Archive for the ‘ advertising ’ Category

To Dell and Back

I left a comment on a blog that wouldn’t leave me alone all day. So here’s a fuller response, and I hope it breaks my blogger’s block.

Antony Mayfield is delighted with Dell’s approach to social media, as represented in this video interview, in particular. Even without that, it’s clear that the company has embraced many of the concepts wholeheartedly through initiatives like IdeaStorm. As Antony the interviewee, Andy Lark, Dell’s head of Global Marketing, points out, the company’s commitment to social tools is pretty thorough:

The social media stuff is probably the most important we do today, from a marketing stand point. The other elements of marketing mix has sort of become more and more transactional and more and more tactical in nature. Social media stuff is much more strategic… Use social media to power the fundamental of the business. That’s what we’re focused on. [Mayfield's transcription - thank you]

Great stuff. And here’s that interview in full:

To be clear, Antony is one of the good guys - I just disagree with his opinion on this one.

The part where I started to become anxious comes late in the piece, at about 4:00. Lark contrasts the approach taken by new media journalists with the old school. BBC journalists apparently now come along with a digital recorder and immediately ask if they can podcast the interview. The old school - regional journalists, he says - turn up with a notepad and pen. That’s a failure on the part of the latter group, according to Lark:

“The content that I’m giving them is the asset, not their translation”.

That’s *not* true. The media is there to question, to analyse and to be sceptical about the ‘asset’ that’s been given to them by Lark. It is certainly not its function to broadcast that ‘asset’ verbatim and without question. That’s what we people who turn up with a notepad and pen and ‘don’t get it’ call an advertisement.

I think we raise a couple of questions here about quite how wonderful 24-hour on-the-moment publishing and releasing to social media sources at the same time as traditional media sources is. If the statements issued by marketing directors are taken as ‘the record’, then we miss out on the opportunity to compare a company’s claims with their financial records, the research that’s been done into their brand value and customer service records, comparisons with competing propositions from rival manufacturers, and the benefits of a broader view. I have nothing against Dell - my current PC is a Dell, and it’s fine.

But, goodness, if I were head of global marketing at any brand, I’m sure that a podcast of my words on a well-trafficked website would be far preferable to an in-depth review of my products or an analysis of my financial performance somewhere else.

The function of journalism is not simply to report or transcribe what powerful figures and institutions want us to. We need to question, analyse and remain continually sceptical, while also remaining neutral. If we can’t do the latter, then declaring our interests immediately.

Taking a little longer to file a story doesn’t mean that you don’t ‘get it’ (a dreadful expression) but might mean that ‘oh yes, we get it alright, and we’re not letting you get away with it!’

Creative Collaboration

One for the agency folk.


http://view.break.com/542649 - Watch more free videos

Found another copy!

links post 03/27/2008

TechCrunch UK » Blog Archive » Roll up, get your Olympic Torch Facebook app  Annotated

tags: facebook, olympics, techcrunch

We are boycotting this Olympics, right? Web 2.0 tie-ins for the Games are *so* not cool.

TechCrunch UK » Blog Archive » Brits go online while watching TV. Duh.

tags: media, socialnetworking, tv

The research showed that nearly 70 percent of online British adults who watch television go online while doing so, with 21 percent of 16-24 year olds always using the Internet while watching TV.

links post 03/26/2008

SMT - fail on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

tags: no_tag

links post 03/21/2008

15 Free Social Media White Papers and Ebooks  Annotated

tags: research, social media, whitepaper

for all that extra reading time I’ll have…

15 Free Social Media White Papers and Ebooks

    Submit A Business Plan  Annotated

    tags: business, business model, funding, vc

    So saith Sequoia: “Start-ups with these characteristics often foretells the success of a business and the likelihood of it becoming a sustainable, enduring company.”

    Start-ups with these characteristics often foretells the success of a business and the likelihood of it becoming a sustainable, enduring company. We like to partner with companies that have:

      Eudora Releases - MozillaWiki  Annotated

      tags: eudora, penelope, thunderbird

      If I’m ever able to ditch exchange server, this sounds a very plausible alternative: “Eudora 8 is an email client that combines Mozilla’s Thunderbird with code, features, and GUI elements from Qualcomm’s Eudora.”

