Thanks to MediaBizBloggers for publishing this first!
I’ve been working on a presentation to give at iMedia Sydney Australia, built around the idea that we need to think about creating relationships with consumers as akin to courtship, nuptials, and married life. In it I am using examples from about 20 countries to show how a variety of brands are courting their customers socially.
And the most salient observation I can make is that the idea of a one-size-fits-all approach to brand participation is patently absurd. Our collective rush to identify and exploit digital magic beans sometimes makes us forget that our brand campaigns have to be as unique as our brands.
For indeed social is simply participatory marketing, not a medium. Social is permeating every media channel, reflecting the truth that consumers prefer personalized experiences across the board, not just on sites where we friend one another.
Preparing the presentation has been a great experience because it has forced me to seek out examples and industry news from across the globe – which is not something I want to do during a typical week. I’ll leave to you to interpret whether that is marketing xenophobia or simply focusing on what matters most in my job today.
In my quest for examples, I’ve learned about Walls, a UK food company that has a multimedia effort showcasing the unique eccentricities of Britons. The campaign asks ordinary Britons to compete to appear in ads where they can showcase their peculiar passions. Mind you, this in a country with a high standard for eccentricity. Where an obscure aristocrat collected thousands of wigs that stuffed every room in his manor house from floor to ceiling. A country where Chelmondeley is pronounced “Chum-Lee”. A place where yeast extract is a delicacy. There is a unique, delightful form of crazy that Britain has a lock on. Tender Britons', please note that I point to your obscure behaviors with loving support. Long live the Belisha Beacon!
But back to the contest. Entries range from “Extreme Ironers” who press clothes while balanced on speeding cigarette boats, to a knitting circle that has created a blanket the size of a soccer field. Where seniors have organized a club in which they compete at pole dancing. Where other people delight in making ginormous versions of snack foods because…well just because. And the whole kit and caboodle of this effort goes far at reinforcing the uniquely British “Proper Food” Walls excels at producing.
The campaign is superb.
And so is the wonderful Australian Tourism effort in which Aussies were asked to submit photos of their favorite hideaways across the country. More than 29,000 people participated, providing what has to be the only travel site that didn’t use (or for that matter, need to use) pro photographers to capture azure ocean vistas and the Opera House at sunset.
Personally, I’d much rather see a snapshot of someone’s favorite billabong.
Another: the fascinating Raymond Weil campaign that asked consumers to describe in their own words what the brand should be in the future. To read these entries is to vicariously experience sincere love.
Which is not to say that good old Yankee ingenuity is dead. Not by a long shot. Pepsi’s Refresh Everything effort and its remarkable charitable overlay are growing that brand as it cures social ills that for whatever reason our government is unwilling or unable to address.
My point is each of these campaigns is wildly different. Each took the essence of its brand and its customers and shaped a participatory initiative around that message. They all recognized that social isn’t a channel. It’s people. People who are anxious to be part of the brands they love.
I for one am delighted to participate in a marketing era where a major national brand is delighted to associate itself with extreme ironing.
Friday, November 12, 2010
Saturday, November 6, 2010
Thursday, November 4, 2010
"I couldn't help myself..."
Forgive my occasional typos please as I am still getting used to the iPad.
I have the privilege of having a great deal of contact with event content planners and programmers, as well as sales people in digital marketing. And I hope that sellers know that I luvs them dearly because they make it all possible. But I am also a snarky sumbitch so I gotta say this.
Sellers always complain that they can't get speaking gigs at conferences. And mostly they don't get on stage.
I am going to tell you why. Because so darn many of the sellers that DO make it on stage spend their moments in the sun shilling for their product. I am flying back from adtech right now as I type, and am happy to report that several sellers provided tremendous content and differentiated themselves superbly there. But a few others -- I won't name names -- did nothing but pitch.
It's like you can't help yourselves, and the pitch oozes out like toothpaste. Hence the title of the post.
So I thought I'd lay out five suggestions on how to get on stage, and get asked back.
1. Do not claim you aren't making a pitch and then show us 6 slides from the pitch deck. Regardless of how it makes us feel about you and btw we hate you for it, you will have ticked off the content people. And they have the memories of elephants and you will NEVER appear on stage again.
2. Stay on topic. You were asked to be there for a reason. How can you substantively add to the discussion? Look, we get it that you have something to sell, and that's how you make your living. Actually it's your in market experience that makes you so valuable to us potentially as a speaker. But an opp to speak to an audience is an opp to differentiate your company and self through thought leadership. It is not a chance to broadcast your sales deck. If you have something to sell that adds meaningfully to the discussion, great. Thing is, so many of you are really rather brilliant and have great thoughts on the topics. But we'll never know because as soon as you start selling, we start emailing.
3. Don't poop on your competitors. Nothing looks lamer and we don't believe one word you say after that.
4. When you are pitching yourself as a speaker, explain what is in it for the audience and the programmer. I listened to a seller earlier today, when asked what they would talk about, they said their very cool product of course. Thing is, the industry has far far far too many cool products, and not enough big thoughts and ideas. Helping you spread the word about you is not something that helps the audience or programmer.
5. Tell us what you think. Not what you have to sell. Because what you think will help us, and then we know you have answers and ideas and solutions. We don't need a new fully transparent real time inventory acquisition platform in the cloud. We need your thoughts first. Then, if your thoughts are valuable, we'll want to know more about what a smartypants like you has decided they want to help build.
Again, I really love sellers. I hope those sellers I know feel that. You solve our problems and make us look good. But you are doing yourselves a disservice when you come across as putzes onstage that we need to endure for the next ten minutes until a real speaker is teed up.
Connect what you are saying to the ideas of others that you share the limelight with. As conference goers we struggle to solidify all the thoughts and ideas ideas into a reasonable number of takeaways. Help us, and you will win.
I have the privilege of having a great deal of contact with event content planners and programmers, as well as sales people in digital marketing. And I hope that sellers know that I luvs them dearly because they make it all possible. But I am also a snarky sumbitch so I gotta say this.
Sellers always complain that they can't get speaking gigs at conferences. And mostly they don't get on stage.
I am going to tell you why. Because so darn many of the sellers that DO make it on stage spend their moments in the sun shilling for their product. I am flying back from adtech right now as I type, and am happy to report that several sellers provided tremendous content and differentiated themselves superbly there. But a few others -- I won't name names -- did nothing but pitch.
It's like you can't help yourselves, and the pitch oozes out like toothpaste. Hence the title of the post.
So I thought I'd lay out five suggestions on how to get on stage, and get asked back.
1. Do not claim you aren't making a pitch and then show us 6 slides from the pitch deck. Regardless of how it makes us feel about you and btw we hate you for it, you will have ticked off the content people. And they have the memories of elephants and you will NEVER appear on stage again.
2. Stay on topic. You were asked to be there for a reason. How can you substantively add to the discussion? Look, we get it that you have something to sell, and that's how you make your living. Actually it's your in market experience that makes you so valuable to us potentially as a speaker. But an opp to speak to an audience is an opp to differentiate your company and self through thought leadership. It is not a chance to broadcast your sales deck. If you have something to sell that adds meaningfully to the discussion, great. Thing is, so many of you are really rather brilliant and have great thoughts on the topics. But we'll never know because as soon as you start selling, we start emailing.
3. Don't poop on your competitors. Nothing looks lamer and we don't believe one word you say after that.
4. When you are pitching yourself as a speaker, explain what is in it for the audience and the programmer. I listened to a seller earlier today, when asked what they would talk about, they said their very cool product of course. Thing is, the industry has far far far too many cool products, and not enough big thoughts and ideas. Helping you spread the word about you is not something that helps the audience or programmer.
5. Tell us what you think. Not what you have to sell. Because what you think will help us, and then we know you have answers and ideas and solutions. We don't need a new fully transparent real time inventory acquisition platform in the cloud. We need your thoughts first. Then, if your thoughts are valuable, we'll want to know more about what a smartypants like you has decided they want to help build.
Again, I really love sellers. I hope those sellers I know feel that. You solve our problems and make us look good. But you are doing yourselves a disservice when you come across as putzes onstage that we need to endure for the next ten minutes until a real speaker is teed up.
Connect what you are saying to the ideas of others that you share the limelight with. As conference goers we struggle to solidify all the thoughts and ideas ideas into a reasonable number of takeaways. Help us, and you will win.
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Three Ways Privacy Could Go...
Article Highlights:
Ponemon Research found that more than 90 percent of marketers eschew BT out of fear of consumer backlash
With a "do not track" registry in place, the internet wouldn't go away, but some companies and jobs would
When consumers are given real, easy to understand information about BT targeting, they are generally satisfied with the explanations and don't opt out
Well, we're finally talking more about privacy -- a nagging topic for our industry for more than a decade. Increased press attention -- often misleading and over-hyped -- plus a highly-charged and unclear regulatory environment in Washington D.C. are creating consumer fear. That, in turn, is making clients wary of participating in interest-based advertising (better known in the industry as behavioral targeting, or BT) out of fear of a backlash. Digital's incredible ability to understand consumers has brought us better business results; but it seems that the day may have finally arrived when we need to face and address those nagging concerns about how we collect and act on all the consumer information we gather.
This topic is important because BT is important. It drives significantly stronger business results, and the higher CPMs; it drives help publishers better monetize and improve content offerings. Currently, well over a billion dollars a year are spent on behaviorally targeted graphical media. And its growth rate is even faster than that of our industry as a whole.
