Catalyst S+F :: A San Francisco based marketing capital firm

Welcome To The (Hype) Machine – Fragmentation Is So 2011 (Mediapost 2.15.12)

Cory Treffiletti — Sun, 19 Feb 2012 09:00:03 +0000

If you are the owner of a social network, a social website, a social app or any other socially enabled communication platform on the web, then you deserve to sit back, relax and have a cigar because you are part of the (hype) machine and that machine is in full swing!

The last month has been amazing in terms of telling a story of the influence of social media. Three singular, unrelated events unfurled to tell a story of the scope of social media and the virtual hype machine that it feeds, and you are insane if you’re not paying attention. If you’re a brand marketer, there are some interesting concepts to take away as well.

First we witnessed the Susan G Komen/Planned Parenthood social media fiasco and the Stop SOPA campaign, both of which were significant watershed moments in terms of using the web and social media to influence real world activity. Though not globally on par with the Arab Spring from last year, both of these were examples of a viral torrent of support or condemnation for their respective movements. In both situations, a movement began in social media that caused the reversal of political-hot-button issues and the people’s voice was heard. Neither situation would have occurred without the popularity of social media, at the very least neither would have been reversed in such a short time.

The second event I will call out is this past week’s passing of Whitney Houston the night before the Grammy Awards. She was a huge influence in music, and one of the biggest, most definable voices ever recorded, and social media was immediately ablaze with the discussion of the sad event. The Grammy Awards followed up quickly, even changing some of their production to fit in the necessary tributes. The news of Whitney Houston’s death went worldwide in seconds, and everyone was commenting on it from all sides of the globe.

The third event is one that’s pending, and hasn’t even taken place yet. It’s the IPO for Facebook. Facebook’s impending celebration has the hearts of the valley all a flutter with the scent of money. It smells like 1999 again, with secretaries and administrative assistants alike projected to be millionaires, and hundreds of people likely preparing to put down deposits on new homes in San Francisco. Facebook is forecasted to be the largest tech IPO in history, and the ad business seems in line with this as they have selected Facebook as a preferred partner for ad dollars, surpassing Google in a recent industry survey. If Facebook is indeed as big as it proclaims it will be, then social will have overtaken search as the premier darling of the data-driven Internet ad business.

On the surface these three events are only associated by one thing; the fact that they center around social media. That in itself is all you need. Social media is the modern hype machine, but unlike the days of Public Enemy, in this case you probably should believe the hype. The learning that I see here is that social media, and specifically the advent of Facebook and Twitter, is causing a reversal in the fragmentation of media. For years we’ve discussed the fragmentation of the media landscape, and how consumers are more difficult to reach with an effective frequency because of the way they spend their day. What these moments are telling me is that when there’s a topic of interest to a large group of people, and when the hype machine is in full force, fragmentation can be reversed and a singular point of view can actually be established in a small number of places. All of these situations drove people to social media, and social media became the hub for all of this activity. The fragmentation only takes place before users flock to social media. Social is the new hub.

Even in the case of the death of Whitney Houston, USA Today was running news stories on its iPad and iPhone apps that were nothing more than a collection of tweets from famous celebrities. Their version of a news story was the collection of celebrity tweets? That proves, if nothing else, that the journalists for USA Today were going to Twitter for their breaking news.

Fragmentation may be alive in terms of initial broadcast, but the machine is alive and well, and it is not going anywhere. The machine is working, and the masses can be culled together for a single action, if you have a message that resonates with them. The Superbowl showed that advertising could be used in this way, if you have the money to spend to reach enough of the audience at least once. The lesson for a marketer is that if you are strategic, and you have enough money, you can indeed influence a large group of people at once. You can put the hype machine to work for you.

Don’t you agree? Who do you see that’s doing a good job of this?

Devilish smile!!

Cory Treffiletti — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 09:00:04 +0000

What??

Cory Treffiletti — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 09:00:03 +0000

Digital marketing’s 4 biggest disappointments

Catalyst S+F — Sat, 11 Feb 2012 09:00:04 +0000

Oh boy, does the digital buzz machine ache for a metaphorical magic pill — some blockhead simple “cure” for many of the marketing challenges facing brands. When new things come along, the buzz about their potential effects on the marketing body sometimes gets blown out of proportion.

