Almost everyone working in PR and communications with B2B companies struggles with media monitoring. When I have conversations with clients about this, they typically complain about one of the following:
- The time spent manually compiling all the information and then getting it into a sensible and presentable format from which it’s possible to derive some intelligence
- The cost of the mainstream, third-party, media monitoring platforms – the investment required can represent a significant proportion of the overall communications budget
- The ‘false positives’ inevitably picked up by all media monitoring platforms – we’ve all seen the worthless press release reprints on totally irrelevant websites that can take hours to weed out
- The missing coverage – no matter what you’re paying for a media monitoring platform, for some reason, they always seem to miss important coverage
Here at Babel, we feel the pain on behalf of our clients, not all of whom can afford to put a heavyweight media monitoring platform in place or to pay for the hours required to set up and manage it. We wanted to provide a solution that delivers intelligence without breaking the bank.
The good news is, with a little ingenuity, it’s possible to get things done much more cost-effectively and still come up with a highly effective analysis that not only provides insight into how your campaign is progressing, but also provides pointers for improvement.
Our starting point for this approach is Google, and in particular, Google’s ability to search within specific domains (e.g. zdnet.com). You see, in the B2B world, we can pretty much identify every important online media outlet for a specific client (trades, vertical, general business etc.) – you might have a hundred or more but you know which they are. With that information to hand, you can then ask Google to search the domain of that media title and to specify the date parameters you are interested in.
Of course, doing this for a hundred domains would be time-consuming, so we developed a means to automatically create Google search parameters that would search multiple domains at the same time. The example below searches 25 separate domains for ‘Cisco Wi-Fi OR WiFi’ with the results restricted to those between 1st April 2017 and 31st March 2018 (it also gets Google to produce 100 results per page instead of the usual 10).
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Cisco Wi-Fi OR WiFi+site%3Aalphr.com+OR+site%3Aarstechnica.com+OR+site%3Abbc.co.uk+OR+site%3Abloomberg.net+
The URL gives you a Google output that looks like that shown left:
You can see from the results that we have a date, a headline, an article summary, a linking URL and the media outlet (part of the URL). That’s what you need as the basis of your media analysis.
The next step is to get all of that data into a spreadsheet so that you can interrogate and manipulate it. There are a number of ways of doing that and if you aren’t comfortable with data extraction techniques, the simplest way is to copy and paste it. You’ll then need to use some advanced spreadsheet formulas to separate the individual data elements into rows and columns. It needs to look something like the screenshot below, and this is a good time to weed out any obvious anomalies (easy to achieve by filtering on columns):
If you are doing a comparative analysis, you’ll need to do the same for the other companies you are looking at and, in the example used here, as well as Cisco, we have extracted data related to Aruba, Huawei and Juniper Networks within approximately 40 media title domains.
Once you have all the data in raw format, you can use some more spreadsheet trickery to interrogate and manipulate. The following are a range of charts that can be produced easily:
Most of these charts are self-explanatory and recognisable as the basis of a standard comparative media analysis. The chart directly above goes a little further and maps the impact each of the four companies has made in each of the media titles. It’s an incredibly useful metric to guide future outreach. If you like, you can add your own data elements – for instance, allocating a sentiment score.
At Babel, we’ve invested time into building a master spreadsheet template that automates most of the process, including creating the search domains and search terms from a list of email addresses or websites to the creation of all the charts. It takes the raw output from Google, extracts the individual data points and builds all the charts without any significant user intervention.
So there it is, very effective media monitoring that doesn’t require a huge investment. If you’d like to learn more about this approach, let us know.
First appeared in PRWeek: http://l.babelpr.com/ocvnd
The revelations surrounding Cambridge Analytica and Facebook revealed by The Observer and Channel 4 are shocking but it was expected by many of us who work in the world of technology. Whatever the legalities of the situation, a good proportion of the population are likely to be both surprised and angry that their personal data appears to have been exploited in the way reported.
I’m not surprised in the slightest, although I share the anger. For some years I’ve been ranting to anyone who was interested (and most weren’t) that we have been sleepwalking. We’ve allowed the creation of technology giants and we’ve handed them enormous power and control over our lives. This is now a world of ‘ones’ – one company dictates which websites we visit, one company curates our relationships with friends and family and one company effectively ‘owns’ shopping.