The BT goose lays, and will continue to lay, golden eggs -- so long as privacy concerns fade and the bird stays healthy. But what happens if tolerance of these methods goes drastically south? No one knows for certain. But it is possible to formulate three possible scenarios about how BT and our industry as a whole will evolve in the next year as a result of different action on the privacy hunt.
Understanding what could happen in the future may help us figure out what to do now. So with that in mind, I offer these three plausible scenarios about how opinions and actions -- of consumers, clients, government, data companies, and media -- could reshape our industry.
Scenario 1: BT = R.I.P
This much has already happened: The Wall Street Journal published a story chronicling their research on ad targeting and privacy. They reported, among many other revelations, that 234 cookies -- including 20 virtually unremovable Flash cookies -- got dropped on their PC during a single visit to Dictionary.com.
Yes. That's 234 cookies!
Even if you think BT is totally hunky dory, that's a crapload of cookies. Enough to make some people even more nervous about internet privacy.
At first, most of the general public didn't really take much notice, but clients and government officials took the article very seriously.
Clients were already pretty nervous. Research conducted in 2010 by the Ponemon Institute showed that more than 90 percent of marketers say they eschew BT or hold back spending out of fear of consumer backlash.
The WSJ piece made them even more jittery, as did the many trade articles that were published in the ensuing months.
Now begins our speculation of what could happen: Soon after, Facebook makes some poorly messaged privacy changes. Again. Privacy advocates counter by putting out some spicy press releases. The cable news kicks in, and then the local news as well. The photographers on Getty One that have keyworded pictures "Big Brother" start making serious bucks. And consumers begin to take notice.
In Washington, Congressional committees and the FTC subpoena the CEOs of data companies and ad networks. We learn that many Congressmen share the concerns voiced by Senator Claire McCaskill in hearings held in July 2010:
"I understand that advertising supports the internet, but I am a little spooked out. This is creepy."
Laws and regs take some time to meander their way through Committee and the FTC. But brands don't wait. They start cutting BT from their plans.
The FTC implements a "do not track" registry, much like the wildly popular "do not call" registry that buried the telemarketing biz. Consumers flock to opt out of being targeted online.
Agency revenue drops a bit because nothing can make up for the performance drops. Then publisher revenue drops. And ad network revenue drops. Certainly the revenue loss deals a blow to many of the data companies, many of whom need BT to make their numbers.
Meanwhile, there are some winners that emerge, such as publishers with high quality contextual content, and network platforms like Vibrant, ContextWeb, and Kontera that offer platforms primarily focused on context. But most publishers take it on the chin. And agencies and brands contend with revenue shortfalls.
The internet wouldn't go away. But some companies would. And some jobs. And it would likely may be more jobs than you would think. Consider:
VCs have flooded the market with money for DSPs and data companies all built on the supposition that the collection and use of data can continue.
The holding companies are creating their own data driven buying platforms -- the value of which is predicated on data.
DM companies are entering the environment in force on the idea that data can empower digital efforts in the same way it does direct mail.
Without data, our well-oiled machine withers.
Scenario 2: In the eye of the storm
As any Floridian knows, hurricanes have odd architecture in that, at their very center, there is often a calm zone.
When the eye passes over your house, you get a few moments respite; but you also know that you then have to get through the second half of the swirling hurricane before it's all over.
In this scenario, our industry gets a year of respite. Consumer interest in internet privacy rises, but does not reach fever pitch. The FTC decides to go forward with some form of regulation, but Washington being what it is, it takes the FTC some time to get it all done. Action's coming, but these things take time.
Many industry stakeholders decide to conduct business as usual, irrationally hoping that the transitory peace of eye signals the end of government and consumer interest in the topic.
But in their hearts, many know that avoidance isn't going to work this time. After all, FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz has already added a number of strong privacy advocates to the Commission, including David C. Vladeck, Eileen Harrington, and Joni Lupovitz to his senior staff. And he's also on record advocating for real privacy reform, saying,
"We may explore in the context of behavioral advertising... a do-not-track mechanism that's more comprehensive and easier to use than the procedures currently available. Under such a mechanism, users could opt out of behavioral advertising more easily rather than having to make choices on website-by-website basis."
This scenario assumes that the "do not track" list won't get up and running in 2011. Given the immense popularity of "do not call", it's logical to expect that when such a mechanism gets up and running, it will be inundated with consumer registrations.
But even if the registry doesn't get off the ground in 2011, it is pretty safe to assume that many brands will pull out of BT out of fear of consumer backlash. After all, brands are in the business of satisfying consumers, not ticking them off. This would lead to perhaps a less sudden onslaught of problems for agencies, networks, data companies, et al. But the ultimate results would be the same as in scenario one; the only real difference is the timing.
Scenario 3: Getting our acts together
The third scenario involves our industry following the lead of a coalition of industry trade groups, who have banded together to create a genuine, good faith self regulation platform.
Formed by the 4As, IAB, DMA, CBBB, and ANA, the coalition has created the Advertising Option Icon program that provides notice and choice to consumers. Under the program, ads targeted using advanced techniques like BT would bear a small "I" inside a triangle in their upper right corners. Clicking on the "I" provides information on who is collecting and using data, and provides options on whether the user wishes to opt out.
Significant research conducted by the portals and others indicates that when consumers are given real, easy to understand information about BT targeting, they are generally satisfied with the explanations and don't opt out. In other words, telling the truth in plain English is a good thing for the future of BT.
And here's a picture of the beginning of the post-click experience delivered by Better Advertising, a company founded to give consumers the notice and choice demanded by the coalition and the FTC. You can find this experience on millions of impressions from leading brands like AT&T already.
Better Advertising (disclosure: a CSF client) has been chosen by the coalition to power its interest-based advertising self-regulatory program," Other companies, including TRUSTe, also offer notice and choice mechanisms.
Scenario three assumes that our brands and agencies follow the coalition's lead. As a result, regulation is unnecessary. BT continues to grow, benefiting publishers, networks, DSPs, and data companies. Venture money continues to flow in, creating more opportunities for the kinds of monetary exits we all like to talk about, not to mention helping us all keep our jobs.
Under this scenario, brands and agencies would also see their businesses grow along with the stronger metrics made possible through advanced targeting. Extending clear information and choice also drives overall consumer loyalty because brands are treating them with respect.
Let me quote FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz on why this scenario is a win-win:
"And we have great hopes for self-regulation. Last year, a Coalition including the Direct Marketing Association, the Interactive Advertising Bureau, and the Better Business Bureau proposed behavioral advertising guidelines; these included the recommendation that companies explain their information collection practices for advertising outside the privacy policy using common language and a common icon. So long as self-regulation is making forward progress, the FTC is not interested in regulating in this area... In this case, doing what is right -- respecting your customers' most basic rights to privacy and well-informed choice -- is also doing what is good -- good for business, good for consumers, and good for the growth of an ever-expanding, innovating cyberworld."
Conclusions: No crystal ball here
No one can predict with certainty what will happen in 2011 as regards BT and privacy. Ultimately, a lot of what happens depends upon the extent to which our industry takes this issue seriously.
But it is certain that the world of BT and privacy is going to change in the future. The days of sidestepping this issue are over.
The question is, will we take the right step, or keep our heads buried in sand? Either way, our heads won't be buried for long, because the privacy hurricane will blow it all away and leave us struggling with the level-five aftermath.
Much easier just to do the right thing now. By embracing the coalition's Triangle-I program, the industry can continue to grow while restoring trust among consumers. Privacy disclosure and choice platforms make compliance quite easy, and once you get started it amounts to no additional work on your end.
Ponemon Research found that more than 90 percent of marketers eschew BT out of fear of consumer backlash
With a "do not track" registry in place, the internet wouldn't go away, but some companies and jobs would
When consumers are given real, easy to understand information about BT targeting, they are generally satisfied with the explanations and don't opt out
Well, we're finally talking more about privacy -- a nagging topic for our industry for more than a decade. Increased press attention -- often misleading and over-hyped -- plus a highly-charged and unclear regulatory environment in Washington D.C. are creating consumer fear. That, in turn, is making clients wary of participating in interest-based advertising (better known in the industry as behavioral targeting, or BT) out of fear of a backlash. Digital's incredible ability to understand consumers has brought us better business results; but it seems that the day may have finally arrived when we need to face and address those nagging concerns about how we collect and act on all the consumer information we gather.
This topic is important because BT is important. It drives significantly stronger business results, and the higher CPMs; it drives help publishers better monetize and improve content offerings. Currently, well over a billion dollars a year are spent on behaviorally targeted graphical media. And its growth rate is even faster than that of our industry as a whole.
The BT goose lays, and will continue to lay, golden eggs -- so long as privacy concerns fade and the bird stays healthy. But what happens if tolerance of these methods goes drastically south? No one knows for certain. But it is possible to formulate three possible scenarios about how BT and our industry as a whole will evolve in the next year as a result of different action on the privacy hunt.
Understanding what could happen in the future may help us figure out what to do now. So with that in mind, I offer these three plausible scenarios about how opinions and actions -- of consumers, clients, government, data companies, and media -- could reshape our industry.
Scenario 1: BT = R.I.P
This much has already happened: The Wall Street Journal published a story chronicling their research on ad targeting and privacy. They reported, among many other revelations, that 234 cookies -- including 20 virtually unremovable Flash cookies -- got dropped on their PC during a single visit to Dictionary.com.
Yes. That's 234 cookies!
