29% of Companies Have a Social Media Policy
Does your company have a formal policy on employee social media usage during the work day (or after)? If not, you’re not alone: a report from employment services firm Manpower shows that only 29% of companies have a formal social media policy in place.
Obviously, far more companies block popular social media sites—another study in October showed that half of all companies block YouTube, Facebook and/or Twitter. But, as Mashable points out, those two stats aren’t mutually exclusive: there’s a difference between a written policy and simply avoiding the issue with blocking sites.
Most companies with a written policy (63%) say that it’s effective. But social media policies can cover much more than just work hours. They can also cover the company’s assets: in a written social media policy, you can establish guidelines for what employees can and can’t mention in social media (trade secrets and insider trading type stuff should be obvious, but isn’t always—and naturally, these rules can go too far, and could become the subject of unlawful termination lawsuits. Woot.).
I’m pro written policies: make it clear that your employees are not to spend work time watching YouTube videos, and enforce it. (Fire them, if that’s the policy.) However, this gets a little trickier when you’re using social media for business purposes, as more and more of us are—and even more tricky when you got on LinkedIn to send a message to get the contact info for a vendor and get sucked into the Q&A for two hours. (Apparently, most workers spend less than 30 minutes a day on social networking sites—which may be why most employers haven’t felt it necessary to come out with formal policies. Yet.)
What do you think? Should companies have formal social media usage policies for employees?
Cup of Joe: How Not To Go Viral and Look Like an Idiot
(via)
So, ever since I came back from Vegas, I have had a pretty bad head cold. But, I have been diligently applying my favorite remedy: Watching mindless YouTube videos! Seriously, it makes me feel better. I am not sure why, but I am sticking to it! One thing I have noticed is that the most popular videos have at least one of two things; authentic, original content, or very well polished and produced material. Basically, if the video has authentic, original content then it doesn’t really matter if it’s “put together” well, because the content alone will sell it. However, if you are trying to replicate something someone has already done, then you need to do it better than them, make sure that your presentation is polished and your delivery is spot on.
Which brings us to the video above. Here we see employees at a Microsoft store dancing to Chris Brown’s “Forever”. This is an obvious attempt to ride on the popular Wedding Entrance meme that started this summer. Unfortunately, the content of this video isn’t authentic or original and it was put together pretty poorly. I mean, take a look at those buffoons! Their own customers are trying hard to ignore how awkward they look. This is the type of video I would normally find at failblog. So instead of creating a viral video that helps promote their brand, the only attention they get is snarky bloggers (like me) making fun of them!
This same lesson can be applied outside of viral video. Take for example MySpace and Facebook. For a long time MySpace was the only mainstream social network. Because they had an original concept they didn’t have to worry about having a polished interface and enforcing tight security standards, and they didn’t. As a result, Facebook gained massive popularity over MySpace because they offered everything MySpace did plus a clean interface and a barrage of privacy options.
So, to sum things up: When developing a product or a new idea ask your self, is this original? If the answer is no, then spend as much time on presentation and working out the kinks as possible.
Google Testing Skippable Ads in YouTube Videos
Online ads might be working well for news sites, but YouTube is always looking for a bigger piece of the online video advertising pie. As of today, Google is testing skippable ads on YouTube, as part of its ongoing search for the “right” way to monetize the most popular video site on the web.
The test will run with videos from content partners who have opted in to the program. The preroll ads will feature a link to skip through the ad and go straight to the video content.
MediaPost says that this test will provide Google with a demographic break down of their audience for high quality ads:
The test that determines if and when people watch the video clips will provide Google with insight into the type of person who may skip an ad, what type of ad they might skip, and what piece of content does better than another. Google also will look at whether some ads are skipped in a specific portion of the session. Does the person skip the ad in the first video versus the third during a 30-minute time slot while on YouTube?
This information could be assembled into another ad method: “The model is cost per engagement, where advertisers would only pay for opt-in engaged views of the ads.” Phil Farhi, product manager at Google’s YouTube, mentions that the promoted videos model is another example in this area, and in the future, there could be a model where advertisers only pay for complete plays of their ads.
They’re also comparing TV ads vs. video ads created specifically for online audiences. Generally, television ads take 30 seconds to make sure viewers get the message, image and contact/purchase information (call to action). Online, the call to action can run along side the video, in accompanying text that remains after the ad is over, they can use direct links or other methods.
What do you think? Will you skip ads on YouTube? Could this finally be the way to monetize YouTube?
Get YouTube Videos In Your Google Product Search Feeds
The Google Base Blog announced they have added a new attribute for Google Product Search merchants to submit product videos for specific products. Google Product Search can now show videos from YouTube.
Here is a picture of the Nikon D90 with YouTube videos:
How do merchants get their videos to show up for Google Product Searches? [...]
….
Must …. Watch …. More …. YouTube …. Videos….