Our industry appears to have its own form of digital bipolar disorder. (“DBD” for the TV campaign every new disease needs — cue the contemporary sound track and vignettes of deliriously happy people raising their arms to the sky.) People in our industry looooove new things. And then, about six months later, we often despise those same things. In many cases, it’s not the platforms and technologies that are at fault — it is the collective DBD and the unrealistic expectations it creates and then dashes.

What’s caused this epidemic of DBD? It seems driven by a desire in some to “take care of” digital — deploy something simple and understandable to make this wonderfully, horribly dynamic environment more manageable. We want to bring structure to something that feels formless.

Just because the latest digital “thing” is transforming communications doesn’t mean it is a panacea for brand challenges. This article looks at four digital “things” that instantly captivated many, only to lose their luster just as quickly when it became evident that they were not magic pills. It also points to a short list of considerations to make the next time everyone is calling something “white hot.” I’ve deliberately picked four fundamentally sound concepts and platforms to demonstrate how it is misplaced marketer expectations that are the problem here — not the technologies themselves.

Daily deals

Everybody’s favorite whipping boyThe hype for daily deals was out of control. I remember reading a pundit’s blog in December 2010 that predicted that a majority(!) of marketing dollars would eventually be spent offering these 50 percent (or more) discounts on products and services.

What caused the super hype? I think two issues were at play here:

Digital loves “disruption.” We love things that bring down the venerable walls of Jericho. We love the idea of a new company shattering time-honored approaches. The notion fuels the collective sense that we are witnessing marketing solution history. But here’s the rub: A promotional tactic can’t live up to that sort of expectation.

Radical misunderstanding of marketer needs. Many in the tech culture don’t really get marketing. The goal of marketing is to charge full price for something — not almost give it away at 75 percent off. By contrast, a common model in tech is to give away services, thereby creating different revenue streams driven by scale. There’s nothing wrong with either way of thinking, but the second often doesn’t jibe well with marketer KPIs. Some marketing investment is focused on trial and demand generation — things that daily deals are good at encouraging. But more money is spent with the goal of driving margin through differentiation.

If I may ascend the soapbox for a second, let me state emphatically that most marketers are notlooking for 29 new ways to distribute coupons. We’d rather have a digital platform that enables us never to need coupons.

Daily deals are an absolutely valid tactic for a host of other purposes. But when the math of a program requires a 50 percent or greater discount — and then takes a big cut of the revenue that is collected — one cannot expect marketers to pour most of their resources in. Daily deals can be a really smart tactic — or a really dumb one.

Branded widgets

Portable corporate goodness

In 2007, widgets were all the rage. Thousands of companies wanted either a desktop widget, a Facebook widget, or a MySpace widget.

The conventional wisdom was that these deep and portable brand experiences would incite such excitement in consumers that they’d want to carry our precious messages “wherever they live online.” Platform-specific widgets quickly gave way to platform agnostic units that appeared to further shed the shackles that had trapped our brands for lo these many years. Hooray! Plus, the good ones had incredible interactivity — in an era in which all banners could give us were 1-2-3 animations.

Six months later, if you mentioned a widget, you saw a cascade of faces doing what Joey Tribbiani called “smell the fart” acting.

What went wrong?

Once again, there was nothing wrong with the thing, per se. Widgets were and are useful little things when designed well. But there were a couple problems there:

Our expectations were whackadoodle. A client once asked me if $275,000 was enough to get 20 million installs of its widget.

Generally brands don’t make good content. Making so-so games or videos isn’t enough. Your beer’s virtual bottle cap spinner “game” (with foamy animation Easter eggs!) doesn’t make the consumer cut.

We forgot the marketing. Most brands spent the majority of their budget on the widget, and almost nothing on publicizing it. Kevin Costner in a cornfield.

Facebook changed how it handled widgets. It consigned them to the back burner.

Of course, actually useful widgets live on in tens of billions of installs, and lots of companies are making a good living by selling the data they collect. But a DBD-fueled brand panacea they were not.

Branded mobile apps

Opportunity calling? Apps can be astounding. Brand apps often aren’t. There are some great exceptions — not the least of which is P&G’s eminently useful “Sit or Squat.”

Or Volvo’s driving game. Or Kraft’s “Big Fork Little Fork.”

But apps are only going to be successful to the extent that they meet an actual need. A FedEx app that lets me see if my packages have been delivered? Nifty! A shopping app built around a store finder for universally distributed bathroom tissue? Not so much.

