Its coming!

The biggest online event in the history of Internet Marketing!

Two of the biggest names in marketing, Jay Abraham and Rich Schefren are hosting a series with the most powerful and impressive collection of world-famous experts to help entrepreneurs tackle their biggest, most immediate and important business challenges, issues, problems and opportunities.

www.theleagueofextraordinarymindsblog.com

We had the great fortune to have a live online presentation from Joseph Jaffe.  This was awesome! After all, Jaffe has appeared on ABC World News Tonight, and has written or been covered by WSJ, NYT, USA Today, and many more. The presentation content was based on Jaffe’s book, “Join the conversation: How to engage marketing-weary consumers with the power of community, dialogue and partnership” and was just right for a new course on new media.  I’m definitely looking forward to purchasing his new book, “Flip the Funnel: How to use existing customers to gain new ones,” which will be published in February of 2010. 

Jaffe was funny, engaging and informative as he spoke about a myriad of relevant topics. He was eloquent in his discussions of marketers need to change; to “adapt or die.”  That change is, in fact “the only constant.” The marketing/branding term “top of mind” is being replaced by “top of page” (as in top of webpage, top in Google search…)

It is especially important for us as business educators and current and future practitioners to understand that if organizations don’t participate in the conversation in some proactive way, we (and our organizations) will become irrelevant.  Jaffe gave us a lot of examples of companies that haven’t been doing this right as well as many that are joining in the conversation.  And some, like Dell, that have really turned it around – now “working with customers as partners”, engaging in Crowdsourcing.  The fact is people are out there talking about your brands now. Choosing to ignore them is “old guard” and downright stupid.  Jaffe mentioned Target’s snowflake angel controversy that went from a blogger comment and attempt to contact Target to much more

Jaffe also emphasized the need for REAL conversations with customers – for commitment to an ongoing process of conversation – not just to a campaign with an end date.  An example of a campaign that was essentially faking engagement in a conversation was Sprint’s – featuring, CEO Dan Hesse.  The ads gave out Dan’s “personal” email address – but, of course it wasn’t…   How can a business or other organization hope to gain our trust with this kind of behavior?

How can marketing be a conversation? Jaffe said that the keys were to “listen, respond, invite people to join in, catalyze and THEN start”.   AND “don’t fake, manipulate, control, dominate, ignore or avoid.”

My favorite parts of Jaffe’s presentation were about the need for organizations to commit to having conversations, to being more vulnerable and emotional and to caring about the people who are trying to converse with people inside organizations.  That this is a new (but really very old) idea of starting and continuing conversations and that it “takes commitment, sweat, effort and tears.”  

“The seeds of conversation are not magic beans.”  You start with some effort, but don’t expect your communities and conversations to emerge full grown overnight.  It takes time and continuous nurturing – a most important lesson for all of us. 

Thank you Joseph Jaffe – it was a wonderful experience!

You know what I love about podcasts? They are archivable, searchable and hands free. Which means that I can listen and learn while I’m doing other things. In the social media and tech space, I think its critical from a business standpoint to continue to grow and learn and stay ahead of the curve.

With that being said here are 14 social media , marketing, and new media podcasts that do just that-allow  me/you to learn. Coming from some of the true leaders of thought and innovation, these should help you achieve what you need most in this industry. Knowledge.

1) Quick-n-Dirty-Brought to you by Jennifer Leggio (@mediaphyter) and Aaron Strout (@aaronstrout) they talk about social networks and social media case studies, and talk with social media thought leaders- as well, they bring their certain style and panache to each podcast. Smart.

2) User Friendly Thinking interviews subject matter experts and industry thought-leaders on topics related to web design, content management, Internet marketing and social media. The show is hosted by CEO John Munsell and marketing director Paul Chaney from Bizzuka.

3) Diva Marketing Talks What can I say about Toby Bloomberg that hasn’t already been said? Add a great podcast to the mix and just be a sponge and learn about social media marketing.

4) Dishy Mix You want content? You want variety? This site and Susan Bratton brings it to you.

5) FIR is a twice weekly podcast covering new media, technology and PR,
provided by Neville Hobson and Shel Holtz, this podcast is very current and will always keep you in the new media loop.

6) Marketing Over Coffee Wait long enough and  John Wall and Chris Penn are likely to talk about anything, however they do focus pretty heavily on the tech, digital media space. Great variety here though.

7) Managing the Gray All around good guy, C.C. Chapman uses his podcast to help business professionals and individuals stay up to date on what is happening in the world of social media.

8. Marketing Voices I’ve been a big fan of marketing voices and Jennifer Jones for awhile now. Jennifer interviews leading marketers and business executives who are changing, or trying to change the marketing landscape.

9) Twist Image Mitch Joel is pretty dialed in. Don’t think so? Look who he has on and look at the topics he chooses to tackle. Plus his sight is bangin.

10) Jaffe Juice One of my faves, each week marketing dude and extremely tongue in cheek provacateur Joseph Jaffe discusses the world of new marketing, media and PR.

11) The Marketing Edge,  is one of the longest running marketing and PR podcasts. Be sure to check out the great summary posts by host Albert Maruggi

12) Find and Convert Wait till you see the list of topics and guests that Bernie Borges has on. Great topics and great content are a winning combination.

13) School of Social media Focused on Web2.0 marketing strategies, the show is produced by Ken English, the BlogTalkRadioGuy, and the Niche Prof, aka Dr. Ron Capps, for the School of Social Marketing and the Social Radio Network.

14) Connected World David Jacobs provides Connected World Radio, produced every Tues and Fri,  featuring a quick thought about an aspect of social or new media.

Have I missed some that might be a great addition to this list?

Share this Post

Seguimos con la serie de artículos publicados por Alan Wolk(2) con el título “Your brand is not your friend”, iniciados, en el post anterior, con El entorno de los medios sociales según Alan Wolk.

Teatro,  TV, DVR, YouTube, virales

En la segunda y tercera partes de su serie, Wolk habla de la Web 2.0 y dispara sin preámbulos una frase que creo fundamental: “Aún si la Web 2.0 tiene un valor limitado, la gente de marketing que la ignore lo hará bajo su propio riesgo. Porque realmente lo único fundamental es que deben ser conscientes de sus limitaciones” Y sigue: “En primer lugar, no va a reemplazar a la televisión por la misma razón que el teatro ha sobrevivido miles de años” y usa una expresión de John Gardner en su libro “On becoming a novelist” para explicar la maravillosa sensación que se recibe con “el sueño vívido y continuo” que cada cultura sobre la tierra ha creado, de sentarse a dejar que alguien le cuente a uno una historia, agregando que la televisión es la última encarnación del teatro: solo que permite ver un espectáculo sin moverse de casa. De la misma manera que la videograbadora y otros aparatos permiten, además, verlo cuando se quiere y no a una hora determinada. Asegura que la televisión seguirá transformándose como lo ha ido haciendo desde el televisor en blanco y negro, antena de conejo y botón selector de canales que eran, probablemente, solo dos o tres. Pero seguirá siendo televisión aunque se vea por Internet en el propio computador. O se reciba por algún sistema universal “a pedido”. Y será pasiva más que interactiva, porque la mayor parte de la gente no quiere comprarse el reloj que usa el héroe que está en pantalla o chatear online con los otros 20 millones de personas que están viendo el programa, entre otras cosas, porque la gente suele ver la televisión acompañada.

Por otro lado YouTube tampoco reemplaza a la televisión: es algo que la gente ve además de la televisión. Y no hay tantas cosas que ver en YouTube, que valgan la pena.

Interesante: prácticamente todo esto, escrito hace dos años, lo ha confirmado Nielsen hace pocas semanas y lo he consignado en Los jóvenes, la televisión e internet: una sorpresa.

Alan Wolk cree que hay una tremenda falta de calidad en la Web 2.0, en comparación con los medios tradicionales (de los que se nutren la mayor parte de los que hacen un blog — los bloggers—, por cierto) y que hay poca gente que quiera crear contenidos, sea esto en respuesta o reacción a algo que leyeron o a un video divertido en YouTube. Es más, incluso dentro de esa ya raleada categoría de “creadores de contenidos” hay muy pocos que realmente puedan crear contenidos convincentes y persuasivos, es decir cosas que la gente quiera ver o leer. Por ejemplo, un blog corporativo escrito con mediocridad es incluso peor que no tener uno. Y a menos que la empresa se pueda pagar un redactor con talento, las probabilidades de que sirva para algo, juegan en contra.

La falta de calidad es también el gran problema de la baja circulación de lo que se pretende que sea marketing viral, según Wolk, porque por falta de ella, la gente no circula los videos destinados a ser virales (y solo circular los hace virales) si no son ingeniosos, divertidos o relevantes como para que merezca la pena pasárselo a otras personas. Llamarlo viral no lo convierte en viral, es viral cuando la gente lo decide así.

Periodismo, información en la blogosfera

El siguiente tema que toca Wolk, es el de la popularidad de la “blogosfera”. La razón, dice, responde a la autenticidad de los autores que, por definición, escriben para sí mismos, o bien dan su propia versión de los hechos, frente a la manipulación de los medios de comunicación masivos, por todo el mundo. Desde sus dueños hasta sus equipos de RR PP (sin dejar de lado a los partidos políticos o a las propias organizaciones terroristas. Frente a noticias manipuladas, sometidas a los parámetros muchas veces rigurosos de las direcciones, hay una enorme legión de periodistas aficionados que con una laptop y una cámara digital cubren muchísimos eventos a una velocidad muy superior a la del periodismo profesional. Probablemente las noticias que mas repercusión han tenido en las semanas pasadas son las que tienen que ver con las elecciones en Iran y las protestas del pueblo en las calles. Su presencia en Twitter #iranelection, mezcla de periodismo y de flashmobs de los que hablé cuando el blog no existía aún y un correo llevaba noticias y comentarios a mis amigos, alumnos y clientes, comentando el libro de Clay Shirky “Here Comes Everybody“. De él y de su autor, encontrarán muchísima información en la red y en la página que Shirky creó cuando lo lanzó. Pongo al pie(3) un extracto del mail, en lo relacionado con ejemplos de flashmobs, sobre todo políticos.

