Social Media - 2/5 - GroupM Search

Home > Blog > Social Media

Can Google Embody the Mantra of Its Social Network

by Chris Copeland ~ October 4th, 2011

With Google+ formally moving into beta, also known as the Google equivalent of full-market release status, it’s time to determine what role Google+ should play for consumers. Is it a cure to Facebook fatigue? A different way to do social, supplementing Facebook and Twitter? Or is Google+ more hype than promise and something consumers can dismiss? All are important questions; success hinges on one the Google+ conundrum. Can Google, the company, embody the mantra of its social network?

In a meeting with Google’s head of social media, Vic Gundotra, and Bradley Horowitz, their head of product management for social, I realized the ambition for Google+ is nothing short of spectacular. The long-range plan is smart and fully obtainable from a technology perspective. It could well redefine the company everyone thinks they know. If Google+ is going to fail, it won’t be because the vision isn’t big enough for the market.

That said, I’m stunned by Google’s reminders in recent weeks that the product was not even to the beta stage. It’s as if Google was shocked by the early success and not ready to release Google+ into the world, without limitations. (This despite the numbers: 25 million reported users in the first 30 days and 40,000 businesses signing up for +Business access before the launch of that product extension.) Yet, Google realizes what they are doing and how it has to be positioned in order to succeed.

And here, the Google+ conundrum enters the picture.

At a Google event in early September, Christian Oestlein, the company’s head product manager for social advertising, stated that to Google, social is “a core human behavior, not a platform,” thus putting Google+ still in the direct line of competition with Facebook in the battle for digital supremacy.

The reality is there is no success guaranteed to Google just because their name is before the plus symbol — not when your competition has 750 million users globally and a firmly entrenched position with brands anxious to alter their communications strategy to become more social.

As the product reached its 90-day mark of the field test and as stories emerged about Google+ becoming “a ghost town,” Google announced new features and beta status. The timing was curious; Facebook’s F8 event introducing timelines completely overshadowed the Google+ stories. However, if Google is building for the long-term, it doesn’t matter what either company does short term.

The timing of the Google+ announcement makes sense if for no other reason than they were starting to be doubted. They developed a quick fan boy culture that liked an alternative to Facebook. The risks of further alienating early adopters through lack of features or other users was not something they could afford, given Google+ is the company’s third attempt to try and makes social a part of their world.

It is clear Google is building for the long-term with Google+. With 40% growth reported in Google+ sign-ups, now nearing between 45 million to 50 million users since moving to open sign-up status. Google is going to have a shot in this space.

Facebook may be mimicking some of the innovations of Google+, but it seems unlikely they will replicate in full. Facebook has a method to its madness as is are not going to jump the tracks over a start-up effort, even from Google.

What Google must do now is to make itsown culture mirror the “social as core human behavior” and be more transparent and public about what is to come. If social is a core human behavior, then Google’s ultra-secretive product launches, infinite beta statuses and general black box approach to search algorithm must be retired.

Whatever is driving people to Google+, it is working. Now Google, the company, must enable more of it by embodying Google+, the social network.

This article was written by Chris Copeland, CEO, GroupM Search – The Americas, and was published on MediaPost, October 4, 2011. Follow Chris on Twitter – @SearchBoss.

Filed under: Emerging Trends & Tech, Social Media | No Comments >>

Will Search Shift the Social Battlefield Between Facebook and Google?

by Lauren Pesko ~ July 27th, 2011

The Clash of the Digital Titans has finally arrived. There’s Google, from its lofty perch as the search giant, and there’s Facebook, which from its social throne, has taken the mantle of display inventory kings. These two industry titans now find themselves face-to-face in no small part due to Google+’s launch.

For years, Google has tried to establish itself in the social space. Likewise, with every million new users the scale of the Facebook ad network has grown. With +Circles, Hangouts, and the rest, Google seems to have hit upon something of worth. People inside the industry and, more importantly, outside Madison Avenue and the Valley are intrigued. That said, the launch clearly caught the attention of the Social Network. Last week, Facebook responded to one of the most intriguing features of Google+, Hangouts (a group video chat application), by announcing its own solution – a partnership with Skype. Skype is the newest acquisition of Microsoft, another Google foe and one-time digital king.

But, for all the social gamesmanship that comes from this response, it’s likely to do little to halt someone from trying out or shifting over to Google+, if they are so inclined. What would it take for Facebook to evolve into an area that would keep consumers engaging and on site more than they already do? Perhaps the answer is all about the field upon which the battle is being fought. Google has clearly come onto Facebook’s turf, but it’s been attempting to do so for several years, so this is no sneak attack. However, if Facebook suddenly appeared on the search scene, well, I think it would be far most interesting.

