It’s been a little over a year since my noble experiment with Twitter began (see my blog, ”I’m all a-Twitter“), going on 2 years since lauching this blog, and several years since I’ve been on Facebook and LinkedIn.

Speaking strictly for myself, I’m still not completely sold on the value of social media, at least for myself. To be completely honest, the more I become involved with these communication methods, the more I feel enslaved by them, and I wonder if other users feel the same way. In fact, I wonder if the whole social media thing isn’t getting close to reaching the saturation point.

I realize that this sort of thinking is tantamount to high treason, especially in an industry that lauds social media as essential to marketing and branding. I also realize I may be contradicting myself, because I’ve written repeatedly about the importance of insurance agents using social media, in this very blog and elsewhere. But I’m speaking personally right now, and isn’t that what social media is supposed to be all about — transparency and authenticity?

Facebook alone is single-handedly doing a lot of harm to the concept of social media. On top of infuriating users by changing its “fan” settings to “like” and generating lawsuits by changing privacy settings, just this week there was another “security flaw” that allowed users to view other people’s private live chats and friends requests. Twitter, with its new ad platform, seems to be going down the same path. Both share a common strategy: insinuating themselves into our daily routine as a “free,” easy-to-use, “fun” service, becoming indispensible — and then monetizing that service. I’m just waiting for the day when Facebook, Twitter or both announce that they’re charging users for their services. Wonder how many “friends” we’ll have left when that happens.

Our industry’s acceptance of social media happened with an almost science-fiction-esque rapidity. Remember how long it took insurance to even start thinking about adopting e-mail and Web pages? Social media reached that level of acceptance in a nanosecond. Twitter has only been on the scene since 2007, but it’s already an indispensible part of the branding tool kit, with even the most staid insurance companies tweeting away, like something out of “Invasion of the Body Snatchers.”

IMHO, as we hepcats on the InterWebs say, I think we are in for a major consumer backlash on social media, whether it’s due to oversaturation, overcommercialization, or being eclipsed by the Next Big Thing. And I don’t think this backlash will necessarily be related to older users, either. You can make the case that I feel this way because I’m an elderly curmudgeon, but statistics show that only 16 percent of the 24-and-younger demographic use Twitter, and that the highly prized Millennial demographic is even starting to be eclipsed on Facebook by older users. Maybe the younger users are already beginning to sense that these sites are becoming oversaturated with commercialism.

I’m not saying that that people will stop using social media, or that we’ll suddenly go back to issuing quotes on paper via snail mail. But people don’t like to be “sold” — especially when the selling comes in the guise of friendship and free expression.

Perhaps today’s forms of social media will be eclipsed by some monster merger of FaceTwitLink, or something new and different that we won’t even see coming. Or maybe people will just get tired of tweeting, texting and talking on cellphones and rediscover the pleasures of face-to-face contact. At least I hope so: A recent study shows that one of 10 of under-25ers would interrupt having sex to take a text message. I sure hope that text message isn’t a tweet from an insurance agent.

In our December look at agency Internet marketing, the first question in our reader survey was, “Does your agency/brokerage have a Web site?” The response was 81%. Why not 100%, you might ask.

Another person asking was Duke Williams, a blogger and consultant on agency Internet use. Last month, Duke decided to conduct an informal survey of “feet on the street results for actual agency Web presence.” His methodology was simple: he used the “find an agent” feature on many insurance carrier Web sites, and Googled the term “car insurance city name state name.” He used the SuperPages, YellowPages and about a half dozen other lists online.

In individually searching several locations in South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, Alabama and Florida, he found:

• 248 independent agencies
• 49 Nationwide agencies
• 19 online-only agencies
• 51 State Farm agencies
• 26 Allstate agencies
• 7 Farmers agencies
• 7 Alpha agencies
• 2 Farm Bureau agencies
• 1 GEICO local agency
• 1 Direct General agency (rregional non-standard auto insurance carrier with owned agency locations)

While these results seem to indicate a strong presence for independent agencies, a closer look tells another story. Of the 248 independent agencies that came up in the search, only 64 — a paltry 25.8% — had a Web site, and only a fraction turned up in the Google “local results” search.