Another issue with the early branded apps was the development cost. Apps took significant time and resources to build. Further, in order to get massive scale, apps needed to be ported to several major platforms — iOS, Android, etc. That cost real money. And every successive generation of those same apps needed to be ported across platforms again. At least in those days, interoperability was a pipedream.

A number of startups are working to simplify the process with toolsets that let you develop once and deploy across all of the major platforms. Further, they enable the assembly of assets in minutes instead of weeks. These advancements won’t make your content better, but they will enable you to spend some marketing money on publicizing a good app.

What’s great about the app space is that there’s sort of a second generation of brand apps in development now — ones focused on meeting real needs. Because apps will likely be a major component in the delivery of digital content for years to come, it’s great to see that the brand community is trying again with better content and more realistic expectations. In this case, it appears that we fought our desire to discard the toddler with the tub water.

First-generation retargeting

An old classicRetargeting has been around for awhile, and it usually delivers highly cost-effective results, especially for direct marketers. For those not familiar, a really basic definition of retargeting is as follows: A third party in your employ cookies your site visitors who don’t convert and follows them around the web with targeted banners designed to drive revisit and response. The cost per metrics are usually amazing. Cool stuff.

But for most brands, the traffic to the website is relatively small when compared to the total potential audience for a product or service. Which means that the total amount of money and results one can expect from this sort of retargeting is rather limited. If only a relatively small percentage of the target visit your site, only that limited population can be retargeted.

The industry was abuzz with the miracle of retargeting for a time. Then it got a bad rap — not worth the bother because of the scale problem.

Over the past couple of years, “retargeting” has evolved into a broader bucket — the foundation for targeted marketing efforts that reach beyond your site visitors. There are several methodologies by which companies are helping to expand the scale of “retargeting-style” performance metrics:

Prospect targeting: This approach, pioneered by m6d, uses your site visitors as the foundation to identify “behave-alikes” that share their media behaviors. The highly developed set of algorithms used by m6d start with your retargeting pool to identify and map large numbers of “behave-alikes.” It then enables you to target this big pool through exchange-based media. These aren’t “look-alikes” — they are “do-alikes.” The idea is that such “do-alikes” will exhibit similar brand propensities and drive great metrics at scale.

Search retargeting: Companies like Magnetic and Chango collect data on a consumer’s search queries related to a product or category. Since search is a great gauge of purchase intent, brands are getting great results across a much broader audience than site visitors

Look-alike targeting: This model leverages the information we can discern about your site visitors and finds others that reflect those same characteristics. Many media companies offer these services, and they are also available for DIY exchange-based buying through DSPs and trading desks.

Social sharing targeting: A different approach, identified most closely with RadiumOne, uses huge numbers of social sharing data points to develop profiles of likely intenders, and then expands the prospect pool by identifying other people with similar behaviors. It’s based upon the concept that social intent and the implicit graph offers the greatest potential audience for a brand’s marketing message.

Of course, there’s nothing at all wrong with classic retargeting. It’s just that most brands need to find ways to deliver greater scale. But the answer to the scale shortfall isn’t to poo-poo the concept; it is to build upon it. Brands can achieve scale with a combination of classic retargeting and other efforts that similarly attract high-likelihood-of-intent consumers. The tide is turning, and now retargeting is generally viewed sensibly positively.

The treatment for DBD

So how do we inoculate ourselves against DBD? Through sensible and rational thinking. I think there are five things to remember the next time we hear about the latest and greatest thing.

Start with a strategy
So many of the mistakes brands make into diving into new platforms could be avoided if we first ensured that they were consistent with your brand’s digital strategy.

Ask yourself whether its creators seem to “get” marketing
Not to put too fine a point on it, but many tech companies and startups simply don’t. Since our goal is to create value, we need to ensure that the tasks the tool seems to address do just that.

Approach new platforms and ideas with sensibility, not the herd mentality
We are in digital because we love new stuff. But let’s keep the breathlessness to a minimum.

Ensure that the expectations of a new thing reflect its potential versatility
Marketing and brand needs are highly complex. While it would be great if a few simple solutions could solve our problems, we need to test the hype before we buy in hook, line, and sinker.

Do the math — and test
The selection of a marketing tactic is a business decision best made with a cool head and open eyes. It needs to meet the same criteria as something long established.

Let’s keep the excitement level sensible and avoid DBD. Side effects of this approach are significant and include better decision making and higher ROI.

