This is something of a public service announcement. I can't tell you how many times I've heard clients/companies say "we'd like you to make a viral video for us." As Greg Verdino would say, "I think I just threw up in my mouth a little."
People, people. It just doesn't work that way. You can't will something to be viral, any more than you can tell an author to go write a bestseller, a director to direct a blockbuster, or an 8 year-old to be a major-league ballplayer.
Virality (if there is such a term) lies in results. It means that if you've created something worthy of passing along and comment, it will be more likely to reach epic heights on YouTube or whatever other way you're choosing to measure it.
For companies looking to create the next viral video sensation, David Meerman Scott recommends creating 10-20 videos in the hopes that maybe one of them will work. If you look at the how many videos actually reach viral status, he's probably right - if not even a little conservative.
I hate to tell you, but you're probably not going to have a viral sensation on your hands. The best you can do is to create content that matters to your customers and prospects and give them the ability to share that content around.
Oh, and the image above? It's taken from the January 1973 issue of National Lampoon magazine. The original caption was "If You Don't Buy This Magazine, We'll Kill This Dog."
Related posts:
"A Mind-Blowing New Advertising Model"
If You're Going to Do Viral, Do It Right
Research + Entertainment = Wildly Successful Campaign
Psst! Want the Secret to Viral Marketing?
Update (7/16 at 2:45 p.m.):
This video was released by the guys at JibJab just 6 hours ago, and currently has bout 2,200 views on YouTube. I think it has qualities that will make it go viral - it's universally funny, it's topical, and you can pass it along. Let's track the numbers and see how they do over the course of the next week.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Why I Won't Make A Viral Video for You
Friday, April 18, 2008
From Mundane to Engaging: How One Man Does It
A couple of weeks ago, I said that conversation was like the weather. It's ubiquitous, and marketers seem to be the only ones interested in talking or doing anything about it (while everyone else just HAS conversations).
But it got me to thinking about something we probably all take for granted, but rarely have a reason to talk about: the weather forecast itself. You probably can't count the number of times you turned on the TV in the morning to catch a glimpse of the 5-day forecast, or dialed TellMe (1-800-555-TELL) and asked for "weather," or clicked on Accuweather.com or Weather.com for your local forecast.
Local matters
In weather and in social media, local content and connections are part of what make them relevant to us. People care about the communities in which they live and invest a great deal of time, energy and money there. To wit: the Newspaper Association of America just announced that over $2 billion was spent last year on local advertising on newspaper web sites. Why? Because it's targeted, it's relevant, and it connects people to the world immediately around them. If content is king, local content is the emperor.
Now think about how you interact with some social media connections. You're likely to have a network from around the globe - whether you're an individual or a business. But the relationships that you build based on repeated interactions and sharing of content, information and insights - those are brought to the next level when you meet face to face. A sales call, a Tweetup, or a social event in your locality make the interaction even more relevant and create the opportunity for deepening the relationship.
What's the weather got to do with it?
When it comes to the weather, you're really only interested in the conditions where you live or where you're traveling. And you generally don't care how you get your information, as long as it's accurate. Sure, you may develop a one-sided "trusted" relationship with a particular weatherman, but I'll wager you don't think much about the actual presentation of the forecast - seemingly a commodity.
Well, I've got to tell you that every day in various markets on Accuweather.com, there is a remarkable weather forecast. If you haven't had the chance to see Jim Kosek in action, here's your chance. He's bringing passion and creativity to his job and in the process is taking something the boring and making it truly engaging.
What I like the most about this story is that Jim's employers have given him the license to be as crazy as he wants to be. He still does the basics of his job, but he incites viewers - for good or bad - which in turn gives Accuweather a sense of its viewership. More companies should embrace this kind of creativity - not as a gimmick, but as a natural extension of their employees' personalities - to boost morale, productivity, and marketing gold.
Have you got a story about how something mundane and ordinary has sprung to life because of a different approach? I'd love to hear about it in the comments section below.
Monday, March 17, 2008
Thank You and Welcome
I'm going to get personal on you for a bit - but with good reason, so I hope you'll bear with me. Today was a big day for me, as I was mentioned in the Wall Street Journal for the first time (that's right, I said "first time." I'll be back.)
