. This means thinking about both types of audience and age groups.

Defining your audiences is critical because you need to find a way to get people to the content you want them to see. Audience types vary according to the type of organisation. They may include service users, supporters, clients, campaigners and many more. But they will probably also include groups we tend to forget, such as peers, decision-makers, advocates, the media, trustees and staff. Each of these audiences is a group you want to direct to specific content.

When you have defined your list, think about activities and internet skill levels. This will help define what you can expect people to do and what you need to provide for them.

If your key audience includes groups under 25, then the site needs to be bright, lively and full of interactive content - opportunities for them to get involved and contribute.

If your key audience is over 55 then the tone and design may be different and the functionality may be toned down. Offering RSS news feeds and user-generated content to older audiences may be a waste of your budget and a distraction on the site.

Offering the wrong content and functionality to the wrong audience will put people off, discourage their involvement and may even alienate them from the cause.

The media want quick access to news stories and a public relations contact. Teachers want lesson plans and teaching aids. Donors want ways to donate and campaigners need content that sparks their interest.

Each of the audiences you define needs to be able to navigate quickly and easily to relevant content, and should be presented with an appropriate tone and functionality.

- Sue Fidler is an independent charity ICT, database and internet consultant.

Charity links 'more effective than celebrities'

Colin Marrs Campaign

Charity links are more likely to persuade consumers to buy a brand than those with sport, music and entertainment, according to a new survey.

The research, conducted for marketing agency Ogilvy Action, found concluded that brands would be better off promoting their green credentials than signing Kate Moss.Respondents were quizzed on their lifestyle and product preferences to discover the links that they make between brands and categories.

David Farrow, managing director of Ogilvy Action sports and entertainment, the sponsorship specialist said: "These are important findings, which should help the right brands team up with the right good causes so they can develop more effective sponsorships for the commercial benefit of all involved.

"Of the top ten partnerships that would make UK consumers more likely to buy a product or service, eight were social issues or charity brands.Top of the list were recycling issues, which increases likelihood to buy among consumers by 52 per cent. Also in the top 10 were charities Red, Greenpeace, the NSPCC and the Red Cross and issues including poverty relief and animal protection.Top 10 brand partnerships likely to increase consumption:

1 Recycling issues 52%
2 Red 51%
3 Environmental issues 48%
4 Greenpeace 44%
5 Poverty relief 44%
6 Animal protection 43%
7 NSPCC 38%
8 Americas Cup 35%
9 Red Cross 32%
10 Fashion 32%

Cancer social networking site debuts

Third Sector Online

Cancerbackup has launched a social networking site designed to help people affected by cancer share their experiences and exchange advice and support.

What Now? offers information and the chance to share stories, comments and pictures with other users. Users can keep blogs, join discussion forums, rate information they find elsewhere on the web and keep up to date with news on cancer treatment and research.

According to Cancerbackup, “what now?” is one of the first questions people ask when they are diagnosed with cancer.

“The What Now? network is the first to really embrace patient-to-patient support and information on the web,” said Kim Hardwick, senior nurse at Cancerbackup. “We are really excited about its potential.”
http://www.whatnow.org.uk/

Facebook fires up IM, ratchets up privacy

Caroline McCarthy – CNET News.com's Dan Farber co-wrote this report.

Social network Facebook will roll out more extensive privacy controls this morning, as well as an instant-messaging service soon after, representatives from the company announced during a press briefing at the company's headquarters in Palo Alto, Calif.

The new Facebook friend-adding interface, integrated with privacy controls.(Credit: Facebook)
Most notable about the new privacy controls is the fact that Facebook members will now be able to choose how much of their profiles are visible to those on their friends list.

Naomi Gleit, Facebook's product manager for privacy and internationalization, previewed the updated options, which include a new "Friend of Friends" option based on social proximity--not unlike LinkedIn profiles, in which profile information is visible to second- and third-degree contacts rather than the site's members as a whole. Facebook members will also be able to include or exclude certain friends from having access to information.

