Black Hat vs. White Hat Social Media and the Battle for Common Sense
Aug 13, 2009 by Rebecca Kelley | Conferences and EventsDay 2 of SES San Jose closed with “Social Media: White Hat vs. Black Hat.” The description of the panel in the agenda indicated that the session would take a “hard look” at social media, and there was a lot of buzz from conference goers who were looking forward to attending the session and hearing an engaging debate/argument about the current perception of social media marketing. Alas, much like Guns n’ Roses’ Chinese Democracy album, the panel was a lot of hype with little reward and no Slash.
A couple glaring issues with the panel were the moderator and the structure. A good moderator can set a certain tone for the session and knows when to move the discussion along and when to linger on a topic. This panel’s moderator seemed intent on killing the session right off the bat by starting with a random slide deck about social media before incorporating the panelists into the discussion. When the speakers would start to get the ball rolling and develop a good back and forth about a topic, he’d abruptly introduce a new topic and kill whatever momentum was being built. I also was not a fan of him starting every other sentence with “I talk about this in my book…” I don’t mean to be harsh, but we’re here to listen to what everyone has to say, not hear you shill some social media book you wrote.
I dug most of the panelists and felt they were a victim of bad pacing and poor moderation, but I felt some of them said some puzzling things to the audience. I disagree with a lot of the advice given during the panel, some of which is below:
“Marketers shouldn’t ghost write your content because they don’t know your product/brand the way your employees do.” I kind of see where this is coming from, but after working with many different types of clients, I can definitely say that there’s a difference between writing a white paper detailing the ins and outs of your newest product and writing a compelling piece of link bait about the X Most Iconic Moments in Television. Just because your employees know their product better than you do, that doesn’t mean they can create compelling blog posts or lists or linkbait or videos about those products. They may not have the writing skills, creative mindset, or social media competency to market successfully like you do, and that’s why they should let the experts either craft the content for them, provide an outline, or train them on how to create the content/help them hire someone who can.
“You shouldn’t tweet your blog posts; it’s better to have someone naturally come across your post and tweet it for you.” I call major BS on that one. There’s a difference between occasionally promoting yourself and your content to people who’ve elected to follow you and submitting everything from your site to a platform like Digg where there are millions of users who don’t know who the hell you are or care about your stupid blog posts. I tweet my posts all the time from both my account and from 10e20’s account, and they get retweeted a solid amount of times by our followers. Hell, one of my posts got retweeted over one hundred times after I tweeted it from our company account and from my account. People follow you for a reason, because they want to hear about you. Of course, you don’t want to pimp yourself 24/7 because your followers will probably start to get sick of how full of yourself you are, but don’t be afraid to promote yourself every now and then.
“I know someone who got banned from Digg…” This was meant to seem like a menacing cautionary tale about how Digg bans people for shits and giggles, but no further details were given about what the friend was doing with the account or provide any circumstances beyond “She got banned!” I’m sure there’s more to the story…
I could go on but my stomach is starting to rumble for food and I think you get the point. I just have an issue when people deal in absolutes, like “never” do this and “always” do that. Should you “never ever” submit your content to Digg or digg your content if it’s been submitted? Not necessarily — obviously you need to be smart about it (don’t have everyone at the office digg the same story from the same IP, don’t only ever submit content from your own site, etc), but if you’re fairly active on Digg and come across your content that’s being promoted, sure, digg it. Should you “always always” have one person managing your brand? No, not necessarily. Chris, Greg and I all manage the 10e20 Twitter account, and I don’t think anyone pisses and moans about how we’re misleading people or confusing folks with an inconsistent tone/voice.
Basically, there’s no black and white to social media marketing. Sure, there’s “blatant spam” and “not spam” (or maybe “not so blatant spam”), but a lot of it boils down to common sense and figuring out what your client is comfortable doing and how aggressive they want you to be. If they’re cool with you managing their Twitter account and crafting content for their blog and you can do it successfully, great, do it. If they’d rather handle the branding and just get some guidance on how to best go about doing it, awesome, that works too. If they understand how Digg works and won’t eff up a campaign you’re promoting for them, have them throw the occasional digg your way. If they can’t manage to stay on the website more than four minutes before getting their account banned, have them stay far, far away. There are no absolutes, just different circumstances and slightly different advice for different clients. A good marketer knows that. A bad one doesn’t.
