cgm

Back to the Digital Future: A Personal Look Back

As you can tell, I've barely touched this blog in a year.  I'm not entirely sure why. I suspect the explosion of social platforms with vastly lower publishing barriers such as Twitter and Facebook contributed to the blog silence. I also took a new job which kept me incredibly busy in my initial ramp-up and onboarding.

On the blogging deficit, there's good and bad news here. The good is that very little of one's personal narrative is missed in a world of one-click or one-sentence posting.  And with the ease of photo and video uploads to these platforms, who needs text, right?  That Facebook now enables us to stitch together a longer personal narrative via Timelime makes the short-form publishing eve more seductive. We simply don't need to work as hard to connect the dots, arguably one of the most important skills in writing.

On the downside, we're taking less time to just sit back and reflect. Sometimes we just
need to step back to gain critical perspective. There's little room for serious reflection on Twitter -- it's mostly impulsive -- and some of the dots we connect on Facebook are downright trivial.  Indeed, there's no chance I could have authored a book, Satisfied Customers Tell Three Friends, Angry Customers Tell 3000 (Doubleday), had I not spent several years organizing thoughts on this blog...and absorbing feedback along the way.  In many respects, the blog was the "beta test" for the book, and you can practically see the book chapters jump out in the tag cloud.  Then again, writing a book wasn't the objective when I started the blog, although I did suspect something "organized" would emerge from the musings: better articles, speeches, consulting, etc. (I guess that's the point.)

Back to the Digital Future

But let's shift back to the good news.  The digital and social world continues to stimulate and provoke and touch every aspect of our lives.  It's not going to slow down anytime soon, and that leaves us with lots to talk about and debate -- irrespective of publishing platform. Last week, after going a good eight months of writing silence, I finally cranked out an Ad Age column entitled "Back to the Digital Future" which attempted to connect a bunch of personal dots into the future.  It wasn't a blog post, per se, but I felt good to blog again.  Here's some excerpts:

The past year saw digital and social media hit new tipping points in our daily lives -- shifting habits, cannibalizing old ways, inspiring new thinking, opening and closing gates to relationships.

But for me, social media remained deeply personal. The connections with family and friends, and especially old friends, powered an almost relentless engagement with social and digital platforms. I cheered friends from afar in their newsfeed pursuits. I cried in comments for those who experienced loss. I reopened relationships with the high-school crowd, even those I once snubbed (or vice versa).

Along the way, I dialed down my pontification level. My personal blog -- ConsumerGeneratedMedia.com -- went a year without a post, and my Twitter account found more substance (and motivating ridicule) in my NikePlus "updates" than in half-baked attempts at digital wit. While I finally hit 9,000 followers, the last 500 took the entire year. Hey, they do call it "earned media for a reason."

I was among the earlier testers of Google+, but got a bit intimidated when A-listers rushed to the platform with almost uncritical resolve. (It made me feel like the party was already closed.) I also got off on the wrong foot by creating too many darn circles. (Lesson for marketers: stop over-segmenting!)

If anything bordered on compulsive behavior, mobile-phone photos took the prize. I took photos of everything, and marveled at how a photo of Saturday pancakes for my kids could generate more "likes" than a "most emailed" article from The New York Times.

Interestingly, I shed a ton of devices: the standalone digital camera, the once-beloved FlipCam, the family video camera, a medley of alarm clocks. My watch, I dare say, is clinging for life. Yes, content quality took a hit, but honestly, I didn't really care. Good enough was my operating principle in a world of lower file-size Facebook and YouTube uploads.

Apps "appsolutely" stole my attention and engagement, but I wasn't the easiest consumer to please or seduce. I tried everything -- even clicked on app ads -- but only found sustained affection in about 5% of them. The apps that made the cut were crazy simple, rewarding and sometimes fun. They added value, and solved real problems.

Must-have mobile apps included Maps, Instagram, NikePlus, the Swiss Rail app, and French for Dummies. IPad winners included Google Earth, TuneIn Radio, Skype, and the brilliant "Charlie Brown Christmas" book.

On moving to Europe:

Moving to Europe digitized new areas. I haven't written a check in 8 months. Skype's a religion. Online grocery shopping, bless its soul, now accounts for 50% of our food purchases. Despite our large-screen TV, the vast majority of our TV-style content sources from iTunes (except for the kids, who are permitted to watch French cartoons on the regular tube).