Delving deeper, Duke discovered that the agencies with Web sites weren’t consistent in functionality, even in non-real-time. For instance, 51.6% had quote request forms, but only 12.5% had “request a policy change” forms, and only 20.3% had “report a claim” forms. Not surprisingly, Duke reported that all the national direct writers had very high functionality.

While you could argue that Duke’s results are atypical — focused on a limited geographic area and a single line of business — you’d be missing the point. In every way, direct writers are making it easy for consumers to find and use their products and services — and it isn’t all about price.

Woody Allen once said that “80% of success is showing up.” When it comes to Web pages, the odds are even better if you show up with a functional product that makes it as easy as possible for people to use what you have to offer.

Last month we posted an interview on our Web page with Progressive’s  Karen Barone, national distribution leader for agency business, which proved to be 0ne of our most popular features.

Not surprisingly, part of the article’s interest — or more accurately, controversy — involves Progressive’s promotion of direct purchase along with sales through its agency force. 

Many of our readers pointed to Progressive’s heavy TV advertising — currently featuring the wacky saleswoman character, “Flo” — as testimony to its commitmemt to direct sales and cutting out the middleman. Surprisingly, in spite of the prevalence of Progressive advertising promoting direct sales,  Barone noted that about 65 percent of Progressive’s sales actually come through its more than 30,000 independent agencies.

Now, in recognition of that fact, Progressive is unveiling on Oct. 19 a new Flo commercial, featuring — you got it — an independent agent. (Well, actually, he’s an actor playing an independent agent, kind of like actress Angelina Jolie will play me in “The Laura Toops Story,” but you get the idea.) And, taking a tip from other industry branding programs (remember the Big I and Raymond Burr?), Progressive agents can even access a version of the commercial they can customize with their agency’s branding to run locally.

The thinking behind this move seems pretty sound — an attempt to promote the insurer’s already prevalent independent agency sales. But the end of the commercial — a voiceover that states, “Prices vary based on how you buy” — sums up the controversy. Because, of course, consumers who buy directly through Progressive will pay less than those who go through an agent.

Do you think Progressive’s new campaign will increase agency sales?

One of my favorite TV shows is AMC’s Mad Men, that paeon to the advertising industry of the early 1960s, when (mostly) men smoked and drank and came up with concepts to brand businesses and sell products. Last season, several episodes revolved around Sterling Cooper’s launch of a television department. At first, they’re not sure what to do with it. The department head is overworked, underpaid and disrespected. When he can’t keep up the pace, agency brass tries to fob off script reviews to the curvaceous office manager. And top dog Don Draper sometimes has a tough sell persuading clients of the importance of adding television to their media mix. Sterling Cooper even makes a point of hiring a couple of young guys to keep up with the new cool medium.

This sounds familiar, if you replace “television department” with “social media.”

Throw away everything you know about customer outreach, time management and building a brand. Over the past year, social media (SM) has changed the landscape of all these areas of property-casualty insurance agency operation, from how you manage your employees to staying in touch with your customers.

And the dust hasn’t settled yet. Even the experts are unsure about how social media will shake out in the business world. One thing is certain, however: Ignoring it is not an option.

That much was evident at the first Aartrijk Brand Camp, held this week at the snazzy Hotel Sax in downtown Chicago. The day-and-a-half meeting, attended by a cross-section of agents, carriers and media types, is the premier event hosted by insurance branding guru Peter van Aartrijk (who I knew long before his guru days). Speakers and subjects ranged from the macro view (Brad Keown of Facebook) to the practical (Marcia Hansen of Allstate), and everything in between.

Some of the findings were startling.

• 29% of consumer consumption is digital, and that number is growing
• Facebook has 90 million U.S. users, and plenty of your customers are there
• When it comes to sheer number of users, “Social media is the new porn,” according to Daniel Honigman, digital communicatio9ns supervisor at Weber Shandwick
• 91% of B-to-B decisionmakers participate in social media, 69% for business purposes
• 70 million retiring baby boomers around the globe are being replaced with only 15 million Gen Xers, with 55 million Gen Yers waiting in the wings, according to Deloitte.

