Organizations are rightly concerned about investing too many dollars in technology that might not be around tomorrow.

I know of at least one “early mover” in the social media agency world who nearly lost the farm betting on Second Life as a platform. And another invested heavily in MySpace only to find their work slowly becoming less relevant as other channels emerged.

So, if the big guys can’t predict, how can you? It’s simple: don’t try so hard.

Use smart overarching communications principals in a medium-agnostic way. That is to say, your message, story, and brand stay consistent across all mediums. Adding a new medium/channel becomes a question of adapting your message so it’s most easily understood in this “new space”--not trying to adapt the new channel to your message.

That may seem a bit like I’m channeling Marshall McLuhan, so here are a few less theoretical points and some real life key questions I ask before jumping into a new social channel, or advising my clients to jump:

1. Overall investment: How much money does the social channel have on hand? Recent rounds of venture capital investment?
2. Integration with other mediums: Does it talk to other social-channels, or is it a walled garden?
3. Replication: Does it do the exact same thing as another channel I use? What is the cost-benefit-analysis of using the new channel?

Now, here is where I contradict myself a bit.

Because, no matter how many smart questions you ask--the only way you can truly judge if a technology, application, or service is going to work for your purposes is to really use it. Experiment. Know how it works. Jump into new social channels with both feet, get wet and dry off if you hate it.

Graphic courtesy webtreats.mysitemyway.com

A couple weeks ago I stood up in front of a whole bunch of people and explained that I was a failure. I told the story of how one of my online projects had been a complete, total, and epic failure. Is it counterintuitive to expose your mistakes? To be certain.

People like to be celebrated--and I’m no different--so the very idea of “outing” yourself as a failure all seems, at first glance, to be crazy. But think about how all successful communities feature some element of sharing success and failure.

Unlike religious communities, we don’t have high holy days to gather around. Unlike cultural communities, we don’t have a common food, dance, or art to flock to. Unlike geographic communities, we don’t have a physical space we commonly use.

Online people communicate in many spaces. I use my Wordpress blog here, my Twitter, and my Facebook as my three main digital rooms. Others prefer more gated and adaptable communities like Ning or stick-with-what-they-know-music-loving-MySpace.

In the physical space the so-called “social media community” has serialized events or one-off fundraisers. DemoCamp, BarCamp, ChangeCamp, Ignite, Social Media Breakfast, Third Tuesday, Social Media Book Club, TEDx, PodCamp, Twestival, and a whole host of others.

None of these spaces lend themselves to the natural airing of failures at the “actual” level rather than the theoretical or “ideas” level. Which is to say,  a group of action-oriented individuals saw a gap in the Ottawa event-market. A place for informal, serious, yet lighthearted examinations of online communications case studies.

Case Study Jam is the creation of a group of core “doers” in Ottawa, as they call themselves. These are people you see online everyday and attending  tech and “social media community” events.

I was pleased to be able to have a venue to get my personal online communications failure on the table.

The DailyBlogPost account came about as a "free idea" from Julien Smith, the Montreal-based podcaster and co-author of Trust Agents. So, I thought - great idea! I'll register the account. Everything after that went awry. It became a chore, there was no feedback from people, community didn't gather around this one-tweet-a-day account. In short, the idea had a kernel of good, my execution was what was wrong.

Here is how I heralded its arrival on my blog.

The short take on my personal FAIL:

• DailyBlogPost was a very bad attempt at a Twitter account.
• Being inspired by Internet superstar Julien Smith didn’t mean guaranteed success.
• I broke every rule I had learned with my personal Twitter account.
• I gave up. Thirty tweets in; I plum didn’t care anymore. Bad attitude.

You can listen to my whole presentation here (I think I was channeling @Julien that night; my presentations are usually more PG) and read the recap of the whole night lovingly crafted by the team at Case Study Jam.

Also, @DailyBlogPost is up for free again. Want to take it on? Fix my mistakes? Comment below (or just comment to add ridicule and scorn).

