I am really trying to figure out how to use Web 2.0 concepts for myself and my clients, but here are three things that I can’t figure out:

1. Facebook: I like Facebook – it’s fun! I just can’t figure out why so many businesses use it for shameless self-promotion. There seem to be two ways to use it: for genuine friendship reconnection and for yucky, over-the-top marketing promotion. There must be a way to find a blance, but so far the only people using it for marketing purposes are just kind of yucky.

2. Podcasts: I read “Podcasting for Dummies,” and I get the concept, but what I can’t find is anyone who listens to podcasts – other than podcasters themselves. Is there a true marketing opportunity here? I really don’t know.

3. Site Conversion: It seems like we need to re-vamp our sites into more targeted sales machines, but, as with Facebook, it feels to me like the people who are doing this are cheezy and a little yucky. There has to be a way to be an authentic, transparent marketer online without being perceived as “yucky,” right?

I’m working on solutions for all of these, but would love to hear comments and ideas if you have any!

(And an update: this post just won me a free ticket to SXSW Interactive in March!)

I used to be a lurker.

You know who they are: those surfers of the web who revel in dark, unknown corners.  Who consume but don’t reciprocate. Whose existence is known to none but themselves, whose presence we are never aware of as anything more than a number on our blog stats that might pique our curiosity. They lurk and disappear back into cyberspace, and no one ever has to know; no trace of them is left behind.

I knew the ups and downs of Penelope’s divorce, Ryan’s workaholism; but until recently I had never so much as left a single comment on any of their blogs. Your first reaction might be: creep! But something like 90% of blog readers are equally creepy lurkers. Chances are, you are lurking right now and will read, digest, and move along without ever saying a thing to me (including you, email subscribers – I know who you are!). You’ll never voice your opinion. So before you call me a creep, don’t forget what you’re doing right now: creeping.

Daring to commit your opinions and your intellectual thoughts down in words, permanently etched into pixels in cyberspace, is unnerving. It takes balls that most people don’t have, and that is why the vast majority of users of the Web are what we so affectionately refer to as lurkers. They’re afraid to voice their opinion and let anyone who Googles them find them; afraid that someone will disagree and criticize them.

I was one of those, and I was hiding. And for a long time that was a theme in my life: hiding. I have about 4 drafts of blog posts I have written over the years, saved in my archives, about how I hide different parts of my life from everyone. But, in my typical fashion, I never posted one of them. Because it takes courage to even blog in the first place. It makes you an outlier, it makes you different, and that opens you up to a whole new level of scrutiny.

Blogging is at once intensely personal, yet unnervingly public. And it connects people in the most individual, human, personal way. Of my college-age friends, I have very few who have blogs. And when one of them first started her blog, she proceeded to get mocked and made fun of behind her back, constantly. Her blog is a joke to the rest of them, constantly bantered about; every new post is gossip fodder, eagerly devoured. Spending so much time around people like that had left me paralyzed, afraid to just be who I am; and prancing around in that living charade was exceptionally tiring. Why did I care about these people again? It was illogical and irrational.

The difference between me pre-blog and me post-blog is simple: I went from an invisible, hiding lurker to a real person, and an outlier. Seems simple, but that transformation is empowering in a way you’d never expect. I went from letting others define me to defining myself. Instead of always having to hide what I do from people, I can just…be. I have something to say that is worth saying, and I actively contribute to the conversation.

It’s no longer a simple matter of writing a blog and hoping someone reads: it overflows into every other area of my life. Now, I want to have more conversations and put out my opinion on everything. I want to seek out new people and new perspectives and constantly learn from everyone around me. I want to explore new ideas, challenge them, and be challenged. I want to do something worth doing, instead of just what everyone else is doing. And sadly, though perhaps not surprisingly, most people aren’t willing to do that. But blogger are.

The mockers matter less and less, because, really, I’d rather drop them from my life now. When one of my favorite writers, who is far, far more successful than me, emailed me out of the blue and told me she loved a piece I wrote, the game changed a little. When my work started to get noticed by some others, the game changed a little. I no longer care to be just one of millions of college kids that are exactly the same. Who wants to blend in?

I realized I am different from them, but instead of continuing to try to hide it I started to reluctantly embrace it. I constantly strive to be an outlier, to be above and beyond, to put myself out there and be someone who challenges the status quo — and not someone who maintains it. I no longer want to be part of the norm. As one blogger said, that’s fifth place, when I know I want first. But if your presence is never known, how will you make an impact? How will you leave your mark? The simple act of voicing your opinion and expressing yourself means you are challenging the status quo, however insignificant you feel. But if you aren’t visible, to the world you don’t exist. If you’re just lurking and not participating, you’re outdated, obsolete, last year’s season. That’s not even fifth place; that’s invisibility.

Now, I’m no longer letting things happen to me. I don’t let others tell me what to do. I don’t believe in destiny; I just go out and make things happen. And I tend to brazenly defy everyone who doesn’t believe me. I realized that the way I defined myself and my life had to change. And in doing so, I won the inner battle that has been raging inside of me for twenty years. I killed the inner critic, the voice that stops so many people from doing great things. I stopped living for what other people think, and started living solely to create an impact and a difference.

