VoIPWatch

A Lot Has Changed

It's been a while since I've written here on VoIPWatch. A lot has changed and yet in many ways the song remains the same. In the hey day of blogging I would post three to four items a day, share my opinion and the cabal of other bloggers like Om, James, Rich, Jeff, Martin, Ted, Alec, Jim, the late Russell, all would also be posting, linking and sharing. Here, I chose to take a perspective based on the core ideas of blogging-I offered insight, perspective and opinion, which I referred to as IPO. I did this, often with a cadre of clients begging to be written about in my blog, something I did only after others had written, or if no one had taken my offer up to write first. 

Today, being Giving Tuesday, I'll give a few things. First, I put out an almost daily newsletter, The Comunicano,  which you can subscribe to by simply adding your name to the list. It has up to 24 items you should know about, often from the top media sources that are still bastions of integrity and honest reporting, even if they're not always right. It's free and my daily gift to keeping people informed.

But now, it's time to give you my thoughts, as that's what I've always done.

The difference here has been, and always will be that when I write, I write with transparency. If the post refers to a client, I've made a point of mentioning that for many, many years, unlike some so called "top influencers" who are paid to write, post, tweet or go to events at the expense of the company in exchange for regular coverage. Sure, I've been to some of those same events, and have also been paid by some of those companies too, but the lack of transparency with influencers and analysts has made a mockery of the numbers on social media and "reporting," and has for the most part made PR all PESO-Paid, Earned, Shared or Owned and we all saw what that did to the Mexican economy, and what that all led to. 

That's pretty much the state of what attempts to pass as journalism today--Fake News. Made up news. Articles and accounts that aren't fact checked, unattributed statements by someone who told some reporter something. As a lifelong media person, I've been on all sides, and in many ways I still am. I've been a PR person-and I hate that title-a copy boy, a sportswriter, on air talent on TV, sports color analyst, night time DJ, event producer, podcaster, speaker, influencer, and social media personality.  My degree is in Journalism, and I've lectured to students too about media, so over the last four and a half decades of being around all this a lot has changed and yet it really hasn't. Forget about all the stories I've pitched, sometimes I've been the story, other times I've been the architect of the story, but one thing has always been a constant. It has always been true.

Most of all the idea of a "free press" and an unbridled media has all but evaporated. Sure there are the independent thinkers. The pundits who use blogging like I do. We have our "followers" and our "readers" and like some news personalities our stories may get shared, but at the end of the day, the state of media is in a major need of repair as often the news isn't true, but here, like the Elvis Costello tune, "My Aim is True."

While we have more choices, we really have less and less perspective on things. Too much is about the "new and shinny" gizmo or gadget. Or about the funding-not about what that which is being funded may do--if it will do anything but burn the cash and will be in the media solely to get more cash.

No. Our media is no longer the counterbalance to all that is wrong. Reporters, and bloggers too, who dare to challenge or push the hard questions to company CEOs often find themselves no longer included in briefings, getting the "word" in advance or being invited  to the press events.  Brands use access to their information and executives as capital--I know one well respected reporter who once agreed with me about something Apple had done, but chose to not pursue the story out of concern of being left off the list of early device review opportunities or access to the executives. 

And with less "beat" reporters covering the stories, and instead stories have to find the reporter, we get more homogenized accounts of the news release that crossed the wire that same day. I find it rewarding how Jeff Bezos has taken a hands off approach with the Washington Post, and how Mike Bloomberg keeps things fair and honest with the numbers. It's encouraging that the Benioff's have invested in media, and Mrs. Jobs too. These scions of tech and wealth know that there's a need for legitimate, unbiased, fair and respected journalism. And I agree.

I don't know if we'll ever again really have a "free" press. But I do know one thing. A lot sure has changed, but in many ways, it's all still the same.

Disney + and the Rise of The Self Marketer

I've been following Disney's pursuit of their own streaming service and the process they've undertaken to get there. For starters they signaled their intention and then acquired the infrastructure of MLB's streaming group. That was a key and very schrewed move, as the MLB infrasructure was already supporting other companies, like WWE, and was a proven, battle tested and state of the art network. It also brought with it relationships and talent that understood how to stream and scale.