Rebbeca Flemming wrote a fantastic article for The Globe and Mail about how she wasn’t the start of the Gordon Lightfoot death hoax. You can find it here. She deals with the situation with a fine wit and a literary flare. Although, one portion has slightly too much artistic license for my taste.

Specifically, I feel compelled to respond to this:

“By the time I went back online, Gordon Lightfoot was officially undead (phew!) and the witch hunt was on (uh-oh!). Media guru and sleuth Ian Capstick was hot on my trail, and even had my picture and the dreaded tweet in question on his blog. Commenters were gleefully posting personal information about me: my full name, where I lived, whom I worked for. So I did what anybody in my situation would do. I opened a bottle of wine, and began to drink.”

First, it’s not a “witch hunt” when you are trying to explain, analyze, and investigate the start of a hoax.

And, let me be very clear: While I had all of Flemming’s personal information moments after I sorted out she was the first online to declare Lightfoot dead; I only posted her then-deleted Twitter account handle. I also did not allow the posting of her name, GEDS information, or other personal data that was not connected to the @fleminski Twitter account (two commenters referenced the Google cache of @fleminski that revealed her full name). The photo mentioned was her Twitter avatar snapped via the Twitter search.

I received over 10 comments that I didn’t post that day because of their personal nature. Until today, I hadn’t had Flemming’s full name on my blog. Just wanted that to be clear that it’s never my intention to drive people to drink--unless in celebration.

So, about a year ago the New York Times pissed off an ugly little fish in New Zealand.

The venerable newspaper published an article on September 10th on A1 of the New York edition titled “From Deep Pacific, Ugly and Tasty, With a Catch”. It suggested that Hoki--also known as the main McFish meat at McDonald’s--was potentially being overfished. The New Zealand Seafood Industry Council, the industry association tasked with keeping exports of the fish alive and well, understandably chafed a little when the paper used their copyrighted image of the ugly creature to illustrate this screed.

This is where things got interesting. At the same time the New York Times was apologizing for the appropriation of the image, the association was hiring a defensive New York PR firm called CounterPoint to begin an online war against one of America’s largest newspapers. Hoki is a $151 million dollar part of the New Zealand fisheries industry, so it’s little wonder the New Zealand Seafood Industry Council found a firm that advertised itself as able to  “...help clients confront volatile media circumstances. We shield clients and counter attacks. We hold press accountable and challenge adversaries. With unique solutions and proven tactics, we safeguard clients through a hostile public affairs marketplace.”

In short, these folks at CounterPoint have no qualms about placing ads targeted at journalists, on sites journalists visit, and intended to inflict maximum pressure.

Campaign Elements

Elements to the campaign as reported in the widely cited interview with CounterPoint principal Jim McCarthy on the Nieman Journalism Lab:

1) Google Ads targeted at reporters, featuring their names and “misdeeds”

“When you include their name in the search, it draws attention to it and lets the reporter know that you mean business and you’re going to hold them responsible,” McCarthy told me over the phone.

2) Blog Ads:

"Targeting reporters where they hang out online is McCarthy’s grating specialty. He went after ABC News, on behalf of the Formaldehyde Council, with ads on Mediabistro’s TVNewser. 'It was virtually a guarantee that they and all their competitors were going to see it,' McCarthy told me with more than a little relish."

3) Convert existing established landing pages with better content to rebut and include proactive messaging

“...the Times had linked to it in the third paragraph of the article (at right), and 78,000 people clicked though, according to Sarah Crysell, a spokeswoman for the council. Taking advantage of that incoming traffic, the group transformed its hoki page into a rebuttal of the Times story.” The ads also pointed to this same landing page.

4) Pressure

Remember that apology for using the picture of the Hoki without permission? CounterPoint used this as the main hook for their Google Ads and targeted MediaBistro presence: “NYT Apologizes for story - Fisherman hold NYT to account”.

