Welcome to the Escape Blog

We are often asked about the benefits of having a blog. And whilst there are many valid answers to this question, it’s always good to be able to use facts to back them up.

So it’s great to see some research from web platform Hubspot in the US, which reveals that blogging can increase traffic, inbound links and the number of indexed pages on a website.

By analysing data from the company’s 1,531 customers, Hubspot found that those with blogs had on average 55% more website traffic. Of course, this could be down to other factors as well but the figure is so high that there seems to be credibility here.

In addition, when it comes to search engine optimisation, the websites that contained blogs had 97% more inbound links (a measure of how many other pages or sites are linking to a particular website) and 434% more indexed pages (a measure of the number of pages that show up in search engines).

These last two statistics are hardly surprising, they just confirm what we would expect; because blogs are essentially creating valuable (we hope!) content – and lots of it – there is more content for visitors to read (and link to) and more content for search engines to crawl and rank.

Of course, establishing the blog is only the first step and it takes time and effort to keep it updated, making sure the content is both appropriate to your business and ‘valuable’ enough for people to want to read.

If you think a blog might be good for your business, let us know…

picture credit

A slightly dubious, non-scientific investigation by a US PR firm has revealed that CEOs are not particularly active on social networks.

The thrust of the argument is that they should be more socially connected: “What CEOs need to realize is that millions of their customers are communicating this way, and it’s foolish for them to dismiss this”. That is quite a big jump between not being active and dismissing it, but I get their drift!

Blogging v. Twitter

However, a recent blog from tech-supremo Robert Scoble suggests that ignoring Twitter and the like might not be such a bad idea:

“The other night Jeremiah Owyang told me that thought leaders should avoid spending a lot of time in Twitter or FriendFeed because that time will be mostly wasted. If you want to reach normal people, he argued, they know how to use Google.”

It’s an interesting argument. There has been a lot of talk recently about the role of blogs and how they will adapt and mature as ‘microblogging’ continues to grow in popularity.

Scoble’s point is that blogs are great for search engine optimisation (SEO) and so will help drive (if you do it right) relevant traffic to you from search engines.

Twitter obviously doesn’t do the same job as there are too many titbits of information. But, it can still help you drive traffic. Build up a big enough following and you will get click-throughs if you share valuable content. Of course, you need something for your followers to click-through to in the first place and, chances are, this will be a blog post.

A happy medium?

So, I’m not sure the answer is black or white. I think blogs still have an important role to play, especially in setting out your position or argument as a ‘thought-leader’.

But social networks are vital to increasing your sphere of influence; engaging and communicating with new people on a regular basis.

So I guess what I’m saying is that both have their place, but need to be approached in very different ways (even if they are ultimately complementary).

picture credit

I have been alive for 9,471 days and share the same birth date as Blue singer Lee Ryan – the 17th June (yes, just round the corner), which incidentally, was 168th day of the year in 1983 when the sun set at 9.20pm and there was a waxing crescent moon.

And you would be quick to ask: what does this mean and why I’m writing about it?

But the right question to ask is how I know this useless information. And the answer to that is through the internet’s latest Google-killer: Wolfram|Alpha (I’m not sure if the vertical line is obligatory, but included it just in case!).

The computational knowledge engine Wolfram|Alpha was launched this week to the usual flurry of media attention whenever a ‘Google-killer’ comes along. Despite the rather strange moniker (named after the creators, Wolfram Research, in turn named after British businessman Stephen Wolfram), the search engine is seen by many as the way the web in going. The semantic web.

Others far more wise than me have described in detail how the site works:

“It doesn’t mine the Web for pre-existing facts. It mines limited databases that the Wolfram Alpha team has amassed, curated and vetted for accuracy. Then it performs computations on those facts, giving you new, original data. Makers say it’s a Web engine that “answers questions.”