Did I like the panel? No. Did I like the idea of the panel? Yes. I think that the concept can be successful with a better organizer and with a panelist of marketers who actually understand social media marketing and are actual experts. Hopefully that’s what we’ll see next time. The audience deserves to hear accurate advice from trusted individuals instead of being confused with information that’s either vague, a sweeping generalization, or just plain ol’ inaccurate.
Postscript: I’ve read some of the comments and remarks about my post and agree that the tone was unfair, and I apologize for that. I edited out the “being clueless” part and fixed some of the wording of this post because I didn’t intend for it to be a personal potshot. I do stand by my opinion that the panel was a disappointment and that I disagree with a lot of the social media advice given. Additionally, Beth said that some of the advice I attributed to her came from other people on the panel, and while I’m not positive that’s the case, I went ahead and removed direct association of the advice because I don’t want to misquote people. Lastly, I’ve contacted Beth about doing an interview to talk about the panel and other social media marketing topics, so stay tuned for an update.
Bookmark this post:
47 Responses to “Black Hat vs. White Hat Social Media and the Battle for Common Sense”
Feel free to leave a comment...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!
It sounds like it was almost blackhat to have attended that session
Thanks for putting up an honest and well written perspective! I couldn't make that one but heard similar comments with regards to the material later in the day
i just want to say i love that you've become even more snarkier on 10e20 the moz. oh and you're also prettier in color than in blue.
Now I happened to like "Chinese Democracy"…
In a way, doesn't "black-hat" social media kind of work itself out? If you're constantly self-promoting to the point of spam or creating link-bait to lure in visitors that has nothing to do with your site or industry, people are going to just start ignoring you. It's easier to dupe search visitors, in some ways, because just making it into the organic results gives you some credibility. If your Twitter account, Facebook page or linkbait are crap, people will eventually treat you like a crap-monger.
Yeah, I hated Chinese Democracy because of the decided lack of Slash. I hated it so much that I dubbed on Slash-esque solos myself just so I could stand to listen to it.
…granted, this turned every song into a solo, but I'm pleased with the results.
Nice one Rebecca – smiling at:
"There’s a difference, however, between “being white hat” and “being clueless.”
I'm relieved to know I wasn't just in a bad mood when I walked out on the session. The moderator started with the same slide he used in the previous session. I left.
I need to use the word "crap-monger" more in my everyday conversations.
This is a first for me to this site. Thanks for your specific examples of what the speakers recommended, and your take – especially WHAT YOU ACTUALLY DO in those situations, such as Tweeting your own blog posts or not and the balance to achieve. I look forward to reading more of your stuff.
Jesse
http://www.threemoneymethods.com
I left the panel feeling a little disappointed as well.
We had a chance to dive into great concepts, but the overall concept of the panel is flawed. There is no polar opposite in smm or smo, there are just differing tactics and rewards.
The issue with social media is it can be all things to all people so speaking in general about concepts becomes impossible.
Is automation bad?
Is it on a blog?
Is it on Twitter?
Automation can’t be seen as wrong or right viewed on anything less granular than a site by site basis.
Its too general to discuss. I think Chris Bennett and Lee Odden are terrifically clever marketers in the social media space and that they made some terrific points that were simply overcast by the general nature of the topic
While I wasn't at this particular session (or even this conference), I know exactly what you're talking about. Great stuff, Rebecca. I'm going to have to agree with Kimberly and say that I like this "new" rebecca much better then the moz version.
New and improved.
Personally, I'd have a lot more confidence in what an experienced marketing person, with a solid background in social media had to say (Beth Harte for example), than someone who's been a "Community Manager" for about 3 weeks!
[...] 10e20 blog [...]
