Category: Social media

Posted on by

You’re a social media landlord – manage your property portfolio well

With a property portfolio at one stage of more than 1,000 homes, Britain’s biggest buy-to-let landlords must have found it difficult to keep tabs on every single property they (or the banks) owned. I find it hard enough to keep tabs on just one – the house I live in. So, almost inevitably, tucked away in an avenue here or a cul-de-sac there will have been buildings that dragged down the reputation of the neighbouring homes. Peeling paint. Broken windows. Leaking roofs.

And so it is with social media real estate. Long forgotten Facebook business pages which haven’t been updated since September. September 2014 that is.  Corporate Twitter accounts with fewer Tweets than an empty cuckoo’s nest. And LinkedIn profiles that are about effective a calling card as a phone number scribbled on a soggy beer mat. All “properties” that could be damaging your reputation.

So it’s time to do a social media audit to assess the extent of your digital estate. Demolish those Facebook accounts, pages and groups that are surplus to requirements. Bulldoze those Twitter accounts that were set up in a burst of enthusiasm for every single department. In short, rationalise.

And where your rationalisation reveals gaps in your digital portfolio get building. Construct a new Instagram account. Open that YouTube channel. Make WhatsApp ‘appen.

Now if you’ll allow me to push the metaphor a little further… don’t risk getting “locked out” of your own property by allowing your “tenants” to make their own keys. Open up social media accounts centrally and keep a register of the administrator usernames and passwords – yours and anybody else you grant administrator or similar rights to – so that if somebody leaves (even you) the organisation can still get in.

If your digital estate audit does reveal a Facebook business page that you’re locked out of, perhaps because it was set up by somebody who’s now left, getting it deleted without a username and/or password can be tricky. The best thing is to report it to Facebook. Here’s a useful post on Facebook’s own help pages.

There’s a chance that your search will reveal property that looks like yours but isn’t. For example, I’ve worked as a social media trainer with local authorities who’ve discovered several spoof pages or profiles set up by disgruntled council taxpayers purporting to be the council. In these cases there’s not much you can do. Most tend to have a short lifespan and fizzle out after the initial disgruntlement (is that even a word)!? dies down. If they persist you could try contacting the owner and resolve the issue by negotiation. If that doesn’t work, and in particular if the spoof content is offensive, you could again try report the issue to the relevant social network. But don’t hold your breath. Resolving problems through the official channels can be long-winded and may still fail. Which is why managing your digital property portfolio properly in the first place is vital.

Be a good landlord.

I have to thank my trainees at Melton Borough Council for proving the inspiration for this post. You can find them on Facebook. If they’ve done their audit properly there will only be one page!

*  I shot the feature image in Kampot, Cambodia while on holiday earlier this year. It’s a fine old building from the era before Pol Pot and his murderous regime. Unlike a disused Facebook page it’s former grandeur shines through the decay.

Posted on by

Why First Person isn’t bad for science communication

Traditionally scientists have used the Third Person when communicating their work – particularly to fellow scientists. But in the cult-of-personality, social media age might the First Person be better? ACM Training’s lead media, communication and presentation coach, Richard Uridge, argues the case for scientists putting themselves centre stage.

Not so long ago science students were encouraged to write in the third person. “I did this” or “we observed that” first person communication was struck through with the bright red slash of a supervisor’s pen and replaced in spidery handwriting with “this was done” or “that observation was made.” Why? Because an aloof way of writing – and even of speaking – somehow reinforced a scientist’s sense of detachment from her or his research.  Get too close, put yourself at the heart of the experiment and you’ll compromise your independence or even corrupt your conclusions.  Or so the argument went.

Well after sitting through two days of presentations at a post graduate student event in Birnham, Perthshire, organised by the James Hutton Institute, I have to say it’s high time we overturned the archaic orthodoxy. The presentations that this, admittedly non-academic, member of the audience understood and enjoyed the most (and the two aren’t mutually exclusive) were those that unashamedly put the scientist centre stage. Being a part of your endeavours not apart from them isn’t bad science as anybody who’s been cured of a stomach ulcer (I speak from personal experience) ought to appreciate thanks to the pioneering work on Helicobacter pylori of Barry Marshall and Robin Warren. By drinking a bacterial brew to prove their theory (that it wasn’t spicy foods that caused gastritis) Marshall couldn’t have been more first person. And it certainly didn’t stop him and his colleague picking up a Nobel Prize.

