I've been asked to give a presentation to the Social Media Council of the ARF (Advertising Research Federation) in about a week or so and wrote this title for my presentation: "No I don't want to be Facebook Friends with my Butter: Resetting the Agenda for Social Media." Its tongue-in-cheek, but I wanted to capture my frustration with the way SM is being abused as adspace (see Best Buy's Twelpforce ads) when in fact its really more of a conversational medium. SM has in mind three real benefits--real-time messaging, acceleration of said messaging (this is a "velocity" measure), and social relevance (if it makes it to me--its been heavily filtered to be relevant to my network). I think the example here in this AdAge video of the CEO of Vail Resorts is apt.
The reality is--advertising in SM takes a narrow view of this medium's potential--SM is really much more of a hybrid channel where marketing, sales, and PR, need to put their heads together to get the most out of it, together. A limited view of the benefits of SM on CyberMonday is just advertising "doorbuster" deals on say, Twitter. It's real-time, but it misses the mark on velocity and social relevance. Its an amped-up coupon. #Amazon has about 12K followers, #AmazonDeals has about #32K followers. Yet, Amazon.com was reportedly the #1 visited site on Black Friday this year. With those numbers, Amazon's Twitter sites shouldn't be made to shill for the website--its not a duty customers are seeking from the channel. By thinking about all three major benefits, Amazon could put their Twitter accounts to better use serving the customer with information that builds a social relationship, not replicating a transactional relationship better served elsewhere.
Monday, November 30
Sunday, November 29
Invitation to Google Wave
Just returned from VA from Thanksgiving to find I got my invitation to beta Google Wave! Quite exciting. Recall I wrote about Wave here back in Oct. I will definitely post on my progress using the new tool.
Monday, November 23
Faris Yacob's Rules for Social Media
I plan on showing my Advertising Campaigns class at NYU this talk by Faris Yacob tonight on some of the fundamental rules for brands executing Social Media.
I found this talk via Brainjuicer as I was doing research in preparation for my own lecture at the Advertising Research Foundation Social Media Council meeting. Once I finish prepping that lecture, I'll be sure to share with you!
Given Faris's approach to recombinant culture IS culture, I'm hoping to add to his list of rules.
Enjoy!
Faris Yakob: Be Nice or Leave! from brainjuicer on Vimeo.
I found this talk via Brainjuicer as I was doing research in preparation for my own lecture at the Advertising Research Foundation Social Media Council meeting. Once I finish prepping that lecture, I'll be sure to share with you!
Given Faris's approach to recombinant culture IS culture, I'm hoping to add to his list of rules.
Enjoy!
Thursday, November 19
Damn you Droga 5!!! I love this ad.
Just when I thought I was sick of advertising...Droga5 goes and drops one like this on you.
Wednesday, November 18
Which shop should own the Social Media strategy?
I'm intrigued by Coca-Cola's Expedition 206 effort. First, I like the global nature of the Social Media program--206 countries in 365 days. I like the multicultural mix of the team being sent out to key events over the next year in search of "happiness." I like the fact that Coca-Cola Co. is taking a risk by embracing the open-ended nature of this type of corporate journalism. In reality TV, things can and always do go wrong--providing a fair bit of eventual entertainment. We should expect the same from reality Social Media. Two guys and a girl--young, 20-something, chemistry being what it is... And I like the fact that the concept came from Corp Affairs.
In fact, I've been asking myself alot of questions about SM lately and one that keeps popping up is "who should own the SM strategy?" Obviously, everyone wants a piece. I've met marketers who are frankly, tired of all the different agencies knocking on their door claiming to be SM conversant. Here's a tough question I would be asking as a marketer....when a SM agency or agency with newly-found SM "expertise" came calling (oh and let's say I'm P&G):
"If Aliens invade the earth at 4am and send out a Facebook message saying they will annihilate us if we don't make Crest toothpaste in a ham-flavor by 5am, which agency should I have help me respond?"
