• The update includes a revamp of the look of the pages, making them look almost identical to individual profile pages. They put tagged pictures at the top, and eliminated the tabs (this is a big one for us as it’s where our landing pages lived — take note).
• One important change is that the links for the tabs have been moved over to the spot under the profile picture, and are now just links. Fortunately, the update didn’t change the requirements or measurements of actual custom landing pages, which is a good thing for those who build them.
• Another interesting feature is that administrators can now comment AS their page on other pages or other people’s profiles. To explain, previously we could only comment as the page’s identity (rather than as Steve Mullen, for example) while actually on that page. Now I could go on the Facebook Page for Twinkies (for example) and a comment from me would show up as the identity of my Facebook Page. This will come in quite handy.  Additional changes related to this include being able to receive email notifications of user comments on your Page, something previously only possible for comments on your personal wall.
• Another feature related to the one above, but deserving of its own bullet is the new ability to “like” other Pages as your page.  Previously you could only “like” something as an individual.  Very interesting.

The one change that is causing some consternation among Facebook Page Administrators is the switch from tabs to the small links under the profile picture. I’m not particularly fond of this either, since they’re not as obvious now.  In the end, though, there’s really no way around it.  We’ll just have to work harder to promote the content in those links.  If one of those links is to a custom landing page, it will of course be the default page seen by all “non-likers” (yes .. I just made that up).

If you administer a page and haven’t updated yet, you have until March 10, when it will be done for you!

This week a new social media campaign launched.  It’s called KeepThePromise.com, and it’s the brainchild of a group of Central Virginia churches.  The site has a goal of collecting promises made to God, while at the same time helping people who don’t have enough to eat.  The concept is simple: individuals are invited to post promises, whether simple, complicated, or downright frivolous.  One example: “I promise to be nicer to my sister if you help me pass this math test.”  For every promise posted, a donation is given to the Central Virginia Food Bank.  Visitors are also given assistance in finding a church, if they would like the help.

Critics sometimes point to social media users as being inwardly focused.  In fact, critics would tell you that’s all social media IS — self-centered individuals who post what they’re doing at every moment.  It’s so much more than that.  It’s a way of reaching out and connecting with other people we’d never otherwise meet.  It’s also an extremely powerful force for good.  One example from a recent article on cause marketing in Adweek:

Kraft is in the midst of a “Share a Little Comfort” campaign that offers to donate 1 million boxes of Kraft Macaroni & Cheese to needy families based on the number of messages people share via Facebook and Twitter. [...] So far, more than 23,000 messages have been posted in response to Kraft’s effort.

That’s just one example of a big brand, but there are literally too many examples like that to count.

Why is it a good idea?  From the company/organization perspective, it could be a bit selfish — the desire to be seen as “good”.  Fortunately, this selfishness is manifesting itself for good, not evil.

Also, causes and organizations wanting to do good have come to realize that social media is just where all of the people are.  It’s better to push a cause (or anything, for that matter) in a crowded room.

Plus, it’s cheaper than advertising.  The donation given by Kraft (for example) is probably going to be far less than it would cost to buy comparable TV, radio, or newspaper advertising.

Finally, “residents” of the social media space just seem to WANT to do good.  Maybe it’s because the desire to share and connect led them to social media in the first place?  Whatever the reason, successful social media cause marketing campaigns usually fall into the category of EXTREMELY successful.

Please check out KeepThePromise.com, and click the button below to like them on Facebook!

You can also follow KeepThePromise on Twitter at http://twitter.com/KTPdotcom

Don't expect pictures like this to stay "private" on Facebook for long.

While this is disturbing and should be handled, as Facebook appears to be doing, it once again brings up the issue of “online privacy” … an oxymoron if I ever heard one.

What we’re seeing in these continued concerns over online privacy is the struggle between the old way and the new way.  The “old way” is when you were able to remain anonymous online and offline.  That way didn’t last long after the advent of large-scale social networking.  The “new way” is that if you don’t want people to know about it, don’t post it online.

You can’t rely on a third party to keep your information private because it’s close to impossible.  If you put your phone number out there on Facebook, it doesn’t matter how high you set your privacy settings, it’s still “out there” and may eventually be found.

• Don’t want anyone to find your number?  Don’t give it out online (or if you have to, give out your fax number or register a Google Voice number and give THAT one out.)
• Don’t want anyone to get your personal email address?  Register a new one on Gmail, Yahoo, or elsewhere, and use that ONLY for social networking.
• Don’t want people to find compromising pictures of you from your Facebook account?  Don’t post them!
• Don’t want your wife/husband/significant other to know about the saucy Facebook chats you’re having with your old girlfriend/boyfriend from college?  Have them over the phone, via email, or not at all!

The first wave of Facebook users were early adopters.  A lot of them had been using online message boards and instant chat for years.  Some of them (like myself) had “social networking” experience that went all the way back to dial-up bulletin board systems.  This group generally understands how things work, and we’re not terribly surprised when a little private information becomes public.  The ones who are surprised are the newcomers to social networking .. the ones who just started in the last year or two as a Facebook profile practically became a mandatory part of citizenship.  It’s up to us to calm the fears of these “newbies” and explain to them that their old way of doing things no longer exists.

