The overwhelming opinion from those who chimed in was that right now brands and businesses have nothing to fear, because while Facebook has made a lot of changes that have ticked off its user base, the growth of that user base shows no sign of letting up.  What all of us in the discussion also agreed upon is that it will be very interesting to see Google+’s options for businesses and brands.  Those are due to be unveiled later this year.

In a roundabout way, this discussion led me to think about how Google+ can grow and become the default social media outlet for more people.  Right now, most people I know spend more time at Facebook and/or Twitter, and if they visit Google+, they do so as a secondary or even tertiary outlet.

I’m going use sweeping generalizations here, so bear with me, but I view Twitter users as people who want to find and share news and short opinions.  Facebook, meanwhile, can be used for similar purposes, but is also a place to see what your friends (and their kids .. grandkids .. etc.) are up to.  If I want to find news about something going on right now, I go to Twitter.  If I want to see pictures from last night’s neighborhood event (bad example, I know) then I go to Facebook.

So … when do people go to Google+?  It’s hard to answer that question.  Google just opened the service to the general public (no invite required) this week.  Until that day, the site was a haven for techies.  Few people who weren’t connected somewhat in the social media world had managed to swing an invite, or cared to go through the trouble of getting one.  As a result of that closed user base, the site has until now been a great place to find news about social media and technology, as that’s what people were sharing.  I have never once seen a post on there with pictures of someone’s new cat.

I view Google+ as being in between Facebook and Twitter in what it does. You can read posts from whomever you want without being invited, something Twitter has always been identified with but Facebook just implemented.  On Google+, however, you’re not limited in character count and can post images … like Facebook.   Being an in between service isn’t enough, though.  Right now, what will do the trick is still up in the air, as the site is still evolving.  What is clear is that Google+ needs to find its niche, and it needs to do it soon before the public forgets about it.

What do YOU think it will take for Google+
to become the default social media site?
I’d love to hear your opinions in comments.

This move is being widely reported as making Facebook more like Twitter.  I think those who are reporting that are missing something — this new feature makes Facebook more like Google+.  On Google’s new social media service, you can add anyone to a circle, which adds their public updates to your news stream regardless of whether you’re in their circles.  Sound familiar?

The question here is whether Facebook is a little concerned about the new competition from Google.  We may never know, as this could be a feature they’ve worked on since before Google+ launched this summer.

Once nice new feature that’s included in the “subscribe” addition is that Facebook is finally allowing us more control over what is shown in our news feed.  Do you have a friend who blathers on about her ex-boyfriend too much?  What about one who is addicted to FarmVille and thus is flooding your wall with updates on her radishes (or some such thing .. I’ve never played the game).  With this new feature, you’ll be able to go to their profile page, click on the subscribe button, and select which type of updates you’d like to receive from that person.  Nifty.

One thing you WILL have to note with this new feature is indicating who you want to see your own status updates.  By default, it’s set to “friends only”, but if there’s something you want the whole world (including non-friend subscribers) to see, you can select “public”.  Broadcast to the world!

The new “subscribe” button is being rolled out gradually across the Facebook universe.  If you don’t see it yet, you will soon.

A big “thanks” to Work It, Richmond, a website and newsletter produced by the Richmond Times-Dispatch.  This week they included me in a feature called “People You Need to Meet”. The feature is an interview about me and EndGame PR. You can check it at this link: People You Need to Meet: Steve Mullen.

Lara started working with EndGame PR last week, and will be helping with several clients.  We’re thrilled to have her!

Once upon a time, there wasn’t really another way to do things.  Back in the day (wow .. I really sound old) you actually used a fax machine to send the release, but other than that the tactic was the same.    You blasted it out, started making phone calls, and hoped for the best.  These days, however, we have alternatives to bludgeoning the media with releases.  Here’s a look at the list of suggestions from the PR Princess:

• Pitch email (sending a customized email rather than just the release)
• Make a website posting (preferably a blog post)
• Send a Tweet
• Send a Facebook message
• Pick up a phone (call the reporter rather than just sending the release)
• Offer to meet the reporter in person

While I consider one of these a dead or dying PR tactic, I’m in favor of anything that teaches public relations people strategies to avoid creating the news release spam that journalists complain about so frequently.