5) Tactician with gumption to apply pressure

Channel V Media Blog spent some time with McCarthy and described him like this:

“... he has a little bit different approach from the rest of us. While most of us publicists are busy pandering to the press in our efforts to get coverage for our clients, Jim is all about taking reporters on and holding them accountable for what they write. Sort of a one man Media Accountability Office. Okay, so it's not exactly like he does this out of the goodness of his heart-he gets hired by companies to monitor media and journalists for biases, inaccuracies or less-than-whole-truth reporting about them. (Thus the name, CounterPoint. Get it?)”

Who is using “Hoki-tactics”?

The Sharp Agency in Chicago talks about how they used similar “Hoki-style” ads in their political work. They aren’t the only ones.

“We’ve used similar tactics for a recent political campaign here in Illinois, working with a local political consulting group to blitz all of the keywords surrounding the candidates for a key state election on the day of a candidacy announcement. When you searched for the candidate’s opponent’s name on the announcement day, the first thing you saw was an ad for OUR candidate, with a message designed to counter-program. When you looked up the current office holder’s name, the first thing you saw was an ad for the new candidate for office, with a link to a site for donations with a nice video commercial. The campaign had the effect of blanketing the digital landscape during a crucial period in the media cycle.”

But is this SEO style AdWords war really going to work? Is this how applying political micro pressure works? I think this is one way, but it’s basic and crass. Google Ads, Facebook Ads, and targeted placement work to get attention--this is true. You can easily watch clicks turn to converts and converts to donors.

But the value is decreasing as a younger generation grows up. Gen Y are digital savvy realists with a finely tuned bull shit detector. Allowing for more nuanced ways of creating the kind of links online that Google loves makes long-term sense. As does fostering a community of supporters and advocates online before you need them--or before you resort to tactics like the ones our ugly little fish friend uses.

The real story of who is behind the Gordon Lightfoot is sort of like an unfinished jigsaw puzzle. Each media outlet has a little bit of the puzzle, but there is still a bit of a mystery.

First, Facebook played an unseen role in this drama. The social networking site has become the go-to place for public grief, so it’s no surprise that it helped set off the first alarm bells about the “death.”  The source of the first digital mention? Ronnie Hawkins' wife, Wanda.

From Sean Michaels' article in the Guardian (emphasis mine):

This will have come as a relief to Ronnie Hawkins, the musician whose backing band became the Band. A friend of Lightfoot's, he was quoted in the early Canwest story, confirming the news. Hawkins said he had received a call from his management in Minneapolis, who had in turn received a call from Lightfoot's grandson, telling them the singer had died. "I don't know Gordon's grandson," Hawkins later told the Globe and Mail. "I didn't even know if Gordon has a grandson. I called my wife in Florida and told her, and I guess she faxed some of her friends and now, all of a sudden, it's all over the world. It's terrible. I can't even get hold of Gordon. Holy smoke, it's unbelievable." ... Hawkins suggested they trace the phone call to Minneapolis. "I think they can trace that phone call, maybe, and see who did that," he said. "I'm glad it is a sick joke, but it's bad."

Several sources have now confirmed that the prank call to Hawkins' management set the ball in motion, and this is when Wanda Hawkins took to the phone, fax machine, and Facebook.

This is where our Ottawa tweeter, @fleminksi, comes in. She knows a close friend of Wanda Hawkins. Our Ottawa tweeter's friend shared her grief on Facebook. The Ottawa tweeter in turn expresses her grief on Twitter and concurrently (and unrelated) CanWest is on the phone with Ronnie Hawkins--who no doubt believes his wife--and expresses his grief to the newspaper.

Meanwhile, this confirmation triggers an “alert” to go out across the CanWest newswire and CanWest reporters across Canada start tweeting it.

David Akin has some reflective and characteristically classy words about all of this on his blog.

And as Media Memo’s Peter Kafka says: Twitter didn't kill Gordon Lightfoot, Big Media did.