Truth is, despite the fact that my profession is public relations, until a relatively short time ago I (and most of my peers) didn’t actually deal with the public all that often.  My job, and the job of most of the vast majority of PR professionals out there, was to either solicit media coverage, handle incoming media inquiries, or to manage the media in a crisis.  In each case, we didn’t take our news directly to the public. Sure … we would sometimes organize an event that was open to the public, but in most cases the main reason for the event was actually to draw news coverage.

It’s no secret that the world has changed due to the social media tools we now have at our disposal.  Now we can blog, we can grow an audience on Facebook or Twitter, we can create our own online videos, and we can even distribute our news release directly to the public rather than politely asking reporters to write about it for us.  While taking this news directly to the public, we’re actually communicating with them one-on-one in a way that wasn’t possible just a few years back.

While the media is still an important tool for disseminating news from my clients, it’s hardly the only way to go about it.  Now, it actually makes sense to call our profession PUBLIC relations.

Note: Part of what got me thinking about this was a blog post from colleague and friend Jon Newman, on how PR can capitalize on winning the “battle” over social media within organizations.  Good read.  Check it out here.

If you look on the EndGame PR services page, you’ll see a pretty long list.  There’s a reason for that.  I want to be able to do everything I can to help my clients.  I’m talking about not only social media, social networking and traditional PR tactics such as media relations, but also search engine optimization (SEO), web content creation, and even web design.  Imagine these skills and tactics as part of a never-ending “circle of life”.  Quality media relations campaigns can equal links back to a web site, which helps search rankings, which in turn can help a social media audience find you, which in turn can help you promote your quality web content, which can add links back to a web site, which can help SEO …. lather, rinse, repeat.  All of these strategies and tactics work well together, and should not be stuck in silos, as they are in so many organizations.

Perhaps the best part of thinking about PR in this way is that you’re not reliant upon one single tactic. If your media relations campaign isn’t going as well as expected, perhaps another portion of the “circle of life” will kick in and help you.

While I’m not suggesting that all PR professionals should know what a 301 redirect is or what to do with the .htaccess file (I do, but I’m a geek), they should know the basics of SEO.  They should also know how (or have access to someone who does) to create a basic web video.  They should also have the writing skills to be able to write an entertaining and thoughtful blog post.  Feel free to judge whether I possess that last one or not .. I won’t assume.

I am going to assume, however, that most everyone reading this knows at least a little bit about social media.  You ARE reading a blog, after all.  Not near as many have knowledge of the SEO basics.  Here are a few, with an example at the end of how the circle of life works:

• Keywords: The basic strategy for figuring out which keywords to use is to think of what words you WANT web searchers to use on Google in order to find your content.  Then, work those words into your title and copy (in a natural way, please .. no keyword stuffing).  If you want to get more precise about which keywords to use, try playing with the Google Keyword Tool.  Most important, however, is that you include those keywords in the headlines and copy of your news releases and other online content.
• Backlinks are king: One of the most important things you can do to improve your site’s search ranking WITHOUT digging into web site code, is increase the number of other sites linking to your site.  From a PR perspective, this can be done two ways.  First, create original content that people will want to link to.  In other words, people will enjoy it and want to blog about it or post about it on Twitter or Facebook.  Another tool in the SEO PR toolbox is online news release distribution.  Check out my sort-of-annual review of online release distribution sites for more information about this.
• Promote your content on social networking sites: Obviously this isn’t ALL you should be doing on Twitter, Facebook, Buzz and all of the others, but it’s one of the things you should be doing.  Obviously, the more people who know about your unique content, the more people who could potentially link back to it from their sites.  See?!  Circle of life!

What it comes down to is that PR pros need to learn everything they can about these tools, even to the point of teaching themselves a little bit of HTML and even how to use CSS.  These skills come in handy much more than you would expect, and can improve the service provided to clients or employers.

And, don’t blame me if you walk away from this blog post humming an Elton John song from a certain Disney movie.  That’s your problem, and I accept no responsibility for it.  It’s less annoying than Hakuna Matata, at least!

Here is this week’s summary for the Facebook Page: Sheltering Arms Physical Rehabilitation

+8 Fans this week (188 total Fans)

6 Wall Posts, Comments, and Likes this week (5 last week)

130 Visits to your page this week (101 Visits last week)

It gave similar stats for the fan pages for SleepBetter, EndGame PR, FightSMA, and all of the others I administer or co-administer.

I get a LOT of junk emails from social networking sites.  It’s nice to get one that, while unsolicited, is extremely useful to me!

Unlike other social bookmarking sites, such as the aforementioned Digg, Delicious, and Reddit, users of StumbleUpon don’t have to be looking for your content to find it.  I’ve often thought this was the downfall of trying to use Digg to help visitors find you.  Unless your content is tech-related or involves someone falling off of a donkey and hurting a sensitive part of the body, posting to Digg is often like whistling into the wind.  StumbleUpon is different.  In fact, the whole point of the site is finding random content that you didn’t know you were looking for. You click a button and “stumble upon” a site.  It’s much like channel surfing.  StumbleUponn can help you find random content that’s been submitted, or you can have it help you find random content within a category. Obviously, it’s an outstanding time waster.

