It’s no secret that the FTC has been monitoring brand usage of social media. The hammer finally fell when the FTC ruled last week that companies and agencies utilizing social media must include disclaimers. This is regardless of the social media platform and whether or not the account is a brand account, an agency account, or company employee’s personal account – and yes, this does mean compacting a disclaimer into 140 words for Twitter.

According to an Adweek article, the ruling originated from a settlement between the FTC and Deutsch L.A., an ad agency.  While promoting the Playstation Vita, Deutsch L.A. ran a Twitter social media promotion utilizing the hashtag #GameChanger. It then sent e-mails to its employees asking them to participate using their personal accounts. The FTC ruled that this violated “the FTC’s stance that brands have to have full disclosure on marketing materials no matter what medium the ad is on.”

According to the article, the crux of the FTC’s stance is as follows:

“...even statements made on personal social media accounts need to be transparent if there may be any brand bias…”

Small businesses of all kinds are affected by this ruling, including public relations agencies, automotive vendors, and even car dealerships. We all need to be aware, and train our employees, that, while it’s certainly appreciated when they promote and/or participate in a social media campaign on our behalf with their social media accounts, they are not exempt from the FTC’s rules. Failure to comply – regardless of if those actions originate from the brand, or a person with a bias towards a business (such as an employee) – is irrelevant. The business can be held liable for their employee’s actions.

As social media usage becomes more important in business’ exposure and branding, I expect that these rules will become more black and white.
 

What does this mean?

For businesses, it means that when sharing client or employer content and messages on personal accounts, this content now has to include disclosure of bias. For tweets, including hashtags such as #client, #sponsored or #employee at the end of the tweet should be sufficient. 

On platforms in which more text is available to use (such as Facebook), disclaimers should be easily understandable and unambiguous to a reader. These could be as simple as an indication that this is a client or that the person posting the content is an employee.

This may seem irrelevant; but it’s actually very relevant. Think of all of your engaged and loyal employees who are supportive of brand messages, contests, and company events that share and encourage their friends to participate using their personal social media accounts. Perhaps they share the company’s Facebook ads – including specials, coupons or offers – to their networks.

Different platforms require different details to increase exposure. For example, hashtags are an excellent way to generate buzz and consolidate a conversation on Twitter amongst a brand and its fans. Hashtags are also relevant on Facebook. However, the uphill battle on that platform is via the Facebook newsfeed algorithm. While it’s unlikely any of your employees are trying to game the system, actions such as liking, commenting and sharing certainly effect the reach of those messages. And employees (or agencies) who share without bias disclosure run the risk of being accused of gaming the system by the FTC.

Just as it’s highly unlikely the FBI will break down your door for recording a movie, the chances are small that our businesses will gain the attention of the FTC regarding these social media postings. That doesn’t mean the possibility doesn’t exist, however, and the FTC is notorious for being very vigilant with car dealerships and advertising compliance. Chances are that your dealership’s social media usage won’t attract the FTC’s attention alone. But should you find your dealership under a compliance audit and/or under FTC scrutiny for misleading advertising, it’s more likely than ever before that they may include your social media activities in the future.

It’s no secret that the FTC has been monitoring brand usage of social media. The hammer finally fell when the FTC ruled last week that companies and agencies utilizing social media must include disclaimers. This is regardless of the social media platform and whether or not the account is a brand account, an agency account, or company employee’s personal account – and yes, this does mean compacting a disclaimer into 140 words for Twitter.

According to an Adweek article, the ruling originated from a settlement between the FTC and Deutsch L.A., an ad agency.  While promoting the Playstation Vita, Deutsch L.A. ran a Twitter social media promotion utilizing the hashtag #GameChanger. It then sent e-mails to its employees asking them to participate using their personal accounts. The FTC ruled that this violated “the FTC’s stance that brands have to have full disclosure on marketing materials no matter what medium the ad is on.”

