I just answered a reporter query about sponsored blogs and sponsored tweets–specifically whether they should be disclosed. And that led me to meditate on the question of whether it is ethical to ghostwrite tweets and blogs for other people.

I have a very clear opinion on both of these scenarios. But I’m going to shut up and see what y’all think, for a few days, and then I’ll tell you my thoughts, and the reasons behind them.

What do you think?

1. Should a blogger or tweeter disclose sponsorship?
2. Is it ethical to ghostwrite blogs and tweets?

To keep the lawyers happy: unless you specifically state otherwise, posting your response gives me the nonexclusive right (but not the obligation) to quote you in an article, blog post, and/or book

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Proving yet again that you can network pretty much anywhere…I was listening to a teleclass and 37 minutes into the call, the presenter fell off. He didn’t come back on, but someone else asked if anyone was there, and I responded.

Fifteen minutes later, I had been booked as a guest on his radio show, he asked me if I would collaborate on a joint venture involving a pitch to National Public Radio, and another person who’d been quietly listening joined the call to invite me to consider a project he’s involved with.

All because I took 30 seconds to explain what had happened and introduce myself.

What networking opportunity can you seize? (Need idea starters? I suggest my award-wining sixth book, Principled Profit: Marketing That Puts People First.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

I’m always looking for ways to keep stuff out of the trash, and I’ve been saying for years that we ought to collect and recycle the prodigious offerings of fur that our dog and cat leave around the house–that someone could spin it into yarn or stuff pillows out of them. But actually doing it was more than I wanted to bite off, so I either deposit the pet hair in the compost, put small quantities outside for birds to line their nests with, or (gasp!) throw it out.

Today, I discovered someone has actually been running a business making yarn out of pet hair, since 2001, and has a long waiting list for the product.. Yee-haw!

But VIP Fibers‘ market isn’t me; it’s people who want quality yarn from their own pet and are willing to pay to get the yarn made. Since I would never actually use the yarn, I’ll have to keep on searching.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Actual submission from my contact form today:

subject = Resume Services
realname = REMOVED TO PROTECT THE GUILTY
position =
Company = SEO Company
Add1Street = 224 Lawrence Road
Add2City = New York
Add2State = New York
Add2Zip = 11111
Add2Country = USA
phone = 000-000-0000
email = REMOVED TO PROTECT THE GUILTY
comments =
Internet Marketing Services

We would like to get your website on first page of Google.

All of our processes use the most ethical “white hat” Search Engine Optimization techniques that will not get your website banned or penalized.

Please reply and I would be happy to send you a proposal.

Excuse me, but just how is spamming my contact form (and with fake contact info, no less) a white-hat approach?

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

While you’re reading this, I’m on my way back from the California desert. I’m actually writing it before I depart, from my home in Massachusetts where there’s plenty of water. But going to the desert, where water is taken for granted, always makes me reflect on how profligate we are with water, and how sorry we’ll be about that a couple of decades down the road.

Yes, I believe that within my children’s lifetime, the price of water will soar, its availability will decrease, and we’ll have a serious resource crisis. Actually more serious than the oil crisis. There are plenty of energy substitutes for oil; we can easily generate the power we need from clean, renewable sources: sun, wind, water, and especially a complete rethinking of what is possible in the way of energy conservation. Reading people like Amory Lovins makes me aware that as a society, we could easily reduce our energy consumption by 80 percent or so, without any negative impact on quality of life.

Water is not nearly as replaceable as oil. Human beings, other animals, and all the plants we rely on directly or indirectly for food need sources of clean water, and the supply is not infinite. So it’s incumbent on us not to squander the good water we have, through waste or pollution.

The good news: like oil, water use could be sharply curtailed without any negative impact on lifestyle. I estimate that I probably use no more than 1/10 as much water as the average American–and I’ve met people who use 1/10 as much as I do. I’m not suggesting you collect buckets of rainwater and use them to flush your toilet, as one woman I talked to recently is doing. But I do suggest you look at the obvious places where you’re running water harder and longer than you need to.