And blogging, and everything and everyone that came with it, are what forced that change.

So when I sat down to write a post about how blogging has changed my life, many things came to mind. I wanted to write something as flawless as Andrew Sullivan’s brilliant essay, “Why I Blog.” But I am not Andrew Sullivan, so I can’t. Instead I thought of all the things I had learned, the advice I had gained, the opportunities I’ve received, the people I had interviewed and the late night discussions I’ve had when I could have been studying. And those have all been amazing things. But to this day, nothing compares to the surprising rush of empowerment that comes in that moment when you hold your breath and hit the ‘Publish’ button. It’s your blog, and no one can fuck with you there.

It’s something those legions of lurkers will never understand.

—–

(Hat tip to BC – what a challenge. This is probably the hardest thing I have ever written!)

Nisha Chittal is a writer and journalist who currently serves as Associate Editor of CitizenJanePolitics.com and is a political columnist for UniversityChic.com. Her personal blog is Politicoholic, where she offers commentary on a range of topics, including but not limited to politics, technology, and the changing role of women and Generation Y in politics today.

What do you think of when I mention “investment newsletter”?

Many will answer referencing the numerous emails (spam?) they receive on a daily basis with information “that’s guaranteed to triple your money!” While that’s a preposterous boast, I think the most important thing to do when starting a financial newsletter business is picking the theme of the newsletter.

Picking a niche topic versus building a general investment newsletter

The key in the investment newsletter business is positioning (see this for an explanation about your Unique Selling Proposition), just like in many other consumer-focused businesses. Success in branding, marketing and distributing your newsletter will be built upon your investment newsletter’s theme. e-books, like newsletters, follow similar rules.

So, is it better to go niche with your newsletter (and publish the clean technology newsletter) or stay broad with a loosely-defined universe (like Joe’s Top Stock Picks)?

I think there is a fine balance between being to tightly-defined (Chuck’s Tech Stocks that Begin with the Letter ‘A’) and standing out from the rest of the pack.

See what else is out there

Go to Forbes Newsletter site.  Forbes runs a whole business where they distribute and market other people’s newsletters.  Check out some of the leading titles.  You’ve got

• personality newsletters — newsletters that are sold leveraging the reputation of an individual (e.g. Gary Shilling’s Insight, Gilder Telecosm Forum)
• sector-focused newsletters — investment newsletters focused on different industries (e.g. Forbes Wireless Stock Watch)
• product newsletters — newsletters focused on investing in specific products (Forbes ETF Investor)
• geography-limited newsletters — investment newsletters focused on opportunities in certain countries (Canada Report)

The majority of the investment newsletters tend to fall in the broad category.  This is probably because the audience served by a broad newsletter is larger than any of the other options.  If you choose to go this route, you fall into the space with the greatest noise.

Buck the trend

The reason so many newsletters have to resort to such slimy marketing tactics is because they lack differentiation because they are so broad.  If you want to stay above the fray, get better defined, without becoming so niche that you become irrelevant.

Have the foresight to scout future trends.  Analyze new investment products as they gain traction.  Scout new geographies where visibility is poor (China hasn’t been taken seriously enough).  Have the insight to pick an investment newsletter focused on the next hot sector in technology.  There will always be buyers (albeit, fewer) for more niche newsletters.

But here’s the thing: they’ll pay more for your expertise.  So instead of finding yourself in the $39-$149/year club, you’ll push the upper range.

Today it is generally agreed that a business is not serious if it does not have a website. People look to websites to find out more about businesses, see how the company presents itself, and what are the services that company provides. People also want to be assured that the business has other, satisfied customers by viewing client lists and testimonials.

However, that type of web presence is quickly becoming outdated…it’s so 1999. The typical corporate website has become irrelevant, and today it’s all about creating a “web presence.” A web presence means that you have a home base, i.e. a website and/or blog, but your brand can also be found in other places on the web, like social networks.

People are spending so much time on social networks, that they expect to find you and your business there:

“a recent Universal McCann report stat[es] that content consumption outside of websites has increased 153% in the last 9 months. Overall, 53% of online users are consuming content outside of a publisher’s site – through the use of widgets, RSS readers, social networks and mobile devices.” (from ReadWriteWeb)

Four steps to a successful social media strategy

I often meet people who understand that they need to expand and diversify their web presence, but don’t know how. Some people feel lost, while others are sure that the way to being part of the social web is to…create a facebook group.

I created a facebook group. So why am I all alone?

Creating a facebook group, or even writing a blog or microblogging on twitter, are not strategies; they are tools for implementing strategeis. They may be the right tools for some businesses or organizations, but they also be the wrong place to invest time and energy for others. Choosing the tools or technologies that you will use to implement your social media strategy is actually the LAST step in the process.