I have no objection in principle to big and powerful technology companies since they’ve given us much that benefits us all. Unfortunately, very little responsibility has accompanied the grant of power and control. Furthermore, unlike our politicians, we don’t have the option of deselecting them every few years via the ballot box. What we have is a small number of companies with enough resources to potentially stifle competition and to take on the legal and regulatory regimes of the countries in which they operate. That would all be fine if all these companies were universally benevolent but it would be naïve to think that the pursuit of individual and corporate wealth isn’t having an influence on the decisions some of them take.
Let’s assume the reports are accurate for a moment. Cambridge Analytica isn’t one of the giants but its apparent actions could only have been enabled by the release of huge volumes of data by Facebook. Facebook argues that this wasn’t a data breach in the strict sense of the term and the ‘techie’ in me supports that position but at the very least it could be seen as an abdication of responsibility. Very few checks and balances appear to have been in place to ensure that the data couldn’t be shared and exploited.
So, what does all of this mean for those of us in the technology PR industry? I think it’s a time for choices. For any of us working, in-house or agency, with the giants of the technology industry, it’s incumbent on us (as those who are often most exposed to external perceptions) that we are a voice for corporate responsibility. That isn’t just about being a ‘good’ person, it’s actually about protecting your company from a situation in which the entire business is threatened. There’s a commonly held view that some companies are too big to crater but those of who have been in the industry for a number of years remember what happened to MySpace, RIM, Nokia, Yahoo and AOL.
If your voice is heard, understood and acted upon that’s great, but you also have a choice if it isn’t. You can resign the position or turn down the offer to work for a company you believe to be acting irresponsibly. If you don’t, and you carry on using your communications skills to defend the indefensible, you’re actually part of the problem.
Hot on the heels of my analysis of the market sectors being represented at Mobile World Congress this year I thought it might be interesting to look at the geographic spread of exhibitor companies. They are shown on the map with the size of the red dot being proportional to the number of companies exhibiting.
The most represented country is Spain but that’s probably an aberration since the Fira is obviously an easy place to get to for Spanish companies and there’s also a (very) strong representation from the peripheral industries servicing the sector (marketing, events etc.). Next on the list are the United States (355), China (216), South Korea (198 and a big increase on last year), the United Kingdom (178), France (151), Germany (141) and Israel (116).
The numbers then drop to double figures quite rapidly until you get to the 14 countries represented by a single company, from Costa Rica (with the strangely named 2fun2me) to Vietnam (Viettel Group).
For those of you who think they’ve spotted an obvious error, that tiny red dot to the right of Madagascar, which appears to be swimming in the Indian Ocean, is Mauritius with two companies exhibiting – who knew!
Here at Babel, we’ve been deeply involved in the mobile sector ever since the company was founded, so it won’t come as any surprise that we have a big team at Mobile World Congress every year. This year is no exception – we’ll be looking after a number of clients located in Hall 1 to Hall 8 and the team will spending plenty of time running between them all (there really is no need for visits to the hotel gym at MWC).
Some of the Babel crew have been attending MWC since the Cannes days and we’ve seen a lot of changes in the industry, and in the event itself, over that time. Regular visitors will know that it’s no longer completely dominated by handsets, operators and network equipment manufacturers. They still play a big part but it’s become an incredibly diverse industry. To illustrate that, we thought we’d take at look at this year’s registered exhibitors and see which sub-sectors they all consider themselves to be operating within.
Here are the top 20 market sectors measured by the number of exhibitors ‘tagging’ a particular sector within their exhibitor listing (they can list up to five).
Now, I know a year is a long time (although acceleratingly shorter as I get older), but we also did this piece of analysis last year and there have been big changes since. ‘Smart Cities’ and ‘Artificial Intelligence’, now in the top five, weren’t even in the top 20 last year! In fact, a total of nine market sectors are new chart entrants.
Nobody with any experience in the sector would be naive enough to think that all of those companies pop up overnight and so it might be useful to think about this as the mobile industry’s Top of the Pops. The popularity of individual songs (stated market sectors) might change rapidly, but the underlying genres and the artists (companies) typically endure for a much longer period.
To illustrate the point, take a look at the number one slot, ‘IoT/M2M’. If the GSMA had split those two categories this year M2M wouldn’t be anywhere near the top 20, but we all know there are blurred lines between the two. Speaking of blurred lines and our Top of the Pops analogy, think about it as the similarity between Marvin Gaye’s 1977 single ‘Got To Give It Up’ and ’Blurred Lines’ by Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams (from whom Gaye’s family extracted nearly $8 million in damages and royalties).
