Feb/102
There’s A Need For Integrated Social Media
Disclaimer: I started this post over a month ago and just never got to finish. Hopefully, it’s still halfway relevant.
If we’re being honest, I started on my path in marketing under the impression that I was going to be concepting billboards, television spots, magazine ads, working with emerging technology, etc. Partially because that’s what we’re taught in school, and partially because I was addicted to Mad Men (congratulations on the third Golden Globe). Nonetheless, it wasn’t so much that I was enamored with the idea of traditional advertising. It was that I strongly believed in integrated advertising. I still do.
I now find myself in social media marketing. A fairly new discipline, many times separated from the rest of the action by clients. And unfortunately, the problem is two-fold.
Social is usually cutoff from the rest of the marketing mix and placed on a petri dish, insulated from the outside world. And like a child who’s sheltered their whole life by anxious parents, it doesn’t socially develop properly (no pun intended). Social won’t ever learn to properly integrate with marketing plans unless it’s included from the jump. That’s not to say it can’t work any other way. Social’s been shoehorned into plans many times before, but how often has it felt like it was an afterthought? Or even worse, a social program shares no common messaging with the overall integrated campaign.
That’s only one part of the problem. The bigger issue is that social isn’t easy enough for brands and large agencies to adopt. They like the idea of social, and they’ll dabble in it; kick a program or two off. But the fact that social itself isn’t integrated is reason enough to understand why brands aren’t emphatically jumping at the opportunity to include a deep social program in their campaigns.
As you might have read in my About Me page, I work(ed) for crayon. That is until Powered came along. Powered used to consider themselves a technology company. They had clients and they did social media workshops and the like, but their claim to fame was their white label community platform. They purchased crayon, Drillteam Marketing, and StepChange Group to become the “first full-service social media agency of scale.”
We’re going through our growing pains right now, and working on integrating our various services to create a lean, streamlined organization. But in theory, this kind of organization is what social media marketing needs. After hearing our CEO, Ken Nicolson, tell the vision of the organization, I began to realize how worthy of a cause this was.
Currently, the main way clients handle full-scaled social programs is by hiring 2, 3, or 4 different shops to get the job done. This creates the problem of “too many cooks in the kitchen”, and it becomes a clusterfuck of a situation. I don’t blame companies for being apprehensive in getting involved in such a fiasco. After all, they’ve never had to go to so many different people to get a campaign done before. Why should they now have to interact with four different companies, who do four different things, to get one job done. Sure, they could go to a large agency who could subcontract the work out to four different shops on your behalf, but then you’re paying for added overhead.
The point is, the need for an integrated approach to social media was long overdue and desperately needed. We need fewer individuals talking about how smart they are in the space, and more individuals banding together to serve our clients better.
Dec/090
Is The Apple Tablet The Future of Print Media? Multimedia? Everything?
As a gadget junkie, my primary interest has always been emerging technologies. Somehow, I’ve always had the room on my credit cards to support my habit, and the mentors to help foster it.
The forthcoming Apple Tablet has always been something of much interest to me. I’ve been following its “development” for the better part of this year, eagerly anticipating any news of its release. As we draw closer to its expected January unveiling, I’m beginning to wonder what exactly we can come to expect out of Cupertino?
I spend too much money on Apple products these days. And after buying an iPhone 3GS and 27-inch iMac this year alone, it’s getting hard to justify the estimated cost (about $800) of an Apple Tablet next Spring. I know I’m lying to myself about it, and will likely own one at release, but I like to pretend I can exercise free will.
But the question for the ages is if it’s just going to be an oversized iPod Touch?
I’m scared of getting caught up in the early adopter craze and snatching one up without justification. What void is the Tablet going to fill that my iPhone, MacBook, and iMac don’t already?
