Category: Branding

Five Impacts of New Media

Branding, Digital Strategy, FutureVisions, Social Media

  on the press 
  Originally uploaded by Nick Sherman

Looking at new (or social) media, it is easy to see that there are some powerful forces driving change across our cultural, our social and even our political landscapes. These five impacts can be summarised, broadly as:

  • Experts coming under pressure from new voices who are early adopters of new technology
  • New organisations emerging to deal with the social, cultural and political changes
  • There is a struggle to revise the social and legal norms — especially in relation to intellectual property
  • The concepts of identity and community are transformed
  • New forms of language come into being
  • Educators are pressured to prepare their students for the newly emerging world

Now while this seems obvious, pause for a moment. This list comes from Elizabeth Eisenstein on the invention of the printing press, and while it speaks to us in our current state, these changes have actually been underway for hundreds of years.

Why is this important? Because the printing press … and for that matter, blogs, social networks, video and picture sharing tools, conversational and other "Web 2.0" sites are not just tools. They don’t just FACILITATE communication and interaction. They MEDIATE it. The impact of this is profound.

If the way that we understand the world is, in turn, mediated by it, then those brands that do NOT engage with new media are placed at a significant disadvantage. This goes beyond the question of whether your company or brand "should have a website" or a "blog", but whether it is important for you to be part of the web of signification that creates the worlds that we live in.

There is a great shift and a great debate still just beginning (remember, for all the joy and speed that comes with the Internet, we still buy books in record numbers). Can you and your brand afford to ignore these changes? Or worse — will you ignore the chance to engage with and SHAPE the future of media (and therefore our future lives)?

Given the ease with which you CAN engage, it’s not a question of how, but how much. Even dipping your toe in the water is a start. Begin here.

Oh, and if you want to go deeper, check out Michael Wesch’s presentation on Human Futures for Technology and Education. More power to you.

Digitial Natives — Is Your Google Tattoo Showing

Branding, Digital Strategy, Social Media

Tattoogle
Originally uploaded by lowereastside

Last week I gave a lecture to Dennis Price’s MBA class on social media. It was great fun (for me), and I hope, beneficial for the students. One of the questions that kept coming up was "why do you blog" — or more precisely, what is the value model that drives/informs my blogging.

My standard response is this — blogging provides me with a disciplined approach to creativity, innovation and writing. This blog is a scrapbook of my ideas that I use to map and document my thinking, often returning to an idea months later. This makes my blog, for me at least, a veritable feast of content and concepts — though sometimes the connections between ideas and actions, between strategies and activations are less than clear. Often this is because I am wanting to provoke potential methods of activation, not constrain them.

Often an idea will come upon me unexpectedly. In this situation, I normally login to the blog and type up a one line or one paragraph entry. If there is a link I will include it. Then I publish this as a draft. Later, when I have more time, I return to the draft to think it through and provide some context.

One such draft that I have been meaning to return to is this one. It is on the concept of digital natives, and in particular, on the podcast between two very clever social media thinkers and commentators — Anna Farmery and Paull Young. And while I admit that there are problems with the terms "digital native" and "digital immigrant", they do provide a starting reference to form a conversation as you will notice in Show #136 of Anna’s The Engaging Brand podcast.

I won’t spoil the podcast for you, but there are some excellent points that Paull and Anna make, including:

  • The identity of digital natives is in flux (as it is for all of us in our early 20s) — and as such it is not yet aligned with our profession. This means there is a focus on the way that "work" and "life" co-mingle
  • One of THE most important aspects of job choice is the opportunity to work with friends (or to make friends)
  • This brings a special focus on the alignment of PERSONAL values and BUSINESS values. For businesses wanting to attract and retain digital natives, this touches concepts such as corporate social responsibility, flexible working conditions and accelerated responsibility
  • Digital natives are impatient for outcomes. They are caught between wanting to overcome barriers to action (short term achievement) and achieving longer term beneficial change in the workplace and the world.

There are many other great points raised through the podcast, so it is well worth a listen (or you could simply subscribe to Anna’s iTunes store). Paull mentioned that the digital natives are the first generation to be born with a Google Tattoo (he attributes this to Geoff Livingston). Think about that from a brand point of view. Listen to the podcast. How is understanding that level of commitment going to impact your hiring practices (it should), how will it change your search for talent (it will) and why will this transform the marketplace for your products and services (it already has)?

Remember, if the digital natives have a Google Tattoo showing, then the digital immigrant also displays the marks of their history. How are your markings influencing your future strategies and visions? Perhaps it is time to recast our ideas and approaches.