There is a serious communications point here. If you’re running around MWC singing Kylie’s ‘I Should Be So Lucky’ and all your prospects, customers and the media are belting out one of Taylor Swift’s numbers, you might not actually be so lucky…
See you all at MWC!
A couple of weeks ago I penned a blog entry that was critical of both Google and major brands with regard to the shit storm surrounding ad placement on YouTube. Those brands had discovered their ads were being placed alongside extremist content and as a result, both Google and the brands concerned were, in effect, providing funding to the owners of that extremist content.
Nobody is suggesting that either Google or the brands were doing this knowingly but that doesn’t mean they don’t deserve criticism. The brands ought to be exercising some due diligence by monitoring (much more closely) where their ads appear and Google has a responsibility to ensure it isn’t facilitating the funding of extremists.
Google’s latest comments, in a recent Recode interview with the company’s chief business officer, Philipp Schindler, suggest Google simply doesn’t understand how serious an issue this is. The following passage extracted from the Recode interview, in which Schindler is talking about the size of the problem, is very telling:
“It should always be smaller. It’s our responsibility to make it smaller. Let’s not take away from that. But remember, we’ve had that problem, at scale, for a long time. The whole industry [has], even traditional. The problem comes from the fact that somebody is aggressively putting it onto the front page.”
So, an acknowledgement that there is an issue and that it’s been going on for some time, but hang on a minute, “the problem comes from the fact that somebody is aggressively putting it onto the front page.” That statement, I believe, provides us with a unique insight into the way the ‘Google mind’ thinks. How else should we interpret it other than to conclude that Google would be happy to leave things as they are and simply find a way to shut up those pesky journalists (and others) who seek to question the fundamentals of this advertising model? It’s a staggering example of corporate arrogance.
I wonder if it has actually occurred to anyone at Google that lots of people actually do care about this issue, that the journalists covering the story are simply reflecting their strongly held views, and that they aren’t simply taking cheap shots at a ‘tall poppy’.
I don’t think any of us know how the issue will eventually play out however, from a communications perspective Google needs to think very carefully about the public statements its employees make. So far, it seems to have handled things very badly and few appear convinced that, of its own volition, it will do everything it reasonably can to address the shortcomings.
The vacuum of inaction is only likely to draw in greater scrutiny from Google’s customers, and from regulators. Perhaps that’s not a bad outcome in the circumstances.
…and apparently neither do Marks & Spencer, Vodafone, Sky, HSBC, Lloyds, Royal Bank of Scotland, McDonald’s, L’Oréal, Audi, Sainsbury’s, Argos, the BBC and the British Government. Google’s seemingly laissez-faire approach to its operations may finally be catching up with the Internet giant after some significant organisations pulled advertising budget from YouTube.
Nobody should be surprised to learn that it isn’t OK, in the eyes of most reasonable people, to be advertising next to extremist material. The end result is that those who do are indirectly funding those extremists and without entering into an argument to define what is extreme and what isn’t, this is not a good thing. On that point, there doesn’t seem to be much of an argument, but where does the responsibility lie?
For my part I’m surprised it has taken so long for some of the big brands to get off their collective backsides and do something about it. YouTube advertising, despite all the talk of precise targeting and the enormous technical resources available, still seems to be little more than ‘spray and pray’. It might be spray and pray that works – the advertisers keep coming back and so presumably see a consistent return on their investment – but the fact remains that we can all point to numerous examples of entirely inappropriate targeting on YouTube.
In that environment, it’s reasonable to ask why the brands involved haven’t been carrying out more effective due diligence. They are very careful where their ads are placed in newspapers and on television but when it comes to the Internet, no such care seems to be applied. Programmatic platforms, like Google’s, fundamentally change the mechanics of advertising. They effectively remove the brand from the actual content and instead, present a range of geographic, demographic and content categories to choose from. It’s impossible to know precisely what you are advertising against until it happens because a machine has taken control of the placement.
That doesn’t absolve brands of responsibility and they really shouldn’t be relying on another brand spotting the issue (which seems to be the case for most of the companies that have pulled their ads) or on a consumer bringing it to their attention. It’s too late by that stage, the money’s already in the pocket of the extremist (and Google).
