Recent research carried out by Pew Research reveals that 71% of "online adults" use Facebook, often two or more times a day. Next in line, and way down the line, are LinkedIn (22%) and Pinterest (21%). It's a bit surprising that Twitter (18%) and Instagram (17%) come in last in the survey.
The differences can be partially explained by demographics. The fastest growing group in Facebook (as shown in other research) is the 45 - 60 age group, a large and powerful demographic. While Twitter is famously popular, it is mostly with young people and certain minorities, not as large a group. LinkedIn is popular as a business relationships tool and the demographic is dominated by young well educated professionals. Most users of Pinterest are female.
But these demographics don't tell the whole story. There are various pockets of usage. For example Twitter is widely used by business for making corporate announcements.
Social media is used by 73% of the online adult population and Facebook has the widest range of demographic among its users. Another Pew study revealed that 74% of adults go online. So we're talking about a major portion of the population that uses social media. That's significant for many reasons.
Business has known for a few years now that social media is important as a tool for reaching their customers and other stakeholders. Many are still struggling with how to make best use of that fact. Some have embraced social media to the point that they are sometimes labelled as social businesses. Others are into select areas, such as Social CRM and Social PR.
The effect is a massive shift in spending - from traditional media to social media.
What the long range effect of this shift will be on social media remains to be seen. We can be sure that the effects will be significant, including formalization, legislative frameworks, rules, specialization, customization, etc.. For the Pew Study, check out this link.
Thursday, July 31, 2014
Wednesday, July 09, 2014
Investor Relations - There's an App for That
Companies are bound by law and necessity to keep their investors informed. They do so by issuing annual reports, maintaining IR sections on their websites and filing various forms with regulators. It's an area where there is room for creativity (the right kind as well as the wrong) and innovation. There are competitions where they compete for prizes, such as the annual Corporate Reporting Contest sponsored by the Chartered Professional Accountants of Canada.
Technology has played a growing role in IR over recent years, mostly on the world wide web. The has included not only websites, but the use of social media. Twitter is big in the IR area, because it is a way to send out quick notices on important events along with links for those who are interested in the details. But they use Facebook, LinkedIn, Youtube, Instagram and several others as well.
More recently, there has been a global trend to the use of smartphones and tablets for all kinds of uses. This has manifested in the use of apps for many of those purposes. IR is no exception.
Several companies have introduced IR apps, two good examples being Tim Hortons and General Electric.
The Tim Hortons app loads for the iPhone and iPad and presents a full range of information normally provided by a company to its investors. On the main page when it is opened, that includes current stock prices on both the TSX and the NYSE. Further there is late breaking news, a complete copy of the annual report, financial statements, other financial information and so on. The range and amount of information is considerable. Of course reading a 228 page annual report on a phone screen is challenging, but possible by enlarging the pages with finger swipes, and may be a good pastime when you are waiting in a doctors office for an appointment or waiting for a flight.
There has been some controversy as to whether these apps are useful or worth doing. They have been adopted by the most innovative companies but not by the average company out there. They are not mainstream as yet, but are growing in numbers.
Intuitively, it seems a logical development in a world inundated with new mobile devices where many users have ceased to use laptops with any regularity. Since it's important to reach these users, especially when they are investors or other stakeholders, then an IR app is a relatively easy and effective way to do it.
Check them out. You can find them on the usual app stores where available and also can often track them down through the corporate IR website of the company in which you have an interest.
Technology has played a growing role in IR over recent years, mostly on the world wide web. The has included not only websites, but the use of social media. Twitter is big in the IR area, because it is a way to send out quick notices on important events along with links for those who are interested in the details. But they use Facebook, LinkedIn, Youtube, Instagram and several others as well.
More recently, there has been a global trend to the use of smartphones and tablets for all kinds of uses. This has manifested in the use of apps for many of those purposes. IR is no exception.
Several companies have introduced IR apps, two good examples being Tim Hortons and General Electric.
The Tim Hortons app loads for the iPhone and iPad and presents a full range of information normally provided by a company to its investors. On the main page when it is opened, that includes current stock prices on both the TSX and the NYSE. Further there is late breaking news, a complete copy of the annual report, financial statements, other financial information and so on. The range and amount of information is considerable. Of course reading a 228 page annual report on a phone screen is challenging, but possible by enlarging the pages with finger swipes, and may be a good pastime when you are waiting in a doctors office for an appointment or waiting for a flight.