La importancia de Twitter en este caso fue capital: el 13 de Junio cuando el gobierno iraní suprimió la escalada de protestas tanto en las calles como online, Twitter literalmente estalló en twits o mensajes de hasta 140 palabras, denunciando los hechos tanto en inglés como en farsi. El movimiento lo recogieron muchos medios (ver, por ejemplo, un artículo de Time), y el propio gobierno norteamericano le puso de manifiesto a los directivos de Twitter, que esa red social era una importante forma de comunicación en Iran, sugiriéndoles no hacer la actualización del sistema en la madrugada del martes 16 de junio como estaba programado, porque cortaría el servicio en horas de la mañana a los iraníes. La actualización se hizo, finalmente, el miércoles a las 17 horas EDT; es decir las 2100 GMt: o sea a la una de la mañana hora de Irán.)

Pero no sobredimensionemos la envergadura del evento. Aunque Twitter pueda ser estupendo para traer noticias que algún gobierno haya censurado —y además a mucha velocidad— la noticia completa, con varias fuentes y comentarios bien organizados, aún, se ve mejor en la televisión. Quizás solo sean hábitos pero subsisten hasta en los adolescentes (ver Los jóvenes, la televisión e internet: una sorpresa.)

Publicidad en blogs

Wolk toca entonces el tema de la industria de la publicidad y sus blogs y dice que el sector está lleno de comunicados de prensa regurgitados y de ejecutivos asustados echándose flores mutuamente y alabando sus trabajos. Cita a Stuart Elliott, columnista de publicidad del New York Times —y dice que trata de cubrir “las tendencias mas grandes” para “el público en general”— con George Parker, un inglés retirado y malhablado que fue redactor en varias agencias y dice las cosas sin pelos en la lengua en su blog Adscam (lo leo diariamente y rara vez me impresiona no solamente por su ordinariez y chabacanería, sino por su obsesión para hablar mal, y de forma soez, de ciertos personajes de la profesión y de ciertas agencias. También leo todas las semanas a Elliot y no concuerdo con Wolk: simplemente hace otro tipo de periodismo. No es incisivo ni va a la médula: presenta novedades y comenta la actualidad con un estilo muy “gran periódico”, muy tradicional. Y eso no es necesariamente malo. Es,  simplemente otro tipo de periodismo y cada uno debe tener su espacio).

Habla Wolk de los intentos de los anunciantes de hacer publicidad en ciertos blogs de opinión y cuenta entonces la historia de Joseph Jaffe y su JaffeJuice que con un grupo de otros bloggers (algunos de los cuales jamás habían mostrado interés en la fotografía) recibieron en calidad de préstamo, cámaras Nikkon gratis a cambio de tomar fotos con ellas y publicarlas en su blog haciendo mención de la marca y modelo. Por el equivalente a $700, que es el valor de la cámara, destruyeron, dice Wolk, buena parte de la credibilidad que tenían. Wolk incluso le echa en cara a Jaffe haber publicado con celeridad, una foto de su bebé recién nacido “tomada con su Nikon D80”, haciendo de un acto puro, un vulgar acto comercial. (Desde entonces Jaffe ha entrado en muchos otros auspicios y defiende con frecuencia su posición. Le ha buscado incluso un nombre “blogger/influencer outreach” (algo así como “extensión del blogger/influyente”) frente a “sponsored conversation” o “conversación auspiciada” que es como le puso Forrester Research al clasificar la actividad).

Un caso parecido es el de Microsoft que le pagó a una serie de dueños de blogs por usar ciertas palabras o expresiones supuestamente propias, en algún sitio de Microsoft y asociar en él las palabras o la expresión, a sus nombres. Levantó mucha polvareda: The Buzz Machine un blog importante en el mundo de la tecnología de punta, dijo que a los involucrados “les habían comprado la voz”  y Adrants, un blog de noticias y chismes, registró que la blogosfera estaba en armas contra Microsoft.

En una posición principista —y en mi opinión extremadamente escrupulosa— Wolk llama a las marcas “intrusos” que vienen a interrumpir una conversación entre amigos “y cuando estoy hablando con mis amigos no quiero hablarle a su marca. Quizás quiera hablar de su marca pero no con ella porque su marca, no es mi amiga”. Suscribe y lo declara así, la posición de su amiga Christina Kerley que en su blog C K afirma que aunque entiende que la publicidad sea válida en los blogs, ella no la aceptará jamás, y, enlazando el post de The Buzz Machine, declara que en la blogosfera, es imprescindible actuar con independencia, objetividad, y confiabilidad (es decir, inspirarla) y a eso lo llama C K sencillamente autenticidad. Wolk, a su vez, llama terreno resbaladizo a cualquier alternativa de auspicio a través de un blog, porque una vez tomado ese camino, así sea una sola vez, el beneficio de la duda quedará permanentemente en el aire para los lectores. (En mi opinión, quizás repetir los estribillos del cliente sin ningún tipo de valor agregado personal, por dinero, haga perder la autenticidad, sin remisión, a un autor. Pero probar un equipo o un software y dar una opinión imparcial no es distinto de lo que hace, por ejemplo, David Pogue en el New York Times o Walt Mossberg y Katherine Boehret en el Wall Street Journal. Y reciben una remuneración por hacerlo y seguramente que ningún fabricante le pide que devuelva el equipo o el software que le dio a probar. Claro que en el caso de los periodistas profesionales, el fabricante no paga directamente sus servicios y en el de los bloggers, si. En cualquier caso, el blog perderá audiencia o no la perderá si su autor toma auspicios. Y si la pierde “en el pecado le irá la penitencia” puesto que al reducir su audiencia decrecerá el interés de sus auspiciadores. Sobre este tema estoy más cerca de la posición de Josh Bernoff de Forrester Research, que de la de Wolk ).

El blog de un CEO: el de Tony Hsieh de Zappos

El Blog del CEO

Termina Alan Wolk hablando de los CEO y de sus blogs. Tener un blog es algo que está de moda en las altas esferas empresariales y es deseado, seguramente por vanidad, por los dirigentes de primer nivel, que encontrarán la forma de dejarle caer la noticia a sus amigos “¿Sabes que tengo un blog?” pero, según Wolk, “el blog del presidente”, no tiene futuro porque lo normal es que, con opiniones nunca comprometedoras además de totalmente neutras, el blog termine siendo una versión en capítulos del Reporte Anual de la empresa (a diferencia de casos excepcionales como el de Tony Hsieh de Zappos, que además de un blog que comparte con el  COO y CFO de la empresa, Alfred Lin usa Twitter con asiduidad como parte de la política de transparencia de la empresa). Recomienda a cambio del Blog, un documento de FAQ (Frequent Asked Questions) o Preguntas Más Frecuentes. Nada sexy y de perfil bajo pero siempre desde el punto de vista del cliente, con respuestas colocadas de manera que tengan sentido para el cliente, no para la empresa. Son las preguntas las que definen el documento y no las respuestas: silenciosamente y contestando lo que el cliente quiere oír y no lo que la empresa quiere decir. Y eso, de hecho, amigos míos, es una conversación, dice Wolk. Frase de cierre estupenda que le quita toda la confusión a un concepto que es simple pero que con frecuencia se enreda, solo para hacerlo parecer mas sofisticado y complejo. Y seguramente para poder cobrar la asesoría necesaria para desenredarlo y aplicarlo.

————————————

(1)Geek (del inglés geek, pronunciado “guik” IPA /gik/) es un término que se utiliza para referirse a la persona fascinada por la tecnología y la informática. Se trata de un estilo de vida y una forma de ser. Aunque no suelen denominarse hackers o gurús, son en forma y fondo similares, con una afición concreta por algo poco habitual, hace referencia a llamar peyorativamente a lo extraño.

El término «geek» en español está relacionado sólo con la tecnología, a diferencia del uso del término geek en inglés, que tiene un significado más amplio y equivalente al término español friki. (Fuente Wikipedia)

(2)Hablamos de Alan Wolk, su blog The Toad Stool y de su frase famosa “Your brand is not my friend”, en Twitter como medio publicitario: una encuesta reveladora y una propuesta.

Alan Wolk se define a sí mismo como una de las nuevas voces del lado creativo del negocio publicitario que ha establecido un espacio distinto para su consultoría por su sentido común frente a la estrategia que combina con la práctica directa en funciones de director creativo.

Es un importante especialista en todo el entorno online, frecuentemente citado, y su blog enlazado, ha sido seleccionado por el exclusivo sitio de Guy Kawasaki en torno a blogs excepcionales, Alltop, aparece en el número 15 de la los “42 blogs” del Top Rank Marketing Blog y además publica artículos con frecuencia en Marketing Profs (mas conocida como MPDailyFix) un blog enfocado en los consultores de marketing y en el consorcio norteamericano de publicaciones Newstex.