In GroupM Search research published earlier this year, we found that consumers form a virtuous circle between the channels. While most start with search, they evolve and move into social when they feel the information available has capped and they want to find other data or get the opinions of others. Google +1, launched a few months back, was designed to be the continuation of Google’s effort (following its now ceased Twitter deal) to bring social into search and compete with Microsoft bringing Facebook into Microsoft’s index.

People don’t want to search. They want to go through a discovery phase, which is about deep and rich data. I suspect Facebook would have little interest in this and could be quite content to fully source this to Bing or just leave it outside the social walls altogether. Searchers also want to reach a destination, and that’s the play Facebook could somewhat easily make.

Imagine you seek to buy a new car, specifically a family SUV. Today, the pattern we have found suggests you use Google or Bing to identify a few candidates and then turn to your peer set to ask their opinions. In that process you may find that a few friends have liked Ford or Honda, but is that level of insight enough? Probably not. You may have to ask questions. Once you get their perspectives, you will then head back into the research loop of search.

Now imagine that instead of this, when you asked the first question inside Facebook, “Does anyone have a recommendation on a great SUV to buy?” the response is a blend of your graph and brand/third-party data. So, Facebook shows you the “likes” of brand pages, ideally with people liking specific models, not just the brand. But it also pulls in data to enable you to see which of those brands and products may be worth further consideration. This deeper search ability does two things. It connects your graph research with your extended research, but, more importantly for Facebook, it keeps you out of Google.

Brands continue to evaluate the worth of a Facebook fan and how they should buy vs. earn exposure. One way to attract brands is to give them connection points. Google built its business through the relevant intersection of content and intent. Using consumer questions in its graph and a better measure of intent could enable Facebook to not only enhance its ad properties, but also re-position the fight with a chief rival.

Regardless, the experience we have seen with Google since Bing started to gain market share suggests that innovation is most likely to be experienced when competition is present. Google+ represents the closest thing to that for Facebook since the late days of the MySpace reign. And whether or not Facebook decides to come to search, competition is present. Search and social will continue to deliver value for consumers in their experiences.

This article was written by Chris Copeland, CEO, GroupM Search – The Americas, and was published in ClickZ, July 19, 2011. Follow Chris on Twitter – @SearchBoss.

Filed under: Emerging Trends & Tech, Social Media | No Comments >>

Google's Unhealthy Obsession With Speed

by Cindy Kerber Spellman ~ June 30th, 2011

At the recent Google Inside Search event, the online advertising and search giant introduced several new features specific to mobile and desktop search. Google product events always have a curious cadence and this event was no different. Between raucous employees in the crowd and the painstaking effort to explain the smart technology behind the innovation, Google events can often obscure the real potential of the new features. One brief and obscure event element was Google’s definition of search. Bing has positioned itself as a decision engine and Google has stepped forward and proclaimed that search is about removing barriers from what you seek, preventing your train of thought from being derailed.

One newly announced feature designed to do just that is Google Instant Pages. Instant Pages takes the Google Instant feature (launched last year) and moves the concept forward by anticipating the most popular searches and producing cached entry points with no page load delay. Not since Tom Cruise and Anthony Edwards proclaimed their undying need for speed in “Top Gun” has a duo seemed so singularly focused as Larry Page and Sergey Brin are with improving the speed of searching on Google.

Google Instant pages is the latest advancement designed to shorten the amount of time an individual user spends on a single query. There are billions of queries every month on Google, so the idea that a vast majority could be impacted for the faster is a compelling feature for Google and a technological advancement worth trumpeting. The problem is that Google is inexplicably obsessed with the immediate gratification moment of the individual search rather than viewing the lifecycle of a search journey.

Apparently, the way Google feels it can best assist in this manner is to speed up the search process for a user. That is helpful if what I am seeking is of a nature that one query or even one session is enough. But what happens when I need multiple data points from different sources to further my decision? Or when the realities of life, work, family, etc. interfere with my ability to drill into a topic. As I’ve said before, search is an output that comes from a personal desire to either discover new information or to reach a destination in our decision-making process. Either way, search is often a process or journey, and three seconds saved here and there are nothing to dismiss, but it is not what people ultimately will reward with future behavior and usage.

What people want is a search service that enables them to store and accumulate knowledge as they progress through the process. When conducting our latest Search and Social in the Purchase Pathway research, we found that consumers say they use search for pricing and product research. We also found that the average purchase in high consideration categories such as consumer electronics and cellphones had nine to 11 touchpoints between search and social media. This suggests that consumers will repeatedly search and use the channel for refinement as they become more educated.

