– [Voiceover] Matthew asks, “You said Pinterest and Twitter
speak different languages. “Is it wrong to have my Pinterest account “tied to my Twitter account
so when I post to Pinterest “It auto-posts to Twitter?” – Yes, Matthew. It is wrong, but it’s not super wrong. You know, automation has a part where, you know, I continue to test what’s scalable, what’s not. The reason it’s probably wrong is you’d probably get a lot more value and we all do it, I do it, I
continue to test the wrong way to make sure about the right way. For example yesterday I put, you know, we have started putting out pictures that are completely native
to Twitter in the forum. Yesterday’s photo of me and AJ, you know high five surround yourself
with people with permission. In the old days, excuse me. In the old days I would have put the
Instagram link in Twitter. And it would have looked like
crap in that crazy screen that is Twitter. It would have had a link to Instagram. You know, Twitter has made
Instagram not native upload. And I would have drove
people to that photo. But now with the original piece of content that got a great engagement. Over 100 retweets and favorites yesterday. And I accomplished the storytelling
that I wanted on Twitter instead of using Twitter as a distribution to drive towards Pinterest for the added efficiency
that created automation. Automation’s great if you’re just trying
to make things happen. Meaning like if you’re just
trying to get the task done. But what about the result
that you’re actually trying, like why do you tweet? You tweet to get your message out. And thus, you need to make content native. So I would say it’s wrong. Because if you take that same pin, whatever you’re trying
to achieve on Pinterest, and you cropped, what’s the crop area, we don’t, none of the
designers are here, right? Dammit, you know. If you cropped it
appropriately by default, let me, they took my phone too. If you cropped it
appropriately it’d do better. So the answer is yeah, it’s a mistake. – Hey Gary, Mottel from Twitter
here and I wanted to ask you

– [Mayanmurfee] Ben asks, “What do you think about
recent Omnicom advice to move 25 percent of ad
budgets to online video?” – So for the small businesses
or the entrepreneurs, Omnicom is a big kind
of conglomerate agency in my VaynerMedia world these days and they do a lot of what’s
called working media, the dollars you spend for distribution. Not to create content. Something we do a lot in social channels but not on TV, print, radio,
all that kind of stuff so I just want want to set the
stage for that question. The thing that scares me with that general kind of statement is that when people think of online video, they think about spending five, 10 percent of the overall budget, let’s call it 100 thousand dollars, on the video production, the quality, the stuff and 95 on the distribution and then what they spend on, and maybe up to 80. Maybe 80 to 90. Let’s say 80. I want to be polite here
today in San Francisco because it’s got a little
bit more of a polite vibe than New York. Of that 80 percent, they pounded in right hook form. What does online video
mean to most people? Let me just explain what it means. It’s pre-rolls on YouTube where people tab out and don’t actually consume it. You go to espn.com and a video pops up and takes over 30 seconds of my time which pisses me off. And so what I’m most worried about when I hear people allocating and it’s part of the bigger story which is that people talk about moving TV budgets into other places. My problem is I actually like
live television commercials more than I like banner ads on websites and pre-roll video that’s blocking the user from doing what they want. So this isn’t about
traditional or digital. This is are you bringing value and when I hear move from television and put it into online video, what I know is going on in
actual practitioner world is people are spending
that money on online video that is annoying customers and putting it in places
where they don’t want it versus putting more
percentage of the money on actually creating great video and then figuring out a more native way to distribute it. That being said, Facebook dark post video native to me is a very attractive option, especially if you’ve been seeing it, the audio doesn’t play but if you’re into it, you click it. And so that’s my overall thought, which is that in theory it’s great that we’re moving traditional dollars here but I see a lot of people
misplaying digital. – [mayanmurfee] Laura asks,