According to the article, the crux of the FTC’s stance is as follows:

“...even statements made on personal social media accounts need to be transparent if there may be any brand bias…”

Small businesses of all kinds are affected by this ruling, including public relations agencies, automotive vendors, and even car dealerships. We all need to be aware, and train our employees, that, while it’s certainly appreciated when they promote and/or participate in a social media campaign on our behalf with their social media accounts, they are not exempt from the FTC’s rules. Failure to comply – regardless of if those actions originate from the brand, or a person with a bias towards a business (such as an employee) – is irrelevant. The business can be held liable for their employee’s actions.

As social media usage becomes more important in business’ exposure and branding, I expect that these rules will become more black and white.
 

What does this mean?

For businesses, it means that when sharing client or employer content and messages on personal accounts, this content now has to include disclosure of bias. For tweets, including hashtags such as #client, #sponsored or #employee at the end of the tweet should be sufficient. 

On platforms in which more text is available to use (such as Facebook), disclaimers should be easily understandable and unambiguous to a reader. These could be as simple as an indication that this is a client or that the person posting the content is an employee.

This may seem irrelevant; but it’s actually very relevant. Think of all of your engaged and loyal employees who are supportive of brand messages, contests, and company events that share and encourage their friends to participate using their personal social media accounts. Perhaps they share the company’s Facebook ads – including specials, coupons or offers – to their networks.

Different platforms require different details to increase exposure. For example, hashtags are an excellent way to generate buzz and consolidate a conversation on Twitter amongst a brand and its fans. Hashtags are also relevant on Facebook. However, the uphill battle on that platform is via the Facebook newsfeed algorithm. While it’s unlikely any of your employees are trying to game the system, actions such as liking, commenting and sharing certainly effect the reach of those messages. And employees (or agencies) who share without bias disclosure run the risk of being accused of gaming the system by the FTC.

Just as it’s highly unlikely the FBI will break down your door for recording a movie, the chances are small that our businesses will gain the attention of the FTC regarding these social media postings. That doesn’t mean the possibility doesn’t exist, however, and the FTC is notorious for being very vigilant with car dealerships and advertising compliance. Chances are that your dealership’s social media usage won’t attract the FTC’s attention alone. But should you find your dealership under a compliance audit and/or under FTC scrutiny for misleading advertising, it’s more likely than ever before that they may include your social media activities in the future.

In the past, a business could increase per post reach on Facebook simply by creating unique and engaging quality content. That has now changed and, for the most part, ads are the only real posts creating any significant reach. Organic posts on Facebook pages have seen reach drop into the 1-2 percent range, down from 12+ just 2 short years ago.  Since Facebook’s IPO, and the subsequent emphasis on Facebook ads and Sponsored Posts, businesses and brands have been forced to look at Facebook as part of their ad budget, not simply employee time to create and post quality content.

Facebook has taken the stance that decreasing reach for pages is the compromise for monetization. It believes that allowing all of the brand/business content into a user’s newsfeed crowds out the content that users want to see – namely posts from family and friends. Decreasing reach of organic content from businesses allows Facebook to substitute that content with Sponsored Posts, while keeping the business to personal content ratio in a user’s newsfeed relatively the same.

There have been some users, however, that have rallied around the movement that Facebook should allow them to control what (and who) they see content from. They do not wish to have Facebook do the censoring for them through a secret algorithm. Facebook did integrate a way for consumers to ensure they can see a Page’s content. However, it was a relatively intricate process that normal Facebook users didn’t embrace, despite many Facebook page’s efforts to get them to do so.

Facebook is reportedly now taking the next step towards allowing users to dictate what content they see. A recent Advertising Age article, shared Facebook’s plans to add a feature they’ve named their “news feed monitor and control tool.” This tool apparently allows a user to view who they are seeing the most content from. They can then dial down the number of posts they see from a given friend or brand, as opposed to completely hiding them. Facebook pages that fail to produce engaging quality content may see their reach decline even more because of this.