Su serie de artículos mas renombrada (que es justamente la que vamos a tratar en dos o tres posts), escrita en el 2007, ha sido publicada, por ejemplo, en Adweek y su editor, Brian Morrissey ha calificado a su blog, The Toad Stool, “como uno de los más leídos de la industria”. La serie “Your brand is not my friend” tiene que ver con las falsas presunciones, suposiciones o conjeturas que expresan, a veces con no poco desparpajo, soberbia y ligereza, algunos especialistas en marketing sea del lado del cliente o del lado de las agencias, en torno a la explotación comercial de  la Web 2.0. La escribió en el 2007 pero no solamente no ha perdido vigencia sino que ha cobrado realismo porque varias de las cosas que el autor anticipó que sucederían … han sucedido.

Cientos de personas acudieron por ímpetu a un flashmob en la estación de la calle Liverpool de Londres y cantaron Bad como tributo al rey del Pop Michael Jackson.Lo mismo sucedió en Paris, Estocolmo, Montreal, Seatle, Tokyo, Hong Kong…

(3) Extracto del mail mencionado, a modo de ilustración de lo que es un flashmob:

Flashmob, traducido literalmente de inglés como “multitud instantánea” (flash -destello, ráfaga, mob – multitud) una acción organizada en la que un gran grupo de personas se reúne de repente en un lugar público, realiza algo inusual y luego se dispersa rápidamente. Suelen convocarse a través de los medios telemáticos (móviles e Internet) y en la mayor parte de los casos, no tienen ningún fin más que el entretenimiento, pero pueden convocarse también con fines políticos.

En Bielorrusia están prohibidas las reuniones de un cierto número de personas, un grupo de jóvenes se puso de acuerdo por Internet y usando sus teléfonos celulares, para ir a la plaza principal simplemente comiendo helados. Cuando empezaron a ser arrestados “por comer helados”, como una forma de protestar que se ha denominado flashmobs (1) sacaron cámaras fotográficas y registraron y subieron a la red la incongruente actitud de las fuerzas policiales con gente que lo único que hacía era “comer helados”. En el siguiente flashmob lo que hicieron fue sonreír sin parar mientras caminaban por la plaza.

El fenómeno de los flashmobs comenzó con la publicación en octubre de 2002 del libro del sociólogo Howard Rheingold, “Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution“. En este libro el autor predecía que la gente usará las nuevas tecnologías de comunicación (Internet, teléfonos móviles) para autoorganización. En junio de 2003 Rob Zazueta de San Francisco, después de haber leído las obras de Rheingold, creó la página web http://flocksmart.com/ en la que por primera vez los mobbers empezaron a planear sus reuniones

La serie de televisión Jericho se canceló al terminar el capítulo 22 de la primera temporada. En vez de enviar mails a la CBS (ya se sabe que la lluvia de mails es poco útil tanto en las productoras de televisión como en los estamentos políticos)  los fans de la misma decidieron enviar maní (peanuts en inglés) ya que al final de ese último capítulo uno de los personajes pronuncia  la expresión “Nuts” (“Nueces”, traducido en el doblaje al español como “¡Y un huevo!”) en respuesta a la sugerencia de rendición hecha por el alcalde de la ciudad donde se lleva a cabo la serie. (Hace, por cierto referencia a la respuesta del general americano de la Segunda Guerra Mundial Anthony McAuliffe cuando fue invitado a rendirse en la Batalla de Bastogne).

Con más de veinte toneladas de maní en sus almacenes CBS dio respuesta a los fans asegurando que grabaría siete capítulos más y volverían a analizar si el rating aconsejaba seguir con más temporadas de la serie.

El libro de Clay Shirky: Here Comes Everybody

Finalmente está la historia de un grupo que empezó a poner stickers protestando por la preeminencia de la Mafia en Palermo, Italia y después han abierto una página web en la que los negocios pueden declararse de acuerdo con no pagar “protección” a la Mafia. si esto se hubiese hecho de manera individual la Mafia hubiese respondido.

Un caso que no contempla Shirky es el de la primera elección de José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero en España

La noche del 13 de marzo de 2004 víspera de las elecciones presidenciales en España ha sido bautizada como “la noche de los mensajes cortos”. Cientos de personas, sin un mismo convocante que las uniera, coincidieron protestando frente a la sede del Partido Popular.

Detrás de estos acontecimientos no hubo ningún partido o plataforma política, no hubo ningún sindicato; ni siquiera algún periodista de los medios de la oposición -como sugirió un periódico- sino un ciudadano que convocó a un pequeño grupo de amigos allí y se encontró con 4.000 personas exigiendo la verdad a sus gobernantes sobre el atentado de los trenes en la estación de Atocha.

El mensaje, que desencadenó la concentración, se expandió primero por teléfono celular y finalmente invadió los foros de internet: “¿Aznar de rositas? ¿Lo llaman jornada de reflexión y Urdaci trabajando? Hoy 13M, a las 18h. Sede PP, C/ Génova 13. Sin partidos. Silencio por la verdad. ¡Pásalo!”.

La casualidad quiso que esa noche frente a la sede del PP, preparadas para informar de la jornada electoral -que tendría lugar 24 horas más tarde- se encontraran diversas emisoras de televisión del mundo que tenían las antenas parabólicas desplegadas… sólo tuvieron que conectar en directo.

Muchos piensan que allí se jugó el resultado final de la elección que dio por ganador al PSOE y presidente del gobierno español a su candidato José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero

Alan Wolk’s Websites:

• Toad Stool Consultancy
• The Toad Stool blog
• Upcoming Speaking Engagements

Si desea suscribirse gratuitamente a Mercaderes Asociados pulse el botón

The May 11th, 2009, issue of The New Yorker features an article by Malcolm Gladwell entitled “How David Beats Goliath.  When underdogs break the rules.”  Gladwell reviews principles by which the weaker of two competitors, who under normal circumstances would surely suffer defeat, can shift the odds to come out the winner.

One of the key principles will be familiar to anyone who has read Adam Morgan’s marketing classic, Eating the Big Fish: How Challenger Brands Can Compete Against Brand Leaders.  Morgan says that in order to succeed, small-share challenger brands, as he calls them, have to change the rules of the game — for example by breaking the conventions of the category.

A great case study of a challenger brand (although I’m not sure it’s mentioned in Eating the Big Fish) is Felix Cat Food.  Originally the number 4 or 5 cat food brand in the UK, Felix advanced up the ranks to challenge the market leader Whiskas with an unconventional, consumer relevant creative approach and by using newspapers as its primary medium, rather than TV.  TV was where most of the other cat food brands were putting their money.

In The New Yorker article, Malcolm Gladwell’s signature case for this principle is the story of David and Goliath.  Gladwell writes:

In the Biblical story of David and Goliath, David initially put on a coat of mail and a brass helmet and girded himself with a sword: he prepared to wage a conventional battle of swords against Goliath.  But then he stopped. “I cannot walk in these, for I am unused to it,” he said … and picked up those five smooth stones.

When the David’s of this world choose to play by different rules than the Goliath’s, more often than not, they win.

Another great example that Gladwell writes about in some detail is the story of a girls’ junior high basketball team, whose players were neither especially tall, nor especially gifted, but who nevertheless made it to the national championships.  They did it by utilizing a strategy that is basketball’s equivalent of David reaching for the five smooth stones.  It’s called the full-court press.  Many basketball teams practice the full-court press a few minutes at a time, but the Redwood City girl’s basketball team pursued it relentlessly.

There is a convention to playing basketball that most teams follow.  When Team A makes a basket, they immediately run back to their own end of the court to await the approach of Team B, who now has possession of the ball.  As Gladwell explains, this convention favors good teams:

Good teams, after all, had players who were tall and could dribble and shoot well; they could crisply execute their carefully prepared plays in their opponent’s end.  Why, then, did weak teams play in a way that made it easy for good teams to do the very things that made them so good?

The coach of the Redwood City’s team — who, by the way, had never played basketball or coached a basketball team before, and therefore had no preconceived notions of the game’s conventions  — took a different approach.  He coached his girls to exercise the full-court press constantly.  Rather than retreating to their own side of the court after they scored a point, they aggressively challenged the opposing team for the possession of the ball on that team’s side.  Instead of standing behind the single opposing player she was assigned to shadow, to impede her if she received a pass, each Redwood City girl maneuvered herself in front of her opponent, to prevent her from even receiving the pass in the first place.

Often this meant the opponents would lose possession because they would fail to advance the ball across the mid-court within 10 seconds, a rule of the game.  This helped the Redwood City players to regain possession close to their opponents’ basket, which meant they could score more often with an easy lay-up, rather than going for lower percentage, long range shots, which demanded greater skill.

They also aggressively tried to block the inbounds pass, which is when the opposing team throws an out-of-bounds ball back into play.  Most teams don’t bother with this, but the Redwood City girls did.  This often forced the opposing team either to exceed the five second limit for getting the ball back into play (and lose possession) or, panicking, to simply throw the ball away.  In general, the opposing players simply lost their groove against the Redwood City team’s tactics.  Flustered and frustrated, they couldn’t take advantage of the strengths that normally made them so powerful.

So what does this have to do with social media?

As I read Gladwell’s article, I began to see interesting parallels between advantages of the full-court press strategy for the Redwood City underdogs and the use of social media for a challenger brand.

First of all, social media is not the conventional choice most big brands will use for communicating with consumers.  They aren’t comfortable with it and continue to focus their efforts, and their budgets, on the standard TV, radio and print media they already know.  But just as Felix replaced TV with newspaper, which was the unconventional medium for the time and the category, a dedicated commitment to social media and the power it has to forge brand-consumer relationships can be a potent strategy for stealing share from the big guys.

