There’s a “new” news consumer today, according to a new study from the Pew Research Center released this week. And the Internet and mobile technologies are at the center of it all, helping people’s relationship with the news become more “portable, personalized, and participatory.”
• Portable: 33% of cell phone owners now access news on their cell phones.
• Personalized: 28% of Internet users have customized their home page to include news from sources and on topics that particularly interest them.
• Participatory: 37% of Internet users have contributed to the creation of news, commented about it, or disseminated it via postings on social media sites like Facebook or Twitter.
According to the study, the rise of social media like social networking sites and blogs has helped the news become a social experience for consumers, where they use their social networks and social networking technology to filter, assess, and react to news.
This is good news indeed. Let’s face it, the mainstream news business, battered particularly hard by the recession, needs all the life-saving it can find to stay afloat and relevant to consumers today. And while that’s clearly not new news, it’s important not to lose sight of the broader story told by the broader trends.
And those trends tell us that the list of shows that thrive on broadcast television—particularly ones that discuss current events, politics, news and lifestyle— is short and getting shorter. The audience is declining for the Evening News. It’s declining for the morning news. No one is immune it seems. Not even the queen of daytime herself, Oprah. The trend for her show, and media empire, is down from where it was, unfathomable a few short years ago.
One of the few bright spots isn’t “real news” at all. It’s the hilariously “fake” news of Jon Stewart’s “The Daily Show” on cable and his even more radical brethren Steven Colbert of “The Colbert Report.” Ratings fueled by the loyal Colbert Nation are doing just fine. Even more surprising is that studies have found that viewers of the Daily Show and the Colbert Report—the news that’s fake mind you—have the highest knowledge of national and international affairs out of any show’s audience, news included! So obviously something more than just laughs is going on here.
But it’s the exception. Polls, circulation stats and Nielsen ratings show, beyond a doubt, that people under 40 are following current events less than their parents. Eighteen to 24-year-olds may be digital natives but research shows that just 11 percent use the Internet to learn about current events. Research also shows that people under 40 know less and care less about politics.
This generational divide is part of what’s wreaking havoc on the newsprint business. Average weekday circulation at 379 of the top U.S. newspapers fell 10.6% during the six months ending in September of last year—the steepest decline ever documented.
Similarly, the percentage of Americans who consider themselves regular magazine readers has shown a slow, steady decline over the past two decades. Pew has also found that 23% of adult Americans in 2008 said they read a magazine of some kind the day before — a drop of nearly a third from 33% in 1994. When asked specifically about news magazines, 12% reported reading one “regularly,” down 2 percentage points from 2006 and down 6 percentage points from a similar survey in 1994.
Together with the deep recession, these trends have led to a total of 15,000+ journalists getting laid off or taking buyouts in the U.S. alone last year. This means less journalists covering more beats, wearing more “hats.” A sobering reality for PR people everywhere, as there are far fewer journalists to write and pages to carry your story today in these old standby news vehicles. But there’s also good news. Niche publications have held up pretty well, with most though not all posting gains in a tough year last year. Same is true with some cable channels, the profit workhorses for many a media network today.
While the traditional news spigot runs drier, and Americans’ relationship with news changes, there’s a veritable fire hose of opportunity happening online. We’ve all heard the stats but they remain no less amazing. More video was uploaded to YouTube in the past 2 months than if ABC, NBC and CBS had been airing new content 24/7/365 since 1948 (which was when ABC started broadcasting). Twitter eclipsed The New York Times in unique monthly visitors in 2009. 250 Million unique visitors go to YouTube, Facebook and MySpace every month collectively (sites which did not exist 6 years ago), compared to the 10 Million unique visitors ABC, NBC, CBS get every month collectively. These kinds of stats could be cited all day long…
Of course, these are exactly the kind of trends that are disrupting the mainstream media model in the first place. But even so, any good news about how Americans are consuming news these days is welcome. Will news organizations truly adapt to and take advantage of them in time? Can they?
Image credit: Flickr
Tags: media, news, socialmedia, trends
Yesterday The New York Times teased an upcoming Strategic Management Journal paper about the positive influence of zealous employees. Their research found that strong sales growth is correlated with an organizational culture in which employees thought more highly of their company than did the public. In other words, when staff believes in its organization, pride and loyalty shows through and customers pick up on the positivity.
The theme of employee advocacy, and its importance to business success, was one of our key findings from research we released earlier this year (Risky Business: Reputations Online™ conducted with the Economist Intelligence Unit). Our study found that global executives believe that the best way to protect reputations online is to monitor employee satisfaction levels and respond to results from employee satisfaction surveys. Many executives echoed the importance of building “best places to work” cultures when asked in an open-ended question about the greatest reputation threats facing their companies over the next three years. As one Australian executive said in response to this question: “Failure to engage the passions of employees will cause the most damage to corporate reputation in the future.” Without a doubt, no company interested in protecting its reputation can afford to have a mob of grumbling employees online. Satisfied employees who are company advocates are the best antidote for–and defense against–reputation failure. A company’s culture is ultimately its best protection both online and offline.
Looking forward to the release of the Strategic Management Journal report. In the meantime, remember: your employees are your best advocates.
