I got a text from Brent yesterday: “Are you in a Cisco commercial?!” And I knew my fraction-of-a-second of fame had gone live, on nationwide basic cable (namely, CNN). It all came about the Sunday after I moved from Echo Park to Venice (in October). I was walking around Abbot Kinney Festival when a young woman with a Flip camera stopped me. It was election season and I was initially skeptical as dozens of people were roaming about with clipboards and Roseanne/Cindy Sheehan 2012 stickers. Then she explained that she was sent out to cast a specific role for a commercial and the director really liked working with regular, man-on-the-street types found at farmers markets and street festivals. I spoke to her casually on camera about how I had just moved to Venice from Echo Park that week and was looking forward to a nice change of pace on the west side.
It seems every social network overextends its privileges with users once a year if not more. In the past the culprit has most often been Facebook, changing its Terms of Service and upgrading its platform to create just a bit more vulnerability for its users. It’s become an almost humorous pattern of overreaching only to retreat slightly in reaction to inevitable user outrage.
LinkedIn launched its own social ad network, which utilized users images and profile information in advertisements that would be served on the site, presumably to their contacts. LinkedIn really should have seen this coming — a few years back when Facebook did the same thing it experienced a user backlash.
What’s the fuss? Social network users expect the opportunity to select whether their likeness is used for profit. In both Facebook and LinkedIn’s case, users were initially opted in to the ad programs by default.
For the past couple weeks I’ve seen headlines and tweets regarding BP’s leveraging of Google Adwords (as well as Bing and Yahoo!) to control the top (sponsored) search results for such terms as BP Oil Spill. This is a natural response to crisis for any corporation, no matter the depth of its PR 2.0 savvy.
But according to recent AdWords number crunches, BP is only paying an average of $1.33 per click or roughly $1 million each month (SearchEngineWatch, June 9). Perhaps as low as $1.22 per click.
Why so little? Nobody has been outbidding them in the AdWords marketplace. It’s time for some guerrilla tactics.
Here’s what I propose: Google should donate any revenues above $5 per click for any keyword to funds and charities dedicated to restoring the Gulf and/or to benefit those whose livelihoods have been shattered as a result of the Deepwater Horizon BP Oil Spill.
Yes, this is a crazy idea and it could throw AdWords of its hinges. So let’s just do it for ONE DAY. Google can’t change the rules for specific keywords but they can change the rules across the board. All it would take is a few noble souls willing to launch a bidding war with BP up to say – $20 per click. And Google’s word that monies will be donated (a great PR move in itself).
Justice is: clicking a search result and having $15 transfer BP to a non-profit Oil Spill fund. With each and every click!
But another number to add to the analytics spreadsheet, this gives the most specific data on “impressions” of Facebook page feed entries to date. But how an impression is defined by facebook is not entirely clear. Does this mean someone actually paused to read it while scrolling their News Feed? Did they visit the fan page while it was top post?
What is clear is that impressions has nothing to do with clickthrus, however, it is a more specific number than “reach,” which in the case of facebook or twitter — where people with inflated friend and follower counts regularly republish and retweet — quickly inflates into the millions with little true effect.
So what of it? And why now? And why do I only see this on ONE of many FB pages that I admin? And when can I get moar moar moar data please facebook?