In December, Facebook added the ability to create custom groups of friends, but aside from sending out group messages, there's not much that can currently be done with them. With this week's update, Facebook will integrate this function with its privacy controls. For example, a user could hide or show private information, such as e-mail address and phone numbers, from friends or groups using the classifications "Friend of Friends," "All Friends," "Some Friends," or "Only Me." This means that individuals on a friends list can have specific privacy settings, Gleit said. Whenever a Facebook member sends or confirms a friend request, he or she can assign privacy settings.

These new features, according to Facebook representatives, have already been extensively tested. Gleit explained that users have been asking for them, and said they will not have a negative impact on the thousands of third-party developers building applications for Facebook's platform.

Company executives discussed the ongoing evolution of the social network and explained that changes to the site's privacy controls are necessary given its rapid growth and increasingly diverse user base. Matt Cohler, vice president of strategy and business operations, reiterated a common Facebook talking point that the social network is designed to facilitate better, more personal ways to share and communicate information. Also central, he said, is the fact that Facebook's product allows users to have control over their personal information.

"It manifests itself in two parts in the product. Tools have to be powerful for giving granular control, but on the other hand you have to make sure they are easy to use and simple and intuitive," Cohler explained. "Keeping those two things together has been something we've always thought about."

He described how Facebook began as a service for American college students--indeed, a university e-mail address was required to register--but four years later the user base, now numbering 67 million, has changed dramatically. Two-thirds of Facebook members are now outside the U.S., compared with just 10 percent 18 months ago.

But that's not all. As was rumored, Facebook will be launching an instant-messaging service, called Facebook Chat, which should be out in two weeks. Product manager Peter Deng gave a sneak peek of the service.

"When you log in to the site there is a Chat (user interface) at the bottom of the browser...It's unobtrusive and there when you need it," Deng said. No download will be required for Chat, which integrates with a user's Facebook friends list, and it works with all browsers. Members can hold multiple conversations, log on and off easily, keep the conversation going as they navigate through different pages on Facebook, and pop the chat up into a new window.

"We want Facebook to be part of your experience all over the Web," Cohler said. "Our business is not to make Facebook an island."

It sounds like Facebook Chat is too light of an application to pose a big threat to existing instant-messaging clients--at least for now. There's no limit to the number of chats a member can hold at a time, but they're all one-on-one (no group chats). There's also no "away message" function, just "idle" notifications if a member is logged in but has been away from the keyboard.

Additionally, Chat is restricted to Facebook alone. There's no API for it, so third-party services like Meebo can't access it. But the company is looking at Jabber support, which would mean that it could access external instant-messaging services much the way Google Talk does.

"We are looking at whether we will integrate it or not," Cohler said of Jabber. He added that other features in Chat are on the way, but not immediately.

Conversations in Facebook Chat are automatically archived for 90 days, after which the system clears them, but Facebook members will be able to clear their chat histories manually at any given time.

After the presentation, Cohler was asked about the company's relationship with the independent developers creating applications for it, perhaps because of concerns that Facebook would create an internal application that would rival third-party ones. "We develop our apps at parity with developers," he answered. "You can remove our apps and use other applications instead, and we don't make that difficult to do."

In addition, Cohler said, Facebook is hoping to strengthen its relationships with its developer community, perhaps holding another large-scale developer event like the one it held when it first launched the Facebook Platform last May

Analysts believe Microsoft-Yahoo! deal is near certainty

Brand Republic

Microsoft's attempted $44.6bn (£22bn) bid to acquire Yahoo!, which has now stretched to a six-week stand off, is likely to succeed according to a consensus of Wall Street analysts.

Microsoft went public with its $44.6bn proposal six weeks ago, but it was rejected by Yahoo!, which claimed that the takeover bid "substantially undervalued" the company.

Despite Yahoo!'s attempts to explore a merger with other companies, including News Corporation and AOL, in the six weeks since Microsoft's bid, a Reuters poll has found that Wall Street brokers who follow either company remain convinced that Microsoft will succeed in its takeover.