That brings me on to Google’s position in this and it reminds me a little of parenting. Now, I don’t claim to be the world’s best father and my children will no doubt attest to the fact that I’ve made some enormous mistakes along the way (and probably scarred them for life), but I did teach them at least one important lesson in their teenage years. It’s the same lesson my father taught me and it’s that there comes a point in your life when you have to take responsibility for your own actions. The teenage Google doesn’t yet appear to have reached that epiphany.
This is evident in the statements Google has made in response to this issue:
“…in the vast majority of cases, our policies work as intended…”
“We accept that we don’t always get it right, and that sometimes, ads appear where they should not.”
“…apologise to our partners and advertisers who might have been affected by their ads appearing on controversial content.”
“I apologise in the instances where that may have happened…”
“…pennies, not pounds…”
The language is clearly designed to position this as a minor hiccup rather than a significant problem and gives you little confidence that this is a company that actually wants to do something about it. What Google hasn’t done is perhaps more telling than what it has said in public. It hasn’t, as far as we know, paid back any of the ‘ill-gotten gains’, it hasn’t truly acknowledged that there is a fundamental issue to be addressed and it hasn’t announced a wholesale review of the platform. In short, it hasn’t taken responsibility for its actions.
I’ve been involved with Internet based businesses for more years than I care to remember and I’ve always taken the position that the Internet should be free of regulation wherever possible. It is a conduit for the flow of information and regulating that flow artificially is akin to building walls between countries.
That’s my position on the Internet itself but it isn’t my position on companies that exploit the Internet for commercial gain, reach a position of market dominance, and return the profits to a small group of shareholders. I don’t object to the model itself but those companies shouldn’t expect to operate in an environment in which they alone create the rules of engagement.
Google apparently approves of the status quo it has established. Whilst it hides under a laughably arrogant ‘don’t be evil’ motto (by whose definition?), Google uses its absolute market dominance to dictate how companies, organisations and individuals act and interact online. The teenager is currently tooled up with as much firepower as it is possible to muster, it isn’t taking responsibility for its actions and it seems immune to entreaties to change.
Be afraid, be very afraid.
It was a gloriously sunny morning on the final day of Mobile World Congress 2017. Whilst many will be glad to return home after a busy week at the Fira, I’m sure we’ll all miss the blue skies and buzzing atmosphere of Barcelona.
Everyone has their reasons for attending MWC; whether representing a company exhibiting at the show, reporting on the latest trends or – as with the Babel team – supporting clients and ensuring things run smoothly. Although show highlights will differ from person to person, there were a few moments at the event this year that could not have failed to impress or surprise the large majority. In no particular order, then, here is what we have learned and what we will remember the most from Mobile World Congress 2017:
All hail handsets!
Despite the abundance of futuristic technology, the traditional smartphone handset still took a prominent position at MWC.
Retro re-launches included the updated Nokia 3310, and BlackBerry KeyOne. New handsets in the budget range included Motorola’s Moto 5G and 5G Plus. Yet with features including full HD display, a 13-megapixel front camera, and a 2.0GHz octa-core processor, these devices prove just how much you can get for your money today.
Drones go commercial
The recognisable hum of the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) could be heard in certain areas at MWC, as drones returned to the show. In addition to being fun to fly, drones also have great potential for commercial use. Chinese company DJI, for instance, used the show to launch its Matrice 200 series, with intended uses including the inspection of power lines, turbines and other infrastructure, as well as assisting emergency services with search-and-rescue operations.
The Drone Zone was new to the show this year, and a Drone Summit was held yesterday, illustrating the increasing importance of this sector to the wider mobile ecosystem.
Cities get smart
We’ve seen smartphones, smart watches and smart cars, and now urban environments are also getting the smart treatment. A number of companies had displays of smart city infrastructure on their stands at MWC, and espoused a shared vision of a more connected, environmentally friendly, and sustainable living environment.
Harman was showing its Quick Predict early detection and warning system, which can be used to examine the health of machines used in factories or utilities that process water.
Elsewhere, AT&T announced a deal with Current and GE to connect cities in the US and Mexico to the IoT. This will include developing digital infrastructure which addresses traffic flow issues, parking, monitoring of air quality and weather emergency alerts.