StumbleUpon’s strength is it’s lack of the cliques found on Digg and other sites.  On other sites, it can be hard to generate interest unless you’re already well known.  In other words, if you’re well known already, you’ll get plenty of “Diggs”. Thing is, if you’re well known already, you don’t NEED Diggs to help people find your content.

So, what’s the strategy for using StumbleUpon if you’re hoping to generate interest in your site or your other content?  It’s pretty simple.  First of all, submit your content to StumbleUpon.  You can go directly to stumbleupon.com to do it, or you can download a toolbar for your browser that will help you.  Then, review others content.  Don’t give random reviews that are not well thought out.  Find good content relevant to your own, and write good reviews.  After doing a couple of reviews per day, if your content is good you’ll find that more people are reviewing and finding your content.

Pretty simple.

Happy stumbling!

This post has been a long time coming.  Client work and family life keeps getting in the way, but the online distribution universe changes so fast, and I’ve received so much goodwill as a result of the previous two versions of my online news release distribution reviews that I had make the time to write this update.

Let’s take a look at a some good reasons to distribute your news releases online:

1. By including a link in your release, you’re building inbound links to your web site.
2. Your news is being spread beyond the boundaries of your web site, increasing the odds of it being seen by your audience.
3. There is the possibility that it will be seen by new media or traditional media, leading to coverage from these outlets.  This isn’t something I ever count on, but it does sometimes happen.

Disclaimer: There have been occasions where I have been given free “try out” release distributions. I do accept these because they allow me to sample different services, but I do my best not to let them sway my judgment in the review.  I consider it the same as a product reviewer accepting a sample product.  Disclaimers about specific services can be found within their reviews.

So, which is the best place to distribute your news releases to reach your goals? Below is a review of what I consider the best of the best, both free and paid. Feed free to add your own via comments!

Premium News Release Distribution

PR Newswire (PRN)
Cost: Varies, starting at $170 for a 400 word release
Review: PR Newswire has been around in one form or another for more than 55 years.  They market themselves as being a mainstay among reporters and news organizations, and are recently pushing their ability to get news to bloggers via their opt-in distribution lists.  They also do a good job of distributing your release for use on other websites.  Your release will rank well on Google News for your keywords, and you’ll get plenty of quality backlinks.

The problem with PR Newswire has always been cost. They have a yearly fee that you have to pay for the privilege of paying more to post your releases.  They have been known to waive that fee for small businesses, so be sure to ask if you qualify.  Releases start at $170 for distribution on their city or state wire, with an additional charge for every 100 words after that. That’s for a short release of 400 words, though, and they charge you for each word after that.   At that price, the distribution to the media is limited.  If you want distribution to nationwide media, you’ll pay almost $650 for a single release.  With all of this said, I do think PR Newswire does a great job getting the word out to the media, and as I’ll say in a number of cases during this review — you get what you pay for.

BusinessWire
Cost: Varies, starting at $180 for the first 400 words, or $175 for EON distribution
Review: Business Wire has become my “go to” service for clients who have the money to pay for premium distribution. As with PR Newswire, their service is not cheap.  A basic citywide distribution will cost you at least $180 for the first 400 words, with an additional charge for every 100 words after that.

A basic release from BusinessWire will generate quality links for your release, and plenty of them.  The version of your release on the Business Wire site will rank on Google and Google News, but I’ve never been overly impressed with how well it ranks.  Generally speaking, the sites they distribute TO will rank better than the actual Business Wire version.  The good news is that Business Wire has a long list of sites that automatically will run your release, and after your distribution they will send you a link that will show you all of those sites.

One thing I should also note is that releases I have posted on Business Wire HAVE resulted in legitimate coverage on blogs and other new media sites.  What I mean by this is that rather than just posting the release verbatim, the bloggers or new media journalists have rewritten it or contacted me to learn more.

New for 2010 from Business Wire is a different pricing plan for their EON release distribution.  The EON platform, launched several years ago, is designed with social media and SEO in mind.  EON releases rank well on Google and Google News.  You can include images and videos, and style your release using HTML.  Previously, EON was an add-on to standard geographic distributions, but starting January 1, 2010, you can purchase it separately for $175.  A word of caution, however: with an EON release, your release is NOT distributed to Business Wire’s online partners.  It will only be posted on Business Wire’s site.

PRWeb
Cost: Packages range from $80 to $360
Review: When PRWeb was launched in 1997, its owners seemed to realize that releases would become more than a tool for sending news to the media.  They were correct, as releases are now a means of pushing news to your audience and pulling them back to your web site.

The two benefits of PRWeb are SEO and price.  Your release will rank very well on Google and Google News, and they do distribute to many of the same sites as PR Newswire and Business Wire.  While you may not receive as many backlinks as with the two services reviewed above, you also won’t pay as much.  Distributions on PRWeb start at $80, and range up to $360.  My personal favorite is the $200 package, which offers a nice mix of cost and features.  Additionally, they don’t charge per word, so a longer release will cost the same as a short one.

All PRWeb releases include live links, feature quotes, and a framed view of your web site below the release text.  Starting with the $200 distribution, you can also utilize anchor text links, which help greatly with your site’s search rankings.

