In an article by Stefan Stern of the Financial Times, I always find something thoughtful for this blog. This past week he wrote about where marketing was going (or not going) in this current economic environment. Stern was describing his conversation with the “father of modern marketing” Phillip Kotler. One part of the conversation had to do with advocacy, the mainstay of this blog. The other one was just plain funny.
Kotler was reminiscing about a book he enjoyed titled Firms of Endearment (the best title). He said that in the book they talk about how some of the most successful companies spend less on marketing than the less successful ones. Sounds counterintuitive? Kotler says, “But they used the word of mouth effect of unpaid advocates – loyal customers – to boost their reputation.” Advocates will do your marketing for you if you mobilize them, listen to them and engage them. Our research at Weber Shandwick found this to be the case. Indeed. Kotler is apparently publishing a new book on the role of advocates in marketing titled Marketing 3.0.
What made me laugh was a statement by Kotler who is 79 years wise. He is quoted by Stern as saying, “At least it’s the finance people who are getting blamed for a change.” Marketers and communications professionals are getting by without the blame for awhile.
Tags: advocates, Financial Times, Weber Shandwick
Google today launched a person finder to quickly connect those looking for missing people in Chile and those with information about earthquake victims. You can choose between – “I’m looking for someone” and “I have information about someone”, and then query the database or enter new information. A great way to advocate for people searching for loved ones in this new world calamity.
Tags: Advocacy, Chile, Chile earthquake, earthquake, Google, person finder
What would you advocate for if you were given $100 to give away and report back? Interesting thought, right? Courtney Martin gave each of nine friends that amount and asked them to report back one month later on their advocacy choice. This appeared in the New York Times. They were also invited into the Secret Society for Creative Philanthropy which now meets on a regular basis to discuss their acts of advocacy or “kindness.” Ms Martin received a huge book advance and decided to make the giving away of some of it the problem of others. As word got out, some other small-time philanthropy advocates joined in. Small philanthropy takes a lot of creativity when you have that responsibility and have to tell others. This mini-advocacy idea has generated chapters of the Secret Society in different cities. Here is a list of what some people did with their $100.
• Turned the writing of New York City children in a literacy nonprofit into books.
•Distributed 10,000 pennies to friends throughout the country to drop so there would be more lucky pennies for people to find.
• Inspired by Lewis Hyde’s book “The Gift,” bought a handmade platter on etsy.com and gave it to a friend, who she hopes will pass it on to others.
• Slipped $100 into a thank-you card and asked a friend to give it to the clerk at her local Duane Reade who makes her feel like a million bucks whenever she buys toothpaste.
• Gave $100 to the most frequent commenter on her Web site, who turned out to be a former correction officer aspiring to write.
• Gave to four established nonprofits that work in Haiti.
• Gave the money to a woman he sees collecting recycling on the street.
Tags: Advocacy, philantrophy
I was wondering what was taking so long. This week a group of brokers and traders started their own advocacy group to stick up for Wall Street. The nonpartisan group can be found at restorewallstreet.com. The CEO of John Thomas Financial, a fairly new investment house, is the head advocate of this rallying cry. At this week’s first meeting, CEO Thomas Belesis said that he formed the group to counter “the repeating, relentless attacks on Wall Street.” The tag line under Restore Wall Street on the web site is “putting the pride back into Wall Street.” This is a group to watch, just as the Tea-Baggers were months ago. I think that Wall Streeters have had enough of the name-calling and are smartly adopting similar counter-insurgency tactics as their critics. Stay tuned.
Tags: John Thomas Financial, restorewallstreet.com, Wall Street
The outpouring of help for Haiti is a prime example of Advocacy in action. All eyes are on the devastation and the many forms of relief being sent to the victims reminds us of what people (Advocates) can do when the chips are very down. Of course, it has to get into the hands of the Haitians quickly. As a resident of Brooklyn where 61,000 Haitians live, nearly everyone feels like they know someone whose family has been hit by this tragedy.