A 5G future
The GSMA’s ‘Next Element’ tagline to the event this year was undoubtedly referring to 5G. With the abundance of 5G tech on show, however, it was easy to forget that this technology is indeed the ‘next’ element, and a few years off being the current connectivity standard.
5G requires new technology to be developed and – most importantly – new standards to be agreed upon. This will only be achieved through cooperation and partnerships between various sections of the mobile ecosystem.
A number of such partnerships were announced at MWC this year, including between Reliance Jio and Samsung. The companies held a joint press conference at which they announced plans to develop 5G and LTE-Advance Pro services in India. Similarly, Nokia and MediaTek announced that they will together develop a 5G-enabled ecosystem for commercial implementation.
In the next 12 months we will hopefully be further along the road to 5G. We will also see improved handsets, better connected cities and even more vertical industries embracing mobile technology, all in time for MWC 2018.
Have a safe trip home, and hope to see you next year!
Running exhibitions is always about the numbers and every year we hear those numbers from the GSMA as they relate to Mobile World Congress. MWC 2016 was a record year as the figures outlined below attest:
- 101,000 attendees, 5,000 of whom were CEOs, from 204 countries
- 2,200 companies exhibiting across 110,000 square metres of exhibition space (this is why your feet hurt)
- 3,600 journalists and analysts (this is why any sensible PR consultant starts circuit training at least two months prior)
Interestingly the GSMA’s independent economic analysis indicates that the event contributed more than €460 million to the local economy and generated 13,000 part-time jobs. Little wonder that Barcelona bid so hard to keep the event the last time a change was mooted.
We thought it might be interesting to look behind some of the raw numbers to see what they reveal. Let’s start with those pesky journalists and analysts (we love ‘em really) and a breakdown of which countries they came from in 2016.
This is a ‘home game’ for Spain and so although there are some very influential Spanish journalists attending the event, the total number is an aberration. The fact is that, if you’re a Spanish journalist based anywhere near Barcelona you are going to drop in at the Fira, even if it’s just to look around, so the number far exceeds what it might be if the event was hosted elsewhere. Next on the list are UK and US journalists and they are likely to be some of the busiest at the show – English language media in the mobile sector, like no other, tends to ‘bleed’ into every other market and so a good proportion of those 5,000 CEOs will be looking to meet at least some of the native English speakers.
Then we have journalists from Germany and Italy. The contingent from Germany doesn’t surprise me – it’s a highly developed mobile and tech. market with a well organised and active media industry but I’m not sure Italy really compares. Despite that, the number of Italian journalists always seems to be significant even if the coverage that results rarely makes its way beyond the country’s borders.
There’s a very long list, from another fifty countries, below those shown in the chart but whatever their numbers and position on the list, you can’t assume they can be ignored. If you’re interested in doing deals in Ecuador, it may well be worth talking to the one journalist that attended (if you can find him or her).
A league of nations
Next we looked at a geographic breakdown of the companies registered to attend in 2017 and it doesn’t take long for you to figure out which countries are the powerhouses of the mobile sector.
Once again, Spain’s position is probably an aberration – unsurprisingly, you’ll find quite a lot of generalist service companies featuring amongst that country’s MWC registered companies. The countries that dominate are the United States, China and the United Kingdom and that won’t shock anyone with some knowledge of the mobile industry. The US and UK have a long history in mobile technologies, content and services and whilst China might have started later in the development cycle, it’s a country that plays the hard ball version of catch up.
For many years we saw Chinese companies concentrating on their (substantial) home market but that is no longer the case and if I could give one piece of advice to anyone thinking about working in the mobile industry now, it would be to learn Mandarin and accustom yourself with the way the Chinese do business.
The country that sometimes surprises those outside the industry is Israel. It’s number five on the list of registrations which may seem surprising for such a small region. It shouldn’t be, telecommunications expertise abounds and in fact telecommunications equipment is one of the country’s major export products.
Finally we examined a breakdown of the various products and solutions those companies registered for MWC 2017 are planning to promote. If ever there was a confirmation of the changing face of MWC this is the chart that does it.
Those of us that have been attending MWC for years can’t have failed to notice some fundamental shifts. If this chart was compiled for any of the Canne hosted MWCs, certain of the categories that feature now in the top 20 wouldn’t exist, and others would struggle to make the top 100. Today we see significant representation of ‘in-building systems’, ‘tablet devices’ and ‘cloud services’ – none of which would have made the list in 2006, the last year France hosted the event.