And many have poured scorn on the site (which is clearly still short of a lot of data). And not surprisingly, The Register has questioned its usefulness:

“I know that in evaluating a Stephen Wolfram production, my meager intelligence quotient may not be sufficient to grasp the gravity of what I’m dealing with. So I don’t feel all that put down that I can’t figure out how Alpha is useful to anyone outside of a small audience of college professors and professional engineers.”

This strikes me as unfair. I can certainly see a use case for a data bank of knowledge that deals in facts (unlike Google) that are credible and reliable (unlike Wikipedia).

And calling the service a Google-killer is way off the mark too as Andy Heaps from Latitude explains:

“Wolfram Alpha couldn’t help me in finding cheaper car insurance. However, when I needed to know the number of vertices of a truncated icosahedron it did the job brilliantly! That optimises everything about the perception of Wolfram Alpha – it’s not a Google killer, it’s not a Google competitor, and was probably never meant to be – its self-proclaimed long term goal is to make ‘all systematic knowledge immediately computable and accessible to everyone’.”

So, it’s got some way to go. It’s not Google, or Wikipedia and has some early detractors…

Seems like one to watch!

Yesterday, while reading the news, I stumbled upon this very interesting article.

In it, Associated Press journalist Shawn Pogatchnik explains that Dublin university student Shane Fitzgerald posted a phony quote on Wikipedia, and he claims he has done so to test how our globalised, increasingly internet-dependent media was upholding accuracy and accountability in an age of instant news. Well, journalism very much flunked this one.

I’ll explain why: The sociology student made up the following quote, which he added to composer Maurice Jarre’s Wikipedia page just hours after he died on March 28th. (By the way, when you Google Maurice Jarre, his Wikipedia page is the first result that appears.)

“One could say my life itself has been one long soundtrack, music was my life, music brought me to life, and music is how I will be remembered long after I leave this life. When I die there will be a final waltz playing in my head that only I can hear.”

But I believe that the problem here does not lie with Wikipedia, whose editors acted fast to remove the quote. The real issue is with the journalists, who acted even faster to copy and paste the quote without checking its source, in an endless pursuit to produce the news fast.

Even worse, high-calibre publications such as The Guardian fell for this hoax. At least the publication later nobly acknowledged their mistake and apologised.

I’ve taken the odd journalism class in my day, and one of the first things I’ve learned was to check every source as many times as possible, to ensure that stories are accurate, and that any quotes can be traced back to a person, place and time. After all, good journalism is not just about a great story, but it is also about accuracy and veracity.

One of the key arguments in the whole blogger v journalist debate is the role of investigative journalism.  The key viewpoint is that whilst ‘anyone’ can report news or give their personal opinions (read: bloggers), upholding traditional media is vital because of the investigative story gathering that goes on. We need journalists to ask the questions on behalf of the public. To expose corruption and root out deception.

So it was interesting today to read that America’s best-known political (professional) blog, The Huffington Post, is to launch “The Huffington Post Investigative Fund”:

“The Huffington Post Investigative Fund, headquartered in Washington, DC, will produce a broad range of investigative journalism created by both staff reporters and freelance writers, with a focus on working with the many experienced reporters and writers impacted by the economic contraction. The pieces will range from long-form investigations to short breaking news stories and will be presented in a variety of media — including text, audio and video — and will be free for any media outlet to publish simultaneously. The Huffington Post Investigative Fund will have an initial budget of $1.75 million.”

It’s a noble effort and, in my mind, further blurs the boundaries between professional journalists or media organisations and (professional) bloggers or blogs.

At the same time, in an article in the Observer on Sunday, Nick Cohen has argued that the BBC is neglecting aspects of its output that in the past has made it great and has the potential to for many years to come. He argues that the BBC needs to rely on producing content that no one else can, rather than merely pandering to the news agenda set by the (tabloid) press:

“The corporation should be becoming the most important news institution not merely in Britain but the world… The paradox of the BBC’s strategy is that the more it spends on expanding into cyberspace the less it has to say… No rival can fill the gaps if the BBC pulls back from comprehensive reliable reporting. Soon, if its camera crews do not go to Nigeria, no one else’s will.”