There are really speakers who don't make sense or what they are saying are just too obvious
While I did not attend this conference I have to say calling someone like Beth clueless is a step out of line. You can disagree with the structure of her presentation, but causing someone clueless who has a wealth of experience in New Media marketing is just a unprofessional.
Talk about telling it like it is. What you wrote took guts. I wasn't there, and I do follow and like Beth. But I have to agree with you on two points:
1) Hearing a lot about how co's shouldn't hire others to write their tweets/blog posts. Seriously? We don't expect them to write their own ads (and oh, how we can tell when they do). This is no different. Your stuff had better be compelling, or no one will notice. Let the experts do what they do best. Hire a copywriter! Wait, I know one…
2) Don't tweet your blog posts? If you said "Don't spam…." I'd agree. But most new bloggers are working to get known. You have to make some effort. By the way, the Marketing Profs people tweet about their webinars all the time. How is that better than promoting blog posts?
I'm going to echo David and Jeff's thoughts. You spent almost half of your recap bashing Beth Harte. You obviously have a lot to learn and don't understand how social media works. Sure you got to throw this piece up and it probably served some good for someone, beyond you, I'm not sure who.
But here's the fall out. We all see and talk to each other a lot. We also work together and recommend each other to clients as well. And for the life of me I now can't see why I would ever recommend you, or use you and your organization for anything but perhaps a refresher course in social media 101.
Completely unprofessional.
If you're referring to me, I've actually done community management (among other things) for nearly 4 years.
I appreciate your opinion, and an opinion is exactly what I stated in my post. I thought she was being clueless based on the advice she was giving during the panel. She wasn't giving a presentation, she was sharing tips that I felt were incorrect and baseless. If you think I'm being out of line by sharing my opinion of her advice, that's your opinion and I'm fine with it.
Social Media to me is all about building community. It's something Beth Harte has done quite successfully – and you can see it through her work, social networking, moderated chats, etc. She's a smart cookie. Why are we coming to her defense? Because we respect and like Beth. Calling out someone by name – and not quoting her correctly – isn't the best approach. Social Media is a fine line of respect, and even if you don't agree with the panel, there might be a better way to present it in the future.
“I dug most of the panelists and felt they were a victim of bad pacing and poor moderation, but I felt like Beth Harte really didn’t belong up there. I’ve never heard of her before today, but apparently she and Dave Snyder got into an argument during a panel at some show in New York, so she was invited to represent the “white hat” side of the panel.”
Right…. that she has many years experience, a massive online following, a successful business and much industry respect, doesn’t matter because you, in all your wisdom and knowledge, hadn’t heard of her. So that she was invited to speak must just be because she had an argument with someone. You, being as special as you are, would have heard of her otherwise, after all.
What a horribly disrespectul attitude. You owe Beth and th SES organizers an apology for that. Wow.
9,511 people (so far) HAVE heard of Beth Harte and follow her on Twitter for her interesting insight and thoughts on social media. She does this is snappy 140-charachters chucks… so while you accuse her of "rambling on" re-read the above and perhaps ask how many people have heard of you. How many people visit your blog daily? She's probably done you a massive favour by linking to it – most visits you'll have all year I'd imagine. Agree with Marc Meyer – extremely unprofessional.
Not to be a "me too," but I completely echo Jeff's and Marc's sentiments. Beth Harte is a fantastic professional, and I feel like I've learned a great deal from her in the time I've known her. For you to have spent so much of your post focused on calling her out and tearing her apart (not to mention calling her names) was an unfortunate and unprofessional decision that can't possibly lead to much constructive conversation.
Rebecca, everyone's entitled to their opinion, as you are to yours. But to call Beth Harte "clueless" is rude, not to mention uninformed, particularly for the Director of Social Media for a firm claiming to specialize in the field. Don't they say, "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer?" Google Beth. Read her stuff. Why, you might actually try talking to her. Then you'll see why she gets the respect she does.
I'm with Marc et al.
I admit I've used my blog to poke at ideas presented on other sites. Ruffling feathers can attract traffic.