On Digital Downsides:

I got crazy frustrated with email. The stuff that really matters in my Gmail pile, like family updates, struggled to compete with the garbage. Thanks to Farmville updates, even Facebook junked up a bit.

While I hit new records in saying "Happy Birthday" to countless friends on Facebook, at times I felt insincere and phony in my efforts. It was just too easy. Then again, my heart warmed when superficial birthday likes came my way.

I cursed hotels or events (even the Cannes organizers) with bad or unworkable or complicated WIFI. I tried every to-do list app, from Evernote to digital stickies, but napkins still reigned supreme. I learned that it's pointless to ask a colleague about their weekend in a world of Facebook transparency. 

Final Word:

But make no mistake. 2011 was a great year. While a bit dazed and confused with the pace of change, I remain infatuated with the dynamic power of the digital landscape -- as should all of us. This is a great time to be in marketing, and a great time to be partners with the consumer. Let's raise our game, and along the way stay grounded in our own personal experiences and common sense.

I'm serious about the last part.  Have a great year. Keep blogging (irrespective of platform).   I'll try to do likewise.

The Twenty Most Important Social Media Buzzwords for 2010

My, how the digital times are a-changin'. We're downsizing to small screens, friending the world, thinking in 140 characters and downloading -- dare I say -- "billions and billions" of apps designed to make everything we do simpler, faster and more convenient (well, we think). And so, only days into 2010, I decided to kick off the year with an Ad Age column dedicated to the most appropriate buzzwords to describe our curious stampede to the social media and mobile future.  Here's are a few excepts and favorites from the piece. Read the full-article here. Anything missing?  Send feedback here or via my Twitter account (twitter.com/pblackshaw)

• SPURNED MEDIA: Just like it sounds, earned media that goes horribly negative, invades otherwise pristine search results or bleeds into traditional media. Bad customer service is a top driver of "spurned media."

• MOBILENECKING: The alarming tendency to have our necks titled down or shifted sideways -- ever glued to our mobile device. This anywhere, anyplace epidemic is increasingly common in cars, airplanes and crosswalks. Closely related to term "Eyevoidance," where no one looks at anyone anymore.

• JACK RIPPER: The device warriors who hog outlets anywhere they can find them -- in the airport, via the USB port of a colleague's computer, even a restaurant reservation desk. They get a charge from a charge.

• WIKI WART: A bad piece of news or an embarrassing brand episode (e.g., an activist protest or a social-media campaign that backfired) that just won't go away in a brand's Wikipedia description. PR pros often give false hope to brands of removing the warts, but relentless Wikipedia editors put them right back.

• OEDIPOST COMPLEX: The curious neurosis that compels folks to sleep with their Blackberry or iPhone. The afflicted can't stop checking -- even in late hours -- for responses to tweets or blog and Facebook posts.

• BRAND TEASE: A consumer who "friends" or "fans" a brand, only to never return for a second date. Brands feed the cycle by forgetting to court the consumer with engaging, interesting or sustaining content or value.

• APPTOSTERONE: The mojo that fuels intense "mine's bigger/better" conversation about mobile apps. "Dude, you got Bump, but I've got FourSquare." Marketing techies are loaded with Apptosterone.

• TWITSTOP: A bathroom detour from a meeting or conversation in order to check e-mail, Twitter or the latest and greatest via an app. (Swear on the Bible, I don't do this ... but I'm told lots of others do.)

• DIGITAL DETOX: What we all need -- at least in doses. As we've learned, total digital immersion has side effects. Let's all pursue a roadmap for balance in 2010. (This is likely the topic of my next book, so send feedback.)

Again, here's the full article.  Love to hear your thoughts. 

Is the Future of Marketing About Marketing to Marketers?

Such is the title of my recent column in Advertising Age, and boy has this topic been on my mind for quite some time.  If you take a close look under the hood on so many of these word-of-mouth, viral, buzz building, and social media campaigns, the folks with marketing pedigree and credentials are everywhere. 

In the blogosphere, there are thousands of bloggers who source directly from the marketing and public relations ranks. Double that for Twitter, which seem to matriculate another hundred "social-media experts" every couple hours. Conduct even the most basic Twitter search on user profiles and you'll find nearly 30,000 Twitter users self-identified as marketers. Nearly 8,500 use the term "PR," and another 8,000 use the term "social media."

