HEAD BLOG

All that blarney yesterday was by way of introducing our latest social media app. There was too much background to the project (which we’ve called ReSporter) to just jump straight in.

Thinking about stuff is what we do.

Let’s try an analogy here.

Think of social media as a party. You are going alone. Don’t worry though, there will be around 100 million other people at the party. You’re bound to find someone interesting. Eventually. And if not, there’s always that Kardashian woman. Or Justin Bieber.

Now imagine if, as soon as you walk in, there were a bunch of people with a placard which read “We like what you like, talk to us.”

That would make life a whole lot easier, wouldn’t it?

This is where our thinking got us. We saw a need for a technology which really did let people focus on their interests first, regardless of where those interests were being played out. They could be on Twitter, Facebook, hell, they might even be on mySpace (cue canned laughter track).

It was about the interests.

We call the system, ReSporter. That’s because we’re going to focus on sports. For now.

And we’ve built the first App which plugs into this system. That’s called ReSporter: Football. For our UK viewers, let me clarify something: we’re talking NFL not Premiership here.

ReSporter: Football is out now and is at version one. It’s a pretty cool way of accessing what your favourite NFL players are saying. It’s a perfect, and focussed, way of getting ready for the Superbowl.

Pick your team and away you go. ReSporter: Football takes it from there. If you read something you respect or agree with, you can nominate that person to be a ReSporter. This will happen A LOT when you access the app during a game because there are A LOT of people wanting their say on things. The ReSporters with the most votes will appear more prominently.

Who knows, you might end up being a ReSporter too with people wanting to know what YOU think.

And as we’ve seen on Twitter, careers can be forged that way.

ReSporter: Football is available NOW on the App Store for iPhone and iPod Touch for GBP £0.69/ USD $0.99 /€0.99. Additional theme packs are available through an in-app purchase priced GBP £0.69/ USD $0.99 /€0.99.

Steven Moffat may not like it, but when every show advertises a hashtag in order to encourage viewers to participate in Twitter discussions during shows then you know that he’s pining for days gone by.

Many shows are ripe for hearty, heat-of-the-moment discussions and it can be as much fun to follow the #masterchef tweets of (say) Mic Wright or Greg Stekelman as it is to watch the programme. Worrying about missing out on the nuanced narrative of such telly isn’t a major issue.

The reality is, whereas once we relished the chance to discuss our favourite shows around the water cooler now we don’t have to wait. Social media commentators are regularly being quoted by the mainstream media and reputations are being made. Book deals or commissions can follow from such popularity.

Even before social media made this process easily accessible, people flocked to online chat rooms to “follow their interests”. And before that there were the bulletin boards. Life was simple, if you could manage to navigate the sign-up process and deal with a 14.4k baud rate and your mum telling you to get off the damn phone.

Twitter and Facebook finally made the rest of us sit up, take notice and take part in the social conversation and we now share squintillions of messages on what we love and hate about every aspect of our daily lives. But I think that maybe we’ve lost a little of the focus which older systems afforded. I first noticed this after we released Super Twario (a mad, fun bit of self-promotion). The vast majority of users were drawn to the app not by the fact that it was a Twitter app, but because it seemed* like it was focussed on gaming. Over the year or so since its release, I have spoken with many of the users and discussed their Twitter stats. It’s quite a revealing story. Many people start using Super Twario following nobody and by having no followers. At first this behaviour puzzled me. Then it worried me. Such people would be visiting an app that was meant to make viewing their Twitter feed that little bit different. It wasn’t designed to be a serious reader but to get something from it, you did need a feed to create the little platforms for our tiny hero to jump upon. Take this away and I think you would be puzzled.

But what it did show, was the role interests (or hobbies) play in social behaviour. People were flocking to something not because of the technology involved or the fact that they knew there was a powerful online meeting room, but because they had an interest.

And they wanted to talk about that interest.

Understanding that made me look at all the people I’d introduced to Twitter and I went back and questioned them. Rigorously. I found I could split them into two camps: power users and casual users. Power users are well catered for in the social media world. Services exist by the bucket which enable them to view millions of feeds, measure interest, analyse influence and send abuse in multiple languages.

But the casual users all reported a period of bewilderment when faced with signing up.

Who did they add to their lists? How did they know who was genuine and who wasn’t? And then, with maybe a dozen or so people in their pocket, how did they focus on what brought them here in the first place: their interests?

Which brought me back to #masterchef and realising, when 1,351 people are all chattering about a dozen different things, that sometimes I wish I’d the time to set up filters for my social feed.

More importantly, it led to a bunch of us sitting down and having a what-if discussion about social media apps.

But more of that tomorrow.

*On a sort of related note: I wish we had the time to develop Super Twario more. We still get calls for it to have this feature or that and there are many ways it could go that would be of benefit to the right brand. Maybe one day we will get a week or two to have a really good look at it again.

See that hedgehog? Come March, it may get flattened by our angry car but for now we are pleased to see its smiling face and neat buzz-cut as it shows that our work for our Resident Evil: Mercenaries social campaign.

