Is Social Media Making Corporate Websites Irrelevant?

Below is an intriguing re-post from Mashable regarding the ever-changing face of business and relationship marketing. In the late 90s we used to call Web 1.0, still one way electronic communications, "New Media". I imagine in "NEW" much the same way television was going to destroy radio, radio was to destroy print, and so forth. Yet the interesting thing about the 'new' in this 'New Media' is that it is the first to change the 'old media'... with newspapers weakened (I will not predict their demise), radio and television streaming, and now... old New Media replaced by Web 2.0, the new New Media. Now that's change.

Is Social Media Making Corporate Websites Irrelevant?

Posted using ShareThis

Mystery Meat

You remember mystery meat, in the seventh grade cafeteria, trying to guess what part of which animal was buried under a mound of potatoes and curdled gravy?

How about this mystery meat: A television-centered campaign that promotes an oft-derided product by hiding behind and talking up the virtues of its partners' products? It is what Microsoft is doing in their new 'Laptop Hunters' campaign, and according to a study quoted in this Fast Company article, it is working.

Microsoft cannot put lipstick on this pig, but it can cover that pig by ladling the value propositions of the hardware manufacturers whose equipment runs the buggy OS (Vista, aka OS7) on top of it.

Microsoft recognizes and leverages the one area the Apple cannot readily claim: value for the money, as PCs can be had for an order of magnitude cheaper than even the most budget-friendly Mac. It realizes that for all the hype around the Mac, the product, to many, doesn't deliver the value promised in its advertising. And ultimately, the product experience equals the brand, no matter how well executed the 'I'm a Mac' campaign.

Thus it appears that for the time being, consumers are holding their nose as they go for the PC. Just like swallowing mystery meat.

UPDATE: 7-15: Microsoft: Apple Told Us to Cancel the Laptop Hunter Ads

Using context in creative

In marketing, we are all too often too quick to shrug and allow 'sufficient' or 'passable' creative because, after all, of the subjective nature of of clients' and creatives' judgements.

Yet the most effective messaging is rarely about the message only, the clever headline only, or the graphics only. It is more broadly all those things, always as they are used within a specific context. Delivering the unexpected means communicating the unexpected, in an unexpected way, in an unexpected place. Saatchi and Saatchi got it right with this ad for flea and tick spray:



Look carefully. This is an enormous advert on the floor of a transporation hub in Indonesia. The 'fleas' are passers-by, many unaware of their role in the ad itself.

Large format floor ads have been done before, but this one is the first I have seen that combines the impressive graphic impact of large-scale installations in an unexpected way, in this case where passers-by are integral to the message. Without them, the image is incomplete. Place this same image on a postcard or in a trade advertisement, it communicates the same message, but offers no interaction, no imact, and builds no affinity for the brand.

"Art" remains subjective, but "context" is objective. Recognizing this makes good creative easier to recognize, easier to sell, and builds credibility for marketing and advertising as measureable and accountable. As ad legend David Ogilvy is quoted as saying, “If it doesn't sell, it isn't creative.”

Getting off the dime

"'Even' is the new (in the) black", a friend in financial services told me the other day. He was referring to his clients' portfolios, bailed out banks, automobile manufacturers. A world where losing a billion fewer dollars than you had been expected to is seen as positive news for the market.

In a time of powerful financial gravity, 'even' is safe. 'Even' is acceptable. Except when it is not (for ancient historical reference, see Matthew 25:14-30).

The origin of the term to 'get off the dime' comes from old dance halls, when floor managers would see dancers and their customers barely move from a small (dime-sized) spot as they held tightly to one another. In the morality of the day, this was unacceptable.

Today it isn't dancers but companies and their executives that can't seem to unwind from their tight hold on whatever brings them security: cash, "the old way", the bird in the hand, or whatever was done a year ago when things weren't so dire. When Larry Young, CEO of Dr. Pepper-Snapple reported earnings last month, he stated, "Even though the majority of Americans are still working, the fear factor that has gripped the nation is having a significant impact on consumer psychology." That psychology is real, and it doesn't just impact sugared drinks. It carries itself into offices and boardrooms where it impacts a whole host of decisions based on the paralyzing fear of the unknown.