Eight out of eight Microsoft analysts and 14 of 15 Yahoo! analysts surveyed believe that Microsoft will close the deal.

Andy Miedler, an analyst at Edward Jones, said: "Yahoo!'s options are becoming more limited and it makes Microsoft's offer look better."

However, there was less of a consensus among analysts concerning the value of the Microsoft bid, with some claiming the software giant must raise its half-cash, half-stock bid in order to succeed.

Others said that Microsoft need not increase its offer above the current $31-per-share bid, although some argue it may need to sweeten the bid by making it an all-cash offer.

In light of Yahoo!'s failure to find an viable alternative to Microsoft's offer, the poll's findings are unsurprising.
Analysts expect Yahoo! to draw a blank in its effort to find an alternative partner, with Rupert Murdoch having recently said he would not try to beat Microsoft to the Yahoo! deal.

Last Thursday, AOL said it had agreed to acquire social networking site Bebo for $850m in a move some say is a sign that parent company Time Warner has plans that do not include Yahoo!.

According to reports, senior executives from Yahoo! and Microsoft met on Monday to discuss the vision for the merged company in the first meeting since Microsoft's bid on February 1.

The meeting has been interpreted as a breakthrough in the stand-off between the two sides, that could lead to deeper discussions and ultimately a deal.

Gossip: Facebook's rumored IM service involves Social.IM acquisition

Caroline McCarthy

On Friday, a rumor surfaced that Facebook would be launching an internal instant-messaging service . Then, on Saturday, gossip blog Valleywag suggested that launching the IM service would involve acquiring Social.IM, a Facebook application that enables instant message chat between services like AIM, Yahoo, and Windows Live Messenger. A Social.IM exec coyly told Valleywag, "If we're being bought, I haven't gotten the call yet."

Social.IM is supported by venture backing from Valley icon Peter Thiel, who also has invested in Facebook.

One thing Valleywag didn't note is that in response to the rumor on Friday, Social.IM representatives had posted to their blog a fake IM conversation between Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and a Social.IM representative. The dialogue consisted solely of that famous exchange between Star Wars' Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader in which Vader (Zuckerberg) attempts to coerce Skywalker (Social.IM) to join the Dark Side.

On Saturday afternoon, the blog post was pulled from Social.IM. Perhaps that's because the undertones of the faux-conversation indeed hint at an acquisition, or at least joke about the possibility of one.

"You have only begun to discover your power," the Vader-Zuckerberg character reads. "Join me, and I will complete your training. With our combined strength, we can end this destructive conflict and bring order to the galaxy."

(Poor, misunderstood Darth Vader. Sounds like all he ever really wanted was to help the world communicate more efficiently.)

Auction sites link with the BBC and Facebook

Andrew McCormick Media Week

BBC Worldwide's new environment-themed portal, BBCGreen.com, has linked up with auction giant eBay to encourage users to buy second-hand goods.

The deal is one of two online shopping alliances announced today. The other involves Amazon's launch of an application on Facebook that enables people to buy presents related to the interests that people list on their profile pages.

BBC Worldwide's deal with eBay is part of the BBC commercial arm's aim to encourage people to take action favourable to the environment. The affiliate partnership will involve eBay ads being embedded in the BBC portal.

Meanwhile, Amazon has launched two Facebook applications in a bid to tap into the social network's young user base. Amazon Giver will enable Facebook users to buy relevant gifts on Amazon, while Amazon Grapevine will provide live feeds on Facebook users' activities on the shopping site.

Google launches free ad serving platform

NetImperative

Google has bugun testing a free ad serving platform, following its purchase of advertising technology firm DoubleClick.

The service, called Ad Manager, will be tested with a ‘limited number’ of publishers, the Wall Street journal reports.

The service, aimed at small and medium sized businesses, will provide the ad serving free, and can handle a number of formats including graphical display, video and text ads.

The search giant is hoping to make money from the service by persuading Ad Manager clients to fill unused inventory with those from Google’s own AdSense system.