Are you a YouTube junkie? Apparently there are a lot of them out there. According to a Wall Street Journal Digits article and comScore there over 100 million YouTube users in the US that average watching 68 videos per month. Wow. I certainly keep that average down but I suppose watching just over 2 videos a day, every day of the month is reasonable. I prefer to think of it as a little lame (don’t people have something better to do?) but that is just my opinion.
So if you are YouTube what would your next move be? Of course they are working on the advertising and further monetization model. What goes hand in hand with that though is figuring out a way to make that average number of videos watched increase so more ads can be served and more money can be made. Makes sense but how to do it?
Today, YouTube takes a fairly rudimentary approach to surfacing new videos. Watch one video about Van Halen and YouTube will recommend a dozen other similar clips featuring the rock band. But “at some point you don’t want to see any more Van Halen videos,” said Hunter Walk, a director of product management at YouTube. “You get Van Halen fatigue.”
So Walk and his team are now trying to figure out how to find new topics to engage users, a process he calls “manufacturing spontaneity.” The “serendipity of YouTube,” he said, is to show people a “selection of videos you didn’t intend to see but are very compatible. I didn’t come here to watch this. But somehow I find myself watching 10 videos about topic blah.”
First, how Van Halen fatigue is possible is the start of whole other debate but don’t you feel real good about a product manager that uses the terminology referring to your valuable time as “watching 10 videos on topic blah”?
The example given in the article about some connections that YouTube might make based on your viewing history (thank you Google for allowing us to be tracked and categorized by you every step of the way) shows there may be some flaws in the process. The suggestion is made that maybe someone watching the Van Halen video might want to see something about scuba diving. Huh? Sure, Van Halen released an album (yes an album) called “Diver Down” back in the 80’s but saying that someone watching a Van Halen video related to that is interested in actual scuba diving is pretty funny. Considering the likelihood of this video watcher’s lung capacity being severely compromised due to other habits formed from being a Van Halen fan and the fact that they are probably just reminiscing about the good old days etc, etc, well you get the picture.
Apparently early experiments with various techniques are showing promise, though. I wonder if Google is in cahoots with the diet industry since it seems hell bent on developing more people spending time in front a screen rather than say, actually walking?
YouTube is rolling out other discovery mechanisms too, including personalized recommendations based on viewing history. And it implemented a feature Google recently launched for its Web search, called the wonder wheel, which suggests different topical “spokes” related to the content a person is searching for.
In a separate interview, YouTube co-founder Chad Hurley said the site is also working on tools that allows people to discover videos being watched by their friends and co-workers.
So how many YouTube are you watching? Would you like more suggestions to show you even more? Are you meeting your RDVA (Recommended Daily Video Allowance) of about 2 videos per day every day of your life or do you actually have other things to do?
YouTube Videos Getting Off-Site Overlay Links
Although the latest planned feature for YouTube looks like an ad, for once YouTube’s rolling out something somewhat noteworthy that’s not part of its continue search for revenues. The feature? Overlays, like InVideo ads, that feature off-site links.
As TechCrunch reports, “you probably thought it was already out there.” But to-date, YouTube hasn’t allowed any links embedded in its videos other than a.) ads or b.) links to other YouTube videos. If you needed to link to your website, blog, Twitter profile, etc., you had to do it in the right-hand sidebar, where it would be largely ignored.
YouTube ran a similar promotion in March for charity:water. This video from the organization features the overlay:
The move is unique in that this is the first non-advertising off-site links YouTube has allowed. However, the program will only be open to YouTube’s advertisers participating in the CPC Promoted Videos program. TechCrunch says the program is launching today.
What do you think? Will this result in more people leaving YouTube—or more people signing up as Promoted Video advertisers?
Wikipedia Showing as a Source in Google News Stories
Google has shown an affinity for Wikipedia for years, often listing entries as a top source for many types of web searches. Now they’ve added links to Wikipedia pages with news stories on Google News. This seems like a small detail, but it gives Wikipedia even more credibility with the most popular search engine.
Google News already gets news from both traditional media like major newspapers, CNN and Reuters (though the AP hates this fact), as well as new media (popular news blogs like Marketing Pilgrim). There are also links to YouTube videos. This further blends how we get news and what is credible.
Like traditional news, Wikipedia has evolved into a site run mostly by gatekeepers who decide what information stays and what gets deleted. It’s just a totally different culture (more like a gang than editors). What is included or not included is highly political. If you’ve ever tried to edit a Wikipedia page you know what I mean. However, the system of payment—whether in traffic or cash—is not so straightforward. People edit for pay, or try to find people with connections to spare their edits from being deleted the second they’re live.
On the other hand, Wikipedia tries to tout itself as being commercial-free and fact-based. It’s a great source for breaking news and for a historical background of current events. You get most of the details in one place—and compared to other sources, it’s quite comprehensive.
Google says they are just testing the feature. I predict it will stay.
What do you think? Thumbs up?