And then I think of something I read in an article: There’s a good chance I simply can’t see the future as clearly as Steve Jobs can. The man is a visionary, no matter what side of the fence you sit on. He’s a thought leader among thought leaders. And before the iPhone, I had no idea the things it can do were even possible. He reshaped the wireless telecom industry with one device. And being that after many years of stop-start attempts, he’s “extremely happy with the new tablet,” I would imagine that wherever it stands, it’s got to be awesome.
As we get closer, the picture is becoming clearer. It’s hard to tell exactly what kinds of multitouch gestures and interactive experiences we can expect to see come from the Tablet. But a recent Popular Science demo out of BERG and Bonnier R&D, dubbed Mag+, explores the possibilities of an interactive magazine, and gets me hot and bothered for the future.
Two other notable demos were created for Wired magazine, and Sports Illustrated. The Sports Illustrated demo was actually done by my old employer, The Wonderfactory. But something I read on Gizmodo brought up a good point:
“I’m sorry, Time Inc. and Condé Nast and Murdochs of the world, but magazines are not dying because they are printed on paper. They are going under because many other factors. Here are some of them: Reduced attention spans, reader’s demand for instant satisfaction, and a general change in visual culture and codes that have rendered the page concept obsolete in favor of more anarchic, time-organized information structures, as well as non-linear ones.”
Is the future of print media on the Tablet simply glorified PDFs with Facebook Connect integration? The Mag+ demo is easily the most impressive, and perhaps the most likely of the three design schemes to succeed. It does, what I believe, the most efficient job of marrying an old stodgy medium with the web-influenced nature of today’s consumer.
I think the key to the Tablet’s success isn’t in what it can do, it’s in what it can deliver. Apple holds a house full of multitouch patents. And apparently we’ll be “very surprised how you interact with the new tablet,” according to a New York Times blog post. So, I don’t doubt that it’ll be fun to use. The question is what it will be used for. And I think that’s where distribution becomes the X-factor in this whole thing.
If the Tablet can deliver Mag+ level interactivity to all of our favorite magazines, newspapers, textbooks, comic books, and shopping catalogs (this IKEA demo is a must-see), and establish a streamlined distribution channel (probably through iTunes), then the future of print media is locked. With the proper content publishers on board, a new way of interacting with content that reinvents the way we thought about print, and an easy and especially cheap way of getting that content into your hands, you’re looking at a fundamental shift in the print publishing business.
Add to all of this, the developing rumors of an iTunes subscription service for television content, and access to the iTunes App Store, and you have a perfect storm for the future of multimedia on-the-go. Anyone can create an awesome device chock full of features (albeit, it may not look as attractive). But the content distribution infrastructure that Apple has worked meticulously on for nearly a decade has put them in a position that no other device maker can compete with; not even Microsoft.
I don’t believe this was all a serendipitous mistake. I believe Steve Jobs and the folks at Apple have been planning this coup d’état of our multimedia content for a long time coming; slowly and very cautiously putting the right pieces in place to checkmate its competitors into submission.
Apple has become the Walmart of digital content, with the Tablet potentially acting as the first missing link between the physical world, and the digital content we love. And now that Jobs is satisfied, the only thing that could could kill this idea is exorbitantly expensive cellular service by a greedy mobile carrier, severely limiting its consumer adoption appeal.
Nonetheless, naysayers who wish to cling to their tired old ways, just may find themselves digging an early grave…if they haven’t already.
Hurrah, Hurrah! Print is dead.
Nov/092
Jeff Howe Didn’t Mean To Be An Asshole
I briefly met Jeff Howe during the kickoff party for his book Crowdsourcing. He’s a good guy. Very charming, very intelligent. It’s not his fault he’s an asshole, having coined the term “crowdsourcing”.
I read an opinion piece on PSFK today by well-known author, blogger, critic, and fabled ad man, George Parker. In it, he pretty much lambasted the Boulder, CO-based agency, Victors & Spoils, for further perpetuating the argument of “What are agencies for?” To their credit, however, according to @BBHLabs, they’ve already gotten 5 letters from Fortune 200 CMOs in the first few days of them opening their doors.
