As I (finally) finish up my last semester of college, I have been closely studying the association between social media use and its relationship to the, “Big Five” personality traits, as categorized by Coasta and McCrae (1992). The (too massive) pile of research I’ve read, in coordination with my findings on the relationship between individuals’ personality traits and their sharing on social networks, has led me to consider the benefits of using personality research and social media in another aspect. There is a huge opportunity to use social media to relate to an organization’s target audience.

All too often organizations want to be “social” or use media as a branding tool to showcase their capabilities without getting to know their audience. Although some brands try to discern the kind of content that would best relate to an audience, they still often fail to understand the ways in which consumers would prefer to interact; they post too often, not enough, or don’t choose a particular type of person to whom they tailor their content.  Brands are still missing out on a chance to take initiative in showcasing interactions that relate more to the audience and directly to the actions and behaviors of those individuals on social networks.

While Coasta and McCrae’s personality traits are directly coded across five categories; openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness and neuroticism, there is an enormous opportunity to build upon this template with more in-depth research to help discover traits of specific niche audiences.

By paying closer attention to the ways individuals in a particular audience communicate with one another, as well as how often and what types of information these individuals are posting, organizations should not only use social media as a tool to teach about brands, but also to learn about the business or consumer they’re trying to reach. I look forward to psychology being used more in-depth to create a real “social” atmosphere in which social media truly becomes a two-way street.

When I first decided to major in both psychology and advertising/public relations I was warned that I might not find a place for both skills. I am happy to say that I believe that has changed and will continue to change as the trend of audience behavior dominating all platforms of marketing moves its way into digital- a tangible element that can be efficiently utilized for observational studies. I’m betting we can learn a lot from what is right in front of us.

Copy image location, Click camera icon, Paste, Voila!

I was shopping at the local pharmacy last week, minding my own business, when I suddenly saw someone I recognized: a woman I had seen in multiple stock photo searches, now plastered on the box of an As Seen on TV product next to the Pajama Jeans aisle.

When selecting impactful images to use for our web clients, it is important to verify that the pictures are not used elsewhere on the Internet – or on embarrassing products, for that matter.

Enter Google “Search by Image.” Perhaps you’re already familiar with it – it’s been around for a while – but for me this was both a useful and time-saving discovery. To take advantage of Search by Image, right click on a picture, and copy the image location or the image URL, depending on your browser (note: do not copy the image itself). In Google Images, click the camera icon on the right end of the search bar, paste, and hit enter.  Search results include the best guess of the image’s subject, visually similar images, and pages that include matching images.

As a web marketer, Search by Image is a valuable tool because it tells me where else a photo is found online, and it saves me time when I need to discover where I initially found an image. There are many uses for Search by Image; tell us what you use it for in the comments below!

Each month a “Cool Tool” is featured in the Walker Sands Newsletter. Sign up to receive our newsletter and see the archives here.

I have a confession to make: I’ve never sent a text message.

I’m the proud owner of a dumb (as in, the antithesis of smart) Samsung flip phone. There are second graders with more tablet experience than me.

I’ve never Foursquared or Pinned anything or FaceTimed. I cannot type with my thumbs, and it has nothing to do with thick fingers. I’ve engaged in a couple rounds of Angry Birds on devices that weren’t my own and found it chomps less thrilling than Ms. Pac-Man on my (still fully functional) Game Boy Color.

Truth be told, I haven’t gone much farther than first base in my relationship with “modern technology” (a term which is about as easy to explain as Ron Artest’s name change).

I assume that, in the PR world, this is blasphemous. How could anyone stay up-to-the-second with news across all wires, blogs and pay-walled
newspaper sites, how could anyone build rapport with reporters geographic regions away, how could anyone retain clients without at least a basic personal experience with the Ice Cream Sandwich operating system (or something close)?

Well, thanks to Twitter, I’m not completely living in the dark ages, but without accessibility to CNN breaking news during my Metra commute or when I’m lying in bed doing nothing but fall asleep to “Friends” reruns, I suppose my world is only dimly lit.

And there’s something to be said for making life work without being plugged in all the time.

How do I know this?

Mad Men, obviously.

If Don Draper could successfully manage Lucky Strike, Clearasil and Playtex accounts in a time of no cell phones, no e-mail and no LinkedIn (not to mention a time when it was atypical not to smoke inside the office), then I truly (and, admittedly, somewhat naively) believe anyone can. I am fully aware that Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce is fictitious and exists solely to make our Sunday evenings more bearable, but it still stands on a historical, factual foundation.

I’m not anti-technology. I’m just pro-1960. I’m not advising any firm to rip the Dells from their desktops this very minute, chuck the tablets off of the nearest balcony or bid Gmail adieu. For all too many reasons, this just isn’t feasible in 2012. What I am advocating, however, is an appreciation of old-fashion. No matter how electronic the world becomes, the words “public relations” still infer that humans are involved, and I think that people (even today) inherently crave a level of intimacy in their communication—which you can’t always achieve through an e-mail blast.