When a Brand Speaks with a Customers Voice

Branding, Smart Bloggers, Social Media

Erin Esurance
Originally uploaded by scottmw1971

Conversations swirl around the touchpoints of a brand. We mention our favourite brands over lunch, we wear them, carry them and sometimes even drive them. And what makes their study so fascinating and the demands of their stewardship so challenging is that they can and do embed themselves very deep in the human psyche.

In the claiming of a brand, we seek to own, consume and digest some spirit that projects beyond ourselves. And the open identification of our selves with a brand allows others of the "tribe" to spot us in a crowd. The brand marks us out to our kin and kind — fugitives, family and refugees all at once.

And yet even as we begin to take ownership of brands, even as we incorporate branded trademarks and language into our everyday speech, there are many companies who fail to notice our actions. They avoid our incantations, turn away from our devotions and swivel their eyes inwards. Meanwhile our efforts of brand cocophany provide the meaningless backdrop for discussions on typeface, look and feel or customer experience. Surely a moment’s attention is not too much to beg?

Ah yes, but what happens when a brand that you have lovingly crafted takes on a life of its own? What happens when your own efforts at outreach fall flat, while the community’s efforts vastly outstrip your own — in popularity, in style and in AUTHENTICITY? What happens when your brand voice sounds better coming through the mouths of your customers?

I only ask because of this discussion started by Chris Kieff around Erin Esurance. Chris nicely documents a series of brand eruptions that have broken out across the social media landscape and charts their effectiveness. It is clear that the work of fans resonates more strongly than efforts of the company and its agency.

So what is one to do? Chris has some good answers. What are yours?

Towards a Holistic Brand

Branding

No matter what you think of Microsoft or the philanthopic efforts of Bill Gates, there is no doubt that Gates’ work is having a significant impact. It seems that Gates is now taking on the influences of writers such as CK Prahalad and Hans Rosling — and considering that money — that economic power, may not just be the force for change. In this WSJ article, Gates calls for a "kinder" form of capitalism that cares for the poor as well as the rich.

Dino Demopoulos discusses this in a great post, Doing Well By Doing Good. In it he touches on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and a renewed rejection of it by The Economist. But in a empassioned plea for a more inclusive future, Dino hopes that CSR is not stamped out in a purely rational vision of the corporate future:

Social entrepreneurism, "creative" capitalism or whatever else it is being dubbed is a good thing that we’re hearing more and more of. I know that sounds blissfully ignorant, kind of superficial and overly optimistic, but it’s what I believe.

The fact that Bill Gates has taken a step back to consider the short-comings of capitalism is a milestone. Not that the world’s richest man is proposing some radical change — he is simply focusing on an outcome that he wants to achieve and then considering and planning how he can get there. He is combining strategy with execution.

I think we should turn debate around a little and ask, how this approach applies to brands, to markets and to the consumers/marketers/strategists/participants in global conversation that we all are (in one form or another)? Sure we need to consider the business of marketing and of brands. We need to ensure healthy consumer relationships, brand equity and ongoing sales and profit margins. But these can no longer be seen in isolation … they have to be seen as part of the interconnected flow of economies that encompass our personal, professional, political, creative and ethical dimensions. All these impact our decision making, our identity and inform the choices that we make about who we work for and why, how we live our lives and how we spend our time and our resources.

It is time we thought through the holistic brand … and how it changes the way we define what it is that we "do".

Measuring Audience 2.0

Branding, Digital Strategy, FutureVisions, Measurement, Social Media

  Eyeballing 
  Originally uploaded by fotologic

So I am sitting there in a meeting in a far-off Asian country. Seated all around me are marketing managers and directors from my client’s company. My colleagues and I are slightly jet lagged but hyped — the countdown to our presentation is only minutes away. We just have to wait through one more presentation on "digital strategy" from another agency. The irony is not lost on us … we are, after all, about to present a solution to the challenge of digital strategy — and we feel like we have nailed it.

Then it starts. Well, I thought — "I don’t know a lot about digitial". Hmmm. "But what I do know, is you can’t measure it". What? I stifle the intake of my breath. This is not the time. This is not the place.

To my surprise I look around the room and observe a sea of nodding heads. Not a dissenting voice. Not one.

As I mentioned in this post on measurement some time ago, the idea of tracking hits and even page views seemed quaint and outdated. But what if there really was an AUTOMATED way of measuring what your audience … or what your PARTICIPANTS were interested in? What if you could use this to refine your site/project/marketing efforts — on the fly?