Such destructive emotions are common among all companies, large and small, and the longer they go unchecked, the worse the impact, as they create a flywheel of negative emotions throughout the organization, building, building, the cycle destroys any chance of a recovery.

In his book Confronting Reality, written with Ram Charan, former Honeywell CEO Larry Bossidy outlines a process for executives to begin to see the forest from the trees, and the symptoms from the cause. Companies that recognize the symptoms, recognize the cases, and, critically, take action to overcome them can recover. It just takes a little insight, a little courage, and a bit of forward strategic thinking.

And that's my two cents. I only wish I had as much as a dime.

This is broken.

If I can be so brazen as to add to Seth Godin's excellent 2006 Gel presentation, This Is Broken, I'd add an additional category to his list of broken things called "It made sense to us at the time" (something I discuss here) and suggest that an earlier blog post of my own hints at one of the possible solutions.

What's broken in your experience?

I had a broken experience yesterday on Amazon. I purchased four MP3s files from three different albums by the same artist. I was forced to check out four times, and further, when I pressed the back button, it returned me all the way to the main page, not the sorted list I had created. Took me close to twenty minutes.

Broken.

Know when to fold 'em.

I know. With that title, I've put a tune in your head you'll not get out for some time. Still, you could do worse than a 70s classic from Kenny Rogers. In any event, my point, and I do have one, is that that lyric has never been more appropriate in a business context than it is to the changes made possible by today's electronic media.

The Pirate Bay case (click here if you are not familiar) came to a conclusion today, complete with jail time and seven figure fines for its founders. So now the entertainment industry has a win in their column based on foggy reasoning, short-sighted strategy, and a desperate effort to hold on to their buggy whip business plans. Now they just have to leverage that surprising win by filing the same suit against thousands of copycats.

Good luck with all that.

The newspaper industry is no different. Teetering on extinction, there has been no shortage of attempts – legislative and otherwise – to support the newspapers' clearly flawed business model. Think of the effort to start a newspaper today with new investors: The ten-second pitch for venture capitalists? "We deliver news and opinion late, in a cumbersome and environmentally suspect format to individuals whose iterative feedback takes days and requires postage."

Well, sign me up!

From efforts to reduce regulation (rarely a bad thing in my mind) to subsidize newspapers through tax policy (rarely a good thing in my mind) the concept of a newspaper is so central to our culture, or so it is argued, that its simply 'too big to fail'.

Like banks. Or car manufacturers.

It's long past time to simply face the reality that newspapers, records, movies and other media are competing not just with new media, but in a brand new context. Traditional distribution methods for everything from news to music to movies are obsolete, and there isn't a tort or an injunction or any lawyer in the world that can stop it.

One of my favorite quotes on the subject is from US Army General Eric Shinseki: “If you don't like change, you're going to like irrelevance even less."

Or perhaps more succinctly put by that other sage, "You gotta know when to walk away, and know when to run."

UPDATE 4-23: Excellent opinion piece regarding Susan Boyle sensation that indicates that the amazing viral nature of the clip has yet to monetize for YouTube or ITV as a result of the battles between old, new, and newer revenue models.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Creative Destruction Happens Quickly; Those Who Wait End Up In The Rubble (techdirt.com)

Of Babies and Bathwater, Part II

Image by HubSpot via Flickr

Given that any job opening today one step above entry level generally requires three to five years of experience in the field to be considered merely sufficient, what does it say about the plethora or Social Media Experts flooding the marketing field today?

In a field barely five years old, it is difficult to suggest that even Mark Zuckerberg, founder of the accidentally successful social media site Facebook, knows enough to consider himself an expert at how social media should be efficiently added to a traditional marketing mix.

"Traditional marketing mix? That’s because social media breaks all the rules! It isn't traditional!", will say my distracters, and by doing so, prove my point.

Didn't we hear this, a dozen years ago, when Internet entrepreneurs suggested that those of us still relying on P/E ratios didn't understand that 'click-thrus' and 'page views' were the new currency? "That’s because the Internet breaks all the rules! It isn't traditional!", I seem to recall them saying.

The blog entry below this post, linked by Zemanta, explains just one of the reasons that marketing in this environment isn't as simple as latching onto the latest marketing tool. Saying you 'do' marketing is easy. Actually doing it, and doing it well, is far more challenging.