Look no further than last week's Skittles brouhaha. Or the Super Bowl advertising buzz that I tracked for Nielsen. Or the Motrin Moms controversy many months earlier. Upward of half of the overall buzz came from the folks with marketing industry pedigree or credentials -- and the percentage conspicuously peaked even higher in the early waves of buzz. Put another way, marketers are complicit in pushing the snowball into a "buzzball."

Is this a bad thing?  Well, I hold off a bit on that particular question, but at minimum we at least need to recognize and acknowledge the disproportionate voice of marketers in the conversational stream. Even I'm a bit guilty of over-romanticizing the "consumer voice" when in fact the earliest buzz-building megaphones are being sounded by the folks I regularly rub shoulder to shoulder with at industry conferences.  Not to suggest we don't wear both consumer and marketer hats; I'm 100% aligned on what Dan Schwabel's suggesting about Personal Branding or Rohit Bhargava is putting out there about "authenticity" in Personality Not Included and I'm a proud participant in that tango.

That all this moves the needle is beyond question. Just consider the impact of search. In the pre-search world, marketers could critique one another into submission and no one outside our hermetically sealed silo would have a clue what we are saying. In the post-search world, all the marketer talk, fortified by heavy doses of link love, pushes straight to the top of organic Google-search results, meaning consumers are as likely to see our informed, often critical spin before they see the first billboard, display ad or TV spot. That's big.

At minimum, we also need to acknowledge that this curious trend blurs lines, and muddies the water.  I call this out not to be righteous but only because I truly believe we marketers need to consistently go the extra distance to keep things transparent, clear, well-disclosed, and of course "open."  When the commentators and analysts are becoming de facto media channels (which is clearly happening), we need to dial up the "clarity" levers.

Then again, maybe that's the bargain we've all struck in this Byzantine conversational bazaar we've buzzed up. Social media both softens silos and mucks up the lines. Web 2.0 marketing is de facto research, and feedback-powered research is the highest form of loyalty marketing, right? Lines naturally get blurry, even confusing, when we're both observer and participant. Inevitably, we end up interpreting the very buzz we created or fueled ourselves.

If you buy into this theory, you really have to think hardder about how to build the likes of David Armano, Steve Rubel, Jeremiah Owyang, BL Ochman, Peter Kim, Charlene Li, Chris Brogan and Susan Bratton into your buzz building or launch strategies, or at least have a strategy for "viral sandbagging" their potential negatives or venom.

This is no cake walk. While there's shortage of easy high-fives from the social-media set on anything that smacks of progressive marketing, let's not forget that these folks know all the tricks of the trade, and can smell an imposter, fraud or half-baked campaign a mile away. Indeed, if you look at the digital trail of road kill (especially in search results) from stupid or unethical marketing practice, the marketing experts -- not Joe Consumer -- were the first to throw the fatal daggers. "Et tu, Brute?" indeed!

I toss in a few final tips on the outreach side, but let me close with this observation.  However this nets out -- even if the net percentage of marketer-initiated buzz increases -- we must keep the space credible and trusted.  Social media is a wonderful thing -- enabling, empowering, rule-breaking -- but at times it blinds us to certain realities. We're a much bigger part of the conversation than we readily concede.  As long as we're open and transparent (and maybe even a bit self-critica) about this point, the odds of preserving trust will go up. 

Some additional comments/observations about this piece.

• Ad Age Column Comments 
• Forrester Blog: Who's Really Watching the Watchmen (David Card)
   

Social Media Confessions & Choices (First Official Post of 2009)

And so this blog enters year five of its existence - hard to believe!  CGM has evolved from peripheral curiosity for companies and brands to major focus. True, the term "CGM" plays a big second fiddle to the all-encompassing term "social media," which includes media and brand initiated content (and beyond). That said, I still think the "consumer" side of the equation sets the pace in this new "age of participation." It's also what excites and energizes me!

In terms of 2008 recaps, I humbly (and introspectively) teed up both reflections and predictions.  In my latest Ad Age column, for instance, entitled "Consumers to Suffer from Social Media Indigestion in 2009," I offer a handful of predictions for the new year, many of them deeply grounded on my own personal experiences...and painpoints.  I write:

Many of us are going to wake up in 2009 wondering "what did we eat?" and "why did we devour it all so fast?" We impulsively adopted everything from hastily assembled Facebook friends and Twitter followers to groups, apps and widgets (usually while shadowing others, such as uber-early adopter Robert Scoble), yet rarely revisited them. Many of us will feel compelled to join the social media equivalent of Weight Watchers, eager to trim the excess and rediscover a modicum of don't-follow-everything discipline. Meanwhile, a new wave of "diet" apps and services from the still-revenue-hungry social media entrepreneurs will flood the market: "For $10 a month, we'll promise you a downsized, manageable, and authentic Friends list." In 2009, less may well become the new more.