Google will then take a commission on revenue from any ads it sells.

The platform marks a major move away from traditional ad-serving platforms, such as the one provided by DoubleClick, which charge publishers to serve up their ads on their website.

The move comes as the search giant looks to expand its ad services beyond its core strengths in pay-per-click (PPC) search ads, which currently make up most of Google’s revenue.

Google added that it won’t be mandatory for Ad Manager users to carry the ads from Google's AdSense system. Instead, they can also choose to fill the spots with ads from other online ad networks in cases where they generate more money for the publisher.

This week, European Union regulators cleared Google’s $3.1bn bid for online ad technology firm DoubleClick, saying the deal would not hurt competition for online ads.

Google said that Ad Manager will serve Web publishers with small- to medium-size sales forces, while DoubleClick's services are suited for higher-end ad-sales operations.

Some analysts have speculated that Google will eventually make DoubleClick's ad-serving services free. A Google spokesman told the WSJ that the company has no immediate plans to make DoubleClick products free.

Commenting on Google's acquision of DoubleClick, Oliver Bishop, CEO of search marketing agency Steak, said: “I’m excited about this deal. It has the potential to do for display advertising what Google has already done for search. Namely, bring it to the masses. I expect display advertising will now become more accessible to small and medium sized businesses. As with search, the size of your marketing budget will not be a barrier to display advertising online.

“This deal could break another important barrier as well,” Bishop added. “That between branding and direct response. The cutting-edge tracking and reporting this deal brings, will empower advertisers to understand how their different advertising buys interact with one another and their combined affect on sales. It’s no longer about direct response or branding. It’s about how every piece of your marketing and communication work together and impact one another to drive purchasing decisions.

Add to that the potential for enhanced targeting and personalisation of ads I believe the Google/DoubleClick deal could have a huge influence on growing the whole online advertising market.”

“The potential is enormous. Success will depend on integration, implementation, addressing privacy concerns and of course, the competition and the looming union between Microsoft and Yahoo! Closing the deal is the first stage. There is much work to be done to realise its potential and many rewards to be gained, ” Bishop concluded.

Yahoo eyes OpenSocial move

Media Week

Yahoo is in talks to join the Google-led OpenSocial platform, an alliance developing common standards to allow developers to run programmes on multiple social networks for the first time.

Yahoo's involvement in the alliance, which could reportedly be announced soon, would bring a large base of online users to OpenSocial, and would deal a blow to Facebook. OpenSocial already counts MySpace, Bebo and numerous social networking sites among its members.

The initiative aims to break down the barriers between rival social networks and establish a standard set of applications to work across all the sites.

Although Facebook remains a noticeable absentee from OpenSocial, Facebook still counts around 200,000 developers and 16,000 applications on its platform. However, Yahoo's backing could prove a significant counterweight to Facebook's application activity, prompting some observers to speculate that Facebook might eventually join OpenSocial.

Yahoo was unavailable for comment when contacted by Mediaweek.co.uk.

AOL to buy Bebo for $850m

mad.co.uk

AOL, the global web services company, has entered into an agreement to buy social networking site Bebo for $850 million (£417m).

The move comes as AOL, a majority-owned subsidiary of Time Warner, looks to expand its reach into the fast-growing world of social media. Last week, AOL launched a new version of its Instant Messaging Service - AIM 2.0 - which enables developers to access the network and integrate into new sites and applications, including Apple's iPhone.

With its membership of more than 40 million, Bebo is one of the largest social networks in the world. Under the terms of the bid, current president Joanna Shields will continue to run Bebo, reporting into AOL’s president and COO Ron Grant.

Randy Falco, chairman and chief executive of AOL, said: “Bebo is the perfect complement to AOL’s personal communications network and puts us in a leading position in social media.
“What drew us to Bebo was its substantial and fast-growing worldwide user-base, its vision of a truly social web, and the monetisation opportunities that leverage Platform-A across our combined global audience.”

“This positions us to offer advertisers even greater reach and marketers significant insights into the desire and needs of consumers.”

