Google is always evolving and as a result, we’re always learning so we can keep up. Well, now Google has created a new feature that may have PR professionals left in the darkness. According to Michael Sebastian’s article, “3 Ways to Prepare for the Changes to Google Search .” Google’s revamped “search results, and the changes will likely affect brands.” Now when users search for certain things, the direct answer will show up on the search results page. The new search method is aimed to keep more people on Google’s page rather than sending them to other pages.
So how can PR professionals and their brands survive the change? Follow the three tips from Nick Papagiannis, director of interactive/search at Cramer-Krasselt, below:
1) Start monitoring search results more closely. Brands should keep a constant eye on where their brand shows up in the search results. This is important to monitor because Google’s information may begin to crowd out the official websites of brands.
2) Consider investing more money in paid searches. Paid searches are the results at the side or top of a Google results page. Papagiannis said companies may want to invest more in this component of their search engine optimization (SEO) efforts.
3) Use the changes as an impetus to build a dedicated search team. The best way to monitor these changes is with a dedicated search team. If the new Google results kick out negative information about a client, or push websites further down the page, this team can respond quickly.
While no word has been said about when the changes will take place, at least now you have a starting point.
So what does this say about Google and their ‘neutral search engine’ title? Is it greedy for Google to want just a little more love?
Let me know!
I really enjoyed Chapter 12 of Brian Solis’ book, “Engage!” This chapter focused on how companies can establish their online personas with their audiences. While reading this chapter, a lot of the questions I had about personas online were answered. Solis mostly spoke from a business’s point of view, but I was able to apply some of the suggestions he gave to my personal life.
When discussing the relationship between businesses and their online personas, Solis said the challenge was “defining and reinforcing the brand personality as it either existed prior to social media and/or how it should display and present to those across the Social Web.” I think this is definitely a good point to bring up. Maintaining an image or brand personality was easier before social media, but now with the new networks, companies have to modify their personality so that it reflects well in social media.
Listed below are the eight essential stages to establishing an online persona, according to Solis:
He then goes on to talk about companies having multiple personalities. I was actually surprised that he suggested having the personal and professional accounts. A lot the times I hear other professionals saying that you should be able to balance your personal and professional personalities on one account. This makes me feel a little bit better because I do have two accounts for certain social media networks because I have different audiences. Yes, I’m still Cherese on each account, but the topics I discuss with my followers vary and I feel it just keeps things in their own lane.
The example he gave of Zappos was cool. I think it’s great to have multiple employees tweeting on behalf of a company. I think it allows each of the employees to show their individuality as well as be a part of the company’s overall online persona. The main thing, as Solis says, is to make sure everyone is aware of the eight aspects of their brand’s online identity. The only problem I could see with multiple accounts related to the company is that it opens up the door for more opportunities for mistakes and to be attacked.
This had to be one of my favorite chapters.
Came across an interesting article about the Apple
So what’s going on:
Apple is currently in a dispute with Chinese company Proview, over the ‘iPad’ trademark. In 2001, Proview trademarked ‘iPad’ in several countries before Apple bought it from them in 2009 for $55,000. Proview is now demanding $2 billion from Apple in compensation.
This story sheds light on the other crisis Apple is currently facing in China regarding the working conditions of its Foxconn factories in correlation to the string of employee suicides. You can read more about that crisis here.
It seems like Proview may be regretting their earlier decision to sell the trademark for a few thousand when it has generated millions for Apple. I mean, I can’t blame them for trying to make up some (well all) of the money they lost but it just looks desperate now that it’s eight years later.
Now, if Apple really did use a fake company name to buy the trademark, then that’s even worse. Apple just beat out Google for the #1 spot of ‘Most Respected Brand,” so something like this would definitely bring some negativity to their title. This could result in losing their China market, which would definitely negatively impact their sales. This just shows that you have to honest from the very beginning because the truth will eventually show its face.
Not to mention the potential that they may have been the ones who made the mistake of buying from the wrong company. As I mentioned above, they’re already facing a crisis in China and it doesn’t seem to be getting them anywhere positive. I guess I’m just surprised that all of sudden Apple is attracting negative publicity. Has their PR team been slacking all these years and we just haven’t seen it or does China just want to take a big bite out of Apple this year?
Another great question is: will Apple settle or ride it out to the very end?