Next they signaled again, telling the market that properties of theirs in the Marvel family would be coming to Disney+.  This was less about taking the content away from rival Netflix than it was the first step in how the streaming service would be where the best Disney content could be found when it launches. And then yesterday Disney indicated that as soon as the theatrical release obligations of their cinematic efforts were up, they would immediately become available on Disney+ which is lining up massive distribution from the start.

Well, reading between the lines, the battle lines are being drawn but that's not as important as what Disney is doing with Disney+. It's about you, the viewer, and how you interact with Disney, the brand. Up until Disney+ once a video asset left Disney and was aired on a network, shown in a theatre, or offered as a DVD, that asset, much like what the wine and spirits industry understands too well, is that the customer wasn't known.  With Disney+ it's all about the data, and you the customer.

By adding data to the mix, Disney knows who has children watching what. That makes it easy to work with their licensed products team to decide what to market to whom. For their theme parks efforts, Disney+ data crossed with other cookie data they have access to means offers and sales. The list of opportunities goes on and on.

When you add it all up, Disney has done with Disney+ what they have done with the theme park business. Acquire infrastructure (land now technology), engage with the market via distribution (travel agents, airlines and hotels now set top boxes), put together the content (the rides, experiences now video elements). 

Now that Disney will have the data, which connects you to them even more closely, Disney is poised to become the biggest self marketer since Amazon....now that's Imagineering...

Want to Tango? Say Hello to the EVNO

We've all heard of the MVNO, the acronym for a mobile virtual network operator. They took a while to take off, and have had their ups and downs all over the globe. In some markets they have done well, in others not so well, and in the end, any have either shut down or simply been acquired as alternative brands for the established mobile network operators (MNO's).

Others like former client Truphone have morphed into a Global Mobile Network Operator (GMNO), combining core network access with global roaming and local numbers. GoogleFi operates similarly, but because it is so tightly woven to the Google core network and services it is really more of a single connectivity plane to all that is Google and the Internet. Nowhere is this more evident than on Google's own Android based Pixel smartphones. But, when you take a broader look at what both Google Fi and Truphone have done so far, they really have set the stage for the rise of a new category, the EVNO-the enterprise virtual network operator.

Recently Tango Networks announced their Kinetic Cloud Mobile X, something the company describes as the "first communications service that creates a private mobile network exclusively controlled by an enterprise for maximizing the productivity of its distributed workforce." If that doesn't have all the makings of an EVNO, I don't know what does.

Tango Networks is providing the enterprise market with total control from mobile and WiFi access to policy and full UCaaS functions, something pal Dean Bubley, the London based futurist and analyst says is "an early example of a wider trend." Beyond Tango, Bubley is expecting to see "continued convergence of MVNOs with enterprise comms and UCaaS, enabled by technologies such as eSIM and cloud-based mobile core networks."

From an enterprise perspective the mobility manager, or IT mobile lead, can now define the mobile experience for their entire staff, and even others who need to be connected to their core communications system using Tango's Kinetic Communications Platform. This goes well beyond simply providing calling, connectivity and access, as what  is doing is more akin to concepts like federation by allowing those who actually need access, even third parties related to the enterprise to have access, and even then, only permitting them do what they are permitted to do. That's a lot like sharing a file from Google G Suite inside and outside the company, as the platform makes voice, text, video and more accessible across the entire enterprise and just as reachable by their ecosystem partners.

While Truphone and Fi, start first with the SIM, Tango ends with that. The SIM, or eSIM at some point, is merely the key to the network lock, including over any form of mobile wireless or Wi-Fi for authentication. What makes this so very interesting is what Tango has done with the core UCaaS system, making the SBC the real traffic cop, and the softswitch more than just a glorified call director by moving the call control functionality from the mobile operator inside, to the enterprise itself.

Taken on face, this may seem immaterial, but have you ever tried to transfer a call from one mobile phone to another? It's almost impossible unless you're running the call over a data connection and have a UCaaS provider in the middle. That's a lot like what GoogleVoice does, and it's really basic stuff.

But in the Tango environment, they've made it is as easy as it is on a desk phone because the call control is inside the enterprise network's UCaaS system, making the mobile wireless network (or WiFi) no different than a cord or cable does for the handset on the office network.

