Looking at a few issues in new media, one that comes to mind is the apparent tension between 'owned' media such as news journalism, media rights to broadcast sport etc which seems to be under threat from appropriation by 'new media' such as blogging and video clips/galleries such as YouTube. the recent Google/Viacom case for the latter, and the Associated press' attempts to limit use of their material in blogs spring to mind, as does conferences with titles such as will Web 2.0 suck all the value out of sports media rights (or some such) which caught my eye.
In some ways one might argue that the reason social media can succeed ins in the way it pools many peoples ability to spot and comment on material that traditional journalism in its publish and forget mode cannot. In this way social media can keep stories going, elicit new material as a result of popularising a story, and in effect broaden the narrative beyond the editorially controlled mode of traditional publishing. If more sports organisations utilised new media effectively, would they play a part in contributing to the creation of a wider ranging, more engaged model of news diffusion and development as opposed to staying safe with the idea of the press release or notice board web site? How many sports properties allow people to clip and share what they find? (I'll be finding out through some research over the next few weeks, as well as looking for other examples of 'traditional' sports management using new media). Will cheap video capture via new cellphones add to the fans ability to capture and communicate their experience of the game, or will it get cracked down upon by the media owners who have paid for the rights in perpetuity? and what is social use versus commercial use? Much odf the sport on YouTube is unavailable via traditional media, and caters for many niche sports in a far better way, as well as providing snippets of information, nostalgia and sheer fun involved in sports. It strikes me that the one aspect of sports fandom that traditional media has always neglected is nostalgia, which is a potent force in maintaining support for a team. Fans loving recreation of the past, arguments about best ever, inter st in sporting history may be better served by relaxation of rights ownership than otherwise.
Wednesday 23 July 2008
Monday 14 July 2008
The New Rules of marketing and PR - is this percolating down to sport management?
In looking at social media and marketing I came across a new-ish book (pub. 2006) called 'The New Rules of marketing & PR by David Meerman Scott (http://www.amazon.co.uk/New-Rules-Marketing-PR-Podcasting/dp/0470113456/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1216037893&sr=1-2) .In this book Scott tries to show how the new tools of web 2.0 have and are transforming the relationship both between Marketing and Public Relations, and, perhaps more importantly, the relationships between companies and their customers. The arrival of new ways of communicating with customers through blogs, podcasts, and web releases that by-pass traditional media to go straight to target customers are a few of the better known techniques he describes with lots of good examples of them working successfully. However, every example comes from traditional industries and there is not one example linked to sport. Is this because sport based marketers are behind the curve of innovation? Or is it because the nature of the sport product and its consumption makes it more resistant to new styles of consumer marketing? It might be argued that sport fans need little incentive to support their team, and are hardly likely to have attitudes changed by the appearance of sports blogs from their favourite team, or that wikis (collaborative knowledge creation tools) are likely to be attractive to sports fans. However we know that almost every professional (and many community/amateur sporting clubs) have web sites, and use these to communicate with fans. And we also know that many use chatrooms and message boards on the web where fans can exchange news and comment, or even arrange for ways to get to games.
In their book The Elusive Fan (2006), Irving Rein, Philip Kotler and Ben Shields argue that sports marketers are essentially failing to spot trends that will lead to reduced personal consumption of sport among the current and future generations of sports supporters. In short, the argument is that sport will be crowded out of a marketplace where there are many other attractions vying for the potential sports ' fan's cash. One issue they highlight is that sports is opened up to media intrusion and publicity on a scale that most managers in sport have never experienced before. This often results in poor publicity for the sport as players coaches and management are exposed in the press, television and on-line. The effect on reputation can be destructive, and maybe this is sowing the seeds of future disaffection. Yet, and this is my point, we rarely see sports organisations handling publicity well, or intervening successfully in PR issues. The recent examples of from the cricket world of the rather ostentatious promises of wealth from 20/20 (a short form of the game) cricket has divided the cricket administrators and players, and led to wonderful scenarios that are more likely to be settled in a court of law than on the playing field. One can argue many cases of player misbehaviour in soccer reported in the tabloid press are also examples of potential PR disasters. Administrators of sport are notably reluctant to open up to fans who voice opinions and comment on various unofficial web sites.
It seems to this interested student of sport marketing behaviour that the model has rather settled down to sell tickets and sponsorship and let the fan or supporter go hang. In other words there is no desire to get involved or intermediate between the fans and sporting organisation, despite the plethora of tools available. In addition one might even make the argument that the web can help intermediate between the organisation and its sponsor.
In research I did personally with sports marketing managers in the UK, it was quite amazing how they helped the supporters' opinions more or less in contempt - in some cases refusing to host a chat room or message board because of the 'nutters' amongst the fans. One club refused to think about monitoring the rooms and boards for comment and rumour. others did so only to prevent possibilities of legal action. very few thought of them as a channel to communicate the clubs or organsiation's position.
I wonder if there are any counter examples? I note that Sport England have just put out a tender for consultancy on use of social media- is this the beginning of a trend?
