This was the easiest year-in-review blog post to create. Everything after this sentence was auto-generated by WordPress.com.
The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2013 annual report for this blog.
Here’s an excerpt:
The concert hall at the Sydney Opera House holds 2,700 people. This blog was viewed about 27,000 times in 2013. If it were a concert at Sydney Opera House, it would take about 10 sold-out performances for that many people to see it.
Last March 1, a full two months into 2013, I stuck my neck out and made some bold social media predictions for the remainder of the year. Now, as I look in the rear-view mirror of 2013, I see a pretty spotty record of prognostication. A lesser blogger might choose to ignore the fact that his predictions did not all hit the mark. Not me. I’m all about transparency. So here’s a review of how well my predictions fared.
1. What social media channel do you feel is primed to grow its audience base the most in 2013?
I suggested that Instagram would be the fastest-growing social media channel. And wouldn’t you know it: I was right! It says so right here. So, score a point for me to take the early lead.
2. Which social media channel may disappear in 2013?
I wrote that none would disappear completely, noting that: “I still get occasional emails from hi5, which I haven’t used in ages, so apparently someone is still out there.” I added that I didn’t think the new Myspace would have much traction in 2013. Apparently, I was wrong. Myspace reported a 50 percent growth from January through September.
Score tied, 1-1.
3. What is the one social media behavior you would like to see more of in 2013?
I voted for the #humblebrag. “Done well,” I wrote, “the humblebrag is a wonderful bit of hubris and snark. It’s the act of ‘[s]ubtly letting others now about how fantastic your life is while undercutting it with a bit of self-effacing humor or “woe is me” gloss.'” I don’t know of any Internet measurement firm that tracks the rise and fall of the humblebrag, but I know of at least one commentator who wishes the humblebrag would die.
I declare this one a draw.
4. What social media behavior needs to stop?
“LinkedIn endorsements,” I wrote. “What is the point? [humblebrag]Hey, I really do appreciate all the nice endorsements about my expertise in blogging, social media, media relations and strategic communications[/humblebrag]. But unless I can include those endorsements in my annual review and parlay them into a big fat raise, they don’t really do much for me. Please tell me if I’m missing something here.”
There appears to be no retreat to the LinkedIn endorsement. Another point against me.
5. What is your best advice for a brand to connect with its audience one-on-one?
Here I agreed with Rohit Bhargava, whose tweet inspired my March 1 post. “I think it still comes down to being human,” he said. “It does require a stronger focus on creating a real voice for all communications. It also takes a deeper understanding of customer questions and how you can answer them.”
On this point, if we can all stay human, then we all win.
*****
So, there you have my scorecard for 2013 social media predictions. How about you? Did you make any predictions for 2013? If so, how did they turn out?
Photo: Crystal Ball by Anurag Agnihotri via Flickr.
It’s the final Friday of 2013, which means it’s time to do a backwards glance at the contents of this blog over the past 12 months. And time for a bit of introspection.
At a time when the experts are saying (again) that blogging is dead (again) — or at least dead for anyone except “40-somethings with kids” (I’m 50-something and have no kids) — I do have to stop and wonder whether there’s any value in a traditional blog like this versus, say, a tumblr. (Except, as I reported earlier this year, I haven’t exactly gotten the hang of the whole tumblr thing.) But then I look at the handful of fine higher ed-focused blogs that are out there, and the value they bring to their target audiences, I have to think that blogging still has a purpose.
And therefore, I plan to continue to publish this blog in 2014. And just as it was in 2013, the frequency of posts will likely be sporadic and sometimes off-topic, but I hope that some of you find some value in the topics I write about, just as you did this past year.
Here are the five (or so) blog posts that I thought brought some value, if not a little bit of insight, to the higher ed community in 2013:
Thanks so much for reading in 2013, and for sharing your thoughts in the comments, on Twitter, and elsewhere. I wish you all a successful 2014 in all measures.
