5 Social Media Content Ideas

Attract new customers, build relationships, and grow brand loyalty.

Display Advertising to Increase Sales

Responsive Design – Smart Design for Smart Devices

How do your clients follow you online? If you are like the thousands of businesses who cannot know what sort of device your clients might use to connect with you at any given time, you need to cover all the bases. Smart phone, tablet, PC, laptop, mini tablet – no matter which way your clients or potential customers do their search, your website has to present a user-friendly, easy-to-navigate portal for that search.

Responsive Design is the answer. Find out what it means to drive [traffic] responsively.

Apple and Android compatibility

Can’t we all just get along? Hey, if Rodney King could get past what happened to him isn’t it time Apple got past isolationism?

With the current wave of tax news about how Apple is “protecting” taxable income through a variety of tax dodges, to the tune of $30 billion or more, you would think they could finally end the divisions of mobile devices.

There are a lot of talented programmers out there creating a ton of mobile apps at really need to be workable on my iPad, and even more iPhone apps being developed that should be compatible on Android devices. And wouldn’t it be great to actually see ALL YouTube videos active on all devices?

It might actually cost one of those billions to make it happen – I am not hardware oriented so I’ll give the benefit of the doubt. Even so, I will bet that if Apple execs appeared before Congress and asked for extended tax relief if they solved this problem, they would get to hide another $20 billion or so in new dodges.

Just saying.

Great article that I spotted from an associate on LinkedIn, and a really important reminder about how quality content is more important than ever in SEO.

The article (http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2164438/Google-Cracking-Down-on-Unnatural-Links-Deindexing-Blog-Networks?goback=%2Egde_102662_member_104140400) details how Google has once more fired a warning shot across the bows of what it considers are unethically optimized websites. In particular the focus here is upon automated link building practices.

Quick and the short of it – Google has started to “take down” placement value of several websites that it feels have employed any form of electronic or automatic (as they refer to it, “unnatural”) link building. As with most Google moves like this, it is reactive to what Google has decided in Google’s own world and it is up to the general public and Internet Marketers to de-engineer the cause of the raucous.

Automated link building has been used by thousands of businesses and web enterprises around the world for as long as the tools to perform that task have been available. Everyone who understands what is required to achieve great Google page ranking also understands that incoming links to a website are one of the more valuable assets. We also know that dozens and many times hundreds of links are nt going to achieve the level of rank increase desired; most times it takes thousands in a highly competitive market.

I’ve been selling the opportunity to build inbound links to my clients for years, and always with the caveat that the process we employ requires manual creation of the links, anchor text, and content. It is slow and, if considered for the level of links required competitively, sometimes quite expensive to build out enough links to add some real value for a client. It always pays off over time, but it is not quick, cheap, or easy. The advantage has always been that the quality of fewer well placed links far outweighs whatever value comes from quantities of poorly placed links, though now that “natural” advantage takes on new prominence.

In a world where headlines win out over material, instant beats out long-term, and quantity is more easily recognized than quality, it appears that Google is trying to take us all back to a more “refined” view of the written word. And while it might be a pain and somewhat annoyingly secretive how it is accomplished, the simple fact is that content remains king (or queen).

Ninja Guru, Proficient in Word, with Good Advice

As a mature and seasoned detailed oriented professional with a proven track record of innovative out of the box intagibles, I consider this article elightening!

http://www.imediaconnection.com/content/31279.asp.

 

You Like Me, You Really Like Me!

I was reminded  of Sally Field’s Oscar acceptance speech while I was looking into some Facebook marketing ideas the other day. The question on everyone’s mind when trying to apply Facebook to their Internet Marketing is “Will they like me?”. It’s really the wrong question to ask. What businesses should be asking is “Do they really like me?”.

Reveal Pages and Tabs with one-step or two-step actions are all the rage when integrating your FB business into your total business marketing. Like us and win something, or get special access to somewhere, or more often than not get an opportunity to get tons of meaningless social communications. When the goal is simply to get people to Like you on Facebook, the result is often as fulfilling as getting someone to like you at a party or bar; might feel good for the moment but the likelihood of a long-lasting relationship is slim.

Listen up folks: there is no magic bullet for marketing. If you are in it, you’ve got to be in it for the long haul. You didn’t build your brick and mortar business overnight, and you didn’t make your most trusted friendships in a day either. There is no reason to think that a quickie Like on Facebook will have any more resonance than an old-fashioned quickie. We all like to be liked, but we need to be loved to gain from our relationships.

Selling is about sales, but business marketing is about building relationships. Don’t ever confuse the two. As any good salesperson will tell you (and if they’re really good, they’ll tell you over and over again), you have to gain your customer’s trust after you get them to like you. You might get the one-off sale on “like” alone, but you won’t get the repeat customers that businesses strive for.

So if you’re planning something social that has the schedule of a fruit fly’s lifespan in order to gain new business through Facebook, be ready to have a lot of one-night stands. It might be satisfying enough to get you through each day, but don’t expect romance.

It’s a Small Word Afterall

Facebook wants to you to keep it crisp and tight. At least that’s the latest rumors to be found at http://www.allfacebook.com/90-characters-2012-02, where it states that the folks at FB wants to keep ads to a 90-character limit. Shorter ads, more ads per page. More ads per page, more revenue streams.

Makes sense but opens up a can of worms for those still struggling to make do with the paltry 135 characters currently available. <- that by the way was 130 characters.

Creativity is the word of the day. Messaging with less elocution. The trend for language throughout the world of the web continues the downward spiral; from 175 characters ads in sponsored advertising (like Google AdWords), to 140 for Tweets, and now this current predicted truncation on Facebook.