Josh Catone has an interesting article on the new Alenty  site engagement measurement tool. Sure it seems to be focused on banners, but I have a feeling that it would be much more beneficially deployed under the hood of your community system. Imagine if Microsoft turned this on for Facebook? How about a widget for Typepad that allows bloggers to tap into the data about their blogs? Or imagine what this would mean for game developers?

In the future, this sort of technology will be mandatory for all branded content. Not only that, when combined with upstream and downstream analytics, the potential for us all to understand what works, what doesn’t and the IMPACTS of our cohesive branding, design and experience efforts will transform the business of branding. And yes, it really is all about the audience. Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.

Brands — Are Bloggers in Your Sights?

Blogging, Branding, Corporate Social Responsibility, Digital Strategy, Old Media, Smart Bloggers, Social Media

Minilarson03 From the outside, the "blogosphere" is a weird, anarchic and slightly self-obsessed world. With over 70 million blogs and countless thousands starting up each day, it is little wonder that most brand managers, marketing directors and CEOs have no idea where to start.

But have you thought about it? Who are these people who write blogs? And how would you respond if a "blogger" contacted you? Do you have a strategy? A policy? Any idea?

Here is how one leading brand responded to an inquiry about their latest ad campaign:

“Unfortunately we are unable to respond to your inquiry because [we do not] … participate with nontraditional media outlets. This practice is in place to allow us to focus on publications that reach our core guest".

Can you guess which brand this is? Have you heard about it already?

To my surprise, this was the response that was sent by Target to Amy Jussel, Executive Director of Shaping Youth. Amy had written to Target protesting about the depiction on their latest billboard — they are, after all, a family brand and one which should have an affinity with organisations such as Shaping Youth. Indeed, Target’s "values" include the following statement:

From national partnerships to local initiatives to our own programs, Target is committed to making our communities better places to live.

This story has now been picked up by the New York Times … and has spread like wildfire. And while the focus of discussion by NYT has been around whether brands should treat bloggers the same as traditional media outlets, there are other things to consider. Amy is not your average blogger — she runs a professional and high profile not-for-profit organisation. She is a parent and she is a regular patron of Target. Before this episode, there was clear a affinity between Amy, Shaping Youth and the Target brand. But the actions (or non-actions) of one of Target’s employees (or PR team) has had an amplified reaction. What could have been done better. Let’s take a look:

  • Keep it real: Clearly Target has a digital/social media strategy of some sort. They have done some high profile work with Facebook and have amassed over 20,000 members to their group — so clearly the response was not completely honest.
  • Quick research: In the time it takes to send a form response to an inquiry, you can easily do a search on the domain, the blog or the profile of the person writing in. In Amy’s case, Shaping Youth clearly appears at the top of a Google search with the following description — "Shaping Youth is a consortium of media and marketing professionals concerned about harmful media messages to children". A moment’s research can help guide your response.
  • Blog it for free: Time and time again, companies ask whether they should blog or not. Clearly a consumer brand could actively use a blog to engage, converse and discuss a range of topics. A blog would have provided a space for this discussion and would have allowed them to enter this conversation in a more natural and harmonious way.

For brands, the question might be "are bloggers in your sights"? The reverse is certainly true — brands are in the sights of bloggers. And while one blogger acting alone may have limited impact, en-masse, it is a very different ball game. Perhaps Target could benefit from the social media insight and skills of Mack Collier, Drew McLellan or Christina Kerley.

What do you think? Is TargetGate a parallel to Dell Hell?

Some Marketers are Liars. Some Just Stupid.

Branding

Sometimes I wonder why marketers have a bad name. There are many that I know who actively strive to do good things, raise awareness, build brands, generate sales, prod, poke and provoke us into doing better work, create job and professional opportunities and to bring people together. These are smart, passionate people who can deliver creative and compelling business value and would have no problem taking a seat at the boardroom table.

But then, you see something that draws your breath. Makes you see the marketing world as others do … as illogical, tactically oriented and slightly foolish. This piece of “brand insight” from Martin Lindstrom surprises me … he is talking about the way that branding bottled water with “PWS” (public water source) can actually drive sales … that by publicly admitting that you are using PWS (ie tap water) that you can create a “first mover” advantage in the North American beverage market — and that people won’t actually mind. By way of example, he cites the tobacco industry. But these are very different products and categories. And unless I am mistaken, there are no addictive elements added to water.