In this new media cyclone perpetuated by Outlook’s send/receive schedule, Google alerts and (insert social media platform here) updates, perhaps we could all benefit from occasionally disconnecting from our devices—and realizing how much more connected we become without them.

When I make my occasional rounds on LinkedIn—to find out if all those jerks from college have jobs and stuff—I’m invariably drawn to the always enticing “Who’s Viewed Your Profile?” section. The last time I did this I was thrilled to learn that six people (six!) had viewed my profile over the past month, but was then immediately dismayed when I remembered the dirty trick that the masterminds at LinkedIn play on their users. “Someone in a leadership function in the graphic design industry from greater Chicago” had viewed my LinkedIn profile, but, devastatingly, I would not be able to learn with any certainty who the person is, without upgrading to a LinkedIn Premium account.

In the moment, I can definitely understand how the powerful combination of narcissism, ambition, and genuine curiosity would entice users to make this dreaded upgrade and start handing over a minimum of eight bucks a month to use LinkedIn Premium. How could you put a price on knowing who views your profile when, in all likelihood, the viewers are the people who can make all your professional dreams come true?!?

Anyway, all this got me thinking about the “freemium” business model LinkedIn is employing here. As you’re probably already aware, the freemium model basically involves offering your product, most commonly a web service, app, or access to content, for free, and encouraging users to pay an optional fee to get a premium version of the product that’s unavailable to the mere mortals who use the basic version.

LinkedIn Premium is my favorite example of this model in action, since the way it preys on our emotions is so obvious, (and frustrating) but tons of web companies have turned to freemium as a way to boost revenue despite the fact that web users have been conditioned to think that most all the online services and content we love so much should be accessible for free. Spotify, Hulu, Rovio, (the company behind Angry Birds) and many online versions of publications are additional examples, off the top of my head, that offer premium versions of their free products, at a nominal cost.

As we’ve learned time and time again, even explosively popular web companies can struggle to actually make money. Viewed in that context, the freemium model seems like it makes a ton of sense, but is it the real answer for long-term economic viability for the many firms in the digital space that should make up a sizable chunk of our “new economy?” Even though the model still allows for cheapskates to continue using the free versions of stuff, the frustration that can surface when using an ostensibly free service, only to hit a paywall with sure-to-be-epic, life changing, PREMIUM content or features on the other side, can be significant.

Once that frustration sets in, the user can either:

A). Cave and subscribe to the awesome premium version of whatever it is (I rarely do this, but did so recently on ESPN.com—I begrudgingly became an Insider on that site recently)

B). Get annoyed and develop a distaste for the company that’s put them in the position to make this decision (I do this regularly, especially when I check LinkedIn)

The hope, I guess, is that services like the New York Times, for instance, have loyal brand advocates who understand the situation, and will either become subscribers, or just stick to the free content without becoming disenchanted. Other, newer companies like Spotify have a possible advantage—since they’re more recently established, they haven’t set as firm of a precedent for their services being free. Once people become used to getting something for nothing, (aside from possibly offering up some personal information, or a bit of theoretical mindshare paid to display ads) suddenly asking them to pay for it is definitely a tough sell.

What do you think? Does this model make sense for web companies, or is there another approach that you see becoming the new standard?

With the tablet craze at an all time high, I recently bought an iPad 2.While I am still exploring my favorite apps on there, Flipboard grabbed my attention pretty quickly. A social magazine application, it allows you to integrate all of your favorite websites, blogs, and social media outlets into one place and read them in a more visually appealing way.

Why it Works

Since starting to use the application, I’ve found that I read more than before. Being more of a visual person, the layout and big imagery on pieces of content keeps my attention longer. After checking out their site, it seems like I am one of many who feel this way. As they state, “We believe this more beautiful, more readable layout will increase your viewership and cause more people to retweet, share and like your content.” The application currently has over 4.5 million downloads.

Ease of Use

Another one of the reasons I love this application so much is the ease of use on it. Andrew Cross, a Media Relations Specialist here at Walker Sands, agrees. “I’m a big Flipboard fan, mostly because it displays the information in a way that’s easy to digest. Twitter can be a great source for news, but I like Flipboard’s Twitter stream because I don’t have to click a bunch of links and open new windows just to see if something is worth reading,” stated Andrew. The idea of making it easier to sift through the hundreds of thousands of articles that are shared on the web daily adds to the appeal of the visual application.

Developers: Take Note

From a development perspective, Flipboard demonstrates elements that every app should have. Between it’s ease of use to it’s UX overall, Flipboard is doing it right. Hillel Fuld wrote a great piece on the 7 Lessons Developers Can Learn From Flipboard. There are a lot of great takeaways in that piece as well about why Flipboard works.

For me, it’s all about having my favorite places on the internet in one central location to check out. Watch the video here to get the full experience.

What do you think? Would you consider using Flipboard?

Screenshots:
1 – Homepage of my Flipboard account. You can add your favorite social media sites, blogs, or sort by industry topics to manage what you want to see.
2 – How the blog all that inspires me appears in the application