About.com Director of Research, Laura Salant noted at Internet Week on Wednesday some significant research findings on how people use search.  She noted that 50% of searches are  “answer me” which she explained as “what is the capital of Washington”. 25 percent of searches are “inspire me” oriented those that fulfill a passion or a hobby. Finally, she noted 25 percent of searches are “educate me” which, for example, could be the answer to an ongoing health issue.

Many people using Google to search for an answer or item tend to type in keywords because that’s what we’ve grown accustom to.  People searching for questions or long-tail keywords typically find what they’re looking for or it could be a question they’re embarrassed to ask their friends on a social media platform.

Another draw back is that Google will be providing the basic information within is search results page, making the need to click-through to a website disappear.  Of course, Google is only providing basic information but it looks eerily similar to that right-hand bar on Wikipedia.

For now, this still seems as though it’s a neat tool for a 5th grade book report.  Until Google finds a way to integrate social and enrich the Knowledge Graph to go beyond basic stats, it will only have a limited capabilities.

Internet Week NYC – Jonah Peretti and Jon Steinberg

The Google semantic search initiative is quite interesting and I’m sure part of a much broader conversation on SEO vs social optimization at least from a content perspective. It’s also a really hot topic in internet nerd land; it’s like the Willie Wonka Chocolate Factory but with computers and gadgets.

What I’ve been finding is that many companies highly involved in the digital space,  have begun rolling pack SEO efforts or halting them all together.  SEO is keyword driven, a process, and works best with evergreen content and not with recent content, that’s where social comes in.

Historically, people would ask a question or search for information on Google.   Now, they’re crowd sourcing within their personal social networks, listening to their friends’ advice, and then MAYBE Googling a product or term and purchasing.  The conversation happens on Facebook, but Google gets all the credit because it’s trackable.  Facebook is gearing up for a new app store, better search features, and I assume a killer mobile strategy.  So, Google is trying to make search relevant and associated with a “friend” experience or conversation.  To date, they’ve failed and may continue to fail because Facebook and Twitter don’t necessarily play nice with Google.

So, where does this leave everything, you ask? Though Google is trying to increase its “relevancy” in search it has yet to be able to include the social component which is on the verge, if not already happening, of making Google irrelevant.  To use the CNet article example, its great the a search for Lake Tahoe will yield the location, altitude, temp., and salt content but, no one really cares about that unless they’re doing a 5^th grade book report.  My (non-researched) guess is that 8/10 times someone is searches for Lake Tahoe it’s because they want to visit so for them relevancy would be reviews/recommendations from their friends, avg. hotel/flight price.  Needless to say, I’m curious and skeptical to see how sophisticated Google’s revamp will be and if really changes anything.  Rankings, perhaps.  Audience use, probably not.

One thing is clear, Google is struggling to compete with or draw parallels to Facebook’s product.  Jonah Peretti  co-founder of Huffington Post and BuzzFeed noted in an Internet Week panel, “people are using search to ask embarrassing questions or search for unsavory information that they wouldn’t feel comfortable asking their friends on Facebook.”

Its is an interesting time in Internet nerd land and no one will know if Google will make it in a world of social networking.

What do you think? Is semantic search cool, lame, or meh?

I am moving to the Big Apple and need to cancel all of my utilities.  I was able to cancel each one online, yay!  Well, every one except Verizon wireless internet.  I thought that maybe I had overlooked or couldn’t find the right part of their website to do that so, I contacted their online chat support.  Yay. Well, not so yay.  She referred me to a 1-800 number.  Okay, fine.  24 minutes after trying to talk to an automated woman who wanted to know everything short of the age my first tooth fell out, I finally reached Monique.

My call lasted 21 minutes. Monique asked for my name, address, account number and phone number. She typed all of my info in while laughing with her co-workers in the background.  Then she said, “Okay, Ma’am, could I have your account number?”  “Monique,” I replied, “I already gave it to you. Twice.”  She puts me on hold.  Comes back.  “Could you tell me your name again?” Puts me on hold. Comes back and said, “Okay, you’re all set.”