Here’s one simple, totally painless example: if you’re like most Americans, when you brush your teeth, you turn the water on (often full-force) and let it run for three minutes or so while you brush. When I brush my teeth, I do it like this: Wet the toothbrush with a small trickle of water, and then turn the water off! Turn it back on to rinse the toothpaste off the brush at the end. So instead of several gallons each time, I consume a couple of ounces of water.

Want to know more? 28 of the 111 conservation tips (yeah, I snuck in a bonus tip) in my e-book, Painless Green: 110 Tips to Help the Environment, Lower Your Carbon Footprint, Cut Your Budget, and Improve Your Quality of Life-With No Negative Impact on Your Lifestyle, are about saving water.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Angelique Rewers

Site sees 513% growth in 55+ user bracket
Number of college and high school users drops 20%

Using Facebook to reach your target audience? If so, be aware that the popular social media site’s demographics are changing rapidly and significantly.

An analysis of data from Facebook’s Social Ad platform conducted by iStrategyLabs reveals that the site’s users are getting much older in a short period of time. The study found:

* A staggering increase in the 55+ age group from 950,000 to 5.9 million in just the last six months
* A 70.8% increase in the number of total U.S. users over the last six months (71,901,400 total)
* That 54.6% of users are female
* That 16.5% fewer high schoolers and 21.7% fewer college students are using the site (iStrategyLabs reports this could be due in part to the fact that younger users are being alienated by their parents joining the service)
* That the majority of users (28.2%) fall into the 35 to 54 age group

Examined another way, between January and July 2009, the overall number of users…

* Ages 18 to 24 has grown only 4.8%
* Ages 25 to 34 has grown 60.8%
* Ages 35 to 54 has grown 190.2%
* Age 55 and older has grown 513.7%

What’s this mean for you?

First, the number of Facebook users overall continues to grow, making this popular social media site an increasingly important communications channel. Even if your organization is not on Facebook, you can guarantee that at least a fraction of your target audience is.

Second, if this data is correct — and it may not be as Facebook doesn’t guarantee the data it provides to advertisers is 100% accurate — then Facebook is not a young site anymore. With such significant changes happening at an increasingly rapid pace, it’s critical that you continue to monitor trends and adjust your advertising and communication strategy accordingly.

You can see a complete breakdown of iStrategyLabs’ data here.

Reprinted from The Corporate Communicator, a free e-zine dedicated to helping professionals communicate more effectively with employees, customers and the media. To get the latest industry news, research and best practices at your fingertips, register for a FREE subscription at www.thecorporatecommunicator.net.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Readers of my various books will know I’m a fan of alternative locally-based currencies. Here’s a twist: A shopping center in Reno is sending street teams out all over Reno to spot acts of kindness, and reward them with “Karma Cards,” redeemable at the shopping center.

Two extra things worth noting:

  • The retail complex is partnering with at least seven nonprofits
  • Anyone receiving the card not only gets store credit but is entered in a drawing for a $3000 grand prize
  • Sweet! The campaign is only six weeks long. Maybe it’ll be so successful, they’ll continue it.

    Thanks to Reno resident Jacqueline Church Simonds for sharing this.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    One of the fun things about social media marketing is that you rub shoulders with other social media marketers, and there a bunch of smart folks with lots of good ideas. I’m always in learning mode, and a lot of my consulting practices synthesizes a gazillion bits I’ve picked up from a book, blog, teleseminar, lecture, or even a Tweet.

    During my rather frequent travels, I’ve often put in one or two blog posts, but usually from some Internet cafe or library on the road. Watching Chris Brogan continue to keep his blog active during vacation with a bunch of preloaded posts, I decided to do that as well. After all, why spend my travel time looking for WiFi? Chris is posting pretty much daily. I’m not as ambitious as he is–but this is one of three posts that will appear over the next ten days while I’m off on the West Coast.

