Making the connection

The problem that I see with the media's new "obsession" with soft news is that consumers want the soft news. Honestly, some journalists and some media-consumers are concerned with hard news, the investigative pieces, but for the most part the general population has no connection with an article titled "10 Are Killed in Bombings at Embassy in Yemen." Why? Because they can't relate to this information. It is too obscure for the mass public to care about. Should they care? Maybe the question isn't should the public care, but more WHY would the public care? Journalists, if they feel that hard news should be more prominent in the mass public's mind maybe need to find a way to make that connection with their audience. It's straight up marketing. You have your product/service- the news, the issues, the stories. You have your target markets- news consumers, which vary depending on the medium you use. Your message (and here's the beauty of it) you can change. You can make your product important to consumers by telling them WHY they need it or why it's important to you. You wouldn't try to sell denture cleaner to teenagers. Why? Because it's not something they need or can connect with. So why would you try to force news consumers who are craving soft news to read hard news unless it's something they need or can connect with.

Has the agenda been set?

One of the NY Times front page articles, Palin's Pipeline Is Years From Being a Reality, definitely plays in to my previous post about agenda-setting in the media. I'm pretty sure everyone knows that the NY Times is a liberal publication, and if you didn't know, well then you probably don't read the times very often. Once again, the media has chosen to highlight and perhaps criticize Palin and her actions. I believe that the media has not only a right, but a duty to report the real issues that will affect citizens when a figure is nominated for public office. However, Palin isn't even in a national position yet and she is being critisized for her actions. What choice do news consumers have but to form an opinion based off of what the news tell us?

Agenda-setting

McCombs' agenda-setting theory quotes I believe are an accurate or at least valid description of the current agenda-setting landscape of journalism today. The public puts their trust into the media and news editors and directors have massive amounts of power. The choices they make can greatly affect the public's perception of issues and therefore can create bias easily. The public must be very well informed, check other sources and follow stories carefully in order to ensure they are getting the complete story. This can prove to be much more work than your average news-consumer is willing to provide. Most news-consumers have no problem just flipping to Fox News or skimming the headlines of cnn.com to get their daily dose of news. In these cases, the public is really who is losing out because they may not be fully understanding the real issues or getting a different perspective.

State of the News Today

After considering our discussion in class about what issues are covered by the media in what form, one would believe unless you're interested in covering war stories or politics there is little hope for aspiring journalists. Part of this doubtful future for journalism lies in the weakening of the newspaper as the essential source for news. I do believe that the future for journalists who are looking to "broaden their horizons" by writing about *gasp* more than just war and politics is grim. Open a newspaper. The majority of the news section is devoted to these issues. However, what about opinion, lifestyle, science, business, technology, entertainment, etc? If the newspaper dies (which, sadly, looks like a definite), these writers will most likely have to write for online or magazine, which can mean a complete change in writing style and spirit. The death of the newspaper will only affect journalists but business, as well. As a marketing student, the death of newspaper means an ENTIRE MEDIUM is gone. For advertisers, that will be a sad day.

News News News

With the conclusion of one class- Audience Research- comes the beginning of another, hence, the change of name and purpose of this blog. I will no longer be posting about my reactions to social networking and its impact on media and marketers, but rather on national and international news. Now aren't you excited?

Wrapping it all up

When proposed the question “what have you learned this semester from my blog reading and writing?” as well as “what is going on in this part of the field, how does it relate to class, and how will it affect me in the future as I look for a first or second job?,” I felt a bit lost. At first, I thought, well I've learned that there are a lot of people out there online, talking about stuff. And, as one of those people talking, just because I'm talking doesn't mean anyone's listening.

However, from reading blogs and getting immersed in blogging by doing it myself, I suspect I have learned more than can be seen at first glance. For instance, I have learned a great deal about the integration of marketing into new technologies.

The marketing world is ever-changing and unique. New concepts, ideas, programs, techniques and models are constantly being created and used, critiqued and evaluated, implemented and discarded. It's the nature of the beast, so to speak. This could be considered a reflection of the communications world itself, as well.

From a students perspective, an ever-evolving field of study is perplexing. Why? Because what I learn today will not be what is used tomorrow. But it's the basics that students are learning, right? And, since new concepts are constantly coming out, students need not only the resources to be “in the know,” but they need to know how these new concepts came about. The new ideas are only based off older ones that have been successful, or in some cases- tweak some that haven't.

Similar to the continually changing marketing world, technology is not a static entity. Marketing and communication are dynamic in the same way, perhaps because of their dependency on technology as a progressive vessel for media. With new technologies, new media form and new ways to use “old” media are created.