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
Ad Age’s Jack Neff wrote that Forrester is coming out with a new report recommending that “brand managers” be newly named “brand advocates.” Forrester makes the claim that it is high time for marketers and agencies to capitalize on the Internet and focus on customer cohorts. The report being issued next week, Adaptive Brand Marketing: Rethinking Your Approach to Branding in the Digital Age, has many other recommendations about brand advocacy programs and what it means for marketers in 2010. Weber Shandwick agrees with this call to action for advocacy-focused marketing. In this complex and resource-restricted world, identifying your advocates and badvocates (what we call detractors) is the right solution. We are all advocates under the skin — maybe not all. Our research found that nearly one out of two (48%) of us are advocates, some more active than others. Non-advocates are also worth identifying and finding ways to communicate with and engage. Looking forward to the report.
Tags: Ad Age, brand advocates, Forrester, Jack Neff
Wanted to direct you to a great article written by Weber Shandwick’s own Colin Byrne, CEO UK and Europe. It appeared last week and includes practical tips for minimizing reputation damage that comes from a company’s badvocates. Colin also cites real-world examples of the kinds of damage companies have experienced when they haven’t kept “the window to sabotage” shut tightly. Enjoy the article.
Thought I’d share another finding about advocacy from our study with the Economist Intelligence Unit - Risky Business: Reputations Online. This research snippet is about where Badvocacy meets Web 2.0.
Although global executives identify major media as the most threatening to company reputation (84%), plenty of executives (42%) recognize the damage new media can impose. Blogs and discussion forums are the most feared with online videos, comments on social networking sites, Wikipedia entries, and online pictures compounding potential destruction. Considering that fast-rising Web 2.0 new media and social networking tools can literally rally advocates and badvocates overnight, more executives should be concerned about new media as a reputation killer. Here’s how each of these rank in terms of global executive fear:
While the blog is considered the king of Web 2.0 badvocacy risk now, it will be interesting to see how the other technologies evolve as badvocacy threats.
If you’ve been following this blog you know that we at Weber Shandwick firmly believe in the “return on advocacy.” Simply, it’s the business benefits of finding and connecting with your advocates. Now maybe it’s time to kick off the “return on BADVOCACY.” Can there be such a thing? Afterall, our own study, Risky Business: Reputations Online™ clearly identified the fear instilled in global executives by customer and employee badvocates.
Employee badvocates are a big concern: executives ranked employee criticism (41%) in a tie for first place with leaked confidential information as the greatest online risk to their own company’s reputation. As employees wrestle with declining pensions and possible layoffs, reputation bandits will be even harder at work online.
The Internet provides innumerable platforms for employees to strike, usually anonymously, at a company’s reputation. However, rather than being immobilized with fear about the potential for such strikes, Nokia, as noted in an article in this week’s BusinessWeek, is embracing employee badvocacy. They are allowing their employees to rant anonymously on an intranet soapbox called BlogHub. “Workers can be savage as they flame thier employer…Nokia managers want them to fire away.” Nokia believes that innovation is accelerated by encouraging employees to say what is on their minds. I would surmise that the other benefit is that by allowing employees to release their frustrations in a “safe” environment, they won’t be tempted to go outside Nokia’s four walls and vent.
It will be interesting to see if Nokia sees a Return on Badvocacy as it struggles in a tough economy with strong competitors. In the meantime, we’ll keep on eye out for other examples of turning badvocacy into a positive return.
Tags: Badvocacy, Badvocate, BusinessWeek, Nokia, Weber Shandwick
How often can a senior executive say his or her biggest ally in the company is the CEO? Well, frankly, I don’t know what the average senior executive says, but I do know that the chief communications officer (CCO) can proudly make the claim.
We conducted our second annual study among CCOs at the world’s largest companies with Spencer Stuart and KRC Research - The Rising CCO II - and found that the CCO’s #1 organizational ally in both North America and Europe is the CEO. Investor Relations is a distant #2 (a predictable ranking given how closely corp comms and IR have had to work together in the tough economic climate).
Our survey asked about top organizational allies and rivals (respondents could choose just one department for each). As communications professionals, we were quite relieved that only 1 person in our sample said his or her biggest rival is the CEO. Worldwide, Marketing is the CCO’s stickiest thorn (as we saw last year) but in North America Human Resources is nearly tied with Marketing.
Why the admiration from the corner office? As our study partner George Jamison, who leads Spencer Stuart’s Corporate Communications and Investor Relations Practice, says, “When many organizations endure critical times, CEOs are increasingly looking to the CCO for their strategic crisis communications and ability to quickly react to a variety of scenarios.”
And Weber Shandwick’s Chief Reputation Strategist Leslie Gaines-Ross adds: “CEOs and boards are under tremendous pressure to navigate through the stormy seas of the current economic tsunami. Like never before, CEOs are depending on CCOs for crisis and issues counsel to steady their company reputations and calm stakeholders. CEOs who do not communicate using traditional and social media do so at their own peril.”
We’ll see when we do the same study next year if the love continues to flourish. But for now, if you’re going to have an advocate in your company, may it be the CEO!
Big shout out to Chris Brogan, Justin Levy and all the folks here at Inbound Marketing Summit in Dallas. Just finished my presentation on how Advocacy and Badvocacy are impacting marketing, and the various apple carts that are being upset in the process. For those who can’t make it, you can watch the proceedings live here or join us at the Boston event late September. Here’s my deck, BTW — would love your feedback…
IMS09 Dallas: Advocacy, Badvocacy & Upsetting Apple Carts
Weber Shandwick recently published The Good Book of Badvocacy, the first in a series of Thought Leadership “mini-books.” As you might have guessed, The Good Book is all about badvocacy. Take a look and let us know what you think!
