One of the benefits media companies enjoy from using an integrated platform like Cisco Eos to deliver their social entertainment experiences is having a singular data view on how audiences are interacting with and around their branded content. This data can be extremely valuable in helping enhance or optimize the value of the content experiences for both the consumer and the business — or, it can be just another distraction.
As an ex-data wonk (and now a marketer trying to leverage a multitude of measurement systems), I know that more data is not always more useful. With the overwhelming amounts of data available from your online channels, the more rare asset is actionable insights that can be derived from all that raw data. Many times insights can come from simply putting individual data points (e.g. a 10% increase in traffic) into context — which helps me understand if a 10% increase is a good outcome relative to what I’m trying to achieve, or some external benchmarks. The ability to provide context around individual metrics gives marketers and website operators a robust platform for testing and evaluating the value each web experience is delivering to its audience.
Introducing the Cisco Eos Brand Value Index (BVI)
We’ve generated a significant amount of data across the 100 Eos-powered web sites, and we recently put on our data spelunking caps to dig into this data to find actionable best practices our customers could use today, as well as to define a framework for contextualizing the broader data landscape generated by Eos interactions.
What I’d like to do now is to introduce you to some early thinking on a contextual analytics framework in Cisco Eos that we’re calling the Brand Value Index (BVI).
Before you ask, a couple of points on the data: Read More »
Tags: brand, brand value, brand value index, bvi, cisco eos, Cisco Media Solutions Group, CMSG, Eos, media, social entertainment, social media
By Steven Shepard, Contributing Columnist
My name is Steven Shepard, and I’m a writer, speaker, and industry analyst for the telecom, IT and media industries. The nature of my work is such that I visit about 70 countries every year, from wealthy First World countries with the most advanced telecom networks available to Third World countries that in many cases are building networks for the first time.
My plan is to take you on a journey through time and a voyage through space, showing you the best — and the worst — that telecom has to offer. For now, let’s go on a retrospective. Who would have thought that we would reach this point in our technological development?
Read More »
Tags: anthology, internet, media, Networks, telecommunications, telegraph
At our recent discussion at IBC about the challenges of monetizing content through social media, Claude London of BBC Worldwide identified three evolutionary phases media companies go through with social media and their branded content. (BTW: if you haven’t already heard the recording of this event, including Alex Balfour’s presentation on how the London 2012 Olympics is using social media, click here).
Over the last couple of weeks, we’ve been explored Claude’s concepts with various media execs in the digital media space, and have generally received a “yep, that’s what we did” response. Given the general consensus, here are the three phases media companies go through:
Phase 1 – “Social” as Communications
Business justification: It’s cheap
Objective: It’s cheap; do we need another reason?
Given the “free” or low-cost nature of many social channels, many brands get into social simply because of the price point. There generally is not a holistic strategy or business objective beyond following the crowd, or even because the boss heard about this <Twitter, Facebook, Foursquare, etc> thing.
This is the Wild West of social with little centralization or corporate standards. There is also wide variability in the type of editorial content pushed out via the channel.
Phase 2 – Promotional Vehicle
Business justification: Engaging a broad audience to make them aware of our content
Objective: Identify and recruit fans of our content. While there are some brands that “listen” or engage audiences in a dialogue, there is usually a push or one-way mentality to the engagement.
After some period of letting the interns drive the social strategy, the media company wakes up and realizes they have several thousand followers on Facebook or Twitter… the light bulb goes on when they realize how effective social can be in attracting and engaging audiences (and it’s cheap!).
At this point, they put more rigor around their efforts often:
- dedicating staff
- formalizing and centralizing some social media processes/standards and
- starting an editorial process for identifying what content to push out to audiences
Social efforts and teams are usually still decentralized, and the focus is on growing audience reach.
It’s at this point – when social starts becoming its own channel, and requiring some level of investment – that some media companies begin to outsource to outside vendors/agencies/experts. How much the company outsources is a good predictor if they’ll progress to the next stage or not. As Claude pointed out in his original comments “social media is as much content as it is marketing. Content is what we [the media company] do. Don’t outsource that.”
As Claude and others have recognized, entertainment content and brands distributed in social channels take on a life as their own as valuable audience experience. Companies that view social as just another promotional channel don’t recognize the value they’re leaving on the table by not making social and their digital content strategy one-and-the-same.
I’m not advocating that media companies should ONLY be social on sites they control – after all, it’s critical that media companies go where audience lives. Media companies should just have a strategy about when they’re using social channels for promotion vs a social entertainment experience that they’re trying to monetize.
Phase 3 – Relationship and Monetization Platform
Business justification: Audience want to interact with, and around my brands… why shouldn’t I build a longer-term, valuable relationship with them – one that I can monetize
Objective: Build brand value, and revenue
Few media companies have made the leap into this last phase, although many in the last 6-12 months are starting to make this transition.
Whether they’ve outsourced or not, in this phase media companies realize they have been giving away their three most valuable assets to 3rd parties:
1. Premium content
2. their brand and
3. the data about the audience (or in other words, the direct relationship with consumers)
They look to remedy this situation by exerting more control over their content and brands to make sure they are realizing some of the value being created on these high-value, social entertainment experiences. To achieve this, media companies begin to centralize staff and activities to realize economies / efficiencies of scale. They also tend to adopt a portfolio approach to their social channels, segmenting them by them by the experience or value they add at each stage of a consumer’s engagement with that brand or content.
The actual monetization of content is highly dependent on what is appropriate for that brand, audience and the social channel in which the experience is happening. Experimenting with what monetization efforts work with what social channels and audiences is the new Wild West.
I’d like to hear your perspectives on this. What phase is your company in? What do you think are the critical factors or items for a company to move from one phase to another? Are there any companies doing a great job at monetizing content in the social channel?
Tags: claude london, IBC, media, social entertainment, social entertainment experience, social media