No matter what your page is seeing in regards to reach and engagement on Facebook right now, expect to see a further decline as consumers become aware of this tool and start to exercise control of what they allow into their newsfeeds. Business participation on Facebook will most likely become more challenging.  It would seem that we will be forced to either join the “pay to play” environment that Facebook has become, or be happy with the crumbs that Facebook allows us.

The marketing purpose of social media is brand exposure. Content and engagement marketing rely upon two core ideas: businesses talking to consumers and consumers talking back. This real-time communication allows businesses to continuously poll their audience through content. They can then change marketing strategies in real-time, shifting the needle as quickly as customers’ interests change.

The only solid strategy left to produce increased reach, regardless of how many fans you have, is to create unique, relevant and interesting content that audiences want to see. At the same time decrease the continuous promotional activities many businesses practice.   While this will not get you as much exposure as in the past on Facebook, it will at least stop your audience from tuning you out altogether!

In the past, a business could increase per post reach on Facebook simply by creating unique and engaging quality content. That has now changed and, for the most part, ads are the only real posts creating any significant reach. Organic posts on Facebook pages have seen reach drop into the 1-2 percent range, down from 12+ just 2 short years ago.  Since Facebook’s IPO, and the subsequent emphasis on Facebook ads and Sponsored Posts, businesses and brands have been forced to look at Facebook as part of their ad budget, not simply employee time to create and post quality content.

Facebook has taken the stance that decreasing reach for pages is the compromise for monetization. It believes that allowing all of the brand/business content into a user’s newsfeed crowds out the content that users want to see – namely posts from family and friends. Decreasing reach of organic content from businesses allows Facebook to substitute that content with Sponsored Posts, while keeping the business to personal content ratio in a user’s newsfeed relatively the same.

There have been some users, however, that have rallied around the movement that Facebook should allow them to control what (and who) they see content from. They do not wish to have Facebook do the censoring for them through a secret algorithm. Facebook did integrate a way for consumers to ensure they can see a Page’s content. However, it was a relatively intricate process that normal Facebook users didn’t embrace, despite many Facebook page’s efforts to get them to do so.

Facebook is reportedly now taking the next step towards allowing users to dictate what content they see. A recent Advertising Age article, shared Facebook’s plans to add a feature they’ve named their “news feed monitor and control tool.” This tool apparently allows a user to view who they are seeing the most content from. They can then dial down the number of posts they see from a given friend or brand, as opposed to completely hiding them. Facebook pages that fail to produce engaging quality content may see their reach decline even more because of this.

No matter what your page is seeing in regards to reach and engagement on Facebook right now, expect to see a further decline as consumers become aware of this tool and start to exercise control of what they allow into their newsfeeds. Business participation on Facebook will most likely become more challenging.  It would seem that we will be forced to either join the “pay to play” environment that Facebook has become, or be happy with the crumbs that Facebook allows us.

The marketing purpose of social media is brand exposure. Content and engagement marketing rely upon two core ideas: businesses talking to consumers and consumers talking back. This real-time communication allows businesses to continuously poll their audience through content. They can then change marketing strategies in real-time, shifting the needle as quickly as customers’ interests change.

The only solid strategy left to produce increased reach, regardless of how many fans you have, is to create unique, relevant and interesting content that audiences want to see. At the same time decrease the continuous promotional activities many businesses practice.   While this will not get you as much exposure as in the past on Facebook, it will at least stop your audience from tuning you out altogether!

Customer complaints happen. No matter how much a business wants to provide great customer service, there are times when the dominos aren’t lined up exactly right. The chain breaks somewhere, preventing the last domino from falling. For the most part, customers understand that businesses aren’t perfect. It certainly helps when the customer that is having a poor experience is familiar with any challenges that prevent the experience from being great. Take for example a story shared recently by ijreveiw.com, about a couple that had a less than stellar experience at a restaurant.