On this point, I do worry we've all jumped into much of the "new" social media stuff too aggressively, often leading to an almost-compulsive need to post, twit, friend, link, and share every mundane detail of my life.  In many respects, it's hard to resist.  As an early leader and adopter -- even a published author on the topic of CGM & social media -- I almost feel an obligation and duty to "keep up with the crowd" and "walk my talk."  Despite all the Twitter banter about convenience, efficiency, empowerment, lower feedback barriers, at times it all feels a bit frenzied -- a perception perhaps biased by the fact that I now have three kids under four years.

Looking into 2009, I need to weigh in on a number of key choices:  

• Popularity versus Intimacy:  A huge friends list begets marketing opportunities (not unlike a good mailing list), and can obviously contribute to building a "personal brand," but is it really a "friends" list? It's hard to do both. Often, when I send a "Dude...let's catch up soon" blurb on Facebook I wonder whether I've cheapened or trivialized the relationship. (It feels that way on the receiving end.) Then again, I did send a wee small sign of life, right? 


• Short Form Versus Long Form:  My blog posts on ConsumerGeneratedMedia.com actually plummeted in 2008...mainly because I found myself perfecting short form messaging on Twitter, Facebook "what are you doing" forms, and Blackberry email.  I'm inclined to return to the longer format lest my Twitter-induced glorification of the "mundane" (e.g. "Hey, watched a movie tonight!") gets the better of me.  My blog played a huge role in laying foundation for my Tell 3000 book, and that's because it afforded me the opportunity to test hypotheses, write "pilot" chapters, take a big step back here and there, and the like.  I don't want to lose that discipline. Of course, like others, I can aim for that perfect symbiotic relationship between long and short form, but that also carries risks.

• Big Tent or Narrow Tent:  Social media now encompasses just about everything -- it's as much of an "organizing principle" as marketing strategy -- and that makes it more difficult to focus content choices.  I also hate the thought of simply reinterating what hundreds of others are already saying, a reality that hits me everytime I inventory the fire-hydrant of self-described "social media consultants" on my Twitter follower list.  Even on this blog, I've noticed no shortage of "topic creep." (Just look at all my categories.)  I'll need to think a bit harder about where I'd like to focus my best thinking. Since taking on my new role as Chair of the Better Busines Bureau, my obsession with the issue of marketplace Trust has jumped to the next level, and I'll likely focus attention in that area.  

Despite all this, I enter 2009 with a great sense of optimism about what's possible.  In a recent post for Nielsen's Newswire entitled "Social Media Comes of Age," I outlined a number of key developments from which I drew inspiration and motivation in 2008, from all aspects of the Obama campaign's web and voter-participation strategy and MyStarbuckIdea.com  to Intel Chairman Scott Cook's Harvard Business Review cover story on "User Contribution Systems."   I welcome any and all feedback.

BlogWorld Notebook: Re-Engaging With My Inner Blogger

I feel like a bit of an imposter here at BlogWorld.  I talk about blogs every day -- interpret them, offer strategy to companies about how to create and manage them - but in many respects I've lost touch a bit with "individual" blogging.  The reality is that I'm only updating my ConsumerGeneratedMedia site one every week or so (sometimes longer), and many of the issues or tips or "deep thoughts" I ordinarily would toss on my blog have been cannibalized by Twitter, Facebook, Yammer (internal twitter), and the bi-weekly "marketing meets service" column I now write for Advertising Age. I'm also increasingly self-conscious that if I don't stay diligent, and ever attentive, I'll continue getting lapped by far wiser and prescient marketing industry bloggers.  There are many, and they keep me on my toes.