What was I all set with? She explained she had set my accounts (plural) to cancel.  “No, I only want internet canceled. Is it canceled for the 28th? Should I call back and talk to someone else?”She responded that she was in the process of cancelling both my internet and cell phone accounts and wasn’t sure how to set a specific date to cancel.  My head hurt.  I only needed the internet cancelled.

I took to Twitter where the incompetence of Verizon ensued.  Read the frustrating and unprofessional exchange below with six, yes, SIX Verizon reps.

Read the whole thing:   Verizon social media fail

Here’s a sneak peek of how it ends:Classy Verizon. Really classy. Verizon: Despite their Twitter name is not supportive and despite their Twitter description doesn’t handle Internet help. I didn’t need a specialist.  I needed to cancel my account.  It should not be that difficult.  Did I eventually get my Internet account cancelled? Yes.  However, because of this experience, I’m also looking for a new cell phone service provider.

I’ve spoken to an online chat representative, an automated machine, Monique, six people @verizonsupport on Twitter, and now they want me to contact different Verizon Twitter account when I didn’t reach out to this one in the first place?  What is the definition of crazy again?

Lists:  This feature allows you to segment your friends into various lists and only see posts from those people. Facebook has automatically placed your friends into lists based on their profile information and mine, linking commonalities. Lists are optional, and thank goodness because assigning each one of your friends to a list could be quite time-consuming.

Subscribe Button: In an effort to give users more control of the frequency that they see their friends’ posts, Facebook implemented the subscribe button.  According to Facebook the button will now allow users to:

• Choose what you see from people in News Feed
• Hear from people, even if you’re not friends
• Let people hear from you, even if you’re not friends

Catch that last one? Don’t get too freaked out, you are able to choose whether you’d like people you’re not friends with to subscribe to your posts.  The problem here, is going through your friends and changing all of your settings.   Read more on the new Facebook subscribe button.

News and real-time feed: In the image below you will see my news feed in the middle and on the side.  The right-side bar is an auto update and the middle section posts stories that Facebook (and I by my list and subscription settings) deem appropriate.  The cool thing about the real-time feed is that you can view the photo, event, video, or comment chain just by hovering over the update.  What does this mean for your business page? See below!

All of this wreaks of Facebook’s attempt to capitalize on Google+’s ‘circles’ feature and Twitter’s ‘real-time’ communication.  But, will it work?  Recently Facebook updates have become a long line of failed attempts.  Facebook Places failed.  So did Facebook’s attempt at Groupon with their own ‘Deals’ application. But, what does all of this mean for your business? Will your posts show up in the middle sections? As a real-time feed? It’s uncertain at this point since subscriptions are not able to be altered for pages.  From what I’ve seen, posts from pages will show up in the big feed when they’re often commented on or recommended with the ‘like’ button.

1. What do you ultimately want to achieve?
2. How many niche groups or potential communities are under your overall brand identity?
3. Do those segmented groups have  frequent and relevant content?
4. Would people participate and benefit from being in those segmented groups?
5. Does the amount of people justify your company having multiple accounts?
6. Do you have the manpower to pull it all off?

Take a look at come companies that have done this really well

Dell has more than 80 different Twitter accounts.  Keep in mind the scale of the company and its customers.

The post I saw was from Aug. 16, 2010 and was quite entertaining considering when I made the post, I was in Branson, Missouri.  The feature was quietly released (I’m assuming it’s still in testing) and reflects posts a user has made from 2009 and 2010.

I don’t’ know about you but, I’d like to see the posts I made in 2006.  Then again, maybe not.  They were probably about how cool and new Facebook was or something dumb from college.

So, what do you think, is it a yay or nay?