Even if you think BT is totally hunky dory, that's a crapload of cookies. Enough to make some people even more nervous about internet privacy.
At first, most of the general public didn't really take much notice, but clients and government officials took the article very seriously.
Clients were already pretty nervous. Research conducted in 2010 by the Ponemon Institute showed that more than 90 percent of marketers say they eschew BT or hold back spending out of fear of consumer backlash.
The WSJ piece made them even more jittery, as did the many trade articles that were published in the ensuing months.
Now begins our speculation of what could happen: Soon after, Facebook makes some poorly messaged privacy changes. Again. Privacy advocates counter by putting out some spicy press releases. The cable news kicks in, and then the local news as well. The photographers on Getty One that have keyworded pictures "Big Brother" start making serious bucks. And consumers begin to take notice.
In Washington, Congressional committees and the FTC subpoena the CEOs of data companies and ad networks. We learn that many Congressmen share the concerns voiced by Senator Claire McCaskill in hearings held in July 2010:
"I understand that advertising supports the internet, but I am a little spooked out. This is creepy."
Laws and regs take some time to meander their way through Committee and the FTC. But brands don't wait. They start cutting BT from their plans.
The FTC implements a "do not track" registry, much like the wildly popular "do not call" registry that buried the telemarketing biz. Consumers flock to opt out of being targeted online.
Agency revenue drops a bit because nothing can make up for the performance drops. Then publisher revenue drops. And ad network revenue drops. Certainly the revenue loss deals a blow to many of the data companies, many of whom need BT to make their numbers.
Meanwhile, there are some winners that emerge, such as publishers with high quality contextual content, and network platforms like Vibrant, ContextWeb, and Kontera that offer platforms primarily focused on context. But most publishers take it on the chin. And agencies and brands contend with revenue shortfalls.
The internet wouldn't go away. But some companies would. And some jobs. And it would likely may be more jobs than you would think. Consider:
VCs have flooded the market with money for DSPs and data companies all built on the supposition that the collection and use of data can continue.
The holding companies are creating their own data driven buying platforms -- the value of which is predicated on data.
DM companies are entering the environment in force on the idea that data can empower digital efforts in the same way it does direct mail.
Without data, our well-oiled machine withers.
Scenario 2: In the eye of the storm
As any Floridian knows, hurricanes have odd architecture in that, at their very center, there is often a calm zone.
When the eye passes over your house, you get a few moments respite; but you also know that you then have to get through the second half of the swirling hurricane before it's all over.
In this scenario, our industry gets a year of respite. Consumer interest in internet privacy rises, but does not reach fever pitch. The FTC decides to go forward with some form of regulation, but Washington being what it is, it takes the FTC some time to get it all done. Action's coming, but these things take time.
Many industry stakeholders decide to conduct business as usual, irrationally hoping that the transitory peace of eye signals the end of government and consumer interest in the topic.
But in their hearts, many know that avoidance isn't going to work this time. After all, FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz has already added a number of strong privacy advocates to the Commission, including David C. Vladeck, Eileen Harrington, and Joni Lupovitz to his senior staff. And he's also on record advocating for real privacy reform, saying,
"We may explore in the context of behavioral advertising... a do-not-track mechanism that's more comprehensive and easier to use than the procedures currently available. Under such a mechanism, users could opt out of behavioral advertising more easily rather than having to make choices on website-by-website basis."
This scenario assumes that the "do not track" list won't get up and running in 2011. Given the immense popularity of "do not call", it's logical to expect that when such a mechanism gets up and running, it will be inundated with consumer registrations.
But even if the registry doesn't get off the ground in 2011, it is pretty safe to assume that many brands will pull out of BT out of fear of consumer backlash. After all, brands are in the business of satisfying consumers, not ticking them off. This would lead to perhaps a less sudden onslaught of problems for agencies, networks, data companies, et al. But the ultimate results would be the same as in scenario one; the only real difference is the timing.
Scenario 3: Getting our acts together
The third scenario involves our industry following the lead of a coalition of industry trade groups, who have banded together to create a genuine, good faith self regulation platform.
Formed by the 4As, IAB, DMA, CBBB, and ANA, the coalition has created the Advertising Option Icon program that provides notice and choice to consumers. Under the program, ads targeted using advanced techniques like BT would bear a small "I" inside a triangle in their upper right corners. Clicking on the "I" provides information on who is collecting and using data, and provides options on whether the user wishes to opt out.
Significant research conducted by the portals and others indicates that when consumers are given real, easy to understand information about BT targeting, they are generally satisfied with the explanations and don't opt out. In other words, telling the truth in plain English is a good thing for the future of BT.
And here's a picture of the beginning of the post-click experience delivered by Better Advertising, a company founded to give consumers the notice and choice demanded by the coalition and the FTC. You can find this experience on millions of impressions from leading brands like AT&T already.
Better Advertising (disclosure: a CSF client) has been chosen by the coalition to power its interest-based advertising self-regulatory program," Other companies, including TRUSTe, also offer notice and choice mechanisms.
Scenario three assumes that our brands and agencies follow the coalition's lead. As a result, regulation is unnecessary. BT continues to grow, benefiting publishers, networks, DSPs, and data companies. Venture money continues to flow in, creating more opportunities for the kinds of monetary exits we all like to talk about, not to mention helping us all keep our jobs.
Under this scenario, brands and agencies would also see their businesses grow along with the stronger metrics made possible through advanced targeting. Extending clear information and choice also drives overall consumer loyalty because brands are treating them with respect.
Let me quote FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz on why this scenario is a win-win:
"And we have great hopes for self-regulation. Last year, a Coalition including the Direct Marketing Association, the Interactive Advertising Bureau, and the Better Business Bureau proposed behavioral advertising guidelines; these included the recommendation that companies explain their information collection practices for advertising outside the privacy policy using common language and a common icon. So long as self-regulation is making forward progress, the FTC is not interested in regulating in this area... In this case, doing what is right -- respecting your customers' most basic rights to privacy and well-informed choice -- is also doing what is good -- good for business, good for consumers, and good for the growth of an ever-expanding, innovating cyberworld."
Conclusions: No crystal ball here
No one can predict with certainty what will happen in 2011 as regards BT and privacy. Ultimately, a lot of what happens depends upon the extent to which our industry takes this issue seriously.
But it is certain that the world of BT and privacy is going to change in the future. The days of sidestepping this issue are over.
The question is, will we take the right step, or keep our heads buried in sand? Either way, our heads won't be buried for long, because the privacy hurricane will blow it all away and leave us struggling with the level-five aftermath.
Much easier just to do the right thing now. By embracing the coalition's Triangle-I program, the industry can continue to grow while restoring trust among consumers. Privacy disclosure and choice platforms make compliance quite easy, and once you get started it amounts to no additional work on your end.
Saturday, September 18, 2010
Brands that made consumers love them forever
Special thanks to iMediaConnection for publishing this piece first!
Building a brand romance
In Italy, there's a principle called la bella figura. It essentially boils down to the idea that you ensure that your public persona always "looks" good -- that you consciously work to control other people's impressions of you. La bella figura has been the driving principle behind brand marketing for decades. We put gorgeous people in ads using hero packages in gorgeous settings, telling our stories in the most flattering ways.
But today we have nuova figuras -- consumers anxious to be a part of brands but also unwilling to simply accept an impression we package and deliver to them. They want to help, but they want their brands to be real. They want to know about the experiences of other real people, and they want to participate in defining and portraying the brand.
As a boomer, I find all this pretty remarkable. When I was little, brand identification was rarer and more subtle. You were proud to wear Levi's or whatever, but buying a T-shirt emblazoned with a gigantic Levi's logo -- that would have been a bit over the top.
Sometime in my formative years -- I think it began when Brooke Shields started talking seductively about her Calvins -- all that changed. Today, kids will engrave logos in their crew cuts. Brands can sell logo shirts for $20-plus, rather than having to give away the shirts to get people to wear them. And Flickr is chock full of photos of people proudly sharing the limelight with their favorite products -- from Marmite to Tide.
This all poses a remarkable opportunity -- but one that requires careful "strategery."
How do we cultivate relationships with consumers that create lifelong loyalty? I think there are lessons in human relationship building -- in dating and marriage. The way we attract, impress, and partner with consumers have strong parallels to the ways in which we find mates. It's a progression, from dating, to marriage, to having babies, to starting to look, sound, and act alike. People don't marry us just because it's what we want. Relationships are joint decisions, and brand relationships are no different.
With this piece I want to take you through four stages of relationship building:
• How brands get consumers to "date" them
• How they get that marital level of commitment
• How we work with consumers to develop new products (our babies)
• And how ultimately we enable our brands to define us, and, to some extent, vice versa
Around the world brands are tackling this concept of brand marriage in unique and intriguing ways. Remarkable brands are jumping headfirst into the relationship pool, finding themselves at different stages on this four-stage continuum. Just as with human relationships, there's no cookie-cutter formula for making a relationship work. The paths to sharing a life together are as different as the brands themselves. Let's take a look at some of these brand romances and see what we can learn.
Dating: Brand meets user
When we're out to meet someone, we try to look the way that they will find appealing. Some brands manage that on their own, albeit with real consumer insights. The Dove campaign is a powerful example from a brand that used substantive consumer analysis to land on an idea with universal female appeal.
But many brands -- and people -- are presentation challenged. In dating, a new book pointing out the fashion and appearance mistakes of men is selling well. Entitled "Undateable," it also has an important metaphorical lesson for many brands. If you want her to be truly happy with your appearance, it's best to just let her dress you.
