consumer generated content


It’s no surprise that the National Gallery of Art wants to update their website and make their overall approach more savvy to Web 2.0 criteria. The problem, however, lies in keeping the museum a distinguished figure in the art arena while also making it something that people of all ages and backgrounds can enjoy.

NGA should allow collaboration on their website—without totally losing control. In doing so, they are the content holders even if they are not always the content creators. They can also use outside sources—such as a YouTube channel or a Flickr gallery—to get people to contribute their own videos.

This means that NGA should use crowdsourcing to a certain degree. They’re not relinquishing total control, but they’re still allowing museum goers to interact with the art and product their own.

Michael Sikorsky elaborates on this idea by saying that “crowdsourcing is the distinction between the wisdom of crowds and the participation of crowds. Not a lot of people separate these two but I try to separate them a lot. Sometimes you do not want both.”

In NGA’s case, they need to couple the idea of crowdsourcing with communications professionals at the museum. The communications pros can provide the necessary channels for museum goers to participate online while not creating their own material. It’s a tricky balance, but if the gallery aims to be up to par with their competitors it’s a necessary step.

Once the foundation of Web 2.0 is established for NGA’s new website, they need to make sure that people are eager and willing to collaborate. Angelo Sotira details the Deviant Art website and how it evolved into the artist community that it is today. Deviant Art is now one of the largest art forums on the web. Artists of all kinds come together in this outlet to express themselves.

Deviant Art may solve the problem that NGA could have in terms of controlling the content that people contribute to the website or other channels. Crowdsourcing gets difficult—unless people come to understand what to contribute. According to Sotira, the cultural context determines what is acceptable:

“And what it comes down to is culture, because our culture dictates what is and what isn’t okay. Our culture sort of decides who is and who isn’t a great artist. Our culture decides on some level if something does or doesn’t belong here. It’s not very overt, but you will get a general sense of acceptance or rejection if you submit certain things.”

Hopefully the contributors to the National Gallery of Art website will recognize what to collaborate on and what to share, while also having the help of the museum to moderate the content. NGA has the potential to exceed the standards of their competitors. It’s a tricky balance, but one that NGA should definitely experiment with.

Advertisements

If you think that Second Life members are just “users,” then the authors of Wikinomics would have to disagree with you. According to Tapscott and Williams, Second Life members are “prosumers.” These prosumers “participate in the design, creation, and production of the product, while Linden Labs is content to manage the community to make sure the infrastructure is running” (p. 125). In other words, they make user-generated content.

Residents create most of the content—not Linden Lab. This empowers each member to build avatars, houses, relationships, and essentially, a second life than can differ from their real one as much as they want. There are about 8.5 million members, with approximately 1.6 million that have logged on in the past two months. When you compare these figures to other social networks like MySpace or Facebook, it doesn’t seem like Second Life is such a big deal. But…countries have opened embassies in Second Life to boost their image. Esteemed universities like Harvard and Stanford are teaching online classes in this alternate world. Brands are selling their products to raise interest to those members that actually log on. What is it about Second Life that makes the trendsetters stumble after it?

Tapscott and Williams think the answer is “prosumption,” and that Second Life is so successful because it relies on the following key points (p. 148):

  • More than customization: rather than being mass customized to tailor to a group of people, Second Life allows each user to build an alternative identity and even use Linden Dollars ($270 Linden Dollars to $1 US Dollar) to mold the lifestyle.
  • Losing control: Linden Labs proudly states that they have little content on Second Life. These enables the members to treat Second Life as their own platform with seemingly infinite freedom.
  • Customer tool kits and context orchestration: Second Life hit the jackpot in making their product “modular, reconfigurable, and editable” (p. 148). This user-friendly nature of Second Life enables anybody to log on, funnel in some money, and use the materials available to them to create their identity.
  • Becoming a peer: This is fueled by treating the members like peers rather than customers. Second Life is successful with this in that Linden Labs only controls 1% of the content—this puts the ultimate power in the hands of the members.
  • Sharing the fruits: Members of Second Life feel ownership and entitlement of their virtual products. Members can buy and sell products, and therefore have a stake in Second Life.

It’s hard to determine where Second Life is going to be in the future. I’m baffled by the idea of an alternate identity to begin with—don’t social networks like Facebook and MySpace reinforce your personal identity and image by displaying your own interests, activities, education info, pictures, friends…? Personally, I’m a fan of this website that I came across: Get A First Life, a spoof on Second Life. Number of total members? Oh, about 6.5 billion.

Despite it’s criticisms and backlash, there are still loyal supporters to Second Life that believe in its general purpose and future. These prosumers will be the ones that determine the potential success of Second Life in the years and months to come.

It seems like everybody is a blogger these days. With so many citizen journalists online, PR professionals have to cooperate with bloggers more than ever before. Building long lasting relationships with journalists is still important, but building those same relationships with bloggers is just as vital to a PR campaign. So many people check out blogs every day, so it’s crucial to get news about a product and company into the hands of those avid bloggers.

Pitching bloggers doesn’t differ too much compared to pitching the traditional forms of media. The key to establishing these relationships with bloggers is to be casual yet professional. Understanding the landscape of the blogosphere will help PR pros build those solid relationships, while continual interaction with the bloggers—whether you have a story coming out or not—will ensure that the relationship has been cultivated and secured.

Nikon D80

Nikon took an interesting approach when they wanted to gain media attention for their product, Nikon D80. According to Jaffe‘s blog, “this has been the best example of blogger outreach I have either experienced (first hand) or read about.” Nikon originally sent a bunch of Nikon D80 cameras to Flickr users and emphasized consumer generated content (CGC). The pictures were then used in a three page spread in BusinessWeek (among other pubs and mags).

Engaging the consumer obviously paid off, and Nikon followed up by giving the camera to fifty bloggers. Jeffe argues that this act “helps continue to legitimize the blogosphere and the new influencers.” With minimal effort, Nikon successfully participated in rebranding their camera and their overall image. The distribution of their cameras encouraged recipients to take pictures and share their experiences online.

Nikon benefited from this project because they made their product relevant to the consumer—and to the blogger. By reaching out to 50 influential bloggers (instead of journalists), they were setting a standard for this new type of blogger/marketing/PR relationship. Nikon has made known their blogger outreach efforts, and are therefore being heralded for trying out new ground with their product. Unlike the Edelman and Microsoft partnership before it, Nikon and MWW Group made sure they understood the blogosphere by first testing out their trial on the Flickr users.

Nikon was sure to cover any and all ground:

“…The only request we have of you is that you please make sure that, if you choose to write about the camera, you make it clear how you got it. We would never ask you to cross any ethical lines, so openness and honesty on all our parts is in everyone’s best interest.

The camera is essentially being loaned to you for six months at which point you have three options:

1. Return it to us
2. Re-up for another six month loan period, or
3. Buy the camera at a significantly reduced editorial discount.

Should you opt for #1 or #3, the camera or the purchase price will then be donated to a photography education program that Nikon supports. That’s it.” (retrieved from http://www.whatsnextblog.com).

Nikon wanted the camera to do its own advertising once it was in the hands of bloggers. This marketing approach may have gained more attention than the actual product– which will inevitably lead to more interest about the product. These bloggers have become brand ambassadors for the program, whether they choose to blog about the product or not. Other companies and PR/marketing professionals can learn a a lot about blogger outreach from this program—the number one rule being: know the blogosphere and you’ll know your audience.