The couple were quoted in the article saying: “service tonight sucked. [It] took 20 minutes to get water, 40 minutes for an appetizer and over an hour for our entrée. People all around us were making fun of the restaurant & how bad the service was.”  In many cases, an experience like this would be blamed on the frontline employee – namely the server. However, as both customers had previously been in the service industry, they recognized the challenges that the server was facing and empathized with him. To them, it was obvious that the issue was being short staffed, not the server. They realized that, despite the fact the poor service was not the server’s fault, he was the one that would suffer when it came to tips. Because of this, they decided to do something different… they left the server a $100 tip on a $67 bill. Why? They observed the server rushing around apologizing to every customer; doing his very best to console his tables, while maintaining his composure. The couple had each suffered in the server’s shoes in the past. They realized that he was actually doing his best. They thus wanted him to know that they appreciated his efforts.
 

Too often, when businesses receive complaints, management’s initial reaction is to put the employee at fault. Assuming the customers in this case were correct; and that the restaurant was understaffed; the evening in question was an organizational and management failure, not the employee’s. In fact, the employee did everything he could to placate the customers. And what’s more, at no time was it reported that, in doing so, he shifted blame onto the establishment. That’s an employee that should be cherished and rewarded, not blamed! 

There’s no telling what the cause of the understaffing was at this restaurant on this particular night. There’s also no way to know whether it is a reoccurring problem. Perhaps they had some employees quit or call in sick. Regardless of the circumstances, the fact is that, on this night, the dominos didn’t fall properly and the customers paid the price. But not just the customers. A very willing and hardworking employee also had to suffer. How frequently this occurs will dictate whether or not the business itself will suffer. However, one thing is certain and that is that on the night in question, management was presented with a test, and they failed miserably!

The next time you get a complaint or poor review, take a moment before casting blame. Consider whether there were underlying causes that prevented an employee from providing an excellent customer experience. Reflect on the steps the employee took to satisfy the customer, despite the challenges presented. Take a look to see if it was an organizational breakdown, or an individual failure. Use these times as a way to improve your business, change your practices, or take action to prevent these types of situations from recurring. When it’s not an employee’s fault, make sure to let them know that it was you who failed, and not them.
 

Sometimes, when customers have bad experiences, it’s not only the customer that deserves an apology, but also your employee.

Customer complaints happen. No matter how much a business wants to provide great customer service, there are times when the dominos aren’t lined up exactly right. The chain breaks somewhere, preventing the last domino from falling. For the most part, customers understand that businesses aren’t perfect. It certainly helps when the customer that is having a poor experience is familiar with any challenges that prevent the experience from being great. Take for example a story shared recently by ijreveiw.com, about a couple that had a less than stellar experience at a restaurant.

The couple were quoted in the article saying: “service tonight sucked. [It] took 20 minutes to get water, 40 minutes for an appetizer and over an hour for our entrée. People all around us were making fun of the restaurant & how bad the service was.”  In many cases, an experience like this would be blamed on the frontline employee – namely the server. However, as both customers had previously been in the service industry, they recognized the challenges that the server was facing and empathized with him. To them, it was obvious that the issue was being short staffed, not the server. They realized that, despite the fact the poor service was not the server’s fault, he was the one that would suffer when it came to tips. Because of this, they decided to do something different… they left the server a $100 tip on a $67 bill. Why? They observed the server rushing around apologizing to every customer; doing his very best to console his tables, while maintaining his composure. The couple had each suffered in the server’s shoes in the past. They realized that he was actually doing his best. They thus wanted him to know that they appreciated his efforts.
 

Too often, when businesses receive complaints, management’s initial reaction is to put the employee at fault. Assuming the customers in this case were correct; and that the restaurant was understaffed; the evening in question was an organizational and management failure, not the employee’s. In fact, the employee did everything he could to placate the customers. And what’s more, at no time was it reported that, in doing so, he shifted blame onto the establishment. That’s an employee that should be cherished and rewarded, not blamed! 