I’m not really qualified to judge whether his comments on the BBC are justified (and Richard Sambrook has issued a rebuttal piece on his own personal blog).

But the comments are interesting nonetheless. We all know that content is key. Get the content right and you have something valuable. This was the case in the offline world, and it is the same online.

Newspapers or newspaper organisations know this better than most. No surprise then that the Guardian has opened its content up to the Web (with advertising attached, of course). The Guardian has realised the inherent value its content has and has realised that the value is not just limited to its own website. It’s a bold, but clever move.

I agree with Cohen that the BBC should be best placed to tackle the ‘online challenge’. And surely investigative journalism lies at the heart of this. The old adage rings true – this isn’t something that bloggers can easily replicate on a regular basis. And yet, traditional media does miss things. Social media in 2009 is coming into its own.

It’s easy for news organisations to panic. But the solution is clear; stick to what you are good at. Retain value and keep producing great content. it might not be enough, but it’s a start.

So, the Ryanair thang I blogged about the other day is really driving traffic to the site and is doing the rounds elsewhere too with the Times and the Telegraph covering it today. [is it surprising that these two articles don't really seem to 'get it'?]

I don’t really want to add much to the conversation, merely post a quick update to the situation.

The first thing to note is that Ryanair finally owned up to Travolution saying:

“Ryanair can confirm that a Ryanair staff member did engage in a blog discussion.

“It is Ryanair policy not to waste time and energy corresponding with idiot bloggers and Ryanair can confirm that it won’t be happening again.

“Lunatic bloggers can have the blog sphere all to themselves as our people are far too busy driving down the cost of air travel”.

I don’t think I need to highlight the PR 101 errors here!

Elsewhere there have been some interesting responses, firstly from noted travel-blogger Alex Bainbridge who gives a slightly different response that has provoked a fair amount of debate.

I’ve got nothing against Ryanair. In fact, two nights ago I actually booked a (very) cheap flight with them. The irony is that the site served me an error message on the final page! The booking went through ok, but it did make me chuckle…

picture credit

In these hard, harsh times we find ourselves in, any attempt to secure a basement bargain is fair gain. So imagine the glee when blogger Jason – Roe (dot) com came across a tiny little fault on Ryanair.com that allowed him (and many some other people) to grab a totally free flight (no taxes or anything…nada!).

So, of course, being the honest blogger he is, Jason – Roe decides to tell the world and promptly pens a post telling one and all the secret he has discovered.

Ryanair, being the conscientious company they are (with an undoubtedly big social media monitoring team), identified that something was amiss and came across the offending article.

Having taken everything into account, commenter #10 – Ryanair staff #1 – proclaims in their best blogger-outreach-facing voice:

jason!
you’re an idiot and a liar!! fact is!
you’ve opened one session then another and requested a page meant for a different session, you are so stupid you dont even know how you did it! you dont get a free flight, there is no dynamic data to render which is prob why you got 0.00. what self respecting developer uses a crappy CMS such as word press anyway AND puts they’re mobile ph number online, i suppose even a prank call is better than nothing on a lonely sat evening!!

Now, I hear what you’re saying: ’surely this isn’t really a Ryanair member of staff?’. Well, our friends over at Travolution (who alerted us to this escapade via their own blog post) have been undertaking some sleuth detective work and traced the offending IP address right back to Ryanair-towers…

Oops

The fiasco gets worse and worse (read in its full glory here) with a veritable war of words continuing down the comment page. At one point, Ryanair staff #3 defends their words stating:

Defensive aggression of Ryanair stuff is less than offensive aggression of customers and each stuff member gains this gradually.
Offensive aggression of customers depends on customer’s ignorance, Ryanair restrictions, Ryanair policy, strictness and low prices as lower the prices are more people are traveling with bigger intellectual diversity.

“bigger intellectual diversity” eh?

I can only assume/hope/pray that these comments weren’t made by the customer service/PR/new media/marketing team but by a disgruntled techy on his/her last day on the job. But, even if this is not legit, even if it is not a Ryanair employee, Ryanair has still not responded. And now other bloggers (like yours truly) are wading in and widening the echo chamber.

