The dialogues, that we can and do have with every customer, is an opportunity to build credibility. If you marry that with the idea that visibility + credibility = profitability ( BNI 's VCP Process) you have a powerful formula for success that is unique to small business. You have the ability to start, and maintain, a conversation with most, if not each, of their customers. One of my favorite points from that list, is the idea that small businesses have the advantage of a dialogue. And, uses those differences to build a case for the idea that Guerrilla Marketing is a better approach for small business. Levinson often speaks in his presentations about the 20 ways that Guerrilla Marketing differs from traditional marketing. They spend millions of dollars to deliver their message, all the while hoping that you are listening and hoping that you like what you hear. Large corporations like Coca Cola, McDonald's and Microsoft advertise in the manner that they do because - their only option for communicating with their customers is a monologue. running a small business is completely different from the job of running a corporation.Īdvertising done by large corporations is driven by money, while the marketing done by small business is driven, not by money (most of us don't have those kind of bucks) but by time, energy and creativity.
I say that based on what I have learned from Jay Conrad Levinson, the father of Guerrilla Marketing. For a small business that could do you more harm than good. But true dialogue demands an equal emphasis on those other conversational skills: listening and responding.I don't think that there is an owner of a small business, anywhere, that hasn't dreamed of more customers and a big advertising budget to make that happen. As their use of a social-media platform like Twitter shows, even today journalists tend to think of their primary media role as talking. For any participant in a communication, the most important elements are first, truly listening to what others say, and then meaningfully responding to them.
We tend to forget that a conversation is not simply one person talking, then the other. Despite the ongoing efforts of organizations like the Associated Press to control when and how their employees speak, journalists now have the same power as everyone else to speak directly to their audience.)Īs I say, all this is old hat for anyone even slightly familiar with new media. (SImilarly, the publisher’s role is no longer to dominate or control the journalist. The journalist’s role is no longer to dominate or control the conversation, but to participate in the conversation, support it, and help a variety of other voices to be heard. It is no longer a one-way speech, but a two-way exchange. Now, as Storyful’s David Clinch told Mashable, “journalists must be able to pivot quickly between the idea of using the community as a source of news and as the audience for news, because they are both.”Īs a result, the nature of journalistic discourse is transforming. Journalists can no longer rely on the idea of professionalism as separating them in a meaningful way from “amateur” bloggers and other kinds of citizen journalists. This change means that traditional distinctions between the journalist, the reader, and the news source are breaking down. Not only can they talk back to publications, but they can also compete against those publications by talking to other readers directly. What’s more, they can now be publishers themselves, whether through their own blogs, Twitter, Facebook, or other forms of social media. Now, readers can easily and immediately comment on stories by commenting on blogs. Digital technologies have dramatically changed the balance.
Publishers talked to their readers, but few readers could talk back, and in only limited ways. In the beginning of their chapter, in fact, they point to magazines as a “form of market conversation.” But the publishing industry’s advantage is only relative it too has tended either to ignore or to dominate the conversation.īefore the Internet, journalism was largely a one-way form of communication. Searls and Weinberger were addressing their comments above all to public relations and marketing people. But however obvious the idea may seem, it remains a powerful, foundational concept for new media. Today, for anyone who’s thought much about social media, it verges dangerously on being trite. In 1999, when Doc Searls and David Weinberger wrote in The Cluetrain Manifesto that “ markets are conversations,” it was a fresh, radically new idea. Doc Searls and David Weinberger: "Markets are conversations"
0 kommentar(er)
