The social web has made it so easy for people to connect with each other and have a voice at the table like never before. Last night at a tweetup here in Honolulu, I met Larry Heim, CEO of HonBlue. This was a Tweetup Treat, as Larry and I do not normally travel in the same circles. Later back at home I could Google him. Then find his LinkedIn profile on the first page of Google’s results. Then click through to a known company here in Honolulu. “That was easy!”

Contrast that to a situation this past week. I was approached (via several urgent phone calls over the weekend), to become an affiliate of a new web site and to also have this company make a presentation at our upcoming Social Media Club meeting. Let’s just call him Sammy.

By coincidence, Seth Godin tackles this topic of the tacky techie on his blog today:

...you can see the danger anyone who introduces new technology faces. While you’ll attract Les Paul and the 37Signals guys, you’re more likely to attract spammers, scammers, opportunity seekers and others that will bring our culture down as easily as they’ll bring it up.

• Contacted me via phone rather than via email. I rarely answer the phone if I don’t know the caller. If you have your caller ID blocked, you will never have me pick up live. It’s just a function of how many incomings I get and that the phone is an interruption when I am working on someone else’s project. I reserve the same courtesy for you if I am working on your project.
• Left very urgent voice mails after normal business hours: Fri afternoon, Sat morning, Sat evening, then Mon morning. I know, the web is 24/7, but even though I might be web surfing for pleasure on Sat night does not mean I want your business problem at that time. The more you call me during non-business hours, the less likely I will respond at all.
• Made false and unsubstantiated claims. “We launched our Site 10 day’s ago and according to Alexa Rating we surpassed twitter in 3 days.” That is an actual quote! And it is patently false. I checked Alexa.
• Has no verifiable bio or resume to be found online, nor any links on reputable sites with biographical details. When all I can find about you on Google search are things like message board postings or a one-off weight loss blog offer, then you are not a serious business person IMO.
• Used a Hotmail address when he finally contacted me via email. You may not know this however Hotmail and AOL email addresses do not inspire confidence in savvy business professionals. Get an email address at your domain (the same domain that has your biographical info and references) or get a Gmail address. Because Hotmail and AOL are infiltrated by spammers and force you to wade through mountains of blinking ads to check your own email, no serious business person I know has the tolerance or time for that.
• Had numerous mis-spellings and grammatical errors in the email. The web is very informal in many ways. However, we business folk still get the “nails on chalkboard” feeling when an email comes in written by someone who appears to be using English as a second language while posing as a native speaker.

On the other hand, because it is easier than ever to connect, it makes strategic sense to list verified credentials and facts when you are reaching out to someone, versus dropping names and over-stating your case. It may work on the short term but over time you are hurting your credibility by trying to make your self, your brand, your idea, more than it actually is at this moment in time.

What tips do you use to make it easy for people to tell you apart from the blowhards and scammers who make a lot of noise on the social web? Contact me if you’d like to see an anonymous copy of the email response I sent “Sammy.” I don’t believe in being rude tho I do believe in calling out the facts.

Aloha,

Share/Bookmark

As I have been discussing here in the past few months, the issue of payola, pay-per-post, freebies, and other incentives by marketers to entice blog coverage has come under review of the Federal Trade Commission. They have published new rules covering paid reviews and celebrity endorsements. The vote was 4-0 in favor.

Keep in mind, that just about all of us can be defined as “celebrities” when it comes to the internet. (Insert smiley face here.) In case you want to catch up on the back story:
Paid Bloggers Get Google Downgrades
Mahalo Mr. Solis (for talking about blogger payola)
Social Media Ethics: A Glossary

From the FTC Filing:

The Federal Trade Commission today announced that it has approved final revisions to the guidance it gives to advertisers on how to keep their endorsement and testimonial ads in line with the FTC Act. The notice incorporates several changes to the FTC’s Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising, which address endorsements by consumers, experts, organizations, and celebrities, as well as the disclosure of important connections between advertisers and endorsers. The Guides were last updated in 1980.

I’ve posted a link to the actual filing after the jump so you can read it for yourself.

It will no doubt be a challenge to enforce this but the FTC recognizes what many of my blogger associates resist: that receiving compensation does affect coverage. At the very least, without compensation or freebies there is far less likelihood that said blogger would be paying attention to said marketer. And in today’s Attention Economy, attention is a most valuable commodity.

