The Bacon Explosion: Wielding Social’s Power

By Valerie Zlotsky

What do you get when you combine 400,000 internet users, a net-savvy marketer, 2 lbs of bacon and 2 lbs of sausage?  Whatever you get, it certainly won’t get you too many kosher friends, that’s for sure.  What it will do however, is provide an incredibly poignant study on the massive power of social networks, as well as illustrate the importance of intelligently harnessing that power.  Oh, and it will also get you a deliriously fatty dish called the Bacon Explosion.

I first read about the Bacon Explosion in an article in the New York Times.  Now usually, a story’s viral life cycle is just beginning when a national publication picks it up.  People read about it, talk about it and spread it around.  In this case however, the article was just a cherry on top of the 5,000 calorie recipe’s viral life.

The Bacon Explosion (its full name is “Bacon Explosion: the BBQ recipe of all recipes”) is a pork lover’s dream-come-true; the recipe calls for making a basket out of bacon, wrapping sausage in that basket, layering cooked bacon in between, for added crunch and then slathering the whole football sized pork-fest with BBQ sauce.  But this outrageous recipe isn’t the story here.  The real story is how the creators of this recipe, two BBQ experts and an internet marketer  trying to promote their website (www.bbqaddicts.com), used social networks to spread the recipe around so much that it became an online sensation.

The Bacon Explosion was originally a challenge for the BBQ experts, sent via a Twitter message.  After creating the recipe, the team posted it on their website and sent out twitter messages to 1,200 of their followers.  They also posted links on various other social networks, like StumbleUpon, a site which attempts to help users navigate towards internet content that they might find interesting.  Within two days of posting the recipe, 27,000 users had visited the site.

“The Bacon Explosion posting has since been viewed about 390,000 times. It first found a following among barbecue fans, but quickly spread to sites run by outdoor enthusiasts, off-roaders and hunters. (Several proposed venison-sausage versions.) It also got mentions on the Web site of Air America, the liberal radio network, and National Review, the conservative magazine.  Jonah Goldberg at NationalReview.com wrote, “There must be a reason one reader after another sends me this every couple hours.”

After gaining so much popularity, the New York Times picked up the story, which I read:
(http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/28/dining/28bacon.html?_r=2&ref=technology).

Now, I’m writing this blog, spreading the word even more.  No doubt, readers of this blog will want to see what this meaty monstrosity looks like and will visit the BBQ site.  When you do visit www.bbqaddicts.com , you’ll note that a link to the recipe is front and center, prominently displayed underneath the NYT logo, thus providing users with a brilliantly smooth user experience.

I should note that the BBQ website relies solely on advertising revenue to operate.  I am sure the 400k+ increase in traffic and nation-wide coverage has given the BBQ team some leverage in ad sales negotiations.  And to think, all of it started with a great recipe idea and a well thought-out social networking campaign.

In a cruel twist of irony, this blog was written by a non-pork consuming Jew.  So, if any brave carnivorous souls out there have tried making the Bacon Explosion, please do share your thoughts right here on our blog!!

The Art of Good Communication….

By Rob Morris

The art of good communication depends on listening for the real meaning under the surface of what people actually say. For example, when someone says “I have this friend with a problem,” most of us assume the ‘friend’ is about the same age, height, weight, hair color and blood type as the person we’re talking to. In my past as a consultant, I’ve identified a virtual dictionary of ‘code phrases’ found in most organizations.  When people say “we need to clarify expectations” they usually mean “I don’t want to do what you want me to.” When they say there’s some confusion about “roles and responsibilities” they mean “other people aren’t doing what I tell them to.”

Ironically, one of the code phrases I have heard most often in the development world is “we have some communication problems.” People would come to me with communication issues, usually wanting technological or policy solutions: maybe we need a new project management system or weekly status reports? But in my experience, these problems were rarely about the means of communication.  Think about it logically for a moment.  Just ask yourself how quickly and broadly gossip or rumors travel in your organization? How well informed are your clients about project successes?