I know, its a silly over-the-top question, but just think about it another way. Your customers are now "virtual" board members of your brand. They can play nice or they can go rogue. They're unpredictable. Like managing any company board, your responsibility is to listen to what they have to say--because they represent vital interests elsewhere in the company--and take their perspective seriously and to keep things relatively predictable. Why? Because they control a vote--or more specifically, they control some of the value of your company and brand. And if you're a smart CEO, you want to be able to influence as much of your brand's value as possible, to reduce risk and chance, to grow its value even.
So, back to the Alien invader question. Lets say there are 4 types of agencies who P&G could call (besides the govt and military of course)--their traditional big shop, their digital agency, their PR agency, and their Media agency.
1) I call the Traditional shop, but no one answers (they're dragging themselves home from the club anyway). Seriously though, the traditional shop employs dozens of people who make mostly TV spots. And those people need continuous employment--hence, my response is going to look a lot like a TV ad. Only these Aliens don't watch TV. Uh-oh.
2) I call the Digital agency, and I get an answer from a Developer in India. The digital shop has outsourced their production to people who mostly make websites. Also, those people need continuous employment--hence, my response will look alot like a website that's going to take 6 months to build and won't carry a FB link because of legal liability issues. Uh-oh, I've only got an hour.
3) I call my Media agency and they answer, but they ask how they are going get a commission off the message and tell me that I should negotiate a better rate with MySpace, that they have an alliance with MySpace and they can get my message out as "added value" if I'll advertise my Ham-flavored Crest exclusively with them. Only, the Aliens think MySpace is passe, they don't have a profile there. Uh-oh again.
Big traditional shops simply aren't organized to be able to actively listen and respond--their bread is buttered on production and a FB message leaves little room for Spike Jonze directing. Digital agencies are for the most part, website producers. Big stupid 5000 page websites with dead-end Social Media functionality does not make them capable of setting a brand's influencer strategy. And lets face it, the biggest digital shops didn't start in marketing--they were tech consultants. It was like having your head of IT write your marketing plan. Media agencies certainly have a lot of influence, but its because they buy it from the networks and publishers. I'd trust Media more with making sure my message was well-supported, had broadest reach and played over and over again to make sure the Aliens got it, but not the crafting of it.
4) Lastly, I call the PR agency and they answer right away and tell me that they employs dozens of people who know dozens more, who make...influence...and they can do it right away, and if need be, they can continue the conversation with the Aliens for as long as I like. They can also help make ham-flavored toothpaste acceptable to the rest of the world by seeding the idea with the Media, celebs and so forth. Well, now that's interesting
Of course I want the PR shop leading my SM strategy! PR isn't beholden to the manufacture of ads and their salaries aren't based on how much media they can buy and they aren't stuck behind 18-month website production schedules. PR is nimble, agile, front-end, upstream, and inherently--social. They manufacture "influence." They understand how to relate to important people with influence, and they already know how to influence people on your behalf to spread positive messages--they've been doing it for years already. Thus they already have the tools and the resources in place. They understand how to craft a message and spread it and they know the message itself is the medium.
Now, there are some interesting conditions that PR has to contend with in order to take the mantle of Social Media lead and we'll see them tested out in the next few years. Influence isn't the only product of SM. There's sentiment, insights & data-mining, community management and more. There's the fact that more and more integrated advertising includes limited SM functionality, necessitating PR learn to lead and play nicely with traditional, digital and media shops. There's also the fact that Corp Affairs directors are typically journalists and rarely marketers creating the inevitability of a turf war with CMOs and Brand Managers. There are many questions to be asked and answered. But I am really looking forward to the ensuing debate.
Lets just remember a couple of things--the CMO doesn't really care which agency gets it done--as long as it gets done. The Consumer doesn't distinguish between Ads, Influence and Media--they've got demands and want to be heard.