This change to how Tango handles calls means even when a user is on a legacy 1XRTT network like Verizon's or Sprint's in the USA, the functions still work as if they were in their offica as Tango's native mobile network policy enforcement tools that have been embedded inside the Tier 1 carriers for going on a decade allow the phone to be a true extension to the UCaaS system. Granted, there may be some differences in how the service behaves depending on user device configurations and support for SIM connectivity, but the Mobile UC and policy enforcement tools work everywhere, with more fuctionality on 3G and 4G/LTE, all based upon the patented Tango technology.

In essence, each enterprise customer becomes their own mobile operator. This happens because Tango keeps the Kinetic Cloud Mobile-X radio and device agnostic, and operates just like Google Fi or Truphone, serving as a global MVNO with multiple carrier connectivity. This gives the enterprise the ability to route calls, messaging and data as well as apply local country numbering using the UCaaS switch and SBC by using the rules that have been established within the enterprise call control platform.

That's all why I'm calling Tango's Kinetic Cloud the first of its kind EVNO!!!

Amazon, Apple and Google Steal The Show at CES

The enemy of my enemy is my friend, and this week's CES is clearly showing how what was once the way companies did business, has changed, and at the same time, what's old is new again and companies who once fought with each other are finding new ways to be allies. For example, Apple stopped licensing in 1997. Now they're redefining licensing by making it easier for anyone to access their iTunes platform. That's called distribution. What's next? Letting anyone make an iPhone-I think NOT.

Taken on face so far, it's clear Apple, Google and Amazon are dominating CES. News about assistants being deployed by multiple brands, new features and uses of the AI backed functionality and most of all iTunes ending up on Samsung, Vizio, and other smart TV brands. That and pure word play on the famed "what goes on in Vegas, stays in Vegas" line tied to your privacy.

Looking more closely, neither Amazon, Apple nor Google has really introduced any new products themselves. No new iPhones or MacBooks. No new Homes, Hubs, Mini's or Pixelbooks and no new Echos were introduced. But all three are dominating the news and over time, your wallets directly and indirectly. In everyway possible, they have mastered the hardware channel at this year's CES and at the same time proved that "software really is eating the world."

But what about all the news about them you say?

Well, its all indeed smoke and mirrors, with the media jumping on the names of Apple, Amazon, and Google when in reality what we have is a roll-out of services. Yes, those same services Tim Cook talked about is what caused the ill-informed stock market types to think Apple was a bad stock to hold onto, who misunderstand Google's real motivations, and who have yet to really see Amazon for what they are.

Apple wants to be the brand you will always trust. Their single billboard in Las Vegas is all about keeping what's your's, your's. It's also the premium brand. It's Bentley and Ferrari. Everyone else is Mercedes Benz and Chevy. They want iTunes to be the lure to keep you an Apple user. By aligning with the TV brands, they are skipping ahead of Spotify, Amazon Music, and Pandora.  Musicians love Apple. The labels work with Apple. The motion picture and television industry co-exist with Apple. Pretty much everyone trusts Apple, and this week, Apple reminded everyone why.

Google wants to make it as easy as talking to collect as much information about you so you can have a better, and less expensive, but still, have an elegant ride. Android is their Mercury, their messenger and the Google Cloud is their playground.  For Google, it's all about developing and deploying services. Hardware is their razor. The services are the blades. Google now has more razor manufacturers than anyone all lining up to be their blades' retailers. 

Amazon is for every day. It's the shopping center, file cabinet, and switchboard. Amazon is Walmart's biggest fear. They sell Apple. Google. Samsung. Jeff Bezos is the most prominent arms merchant in the world and never has to fire a single shot. Amazon hardware is the Colt .45's of every man. But if you want a Sig (Google) or a Glock (Apple) he'll find a way to deliver one to you. 

All the interest around voice interfaces is really about the death of the keyboard and the calculator. Just as we traded our landlines for smartphones and our calculators for digital spreadsheets, we're being migratory. Like the birds which fly south for the winter, we're leaving one nest for another. Instead of typing we merely talk. 

