In case you hadn’t heard, GM announced in March that they are moving half of their $3 billion marketing budget, to third largest in the United States, to digital and one-to-one initiatives (GM Changes Game, Puts $1.5 Billion Online). That’s a full $1.5 billion dollars, a sizable portion of which will likely end up on the web.

It’s my curiosity on how enterprise money is being spent that led me to attend a discussion on Social Media and the Enterprise with panelists Natalie Johnson of General Motors, Chris Reid of Yamaha Motor Canada and Jenny Bullough of Harlequin Enterprises Ltd., and moderated by Michael O’Connor Clarke. Michael’s mere appearance on the stage resulted in a dramatic hush coming over the room.

Following pleasantries and introductions, Michael kicked off the discussion with a quote from The Cluetrain Manifesto:

“…companies so lobotomized that they can’t speak in a recognizably human voice build sites that smell like death.”

Harlequin enjoys strong brand reputation. This means that there’s a community built on decades of publishing books that appeal to a specific and demanding niche. In fact, Harlequin publishes 120 new books each month including electronic selections of their back catalog based on user demand through their website. Also interesting is that Harlequin still accepts unsolicited manuscripts.

One of Harlequin’s greatest successes is a series of meet-the-author podcasts that connected aspiring authors with potential readers and meet-the-editor podcasts which educated aspiring authors on the Harlequin approach.

Nathalie talked up General Motors’ social site imsaturn.com (though her way of saying I M Saturn was confused by the entire room to be I Am Saturn which led us to the website of a hip-hop musician). Another initiative that connects their customers with the organization is IGotShotgun.com which features behind the scenes videos. The greatest challenge to moving to the social web has been securing the support of the upper ranks and steering the corporate culture of 266,000 people in a new direction.

Yamaha brought in an outside expert to educate senior management on the value of social media for brand value and online reputation. Chris described how he could see the lights go on during the session and that having an outside expert added credibility to the campaign, that he alone would not have had the same impact despite the fact that he is the in-house expert.

While each organization has corporate blogging policies, each approaches participation in online communities by employees a different way. Harlequin’s multi-page policy comes down to ‘don’t be stupid’; don’t blog about authors, don’t blog secrets, etc… The brand is well defended by a large and passionate community. This means that Harlequin watches as the community responds to negative comments. GM allows employees to participate in online communities provided they are transparent about their employment. They moderate comments for foul language and offensive remarks. Otherwise, they allow negative remarks and criticism in order to be transparent and to learn from the community. Yamaha only allows internal blogging and does not permit employees to represent the company online.

When the panel was questioned about their organizations’ commitment to social media, Michael noted that the panel represents a new environment in which companies are dedicating full-time positions to social media engagement.

Amber MacArthur led a talk about the proliferation of video content on the web called Video is Everywhere. The panelists introduced themselves and their roles within their organizations as follows:

• Dina Kaplan (blip.tv): original episodic content on the web and matching of content with revenue opportunities

• Andre Gaulin (CTV): tasked with bringing online social media craziness to television for CTV

• Guinevere Orvis (CBC): mobile and online strategy production; putting behind the scenes video added value content that doesn’t appear on television online

This panel featured a classic display of the perceived personality stereotypes.

Dina represented the excited and passionate, over-caffinated envangelist of a grassroots community whose passion to create great content is increasingly obscured by the ambition to convert user-generated content into independent wealth. Dina’s near message-track focus was on maximizing revenue opportunities by packing as much advertising into any available corner of a video clip. She also really liked every question (’That’s a great question”, “It’s a really interesting question”…).

In contrast, Andre explained in his calm demeanor how CTV is working with various production companies to bring terrestrial content to the web and web content to our televisions. When posed with the challenge of explaining why some US content is not available in Canada, he spoke at a high level explaining that rights and licensing is an extremely complicated legal are which involves different production houses with different requirements and licensing restrictions.

Guinevere summed up the session’s unique qualities  by eloquently pointing out that the three panelists represent three different approaches that won’t likely converge into a single model, ever. Where CTV is pursuing unique ways of cross-pollinating content from various media, CBC is on the cutting edge of exploiting new technologies to inspire custom content creation and distribution. Among their innovative initiatives (for a public broadcaster) is the distribution of Canada’s Next Great Prime Minister using Bittorrent.