In their book The Elusive Fan (2006), Irving Rein, Philip Kotler and Ben Shields argue that sports marketers are essentially failing to spot trends that will lead to reduced personal consumption of sport among the current and future generations of sports supporters. In short, the argument is that sport will be crowded out of a marketplace where there are many other attractions vying for the potential sports ' fan's cash. One issue they highlight is that sports is opened up to media intrusion and publicity on a scale that most managers in sport have never experienced before. This often results in poor publicity for the sport as players coaches and management are exposed in the press, television and on-line. The effect on reputation can be destructive, and maybe this is sowing the seeds of future disaffection. Yet, and this is my point, we rarely see sports organisations handling publicity well, or intervening successfully in PR issues. The recent examples of from the cricket world of the rather ostentatious promises of wealth from 20/20 (a short form of the game) cricket has divided the cricket administrators and players, and led to wonderful scenarios that are more likely to be settled in a court of law than on the playing field. One can argue many cases of player misbehaviour in soccer reported in the tabloid press are also examples of potential PR disasters. Administrators of sport are notably reluctant to open up to fans who voice opinions and comment on various unofficial web sites.
It seems to this interested student of sport marketing behaviour that the model has rather settled down to sell tickets and sponsorship and let the fan or supporter go hang. In other words there is no desire to get involved or intermediate between the fans and sporting organisation, despite the plethora of tools available. In addition one might even make the argument that the web can help intermediate between the organisation and its sponsor.
In research I did personally with sports marketing managers in the UK, it was quite amazing how they helped the supporters' opinions more or less in contempt - in some cases refusing to host a chat room or message board because of the 'nutters' amongst the fans. One club refused to think about monitoring the rooms and boards for comment and rumour. others did so only to prevent possibilities of legal action. very few thought of them as a channel to communicate the clubs or organsiation's position.
I wonder if there are any counter examples? I note that Sport England have just put out a tender for consultancy on use of social media- is this the beginning of a trend?
Thursday 10 July 2008
marketing sport through social media
I know there are sports sites arriving on the web that incorporate sports fan interaction - and always have been through notice boards and chatrooms since the web started. However what intrigues me is how much do sports organisations - from the top professional teams and organisations, through to the amateur, participant oriented sports clubs, actually use the new media to promote organise and develop their presence?
I did some research for my MA two years ago into UK Premier Rugby and County Championship cricket clubs investigating how they used the web in a marketing sense and found that the marketing presence and messages was relatively limited, and most web sites were pretty much static noticeboards, and that fan 'chat rooms' were more or less tolerated rather than encouraged.
I was wondering whether this had changed, whether there were better examples of really interactive communications betwen sporting organisations and their fan base (and between organisations and those interested in practising or developing their sport)?
I am doing some new research myself into this by trawling the blogosphere and the web sites globally of sporting organisations, but I wondered just how much sports had adopted the new social media, and would love to here from people who had positive (and negative) experiences.
http://knightknetwork.com/2007/08/27/sports-on-the-web-20/ was my first port of call, but this tends to illustrate the fact that socila media lies outside maintsream sports organisations. The acquisition of FanNation by Sports Illustrated, and the fact that searching, say for sports blogs tends to unearth traditional media in its on line appearance (BBC, Guardian OnLine in the UK for example, Fox in the US) made me think that sport and the new media is not really being adapted by sporting organisations as much as by those whose job it is to report sport.
Other sites like takkle.com and isporty.com seem glorofoed chat rooms or weak imitations of Facebook type profiling (I may be doing them a disservice and need to explore these further!).
As I go on this exploration, I'll share views and insights and hope that this develops further
I did some research for my MA two years ago into UK Premier Rugby and County Championship cricket clubs investigating how they used the web in a marketing sense and found that the marketing presence and messages was relatively limited, and most web sites were pretty much static noticeboards, and that fan 'chat rooms' were more or less tolerated rather than encouraged.
I was wondering whether this had changed, whether there were better examples of really interactive communications betwen sporting organisations and their fan base (and between organisations and those interested in practising or developing their sport)?
I am doing some new research myself into this by trawling the blogosphere and the web sites globally of sporting organisations, but I wondered just how much sports had adopted the new social media, and would love to here from people who had positive (and negative) experiences.
http://knightknetwork.com/2007/08/27/sports-on-the-web-20/ was my first port of call, but this tends to illustrate the fact that socila media lies outside maintsream sports organisations. The acquisition of FanNation by Sports Illustrated, and the fact that searching, say for sports blogs tends to unearth traditional media in its on line appearance (BBC, Guardian OnLine in the UK for example, Fox in the US) made me think that sport and the new media is not really being adapted by sporting organisations as much as by those whose job it is to report sport.
Other sites like takkle.com and isporty.com seem glorofoed chat rooms or weak imitations of Facebook type profiling (I may be doing them a disservice and need to explore these further!).
As I go on this exploration, I'll share views and insights and hope that this develops further
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)