Take for example, the Telstra Social Review program, a competition whereby Australians with a social media presences could ‘compete’ (in loose terms) for the chance to be one of 25 social reviewers.  The final 25 were each given a HTC handset and asked to review it for 2 weeks.

There is nothing new about this initiative in some respects – it is essentially a blogger relations program – but the public nature of the Telstra ‘experiment’ represents a very different approach.  Good blogger relations practitioners will insist on full disclosure but its rare for an organisation to PR this kind of program in the way that Telstra did.

As a result, Telstra has telegraphed its respect for blogging (as well as other forms of social media) and I believe that other Australian corporations will sit up and take notice.

I believe that ‘commercial confidence’ in blogging is a requirement for blogging if it is to acheive genuine mainstream acceptance.  This ‘commerial confidence’ could take many forms including advertising and sponsorship investment, collaboration, access, insights or simply advocacy.

The blogging community is challenged however by a fundamental lack of transparency.

Readership data underpins the traditional media sector, it provides the business justification for advertising spend and PR programs. In a section of the media where the glossy finish of the product (or lack of it ) bares little or no relationship to its reach and influence, its essential that proprietors become more open about their traffic and engagement scores.

Commercial (business) decisions are based on an assessment of risk over opportunity.  The blogging community in Australia needs to help its potential partners understand the opportunity.

That might sound like a scary proposition for a young blog with low traffic scores today.  But remember this.  At some point, consumption of print media will be a small proportion of what is consumed online.  Transparency can help you build trusted relationships with potential commerical supporters today, for the future.

What do you think?  Do you agree?  If not, why not?

Is it wrong to assume that all blogs have a commercial imperative?

Should bloggers be open and transparent about their number of readers, time spent, uniques?

If so, what data should they share?

1. With meaningful follow through, crowdsourcing can deliver a specific business outcomes and audience engagement
2. Allow the community to determine success, ensure that you profile contributors and make it fun
3. Crowdsourcing not recommended as a first foray into social media

Telstra were on the bill today.  David Quilty, Managing Director, Group Communications at Telstra shared details of a Telstra crowdsourcing initiative called T [ideas], an internally focussed initiative designed to gather feedback from employees and partners.  Partners and employees can submit ideas to the company, which are then voted on by the community and ultimately implemented by Telstra.  Quilty provided examples of ideas that had been implemented including a contact centre customer callback service and new applications.   

No-One!

oh, hold on …the Government!

The Government awarded the contract for its National Broadband Network build to itself having ‘formally teminated’ the NBN tender.

The proposals submitted by Acacia, Axia Netmedia, Optus, Tasmania, Telstra and TransACT were ‘under-developed’ – especially Telstra’s effort.

The Australian Federal Government will establish a public private partnership to roll out ‘the largest investment in infrastructure’ in Australia’s history. In five years time the Government will sell down the company as a wholesale and open access network operator.  

The Government also announced a discussion paper to seek public comment on ways to improve telecommunications regulation to make it work more effectively in the interest of consumers and businesses.  The Government is keen to break Telstra’s ‘monopoly’ hold on telecommunications services in Australia as the owner of the once public telecommunciations infrastructure and the largest retail service provider in the country.

It’s hard to believe that the Government doesn’t have a pre-prescribed view on what form telecommunications de-regulation (the separation of Telstra’s operations) should take given the size ($43billion) and scope (fibre to the home) of its public private solution.

The Regulatory Reform paper canvasses a range of options for reform, including:

• streamlining current regulatory processes, by allowing the ACCC to set up-front access terms for companies wanting access to Telstra and other networks;
• strengthening the powers of the ACCC to tackle anti-competitive conduct by allowing it to impose binding rule of conduct when issuing competition notices;
• promoting greater competition across the industry, including through measures to better address Telstra’s vertical and horizontal integration, such as functional separation;
• addressing competition and investment issues arising from cross-ownership of fixed-line and cable networks, and telecommunications and media assets;
• improving universal access arrangements for telephony and payphones; and
• introducing more effective rules, requiring telephone companies to make connections and repairs within set time-frames.

The Government is seeking submissions by 3 June 2009, before making final decisions and introducing legislation into the Parliament.

The net result of this anouncement is delay. The Government is taking on a high risk project – public private partnerships don’t have a fantastic track record in Australia. Many are suffering from a lack of private funding.

The Government directly references Telstra’s control of the last mile as one of the reasons for failing the NBN tenderers - citing their exposure to extensive legal liabilities which make the business case for building the network unpredictable and untenable.

The biggest obstacle between the Government and a national high speed broadband network continues to be Telstra. Its appropriate for Telstra to protect its business interests having been fully privatised by the Federal Government just over 2 years ago.

Could this new approach by the Government be designed to provide an incentive for Telstra to separate its wholesale and retail operations and partner with the Government to establish the nbn, which would make it the ideal purchaser of the network assets in 5-years time.

It also provides the Federal Government with an opportunity to stimulate the national economy through job creation and big fees for consultants as we embark on YET ANOTHER episode in the long drawn out saga of a high speed broadband network spanning the country.

