Social Media Rules SXSW ‘08

Pulling down the window shade to shield my particularly-sensitive eyes (and head) from the intense Austin sun, I write this entry on the flight back from the 2008 South by Southwest (SXSW) Interactive conference. Albeit a massive event with endless panels, events, and parties parties parties – there seemed to be one theme in particular that I encountered repeatedly over the past several days: social media. Most of the panels I attended revolved around these topics in one way or another – and pretty much 9/10 people I met from the conference were somehow involved in social media. Most were start-ups offering niche social networks or aggregation of social media (social networks, blogs, and video). I was pleased to encounter social media in a multitude of different situations as it is becoming a core interest and marketing concern for many Geary Interactive clients.

I attended one SXSW panel titled, “Social Marketing Strategies Metrics, Where Are They?” lead by Tom Parish of Tom Parish Inc, Brian Magierski of BSG, Michael Smith of USAA, Ynema Mangum of BMC Software, and Rohit Bhargava of Ogilvy. The only conclusion that I was able to leave the room with was that there basically is no consensus as to social media metrics should even be. The perceived value of social media is user engagement from a qualitative perspective rather than quantitative. Rather than counting number of visits, we should be considered with amount of time spent on the site/blog. And not only that, but what is the level and quality of user contribution? Are they generating content that adds to the value of the site? Therefore “traditional” online analytics methods and metrics are inherently flawed for social media measurement.

Although social media currently resides at the periphery for most online campaigns — I see it rapidly approaching the center. And as it does, there will most certainly be new and different analytics methods developed to better capture the essence of what makes social media efforts a success — or failure. I’m also curious to see how all of the social networking aggregators come into play here and how they effect analytics numbers for the sites they are pulling from.

However the issue of getting C level executives to even consider entering the realm of social media dominated the panel discussion. I was surprised and simultaneously grateful that at Gearyi we have such progressive clients, whom give us the opportunity to utilize newer and more innovative online strategies like social media. While social media might not make sense for all industries or clients, it’s going to be tough for most organizations to ignore the impact that social media is having on how users interact with each other and the web. That interaction may be the very thing that the C level execs find most intimidating — suddenly the users have a voice, and a very strong one at that. Therefore transparency and moderation now surface as primary concerns. This brings us to another consideration for social media ventures: moderation.

In the process of developing community sites, one resource that is often overlooked is a community manager/moderator. At least one, living, breathing human being will be required to manage the community site. But who is best fit to take on that daunting role? SXSW panelists Miles Sims and Jake McKee explained several options: You could hire someone internally (or with your agency) who does this as part of many other job requirements and responsibilities. But, chances are, that unless the resource can be fully dedicated to managing the community, you can rest assured that moderation on the community will be very minimal.

This might work for more some communities, however, there are many others that require constant moderation to keep things from becoming unruly or even illegal. In the case that intense moderation is required, it’s best to allocate more than one, full-time dedicated community managers to the site. These managers can be internal employees, agency reps, or even volunteers from the site itself.

There is also the option of having the community platform provider manage the community. For example, Small World Labs offers community management among their many other services at different levels and pricing depending on the requirements and size of the community. If it were my community, my top concern in this situation might be the level of brand knowledge that can be provided. Agencies and clients work hard to build partnerships based on a solid, mutual understanding of a particular brand. It could be quite risky to bring in a third party for community management when that party may not have such intimate knowledge of the brand’s identity.

One way or another, it’s crucial to have a community deployment AND management strategy in place early-on. You can help steer the community in the right direction and pre-empt extensive moderation is to provide community members with a clear understanding of what the purpose and/or mission of the community is. Users are more likely to contribute (and contribute quality content) when they feel as though they have a “job” to do as part of a greater effort or movement. Let them know what you are hoping to achieve with their content and why their voice matters. It’s not enough to simply create a community for your website and to hope that users will figure out what it is they are supposed to be doing there.