The fact that the pair were plain speaking Australians helped. You can’t imagine Warren saying “a beaker of H. pylori was consumed and 48 hours later vomiting and fever were observed in the patient.” You can imagine him saying “Bazza chugged a tinny of the stuff and was crook as a dingo on dodgy dog food before you could say surf’s up. “

Okay so I’m exaggerating but you get my point: first person doesn’t equal bad science. And what’s more, first person does equal more effective communication. In short because it’s more engaging. Engaging an audience is a necessary precursor to communication. Think of engagement as opening up the pipeline between you, the scientist, and your audience. Once it’s open you can push information, data if you will,  through it from your brain to theirs. If the pipeline’s closed conveying that data is impossible.

Here’s the Who Goes First? podcast. It’s not about first person science communication per se but more about scientists who’ve experimented on themselves and are very much centre stage in the way I discuss above. It includes discussion of the ethical dimension of Marshall and Warren’s work.  [powerpress].

Please note that this programme was first broadcast on BBC Radio 4. As a result it contains copyright material so is strictly for personal use and must not be used for commercial gain withour our express permission in writing. Please contact me if you’d like to obtain a licence.

NEXT Rumours of its death may be greatly exaggerated but why PowerPoint is in intensive care and may not be the most appropriate tool for science communicators.

Posted on by

Hook ’em with a question

“Online it’s all about the narrative. We’re suckers for a good story so try to convey your research as such. Make it engaging for your target audience. Aim for a conversational tone. And remember to ask lots of questions. Think of it this way: a question mark is like an upside down hook so to hook people into your research ask them questions. As a researcher you’ll be amazed at the value of their responses. It could even be the answer you’re looking for!

I penned these few words of advice for researchers looking to build an audience for their work online. It was in response to a request from Hywel Curtis at http://www.growresa.com – a new website to help academics with blogging.

The quote took me a long time* – certainly longer than the few minutes I’d expected. But it’s amazing how blogging can help clarify the thought process. And that, in itself, is surely one of the benefits of blogging for researchers? There are, of course, other benefits. Here’s a short presentation I prepared as part of a training course for Queen Margaret University in Scotland. It’s a basic introduction that I hope might help you decide whether to start blogging yourself. Watch it carefully and you’ll spot the delicious irony when I say that blogs shouldn’t be a repository for all those presentations you’ve given!

 

French philosopher Blaise Pascal
French philosopher Blaise Pascal

*The French philosopher Blaise Pascal, he of the “I’m sorry I wrote you such a long letter I didn’t have time to write a short one” was right; it takes longer to ponder a few sentences than it does to compose a whole article.

[products limit=”4″ columns=”4″ skus=”wpid=63,wpid=109″]

Posted on by

What’s the difference between categories and tags?

Whether it’s birds or blogs we’ve be organising stuff into groups since the Swedish botanist Carl Linnaeus invented his system of classification. In fact I’d argue that making sense of our complicated world is something we’ve felt compelled to do as Homo sapiens (Kingdom: Animalia; Order: Primates; Family: Hominidae) pretty much from the get go. Or to put it another way, we were anoraks well before the anorak was invented. But whilst the taxonomy of the natural world is, for want of a better word, taxing, the taxonomy of the digital world is, thankfully, less complicated.

Carl_von_Linné

Blogs can be organised into three, simple sections:

  1. Subject
  2. Categories
  3. Tags

Think of the subject as the label that covers everything you write about or are planning to write about in your blog. It might be a subject with a wide-ranging scope like nature or gardening or something much narrower like hill walking or vegetable growing or narrower still like Munro-bagging or potato propagation. Narrow or wide the choice is yours – especially if you’re blogging for pleasure. If you’re blogging for profit then I’d suggest you stick to a subject you know about and one where your target audience will value your expertise. It’s easier to sell yourself a master of one trade rather than a Jack-of-all.

Categories become important once you have more than a few blog entries and  help vistors find their way around. The wider-ranging your blog the more important categories become. I have a client who blogs about urban anthropology (the subject). She’s written extensively about the legacy of the London Olympics but also writes about the post industrial landscape and about the impact of technology on human behaviour. I suggested they should be thought of and classified as three separate categories. Of course, there will be times when you want to list a post under several categories and that’s fine. For example, if Pokémon GO ever becomes an Olympic sport it’d come under two of my anthropologist’s category headings.