I am all for co-creative collaborations between brands and bloggers. I have a long record of encouraging brands to work with new media creators for the better bang for their buck than with traditional media. But we’ve got to stop thinking that just because many of us brought ourselves up by our boot straps, that we are somehow immune to influence. If anything, all of our free contributions to brand awareness makes us more vulnerable to seeking compensation and creating blurred lines of coverage IMO.

View the FTC legal filing on Scribd. I think it is up to both bloggers and marketers to develop their policies and share them publicly as applicable. What do you think?

Aloha,

Share/Bookmark

This Friday, our local chapter of the Social Media Club (founded by yours truly) is having a panel discussion on Ethics in Social Media. It’s a hot topic all around, as social media lends itself to some highly unethical practices and characters! The good news though, is that the conversational nature of the social web exposes many of these deliberate and accidental faux pas so the rest of us can learn from them. I thought it would be handy for those of you new to social media ethics to have a glossary of terms and issues that have arisen. As with all good things in life, perfectly reasonable people may disagree!

First – The Guiding Principles of Social Media
Transparency, Truth, and Trust.
Chris Heuer, founder of the Social Media Club, articulated this well here. Be who you are, provide evidence of who you are, respect others and over time you will build trust.

Second – Conflicts of Interest
As bloggers, podcasters, marketers and PR professionals adopt social media tools and tactics, they are often caught in the middle of problematic situations. You are being paid to represent a client – but what if said client wants you to not be transparent, truthful, or trustworthy? How far will you go and what damage does your brand risk? When you are conversing on social networks, how, what, and when do you disclose your business relationship? Tamar’s post on the Zicam controversy addresses these questions.

The conversational web and the laxity of so many rules of the conversation itself along with innovative business practices and well-intentioned attempts to think outside the box sometimes have unintended consequences though. These conflicts are where many of the problems arise.

Third – Disclosure
Stowe Boyd has identified a rating scale that covers the many combinations and permutations of advisory interest and financial interest. The FTC is looking into the practice as well, as I blogged about here and here. Here’s a good example of a PR professional (Todd Defren) who discloses when he is Twittering on behalf of a client.

The Glossary – Add to Your Vocabulary and Your Business Practices

Blogola – like it’s sister payola, it refers to bloggers receiving products and services in exchange for media coverage. It’s also known as Pay-Per-Post, and traditional “fam trips” for travel bloggers also fall into this category. Well-known and loved blogger Chris Brogan spent far more hours defending his actions than enjoying the $500 shopping trip at K-Mart. He lost some followers too though many said K-Mart was smart to find such a popular person of influence with whom they could spend very little  money and gain an incredible amount of publicity. Chris nails the main underlying issue for many bloggers in this statement:

By the way, another point on this: I don’t ask you for money. I give you everything for free. Somewhere, I have to make money, or my kids don’t eat. Would you rather I ask you for money? Someone always pays for the meal.

Brand Jacking – This is when an unauthorized person or persons pose as a someone or something they are not. One of the better known cases was “Janet” who created a Twitter profile for Exxon Mobile. She didn’t last long, as the community questioned her extreme statements and Jeremiah Owyang (a Forrester Analyst) contacted Exxon directly for comment. (I hope you have set up Google Alerts for your brand! If not, go to KnowHow Cafe and get on our mailing list so we can help you.)

Character Blogs or Personas - these are  blogs that are written by an alias or an obvious person who is not real. My friend Toby Bloomberg created one years ago for one of her clients, though some early bloggers insisted that only real people should have blogs. But there is a  business case (and an opportunity to have some fun) for bona fide character blogs. Another colleague, Dave Peck, created the persona of Britney Mason who started as a character in Second Life and took on a life of her own. (This can apply to Twitter and accounts on other social networks as well as on blogs.) On the other hand, Whole Foods CEO really crossed the line by posting on stock message boards under an alias name, attempting to influence the stock price of an acquisition.

Flogs – aka Fake Blogs. Walmart and their PR firm Edelman suffered considerably when they pretended to feature two “real people” Walmarting across America. Edelman was suspended from WOMMA for 90 days and now will not work with bloggers who do not disclose their sponsorships and compensation, regardless of how small it may be.