But what's also interesting is how all three are avoiding being social media platforms. Instead, they have all chosen to leave that for Facebook, Twitter, and Pinterest.  That's smart thinking as the big three are really all about the customer. Consumer or enterprise. Social media is all about the interaction between people who in theory are friends (or not), and a means to amplify, extol and pontificate.

Who do I see as winners from CES?

1. Zapier-without question the more cloud-based services with open API's based on REST come to market, the more Zaps get created, the more opportunities Zapier has.
2. IFTTT-where Zapier has taken a cloud and software focus, IFTTT takes the hardware world and connects it to services. Both are able to be used with Google's Home Hub and Alexa, and not as much with Apple (yet).
3. Google as Gmail, Calendar, Tasks, Apps integrate with more smart assistants but comes with a caveat. Google need to connect the Assistant to their business accounts soon as you can already do that with Alexa and Echos. I consider this like the way SMS was a decade ago. It wasn't interoperable with every operator. Then one day, it was. Like that, so will Home Hub and G Suite for business start working.
4. Amazon - someone has to sell all the new hardware, and they've proven they are the best (place) to buy beating out Best Buy, Costco and eBay sellers for new, more because they deliver and this year literally will be.
5. Qualcomm and Intel-their chips are everywhere. NVidia and MediaTek too. But for these four the looming 5G is where their chips really start to be cashed in.

Oh, how 2019 is going to be an exciting year as friends, foes, allies alike dance with one another, while still looking to stick the knife in their rivals backs.

But with all the hoopla, one question has to be looming in everyone's mind.

Where have you gone, John Legere?

Why I Love My $79 Amazon Fire HD Tablet

I don't usually buy cheap. As a matter of fact, that's about as far from my behavior in tech gear as people who have known me will tell you. I've always bought (or overbought) the latest and greatest Apple gear. I would dive in and buy whatever was newest in Android, usually from Samsung, then OnePlus (I still do buy their gear for Android). I would almost always buy a Pixel from Google.

The rationale was simple, those brands build the best of the best, so paying more for it, meant I had the best. But when it comes to tablets, I haven't rushed out to buy a new iPad, as my iPad Pro 9.6 does all that I need. It's still is as fast as any iPad on the market, runs the apps I use, and can be my companion at dinner or when on the plane. But it's got one problem. Even at 10" with the case, it's just too big for me sometimes to tote around.

The iPad Mini is a better device for that, but price and performance wise, it's not justifiable anymore. It doesn't have the fastest processor, and it's not really a phone, even if I can add all the VoIP and Conferencing apps I use.  Even at $399 for a Wi-Fi only iPad Mini 4, it's over 4 times the cost of a tricked out; case carried, keyboard enhanced Amazon Fire HD 8.

But there's something else that has had me fall in love with the Amazon Fire HD 8. It's the audio and video quality when I cast to any Chromecast HD in the house.  It's fuller, richer and more robust than my iPad. Hands down. That and the facts that it's also so small and light and if it's damaged or stolen, I've lost all of $100 (case, keyboard included).

It's become my go-to jukebox to send music to my 4-year-old Samsung 43" SmartTV, and my two less than a year old TCL Roku 65" or 55" Toshiba Amazon Fire TV's that dot the house in different rooms. Each has Google Chromecast's or Android TVs, and even some have built-in Chromecast themselves. Video streams flawlessly. Audio hits the highs and lows, and by choosing the best quality, it's delivering the audio as good as any mobile device can.

When I take it with me on the go, I can tether to either my OnePlus 6T or iPhone 7. It connects quickly to Wi-Fi, and when I need to, I can always latch on to a Boingo powered hotspot.

Amazon's private label program for hardware doesn't end with the HD Fire for me. I also needed a soundbar to connect to my TV. While it's not the best on the market, it sure is good enough to do what I need, and priced at under $75.00 it sure fills the living room, enhancing the audio enough to keep me happy.

Here's the bottom line. Amazon's line of gear is value priced. Yes, you have trade-offs, but for where we've gone tech wise we don't need to buy only Apple to have what we need.

 

 

The CES Ramp Up

If you're a techie, a gadgeteer or an electronics junkie or simply someone who enjoys entertainment gear, CES is where the action is every January. It starts next week, and already, the ramp up is happening.