Tags are similar to but more specific than categories. Again looking at the example above a post could be categorised under “Olympic legacy” but be tagged specifically “London” or “Rio” so that a visitor could more easily find all the posts that are tagged or reference, say, “Rio.” Tags on blogs aren’t that different to tags on #Twitter that help us find stuff there.

Most if not all blogging platforms allow you to display your chosen categories so visitors can see your blog’s organisational structure at a glance. I’d suggest you do just that. WordPress and others also enable you to display the tags you use so that if a visitor clicks on a particular tag it aggregates all the posts that use that tag.

If you want to have a look at how I utilise categories click on the dropdown menu  on the sidebar of this post or on my personal blog. The tags I use appear along the bottom of this and other posts. Try out the feature by clicking on one.

Eat your heart out Linnaeus!

[products limit=”4″ columns=”4″ skus=”wpid=63,wpid=109″]

Posted on by

Facebook groups versus pages

Should I set up a Facebook page or group?

Good question and the short answer in most cases is both!

The longer and more helpful answer is that it depends largely on what you’re trying to do (your organisational aims and objectives) and who you’re trying to do it with (your target audience). By answering the following questions you’ll be able to arrive at the best answer…

Which description best fits you and your organisation?

A: We’ve got a well-established support base on the social web and would simply like to split this existing audience into more manageable and natural subsets.

B: We need to get more likes and build a bigger audience in order to “sell” our products, services or ideas.

Answer A Then a group or groups is probably the best option for you.

Answer B Then a page is more likely the better option.

Do you want to keep the conversation between you and your audience private?

YES! Then a group is probably the best option because with closed or secret groups you can more easily manage who sees what’s being shared on the group’s timeline.  For example, with a secret group nobody outside the group can see it and, as a result, know who’s in it or what they post.

NO! You need to answer a few more questions yet. A page might be the best option but equally an open group could be the perfect solution.

Do you want to vet who’s allowed to join?

YES! Then a group is probably best. Group settings allow you to decide who you invite and/or accept.

NO! Then either a group set to anyone can join will be the right option or a page where anyone can like a page to connect with it and get updates in their news feed.

Do you want to use Facebook Insights to measure the results?

YES! Then go for a page because Insights doesn’t currently work with groups.

NO! Then it doesn’t matter which.

Do you need to share with your audience documents or files on your computer?

YES! Then go for the group option as it’s easier to share, collaborate and ask questions.

NO! Then again it doesn’t matter.

CASE STUDY – local authority

Victoria Fawcett of Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council set up a Facebook group called Stockton 5K trail series to promote, as the name suggests, a series of 5k runs across the North East of England. The group was fine as a way of communicating with athletes who’d already heard of the series from other sources – both on and offline. But it wasn’t so effective at growing that community to get more taking part in the events. Two things informed Victoria’s decision to set up a page and invite group members to join her there: firstly visibility – pages, she was told, are easier to find on Facebook than groups; secondly, because only a page gives you access to valuable metrics via the Facebook Insights suite of feedback and analysis tools.  Whilst the latter is true the former is not – unless your group is secret. The community page has nearly 1,500 likes (July 2016). That’s significantly more than were members of the now defunct group so it was clearly a good decision to make the change to page.

TOP TIP

Make an informed decision before you establish a page or group as you can’t automatically convert a group into a page or vice versa at a later stage. The only workaround in the case study above was for the group owner to ask members via the group timeline to migrate to the page incentivising those who make the journey across the wide open trails of cyberstockton by offering modest prizes (a beanie)!  Nor is it possible to merge two groups into one short of asking members of the one you’re closing to join the one you’re keeping going.

Think of pages as physical places. If you’re a small organisation you might only need one page/room. If you’re a big organisation you’ll probably need several pages/rooms. Get as many people coming through the doors of these pages/rooms as you can and then, once they’re in, decide how you want to organise them into separate groups.

CASE STUDY – national charity

As a supporter of the NSPCC you might like the charity’s Facebook ’s page. Almost 300,000 people already have. But it would be inappropriate for discussions about some of the grittier areas of the society’s work to be held, in effect, with all these people listening. So there are five open or public groups and who knows how many secret groups where like-minded individuals can get together in much smaller groups to discuss things. Social workers use these groups, for example, to discuss child welfare issues away from the public gaze. And young people can discuss growing up in a secret group away from the inappropriate gaze of adults.

