Category Archives: digital media

It’s Not Just Big Brother

Another day, another horrible bit of news on the privacy front.  I’ll take it as a sign that another post on data collection and privacy is called for.  I think that by now we all know that everything we do in a digital world is collected and that nothing collected in a digital world is private.  Oh sure, maybe your Aunt Sally can’t see your phone records, but someone can, and it’s probably not someone who needs to know that you called a suicide prevention hotline 4 times last month.  As one writer put it:

Collection means access, period. Someone who wants information can always find a way to get it, and yet we’re only expanding methods of information collection: trackers, cameras, beacons, glass, drones. This puts all of us in a very public place, constantly.

Amen, and it’s a thought each of us needs to keep more forward in our minds.  The Pew Internet folks have been doing an ongoing survey with respect to privacy and the latest report (which you can read here) contains the following quote:

An executive at an Internet top-level domain name operator who preferred to remain anonymous replied, “Big data equals big business. Those special interests will continue to block any effective public policy work to ensure security, liberty, and privacy online.”

I’m not really aware of any recent business model that isn’t centered around data collection and monetization at least in part.  Retail, health care, entertainment and media, finance, and insurance are sliding their models to revolve more around robust data collection and usage.  We as consumers can say “fine, I will gladly give up data in return for convenience, better pricing, or an improved product”, but that’s a choice WE make, not the provider.  It implies informed consent.

The latest fiasco to which I referred earlier comes from Lenovo, which, as Ars Technica reported:

…found itself in hot water last week when researchers discovered that pre-installed adware from a company called Superfish was making users vulnerable to man-in-the-middle attacks. The adware installed self-signed root HTTPS certificates that made it easy for Superfish (as well as low-skilled hackers) to intercept users’ encrypted Web traffic.

In other words, by buying a Lenovo computer you made data which you thought was secure and private very much not so.  That’s the sort of corporate bad behavior which is intolerable.  But in order to respond, we have to be aware, and I suspect that this is only one example of this behavior.

OK.  Rant over.  The take away is this – if you’re a business, act responsibly and transparently.  If you’re a netizen, pay attention.  It’s not just Big Brother who is watching.

Thoughts?

Leave a comment

Filed under digital media, Helpful Hints, Huh?

Flying Blind

The latest edition of the CMO Survey from the Fuqua School at Duke is out and it’s baffling, at least to me.  You can read the data here if you care to but here are a few points that caught my eye.  Maybe which raised an eyebrow as well.  

The good news is that there seems to be an awareness that we live in a data-driven age.  The report shows that CMOs expect to nearly double the share of their budgets spent on marketing analytics over the next few years. That said, current levels of spending are actually down. Unlike computer chips, it hasn’t been my experience that you can buy more for less in the analytics field so that’s kind of baffling.  In addition, there may be more data around but it seems as if it’s getting used less.  Overall, CMOs reported that just 29% of projects used available or requested marketing analytics, down from 32.5% a year earlier and representing the lowest figure since August 2013.  Huh?

The strange news doesn’t stop there.  Despite the fact that we’ve been using social media in marketing for at least 5 years, social media remains poorly integrated with marketing strategy.  When asked “How well is social media integrated with marketing strategy?”  23%  reported a 1 or 2 on a 7 point scale.  That lack of integration isn’t restricted to social media either.  When asked “How effectively does your company integrate customer information across purchasing, communication, and social media channels” the average score was  3.7, down from 3.9.  In other words, flying blind.

That has an effect on how well CMO’s can track results.  They were asked about the impact of their social media spending, the same social media that isn’t properly integrated into their marketing strategy.  14% reported that they have proven the impact quantitatively.  41% said that they have a good qualitative sense of the impact, but not a quantitative impact.  Nearly half – 45% – said that they haven’t been able to show the impact yet.  Anyone wondering why?

One final rant.  Most marketers have low levels of concern about the use of online customer data.   When asked “How worried are you that the use of online customer data could raise questions about privacy?”40%  answered either a 1 or 2 on the 7 point scale.  Not very concerned, in other words.  Really?

I find much of the above indicative that many marketers are still flying blind.  What’s your take?

Leave a comment

Filed under digital media, Huh?

I’m Confused

One of the newsletters I receive linked to a couple of articles today which deal with the same issue from opposing points of view. I’ll lay out what they say and I’d love to hear what you think.

The issue is how to deal with social media posts made by employees on the employee’s personal pages. On one side we have an article from the AP called “How to handle an employee’s offensive social media post.” On the other we have The Atlantic with a piece called “A Social-Media Mistake Is No Reason to Be Fired.” The former calls for swift action (read that as termination); the latter urges leniency. Here is the reasoning behind each but I think you see why this is a confusing issue for many of us in business.

First the AP piece:

Whether it’s comments about news events, long-held beliefs or a bad joke, an employee’s offensive posts on Facebook, Twitter and other social media sites can damage a company’s image and profits. If the comments are racist, homophobic, sexist or against a religious group, tolerating discriminatory comments puts an employer at risk for lawsuits and losing customers.

Clearly, if posts of this sort are placed on the company’s pages, I’m in total agreement.  There is no middle ground – the person needs to be fired.  But what if, as is the case in some of the examples cited in the article, the employee is posting on their own page during non-work hours?  Are we as business people responsible for the political and religious beliefs of our staff?  What right do we have to regulate those beliefs and, moreover, what about the first amendment protections each of us enjoys?  The article says that many employers have taken to monitoring their employees’ personal pages to make sure that there’s nothing there that would be detrimental to the company.  Fair?

The Atlantic, on the other hand says:

Here’s what corporations should say in the future: “Sorry, we have a general policy against firing people based on social media campaigns. We’re against digital mobs.”

But note the one exception built into what I propose. Sometimes people do stupid things in the public eye that relate directly to their jobs… generally speaking, Americans ought to be averse to the notion of companies policing the speech and thoughts of employees when they’re not on the job. Instead, many are zealously demanding that companies police their workers more, as if failing to fire someone condones their bad behavior outside work.

The piece deals with the public shaming that bad actors often suffer.  The author believes this is punishment enough and is generally a short-term issue while a termination has long-lasting effects, well beyond the scope of the bad behavior.

So where do you come out?  Can you see why this is a confusing issue?

Leave a comment

Filed under digital media, Huh?