1. Skype-powered integration of  video chat within the Facebook platform.
2. Facebook video calling is available through chat tab and within each person’s profile.
3. Video chat is extraordinarily easy, no download necessary and available in less than 30 seconds .  Even my Mema can use it.
4. Group Chat: This text chat feature allows you to chat with multiple people at once without utilizing the full ‘groups’ feature.
5. Users will have an easier time with the chat feature’s design and the ability to find friends online easily.
6. Trends: 4 billion things are shared each day.

The announcement left many in the industry, myself included, underwhelmed.  Cool? Yeah.  Awesome? Debatable.  Groundbreaking? Definitely not.

Gmail has video chat too so what’s the big deal? Google Hangouts also offers the video chat feature and even allows people to chat with more than one person at a time.  Facebook did stress that they have set up the infrastructure to handle more complex applications.  Perhaps in the future we’ll see a music sharing/cloud music component or the ability to watch movies with your friends all within Facebook.  Time will tell.

As the online arena for public relations begins to mature, how has relationship management evolved, as technology grows from childhood to adolescence?

I think what we’re seeing is the beginning of complete integration of marketing and public relations functions.  PR people were initially assigned the social media function at most corporations primarily because no one knew who should really be responsible.  Social media blurs traditional PR, marketing, advertising, customer service and sales roles.

Relationship management has really transformed.  The way companies previously interacted with their consumers or key publics was on a B2C (business to consumer) basis.  Currently, consumers have the upper-hand.  Companies use to just tell a consumer what they wanted them to know about a product or a service and most often, the consumer would just believe it.  If they had a positive or negative experience they may tell five to ten of their friends, but now, word of mouth has really become word of finger.

How has technology changed public relations professionals approach to maintaining relationships with the new playing field of social media?

The average number of friends a person has on Facebook is around 150, so if a person has a positive or negative experience, the word spreads rapidly.  Fortunately, companies are beginning to use social media, not as a platform to sell or promote their product or service, but to listen to their consumer, enhance their product or company, and offer a ‘value added’ component to their key publics.  There’s a huge opportunity for companies to develop a core group of ‘super fans’ of their product.  These are the people who will scream the company’s praises from the rooftop and will often defend them should a negative situation arise online. It really takes strategy development and careful crafting of messages to make this happen.

I think PR has changed with technology. Professionals can fully engage with their consumer one on one, versus trying to engage with a mass group of people.  Generally, people have a great sense of happiness when they feel as though their opinions are being heard and this notion is applicable online as well.  In addition, things like Twitter and Facebook have provided a nice outlet for PR people to increase their relationships with media.

Has maintaining these relationships become harder or easier?
I don’t know that it’s more challenging or easier, it’s just different.  Relationships with PR people and media are on a deeper level through social media, which is extraordinarily challenging.  Most journalists will agree that they don’t appreciate random story pitches from people they don’t know.  Some journalists love pitches via Facebook or Twitter.  It is the PR person’s job to establish a relationship with the journalist and figure out how they would like to be communicated with professionally.   However, the mediums PR professionals use are now simpler and faster making it easier to pitch stories or create a ‘buzz’.  Could you imagine still using a fax machine to send releases?

Tracking of PR campaigns and tactics have also become easier, which has been a tremendous benefit for people in the public relations field.  Historically, it’s been difficult to back up the need for PR because it wasn’t as easily trackable and CEO’s want to see numbers.  They want an ROI and if a public relations professional cannot determine that, then they will simply be out of a job.

Have relationships become less personal now that most communication is done online?

If anything, I think they’ve become more personal.  To be frank, no consumer or user of Facebook or Twitter wants to be sold to, or engage with someone who uses corporate jargon.  I have so many examples of what not to do in social media, it’s quite alarming.  They want to interact and engage with a brand that is relatable.  Being relatable online is probably the biggest challenge most companies that use social media need to overcome, however, some companies have been rock stars at doing this.

In what ways must public relation practitioners rely on old practices such as print media to compliment online media?