Our findings also revealed that in the abovementioned categories, it was taking on average two months to reach a final purchase. And that data point is the one that suggests what Google is trying to do with Instant and now Instant Pages are short-term responses when consumers need long-term solutions. What users of search engines need is the ability to catalog their knowledge as they accumulate it. As people move from search to search over the course of weeks, not seconds, the ability to reference what they have found previously and what they clicked on can enable a more fluid and positive experience.

Google Instant Pages further enhance the destination phase of a searching pattern. I want to know the weather or events taking place in London next week and it will help me. But, the discovery phase that exists in an overwhelming majority of searches is still being underserved. Google states that it wants to help avoid the derailing of your train of thought, but it is building the track for the set with a short attention span and need for instant gratification. Enabling the track with a run long enough to serve this multi-step, multi-session journey consumers are taking to a conversion decision would be a truly ground-breaking effort worth speeding up development on for the market.

This article was written by Chris Copeland, CEO, GroupM Search – The Americas, and published in Instant Insights on ClickZ, Tuesday, June 21, 2011. Follow Chris on Twitter – @SearchBoss.

Filed under: Emerging Trends & Tech, Organic Search, Paid Search, Social Media | No Comments >>

Building A Likable Partnership

by Chris Copeland ~ June 9th, 2011

Facebook has launched its first effort in an emerging focus area of developing deeper relationships with advertising agencies. The Facebook Studio concept is designed to showcase the creative and diverse experiences that are facilitated on the social platform. The program is a nice first attempt at bridging the gap which typically exists between media and publisher. It’s also a safe step because it gives creative agencies and social content developers an opportunity to put their best work on display in a Facebook-sanctioned environment. These are all positives for Facebook and a safe play to move into this territory.

What comes next will be the true measure of the Facebook/agency relationship. Over the last decade, I’ve served on virtually every agency council run by a search engine and have seen the myriad of attempts engines have tried to make to connect with both stand-alone agencies and search units inside traditional media and creative shops. Every council or agency relationship has a stated mission of improving the working partnership to provide better opportunities. These are opportunities for agencies and clients to voice their wishes and discuss new innovations that would be meaningful, and opportunities for the platform to incorporate that feedback and create new models for revenue generation or enhance existing products.

Well, that’s the stated goal. The reality is they are often as fulfilling as bi-partisan politics. Why? Because every council is driven by the sales arm of the organization with a guest appearance role by product engineering. Ultimately, the powers that drive these platforms, be it Google, Microsoft or now Facebook, reside inside the engineering community that shapes innovation. And those individuals are either only included at random intervals, non-incentivized to incorporate this level of insight, or they simply hold “sales and agencies” in such disdain that the mere suggestion of collaboration draws a sneer and terse interaction. That leaves a sales team offering up the olive branch of peace and prosperity, and left to navigate into uncharted territory inside their own organization only to be met with an outcome that shows the council/partnership to be nothing more than a glorified sales effort with no real impact on bigger thought.

So, Facebook has made a fine first effort but it’s an easy effort and will ultimately mean little for future development. What they do now in structuring true agency teams will reveal if they have an appetite for input and collaboration or if they are putting lipstick on the pig and passing it off for something more than what it is – just another sales tactic. If Facebook wants agencies to be “Fans,” then they’d be well-served by making product engineering an empowered and key component of this agency structure.

This article was written by Chris Copeland, CEO, GroupM Search – The Americas, and published in Instant Insights on ClickZ, Tuesday, May 24, 2011. Follow Chris on Twitter – @SearchBoss

Filed under: Social Media | No Comments >>

How Google +1 Could Impact Your SEO

by Stephen Hall ~ April 1st, 2011

This article offers perspective from GroupM Search on the SEO implications of Google’s +1 feature. It is a follow up to a POV published by GroupM Search on 3/31/2011 about the strategic implications of +1 and its meaning for brands and the digital marketplace.

Google’s “+1” (pronounced, “plus one”) is a type of social media sharing and recommendation feature released this week by Google to help them improve their website ranking system and improve the relevancy of their search engine results. This is a positive system for highlighting websites that you, as a consumer, think are good or deserve special consideration by your network. There is no “-1” in this system, although, Google does already have a ‘negative’ endorsement tool in their “Block all domain.com results” function.