Hundreds of brands are using digital to do just that. In its simplest incarnation, car banners that allow viewers to try different colors are built around this concept.
More complex examples can be found across the globe. DHTML banners and ads powered by technologies like Linkstorm enable users to drill down and customize their ad experiences. Still more extensive examples of user-customized marketing experiences come in many forms. An Australian supplement company called Blackmores http://www.blackmores.com.au/ has transformed its website into a peer-to-peer community revolving around users' goals and questions.
Rather than hawking jars of supplements, the brand allows users to discuss needs and benefits on their own. Products arise organically in conversations. Perhaps most remarkable is that this community has more than 300,000 members, in a country with about 22 million inhabitants. To give American readers an idea of what that means, if Australia's population matched that of the U.S., the site would have 4.3 million members.If it were in the UK, we're talking about more than a million members. RE-MARKABLE!
Retailers are getting in on the game with virtual mirrors that allow users to customize brands entirely on their terms. Meanwhile, websites like Ray-Ban's have long made it possible for users to try on eyewear virtually, another incarnation of this same concept.
In another example from Down Under, the Australian Defence Force uses multiplayer games -- as does the U.S. Army -- to enable users to virtually sample military experiences of their own choosing.
Since they began using the games as recruiting tools, more than 1.5 million people have registered and played, and thousands have made inquiries from the games.
In short, different brands can find unique ways of enabling consumer customization -- and a program can be devised for virtually any budget.
Getting hitched: Sharing the stage with the consumer
This stage is about becoming a "we" -- about collaborating with consumers to develop marketing messages. The best U.S. example I can think of is the Pepsi Refresh Everything campaign. As we all know, Pepsi spent decades winning sales by juxtaposing stars of the instant with young messaging and a flavor profile best suited to under 18s.
Pepsi entered the new millennium doing what it had for years -- pairing the white-hot celeb with a youthful message. This 2002 ad, starring Britney, pretty much encapsulates the entire campaign -- a bajillion dollar ad with everything that always worked until we entered the social age: celebs, singin' and dancin', massive casts, beautiful settings, and catchy tunes.
The social era made the brand head in a decidedly different direction. The Refresh Everything charity overlay lets consumers determine how Pepsi marketing dollars get spent. Pepsi sales are up, and the web traffic to the Refresh Everything website eclipses that garnered by Pepsi.com.
That's only natural seeing as how there's a decidedly real reason to want to visit.
An English meat brand has launched a multimedia campaign starring its users, who demonstrate that special brand of crazy at which Brits excel. The "Proper Food" rebranding effort for Walls began with ads that show people with deep passions -- for hobbies and Walls products.
The next phase of the effort was a social media program pitting Briton against Briton in a contest to win £5,000 and a role in a Walls ad that showcases their eccentricity. And what sorts of response are they getting? Some examples:
• Chess boxers (a simultaneous fight and chess game)
• Extreme ironers (who iron in unusual venues like on the hood of moving cigarette boats)
• OAPoleDancers (OAP is the abbreviation for old age pensioners)
• Snack pimpers (makers of enormous versions of U.K. junk food)
(Check out these and others here. http://bringitonbrits.wordpress.com/)
Unmistakably British flavors of nuts, from a quirky proud British food company.
Bun in the oven: Making products together
The next logical step is co-creation, the co-defining and sometimes the co-designing of new products. Obviously this takes a higher level of commitment from both the brand and the consumer.
Pizza Hut is using social media globally to devise new flavors to meet local tastes. A recent effort in Brazil unearthed 80 different distinct recipes, thousands of votes, and a hot-selling new item.
In Korea, Pizza Hut did the same on the Korean social net Cyworld.
A mindboggling U.K. start-up called Ucodo http://www.ucodo.com/ actually enables consumers to co-design consumer products online, which are then produced. Within broad parameters the consumer can push, pull, stretch, and twist the virtual design and have their co-designed item delivered to them.
I have never said "Will wonders never cease?" with greater sincerity.
Starting to look alike: Becoming the consumer (and vice versa)
There's a centuries-old meme about couples converging on similar appearance over the years. This is perhaps the strongest evidence of a symbiotic relationship, and a number of brave brands are taking the plunge with great results.
Back Down Under for the first example. Tourism Australia created an amazing effort that asked Australians to upload photos and descriptions of their favorite places across the country to give tourists ideas on things to do. More than 29,000 responded, and the happy would-be traveler can explore this user-generated content in a wonderful visual interface.
This is just one of Australia's social tourism efforts -- a participatory strategy that has garnered it more than half a million likes on Facebook. Compare that to the number of likes for the U.S. on Facebook.
Although spouses might grow to look alike, one of the best things about having a partner is that often one person finds it easier to say things that the other can't. One can speak up while the other might simply endure to avoid a scene.
Consider this effort by U.K.'s Labour Party during the last election. While Labour lost, it's easy to see the power of its social effort that asked Labourites to make parody ads for the super-slick "I am a just a bloke too" efforts of conservative David Cameron. Lefties delighted in mocking Cameron's protestations of folksiness. First, everyman David as Ali G.
And a biting attack on the Tory's defense of fox hunting:
Now, the party couldn't officially print things like this. But its consumer spouse? Why not?
Conclusion: Are you ready for a consumer LTR?
You sort of have to be. With the latest figures from Forrester showing tens of millions of consumers anxious to connect and create content for brands, it's incumbent on you to harness this enthusiasm in light of declining marketing effectiveness for traditional media. These five points offer a starting point for brands hoping to tie the knot with consumers:
1. Just like dating, it's important not to get ahead of yourself. Pick a level of commitment that works for both of you now. Not every brand or every consumer is ready for serious commitment yet.
2. Don't say things you don't mean. Don't promise things you won't go through with. Remember that Chevy Tahoe campaign? Think your program through.
3. In a relationship, the idea is to share decisions -- not be a doormat. It's your responsibility to enhance the brand through participation, not abdicate your role.
4. Marriage is work, and not everything turns out as you expect. Some programs will succeed, and some will fail. You need to be ready for that.
5. Dating the young has a special challenge. Young people expect more of a role. If your target is under 25, be prepared to give consumers a pretty big role.
Finally, whatever stage you are ready for, make sure your campaign reflects your brand as vividly as a TV ad might.
Building a brand romance
In Italy, there's a principle called la bella figura. It essentially boils down to the idea that you ensure that your public persona always "looks" good -- that you consciously work to control other people's impressions of you. La bella figura has been the driving principle behind brand marketing for decades. We put gorgeous people in ads using hero packages in gorgeous settings, telling our stories in the most flattering ways.
But today we have nuova figuras -- consumers anxious to be a part of brands but also unwilling to simply accept an impression we package and deliver to them. They want to help, but they want their brands to be real. They want to know about the experiences of other real people, and they want to participate in defining and portraying the brand.
As a boomer, I find all this pretty remarkable. When I was little, brand identification was rarer and more subtle. You were proud to wear Levi's or whatever, but buying a T-shirt emblazoned with a gigantic Levi's logo -- that would have been a bit over the top.
Sometime in my formative years -- I think it began when Brooke Shields started talking seductively about her Calvins -- all that changed. Today, kids will engrave logos in their crew cuts. Brands can sell logo shirts for $20-plus, rather than having to give away the shirts to get people to wear them. And Flickr is chock full of photos of people proudly sharing the limelight with their favorite products -- from Marmite to Tide.
This all poses a remarkable opportunity -- but one that requires careful "strategery."
How do we cultivate relationships with consumers that create lifelong loyalty? I think there are lessons in human relationship building -- in dating and marriage. The way we attract, impress, and partner with consumers have strong parallels to the ways in which we find mates. It's a progression, from dating, to marriage, to having babies, to starting to look, sound, and act alike. People don't marry us just because it's what we want. Relationships are joint decisions, and brand relationships are no different.
With this piece I want to take you through four stages of relationship building:
• How brands get consumers to "date" them
• How they get that marital level of commitment
• How we work with consumers to develop new products (our babies)
• And how ultimately we enable our brands to define us, and, to some extent, vice versa
Around the world brands are tackling this concept of brand marriage in unique and intriguing ways. Remarkable brands are jumping headfirst into the relationship pool, finding themselves at different stages on this four-stage continuum. Just as with human relationships, there's no cookie-cutter formula for making a relationship work. The paths to sharing a life together are as different as the brands themselves. Let's take a look at some of these brand romances and see what we can learn.
Dating: Brand meets user
When we're out to meet someone, we try to look the way that they will find appealing. Some brands manage that on their own, albeit with real consumer insights. The Dove campaign is a powerful example from a brand that used substantive consumer analysis to land on an idea with universal female appeal.
But many brands -- and people -- are presentation challenged. In dating, a new book pointing out the fashion and appearance mistakes of men is selling well. Entitled "Undateable," it also has an important metaphorical lesson for many brands. If you want her to be truly happy with your appearance, it's best to just let her dress you.
Hundreds of brands are using digital to do just that. In its simplest incarnation, car banners that allow viewers to try different colors are built around this concept.
More complex examples can be found across the globe. DHTML banners and ads powered by technologies like Linkstorm enable users to drill down and customize their ad experiences. Still more extensive examples of user-customized marketing experiences come in many forms. An Australian supplement company called Blackmores http://www.blackmores.com.au/ has transformed its website into a peer-to-peer community revolving around users' goals and questions.