Finally, combined with the proposed Internet filter this strategy will provide the Government with a great deal of control over the Internet – lets hope they wield this power in a truly open fashion.

This extract from the Government Panel Evaluation Report provides a succinct summary of the decision making process.

Telstra’s chairman, Donald McGauchie has labelled the reasons for the exclusion as ‘trivial’.

Telstra’s initial proposal was an attempt to disrupt the process. I doubt they expect such a ballsy response from the Government.

Its possible that Telstra will somehow be invited back to the negotiating table. Some have argued that it’s in the national interest for Telstra to build the network or at least be considered alongside the competition.

The other bidders include Signtel Optus, Melbourne-based Acacia, Canadian group Axia, the Tasmanian Government and Canberra utility group TransAct.

The likely outcome of this development (apart from a major dip in Telstra’s share price).

First off, a media war whereby Telstra paints itself as the victim. The company runs the risk of generating considerable bad will if it is not able to do this and its engagement with and commitment to social media will be put to the test.

Second, delays to the process. Legal claims and counter-claims.

Third, Telstra going it alone by investing and building out its current cable, Next G (which doesn’t work in parts of Perth’s CBD) and DSL networks resulting in the eventual Government-sponsored NBN competing head to head with an obstructive and reactionary incumbent.

Fourth, enforced separation of Telstra’s wholesale and retail assets.

The net net result: A continued hiatus for Australia’s broadband network and the digital economy.

This country!

It has not submitted a bid for the contract ‘due to a number of unresolved issues in the Government’s Requests for Proposals’: 

• The lack of clarity around possible further separation
• The 12-month negotiation period under the RFP
• Concerns about the use of Telstra’s detailed information
• The proposed commercial terms issued by the Commonwealth

Today’s deadline was for companies to submit bids.

Most people agree that Telstra is the only viable option for the Australian Government. The Telstra ’counter proposal’ means that the company is still in the running without making a commitment. The company has created a negotiating point with the Government. Telstra is ’willing to engage in discussions with the Government’.

How will Conroy and the Federal Government react? It seems their hands are tied. One wonders how easy it will be for the Government to break up a recently privatised company.  

Hopefully, this won’t result in months of back and forth, he said, she said (as we saw with the previous Government). 

Is this the first step in a long drawn out wrangle between Telstra and the Government that will only serve to further delay the process and muddy the waters? I think it could be.

Where the bleeding hell are you?

Examples include – wikis at Janssen-Cilag, BlueTube for the Victorian Police Force and the ever present case study: Now We Are Talking.

And I have worked with companies in this sphere.

As a side note: It seems to me that Telstra entered the social media space with a very specific agenda (T3) and objective. The approach delivered value and has since permeated other areas of their business in a positive way.

For the purposes of this post, I want to focus on externally facing social media projects by Australian corporates.

Laurel Papworth recently posted on the topic of CEOs that use twitter, as a follow up to a BusinessWeek story about tweeting chief execs in the US. The list is made up by the leaders of web 2 and tech companies on both sides of the Pacific.

Talk to any PR in Australia and they’ll tell you that the corporate sector remains unwilling to dip its toe into social media in a meaningful or strategic way. Maybe that’s an exercise in PR business development, either way I’d like to suggest a few reasons why this might be the case.

1. A small corporate sector which remains well connected via traditional offline networks
That sense of the old boys network in Australian business still feels very prevalent to me. That concept of mateship and personal connections comes through quite strongly. The people that run Australian businesses are not using social media as a prmary means of communication.

2. The retail sector has not led the way
Amazon and eBay were the Web pioneers in many ways. Their success gave the Web a lot of credibility in a market (the US) which has a very rich catalogue mail order retail culture. The Australian retail sector on the other hand has been very cautious and reticent when it comes to establishing an online presence, resulting in a lack of leadership.

Too many cultural stereotypes for one post?

4. Abscence of high speed national broadband
Internationally, Japan leads the way when it comes to national broadband speeds. The NBN project in Australia has a long way to go still – a nationwide broadband network in Australia is five years away, at the very least. This has impacted the sophistication, the uptake of Web applications, interaction etc. Australia is way down the rankings in terms of broadband quality, as this study shows.

5. There has been no high profile reputational crisis on the Web in Australia
Corporates will only recognise the power of the Web when they see one of their peers suffer major reputational damage as a result of online activity. Until then, corporates will sit back and focus on the risk of getting involved.

6. Corporates aren’t being sold on the benefits effectively
Marketers, consultants, PRs have to accept some responsibilty for the current state of affairs. It’s their job to educate decision makers. It’s their job to prove the business case. Marketers and communicators in Australia aren’t strong on this stuff.

As I said at the beginning, there is activity out there. It’s happening but Australia continues to lag behind the rest of the world. My sense is that the multi-nationals operating in Australia are leading the way. It can only be a matter of time until we see the large corporates follow Telstra and usurp the telco as the outstanding Australian corporate in social media.