“on my blog and mention on social “or post natively on sites “like Linkedin, Medium,
and Facebook, or both?” – Brian, great question,
and it’s a loaded question, because you’ve probably looked at the new garyvaynerchuk.com (ding) and you probably realized
that I’m doing a mix. Like, you know, you land on a page and I’ve got the place for
Medium posts and Linkedin posts. When you land on it, some of the posts literally link out to Linkedin and Medium, and then obviously I have my own posts, and actually, Steve and
I were just talking. Did we put up the first post where it’s just for garyvaynerchuk.com? – [Steve] Yes, we did. – Got it. So that’s there too. And so what I think is
interesting about this question is most people in the
internet marketing world want to keep telling you
to do it on your own site, monetize your own traffic, it’s yours, Facebook reach can’t be taken away. All this “own it, own it, own it.” The problem with “own it, own it, own it” is when you’re doing it on your own site, you’re at the mercy of how much traffic you’re able to establish on your own site, and so from the 99.999% of
you that are watching this that don’t have four million unique people coming to your site
every day, every month, the reality is is placed like Medium, for example, I had a
Medium go extremely viral, viral as in it did really well on Medium, and right now it’s sitting
as number six or seven on Medium’s top stories where I’ve noticed that 950 people have clicked
over and read the article because of that place,
and that’s 950 people that I’m gonna guess 787 of them have never even heard of me before. And so too many people are worried about monetizing the now, posting on their page, versus using things like
Linkedin and Medium, and notice I use those two
because they have viral loops. Linkedin, when articles go
well, it shows up in Pulse. Medium sends out an email
and has the top stories. So I like being in places
where there’s viral loops, that if you put out a
nice piece of content, I noticed the kid on
Twitter today tweet out, “Hey, I’m number four on Medium, “two spots ahead of Gary V,” and then I looked at his profile and he has 1,400 Twitter followers, and that got me excited, I’m like “See, great content can raise to the top and bring awareness,” and so I think a heavy mix of both. I’m a big fan of picking
spots strategically that give you awareness and
then builds leverage for you that then eventually you can
monetize in your own world. – [Voiceover] Sean asks, “You
are always answering questions

– [Voiceover] Danami asks, “Why are you uploading
the episodes to Facebook “instead of attaching a photo “linking to your website of
the video or using YouTube?” – The reason I’m posting this
video in Facebook natively is because I fancy myself as an expert or someone who at least
wants to be one day an expert in really understanding things like, you know, what the book was written about. Can you get it back there, DRock? – [DRock] Yup.
– Jab, jab, jab, right hook. A lot of you read it. You know that I care about being native, being platform specific. I am seeing data that shows me that if I put the video
in natively and upload it versus linking it to
YouTube or my website, about 20 to 30,000 more
people see the video. I care about them seeing the video. I don’t need to feel good about
where my traffic comes from. I don’t need the vanity of
having more YouTube views. I don’t need to see my
website getting more traffic because I’m gonna sell ads on it. I want people to hear the
answers to the questions. I’m playing the long game. I want to bring value. The more people that see it,
the more value I’m providing, If the feed natively is going to allow me to reach more people, then
that’s what I’m going to do. – Hey Gary, how’s it going? – Just wanted to say
hello and ask you this.

“call to action to push
subscribers from social channels “to a website or newsletter sign-up?” – Dawn, who says I ever thought it was a necessary call to action,
’cause the answer is I didn’t, and I don’t. No I don’t. No I didn’t. What I mean by that is, sure,
I think it’s a good idea to push to a website right now, especially if you’re selling
something on that website. But in a world where you
can buy that same product right on Twitter, right on Facebook, do you necessarily need to
schlep somebody to your site to make them buy that, when
it’s native right for them, and they could just buy it in there? No, the answer is no, isn’t it? ‘Cause friction sucks, right? Friction sucks, and consumers
do not want friction, so anything that allows you to execute within the place you’re in,
that’s what you’re gonna like. And so, my answer to your question is, less and less every day. People always say, Gary, why
aren’t you driving people to GaryVaynerchuk.com? Why are you putting
out content on YouTube? Why are you putting out content on Medium? Why are you putting content on LinkedIn? Because I want awareness,
so I’m putting out content for awareness and to build
relationships with all of you. That’s what I’m doing, and thus, what that is doing is creating a scenario where those channels allow me to do that. Just because I’m not
driving them to my dot– You know how many people give
you bad marketing advice? That say, “You have to
drive to your website.” For what? To collect the email? Last time I checked, a tweet
card that collects email has been the most efficient
way that I’ve collected email, better than driving to my dot com. For what? What are you, selling
advertising on your site? If you’re selling
advertising on your site, then maybe that’s the thing you could do, but you can also sell advertising to people within your social channels and run that arbitrage. So the fact of the matter is, Dawn, is that I think people are
just not really that educated on what they’re trying to achieve. And so I’ve never been
worried about forcing somebody to a dot com, unless that
was the right strategy at the right time to drive the result. The fact that even e-commerce, buying within a tweet and a Facebook post, has now gotten native the platform, has eliminated a lot of the reasons that you have to drive somebody.