Joanna Shield, president of Bebo, said: “AOL understands the shifting dynamics of the web and has clearly demonstrated its commitment to leveraging the ever-increasing power of social networks.

“With one and the same vision in this area, it was a natural progression for Bebo to join AOL, and we look forward to working together to continue to expand the online social experience globally.”

But David Hallerman, senior analyst at research firm, eMarketer, warned: "There's a disconnect between the high degree of traffic at social network sites and the low amount of revenue from advertising...and the two might not match up.

"However, to the degree that social network sites are also content sites -- as Bebo is with sponsorship deals -- that makes it better for selling display ads targeted at the Bebo audience."

Building a website: Purposes of the site

By Sue Fidler, Third Sector, 12 March 2008

Sue Fidler recommends asking what visitors to your website actually want to do.

Before starting to develop a website, it is essential to have a specification of what you want it to do.

The first question to ask is the purpose of the site. That may sound daft, but too many sites are launched without objectives - and it shows in the lack of clarity in the home page and the structure.

The objectives you set may be the same as those of your organisation, or they may be a sub-section. They might include fundraising, campaigning, capacity building, service provision, recruitment and so on. These are broad brush strokes, but they will help to define what the site needs to deliver.

Once you have a list of objectives, put them in priority order. This will help define both your navigation and your home page.

Brand building is one underlying purpose of having a site. But people who visit your site are actually users who come to do something. What you want them to do defines the objectives of the site and should define the content and signposts of your home page.

Defining your objectives will also give you both an outline of the functionality your site needs and a measure against which to judge it when it is done. You may find that you cannot afford or manage everything in one phase, and prioritising gives a structure to what is most important.

If you want people to use your services, you shouldn't be burying them under a welter of content and clicks. A link to your services should be at the forefront of the whole site, and in bold.

What makes Amazon, eBay and Google so successful is a clarity of purpose. When you visit their sites, you have no doubt what they are for. We need the same clarity of purpose to make our sites usable for visitors.

- Sue Fidler is an independent charity ICT, database and internet consultant

Building a website: Purposes of the site

By Sue Fidler, Third Sector, 12 March 2008

Sue Fidler recommends asking what visitors to your website actually want to do.

Before starting to develop a website, it is essential to have a specification of what you want it to do.

The first question to ask is the purpose of the site. That may sound daft, but too many sites are launched without objectives - and it shows in the lack of clarity in the home page and the structure.

The objectives you set may be the same as those of your organisation, or they may be a sub-section. They might include fundraising, campaigning, capacity building, service provision, recruitment and so on. These are broad brush strokes, but they will help to define what the site needs to deliver.

Once you have a list of objectives, put them in priority order. This will help define both your navigation and your home page.

Brand building is one underlying purpose of having a site. But people who visit your site are actually users who come to do something. What you want them to do defines the objectives of the site and should define the content and signposts of your home page.

Defining your objectives will also give you both an outline of the functionality your site needs and a measure against which to judge it when it is done. You may find that you cannot afford or manage everything in one phase, and prioritising gives a structure to what is most important.

If you want people to use your services, you shouldn't be burying them under a welter of content and clicks. A link to your services should be at the forefront of the whole site, and in bold.

What makes Amazon, eBay and Google so successful is a clarity of purpose. When you visit their sites, you have no doubt what they are for. We need the same clarity of purpose to make our sites usable for visitors.

- Sue Fidler is an independent charity ICT, database and internet consultant

Google's acquisition of DoubleClick gets the greenlight

Brand Republic

Google has won unconditional approval from the European Commission to go ahead with its $3.1bn (£1.55bn) takeover of online advertising company DoubleClick.

The commission began its investigation last November, after concerns the merger would overly restrict competition in the online advertising sector.

There were also complaints by third parties, including Microsoft, over DoubleClick's position in ad serving and Google's position in search advertising.

However, the commission has stated today that the merger would be unlikely to have harmful effects on consumers, either in ad serving or in the online advertising market.