The Past & Future Of Sports In Video (Mediapost 2.8.12)

Cory Treffiletti — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:06:00 +0000

Over the last few weeks I’ve been thinking a lot about sports marketing, and this past weekend I was reminded of why; the emotions tied to sports are palpable and real and they are the kind of emotions that brands can only dream of being associated with.

Its really simple if you think about it. Try and find one other area of life where the emotions are as high or as passionate as they are with sports. I’ll go out on a limb and say that sports only come second to birth and death when you consider their emotional ramifications. If you hear a diehard sports fan, it’s not uncommon for them to be as excitable and enthusiastic when talking about their favorite baseball or football team as when you hear a parent talk about the birth of their children or the memories of their parents when they’ve passed on. It taps into the same emotional core in our brains and it creates lifelong associations. The kind of associations that brands want to see, at least on a microcosmic-level.

It’s not realistic to assume that household cleanser or shampoo can create that same emotional connection, but it is extremely plausible to consider that brands want their consumers to think strongly about a positive association with their brands, which is why sports sponsorship is such a tricky business. Sports sponsorships require a brand to engage in a long-term relationship, and a very trusting relationship, because you have to have faith that the athlete will stay relevant, and on the right side of the ethical mores that society puts forth for people in a position of attention and focus. Athletes are aspirational as well as inspirational, meaning that we can all aspire to be like them (i.e. as self-confident as Tim Tebow). They are also fatally humanistic, meaning they are only as good as the best or worst of us (see so many examples of mistakes from athletes in recent years). It may not be fair to place an athlete on a pedestal and hold them to a higher standard, but that is what we do and that’s why sports sponsorships exist. There is an associative value to working with them, and to transferring the positive brand equity we have in them to a brand. That value is high for a marketer and athletes make significant money off of them, as well.

If you think of the best sports marketing images of the last 50 years, you think of images of strength and confidence. The kind that comes from a truly inspirational sports figure. For me, I think of Mean Joe Green in the Coke commercial. I think of Michael Jordan in the Nike spots flying through the air. I even think of humor (when its done right) like all of the Peyton Manning Mastercard commercials. These are images of confidence, and the brands that were able to harness the power of sports were able to stand out and differentiate themselves in the eyes of consumers. That differentiation translates to sales.

What is really interesting to me about sports marketing is that it would not have existed without television, and its future is indelibly tied to online video. Sports is a physical and visual medium. You have to be playing sports to understand the physicality involved, and you have to see others play sports to learn about it and understand it fully. If TV had never been invented, the NFL would be nowhere near as popular as it is. The NBA and Major League Baseball would be half the size they are today. Television created a way for anyone and everyone to see sports without having to physically be there, and the images you see on those broadcasts have inspired millions of people to pick up a bat or ball and play. Those images are inspirational, and online video is going to extend them even further.

Social media and mobile media are the future of sports marketing. Mobile video, and sharing video through social platforms – this is where the future of sports marketing lies because these images can take on a life of their own. The more those images, in all of their video glory, can be shared and seen by droves of fans, the more impact they will have and the more opportunity there is for a brand to reach a passionate audience. The television (and a close second with the actual stadium) is never going away and will always be the primary vehicle for sports marketing, but digital media has one heck of a future for sports marketing. Just you wait and see!

Mason Loves Rock N Roll!

Cory Treffiletti — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 19:32:16 +0000

Ten Super Bowl Wins and Fails From 2011

Catalyst S+F — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:00:04 +0000

Teaser: Déjà vu all over again. Let’s take a trip
into the past by checking out the Wins and Fails of last year’s Super Bowl
ad-off.

Ain’t
nuttin’ like the Superbowl.

It’s the loudest
shout of old media – the opportunity to connect with more than half the nation
in an afternoon with a message more or less guaranteed to be watched, discussed
and scrutinized. Plus, if your ad is really really good or, like, a total piece
of poo, there’s always the chance you’ll be featured on the front page of newspapers
coast to coast.

But it’s a
lot more than that. It’s also a brilliant beacon within new media. People talk
about experiences. And the Super Bowl is something we all experience. What an
opportunity for a savvy (and well heeled) brand to drive thousands of friends
and follows in one short afternoon. To mesmerize bloggers from coast to coast,
and to motivate their typing and embedding fingers.