Under the big idea of ‘The War On Horror’ Head First created a damn fine campaign to promote Capcom’s first Resident Evil game for the Nintendo 3DS (wow, SEO overload for you there folks). From packaging to advertising by way of video and apps (with hard-core programming by Worship Digital) this was a campaign that tested new waters.

And, gosh, it was a success too. Our video saw over 80,000 views in just a few weeks and the War On Horror Facebook app we designed was played over 40,000 times in the same period. The campaign boosted the official page by 160,000 (and maybe more).

As part of our campaign (which has pushed the Facebook.com/deadrising page from 15,000 to almost 100,000), we got to create a whole load of fun stuff from images of the lead character killing zombies to videos of him.. well… killing zombies.

There’s more to come too but one item I wanted to share was Frank’s radio show. Mainly because it drew some pretty nice comments (although to be fair, one commenter thought he was an asshole). You can watch the show over HERE for part one and HERE for part two.

It’s sort of leading me to think about what interests folk through social media and also why we even want to interest them. Is interactivity important in social media or do people prefer passive experiences (such as viewing or listening), leaving social media as a mainly distributive mechanism? And how important are genuine conversations (I’d have thought that was probably the most important aspect of a campaign but mostly I tend to see broadcast campaigns). All that’s food for an article on another day, I think, because games are a very different beast when it comes to advertising.

For now, take a look at some of the nice comments:

Social engagement is down 22% according to Syncapse. Maybe the veneer of social media is wearing thin, maybe we’ve had enough of flaming popular brands or maybe the content is no longer worth talking about.

Whatever the reasons, what is interesting is the fact that we have come to associate ‘engagement’ with conversations.

A cacophony of voices urge brands to use social media to start conversations with their customers.

It’s a case of ‘do it because you can’.

Few people challenge this instruction and in doing so, start their brand down a course of engaging in the most ridiculous “conversations”.

Brands check their bibles for any pretext upon which to strike up conversations.

We produce hair products, they observe, so let’s ask women how they feel about their hair.

We make glasses. So let’s try and get people to talk about poor eyesight.

Sometimes these conversations have the potential to unlock interesting, human stories (though rarely because to do so properly generally means allowing people more space than Facebook tends to encourage).

Mostly, however, they feel stretched, over-polite at best as customers contribute just to get at a deal.

Are these the conversations a customer really wants to have?

Or are they beginning to wonder whether they want their Facebook feed littered with references to 2 for 1 offers?

If you’ve ever wandered down a high street and avoided the clipboards then you will understand the issue currently facing social media now that it’s all becoming a bit ‘normal’.

Because thirty years ago, when clipboards were new, shoppers flocked to them in a rush to be questioned on calorie intakes, sexual preference and whether or not they thought fluoride toothpaste was a good idea.

Ok, maybe not.

But compare that to a crowd around a busker and you’ll see that being social isn’t about demanding something from a customer – even in return for marvellous coupons or the opportunity to look like a celebrity next to Cat Deeley.

When it comes to advertising, everyone wants the big numbers. It seems to be the first demand made on creative – “we want this to go viral”.

It’s led to an environment where we tend to look down on the low numbers and pity them.

At least, I do.

I read this article on Brand Republic and quickly found myself drawn to the work by Tom Ridgewell for The University of Lincoln. It’s funny, to the point and, as a result, highly impactful. I know this because his stats back him up. Over a million views is impressive.

The rest of the article showcases how other universities handle their promotion work. It’s predictable, dry stuff for the most part. Information about courses, interviews with students and lecturers – not the kind of promotions that tend to get you noticed by the Press. Their numbers are less impressive.

Following on from Tom’s work they appear ineffectual; reinforcing a dry and dusty image of study.

Let’s be honest, they do reinforce a dry and dusty image of study.

But is that a bad thing?

Numbers may be the thing to chase when it comes to selling product. A social media campaign that results in a million extra units being sold is a wonderful thing (with the proviso that the cost to get those extra million justified the investment).

A million extra applicants to a university though?

I can imagine the secretary looking at a desk full of of letters.

Social media is good at reaching large numbers of people but a good campaign should reach the right people, not the right numbers.

Numbers aren’t everything.

Much as I love them and work with them on a daily basis, even I have to admit that zombies aren’t everything either.

In an episode of Looney Tunes called One Froggy Evening, the frog’s owner/agent attempts to put on a show designed to bring the world to see the marvellous singing and dancing of his pet. It never happens. The frog never performs. Capable of amazing things in front of the hapless owner, the presence of a second witness renders it completely and utterly amphibian. The whole episode is a lesson in frustration to rival Beckett but this one particular sequence has other lessons.

Despite detailing the contents of the show (it’s a singing, dancing frog – isn’t that enough?) not a single person shows an interest. You’d think they would. It’s a testament to the creativity often found in classic Looney Tunes cartoons that even this expectation is trumped in order to prolong the anticipation. Faced with an empty auditorium but still determined to show the world he’s not a liar (and by this point even we are wondering whether this is some kind of dream) the owner places a placard outside the theatre doors with the legend “Free Entry”. He steps back to avoid the crowds.