TOP TIP

Ask yourself is it more appropriate for conversations with a target audience to be happening in relative if not absolute privacy? If the answer is yes then a Facebook group with its built in privacy settings is probably the best  for you.

CASE STUDY – small business

At ACM Training we had too many groups and it was almost impossible to find both the content and the time to post stuff to the various groups’ timelines to stimulate debate among members. For example, we had one group for people who’d been on our social media training courses and another for those who’d attended our writing for the web courses. Now we have a larger – but more easily managed – social web group which works for us because resources aren’t spread so thinly and works for group members (unless they think otherwise!) because there is a natural crossover between the two subject areas – if you’re interested in the social web you’re almost certainly going to be interested in writing for the web. We encourage group members to like our page but don’t insist on it as a precursor to joining the group. We also allow group members to invite new members so we can grow organically.

Here is a link to Facebook’s own thoughts on groups vs pages.

Posted on by

Front loading – websites not washers

Here’s a quick and easy fix to make your website more appealing to your target audience:

Don’t bury the good stuff so far down the screen that people have to scroll or swipe to find it. Because they probably won’t!

To avoid this problem we have to “front-load” web pages – that is, put the most critical information at the top of the page where it’s clearly and immediately visible. In the old days of broadsheet newspapers it was called putting stuff  “above the fold” where, on a newsstand, the bit of the article on the top half of the front page could instantly be seen by potential buyers.

Front loading is such an important concept in my writing for the web workshops that I’ve devised some simple exercises to help explain it. The exercises also cover principles such as decluttering for clarity and brevity. It’s probably easier to print them off  (open pdf) and mark the paper, as I suggest, with a real red pen.

Here’s a paragraph written specifically for print that follows the conventional, and some would say out-dated, intro, explanation, conclusion format:

In this article I’m going to show you how to write for the web and explain why it’s different to writing for print. But first a little bit of history. Cast your mind back to school days.  Pound to a penny you learned to read in a linear fashion. For me it was Janet and John. And that’s still pretty much how we read books – word by word, from the top left to the bottom right of the page, page after page after page. But when we read stuff online we’re much less linear in our approach. Eye tracking studies suggest we scan the page in an F pattern searching for interesting or relevant information and read as few as 1 in 5 words. And if we don’t find what we’re looking for we leave the page or worse still the whole site in a hurry. The fickle way readers behave online is the biggest single factor determining the way we write web copy. In short, because people read differently we need to write differently. It really isn’t good enough simply re-purposing words written for paper. Or certainly not without wholesale changes in terms of structure, layout and length.  Structurally we need to write in such a way that the important stuff is placed on the screen where it’s clearly visible without the need for the user to scroll down. The principle is called top or front loading. Another name for the technique is the inverse pyramid. Doesn’t really matter what it’s called. We need to write in a way that lends itself to breaking up long paragraphs and, therefore, large blocks of text, into shorter paragraphs and smaller blocks, bullet points and lists. And we need to write in a way that is shorter, sharper and to the point because or readers tend to be less patient than when reading a book. [312 words]

Where is the introduction? Highlight it and write the number 1 in the margin alongside.

Where is the explanation or background? Put a number 2 next to it in the margin.

Highlight the conclusion (or conclusions) and mark with a 3.

Now try writing a version that conveys the same information but in the reverse order – 3, 2, 1. Start with the conclusion.

Struggling to find a natural sounding place for the introduction at the end? Another virtue of writing this way is that we can often dispense with the intro altogether and make the article shorter as a consequence.

Here’s my version.

People read differently online so we need to write differently. Put the important stuff at the top where it’s clearly visible without the need for the user to scroll down. The principle is called top or front loading or the inverted pyramid method. Break larger blocks of text into shorter blocks, bullet points and lists. Write in a way that is short, sharp and to the point. Why? Because eye tracking studies suggest we scan the page in an F pattern searching for interesting or relevant information and read as few as 1 in 5 words. And when we don’t find what we’re looking for we leave the page in a hurry. Compare that to the way we read words on paper. Cast your mind back to school days.  Pound to a penny you learned to read in a linear fashion. For me it was Janet and John. And that’s still pretty much how we read books – word by word, from the top left to the bottom right of the page, page after page after page. [176 words]

Better structurally but still a bit too long so let’s next go through it striking out the words that aren’t strictly necessary. See how short you can make the paragraph without rendering it meaningless.

