Like Minds - Controversy and Misunderstanding

There seems to be a bit of controversy following the Like Minds Conference in Exeter last Friday. I should, from the start, point out that I was one of the people on the stage as part of the panel discussion on building community.

During the event, one delegate questioned whether it had answered the key questions regarding measuring ROI derived from social media. There are, clearly, those who want a 'formula' approach to give some numerical answer.

The first and most effective answer had to be what was happening around us on Friday. Like Minds was promoted and advertised solely using social media. On Friday, 200 people turned up to Exeter from across the country and another 600 tuned in online to watch the live feed. Now, maybe I am missing something but surely those people who were in the room or online were proof of concept. They provide us with measurable numbers.

But they do not tell us the whole story. Lots of people joined us via Twitter - we could not measure them. My co-host on PhotoLegal, Phill Price, was one of them - he was waiting for a haircut at the time but got involved and gave us a tweet. He interacted - which was the point of the day. Also, uber-tweeter, Stephen Fry sent us a tweet with his good wishes for the event. People talked about the event before, during and answer. We can't measure them. We reached people through coverage online and offline - we can't measure them.

Amongst the 'unanswered' questions, so we are told, are:

• How to carry out online campaigns to compliment offline marketing mix

• How to target online audiences, and best engage current customers and new customers

• How to turn customers into brand advocates through social media

Now, we discussed a number of things, one of which was my own subject of the PhotoLegal social media phenomenon. Our online campaign led to offline coverage within industry publications. We indentified, engaged with and nurtured our online audience - actually, we have also showed them the 'L' word which Daren Forsyth used and was so derided by some. They are our customers and brand advocates and they have become not only evangalists for the podcast but some have recommended me and my firm to their friends and contacts. They also go to my cohosts, Darren Hector and Phill Price for advice on photography issues. How would you measure the 'feeling' that they have towards us and that we have towards them? What would the answer be? 75.3? 26.1? What would it mean? What would it matter?

As someone who has also worked in the PR industry, I know that there are some things that cannot be empirically measured. Print adverts are one of them - you will never know how many people have seen your ad no matter what people say. Brand awareness is also incredibly difficult to measure as people sometimes guess as to whether they know a brand when asked - do you want to be the idiot that hasn't heard of the latest website adhsadjhsdf.com? No? Then you answer 'yes' to the nice lady with the clipboard.

In my opinion, the desire to have 'numbers' to justify campaigns is lazy thinking - brand and issue campaigns can take months or even years to come to fruition - and attempting to measure them will prove pretty much impossible (although we could all find a polling agency that could come up with some questions for a fee!).

Sometimes, you need to step back and see and feel what is around you. Sometimes there are no numbers.

From a standing start, we put together a podcast and an ecosystem that has proved massively popular in its particular industry area. What are the percentages? No idea. Nor do I want to rely on numbers. Sure I know how many downloads we have had but it is much more interesting to know the influence we have when we go live and see people sit with us, online, listening, interacting, talking and promoting us without us even asking. It feels right. We have a relationship with our listeners - the best listeners in the world, by the way! When it doesn't feel right any more, we will know and we will do something about it. We do not need numbers to tell us what is working and what does not.

Now, I know all this sounds a bit defensive and maybe it is. The Like Minds crew put together an amazing conference that proved the importance of social media. The speakers, especially Trey Pennington, Daren Forsyth and Olivier Branchard, did address the ROI questions including why it is difficult to measure, why it may not be right to measure it in 'traditional' ways and what other indicators of success there may be.

The conference is now available online via the Like Minds website, so you can decide for yourself. Go and watch it. See what this social media thing is all about and why using traditional methods to measure new media is about as relevant as putting petrol into a horse and cart.

Lord Carter and Digital Britain - My 2 megs worth

I have taken a long time before settling down to write this piece on Lord Carter's Digital Britain Report. I've done that because I was conscious that my initial reaction would be something of a kneejerk one which might, if I sat down and thought about it a bit, mellow over time. I'm not sure it has.

The Report, which Lord C is keen to point out is a draft and a discussion document, has been roundly criticized in all quarters. The occasional person has put their head about the parapet to defend Lord C but, if we are being honest, there hasn't exactly been a rush.

The main charge is that the Report, in recommending a minimum 2 meg broadband speed for every household, lacks ambition. Personally, I do not think that goes far enough.

Lord C's defence is that the minimum speed is a guaranteed minimum available to every single household and it will be difficult and expensive to achieve.

My own view is a simple one – why set ourselves such dull and uninspiring targets? If we are about to spend a massive amount of time, effort and money, why not try to achieve something bigger? Developed nations around the world see 20 meg, 50 meg and even 100 meg connections as nothing out of the ordinary. We plan to give a minimum of 2 meg. And, if we are being honest, we all know that, based on past experience, if you tell people in this country that they are going to get a minimum of 2 megs, they are going to get 2 megs – nothing more.

The Report, for me, underlines all that is wrong with the country at the moment. It lacks any self belief, any ambition, any hope, any drive. It is feeble in the extreme. We no longer strive to win, we strive to provide some sort of minimum level of service. And it's pathetic.

Back in 1961, President John F Kennedy made a speech to Congress in which he outlined the reasons why they should back his space plan. He said:

“I believe we should go to the Moon. But I think every citizen of this country as well as the Members of the Congress should consider the matter carefully in making their judgment, to which we have given attention over many weeks and months, because it is a heavy burden, and there is no sense in agreeing or desiring that the United States take an affirmative position in outer space, unless we are prepared to do the work and bear the burdens to make it successful. If we are not, we should decide today and this year.

This decision demands a major national commitment of scientific and technical manpower, material and facilities, and the possibility of their diversion from other important activities where they are already thinly spread. It means a degree of dedication, organization and discipline which have not always characterized our research and development efforts. It means we cannot afford undue work stoppages, inflated costs of material or talent, wasteful interagency rivalries, or a high turnover of key personnel.

New objectives and new money cannot solve these problems. They could in fact, aggravate them further--unless every scientist, every engineer, every serviceman, every technician, contractor, and civil servant gives his personal pledge that this nation will move forward, with the full speed of freedom, in the exciting adventure of space.”

He didn't say, 'Well, this is going be hard and the Russians are already pretty much there. So rather than reach for the stars, how about we reach for Dagenham? We could do that and it still won't be easy. Many people will get further but we will give you a minimum guarantee of Dagenham. What do you say?'

I do not for a second think that guaranteeing a 20 meg or 50 meg connection would be easy. I also do not necessarily believe that it could be rolled out using current technology. So, here's my thought – let's have a guarantee of a minimum speed of 20 megs by 2012 for every household in the country. Let us strive to achieve. If we need to equip a small number of house with fibre or satellite or some other technology, let's do it. Of course it will cost a lot of money but we're printing money at the moment, so we can use as much as we want! Seriously, though, if we are to bring the advantages of the internet to every household in the UK that is going to cost money and it will cost money if we strive to achieve a slow speed or a faster speed but the returns for us as a society (and the Government through increased taxes) will be great as the UK takes its place at the forefront of technological advance and of ecommerce.

Lord Carter was meant to dream of a better future and he could only come up with a slightly enhanced present (and I am being generous here). The UK needs to dare to dream because if we do not, we will be left behind by countries with real vision.