The predictions for 2009 is already a piece of hot cake floating around the blogosphere, as much as I hate predictions. More often, these predictions become marketing objectives in the following year. I think it is more appropriate to label these as “progressive suggestions”. Does it matter what we call it?

The year of 2008 has seen a sharp rise in the number of blogger events compared to 2007. I seriously meant EVENTFUL as bloggers are seen in all kinds of corporate and media events. I may have doubted the genuine objectives of some events, but the movement to engage consumers at large is ever growing.

Therefore, I am not keen to read too much into predictions. What I can offer though, is the progresses and improvements I hope to see in the coming year.

Qualitative over quantitative
It’s easy to bring in a whole bunch of people to flash your product, but many times harder to bring in a series of interactions that empowers you to build a rapport with your customers. Many PR agencies and companies are still dwelling in the pits with metric-obsession and their expenditures could be better placed in SEO or web advertising services.

Companies will always prefer opinion leaders through such events. Some of you call them influencers. It will be more beneficial for companies to spend more effort studying bloggers and take a deep consideration if they are indeed opinion leaders. The eventual bloggers will/should bring your brand alive.

Clear objectives
I have long grown sick of reading hullabaloo about how committed companies are to talking with consumers. Fact is, they’re not even anywhere close to who their real customers are. So, quit all the funky words. The objectives should be clearly described in the invitations. If your true intention is publicizing your new product, don’t even attempt to bluff your way through with appreciating whoever it is. Especially in where I am, web traffic overrules content quality.

Open communication
I shared a short example of controversial differing viewpoints made openly in my blog and the subsequent private email previously. Too many people are advocating “private settlements” instead of an open and transparent conversation. This solution sends a major doubt on what’s so hideous and pretentious that cannot be discussed openly, especially when there is an important message that is needed to be conveyed to the mass. When customers are able to see your dedication to conversations, it tells them you are always available to be engaged. Here’s a superb case study of how open communication is done. Imagine how nasty it will get if it wasn’t conducted this way.

Matt Rhodes of Fresh Networks touched on showing that companies do listen and focus on the needs of customers, so I am not going to repeat it here.

Customer service engagement
Noticed how many companies started their blogs only to end up with a statement that says no request for assistance should be made in them? I figured a blog is one of the most ready tools to be reaching out to customers who are facing problems with your products or services.

This is no excuse for any official corporate blogs seriously. If you’re updating your blog regularly, you are deemed to be reading the comments left by readers enthusiastically too. If you decide to let a call for assistance go unattended in your blog, it only means your company can’t bring itself to go the extra mile to keep customers happy. If your competitor can accomplish this, I feel sorry for you in 2009.

Leading as mentors
Especially so for PR practitioners, they should adopt the role of mentoring instead of stooping down into “political warfares” as initiated by a small handful of bloggers. In the arena where bloggers are vying to be invited for blogger events, all the more it is important for the hosts to step out and restore order. Being involved in such games will not help you build rapport with customers or with the bloggers’ readers, it only damages your brand.

Putting your foot down when it matters tell customers you are in control and believes in what you do. To improve on this one step further, avoid engaging one single blogger and leaving the entire invite engagement to that blogger. If a certain attendee does not fit into the demographics you are looking to reach out to, do not feel obligated even if they are close friends.

The financial market has taken a big hit and nobody knows how much more can it take. Of all the commotion, three incidents stood out and reflected the various aspects of social media in the works. The financial market is now paying its price for the lack of monitoring and regularities. Given such, will the social media scene suffer such a backlash if left unchecked?

I mentioned three incidents above, namely;

• Closure of Lehmann Brothers
• Bailout of AIG
• Fraud Exposure of Bernard Madoff

On totally unrelated grounds, the financial market was sparked off by subprime loans which spun out of control. Along with it, other factors of irregularities and non-factual reporting of status came into light. That again, sent many other firms down the chute.

We have been harping for too long that the social media scene shouldn’t be controlled and be allowed to flow where it leads us to. While I do acknowledge the joy and excitement of a freefall adventure, there is always the risk of a failing parachute. Of course, the notion that “the community will self-regulate itself” has always been loud. Faced with various avenues to acquiring hidden benefits, how true will the community stay to their cause?

Lehmann Brothers had always been dominating the market and created such a big game. As fitting as their shoes are, they still crashed and burned in the most unimaginable way without a bailout. The amount of diversified customers globally seemed like peanuts overnight.