Not that this is all too new – those familiar with high-cost real estate or sex partner advertising in newspapers are long familiar with the creative process of abbreviated messaging. Care for a 2/1/1 DA ez comm 825sf bsf only? But with those shortened code messages comes the requirement of a user community familiar with the acronyms and abbrs. Desperately hunting for apartments force-teaches many to become experts in the linguistics of the newspaper ads, just as years of playing around with text messaging has both created and force-taught millions how to lol at the mztks of novice texters 🙂

The question is, how fast will a new language take to form that will fit comfortably into the confines of Facebook advertising, and how valuable will it be to users to teach themselves how to navigate the language? Only time will tell.

Ltz hop it dznt kll lang al2gthr!

If I wanted your opinion, I’d give it to you

The US Federal Trade Commission is trying to corner all of the good properties on the Monopoly board before Google can buy them up, metaphorically speaking.

Google’s latest expansion of its search algorithms to modify search results in favor of Google Plus tags is seen by many to be just one more step in guaranteeing that those who master Google’s own toolsets will be able to benefit most from Google search.

In a nutshell, the recent changes to Google rules with result in SERPS (search engine result pages) showing content based upon a combination of the searcher’s criteria and the activities of the social network (within Google’s world) of that searcher. If I have many friends and business associates related to me through Google+, and those social connections have preferences for particular entities or businesses relative to a search I am conducting on Google, those preferences will be a factor in my SERPS. You like funnypets.com (via a Google+ like), and you are in my Plus network, then funnypets.com becomes a more likely result for me in searches related to pets and fun.

This is all great in a world where the only type of searching you do is as part of a community. But how many of us really want to be influenced by others in what should be simple research? I mean, if my Google+ friend likes some really stupid websites, should those preferences play any role at all in my online search for related content? My friends on Google+ have their own preferences for many things that are part of my world; however, I can contact them directly if I want their input.

These Google+ influences on search bring us into a party-line mode of Internet search. For those of you who don’t know that reference, a party line used to be a situation whereby multiple people would have access to the same general circuit on the phone, thereby making it all too possible that someone else could accidentally or purposely listen in our your calls. I think most of us would agree that this is not a situation we would like to return as part of our phone networking, so why would we want to make it part of our online search?

As an Internet Marketer I have both this personal stake in what Google is doing and a very important business stake. How do I control the external influencers, the social networks, of my clients’ potential connections? Making yourself visible in a top position in Google search is hard enough. Trying to get a first page listing when you have this vast unknown of Google+ connections that are influencing the search results of people looking for your services or products will be many times harder.

Don’t get me wrong – I’m not afraid of hard work. Don’t necessarily like it, but not afraid of it. Hard work will not overcome something over which I have no possible control. If Google decided that all SERPS would be presented in Russian by default, I could learn Russian and I could help my clients learn Russian no matter how difficult that might be (Это нет обвинительного акта русского языка!). Yet if Google decided that every time someone uses their search tool, Google would no longer pick the best public resources available for that search result but instead selected something only they could find, there is little I could do to control the results.

By the way, that is what they are doing.

No big conspiracy theories here. I hope the FTC can “guide” Google back to open search with a little prodding. Whether Google’s move is malicious or not, the end result is a more self-centered, niche world of search. People spend enough time now narrowing their filters on things they do, read, watch, listen to, or research; taking away the last opportunity for people to accidentally stumble upon someone else’s world view on the Internet may make us more comfortable in our own little cubicles, but it does nothing for expansiveness of thought.

The promise of the Internet has always been the free and unfettered access to information. If I want someone else’s opinion about what I want, I’ll ask them for it. Right now it’s more like that old saying: If I wanted your opinion, I’d give it to you.

Your Online Personality

What you say, how you say it, and when you say it – these are the components of content that can make or break your Internet Marketing. Right from the very first words (and images) displayed on your web resources, to the last call to action you hope entices contact.

The process of compressing everything you want to say into a handful of words and a couple of images is a challenge. It is also the most important thing you will do when marketing, whether on the Internet or anywhere else. It is why a good marketing director or advertising agent can be paid a small fortune for what might amount to 100 words over the course of a year. If you can capture the spirit of your corporate voice and entice your audience to action all with a short phrase and a pretty picture, everything else will flow from that starting point.

Take for example the process we are going through with a client right now. This client has established an image for herself as a budget-conscious interior designer on the back of a static, somewhat cluttered presence. Her work and business ethic speak volumes for her, but she realizes that the Internet image she projects has handcuffed her to a limited audience. It is time for her to shine in the light of her personal image, and to get a message across quickly and effectively online.

It is our job to bring any visitor to this new website towards that image. Our initial discussions on the language of the home page for this new website illustrates the concern for tight focus upon her talent and high-end appeal, and still manage to convey her attractiveness as a designer for the budget-conscious. Say too much about “budget” or “affordable” and you turn off those looking for talent over cost, or even those without budget limits (got to love those!). Say too little about affordability and you lose your bread and butter clients who have more limited operating budgets.

You’ve heard the expression “a picture is worth 1,000 words”? Well, that doesn’t always mean that the words are the ones you want. So we are dancing around images as well, trying to send the simultaneous messages of “You Can’t Afford NOT to Use Me” and “You Can Afford to Use Me”. The very best work my client does for those with monetary constraints often leads to images that look much more costly than they were to create. In other words, the 1,000 words of some of these images might include “Wow – this looks too expensive for me!”.

As I mentioned, we are in the design phase right now and are having some fun working around the idea of “The Look for Less”. We are both pretty anxious to get through this phase and into development so that we can start to realize the vision, and begin some serious marketing. I’ll post on this client again when we get there – then you can decide if we managed to get the message right.