All they need to do is simply upload a photo or select one from their existing Facebook albums, and they can personalise it by adding graffiti styled icons or text. Once they’re done adding that creative touch, they can share it personally with their special someone or show the whole word on Facebook or Twitter.

Create your own personalised love note at http://on.fb.me/TagYourLove today!

According to Forrester Research Inc, Word of Mouth impressions on the social web are about ¼ impressions of paid media. (This doesn’t include offline WOM impressions.) Super Bowl ads have massive reach. 7 out of 10 people watching TV on Sunday were tuned into the Super Bowl. And a really great Super Bowl ad like Apple’s 1984 ad creates a ton of positive WOM and can be a defining moment for the brand. But nothing beats WOM when it comes to trust and real influence.

So, which marketing decision do you think has more “lifetime marketing value?” A 30-second spot on the Superbowl or energizing your Brand Advocates for 20 years?

By Rob Fuggetta, Founder and CEO of Zuberance

So in an age of social media, when the few can inflame the many (or not), how does a marketer know when to react — and when to sit tight?

Brand crises are as old as marketing itself and practitioners have long used tools to manage them. But the immediacy and contagion of social media has changed the game. Today, there’s a tougher challenge than ever to pinpoint when the crisis hits a flash point and when it’s time to craft a response strategy without doing more harm than good.

“The traditional PR approach is to issue a statement, apologize and cross your fingers that it goes away. With social media, you need to reach out to who is talking and swaying opinions,” said Shift Communications President Todd Defren.

McDonald’s, which often finds itself on the defense of the powerful nutrition debate, has a well-oiled PR and social-media machine. But even the fast-food giant recognizes that there’s no quantitative measure that can define a crisis or inform a specific response.

When people started posting nasty comments about the look of the company’s limited-edition McLobster product and it started trending on Twitter, “it was the volume and ferocity of the tweets and chatter,” as well as the fact that “it was so pervasive so quickly that made it a crisis,” said Rick Wion, director of social media at the company.

Though the team knew the posts wouldn’t affect sales, he said, especially since the item wasn’t on the menu nationally, the McDonald’s brand was “taking licks” on a national scale. When a corporate statement with facts about the sandwich couldn’t quiet the online mobs, the company used humor to defuse the situation. In a nod to the Charlie Sheen fiasco that was raging in social media at the same time, McDonald’s tweeted that it was working on a sandwich called the McWinning. The conversation changed within an hour, said Mr. Wion.

On the other hand, McDonald’s misjudged another social-media flash fire. It started when the chain saw an online image of a doctored note on a McDonald’s door that read: “Due to string of robberies in the area, we’ve been forced by an insurance company to charge a $1.50 surcharge to all African-American customers. ”

“We never got any traction,” said Mr. Wion of the early posts, adding that the team didn’t want to attract more eyeballs by responding. “The initial read was, “That’s so preposterous; no one would believe that.’”

It was wrong. Months later, a few influential people with around 15,000 Twitter followers posted it as a fact, expressing disappointment in the brand. It became a trending topic the next morning, and the McDonald’s team realized that “if enough people believe and think you have a preposterous policy like that, it can start to affect sales,” Mr. Wion said. The company responded with a “very corporate message” disputing any ties to the note or its contents, and the conversation eventually slowed.

“Monitoring gives you metrics in terms of how many people are talking about your brand … but it’s also important not to forget your classic crisis/issues management training,” he noted. “Through that you develop a gut feel for “This is trending this way, so this is how it will play out.’”

Most PR pros agree that deciding when and how to respond is a case-by-case situation. For example, not all issues start with a vocal minority online, as seen in a recent Applebee’s incident.

When one restaurant in the Midwest accidentally served a toddler a margarita instead of juice, which sat next to the alcoholic mix in the kitchen, the mother went straight to a newspaper. The company struggled with whether or not it was dealing with a communications crisis or an unfortunate error that would fade away after it changed its policy about how it stored drinks. It wasn’t until the incident became the topic of conversation on Twitter that the company hired Shift Communications to manage what it considered a “crisis” at that point, said Mr. Defren.