Google’s launch of +1 is being broadly compared with the Facebook “Like” button, and it appears to be a similar system. Indeed, we would suggest that Google is piggy-backing on the simplicity and success of the “Like” button that so many web users are familiar and comfortable with. The other side of “+1” that is still under development is their website button – a widget, which, as with Facebook’s Like button, can soon be embedded into any page on a website and will allow users to pass their approval – through Google – to others in their Google +1 Network. Don’t underestimate the value of this part of the equation – if there is one thing that most websites want, it is the #1 rank in Google. If this button can help elevate your website to number one (at least for those in the networks of those who have “+1’d” it), then adoption of the widget is a no-brainer. This does not negate the need for search engine optimization (SEO) – there is still a baseline that Google (and Bing) need to take to let their algorithms do their work, so an optimized website is always going to help you rank for key terms. But if this widget makes the difference between #5 and #1, then expect to see broad adoption, and quickly.

Why Is Google Doing this?

This move is a fairly natural extension from Google’s existing social search product that has been around for the last couple of years. It is also designed to help improve search result quality, which has recently been called into question. Last year, Microsoft’s Bing search engine beat Google to the punch in signing a deal with Facebook to provide them with access to data from Facebook’s ubiquitous social network. Access to this data meant that Bing was able to – when users were signed in to Facebook – deliver recommendations based on the data from their network that Continue reading >>

Filed under: Organic Search, Paid Search, Social Media | 4 Comments >>

Google +1: The Strategy Behind the Latest Search Innovation

by Chris Copeland ~ March 31st, 2011

On Wednesday, March 29, Google rolled out a new search product innovation called “+1.” +1 is designed to allow users an opportunity to recommend ads and pages they have found to be useful. Doing this will enable other Google users to see pages and ads that have been “+1’d” (Google’s newest attempt at verb creation).

The Wall Street Journal has an extensive write-up on the specifics of the topic in an article titled “Google Wants To Be More Social,” as does the official Google blog.

In launching +1, Google appears to be making a direct challenge to the well-established “Like” functionality of Facebook. The move continues a recent shift in the way Google approaches its own algorithm and rankings, which have come under substantial scrutiny in the past three to four months.

Google product manager Christian Oestlien acknowledged, “Recommendations play a vital role in our decision-making process.” Google supported this with additional statistics that suggest 90% of consumers trust recommendations from people they know, while 71% say reviews from family members or friends influence purchase decisions. These figures align with recent research published by GroupM Search which indicates that more than 50% of all consumers had their perceptions changed about brands based on social influences.

At present, there seems to be three central questions to consider about the broader plan behind such a move by Google. There is also the discussion of what opportunity this presents to marketers. Continue reading >>

Filed under: Organic Search, Paid Search, Social Media | No Comments >>

The Me-Ification Of Search And Social

by Chris Copeland ~ March 16th, 2011

Chris Copeland wants to be #1. Correction: Chris Copeland knows that Chris Copeland is already an expert, a search and social marketing guru, but he wants Google to know that he is all of that and for Google to give him the self-glorifying satisfaction that comes with one thing: Chris Copeland ranking #1 in the Googgle search results for the term Chris Copeland.

I am personally excited because I have my sights set on not just being #1 for me, Chris Copeland, in the engines, but am now turning my focus toward the self-gratification that comes with having the most Twitter followers that hang on my every self-serving and validating 140 burst of brilliance from my @SearchBoss handle.

Actually, the paragraphs above have almost not a word of truth in them, but they do make a point – one that seems to have been lost in the gold rush surrounding the latest digital trend. You see, if you asked me to describe my personal philosophy, it would be more “Act like you have been there” than “I’m a Golden God.” But, apparently somewhere in the last few years, that philosophy came to mean that I wasn’t old-school, just old — at least in our industry.

My job is not about building the brand of Me first. If the adage is true that you can’t take it with you, I have to believe that goes beyond the material possessions to the immaterial of the social sphere. I only need a retweet from St. Peter at the pearly gates when the time comes — not from 1,000 of spambots before I leave this world.

I’m not a rocket scientist or doing brain surgery every day, but what we do in advertising does have a purpose and a meaning. If you care about this business, then you approach your job with a hearty desire to impact the masses – not with your self-fulfilling messages, but rather by connecting consumers with brand and being relevant. It’s not Don Draper sexy 99.44% of the time, but it has its moments.

People in the business of search and social have confused promotion of ideas and material performance with promotion of self. They are measuring their impact by follower counts and printed and spoken self-references. Let’s be clear that this problem is not an epidemic, but more prevalent than ever before.

Some people have “the goods,” and earn respect by the way they handle their business and their unflinching willingness to do the right thing to ensure success. And then there are so-called experts who now advise others on how to construct programs to maximize follower counts and enhance rankings through the superficial and timely with a kind of excess that would make a Kardashian weep with jealousy.