Rather than hawking jars of supplements, the brand allows users to discuss needs and benefits on their own. Products arise organically in conversations. Perhaps most remarkable is that this community has more than 300,000 members, in a country with about 22 million inhabitants. To give American readers an idea of what that means, if Australia's population matched that of the U.S., the site would have 4.3 million members.If it were in the UK, we're talking about more than a million members. RE-MARKABLE!
Retailers are getting in on the game with virtual mirrors that allow users to customize brands entirely on their terms. Meanwhile, websites like Ray-Ban's have long made it possible for users to try on eyewear virtually, another incarnation of this same concept.
In another example from Down Under, the Australian Defence Force uses multiplayer games -- as does the U.S. Army -- to enable users to virtually sample military experiences of their own choosing.
Since they began using the games as recruiting tools, more than 1.5 million people have registered and played, and thousands have made inquiries from the games.
In short, different brands can find unique ways of enabling consumer customization -- and a program can be devised for virtually any budget.
Getting hitched: Sharing the stage with the consumer
This stage is about becoming a "we" -- about collaborating with consumers to develop marketing messages. The best U.S. example I can think of is the Pepsi Refresh Everything campaign. As we all know, Pepsi spent decades winning sales by juxtaposing stars of the instant with young messaging and a flavor profile best suited to under 18s.
Pepsi entered the new millennium doing what it had for years -- pairing the white-hot celeb with a youthful message. This 2002 ad, starring Britney, pretty much encapsulates the entire campaign -- a bajillion dollar ad with everything that always worked until we entered the social age: celebs, singin' and dancin', massive casts, beautiful settings, and catchy tunes.
The social era made the brand head in a decidedly different direction. The Refresh Everything charity overlay lets consumers determine how Pepsi marketing dollars get spent. Pepsi sales are up, and the web traffic to the Refresh Everything website eclipses that garnered by Pepsi.com.
That's only natural seeing as how there's a decidedly real reason to want to visit.
An English meat brand has launched a multimedia campaign starring its users, who demonstrate that special brand of crazy at which Brits excel. The "Proper Food" rebranding effort for Walls began with ads that show people with deep passions -- for hobbies and Walls products.
The next phase of the effort was a social media program pitting Briton against Briton in a contest to win £5,000 and a role in a Walls ad that showcases their eccentricity. And what sorts of response are they getting? Some examples:
• Chess boxers (a simultaneous fight and chess game)
• Extreme ironers (who iron in unusual venues like on the hood of moving cigarette boats)
• OAPoleDancers (OAP is the abbreviation for old age pensioners)
• Snack pimpers (makers of enormous versions of U.K. junk food)
(Check out these and others here. http://bringitonbrits.wordpress.com/)
Unmistakably British flavors of nuts, from a quirky proud British food company.
Bun in the oven: Making products together
The next logical step is co-creation, the co-defining and sometimes the co-designing of new products. Obviously this takes a higher level of commitment from both the brand and the consumer.
Pizza Hut is using social media globally to devise new flavors to meet local tastes. A recent effort in Brazil unearthed 80 different distinct recipes, thousands of votes, and a hot-selling new item.
In Korea, Pizza Hut did the same on the Korean social net Cyworld.
A mindboggling U.K. start-up called Ucodo http://www.ucodo.com/ actually enables consumers to co-design consumer products online, which are then produced. Within broad parameters the consumer can push, pull, stretch, and twist the virtual design and have their co-designed item delivered to them.
I have never said "Will wonders never cease?" with greater sincerity.
Starting to look alike: Becoming the consumer (and vice versa)
There's a centuries-old meme about couples converging on similar appearance over the years. This is perhaps the strongest evidence of a symbiotic relationship, and a number of brave brands are taking the plunge with great results.
Back Down Under for the first example. Tourism Australia created an amazing effort that asked Australians to upload photos and descriptions of their favorite places across the country to give tourists ideas on things to do. More than 29,000 responded, and the happy would-be traveler can explore this user-generated content in a wonderful visual interface.
This is just one of Australia's social tourism efforts -- a participatory strategy that has garnered it more than half a million likes on Facebook. Compare that to the number of likes for the U.S. on Facebook.
Although spouses might grow to look alike, one of the best things about having a partner is that often one person finds it easier to say things that the other can't. One can speak up while the other might simply endure to avoid a scene.
Consider this effort by U.K.'s Labour Party during the last election. While Labour lost, it's easy to see the power of its social effort that asked Labourites to make parody ads for the super-slick "I am a just a bloke too" efforts of conservative David Cameron. Lefties delighted in mocking Cameron's protestations of folksiness. First, everyman David as Ali G.
And a biting attack on the Tory's defense of fox hunting:
Now, the party couldn't officially print things like this. But its consumer spouse? Why not?
Conclusion: Are you ready for a consumer LTR?
You sort of have to be. With the latest figures from Forrester showing tens of millions of consumers anxious to connect and create content for brands, it's incumbent on you to harness this enthusiasm in light of declining marketing effectiveness for traditional media. These five points offer a starting point for brands hoping to tie the knot with consumers:
1. Just like dating, it's important not to get ahead of yourself. Pick a level of commitment that works for both of you now. Not every brand or every consumer is ready for serious commitment yet.
2. Don't say things you don't mean. Don't promise things you won't go through with. Remember that Chevy Tahoe campaign? Think your program through.
3. In a relationship, the idea is to share decisions -- not be a doormat. It's your responsibility to enhance the brand through participation, not abdicate your role.
4. Marriage is work, and not everything turns out as you expect. Some programs will succeed, and some will fail. You need to be ready for that.
5. Dating the young has a special challenge. Young people expect more of a role. If your target is under 25, be prepared to give consumers a pretty big role.
Finally, whatever stage you are ready for, make sure your campaign reflects your brand as vividly as a TV ad might.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Thursday, August 26, 2010
The Real Winners In Social? Content Publishers!
Thanks to iMediaConnection For Publishing this First!
I have a pet peeve about the term social media. Social is a marketing style, not a medium. The real value of social is helping people talk about things that matter to them, not informing me that my friend Paul is eating bacon right now.
The power of social becomes evident on sites like consumerist, where shoppers’ problems get solved by both exposure and people power.
It becomes evident on HuffPost when a blog post about an issue creates fiery debate. Debate that extends beyond the pages of HuffPost into communities like FaceBook, into Meebo, and wherever else the message can spread.
It becomes clear when people share their POV on what MP3 player to buy, whether to buy an iPad or wait for the Android, and whether to rush out and see that new Jen Aniston movie. Those discussion can occur on brand pages, or in forums on CNET. Or in both. Or in neither. It occurs where it occurs organically.
In my view, the real winners of social are going to be content sites that use social as a way of driving stickiness, community and passion. THESE are the places where important conversations are most likely to take place. And that’s a good thing because content sites will be able to monetize their socialized environments better.
Every time we say social media, I think we enable a misperception that there is a special class of places and sites for social marketing. When the reality is that we need to think about empowering social everywhere, but especially in places that re most likely to attract passionate thought leaders. And THAT means content sites.
I have a pet peeve about the term social media. Social is a marketing style, not a medium. The real value of social is helping people talk about things that matter to them, not informing me that my friend Paul is eating bacon right now.
The power of social becomes evident on sites like consumerist, where shoppers’ problems get solved by both exposure and people power.
It becomes evident on HuffPost when a blog post about an issue creates fiery debate. Debate that extends beyond the pages of HuffPost into communities like FaceBook, into Meebo, and wherever else the message can spread.
It becomes clear when people share their POV on what MP3 player to buy, whether to buy an iPad or wait for the Android, and whether to rush out and see that new Jen Aniston movie. Those discussion can occur on brand pages, or in forums on CNET. Or in both. Or in neither. It occurs where it occurs organically.
In my view, the real winners of social are going to be content sites that use social as a way of driving stickiness, community and passion. THESE are the places where important conversations are most likely to take place. And that’s a good thing because content sites will be able to monetize their socialized environments better.
Every time we say social media, I think we enable a misperception that there is a special class of places and sites for social marketing. When the reality is that we need to think about empowering social everywhere, but especially in places that re most likely to attract passionate thought leaders. And THAT means content sites.
Eight Marketing Blunders to Avoid
History lessons
While the world economy has been bouncing back of late, we are all more than aware that the recovery is fragile -- and so are many of digital's companies, small and large. Thus, it's more important than ever for us to be smarter and learn from our own mistakes, as well as the mistakes of those around us.
The beauty of digital is that there have been so many initiatives in this fragmented arena that history's lessons come fast and furious. And yet, it's human nature to assume that our individual situations are somehow unique. We are, of course, wrong.
I say "we" because I have made such mistakes many times over the years, dashing down the seductive path of feeling my challenges are unique, only to realize some months or years later that, nope, my situation was not at all special -- and that I am at square one just like those who came before me.
There's an adage that says the essence of stupidity is doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results. Here's my take on eight things we all need to avoid doing again.
1. Trying to Outcool Apple
Can't be done. There are ways to compete with Apple. But "outcooling" isn't one of them.
2. Shiny Object Syndrome
Oh, where to begin on this one? Remember when every brand and its mother were launching widgets?
Remember when most brands sites were trying to be destinations? When chatrooms were popping up on toilet paper sites? None were bad ideas per se; the problem was that we ran into these shiny spaces willy nilly, without a reason or a strategy.
Are brands still doing this? Sure. But fewer. Let's keep that trend going.