In fact, I've been asking myself alot of questions about SM lately and one that keeps popping up is "who should own the SM strategy?" Obviously, everyone wants a piece. I've met marketers who are frankly, tired of all the different agencies knocking on their door claiming to be SM conversant. Here's a tough question I would be asking as a marketer....when a SM agency or agency with newly-found SM "expertise" came calling (oh and let's say I'm P&G):
"If Aliens invade the earth at 4am and send out a Facebook message saying they will annihilate us if we don't make Crest toothpaste in a ham-flavor by 5am, which agency should I have help me respond?"
I know, its a silly over-the-top question, but just think about it another way. Your customers are now "virtual" board members of your brand. They can play nice or they can go rogue. They're unpredictable. Like managing any company board, your responsibility is to listen to what they have to say--because they represent vital interests elsewhere in the company--and take their perspective seriously and to keep things relatively predictable. Why? Because they control a vote--or more specifically, they control some of the value of your company and brand. And if you're a smart CEO, you want to be able to influence as much of your brand's value as possible, to reduce risk and chance, to grow its value even.
So, back to the Alien invader question. Lets say there are 4 types of agencies who P&G could call (besides the govt and military of course)--their traditional big shop, their digital agency, their PR agency, and their Media agency.
1) I call the Traditional shop, but no one answers (they're dragging themselves home from the club anyway). Seriously though, the traditional shop employs dozens of people who make mostly TV spots. And those people need continuous employment--hence, my response is going to look a lot like a TV ad. Only these Aliens don't watch TV. Uh-oh.
2) I call the Digital agency, and I get an answer from a Developer in India. The digital shop has outsourced their production to people who mostly make websites. Also, those people need continuous employment--hence, my response will look alot like a website that's going to take 6 months to build and won't carry a FB link because of legal liability issues. Uh-oh, I've only got an hour.
3) I call my Media agency and they answer, but they ask how they are going get a commission off the message and tell me that I should negotiate a better rate with MySpace, that they have an alliance with MySpace and they can get my message out as "added value" if I'll advertise my Ham-flavored Crest exclusively with them. Only, the Aliens think MySpace is passe, they don't have a profile there. Uh-oh again.
Big traditional shops simply aren't organized to be able to actively listen and respond--their bread is buttered on production and a FB message leaves little room for Spike Jonze directing. Digital agencies are for the most part, website producers. Big stupid 5000 page websites with dead-end Social Media functionality does not make them capable of setting a brand's influencer strategy. And lets face it, the biggest digital shops didn't start in marketing--they were tech consultants. It was like having your head of IT write your marketing plan. Media agencies certainly have a lot of influence, but its because they buy it from the networks and publishers. I'd trust Media more with making sure my message was well-supported, had broadest reach and played over and over again to make sure the Aliens got it, but not the crafting of it.
4) Lastly, I call the PR agency and they answer right away and tell me that they employs dozens of people who know dozens more, who make...influence...and they can do it right away, and if need be, they can continue the conversation with the Aliens for as long as I like. They can also help make ham-flavored toothpaste acceptable to the rest of the world by seeding the idea with the Media, celebs and so forth. Well, now that's interesting
Of course I want the PR shop leading my SM strategy! PR isn't beholden to the manufacture of ads and their salaries aren't based on how much media they can buy and they aren't stuck behind 18-month website production schedules. PR is nimble, agile, front-end, upstream, and inherently--social. They manufacture "influence." They understand how to relate to important people with influence, and they already know how to influence people on your behalf to spread positive messages--they've been doing it for years already. Thus they already have the tools and the resources in place. They understand how to craft a message and spread it and they know the message itself is the medium.
Now, there are some interesting conditions that PR has to contend with in order to take the mantle of Social Media lead and we'll see them tested out in the next few years. Influence isn't the only product of SM. There's sentiment, insights & data-mining, community management and more. There's the fact that more and more integrated advertising includes limited SM functionality, necessitating PR learn to lead and play nicely with traditional, digital and media shops. There's also the fact that Corp Affairs directors are typically journalists and rarely marketers creating the inevitability of a turf war with CMOs and Brand Managers. There are many questions to be asked and answered. But I am really looking forward to the ensuing debate.
