New Venture Marketing

"Why Online Matters More than Print"

Paul Gillin (who writes Newspaper Death Watch and wrote a tremendous book on Social Media Marketing) recently wrote a very insightful piece on “Why Online Matters More than Print”.   His observation was that most PR folks still consider Web coverage to be nice, but what their clients want is ink.  And that from his point-of-view, the opposite should be true.  I couldn’t agree more.

 Depending on the publication, an article may last no longer than the issue it was printed in, but online that same piece will last forever, be searched, and linked to as long as the subject is of interest. 

 The power of the Web over the power of print can not be overstated, and yet it is rare that press releases or any of what I would call more traditional PR collaterals (white papers, articles, case studies, testimonials) are optimized for online distribution.

 What do I mean by that?

 Write a press release and get it picked up in several publications, and you will have some ink and some coverage.  Write a press release whose purpose is to draw in readers on the web, be targeted to online media outlets, and search engine optimized, and it will do 3x the job of a traditional release.

First, the release will draw attention when it is distributed.  Second, it will continue live on the Web, drawing in readers via the search engines, and third it will actively help to draw readers to the customer’s site.

If you think about it, it only makes sense that press releases, articles and other kinds of copy be designed for the Internet.  But we grew up on newspapers, magazines and TV and for many of us those still count.  And to a degree, a lesser degree, they still do.  But what really counts is drawing readers to your business over the Internet, and giving your copy “feet”.

The most effective articles, press releases and any other kind of copy has been designed for pick up on the Web.

Participation in the Web 2.0Open and Conference

Sarah Milstein, from the O'Reilly Media, has extended to anyone from my Stanford class or colleagues an invitation to participate in the Web 2.0Open part of the Web 2.0 Expo this year. The Web 2.0 is an "unconference where the event and topics are determined by those who attend.  Its emphasis is participation over presentation where participants can connect with others to discuss issues related to Web 2., ask and answer questions. The free session will be held on April 1 and 2, 2009 at the Moscone Center in San Francisco.  If you have never attended an unconference or are simply interested in participating, I highly recommend it.  See information below:    

(http://www.web2expo.com/webexsf2009), I'm organizing Web2Open, a series of free sessions on April 1 and 2 that anyone can attend or even organize (http://www.web2expo.com/webexsf2009/public/wiki/Web2Open).

To register, use the code websf09opn for a free pass that
will give you access to Web2Open, Hybrid Sessions, Keynotes, Sponsored
Sessions, the Expo Hall, and BoFs
(https://en.oreilly.com/webexsf2009/public/register).

If you'd like to attend the full Expo, the conference is offering 35% off to friends and colleagues of speakers Sarah is speaking about Twitter for business on April 1).

Use this code when you register:  websf09spr35. Alternatively, if you'd like free passes for a main
conference session or two on either Weds or Thurs, you can volunteer at the Open for a little more than hour, and Sarah can give you passes; shoot her an email for that option.sarah.milstein@gmail.com.

Web 1.0, Formerly knowns as "The Web"

When we speak about Web 2.0, it begs the question of whatever happened to Web 1.0 and when was it replaced.

Web 1.0 is considered by many to be the first generation of tools and technologies to harness the power of the Internet, invented by Sir Tim Berners Lee in 1989 and implemented by him and a student the following year as the “World Wide Web” ( “The Web”).

The tools of Web 1.0 were used to publish information. This first Web is often referred to as the <read only> web, a place to provide and retrieve information. Most corporate websites today are built on a Web 1.0 model.  These traditional sites are used to provide a wealth of information on the company, its products and services.

The term Web 2.0 is used to refer to the next generation of Internet technologies and tools. Web 2.0 is known as the "social web", where new social media tools enable engagement, interaction and discussion. It is a web of relationships among people, sometimes referred to as the <read/write> web.

The term was first coined by computer publisher and conference producer Tim O’Reilly in 2004 at his first Web 2.0 Conference.  The focus of the conference was to explore a whole host of new, next generation technologies and their impact on business practices. O'Reilly was among  the the first to note that the Web was moving from its initial use as an "information highway" to becoming more a “platform of participation”, a social web.

A corporate blog, which is a specific kind of web site, is a good example of Web 2.0 technology. While there are many things that distinguish a business blog from a corporate web site, two key things stand out. First, a blog is written by an individual in his or her own voice where as a company website is written in the anonymous language of the corporation. Second, readers can comment on a blog, express their opinion and differences, in other words, readers can talk back. On a standard website neither was possible.

Today, the attention is focused on to Web 2.0 and all the power and new innovations it has unleashed. But Berners-Lee would argue that there is no such thing as Web 1.0 and Web 2.0, that the Web is the Web and that the potential was there from the start.

For me what is important is having a way to define and express the differences between two generations of Web tools and technologies and most importantly how each has been applied. 

Web 2.0 is a real, honest to goodness, sea change in how we do business (and just about everything else). Differentiating Web 2.0 from Web 1.0, enables me to underscore the difference between two profoundly distinct approaches and raise the flag that a new day has come.