3. Fostering consumer control without guidance
Usually it's not what people want. I once worked at a startup that boasted that its database was so big, consumers could search for something and get 1,200 options in results. Wouldn't they looooove that?
Of course, people don't want 1,200 options. They want the best outcome for them. Most of the time, they want three options or so to choose from, with a big blinking arrow over one of the choices that says, "Best value!"
OK, that was comment bait. But I assure you I don't think consumers are stupid. They are smart. Smart enough to realize that three choices are about all most decisions are worth when you have to decide and run and buy the Dragon Tattoo book for book club and pick up your daughter from Scouts. All in 30 minutes. Most things just don't matter more than three choices' worth. And the human mind can only process so many choices anyway. Heck, ask a realtor about the advisability of showing someone 30houses.
There's more to this point, though. Consumers want control of outcomes, not process. Witness MySpace. MySpace gave people total control of their pages. Here's the result:
And here:
What people wanted were profiles that allowed them to express themselves. Without guidance, they got profiles no one wanted to visit out of fear of visual and audio assault.
The new MySpace profiles address this issue rather well. We'll see if it reverses the slide.
4. Trying to make up for it in volume
Lots of yummy morsels here. Let's start with Kozmo.com, the company that would deliver virtually anything to your house for nothing. What's wrong with this picture?
Or Webvan, the company that -- oh, I'll let Wikipedia tell you:
While Webvan was popular, the money spent on infrastructure far exceeded sales growth, and the company eventually ran out of money. For example: Webvan placed a $1 billion (USD) order with engineering company Bechtel to build its warehouses, bought a fleet of delivery trucks, purchased 30 Sun Microsystems Enterprise 4500 servers, dozens of Compaq ProLiant computers and several Cisco Systems model 7513 and 7507 routers, as well as more than 80 21-inch ViewSonic color monitors, and at least 115 Herman Miller Aeron chairs (at over $800 each).
You've got to sell a lot of Cookie Crisp to make up for those costs.
Or, my personal favorite, Pets.com, which thought it would be good business to ship 40 pound sacks of dog chow by UPS and beat retail prices. During one period, according to Wikipedia, they spent $12.8MM in advertising and sold $600K in pet supplies. And the pet supplies went out the door at 1/3 of the price they went in for.
But on the other hand, consider Amazon. Now the world's largest bookseller, I have the personal satisfaction to tell you that during 2000, I don't think I ever paid more than a nickel for a hardback. I became expert at getting $25 off $25-plus purchases and ringing up totals of $25.05 with shipping.
Now, Amazon survived this largesse -- God knows how -- and in the end I became addicted to receiving daily deliveries of boxes with smiles on them. Since that time, I've spent more than $20,000 with Amazon over the years -- so perhaps that strategy wasn't so dumb after all. Though I'd never say giving me "Nothing Like It in the World" for a nickel was a smart thing. But it was a mistake the company survived, to flourish in the end.
5. Marketing on attributes versus benefits
Much hardware and software promotion focuses on data points indicating attributes that are expected to serve as sufficient inducement to purchase. There are certainly segments of the audience that already understand the benefit of something and find the data valuable as a way of distinguishing between items.
But history shows over and over that benefits and brands can trump attributes in most B2C businesses, including hardware. Which of these two players do you think will make your music sound better?
Player A:
Player B:
In fairness, some of the sharpest big companies in the Valley have figured out how to make attributes into benefits.
It can be effective, but it often costs a ton of money to do it.
6. Thinking "better" is always better
In digital, lots of time and energy gets spent building that better mousetrap. Which is excellent. But by what person's definition is "better" defined? In our industry in 2010, trash bins are full of the stationery of defunct startups that focused on things that people didn't actually care about.
Henry Ford once said, "If I had asked consumers what they wanted, they would have told me a faster horse." So it's important to innovate in areas that aren't necessarily things people are clamoring for. But at the same time, having a rich understanding of the target's problems and tastes is also important.
7. Confusing your needs with target needs
Recently a publisher tried to sell me a heavily male-skewing site as a great place to connect with women. Now, I get it that technology makes it possible for a site to predict gender reasonably well, but do you honestly expect me to say, "Hmm. I could message on sites that attract 90 percent women and have relevant context. Or! I could choose a venue with 15 percent comp that has nothing to do with my category. Hmm. What to choose? What to choose?"
8. Ignoring privacy concerns
Two years ago, two companies called NebuAd and Phorm launched services in conjunction with ISPs that tracked every activity of customers for the purpose of gathering data for ad targeting.
In the U.K., Phorm was partnered with three ISPs -- BT, Virgin, and TalkTalk -- which make up a large portion of total U.K. connectivity. As part of the process, the company quietly worked with BT to test its platform on thousands of consumers who were not informed of the test. Consumer anger and regulatory ire ensued, and all three ISPs have dropped out of the plan. The company has shifted to a consumer content personalization strategy (eventually including ads) and an opt-in versus opt-out model. According to The Register, it has lost more than $100 million, with little possible revenue for the foreseeable future.
Today, consumer groups and the FTC are voicing concerns about cookie-based targeting, especially behavioral targeting. FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz has demanded industry action. While our industry has made efforts in the past to address privacy concerns with regard to ad targeting, these measures have been widely viewed as inadequate. Now a cross-industry coalition has proposed a self-regulation program centered on the "Power i," an icon that will appear on ads. Clicking on the icon will offer consumers information about the companies collecting and using data to target, along with choices in how they participate (or don't.)
Our industry would do well to embrace this program and raise its level of vigilance regarding privacy and ad targeting.
Conclusion
People far wiser than me say that if you don't make mistakes in digital, you aren't doing your job right -- because there are no certainties in a medium that changes hourly. And because part of the magic of digital is that innovation requires tons of trial and tons of error.
I once heard a speaker say we should rejoice in our mistakes. I am too much of a boomer to rejoice in anything other than hard work that leads to incremental success. But I do believe that failure should not be a source of shame. The decision to rejoice in errors is entirely yours. But we can all agree that it makes sense to concentrate on making new mistakes rather than repeating old ones.
But should Amazon ever want to repeat its $25 off $25-plus purchases couponing...
While the world economy has been bouncing back of late, we are all more than aware that the recovery is fragile -- and so are many of digital's companies, small and large. Thus, it's more important than ever for us to be smarter and learn from our own mistakes, as well as the mistakes of those around us.
The beauty of digital is that there have been so many initiatives in this fragmented arena that history's lessons come fast and furious. And yet, it's human nature to assume that our individual situations are somehow unique. We are, of course, wrong.
I say "we" because I have made such mistakes many times over the years, dashing down the seductive path of feeling my challenges are unique, only to realize some months or years later that, nope, my situation was not at all special -- and that I am at square one just like those who came before me.
There's an adage that says the essence of stupidity is doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results. Here's my take on eight things we all need to avoid doing again.
1. Trying to Outcool Apple
Can't be done. There are ways to compete with Apple. But "outcooling" isn't one of them.
2. Shiny Object Syndrome
Oh, where to begin on this one? Remember when every brand and its mother were launching widgets?
Remember when most brands sites were trying to be destinations? When chatrooms were popping up on toilet paper sites? None were bad ideas per se; the problem was that we ran into these shiny spaces willy nilly, without a reason or a strategy.
Are brands still doing this? Sure. But fewer. Let's keep that trend going.
3. Fostering consumer control without guidance
Usually it's not what people want. I once worked at a startup that boasted that its database was so big, consumers could search for something and get 1,200 options in results. Wouldn't they looooove that?
Of course, people don't want 1,200 options. They want the best outcome for them. Most of the time, they want three options or so to choose from, with a big blinking arrow over one of the choices that says, "Best value!"
OK, that was comment bait. But I assure you I don't think consumers are stupid. They are smart. Smart enough to realize that three choices are about all most decisions are worth when you have to decide and run and buy the Dragon Tattoo book for book club and pick up your daughter from Scouts. All in 30 minutes. Most things just don't matter more than three choices' worth. And the human mind can only process so many choices anyway. Heck, ask a realtor about the advisability of showing someone 30houses.
There's more to this point, though. Consumers want control of outcomes, not process. Witness MySpace. MySpace gave people total control of their pages. Here's the result:
And here:
What people wanted were profiles that allowed them to express themselves. Without guidance, they got profiles no one wanted to visit out of fear of visual and audio assault.
The new MySpace profiles address this issue rather well. We'll see if it reverses the slide.
4. Trying to make up for it in volume
Lots of yummy morsels here. Let's start with Kozmo.com, the company that would deliver virtually anything to your house for nothing. What's wrong with this picture?
Or Webvan, the company that -- oh, I'll let Wikipedia tell you:
While Webvan was popular, the money spent on infrastructure far exceeded sales growth, and the company eventually ran out of money. For example: Webvan placed a $1 billion (USD) order with engineering company Bechtel to build its warehouses, bought a fleet of delivery trucks, purchased 30 Sun Microsystems Enterprise 4500 servers, dozens of Compaq ProLiant computers and several Cisco Systems model 7513 and 7507 routers, as well as more than 80 21-inch ViewSonic color monitors, and at least 115 Herman Miller Aeron chairs (at over $800 each).
You've got to sell a lot of Cookie Crisp to make up for those costs.
Or, my personal favorite, Pets.com, which thought it would be good business to ship 40 pound sacks of dog chow by UPS and beat retail prices. During one period, according to Wikipedia, they spent $12.8MM in advertising and sold $600K in pet supplies. And the pet supplies went out the door at 1/3 of the price they went in for.