There has been some controversy as to whether these apps are useful or worth doing. They have been adopted by the most innovative companies but not by the average company out there. They are not mainstream as yet, but are growing in numbers.
Intuitively, it seems a logical development in a world inundated with new mobile devices where many users have ceased to use laptops with any regularity. Since it's important to reach these users, especially when they are investors or other stakeholders, then an IR app is a relatively easy and effective way to do it.
Check them out. You can find them on the usual app stores where available and also can often track them down through the corporate IR website of the company in which you have an interest.
Tuesday, July 08, 2014
Using the Internet to Inform Investors
For over
fifteen years now, companies have been reporting their investor information on
their websites. At the time, this was a big change because traditionally, they issued big printed
annual reports with all the financial and business information.
their websites. At the time, this was a big change because traditionally, they issued big printed
annual reports with all the financial and business information.
Now, there is
a general recognition that the website information in the Investor Relations
sections of the websites is the prime source of information by investors and others. Generally
speaking, specific information is easier to find on the web than it is by leafing through print
documents. And then, it is easier to use, since the information is already digital and can be
transported over to individual desktops for further analysis. That is, some of the time.
sections of the websites is the prime source of information by investors and others. Generally
speaking, specific information is easier to find on the web than it is by leafing through print
documents. And then, it is easier to use, since the information is already digital and can be
transported over to individual desktops for further analysis. That is, some of the time.
The difficulty
is that quite often companies have found it hard to move away from the old
print paradigm. They persist in presenting information in large PDF documents that preserve
the information just as if it had been printed. Nothing against Adobe here. It’s just that if that
is the only way the information is presented, then we lose the benefits of a digital format for
presenting information because typically PDF documents are difficult to extract information
from and leave the user in exactly the same position as if the information had been printed.
print paradigm. They persist in presenting information in large PDF documents that preserve
the information just as if it had been printed. Nothing against Adobe here. It’s just that if that
is the only way the information is presented, then we lose the benefits of a digital format for
presenting information because typically PDF documents are difficult to extract information
from and leave the user in exactly the same position as if the information had been printed.
Some of the
more progressive companies do provide the information investors need in
alternative formats. Potash Corporation, for example, long a leader in financial reporting and
winner of many awards, provides a “Data Tool” in which a variety of information is
presented in a format that can be easily manipulated and downloaded for analysis.
Others, such as Agnico and BMO, also leaders in investor relations reporting, offer financial
alternative formats. Potash Corporation, for example, long a leader in financial reporting and
winner of many awards, provides a “Data Tool” in which a variety of information is
presented in a format that can be easily manipulated and downloaded for analysis.
Others, such as Agnico and BMO, also leaders in investor relations reporting, offer financial
information in their websites in Excel format, which of course can be
imported directly into
individual user spreadsheets. Still others, such as Thompson and Tim Hortons offer their
information in XBRL (eXtensible Business Reporting Language) format, a powerful format
that is easily transported across platforms and analyzed in real time mode.
People want to consume financial information not just by reading it, but by analyzing it.
individual user spreadsheets. Still others, such as Thompson and Tim Hortons offer their
information in XBRL (eXtensible Business Reporting Language) format, a powerful format
that is easily transported across platforms and analyzed in real time mode.
People want to consume financial information not just by reading it, but by analyzing it.
Offering them at least the opportunity to choose seems not an unreasonable proposition,
and
one that is easily accommodated by the web. Lets hope that those companies who are stuck
in the past rethink their approach.
one that is easily accommodated by the web. Lets hope that those companies who are stuck
in the past rethink their approach.
Friday, July 04, 2014
Right to be Forgotten Presents a Host of Problems
The internet contains a lot of information about people that in many cases those people wish wasn't there. It might be indiscreet posts on Facebook, pictures and newspaper articles posted or linked on websites. Or links showing up in search engines. It might be a case of "revenge porn", where photos or videos are posted of a person engaged in sexual activity by someone with destructive motives. In Canada, as elsewhere, we've seen the trauma that this can cause for young people.
Many of us would not want to be held to account for everything we did as a teenager, yet today a lot of their activities and thoughts are recorded for posterity. When they apply for a job, the search begins. This can be very unfair.
Because of these and other circumstances, the EU passed a ruling recently providing that people could request the deletion of certain information about themselves. The question of enforcement was unclear. In a court case in France, a finding against Google held that search engines are responsible for the links that show up in their searches and therefore must comply with legitimate requests to have them removed.