Budget News Release Distribution

Online PR News (OPN)
Cost: $12 (free releases available)

Disclaimer: Since the last time I updated my review of online news release distribution, I have begun partnering with Online PR News on their podcasting service. I have also consulted with them on marketing in the past. In return for my consulting services, I receive complimentary distributions.

Online PR News is a relative newcomer to this stratosphere of distribution services.  Founded by two SEO content producers, the site naturally focuses on helping you publish a release that ranks well in the search engines.  The site has installed many upgrades for 2010, and has in turn raised its prices.  Free ad-supported releases are available that include one backlink, but with the low cost distribution beginning at $12, there’s no reason not to ditch the ads.

OPN has taken many cues from PRWeb in its release design, with each paid release receiving a pull quote and a frame below the release text that shows your web site.  Paid releases at the $12 level can also include user images, and releases at the $49 level and up can embed YouTube videos.  At the $349 level, you not only receive their maximum visibility and distribution, you also receive release editing services AND distribution via PR Newswire.

OPN does not yet have the push to other sites that Business Wire, PR Newswire, or PRWeb offer, but their prices are attractive and the OPN version of the release will rank very, very well on Google and Google News.  This service is definitely worth trying out.

PR Leap
Cost: Distribution starting at $49
Review: Started several years back as a free service, PR Leap has grown into a full service paid distribution site.  New for 2010 is a feature called PRTube that allows you to embed your release on a web site or blog using a code much like a YouTube video.  Additional services include Google News distribution, text links, and submission to (but not guaranteed usage by) outlets like the AP and UPI.  My previous experiences with PR Leap have been good ones, with their releases ranking well for my keywords.

PR.com
Cost: Distribution starting at $30 (free option available)
Review: The first thing you’ll notice about PR.com is the AWESOME domain name.  It doesn’t get any better than that.  The second thing you’ll notice is a slightly confusing web site set up.  I don’t normally distribute using this service, so I in writing this review I needed to go back to check pricing information. It took about 10 minutes to find the pricing page, which is about nine minutes too many.  The major issue is that the site has lost some of its focus on release distribution and is now also posting job listings.

Aside from the navigation and focus issues on the site, distribution from PR.com appears to be quite solid.  After running some Google searches for releases posted there, I found that the site does help spread your release to a number of other sites.  Distribution costs start at $30, but after perusing the options at that level, it appears that you’d really need to spend $50 to get much distribution to other sites.  A free option is available, but is ad supported.

PRUnderground

Note added 10/29/10: PRUnderground has recently increased their prices and changed the services offered at their various pricing tiers.  This review is updated to reflect that change.

Cost: Distribution starting at $19.95
Review: PRUnderground is one of the more successful of the sites using a social media approach to distribution.  At the $19.95 level, you get distribution to other sites, but not to social networks.  Your release will also have advertising on it.  At the next level, $49.95, you get distribution to other sites and social networking outlets, and the ads go away.

Distribution from PRUnderground focuses on channels such as Twitter, Facebook, Digg, and Moreover.  The technique seems to work, as the releases from PRUnderground that I tested by searching for them in Google did seem to get distribution beyond the PRUnderground.com site. You can also embed a YouTube video, and a preview of your web site is shown in a frame below your release text.

Other paid distribution services: Marketwire, PRBuzz, 1888PressRelease

Free News Release Distribution

Fewer and fewer sites offer quality free distribution anymore.  Here are some of the better options:

PRLog
Cost: Free (ad supported)
Review: PRLog has been around for years, and despite the unattractive layout of the site and its releases, it’s hard to beat the rankings they achieve for releases posted at this Romanian-based site.

A couple of years back, PRLog branched out from news releases and started offering job listings as well (is this a trend?), which cluttered up the site considerably.  Despite my cries that I’m going to stop using the site, I keep coming back.  If you can tolerate the look and feel of the site, it’s something worth considering.  It’s one of the last truly free release distribution services that isn’t neutered, as they include a user-uploaded image, some customization (bolding and italics), and the first three links included in your release will be live.

24-7 Press Release
Cost: Free (ad supported), with a $49 paid option
Review:24-7 Press Release is another of the sites with free options that I have on my roster for secondary distribution.  Generally for a client, I post on one of the premium paid sites such as PRWeb or Business Wire, and then I post versions of the release with different headlines on some of the free sites, such as this one.

One of the only major downsides to 24-7 Press Release is that they hold your release for a day or two before they post it on their site.  However, if you pay for immediate distribution, they review it pretty quickly.  Once live, your free release will rank well on Google and sometimes Google News.  Links in the release body are not an option unless you pay for the upgraded release, but a link is included in a small company profile box.  Their paid option of $49 includes enhanced SEO benefits such as anchor text for links within the release.

Wikio
Cost: Free
Review: Wikio is actually meant more for articles and for sharing links, but it can also be used to post your news release content.  A voting system similar to Digg is utilized.  When setting up your release, you can post anchor text links and format your release in many of the same ways you can when using a paid service.  There’s no additional distribution beyond the version posted on Wikio, but that version does seem to rank fairly well in Google.

I-Newswire
Cost: Free (ad supported) with paid option
Review: Going the route of many of the free release sites, I-Newswire has neutered its free options and increased its paid options.  Their free releases no longer include a link.  That will cost you $35.