I’d like to add a few more suggestions to the list:

• You can re-purpose these releases as part of a monthly e-newsletter to your clients and employees.  It will let them know what you’re up to.
• Create a custom Facebook landing page (new service EndGame PR is now offering — look for an announcement soon) and list releases there, along with special offers for Facebook “fans”.
• Post on a news release distribution service, and be sure to include a link back to your (or your client’s) website.  It’s a great way to spread your release around the web, and it’s good for SEO too.

It’s good to be a PR person in our social media age!

• 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!

It’s always a little tough to point out exactly when EPR began.  I normally point to when the domain name endgamepr.com was originally purchased, which was January 27, 2006.

So, I thought I’d reflect a little on my top 5 favorite milestones over the past half-decade.  Here they are, in no particular order:

1. EndGame PR’s First Website Launches — I don’t recall the exact launch date of the site, but I know it was in February of 2006, and I can show you what it looked like.  Here’s a screenshot taken from the Internet Wayback Machine.  Note that the spacing issues on the left sitebar are due to the Wayback Machine’s cache.  This blog launched in May of the same year.  More new site designs went live in 2007 and 2008.  That last version stuck around until the site was redesigned to look like it does now.
2. First official client: Richmond Rollin’ Robins — The Rollin’ Robins launched in January of 2006 as the area’s first professional roller hockey team.  They’re still around, but are now just the Robins.  More information can be found here.  Our project for them was to get local media coverage for their first game.
3. Longest client relationship: FightSMA — EndGame PR began working with this international nonprofit in January of 2007.  The original project was to optimize their website for the search engines.  Since then, EndGame PR has assisted with media relations, social media, and even a tiny bit of event planning and advertising.  EndGame PR is currently building a brand new website for FightSMA, which should launch in the next month or so.  Interestingly, MY relationship with FightSMA goes back more than a decade, as FightSMA used to work with The Martin Agency, where I was employed in the late 90s and early 2000s.
4. Startup BizCast Launches – From its launch on May 31, 2007 until July 2, 2009, I hosted the podcast Startup BizCast, conducting interviews and providing advice for small business owners.  I loved the show, but the production schedule got to be too much, and it podfaded.  EndGame PR provided podcast production assistance and hosting for a variety of clients during that time and since then.  You can still listen to Startup BizCast at the podcast website, or on iTunes.
5. EndGame PR Branches Out — Not exactly a “milestone”, but if you look at the EPR launch release, you’ll see that we originally were a media relations firm that did a little bit of audio production for PR purposes.  Since then, our core competencies have branched out to social media, web design, podcasting, and beyond.

I expect EndGame PR will be around in five more years, but I can’t tell you what the firm will be like.  Judging by the changes that have happened thus far, I can tell you it will be interesting to see!

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.

What you’ll notice about this video is that it was played backwards.  Rhett & Link actually lip synced the words backwards while doing the video shoot.  These guys are amazing!  Want to know more about how Rhett & Link made the video?  Head to SleepBetter.org to see the video FORWARDS!

Google has its own location product.  Interestingly, it’s called  Google Places.

Despite using the same names, Facebook and Google Places are completely different products.

Facebook Places is simply adding another way you can tell people what you’re up to, by using geolocation.

Google Places is a re-branding of Google’s Local Business Center.  It launched back in April, and included a ton of new features.  Its basic goal is to get local businesses to “claim” their Google Place page on the web, fill it up with information, use it to serve things like coupons, and then (hopefully) buy advertising with Google to direct people to it.  Geolocation is a feature, but it’s not even closely related to how Facebook is using it.

For Facebook, this new product is a great idea.  While squashing competitors Foursquare and Gowalla (I know those two companies are “partners” in Facebook Places, but that’s really only because they don’t have much choice but go along) a logical function is also being added to Facebook.  You can already tell your Facebook friends what you’re doing.  With Places, you can show them where you’re doing it.