It said: "The commission's in-depth market investigation found that Google and DoubleClick were not exerting major competitive constraints on each other's activities and could, therefore, not be considered as competitors at the moment."

The deal has already been approved in the US by the Federal Trade Commission. However, critics have said that it will put too much sensitive information about what people are doing on the internet into the hands of one company.Google's share price was up when the US markets opened this morning, rising by more than 4% to $430.67.

Building a website: Purposes of the site

By Sue Fidler, Third Sector, 12 March 2008

Sue Fidler recommends asking what visitors to your website actually want to do.

Before starting to develop a website, it is essential to have a specification of what you want it to do.

The first question to ask is the purpose of the site. That may sound daft, but too many sites are launched without objectives - and it shows in the lack of clarity in the home page and the structure.

The objectives you set may be the same as those of your organisation, or they may be a sub-section. They might include fundraising, campaigning, capacity building, service provision, recruitment and so on. These are broad brush strokes, but they will help to define what the site needs to deliver.

Once you have a list of objectives, put them in priority order. This will help define both your navigation and your home page.

Brand building is one underlying purpose of having a site. But people who visit your site are actually users who come to do something. What you want them to do defines the objectives of the site and should define the content and signposts of your home page.

Defining your objectives will also give you both an outline of the functionality your site needs and a measure against which to judge it when it is done. You may find that you cannot afford or manage everything in one phase, and prioritising gives a structure to what is most important.

If you want people to use your services, you shouldn't be burying them under a welter of content and clicks. A link to your services should be at the forefront of the whole site, and in bold.

What makes Amazon, eBay and Google so successful is a clarity of purpose. When you visit their sites, you have no doubt what they are for. We need the same clarity of purpose to make our sites usable for visitors.

- Sue Fidler is an independent charity ICT, database and internet consultant

Half UK retailers 'fall short in email strategy'

CharityeMail offers low cost email marketing for the nfp sector uses the dotMailer platform.

Netimperative.

Almost half of the retailers (46%) failed to comply with basic legal requirements, according to the study, which evaluates 46 retailers’ email campaigns against 20 criteria, awarding each email campaign an Email Effectiveness rating out of 100.

Topshop heads the index of UK retailers with a score of 86.5 but is one of only eight to score over 80%. STA Travel, ASDA and M&S were close behind with 85.5, 84.5 and 83.5 respectively. At the other end, shoe retailer Office came in last place (54) just behind Lidl and H&M (both 57). Overall an alarming 35% failed to score more than 70.

Key failings identified by the study included minimal or ineffective design, inappropriate landing pages and non-existent targeting. Alarmingly the average score for effective targeting was a lowly 16%, with only five brands in the study using information about customer preferences to tailor email content and just 15% asked for any information about customer preferences during the sign-up process.

The study also revealed that retailers are not investing in email specific design skills. By failing to understand the unique technical requirements of email design, communications are failing to render correctly across inboxes leading to a less than satisfactory customer experience.

Only 30% of retailers invested in campaign specific designs and 40% of retailers failed to design relevant landing pages with consistent branding and a clearly visible offer or call to action.

“Our study was eye-opening in demonstrating that many retailers are failing to realise the full potential of email as a sophisticated direct marketing channel, offering vast scope for targeted and measurable communications,” said Tink Taylor, dotMailer’s Business Development Director and a member of the Direct Marketing Association’s Email Marketing Council.

"There is a long way to go in understanding that email requires specific skills and expertise that offline designers and website developers do not always possess or are not actually aware of. These key elements are essential to ensuring that email marketing activity engages customers, encourages them to interact with brands, and ultimately, impact sales.”

Te 20 criteria in the report were used to evaluate the key factors that need to be addressed by any email marketing campaign to be effective across the four key areas that determine success: deliverability, renderability, open rates and response rates. A range of aspects were considered, including sign-up, unsubscribing, the HTML code used, effectiveness of the design, targeting and time of sending.