I was interviewed about the "My ooVoo Day With" program that we at crayon developed and executed on behalf of our client, ooVoo. The resultant article, Attention, Bloggers by Shelly Banjo describes how small businesses can use nontraditional marketing methods, such as blogger outreach, to build awareness. We were very pleased that ooVoo got a nice mention.
But at the same time, I got some surprising press as well - Ms. Banjo asked me for a list of recommended reading material to complement the article that was part of the Small Business edition of today's Journal Report. I ended up with my photo included in Marketing with Social Media, along with books, podcasts and blogs that I consider to be top-notch. Click the link to see the full list and a line about why I think each is worthy of your time.
(Full disclosure: I had also included Join the Conversation
The "thank you" I referred to in the title of the post goes to all of the friends, colleagues and connections who were kind enough to congratulate me on this bit of good fortune. I appreciate your thoughtfulness and support and I hope I'll continue to earn it.
And the "welcome" is for anyone who is happening by this blog as a result of the article. I do hope you'll consider subscribing - it's completely free. I hope you'll take the time to look around, comment, provide me feedback, join me on Twitter, and let me know what's on your mind.
While the editors only had space for 8 -10 recommendations, there are many more than could have been on there. While I feel like I follow many (too many!) such blogs out there, I'm sure there are some that I'm missing - and my blogroll needs some updating. So here's your chance to help me out: what are your favorite blogs? Leave a comment below and I'll take a look at them. Who knows? They might even end up on my blogroll or feedreader.
Saturday, March 08, 2008
The Suxorz: Worst Social Media of 2007
I'm here at SXSWi - South by Southwest Interactive - in Austin, TX and I just sat in on a panel called "The Suxorz - the Worst of the Worst in Social Media Marketing for 2007."
The panelists included Charlotte Selles (brand perspective), Jeff Jarvis, Rebecca Lieb, Steve Hall, and the moderator was Henry Copeland. While this may not seem like a who's-who of the social media industry, they did come at it with a pretty broad perspective of advertisers & marketers using common sense. You'll see a number of selections that were based on poor opinions of creative execution, as well as those that don't follow good social media practice.
Here's how the session worked: each panelist nominated a campaign; after three rounds, the "winner" was selected.
Round 1
- Selles: Molson asked individuals to use Facebook to share pictures of themselves using the product; the winner would get a trip for 5 to Cancun.
- Lieb: Carlton Beer "big ad" video - it's just a bad ad. This is the type of ad where you remember the activity within the ad, but not the product. So much so that people didn't even get the name of the product right in some YouTube videos.
- Jarvis: HP PayPerPost - mom accepts $1000 to have her kids destroy a Fuji camera in favor of HP. Got moms to use their kids as shills to make a splog. Just. Plain. Evil.
- Hall: Wal-Marting Across America used a real journalist and real photographer, but set them up as simply Wal-Mart fans, traveling across America, parking their RV at Wal-Mart parking lots.
Round 2
- Selles: Rahodeb - Whole Foods CEO John Mackey uses an alias to ding detractors on forums
- Jarvis: Cisco's Human Network - wrote all Cisco-related Wikipedia entries; had vloggers try to write about the Human Network. Got themselves to #2 in Google organic search.
- Hall: Mentos/Diet Coke - the extension campaign that Coke undertook after the original video was not nearly as authentic and spontaneous as the first
- Lieb: Vespa's corporate advertising "blog"
Round 3
- Lieb: Agency.com going to work for Subway - "when we roll, we roll big". Made a laughingstock of.
- Hall: Target Rounders on Facebook - shhh! Don't tell anyone you're a Rounder, but be a Target fan.
- Selles: Sony PSP - all I want for Christmas is a PSP. 550+ negative posts on this blog that was created by their marketing agency, but professed to be a real fan blog.
- Jarvis: Giuliani campaign - he wasn't afraid of terrorists, but his MySpace page was closed to friend adds.
The winners of the three rounds were put against each other and the final winner was selected:
Hewlett Packard.
According the the panelists, some of the criteria they used in judging what qualified as a "bad" social media campaign:
- Advertisers acting like asses
- Out and out lying to customers
- Corrupting authentic voices
The bottom line, according to the panelists is: treat people as people, not as a mass. You'll be forgiven if you're honest with people.