Years ago, I used to joke that people would attend a search conference for four days and suddenly become qualified to hang out a shingle and go into business as a consultant. The acceleration of technology has been such, that in the social media space you can seemingly skip the conference, hit a couple of websites, gorge your Twitter account with meaningless followers chasing keyword-laden tweets, and bypass doing any work.

If Chris Copeland ends up #1 on Google or Bing as a result of an article that celebrates Chris Copeland, written by Chris Copeland, then so be it. That’s the way the game is played today, and I can handle that. But, while others are worried about being experts in self, the Zen of Me, the tao of I, I’m worried about next. And next isn’t about me; it’s about a platform in a garage or dorm room — and it’s certainly not being developed by someone tweeting how friggin’ cool it’s going to be when finished.

Look at the great digital successes of the past decade, and you see companies that have reached the top by doing the work first — not by talking about it. Someday Chris Copeland will walk away from advertising – and, like a majority of the folks in this industry, there will be no highlight reel on the work I did for me. The people, the work, the recognition from others will speak for me far better than anything I can say about me, Chris Copeland.

This article was written by Chris Copeland, CEO, GroupM Search – The Americas, and was published in MediaPost, March 9th, 2011. Follow Chris on Twitter – @SearchBoss.

Filed under: Digital Advertising, Social Media | No Comments >>

The Me-Ification Of Search And Social

by Chris Copeland ~ March 14th, 2011

I’m not a rocket scientist or doing brain surgery every day, but what we do in advertising does have a purpose and a meaning. If you care about this business, then you approach your job with a hearty desire to impact the masses – not with your self-fulfilling messages, but rather by connecting consumers with brands and being relevant. It’s not Don Draper sexy 99.44% of the time, but it has its moments. Continue reading >>

Filed under: Features, Paid Search, Social Media | No Comments >>

The courting of King James: How a personal brand diminished via social media

by Chris Copeland ~ July 8th, 2010

Tonight, LeBron James, the basketball superstar and marketing machine, will announce where he will play his home games in the future. For the first seven years of his NBA career, The Chosen One has played for his hometown team, the Cleveland Cavaliers. Now, King James, as he is also known, will chose to either stay with Cleveland or move on to another team, possibly Miami, Chicago or New York. The brand of LeBron is significant. For 2009, James’ estimated endorsement deals totaled $28MM placing him third among all athletes and the #1 basketball player globally. With his pending decision the brand should be growing stronger, more beloved and inching LeBron closer to the hallowed territory of His Airness, Michael Jordan. Jordan, the first great Nike-engineered superstar had a brand that was unsurpassed and still, to this day, is the gold standard for athletes.

This move was to signal the second coming, if not on the basketball court, then certainly across homes around the world of what a superstar athlete can deliver from a personal brand to corporate brands. With that as the backdrop it is staggering to look at the complete airball that LeBron is shooting in the social space leading up to this decision. Let’s break down how the Brand of LeBron has fared poorly in furthering his brand.

Even personal brands don’t get that social media is about the community
On Tuesday, LeBron James officially joined Twitter. Within 24 hours nearly 24,000 people were following @KingJames. So far there have been 2 tweets, one announcing LeBron’s arrival on the platform and the second wishing everyone a good Wednesday morning. In one sense this sums up the value exchange and worth of Twitter for many. On the other hand it paints a stark contrast to the efforts by companies like RadioShack together with athletes like Lance Armstrong and his @livestrong work. Armstrong is LiveStrong and through that support and affiliation with select corporate brands people are now associating him with his Team RadioShack cycling efforts and their combined efforts against cancer. Could this become LeBron’s future on the platform and in a broader social way? Sure, but the Brand of LeBron is clearly about just that – LeBron at this moment. When the value exchange is so cheap, a follower on Twitter is making no emotional or financial commitment and you often get back what you put in, which is nothing. The brands that have figured out Twitter and other key social platforms are the ones putting more into the community than just themselves.

Filed under: Social Media | 3 Comments >>

Can Social Media Bridge the Brand-Consumer Gap?

by Suzanne Wagner ~ April 7th, 2010

According to recent findings by Marketing Charts, a deep chasm of distrust separates the global consumer from today’s leading brands.

Let’s face it; this is not a new trend. Consumers have always been weary of companies, and companies have always searched for ways to gain consumer trust. Now, social media has become the corporate go to for “connecting” with the audience, forming relationships and humanizing brand image. However, even after the frequent Facebook updates, promotional Tweets and viral YouTube videos, it all comes down to one thing – why should consumers care about your brand?

Filed under: Social Media | No Comments >>

Why Is Google Doing this?

Categories

Whitepaper

Most Recent Posts