      Eudora 8 is an email client that combines Mozilla’s Thunderbird with code, features, and GUI elements from Qualcomm’s Eudora.

        So this VRM thing

        I had the great pleasure this evening of attending the VRMhub meeting organised by Adriana Lukas, and attended by a group of extremely clever people working to try to make it happen (and me). Tonight, Cluetrain co-author and father of the VRM project Doc Searls was in attendance. I’ll paraphrase his introduction and add a little commentary.

        509344f9ebdc8fe2371dbb1512f6d106b63397f9_m Right now, VRM (vendor relationship management) is an idea. It’s predicated on the perception that the relationships between people and brands/companies are terrible. They shout at us with their megaphones and we often do our best to ignore them. Most of the time, the only thing either side ever talks about is the exchange of money - “how much does it cost?” Compared to a real market, a street market, that’s an extremely impoverished relationship.

        Up till now, it’s been business that has come up with ’solutions’ to marketing problems. But there are some problems that can and ought to be solved from the individual perspective, the demand side, Searls maintains.

        One of the latest solutions to the problem of marketing without wasting loads of money is CRM. Companies collect loads of data about their customers and potential customers and then target their marketing efforts at segments of those groups. CRM is ‘lame and bad’, though, because it isn’t about relationships at all, but about media planning. And it can go wrong badly, Searls recounted that his Satellite TV company simply lost his account details when he last moved house - he lost the extras and perks he’d gained from being a long-standing customer.

        Searls also cited the example of National Public Radio in the US, a service akin to the BBC, but dependent on voluntary contributions rather than a licence fee. So how do they get people to make contributions? Every so often they say they are going to have to close down because they haven’t got enough money. So people send in money. Then, for the rest of their lives, they get spammed by the organisation, asking for more. This is ineffective and intrusive. There’s no mechanism for listeners to act the way they want to naturally. They can’t donate money to a particular show they enjoy, for example.

        There are efforts to cut out advertising and create more direct relationships. The online sale of Radiohead’s In Rainbows, for example. The trouble is that these come from the supplier side, so we potentially end up with a million different ways of dealing with organisations we want to buy things from. If the nature and technology for managing those relationships came from the customer side, then it could be uniform and cut out a lot of the inefficiencies in the system.

        Searls views the VRM project as unfinished business from the Cluetrain Manifesto. The central insight there, ‘markets are conversations’, has struck many people as true and right, but the technological implementation and management of that remains frustratingly tricky.

        So how does VRM work?

        That remains something of a conundrum. The best bet - as far as I could make out - is that it integrates with blogs or is similar to blogging. Individuals record their preferences and the personal data that you normally need to use an ecommerce site - on their own sites (or maybe they use a third-party service or a facebook app or whatever).

        Those preferences are objects on your site - I think they are probably recorded as microformats - little snippets of machine-readable code that you can post online. There are already formats like hCard that can act as an online business card. Carrying that over to record things like product details or preferences wouldn’t be terribly difficult from a technical perspective, as I understand it. So there might be a microformat that records your preference for airline seats, for example - extra legroom, window seat, not by the wing, say. You’d have that little code snippet at a unique URL and you could decide whether to allow universal access or access only for companies that you’ve decided to have a relationship with. If a company annoys you, you could cut off their access at the press of a button.

        So you have got all these details and preferences recorded in your online strongbox. Then - if you want - you let Amazon or Waitrose or whoever have access to the parts of that that you chose. The consequences might be that (a) you never have to fill in online forms again; (b) companies get to submit tenders for whatever it is that you want. I need to buy a new laptop - these are my preferences - I’m letting that information out to vendors. What have you got? (c) companies have access to rich data about what their customers actually want from them.

        Objections

        (a) this all sounds a bit geeky - it will never catch on

        Yes it is, so are blogs. And blogs have forced companies as big as Dell to completely change the way they interact with their customers. If we just do it, and it becomes a phenomenon, companies will be forced to listen. Eventually, it will become productised, the same way MySpace productised blogging.