What do you think? Do these campaigns represent the worst of the worst? Are there others that you might nominate? Do you think there are other criteria to consider or other lessons to be learned? I'd love to hear your thoughts.
Monday, March 03, 2008
Watch Your Frickin' Mouth
When you have kids, you naturally censor yourself when you're around them (or at least you try to - sometimes you just let an expletive slip out). But when you're in marketing, is there an obligation to keep it rated PG?
Racy ads, like some more mature prime time shows, have traditionally been reserved for after-bedtime hours. But with the advent of so many social media tools for sharing video content or photos, marketers can bet that their ads will pretty much been seen any time of the day.
The reason I bring this up is that there's a billboard campaign by the regional convenience store chain Sheetz that's created quite a stir. Evidently, a Harrisburg, PA family took a look at this billboard and balked, claiming it contained offensive language:
Having been raised in a household where the offending word was banned, I can understand how this might have ruffled a few feathers. They claim it's an approximation of another word that has an 'F' a 'C' and a 'K' in it. Whether you agree or not, you have to admit two things: (a) how pervasive foul (fowl?) language has become these days and (b) how easy it is to get more mature subjects into younger hands.
Every website that contains a signup process, whether it's a social network, newsletter, etc. typically has language asking to verify that you're 13 years of age or older. This is in cooperation with the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act. But when we create portable or distributable content (to say nothing of billboards), there has to be some acknowledgment that this content, however edgy it may be, could end up in the hands of an unintended minor.
While I snickered at Sarah Silverman's "I'm F*cking Matt Damon" on late-night TV, it was quickly and widely distributed over the Web within days (current count of this version: over 7.8 million views). Jimmy Kimmel came up with the rejoinder in his equally as funny/disturbing "I'm F*cking Ben Affleck" (currently at just over 4 million views). So, this content isn't remaining in the sole domain of late-night viewing.
There are always going to be sensitive eyes & ears about any variety of things. The politically-correct movement is always trying to change our phraseology so no one gets offended, but the reality is, someone is always going to be offended by something. My question is: with the ease of syndication, embedded videos, and widgetized content, is their anything we can do to minimize the exposure of tiny eyes and ears to this stuff? Or is doesn't it matter any more?
As to the above, I guess this family won't be eating chicken fricassee any time soon. At least they won't be putting with with any more Sheetz. Maybe they'll be frickin' Jimmy Kimmel...
Whoops! Can I say that here?
Monday, February 25, 2008
Social Media for B2B Marketing: Don't Monkey Around
As a former classical studies major, I’m fascinated with etymology, the study of linguistics. The word that is the focus of so many marketing books – conversation – has its origins in the Latin word conversari, which means "to dwell, to keep company with." And this is entirely appropriate in the name of social media marketing, since having conversations requires spending time with people – namely, customers.
Too often in B2B marketing, we see the definition of the more personal "customer" devolve into the distant and cold "decision maker." Decision makers are relegated to the sales cycle, engaged in research and in need of information and education. The prevalent attitude seems to be that marketers develop the message and decide which information to share with decision makers. This is command and control, with unidirectional messaging at its core.
Is it any wonder then why B2B companies are slow to adopt social media as a marketing channel?
It's not that B2B customers are steering clear of social media. On the contrary, they use blogs, message boards, podcasts and online communities in their research for business solutions as well as in their personal lives. But B2B marketers don’t seem to be aware of – or worse – care about conversations that are taking place within the social media space about their brands.
Brands are being discussed, both positively and negatively; now marketers can follow the conversations and join in. Ignoring it won’t make the problem dissipate; indeed, businesses that continue to put off the decision to join the conversations will find themselves at a disadvantage.
But – to return to our etymology lesson – marketers need to spend time with their prospects and begin to embrace bidirectional conversation. A simple way to start is to listen. Keep listening. And listen some more. Take the time to explore the sites. Look around. Follow the conversations with RSS feeds.
Above all, resist the temptation to jump in until you understand the context. Businesses that attempt to harness the power of social networks or new media sites without realizing the generally accepted etiquette will find themselves unwelcome. It is only by listening and learning that B2B marketers will be able to start talking with their customers.
Note: this post originally appeared as a chapter in The Age of Conversation.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Generation Y and Your Business
Call them "Gen Y," "Millennials," "Echo Boomers," or whatever you want - just be sure you call them, because they've got something to say.