It’s the
perfect media storm. And if your ad actually makes the product compelling, it’s
the opportunity to sell loads of stuff lickety-split.

But
whatever. Let’s all relive some of the Wins and Fails from last year’s Super
Bowl!

WIN: Chrysler “Imported from Detroit”

It took
Fiat management to teach us ‘Murikans how to “do” patriotism right. Not that
there was ever a shortage of flag wavin’ in our spots – I am told that visitors
to this great land get the willies from our ads. But it took Chrysler’s new
Eyetalian management to craft a patriotic message that connects with the side
in all of us that hopes for a future in which not every single American must
take a job wearing a headset. And saying “How can I give you excellent
service?” while simultaneously training his replacement in Bangalore.

This wasn’t
just gratuitous flag waving. The ad screamed strength and power and democratic
ideals. And, yes, quality, from a mark that sorely needed to stand for
SOMETHING. The choice of Eminem was genius – a “brand” inexorably connected
with Detroit and a gritty, authentic appeal even broader than his MP3
penetration. Plus he’s cute.

Proof of the Win:

·
Tremendous increase in Chrysler 200 sales versus the Sebring it
replaced (Allpar)

·
Tens of millions of ad views on YT and other sites (YT)

·
4X increase in Chrysler Google searches (Google Trends)

WIN: Bud Light Dog Sitting

This slice
of family friendly physical comedy was the highest rated ad in the USA Today AD
Meter study (along with a Dorito’s ad,) and not without good reason. The beauty
of the Super Bowl is its mass appeal. And dogs playing poker is always good for
a yuk whether you’re 21 or 91. Just ask the people that sell velvet pictures!
No objectification of women, no insider cultural references. It’s dogs. Doing
funny things. All connected to the product.

When you do
dogs playing butlers, you aren’t gonna win a Cannes Lion. But you WILL sell a
lot of beer. Which is actually the point.

Proof of
the Win:

·
Highest rated by consumers (USA
Today)

·
Millions of online views (YT, Y! Video, Google
Video)

WIN: VW L’il Vader

No red car.
No talk of zero to sixty. Nor, I venture to say, is the woman a MILF, though
perhaps she’s a MYLF – to each their own. But I digress. We were talking about
which of the gimme car ad things aren’t in this baby. Oh, here’s a biggie. The
VO about “zero point nine percent financing” followed by the whisper “for
highly qualified buyers” – it’s decidedly MIA.

But what VW
understood is that emotional storytelling trumps “speeds and feeds” in 2012. That
the target would make a visceral connection with this evil l’il toddler. That
connection carried the brand into tens of millions of social discussions and consumer
decision sets. And hey, it’s fun, and exciting, and memorable — three equities
not then connected to the “people’s car.”

VW needed
to restore a place on our radar. A three year old did it for them.

Proof it’s a win:

·
Almost 10 million views and 49,000 likes BEFORE the Super Bowl, when
it was “leaked” by VW (SEW)

·
Winner of the coveted University of South Carolina “Cocky
Award”

·
Best Passat sales in six years in 2011 (VW
Vortex)

WIN: Snickers Logging

I have
adored this campaign since it relaunched Betty White’s career. But the
challenge of something so acutely funny as Betty playing football is how to
extend it. This great message combines the legendary whininess of Richard Lewis
with the crabby obnoxiousness of Roseanne Barr in a one two punch.

The product
message comes through loud and clear, and a big ole log hits Roseanne right in
the gut, which would seem to have both fantasy and real world appeal.

Proof it’s
a win:

·
Millions of online views (YT, Y! Video, and Google Video)

·
1.9 million references and features (Google)

·
Manual comment analysis reveals that consumer reaction is almost
always positive

WIN: Dorito’s Crash the Super Bowl

Dorito’s is
always ahead of the pack digitally, but especially in social. Their Super Bowl
strategy was and is to turn to budding videographers like you and me (and small
studios just getting their start) to capture the desire and crunch.

It’s a win
in several ways. First, the ads, such as the one above, are very good. Second,
their “Crash the Super Bowl” website showcases dozens of entries, which more or
less guarantees that millions of people will waste whole minutes watching when
they should be generating their weekly TPR reports. Third, the contest itself
creates tremendous buzz in social media among both lay people and the opinion
leading “creative class.” And that to no production costs and you got yourself
a fat end-of-year marketer bonus!