Lets just remember a couple of things--the CMO doesn't really care which agency gets it done--as long as it gets done. The Consumer doesn't distinguish between Ads, Influence and Media--they've got demands and want to be heard.
Monday, November 16
Guy Murphy on Account Planning
Came across these videos from Guy Murphy (Worldwide Planning Director, JWT and Chair, IPA Strategy Group) posted on YouTube. What a wonderful, precise refresher in some of the key roles, definitions and purpose of Account Planning as well as some thoughts on preparing for the changing landscape of a global post-recession amidst new media/technology behaviors. I hope he won't mind me re-posting the links here. Its timely considering the recent launch of the Spur Planning video series by RedScout.
Guy Murphy on the Role of Planning
... on Consumer Insights
... on the Creative Brief
Guy Murphy on the Role of Planning
... on Consumer Insights
... on the Creative Brief
Thursday, November 5
New Ebay Campaign makes more out of Banners
Spotted the new eBay campaign, "Come to think of it, eBay" from Goodby Silverstein and Partners over on Creative Online and was struck by how it single-handedly sets out to save the banner from being another intrusive media format. While the TV isn't earth-shattering in its creativity (but right on for the recessionary mindset), the banners feature a cooking show, fashion runway show, and music player--all within the banner--no extended pop-up or page take-over, just a simple, refined and elegant presentation of content (via digital video and audio) that captures the viewer for about a minute or so.
As eBay sets out to reposition itself from online curio-shop to more everyday value--the banners do a good job in letting consumers actually experience the utility of eBay in another form other than the familiar shopping/auction experience. This is more shopping as entertainment than the thrill of the auction. I'm sure the team at the agency had a fair bit of convincing to do of the folks at eBay that the way to go was to create original content to demonstrate to consumers that eBay has more stuff that's nearly as good as new. They really captured the notion that media can be more than the message here--it can really be a utility, a Brand Tool, that does something for both the brand and the consumer simultaneously.
The work can be seen here, here, and here.
Interestingly, the repositioning is very timely. Do we really need all-new stuff right now given the environment (old stuff fills up a landfill), the recession (we should be saving more, spending less), and the variety of tools to re-use/recycle (there's been an explosion of services lately). Example, I recently lost a ton of weight so had to replace my wardrobe. My fiance has sold nearly my entire old wardrobe on eBay (its going to the wedding fund)--and where I think its appropriate, I've been donating my old things to the Salvation Army. Growing up--we shopped the Army because of necessity and its easy to forget that people are in need always. I would have liked to see eBay take a further step in their repositioning and to tap into the broader benefits of re-using. This would take the repositioning not just into the functional territory of increased everyday value--but the emotional more long-standing brand equities of "better shopping." Maybe they'll get there next time.
As eBay sets out to reposition itself from online curio-shop to more everyday value--the banners do a good job in letting consumers actually experience the utility of eBay in another form other than the familiar shopping/auction experience. This is more shopping as entertainment than the thrill of the auction. I'm sure the team at the agency had a fair bit of convincing to do of the folks at eBay that the way to go was to create original content to demonstrate to consumers that eBay has more stuff that's nearly as good as new. They really captured the notion that media can be more than the message here--it can really be a utility, a Brand Tool, that does something for both the brand and the consumer simultaneously.
The work can be seen here, here, and here.
Interestingly, the repositioning is very timely. Do we really need all-new stuff right now given the environment (old stuff fills up a landfill), the recession (we should be saving more, spending less), and the variety of tools to re-use/recycle (there's been an explosion of services lately). Example, I recently lost a ton of weight so had to replace my wardrobe. My fiance has sold nearly my entire old wardrobe on eBay (its going to the wedding fund)--and where I think its appropriate, I've been donating my old things to the Salvation Army. Growing up--we shopped the Army because of necessity and its easy to forget that people are in need always. I would have liked to see eBay take a further step in their repositioning and to tap into the broader benefits of re-using. This would take the repositioning not just into the functional territory of increased everyday value--but the emotional more long-standing brand equities of "better shopping." Maybe they'll get there next time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)