Nielsen Is Clueless

Nielsen is holding a conference on User Generated Content. Arggg!!! We aren't "users", it's not "content", and it isn't "generated" -- can't we get rid of this stupid term? It's the edglings, the people formerly known as the audience, the participants in participatory media, it's a spectrum of involvement, not a dichotomy.

But that's not the point of this post. It's how clueless they are.

[from Greg Verdino's Marketing Blog: Nielsen BuzzMetrics CGM Summit is a no blog zone.

"Off The Record: the CGM Summit is off the record, so please no blogging, reporting, recording or broadcasting."

Nutso.

Didn't Walter Mossberg and the old media types at the Wall Street Journal do this a few years ago at the D conference?

[pointer from Jarvis from Rubel from Darmano]

tags: walter+mossberg, d+conference, neilsen, wall+street+journal, deplore:user+generated+content, greg+verdino, edglings, participatory+media

Comments

[Jevon]

The reason they are acting this way is that they are dying,. Neilson is crashing fast and they are confused as hell.

How would we feel if we were stuck measuring the old world? I wouldn't feel terribly good.

So what do you do? Have a conference, invite anyone ANYONE you think can help, and you listen... and because your next strategy/move will literally be decided on what people have to say to you, you make it secret. Because you want to capture some sort of competitive advantage.

Sadly, that very mindset means you are destined to lose.

[John Cass]

I don't see the problem with using the phrase user generated content. I know I am an internet user, and I write or generate my own content. What would you rather call blog or forum content generated by people. Stuff written by people? We have to have some term for the stuff written on the web by ordinary people, why not CGM?

[Max Kalehoff]

Hi Stowe,

Max Kalehoff here from Nielsen BuzzMetrics. Our event was a private, client-only user-group event. Unfortunately, most of the discussion about our request for attendees not to blog missed this important fact. As you note, Steve Rubel failed to indicate this, as well as many others. I guess it would’ve dilluted the otherwise great headline.

So why? The answer is simple: our paying clients preferred that format, and this was their conference. The agenda, topics, and key questions all flowed from their input - even their desire to tackle issues privately. Importantly, unlike many public media conferences, which seek awareness and ticket sales, this was a no-charge, no-frills gathering of 100 representatives from client organizations who have invested significant time and resources in Nielsen BuzzMetrics services. This was not an event put on for bloggers, but a client user-group meeting, something thousands of companies hold in private everyday. In the end, we achieved deep and stimulating conversation, led primarily by the clients themselves, and putting their interests first was the right thing to do.

We’ll continue to seek our clients’ input in future client-only events to see if a more fully exposed, “on-the-record” forum makes sense. We want to get it right, and welcome public feedback as well. At the same time, we must honor obligations to confidentiality around client case studies, client information and client wishes…

I welcome you to read my full post as well as offer any further comment or suggestions. Thanks.

http://attentionmax.com/blog/2006/10/are_private_conversations_hist.html

[alan herrell - the head lemur]

UGC should have a stake driven into it and it's mentioners should be put into time out for say 20 years.

I am a fan of 'ICE' Individual Creative Expression. Yes it not only is about the Individual but also starts with "I".

[Stowe Boyd]

Jevon - I agree, bro.

John - I am a blogger, and a blog reader. In neither case am I a 'user' of anything, except my Mac. In both cases, I am participating -- writing -- not 'generating'. And writing is not 'content' except when looked at by media companies that are trying to package it.

Max - I still think it's silly to have a large, publicized event -- private or no -- on this subject and to not blog about it. The fact that some -- even a majority -- of the participants want to do it that way doesn't mean that others should have to go along with it. I will look at your post, as well.

[John Cass]

Stowe, What about content on forums and other websites. what's the generic term you use for all of the content written by people on those sites?

Alan,

ICE sounds good as well, who came up with the term?

[marianne richmond]

Stowe,

Although the comment says "Max Kalehoff" from BuzzMetrics here"...I am not so sure. I guess it depends on the definition of "here."

I got the exact same comment on two of my blogs, except it said "Hi Marianne" on one and on the other, simply :Hi." So I am thinking that automax really doesn't welcome us to read his post or care about our further comments or suggestions.

So, I am thinking that "clueless" was pretty accurate...I know getting spammed by automax is not liely to change my mind.