The Open Press
Cost: Free (ad supported) with a $10 paid option
Review: This is a great free distribution site, with one downside — signing up is extremely ponderous.  Currently, you cannot sign up on the site.  Instead, you have to send an email and request to be registered. The explanation given is that they’ve had issues with spammers.  Once you go through that process, however, the site is very good.  It looks businesslike, and the releases posted there rank well in Google web search.  Tasteful ads are placed on your release.  They can be removed by paying $10.  The site’s owners truly review your release before posting it (unlike some sites who say they’re reviewing it, but really want you to pay for expedited distribution) and WILL reject releases that they don’t feel meet their standards.  I know this from experience.

PressReleasePoint
Cost: Free to post on their site (ad supported) and $15 to distribute elsewhere
Review: This site sounds good on the surface — they post your release on their site for free, and for $15 they’ll post it on 50 free distribution sites.  I have not tried this service, but it concerns me.  Google’s duplicate content rule may come into play after the same content is posted on that many sites.

Another problem is the site itself.  Previously, it had a number of layout problems.  Some of those have been fixed in the past year, but what hasn’t been fixed is that the web site itself is riddled with grammatical and spelling errors.  My suggestion to the owners is that they have a professional copy editor go through the site with a fine-toothed comb.

One thing I do like on their site is the comprehensive list of more free and paid sites than I can possibly list here.  The list is found here.

PitchEngine
Cost: Free (no ads)
Review: PitchEngine is a bit of a conundrum for me.  The site, which features a slick social media news release format, has numerous fans.  However, while the version of the release on PitchEngine ranks rather well on Google, there’s no Google News distribution.  The site has had it in the past, but has lost it several times.  Additionally, releases posted using the free option expire after 30 days.  To have them posted permanently costs $35 per month.  To get the full benefit of the site, with a custom newsroom and permanent hosting, will cost you $50 per month.  I’m not certain what happens if you pay your subscription for a year, post releases, and then decide not to renew.  If anyone can tell me whether those releases then expire or not, I’d be happy to update this review.

The bottom line is that while PitchEngine has many loyal fans, I’m not really one of them.

Other free distribution sites: PR-USA, PostaFreePressRelease, Express Press Release

The Best of the Best

So, which of these sites do I think are the BEST?

Premium Release Distribution: PRWeb and Business Wire (Tie)
It’s hard for me to pick between these two, so I’m taking the easy way out.  PRWeb does a better job of ensuring your release ranks well and generates some backlinks.  Business Wire, however, will make sure your release receives loads of backlinks.

Budget Release Distribution: Online PR News
With budget distribution services, you normally won’t get a lot of distribution, so I’m judging how well the version of the release on the distribution site ranks on Google and Google News.  OPN gets you VERY good rankings with both, and they’re continuing to expand their offerings.
(Honorable Mention: PRUnderground)

Free Release Distribution: PRLog
I keep trying to replace them on this list because I wish they’d do something to clean up their site, but it’s hard to argue with a free release service that offers their features, and will get your release excellent search rankings.
(Honorable Mention: Wikio)

Disagree?  Agree? Want to talk about another distribution service (preferably not one you work for)?  Please let me know about it in comments!

If you appreciate the work it took to compile these reviews, please be sure to “retweet” it using the button at the top of the page, or post it on one of the services below!

The article, Baby Boomers and Seniors Are Flocking to Facebook, has some great stats about the growth of the number of Americans 44+ on Facebook.

According to Deloitte data, 2009 was the year that social media bloomed for Baby Boomers, with nearly 47% of them actively maintaining a profile on the social web, which is up 15% from 2008. Further driving home that 2009 was the year of the social BB is the fact that from 2007 to 2008 there was barely a measurable change — just 1% — in that demographic’s adoption of social media.

For another quirky finding, take a look at the percentage of “Matures” — individuals between the ages of 63 and 75 — who use Twitter regularly. Seventeen percent is actually quite high when you compare it with the percentages of the other demographic groups. Also of note is that nearly all the Senior social media users (90%) have picked up Facebook as a new hobby.

Fact is, Facebook is actually BETTER for people who are older than those who are 21 or 22-years-old.  Why?  Let’s take a look…

• Facebook is fantastic for sharing pictures of kids and grandkids.  What do people love to do more than show off pictures of kids and grandkids?  I say “not much”.  People 44+ are more likely to have kids and grandkids than 20-somethings.  The 21 and 22-year-olds only have pictures of parties to show off, and sometimes it’s best to keep those to yourself until you’re 44.
• People who are 44+ have had plenty of time to get over grudges with people from high school, and are interested in reconnecting.  In fact, by that age they’re probably interested in connecting with anyone from their hometown, particularly if they don’t live there anymore.  The 21 and 22-year-olds still have fresh wounds and grudges are are still very much active.
• People who are 44+ simply have more time on their hands.  If you’re 21 or 22, you’re still going out at night, perhaps dating or hanging out with friends.  Most people who are older than 44 are pretty much done with that.
• There are more adults in the U.S. who are older than 44+ than any other age group.  And, that age group has more of the wealth.  What they want … they take.