Here’s my version, first with the editing showing and then without:

People read differently online so we need to write differently. Put the important stuff at the top where it’s clearly visible without the need for the user to scroll down scrolling. The principle is It’s called top or front loading. Break larger blocks of text into shorter blocks, bullet points and lists. Write in a way that is Be short, sharp and to the point. Why? Because eye tracking studies suggest we scan search the page in an F pattern searching for interesting or relevant information and read as few as 1 in 5 words. And when we don’t find what we’re looking for we leave the page in a hurry. Compare that to the linear way we read words on paper. Cast your mind back to school days.  Pound to a penny you learned to read in a linear fashion. For me it was Janet and John. And that’s still pretty much how we read books – word by word, from the top left to the bottom right of the page, page after page after page. 

People read differently online so we need to write differently. Put the important stuff at the top where it’s visible without scrolling. It’s called front loading. Break larger blocks of text into shorter blocks, bullet points and lists. Be short, sharp and to the point. Why? Because eye-tracking studies suggest we search the page in an F pattern and read as few as 1 in 5 words. And when we don’t find what we’re looking for we leave the page. Compare that to the linear way we read words on paper  – word by word, from the top left to the bottom right of the page. [106 words]

Shorter, certainly, but perhaps still a bit “slabby” in appearance. Try breaking it into bullet points and improve usability further by changing the font type, size and colour to make the key words stand out like headlines in a newspaper.

Read differently means write differently.

  • Put the important stuff at the top where it’s visible without scrolling. It’s called front loading.
  • Break larger blocks of text into shorter blocks, bullet points and lists.
  • Be short, sharp and to the point. 

Eye tracking studies suggest we search in an F pattern and read as few as 1 in 5 words. And when we don’t find what we’re looking for we leave. Compare that to the linear way we read word by word on paper. [83 words]

The shortest and cleanest-looking version yet, although maybe a bit too short for readers who are really interested in the subject. Extra detail can be provided through hyperlinks (internal or external) readily accessible to those who are motivated to learn more but without cluttering the page or confusing those who are only after an overview.

Here’s my shorter version with hyperlinks (and, yes, the hyperlink works)!

Read differently means write differently.

  • Put the important stuff at the top where it’s visible without scrolling. It’s called front loading.
  • Break larger blocks of text into shorter blocks, bullet points and lists.
  • Be short, sharp and to the point. 

Eye tracking studies suggest we search in an F pattern and read as few as 1 in 5 words. And when we don’t find what we’re looking for we leave. Compare that to the linear way we read word by word on paper. [83 words]

Now try the above exercises with a page or section from your own website. When you’re done road test it by asking your visitors  (or, failing that, colleagues, family or friends) which version they prefer. If your own website is too close to home to fiddle with without upsetting your co-workers then choose an external website from your sector that you think could do with a makeover.

This article first appeared in Richard’s writing for the web booklet which accompanies his training course of the same name. You can book a place here.

Posted on by

The press release – dead or alive?

Ten years ago ACM Training regularly ran writing press release courses the length and breadth of Britain. Filling a room with trainees in London, Birmingham, Bristol, Cardiff, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Manchester, Nottingham and Newcastle wasn’t a hard sell. Why, we even paid the occasional visit to Norwich! But then something happened and within a year bookings dropped almost to zero. That “something” was the social web. Suddenly organisations didn’t have to rely on the media to get their messages across. Facebook and everything that followed meant they could get in touch with their target audiences directly. Cut out the middleman was the mantra. Made sense. Sort of. Cue dozens of articles proclaiming “the press release is dead.”

And that’s pretty much the way it stayed. Or at least it was until about six months ago when, almost as suddenly as it dropped off, demand started building up again. Cue dozens more articles proclaiming, with a startling lack of originality and misappropriating Mark Twain, that “reports of it’s death had been greatly exaggerated.”

So which is it – DEAD or ALIVE?

Both, in my view. Dead in it’s original form. Alive in it’s new form. Or to sum it up in one word: different. Different because the media landscape has shifted dramatically in the past decade. A decade where the dizzying rise in the fortunes of another Mark (Zuckerberg not Twain) has been matched by a precipitous fall in the fortunes of the print media, particularly local newspapers.