I was listening to episode 79 of HBR Ideacast, Managing Generation Y, in which Tammy Erickson, who writes the Across the Ages column for the Harvard Business Review, was interviewed. As I was listening, I realized that in addition to the baby boomers, this is a generation that is potentially going to change the way you're doing business - or at least thinking about doing business. There are implications to marketing, internal communications, social media, and organizational behavior here.
In the podcast, they referred to the "self-assured, overly emotive, text messaging" generation who are "happy to tackle the big jobs, and they'll do it with confidence." This should be welcome news to any manager's ears, but I think this should be tempered with an acute awareness of the idiosyncratic traits that this generation brings with them. Let's look at them one by one:
Impatience/Immediacy
I've often said that this is the generation that wants to be an intern on Monday and the CEO by Friday. I admire that kind of drive, but I also wrinkle my nose at the hubris that accompanies it; there seems to be a lack of willingness to put in the time and gain the experience necessary for such a role.
According to the Erickson, this is deeper than just youthful impatience; she says they're likely be impatient for their entire lives. She posits that during their formative years, Gen Y has been bombarded with inexplicable, sudden and tragic events such as 9/11, Columbine and Virginia Tech - and that they've decided that they need to live life now.
I think it goes a little deeper than that (perhaps she was limited in time on the show). Look at the way the cable news networks have evolved over the last 10-15 years. Whether it's padding their daytime programming with Iraq war I or II, the O.J. Simpson chase & trial, or the latest celebrity overdose, all of the news outlets are catering to a need (?) for more information, now. When you take this institutionalized view of news, information and service, it's not too much of a stretch to think that Gen Y is going to expect fast results in the workplace.
But at the same time, I think we need to keep in mind that this desire for results and action may come at a price: the inability to think strategically. Granted, there are very few (if any) strategic planners who are 20-somethings. But if they have this nurtured aversion to longer-term thinking, there may be trouble ahead.
Let Me Tell You What I Think
By and large, this generation has grown up in a peer to peer world, where they're used to openly sharing ideas and not being shy about saying what they think. Odds are that in the workplace, if they have an idea that will benefit you, they'll share it - with managers, directors, and even CEOs.
Technology
This is the generation that€ was raised on text messaging. They look up on email as an outmoded style of communication. To them text messaging is personal, immediate, and it gets results. They can't understand why it takes us
16 emails deep in a chain to come up with a time to schedule a
conference call. To them, it's a no-brainer: text, boom, done.
In addition, TiVo, Facebook and other technologies lead them to doing things on their own time. We've been used to structure & scheduling, while they do things when time allows them to do so. Asynchronous behavior may become more prevalent.
our day-to-day lives, with internal communications, and possibly with
marketing.
Parents' Roles
Gen Y likes their parents; not surprising when these "helicopter parents" are involved in many aspects of their children's lives. While this can be incredibly annoying (and these kinds of parents should ease off, lest they tarnish their kids' reputations in the workforce), it does have one positive side effect: Gen Y has great working relationships with Boomers in the workplace.
There is no doubt that this generation will have a huge impact on the world. They're certainly ready for us. But are we ready for them?
What do you think? How have you experienced Gen Y in the workplace, either as a Boomer, a Gen X-er, or a Gen Y-er yourself? And what do you think the answers are?
Friday, February 01, 2008
Does Marketing Get Social Media?
Last night, I attended an event hosted by the Boston chapter of the American Marketing Association. It was titled "The Impact of Social Media on Marketing."
The format was friendly and inviting, very much in the spirit of social media. We mixed with each other freely, connecting with old friends and meeting new ones. And we were asked a couple of questions, which we debated in small groups:
- Five years from now, will "Web 2.0" (aka social media) sites be used more for traffic or building relationships?
- Should companies get involved in social media now, or wait it out?
