Marketing Pilgrim's "Research" Channel

Sponsor Marketing Pilgrim's Research Channel today! Get in front of some of the most influential readers in the Internet and social media marketing industry. Contact us today!

Failed: Reuters Gets it Wrong About Facebook Transparency

Here’s a headline from a new Reuters article:

“Facebook users willing to let employers see profiles”

Reuters looks at a new report on Canadian Facebook users and pretty much declares that they are now happy to let employers see their profiles.

But look at the data:

Almost half of 1,200 people questioned in an online survey said they would be comfortable sharing their personal profile with their current employer, while two in five would consider letting prospective employers look at their Facebook account in addition to their resume.

Huh? “Almost half” would share with their “current” employer? Only 20% 40% would share their Facebook profile with a “prospective” employer?

How does that match-up with the headline? Maybe Reuters was influenced by the report’s author who says, “The days of getting drunk and getting all your pictures posted online, that’s gone.”

Write Newsletters Even You’d Want to Read

By Michelle Greer.

It’s official. As much as people want to pile on the social media consulting gravy train to bring in the big theoretical bucks, even Biz Stone at Twitter sends email newsletters. Apparently, the guys at Twitter have cool news they want you to hear that requires more than 140 characters.

How can marketers actually send emails that people want to read, according to a study done by eROI?

  • Put out something people can use. Of those who responded to the study, only 29% offer access to preferred content, 24% offer discounts/coupons, and only 22% offer some kind of contest.
  • Don’t be a jerk. Only 30% of respondents to the study are offering any opt-in options.

Take the Reputation Management Survey; Get a Trackur Special Offer!

After reading Radically Transparent, BearingPoint’s Paul Dunay wants to know just how ready companies are for reputation management.

Dunay tells us, "I feel that many companies are not prepared for the full extent of reputation management and my hypothesis is that more than 70% are not prepared to handle a reputation disaster especially when you factor in social networks and communities – which are conversations they maybe cant even see at this time."

As a side project for his blog and an upcoming MarketingProfs conference, Dunay’s conducting a brief Reputation Management for New Media survey. We want to encourage Marketing Pilgrim readers to take part, so please complete the survey. Not only will you get a copy of the results, but you’ll also receive a special offer for Trackur–details will come when the results are published.

72% of Consumers Research Reputations Online, 59% of Customers Happy to Share Gripes With Them

Do you use the web to complain about poor customer service? (Maybe I should say "thanks," because you keep me busy with reputation management clients).

Well, if you do, you’re not alone. According to a new study by Society for New Communications Research 59% of respondents said they regularly use social media to "vent" about a poor customer service experience.

And, thanks to the two third of you that do complain, there’s plenty of online fodder for consumers to read, when researching a company’s reputation. And lots of us are researching:

72 percent of respondents used social media to research a company’s reputation for customer care before making a purchase, and 74 percent choose to do business with companies based on the customer care experiences shared by others online.

Here’s the Reason Why Small Businesses Won’t Adopt “Enterprise 2.0″

There seems to be somewhat of a shock wave going around the web, due to the startling revelation that 68% of small businesses have no plans to adopt “Enterprise 2.0″ initiatives.

Here’s a look at a chart from the Forrester report.

I know what you’re thinking. Wow, 51% of employers with 20k+ employees are already planning to adopt Enterprise 2.0, yet only 20% of those with less than 99 employees are planning the same.

I know what else you’re thinking. What the heck is “Enterprise 2.0″ anyway?

I certainly didn’t know what the term meant, and perhaps small business owners either don’t know what the term means either or they see “enterprise” and just assume it doesn’t apply to them.

Google #1 Brand; Did Millward Brown Wait to See Q1 Before Announcing List?

Here’s something to think about, when perusing the BrandZ Top 100 Most Powerful Brands list. If Google had reported a lousy Q1 last week, would it still have taken the #1 spot?

The list–based on financial clout and brand equity–orders the top ten brands as follows:

  1. Google
  2. GE
  3. Microsoft
  4. Coca-Cola
  5. China Mobile
  6. IBM
  7. Apple
  8. McDonalds
  9. Nokia
  10. Marlboro

Maybe the list was already finalized way before Google’s financial report, but maybe, just maybe, Millward Brown held on to the report until it knew for sure that the company didn’t take a bath in Q1.

Something else to consider? Microsoft’s brand value jumped 29% while Yahoo’s dropped 13%. That appears to negate any argument that a Microsoft deal would devalue Yahoo’s image.

comScore Did Cry Wolf About Google Growth, Just a Different Kind of Wolf

By now you know that the paid click metrics released by comScore came nowhere near Google’s actual growth for Q1 2008. So what happened? Did comScore cry wolf, or is there a legitimate reason for the gaping void between what it predicted and what Google announced?

Before, I share my thoughts, here’s what comScore’s Andrew Lipsman has to say

comScore reported that Google’s U.S. paid clicks in Q1 were up 2% vs. year ago, and down 9% vs. Q4 ’07. During the earnings call, Google noted a 20% increase in aggregate paid clicks vs. year ago and a 4% sequential gain.

Why the discrepancy, you may ask?