This adds up to nothing less than a quantum shift in how we do business. Statistically, the future face of business will be increasingly female, Hispanic, and very comfortable with all forms of Web 2.o technology. This is the demographic we need to attract and understand, both as employees and customers. Much of our communication with them boils down to authenticity, transparency and trust — words not typically associated with insurance.

Take employees, for example. Because much of social media blur the lines between the personal and professional, your employees can be your company’s goodwill ambassadors everywhere in the virtual world. The Brand Camp speakers agreed that instead of building firewalls between your employees and this online world, you should be training them on its use. The thinking is that they’re going to be popping onto Facebook and YouTube on company time, anyway; you might as well make sure they’re doing it right when it comes to representing your business.  Bottom line: If you hired them, you should be able to trust them to do right by you — radical thinking from what most of us are used to!

Social medial also mean instant and constant accessibility.  Not too long ago, I would have “covered” this event by writing up the proceedings for publication in a magazine, which readers would get more than a month later. Reporters covering the Brand Camp tweeted their comments for instant delivery throughout the event, updated their Facebook or LinkedIn pages, or blogged about it, with plenty of room for others to comment (feeedback is a key element of social media).

This doesn’t mean the “old” communication methods are dead. Press releases are alive and well as a way to stay on a publication’s radar, and in spite of the growth of “unofficial” sites, there is still plenty of cachet in being written about in a recognized publication (whew! Good news for us formerly ink-stained wretches!). But social media needs to be part of your branding arsenal, and like any other branding effort, must be thoughtfully integrated into the mix.

What is your agency doing with social media to promote your business?

Sam Friedman recently generated a lot of controversy in NUP and on his blog (http://nusamsoapbox.com/2009/05/27/time-for-some-tough-love-on-industrys-image/) about the insurance industry’s traditionally lousy image and what can be done about it (even Bob Hunter weighed in — I’m jealous!).

On the same topic, I’d like to comment on the recent State Farm ads (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PMwTwY7SUs) now airing on TV. I almost never watch commercials since the advent of TiVo, but the latest one grabbed me and didn’t let go.

To the strains of the Jackson Five classic “I’ll Be There,” the 90-second spot shows real (albeit staged) images of what insurance is all about: hurricane victims crying in front of home wreckage, women on a breast cancer walk, a female soldier returning home to her young son, a Habitat for Humanity group raising a house, old folks caring for one another. It ends with the simple words on the screen, “Nothing’s more important than being there.”

Apparently I’m not alone: read some of the comments under the YouTube clip to see that along with the usual cynicism, many people were actually moved by this piece of advertising.

I know the insurance industry’s image revolves around a lot more than paid advertising — and that direct writers are the the Great Satan — but this ad campaign speaks to what insurance is really about, underplaying the price issue and playing up the importance of a real, live agent who’s on the scene when you need them.

I’ve always maintained that catastrophes are the true proving ground for agents to not only justify their existence, but to establish some bragging rights about the important work they do for their customers.

Hurricane season is coming up. Image enhancement, anyone?

 The ballots have been counted, they’ve cleaned up Grant Park, and the 2008 presidential election is finally history — literally.

Whether you’re ecstatic or disgruntled about the outcome, you have to agree that what happened is unique, in more ways than the obvious (our first black president). The fact that more than 130 million Americans turned out to vote (the biggest number in 44 years!) flies in the face of conventional wisdom about voter apathy, political burnout, voting along racial/regional lines, and just about everything else we’ve come to expect.

So what was different this time around? Obviously, the economic disaster and two wars dragging on were major factors in turning the tide against the incumbent administration. But there was much more at work here than simple backlash. I think the real story lies at least in part with the number of young voters and how they communicate and relate with each other and the world.

According to CNN’s numbers, 18 percent of the voters were between the ages of 18 and 29, and 66 percent of them voted for Obama. The Gen Y voter trend began in 2004, when 20 million of them cast a ballot, the largest young-voter turnout since 1972 (remember “get clean for Gene”?), according to the Young Democrats of America (www.yda.org).