GMOOT - An acronym that stands for “Get me one of those!” This is the phrase often shouted by CEO’s to their ad and PR agencies, thinking that viral web successes can be pulled out of a tactics and strategy handbook. They can’t – that’s why they are called “viral.” Money cannot buy you influence on the social web; remember it comes from Transparency, Truth, and Trust.

Shill – Direct from Wikipedia: “A shill is an associate of a person selling goods or services or a political group, who pretends no association to the seller/group and assumes the air of an enthusiastic customer. The intention of the shill is, using crowd psychology, to encourage others unaware of the set-up to purchase said goods or services or support the political group’s ideological claims. Shills are often employed by confidence artists. The term plant is also used. Shill bidding, found on many auction sites such as eBay, is punishable by law and may result in fines and or prosecution.” See “Astroturfing” above for more. (Hat tip to Dave in the comments for this one.)

Sock Puppets - See the discussion above re: aliases or personas. Sock Puppets are the paid marketers who pose as community members to create content on behalf of a client or their own company. There’s an example here. (Hat tip to Dave in the comments for this one.)

Splogs – aka Spam Blogs. Due to the magic of RSS, any creep with a little programming skill can buy hundreds of web domains, put up a quick free blog, and populate them with legitimate content from others (via RSS) then fill them with Google ads and hope people land there and click. Bad news all around.

Wikipedia - “Wikipedia’s 13 million articles (2.9 million in the English Wikipedia) have been written collaboratively by volunteers around the world, and almost all of its articles can be edited by anyone who can access the Wikipedia website.” There is Wikiscanner – A cool tool that discloses who is editing what pages on Wikipedia. By examining data including IP addresses, you can see if companies are the primary (self-interested?) editors of their pages. The Church of Scientology was recently banned from editing any articles on Wikipedia for “repeated and deceptive editing.”

Did I miss one of your favorite social media ethical dilemmas? Please do leave a comment!

Aloha,

Share/Bookmark

Brian Solis, a truly forward thinking PR professional and co-founder of the Social Media Club, took the time and captured a lot of the same thoughts I had, yet was reluctant to post in detail when I discussed Google, the FTC, and paid links. I too am influenced by my friends and business colleagues, and am trying to influence the discussion of social media practices here in Hawaii as a long time practitioner and also a founding member of the Social Media Club. (Whose tag line is, “If you get it, share it.” sometimes people don’t want to get it though – they are more comfortable doing business in the old ways.)

Please read: This is Not a Sponsored Post by Brian Solis

My post now is in response to Brian and the discussion taking place over at WebProWorld.com – where the opinion of bloggers among web managers and SEO experts is not too positive.

On a blog you never know as there is no way to know. Google warned about this a long time ago, likely because they remember how the FTC reatced [sp] to sponsored links when Se’s tried to disguise they were paid advertising, It is the law… bloggers aren’t above it.

These new brand ambassadors are almost the perfect instruments for surreptitiously sparking and cultivating groundswell within desired and vital target markets.

Consumers look to experts and trusted peers for guidance and insight when making decisions.

Who’s to say that the information they’re receiving from their trusted sources is indeed truthful and honest, if they’re unaware that these authorities are actually directly or indirectly compensated for their opinions and insights.

To me, blogging has become a big enough industry that it now replicates behaviors that humanity has gravitated towards “naturally.” Some travel bloggers, like some travel writers for mainstream press, now receive paid fam trips. We all like to think we are free thinkers – but when we are being paid, that does change things. We are not as impartial. Nearly impossible for all but the crankiest among us.

When a beloved blogger gets laid off from her job and appears to serendipitously take a trip to Hawaii to get her life sorted out, her readers responded with support and compassion. How would they feel if they knew it was an all expenses paid trip, courtesy of the tourism industry?

The really good news is that all parties stand to gain more by tweaking this relationship a little bit, and doing business in a more transparent manner.

Problem:

• Advertiser pays blogger for specific reviews or specific trips, knowing that they will get better than blind coverage.


• Blogger hides said compensation to maintain appearance of independence and not taint the story with “pay per post” energy.


• Google is aware of this and is working diligently to find a way to ignore “advertorial” postings.


• Blogger has to hustle on a case by case basis to cover costs and receive just compensation fro the incredible work being done building a targeted and loyal audience.


• Advertiser has to jump from blogger to blogger in search of hidden paid endorsements.  


• Both run the risk of being outed with the ensuing backlash.


• Readers do not get the whole truth.