Here’s an outline of the general steps needed to create a successful web presence:

1. Identify your goals: what do we want to achieve? Who are we trying to target?
   Part of this stage is benchmarking: analyzing current statistics; identifying what you hope will be different as a result of your social media efforts; defining parameters that you want to change most and least.
2. Next, work out the strategy: how are we going to achieve these goals? Where do we need to be to reach our target audience, i.e. based on their demographics, where are they hanging out on the web? What type of content will they like? What manpower considerations do we need to be aware of (i.e. the need to hire a Community Manager, etc.)? Do we have legal considerations?
3. Once all of that has been prepared, then and only then can you choose tools and technologies. A facebook group may not be the best strategy for your goals, or it may be appropriate, but maybe it won’t work on its own. Tools and technologies are just the medium, not the message (sorry McLuhan). For example, in the world of print marketing, you know a rollup is exactly what you need to get your message across at the upcoming trade show, but you’d look mighty strange schlepping it to pitch a new client at their office.
4. Implementation. Now you get to have fun with your shiny tools, because they’re the right ones.

I need to build a house. I hear these tools are good so I think I’ll use them.

Forrester has laid out a similar approach to creating an effective social media strategy by putting technology last, which they coined as POST: People, Objectives, Strategy, Technology. (Here’s a link to the original blog post, but it looks like Forrester is trying to wipe out any memory of Charlene Li since she left, so you can only access the cached version on Google.)

Like most things in life and business, you need to know what you want to achieve before you decide how you are going to achieve them. And that is why a facebook group is most definitely not a strategy.

Lonely girl image from willgame on flickr

Thinking about Facebook’s Beacon from a partner perspective…

The Techdirt Insight Community recently addressed this issue and posited it to their group of experts.

“Does it make sense for a consumer-facing company to sign on to Beacon — or has the program forever been tarnished? How should we approach using Beacon? In an ideal world, we would like for it to be a way for fans of our products to pass on effective “endorsements” of the product, but we do not want to be seen as doing something intrusive or upsetting. If not Beacon, is there a better way to do this either within Facebook or through a different platform?”

Here’s my answer:

*********************

I think the only two games in town that are worth exploring are Facebook and Google. MySpace is too raw for most consumer goods companies and the demographic doesn’t compare to Facebook’s and Google’s.

So, let’s look how Facebook’s efforts stack up vs. Google’s:

Facebook

Traffic: Facebook is on fire. Traffic and usage stats are sky high
Monetization: monetization is just getting better. Most of the current ad sales are sponsorship-related. With Beacon, lead generation becomes viral. Huge potential here.
Reach: Facebook just announced that they are licensing their infrastructure. This moves Facebook even closer to the Google/Open Social platform in terms of reach.
Privacy is certainly an issue. Check out the traffic to Facebook’s privacy page. Opening up profiles caused a bigger blip in users’ minds than did the hullabaloo surrounding Beacon.

The Pro-Beacon camp basically espouses the idea that (see Dave McClure’s article on the matter)
1) Facebook has introduced a universal opt-out which should satisfy the privacy police.
2) The biggest mistake was a PR one — one that positioned Beacon as opt-in when it wasn’t. Facebook is addressing this issue.
3) people who are going bananas over Beacon should understand that most people on Facebook are used to the default being opt-out (ie, lifestyle transparency), not opt-in (selective sharing).

I see parallels with what’s occurring surrounding Beacon to the snafus made during the introduction of In-Text Advertising. There was tremendous, immediate push-back when in-text advertising was introduced. Although privacy wasn’t the primary concern, users and customer advocates didn’t like the intrusion of advertising. Today, the ads (run by such networks as Vibrant Media and Kontera). Companies like Forbes were forced to remove the advertising originally and now, (almost) no one bats an eye. Editorial and advertising converge — I think the same evolution is going to occur with Beacon. My extra-Facebook activity is going to join my Facebook activity to be published to my friends network via my News Feed. That’s what I wanted when I joined Facebook, wasn’t it?

Google

Traffic: No one puts up search numbers like Google. Even at this stage, Google continues to gain market share
Monetization: Google runs it’s own network of publishers and has the ability to juice its numbers by adjusting its variable payouts to its partners and by adjusting how much traffic it shares out to the network vs. internalizing/monetizing it itself.
Reach: Keeps growing.
Privacy: Google offers Web History internally to users. Now that Open Social and Google Profiles have launched (see my article about this soft launch and what it means for Google’s moves into social networking), Google is going to have to deal with privacy issues as well. Google has tons of personalized information about users (from Gmail, Search History, Blogger, Docs) and continues to accumulate this info. Google has to be careful how it shares out this info and should learn from Facebook’s mistakes.

Google’s advantage vis-a-vis Facebook is that even with Beacon, Facebook is pretty much a closed network. You won’t have 100% participation and users still spend a lot of time and activity outside the Facebook network. Google has replaced the portal of the 1990s to become essentially the Internet for many users. From search, to email, from Adwords to Analytics to Checkout, Google has closed the loop in terms of activity.

I think Google is also more advanced in terms of providing partners with analytics — the absolute KEY to web advertising. It’s not enough to provide partners with an interface for social networking. Partners should demand ROI. Facebook is just in the early days of providing metrics for its Apps. Google has made an entire business out of metrics. As markets look to expand their influence in social networks, they will need the tools to address this.