Wildfire Tech PR Blog – Business and Consumer Technology Public Relations

It struck me recently that with all the focus and interest on social media and digital PR, we are giving short shrift to an aspect of ‘traditional media’ that I believe still holds a lot of value: the British newspaper.

Let me explain why.

The other half and I went blackberry picking at the weekend. We came away with two large tubs full of lovely juicy berries and popped them in the fridge, but we just couldn’t think of anything interesting to do with them outside of a crumble, blackberry pie or jam.

Then this morning I received a letter in the post from my mum (who I’d updated on our blackberry predicament). She’d cut out a summer pudding recipe from her local newspaper and sent it to me.

So I stuck it in the letter rack along with the other 14 newspaper articles she’s already posted to me this year, which range from restaurant reviews and ads for sofas, to recipes and health remedies, and even some articles on fishing.

You see, my mum actually reads the newspaper.  She doesn’t flip through the money pages and check the TV guide before turning to the crossword. No, she sits down with a cup of tea and gives the newspaper her full attention, with scissors on hand to cut out any titbits (she’s been doing viral marketing for years has my mum).

She’s not on Facebook, or Twitter. She probably thinks Spotify is some kind of illness. And she still prefers to go into her local travel agent to book her holidays.  My mum’s probably not the type of person any brand is going to reach with viral marketing or social media or banner ads or digital PR.

But if you’re looking to target a woman with time on her hands to really absorb a message, who feels compelled to proactively share interesting articles with friend and family, and has the purchasing power – and time – to take action if something catches her attention, then you could be making a mistake if you ignore print newspapers.

This week, Wired put out a controversial article called “The Web is Dead. Long Live the Internet” which has been making waves across social networks due to its audacious claim.

We thought we’d point you toward some links which continue the debate.

Enjoy!

Is the web really dead? – Rob Beschizza, boingboing.net

Takes the graph from the Wired article and shows what happens when you change the axis from “proportion of total” to “actual total”.

Wired’s Worst Stories – Gary Wolf, Wired

From 2003 but still worth a read – insight from a Wired contributor on culture of “must-readness” at the publication which causes articles like this to emerge.

What’s Wrong With ‘X Is Dead’ – Alexis Madgiral, The Atlantic

Great analysis of how human beings try to shape the technological narrative of their worlds based on desires and intellectual leanings- in this case, Chris Anderson’s role as Editor of the Wired app and magazine but not the website.

The Chrome Web Store Is Coming and Google Has Big Plans for It – Ben Parr, Mashable

The article focuses on how iOS devices have spread the app phenomenon. However, Android now has greater market share on mobile and this will undoubtedly continue in the tablet market. All this means that the Chrome Web Store and its browser based apps are a good horse to put money on. What’s the difference between a website and web app?

Bonus Top 5 things which “have died”

• Email
• Microsoft
• MySpace
• Newspapers
• Elvis

At Wildfire, we work closely with brands to guide them through the world of social media, to create an effective presence that really delivers results. But to the uninitiated, managing a public space to share information, engage with customers and increase brand recognition could sound incredibly complicated – or even worse, expensive!

But actually, when you break down the core elements of running an effective social media offering, it’s really quite straightforward and just needs time, planning and a long term commitment to keep up activity.

How do we know this?

One of our long term clients, set-top box manufacturer and digital giant Humax, has recently been recognised by Get Connected magazine as a shining example of how effective Facebook can be to handle consumer engagement correctly. As the columnist George Cole points out, “the best companies are doing what Humax has done, they are embracing the internet’s potential”

Check out our top five tips for using Facebook to engage your customers, or contact our team to find out how we can help you to devise a social media strategy that works for your business.

1. Post regular updates
2. Reply to criticism as well as praise – face things head on
3. Offer exclusive content to your fans – competitions, videos and savings
4. Keep it interesting – less corporate, more inviting
5. Take part in discussions, encourage your Facebook fans to become a community

I was quoted in an article in PR Week today, responding to a survey the publication ran looking at reactions to The Times paywall. The PRWeek/OnePoll survey of 3,000 members of the public found 78 per cent did not think the paid-for model would succeed and 67 per cent thought its previous users would visit other newspaper sites instead.

As I said in the article, the problem for The Times is that putting the entire site behind a wall, most potential readers will just stay away:

“By putting its entire site behind a paywall, The Times is hoping the strength of its brand will convince a small, but hardcore, segment of readers to stump up some cash. The obvious question therefore is whether the brand alone is strong enough to convince users to subscribe. If the brand isn’t strong enough, the focus is on whether The Times generates enough valuable and unique content to convince visitors to pay. The challenge for The Times – and its competitors – is to achieve a balance between free and paid-for content. Publishers should provide general news for free, but charge for niche content.”

“It’s an empty world”

This follows comments from US media columnist Michael Wolff, writing on the Newser website claiming that hardly anyone is subscribing to The Times:

“My sources say that not only is nobody subscribing to the website, but subscribers to the paper itself—who have free access to the site—are not going beyond the registration page. It’s an empty world.”

Wolff continues in a more controversial vain and even questions the influence of The Times for the PR industry:

“The wider implications of this emptiness are only just starting to become clear. A Murdoch and Fleet Street veteran with whom I’ve been corresponding about the paywall reported to me on his recent conversation with an A-list entertainment publicist: “What was really interesting to me was that this person volunteered a blinding realisation. ‘Why would I get any of my clients to talk to the Times or the Sunday Times if they are behind a paywall? Who can see it? I can’t even share a link and they aren’t on search. It’s as though their writers don’t exist anymore.’””

I’m not going to start suggesting that clients simply ignore The Times (after all, the print edition still has a fairly impressive readership), but at a time when PRs need to focus on influence and ROI, it’s not something that should be ignored.

It looks as though the BBC website’s long awaited redesign is about to be unveiled on the public – you can see a gallery of screenshots on the site.

When the UK’s most visited online news portal makes significant changes, those involved in PR need to sit up and take note. The benefits of getting coverage on the BBC are pretty obvious – a link alone can do wonders to your SEO – and it remains the holy grail for many companies.

One of the most interesting developments from the screenshots seen so far is the addition of social media sharing links including Facebook like and tweet this as well as options to email and print articles. My initial reaction to this move by the beeb is “about time”, but it’s still significant and demonstrates the importance of social media for traditional news sites.

Is a new lick of paint necessary?

We’ve work with a number of design agencies and so are well aware of the time and effort that a new website requires. We are also in the final stages of redesigning wildfirepr.co.uk and while we don’t suggest our project is anywhere near that undertaken by the BBC, it has still been a complicated and time-consuming process.

So is a regular refresh important and necessary for businesses? Has the rate of refresh for websites increased in recent years?

The BBC seems to have put the emphasis on making user experience improvements to the site and this I guess must be the main driver for any business. While the actual conversion point for the BBC might be different to a more commercial or ecommerce-focused site, it all amounts to the same thing; a new site needs to work harder to achieve its ultimate goals.

I imagine there will be some nervous people when they decide to flick the switch later this week!

What do you think? Is it an improvement?