• The problem holds true even if there is a page hidden away somewhere on your blog that says you got paid for something.

• A statement of acknowledgement belongs on every post not just in the back of the blog.


• I’d like to see a generic icon developed that indicates some form of compensation was received for the item(s) mentioned in this post. It has become very popular to nuance the language these days, “no one was paid for their time” – yeah, but they did get an all expenses paid trip to Hawaii with access to countless not-so-obvious products, services, and people right? That dear readers, is compensation to me. Is it to you?


• Advertisers are better served by developing a relationship with bloggers who have an audience in their desired space. They should step up and provide ongoing paid support for that blogger, so s/he can continue to do the fine work and build the audience. This goes for the people developing social media campaigns too. There is a lot of effort that goes into creating these campaigns, effectively.


• This means not paying for specifics on a per trip or per product basis, but by being a proud sponsor of said blog. Create some distance. Get your banner ad, write the check, participate in the comments, and otherwise stay out of the way.


• Let the blogger pay for their own products and services unless each mention of said item is disclosed.


• Blogger can thank the sponsors at any time; it’s good etiquette. They can be transparent about the help and the money they are getting. There is nothing to hide here when it;s being handled ethically.


• The NPR model works so well. “This blog/this post is brought to you by ABC.” Then everyone knows the deal and can make their own decisions.


• I know the loyal viewers of our BeachWalks.tv internet show would be thrilled for us to get a sponsor who truly grokked the value we bring to people’s lives. They often even suggest sponsors they would like to hear from, who they think are a good fit for our show. How many instances do you know of that happening?

The agency should be proud to support aka sponsor bloggers and bloggers should stop pretending they are immune to editorial standards of disclosure. If a big company did this – like Walmart did with its fake videoblogger/RV across America tour a few years back – they would (and did!) get nailed for it in public.

There really is a win-win-win in here! But advertisers and bloggers have to remember one of the fundamental rules of the social web: TRANSPARENCY. We can move business ethics forward, support the companies and the bloggers and the audience. Really, it’s not that hard. I am confident it will get worked out sooner than later.

Aloha,

Share/Bookmark

This post is a promised follow-up to my recent post Why are Advertisers Embarrassed by Advertising?. Recently KGMB9 implemented the WOMF service. To me, an outside observer, they have treated it as a sales platform though positioned it as a community forum. I actually think it has the potential to be quite useful as both, if they are willing to address a few flaws in this social web business tool.

First, let’s clear up the acronyms:
WOMF stands for Word of Mouth Forum™. It is a company that has developed a type of web software that allows local communities to have an advertiser-sponsored, consumer reviews and discussion web site. This is a standard web formula: build it once and re-use it as much as possible. The parent company is from Australia, though their corporate site has zero information. You must choose your country and then be directed to the local affiliate site.

WOMMA stands for Word of Mouth Marketing Association. This is a professional marketers association, dedicated to building and promoting best practices in, you guessed it, word of mouth marketing. It is becoming increasingly powerful, and there is not only confusion but a swarm of con artists who are riding the wave of word of mouth marketing.

Visit the WOMF parent site here.
Visit the WOMF USA site here.
Visit the WOMMA site here.

On the surface they sound very similar, but in practice they function differently. Together they represent an opportunity to shed light on the style and the substance of using social media to grow your business.

Let’s look at two bricks in the social web foundation – Transparency and User Interactions, and compare what WOMMA recommends with the execution of WOMF-affiliated sites.

TRANSPARENCY

• Creating forums and feedback tools
• Informing these individuals about what you do and encouraging them to spread the word
• Listening and responding to both positive and negative conversations
• Encouraging two-way conversations with interested parties
• Participating openly on online blogs and discussions

On the other hand, WOMMA cautions against various unethical strategies, including “Stealth Marketing: Any practice designed to deceive people about the involvement of marketers in a communication.”

The WOMF affiliate sites are built around the software platform, creating a place for people to talk about things they like or dislike. But the fact that each affiliate site is managed by a media company, who remains un-named, sold by a parent company who operates in complete stealth mode, for the express purpose of selling ads to small business, casts a pall on these potentially useful community-based sites.

How Does WOMF Rate?