I’m not quite to the 44+ age group, but I can see it from where I am.  I us “old folks” should just declare that we own Facebook.  Those kids can keep texting.  We don’t want it.

This isn’t a complete textbook on Twitter, nor was it meant to be.  It’s merely some information to get you started.  Whether you’re just learning, or you’re a social networking pro, please be sure to follow me on Twitter, at @stevemullen!

A Primer on Twitter

While Twitter and Facebook have some similarities in what they’re used FOR (at least when it comes to business), the atmosphere at each is very different.  Using Facebook privacy settings, you can control who sees your posts.  On Twitter, everything is out in the open for all to see.  Additionally, there’s the 140-character limit to deal with on Twitter, which means posts are usually limited to a sentence or two and a link.

There is really only one type of Twitter account.  When you sign up, you have the ability to post a short bio about yourself and a link to a web site.  People tend to make the mistake of not filling these out.  They’re missing an opportunity to promote themselves that no one will begrudge them.  Advertising yourself in Twitter posts on a regular basis is generally a no-no, so plug away in the bio!

When you follow someone on Twitter, their updates show up in your “stream”, which is the list of your posts seen on the Twitter site when you click on “profile” at the top of the page.  When someone follows you, your posts show up in their stream.  There is NO obligation to follow someone back if they’re following you, but the fact that you don’t follow them back doesn’t stop them from being allowed to follow YOU.

There IS a way to protect your Twitter posts so that they’re not seen by everyone, but I don’t recommend using it unless you’re a minor (in which case you really shouldn’t be on Twitter anyhow).  The way it works is that new followers have to request to follow you, and you have the opportunity to approve or deny them.  I don’t understand why you’d want to do this on Twitter, and I never ask permission to follow anyone.  It seems very anti-Twitter.  If someone is particularly bothersome, you can unfollow them, and they probably won’t bother you.  If they’re REALLY bothersome, you can “block” them, and they won’t be able to see any of your posts or message you in any way.  If someone gets blocked by enough people, their account will be deleted from Twitter.

When considering Twitter, think of it as a giant all-inclusive networking meeting.  People are having all kinds of conversations, ranging from sports, to business, to industry news, to simple goofing off.  Whatever you want to talk about can surely be found on Twitter.  Joining in is simple.  On the Twitter website, hover your mouse pointer over the post you want to respond to, and then click on “reply”.  This will populate the form at the top of the page with @username.  Then, just type your message in 140 characters or less.  Putting an @ symbol in front of someone’s name on Twitter indicates that you’re talking to them.

Twitter has developed its own terms … some would say its own language.  Here is some Twitter terminology:

• Tweet: One post on Twitter.  If you say, “I just tweeted that”, you’re saying “I just posted on Twitter about that.”
• Retweet: Copying a tweet from someone else, and posting it on your account.  This has the affect of alerting your followers about the post.  It’s a way of rewarding a person who tweets something useful, witty, or simply interesting.  To retweet something, type “RT”, then the original poster’s username with an “@” in front of it (i.e. @sleep_better), and then their original post.
• Tweeps or Tweeple: Your friends on Twitter.
• Hashtag: A way of categorizing posts on Twitter.  To utilize hashtags, simply put the “#” symbol in front of a word. For instance, in every post I write about my area, Richmond, Virginia, I include the hashtag #rva.  Anyone who knows this hashtag will then be able to easily search for posts about Richmond.

Finding followers in Twitter is different than Facebook, mainly due to the lack of stranger anxiety and the fact that everyone can see your posts.  The first thing I always recommend to people is to write a handful posts.  When you start following people, they’ll check out your posts.  If there aren’t any, then they won’t be likely to follow back.  Also, if you write about your favorite topics, this alone is likely to gain you a few followers.  People out there have searches set up to automatically follow people who talk about certain subjects.  You’ll be amazed how one post on something like real estate can lead to a bunch of real estate agents following you.

The next thing to do after writing a few posts is to have Twitter search your email address book, just like Facebook does.  Then, do some searches for people in your area.  Try to figure out if your area has an established hashtag, and do some searches for that word.  You can also do some simple keyword searches (with or without the hashtag) that indicate your interests.  If you like golf … search for “golf”.  You’ll find golf enthusiasts, people giving information on how to play better, as well as some golf courses.

A note about spam: You will find significantly more on Twitter than on Facebook.  This is largely due to Twitter being more open than Facebook.  Remember that you’re under no obligation to follow someone back if they follow you.  If it smells like spam and looks like spam … then it probably is.  Either that, or it’s a legitimate business person who has no idea that he or she shouldn’t post a mess of advertisements on Twitter.

After doing some hunting and following people in your area … keep posting.  Followers will find you … I promise.

This isn’t a complete textbook on Facebook, nor was it meant to be.  It’s merely some information to get you started.  While you’re learning, please be sure to become a fan of EndGame PR on Facebook!

When you’re done reading this post be sure to read the sequel, A Facebook and Twitter Primer, Part 2!

A Primer on Facebook

The general idea of social media, whether it’s on Facebook, Twitter, on a blog, or somewhere else, is to provide something of value that people want to consume — whether it’s an article, blog post, video, audio, or something else.  Before launching a social media presence, think about what you’re going to do with it.  That may tell you which site is best suited for you, or that none of them are.