So, if some information travels well, it probably isn’t the communication infrastructure. No, most communication problems are actually caused by the content – or more specifically, fear about the content.

There are two primary components to most communication problems. The main problem is a basic insecurity so many people seem to carry. I feel it’s my duty at this point to reveal the Big Secret so we can move on: so many people are all secretly terrified that they will be unmasked for the frauds they know themselves to be (There may actually be someone out there who doesn’t feel this way, but I haven’t met them yet). There. Now you know. So, all these fine, bright people go around putting on a performance to mask this insecurity. Everyone does it, but we all do it in different ways and to different levels. The problem is we think other people’s performances are real, while we know ours is only a hollow shell. As a result, we go to great lengths to avoid saying anything that might reveal our secret.

This leads to the second problem, what I call magical thinking. This is the idea that we can change reality with the power of our mind. Now, very few people believe they can bend spoons with their brainwaves, yet when it comes to communication we all secretly believe that if we don’t acknowledge a problem it simply doesn’t exist. “Elephant? I don’t see an elephant.” Sure, the project is two months behind schedule, but maybe if we don’t tell the client a miracle will occur and we’ll catch up. Somehow, if we tell them it will become “real” but if we cleverly avoid the subject it simply won’t exist.

Alas, it just makes us look silly in the end. Like a five year-old learning how to lie or that person who comes to us saying “I have this friend…” we can all pretty much see through the flimsy excuses and missing updates. We may not know the details, but we know something is up. And, of course, this makes it worse because we fill in any gaps with the most creative (and usually unflattering) information we can think of.

So, if it feels like you’ve got “communication problems” at work, rather than spending a lot of money on new Blackberry’s for everyone or crafting a new policy statement on client communications, start at the heart of the matter and examine what information feels hardest to communicate and what you really think will be accomplished by concealing the information. Is it all simply a vain attempt to project some image of you or your company as perfect and superhuman? (Note: no living person is capable of and no sane person expects perfection.) Will reality change in any way or will it simply make matters worse?

Then focus on creating a culture of trust where people feel safe to come out of hiding. As a leader, be the first to confess your humanity. Set challenging, reasonable expectations and refuse to buy into the illusion of perfectionism. Reward risk, effort and honesty. Focus on learning, systemic thinking, and moving forward and refuse to place blame. Lead with honest curiosity about the potential in everyone and real compassion when people turn out to be human.

You’ll be amazed at how “communication problems” evaporate when people feel safe. There will always be “bad news” to report and it will never be fun, but we can easily avoid the inevitable train wreck when we think magical thinking can actually make problems disappear.

The Morning Edition Sleeps In

By Pam Holland

What is black & white and NOT red all over?  Easy answer, right? More and more stats are starting to validate what most of us kinda already knew — newspaper readership continues to decline while consumers replace their news source with internet news providers. While television still remains the overall leader in where consumers go to for their national and international news, the internet now surpasses newspapers for second place, according to a recent study. ( http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10128861-93.html )

Some 40 percent of those surveyed by Pew Research for the People & the Press say they get most of their international and national news from the Internet, up from 24 percent in September 2007. Another interesting point to note is as the user’s age drops, so does the gap between TV news and online news as the leading source. Whereas the youngest end of the consumers measured show TV and internet in a dead heat for leading provider.

The ‘almost’ good news in all this is where those consumers are headed in the online space . A related study from the same researchers shows that newspapers would have suffered even greater losses without their online versions. The significant loss in readership since 2006 has come among those who read the print version while the online readers shows growth….not leaps, but growth none the less. (http://people-press.org/report/444/news-media)

Keep your eyes open in your local market, and if its anything like our area, you’ll see most of the traditional paper companies marketing budget strictly focuses on their online content and offerings. Its a big game of catch up. We wish them luck.