The great debate of the effects of crowdsourcing on ad agencies is something I’ve always been fairly agnostic about. I was always a supporter of Jeff Howe, so I didn’t immediately write it off as the bane of creative agencies. But after hearing George Parker’s criticisms of Victors & Spoils, I think I might have to side with the agencies. And it’s not because I think agency creatives would be out of a job otherwise. There’s more to the argument than that.
First off, crowdsourcing your work does NOT guarantee quality product. Fast Company’s Cliff Kuang published a piece that took a look at some of the mediocre work that has come from crowdsourced efforts. I’m not suggesting that crowdsourced work can’t be good. And I’m not saying that it doesn’t help in shining light on many talented people who might otherwise be overlooked. Honestly, at its core, I don’t believe crowdsourcing, as a marketing vehicle, is such a bad idea. It promotes consumer interaction; celebrates their creativity; and all that other good stuff we like to say about the benefits of crowdsourcing.
Where I’ve decided to put my foot down is exactly where Victors & Spoils has decided to venture: crowdsourcing all of your work as a creative ad agency. I was impressed by the attention that they’ve been getting, but after further thought, I’m not so sure it’s well-deserved. Under this business model, can they legitimately call themselves a creative ad agency? I’m not so sure. If anything, an agency of producers and project managers sounds more apropos. Isn’t that what they essentially boil down to? And that’s the problem that Parker cited in this business model.
If you act as though getting agency quality work is as easy as logging onto crowdSPRING, then what the hell are we being hired for? Clients have their own project managers to oversee crowdsourced initiatives if they really wanted to. I don’t think the creative ad agency will go the way of the Dodo, especially considering there’s simply a different grade of work you get from dealing with “accredited” (for lack of a better word) agencies. I just think that it’s a bit pretentious to put yourself on a high horse and label yourself as forward-thinking when in reality, you aren’t doing any of the heavy lifting.
Having started my career at a creative digital agency, I naturally have a high respect for the work that goes into agency developed creative. I don’t think agency creatives have anything to worry about. Out of work art directors and copywriters aside, the best either already work for someone, or consider themselves too good to essentially work for free. And for those designers who do compete in crowdsourcing competitions, it’s a good way to get noticed, and perhaps find yourself with a job where you don’t have to forfeit valuable hours of your time contending with dozens of other designers working for nothing.
I’ll leave you with this comment from V&S’ announcement blog post:
You guys are kidding right?
You are not changing an industry you are helping hammer one more nail in its coffin. For years we fought the idea of advertising by committee and you are legitimizing it.
You are not calling creatives with spirit you are calling all those willing to be underpaid while you guys reap the rewards.
As John Lennon said, “How do you sleep at night?”
Aug/091
Have Marketers Lost Their Individuality?
I was going to write a post about an important tip if you’re building an iPhone application, but I think I’ll hold that off for a later date. Instead, let me share something that has certainly come to bother me: becoming a standardized marketer. And it’s not for all of the reasons you may think.
If you’ve read my About Me page, you can see that I’m not a fan of the self-righteous, and am afraid of it happening to myself. But that’s not where it ends. Some time ago, I came across a website many of you may be familiar with: Things Marketing People Love. I thought the site was so funny, I emailed the creator, Heron Preston, thanking him for it.
The reason why it’s so amusing is because just about everything in it is true, and that’s because (I’d imagine) all of the submissions are from marketing people themselves. Marketers do love “the elephant in the room,” “taking a stab at it,” saying “divide and conquer,” “fleshing out ideas,” “brain dumps,” “ending emails with ‘thoughts?’,” and “getting your ducks in a row.” So much, in fact, that it annoys me that I have to call myself one. Are we really so predictable? How can we guide others’ behavior when it’s so easy to anticipate our own?
I stand by the notion that no idea’s original. But I do believe you can be different; and that’s what I want for myself.