On Twitter, from where most of the noise was coming, his team sent a link and statement to individuals with more than 50 followers or those whose tweets had been retweeted. In less than two weeks, the team reduced the negative brand mentions online that had reached 76% to 22%, which is average for any brand.

Sometimes, however, the best move is to hunker down and ride it out. When Marriott decided to eliminate smoking in its North American hotels four years ago, John Wolf, senior director of PR at Marriott International, said that the first comments on Bill Marriott’s blog announcing the news were overwhelmingly negative. The PR team didn’t police the blog, he said, because the brand had worked hard over the years to create a positive consumer following, and he knew that it would police itself.

For some crises, the significance and the amount of resources that the team needs to devote to a response comes down to brand sentiment. It’s what often will determine the level of pending damage to a brand, PR executives said.

Despite all of the marketers who reference the case of “United Breaks Guitars” — the song a guy wrote a song about United Airlines breaking his guitar that went viral — as a top social-media crisis, one communications executive close to the situation argues that it wasn’t that big of a deal. The reason: Most airlines have a difficult time gaining consumer trust, so a crisis that highlights bad customer service doesn’t have the effect that it might have on a more positively perceived brand.

There are times when swift reaction is called for. Take the now-infamous Kenneth Cole tweet—”Millions are in uproar in #Cairo. Rumor is they heard our new spring collection is now available online at http://bit.ly/KCairo.” The surprise factor can hurt the brand if not dealt with right away, and the negative reaction can linger in Google search for a long time.

“If you see an influencer [pick it up], that’s when you hit panic button,” said Mr. Defren. Like many PR practitioners, he acknowledges that while most of these social-media debacles don’t tend to affect sales, especially those related to these “stupid tweets,” they do affect long-term brand health.

Andrew Worob, manager for digital communications at Ruder Finn, said that in this type of misguided tweet situation, the team will develop a contest or enlist more brand ambassadors to seed positive online content and activity “to filter the negative.” Looking at 2012 planning, he added, there are more discussions around additional budgets for these types of fan-interaction programs, especially to bolster brands that have already weathered a crisis.

“Something that might seem small and trivial can have a long-term damaging impact. All that’s archived in search,” said Kevin King, global practice chair for Edelman Digital.

By: Alexandra Bruell

That’s an extrapolation from Technorati’s latest annual survey of the blogosphere.

Facebook remains the most popular form of social media, and the latter dictates what pro bloggers post more than any other source of information.

This continues a trend we documented last year, and expect to see in subsequent surveys.

This year, the survey found that over 60 percent of all bloggers use social media to follow the brands that they blog about.

And 14 percent of bloggers spend at least 21 hours a week on Facebook (we’re in that demographic),according to Technorati.

Readers, what does this trend mean for media over the long term?

Malaysia – Social networking accounted for one third of all time spent online in Malaysia in August 2011, rating it as the top online activity for the market, a comScore report concluded.

In the past year, social networking has increased by five percentage points to 32.1% of all time spent online, comScore added.

Joe Nguyen, comScore vice president for Southeast Asia said “Social networking has become the central activity in Malaysians’ digital lives, accounting for 1 in every 3 minutes spent online.”

“Given its importance today, brands and marketers need to ensure that social media is addressed in their digital strategies – whether that means having a dedicated social media plan or simply monitoring consumer sentiment towards your brand.”

Other top categories by share of time spent online included Entertainment (11.5%) and Portals (11.0%). Instant messengers and email represented 5.3% and 4.2% of total time, respectively.

Online video viewing continued to be a growing activity in Malaysia with its audience growing to nearly 9.3 million viewers in August 2011, up 8% from the previous year. Growth in online video engagement was even more pronounced as average minutes per viewer increased 19% to 6.2 hours in the same period.

Google sites ranked as the top video property in Malaysia with 8.8 million viewers and 457 million videos during August 2011 driven largely by YouTube.com, which accounted for 99% of viewers.

Facebook.com ranked second with 4.1 million viewers watching a total of 30.5 million videos during the month, while Vevo saw nearly 3 million viewers watch 26.5 million videos ranking as the third largest online video property in Malaysia.

In August, more than 11 million people aged 15 and above accessed the Internet from a home or work location in Malaysia. Among this audience, 92.4% visited Google sites, which ranked as the top online property for the market with 10.4 million visitors.

Facebook.com ranked as the second most-visited property with nearly 9.9 million visitors, up 15% since the past year, as the social networking giant continues to attract more users.

Among local properties, Mudah.my ranked as the most visited site with 2.5 million visitors in August. Media Prima Group, which includes Hmetro.com.my (Harian Metro), Bharian.com.my (Berita Harian), Tonton.com.my and others, reached 2.2 million visitors.

Maybank Group drew nearly 1.9 million visitors in August 2011, growing 20% from the previous year with Malaysians continuing to adopt online banking.

By: Malati Siniah, Malaysia

Consumers are spending more time than ever using social media, as demonstrated in the Social Media Report recently published by Nielsen and NM Incite, a Nielsen/McKinsey company. Building on this report, research by NM Incite helps uncover what impacts social media may have for marketers trying to build their brands and connect with their audience more directly.

Social media plays an important role in how consumers discover, research, and share information about brands and products. In fact 60 percent of consumers researching products through multiple online sources learned about a specific brand or retailer through social networking sites. Active social media users are more likely to read product reviews online, and 3 out of 5 create their own reviews of products and services. Women are more likely than men to tell others about products that they like (81% of females vs. 72% of males). Overall, consumer-generated reviews and product ratings are the most preferred sources of product information among social media users.

Research shows that social media is increasingly a platform consumers use to express their loyalty to their favorite brands and products, and many seek to reap benefits from brands for helping promote their products. Among those who share their brand experiences through social media, at least 41 percent say they do so to receive discounts. When researching products, social media users are likely to trust the recommendations of their friends and family most, and results from Nielsen’s Global Online Survey indicate that 2 out of 3 respondents said they were either highly or somewhat influenced by advertising with a social context.

Social Media also plays a key role in protecting brands: 58 percent of social media users say they write product reviews to protect others from bad experiences, and nearly 1 in 4 say they share their negative experiences to “punish companies”. Many customers also use social media to engage with brands on a customer service level, with 42 percent of 18- to 34-year-olds acknowledging that they expect customer support within 12 hours of a complaint.

On the flip side, another interesting trend is the interest of consumers to act as ambassadors and advocates for brands through social media. A majority of active social networkers (53%) follow brands. These brands are increasingly recruiting their fans and followers to spread word-of-mouth recommendations about their products and services, and among consumers who write product reviews online, a majority say their share their experiences to “give recognition for a job well done” by the company. Social media users are also interested in collaborating with their favorite brands, with 60 percent of 18- to 34-year-olds saying they want to give product improvement recommendations, and another 64 percent who want to customize their products.

Social media continues to influence how consumers interact with brands and share content every day. Increasingly, TV viewers leverage social media as a platform to talk about and engage with TV content. These conversations are not only opening new channels for consumer engagement with their favorite TV shows and fellow fans alike, but also are providing insight into which viewers are driving the conversations and when.  A recent analysis by NM Incite and Nielsen sheds light on which demographics are engaging with TV across social media and highlights some differences in composition between the general social media population and the population on social media sites talking about TV specifically.

The social media population overall, skews slightly higher among females (55%), than males (45%). However, when comparing this demographic split to that of the population on social media sites talking about TV, this split reverses skewing higher among males (55%), than females (45%). There are several interesting demographic shifts when comparing general social media users and the portion of the population talking about TV specifically on social media. Those under age 18 account for 34 percent of the overall social media population, yet make up only 12 percent of the population on social media sites talking about TV. The opposite shift happens when focusing on the 25 – 34 year-old demographic. This age break comprises 17 percent of the overall social media population, but jumps to 29 percent of the makeup of the population on sites talking about TV. Within these age groups it’s interesting to note that, the difference in percentages across ethnic backgrounds remains relatively unchanged for African Americans, Asian, Hispanic and Whites.

When are consumers discussing TV?
TV buzz closely mimics traditional ratings patterns as well as a show’s yearly cycle.

Buzz is highest on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday coinciding with days when a lot of major shows air. TV buzz drops off on the weekend and increases once again as the middle of the week approaches.

Research shows that TV buzz nears its high during September, right before a show premieres and during its initial month. Conversations taper off slightly over the ensuing months, but increase again in January with the introduction of new and returning shows. TV buzz then seems to peak during April and May as consumers respond to show finales, and then dips again during the summer.

What are consumers discussing?

Consumers use social media to talk about a number of key TV-related topics such as winning (14%), voting (6%) and judging (6%), which highlight the appeal of and engagement consumers have with reality-based TV. Top genres fueling the most buzz are funny (10%), romance (8%) and drama (6%). Entertaining (11%), physical attractiveness (9%), fans (9%) and writers/creators (6%) round out the rest of top topics driving consumer discussion across social media.

For more on TV viewers getting social, download research and watch video from Nielsen’s Advertising Week presentations.

The report focuses on social media crowdsourcing efforts of three brands: Colgate, Nando’s, and Uniqlo. A brief summary of each effort follows.

Colgate Gets Smiles on Facebook

With its “Smile” campaign in summer 2011, CPG toothpaste brand Colgate used a dedicated Facebook page where users were encouraged to upload pictures of themselves smiling. These were then turned into large collage posters which were displayed in supermarkets, shopping malls and other point of sale locations. WaveMetrix analysis reveals that Colgate’s strategy also had a positive effect on purchase discussion, as users became 2.5 times more likely to discuss purchasing toothpaste as the campaign went on (6% of purchasers produced buzz the week of June 13 compared to 15% the week of June 27).

Moreover, the “Smile” campaign had a positive impact on brand image, as users identified Colgate with a sense of community and fun.

Nando’s Noise Needs Nourishing

In a less successful social media crowdsourcing campaign from casual dining chain Nando’s, consumers were asked what noises they make when someone says the word “Nando’s” and invited to upload video clips of their “Nando’s Noise” on the campaign website. US comedian and beat-boxer, Reggie Watts, featured in the campaign launch ad, creating a series of “Nando’s Noises” which users could then mix with their own clips on the campaign website.

Wavemetrix analysis reveals that this latest Nando’s campaign had a positive effect on consumer engagement and purchase discussion. Positivity about the “hilarious” campaign generated the most interest and consumers were led to talk positively about Nando’s products.

However, discussion surrounding the Nando’s brand is very mixed, with some consumers criticizing the campaign for not reflecting what Nando’s does, or commenting that they prefer a competing brand. This shows that crowdsourcing can leave a company with less control of how their brand is portrayed and exposed to criticism through competitor comparisons.

Uniqlo Gets Shoppers Talking

In addition to having several more traditional regional Facebook pages, Japanese clothing retailer Uniqlo also has a “Worldwide fanpage” which has garnered close to a quarter of a million Likes. Described as “a page by Uniqlo fans for Uniqlo fans,” the site fosters a community of “Uniqlovers,” with both community managers and group members acting as evangelists for the brand.

WaveMetrix social media monitoring shows that the UNIQLO fanpage is successful at prompting consumers to talk positively about the brand, stores and products. Although half of the consumers who post discussion indicate that they are current UNIQLO shoppers, the other half of consumers are engaged by the social media content, but do not discuss UNIQLO.

Buddy Media: Most Branding Posts during Work Hours

Approximately 60% of Facebook branding posts are published from 10 AM through 4 PM, indicating brands are most active with their posts during core business hours (EST),according to a study released in October 2011 by Buddy Media. Data from “Strategies for Effective Facebook Posts” reveals that after 4 PM, the number of published posts steadily decreased. However, brands that posted outside of business hours (early morning, at the finish of the work day and late at night) had engagement rates approximately 20% higher than average.

Email appending is still polarizing as a “responsible” way to reach customers that you engage through other channels.  Email deliverability is a really fickle business today, with all the fraud and litter that crowds the inbox.   With that said, it’s still seen as a critical layer of every customer engagement, it will continue in the future and it’s mainstream in the eyes of most generations that are “online.”  Shorting this stock might be a bit premature, in my opinion.

Yet is it really effective?  As they say, if you don’t have the answer to the question, ask a different question. I think we’re at that point of maturation in this space that we have to ask another question:  “Is there a real value exchange with the consumer through email?” I believe email has four functional values to the consumer:

• Informational value (newsletters, publications, general information tied to interests and connectivity).
• Promotional value (extensibility to offers and brand connections where there is some reward tied to the communication).
• Social value (today it’s more than viral, it’s about relevance of the “share” function — and there are many tools to enable this today, which is why email “viral” never lived up to its press).
• Notification value (this has been somewhat minimized with SMS and other site notifications, but as long as we are driving commerce with customer online, there will be notification systems that will be leveraged.)

The problem with this, in today’s time is that the use cases have changed.

Content generation, creation, curation is less about the brand today.  It’s become so easy to search, create, publish and syndicate information as a consumer that fewer people rely on email as their sole source if content.  Does this minimize the value of email newsletters?  No, but the value is changing, and timing in many respects takes priority over content.  It used to be about sharing an article from a newsletter.  It used to be the question was “is email designed to link you to the site?” or “is email expected to be the container of the information?” Today email has notification value.

Timing is changing our use case.  Time-shifting has evolved with the device.   No longer can we consider content as static or timing static.  Our publishing standards will have to shift to simplified real-time, vs. batch personalization.  Our notion of timing will be content on demand vs. push logic.   Email will follow the ad media optimization and multimodal consumption rather than the traditional personalization view of direct response marketers of the past.  It will combine contextual, behavioral, response, location, device and an interaction index that will support personalization on-demand.

The notion of what drove the sale has never been a great science, nor has it really benefited the email channel.    I believe attribution will be defined by a weighted interaction index that will allow us to understand and project channel bias, layers and recency of interactions.  I believe the index will have “network” and “reach” values that help isolate how customers are connected in what context and the values of these connections.  Many define that as influencers.  I think it extends past the concept of an influencer and has a much more granular value:   connecter, advocate, influencer, evangelist… each have a commercial value, and the use cases for how they engage with email changes by brand/type and timing.  It won’t be fixed view.

by David Baker

The process is fairly simple. Upon a minimum purchase of $50, Topshop customers were presented with a game card with a QR code printed on it. They could use their own mobile devices or the in-store iPads provided to scan the QR code, which instantly brought them to Topshop’s mobile website.

On the website, they were instructed to connect their Facebook accounts and given the option to “like” Topshop’s Facebook page. Thereafter, the customers were required to enter their names and their ID numbers to find out what they have won. Finally, they were to proceed to the counter to redeem their prizes, which included instant wins like lipsticks and tote bags, and discount vouchers of up to 50%.

The results of the campaign were hugely encouraging. Garnering over 1,000 participants and an almost equal number of “likes” on the Facebook page, the campaign saw 66% of the participants completing the journey. The vouchers also attained a high redemption rate of 17.60%, which in turn generated considerable transaction amounts.