Wayfinding the Web

By Brian Kempf

When we look out of our windows in the morning and see the sun rise we know we are looking east. In a very primitive sense we know where we are. We know that west is to our back, north is to our left and south to our right. In this simple example we used the rising of the sun to orient us to our physical space. This is known as wayfinding.

Early Polynesians used similar methods to navigate the open ocean without the aid of compass, sextant or GPS. The sun was a main guide giving early navigators a clear directional pointer twice a day. At night, they would rely on the rising and setting of stars. And, when these celestial pointers could not be seen, experienced wayfinders could navigate by laying down in their canoe and feeling the swell patterns of the ocean.

In recent years, wayfinding has been a term architects use for the user experience of finding and choosing a path within a built environment. This often includes, but is not exclusive to, signage and graphical communication and often extends far beyond interior spaces. For miles around an airport you will see signs and pointers that will direct you into and around the airport. Once inside you will see a number of international symbols (http://www.aiga.org/content.cfm/symbol-signs) to guide your way and whether in Zurich Kloten International Airport or Chitose International Airport, you should always be able to find the restroom. For fun check out some of these international interpretations of restroom signs (http://www.fareastmovement.com/st/rr-signs-in-different-countries/).

The concept of modern wayfinding has naturally been applied to the online world and is sometimes referred to as “structural wayfinding”. This is a natural adaptation as many of the same basic questions are asked by online users that are asked by visitors to a building. Where am I? Where do I want to go? Am I on the right path? Am I where I want to be?

While there are many similarities between architectural wayfinding and wayfinding on the web, there some distinct considerations that user experience professionals must take into consideration. Until teleportation becomes readily available it is unlikely that a person will be dropped into a room within a building and then be asked to find their way out. This is a common occurrence for online users that use search engines to find specific content then are dropped into a site. It is also rare that a person would not use a restroom if they couldn’t find it on a map in 15 seconds. They would likely take the time they need to understand the map, locate the restroom and identify markers that could navigate them to their destination. Many web users would not give this level of consideration to their online experience.

A high level view of how wayfinding affects the user experience can be seen by analyzing the first question. Where am I? A simple question that has deep implications when developing a robust web experience. Search engines, blogs, cross linking don’t always land users on a sites home page so we can’t depend on a linear home page driven experience. Instead, we ensure that users can quickly do three basic things when viewing any page. First, users must be able to identify the company through branding elements, clear urls and distinct visuals. Second a user must be able to understand where they are within the context of the site’s overall structure. This includes using clear understandable navigation and page labels, visual placement markers that reveal on states and navigational relationships and linear trails that indicate a content path. Finally, provide clear ways through to other content including primary and secondary navigation and dynamic content relationships (e.g. user that read this also read …). Users often better understand where they are by the content a page is associated with.

As with many things, the future of user experience design relies heavily on basic concepts of the past. Understanding the basics of how users interact with environments both online and offline will produce a better end product. Whether traversing the open ocean, walking your local mall or navigating the vast world wide web, wayfinding will be there to help guide you on your journey.

Google Search…Or…(Misc.)

By Anthony Vespucci

NEWS FLASH: Google is the number one search engine on the web! Oh wait, you already knew that didn’t you.  Let’s try this one than.  What percentage of the search marketplace does Google currently hold? Is it 55%…..60%….65%? Nope.  As of the November ’08 report by Hitwise, Google had an overwhelming 72% of the market and growing.

Growing that is, at the expenses of the other leaders in space, specifically Yahoo and MSN.  And I use the term leaders loosely.  Combined Yahoo and MSN account for a meager 21.8% of the search market, or less than one third of Google’s share.  Below is a graph of the last 15 months for each of the four leaders in the search space and their respective percentage of the market as listed by Hitwise:

Since September of 2007, Google’s share of the market has grown by a modest 8.42%.  However it’s how it compares to the other leaders in the space that really paints the picture: Yahoo (-4.85%), MSN (-3.73%), Ask (-0.97%).  Some in the industry project that within the next year Google could feasible control 90% of the search market, something that has never been achieved within the US (Google already contain over 90% of marketshare in several countries outside of the US).  If this continues as predicted, it is feasible that the current other leaders would combined make up less than 10% of the search market.