    Hopefully it’ll work. The last time I preloaded a post, which was not for a vacation but to coincide with a blogosphere event, I had to go in manually and publish it.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    Perry Marshall has a really good article about online privacy concerns, the Google experience yay and nay, and Google’s first real competitor in general search–Bing. It’s getting a lot of comments, including this one from me. I discuss not only transparency vs. secrecy, but also the Google user experience, talk about the USP (Unique Selling Proposition) I think Google might operate under, and point out the business opportunity that grows out of our society’s lack of privacy.

    One point I didn’t make is that in dystopian-totalitarian novels like 1984 and Fahrenheit 451, the very tools that provide information and entertainment also eliminate our privacy. While at least in the US, this information gathering has been used primarily for commerce rather than social control, the potential is very real.

    The rest of this post is what I posted to Perry’s site:

    You write, “Google has done a glorious job of doing what I encourage all my customers to do: Create offers that are so sensationally irresistible that you can’t help but use their search engine. They’ve beat all comers fair and square.”

    This is sooo true. If ever there was an example of a huge USP, it would be Google’s. I don’t know how they phrase it, but it may as well be “we let you actually FIND what you’re looking for…in nanoseconds.”

    And because they honor and deliver this USP, and because they were smart enough to make ads user-friendly, they have a vast revenue stream. But remember that search was there before ads, a couple of years before, in fact.

    As pointed out above, we haven’t had privacy for decades anyway.

    –>I feel the lack of privacy is actually an *opportunity* for entrepreneurs. Since we have no privacy anyway, why not run your business with a high degree of transparency and turn it into a marketing advantage? Why not do the right thing and be thoroughly ethical, and then demonstrate this to the world so they beat a path to your door? (This is something I advocate heavily in my award-winning sixth book, Principled Profit: Marketing That Puts People First )

    Back to Google: my concern is not *privacy*, but *piracy.* Google’s respect for others’ copyrights is often in conflict with its desire to index the world’s knowledge. As someone who creates a lot of intellectual property (including eight books), it concerns me deeply that Google assumes the right to index first and ask permission later. I could definitely see circumstances where work created (say, for a high-paying corporate client) should not be placed in the public stream. Google claims to be and for the most part acts as a highly ethical company, but on the issue of intellectual property control, I disagree with their approach.

    Still, I’ve been an avid Google user, because it does deliver that USP, and that’s something I need.

    I wasn’t familiar with Bing prior to reading this article. Did a search for “shel horowitz” and saw very different results than Google. 1,100,000 hits versus about 23,400 on Google (a number that shifts daily between 14,000 and 54,000). Bing’s results heavily skewed toward big portal sites like Facebook (very first result) and Amazon Subsequent pages (I looked through page 3) include a lot of the blogosphere/podcast interviews I’ve done for others, and some of my major media hits. Only three of the top ten were my own sites. Google’s results skew heavily toward my own sites. I love the popup feature on Bing, and expect that Google will implement something similar; this may be Google’s first real competitor for generalized search. (For specialized search, I’ve often turned to Clusty, Ask, and portal-specific search tools.)

    By contrast, on Google, I have 7 of the 12 results on page 1. Google itself has positions 4 (Google book search) and 12, and my twitter and Facebook profiles, along with a book review on an outside blog that was published this week, fill out the page.

    GMail is still the best web-based e-mail client I’ve used, but that ain’t saying much. I vastly prefer download-based email such as Eudora. Surprisingly, my biggest gripe with GMail is that its search function is just plain horrible. Something you’d think they of all companies could have figured out better. My other gripe is that you can’t do much in the way of batch processing, and dealing with one e-mail at a time, especially over the web, for anything except delete is frustratingly slow.

    Shel Horowitz, ethical/effective marketing specialist
    https://shelhorowitz.com

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    Pope Benedict XVI’s third encyclical is a sweeping, 144-page document addressing and interlocking a wide range of social issues. He calls on the financial industry to tame its greed and turn to ethics, asks the United Nations and individual governments to address deep-rooted poverty issues–not only from economic development perspectives but also making sure these countries have a voice and a seat at the table of power–a political shift, in other words.

    Good coverage in the Washington Post (see above link). And a shoutout to Allan Holender of the World Wide Association of Zentrepreneurs, for bringing this important document to my attention.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail