Google yesterday announced its latest assault on the world of social and more specifically, Facebook. With Facebook’s massive user base and seemingly relentless desire to bring the entire internet inside Facebook, Google has for some time been looking for a way to address the threat to its bottom line.

The Google+ project, revealed yesterday with little fanfare via a blog post by Vic Gundotra, Senior Vice President, Engineering, is what Google hopes will be the answer to Facebook’s social dominance.

At the centre of Google’s premise is that “not all relationships are created equal” and therefore you might not want to share everything with everyone. As our online social networks have developed and we’ve become more switched on regarding what we’re sharing and with whom, we’ve increasingly become more selective about sharing. With Google+, Google is betting that we’d prefer to be selective within a single social platform rather than managing multiple social networks for different types of people e.g. LinkedIn for business, Facebook for friends and family.

Google is currently limiting who can access Google+ via a ‘closed beta’ so that it can quickly and easily react to user feedback. However, Google is hoping its range of new features will be too compelling to ignore:

+Circles – share different content with different social circles
+Sparks – find the content you (and others) love via an online sharing engine
+Hangouts – ‘hang out’ online, face-to-face with your friends (essentially an instant messaging/video calling application – watch out Skype!)
+Mobile – easily share pictures, experiences, your location etc wherever you are

As this is still day one and limited people have access to it, there’s no way of knowing if Google+ will be a success, let alone make even a small dent in Facebook’s dominant position. One of the key barriers to take up will be prising people away from Facebook and on to a new platform.

As for the impact on brands, well the jury is most certainly out. We’ll definitely be keeping a keen eye on developments though and advising clients as and when opportunities arise.

The trends that are important are those that show how consumers are changing. So, whilst in 2009 fear played an important role in shaping consumer behaviours, 2010 is set to see the start of the return of consumer confidence. Mintel, the market research company, has suggested a new set of consumer values for 2010, with ‘balance’ and ‘resilience’ being peppered with ‘escapism’ inside and outside the home. So, a hopeful look towards the future as we encounter a more positive outlook.

So what else is set to come out on top for the year? Whilst digital has been delved into in the past, make no mistake, 2010 is the year of digital, with consumer electronics dominating trending search terms.  This month’s Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in Las Vegas was hit by 3-D mania, fuelled by impressive new TVs sets and the epic film Avatar.  This year and beyond will be focused on 3-D.  E-readers are also set to revolutionise the way we all read content, particularly with a whole host of new e-readers being launched on the back of the success of the Amazon Kindle.

But, as always, the real value in tracking consumer trends is the ability to predict how today’s trends will again develop tomorrow. By always looking to the next stage of the consumer journey…or leap, and the future implications, means that brands will be able to stay one step ahead and adapt before their competitors.

Ten to fifteen years ago, other than the occasional interruption of radio and possibly TV news, many crises worked across a timeframe of a day or a couple of days. This is a luxury that no longer exists due to the complexity and immediacy of today’s media and, of course, social media.

There are now news cycles within news cycles, media within media, and enthusiastic amateurs that can spread a story faster than Tiger Woods can make an apology!

So how can brands plan to adapt to the ‘Micro news cycle’ so that its own activity does not amplify that which can be controlled or ignore that which will be shared?

There are a few simple rules to apply here:

Know the influence of the audience
Part of the issue some have is that they can’t make the same association in terms of credibility with, for instance, a tweet as they can with an article in a national Newspaper, so a social media audit should be the first step in any crisis planning activity. Brands need to know the authority of their potential promoters and detractors, and what really constitutes influence.

Don’t wait until the crisis to communicate
Apply the same principles of developing relationships with influential social media contributors as you would with the traditional media. Engage, communicate, involve, and if possible meet.

Put processes and protocols in place
Using the knowledge developed through a media and social media audit, ensure that crisis plans developed take into account some basic metrics that relate to social media, so that the team can distinguish between a crisis and basic background noise.

Adapt and take advice
The hard and fast rules are that there are no hard and fast rules, just a changing landscape that requires the brand to be flexible, open, communicative and relevant. In the heat of a social media frenzy, one bad move can spread like wildfire so testing responses internally and with advisers is essential.

Remember one tweet won’t build a brand but it might bring one down…

Contact rhodri.harries@kaizo.net for further information.

On Wednesday Kaizo ran a successful messaging session with 300 top executives from across Europe for a large multinational corporate. The team pulled off the challenging task of capturing all 300 on video as a way of helping them to develop key messages. The activity also demonstrated that new technologies (in this case, Flip Videos) make it easy for everyone to use video to present themselves and the brands/ companies they represent not just in campaigns but every day. And it’s crucial as this is what customers will expect very soon.

Take the example of my 2 year old. She has a weekly video call on Skype with my parents, both in their late seventies, sunning themselves in Cape Town, which far from being confusing for her (or them for that matter), is accepted as being the norm. And when her baby brother was born recently, it was a video of the two of them playing that the Grandparents were asking for.

Accessible technology has enabled brands to turn into everyday broadcasters, and the audience is ready, waiting, willing and able.

Arthur Guinness once said “good things come to those who wait.” But does this philosophy translate from the perfect pint to the perfect news story? The media has a responsibility to provide the public with factually correct, accurate information – so does this mean 24/7 rolling news is potentially damaging and irresponsible?

As the sponsors of this year’s Tom Olsen Lecture, Kaizo headed down to St Brides Church last night to hear Adam Boulton’s opinion on the newsroom that never sleeps. As political editor of Sky News, he argued in favour of 24/7 news. Adam claimed that the idea that newspapers are more accurate than 24-hour news was bogus. Yet incorrect reports such as the death of Al Megrahi, would suggest otherwise.

However I’d argue that the two concepts aren’t mutually exclusive. On the one hand, the fast paced hedonism of ‘the breaking news’ can provide that instant fix. Whilst the traditional news cycle satisfies other needs. It provides the carefully deliberated, well structured sustenance. Personally, I like my news like my drink, a well brewed stout… but I still enjoy the occasional aperitif.

But what did the audience think of Alan’s lecture? Check out the video below to find out.