Tag Archives: myspace

Social Media Smackdown: Columbus, Ohio vs. Columbia, S.C.

Posted on by

Something a little different for this third round of Social Media Smackdown: I’m comparing how two cities are using social media from a travel and tourism perspective. Both have their namesake from Genoa’s most famous navigator and both are home to college football teams I love to hate. Let’s see how Columbus, Ohio and Columbia, South Carolina are cultivating relationships with fans through social media. Buckeyes or Gamecocks? Let’s find out:

expcollogo columbialogo

Round 1: Twitter

Each city has a Twitter account; Columbus can be found @ExpCols and Columbia is @columbiasc and both claim to be the “official” guides to their respective cities. Twitter-Friends, which I’ve used in past Smackdowns to calculate metrics like Conversation Quotient and Link Quotient, was not functioning properly and kept giving me big zeroes in these categories for both accounts. So, I had to go through manually and eye up each Tweetstream to make a judgment.

Columbus, Ohio: Following 1,853; Followers 2,775; Tweets 3,217
Columbus is VERY active on Twitter, posting updates several times a day. Most of their tweets include a link to its CVB blog and there are very few @replies. They often add the #ExpCols hashtag to tweets, but it doesn’t appear that many others do. Essentially, Columbus’ Twitter account can be boiled down to an RSS of its blog (with more interesting teasers to accompany the links to the blog posts).

Columbia, S.C: Following 3,665; Followers 3,832; Tweets 1,140
This Tweetstream is much more interactive – a better mix of @replies and RTs along with links. It looks like the Columbia CVB has used Twitter to promote giveaways and take a thought leadership position in the travel/convention industry: many tweets are links about meeting planning in general. They also recommend other local South Carolina twitter accounts for people to follow and offer tips on things like local grocery deals and weather reports. They also use the #famouslyhot hashtag to identify some of their tweets.

Point: Columbia is using Twitter not only to push out its own content, but also to share interesting tweets and links from others. Columbus, however, uses Twitter more as a broadcast channel. Point to the southerners.

Round 2: Facebook

At first glance, this was a walkaway victory for Columbia, S.C. When I searched Facebook pages for Columbus, Ohio, the page I found first had 16,259 fans. However, the city didn’t appear to be taking advantage of the page very much. The only wall posts were by fans – Columbus didn’t seem to be interacting with them at all. Posts included “shout outs” like “Just visited The Short North. Pretty Cool! White Castle rock on!” Other wall posts by fans are advertisements for events or fundraisers in and around the city. On the photos page, there are a few profile pics and about 20 photos that have been uploaded by fans. There was only one discussion topic posted with no replies. It seemed like a big miss. But when I went to the “Experience Columbus” Web site and clicked the Facebook link from that site, it took me to an entirely different page. This one only had 525 fans, but was much more interactive. The page has Flickr and YouTube streams integrated into it, a feed from its blog, and several posts and links to the wall detailing all the goings-on in the city. But, when I searched “Columbus, Ohio” on Facebook, it didn’t even come up in the results. Searching on just the word “Columbus” revealed the site, but it was listed seventh or eighth in the results.

cbabridgeThe Facebook page for Columbia, S.C., has just over 8,000 fans, but is much more interactive. The site appears to be maintained by the Columbia Convention and Visitor’s Bureau, whose staff posts events and news items about what’s going on in the city and invites fans to share their events. What I particularly like is a post on the wall (with a photo) identifying and introducing the Columbia CVB staff. It humanizes the page and lets you know that there are real, live people behind this brand! The photos page includes nine albums, like “Celebrities in Columbia” and candids from various conferences held in the city. On the boxes tab, Columbia has an import of its Flickr stream for more photos and feeds to three different blogs about Columbia. It also includes a .pdf of its meeting planners guide and more than 400 links posted to the page that relate to events, residents or news items about the city. A YouTube box on the home page links to a few videos about Columbia.