And as AA&B tech writer Tom Baker so often reminds us, the Millennial Generation is characterized by its technological sophistication and constant connection to each other and the world via social networks, blogs, Twitter, IM and text.

The Obama campaign knew this demographic well, and tapped into the youthful zeitgeist by making it as easy as possible for its supporters to get out the vote. Volunteers could canvass door to door or call registered voters from online lists at the Obama Web site, then click an online checklist to record their responses. The campaign was in constant communication with its supporters; if the sheer volume of e-mail is any indication, I’m now on a first-name basis not only with Barack and Michelle, but with Dave (Plouffe, Obama’s campaign manager) and occasionally Joe (Biden).

What does any of this have to do with insurance agents? Plenty. The Obama campaign used every form of technology and communication at its disposal to reach a new generation of voters, just as our industry must come to terms with this emerging market demographic, both as employees and as customers.

But I’m not paraphrasing good old Marshall McLuhen here; I don’t believe the medium alone is the message. Young people have been marketed to virtually from infancy onward. They’re savvy about being sold a bill of goods. It’s not enough to reach them by Twitter, e-mail or YouTube. Your message has to be authentic and succinct to grab them.

I’ll be ruminating more on this topic over the next month as we gear up for our January issue on talent management. Meanwhile, I’d love to get your thoughts on reaching Gen Y. Can we reach them? Yes, we should!

Just in time for Halloween, here’s a little something from the news wires to add another touch of lunacy to the AIG debacle. From the Duluth News-Tribune:

Duluth insurance agency fined for AIG ad

A Duluth insurance agency has agreed to pay thousands of dollars in fines for taking out an ad questioning the financial health of insurer AIG.

 The state Department of Commerce says Wednesday that insurance agent Gregory Brisky agreed to pay a $2,000 fine. His agency, the Dwight Swanstrom Co., agreed to pay a $3,000 fine.

 The department says the agency took out a newspaper ad soliciting AIG customers who might be “nervous” about their insurance company in an attempt to get them to switch insurers.

 American International Group was bailed out last month when the federal government offered it an $85 billion loan during the ongoing credit crisis.

 The Commerce Department says it has affirmed the financial solvency of AIG’s insurance companies, despite the troubles with the parent company.

 It’s against Minnesota law to make misleading statements on the financial condition of any insurer.

 Brisky says he has no comment

I tried to reach the agent to get his side of the story, but had no luck (not surprisingly). What’s really ironic is the same day this little item appeared, pressure from New York AG Cuomo forced AIG to freeze $600 million in deferred compensation for the brain trust of executives that got them into this mess in the first place.

Naturally, agents have to be careful with what they say, or run the risk of violating local law. The New York State Insurance Department, for example, has issued a number of warnings about licensed producers attempting to cash in on AIG’s troubles, reminding them there are laws against:

AA&B’s legal guru Barry Zalma calls the agent’s efforts “a violation of a local law and a stupid attempt to gain business…E&O does not cover, nor should it cover, criminal or other intentionally wrongful acts.” And our “Avoiding E&O” columnist Louie Castoria, an attorney with Wilson Elser, says, “This issue came up yesterday at the Credit Crisis presentation I gave in Portland to the Oregon Surplus Line Assn. The E&O problem with dissing AIG, apart from factual inaccuracy, is that if you play on people’s fears and they swith to a non-admitted insurer, they won’t have the state insurance guaranty fund as a fallback. There are also the usual problems with switching: advancing retro dates, changes in primary coverage that may effect excess layers, etc. In general, a broker should view switching carriers with suspicion, just as a mortgage lender today should be somewhat skeptical of a re-fi. Bottom line: Does it create a material benefit for the borrower?”

However, I can’t say that I blame the Duluth agent for trying to (literally) scare up a little business in the wake of the AIG mess, although obviously one has to stay within the limits of the law. And the story does raise the legitimate issue of how to assuage policyholder concerns during these unprecedented times.

I’d be interested to hear from any of our readers about whether their customers have expressed concerns about their coverage with AIG (or any other insurer, for that matter) and how you’re responding to them.