So next week, as the publicity machines crank up there will be lots of news surrounding what some will call "the next big thing," but in reality, it's not what's on the floor that's big. It's CES that is the "big thing" as it takes over the entire city of Las Vegas. It's where every brand fights for attention and where every attendee fights for a cab ride.

Already, rumors are floating around about this being the big show for Google (I disagree as I/O, and Next are where Google shows off). Apple never really does anything at CES except walk the floors, and Amazon, which has Re: Invent every November only needs to be there to support licensees. 

The mother of all trade shows is for the mega brands and the want to be brands to generate "heat" around their newest products. That's why CES has morphed into so much more than just "consumer electronics" and is why FoodTech, SportsTech, AutoTech, GreenTech, SeniorTech and BizTech are all there. CES creates new markets, builds awareness and is where the exhibiting companies are selling in.

And CES is about just that. SELLING IN. It is not about selling through. CES is where new products are seen, where meetings are held and where orders get written.

In many cases, the hype around the new products is so early that consumers salivate for the next big thing. It used to be TV and Stereo gear, but now it's about smart devices, smart homes, smart kitchen appliances-seriously, does anyone want dumb anything? 

This year marks the third year I'm skipping CES because, in this era of instant journalism, you can know all that's going on in more places more quickly by just using Google.

And that's why for Google, CES is really a big deal.

What's Ahead in 2019-AI, More Video, Better Customer Experiences

There is no question that AI and video are going to be more widely deployed in 2019, and beyond. You don't need to be a Gartner Analyst to be seeing and hearing what's ahead. As a matter of fact, as direct to customer approaches are more and more en vogue in every industry, not just in consumer products, all you need to be is on the mailing list of brands with a history of anticipating the future to know what they're focusing on next. 

Take Twilio. I'm on their mailing list as I have an account. I don't make much use of it, more to "play" and experiment with simple "consumer" level integrations with Zapier and IFTTT. However, what that gets me is their developer and marketing newsletters, and allows me to know "what's possible." That's why today when I received their post-Christmas drip campaign email from Twilio,  I took a look to see what they were up to.

Today's newsletter took the form of a series of short, well-penned announcements about a few new functions which over the past month the CPaaS (communications platform as a service) company has been rolling out. The marketer in me liked the breezy, as it was designed to have the reader click through for me. I liked the way it was presented and the topics, so I bit and clicked.

First is the network video quality API.

This is a function that anyone building group video calling or video conferencing would be interested in, as too often the network connectivity isn't up to carrying a solid video call. While the API today is built for the video calling supplier, the plan is to roll out an SDK to build the reporting into iOS and Android apps. That way the end user can see how good or how bad their connection is, and how well the conversation session will be.

 

The second item in the drip campaign was Twilio's approach to building Facebook Messenger's Chat bot via Autopilot, Twilio's beta AI platform offers what they say is a "declarative API" that also offers "NLU and ML to parse data, intent, and tasks from customer interactions out of the box." In a nutshell Twilio is connecting Messenger Chatbots to other services, starting with SMS, but there's no reason they can't interconnect to Slack or other messaging based services too.

Here's my take:

1. Twilio is using Facebook's universe of connected people to gain as much knowledge as fast as they can about people. The level of interactions, the size of the addressable audience using Messenger and the already text first nature of the participants, is a massive number. This experimental stage deployment helps Twilio build up an extensive lexicon, understand behavior and go from testbed to commercialization with data.
   
   
2. The Video Network Quality API is a trojan horse. What service provider doesn't want to be able to know how good or bad their delivery is to the person on the other end of the line, and be able to not take ownership of the problem by being able to say "oh it's not us, it's your _________" to the customer. Twilio will then be able to forge alliances and offer better solutions to those providers.

Given that I'm predicting that in 2019 we'll see many more brands embrace the idea of in-app AI, voice and video all as standard functions enabled by using WebRTC (ala what Uber is already doing) Twilo's message was well timed as it hit on all of those AI, Voice and Video.