But on the other hand, consider Amazon. Now the world's largest bookseller, I have the personal satisfaction to tell you that during 2000, I don't think I ever paid more than a nickel for a hardback. I became expert at getting $25 off $25-plus purchases and ringing up totals of $25.05 with shipping.
Now, Amazon survived this largesse -- God knows how -- and in the end I became addicted to receiving daily deliveries of boxes with smiles on them. Since that time, I've spent more than $20,000 with Amazon over the years -- so perhaps that strategy wasn't so dumb after all. Though I'd never say giving me "Nothing Like It in the World" for a nickel was a smart thing. But it was a mistake the company survived, to flourish in the end.
5. Marketing on attributes versus benefits
Much hardware and software promotion focuses on data points indicating attributes that are expected to serve as sufficient inducement to purchase. There are certainly segments of the audience that already understand the benefit of something and find the data valuable as a way of distinguishing between items.
But history shows over and over that benefits and brands can trump attributes in most B2C businesses, including hardware. Which of these two players do you think will make your music sound better?
Player A:
Player B:
In fairness, some of the sharpest big companies in the Valley have figured out how to make attributes into benefits.
It can be effective, but it often costs a ton of money to do it.
6. Thinking "better" is always better
In digital, lots of time and energy gets spent building that better mousetrap. Which is excellent. But by what person's definition is "better" defined? In our industry in 2010, trash bins are full of the stationery of defunct startups that focused on things that people didn't actually care about.
Henry Ford once said, "If I had asked consumers what they wanted, they would have told me a faster horse." So it's important to innovate in areas that aren't necessarily things people are clamoring for. But at the same time, having a rich understanding of the target's problems and tastes is also important.
7. Confusing your needs with target needs
Recently a publisher tried to sell me a heavily male-skewing site as a great place to connect with women. Now, I get it that technology makes it possible for a site to predict gender reasonably well, but do you honestly expect me to say, "Hmm. I could message on sites that attract 90 percent women and have relevant context. Or! I could choose a venue with 15 percent comp that has nothing to do with my category. Hmm. What to choose? What to choose?"
8. Ignoring privacy concerns
Two years ago, two companies called NebuAd and Phorm launched services in conjunction with ISPs that tracked every activity of customers for the purpose of gathering data for ad targeting.
In the U.K., Phorm was partnered with three ISPs -- BT, Virgin, and TalkTalk -- which make up a large portion of total U.K. connectivity. As part of the process, the company quietly worked with BT to test its platform on thousands of consumers who were not informed of the test. Consumer anger and regulatory ire ensued, and all three ISPs have dropped out of the plan. The company has shifted to a consumer content personalization strategy (eventually including ads) and an opt-in versus opt-out model. According to The Register, it has lost more than $100 million, with little possible revenue for the foreseeable future.
Today, consumer groups and the FTC are voicing concerns about cookie-based targeting, especially behavioral targeting. FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz has demanded industry action. While our industry has made efforts in the past to address privacy concerns with regard to ad targeting, these measures have been widely viewed as inadequate. Now a cross-industry coalition has proposed a self-regulation program centered on the "Power i," an icon that will appear on ads. Clicking on the icon will offer consumers information about the companies collecting and using data to target, along with choices in how they participate (or don't.)
Our industry would do well to embrace this program and raise its level of vigilance regarding privacy and ad targeting.
Conclusion
People far wiser than me say that if you don't make mistakes in digital, you aren't doing your job right -- because there are no certainties in a medium that changes hourly. And because part of the magic of digital is that innovation requires tons of trial and tons of error.
I once heard a speaker say we should rejoice in our mistakes. I am too much of a boomer to rejoice in anything other than hard work that leads to incremental success. But I do believe that failure should not be a source of shame. The decision to rejoice in errors is entirely yours. But we can all agree that it makes sense to concentrate on making new mistakes rather than repeating old ones.
But should Amazon ever want to repeat its $25 off $25-plus purchases couponing...
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Social Media: The Next Generation
xxxooo to iMedia for running this piece first
If you said "social media" to a marketer 18 months ago, chances are they'd have thought exclusively of social networks. No more. We're seeing social capabilities incorporated into virtually every digital experience. This has brought opportunities and dilemmas for marketers. I say dilemmas because lots of brands got online by pounding to fit a broadcast-shaped peg into an interactive-shaped hole. They developed one-way websites, banners, and search programs. Social media analytics tools are showing us that this model had many flaws.
But as more and more brands embrace social for the two-way offering it is, it's important that we keep abreast of major news in the segment.
This article is designed to give marketers some highlights of what new initiatives, offerings, and companies appear to have traction. It's not for the social "expert." Rather it's geared to the generalist who wants a survey of some of the more important and interesting developments.
Without further ado, check out this summary of social developments divided into four "buckets":
Facebook Open Graph and the socializing of content sites
Facebook's new Open Graph (OG) initiative is a means of adding value for its members across the web while simultaneously enabling content publishers to offer social features. In OG's launch week, more than 50,000 sites incorporated OG components. Many of those implementations were small, such as adding a "like" button embedded in content. But here are some of the ways it's being used on a grander scale:
Pandora is leveraging Open Graph to facilitate the sharing of music and discoveries between friends. Capabilities include:
•See a list of friends who use Pandora
•See which artists and songs are "liked" by friends
•Import Facebook pic into your Pandora profile
•Listen to friends' stations
•Get music suggestions based upon music you "liked"
The Huffington Post has socialized its content by offering a "Hot on Facebook" module, a "what your friends are reading" module, and a "like" button on most stories.
Newspaper sites are incorporating a sort of "your news" box that lists the latest "news" you have received on Facebook.
Yes, Facebook's hit some roadblocks and hurdles over privacy. Assuming it gets past those, Open Graph will make profound changes in how we consume content.
Promoted Tweets debut
The big news on Twitter is Promoted Tweets. These are sponsored tweets that appear in the Twitter Search results.
Twitter announced Sponsored Tweets and its charter sponsor list (Best Buy, Bravo, Red Bull, Sony Pictures, Starbucks, and Virgin America) in April. More recently, Twitter altered its terms of service to ban the Twitter platforms and third parties from embedding sponsored tweets into users' tweet streams. Twitter shared this rationale:
First, third party ad networks are not necessarily looking to preserve the unique user experience Twitter has created. They may optimize for either market share or short-term revenue at the expense of the long-term health of the Twitter platform. For example, a third party ad network may seek to maximize ad impressions and click through rates even if it leads to a net decrease in Twitter use due to user dissatisfaction. Secondly, the basis for building a lasting advertising network that benefits users should be innovation, not near-term monetization.
UnFacebooks and user control
Partly as a response to concerns about Facebook's privacy missteps, a number of alternative social networks are attracting attention. From tech blogs to Elle.com, the UnFacebooks are a popular story. Of course Orkut, MySpace, and Friendster are also trying to capitalize on Facebook's stumbles. But here are some new sites getting play:
Diaspora: Billing itself as "an open source personal web service that will put individuals in control of their data," Diaspora is the brainchild of four NYU students and has raised more than 20 times its initial funding goal. The idea behind Diaspora is essentially opt-in, versus the major social sites' opt-out approach. It is working feverishly to get everything going this summer. A word from the founders:
Pip.io lets users define different "rooms" of people that they want to share information with. Users can also define if they want one- or two-way communications with their rooms.
A self-described "social operating system," Pip.io is clearly trying to be more than a social net. When you visit, make sure you are using Firefox or Chrome, not MSIE.
Story of My Life is a new platform enabling members to tell stories in a variety of media and make them private or public. I love the idea of letting more people tell the stories of their lives. And not just in words.
Does it sound like a blog platform to you? Yes, but the community features make it more than that. And it's really more about defined stories than a stream of consciousness.
Social search
The biggest proportion of online dollars goes to search, so let's take a look at some of the "new" social search offerings:
Mahalo bills itself as a human-powered search engine that combines machine results with expert and consumer recommendations. From its beginnings as a search-focused entity, it has now added a lively Mahalo Answers section and Mahalo How To, where experts help users accomplish tasks.
Wowd (disclosure: a Catalyst:SF client) helps users understand what content is popular now and what content users like best. Users download the application, and conduct searches that reveal:
•The most popular pages related to the search query
•The freshest content available on a topic, whether just created or just viewed by other Wowd users
•Real-time content from most sites, not just a select few
•Pages that other users have rated as most valuable
Wowd is for people who are interested in the latest information on a topic -- in the things that are happening now and the content that has just been created or updated.
By combining a sophisticated search algorithm with consumer behavior and ratings, it provides a unique perspective.
Delver is a social shopping community that helps people find the best products and make the best buying choices with the help of friends, family, and the community at large. The idea behind this offering is to create a community around shopping and help people learn from each other about interesting products and the best places to buy them.
The bigness of this concept is that the site is out to make online shopping fun, rather than a utilitarian experience.
The portals (and Meebo)
The social strategies of the major portals are very different from one another. At one end of the spectrum, Yahoo is leveraging social content from its own sources as well as third parties like Facebook. Apparently, Yahoo has concluded that trying to create a new social media entity won't work. Instead it blends the information available from existing platforms to enrich Yahoo channels.
On the other end of the spectrum, Google is still trying to create a homegrown social platform to help it become a leader in providing social content. One of the more interesting integrations is its flavor of social search. By linking your Google profile to social platforms, you get search results that include comments and content from connections.