1. There is no About page or any information on the parent company page; you must visit the main office in your country.
2. The WOMF USA site does have an About page, with names, phone numbers, and email links, tho the photos are of dogs not people. I think this intends to be cute (and we all know I love dogs!) but it comes across unnecessarily cryptic.
3. There is no About page on the local Hawaii WOMF or any information about the single WOMF administrator who posts on the site. Is it one person or several? We just don’t know who owns the site, who runs the site, or who this poster is. They have posted 69 times in the past 6 months, or about 2-3 times a week. This is probably not enough to “juice the site” and create the feeling of energy and activity on the site.
4. Local businesses are encouraged to advertise on the site, and can be featured by clicking through a “Businesses That Care” button at the top of each posting. There are also self-service banner ads for businesses sprinkled throughout the site.
5. There was a forum/blog/WOMF posting titled “Is WOMF locally owned?” and the question went unanswered by the site owner. This is not good; these questions must be answered truthfully, quickly, and without defensiveness.
6. The stated goals of the site are different, depending on the targeted audience. Read on for the actual text and make up your own mind.

Here is how WOMF USA defines their service, when talking to target customers (media outlets) on the corporate site – a mere four pages:

WOMF is a client acquisition program for Local Media to generate online revenue. This is a collaborative effort between programming, promotions and sales helping to deepen the relationship between your medium, your audience and your advertisers. Additionally you gain market prominence, heightened brand awareness and thought leadership for providing internet advertising solutions for your local businesses.

Yet here is how the local affiliate site defines its service on the community site, when talking to the users:

WOMF is about you. Your experiences, your opinions and your expertise. We want to hear what you have to say. Go ahead…Register and WOMF. It’s easy!!

Actually, both statements are true. But to have different definitions of who you are across the public web, runs the risk of being labeled “two-faced” and worse.

INTERACTING WITH YOUR USERS

1. The platform provides an elegant interface but the functionality is quite rudimentary as far as social networks are concerned. There is no RSS for users to subscribe to their interests, though there are “E-lerts” designed to email notifications (to businesses only) for $120 per year.
2. There is more than the usual level of information required for users to create their free accounts yet very little optional additional information for users to provide. It requires a screen name and a full name, though the signup process does not tell you which will be used where. In general, though businesses often don’t like it, you get more honest feedback when people can register with full anonymity. This site even requires your month and year of birth. (Clearly, this data point is of value to marketers, but I think it should be optional not required.) I know this is confusing at first, but here is how it works: The more you require, the less people will want to give. The less you require, the more they will want to share. Let them share their favorite bands their favorite restaurants, so others can see and be influenced by that. It’s how the social web works. Just don’t require people to tell you their real names.
3. The site offers an Upgrade though does not say what the benefits are or what the cost is before requiring very extensive information. It appears to be for businesses however, as “business name” is a required field. This upgrade messaging to users is not as clear as it could be and in fact site-wide, they could be using login tools to filter the messaging based on your user type. There is nothing wrong with having a mix of business and consumers – it’s desired actually, but it helps to pay attention to how, when, and where you communicate with each constituency.
4. Postings are moderated; in general, the more you moderate the less interaction and the less truthful interaction you will receive, and over time, the less interest people will have in contributing their feedback. I understand the desire to remove negative comments when it’s about one of your advertisers, but censoring perceived bad news is the best way to kill a user-generated content site.
5. There are no listings of users; they all fall into one amorphous pot other than the top ten in various categories. A key feature of social word-of-mouth sites is allowing users to easily interact with each other. Though users can comment on each others’ postings, few do.
6. Star ratings are unclear – a user can give a company a bad review, yet if people like the bad review aka “blog post” it gets more stars. To a casual visitor this appears at a glance to convey a rating about the company, not about the posting. I can’t say if this ambiguity is intentional or accidental, but it blurs the line and is confusing for users. Users also acquire both rank and star ratings, though it is unclear how one achieves this other than by the number of postings and by inheriting the ratings given to other postings, respectively.

WOMMA values honesty in word-of-mouth marketing:

Only honest marketers with confidence in their products dare engage in word of mouth marketing—because it will backfire if the promise of your marketing message isn’t backed up by reality. Once you give people a voice, they will tell the true story of your company, good or bad.

So How is WOMF Hawaii Doing?