But those that are left still need copy. In fact, with very few staff running them, they are so desperate for copy they’re likely to print your press release almost verbatim. Which is good. Unless your press release is bad. In which case it’ll still be bad. Because the chance of a reporter or sub-editor rewriting your copy and ironing out any wrinkles are zip.

So without this journalistic back stop in place there’s a good case to be made for ensuring your press releases leave you in the very best shape. Which is perhaps part of the reason why there’s been an upturn in business for training companies like ACM. But there’s an additional reason to give your press releases a polish – because once written they can easily be re-versioned for all of the other distribution channels now available such as online newsrooms and, of course, the likes of Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn.

Think of the press release as content with a newsy nose. That kind of content is likely to go much further on the social web as well as getting you noticed by journalists working in print, online, on television and radio.

In my next article on this subject I’ll take you through the key elements of a press release fit for the digital world. If, in the meantime, you’d like to book a course and join the renaissance movement then click on the image below.

writing-press-releases

Richard Uridge has been a journalist for more than 30 years, though he claims it feels like only yesterday that he started as a cub reporter on the Reading Chronicle. Heʼs worked in all three major media – television, radio and print – and for ten years presented Open County on BBC Radio Four. His journalistic work has taken him all over the world. Less exciting, though perhaps more relevant, is that over the years he reckons heʼs read several thousand press releases and as a result knows what makes good, bad and downright ugly reading.

Posted on by — 1 Comment

First, second or third person: which is best for blogging?

First Person

For me writing is a largely instinctive activity and I don’t often ruminate over which personal pronoun I should use when blogging.

Second Person

Want to know which perspective to use when writing a blog? Then keep reading. This post will explore the various options and help you decide which is best.

Third Person

Bloggers often struggle to know which perspective to apply to their posts. Should they use the first person of paragraph one? The second in paragraph two? Or, like this paragraph, the third?

And I know what you’re thinking, maybe you could use all three in the same paragraph because some writers do just that and seem to get away with it!

The first person (me) puts the writer centre stage. The second puts the reader (you) in the spotlight. And the third views things from an audience’s point of view (he, she, they) – way up in the cheap seats at the back of the auditorium if you like.

So which is the best? Sadly there’s no simple answer. All three have their place. It depends on a number of variables: who you are; why you’re blogging (your purpose); who’s reading (your target audience) and so on.  But what follows is some basic guidance drawn together after I delivered  ACM Training’s blogging workshop to a group of enthusiastic but reflective academics at Queen Margaret University in Edinburgh.

Like most academics they are used to writing in the third person because of the commonly and firmly held view that this way is somehow more objective. (I say somehow because I’m not sure that it genuinely is only that it gives the impression of being so, but that’s a discussion for another day). So changing their perspective from third to second seemed, for them, like a huge step. From third to first a giant leap. And one that, because they’re academics, they needed plenty of empirical evidence to take.

When to use first person

The person you know best is you. So writing about yourself ought to be easy. And for some people it is. Too easy in fact. And they end up over-disclosing. Telling us all sorts of things that, frankly, are of no interest to us at all.

But some of you will find writing about yourself really difficult. Perhaps you’re naturally shy. Or, like my academics, so used to writing about other people that writing about number one seems uncomfortable. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t though. As a blogger the most important thing is that you engage your readers – hook them in the first place and then keep them reading, ideally to the end. And if writing about your own experience is the stuff that is most likely to engage your audience then do so. Get out of your comfort zone.

Let me give you an example. An academic had written a blog post about the Notting Hill Carnival and a controversial proposal to change it from processional to a fixed location. It was, by her own admission, a little dry and read more like a press release or the abstract of a learned paper. All because it was written in the third person. Talking through her own experience of the carnival it turns out that she attended her first as an unborn child. Write about that I implored her. Let rip with your imagination. Take us there. Have us listen to the beat of your mother’s heart in utero overlaid with the pulsating rhythm of steel drums.

When your experience is relevant and interesting it can lift your copy from the ordinary to the extraordinary. Try it.

The first person approach is also good when readers are coming to your blog principally because of you (and not only for what you’re offering them). As a keen cyclist I might, for example, follow Chris Froome’s thoughts on Twitter (a micro blog) not to read his detached and aloof views on cycling but to get first person insight into his life in the saddle.