The emergence and popularity of social networks is only a natural step. Considering our move towards this over-arching idea of convergence of media, using media and new technologies to communicate in a more personalized, simplistic and direct way is what marketers strive to do best.

Social networking solidifies three major entities with the mass public- technology, communications and marketing. With the public’s growing interest, experience and general knowledge of new technologies, integrating these other worlds with advances in technology is a good way to reach the mass public. If we could call technology the platform for which communication and marketing emerge, then communication is definitely the cornerstone. Though communication infiltrates every aspect of daily life, its the communications professionals who are thinking about it, talking about it, working to improve it, studying it and making progress for better communication for all. Therefore, marketing...it's like the new coat of paint. You might think you don't need it, but you do. It is a necessity that people think they don't need. It's the last part of this equation; marketing uses both technology and communication to better reach publics.

Now that we've established that these three worlds are interdependent on each other, at least in the social networking sense, what has social networking done for these three worlds?

Well, social networks utilizes technology and communication to a great degree, but it's the marketing that's different. It's a little backwards in this sense- with marketers using social networks to better understand and reach target and niche markets. It's a good combination, too, because social networks inherently provide target markets. Specialty social networks also provide niche markets, whereas the bigger more “conglomerate” type social networks generally reach....well everyone. If marketing, communications and technology were little kids, then social networks are the public playgrounds.

Adult only?

In the blog post Networks for Children posted by Nick O'Neill on the Social Times blog, the statement is made that social networks are for children and blogging is for adults. I agree and disagree, both. Here's why.
First of all, let's clarify. It's not really children we're talking about, it's young teenagers. Because when I think children, I think kids under the age of 11. Which, perhaps they are on social networks. Those little liars, telling Myspace that they're 13. But there are PLENTY of adults on social networks, as well. I mean, they're the ones who have people to connect with. Kids just don't know that many people to be able to have the same social network experience. If I was 11 and I had a Myspace account, my friends would be limited to a few friends from school, my 2 cousins, perhaps my sister and if I'm lucky, some camp friends. And that's it. But I'm not going to say that kids aren't on social networks, because they definitely are.
As for the blogging, I think that it's very similar. Adults have stuff to blog about. Kids, in general, don't. They might have some good insights here and there, but for the most part, adults are the ones who have the power.

Niche Marketing

If you pay attention to some of the new (and even older) social networks that are popping up, you can see that their topic of interest or commonality differs greatly. Some social networks are simply set up to keep people in touch or to meet new people (Facebook or MySpace), but some have very specific target markets. Take for example Handbaggers- a social network for *gasp*- you guessed it- handbag lovers. Or what about meandmybicycle- for *big surprise* cyclists and cyclist enthusiasts.
Social networks are staking the claim of the "magazine market" of the online world. This can be awesome for marketers because once you find your niche market, there's probably a social network for that market. Could it be any easier? Silver platter, your target market.
I guess one issue that could arise is that even though these niche social networks exist, does that market use those social network. What I mean is, are people who buy $1,695 Dolce & Gabbana handbags using the network, or is it people who just like looking at the bags? Same goes for cyclists- I mean, wouldn't they rather be outdoors, riding their awesome bikes, rather than hanging out posting pictures of themselves online?

Monopolization of Social Networks

Social Times is a blog that used "as a way to leverage social technology to build local entrepreneurship communities." In the post Ma Bell the Social Network, blogger Anthony LaFauce writes about social networks are slowly being bought and will eventually be owned (pwned) by one conglomerate. And that's when all the trouble starts, apparently. Because then the government will come in because our market is against monopolies.

Personally, I don't think the government would ever find a reason to break up social networks due to the monopolization of the market. Why? Because it's not a necessity. We use social networking for socializing, for fun and a little for business. However, we can certainly get by without it. The difference between social networks and the monopolization of the phone system is that phone service is not so much a "just for fun" system. It's necessary for business. Now, I guess you could say we could become just as dependent on social networks as we have on the telephone. But right now I think that our dependency on email, telephone and other forms of communication make social networking still a non-necessity.

Mac Club- No PC Users Allowed!

In the blog post Net4Mac - Social Network Application only for Macs - huh? on the AppleGazette blog, attention is brought to the Net4Mac social network. It's only available to Mac users; you can't download the app unless you're using a Mac system. Like the MyStarbucksIdea social network, basing a social network off of very specific target markets probably won't be very successful.

It reminds me of those "clubhouses" you made when you were little- ya know "No girls allowed" clubs.

Also, what about all of us who are proficient Mac & PC users?