With LTE becoming more ubiquitous and less congested, especially as 5G comes along, in the session path, voice and video in-app will no longer be a nice to have. Those features will be a must, as AI, location services and data science all take center stage with the idea of better customer service, product design (UI/UX) and customer experience (CX).

This likely adoption direction by companies large and small means Twilio's service, and that from the competition, will drive app enterprise decision makers and app developers to build a better service both for the deskbound, as well as the mobile-first worker. To do that means smarter tools, and these two are all about intelligence, not simply connecting the call.

Clearly Twilio won't be alone in offering tools like these even if they are just today in beta stage. Companies like Nexmo, Telesign (owned by Belgian giant BICS), client SignalWire and others will all be in the mix, carving out their own areas of specialty in the AI and video markets next year.

Look for apps like food delivery, medical, counseling, consulting, all to begin to go in-app vs. out of app as the tools to build and to manage, as well as to be more automated come on stream as we have only scratched the surface so far. Most of all, look for the contact centers and call centers to brace AI and Video, as calls move from chat, to voice to a face to face session, all within the app and the call.

The Age of Influence Online

In 2005 Martin Geddes asked me to outline how Nokia could use bloggers to help properly introduce their upcoming line of smartphones, dubbed the "N Series" to overcome the challenges faced by their USA Country Comms team and Global Comms worldwide. In the past they had tried to work with bloggers and never got past the starting gate I was told.

Over a chat I outlined the program, and a day later presented the program to the Nokia Global Comms lead charged with the N Series rollout. The program, simply named "The Nokia Blogger Relations Program" became a runaway hit six months later when we launched it. It was such a hit that the Washington Post credited it with changing Nokia's fortunes.

Back then, metrics like we have today weren't available. There was no Twitter and Facebook was just getting going. My hand-picked group of "bloggers" included the likes of Om Malik, who then was GigaOm, Michael Arrington, who was TechCrunch, Rich Tehrani of TMCNet, Jeff Pulver, Kevin Tofel and the late James Kendrick of JK On the Run, Matt Miller of Palm Solo, now with ZD Net, Alec Saunders who had launched Windows Mobile at Microsoft and others like them.

Unlike today, where social media managers use data, I relied on my sports era training of how to find the right players and volunteer leaders to help grow the Philadelphia Flyers amateur hockey community presence. 

Stats like web traffic wasn't really a factor. Instead I looked for those who could provide insight, perspective and opinion surrounding the devices. I also looked for passion in their writing, and a fundamental aspect of their work life. They had to have experience with some smartphone. Back then it was either a Palm Pilot, a Blackberry or a Windows Mobile devices.

Today, data like the number of followers on Facebook, Twitter or Instagram, are laregely how decisions are made, and in turn a lot of money is wasted on targets who will never buy the product or use the service. In the social influencer world there are three types of influencers:

Those who are all about New and Shiny - they simply reflect what they've been told by the company behind the product or service. Often the coverage is based on a news release, a photo or a short statement. Rarely is there any hands-on experience and almost never is their factual comparative reporting, as too many companies fail to let the media have long-term, unfettered access to a product or service. In the Nokia program we simply said to the bloggers to return the devices whenever they wanted to. We followed a similar approach with Boingo where we provided test accounts that were not supposed to expire though sometimes they did and we would reactivate them almost immediately. Most of what you read in high traffic news sites are using this approach where they want to control the message, not inspire thoughtful coverage.

Second is Release and Review. This is where the actual service or product is provided under embargo, or post-launch to reviewers for the purpose of detailing the many features and benefits. The music review world or book critics were great examples of this years ago, and in the days or real media, restaurant critics, many who were unknown on sight, would honestly provide a comparative critique, and offer the kind of detail that helped buyers and customers make informed decisions.

A great example of the expert reviewer is Kevin Tofel, a long time friend, peer and colleague (I was the intermediary who suggested to Om Malik that GigaOm purchase JK on The Run.) Kevin's recent review of the Pixel Slate is a fine example of a targeted review by a well-informed expert. When you compare his review vs. those from general market tech reporters, who have larger audiences, you see why Kevin's the go-to guy for Chromebooks and Slates. Many of the other reviewers have never touched a Pixelbook, or their experience was for only a week or two. This goes back to why in 2005 we aimed for smartphone using bloggers to be who received the Nokia devices whenever possible.