There’s no telling what the cause of the understaffing was at this restaurant on this particular night. There’s also no way to know whether it is a reoccurring problem. Perhaps they had some employees quit or call in sick. Regardless of the circumstances, the fact is that, on this night, the dominos didn’t fall properly and the customers paid the price. But not just the customers. A very willing and hardworking employee also had to suffer. How frequently this occurs will dictate whether or not the business itself will suffer. However, one thing is certain and that is that on the night in question, management was presented with a test, and they failed miserably!

The next time you get a complaint or poor review, take a moment before casting blame. Consider whether there were underlying causes that prevented an employee from providing an excellent customer experience. Reflect on the steps the employee took to satisfy the customer, despite the challenges presented. Take a look to see if it was an organizational breakdown, or an individual failure. Use these times as a way to improve your business, change your practices, or take action to prevent these types of situations from recurring. When it’s not an employee’s fault, make sure to let them know that it was you who failed, and not them.
 

Sometimes, when customers have bad experiences, it’s not only the customer that deserves an apology, but also your employee.

While I love to be active myself, I certainly could not call myself a big fan of watching and keeping up with sports. It seems, however, that you cannot turn on a television, read a newspaper or use any social media recently without hearing about continuous misdeeds and wrongdoings of NFL players. I’m sure that you’ve seen them as well. So this is not designed to rehash, recap or discuss any of these controversies. Much of the attention and negative PR has been directed towards those players involved, as well as the NFL itself, as can be expected. Due to the ongoing controversy, sponsors have distanced themselves and some have even disassociated themselves with the league. One sponsor, however, seems to be taking a slightly different approach to the controversy… Verizon.

Let’s face it. Regardless of any controversy, football is not only uber-popular in America, but also big business. It brings massive exposure to its partners and sponsors. Just as in the real world, however, in times of crisis, there is always the risk of “guilt by association” that comes with staying the course when partners are involved. Verizon has not only chosen to stay the course, but has gone a step further by proactively taking steps to preserve its image.

In a recent article on Forbes.com, a blogger recounted his experience with Verizon after writing a blog critical of the NFL. According to the author, a couple of days after publishing his blog, he received an unexpected email from Verizon. The email detailed Verizon’s firm stance against domestic violence and referenced their CEO’s statement that “the real issue at hand is not the image of Verizon or the NFL, but ‘the scourge of domestic violence itself.’” It went on to detail how Verizon had launched a public awareness campaign designed to help put a stop to this through a newly created social media platform called Voices Have Power. They have also pledged to “donate $3 to domestic violence prevention organizations” for “every message sent through the service.” It went on to ask the author, whose obvious stance was against domestic violence, to spread the word about the campaign.

In business, companies always have to carefully guard their image, along with the image of any companies they choose to support or are closely associated with. There have been many times in the past when corporate sponsors and partners of organizations in crisis become collateral damage by failing to pull their partnerships. While some organizations choose the safe course of disassociation rather than risk consumer backlash, others choose different paths. Typically, companies who stay the course will issue statements of regret and some type of response to the event detailing their stance, but then remain quiet on the matter, allowing the outcome to reveal itself over time. Verizon, on the other hand, has chosen to monitor and reach out to the most vocal critics and educate them on a massive public awareness campaign. This essentially preserves their partnership while, at the same time, shows support aligned with public sentiment.

Whether this is a good strategy remains to be seen. There is an argument to be made that Verizon’s failure to pull its sponsorship implies support regardless of the campaign. Some may even accuse Verizon of piggybacking on the events for exposure. Regardless of the motives, from a public relations perspective, Verizon has chosen to take action to preserve its own image through a parallel and rather clever PR campaign. The company is seeing as taking positive action, rather than remaining a passive observer.

How this plays out remains to be seen. What I can tell you is that public relations is vital to companies in crisis, especially when the crisis involves a close partner. Make no mistake that consumers will project accountability upon any companies associated - whether directly or indirectly. Especially in this instance, domestic violence is an issue that affects so many and is naturally very emotionally charged. Verizon’s PR efforts seem to have sated the author of this particular blog. He was so impressed that he wrote the article recounting this experience and told his audience that it was a message that needed to be passed on. That’s a win for Verizon. Will this work every time and with every outspoken fan? Probably not. The bottom line is that you don’t have to win all of the time, just enough of the time to make a difference.

While I love to be active myself, I certainly could not call myself a big fan of watching and keeping up with sports. It seems, however, that you cannot turn on a television, read a newspaper or use any social media recently without hearing about continuous misdeeds and wrongdoings of NFL players. I’m sure that you’ve seen them as well. So this is not designed to rehash, recap or discuss any of these controversies. Much of the attention and negative PR has been directed towards those players involved, as well as the NFL itself, as can be expected. Due to the ongoing controversy, sponsors have distanced themselves and some have even disassociated themselves with the league. One sponsor, however, seems to be taking a slightly different approach to the controversy… Verizon.

Let’s face it. Regardless of any controversy, football is not only uber-popular in America, but also big business. It brings massive exposure to its partners and sponsors. Just as in the real world, however, in times of crisis, there is always the risk of “guilt by association” that comes with staying the course when partners are involved. Verizon has not only chosen to stay the course, but has gone a step further by proactively taking steps to preserve its image.

In a recent article on Forbes.com, a blogger recounted his experience with Verizon after writing a blog critical of the NFL. According to the author, a couple of days after publishing his blog, he received an unexpected email from Verizon. The email detailed Verizon’s firm stance against domestic violence and referenced their CEO’s statement that “the real issue at hand is not the image of Verizon or the NFL, but ‘the scourge of domestic violence itself.’” It went on to detail how Verizon had launched a public awareness campaign designed to help put a stop to this through a newly created social media platform called Voices Have Power. They have also pledged to “donate $3 to domestic violence prevention organizations” for “every message sent through the service.” It went on to ask the author, whose obvious stance was against domestic violence, to spread the word about the campaign.

In business, companies always have to carefully guard their image, along with the image of any companies they choose to support or are closely associated with. There have been many times in the past when corporate sponsors and partners of organizations in crisis become collateral damage by failing to pull their partnerships. While some organizations choose the safe course of disassociation rather than risk consumer backlash, others choose different paths. Typically, companies who stay the course will issue statements of regret and some type of response to the event detailing their stance, but then remain quiet on the matter, allowing the outcome to reveal itself over time. Verizon, on the other hand, has chosen to monitor and reach out to the most vocal critics and educate them on a massive public awareness campaign. This essentially preserves their partnership while, at the same time, shows support aligned with public sentiment.

Whether this is a good strategy remains to be seen. There is an argument to be made that Verizon’s failure to pull its sponsorship implies support regardless of the campaign. Some may even accuse Verizon of piggybacking on the events for exposure. Regardless of the motives, from a public relations perspective, Verizon has chosen to take action to preserve its own image through a parallel and rather clever PR campaign. The company is seeing as taking positive action, rather than remaining a passive observer.

How this plays out remains to be seen. What I can tell you is that public relations is vital to companies in crisis, especially when the crisis involves a close partner. Make no mistake that consumers will project accountability upon any companies associated - whether directly or indirectly. Especially in this instance, domestic violence is an issue that affects so many and is naturally very emotionally charged. Verizon’s PR efforts seem to have sated the author of this particular blog. He was so impressed that he wrote the article recounting this experience and told his audience that it was a message that needed to be passed on. That’s a win for Verizon. Will this work every time and with every outspoken fan? Probably not. The bottom line is that you don’t have to win all of the time, just enough of the time to make a difference.

It’s widely accepted that content created by third parties in general holds more value for businesses than content they create themselves. Many have felt that consumers better trusted product information and reviews written by neutral persons. According to new research by Vibrant Media, however, that thought process may no longer be the case, if it ever was.

The Vibrant study included 1,000 Americans between the ages of 13 and 64 and revealed some interesting data that should serve as a wake up call for brands. Some of the study’s key finding includes:

• “…one in three consumers rate the advertiser’s own website as the most useful source of information after seeing a product.”
• “Sixty-four percent stated they were receptive to brand images, and 57 percent were receptive to video.”
• “Forty-six percent stated they were receptive to articles written by brands.”