The amount of money raised through texting is encouraging and makes Americans proud of their generosity–over $10 million has been raised in the U.S. alone. Here are the many ways to help via texting (from the Washington Post) :
*Text HAITI to 90999 to donate $10 to the American Red Cross
* Text HAITI to 25383 to donate $5 to International Rescue Committee
* Text HAITI to 45678 to donate $5 to the Salvation Army in Canada
* Text YELE to 501501 to donation $5 to Yele
* Text HAITI to 864833 to donate $5 to The United Way
* Text DISASTER to 90999 to donate $10 to Compassion International
* Text HAITI to 90999 to donate $10 to the American Red Cross
* Text RELIEF to 30644 to get automatically connected to Catholic Relief Services and donate money with your credit card
* Text HAITI to 25383 to donate $5 to International Rescue Committee
*Text HAITI to 45678 to donate $5 to the Salvation Army in Canada
* Text CERF to 90999 to donate $5 to The United Nations Foundation
*Text YELE to 501501 to donation $5 to YeleText RELIEF to 30644 to get automatically connected to Catholic Relief Services and donate money with your credit card
*Text HAITI to 864833 to donate $5 to The United WayText CERF to 90999 to donate $5 to The United Nations Foundation
*Text DISASTER to 90999 to donate $10 to Compassion International
Tags: Haiti
Jimmy Wales, founder of Wikipedia, and Andrea Weckerle, founder and president of CiviliNation, wrote this oped for the WSJ at the very end of December. I took some time off from blogging over the holidays (sanity check!) but saved this for my next blog post. It is the perfect coda to 2009 where incivility online and “badvocacy” seemed to explode exponentially, particulary as politics heated up. CiviliNation is a global non-profit education and research organization based on advancing how individuals communicate and engage online in a responsible and accountable way. This is an important advocacy group that deserves all of our attention and support. The oped is a call to action for many of us who advocate for fairness in conversations online and preserving reputations. Wanted to share with our followers.
Keep a Civil Cybertongue
Rude and abusive online behavior should not be met with silence.
by Jimmy Wales and Andrea Weckerle
In less than 20 years, the World Wide Web has irrevocably expanded the number of ways we connect and communicate with others. This radical transformation has been almost universally praised.
What hasn’t kept pace with the technical innovation is the recognition that people need to engage in civil dialogue. What we see regularly on social networking sites, blogs and other online forums is behavior that ranges from the carelessly rude to the intentionally abusive.
Flare-ups occur on social networking sites because of the ease by which thoughts can be shared through the simple press of a button. Ordinary people, celebrities, members of the media and even legal professionals have shown insufficient restraint before clicking send. There is no shortage of examples—from the recent Twitter heckling at a Web 2.0 Expo in New York, to a Facebook poll asking whether President Obama should be killed.
The comments sections of online gossip sites, as well as some national media outlets, often reflect semi-literate, vitriolic remarks that appear to serve no purpose besides disparaging their intended target. Some sites exist solely as a place for mean-spirited individuals to congregate and spew their venomous verbiage.
Online hostility targeting adults is vastly underreported. The reasons victims fail to come forward include the belief that online hostility is an unavoidable and even acceptable mode of behavior; the pervasive notion that hostile online speech is a tolerable form of free expression; the perceived social stigma of speaking out against attacks; and the absence of readily available support infrastructure to assist victims.
The problem of online hostility, in short, shows no sign of abating on its own. Establishing cybercivility will take a concerted effort. We can start by taking the following steps:
First, and most importantly, we need to create an online culture in which every person can participate in an open and rational exchange of ideas and information without fear of being the target of unwarranted abuse, harassment or lies. Everyone who is online should have a sense of accountability and responsibility.
Too frequently, we hear the argument that being online includes the right to be nasty—and that those who chose to participate on the Web should develop thicker skin. This gives transgressors an out for immoral behavior.
Just as we’ve learned what is deemed appropriate face-to-face communication, we need to learn what is appropriate behavior in an environment that frequently deals with purely written modes of communication and an inherent absence of nonverbal cues.
Second, individuals appalled at the degeneration of online civility need to speak out, to show that this type of behavior will no longer be tolerated. Targets of online hostility should also consider coming forward to show that attacks can have serious consequences. There are already several documented cases of teens taking their own lives because of cyberbullying.
A third step has to do with media literacy. People need to know how to differentiate between information that is published on legitimate sites that follow defined standards and also possibly a professional code of ethics, and information published in places like gossip sites whose only goal is to post the most outrageous headlines and stories in order to increase traffic. People can and will learn to shun and avoid such sites over time, particularly with education about why they are unethical.
Fourth, adult targets of online hostility deserve a national support network. This should be a safe place where they can congregate online to receive emotional support, practical advice on how to deal with transgressors, and information on whom to contact for legal advice when appropriate.
Finally, it’s time to re-examine the current legal system. Online hostility is cross-jurisdictional. We might need laws that directly address this challenge. There is currently no uniformity of definition among states in the definition of cyberbullying and cyberharassment. Perhaps federal input is needed.
The Internet is bringing about a revolution in human knowledge and communication, and we have an unprecedented opportunity to make the global conversation more reasonable and productive. But we can only do so if we prevent the worst among us from silencing the best among us with hostility and incivility.