A few points to learn from this debacle:

1. This really isn’t the best way to talk to anyone publicly
2. Especially online
3. Especially a blogger
4. Blogger outreach takes thought, time and care as does damage control
5. By escalating the situation, you merely invite more people to jump on the bandwagon (see the other comments!)

Having published this post, I am looking forward to a visitation from Ryanair Staff #4 below…

picture credit

UPDATE: via Econsultancy, we discover that Matt Mullenweg from Wordpress has now blogged about the anti-WP comments Ryanair staff made: this one could run and run. As Chris Lake says, let’s hope this is a viral marketing idea….

In the age of digital media, when brand reputations are made and broken so fast, it is always great to see that some brands truly do care and still try to reach out to their customers. Case in point: Overstock.com, an online retailer of brand-name merchandise, recently launched in the UK.

Not too long ago, a Guardian tech journalist has used Twitter to ask for recommendations on the best websites selling luxury goods. Using the same micro-blogging website, I replied to her that Overstock.com was one of my favourite websites for shopping.

A few days later, I receive the following message from the company:

overstockdotcom @GabiWarren Thanks for recommending us! We really appreciate it.

Very simple and not incredibly time consuming. However, such a message is incredibly powerful. So powerful that I felt compelled to blog about it.

This occurrence has a lesson within it, which is: It is becoming very easy for brands to find out exactly who their customers are, and what they are up to, and better yet to communicate directly with them. Brands that choose to ignore social media do so at their own peril, as people are increasingly looking for this direct, easy and informal communication from brands. They want to feel special, and know that they are valued as a customer.

‘Live blogging’ is growing in popularity, from inaugurations and TV/radio shows to updates on football matches and conferences.

The idea is simple. Instead of writing a blog post about an event after it has happened, you cover it live, bit-by-bit, as it is happening. Live!

The draw is obvious. Create a sense of real-time and get your thoughts and the thoughts of others across as political/sporting/tv history is made.

There are a wealth of possibilities and now, the whole process has been made easier following the launch of a new beta tool called ‘Coveritlive.com‘.  It is essentially a little AJAX plugin that sits inside your blog or webpage and allows you to update and others to contribute.

See it being used by the Birmingham Post.

So the next time you are at a conference, why not consider live-blogging your experiences?

Today is a much anticipated day in America. I actually think today is a much expected day in the whole world, as Barack Obama becomes the USA’s 44^th president.

Barack Obama has many firsts to his name, he is the first African American president of the United States, and he is also the first president to have a Facebook page and a YouTube channel. As such, it is clear that Obama is the first president that will truly be able to communicate directly with his audience in a way that previous presidents could not even dream of doing.

During his campaign, Obama has been savvy in the use of social networking websites such as Facebook, Myspace and Twitter, and judging from that, we can expect to see a president who will be able to reach out to citizens directly, and will no longer rely solely on the media to get his message across. He will be able to watch the way people react to his government, and he will be able to respond immediately, giving democracy a whole new meaning.

Unlike his predecessors, Barack Obama is expected to have an interactive White House website for his presidency, where users can be immersed in the political experience and where they can truly feel close to their commander-in-chief. Not only that, but he makes use of his personal website (www.mybarackobama.com) to let visitors know which events he will be attending, to rally their support and raise money.

It is not difficult to find millions of Obama supporters on the internet, as you can befriend him on MySpace or influence millions posting your support on a blog. And Barack Obama knows that, which is why he makes every effort to reach his audience wherever they might be. It is no wonder that he has so many younger supporters, who were ignored by candidates in previous campaigns. Barack Obama sees the value in each and every citizen, and he wants to communicate with them regardless of political affiliation, age, race, sex or age.

Obama has quite a challenge ahead of him. Being able to communicate and truly get the national (and worldwide) sentiment has never been so important, and I am sure that his enlightened view of technology will be one of his many marks as the 44^th president of the USA.