        (b) I don’t want a relationship with the people I buy things from

        Doc said, “Sometimes, I don’t want a deep relationship, I just want a cup of coffee”. And that’s fine. VRM-style approaches won’t replace all other marketing by every company. However, most people spend most money on big, considered purchases like houses and cars. Our ability to properly judge those purchases will be enhanced by a VRM approach. Large B2B purchases also account for a lot of money. Regular, smaller purchases from companies like supermarkets and bookshops will also be enhanced.

        (c) Hang on, I work for an advertising agency/publisher/PR Company.

        Yeah. You’re screwed.

        Well, not entirely. That’s not going to happen overnight and not going to happen to the whole of the marketplace. Think of VRM as having the same impact as blogging activity now and the way that will grow. We’re at the equivalent of 1999 when it comes to VRM.

        (d) Where’s the money?

        Good question and it’s not something we know right now. There’s a potential whole new industry called ‘needs management services’; there’s the potential for individuals being paid for access to their data; there’s the possibility to create large, targeted focus groups on the fly similar to YouGov. Basically, that 50% of the advertising budget that doesn’t work is up for grabs because VRM systems guarantee interested, relevant relationships. However, the thing now is to create the phenomenon. From the human being perspective, this better than what we have now. You will have a better life if you embrace VRM.

        How to learn more?

        I’m glad you asked. NMK is running a panel discussion about VRM on the evening of March 18. Do please come along. Top speakers, cheap ticket, free beers, exciting subject. What’s not to like?

        [The picture came via fffffound from here and shows how VRM might work in practise. ;-) ]

        Glue, Web 2.0 and the Next Google

        If you were a brand manager for an FMCG company - let’s say you look after Bostik, for the sake of argument - what would you be doing when it comes to your online strategy?

        Well, you’d probably try to work out how Google works. You want to come top of the search results for things like err.. ‘glue’. You’d probably also want to come at the top or near the top for things like ‘DIY products’ and ‘craft supplies’. You can’t just buy your way to the top - well, you can, but it would be better to be returning top positions in the organic results as well as sponsored positions.

        How would you do that? Well, you’d go about making sure that the Bostik site was the best site on the web when it comes to glue. You’d have sections on the history of glue, glue tips and tricks, glue industry news, glue formulae, learned articles on the future of adhesives. It’ll take a little resource, but hey, you’re a brand - part of the Total group in this case - you aren’t short of a few bob. Plus, if you get it right, you’ll be saving a packet on advertising. Depending on your marketplace, you might not have to go overboard here - you just need more, better stuff than those bastards at Copydex.

        You’d also get into this whole Web 2.0 thing. It’ll help you generate more content and get linked to. Pay someone to write the best glue blog on the planet for you. Get some message boards on the go about DIY, handicrafts and other glue issues. You’ll get a widget put together - maybe it gives you a DIY tip every day or something. You’ll provide RSS feeds for all your content so it can travel as far as possible.

        Google loves all this stuff - pretty soon, you’ll be ranking for as many glue, DIY and handicrafting terms as you’d care to mention. And it’s all relatively easy.

        Most brands aren’t currently doing this stuff. That’s because corporations are slow-moving and stupid, not to mention psychotic. Most brands behave like toddlers screaming for attention at the moment; the brands of the future will behave like best mates and learned counsellors - people you actually want to have a relationship with.

        They will come round eventually - it’s common sense. If you are a brand you will sooner or later be working as hard as possible to either create or acquire the definitive site on the Internet when it comes to your subject matter.

        Anything wrong with this? In some senses, it’s great. Google is rehabilitating corporations in some senses - forcing them to offer stuff that’s useful and interesting rather than the old raping and pillaging shenanigans they used to do.

        Well, it’s great if you work in advertising or marketing (hey, kill yourself). Not so much if you are a citizen of the world. Brands are still psychotic underneath, you see. They are being rehabilitated in the same sense that a mass murderer growing flowers in the prison garden is rehabilitated. You know exactly what they’d really like to do with those shears. The problem is brands have been given the means to take control of the message once again, if only they had the sense to realise it.