Our answers were tallied and it was interesting to see how each question resulted in a 3:1 split in favor of social media:
- 75% thought Web 2.0 sites would be relationship-centric
- 75% thought companies should get involved now
Earlier this week, I asked my Twitter followers if web site traffic even mattered for social media. Here are some of the responses:
- to 99% of the people that will be paying you these days it does. (Tom Biro)
- I've heard a lot of interesting thing about volume of posts and things like sentiment extraction and comment clustering (Rachel Happe)
- I think it's worth looking at. But the real # that should matter is how many people are truly engaged? (Chris Wilson)
- Comscore and Nielsen have metrics such as visits/minutes spent on the site per user.'engagement' is dependent on the context tho (Jamie Nathan)
It's definitely a challenge for social media - the notion that content should be open and distributed is in direct juxtaposition to most of our current notions about measurement. But where we are able to measure, I think my Twitter peeps have it right - it's much more about engagement and interaction than it is about traffic.
When are the other 25% of marketers going to realize that?
Thursday, December 06, 2007
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?
Wednesday, December 05, 2007
Great New Portal Hits the Spot
Chip Griffin is a visionary. He keeps churning out start-ups that are simple in concept, yet elegant in execution. Custom Scoop was an idea whose time had come - a new media clipping service, catching the best in blog and podcast content; and Cork & Knife is a e-magazine for foodies. That appeals to my inner diner.
Yesterday, he launched his latest - Media Bullseye. Put briefly, Chip publishes it "to provide media, public relations, and marketing professionals with news and commentary about the modern communications landscape." But the cool part is that it combines video, audio, feature commentary and aggregated content, presenting it all in one slick interface. And naturally, it's completely RSS-able. It's definitely worth checking out.
And here's Chip himself to tell you about his vision.
I'm honored to be one of the early contributors to the site. Joining other social media greats like Chris Brogan and Chris Thilk is an honor (I'm lucky I got in, seeing as my given name isn't Chris). We'll see if I can turn this into a regular feature.
What do you think? Is this an idea whose time has come? Any suggestions for Chip?
Monday, December 03, 2007
For You, and for the Children
I've been receiving Search Marketing Standard for the better part of a year - and if you don't subscribe, you should really consider doing so.
To my surprise, they've been around for a little longer that I thought; this month, they're celebrating their 2-year anniversary as a matter of fact! And as part of their celebration, they're giving a discount to readers of the Social Media Marketing Blog.
If you would like to subscribe, you can receive a 67% discount off the normal rate, bringing the U.S. cost down to just $4.95 a year! In addition, SMS will donate $1 for every new subscription to the Toys for Tots Foundation.
Just use the coupon code HOLIDAY67 when you subscribe to Search Marketing Standard between now and December 10th and you can begin receiving a top-notch publication related to search for a great price and you'll be making a difference in the lives of children for the holidays.
Friday, November 09, 2007
How to Teach Marketers to Be Authentic
Did you ever take the time to step back and wonder about the various personas you meet online? They could be long-lost friends, bloggers that you admire, or people in your Facebook network whom you may have never met before. But what do you really know about them?
How many of these folks are truly themselves when they're online? I mean, how many are perhaps bolder in their assertions or less cautious with the language they use because of the less personal nature of the medium?
We spend a lot of time talking about authenticity as one of the tenets of social media - how businesses, brands and the people behind them need to be seen as real. There's no doubt that the masses will sniff out a fraud. But how do we guarantee them authenticity?
While you ponder that, take a look at Brad Paisley's take on it:
As recently as this week, someone in my LinkedIn network posed the following question: What disciplines should marketers be training within to ensure authenticity? My first thought, was, "You've got to be kidding, right? You want to teach authenticity?"
It reminded me of the old George Burns quote:
"Acting is all about honesty. If you can fake that, you've got it made."That one-liner often sums up all that is seen as wrong with and disliked about advertising, marketing and public relations - mouthing the words without actually believing what you're saying. Can you blame the public for distrusting advertisers or for thinking of public relations professionals as "spin doctors"?
Many of the other respondents to the LinkedIn question also noted that authenticity is more of a state of being rather than a skill - it's something that has to be imbued throughout one's life rather than taught as a course. Authenticity represents who we are, not what we do. And when we use marketing speak to address our audience, are we being truly authentic, or simply following a corporate protocol out of some antiquated tradition?
I say it's time to step out of those corporate roles and leave behind those traditional templates and speak to our customers as if we're real people talking to other real people. As David Ogilvy once famously said,
"The consumer isn't a moron; she is your wife."How do you learn how to be authentic with your wife? You don't learn it; you simply be yourself - that's why she picked you, right?