But say it is true. Twitter still didn’t force Canwest, the big Canadian media conglomerate, to publish a wire report that said the singer was dead. As best I can tell, it was that story, which was picked up by various Canwest newspaper sites, that convinced people that Lightfoot had croaked.

As Kafka says, this doesn’t suggest that CanWest is off the hook for not double or triple sourcing their facts. And, had an editor at CanWest News Service jumped onto the Twitter search, they too could have found--in well less than 30 minutes--that Lightfoot was alive.

Here is the point I think people should be very clear on: while the tweet from @fleminski came first, it certainly wasn’t what set off the nearly 3,000+ tweets in two hours. That is most certainly the fault of whoever pressed the “go” button on the CanWest wire alert.

All in all, only one person should be very happy about all of this: Gordon Lightfoot. His radio play hasn’t been this big in decades and he just successfully introduced himself to a generation of Canucks who thought he was already dead.

Update:  Some added information from a friend of the "Ottawa tweeter" at ThreeSeven.ca

However, it appears that the mainstream media jumped on it. Within half an hour of tweeting, Fleminski received a phone call from a reporter from CanWest (1. holy sleuth work, and 2. boundaries much, media?) asking for the source. She replied honestly: Ronnie Hawkins. The media then called Hawkins who confirmed the story. Believing they had a confirmed story, the media then ran with it.

In the next few days I’m going to feature some stories on the digital tactics that firms are using to apply specific bouts of pressure to specific media outlets. These high-stakes, no-holds-barred firms are successfully using ads on Google, Facebook, and blogs to correct the record and and to skewer opponents.

Today’s case study is based on an article in Politics Magazine titled, “How digital ads helped turn CNN’s Lou Dobbs problem into a PR nightmare.” It’s a story about an old tactic turned digital with the end result being Dobbs resignation from CNN, citing this campaign as a factor.

Campaign Elements

Two partners at the consulting firm Chong + Koster (which describes itself as a “digital consultancy that specializes in high-stakes communications and win-or-lose situations around the world”) wanted to neutralize an opponent on behalf of their clients--America’s Voice, along with Media Matters, Presente.org, and others.

“The coalition aimed to take the poster child of the xenophobia movement—Lou Dobbs—out of the debate before it began.”

Here is a brief picture of the digital tactics used to support their strategic objective:

1) Create the hook

“We would make an amazing ad to drive donations, yet too controversial for CNN to accept. If the campaign raising enough money to air the ad during 'Latino in America' wasn’t enough to generate press, then the placing, the inevitable rejection and subsequent runs on other networks would. All the while, MediaMatters and Presente.org would run their own petition to drop Lou Dobbs, thus building a narrative that appreciated the commitment of the coalition.”

2) Get their attention

“If CNN thought of this as a three-day story, it would have passed. We had to get their attention at the very beginning, so they would set up Google Alerts to monitor the story, and to ensure each little hit was noticed and made them nervous. This is where digital ads shine.”

3) Ruthless targeting, Facebook Ad buy, $1750

“The Facebook feature 'workplace targeting' was our primary weapon. We targeted all CNN/AOL-Time Warner employees with 500 points per day (the Facebook max). We ran dozens of different ads, testing message hooks from 'Why did you let Lou Dobbs broadcast from a hate rally?' to 'Why is CNN profiting off racism?' We even called out CNN’s on-air talent by name...”

4) Hard sell fundraising asks via Facebook ads, undisclosed

“The majority of the Facebook budget was spent running the ads to progressives and Latinos with a hard fundraising ask.”

5) Blog ad buy, $10,000

“Within 24 hours, we also launched banner ads that paired the best performing imagery, hook, and call-to-action from the Facebook ads on political blogs.”

6) Google Ads, undisclosed (Blue State Digital was the vendor)

“delivering about 500,000 ad impressions per day, but we were also raising money from our clicks”

7) Access traditional earned media via trade media and online press

“We also leaked the story of the digital buy to ClickZ—one of the most well-read digital advertising publications. We chose them because an editor named Kate Kaye is the foremost journalist covering political digital ads, and they are exceedingly well syndicated and search engine optimized (anything that they post triggers dozens of Google Alerts). This post led to a post by MediaBistro—the insider rag for journalists—and the story exploded from there.”