The question that comes to mind is: How does this affect us as marketers?

While in the current market, Google is the clear leader in the space, most advertisers spread their search budgets across several search engines giving themselves exposure across the board, while at the same time, giving them flexibility to adjust and shift budgets based on ROI.  Essentially, if it is shear reach you are looking for, there’s no question Google is the way to go.  However, for advertisers utilizing search marketing as a means to increase some form of a transaction or sale, Google will not always be the most efficient.  Some advertisers will find that when it comes to ROI, the likes of Yahoo/MSN, are much more efficient than Google.

Taking this into context, as Google’s market share reaches into the 90%+ range, most advertisers will be left with no real choice.  At that level, MSN and Yahoo will lose the ability to deliver much scale, if any, and their value will be minimal at best.  With this, two things will happen to advertisers in the search marketing space: 1) Advertisers who had focused on MSN/Yahoo will have no choice but to put their dollars into Google, increasing competition in the space, and thus effectively driving up cost per clicks across the board 2) Advertisers currently utilizing Google will have to up their budgets in order to maintain their same levels of exposure/ranking.

Clearly the search marketing road ahead is going to be tough.  It is also one that will see those advertisers whom are either a) not savvy in the space b) working with relatively small budgets, to face a real battle against the mass quantity of competition.  The question is who will emerge in this time of Google Search Domination to provide an alternative solution? That remains to be answered.  One thing however is for sure: Within the next couple of years the search engine market share graphs will only have two columns; Google and (Misc).

Investor communications online: Transparent, accessible and cost-effective

By Judy Vigiletti

The SEC may be getting some bad press lately, but there is a positive legacy that they will leave in these tumultuous times—recognizing the internet as an accessible, transparent and cost-effective medium to disseminate financial disclosure to the broadest audience.

Back in August ’08, the SEC provided guidance and recommendations on making corporate websites the center for investor communications. This was the first time in nearly a decade that the SEC gave comment on corporate websites. The SEC’s recommendations indicate their belief that the website should be the critical source for institutional and retail investors to receive the data and the detail to make better investment decisions. To take it even further, the SEC says that your corporate website can, if certain criteria are met, be used as the only source of company information without violating Regulation Fair Disclosure or other securities laws.

Furthermore, as recently as December of last year, the SEC continued to promote technology by officially adopting a rule mandating XBRL filings beginning in 2009.

With this rule, the SEC is effectively mandating that all public companies submit their SEC reports in Interactive Data format, (specifically XBRL, Extensible Business Reporting Language) making it much easier to collect, manage and share financial data and information, essentially ‘bar-coding’ financial data.

Why the bold move to the internet?
Consider the benefits in terms of transparency and cost savings.

XBRL could usher in an age of transparency of public financial information. It is one of the most important changes in financial reporting since the Securities Act of 1934 and will be good news for investors, for analysts and for the financial stability and transparency on Wall Street. It’s obvious that the SEC understands the importance of democratizing financial disclosure for the average American.

But what hits home today for most companies, especially their IR and Marketing departments, is the vast cost savings that can be found.

If you’ve take the steps to make your website a recognized distribution channel and confirm that it is the main source for IR communications, you won’t have to publish press releases to satisfy Regulation FD requirements. Press Wires charge by the word, and if we do the math, an average Company could save thousands per year.

Online Annual Reports have been gaining ground in recent years for the very same reason: saving money. By moving your Annual Report onto the digital space, you can not only make the experience more interactive and easier to understand for the investor, you can eliminate the need for a glossy, printed report. Think about savings on printing and postage to the tune of $30,000 up to hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. Of course, the caveat here is that you still have to provide a printable version and mail hardcopy if it is requested. Still, the savings are extensive.

We should all laud the SEC’s embracing of technology. It’ll be a win-win in this economy.