Social Media is a new tool for marketers, a potentially efficient way to accelerate personal conversations with a brand's 'tribe', as Seth Godin would describe their most vocal and active consumers. A new tool, and just a tool, like the web, television, radio, newspaper, town criers, and signs etched in sandstone that came before it. It is not a revolution - no matter how successful political activists were last year in leveraging the media to communicate with… other political activists.

Twittering, blogging, actively posting on Facebook, sharing photos on Flickr, posting on Digg, are all experiential. Experiencing it doesn't make an expert. I'm on my fourth dog, yet I still feel compelled to take it to the vet for treatment. That's the critical difference between having an experience and being an expert.

Even Social Media Experts at established firms like Agency.com tried it with client Skittles and succeeded only in spiking discussion of the candy's brand in a negative light, visits to the site equally mixed between social media "experts" blogging on the ill-fated experiment and giggling preteens excited to see their indiscriminate use of foul language posted prominently on the site.

Integrated Marketing Communications remains a proven and successful strategy for developing and executing successful marketing campaigns. Integrating Web 2.0 and Social Media will most certainly be a critical part of this planning. But it cannot be done effectively in a vacuum by self-proclaimed social media experts lacking essential marketing skill sets and an understanding of basic, proven marketing concepts that can leverage these new tools to even greater influence. That’s babies and bathwater, experts and experience.

Related articles by Zemanta

• What comes after Facebook & Twitter? (thecustomercollective.com)

The marketing of consumer debt

I'm old enough to remember that in my youth, the preeminent bank card was called MasterCharge. Every time you used it, it reminded you what you were doing. Charging. Going into debt.

At some point it was changed to MasterCard, evoking Indomitable Power over the darkness of want. Then along came Delta, which became Visa, a travel pass to your heart's desire, and then Sears launched Discover, perhaps a new way to find the fabled city of El Dorado.

I am reminded of a statement by GSD&M's Roy Spence, who once advocated a Secretary of Marketing to replace all other presidential cabinet posts. In this case, that idea could be easily tested: instead of the new rules and regulations that are about to be put into place by regulators regarding fees and interest on credit cards, perhaps we instead could let the free market establish those rules, with the regulators requiring only that the cards brand themselves as Slave2Debt (MasterCard), Passport To Bankruptcy (Visa), or Devoured (Discover). Then let's see how often they're used over cash when consumers pull that message out of their wallets with every purchase.

I'm kidding of course. But only because government regulators wouldn't know good creative when they see it.

Lookin' for latte in all the wrong places

When I was last in Zurich, in 2006 (negotiating a settlement regarding trademark infringement by Swisscom - shame I don't ski) I took a few hours to explore the city on foot. After I had passed the fourth Starbucks, it struck me that I had likely traveled 16 to 20 city blocks, so made my way back to the hotel. I had counted my distance in Starbucks, not blocks. The same could have been done in every American city and virtually any other city in Europe. And then.

Three years later, Starbucks has shuttered hundreds of locations worldwide and what was once an iconic brand and a unique experience now looks to McDonalds Value Meals for salvation. The thinking must be that they are looking for ways to ingrain Starbucks into our routines the way McDonalds has done. Yet in addition to the grab and go $5 latte market, Starbucks was always a destination for the self-employed, the freelancer, the coffee networking types to meet and discuss business. With this in mind, just how much business do Starbucks executives think is conducted at McDonalds?

In the interest of fairness and full disclosure, I am not privy to extensive research regarding Starbucks customer base. Anecdotally, however, these types of meetings, good for about $10-15 a table and high table turn, are a critical market - and in my neighborhood, Starbucks are losing these common meet-ups to Paneras Bread. Paneras welcomes this type of guest with large tables and free wifi, which activates with a polite reminder regarding etiquette in the use of the facilities. (Starbucks is still trying to wring revenue from agreements with AT&T and T-Mobile.)

There are other local restaurants, regional and national chains that serve a similar market, but few are as effective as Panera at creating an environment as specifically well-suited to the needs of the increasing legions of the 1099 workforce.

Last year the 1.3 billion (revenue) Paneras stock soared from $32 a share in January to about $50 a share at the end of the year with a debt-free balance sheet. McDonalds, meanwhile, struggles with systemwide sales off by 4.6% in February. McDonalds might be aspiration for Starbucks in size and brand ubiquity, but Paneras reflects the needs of its customers.

In latte as in life, it is important not only to understand your competition, but to be certain that you've properly identified who they are.

The Internet, in dog years

This is not your teenager's Internet.

The latest news from the Pew Internet and American Life Project will not surprise a colleague who has a 90+ year old father who regularly "Tweets" his family.

Older Americans are going online more than ever before.

According to the study, in the past three years the 'hockey stick' in Internet adoption has been in the 70+ demographic. 70+, folks. God love 'em, these are the same folks that still re-use aluminum foil. Growth in Internet use among people ages 70 to 74 increased by 19% and for those above 75 (b.1924!) growth clocked in at 10%.

Other studies concur that older demographic groups spend more time online than their younger counterparts and while many go online to get health information and visit government Websites, the growth actually stems from use of the Internet for activities such as games, watch movies, use social networking sites or read blogs.

The assumptions and biases that the Internet, social networking and digital media are all tools to reach younger demographics needs to be readdressed by marketers as in this economy particularly, no opportunity to reach out to prospective customers should go unexplored.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Old Fogies Taking Over Social Networks? (socialmediatoday.com)

How much is a friend worth?

A month or more ago when Burger King was running its Facebook promotion that encouraged users to delete 10 friends to receive a free Whopper, a friend of mine posted on his status that he "is not going to give up a friendship for a Whopper." Well, that’s a kinda low threshold for my value as his friend, though to be certain, I'm glad I qualified.

So what is a friend worth? Poets and songwriters might couch it in elegant prose and a clever turn of phrase, but a new study by University of Chicago Economics professor Gabriella Conti affirms that being popular – particularly in high school – is quantitatively valuable later in life. In the study, Conti and colleagues measure the association between popularity in high school and later wages.

From admittedly dated data (the raw data was gathered in 1975 from 4000 men who graduated in 1957) The subjects were asked to name up to three of their closest friends and used the number of times ta person was mentioned as a measure of that person’s popularity, and then compared that to a person’s earnings.

The takeaway?

They found that, after controlling for variables, each extra close friend in high school is associated with an increase in earnings of 2%. The study concludes that either social skills carry forward to the working world or simply, friends tend to help friends.

Given the subjects and the data are dated, it begs the question as to whether the data carries forward to friends through Social Media net out as an increase, and if friends that are exclusively 'virtual' friends have the same impact.

Either way, its bad news for social misfits who take solace in the idea that one day they'll be lord and master over their current adolescent tormentors. The data doesn't seem to support the fact that the computer club president will one day be in a position to hire and fire the varsity quarterback. On the upside, years later he might still be able to hack that football hero's fat bank account.

Silly Skittles, this trick is for kids

Okay, so by now, everyone knows that Skittles jumped head first into Social Media yesterday, and by today (24 hours later) has recognized what many of the rest of us already had known: its a shallow pool. Or a pool of shallow people. Either way, a bit of a mess. Like I wrote THREE years ago folks, just because its the new thing, doesn't mean its right for your message, or at least the way you might initially think about going about it.

A brief history of Skittles Marketing, ca. March 2 - March 3, 2009: "Edgy" ad campaign moves to Social Media by using the Skittles brand feed on Twitter as the home page, accepting all posts and all posts using the word "Skittles". (User name, "Skittles", incidentally, not secured. A lonely woman with a cat and an abandoned Twitter account, #skittles, presumably gets a lot of misdirected traffic.) After discovering a preponderance of negative and/or objectionable posts coming through on the Twitter feed, decide on Tuesday to instead use their brand's Facebook presence as their new website. Rude comments continue on both sites.

So, Skittles discovered that the prime users of Social Media and their demographic overlap. What they hadn't learned was that Social Media isn't about them, its about the community. By hijacking a third party site like Twitter and claiming it as your own, you are undermining the validity of that community.

Hint: Marketing is a lot more than simply mixing in equal parts audience reach, clever messaging, and good product. It takes a bit of thought, consideration, and strategy. Those leading the social media revolution are brilliant, truly, but just a little green. Hey kids, marketing fundamentals are still relevant.

Still, I wouldn't be too concerned. Former Coca-cola CMO Sergio Zyman built a career talking about the New Coke debacle. I assume this will have a silver lining as well.