Another point Gladwell makes about the full-court press is that it takes much more physical effort than the conventional way of playing the game:

It is easier to retreat and compose yourself after every score than swarm about, arms flailing.  We tell ourselves that skill is the precious resource and effort is the commodity.  It’s the other way around.  Effort can trump ability … because relentless effort is in fact something rarer than the ability to engage in some finely tuned act of motor coordination.

In other words, it’s easier to create and produce a flashy 30″ TV commercial and stick the thing on air, than to be out there in the social media space day in and day out, talking like a human being with individual consumers, engaging with your brand enthusiasts and building your brand’s reputation one consumer at a time.   As my friend Joseph Jaffe says:  in the world of new media, “Marketing isn’t a campaign, it’s a commitment.”

And finally, consider this quote from the Gladwell article:

Redwood City attacked the inbounds pass, the point in a game where a great team is as vulnerable as a weak one.

Putting a positive spin on it, the inbounds pass is the point in a game where the weak team is as powerful as the strong team.  The same can be said for social media.  It doesn’t require a mega-budget for a brand to put together an effective social media effort.  Unlike conventional broadcast media, the playing field in the online social media arena is fairly even, whether you’re the market leader or a smaller challenger brand.  Social media is the place where great ideas can catch on and spread without big budgets, thanks to the connections people have within their communities and their passion to pass on content they love.

So to all you small players out there in the marketing world — think like David and the Redwood City girls basket ball team.  Consider how social media can help you shift the rules of the game to your advantage, and slay big old Goliath.

I have been studying in Finland/Kauhajoki for two years and now our course is graduating this week. We also had a digital marketing course with amazing teacher Andrea Vascellari. He opened our minds and souls to new media, showed us how to use social media tools and guided us thowards joining the conversation. I´ve became a fan of Twitter (@kristinapoldots), had conversations on Seesmic, have videos on Youtube, pictures on Flickr, have accounts in Facebook, GMail, Friendfeed, LinkedIn, Delicious etc. In a word, I have become more active in social media and I¨m learning how to take advantage of my knowledges.

This is the video that we have done for Joseph Jaffe. It is related to new media. The purpose of this video is to ask Joseph Jaffe some questions about social media, that have been interested us. The inspiration is Joseph Jaffe´s book “Join the Conversation” . This is, how we are joining the conversation, our first steps thowards it.

For entertainment, check out some videos and pictures of making the video: HERE

Theese are links to our blogposts:

Hille Rokk

Kristiina Juurikas

Mari Viiard

Jaanika Tõigast

Piret Kuusik

Petri Foudila

Merili Kuntu

Kristina Põldots

Andrea Vascellari

 Here are the questions, which were asked in the video:

1. How to reach consumers, without making them feel that they are being brainwashed? (asked by Kristina Põldots)

2. People are so used to be interrupted by pointless 30 seconds spots, will they miss traditional advertisement or feel disoriented in this new conversational marketing era? What is the future of advertisement? How brands can get it right in this many-to-many era? (asked by Kristiina Juurikas and Hille Rokk)

3. Where stays the line between advertisement and manipulation? I mean the morality of affecting people on such way? (asked by Jaanika Tõigast)

4. Is there a better channel than Internet to join the conversation? (asked by Piret Kuusik and Merili Kuntu)

5. What about the engagement through real feelings and emotions? This is how I want brands to connect with me. Is it possible, or am I just asking too much? (asked by Petri Foudila)

6. What do you think stops many organizations from joining the coversation? (asked by Mari Viiard)

We invite Joseph Jaffe to watch our video, that we made for him and answer our questions.

Dear Joseph Jaffe, please join the conversation!

xoxo Krissu

<caricature> Quand les marketeers commencent à s’intéresser aux médias sociaux, c’est, au choix, parce qu’ils veulent obtenir de la couverture à bon prix et s’adresser aux bloggeurs influents dans leur secteur d’activité (sic) ou bien parce qu’ils se demandent comment faire en sorte de fermer un groupe Facebook qui « casse» leur produit/ entreprise. </caricature>

 Or, gare à celui qui débarque dans les médias sociaux avec ses gros sabots pour dire « je vais une fois bien vous expliquer combien mon produit est génial ». Les médias sociaux sont des endroits de conversation où chacun doit se comporter comme dans n’importe quelle situation de conversation réelle.

Pour éviter de se comporter comme un goujat qui intervient dans une discussion de groupe sans demander la parole, sans tenir compte de ce qui a été dit auparavant et surtout en déblatérant du contenu inintéressant pour son auditoire, les entreprises qui veulent utiliser les plateformes de médias sociaux pour communiquer doivent suivre quelques étapes pour engager un vrai dialogue avec les communautés en ligne sans commetre d’impair difficile à réparer.

Joseph Jaffe (spécialiste des médias sociaux que je cité décidément beaucoup sur ce blog) définit 5 étapes nécessaires à toute démarche : « Social Media » :

1. Listen
2. Respond
3. Be invited to join
4. Catalyze
5. Start

De mon point de vue, cette première étape est de loin la plus cruciale.  Ecouter vos publics va vous permettre d’apprendre énormément sur le fonctionnement des réseaux sociaux mais surtout sur la manière dont votre produit et votre entreprise sont perçus, d’identifier les “pros” et les “contre”, les personnes “ressources” qui animent les communautés en lignes…

Si vous prenez la peine de récolter et d’analyser ces informations, vous allez entre en mesure d’établir un diagnostic, un bilan de la situation, de poser le problème qui va vous permettre d’établir une stratégie qui va vous permettre de progresser dans votre démarche communicationnelle et passer à l’étape suivante : Répondre (de manière enfin appropriée et pertinente).

 Certes, ça prend du temps mais a contrario, on n’a jamais disposé d’autant d’outils pour suivre ces conversations, qu’elles soient en ligne ou pas : Mediargus et Press banking pour la presse (belge), RSS feeds (mais aussi ici), Google news, Search Twitter… que vraiment vous n’avez plus d’excuses pour ne pas savoir ce qu’on dit de vous !

Amusingly, David Jones  then pointed out that Joseph’s company Crayon is only following 6 people on Twitter: “@jaffejuice uh…pot, this is the kettle calling. I’d like to talk about the six people @crayon’s twitterfeed is following.” #Iwork4WPP”

A good old (140 character) slagging match ensued…

Post scriptum: my always on-point old mate Lezza just tweeted that Will Self is widely followed and follows no one (and this is to be admired!)

9 INCH AXIOM – Advertising and Content

‘Advertising only works when it has the ability to engage.  It must be targeted, relevant and not seen as an intrusion’

I was listening to a great podcast on ‘Across the Sound’ the other day.  It was a conversation between Joseph Jaffe and Bob Garfield on the collapse of advertising and the digital revolution.  Ad Age’s Bob Garfield used the analogy of Frankenstein whereby the technologies and tools that made the monster ultimately turned against and destroyed the creator. 

A very interesting conversation.  One point that resonated was the premise that advertising was the thing we all put up with as a way to subsidize content.  No one liked it . . . and there is a whole new generation that sees content as free and advertising as merely an intrusion.  Even when we have to put up with it, technology has given us the ability to avoid it.

Issue:  Where do we go from here?

I gave it some thought and although I like the Frankenstein analogy for its death, I think the final scene from the original Matrix may be a better fit for the question of its future.  The setup for the scene is Neo talking into a pay phone.  Imagine Neo as an ordinary consumer representing the general public and talking to traditional media/advertising.

Here are the last lines from the movie.  

I know you’re out there. I can feel you now. I know that you’re afraid… you’re afraid of us. You’re afraid of change. I don’t know the future. I didn’t come here to tell you how this is going to end. I came here to tell you how it’s going to begin. I’m going to hang up this phone, and then I’m going to show these people what you don’t want them to see. I’m going to show them a world without you. A world without rules and controls, without borders or boundaries. A world where anything is possible. Where we go from there is a choice I leave to you.

Is there a ‘Brave New World’ without Advertising?  I doubt it.  The role of advertising may be diminished, but in my opinion it will still remain a vital part of an integrated marketing strategy.  The big difference going forward is that we’re going from a ‘one to many’, to a ‘one to one’ approach.  The communication has gone from being ‘one way’ to an open ‘two way’ flow between brands and consumers.

The bigger question and the last line in the Matrix is, ‘Where we go from here is a choice I leave to you?’

Your thoughts?

Today’s Lagniappe  -  KFC’s newest campaign.  

KFC is offering to fix potholes to ease the burden on municipal budgets.  The catch is that they are willing to do if they can stencil an ad on the fresh-ly covered pothole.  Here is some additional background and a review of the campaign from Ad Age’s Bob Garfield.  Kudos to the marketing team at KFC.  Part Advertising / Part Pr Stunt / Part Viral.  A great job on the hole (pun intended).

In his current episode of the podcast Jaffe Juice, Joseph Jaffe talks to Bob Garfield about his latest in a series of Ad Age articles on the death of media and advertising as we know it (“Future May Be Brighter, but It’s Apocalypse Now,” Advertising Age Online, March 23, 2009).  In this most recent piece on what Bob has called The Chaos Scenario, he presents growing evidence that the business model of traditional media, based on content creation funded by advertising revenues, is coming undone faster than anyone may have imagined.

The written word is a wonderful thing, but actually to hear Bob discuss and elaborate upon his perspectives in the interview is an eye opener.  Those of us who think about social media already know a lot of this, but to listen to the man who still reviews the Superbowl commercials every year predict the demise of the 30″ TV commercial really makes an impression.  You can’t help but feel Chicken Little was right.  The sky really is falling.  (And in a few years I may be out of a job!)