The third, and most important group, are those who demonstrated their blogging to provide what we nicknamed IPO for Insight, Perspective and Opinion.  That meant long-form writing, not short, simple, thin and unimaginative reporting. This allowed for the kind of coverage that people like Oliver Starr, Tofel, Miller, Malik, Pulver, Tehrani, Arrington all were providing their audiences. The IPO blogger or influencer also have what the release and review and new and shiny influencers don't have.  Deep experience and subject matter expertise.

Today, influencer relations is not about quality for many companies or their marketing execs, especially, those not versed in direct marketing vs. digital marketing. It's why social media managers who never learned about TRPs (target rating points) vs. GRP's (gross rating points) often buy their influencers based on large numbers - like the number of followers, vs. the right people who are followed.

The Kevin Tofel example is key here. His readership numbers are far lower than CNET, TechCrunch or The Verge, but his knowledge about Chromebooks is far richer, and his opinion is based more on deeper insight, and a far more experienced perspective.  That makes his reviews far more valuable, as they combine "release and review" with IPO.

What This Means

Twitter is more akin these days to the envelopes full of coupons that come in the mail. 99% of what you see is from businesses or people you would never do business with unless the deal arrived at exactly the time you needed it, as most expire a few weeks later. 

Instagram is like a glossy magazine of the past that you subscribed to and has "ads" from the places you shop, or want to shop in. When you start to follow influencers (i.e people you don't know and who surely don't know you) this is an example of vicarious living, much like the glossy magazines like US and People were or what watching TMZ or ET provide. The feeling of being an insider in Hollywood or New York when you live in, say Iowa (no offense to Iowans). Rarely do the influencers really engage with you except to drive traffic.

Facebook started out similar to a mailing list where friendship was the common thread. It has in some ways replaced your personal address book and phone as you can connect, keep tabs and communicate with your friends. It was supposed to be only about your friends, but has now become a home of businesses too. They use your friends' relationship as currency to get you to follow them. With LIKES related to what your friends approve of being shared to you, very specific geotargeting and more, Facebook had the right idea with its core idea, as its cap of 5000 friends limits overreach. Unfortunately, Facebook let the genie out of the bottle and the more they add in ads paid for by businesses augmented by promoted content, or what we used to call "the advotorial," the less meaningful the content  has in value, and likes become nothing more than a checkbox. Check-ins are meaningful to Facebook. It's the content surrounding the check-in that is meaningful to your friends. Unfortunately, Facebook's search  relevance is not really that good, eliminating the value of a historical post to your friends.

LinkedIn has always been the most restrictive to marketing, so beyond the InMail offers from people you don't know, LinkedIn level of control was enough to keep the excess marketing to a minimum. That's why LinkedIn has always been a higher value service for influence to reach the longer form seeking audiences.  Think of LinkedIn like what was directory assistance or the White Pages directory with additional content about people you know, want to know or used to know.

Review Sites/Blogs/Personal Websites once you get past the pay for player, the bloggers who are paid to write, or produce videos for product and service companies, you'll find deeper insight and better advice. For example, the Costco Wine Blog is a great site for wine buyers who shop at the wholesale club. Costco permits it to use their name because it is not harmful to the brand. If anything it provides an outsider opinion on what's only found on their shelves. It highlights only the best wines based on real tastings of the wines, not merely, the fact that they are sold there. 

Sites like TripAdvisor and Yelp in theory are valuable, but only to a point. They are helpful in researching what's where or who's who. Unfortunately, the content is user contributed, making the authority value rather low. In essence they are more like the almost defunct Yellow Pages directory ads. 

Each social media approach has value, but as a pioneer in social media marketing, too much of what was advertising dollars are being spent on mass audience, where if you reach a large enough audience you'll get some traffic and in turn some customers. 

Today, Social Media today is too much like Mass Media of the past. It needs more.

Smart social media management means taking the approaches of direct marketing first, so if you effectively target the right influencers from the start, then you don't need the mass part at the start, but can apply that approach after you've built the quality content that's "real."