Dennis Howlett points out that telling the truth should not hurt the beverage industry, and says, “If you can’t trust the brand, then what can you trust?”. This is exactly the point that seems lost in Lindstrom’s analysis. Encouraging any brand (let alone leading brands such as Coke) to play fast and loose with the truth is inviting a tidal wave of social media criticism. In an increasingly connected world, brands are only as squeaky clean as their last campaign — and we consumers, audiences, segments and participants are far less forgiving and more determined than ever before. The sooner brands start to rethink their network of advisors and start listening to agencies that get it, the better off we all will be.

Bridging the Gap

Branding

The more I think about Heart Intelligence, the more I like it as a way of understanding communications. It is like a lovemark with … well, a lovemark with a brain. It takes "gut instinct" and recontextualises it as a form of logic — it gives us a way or perhaps, a reason, to confirm our sense that there is something deeper at play in the way that we communicate. It certainly provides an understanding of the desire or impulse to "connect", but it also provides a tangible link to our bodies. At first instance, heart intelligence makes a great deal of sense in relation to communities — both on and offline — but it also makes sense in terms of any form of human communication. (Bloggers should be able to relate to the increased heart rate and adrenaline rush that comes when you receive your first comment.)

When I was looking through the presentation deck below (courtesy of Katie), I was struck by the way that the principles and approaches to bringing brand strategy and design together reinforced this idea of heart intelligence. However, I am thinking that heart intelligence is a way of understanding brands and communication from the consumer backwards, not the brand forwards. More to come on this!

Social Media is Not a Silver Bullet

Branding

AdliteratebrandideasI almost always read Richard’s Adliterate blog, but with the drama in the lead-up to Christmas last year, I must have missed this post on building better brands. The diagram here came out of another discussion that Richard was hosting, and it distills a whole range of thinking around whether or not you have a brand idea. What Richard was driving at was the difference between a brand idea and an advertising/creative idea.

In that I have been thinking about the nature of brands in some depth recently, it is quite fortuitous that I have stumbled upon this. I love its simplicity. And I think this is well timed considering the resignation of Cramer-Krasselt, Chicago over CareerBuilder’s Super Bowl ads (via JaffeJuice):

Cramer-Krasselt, Chicago, has resigned as CareerBuilder’s agency of record after a five-year run. In an internal memo issued today, the agency’s president, Peter Krivkovich, said CareerBuilder put its account up for review after the agency’s Super Bowl ads failed to rank in the top 10 in USA Today’s viewer poll.

It seems unbelievable that the measurement of the success of a Super Bowl ad could hinge on a viewer poll. But it is even more unbelievable that the marketing team over at CareerBuilder could have such a narrow view of a brand — or at best, a confusion over the nature of a brand idea.

But it seems that this is not as crazy as first thought. Reading through the comments over at Adliterate, I found this interesting comment by Robert:

When planning, I try to find a truth people can embrace. I guess ‘beauty’ is about attraction. They say beauty is in the eye of the beholder and I think that is right. When someone feels attracted to a conceptual thought, proposition, message, story – whatever you want to call it – it is because they recognize something important from themselves in it. People don’t see the world as it is; they see it the way they are. And if they feel attracted to an idea, that is because they see their truth. A truth that ties in well to their beliefs.

Marketers are also attracted to ideas. The CareerBuilder team were focusing on user polling. They must have expecting buzz. Or YouTube viewing statistics. Or … Or … And while their expectations were obviously not met, it is clear that the "idea" of social media was top of mind. Whether this was communicated to the agency or not … I don’t know. But just because social media is growing in influence, it doesn’t mean that its measurements can be used to judge all media/creative. Sometimes social media is NOT the answer …

It is just a shame that ideas can sometimes overtake commonsense. It is why I prefer lots of small, momentum building ideas than one BIG one … when your big idea misses the mark, it can take you out.

How Deep is the Hole Your Brand is In?

Branding

Interbrand’s Brand Marketer’s Report for 2007 has been released and makes for some interesting reading. You can download your own copy here.

Interestingly, "consistency" is seen to be the most important aspect of successful branding. This made me think. It made me wonder. It made me realise that there are many brands and brand managers out there digging themselves a very large hole.

If consistency is one of the most important aspects of branding, then how is your brand going to withstand the forces of co-creation? How will you and your organisation cope with the ravages of consumer generated content? What will you do about blogs? YouTube? Flickr?

I am all for consistency — but consistency of story ranks high for me. Get that right and your brand is safe in the hands of your consumers.