        They don’t want you to consider their competitors; they don’t want you thinking about buying nails instead of glue; they don’t want you to know about the Marvin Medium massacre of ‘37. And it will only take them a very little time and resource to achieve it. And remember, they’re brands - their resources and energy are pretty much limitless. Particularly compared to you, Mister competitor Glue Blogger. They’ll buy you up and shut you down in an instant. Here’s a real example - a search for Mattel Toy Recall takes you straight their consumer relations page as the top result. Potentially more vital information about the results of lead poisoning in young children appear half way down the page, where nobody clicks.

        So the next Google. Not only will it be better at searching - we’re only impressed by the current Google because the competition is so absolutely dismal. It will also be about expressing diversity rather than hierarchy. About delivering the truth in all its facets rather than the definitive answer. It won’t produce a list; it will produce a crystal.

        Rather Clever

        image A very nice website created to promote Orange’s unlimited texts on on one of its tariffs. It goes on forever and is full of fun stuff … geddit?

        Created by digital agency Poke, who’ve documented the site here. Apparently, there’s a Christmas version on the way soon.

        "Top of the World, Ma!"

        facebook News Blog - Daily Brief: Official: Facebook Poised to "Take Over The World" - Portfolio.com

        Among other things, it will allow businesses to set up their own Facebook pages and then reach out to real, live users — that is, potential customers — based on the interests they have described in their profiles.

        If those interests include not seeing advertising, that is too bad. "There is no opting out of advertising," Zuckerberg said.

        No opting out of advertising for Zuckerberg, perhaps. A $15bn dollar valuation has to have some sort of business model and since the open platform dropped the bottom out of the user gifts market, advertising is all they have left. I, on the other hand, most certainly do have alternatives (instructions on how to block Facebook Beacon ads).

        Don’t Quit the Day Job

        Interesting piece on paidcontent.org, covering a talk by Henry Copeland, CEO and founder of BlogAds, a network which serves adverts to participating blogs. Copeland says that only around 100 of the 1500 blogs his company works with are likely to be self-sustaining from advertising - and these are the creme-de-la creme - participation in the BlogAds network is by invitation only. He also recognises that blogs have special problems for advertisers:

        The appeal of blogs to marketers is their singular brand identity, making it possible to accurately target their ads. Copeland: “Advertisers say, ‘I know I can trust Blog X, but I also know that Blog X has 100,000 readers - and God knows what those 100,000 readers are going to say.’ It’s not me, it’s the advertisers who are saying this.” And so, BlogAds,which handles advertising for Perez Hilton, Cute Overload and DailyKos, offers to quarantine ads away from the comment pages. “If you look at Perez Hilton, there’s certain kinds of ads that can run on the front page where you can’t see comments. And then on pages where you can see comments, there are other kinds of ads. That is exactly what is occurring.”

        Brands are happy to trust bloggers, it seems, but not blog readers. They’re worried that the sort of flame wars that popular blogs tend to attract will somehow create an adverse association for their brand. From this perspective, our nascent UK blog networks should arguably separate adverts from comments, or always moderate comments, if they’re to attract larger advertisers. This is relatively easy to implement: the blogger platform does this out of the box, and other sites could use Haloscan or similar to host comments separately from articles. However, a quick survey this morning would suggest that few UK sites are interested in the separation and pre-moderation of comments of the type that is found on US blog network Gawker’s sites (though I assume they all remove offensive comments, once they are discovered):

        Paidcontent: no pre-moderation; ads shown on comment pages.

        Blognation: no pre-moderation; ads shown on comment pages.

        Techcrunch UK: no pre-moderation; ads shown on comment pages.

        Westmonster: register to comment; no pre-moderation; ads shown on comment pages

        Shiny Media: no pre-moderation; ads shown on comment pages.

        It’s an interesting conundrum. If blog networks start pre-moderating comments, that reduces their ‘bloggishness’. It’s not so much a conversation as a return to ‘Letters to the Editor’. But if that is what it takes to attract more advertising, and thus more investment in the content of these blogs, will readers forgive that? It doesn’t seem to have hurt Gawker - publishers of Gizmodo and Lifehacker, among others - too badly.