Any social media team can still suffer from such a backlash. Having a large pool of bloggers at your disposal may not necessary indicate that you will enjoy the fruits at the end of the day. Also, bloggers are making up a part of the strategy but not everything. True, you could be looking at alot more eyeballs if you’re taking it on as free publicity. But as the scene had played itself out, quality audience are far more precious than just any eyeballs. I am sure all of us know, bloggers can be double-edged swords.

Here in Singapore, it also struck off protests against banks and financial institutions on alleged misrepresentation or false selling. Investors (especially retirees) sent feedbacks which included allegations that these minibonds were being marketed as low-risk investments. That is a direct reflection of how activities can also be misrepresented in the social media circle. What makes it even riskier, is that most bloggers are not business entities that can be dealt with in a single sweep.

The bailout of AIG left behind a shocking note, reflecting transparency and management deficits. It raised many eyebrows when top executives’ luxurious expenditures were rumoured to be ranging from five-digits to six-digits upon a massive bailout package by the Federal Reserve. Despite a hard attempt to clarify the issues, it still left a bad taste in the mouth of many.

What exactly is transparency? And, how exactly do we determine transparency? I believe it is still very much debatable. The allegations put against AIG exorbitant luxuries tell us how damaging it can be when anything less than acceptable and reasonable is being exposed. You may try to deny it or probably do a little damage control. However, the slightest indication that something is not quite a clean deal can still hurt a long way down the road.

For formal settings, companies often shy away from PR agencies and turn to them only when a crisis pops up. It doesn’t work that way because no amount of PR can cover up a critical flaw in the product, service, management or even issues that you feel too trivial to be fussing over.

Bernard Madoff’s $50 billion fraud (or possibly more) is one that I truly love watching as it unfolded. I am not gloating over those who were scammed in the process, but this incident alone amplified countless aspects of social media that we see today. While some may brush Madoff’s clever plot as a one-off incident, it certainly proved that it is possible for famous, credible and supposedly trustworthy individuals to pull off such a stunt.

Some have classified this massive Ponzi scheme as a form of affinity fraud - taking full advantage of trust, faith and friendship built up through the process of gaining their credibility. Now, it’s painfully similar to “friendships and rapport” between bloggers, and also with PR practitioners, isn’t it?

I fondly recalled how a blogger once contacted me privately, citing the “using-each-other-strategy” after a post of mine in an old blog. This is only the tip of the iceberg (which I will refrain from going into details), but it is a good enough an admittance of false rapport being displayed which misled many fellow bloggers into thinking so. This supposed “friendship” eventually spiralled into a tug of war for fame, recognition, web traffic and many more.

It may be a little audacious for me to warn that larger corporations are more likely to commit these atrocities in all industries, especially in social media that is being “regulated” lightly. Why did I come to such a notion?

Big corporations naturally have the monetary support, industry experts, technical know-hows and human connections much better than small firms. Armed with such a big toolbox, it is easier for such corporations to bend around the system and play a different game other than what’s stated. Similarly, they are also able to cover their tracks more efficiently than small firms.

In this case, big names and reputations may be a facade afterall. Looking back at how Madoff managed to pull off such a scheme on reputable financial institutions, the bulk of trust in his reputation and social standings must have played a significant role in this fraud. Perhaps, some would have proclaimed that there are no reasons to doubt him because his name spelled credibility in the market. Would you know?

In the rat race to fame among bloggers (particularly in Singapore), we’re looking at names which have grown enormously noisy. Whichever strategy they have adopted, they have certainly set their sights far. But what’s unknown to many, is how “business” is being done. Companies can still be easily misled into believing a big reputation and followers would be enough to determine the credibility of… let’s say… a blogger. Madoff’s incident has completely proven this belief wrong.

Instead of gauging on superficial statistics, companies ought to start prying deeper as to how various groups operate. Start asking difficult questions and make them prove their claims. Needless to say, you’ll find yourself in the pits if you rely obsessively on their information, run your own due dilligence. Communicate with outsiders who are not within the groups. Understand why they’ve chosen not to associate with these groups. Penetrate why some of them cannot put their trust in these groups and redirect these doubts back to the groups. Any less than satisfactory explanation will help you a long way to assessing the true credibility of these social media groups. It’s a tough job, but it is inevitable since most of these participants do not possess an entity that can be held accountable for any deficits in your programs.

Such is fragility of trust, it also made itself an easier tool to harness and exploit on unsuspecting people. I’m not saying you shouldn’t, you’re looking to build a lasting relationship with your customers afterall. Yet, it shouldn’t be loosely used when your brand is sitting on it. When you truly investigate deep into the hearts of some bloggers, you will be fascinated by the elaborate schemes they are operating by. Possibly better than Bernard Madoff himself.

The principles apply still… don’t they?