But there's a huge gap between challenging someone's ideas, and attacking them personally. Calling someone clueless builds walls, not bridges. It promotes cliques, not communities.
Communities promote the growth of their members, whereas cliques attract like-minded people more interested in detracting from others than examining their own point of view.
Basic etiquette aside, personal attacks are a short path to making your blog irrelevant.
I must say I am disturbed by the fact that a person who states they are a Community Manager and "understands" social media could show such a disregard for the social media community and what it stands for. It is one thing to disagree with the position that someone has taken, but to resort to a blatant attack on someone's credentials and personality, quite obviously without any research into that person or their body of work, is unprofessional. Your statement that you did not feel Beth should have been on the panel because you had never heard of her is inane. It is by listening to and interacting with those we do not know that we learn and grow. An open mind and willingness to learn and experience are some of the strongest weapons we have as online marketers. As Marc, Lauren, Anna and Lindsay have pointed out, this is a strongly networked community. Calling out one of individuals who has worked hard, shown results and earned the respect and trust of the community as a whole was probably not the best way to build your network.
Just an FYI: I appreciate all your comments (both the good and the bad), and I've edited this post and added a postscript. I've also contacted Beth about doing an interview — I have no hard feelings and have nothing personal against her (hopefully she feels the same!), so I'd love to hear her perspective of the panel and learn more about her. Thanks for voicing your opinion, everyone!
“I dug most of the panelists and felt they were a victim of bad pacing and poor moderation, but I felt like Beth Harte really didn’t belong up there. I’ve never heard of her before today, but apparently she and Dave Snyder got into an argument during a panel at some show in New York, so she was invited to represent the “white hat” side of the panel.”…
Right…. that she has many years experience, a massive online following, a successful business and much industry respect, doesn’t matter because you, in all your wisdom and knowledge, hadn’t heard of her. So that she was invited to speak must just be because she had an argument with someone. You, being as special as you are, would have heard of her otherwise, after all.
What a horribly disrespectul attitude. You owe Beth and th SES organizers an apology for that. Wow.
"Your statement that you did not feel Beth should have been on the panel because you had never heard of her is inane."
I never said that, not even in the original version of this post. That's an (incorrect) association you made. I have edited the tone of this post to be less harsh, but I do feel that a strong part of social media is stating an opinion or review, and that's what I've done here.
Props to you, Rebecca. You just turned your blog back into a conversation about ideas… That took courage.
I agree with you, Dan, and I've amended the post to focus more on challenging her ideas, as you've said, and removed the personal attack (which I never intended to be personal in the first place, but it got interpreted that way and showed me that I do need to be more careful with my wording in the future). Thank you for your opinion!
Is it me, or does it seem like someone has organized a "save Beth Harte" campaign – 9 new comments defending Beth in the last hour? Just saying
For the record, I don’t know Beth Harte nor did I attend the SES session where she gave this presentation. However, I've followed Rebecca for what seems like forever and while I may not have always agreed with her on specific topics, I do commend her on her "tell it like it is" attitude. As a blogger, I can appreciate that! And, somewhere deep down you all can too.
I disagree with Jeff Vreeland who called Rebecca "unprofessional" for her criticism. In my opinion, she'd be unprofessional if she would have sugar-coated her post and ignored her personal thoughts and opinions regarding the session, and specifically Beth's presentation. Such truth and honesty is needed to build a better blog, online community, and search conference. Let’s not forget that the people who attend these conferences pay damn good money to do so. I’m not suggesting Beth's presentation was crap, but if it was, she should be called on it. This feedback can help both Beth and the people at SES to put out a better product.
There were about 20 comments here not more than 30 minutes ago, is there a database error or were they deleted?
I wasn't there but if beth was the person that attacked Synder at ses NY.. she was clueless what blackhat is is her online nick socialmediachampion by any chance
Wow… interesting comments.
I'm not going to get into the "she said, they said" exchange because there are valid points to both, and they've already been covered well enough by both sides.