Here are some of the key points that stuck in my mind:

The old advertising model is dying, if not already dead, because it’s built upon  two pillars that are crumbling:

1) Good content is scarce, 2) You can force people to look at advertising in exchange for that content.

YouTube has already taken a big bite out of the first pillar, and the adaption of TiVo and DVR’s is eating away at the second one.

Still, consumer generated content alone will never replace professionally produced content like Lost and Grey’s Anatomy.  And while newspapers in their current form are clinging to life, there will always be demand and a need for objective, well-researched reporting and journalistic excellence.  Indeed a democratic society depends upon it.  Gen Y’ers may ascribe to the philosophy that content should be free, but it isn’t.  Or at least much good content isn’t.  Talented directors and serious journalists also have to eat, buy clothes and support families.

Right now it’s easy enough to say good content should be free because there’s still plenty of it around that you can get for free, even as the revenue sources and models that fund the production of it are drying up.   But imagine a day when there are no newspapers like The New York Times, no magazines like The New Yorker, and nothing on TV except low-cost production reality shows.  If that day ever comes, people will be starved for something better.  And they’ll pay for better fare in one currency or another.  But it will no longer be by subjecting themselves to advertising that bores and irritates them.

We are observing a sea change — a major upheaval on a par with the industrial revolution and other historical movements that changed society forever.

I think this is true.  And as Bob points out, it will effect every part of society, not just marketing and communications.  The power has truly shifted from the top of the pyramid, to the bottom — the crowd, thanks to the digital and social media revolution that is enabling people to connect and wield collective power like never before.

People are still interested in products and brands.  They’re just not interested in advertising.

I don’t completely agree with this.  People are not interested in advertising for products in which they have no interest.  I have argued elsewhere on this blog that the 30″ commercial is actually a very efficient tool to learn quickly about a product and its benefits.  The problem is an ineffective distribution system that places too many commercials in front of the wrong people.

I do agree that advertising in future will be a small part of a rich pallet of consumer-brand interactions, enabled by the internet and social media, that shifts the relationship between the brand and the consumer from one-way telling and selling to collaboration, dialogue and partnership.

The Chaos Scenario — soon to be a new book and a platform for conversation.

Bob will soon be packaging his thinking into a suprisingly old media form — a book.  He’s also created a web site — www.thechaosscenario.net — that he promises will be more than just an online promotion for the book, but a place for people to come together and share thinking on the topic.  It’s not active yet, but you can already go and sign up to receive updates as the project progresses.  I for one will be watching, listening and participating.

they call themselves the “jewish defense league,” (jdl) but this misnomer, like the “israeli defense forces” masks what they are really there to do: to murder, steal, and cover it all up. the jdl, fortunately, continues to be on the united states terrorist watch list for its history of attacks on american soil. here is one recent report by the fbi:

The two terrorist plots prevented by law enforcement in 2001 were being planned by domestic extremists. Ronald Mike Denton was planning to attack his former place of employment, the Chevron Oil Refinery at El Segundo, California, when he was arrested in March 2001. In December 2001 Irving David Rubin and Earl Leslie Krugel, members of the extremist Jewish Defense League, were arrested as they were in the final stages of planning attacks against the King Fahd Mosque in Culver City, California, and the local office of U.S. Congressman Darrell Issa.

sometimes these jdl terrorists are even put in prison as reported by the new york times‘ leonard buder:

A former head of the Jewish Defense League was sentenced yesterday to 10 years in Federal prison for taking part in a series of ”terrorist bombings” in the New York area since 1984 to protest Soviet treatment of Jews.

Among the incidents was a firebombing at Avery Fisher Hall at Lincoln Center on Oct. 20, 1986, the day of a scheduled performance by the Moscow State Symphony. The firebomb damaged the stage-door entrance but caused no injuries.

i grew up around this terrorism, although admittedly at the time i did not have any understanding or any context for it. but the jdl was and is active in los angeles. i’ve written about this before, but bears repeating in light of recent events. here is part of an older report by gerald neff on the if americans knew website documenting some of racist, terrorist crimes committed by the jdl:

A 1985 FBI study of terrorist acts in the United States since 1981 found 18 incidents initiated by Jews, 15 of the acts by the JDL. In a 1986 study of domestic terrorism, the Department of Energy concluded: “For more than a decade, the Jewish Defense League (JDL) has been one of the most active terrorist groups in the United States….Since 1968, JDL operations have killed 7 persons and wounded at least 22. Thirty- nine percent of the targets were connected with the Soviet Union; 9 percent were Palestinian; 8 percent were Lebanese; 6 percent, Egyptian; 4 percent, French, Iranian, and Iraqi; 1 percent, Polish and German; and 23 percent were not connected with any states. Sixty-two percent of all JDL actions are directed against property; 30 percent against businesses; 4 percent against academics and academic institutions; and 2 percent against religious targets.”

The JDL was suspected in two high-profile murders over the years. One came in 1972 when a bomb exploded in impresario Sol Hurok’s Manhattan office on Jan. 26. The explosion killed his receptionist, Iris Kones, 27, while Hurok and 12 others were injured. The JDL was suspected because Hurok was bringing Soviet performers to the United States.

The next year, Jerome Zeller, an American JDL member, was indicted on charges of planting the bomb at Hurok’s office. He had since moved to Israel and his extradition was requested. Israeli authorities arrested the American expatriate but released him on $1,200 bail. He later was wounded in the 1973 war. Afterwards, the U.S. again requested extradition, but the response was, said U.S. Attorney Joseph Jaffe, who prosecuted the case, “You can…hold your breath until you die cause you ain’t going to get him because he’s a national hero.” Zeller was later reported living in the occupied West Bank among militant settlers.

Kahane became an outspoken advocate for the “transfer” of all Palestinians.

The other high-profile murder came in 1985, on Oct. 11, when Alex Odeh, 37, regional director of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) in Santa Ana, California, was killed by a bomb planted at his office. Odeh had appeared the previous night on a television show and called Yasser Arafat a “man of peace.” The Jewish Defense League praised the bombing but denied involvement, its usual practice in such incidents.

One of the suspects was Robert Manning, 36, of Los Angeles, a JDL member. He and his wife, Rochelle, moved to Israel, where he joined the Israel Defense Forces. FBI agents said Manning and others were also suspected of being involved in a year-long series of violent incidents in 1985 including the August house-bomb slaying of Tscherim Soobzokov, of Paterson, N.J., a suspected Nazi war criminal; the Aug. 16 attempted bombing of the Boston ADC office in which two policemen were severely wounded; the September bombing at the Brentwood, Long Island home of alleged Nazi Elmars Sprogis, in which a 23-year-old passerby lost a leg, and the Oct. 29 fire at the ADC office in Washington, DC, which was called arson.

By December 1985, FBI Director William H. Webster warned that Arab Americans had entered a “zone of danger” and were targets of an unnamed group seeking to harm the “enemies of Israel.”

Manning and his wife lived in the radical Kiryat Arba settlement in Israel’s occupied West Bank until March 25, 1991 when, after two years of pressure, Israel acceded to U.S. extradition demands.

The case caused critics to charge U.S. media bias against Arabs, noting that a week earlier the killing of American Jew Leon Klinghoffer aboard the hijacked Achille Lauro received heavy media coverage. They pointed out The New York Times devoted 1,043 column inches to Klinghoffer while devoting only 14 inches to Odeh’s death.

Israeli police finally arrested the Mannings on March 24, 1991. Although strongly suspected in the Odeh murder, they were charged in a separate suit involving the 1980 letter-bomb murder of California secretary Patricia Wilkerson. Robert Manning, but not his wife, was eventually extradited to the United States on July 18, 1993, and was found guilty on Oct. 14, 1993, of complicity in the Wilkerson murder.

On Feb. 7, 1994, Manning was sentenced to life in prison. His wife died of a heart attack on March 18, 1994, in an Israeli prison while awaiting extradition.

Meanwhile, Kahane had moved to Israel in 1971 and immediately became an outspoken advocate for the “transfer” of all Palestinians. His unabashed public voicing of a subject that Israelis had spoken about only privately for so long earned him instant popularity among the most radical of Israelis. He founded the Kach Party. Kach in Hebrew means “Thus!” and Israelis understood that the party’s name referred to the use of violence to ethnically cleanse the land. By 1984 Kahane was popular enough to win a seat in the 120-seat Knesset under the Kach banner.

why do i bring this all up? because the jdl in canada, which seems to be far more active than in the u.s. of late, has issued threats on television to anyone supporting george galloway’s lecture tour, which they had a role in canceling by getting the canadian government to ban galloway from setting foot on canadian soil. live on television some terrorist from the jdl threatened such people, including churches sponsoring his speaking engagements. watch the terrorist meir weinstein of the jdl for yourself:

when you look at the list of reasons that the canadian government may have used to prevent his entry this story becomes even more outrageous as deborah summers reports for the guardian:

A spokesman for Citizenship and Immigration Canada said the decision had been taken by border security officials “based on a number of factors” in accordance with section 34(1) of the country’s immigration act.

The act states:

“A permanent resident or a foreign national is inadmissible on security grounds for:

(a) engaging in an act of espionage or an act of subversion against a democratic government, institution or process as they are understood in Canada;

(b) engaging in or instigating the subversion by force of any government;

(c) engaging in terrorism;

(d) being a danger to the security of Canada;

(e) engaging in acts of violence that would or might endanger the lives or safety of persons in Canada; or

(f) being a member of an organisation that there are reasonable grounds to believe engages, has engaged or will engage in acts referred to in paragraph (a), (b) or (c).”

just one question: is irony dead?