This firm used tougher-than-nails tactics to get their clients point across to big American media. It worked like a charm. But at what cost?

It’s pretty clear that this firm doesn’t care about burning bridges with the traditional media. They only care about getting their point across. Suffice it to say that if someone in official Ottawa tried a stunt like this, they would probably be on the defensive for some time.

Tomorrow: What if you are on the other end of online ad-war tactics like these? We have a couple of pointers.

The True North Media House is an Olympic project worth watching. As you learn in this short clip the group is neither pro or anti Olympic - but acts as resource, collaboration vehicle and social space for “self accredited” reporters. This webisode is one part of a larger storyline a Vancouver documentary film maker is weaving about the Olympics, social media and society.

For more on the documentary visit the official site. And, if you are in Vancouver during the Olympics and have a desire to contribute to a larger media project - visit the True North Media House and sign up.

Sean McDonald - a communicator at Toronto-based digital PR firm com.motion (owned by Vertitas Communications) was kind enough to answer a few questions about how he sees Fourquare playing into the technology sphere, PR and business marketing.

Q) It's looking like "geo-tagging" is one of the most cited tech-trends-to-watch for 2010; the first move advantage goes to the little application that could from New York City - Foursquare. Some have called the geo-aware game "Boresquare" for its frequent pushes of information and broadcasts of information using social channels; how have your online communities reacted to your use of Foursquare? Any user revolt or new relationships built?

Several major announcements recently made in the smartphone market and my ongoing research (read: playing) on Foursquare - a hyper-local social network based on “checking in” at locations (office, restaurant, home, etc.) to earn points with your phone, are perfect fodder for a set of MediaStyle.ca posts.

Over the next few days I’m going to be featuring developments in the mobile space. We will be posting on new smartphone applications that feature of this years most-mentioned online trends: geolocation; as well a couple ideas on how political parties and unions could be using mobile technology and I’ve got a few amazing interviews lined up.

Tomorrow: Pro and Con of Foursquare. Two seasoned online communicators from Toronto are interviewed about their Foursquare views.

Monday: we explore why geolocation may be the tool that gets politics really (and spending real money) on social media channels.

Tuesday: ideas on how unions and NGOs could be using text messages, mobile applications and wireless communications.

But first, I wanted to hear from my online community on Foursquare - a couple days ago I asked via Twitter what users/non-users thought of Foursquare. Here are some of the responses. Some love it, some hate it  and many see opportunity.

PS. If you want that Nexus One from Google? I’d look to the new kid on the block. WIND Mobile COO tweeted yesterday:

Wow! Lots of interest in the Nexus. http://bit.ly/5XZQ9e Yep, works on AWS, and we're chatting with them... will let everyone know soon.

Two incidents have official Ottawa buzzing about "social media" and the far reaching implications of these new communications tools:

First, the Yes Men pulled off a complex stunt aimed at confusing the Canadian delegation - it worked by leveraging common internet behavior and trust of major media; much of the media focus has been on the hoax itself - thereby drawing attention to Canada’s laggard status on climate solutions. It worked so well, the Prime Ministers press secretary Dmitri Soudas pounced on the wrong environmentalist and made himself look like a fool.

Second, a photoshop contest over at Liberal.ca has gone awry. As Taber and O’Malley report the official opposition site posting a manipulated image of the PM getting shot, well this simply made the Liberals look like fools.

Neither of these stories are really about social media - oh, sure they have aspects where social media/internet communications helped along the story - these stories are really about unforced staff errors. The worst kind of political staffing mistake.

Soudas made an unforced error in screaming at a well known activist. And, the Liberals made an unforced error by failing to see that assassination isn’t funny. Apologies all around and move on folks: social media isn’t the problem. Foolish behavior is.