Ultimately, it's worth asking how do your customers or your community view you? I hope you're prepared for the answer, because we live in an age where they'll tell you and expect to be heard.
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Psst! Want the Secret to Viral Marketing?
Viral marketing is like the weather: everyone's talking about it, but no one is doing anything about it.
You know why? Because you can't. That's right. You can't simply manufacture viral marketing. But don't tell that to some marketers. They're out there, practicing something akin to alchemy.
Think there's a science behind viral marketing? Or perhaps a secret formula? I think there's a bit of each, but they follow that famous saying by Louis Pasteur, "Chance favors the prepared mind."
While so many marketing efforts are more measurable than ever before, there are aspects to the practice that are still a combination of art and science. Good research trumps everything, but then again, so does common sense.
When it comes to "viral marketing" I think the secret sauce is simple: make it entertaining. If you know your audience, what they like and what will grab their attention, adding an entertainment angle to it (plus the ability to easily pass along the content) will make it viral. That's it. You may recall a mathematical formula I've used here before:
That's not to say it's going to work. Odds are, it won't. But this is the formula that has to be followed, in my opinion, if you want any shot at success. You don't just upload some half-ass video to YouTube and claim you've got a viral video. The 42 people who view it may think so, but I doubt your client or manager will.
Bottom line: you need to exercise good judgment, gut instinct, have some smart research insights, and know your audience. Come to think of it, this doesn't sound that different from traditional marketing, does it?
Thanks to Rohit Bhargava for issuing the challenge on this one. I hope I can bring these and other insights to Ad:Tech.
Monday, September 10, 2007
Ad Age Hates Innovation
You have to wonder about the ability of the marketing profession to move forward when a mainstream medium such as Advertising Age seems dead-set against it.
Here are just three examples:
- Even though they're embracing new media by offering RSS feeds, you can't read the entire posts in your feedreader. Ad Age makes you visit their site for the full content. Yes, they probably want the traffic so they can support the site with (ahem) ads, but you know what? You can run ads in feeds too, guys.
- Today Jonah Bloom decided that he'd call out a small company and rant against it. In this case, he was talking about my company's recent announcement. I couldn't find any instance of him berating any other small companies, but then again, I got tired of scrolling through the archives since the Adages blog doesn't have tags.
- Finally (and this one's a doozy), Mark Simon gives us his take on trends by recommending that CMOs Ditch the Lunatic Web Content Crazes in the CMO Strategy column. He particularly calls out Twitter as nothing more than a personal update application; it's clear he hasn't spent any time on it or developed a network. As the very astute Karl Long puts it:
Even more ironic this is under “CMO Strategy”, yep this is exactly the kind of advice you need if you’re a CMO, ignore new things, don’t experiment, don’t participate and your world will be simpler, safer and easier to understand.Maybe the folks over at Ad Age don't think this whole Internet thing is going to catch on.
Saturday, September 08, 2007
Five Marketing Secrets from Apple
Steve Chazin, a marketing executive with Apple, recently launched a blog called MarketingApple with the able assistance of David Meerman Scott, who himself is the author of The New Rules of Marketing and PR
In addition to his blog, Steve has written an ebook - styled in the cool and classic Apple look & feel that we've all come to expect - in which he outlines the five marketing secrets that have catapulted Apple to success. Well, they're not so much secrets as astute observations based on everything that Apple has done right.
Each one deserves to be read through in its entirety, but the summary is as follows:
- Don't Sell Products. People buy what other people have
- Never Be the First to Market. Make something good better
- Empower Early Adopters. Help your customers help you
- Make Your Message Memorable. Boil your idea down to its syrupy goodness
- Go One Step Further. Surprise and delight your customers
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
O Tempora, O Mores
I'm still trying to rub the cobwebs out of my labor-intensive Labor Day weekend, so in the hopes that you're more alert than I am today let me try a little riddle on you.
What's one thing that is ubiquitous, we all have in equal amounts every day - from the tiniest baby to the oldest person, from the dirt poor to the filthy rich - yet we never seem to have enough of it? And pondering the mystery of what it really is St. Augustine said of it: "If no one asks me, I know; but if any person should require me to tell him, I cannot."
Time.
We all have time. Oh you've heard the idioms: time's a-wasting, time is on your side, time's up, time out, time being, take your time, killing time. I could go on, but this isn't Grammar Girl. If you'd like the full list, check this out.