• It calls discussion topics blog posts though refers to itself as a forum.
• It is advertiser-sponsored, though not in the usual ways. Not a bad thing, mind you, but it is not clear, and people can sense that discrepancy. People are so used to being tricked into sales, that they have developed sensitive radar and want to be told the truth. This truth-telling is the backbone of why WOMMA exists.
• The various calls to action on the site are actually aimed at businesses, not consumers, but the welcome messaging on the site and most of the visible functionality is aimed at regular folks just talking about their favorite things.
• There is little incentive for users to come back – they can’t get feeds with recent activity and they can’t link with their friends, and there’s just no one home there really.
• No one home. This is the real problem. Even the sales material promises the affiliate that this powerful site can be run on its own with very little time investment. This is the #1 misconception about the social web! Time is the new currency – it is not about the platform, it is about the relationships you cultivate with the people in your community.

How can this be improved? Here are a few of my recommendations for KGMB9:

1. The most important thing KGMB9 can do is to acknowledge itself as the site “host.” There is nothing wrong with advertising, except when it pretends not to be advertising. People don’t go to parties when it is unclear who the host is. “Who’s having the party?” “I don’t know.” “Well are they cool or creepy?” I don’t know!” “OK, let’s go someplace else then.”
2. KGMB can and should claim WOMF Hawaii as their brainchild, proudly defend their desire to both create a forum where we all can talk about local businesses AND where local businesses can advertise in targeted sections and talk with us. They could have a custom page on the site that is accessible from anywhere talking to people about this. Have a real person write it and include her/his photo and contact information. There is not enough anonymity for the users during the signup process and there is too much anonymity about the site owners/managers. Let’s flip this around.
3. KGMB9 has fantastic on-air talent. I think people would love to interact with Stacy and Keahi and Guy and engage users in discussion about local businesses and events and even power outages! (KGMB9 had great coverage last weekend – was WOMF used to support emergency resources?) These discussions can cross-link over to KGMB9 Twitter accounts here and here and I think you could proudly mention in the site graphics, “brought to you by KGMB9 as a service to our community and to support small business.” Ditto for the many WOMF banner ads on the KGMB9 web site – they just look like other banner ads. It’s 2008 – people hardly ever click on banner ads any more. Don’t be embarrassed by advertising – tell us you are the people of WOMF and that just like the rest of us, you are learning as you go too.
4. KGMB9 could reach out to other popular local leaders, celebrities, and marketers and ask for honest feedback about the site, on the site. Let the users witness and contribute to these conversations, as we love this kind of talk story.
5. KGMB9 could have the site admins do a weekly podcast on what’s new and hot. They’ve got access to film crews out roaming the island all day every day; they could connect their resources and grab some footage or even live-stream from a cell phone to feature new businesses who are mentioned and/or who are advertising on the WOMF site.
6. KGMB9 could advise its company advertisers to get on the site first as users, and reach out asking for feedback, commenting on other people’s postings. The conversation must come first, the good products and services come first – then the sales can follow. To attempt to use social web tools only for selling, is like making every party a Tupperware party. Museums are smart – they take you through the exhibits first and you end up at the gift store, not vice-versa. Yes, there might need to be some training involved and we can help with that. Don’t mislead businesses that social networks are quick and easy ways to makes sales. They aren’t. They take time and transparency at the very least.
7. KHMB9 could have more things going on for the users on the site. It is very one dimensional right now. Why not have a site member do a business review on the morning show with Howard once a week? You have so many ways to give people their 15 minutes of fame, and they will go to the ends of the earth for you in the process. We can provide ideas on how to do this, the limitations of the software platform or the licensing agreement notwithstanding.

Seth Godin has written several books explaining why sites like WOMF are the wrong approach for businesses to take. The disruption taking place in the market requires a change of culture – not simply slapping a new bandage on a problem that, once you understand it, is not at all like the ones you have faced in the past.

That doesn’t mean you toss the baby out just yet though. It does mean you put in place a lot more transparency. I know it is the opposite of business as usual, but it truly is your best friend in this environment and time. The WOMF software itself does a lot of cool things. Unfortunately, as I have learned too, the power of the social web is more about the users, than the platform.

I know this post is long but can you believe I have only scratched the surface of analyzing WOMF sites? It just goes to show this stuff is not as easy as it looks (most things rarely are) but getting the conversation started is well worth the effort. I hope to hear from some of the businesses who have advertised on WOMF as well as some of my friends over at KGMB9 and fellow media junkies both here in Hawaii as well as beyond.

Aloha!

Share/Bookmark