According to an article about the study, published on the Content Standard, “the majority of US consumers want content from their favorite brands, and 46 percent read their favorite brands’ blogs.”

Many companies question the value blog articles and content bring to their brand. As public relations agencies increasingly take on the responsibility of managing social media and content marketing, it has become apparent that producing content offers a myriad of benefits for companies. This includes opportunities to connect with their potential and existing customers via comments, the ability to position themselves as thought leaders in their industries, search engine optimization benefits and, most importantly, the ability to keep their companies top-of-mind.

The key to successful content production is cemented in the strategy that content produced must provide value to an audience. All companies want to spread the news about their latest product and service. There is nothing wrong with that. It just has to be done right. A company needs to strike a balance between product info and best practices tips and information of value to their audience. PR professionals can strategically identify key industry sites and news sources that are appropriate for each message.

According to this study, customers – both existing and potential – want to learn from you and better utilize the products and services you offer. Many of you, however, aren’t providing the content their audience is seeking. If almost half of consumers trust your content, ensuring that the content is relevant, educational and informative, is of utmost importance to maintaining and building an audience.

Consistently creating and publishing content can also lead to increased requests for interviews and speaking engagements. Companies who employ successful content marketing strategies oftentimes find media sources and events seeking them out as a result of their increased profile.

This Vibrant Media study data suggests that companies should increase their focus and efforts in creating successful content marketing strategies.  The data shows that apparently your customers are not simply paying attention, but are craving this content. If you fail to produce any, you are missing golden opportunities to connect with your audience, and losing the side benefits that consistent quality content can produce.

It’s widely accepted that content created by third parties in general holds more value for businesses than content they create themselves. Many have felt that consumers better trusted product information and reviews written by neutral persons. According to new research by Vibrant Media, however, that thought process may no longer be the case, if it ever was.

The Vibrant study included 1,000 Americans between the ages of 13 and 64 and revealed some interesting data that should serve as a wake up call for brands. Some of the study’s key finding includes:

• “…one in three consumers rate the advertiser’s own website as the most useful source of information after seeing a product.”
• “Sixty-four percent stated they were receptive to brand images, and 57 percent were receptive to video.”
• “Forty-six percent stated they were receptive to articles written by brands.”

According to an article about the study, published on the Content Standard, “the majority of US consumers want content from their favorite brands, and 46 percent read their favorite brands’ blogs.”

Many companies question the value blog articles and content bring to their brand. As public relations agencies increasingly take on the responsibility of managing social media and content marketing, it has become apparent that producing content offers a myriad of benefits for companies. This includes opportunities to connect with their potential and existing customers via comments, the ability to position themselves as thought leaders in their industries, search engine optimization benefits and, most importantly, the ability to keep their companies top-of-mind.

The key to successful content production is cemented in the strategy that content produced must provide value to an audience. All companies want to spread the news about their latest product and service. There is nothing wrong with that. It just has to be done right. A company needs to strike a balance between product info and best practices tips and information of value to their audience. PR professionals can strategically identify key industry sites and news sources that are appropriate for each message.

According to this study, customers – both existing and potential – want to learn from you and better utilize the products and services you offer. Many of you, however, aren’t providing the content their audience is seeking. If almost half of consumers trust your content, ensuring that the content is relevant, educational and informative, is of utmost importance to maintaining and building an audience.

Consistently creating and publishing content can also lead to increased requests for interviews and speaking engagements. Companies who employ successful content marketing strategies oftentimes find media sources and events seeking them out as a result of their increased profile.

This Vibrant Media study data suggests that companies should increase their focus and efforts in creating successful content marketing strategies.  The data shows that apparently your customers are not simply paying attention, but are craving this content. If you fail to produce any, you are missing golden opportunities to connect with your audience, and losing the side benefits that consistent quality content can produce.