According to a posting on Techdirt today, the brain trust over at Linden Labs, the company behind Second Life (full disclosure: Mark Kingdon, who now heads up Linden Labs is an acquaintance) thinks the reason that brands never really warmed up to their virtual world is sex. And while I’ll grant that having a naked nine-foot-tall Tongan bodybuilder stroll through your virtual store may not be all that good for business (depending on the wares you’re peddling, of course) to blame sex for corporate disinterest in Second Life is to miss the point  entirely. 

The reason brands didn’t  embrace Second Life is that ultimately attempting to do real things–i.e., shopping, press conferences, product testing, etc.–was a beating, a needless complication, a plate-spinning act. Yes, I’ve been present when Joseph Jaffe brags about how many people have shown up to shindigs he’s thrown for his company Crayon in Second Life. Fine, you got a hundred or even a few hundred avatars to stop by and see you and your pals moving around a room like bad Korean animation. But once the novelty had worn off, then what?

I’ve also heard Jaffe predict that the virtual world interface would replace the browser as the main way we do things online. Wrong, of course, and wrong for what should have been a painfully obvious reason. A good marketing program has no unnecessary components, just as a well-built machine, has no unnecessary parts and a well-written sentence has no unnecessary words. When brands asked their consumers to go to Second Life, they were asking them to play dress up. Consumers simply didn’t have time for it. The value exchange wasn’t there. Banishing sex to a new “nookie continent,” or whatever Linden Labs is going to call it, isn’t going to solve the problem. 

What will ultimately attract consumers isn’t some sort of cockamamie electronic costume party. It’s simplicity. It’s being able to do things online almost just by thinking about them. Really great ideas are stunningly basic. Second Life’s fifteen minutes are up. Bring on the next thing.

Cada vez se ven más horas de televisión al día en EE UU

Hace mucho que se firman partidas de defunción para la publicidad en televisión y es que estamos todos tan embobados con la publicidad en Internet que creemos que ya es solo cuestión de tiempo -de poco tiempo- que desaparezcan los avisos de 30 segundos

Un libro Life After the 30-Second Spot: Energize Your Brand With a Bold Mix of Alternatives to Traditional Advertising, lanzado al público el 25 de mayo del  2005, arengaba a “abandonar las viejas reglas del marketing y a despertar a nuevas oportunidades” culpando a la viejas grandes  agencias de un problema de falta de imaginación. Y daba las alternativas y los consejos del caso para operar en lo que llamaba, desde el título “La vida después del aviso de 30″. Pero se equivocaba Joseph Jaffe, su autor, que no hubiera imaginado jamás que la televisión y el aviso de 30″ estén, 4 años más tarde, más vivos que nunca. Porque hay más gente que nunca viendo TV en los EE UU (donde, era de esperar por el volumen de operaciones tanto en la TV como en Internet, que muriese antes la primera). Por si fuera poco, como veremos en una siguiente entrada, los avisos den TV son, en la actualidad, más efectivos que nunca.

De lo que vamos a hablar ahora, el uso siempre creciente de la TV, lo ha anunciado Nielsen -que tiene una vieja base de datos para probarlo- en el llamado The Three Screens Report (del que ya hemos hablado en el blog, lo mismo que del hecho de que Los norteamericanos ven cada vez más televisión) que cubre las tres alternativas de pantallas que se usan: tv, Internet y teléfono móvil. Unos 285 millones de los 306 que viven en los EE UU ven TV en sus casas en promedio unas 151 horas mensuales por mes. Lo dice en su reporte TV, Internet And Mobile Usage In U.S. Continues To Rise

- Oiga ¿151 horas? ¿no son muchas horas?

- Pues eso parece a primera vista. Alrededor de cinco horas diarias durante el ultimo trimestre del 2008. Claro que como hablamos de promedios seguramente que la parte  más importante se la llevan los fines de semana. Y es además 3.6% más de lo que el norteamericano veía el último trimestre del 2007 que eran 145 horas. Muchas horas también parecen… pero ahí está Nielsen con varios años de historia para probar que es cierto. Tiene usted el detalle en las Tablas 1 y 2 que pongo inmediatamente y que he tomado del reporte de Nielsen: Television, Internet and Mobile Usage in the U.S.. Y en la primera línea de la tabla 3, descubrirá usted que según avanza en edad, el norteamericano ve más y más horas de televisión al día, llegando al límite superior los mayores de 65 con 207 horas al mes.

Tablas 1 y 2

- ¿Y eso a qué se debe?

- Pues hay varias razones. En primer lugar es una costumbre que acompaña al norteamericano desde los cincuenta y que no ha cambiado con ninguna de las distracciones que se han ido acumulando a la de plantarse delante del televisior de la familia. Y de hecho no la ha disminuido Internet que podría haber sido el gran rival. Pero las dos pantallas se han traslapado perfectamente. Hay gente viendo tv mientras chatea o simplemente navega por la red y gente viendo tv (particularmente capítulos ya presentados de series actuales) en la pantalla del computador.  

Nielsen informó, en otro reporte, en noviembre del año pasado (Nielsen finds strong TV-Internet usage overlap),  que aproximadamente un tercio de la actividad en Internet tiene lugar mientras el usuario está viendo televisión. Incluso se trata de los que más horas de televisión ven al mes: unos 250 minutos frente a los 220 de aquellos que nunca se conectan a Internet. (No se ponga usted nervioso si las cuentas en horas no le salen porque las bases son distintas: los promedios de los que hablamos más arriba están referidos a toda la población, mientras que éstos, solamente a los que ven TV y al mismo tiempo se conectan y aquellos que jamás se conectan a internet).

Están además el hecho de que es otoño/invierno en la época con menos atractivos para salir de casa, y sin duda, porque es la distracción más barata en esta época de crisis. Hay también cada vez más televisores en la casa: incluso más de uno por persona con lo que cada cual puede elegir ver lo que quiera desde su propio espacio. Y un efecto que de hecho causó mucha espectativa y debe haber atraído a más gente: el final de la campaña electoral y la elección misma. Se verá en el trimestre siguiente cual fue su incidencia en los promedios del trimestre del que estamos hablando. Pero no hay que olvidar que el crecimiento del uso de la TV en los EE UU jamás se ha detenido.

- ¿Y el TIVO?

- El 29% de los hogares cuentan con un sistema de grabación digital, que permite ver una cosa y grabar otra. Siete horas y once minutos en promedio pasa el norteamericano viendo programas grabados; 33% más que hace un año. Así que aún cuando se salten muchos comerciales… no son tantos. Que hay por ahí la teoría de que cuando los comerciales son nuevos los ven y cuando son vistos y conocidos, aún viéndolos a velocidad rápida, los recuerdan.

- ¿Tiene usted alguna publicación al respecto?

- A la mano no. Pero desde luego algo de eso hay en mi archivo. Y creo recordar que la fuente es Ad. Age. o quizás de AdWeek.  La buscaré otro día y se la enseñaré.

- ¿Y video online?

- Hay que agregar a lo que se ve en televisión tres horas de videos online al mes y cuatro de teléfonos celulares.

Cosa curiosa es que no son solo los chicos los que ven mucha televisión sino que es una costumbre bastante pareja a lo largo de las edades y aumenta el número de horas con la edad. Fíjese en la primera línea de la tabla 3.  

En cualquier caso, es interesante anotar que, por primera vez en un estudio de Nielsen los jóvenes comprendidos en el intervalo de edad de 18 a 24 años pasan prácticamente el mismo tiempo viendo video en Internet -5 horas- que viendo video grabado. Y otra cosa a destacar es que las horas de trabajo, de lunes a viernes y de 9 am. a 5 pm., son las horas favoritas para ver video en Internet.

Por otro lado, las mujeres ven más televisión que los hombres (53/47%), y más video en internet (53/47%),  pero en cambio los hombres ven mas video en teléfonos móviles.

Tablas 3 y 4

- ¿Y estos resultados son importantes?

- Es importantísimo descubrir que, como dice el dicho popular que se le atribuye al Don Juan Tenorio de Zorrilla “… los muertos que vos matasteis gozan de buena salud”, la televisión, en los EE UU, donde fue declarada muerta o moribunda, no solo goza de buena salud sino que no cesa de atraer a los norteamericanos de todas las edades a pasar más tiempo delante de ella. Y eso, aunque no se pueda extrapolar a todos los mercados,  implica que la vida de la publicidad en la televisión tiene, por bastante tiempo más, en los EE UU y fuera de ellos, larga vida también.

Esto permite ir probando y refinando los medios complementarios sin la espada de Damocles amenazando a encontrar con urgencia, una manera de reemplazar a la televisión. Eso, desde luego, sin quitarle méritos a la extraordinaria herramienta de medios y de investigación que es, sin duda, internet.

Después, como lo adelanté, hablaremos de la eficacia de la televisión, que otro estudio demuestra que también es la más alta, de la historia. Sí, ya sé: parece “too good to be true” y usted estará sospechando de una mano negra metida a fabricar resultados. Pero si ese fuese el caso aún nadie la ha podido denunciar (y mire usted si habrá gente deseando hacerlo) y además debió empezar a “cocinar” información hace muchísimos años. Porque la data historica lo que prueba es que las cifras no han hecho más que crecer progresivamente, trimestre a trimestre.

Multitarea: TV y Laptop mientras se come. Y el teléfono celular a la mano.

Si desea suscribirse gratuitamente a Mercaderes Asociados pulse el botón

9 Inch Axiom – The Sixth Sense

‘The ability to speak, to be heard and to be acknowledged is a sensory experience’

A couple of posts ago I introduced the idea that the ability to converse was our Sixth Sense.  