When to use second person

But if people are visiting your blog mainly because of what you’re offering them (and who you are is largely irrelevant) then focusing on their needs via the second person perspective is probably the best approach. I find myself using the second person most often for instructional blogs and think of it this way: what does the reader really want? Me or the advice I’m offering them? If the answer is them then that’s what I’ll concentrate on. That’s where the value is. And my stock rises (hopefully) not because of who I am but because of how I’ve helped.

As Brian Clarke of Copyblogger put it “…if you’re blogging for marketing or public relations purposes, your every post should be purposefully aimed at the needs and wants of others. You only benefit when readers benefit first.”

When to use third person

Writing in the third person puts some “distance” between you as the writer and the events or people you’re writing about. It’s the preferred position in academic writing because, as already touched on, is or appears to be more objective. So if that’s what you’re after in your blog use the third person. But that sense of detachment can also appear aloof. The reader may be frustrated by this and wish you’d come off the proverbial fence. Again the guiding question should be this: is my detachment helping me achieve my purpose? If the answer is yes then stay detached. But if your aloofness is hindering then don’t.

In all forms of writing engaging readers and keeping them engaged is crucial. Whilst the words engaged and detached aren’t exact antonyms (engaged and disengaged would be) being engaging in a detached way is a hard trick to execute. Good academic writers are frequently pulling this particular white rabbit out of the hat. Bad ones send us to sleep.

When to mix and match

In reality very few posts are written strictly from only one perspective. We (first person plural) tend to use them in combination. You (second person singular) might even find them all together in the same paragraph. But never in the same sentence. That’s a recipe for confusion:

“I signed up for Richard’s blogging course and by the end of the day you have to write at least one blog but they didn’t insist in it being written from one particular perspective.”

Let me know what you think. Comments welcome. And if you author or read a great blog written from the first, second or third person link to it below. This person would love to see it!

Posted on by — 1 Comment

Tripping over TripAdvisor

How should restaurateurs and hoteliers respond to negative reviews on TripAdvisor?

It’s a question I’ve pondered many times as a social media trainer who, because of the job, eats out more than in and the answer is always the same: only after careful consideration. Doesn’t matter if we cook for a living or not, our instinct, when attacked, is to lash out. Attack being the best form of defence, or so the saying would have us believe. But it rarely is, whether we’re being bashed over the head with a real stick or it’s our online reputation that’s taking a digital beating. Why? Because in the heat of the moment we might end up doing, saying or writing something that makes matters worse.

So here’s my recipe (forgive the pun) for avoiding disaster on TripAdvisor, or elsewhere on the social web for that matter.

Ingredients

Everyone has their own favourite version of this dish. And even the name varies. The most common is revenge which, according to aficionados, is best enjoyed cold. Others prefer it served at boiling point or, ideally, above. Whatever your taste, all have certain ingredients in common:

At least 1 disgruntled customer (2 or more can make the dish hotter);

1 angry chef, restaurateur or hotelier (some recipes call for all three);

A liberal dash of sarcasm;

More than a pinch or two of salt;

A heaped tablespoon of opprobrium;

and 1 litre of bile.

Method

Mix all the ingredients together. Bring to the bile – I mean boil. Simmer, stew, roast… it really doesn’t matter which. The most important part is to serve the dish as publicly as possible.  Most people use TripAdvisor for this purpose. Others swear by Facebook or Twitter. The really rancorous often serve up a slice on each.

Here’s one somebody made earlier…

So how best to respond to something like this? Before I share with you what the owner of the restaurant castigated above actually said, here’s the decision-making process I encourage those in the hospitality business to follow.

It requires honest reflection, which is made easier by the passage of time. The social web creates a feeling of immediacy and it’s all too easy to get caught up in the moment. Don’t! Pause. Take a deep breath. Take several more deep breaths. Finish service. Pour yourself a hard drink. Or a soft one. Sleep on it. And only then ask yourself these questions:

Have they got a point? And can you do something about it? If the answer to both is yes then thank them for bringing the matter to your attention and tell them (and the wider world) you’ve done something about it. If they’ve got a point but you can’t do anything to rectify the situation then gently explain why. Perhaps their complaint was about an argumentative couple at the table next to them. Not within your control, although you might point out that if they’d raised it at the time you’d have done your best to move them to a quieter table. In both cases saying sorry doesn’t hurt and plays well with the increasing number of would-be customers who use TripAdvisor to help them make their minds up where to stay or eat. (By the way, nobody’s really sure exactly how many people rely on TripAdvisor and you’d want to take the network’s own figures with a pinch of salt for obvious reasons but that the number is increasing is certainly the case).