Say what you will about the dinosaurs of broadcast media, their primary interest remains the creation and distribution of quality content using innovative and accessible technologies.  They understand the competitive nature of content creation and consumption. Meanwhile, the grassroots are giddy about the idea making a buck. (note: Dave Fleet suggests that a buck might be more than they will actually make)

Okay… I made a mistake.

After making my post The record industry doesn’t want your money — and only after publishing that post — I hopped on to iTunes and was shocked to discover that some of the obscure acts I mentioned in the post, and was so convinced were long abandoned by the music industry, are actually available in iTunes.

Imagine my surprise to find Pukka Orchestra, Chalk Circle and Scott Merritt (though they mispelled ‘Overworked’ as ‘Overworker ‘ which are two very different things) to name a few of the less-remembered Canadian bands of the 80’s. I guess I can forgive iTunes the absence of Ottawa bands Eight Seconds and One to One.

Something unexpected happened last night. While waiting for my main computer to complete a backup, I found myself on Twitter to continue an earlier discussion about Canadian 80’s music. Somehow, the conversation evolved into great music, big hair and cheesy videos. Things got out of hand when we discovered a lot of the bands and music we were talking about — some of which didn’t didn’t make it through the 80’s — on YouTube.

A group of thirty-somethings, midnight, Twitter, and YouTube; it was a perfect storm.

This exchange reminded me that so much pop culture, which has largely been forgotten, is being preserved for all to discover. It would have felt lonely in many respects if memories of my youth had not been preserved for me to reconnect with.

The music industry doesn’t realize the opportunity it’s missing. If they took a few days to think productively and creatively about it, they could harness the long tail at a marginal cost, and rejuvenate a market that has a disposable income while establishing new markets that capitalize on the appeal of retro. Most importantly, they could breath new life into relative unknown and obscure artists at a time when making connections between musical styles and pedigrees is more popular and easily-done than ever before. (update: The music industry DOES want your money!)

Notable finds that were part of yesterday’s discussion include:

• Boys Brigade: Melody
• Chalk Circle: April Fool
• Chilliwack: My Girl
• Eight Seconds: Where’s Bula
• Glass Tiger: Don’t Forget Me (When I’m Gone)
• The Grapes of Wrath: Backward Town
• Honeymoon Suite: Love Changes Everything
• Images in Vogue: Call it Love
• Loverboy: Queen of the Broken Hearts
• Scott Merritt: Overworked and Underprivileged
• Northern Pikes: Teenland
• One to One: Hold me Now
• Payola$: Eyes of a Stranger
• Pukka Orchestra: Might as Well be on Mars
• The Spoons: Romantic Traffic
• Strange Advance: We Run
• Streetheart: Snow White (live)
• Triumph: Lay it on the Line

To get your fix of Canadian music that the record companies won’t sell to you anymore, checkout the Canada Rocks! YouTube channel.

Thanks to everyone who reminded me of the bands I had long forgotten.

I listened to some old podcasts while reorganizing my home office, yesterday. When I say old, I mean episodes that were published so long ago, podcasters were still encouraging their listeners to register monthly votes at Podcast Alley and pin Frappr Maps. Yeah! That long ago. The amazing thing is that those services still exist. I was amazed to discover that my Frappr Map is intact. Wow!

One of the shows I listened to, Zee and Zed, stepped down in its prime with a show that included some interesting commentary about the podcast movement. Ross and Karen’s follow-up podcast, Dry Shave, made a much quieter exit this past summer.

Another show that took a pragmatic view of podcasting is the Ottawa Local Podcast. This evening I noticed that the feed for that show is gone so I called Arthur Masters to find out why he pulled the plug.

Notwithstanding work and life demands that led to the evaporation of his podcast production time, Arthur made some interesting comments about where podcasting is now. I’ll paraphrase. He suggested that podcasting is pervasive now. Back when the veterans got their start, radio was well into a creative and identity void, CBC wasn’t podcasting and the corporate world hadn’t figured this thing out. The podcasters were changing the way media was being used and perceived. Many people who like to be different find themselves being part of the ’same’ now.