The Rise and Fall of A Cloud Leader

Diane Greene at Google wasn't doing a bad job at all. As a matter of fact, she was leading the massive business, Google Cloud, and taking it in the right direction. But being second fiddle to Google Ad sales and then having to navigate around something new from Google every month is no easy task. The Google Graveyard is full of other so called failures, some of which were good ideas but not successful.

However, it was made harder by the internal competition between divisions and personal agendas of each divisional CEO. So when Google became Alphabet, and each company had to start to account for their usage of Google services and infrastructure vs. it all coming out of a shared pool, internecine rivalry and priorities had to take hold.

Google Cloud is every bit as good, or better than Azure or AWS. However, the difference is that at both Microsoft and Amazon their clouds are a priority, and a core part of their marketing and sales efforts. They don't fight against their cloud sales effort, they embrace it and make it something that everyone is aware of and actively supporting. For both companies, the route to the Enterprise starts now with the cloud as evidenced by MSFT's push of Office365 before they mounted a big drive for channel partners to sell Azure.

Google has a built-in Cloud customer base. It's every user of anything Google, and that starts with GSuite, YouTube and YouTubeTV. Those categories present a variety of sales and marketing opportunities to sell Cloud and cross-sell other Google services, and that includes using Ads as a loss leader. So while reports are that some of that was starting to happen, it couldn't happen soon enough.

At the start of the year, I presented concepts like that to the rep selling Google Next to me for a client. I proposed a series of cross-collateralized marketing promotion ideas that would have been of value to Google and my client. So while viewed by the rep as what was needed to make the event great, Google's Cloud team came back with basically a vanilla proposal, not for lack of interest but due to a lack of internal capacity to make things happen.

That's what's likely did in Diane Greene. Not what she and her team wanted to do, but what the company prevents from happening due to the way the business is structured, and how the corporaticians can win out over the bold and the brave.

When PR Isn't

As background I've been in the PR world since I was 14 years old when I was in sports with the Philadelphia Wings and then with the Philadelphia Flyers. Back as far as then the idea of being friends with media, keeping them informed and being able to talk, present a story angle that was more of a conversation than the so called "pitch."  As a blogger, I get pitched everyday, and while I don't accept contributed articles, I do get ideas on topics when the PR person has taken the time to only pitch me on story ideas that will be newsworthy, not simply to meet their client's wishes.

But PR has changed. Recently I was sent a pitch by NordVPN. It included an interesting angle and one which I was half interested in writing about, but the release had holes in it to make for a good blog post, so I sent a few questions back to the person who sent the pitch and release to me. No reply. I followed up a few days later. Still no reply. I then reached out to the person listed on the web site for communications. No reply.

On another story angle I called and wrote the PR contact for ZipCar. No reply. Even worse, the phone number listed resulted in a message saying the number "does not have voice mailbox has been set up yet." This is for the PR person listed on the most recent release. An email to the contact also wasn't replied to.

A third example is how PR people make it so difficult a story isn't able to be written. A few months ago I got assigned to write a story about identity verification in the technology era. Having experienced the situtaion first hand with both physical address and phone number verification, and having vendors like ADP tell me they use Experian to check addresses and Acxiom to validate addresses as well (FedEx) I posed the question to both requesting information about processes, data sources and alternative methods of validation. Acxiom promised an answer and never provided one. Experian said they didn't want to take part in the story. The story never got written. 

This is the state of PR and why reporters are now fed up and why "fake news" exists.

Having been a PR pro and a journalist the ability to produce a factually accurate story is only made more difficult when PR people choose to play defense vs. work with media on getting the right story. When journalists have first hand knowledge of what's going it only makes for a more accurate story. Receiving the right answer from the company in question only goes to make for a better and more correct news account.

Unfortunatly, when PR folks don't work in a cooperative manner with media only two outcomes can occur. No story, or a story that is based on what the media thinks are the facts. In both cases the brand loses.

Having worked with luminary brands like AT&T, AOL, Nokia, RIM and breakout brands like GrandCentral (GoogleVoice), StubHub and many others, we always made a point of working with the media, and being cooperative. That approach yielded in successful campaigns and stories about the companies. Media pros know how to do things right, but when they play like amateurs then no one wins and their audiences end up the losers.