Integration is really imperative.  While the online arena is the ‘sexy’, new and shiny thing available, traditional PR or print media won’t go away.  It will change its form but people will always read articles in magazines or newspapers.  However, instead of reading them in paper form they may read them on their iPad or mobile device. The types of media used should be determined based on the key publics and goal of the project or campaign.

Are we moving to the point where face to face interaction is no longer necessary?

I’ve really struggled with this question.  Often times, people (mostly students) will ask me what the future of social media is.  I can see it going in one of two ways; either people will get sick of only knowing people online and through status updates or 140 character tweets or they will see online social outlets, like Twitter, as becoming a part of a global community.

People will always have a fundamental need for interpersonal relationships.  Online relationships have a tendency to be shallow, but people in general have an inherent need for depth.  There are things that can only be conveyed in person, but the online arena has certainly made it extraordinarily easy for people to avoid personal contact all together.

• Following a bunch or relevant accounts (casting a net)
• They would unfollow the accounts that did not follow them back

Since it’s difficult for me to control my facial expressions, I’m pretty certain my eyes bulged out of my head.  Do. Not. Do. That.

Here are some tips on obtaining more followers on Twitter without being a jerk.

1. About you: This little 140 character blurb is often overlooked but it’s probably one of the most important components of your Twitter personality.  Make this blurb fun, personal, and most importantly tell me why I would want to follow you (ie. what are you posting about).
2. Get nichey with it: Have niche on what you will most often post about. Note that niche in your ‘about me’ section and make it fun. It’s extraordinarily difficult to obtain quality followers without having a focus of your Twitter account.
3. Post frequently: But, not too much.  I hate when my Twitter feed gets clogged with many posts about random things from one person.
4. Quality:  Make the content of your posts something useful.  They don’t always have to be but, I’d say 60 percent of the time they should be focused on the end-user or your niche.
5. Interact:  RT, use hash tags, talk to other Twitter users.  Not talking to people on Twitter is like walking into a party, yelling “ta da, I’m here,” and then standing in a corner, staring at the floor.

Not actually my gramma

** CNN just did a story on this.  Six million people left Facebook in May equaling 4 percent of the U.S. users.

It has happened.  My grandmother (whom I call mema) is now on Facebook and has added me as a friend.  I suspect my aunts of having something to do with these shenanigans.  Obviously working in internet marketing has taught me a few things about what to post online so mema won’t endure ridiculous photos of her perfect granddaughter on the internet.  But, the addition of my mema on the social media superpower leads me to a larger question;  is Facebook on the outs?

Typical product marketing and launches begin with innovators. Those are the people who will buy it or use it just because it’s the new, hot thing.  This principle is from the Diffusion of Innovations theory.  Basically, it outlines the curve in which people adopt new products in a marketplace. They’re broken down into innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards.  Typically laggards are older people, set in their ways, that adopt a product late into the game.  Personally, I’ve also found that by the time laggards enter the market the innovators, early adopters and early majority are ready for something new.

I’m taking that fact that my mema being on Facebook as a sign of descent.  More recently, I’ve been spouting out some Nostradamus type predictions that have ruffled a few feathers.  Let me preface this by saying, I’m not a statistician, nor am I involved in the philosophical or psychological nature of humans.  I am coming from a personal experience perspective and, more importantly, a marketing perspective.  I think Facebook will be over in three years at the most.  All the red flags are there.  Mema is a red flag, the massive corporate influx on Facebook is a red flag, the tremendous amount of advertising is a red flag, the spamming and viruses are red flags, and finally, the age of Facebook is a red flag.

While Facebook is only six years old, the innovators and early adopters have used this for at least five years.  Quite honestly, it’s not cool to us anymore, although, seeing some people from high school on Facebook has its benefits.  For people of my innovation grouping, Facebook has become something like AIM or chain emails.  We’re just using it because we’ve already been camped out there for a while and we’re waiting for something cooler and more exclusive to come along.

What do you think? Is Facebook just getting started or is it over?