Google Places is also a great idea.  It’s an attempt to expand its local search offerings.  Search and other Internet services are what Google does best.  There is no social aspect to Google Places, which is a good idea given Google’s lack of success in social media offerings.

We’ve determined that these two services are only slightly related … so, why do they have such similar names?  I can’t imagine.  Maybe all of the words that don’t mean anything (see also: Twitter, Gowalla, Foursquare, Vimeo) are already  taken?

When was the last time you “Buzzed”?  If you’re anything like me, you can’t remember the last time you logged on to Google’s attempt at a social media service. All evidence indicates that while Google Buzz does have its users, it doesn’t have anywhere near as many loyal users as Facebook or even Twitter.  Mashable noted back in April that 89% of the traffic on Buzz is automated.  That percentage is way too high.  Here’s another piece of evidence that Buzz isn’t a big hit:

The image above is clipped from the Techcrunch website.  As you can see, the article has been shared on Twitter 235 times.  It’s been shared on Buzz exactly once.  It hasn’t been shared many times on Facebook either, but that site doesn’t have quite as much tradition of sharing news articles as Twitter, and Buzz obviously wants to be more like Twitter.  Mashable, meanwhile, appears to have removed its Buzz share icon entirely … replacing it with one for Digg.

When it was (hastily) launched back in February, it seemed like it might be a good idea.  It seemed Twitter-like, without the limitation of 140 characters.  And, the integration with Gmail ensured it would get off the ground quickly.

However, I think it was actually the strengths I mentioned above that ended up keeping Buzz from being a huge success.  First, while the integration with Gmail did automatically bring the service millions of users, I think people realized they didn’t want close integration with their email.  Who wants an email every time something is posted?  Also, the fact that the service is similar to Twitter may be the other factor that kept it from being a Twitter killer.  We already have a Twitter … why do we need another one?

I’m planning to remove the Buzz share icons from EndGamePR.com and replace them with ones for Digg.  I’ll likely do the same for my client sites.  Honestly, I haven’t seen any evidence that the Buzz icons are being used.

What about you?  Are you using Buzz?  Are your friends and co-workers using it?

Before I explain my educated guess, let’s back up a bit and get everyone caught up.

There have been rumors for a while that Google is working on a new social media site.  Those rumors yesterday seemed to be confirmed in an article on Techcrunch.  The site is said to be called “Google Me”, and while Google seemed to have Twitter in mind when it created it’s Buzz service, Google Me is said to directly target Facebook.

Assuming all of this is correct, it means Google is trying to create a Facebook killer.  Will it succeed?  Obviously it’s too early to tell, but I’m going to go out on a limb anyhow.  If “success” is making a serious dent in Facebook’s dominance of the social media market, then I believe the answer is “no”.  Here’s why:

1. Google hasn’t yet shown that it can succeed in the social media space.  Buzz was Google’s best shot so far, and in my view it’s been a relative bust.  It’s hard to call it a true bust because Google can claim millions of users, but those numbers are a charade because the service is tied into Gmail, and Gmail users almost automatically signed up when the service became available.  I don’t see any signs that a huge percentage of those users are actually USING Buzz.
2. People’s lives are tied into Facebook.  Not only that, but their friends’ lives are tied into Facebook.  For Google to draw any significant number of Facebook’s more than 400 million users away, Google will have to demonstrate not only that Me is better than Facebook, but also that Me users will be able to find their friends there.
3. We don’t need another Facebook.  We already have one.
4. A large number of Facebook users have been pretty ticked off by Facebook’s well-documented privacy screw-ups, but those users haven’t left yet.  You could say it’s because there wasn’t an alternative, but I say it won’t matter because of point #2.

I’m not saying Google shouldn’t make the attempt.  Google has its own very successful advertising system in place that it could easily port to a Facebook-like site, so it makes a certain amount of sense to try to find new places to show those ads.  However, in my view Google is best at providing services, not destinations.  I am a a Google services “fanboy.”  I use Google Search (of course) and its daily alerts, Gmail, Google Voice, Google Reader, and Google Docs.  But, if you’ll excuse a reach on an analogy: Jjust because I like my cell phone provider, doesn’t mean they’re the best company to also provide my daily news.