To clarify… Arthur never suggested that he’s out because his show is now part of the mainstream. I’m just latching on to some specific comments he made.

During our drive from Boston to Ottawa in October, Bob Goyetche suggested that one reason why people have generally become complacent about podcasts is because there has been very little technological innovation in the space since iTunes v4.9 was launched in June 2005.

To me, podcasting is now in a state of maturity. The production tools have plateaued for the time being allowing, perhaps forcing, producers to focus on developing their content and delivery styles. Likewise, the tools for promotion and community development are fundamentally the same; they just exist in different places and have different names.

Some people have suggested that podcasting is dead. I disagree.

Like a rocket on course to use the gravity of a moon to slingshot it to a distant planet, podcasting is prime for its next explosive development cycle.

This is our opportunity to refine, and perhaps shake up, our shows and figure out what we want next. We can set the course for what the podcast channel will look and feel like.

What do you want?

Photo: jurvetson

Suppose you were building an empire of great online communications technologies. You’d probably have your eyes on Feedburner, right? Do you have Google’s money? Google does, and according to reports it has taken your $100-million idea.

It’s an obvious fit and you can read a good analysis of the deal on Paul Colligan’s blog.

People choose the Podcasting delivery channel because it’s convenient. Podcast creators can push content out easily, and listeners can choose the content they wish to receive and listen to it when it’s convenient for them to do so. At its heart, Podcasting is about the subscription mechanism and those who embrace it.

So, why do I, a Podcaster, advocate the use of embedded media players on, and the ability to download Podcasts directly from, Podcast websites?

The vast majority of people understand what audio and video content is. They know how to search for it and how to click play or download in a browswer window. An even greater majority of people don’t know what subscribe means and, by extension, have not yet realized the power that they have to make choices and to not have to chase what they want. By making your content easy to find and easy to consume, you have the opportunity to attract listeners and convert them into subscribers.

If you give your audience the power and permission to choose, they will probably choose you.

Companies have spent boatloads of money to create their online identities. Significant effort is put into setting goals for the site and developing policies that address the nature of the content that will be made available. Common look and feel standards are established, the user experience is studied and carefully considered in the design, the hardware and software is tweaked and secured, and the whole environment is monitored and maintained.

Consumer-centric push technology has turned the entire concept of having a website on its head.

Almost every site that serves up content that appeals to me offers that same content through the RSS delivery channel. This means after the first visit, I have no immediate reason to visit the source website ever again - everything I want comes to me at my request. If a friend sends the RSS address directly to me, I can plug the URL into my subscription list and never have to visit the site. Even though RSS feeds are largely derived from website-based content, the technology is in its infancy with - as my teachers once said of me - a lot of potential.

People often talk about the demise of radio at the hands of Podcasting. Is it time to start talking about the demise of websites at the hands of RSS?

I reconnected with a good friend, Stephen Hardiman, today. It’s fun to talk to Stephen because I always get juiced about something new and he has a way of taking my ideas and putting a new spin to them. Today was no exception. He summarized my description of the relationship between Podcast producers and Podcast consumers from my recent posts, Podcasting as a channel for two-way communication and Size matters, using the phrase “asynchronous intimacy”.

What a perfect and concise statement.

To me, the key points of asynchronous intimacy in Podcasting are:

• Podcasting is an asynchronous channel for communication
• Podcasters who extend themselves create an environment that facilitates and encourages two-way communication over the asynchronous channel
• Listeners value the power of permission-based media and the ability to have their voice heard
• A small and engaged community that is committed to its own success is stronger than a community based on numbers alone

Stephen will be my guest on Electric Sky this weekend. I am going to interview him about storytelling as a business tool.

I was asked why I use Feedburner. Is it to take advantage of their stats services, explore monetizing opportunites, or perhaps have yet another online account?

The answer is “simplicity”. It’s far easier to explain and remember feeds.feedburner.com/electricsky than electricsky.net/?feeds=rss2 - and many RSS2 feeds are far more complicated than that… muchmusic.com/events/vjsearch06/podcast/podcast.xml. Also, it is far easier for the Podcast Producer to move his or her source feed to any location on the Internet and change their Feedburner URL to pick up the change, than it is to re-educate subscribers to change their subscriptions.