Point: Both cities have a good Facebook presence. I like how Columbus is a little less marketing focused. But because it’s so hard to find on Facebook, I think I have to go with Columbia on this one.

Round 3: Web site

Each city’s Web site is run by its Convention and Visitors Bureau. While Columbia’s starts out with a landing page that makes you choose among the Convention Center, CVB and Regional Sports Council sub-sites, Columbus’ home page is more traditional and in my opinion, easier to get pulled into.

colsskylineOn the “Experience Columbus” Web site, you are immediately presented with a scrolling visual of photos from various events around town, a sidebar of social links to six different online locations like Facebook, Twitter and Flickr, a hotel booking widget, a blog feed and an events calendar. Despite all this information being on the home page, it’s not too intimidating. There are links and tabs for meeting planners, the media, and then a series of links to dining, lodging and activities in the city. There’s also the option for local Columbus residents to become “members” of the site. The link to the site’s blog takes you to a nice platform that appears to have been posting since last October. The content is written by various members of the CVB staff and discusses local events and suggestions for things to do in the city. They even appear to have featured some guest authors now and then and have done a good job of embedding pictures and videos into the blog. Few of the posts have comments, but overall the blog does appear to be a good source of information for residents and visitors alike. The “IN” portion of the Web site for Columbus residents is interesting; it is basically a call to action for city residents to help share the good news about their city by inviting family and friends and identifying opportunities to host meetings and conferences in the city. Site members get access to special discounts at local merchants.

I disliked how immediately on Columbia’s “Famously Hot” home page I was faced with a choice.  How am I supposed to know which of the three options to choose? Each link took you to an entirely different site. I ended up picking the CVB portion of the site. Each link took you to an entirely different site. It didn’t work (in either Firefox or IE). I kept getting 404 messages. I’m not sure if it was just my computer, but still after several clicks and refreshes (and even trying to access it on one of our four other computers at the house), I couldn’t get it to load. It appears that there are a few blogs on the site (their FB page had links to a few), but anything trying to resolve to the columbiaCVB.com site just wouldn’t fly. FAIL.

Point: Probably unfair since I couldn’t actually load Columbia’s site, but Columbus, Ohio, wins for its simple but effective presentation, obvious links to social outposts, ease of navigation, well-written blog and innovative focus on residents with its “IN” community.

Round 4: Other Social Sites (Flickr, YouTube, MySpace, etc.)

Both cities do a pretty good job here. Both have a Flickr presence, but while Columbia’s is heavily populated with more staged “markeing” shots and logo images, Columbus has its Flickr presence set up as a group pool where other Flickr members can add their own photos and tag them. There are 300+ photos in the pool and they give you a true sense of what the city is like.

On YouTube, Columbia has had a branded channel since 2007 and has 25 videos posted, with over 4,000 views. Columbus’ 13 videos have been viewed more than 2,000 times, but that’s in just two and a half months since they created their YouTube site. Again, the Columbia videos feel a little more produced and staged and focus heavily on meetings and conventions, whereas Columbus features clips on what it’s really like to live in that city (neighborhood profiles, e.g.)

Both cities had MySpace pages (Columbia actually had two). Both pages had about 1,000 friends, and both had integrated their other social outposts onto their MySpace pages. There was really nothing to truly distinguish them. What I found very interesting is the Columbus is using Delicious to bookmark articles and sites about its city and Northern Ohio. They’ve tagged and bookmarked articles from Bon Appetite, Style, and the Columbus Dispatch.

Point: The point goes to Columbus here. Although it was essentially a draw with MySpace and YouTube, Columbus’ more authentic presentation of its city on Flickr and its innovative use of Delicious to draw attention to news about the city gives it the edge.