Over the past 2+ years I must have heard just about every phrase and seen every behavior that TMPL lists off. That we can be read like a book so easily makes me uncomfortable. It makes me feel like we’re not being ourselves; like we’ve just become a collection of plaid shirts and catchphrases. Many of us have been trained to speak the lingo. Are there any of us out there who refuse to assimilate in an attempt hold onto that shred of their individuality that made them unique; that person who existed before they got into this business?
That’s one thing that terrifies me: losing myself. If you have to ask the question “why do you think that?”, then it’s probably too late for you. You’ve already been borgified.
TMPL is a testament to the fact that as much as we like to believe we’re masters of the universe, anticipating consumer behavior, and packaging “individuality” as a false purchasing pretense, we ourselves have lost our own individuality. We’re no better than the markets we segment in our strategic plans; perhaps even more predictable.
We like to believe that the way we dress and act in the office is so different from past business generations. But if we’re all doing it, how different are we from each other? If you’ve already lost yourself, was it really worth it, and what are you going to do to take your life back?
Jul/091
Want To Understand Social Media? Don’t Stop Using It At 5 P.M.
This is something I’ve noticed with a number of marketers who have had difficulty in understanding social media, whether that means getting a grip on its value, or simply how to use it beyond what they read on random marketing blogs like this one. The key to truly understanding and getting a handle on social media is very simple: Don’t stop using it when you punch out for the day.
Don’t treat your work in social media like you treat your work on a TV spot. They’re not the same. In many ways, social media is a living, breathing creature. If you really want to “get it,” incorporate it into your everyday life. Don’t just keep a “business account” on Facebook. Really dive in. Put yourself out there. Make a personal account and share videos of your family, or photos from poker night with your real friends. Stare awkwardly into your mirror with your camera phone in an attempt to capture your next profile photo. Get on Twitter and find your friends and co-workers. Trust me, you’ll look cooler for doing so.
The reason why my generation has taken to social media like a fish to water while you flounder on the shore, isn’t because we’re cleverer than you. Not by any means whatsoever. It’s because it’s not a side-dish in our lives. We don’t see it as a obligation because Seth Godin says we should be doing it, or because it’s what our clients want. It has become the centerpiece of our social experience, for better or worse. We keep in touch with our family, friends, and acquaintances through these mediums. We’re on them all the time because they’ve become instrumental in facilitating our relationships with one another.
If you want to understand social media, beyond what you read online and in books, adopt it the way we have. If you want to understand social media, you have to EXPERIENCE it. Don’t just read about it and fumble trying to apply what you’ve read to practice.
It’s a lot easier than it sounds. You can start by friending me:
Jul/090
CNN’s Black In America 2: Bourgie Blacks. But Are They Really?
I’m going to take a quick break from writing about marketing to discuss something somewhat dear to me. I was watching CNN’s Black In America 2 last night and a particular segment of the 2-hour special struck me: the segment on what some twitterers are calling bourgie blacks. A quick look at the conversations swirling around #BIA2, and you’ll see a mixture of opinions. Some people complain that CNN has gone from one extreme to another, without touching on middle-class blacks (a notion I agree with). Others are proud of the “well-to-do” blacks who were being highlighted, believing that they stand as a testament that there are well-educated black people. And finally, there are those who believe that the “elite” blacks are just as alienating as anyone else.
One twitterer went so far as to respond to another who was asking if there were any darker skinned black people, with: “Yes they were serving folks at the Tuxedo Ball!”
And another made the extreme statement: “…and Tyler Perry will tell us how cooning is the quickest avenue to Black wealth, tomorrow on Black in America 2.”
Conversations like these make some people uncomfortable, and I personally have found myself in the crossfire. Being a mixed minority myself (Black & Hispanic), but not fitting the typical stereotype of what a black person in America is thought to be, I’ve felt the same ire as the kid the segment was about. I didn’t grow up nearly as privileged as he did, but the identity crisis is much of the same. When blacks say you don’t “act” black enough, or that you’re not the “typical” black person, it begs asking the question: “How am I supposed to act? How does one ‘act’ more black?” Is a suburban white kid who wears baggy jeans and fitted caps “more” black than I?