“With spam accounting for 85-95% of all emails sent, it is now more crucial than ever for marketers to get their message across. However, ISPs are filtering out marketing email and consumers are becoming more selective in the way they view, read and delete emails.

“Email marketing is a complex marketing method and if we simply ignore the best practice guidelines or not aware of the issues involved then we fail to maximise every opportunity that email offers. This study highlights how marketers should use the criteria we outline throughout their planning and development stages to ensure that they get the most out of their email marketing,” concludes Tink Taylor.

Some of the most critical problems found were:

Good practice legal requirements were not included – Following the Companies Regulations of 2006, marketers have adopted as best practice the requirement that every marketing email should now include the company registration number, country of registration and a registered office address. Incredibly, 46% of the emails studied did not contain this vital information

The website landing page was not consistent with the look and feel of the email – An email marketing message acts as a vehicle to direct recipients to a website. However, too often either the wrong link was used or a website page no longer existed. Many landing pages looked different to the email itself and lacked clear navigation that would allow calls-to-action to be followed through to a measurable conversion. 40% of the retailers assessed scored under half in this category

Emails did not render across popular email clients – Very few emails managed to display properly across the most common UK email clients. This suggests that designers are not aware of the way certain inboxes render emails and have not tested the message prior to sending.

No viral element or links were hidden – Only 20% of the emails examined contained a forward to a friend link or viral element and of these, many were hidden at the bottom of the email out of sight

Design was not appropriate to email or specific campaign – The survey revealed that only 30% of retailers had invested in a campaign-specific design

The email showed no evidence of targeting – Only 15% of retailers asked for any information about interests during signup. Targeting is crucial to ensuring that the right message is sent to the right person at the right time. Retailers scored 16% on average in this section

The full report and whitepaper can be downloaded from http://www.dotmailer.co.uk/hittingthemark

Get Charity pricing for dotMailer from www.charityemail.co.uk

Silver surfers outsmart iPod generation

Ian Williams vnunet.com,

Older users far savvier about online security

Young people in the UK are the least aware of security when shopping online, according to a new study by credit protection firm CPP.

The survey found that, while the young 'iPod generation' is the most web-aware, the older 'silver surfers' are far savvier when it comes to protecting themselves online.

Four-fifths of UK respondents aged 45 to 54 refuse to make purchases online if there are no markings on a website to prove its security, but only two thirds of those aged 16 to 24 take similar precautions.

More than 80 per cent of young people continue to leave themselves exposed to online card fraud, but become the most frustrated and annoyed by the inconvenience when they become victims.

The survey showed that one in 10 people in the UK had been a victim of online fraud and that, with an estimated £58,000 spent online in a lifetime, shoppers of all ages need to be a lot more vigilant.

More than a third of all UK web shoppers were not sure how they had been defrauded, but a significant number experienced fraudulent PayPal transactions which CPP believes highlights auction site eBay as a online fraud hotspot.

"Using your card online can quite easily be a way for you to become a victim of card fraud," said Danny Harrison, an identity theft expert at CPP.

"It is surprising that young people take the most risks online, where you might assume that they would be much more 'web aware' than the internet's older users."

Harrison added that all users should make sure that web pages are secure before entering any personal details.

"Just look for the padlock in the right hand corner of your web page," he said. "This means that it is a secure web page. Also look out for the HTTPS at the beginning of the web address as this also means that your card details will be protected."

Twitter for Health

Was passed this and thought it was really useful, from a blog by Nedra Weinreich (hit title for link)



When I first read about Twitter last year, I scoffed. Who cares what other people are doing, thinking or eating every waking moment of the day? I don't have time to pay attention to random bits of information or to post my every passing thought. For those of you not up on the latest shiny object to be embraced by the neterati, Twitter is a microblogging application that asks you to answer the question, "What are you doing?" in 140 characters or less. People use it to do everything from detailing the minutiae of their days to engaging in witty banter to promoting their latest blog posts and sharing useful resources.