Back in October, when A&E unveiled a new tagline as part of its rebranding campaign, the cable network was riding a wave of popularity, thanks to hit shows like Duck Dynasty. The “be original” tagline seemed to work well with A&E’s lineup of quirky programming.
As A&E marketing exec Guy Slattery told The Hollywood Reporter at the time:
We felt like we could really own “originals” the way USA has managed to own “characters” and TNT owns “drama.”
Well. What a difference a couple of months makes, eh?
As has been widely reported over the past week, Duck Dynasty‘s bull goose, Phil Robertson, in an interview with GQ Magazine, shared some of his thoughts about gays and African Americans in the pre-civil rights south, among other things. His comments sparked strong reactions among gay rights and civil rights groups, and (of course) on the Internet. A&E suspended Robertson, a move that caused a powerful counter-backlash from Duck Dynasty fans, conservative Christians and alleged First Amendment advocates who took to Twitter to #StandWithPhil.
It now appears that A&E wasn’t too serious about the suspension. The Duck Dynasty patriarch will return to the show in January (source). So, maybe the GQ interview was all a publicity ploy cooked up by A&E’s publicists? (Although this report — and this one — would suggest otherwise. It appears that Phil Robertson went rogue on A&E.)
But my subject here today isn’t about Duck Dynasty or Phil Robertson and his comments. It’s about A&E’s brand identity.
I wonder if this entire controversy will strengthen A&E’s “be original” brand or weaken it?
Let’s examine this issue in branding terms:
Phil Robertson is a de facto brand ambassador for the network. As a star of A&E’s franchise program, he is among the most widely recognized personas of the A&E brand (along with the rest of the Robertson clan), and A&E features the family heavily in its branding and marketing. These days, it’s difficult to separate the A&E brand from the program.
But do the stars of Duck Dynasty represent the brand A&E desires? They’re not mainstream America — not by a long shot. They’re rednecks, bearded, white, conservative — the stereotypical Red State “God and guns” demographic. But their show has managed to appeal to a broad audience, if the ratings are to be believed.
But does all this equate to original?
The visual cues may indicate that. But with any brand, the messaging is also important.
And whether A&E likes it or not, the words of Phil Robertson, as a brand ambassador for A&E, reflect on the network.
Phil spoke his mind. I’ll grant him that. But what he said was not very original. In fact, and unfortunately, his views have been around for a long, long time. For too long.
If A&E really wants to “be original,” it should pluck Duck Dynasty from its lineup. But that won’t happen. That golden goose is probably more valuable than ever.
If there’s a branding lesson to be learned from any of this, it is this: Make sure your brand ambassadors are on message. In other words, get your ducks in a row.
Even the most established global brands need an occasional refresh. So in the spirit of the season, the UK-based branding firm Quietroom took it upon themselves to give one of the most venerable and well-known brands in the world a new approach.
The result is the *Santa* Brand Book, a brand identity manual for that brand we know as Santa Claus, St. Nick, Kris Kringle, the Jolly Old Elf, etc. (Hmm. With so many variants of the brand name, perhaps this brand refresh came none too soon.)
The online manual is a tongue-in-cheek introduction to *Santa* — a brand identity which subtly differs from the more traditional Santa. (The bookend asterisks are symbolic reminders to customers of “a snowflake alighting on the eyelash of a fawn” and “the polar star, and hence the birth of dreams.”)
It’s also a clever look at how branding agencies and in-house brand managers work to flesh out the intangibles of our respective organizations. It offers guidance on a range of brand issues, including:
While this brand book is a satirical look at the branding business, it also offers some valuable insight into the work of brand management. They begin by looking at the idea of Santa Claus as a metaphor for branding, and there is a lot of truth to that line of thinking.
There’s also a lot of truth to this phrase from the manual:
A brand is a sack on a sleigh of belief
Thank you, people of Quietroom, for giving brand managers the world over this little gift at Christmastime.
P.S. – Thanks also to Robert French for sharing the brand book via Twitter.