If you genuinely believe your critics haven’t got a point you’ve got three choices: ignore them (the least said soonest mended approach); thank them for their comments and leave it at that (the turn the other cheek method); or tell them they’re wrong and explain why (the customer isn’t always right technique). I’ve nothing against any of these approaches providing – and it’s an important proviso – in doing so you don’t compound the situation by inadvertently drawing more attention to it than is warranted.

It’s also worth considering the gearing between positive and negative comments on the TripAdvisor visitor rating bar chart (see below).  I don’t know about you, but I tend not to believe establishments that have nothing other than positive comments and avoid them. What I’m looking for is a nice smooth downward curve from top right to bottom left. Lots of excellents and very goods, some averages, a few poors and even fewer terribles.

TripAdvisor's visitor rating bar chart.
Uphill good. Downhill bad.

Generally speaking the higher the number of reviews of any kind the more accurate the reflection of the establishment. That’s the beauty of crowd sourcing. One or two people might be mischievous, malicious or  just plain wrong. But hundreds? Unlikely. It’s a warning sign. And not only for potential customers but also for the management. A warning they ignore at their peril.

There is an alternative method. I call it the Basil Fawlty way. Done well it’s hugely entertaining and actually makes you want to visit the place being so rigorously defended. Done badly it can leave a poor taste. Just like food. And there’s the rub. Taste is such a subjective thing. One man’s meat is another man’s poison and all that. Perhaps we should be thankful that the range of replies on TripAdvisor is as wide as the range of food on offer. Something for everyone.

Here’s the French Pantry’s response to the complaint above. For the record I’ve eaten there many times and always enjoyed it. I like the owners Simon and Helen. Simon’s a colourful character. An accomplished musician as well as a restaurateur. Whether he’s too colourful at times with his use of language…well I’ll let you be the judge. Comments, as always, welcome. Even negatives ones!

The restaurateur's response.
A Fawlty-esque defence. Right or wrong?

Posted on by

What do Facebook’s new emojis mean for business?

facebook new emojisThose of us who use Facebook for business may soon find our target audiences have six new ways of interacting with us online – and not all of them good.

We’re familiar with the concept of liking a post or a page by giving it the big thumbs up. But now Facebook is testing a series of emojis that will enable users to react more broadly to content. And if the experiment in Spain and Ireland goes well they could well be rolled out to users everywhere soon.

There are seven emojis in total. The first is a reworked and animated version of the ubiquitous thumbs up like. The others are love, haha, yay, wow, sad and angry. Noticeable for its absence is an eighth thumbs down dislike emoji which Facebook apparently resisted despite widespread calls for it because of concerns over cyber bullying (and because it might dampen the overwhelming sense of optimism and well being they at least like to think the network promotes).

So what will the emojis mean for social media managers? I’d say the biggest area for potential concern is around the sad and, in particular, the angry face. Good quality content will still garner likes. The very best content will perhaps get loves. The funniest a haha. And the most profound a wow. We might even, if we’ve got exciting news to share, get a yay. But what if we’ve failed in someway and the person or people we’ve let down express their sorrow for all to see with a sad face or their anger with a red face? Then we better react fast, first to acknowledge their upset and then to engage them in conversation (possibly offline and away from prying eyes) to resolve the situation. Handled well it might be possible to get a blue thumbs up for our customer service despite a failure elsewhere in our organisation – a kind of emotional red shift.

Imagine that the new emojis had already been rolled out globally when the VW emissions scandal broke. Irate motorists would have posted angry red faces to Facebook in their thousands. But there’s no doubting VW’s sure-footed handling of the situation and for that one might give them the blue thumbs up.

So take a leaf out of the German motor manufacturers crisis communications handbook and think about how your customers might use the new emojis and how you’d handle a load of red faces. Better not to have them in the first place, of course. But all organisations err in some way or other at some time or other. None of us is perfect after all. And the measure of the very best organisations is how they react in adversity.