Tags: Advocacy, Badvocates, online civility
Thought we should point out that advocates are everywhere, including the Army (client). Take a look at what Army advocates are up to. They are putting some companies to shame. They have 61 soldiers blogging and answering questions about what life in the Army is really like. They provide a genuine window into the human side of the military. Instead of the old way of walking into a recruiting station to learn what the Army does, they are going where people are today….and that is online. Some of their lessons are worth noting if you want to build advocates for your company, organization or cause.
I pulled out an article from the Financial Times on Wednesday night before the Thanksgiving holiday in the U.S. It was about Room to Read, an organization I had recently heard about but which I really did not know much about. It was going to be my relaxing subway ride home reading and I was looking forward to it. I look forward to my reading about things that interest me as the subway winds it way to Brooklyn. Turns out that Room to Read is the FT’s seasonal appeal this year. Now I understand why. It is the story of an advocate extraordinaire. Here is what the article said about how it got started.
“Room to Read started out nearly 10 years ago with smaller ambitions. It all ?began with a trekking holiday to Nepal. A casual encounter with a school inspector led Mr Wood, then Microsoft’s head of business development for greater China, to a Himalayan school three strenuous hours up a mountain path. There he found a classroom so bereft of educational materials that the only books available – a few cast-offs from trekkers, including the absurdly inappropriate Finnegan’s Wake – were precious objects kept under lock and key.
It was there that the headmaster uttered a phrase that was to change Mr Wood’s life: “Perhaps, sir, you will some day come back with books.”
Back in Kathmandu, the Microsoft executive furiously dispatched e-mails to his friends, urging them to send him picture books. The following year, he returned to Nepal with eight donkeys bearing 37 boxes of children’s stories. He was so overwhelmed by the reception at Bahundanda school, where children decked him in marigold garlands, that he quit to devote himself to the cause of education.”
Literacy is a basic right and alters individuals and communities. The San Francisco-based charity builds and stocks libraries, constructs schools, offers scholarships for girls and publishes books in local languages. What could be a better advocacy appeal. As an avid reader, mother of girls, author and education advocate, I was moved and intend to contribute this season.
I returned to the Air Force Blogger Assessment tool today as I was writing something I hope to eventually publish. As I refreshed my memory about the blogging guidelines, I fell upon David Meerman Scott’s blog which had an interview with Captain David Faggard, Chief of Emerging Technology at the Air Force Public Affairs Agency at the Pentagon and developer of the blogger tool. The tool is also on his web site. I could hardly believe my eyes when I read that Faggard oversees 330,000 communicators! That is a big number! Scott spoke with Faggard (who I also emailed with months ago) and this is what Meerman wrote about their exchange.
“Their mission is to use current and developing Web 2.0 applications as a way to actively engage conversations between Airmen and the general public. Yes, that’s right, the goal of the program is that every single Airman is an on-line communicator.
In an environment where many corporations are scared witless about social media, here a huge global organization firmly committed to social media communications to spread messages, stories, knowledge and ideals. Capt. Faggard says that the focus is on: “Direct Action within Social Media (blogging, counter-blogging, posting products to YouTube, etc.); Monitoring and Analysis of the Social Media landscape (relating to Air Force and Airmen); and policy and education (educating all Public Affairs practitioners and the bigger Air Force on Social Media).”
While I was amazed that the Air Force is doing so much while many in the private sector are still doing so little, I asked about the unique challenges faced by the US armed forces when it comes to social media. In particular, I was intrigued by the term “counter-blogging” which Capt. Faggard says is when “Airmen counter the people out there in the blogosphere who have negative opinions about the US government and the air force.”
This interchange reminded me of Weber Shandwick’s discussions and research on badvocates. Counter-blogging is similar to countering and engaging badvocates before it is too late. Scott’s comment about the private sector’s reluctance to wholeheartedly use social media to manage critics struck home. In our research with global executives, Risky Business, nearly four in ten said that they worried alot about the damage that can be done to company reputation from dissatisfied customers and critics.
Thought that the parallels were worth mentioning here. Hope you do too.
Tags: Badvocates, US Air Force Blogger Assessment Tool, Weber Shandwick
Talk about advocates. Microsoft’s new campaign for Windows 7 uses customers to help it make its selling points for its new operating system. The ads say, “I’m a PC and Windows 7 was my idea.” From what I have read about this campaign, there will also be print ads, banners, mobile ads, and all the many ways to reach customers. For those customers who had ideas on how to make Windows 7 work better for them, they now have a voice in the campaign and are featured as the real heroes. Supposedly one billion people helped Microsoft improve the new Windows product. That’s many advocates. Even employees are getting into the act. Real people as advocates makes great sense in a world where listening to your supporters and enthusiasts is the newest narrative. To learn more, read this article where I found out about this new initiative.
Tags: advocates, customers, Microsoft