There are a few different types of Facebook presences:

• The first type is the simple individual account. This is what you get when you sign up for the first time.  It’s primarily good for networking with people you know, and keeping in touch with old friends by becoming their Facebook “friend”. People generally don’t like to network with strangers on Facebook because one of the primary activities on Facebook is posting pictures of your kids, grandkids, house, car, vacations, etc. When you become a “friend” of someone, unless they’ve tinkered with their privacy settings, you can see all of their pictures and news about kids, grandkids, vacations, etc. People get nervous about showing these things to people they don’t know. I call this “Facebook Stranger Anxiety”. The other two types of Facebook presences (charted below) solve this stranger anxiety problem, but you MUST have an individual account to create either of the other two.
• The second type of presence on Facebook is a Facebook Fan Page. While it looks like an individual account, it allows people to network with a company or cause without the administrator/owner of the page having to reveal pictures of his kids, grandkids, etc. to complete strangers. People who have elected to become “Fans” receive all news updates that posted on the page.
• The third type of Facebook presence is a Facebook Group. For a variety of reasons, this is great for private organizations, but not great for publicizing a business.

Finding “friends” for an individual account on Facebook is relatively simple. With 350 million registered users, surely you know SOMEONE on the site! When you sign up, you can have Facebook hunt through your email address book and look for people you email who are already on the service. Additionally, you can search on Facebook for your high school, college, organization, or anything else, and surely find people you know. Once you’ve made a few friends, look at who they’ve “friended”. Chances are, you have a mutual friend.

When I launch a Fan Page (whether for myself or a client) the first thing I do after I’m finished is invite all of the “friends” from my individual account. The idea behind this is to start seeding the page. People who are friends of these friends may then learn about the Fan Page, and join as well.

What you post on Facebook depends upon what type of presence you’re talking about. On an individual account, if you’re not using it for business purposes, you can post anything you like. On a Fan Page, it’s best to stick to the topic. It’s NOT a place to advertise on a frequent basis.  That sort of thing will cause you to lose fans quickly.

The important thing to remember about Facebook is that it’s meant to be a community, while Twitter and LinkedIn more closely resemble networking events.  If you go to Facebook expecting that if you shout the loudest, more people will hear, you’ll soon learn that you’re using the wrong strategy.

But, what happens when the media weakens, and there aren’t enough reporters to cover even the most fascinating stories?

I happened upon two different articles this week that say essentially what I’ve been saying for some time — the answer is to create your OWN media.  Blogging, podcasting, web videos, online news release distribution, Tweeting, and Facebooking all can take your message to your customers in an unfiltered way.

From Advertising Age:

As the body count of magazines and daily newspapers continues to rise and the once-robust news and feature holes of surviving publications shrink along with reporting staffs, some marketers have given up on the traditional path to media coverage: pitching journalists. According to the website Paper Cuts, which tracks layoffs and buyouts at U.S. newspapers, nearly 30,000 reporters have left the industry since the beginning of 2008. So instead of pitching their stories to reporters, a growing number of marketers are directly engaging consumers through original content they and their agencies are creating.

This bleak picture of the media industry is one that I see on a regular basis.  I still do quite a bit of traditional media pitching, in addition to the social media PR tasks that I perform for clients.  While I still have success with my client media pitches, there simply aren’t the same number of opportunities for media placement as there were for PR professionals ten years ago.  The answer is to add to the value of your announcement/story/new product/etc. by utilizing social media tools.

More on the topic comes from Newsvetter, which says the death of the newspaper beat system is a huge opportunity for PR pros to become the experts that reporters so desperately need.  I’ve lived the issues that this article brings up as well.  At medium to large newspapers, there used to be one reporter in charge of health, another in charge of technology, and so on.  Now, one reporter might be in charge of health AND technology AND food AND any number of other things.  Even worse, reporters might be assigned to stories based completely on availability, not on knowledge of a topic.  One suggestion from Newsvetter to make yourself the expert that reporters can rely upon is to utilize corporate blogging:

Minimize the use of the dreaded press release and focus instead on developing your own corporate news channel that distributes information via blogs, Twitter, Facebook, FriendFeed, or some other platform that you control. This will get your information to both consumers and the media.

Solid recommendation.

One thing to bear in mind in this new world of PR is that you can’t ignore the traditional media any more than you can ignore the new social media channels.  The old media is not dead, and I don’t think they’ll ever completely die.  I’m not ready to write their obituary and chisel their headstone, despite the attempt at an amusing picture at the top of this blog post.  The world is changing, however, and PR professionals who want to be successful need to change with it.

The first thing you’ll notice (click the image for a larger view) is that the look and layout are now much more in line with Fan Pages and individual profiles.  One obvious unique addition is organization information in the left sidebar, above information about group members.

So, the first question I asked myself after hearing of this redesign is, “Are groups now better than Fan Pages for businesses?”  For the answer, lets look at the pros and cons of each…

Groups have always had one huge benefit over pages: You can send a message through Facebook to every member of the group at once.  You’ve never been able to do this with a Fan Page.  If you are using Facebook to promote a business or other organization, it’s a great way to contact people and perhaps offer a coupon or other special benefit to members of your group.  It can help you create something along the lines of a “special customers” club.