Arguably, the best part of the website is the graphic design- completely Mac, very sleek, simple, consistent, with a coherent color scheme and the ever-present drop shadow.

I know where you live...

So I'm sure everyone's aware of Ping.fm, the site that connects your social networks when you update your status so all your friends can see exactly what you're doing. Makeuseof made a blog post about the network status updater.
I thought that people were trying to get away from the whole "stalker/I know everything that's going on in your life/I know where you are." Apparently, they're not.
Considering the popularity of the site, people definitely want to know exactly what everyone else is doing at that moment.

Demand for Social Graph API

In The Work Place's blog post Social Network Overdose: Is there a solution?, blogger complains about a lack of a single source to connect all social networks. Unfortunately, well-actually- fortunately, there's the Social Graph API. Problem solved! Notice, I posted about the social graph API about a month ago.

When I first read the blog post title, my reaction was...re-hab. Honestly. Just quit all your social networks. Admitting you have a problem is the first step. Just kidding.

But this just goes to show that others are thinking about how to connect social networks, for well...more networking capabilities. The demand is there, the product is there and probably demand will increase.

Amy Winehouse? The first image that shows up on Google image search of overdose.

But their Facebook says...

Josh Catone's blog post Should Employers Use Social Network Profiles in the Hiring Process? addresses the issue that many current college students face. When employers are looking into potential job candidates, social network profiles provide personal information that may or (in most cases) may not be relevant to the job.

I understand that employers want to find out about what kind of person they may be hiring, but the information that is on social networks is for just that purpose- networking for SOCIAL purposes, not necessarily job prospects.

The topic of discrimination based off of social networks profiles was also brought up. It could be very difficult to determine why a person was not hired based off of solely the social network profile, especially if a picture of the applicant is available.

Two addictions for the price of one

Douglas Carr made a post about Starbucks launching a social network in order to get customer feedback. My Starbucks Idea brings customer service to a whole new level. Of course company websites offering email and FAQs are the norm, but a social network based solely off of the caffeine-product company is creative to say the least. The social network is in response to Starbucks stocks floundering. Video of Howard Schultz's return as CEO explains.



I think that a social network for just one company has its pros and cons. For example, you know your already reaching your target market because the people using your network are people who are not only brand loyal, but feel strongly enough to join a network. However, the social network will only be relevant to Starbucks users, therefore missing other complete markets.

I have no friends (on my sweet new app).

Brad Fitzpatrick's post URLs are People, too perplexed me at first. He talks about how you join a "sweet new app," but you're all alone because none of your friends from your other "sweet apps" use this new app. And so, to fix this "sweet new app" dilemma, the Social Graph API was hence born. It's pretty techie, but for all us non-techies, there's a wonderful video showing how it works in (mostly) Layman's terms.
Basically, it's like a Facebook Mini-feed type deal for all your web needs, sort of. It connects all your social networks together, so you have a friend on Myspace who also has a blog, you find out about all of these things. Yup, it's like a social network "stalker's paradise." So much information, all at one's fingertips!

Make Your Own!

The iMedia Connection article "Build a Social Network in Les than 60 minutes," shows not only how important it is for companies to know where the social market is leading, but also how important engagement is for a company or brand.
I think it is very possible for every brand to have its own social network. This would not only build brand loyalty, but would show how a brand can "keep with the times." This could be comparative to how many companies keep blogs.
I do foresee one problem with this idea. Something is usually only cool when only some people have it, when it's for the "elite" or "special." When it's something common, it loses an aspect that is difficult to attain again. Therefore, its a definite that at this point in time, it would be wise to form a social network for your brand, but it could hurt the brand in the future.

Converge, converge!

In PC World's review of ecirkit.com, it compared the "webtop" idea of compiling all your RSS feeds, blogs, social networks and a mini-browser into one site to old-school AOL. Though the idea is not a new one, it would be very useful. Think of it as a more intense version of iGoogle.

When I was a freshman here at the prestigious Park School of Communications, the word on everyone's tongue was convergence. Convergence of ideas, convergence of media, converge, converge. This is convergence occurring right before us. Which goes to show convergence won't die. Even though I haven't heard a professor (or dean for that matter) go off on the importance of convergence since that frightening first semester at school, it's still going on around us.

B-b-back to the Future!

This whole week I have been dreading everything that has to do with my future. Whether it's my lack of internships, my questionable summer job, my desire to not be a resident assistant in the dorms and therefore destroy my future at Ithaca College because of a lack of a payment plan, or just my stupid car troubles, it all adds up. I freak out when I think about the future. But one little website takes my sorrows away (even for a short while) and makes me feel as though I DO have a possibly bright future! This website is the Westminster Kennel Club's Dog Show, specifically, the Samoyed breed.
Just kidding. But they are the most adorable dogs on the planet, right?