Still, few experiences have so motivated me to think differently about consumer-generated media (or conversations, or social media...) as my own personal blogging (whether this one or my own family blogs like DosBebes or HybridBuzz) and I'm eager to rediscover some of the blog-love while here at the BlogWorld Expo in Las Vegas.  So in addition to participating on a panel dedicated to one of my favorite topics, Defensive Branding, which builds on my of the themes in my book, I hope to put on my consumer cap and soak in some fresh ideas and inspiration.  As I look across the hundreds of individuals intently listening to the keynote address here, delivered by TypePads Anil Dash and Chris Alden, there's an unmistakable level of passion, commitment, and personal pride in the development of the blogosphere. At times it borders on romantic "blogs will solve all" naivette, but that's overshadowed by the unmistakable reality that these are the new media creators and content curators of the marketspace. From traditional media companies who increasingly connect with readers using blog publishing tools to corporations seeking to dial up a greater sense of authenticity and transparency with consumers or customers, everyone, it seems, is borrowing lessons and insights from the folks in this room.  So perhaps this is where insight begins -- perhaps!  We'll see.  I'll keep taking notes. #bwe08

The "Conversational Customs Office" and other Painpoints in Participation

There's a certain irony that in this "age of conversation," we're increasingly compelled to pre-qualify conversation lest undesirable noise, garbage, or spam infest the airwaves. This latest chapter in the "Tragedy of the Commons" is not only a buzzkill, but borders on comical.  This evening, after reading a thoughtful post on viral marketing by respected blogger B.L. Ochman, I attempted to toss in a short and sweet "great post" comment.  Before it could go up, I had to type in the term -- I hope I get this right -- BROWNLABRADOODLE. You've got to be kidding, I kept muttering to myself.  Of course I promptly and predictably flubbed the spelling of this tongue-twister-on-steroids on the first two go-arounds, eliciting this annoying "error" message.  Of course, this is just the tip of the iceberg.  For some blogs, you practically need magnifying glasses (and a code-breaker) to figure out the weird bends and contortions of letters embedded in the cryptic words.  It all borders on tragic.  To keep our airwaves clean, we now have little choice but to subject consumers or users to what we might refer to as a "Conversational Customs Office."   

This Brand May Be Monitored for "Quality Purposes"...and Other Lessons in Consumer-Surveillance

In my ClickZ column this morning, Adapting to Consumer-Controlled Surveillance, I volunteer a dosage of tortured ambivalence about today's marketing environment:

"I often worry that in our sometime irrational exuberance over the benefits and wonders of conversation, brands are blind to what it truly means for consumers -- our coveted buyers and lifetime revenue streams -- to be constantly watching, monitoring, evaluating, and talking about us. At the end of the day, consumers are monitoring brands and companies "for quality purposes" 24/7, far more attentively than companies recording toll-free calls. And that has enormous consequences for how we promote, protect, and manage brands."

It's not that I lack excitement about "participation" and "conversation." I just worry that brands and their agencies -- and other brand stakeholders -- all to often sidestep the more difficult questions around how to truly manage and interact with consumers in this age of "consumer control." Romanticism sometimes suffocates realism. Marketing claims often simply betrays the facts.  This is big theme in my upcoming book, Satisfied Customers Tell Three Friends, Angry Customers Tell 3000: Running a Business in a Today's Consumer-Driven World.  This isn't to suggest I have the answers, but I do know we need to get this particular "conversation" going sooner or later.  In my column I outline six key rules and principles to warm up our thinking. They include:

• We must rethink what it means to be truly credible. In a world of 24/7 consumer surveillance, credibility is everything. Today's infrared-enabled consumer can find every chink in the brand armor. My book outlines the six drivers of brand credibility: trust, transparency, authenticity, affirmation, listening, and responsiveness. Getting these drivers right not only neutralizes the impact of piercing consumer radar but also lays a foundation for a win-win.

• We must become better listeners. Marketers must shift from a paid-media marketing model to a listening-centered marketing model wherein all early signals, whether extreme or ostensibly insignificant, are absorbed and internalized across the brand franchise. This requires both internal brand radar, and processes and tools similar to what my own firm (and many others) provide for external listening.


• We must reposition customer service as the new media department. You can put Dove Evolution, Dove Onslaught, every Doritos consumer-created Super Bowl ad, and dozens of hugely popular user-generated ad spots into a blender, and they still won't come close to filling the Olympic-sized pool of negative media in the conversational airwaves implicating bad customer service. In categories like banking and financial service, conversation indicting customer service owns upwards of 40 to 50 percent of all discussion volume. In electronics, the number is around 20 percent. The consumer-controlled surveillance culture is actively taking notes on customer service, and the narrative -- the content it creates -- can cut in either positive or negative directions depending on how well brands nurture this arena.