Racial divides haven’t dissolved. It’s ridiculous to say they have. But I will say that a new form of segregation has formed, and going into an industry that’s all about segmentation, it’s clear to see that socioeconomics have overtaken skin color as the most important demographic. Who has the money? The haves and the have-nots has largely become the ruling principle; and it has divided those within my own race.
I’m going from “not being black enough” into an industry where minorities make up a small fraction of the population. Does that make me bourgie as well? I don’t consider myself elite. I’ve never lived in a house, I went to a school district where undercover cops monitored the cafeteria for gang activity, and I’ve never had the luxury of jetsetting around the world (the furthest I’ve been out of the country is Canada).
The point I’m trying to make is that within the community there is a divide between blacks and “real blacks,” and that’s a serious problem. Unfortunately, like in any culture, there are simply different “classes” (for lack of a better term). I think the problem is that CNN failed to shed any light on the middle class blacks in America; they’re just as important as everyone else. As one twitterer aptly put it: “Maybe they aren’t showing the Black Middle Class becuz we aren’t part of the ‘problem’.”
All I can hope for is that the underprivileged get a chance to shine, and the privileged remain humble while remembering to reach back and help others who were not born with the same opportunities. I plan to do the same for any minorities hoping to break into this industry after me. And that’s why I applaud the AdColor coalition, and hope to one day do some work with them.
And with that, I’ll close with a tweet that I found particularly entertaining: “At the end of this they should have the Huxtable family come on and say “See, we ain’t that bad”.
Jul/096
The Only 3 Things You Need to Succeed In Social Media and Become an Engaged Brand
Wetpaint and Altimeter Group just released a thought-provoking report about the most engaged brands in social media, with a listing of 100 companies starting with Starbucks at No. 1 and ending with AIG at No. 100. An interesting thing worth highlighting is that the most engaged brands saw the highest revenue growth versus those who chose to sit on the sidelines and experienced negative growth; the “wallflowers” as the study categorizes them.
Before I get to my point, however, I want to note how surprised I am that the report lacks some smaller companies who most certainly should be listed, and high, like Zappos.
This study should stir some things up, and get folks talking about how they can improve their social media efforts. I’ve had this conversation before: How do you succeed in social media? It’s seriously a lot simpler than many “experts” are making it out to be. Things have become overcomplicated when the key to succeeding in the social space honestly comes down to 3 things:
1. Be Human
This is the number one rule of social media and it’s mind-boggling that marketers are still getting this wrong. You don’t have to be a genius to understand social media. You do have to be human though; albeit a social one, but humans are social creatures to begin with and you wouldn’t be working in communications if you weren’t a little social. That said, the mistake that marketers are making is that they’re over-thinking and over-complicating social media. The question I can’t stand is how you should talk when using social media channels. Talk the way you would talk to a friend. If you’re wondering if you’re crossing the line or being too intrusive, think about whether or not a friend would feel you’re crossing the line or being too intrusive. Ultimately that’s what this is about: befriending PEOPLE (I say “people” instead of “consumers” because I don’t want you treating them like faceless cattle; that’s part of being human).
Think of it this way, before you walk in the office and your workday begins, you’re all just regular people living life. You hang out with friends, go to the park, have barbecues, and play games. Instead of leaving your personal life at the door, invite it inside the office. Celebrate it. Because it’s that aspect of your life that will allow you to succeed in social media. Conduct yourself, and your business, the way you would outside of the office, where you’re — well, more human.
2. Educate Yourself (Be A Little Geeky)
This really should be a no-brainer, but many marketers aren’t taking the time to keep themselves on top of the hottest things going on in the social/digital space. That doesn’t mean just reading AdAge’s ‘Digital‘ articles. It means really staying abreast of what’s going on with tech startups and the like. Get your geek on by reading blogs like TechCrunch, ReadWriteWeb, and Mashable. And that doesn’t mean handing that responsibility off to someone else. If you’re ultimately the decision maker, you need to be the one with your ear to the ground, understanding what’s going on and what tools you can leverage to help your brand. As I suggested in my last post, the services come and go, so you need to know what’s wired, what’s tired, and what’s next. You have to train yourself in a bit of trend spotting.
3. Don’t Do Everything. Just Do It Right.
One of the biggest key takeaways from the study is that of the four engagement profiles (maven, butterfly, selective, wallflower), selectives saw higher gross and net margins than butterflies, who were involved in more social media channels, but not as deeply. This goes back to being human. You wouldn’t try to grill a steak, bake a cake, make a salad, and scramble eggs all at the same time. If you did, something is bound to go wrong; especially if you’re not much of a cook to begin with. Even if you have the money to invest in every social channel known to man, you shouldn’t. Pick a handful of platforms that you think you can excel in, and dominate them. The same rules from the real-world apply to social media: don’t spread yourself too thin. That’s why I don’t have an account on every social site I’ve ever heard of. I know I would neglect the majority of them. I stick to the few that I know I’ll be responsibly active on.
It speaks to a crayon strategy called Commitment to Conversation. If you’re going to engage people in conversation, don’t half-ass it. You have to be active, you have to be sincere, and you have to invest the time to continue it past introductions.
Do these 3 simple things, and I guarantee you success in social media. Anyone who makes it out to be more complicated than this is lying. That may sound divisive, belligerent, and accusatory, but it’s true. Social media is not rocket science, don’t ever let anyone tell you otherwise.
Jul/091
Twitter Is Not The Messiah. It’s Just a Tool.
I love Twitter. Don’t get it twisted. I find it to be a very useful resource when it comes to discovering interesting gems around the internet. So, I’ll be first in line to say that it has provided me with real-world value, and have fervently defended it against friends of mine who don’t see a use for it.
However, I will say that I think there’s just too many people (read marketers) who have clung to it like it is the second coming. Last week, Morgan Stanley’s 15-year old intern, Matthew Robson, wrote a report that shook up the marketing world. Why? Because in it he said that teens just aren’t into Twitter. First off, it wasn’t a real, full-fledged research report in the traditional sense, so, why people acted as though the apocalypse was upon us is beyond me. Even with that aside, however, why is this news? This kid wasn’t the first to look into the massively overhyped impact of Twitter.
You have Robson saying this, but if you go back not so long ago, The Harvard Business Review did a study that showed that more than half of all Twitter users visit the site less than once a month. And even though nearly half of all Twitter activity comes from the various desktop/mobile applications available, I think it’s safe to say we all send at least one tweet out a month using the site. Furthermore, the study found that the median number of lifetime tweets per user was only one.
Taking another step, Participatory Marketing Network conducted a survey on 200 18-24 year olds and found that only 22% of them use Twitter. And iMedia Connection’s Jason Clark published a piece that did a great job of calling Twitter out. He pointed out the 30% retention rate, which translates to 7 out of 10 users who use it once and stop.
Above and beyond all that, what really upsets me is how some people will defend Twitter to the death, as if it is their child. Why is it so outrageous that not everyone is into Twitter? Is it because it proves that the tremendous amount of hype surrounding it is just that: hype?
Social media platforms will come and go. Yes, Twitter is one of the big ones right now, but who’s to say that it’ll still be around in 5 years. We need to remember that it isn’t the tools that are important, it’s the philosophy behind them. And the underlying theme for all of these sites is social interaction. At the end of the day that’s what it’s all about. Biz Stone and Mark Zuckerberg didn’t start Twitter and Facebook, respectively, for the sake of starting them. They did it to facilitate what we naturally do as human beings: communicate. And just as human communication evolved from carrier pigeons, to morse code, to telephones, to email, and now to Twitter, it will continue to evolve. They’re all just tools ultimately serving the same purpose: connecting people.