Careerbuilder lets you build a profile depending on the type of job you are seeking, where you want to find the job and what your skills are. I entered information for my chosen field and set it for information in and around the Denver, CO area since that is where I want to live after I graduate, and voila! Instant results. There are a couple downsides though. First, the entry level jobs that appear are jobs that I feel anybody with a high-school diploma could get. It's been my experience that to get the really good jobs, ya gotta know somebody. Another downside is that there is some spam/junk. I'm not the only one who knows how annoying the spam is. Bloggers Chuck Huckaby and Dane Carlson note this as well.

And the picture of Dwight Schrute? Oh you know, just one of my idols.

Link it!

Many college students have been warned about the "dangers of Facebook," yet few actually adhere to these precautions. The limited profiles seem like a great idea, except when you realize that by posting pictures on Facebook, you are actually giving them to Facebook for it to do with it what it pleases.

For students who are seeking more protection, but would like to use a social network for business networking purposes, try LinkedIn.

This network is specifically built for networking students with businesses.

An issue that may arise from using alternate sites for networking is that it only networks those who join. Therefore, the network is only as strong as its popularity. In networking terms, this is a major downside. Good news is as of December 2007, its site traffic was 3.2 million visitors per month.

Let's Do the Time Suck, Again!

Tonight, I had plans. I was going to get so much work done and get to bed early. I planned on reading for Audience Research, finishing my logo assignment for Ad Copy & Art Direction, printing notes for International Marketing, AND write my case brief for Government and Media. Here's what really happened:
I added 2! new stations to Pandora, I played Food Friendzy (the only application worth your time on Facebook), checked my iGoogle account too many times to count, watched videos on YouTube, joined Ebay, and budgeted how much its going to cost me to buy a MacBook Pro. Now, I also got all my other work done, but I have been in the library (and Park School of Communications) for almost 6 hours.

This leads me to believe that social networks are just big time sucks. That's right, I said it. What benefit (besides $.50 for CampusFood from Food Friendzy) did I receive from these social networks?

Am I mistaken? Apparently so. Peter Black's Freedom to Differ blog refers to this aspect of social networking being a bad idea or a waste of time, but then goes on to compare it to other major inventions (like airplanes and the talking picture). OK, let's not get carried away. I mean comparing Facebook to Airplanes?

The marketing opportunity value of Facebook and other social networks is proving to be a force to be reckoned with. So maybe it's not such as much of a time suck as I thought.

The Business Side

Please bear with me as this blog is in the process of deciding what it wants to be.
With that said, social network's monetary future looks bleak, according to the Tech Trader Daily's blog. “Social networking inventory is not monetizing as well as expected,” Google CFO George Reyes stated.
This could mean that Apple made the best choice by not getting caught up in the Myspace and Facebook of it's kind. On the other hand, an Apple social network, if marketed the right way, could have been a huge success with college students and the post-college age market.
PS- Feedback is welcome!

Pandora is like Whoa...

So I'm sitting around on office duty and I notice a little note chicken-scratched on the communication log binder stating the following:
Bored? Try pandora.com

I think, well, what else do I have to do with 3 hours of free time? (Notice how homework was not my first thought.)
And now I don't even bother with opening iTunes, I go straight to Pandora. My *very new* favorite song is playing and I click on the album cover, and bookmark the song. This opens a new window with my (very own!) profile. Another social network to join!

Most college students think they know everything about social networking. I mean we invented it, right? Hellooo, Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg...duh?

Mashable's article on Pandora states that it's not yet a complete social network, but Pandora has integrated itself with Facebook as an application.
Now there are limits to Pandora's capabilities. I've noticed that on my Sara Bareilles station, it tends to play her every 3 or so songs. It's also the same musicians over and over again. But then again, just add a new station.

Some thing surprise me about Pandora. For one, on my Sara Bareilles station, two Christian bands have come up- Kutless and Relient K. In radio, Christian music hardly ever interferes with the "big bad mainstream," but Pandora compares styles not types of music. I, for one, like this. I can imagine how others, say non-religious people, would not appreciate this. I'm sure Pandora will come up again in some other posts, but for now, I'm going to go make more Pandora stations.

Introducing...

Hello and welcome to my New! (not so improved) blog. This blog is for my Audience Research class and will be about social networking and all its wonder. I will be blogging a few times a week so check back often to find out what's going on with me and what's going on in the social networking world.