ALA @ USCThe Final Verdict: It’s a 2-2 tie…but I think the overall win has to go to the capital of the Buckeye state. I really like how, despite the fact that the CVB is backing their online presence, Columbus, Ohio, is really trying to not be too heavy handed with the marketing aspect of it and trying to engage people and give a real portrayal of what the city is like. Columbia, S.C. does a good job having a presence and using some of the social media tools, but it just feels a little more forced somehow – more like the content and messages are being pushed out versus engaging with fans to create content and conversations together.

Plus, Columbia is home to Steve Spurrier, so they should automatically lose anyway. Go Dawgs.

Previous Smackdown: Mountain Hardwear vs. The North Face
Previous Smackdown: Magic Hat vs. Bell’s Beer

Image via Flickr users RatsOnParade and BridgeImages

Is Facebook the new AOL?

Posted on by

exitWhen I was in middle school, EVERY family I knew that was on the Internet was on AOL. It seemed like the only way you could get online. Everyone had AOL e-mail addresses, AOL Instant Messenger handles, and those somewhat stalker-enabled AOL Profiles. There were some alternatives, like CompuServe, but essentially you were on it because everyone else was.

Fast Forward 10 or 15 years and enter Facebook. Lots of people are joining the site because, well, everyone else is on the site. People in my parents’ generation have started to join because they’re being left out of information and conversations that happen on the site. Grandparents are joining Facebook because that’s where pictures of their grandkids get posted. My husband calls his parents in Pennsylvania to fill them in on the health of a neighbor who recently suffered a stroke. My in-laws live 500 yards from this man, but since my husband has friended his daughter on Facebook, he knows much more about how the neighbor is recovering than my in-laws do – despite that fact that we live 250 miles away. If you’re not on Facebook, you’re missing out.

But Facebook made changes earlier this month to its home page and the way information is presented. It now emphasizes friends’ status updates and photo posts and makes it hard to tell if they’ve joined a group, friended someone you know, became a fan of something, or installed an application. You have to visit their profile page for that. The process for things virally spreading through Facebook has been hampered, in my opinion. And according to TechCrunch, a new Facebook poll shows that 94 percent of Facebook users don’t like the changes, either.

In many industries, customers can “vote with their feet.” If they don’t like something, they leave. They take their business elsewhere. As alternatives to AOL began sprouting up, people began doing just that. They opted for a more open Internet, better connection service, less controlled content. But with Facebook, there doesn’t seem to be that option. How do you vote with your feet when there’s nowhere to go? MySpace is old hat and has its own set of issues that make it less user-friendly than Facebook. If all your friends are on Facebook and that’s where the action is, it doesn’t make much sense to leave in protest unless you can all go somewhere together. So as much as people are griping about the homepage changes, Facebook doesn’t have a ton of incentive to revert to the old site. Where are people going to go?

Facebook has shown willingness to listen to customers in the past – notably with its Beacon advertising platform and its recent changes to its Terms of Service. And several users weren’t fans of the 2008 design change, but Facebook stuck with it (those changes were more subtle). It has the luxury right now of being the biggest game in town. But judging by what became of AOL, that’s not a position that Facebook should get too comfortable in. Eventually, if Facebook users remain unhappy, expect a newer, cooler kid to roll in and start attracting attention – and users.

Image: Flickr user Scoobyfoo

Social Media Smackdown: Magic Hat vs. Bell’s Beer

Posted on by

I have a highly embarrassing confession to make: I drank a lot of Coors Light in college. I think the beer gods have mostly forgiven me at this point – I was young and stupid! But thankfully I’ve graduated to the world of craft beers and microbrews. I’m currently partial to Magic Hat, brewed in South Burlington, Vt., but my Midwestern pals on Twitter are continually singing the praises of Bell’s Beer out of Kalamazoo, Mich. I can’t find it in Upstate N.Y. and thus I have yet to try it. So since I can’t do a blind taste test, I’ve decided to pit these beers against each other and see how their social media strategies fare in a head-to-head (get it?) competition:

beercompare

Round 1: Twitter

Both beers are on Twitter: @magichat and @bellsbeer (along with more than 50 other craft beers, btw). So far, despite both acquiring legions of followers, neither brand is terribly engaged with its fans. Here’s the shakedown:

Magic Hat: Following 3,110; Followers 2,829; Tweets 71
@magichat’s first tweet was nearly 11 months ago and so with only 71 Tweets, it’s not a terribly active account. Tweets have included some coupons, a few twitpics of a recent promotional event, a couple of contests, and links to some videos of its brewery. There are some replies sprinkled throughout its Tweetstream, but not many. If you look at @magichat’s statistics from TwitterFriends, it earns a CQ (conversation quotient) score of 14.9 percent, versus a 41.8 percent average. Its LQ (link quotient) is 53.6 percent. Its Twitter rank is 3329 out of 56585.

Bell’s Beer: Following 1,469; Followers 1,509; Tweets 56
@bellsbeer started Tweeting in July of last year and with 56 updates, it’s also not terribly active. It ranks 9500 out of 56585 according to TwitterFriends, but its conversation quotient is much higher than @magichat’s, scoring a 33.3 percent. Its Tweets are primarily informational – where to find their beers, info about beer events they’re attending, answers to questions. But Bell’s Beer does seem to be more engaged with its fans – more replies and a more conversational tone. Its replies tend to be answers to people’s questions on everything from where to find the beer to nutritional information to how to find the date each beer was brewed.
Point: Bell’s gets the point for engaging with its customers via Twitter moreso than just pushing out information.

Round 2: Facebook

Each brand has a Facebook fan page. Magic Hat has 8,924 fans and the page is chock-a-block full of activity. A video post of a recent Mardi Gras parade it sponsored and 47 accompanying photos. An event announcement for Philadelphia Beer Week. An info center with graphics that link back to pages on the company’s web site (including its “Sip Code Locator” to find beer in your area). There are dozens of notes posted to the page that announce new beer variety packs, upcoming events, contests, and new distribution locations for its beer.

Bell’s Beer currently has 16,901 fans. Its wall includes 359 posts and there are three discussion boards. One is a forum for fans to discuss changes made to the variety of hops used in its Oberon brew. Bell’s hasn’t weighed in on the discussion at all. The photo section only includes images of each beer case design. There are 40 fan photos, many of them of a cycling team wearing Bell’s jerseys.

Despite the fact that the Bell’s Beer fan page has almost twice as many members, it doesn’t appear to be utilizing the space very well. Magic Hat is creating buzz about its beer and using Facebook as a platform to showcase its fans and customers using the product – pictures of people at Magic Hat events, for example. Its fan page makes you want to engage with the brand, while Bell’s Beer is pretty static.
Point: Magic Hat, hands-down

Round 3: Web site

Magic Hat’s Web site design is right in line with its trippy Vermont roots. If you click on the “People’s Place” blimp that floats across the screen, you’re taken to the “epicenter of all things Magic Hat.” There’s a blog (called a “glog”) that repackages some of the Facebook notes found on its fan page. You can create a login to become part of the community and see Magic Hat events in your area. The site includes polls, photos from both Magic Hat and the site’s users, an FAQ section, and an online press center. Badges on the left side of the page direct you to Magic Hat’s online presence on Facebook, Twitter, Flickr and MySpace.

Bell’s site is a much cleaner and more traditional design. The beer itself is what dominates the site – just about the only images are of beer bottles! You can find during which season each of their varieties is available, purchase Bell’s shirts and products, and find a local distributor. But the site itself doesn’t lend itself to connecting with other Bell’s fans. There’s really no interactivity. You can sign up for an RSS feed of Bell’s Beer news items, but you can’t comment on them. The site doesn’t direct you to its Facebook fan page or its Twitter page. The design is nice, but in the end, it’s your basic static Web site. To beer fair, the home page claims that the site will be updated in the coming weeks.
Point: Magic Hat, for creating an online community that highlights its customers and allows them to connect in several different ways.