• We must rethink the value and importance of indirect marketing, including human resources and operations. In a surveillance culture, consumers see three levels deeper into the brand. What they see has less to do with the message's polish and more with the brand experience's foundational drivers. Products that work require a superb operational backbone. Meaningful service experiences require a service profit chain of well-trained, motivated, loyal employees. Smart, interactive, responsive online interfaces require excellent business processes.


• We must close or integrate the silos. Brands need a united, cooperative front to contend with the elevated power and leverage of the consumer-controlled surveillance culture. At some point, it's just not going to work to have PR firms, advertising firms, digital agencies, and other supplier groups messaging against or with these new currents. We can't have eight different groups managing and interpreting influencers. We probably need to refashion and recast what we mean by holistic communication.

Here's a link to the full article.

Death of a Newspaper: A Final 2007 Post About the Cincinnati Post

Today the 126-year old Cincinnati Post and Kentucky Post published its final issue. This is no small deal, and even the New York Times gave the matter half a dozen column inches this morning.  Admittedly,I wasn't a huge reader of the Post, but it's hard not to feel bittersweet, even a bit nostalgic, about its exit. Indeed, earlier today I couldn't resist cruising around the streets of Cincinnati to capture the paper's last breath of circulation in action. Regrettably, after visiting nearly a dozen stands, I only found one that had copies of the new edition.  Here's a photo gallery from my journey.  While Cincinnati is now a "one-newspaper," I'm probably stop short of using the word "consolidation" to describe what's going on. With the advent of blogging and other forms of CGM, it's just not that simple anymore. Indeed, media continues to fragment everywhere, and the challenge for print publications is to not only harness the digital space an extension of what they do well offline, but also to co-create content with consumers and readers who bring new skills and capability to the table in the event capture and packaging department. Easier said than done, of course, but there's experimentation taking place among newspapers on this front, even here in Cincinnati, with the Cincinnati Enquirer exploiting "expert moms" as part of program called CincyMoms.  Local TV stations are also getting into the act, and there's no question we'll see in 2008 a further blurring of the line around "who owns local content" question.  Never a dull moment!

And so "The Post" wraps up my final post of 2007.  Happy New Year!

CGM Shows Signs of Life on Wikipedia

I just noticed the Wikipedia entry for "Consumer Generated Media" is finally starting to take shape.  That's an encouraging 2007 development, and I hope 2008 sees further definition and elaboration (and supporting links) against this important trend and concept.  I've pretty much sat on the sidelines watching as the definition evolves, and it's quite fascinating.  In the early phase, it was quite obvious that the Wikipedia entry-elite (another 2008 buzzword?) were not too fond of the term "consumer" versus "user" or "people," and at once point someone suggested folding the entry into the User-Generated Content entry.  Fortunately, CGM passed that test.  Early on, someone also noted on the entry that I wasn't the first person to use the term, which appears to be true. Turns out someone did in fact use the term before I did, but in an entirely different context.  Still, there's a beautiful accountability principle at work with Wikipedia that constantly keeps us on our toes.  This form of "group CGM" drives transparency. Lastly, it's pretty obvious that a growing number of folks are linking to the entry as it now owns the #4 position on Google against the query "Consumer Generated Media," up significantly from a year ago. 

MarketingProfs Podcast: Debating the Great "Conversational Divide"

Precipitated in part by a post by my friend and fellow WOMMA board member Jim Nail questioning whether whether social media is scaling the Hype Curve -- a topic I also took on recently in a ClickZ column (Sustaining the Conversation?), I was invited by MarketingProfs Ann Hadley and Paul Dunay to participate in a spirited podcast on the subject.  Jim also participated, although it would be a total stretch to suggest it was a debate, since we agreed on 99% of the points. In a nutshell, I reiterated many of the same points you keep hearing from me on this blog: we're just not credible as marketers on the "conversation" front until we make meaningful investment in listening infrastructures (consumer affairs, relationship marketing).  Too many CMOs and industry pundits are waxing poetic about the power of conversations while the consumer gets snubbed at the brand welcome mat or feedback pipe. We need to get beyond such "conversational divides" and drive more consistency and credibility. Other folks engaged on this topic include Joseph Jaffe and Jen McClure of the Society for New Communications Research.  Here's a link to the podcast