Old school marketing was all about brands maintaining a one way dialogue talking to their customers via traditional media.  Listening to your customers was something that was done sparingly . . . in things like focus groups or telephone surveys.  

With the rise of social media, new school marketing is allowing consumers the ability to directly converse with brands.  More importantly for brands who embrace the conversation it allows for the power to engage and connect with consumers.

My father was fond of telling me that God gave me two ears and one mouth.  My standard reply was “What. . . Huh”. His obvious message was that we should listen twice as much as we talk.  That seems like good advice for brands.

Case Study: “Who has the World’s Worst Commute?”

The Daytona 500 is the Super Bowl of experiential marketing.  Brands that invest in NASCAR understand the importance of activation and the power of integrating the sponsorship into their overall marketing plan.  The early February date means you get treated to the latest and greatest. Walking the Midway in Daytona for a marketer is like being a kid in a candy store.  

I’m always interested in looking at activations that have some ‘legs’ and extend beyond the event footprint.  There was one promotion that really stood out.  Quaker State had an event setup that encouraged consumers to create a video.  It was based upon a simple premise and pain point for consumers . . . commuting.  They are searching for the world’s worst commute.

[Sidebar - Commutes are like opinions and a--holes . . . everyone has got one and to varying degrees they all stink]

Quaker State used the promotion to launch their new website and reinforce their positioning of the world’s most durable oil. Here is the contest in a nutshell:

The winner of the video-submission contest will receive a once in a lifetime ride to work with a very special chauffeur: Jimmie Johnson, only the second driver in NASCAR history to win three consecutive Sprint Cup Series championships.   To enter, consumers submit a 30- to 60-second video highlighting why they have the “world’s worst commute.”

This is a brilliant campaign on many levels.  It is fully integrated into the overall marketing plan:

• Advertising – using the best of the consumer generated videos to create TV ads
• Sponsorship – leveraging the affiliation with Hendrick Motorsports and Jimmie Johnson
• PR – the concept is extremely sticky and the payoff of Jimmie Johnson as one of the judges and driving a consumer to work is a great hook
• Online – utilizing the promotion as the backbone to launch their new website
• Viral – consumers vote on the best videos which means contest entrants are motivated to share and spread the word
• Experiential – creating a vehicle based mobile marketing tour that takes the message directly to the consumer

Today’s Lagniappe – A piece of trivia and a movie + book reco:

Trivia – Did you know that Nike was going to be originally called ‘DIMENSION SIX’?  Check out this excerpt from the book  Bowerman and the Men of Oregon for the interesting backstory.

Movie - It’s hard to believe 2009 marks the 10th anniversary of M.Night Shyamalan’s third film ‘The Sixth Sense’.  It’s a supernatural thriller and one for the ages.

Book – Joseph Jaffe’s Join the Coversation is a must read and primer on the importance of conversation.

First time to 9 INCH MARKETING? Get into the journey.  Click here to subscribe and receive new posts courtesy of Feedburner via e-mail

Yep add my blog post as one of those end of year “lists’. But as I’ve stated, I’m going to scale back what I read. I’m going to hone in on quality. With that being said here is my list with reasons why. They also are in no particular order either.

1. Paul Chaney’s Conversational Media Marketing blog always has an interesting post or content. It’s light, it’s a good read and it’s insightful.
2. Shannon Paul’s Very Official Blog is always in the sweet spot. Her stuff is short, generally, always to the point, and it resonates on many levels.
3. Lee Odden’s Online Marketing Blog is a no brainer. It’s updated daily and it’s chock full of content that makes you better at what you do. Even if you don’t do “it”, it’s worth reading.
4. Chris Brogan is our Grand Poobah”. Now I know he’s taken hits lately but look, Chris gives away 10 times more than he takes, and thus he should be a blog that you check in on from time to time. He’s a content creating fool.
5. Valeria Maltoni true to her tag line, “connects her ideas with people”, and will make you think. When I read her stuff, that’s what happens. Her blog is another that I dip into every once in a while for perspective. She’s current, always on point and she’s eloquent.
6. I like the Ignite Social Media Blog but it might be because it’s very vertical for me. I’m entitled to one or two of these, and this is one of them.
7. Ok, so something about Joseph Jaffe makes me want to read his stuff. It’s funny usually, and underneath it all, there’s generally some sort of marketing theme or message.
8. Beth Harte is one smart cookie. She says it in a straight shootin way. She’s respected, she’s connected and she knows all things marketing.  You will love her perspective.
9. Brian Solis is a good read, he churns out content, it’s not over your head, it’s current and it’s useful. Boom.
10. Mashable is the source or the site you would go to if you needed information, if you need updates and if you could only go to one site. This is it. Check it out.

Honorable Mentions

Here are 10 more that I read because  they are prolific in cranking out content that is in tune with the issues of marketing, PR,  social media, and life. You didn’t think I could just read 10 blogs a day did you? Well neither will you, not with this much quality out there!

1. Ari Herzog
2. Liz Strauss
3. David Armano
4. Peter Kim
5. Jeremiah Owyang
6. Mack Collier
7. Amber Naslund
8. Adam Cohen
9. Gavin Heaton
10. Ken Burbary

Like I said, it’s quality over quantity, though all of these people churn out some pretty good quantities of content. I could only hope to do the same.  I look forward to continued learning from all of them.

Some marketers would have you believe otherwise...

There’s a t-shirt that reads “Al Gore didn’t invent the internet but he did make up global warming.”

Funny, no? Anyway…

There’s an interesting parallel between the global climate crisis and current state of advertising, not the least of which is the death-grip some agencies have on the idea that traditional above-the-line advertising will continue to be as impactful in the future as it was 10 years ago.

In much the same way that the ice caps are melting and the oceans’ volumes are increasing, so are the consumer attention spans decreasing in relation to the increase in marketing noise. Consumers are actively doing more to block out advertising messages.

And rightly so… Most marketing messages are simply noise; some guy yelling at you trying you convince you to buy his product – a product that more often than not, you didn’t want to know about anyway.

Of course, there are things you can do to prevent your brand’s extinction. Where the climate is concerned, you can “go green”: like decreasing your carbon footprint… When it comes to advertising, you can include a social media marketing strategy. The one thing the two ideas (going green and social media marketing) have in common is that they require a mindset shift, backed up by committed action. Once you choose to adopt these strategies you need to stick with them. The results aren’t always immediate but there will be results. In much the same way that we cannot fix the planet overnight, social media marketing will not benefit your brand overnight. You need to be prepared to lean into the situation and work it hard.

Of course, if you’re at a loss about where to begin there are people out there who can help you. Seth Godin, Mitch Joel, Joseph Jaffe … these guys are at the bleeding edge of social media marketing. Get their books, subscribe to their blogs, download their podcasts, check out the people they recommend…

Fixing the planet means taking action and effecting a sustainable change in the way we do things. Staying relevant and viable in advertising and marketing requires the same. Get stuck in.

One last thing: if you can create truly green marketing and advertising solutions for your client, do so. The lead time on a fully-grown tree is a lot longer than that of a billboard.

I just read a tweet, yep that’s right a tweet in which David Armano pondered whether Adam Kmiec’s blog post about the quality and frequency of some notable bloggers is diminshing because of Twitter… is true. 

Kmiec mentions that not only Armano, but Peter Kim and Joseph Jaffe are guilty as well of producing substandard  quality and quantity. I say he’s right. And though I’m not on the same level as those guys, I see it happening to me as well.

The proof:

David Armano yesterday penned, The world’s shortest blog entry

Joseph Jaffe recently wrote the post titled, “Who gives a shit about toilet paper?”

I’m not using David and Joseph as the poster children here, Adam already did, but I did think it was funny to look at their most recent blog posts. I liked both, but there was some delicious irony in it all. I know there are lots more of us twitter/bloggers out there whose craft might be suffering because of Twitter; and I can without a doubt tell you that I have tweeted wasted? some great blog post topics which have then transformed into some great twitter conversations. My posts are becoming shorter. Any coincidence? They’re becoming more rant-like. I feel like I’m mailing it in some time. Or maybe because there are so many good conversations going on, on Twitter, all the good stuff is being said in real time and doesn’t need to be elaborated on? I’m speculating, but you get the point.

 So what happens?

The digital footprint isn’t the same as if it were a blog post. It’s there, sort of, but for the most part it is gone.  I’m not sure how to strike the happy medium because I like both worlds. But my blog is suffering.

Thoughts?

It was a regular Thursday afternoon. The social media moguls at digital agency Crayon were about to start their weekly “Coffee with Crayon” meeting in Second Life. The avatars were just settling in on Crayonville Island, when the unthinkable happened.

Joseph Jaffe, Head Crayon, suddenly disappeared from his office. Irresistibly sucked into his computer, he appeared in what seemed like a flesh-and-blood personage in Second Life. Glancing around at the funky-looking avatars of his colleagues, he laughed gleefully and teleported off the island, and has not been seen since.

“We’re devastated,” said Greg Verdino, 40-something crayonista, enjoying his third breakfast in a now quite relaxed schedule. “One minute my avatar was insulting his avatar, and then the real Jaffe showed up on my computer screen, wildly leaping around Crayonville. He even spilled my half-caff double mocha unsweetened lo-cal Amandaccino. Disappearing, I get. But leave my morning fix alone!

“Given his penchant for not showing up for things, this whole thing was doubly surprising – if he hadn’t had on his famous “Joe Jaffe” nametag, I wouldn’t have believed it was really him!”