circus

Round 4: Other social sites (Flickr, YouTube, etc.)
I couldn’t find a YouTube channel for either beer. Magic Hat has a Flickr account with several albums. The images feature the brewery and several Magic Hat sponsored events. I couldn’t find any sort of official Bell’s Beer Flickr account. Magic Hat’s MySpace page counts 3,746 friends and includes links to its “glog” posts. As far as I could tell, Bell’s Beer does not have a MySpace presence.
Point: Magic Hat once again

The Final Verdict: Magic Hat is clearly outpacing Bell’s Beer in the adoption of social media platforms to reach out to and connect with its fans. Magic Hat’s brand image is quirky and funky and it probably skews younger than typical Bell’s Beer fans, so maybe social media was less of a stretch for the company. I’d love to see Magic Hat become a little more engaged on Twitter and really interact with its fans in that space, rather than using it more as a platform to push information. And it would be great if Bell’s Beer could tap into its rabid fan base on Facebook and create a more interactive and engaging site.

But whether you kick back with a Two-Hearted Ale or a Circus Boy, either one definitely beats a Coors Light– and there are apparently thousands of fans online who agree.

Image via Flickr user dnolan36

Geni.com: Stealth social media

Posted on by

My mom is a Baby Boomer, and I don’t really think she could be labeled as an early adopter of technology. She teaches elementary school and uses the computer in her classroom probably better than most teachers (she made a blog for her kindergarten class one year and had the students post a sentence each day about what they learned). But my mom doesn’t really participate in social media on a personal level, and in fact, she’s pretty skeptical of it. I’m pretty sure she’s never heard of Twitter or LinkedIn, doesn’t subscribe to any blogs, and definitely, definitely doesn’t want anything to do with Facebook. She’s wary of posting personal information online and thinks that Facebook is “something that you young people do.”

Geni

But a over a year and a half ago, I started creating our family tree on a site called Geni.com. You can create profiles for members of your family tree and invite them to join. If they do, they take over control of their profile and can then add additional family members. My family tree now stands at 500+ members, stretching back to Tipperary in 1816. Each family member can add photos and videos to their profile, edit personal information, and post messages to other family members’ pages. If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck…

My mom and her siblings love Geni. They post birthday greetings, anniversary messages, and comment on pictures of relatives’ kids. My mom’s oldest sister has really gotten into it and added scanned images of birth, death, and wedding certificates of some of our first ancestors. She’s connected with our third cousins twice removed (Geni calculates those weird relationship rules for you) and added all the family genealogy data that previously was scattered around on a dozen different paper trees.

My mom is all over this “family” version of Facebook. She doesn’t view it as social networking; maybe because it’s a little more controlled and she knows that only her family members will see her profile. But she’s actively participating.

The PEW Internet & American Life Project recently published a report on Internet usage for American adults. According to the report, 19 percent of online adults aged 45-54 have some sort of online profile (Facebook, LinkedIn, MySpace, etc.) and only 10 percent of online adults aged 55-64 have one. These numbers are increasing but the report shows that by a wide margin, social networks are, as Brian Solis puts it, “still a phenomenon of the young.” The report also indicates that 60 percent of adults restrict access to their profile so that only their friends can see it.

My extended family’s online presence seems to mimic the age splits in the PEW report. Most of the cousins in my generation have multiple social network profiles and have joined Geni, but we all prefer to connect to each other through Facebook. We post pictures there, send birthday greetings to each others’ walls, and connect and share family news. Many of my cousins are fairly open and don’t restrict their profiles.

Family members in my mom’s generation use Geni for all the same purposes, but almost none of them has a Facebook profile. In many cases, Geni is their only online profile, and they’ve set it up so only members of our family can see it. I’m not sure if my mom is intimindated by Facebook or just thinks it’s not for her, but I’m wondering if Geni will serve as the “gateway drug” for her to branch out and start accepting social media more openly. We’ll see.