I'm coming into this after the post has been edited so I've missed the main reason for the criticism. I agree that calling someone clueless isn't the best approach; but then attacking someone on their own blog for sharing their own points of view could also be seen as taking the "high road".
Sure, we all have opinions and it's great that a blog offers an open platform like the comments system to offer these viewpoints in. Just let's keep the "on the offense" comments within reason if you're trying to make a point about the original post or blogger being outside that reason.
For what it's worth, I follow Beth and she is always full of great marketing advice. But I'd disagree that you shouldn't tweet your own posts – as mentioned, there's a big difference between sharing and spamming.
See what happens when you blog drunk, or pissed off or hungry? The original version of this post (read on my iPhone between plane and car) had me thinking that this was somewhere between linkbait and just plain pessimistic.
Regardless, there were indeed things to say about the organization of the session and I think the comments about the moderation/structure are right on.
As a moderator of a social media panel on the Google/YouTube track the Tuesday before this session, I can appreciate the need to set the tone, but it must be done quickly, insightfully and hopefully in an entertaining way. Moderators are to be audience advocates first and foremost, to make sure the audience gets the most out of the panel. The first 5-10 minutes of this panel had us looking at each other wondering…
Even if there were a fresh perspective on moderating and the structure, I think the distance between public relations and SEO is still too far for most to appreciate such different perspectives. In fact, I'm not sure it's really appropriate. Absolutes aside, building real world brands and reputation using online communication tools is not the same as search engine sourced lead/sales generation at all.
If there were to be such a panel again at a search marketing conference, it would be interesting to have a panel of all search marketers that use social media to build traffic and sales or all PR types that use social media to build community. Then at least there's an apples to apples comparison.
As communications professional I think we have all spent time in conferences listening to people that we don't agree with. Many of us who are speakers and trainers ourselves often think that we could do it better, present it better, and have better ideas. I think that is a given. Although I have never seen Beth in person, I follow her and read her blog, Just like everyone I follow, sometimes I agree with her and sometimes I don't. But I think the lesson learned here is when disagreements happen, writing a blog post filled with personal attacks is never the best course of action.
I'm guessing by your edit and postscript you figured that out as well. That's the bummer about the web – once we put something out there, it is out there and it spreads quickly, especially when you are as well respected and followed as Beth is. I applaud your effort move forward to recover from this mis-step and keep the conversation going.
Karl,
If your read Rebecca's first post and her edited one, you will see a distinct difference between the two. I can certainly appreciate a "tell it like it is" attitude, particularly in critiques of presentations, since that is part of how I make my livelihood. However, a professional, and I would say, helpful, critique would be offering criticism of the content of the presentation. Personal attacks are neither professional nor helpful.
I don't think that somewhere deep down any of us appreciate that attitude. My guess would be that is why Rebecca removed those comments from her blog. The thing is, I still get the same information without the attacks in the edited version, and my opinion of Rebecca is much better.
And just FYI, Beth doesn't need saving.
Thanks, Kristen. I agree with you — lesson learned. Next time I'll try to do a better job of highlighting my point of view without getting too down and dirty.
I heard she and Snyder were on a panel together, but I don't know if it was SES NY, nor do I know what her online nickname is.
Hi Teifion,
We noticed a problem where some of the comments were missing – thus in response we had to reimport all the comments. Everything should be back to normal now.
[...] definition became even more solidified when someone I consider a mentor, Beth Harte, was attacked through a blog in what I considered to be an unprofessional manner. This is a great example of community building [...]
[...] Kelley, Director of Social Media for 10e20, recently wrote a critical blog post about a panel discussion she attended, Black Hat vs. White Hat Social Media and the Battle for [...]
[...] Kelley, Director of Social Media for 10e20, recently wrote a critical blog post about a panel discussion she attended, Black Hat vs. White Hat Social Media and the Battle for [...]
I went to The BuyerSphere Project session instead – it was amazing
[...] definition became even more solidified when someone I consider a mentor, Beth Harte, was attacked through a blog in what I considered to be an unprofessional manner. This is a great example of community building [...]