According to Jane Quigley, grandniece (twice removed) of Alexander Haig, who used to report to Greg Verdino, “I guess I’m in charge around here! Given the fact that we were a virtual agency, I don’t think any of our clients will really notice the difference anyway. Maybe once he’s done exploring all the other Second Life islands, he’ll get tired of his new digs, and come on back for Coffee with Crayon. But I’m still running the joint. We, umm, unplugged his computer.”

Joe’s family was understandably upset by the incident, but a life-sized cardboard cut-out of his avatar has been placed in the family room to remind them of his absence. In the meantime, a posse of bloggers has been assembled who plan to infiltrate Second Life and see if they can bring the rogue crayonista back. Their progress can be tracked on Twitter at @wheresJaffe. Faint iPhone signals were last detected at the Delta Airlines virtual terminal, so he may have hopped a flight on his favorite carrier for parts unknown.

All others are urged to keep an eye out for anyone wearing the tell-tale Joseph Jaffe nametag, and to alert appropriate authorities immediately – or Geoff Livingston, whichever comes first.

The rumors of my death have been wildly exaggerated.

Forgive me if I sound like I’m beating the proverbial dead horse.  But with all respect to Joseph Jaffe (social media maven par excellence and author of two terrific books — Life After the 30-Second Spot and Join the Conversation), I continue to struggle with the widespread assertion that the 30-second commercial has witnessed its heyday and will soon vanish from the face of the planet.  Note that I’m not saying 30-second television commercial.  The reason for the distinction will become clear.

I have written on an earlier blog post about how effectively this old format can tell a product or brand story in a remarkably efficient amount of time.  What’s more, while I am as excited as anyone by the possibilities social media and web 2.0 tools create for brands and “consumers” to engage on a much more personal level, we live in an and/and communications world.  Fact is, there are still times when people aren’t interested in a conversation (much less creating their own TV spot).  Conversation takes time, which is one thing most people have very little of.  If there’s a new, household product out there that is going to make my life easier, or if I’m in the market for a new mobile phone, then I’m not necessarily interested in a conversation.  Right now, I may just want to get a quick overview of the product choices available to me.  I want to hear what you have to offer — fast — and then get on with it.  A one-way message is just fine.

It’s simply not true that people have a problem with 30-second commercials.  They have a problem with bad commercials — ones that are unclear, convey no apparent benefit, or do so with an execution so tedious and irritating, they’d like to throw a brick through their TV screen.  Even more so, they have a problem with commercials, good or bad, for products or services that are irrelevant to them, and that show up as uninvited and disturbing interruptions to their favorite shows.

The problem isn’t the commercial, the problem is the distribution system.  Television networks are simply ineffective at delivering a specific message to the people for whom that message is relevant, and only to them.

Enter social media!

Marketers should think about online communities and networks as a new, superbly effective distribution system for their messages.  I don’t mean they should push commercials into online social networks uninvited, but instead enable individuals online to discover commercials that are personally interesting and relevant to them.  And then pass them along to others — friends, their communities, their blogging audience — for whom they think these will also be of interest.

A mom blogger who discovers a great new kids product will be connected to others who are in the same life situation, have similar needs and will also want to know about that product.  If she has access to a commercial that she thinks gets the product story across, especially if it’s executed in an appealing way, she will naturally pass it on.  All the more if she has tried and was happy with the product.  What she won’t do is share that commercial with her online connections for whom she knows the story won’t be interesting.  In this way the community becomes a self-regulating system that ensures the message spreads only to those people who will get value from it.  How cool is that?

It doesn’t necessarily have to be the traditional 30-second spot, although when people suggest to others that they take a look at a product message, 30 seconds are relatively risk free.  If, perchance, the story isn’t of interest, at least they only wasted 30 seconds of the their friends’ precious time.

So here’s something marketers ought to consider placing on the packaging of their next product launch, upgrade or line extension.  “If you like our product, please go to www.brandx.com, upload our TV commercial, and share it with your friends online who you think would also be interested.”  If the expression “TV commercial” seems too pre-web 2.0, then call it a 30-second video if that makes you feel more in sync with the age of “YouTube.”

It can’t hurt.  And it just might get your message to spread across a network of thousands of interconnected, prospective buyers for whom it isn’t an intrusion, but a welcome source of news and information.

You know, it’s amazing how life just throws you softballs, curveballs, fastballs, whiffleballs and screwballs. It’s all in how you take the pitch. Do you hit it? Or wait for your pitch?  With that being said, lets look at some sites and posts that might require your attention over the weekend.

The TechCrunch50 just concluded and there were a couple of entries that really stood out to me. I thought that Steve Spalding brought up some good points in his Techcrunch50 recap in regards to why some of the entries may or may not make it and I have to agree with him on icharts Icharts has a crappy tagline but a great premise. Make better charts, make them seo friendly and searchable and interactive. Things that I would love to do for some of the lame charts I create. Maybe they’d kick me a free trial so I can review it?

I’d highly recommend fitbit too. since we’re all obsessed with losing weight, gaining muscle etc etc. Fitbit is a device and website that makes you aware of how active you are and what you eat. Go figure, a site and product with a way to make actual money!

My other favorite was Goodguide, it has a great idea and is so dead on right now. I think it’s only hurdle might be widespread adoption.  Goodguide provides free and easy access to the world’s largest and most reliable source of information on the health, environmental and social impacts of products and companies.

Of course be sure to check out this years winner Yammer, which is essentially enterprise level Twitter. Yammer had a ton of action as soon as it was released publicly. They too have a business model as well, but it can be used freely.

Be sure to read Carter Lusher’s post When hype can go overboard and hurt credibility  he mentions some Analyst ‘hype-alert’ verbiage  to be on the look out for.

Joseph Jaffe adds more than just his 2 cents on his blog post about Why the term “Agency of the Future” is an oxymoron (you can choose if you’re the ox or moron) Its a definite keeper.

When you get a chance, test drive this site SpinVox and tell me what you think.

I’ve been participating remotely to events all week and have to say that the access to all them has been awsome they are: Izeafest, The Techcrunch50,  and the T3PR confeerence to a certain degree. I think it’s important that though you may not be able to be there physically, you can still interact via, Twitter, Summize and the live web casts. I’d highly suggest you check your calendars.

Lastly,  Forrester, has pushed out it’s submissions for Groundswell awards, check out some of the companies up for awards, it might help you hone in on your OWN social media strategy. Imitation is the best form of flattery!

I was reading Joseph Jaffe’s latest post on the Agency of the future in which one of his points was that brand marketers are wanting someone or a company with more experience and knowledge in regards to the digital space.

It struck me that the majority of brand marketers are currently searching for someone who gets it. Or at least for someone who get’s it, until they get it.  Which makes me wonder how many of us out there right now, could take a company where they want to go? Sure we all have an idea, or maybe a clue, at least I hope you do, but how many of you could map out a plan, that works? I’m guessing not as many, which leads me to my main question of how many of you are willing to take the lead instead of languishing in the echo chamber?

 With that being said, here are 5 questions you need to ask yourself:

• Are you a social media ”me too” person?
• Could you sit down today and map out a social media plan that could garner results either for yourself or a company?
• What are you doing to become a social media doer or leader?
• How long are you going to sit on the sidelines?
• Have you really tried?

Once you answer these questions, see where you’re coming up short and do something about it. You can only read and write about it so much. A great resource for ”how to’s” if you need it, is Chris Brogan   But most of all, practice what you preach! Get out of the fishbowl and go do it dammit!

Frank of Frankwatching sent me an e-mail right from Sweden. “Isn’t this something for you?” Well, it was: a workshop by Jospeh Jaffe, writer of amongst others ‘Join the conversation’ or a book about ‘how to engage marketing-weary consumers with the power of community, dialogue and partnership’. Jaffe lives in New York and is a well-known expert travelling the world to give his workshops. Yet, the Belgian agency Famous managed to invite Jaffe in Belgium today, in the beautiful Koloniënpaleis in Tervuren.

I decided NOT to twitter and NOT to write down anything. I just listened to what Jaffe had to say. And that seemed to be a good idea. According to Jaffe there are five things you should do with your customers: 1. listen to them, 2. respond, 3. be invited to join the conversation, 4. catalyse and 5. start. And what you shouldn’t do? Manipulate, dominate, fake and control. The consumers of nowadays are smart, and they know when you are messing with them (and when you aren’t). So far so good.

Jaffe showed a lot of examples underlining his viewpoints. You probably all remember the film of the sleeping Comcast Technician:

You can imagine that this film damaged the reputation of Comcast quite a bit. Yet, they are joining the conversation and recently started offering their clients help on Twitter. And not in an anonymous way. Employer Frank takes care of ‘comcastcares’. A good reaction of the company if you ask me.

Jaffe also referred to “The Cluetrain Manifesto“, in which ‘markets are conversations’. According to Jaffe not only markets but also marketing should and can be a conversation, instead of one way messages from a marketeer to an anonymous crowd. He showed a picture of markets in the old time (where you could smell the herbs, hear the music, … and in the meantime discuss the goods) as opposed to the very clean shopping centres of nowadays, avoiding every kind of emotion. “That’s the problem of our whole society,” the man behind me whispered. But that’s another discussion.

At any case, it was quite inspiring. Even though I knew quite a lot of the ideas/examples mentioned, it’s always good to have them refreshed. The ideas are bubbling .

The quote of the day:

“You shouldn’t ask your marketing agency for a VIRAL marketing campaign. When you have a good campaign, your marketing is always viral. People will always talk about you.”