But of course, none come.

The theatre remains empty and the frog continues is performance in solitude.

Undeterred, the owner replaces the placard with a new one saying “Free Beer”.

That does the trick. Crowds pour through the doors and, inevitably, the frog reverts to froggy status.

He is, of course, let down by his product but his methods are perfect. Knowing that he only had to get people through the door in order to make his fortune, the owner was a lesson in promotion. By knowing his customer, by adapting to his customer, he was able to put the bums on seats. He didn’t repeat what many would see to be the sales message. He didn’t stand and shout “but it’s a singing, dancing frog”. He adapted.

His only real mistake was in not ditching the frog and getting this in sooner.

So we mix on Facebook, buy stuff on Amazon, learn stuff on Google. For marketeers this sounds like a dream scenario. It’s the lazy web in full effect. No longer do we have to search out digital nooks and crannies for people who might be interested in what we have to say. People who once used to show their love of television or music by creating fan sites on Angelfire or Geocities have now settled into the retirement home that is Facebook and share their love with the people they love. Want to know what “Jane” thinks about the latest episode of Family Guy? Well tough. She is too busy talking to her friends to bother with the likes of you.

That’s not a big deal of course. If you can manage to talk to her and get her interested in what you have to say then she might tell those friends. And those friends have friends.

The trouble is she only wants to play a game by Zynga because one of her friends recommended it once. Or did she recommend it to a friend and they recommended it back? I’m not sure but she sure as hell isn’t going to take a recommendation from someone she doesn’t know.

She used to of course. Google used to give her all sorts of crazy new stuff to look at. But that was before Google started to show results that her friends were interested in. Your product is listed there still. But not until page 347629390819. And she wouldn’t be interested in that because it was recommended by a friend she didn’t much like and whom few people spoke to at school. The only reason he even shows up in her friend list is because he used to go out with the sister of a friend’s boyfriend and it seemed like adding him was the polite thing to do.

The good news is that he likes your product. Talk to him all you want. He doesn’t even hide any of his personal details. At least not on this profile. But to be honest, he stopped using that a few months ago. After a bit of a nasty relationship break-up.

The answer is easy though – just apply to be accepted as a friend. “Jane” has over a thousand of them so she can’t be all that picky. All you need to do is be recommended by another of her friends and you’re in.

Any time now the world is going to start up a demand for typewriters and all you fools with computers and keyboards had better watch out.

I’m certain of it.

I’m ready, of course. I’ll be selling ink ribbons on eBay at a premium price so as to cash in quickly before the shuttered factories are dusted off and machinery cranks once more into action. And after that, as old businesses are called to perform once more, then I will act as an advisor. A guru. Wise in the processes of touch typing and carriage returns.

Of course things aren’t going to be like they used to be. That would be silly.

No, these new typewriters will be modern. They will be optimised for Twitter; accepting tiny sheets of paper designed to be efficiently scanned in and distributed within the day.

Sure, it will be slower. But people will think more. Rash statements and bandwagons will be a thing of the past and only the most crafted thoughts will be considered.

Not everybody will adopt the new technology. Some people will continue to use a computer to bash out a hundred messages a day but this will be quickly corralled and those opinions will be placed in a digital kindergarten.

It will still be social. There’s no getting away from that. In fact it will be more social. More people will be involved in getting your message onto the Internet.

Oh, and we’ll have typing pools again. Those sounded nice.

So maybe I’m off on one or two of the details. But the technology we use will change, the way we define ‘social’ on the Internet will change. At the moment it is too preoccupied with the channels rather than the message so brands interested in the long haul will spend time learning the principles behind what doesn’t change. The principles of people. The way we like to listen, to talk and to while away the time in a bid to drown out the clatter of keyboards and work in our lives.

Every so often I receive an email or a text message from a friend whose busy life precludes the time it takes to keep in touch on a more regular basis. I feel consoled in that it isn’t just me the friend doesn’t have time for; I belong to a wide circle of people all sat in the same boat. I know this because we are all cc’d on the message which usually starts with some kind of apology.

It’s the wonder of digital communication which makes this kind of impersonal contact possible and makes me realise that spam isn’t always trying to sell viagra.

Which is all a very convoluted way of saying “just because you can, doesn’t mean you ought to”.

Keeping in touch with customers can offer similar issues as marketeers attempt to write copy which is “personal” but then fire it across the decks of a thousand people.

Such copy might begin by laying claim to a shared experience before going on to reveal the solution and thereby sell the product. It’s not a terrible way to start but it’s possible to go too far and assume too much from any imagined shared experience. Add to this the number of personalisation options available through digital media and you risk being seen as a stranger pretending to be a friend, like knocking on a door and asking how the kids are.

Just because you know personal details, doesn’t mean you should use them.