And we've all heard someone (most likely our mothers) say "So-and-so had the same hours in a day that you have" when trying to cajole us into being more productive. While it's easy to dismiss such "motherisms," I think that particular phrase gives us a lot to think about.
At the end of the day (24 hours, to be exact), we all had the same amount of time to create or do or think and change the world just a little bit more. We all had the opportunity to improve the experience of a customer, make someone feel special, measure and report something to a client, or encourage those around us.
Time may be the great equalizer, but it's our persistence, work ethic and imagination that set us apart from each other. It's how we utilize our time that makes all the difference in the world. Time spent with family, at work, solving problems, helping others and generally making the world a better place than we found - whatever we deem worthy and important in our lives - is what makes us productive.
How do you spend your day? Do you impart a unique value or imprint on every interaction you have? In short, do you use your time wisely?
If not, there's always time to improve.
And yes, this entry was a thinly-veiled mea culpa for not writing anything over the past week. Thanks for humoring me.
Friday, August 17, 2007
There's a Write Way and a Wrong Way
You know, when the mail-order gun arrives here at the beach, just shoot me with it. Get your handbook today:
I was reading an e-newsletter (well, it's actually an emailed blog entry) today from Mobile Insider called My iPhone Needs a Gun, when I noticed something.
I actually read the entry in its entirety.
It may not seem like a big deal to you, but I consume a lot of information every day, which means I do a lot of scanning - headlines, first sentences of paragraphs. And if the copy or subject matter doesn't grab me, I'm outta there.
But this article was different. Why?
Put very simply: it was written the way I like to listen. That's not a typo. I mean that if someone was reading the article to me - or telling it to me as a story - I'd want to listen. And it made me keep reading.
Now I'm not an iPhone user, nor do I really care about what apps are working or not working for it - which was the point of the article. What had me entertained and focused was that this guy was talking as if we were joking in the hallway or sharing a beer after work. He used attitude infused with humor as a way to tell a compelling story about some iPhone features (or those he'd like to see). An excerpt:I also get to spend time with the iPhone now at the beach, because lo and behold my 15-year-old daughter has evolved into the nightmare of every father — the cutest thing on the sand. The first time she walked into the water I actually saw teen boys point and move towards her like shards of metal towards a magnet, like puppies towards food, like detestable vermin towards a 5-star kitchen.
And another:Luckily, the iPhone has a good camera and loads of memory, so I was able to take snaps of all these little felons just in case we need to run them with the FBI. I dug into the Safari browser in search of online sign-ups for the NRA. No one delivers firearms same day to the north beach of Cape May, I discovered.
And finally:My daughter...was more interested in SeeqPod Music (seeqpod.com/iphone), which is a very nice index and front end for the thousands of MP3 tracks that are accessible for streaming directly from the Web. I am not sure about the legality of the rights management here, but the app uses the familiar iPod interface to slip through catalogs of artists and search for tunes that stream well into the Quicktime player. There are no ads here yet, but clearly there could be, and with people declaring their musical tastes so precisely, there should be some very targeted ad possibilities. "Ooh, look, they have Slipknot's 'Do Nothing Bitchslap,'" my sweet young girl said.
When you're preparing the copy for your blog, corporate website, brochure or direct mail piece, what style do you typically effect? Having worked in the b2b space previously, I can tell you there's a lot of dry, dull and seemingly overused copy out there. Corporate standards must be upheld, you know.
But what if you took that website or brochure and really made it sing? What if you wrote it the way people would listen to it? What if - just for a moment - you did something that was completely unexpected and out of the ordinary?
It might be slightly "off-brand," but you know what? The people that work for your company aren't all "on-brand," are they? What makes Corporate Communications think every microsite, every tri-fold, every newsletter has to be devoid of personality and as antiseptic and emotionless as a Stepford wife? Aren't rules made to be broken once in a while?
I'm sure no one is monitoring how your sales team interacts with customers in one-on-ones. They get to use their personality to persuade, inform and relate. Why shouldn't you?
Think about it. Don't make Steve Smith get the gun for his iPhone.
How to Market Your Company with a Blog handbook features:
http://www.sherpastore.com/c/a.pl?9403&p.cfm/2124