The three product categories you should note are ‘consumer electronics’, ‘mobile advertising and marketing’ and ‘IoT / M2M’. They are all categories that really stood out this year at the Fira and they provide a good indication of where many in the industry are focussing their attention.
What the top 20 list doesn’t reveal is the dramatic change in the power structure within the industry over the last ten years. MWC was once completely dominated by tier one operators, handset brands and network equipment manufacturers. Today, though each of those is still important, it’s arguable that the global internet brands have greater influence on the future direction of the industry. That’s why you’ll see people like John Hanke, CEO of Niantic, listed as keynote speaker in 2017. Although handset launches got some people out of bed this year it was an augmented reality game published by Niantic called Pokémon Go that got billions moving.
See you there
Whatever it is that ‘floats your boat’ in the mobile industry, there’s no doubt that you’ll find it at MWC. It remains the premier event in the sector and no matter how many grumbles there are about the cost of exhibiting, you have to hand it to the GSMA. They produce a compelling event and manage to keep it relevant year after year.
STORY UPDATE 1 (10.00 20th October) – Since writing this story we have received communication directly from Apple’s PR office to deny they have an “official presence at the show” and since then the listing on the MWC site has mysteriously disappeared.
STORY UPDATE 2 (14.30 20th October) – In an update to their original story, The Mobile Network has received a statement from the GSMA saying that, “We can confirm that Apple will have meeting space at Mobile World Congress, as they have had previously.” Looks like theory 2 (below) was correct (not sure about the ‘execution’ though).
As spotted by yours truly, and reported first in The Mobile Network, it looks like the obvious missing element at Mobile World Congress has been found. The recently published exhibitor list for MWC 2017 is listing Apple for the first time, a company that is such a huge part of the mobile ecosystem but one that, at MWC, has always been noticeable only by its absence.
Apple has famously avoided the event and while we’ve all become accustomed to the increasingly annoying Android robots getting in the way while we rush from one meeting to another, nobody has ever stumbled over a half eaten Golden Delicious. You might be pleased to hear that situation is still unlikely – Apple’s space is actually three meeting rooms rather than exhibition space but it’s a whole lot more than we’ve seen previously.
Strangely, although the the company appears in the exhibitor listing, on the show floor plans each of the meeting rooms is listed as space for the GSMA so we have two theories:
- The charm offensive has worked, this is the start of a new love affair and the ‘powers that be’ at the GSMA can’t wipe the smiles off their faces
- The listing was an accident and Apple has secretly been holding meetings at MWC for years. If that’s the case the aforementioned powers that be have probably already executed the culprit responsible (or at least they will when they see TMN’s story)
One final point on MWC 2017 but at a slight tangent – just how many meetings can one company possibly hold at the event? Just take at look at the collection of rabbit hutches that Facebook has assembled:
Creating relevance in your IoT story
We’ve just published our latest research that provides communications insight for companies seeking to make a name for themselves in the Internet of Things sector. The first couple of paragraphs are pasted below but you can see the full paper here.
A little research will quickly reveal that the Internet of Things (IoT) market is primed for considerable growth. Just how much it grows is open to an active industry debate but if you take the figures from IDC’s Worldwide and Regional Internet of Things (IoT) 2014–2020 Forecast, we can look forward to a market worth $7.1 trillion in 2020. Those trillions of dollars represent an environment in which 28.1 billion ‘things’ that will be monitoring and communicating with something or somebody, somewhere at some time.
So, let’s just agree, it’s a big market and with big markets come big opportunities so it’s little wonder that, all of sudden, everyone seems to be in the IoT business. From a communications perspective it’s one of the noisiest markets of them all with everyone from tiny start-ups to major international corporations vying for the eyes and ears of media, analysts, partners and customers. At Babel we see this ‘one in, all in’ situation all the time – mobile, big data, cloud, gamification, artificial intelligence and robotics are just a few of the technology trends that everyone seems to want to get involved in.
Of course it can make a lot of sense to follow the hype cycle (and the money!) but if you do so, as well as having a viable commercial proposition, you have to remember that you are not alone. For your voice to be heard you have to shout loud (£££££££££££) or box clever (£). With that in mind we’ve undertaken a detailed analysis of one aspect of the IoT communications mix to try and establish what approach needs to be adopted for media outreach to shine a light on companies operating in the IoT sector.