The provisions in the EU ruling are extremely vague about how to determine when deletion requests are legitimate. The legislation seeks to balance the rights of the individual to privacy against the rights of the public to know. But this involves making a lot of decisions as to when the line is crossed. Decisions that Google is not really equipped to make. Some situations are relatively obvious - a revenge porn video, for example, would presumably be an obvious candidate for deletion. At the other extreme, a request by a convicted habitual pedophile to have community bulletins or news reports deleted would more likely be ruled against because of the public's right to know. But there is a very wide range of circumstances in between.
The ruling also raises questions about censorship and violation of freedom of the press. And there are even more basic questions about violations of free speech. In the US, the First Amendment makes it unlikely that legislation similar to that in the EU would pass. But then, it's not that simple. Legislation already requires that certain information be deleted, for example, from credit reports after a period of time. Is the right to be forgotten just a new version of the old, well established, right to privacy or something totally new?
To compound the issue, the BC Supreme Court recently ruled that Google must remove certain information world-wide from its search engines. This goes even further than the EU ruling, which only applies in the EU. Therefore links deleted under the EU law will still show up in US or Canadian searches. Google has appealed the BC ruling on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction and extra-territoriality, an appeal that has every chance of success.
The problems raised by the right to be forgotten are massive. And yet, there are those situations where there is an obvious need to exercise and respect that right. The courts are struggling to deal with the issue. But it can't be left to them. Legislators need to buckle down and try to address the issues in more specific terms. The EU ruling is totally inadequate. They will have no choice other than to provide more direction in its application.
For some reading on the subject:
1. Google's 'right to be forgotten' takedowns a 'challenge to press freedom' - The Globe and Mail
2. Google Starts Purging Search Results in Europe - The E-Commerce Times
3. For Google, the ‘Right to Be Forgotten’ Is an Unforgettable Fiasco - Wired
4. The right to be Forgotten - Stanford Law Review
5. Google appealing BC court decision that would delete websites from search results - The Vancouver Sun
Many of us would not want to be held to account for everything we did as a teenager, yet today a lot of their activities and thoughts are recorded for posterity. When they apply for a job, the search begins. This can be very unfair.
Because of these and other circumstances, the EU passed a ruling recently providing that people could request the deletion of certain information about themselves. The question of enforcement was unclear. In a court case in France, a finding against Google held that search engines are responsible for the links that show up in their searches and therefore must comply with legitimate requests to have them removed.
The provisions in the EU ruling are extremely vague about how to determine when deletion requests are legitimate. The legislation seeks to balance the rights of the individual to privacy against the rights of the public to know. But this involves making a lot of decisions as to when the line is crossed. Decisions that Google is not really equipped to make. Some situations are relatively obvious - a revenge porn video, for example, would presumably be an obvious candidate for deletion. At the other extreme, a request by a convicted habitual pedophile to have community bulletins or news reports deleted would more likely be ruled against because of the public's right to know. But there is a very wide range of circumstances in between.
The ruling also raises questions about censorship and violation of freedom of the press. And there are even more basic questions about violations of free speech. In the US, the First Amendment makes it unlikely that legislation similar to that in the EU would pass. But then, it's not that simple. Legislation already requires that certain information be deleted, for example, from credit reports after a period of time. Is the right to be forgotten just a new version of the old, well established, right to privacy or something totally new?
To compound the issue, the BC Supreme Court recently ruled that Google must remove certain information world-wide from its search engines. This goes even further than the EU ruling, which only applies in the EU. Therefore links deleted under the EU law will still show up in US or Canadian searches. Google has appealed the BC ruling on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction and extra-territoriality, an appeal that has every chance of success.
The problems raised by the right to be forgotten are massive. And yet, there are those situations where there is an obvious need to exercise and respect that right. The courts are struggling to deal with the issue. But it can't be left to them. Legislators need to buckle down and try to address the issues in more specific terms. The EU ruling is totally inadequate. They will have no choice other than to provide more direction in its application.
For some reading on the subject:
1. Google's 'right to be forgotten' takedowns a 'challenge to press freedom' - The Globe and Mail
2. Google Starts Purging Search Results in Europe - The E-Commerce Times
3. For Google, the ‘Right to Be Forgotten’ Is an Unforgettable Fiasco - Wired
4. The right to be Forgotten - Stanford Law Review
5. Google appealing BC court decision that would delete websites from search results - The Vancouver Sun
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)