Google Buzz is a social sharing service integrated into Gmail that lets you share statuses, text, photos, and videos easily. Public and private sharing are offered.
Google Wave is a collaboration platform that creates a shared space for teams. Participants can add text, photos, and videos in real time. The vision for Wave is to replace a variety of other applications with a single environment.
Microsoft's strategy sits between these two poles, though it's closer to Yahoo's. Bing is leveraging existing third-party communities to socialize search results. Now tweets, blog posts, and shared links are incorporated in results.
But Bing is also striving to create unique social-centered experiences. One example is how it integrated social into Bing Shopping. According to its blog, "With a single click you can ask for advice from your friends on Facebook and followers on Twitter for their take on a product you saw on Bing Shopping."
Meebo's strategy is to focus on its strength in instantaneous sharing to carve out social territory. Its new "Meebo Bar" offers publishers an easy way to socialize content and promote virality. This ad-supported bar appears when a Meebo user visits a bar-enabled site. Users can send pages and content via IM of course, but also through email, Facebook, Twitter, Google Buzz, and Yahoo.
Conclusion
Sharing content and opinions is something consumers seem to want in many of their web experiences, not just on specific social sites. How some of these companies and platforms will work with marketers, or indeed if they will work with marketers, remains to be seen. But consumers show a marked unwillingness to pay for content, so my guess is that many of these companies will be a-knockin' on our doors before long. That doesn't mean that they will work with us using the classic advertising model, though.
I would be remiss not to mention blogs as the "sleeper" of social. It seems that these high-quality, high-passion, high-depth environments often get overlooked by marketers. While social nets and Twitter can offer us enormous reach, so can blogs, many of which offer the added benefit of expert perspective and depth of content. They may not be the shiniest of the social objects, but in my view brands would do well to spend more time and attention on them.
An article like this omits other good companies and developments. If you are working on something that is more real than vapor and want me to talk about it as a follow-up, send me an email through PeopleConnection. If I like it, I will be happy to follow up with a brief piece about you in the blog section of this site.
If you said "social media" to a marketer 18 months ago, chances are they'd have thought exclusively of social networks. No more. We're seeing social capabilities incorporated into virtually every digital experience. This has brought opportunities and dilemmas for marketers. I say dilemmas because lots of brands got online by pounding to fit a broadcast-shaped peg into an interactive-shaped hole. They developed one-way websites, banners, and search programs. Social media analytics tools are showing us that this model had many flaws.
But as more and more brands embrace social for the two-way offering it is, it's important that we keep abreast of major news in the segment.
This article is designed to give marketers some highlights of what new initiatives, offerings, and companies appear to have traction. It's not for the social "expert." Rather it's geared to the generalist who wants a survey of some of the more important and interesting developments.
Without further ado, check out this summary of social developments divided into four "buckets":
Facebook Open Graph and the socializing of content sites
Facebook's new Open Graph (OG) initiative is a means of adding value for its members across the web while simultaneously enabling content publishers to offer social features. In OG's launch week, more than 50,000 sites incorporated OG components. Many of those implementations were small, such as adding a "like" button embedded in content. But here are some of the ways it's being used on a grander scale:
Pandora is leveraging Open Graph to facilitate the sharing of music and discoveries between friends. Capabilities include:
•See a list of friends who use Pandora
•See which artists and songs are "liked" by friends
•Import Facebook pic into your Pandora profile
•Listen to friends' stations
•Get music suggestions based upon music you "liked"
The Huffington Post has socialized its content by offering a "Hot on Facebook" module, a "what your friends are reading" module, and a "like" button on most stories.
Newspaper sites are incorporating a sort of "your news" box that lists the latest "news" you have received on Facebook.
Yes, Facebook's hit some roadblocks and hurdles over privacy. Assuming it gets past those, Open Graph will make profound changes in how we consume content.
Promoted Tweets debut
The big news on Twitter is Promoted Tweets. These are sponsored tweets that appear in the Twitter Search results.
Twitter announced Sponsored Tweets and its charter sponsor list (Best Buy, Bravo, Red Bull, Sony Pictures, Starbucks, and Virgin America) in April. More recently, Twitter altered its terms of service to ban the Twitter platforms and third parties from embedding sponsored tweets into users' tweet streams. Twitter shared this rationale:
First, third party ad networks are not necessarily looking to preserve the unique user experience Twitter has created. They may optimize for either market share or short-term revenue at the expense of the long-term health of the Twitter platform. For example, a third party ad network may seek to maximize ad impressions and click through rates even if it leads to a net decrease in Twitter use due to user dissatisfaction. Secondly, the basis for building a lasting advertising network that benefits users should be innovation, not near-term monetization.
UnFacebooks and user control
Partly as a response to concerns about Facebook's privacy missteps, a number of alternative social networks are attracting attention. From tech blogs to Elle.com, the UnFacebooks are a popular story. Of course Orkut, MySpace, and Friendster are also trying to capitalize on Facebook's stumbles. But here are some new sites getting play:
Diaspora: Billing itself as "an open source personal web service that will put individuals in control of their data," Diaspora is the brainchild of four NYU students and has raised more than 20 times its initial funding goal. The idea behind Diaspora is essentially opt-in, versus the major social sites' opt-out approach. It is working feverishly to get everything going this summer. A word from the founders:
Pip.io lets users define different "rooms" of people that they want to share information with. Users can also define if they want one- or two-way communications with their rooms.
A self-described "social operating system," Pip.io is clearly trying to be more than a social net. When you visit, make sure you are using Firefox or Chrome, not MSIE.
Story of My Life is a new platform enabling members to tell stories in a variety of media and make them private or public. I love the idea of letting more people tell the stories of their lives. And not just in words.
Does it sound like a blog platform to you? Yes, but the community features make it more than that. And it's really more about defined stories than a stream of consciousness.
Social search
The biggest proportion of online dollars goes to search, so let's take a look at some of the "new" social search offerings:
Mahalo bills itself as a human-powered search engine that combines machine results with expert and consumer recommendations. From its beginnings as a search-focused entity, it has now added a lively Mahalo Answers section and Mahalo How To, where experts help users accomplish tasks.
Wowd (disclosure: a Catalyst:SF client) helps users understand what content is popular now and what content users like best. Users download the application, and conduct searches that reveal:
•The most popular pages related to the search query
•The freshest content available on a topic, whether just created or just viewed by other Wowd users
•Real-time content from most sites, not just a select few
•Pages that other users have rated as most valuable
Wowd is for people who are interested in the latest information on a topic -- in the things that are happening now and the content that has just been created or updated.
By combining a sophisticated search algorithm with consumer behavior and ratings, it provides a unique perspective.
Delver is a social shopping community that helps people find the best products and make the best buying choices with the help of friends, family, and the community at large. The idea behind this offering is to create a community around shopping and help people learn from each other about interesting products and the best places to buy them.
The bigness of this concept is that the site is out to make online shopping fun, rather than a utilitarian experience.
The portals (and Meebo)
The social strategies of the major portals are very different from one another. At one end of the spectrum, Yahoo is leveraging social content from its own sources as well as third parties like Facebook. Apparently, Yahoo has concluded that trying to create a new social media entity won't work. Instead it blends the information available from existing platforms to enrich Yahoo channels.
On the other end of the spectrum, Google is still trying to create a homegrown social platform to help it become a leader in providing social content. One of the more interesting integrations is its flavor of social search. By linking your Google profile to social platforms, you get search results that include comments and content from connections.
Google Buzz is a social sharing service integrated into Gmail that lets you share statuses, text, photos, and videos easily. Public and private sharing are offered.
Google Wave is a collaboration platform that creates a shared space for teams. Participants can add text, photos, and videos in real time. The vision for Wave is to replace a variety of other applications with a single environment.
Microsoft's strategy sits between these two poles, though it's closer to Yahoo's. Bing is leveraging existing third-party communities to socialize search results. Now tweets, blog posts, and shared links are incorporated in results.
But Bing is also striving to create unique social-centered experiences. One example is how it integrated social into Bing Shopping. According to its blog, "With a single click you can ask for advice from your friends on Facebook and followers on Twitter for their take on a product you saw on Bing Shopping."
Meebo's strategy is to focus on its strength in instantaneous sharing to carve out social territory. Its new "Meebo Bar" offers publishers an easy way to socialize content and promote virality. This ad-supported bar appears when a Meebo user visits a bar-enabled site. Users can send pages and content via IM of course, but also through email, Facebook, Twitter, Google Buzz, and Yahoo.
Conclusion
Sharing content and opinions is something consumers seem to want in many of their web experiences, not just on specific social sites. How some of these companies and platforms will work with marketers, or indeed if they will work with marketers, remains to be seen. But consumers show a marked unwillingness to pay for content, so my guess is that many of these companies will be a-knockin' on our doors before long. That doesn't mean that they will work with us using the classic advertising model, though.
I would be remiss not to mention blogs as the "sleeper" of social. It seems that these high-quality, high-passion, high-depth environments often get overlooked by marketers. While social nets and Twitter can offer us enormous reach, so can blogs, many of which offer the added benefit of expert perspective and depth of content. They may not be the shiniest of the social objects, but in my view brands would do well to spend more time and attention on them.
An article like this omits other good companies and developments. If you are working on something that is more real than vapor and want me to talk about it as a follow-up, send me an email through PeopleConnection. If I like it, I will be happy to follow up with a brief piece about you in the blog section of this site.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)