While I was on my blogging hiatus, I found that I had a lot of thoughts I wanted to share, but no time to put them into a blog post. I decided to try out Twitter on a short-term basis to see if I thought it was worthwhile. After a few days of using it, I was hooked. I found that Twitter was a great way to have ongoing conversations and build relationships with colleagues, get quick answers to questions and get pointers to useful links. It sometimes feels like I'm drinking from a firehose, but I'm learning to identify the people who consistently have the best tweets. I've been on Twitter for a couple of months now (follow me at @Nedra), and I can see many potential applications for organizations promoting health and social issues.

Some of the ways nonprofits and government agencies could use Twitter in their work, along with real examples and ideas, include:

• Providing information and tips - ex: eDiets, womenshealth, Health News
• Providing motivational support - ex: Qwitter (smoking cessation), Twitter PT Challenge (fitness)
• Creating a social support network - ex: Frozen Pea community, Back in Skinny Jeans (weight loss), mental health, Traineo (fitness/weight loss)
• Fundraising - ex: 1PinkRibbon, Frozen Pea Fund, Beth Kanter/Sharing Foundation
• Responding to disasters - ex: San Diego fires, safeandwell (American Red Cross), InSTEDD (Google.org + Rockefeller Fdn), general emergencies
• Tracking activities or readings - Tweet What You Eat (food diary), SugarStats (diabetes), gtFtr (exercise), pain diary, My Mile Marker (fuel economy)
• Reminders - ex: Timer (could be used for medication, stretch breaks, etc.)
• Pushing news/information out quickly - ex: MissingChildren, Los Angeles Fire Department
• Connecting patients and health care providers - ideas from Medical 2.0
• Conducting research - ex: ethnography, buzz tracking, surveys
• Role modeling - ex: Scott Hanselman (diabetes), skinnyjeans (weight loss)
• Early warning systems - ex: Morbus (pandemics), trouble alerts

Since Twitter can be used via mobile devices as well as computers, many of the same concepts behind using mobile phones and SMS for social change are applicable as well. In fact, this Friday (2/29) there will be a conference on Texting 4 Health at Stanford focusing on using SMS to improve health behavior. Though it is not explicitly on the agenda, I would hope that they will also be discussing how Twitter can be used to facilitate this approach. Does anyone know if someone will be livetweeting the conference?

Nate Ritter lays out some of the benefits and limitations of using Twitter that you should take into account when determining whether the tool will work for your purposes:

Benefits

1. Speed Using twitter, you can very easily publish information more than once per minute. If distribution speed is critical, regardless of the information being distributed, Twitter may be the tool for you.
2. Non-website (source) based alerts Instant messaging, SMS/text messages on cell phones, RSS/Atom feeds, email alerts, badges/widgets on other sites, and other methods of distribution are available. If your community can’t be tethered to a website for it’s communications, Twitter can provide other methodologies to get that information out to them.
3. Community publishing There are a few (slightly more technical) ways of aggregating a group of twitterers posts, which means you could have more people — even your community — pitching in to help publish pertinent information.

Limitations

1. Only text and links can be posted. No maps. No photos. No videos. Text and links are all you get.
2. 140 character limit. URLs will get shortened wherever possible, but 140 characters is tough to get used to.
3. No conversation threading. This can be tough to deal with when you’re used to discussion forums and such. Connecting with your community in this way is almost limited to real-time dialogue, which can limit the conversation’s depth and longevity.
4. The API has a 70 post per hour limit. Note that from what I could tell, the web UI doesn’t have this limit, but I’m sure they wouldn’t like you posting more than that unless it was an emergency anyway.

For still more ideas on how nonprofits can use (and shouldn't use) Twitter, see NetSquared's Net2ThinkTank round-up.

So, for some, Twitter will always just be a place to tick away the moments that make up a dull day, to fritter and waste the hours in an offhand way. For smart social marketers, though, Twitter can be a powerful tool for education and action. How will you use it?

(If you have additional ideas or examples, leave them in the comments and I will add them to the list.)


Technorati Tags: twitter, health, marketing, nonprofit, Texting4Health, disaster