Send to Kindle

Tweet

Share

 Comments

 LINKS TO THIS POST

At 12/06/2007 5:49 PM,  Greg said...

Not sure how Swear Jar could be WOM. It *stimulated* word of mouth, but it is in fact a viral video (or more precisely, a tv-style commercial that went viral, since we all know that companies make the videos but consumers make them viral.)

WOM is about person-to-person (whether it's about trying and buying or not, whether it is stimulated by a company or not). Viral marketing is a conscious effort by a company to make word of mouth happen.

That's my take.

 

At 12/06/2007 6:53 PM,  Peter said...

Maybe I'm over-simplifying but I've always said that WOM is about enabling people to recommend things to their friends and family. The strongest kind of WOM is a one-to-one recommendation but when you're recommending something to more than one person it's viral. Hence, sending a funny branded video to five of your best friends is viral. Saying "I love Budweiser, did you see the swear jar video?" to your friend is a one-to-one recommendation. Both are WOM but only one is viral.

That's my take anyway.

 

At 12/06/2007 7:58 PM,  mjb said...

I think you have something in trying to delineate between these two terms on the basis of how personal their technique for spreading is, but I believe the distinction might break down at some point.

Word of Mouth is built as an expression upon an oral tradition, which is, as you say, person to person, but it still may spread exponentially (I always think of the commercial for that hair product: "and she'll tell two friends, and so on, and so on"). Whereas the unfortunately termed "viral" is based upon a notion such as represents the distribution of disease, like colds, flu & etc. - which can certainly tend to be more impersonal and indirect (although not necessarily, and may certainly occur one person at a time).

I think the value of this debate lies not in wrestling with how distinct we might make these terms, but with getting a better grip on these two approaches in relationship to agency (i.e. as deliberate tactics to deploy).

 

At 12/08/2007 12:14 AM,  socialmediaguy said...

WOM, Viral, Buzz... It's all so played out. Marketing "Buzz" words should follow the same lifecycle as fashion. New ones should come out every season.

I prefer sticky video over viral video. And ideas that "pop"...The word "inject" has also been popping into my head. Like injecting your brand into a community. Community, that's another one I feel I say about a million times a day. Its a good one but we should find something new. How about, "Facebook is the ideal commune to raise awareness of your brand," or, "How can we leverage the Twitterhood". Facebookhood...Nah doesn't work as well.

What new words can we come up with? Let's hold a contest!

 

At 12/11/2007 9:51 AM,  Kristofer said...

Hi,

I would say viral marketing is a digitally enhanced form of word of mouth. With digital forms of communication, you can avoid the limits of time and space. I can send a message from Stockholm, Sweden, to ten friends in São Paolo - Brazil, London - UK and 8 other different cities in a matter of seconds. There is no way I could interact with the same people in that amount of time if I did it person to person.

Now, viral and word of mouth are often differentiated by their intent, but that doesn't have to be. Word of mouth stories do get viral spread on the Internet for example, and viral techniques can be used to enhance spread of more traditional word of mouth. Also, viral attempts can be designed with a call to action to actually drive sales.

Buzz to me isn't as much about the product/service, but rather some stunt created to get attention and generate publicity. Less call to action. Mostly done offline, but with potential to spill over online.

 

At 12/19/2007 10:34 AM,  promodem said...

I happen to think it doesn't matter if it's viral or WOM. The audience will tell us. What people respond to is great creative and this invariably is based on a good story. Different audiences will be engaged by different stories. Our challenge as marketers is to find something that people are willing to share with their friends. Viral or WOM is the power of the story. Nobody knows what the magic is.

 

At 3/14/2008 11:06 AM,  gayathri said...

Has anyone out there heard about WideCircles.com. It seems like a way better service then wasting money on PPC. Apparently they are using refering websites ( forums, blogs, wiki, etc. ) and have a viral word of mouth distributed approach to it. My friend told me he got around 100 visits from single post which cost him $0.40c. I am going to give them a try today . In case you are intrested here is it. http://widecircles.com?s=imt1

 

At 8/19/2008 6:18 AM,  yuette said...

The strongest kind of WOM is a one-to-one recommendation but when you're recommending something to more than one person it's viral.

_________
DILSHI

Social Media Marketing

 

At 9/19/2008 3:51 AM,  Rene said...

This is a tangent, but am I the only one who noticed that the advert doesn't say a d@#n thing about the brand it's supposed to be about.
Don't you think that in the effort to produce something people will want to take viral, some very basic brand management corners are being cut?

 

Is It Viral or WOM? What's the Difference?

I've been having a really interesting Twitter debate (Twitdebate?) with Christopher S. Penn and Albert Maruggi about the difference between word of mouth (WOM) and viral marketing. You can follow Chris and Albert on Twitter as well.

Albert was wondering what to call the spread of a commercial like Swear Jar and Chris chimed in with "word of mouth." I disagreed, saying there's an inherent difference between WOM and viral. I would have elaborated, but you know, 140 characters and all...



So I'm opening it up here to a larger debate. I think that WOM is a one-to-one or one-to-few methodology with an influencer asking for the listener to try / look at something. The expectation is that the listener will then start using a product or service. There's a specific call to action.

Viral, on the other hand, is much more about creating something that is dependent upon network of people to pass it along. It's a one-to-few-to-few-to-few.... model. If a campaign / site / video goes viral, it does so by virtue of being worthy of being passed along and without a specific call to action (albeit the unspoken CTA is "pass this along").

I guess I'd sum up my position as follows: WOM is tied to making people try/buy things and if done well, results in a long-term impression. Viral, on the other hand, is tied to making people pass things along and is more or about creating a quick buzz.

My Parthian shot: people create viral videos, not WOM videos.

For more information, the Internet Marketing Driver had a great post on this subject.
Update: here's a post from Seth Godin that stuck with me and influenced my position above.

So now the fun begins. What do you have to say about all of this?

Labels: Marketing, Viral, WOM

blog comments powered by Disqus

Home