Marianne

[Stowe Boyd]

John -

I think content sounds like something used to stuff a mattress, or an additive for sausages. Why can't we call it writing? Why do we need to adopt a generic term derived from traditional media companies, who view themselves as "pushing content through pipes to eyeballs."

Would you collectively refer to all art -- generically -- as content? Are Hemingway, Picasso, The Tao Te Ching, and The Red Hot Chili Peppers content? Why, then, do we want to talk about writing online as if it is bits in a database? Is our conversation content? Why reduce everything to sameness?

Marianne -

Seems like a rubberstamp attempt to get everyone to go read his blog post, instead of an effort to engage in a conversation. I guess I will go read it, and write something about it.

[Max Kalehoff]

Stowe and Marianne,

Max here is real, I'm here in the conversation. This is a real person you're attacking. I responded lots of places to this discussion, lifting the key points from my original post at attentionmax.com, my personal blog where I commented on an issue involving my company. In terms of clueless, I'm not so sure what you mean, but I'm sure willing to talk about it. Same for "rubber stamp." Heck you're even welcomed to personally call me live at my office (646.253.1900 and ask for me).

I'm happy to vet out issues we and others face when protecting confidential case studies and information surrounding clients in an intimate, closed-door forum. That's the real issue -- which conversations are public and which aren't. There are legal and fiduciary responsibilities. We were not holding a public conference, rather a user-group meeting, and we sought feedback from our clients on the format that they desired or required. We were not seeking publicity, nor did we charge any of our cients a dime to convene and talk about issues they otherwise would not address in any other sort of venue.

I agree very much with the spirit of transparency and full exposure (and this goes far, far beyond blogging) -- I see the benefits. But we had to make a decision, and it was in the interest of our cleints, for whom our user-group meting was for. I'll reiterate: we'll address this issue at future client user-group meetings, and perhaps open it up to blogging and other. Thanks for your feedback. And please remember, I'm a real person.

Thanks,
Max Kalehoff

[alan herrell - the head lemur]

John Cass,
I invented it in a fit of lunacy after reading tons of postings by media pundits, 'how to make money with blogging' snake oil salesmen, and every PR Firm on the planet that thinks that blogs are the next spin machine, and how user generated content was the new black, and how they could monitise it.

UGC is an excellent signpost used by every group who still has an overwhelming desire to keep any actual one on one conversation at arms length. Everybody wants to be a rancher, nobody wants to know the cows.

[Stowe Boyd]

Max - I didn't attack you, I said I would read your post, which I have. Marianne thinks your responses was clueless, and I think the whole idea of an event with blogging is clueless.

Alan - Thanks.

[John Cass]

Stowe,

I think we must agree to disagree that content is a good word to use for writing or not. However, I do agree writing is also a good term to use. But I'd like a term or phrase that I can use easily in my writing when I talk about the new volume of content that's written by individuals on the web. I'd like to distinguish between writing for a book and writing in a blog, wiki or other form of website. Why, well I think the work written on the web by individuals is something new.

I don't think having a useful way to distinguish personally produced writings reducing everything to sameness. I think it provides a helpful way to describe the new phenomena. To me this is a matter of personal preference about what language to use, rather than a right way or a wrong way to describe what’s happening in the new world of social media.

Alan,

I disagree with you that everyone wants to use blogging as a way to sell, though you are right many people think of blogging in that way. I think that’s because its tough for a business person so used to the sales model to change to the marketing model. Where marketing is the process of building a product that meets the needs of a customer, and blogging helps with the process of building better products by asking your customers what they want. I think some companies do understand that by following a strategy of selling when it comes to blogging, will produce zero results and probably some bad press. However, I think it’s perfectly okay for companies to have a strategy of engagement, along with an eventual goal of increasing sales through building better products.

The more serious corporate blogging companies are having one on one conversations with their customers, and really understand that’s what it takes to be successful in engaging and understanding their customers.

[Randy]

I am sitting in a web conference with Nielsen Buzzmetrics Pete Blackshaw. I just asked him "how do you reconcile not allowing cgm at the recent cgm conference? "Off The Record: the CGM Summit is off the record, so please no blogging, reporting, recording or broadcasting." He responded that it was a fiduciary responsibility to their clients. It was the last question of the day and although I disagree I respect his answer.