The benefit that Fan Pages have had over groups is that when you post something on your Fan Page, it shows up in your fans’ news feed.  This is great for promoting your company, as the posts show up in the feed alongside status updates, pictures, and videos posted by friends of your fans.  This obviously makes your news more likely to be seen.   The problem with groups has been the lack of this feature, which made your news invisible to anyone who didn’t actually visit the group page.  This has changed somewhat with the new group redesign, as Facebook has introduced a somewhat neutered version of this feature.  Facebook explained how it works in their blog on Monday…

To ensure that you get the most interesting and relevant content from groups you’ve joined, you only will see stories [in your news feed] when one of your friends posts within a group rather than when all members post. For example, you now will see a story when your friend uploads photos from a recent party at your high school alumni group or when one of your friends posts a message on the Wall of your pick-up soccer group saying that there is a special game this week.

So what does this all mean?  If you already have a Fan Page or a group and have a decent number of fans or group members … keep the status quo.  I know from experience that it’s VERY hard to get people to move from a Fan Page to a group, or vice versa.  There’s no way to pick them up and move them all at once.  They have to do it themselves, and it’s like herding ferrets.  Until this redesign I would have recommended that any organization move from a group to a Fan Page, but it’s no longer a clear cut decision.

If you don’t currently have a group or a Fan Page, or are thinking of making a change, you have a decision to make about how you plan to use Facebook.  If you’ll be primarily posting news about your company and perhaps having discussions with your customers, then a Fan Page is the way to go.  If you’re close with your customers (i.e. you’re Facebook friends with many of them) and need a way to message all of them at once (perhaps to send a coupon) then consider starting a group.

One more note: Become a “fan” of EndGame PR on Facebook!

Somewhere in June [...] Twitter stopped growing, at least according to Compete. The same thing happened to Facebook (Facebook) at the exact same time; at first we’ve attributed the traffic numbers to the summer slumber, but now that Compete’s numbers for September are out, there’s no doubt that both Facebook and Twitter are no longer growing, at least in the eyes of the (admittedly US-centric) Compete.

Be sure to click over to the article, and check out the charts.  They paint the picture pretty well.

So, what does this mean exactly?  That’s unknown at this point, but there are several possibilities.  One is that it’s a blip on the growth chart.  That’s unlikely, as it’s a three month slowdown.  Another possibility is that it’s due to summer and vacations.  Unlikely also, since the slowdown (or even reversal) extends into September.

The final (and I think most likely) possible explanation is that we’re reaching the saturation point (at least in the U.S.) for social networking.  Most of the people who were going to join … have joined.

When you think about it, the saturation theory makes sense.  I frequently teach classes and lead workshops on how business owners can use social media and social networking tools like Facebook and Twitter.  I always ask how many in the room use each site, to get an idea of how much explanation will be needed.  Generally, about 75-95% in the room use Facebook.  How many more are really going to sign up?  No product is ever going to have 100% penetration, even within its target demographic.  For example, there are plenty of people who don’t use email much or at all, even though it’s been an accepted business tool for more than 10 years.

My informal polls usually show 25-50% of the room using Twitter.  There’s obviously a lot of room for expansion, but will Twitter ever get significantly larger?  The site concept isn’t as easy to “get” as Facebook, and many people don’t like condensing their thoughts into 140 characters or less.  Many people will never be comfortable on Twitter.

So, if the saturation theory is correct … what’s next for these sites?  For Facebook, there aren’t many worries.  The company is profitable and 300-million users is nothing to scoff at.  For Twitter, the news isn’t as good.  The company is not making a single dime of its own money, despite their recent move to start posting ads on the site and recent infusions of venture funding.

While Twitter’s user base (estimated at 13 to 15-million) is quite healthy, if it stops growing, bad things could happen.  The most damaging scenario could be that a new competitor seeps in, starts growing, and becomes the “next big thing”.  Remember FriendFeed?  It was a big dog on the block once upon a time.  Then, Facebook came along.  Now, Facebook owns FriendFeed.

Here’s an excerpt from an article about the study on Journalistics:

The survey also found that 69 percent of respondents go to company websites to assist in their reporting, while 66 percent use blogs, 51 percent use Wikipedia (wow), 48 percent go to online videos (double wow), and 47 percent use Twitter and other microblogging services (would have guessed higher on this one).

A big part of this shift has to revolve around journalists having less help to do their jobs, while being required to produce more content across various formats in near real-time. Journalists have no choice but to use these tools to find sources fast – and in some instances – crowdsource suggestions, tips and interviews.

This is just confirmation that companies need to think of the big picture when formulating their web marketing strategy.  Of course, we should take the stories directly to the reporters by using media relations tactics.  However, reporters come up with stories on their own, and we need to be where they’re looking.  That means, among other things, being on Twitter and having good visibility in relevant Wikipedia articles.  One thing left out of the study (as far as I know) was how often reporters simply search on Google for sources.  I’d be willing to bet the percentage is quite high … so high in fact that SEO should be an extremely high priority for businesses.

Here’s a link to more on the study, from Journalistics.