Proof it’s a win:

5,600
submissions and 28 Million YT page views (ThoughtPick)

Strong
traffic every year to the Crashthesuperbowl.com web site. (Quantcast)

Consistently
high rankings in the USA Today SuperBowl Ad Meter (USA Today)

WINS: PETA and Go Daddy

Tits are
not an idea. But each of these brands uses them to drive awareness year after
year. PETA never actually makes the “big game” because they produce ads
DESIGNED to be rejected by Network Clearance. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFlHDlYs4c4
is just an example. Because of its content, it can’t be embedded.

Go Daddy
put itself on the map with buxom models driving awareness for what is almost by
definition a commodity product. The problem with T ’n A as an awareness
building device is that it’s hard to keep busting through the clutter year
after year. How do you follow up DD-riven awareness burst? DDD? GGG? Surely
there is some
point at which larger ceases to be appealing to a general audience.

So whaddaya
do? Call Joan Rivers! Who was proud of her ad and said it had important
meaning: “The message for young girls is,
marry rich while you’ve got it. If you want to look like me, you want a shake
for breakfast, a shake for lunch and extensive surgery for dinner.”

Proof that it’s a win (PETA)

·
Doubled web traffic (Quantcast)

·
One million+ online mentions/discussions (Google)

Proof it’s a win (Go Daddy)

·
Huge popularity of tandem social media campaign in which Joan tweeted,
“Yes, yes, it is my body.”

·
Millions of social mentions on Twitter and Facebook, in addition to
hundreds of blog features

FAIL: Stella Artois: Underground Club

I like the
quirky campaign for Stella Artois and its depictions of idealized European
lifestyles. The stories are at once entertaining physical comedies and
carefully constructed tableau underscoring the irresistible appeal of the beer.
LOL. Tableau indeed.

Pretentious?
Moi?

Then we
come to this spot. It’s not a bad ad, but I question the placement. Perhaps
it’s because I love the brand and want to see it place ads before art house
movies, or at the very least dramas starring Angelina Jolie.

And I’ve
been in American marketing long enough to know that women in Packer’s sweatshirts
eating Rotelle Velveeta dip like their men smelling of Old Spice and Pert Plus,
not Galousies and Camembert Cheese. Super Bowl is the time to show ads starring
a shiny faced Brett Favre (making sure, of course, to omit any of those photos
of his winky.) It’s NOT the time for messaging starring a funky looking Adrien
Brody.

Signs it’s
a fail:

<20,000 YT views

Very low
level of US social buzz

FAIL:
Hyundai Elantra Kaleidoscope

Hey,
nothing I can say can detract from the tremendous success of this brand year
after year. Hyundai marketing clearly rocks. But this Elantra ad tries really hard
to be noteworthy, yet with limited success.

One of the
common denominators of successful Big Game ads is storytelling. There’s no
story here. Rather, Hyundai served up a visual feast that is interesting to
watch but doesn’t leave the viewer with “it.” It being the message. The
positioning is powerful as an idea, but this ad, and running it in the Super
Bowl, seem to be poor ways of communicating it.

And why are
women’s legs spinning at me?

Signs it’s
a fail:

<100K YT
views (YT, Y! Video, Google
Video)

Almost no
social media “buzz” (Technorati)

FAIL: Home Away Government Agency

The most
memorable bit in the ad is the (test) baby’s head being crushed against a Plexiglas
wall. Virtually all of the social discussion on this ad is about that instant
of film.

Based upon
my admittedly cursory examination of the comments, it appears that men – young
men in particular – found it hilarious. Older folks and especially women seem
generally horrified. This campaign was a lightning rod of emotion. Strong
visceral reactions are, of course, great for socializing a message. But what is
the brand benefit of this discussion? Do couples sit at kitchen tables browse
the web together and say, “Hey, Home Away! They are the ones that crushed a
baby’s skull against a wall! Let’s rent from them!”

Hey, maybe
they sold bazillions of rentals. I don’t actually know. The fail here is with
Network Standards and Practices. You approved an ad of a baby’s head being
crushed? I for one would rather see PETA’s women fellating broccoli than this.

Signs it’s a fail:

High number
of negative comments about the ad (various sources)

No link
between the discussion and the actual service (various sources)

Rush, 2112, and My Missed Interaction In Mobile (Mediapost 2.1.12)

Cory Treffiletti — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:00:02 +0000

Creativity and insights can emerge from the most unlikely of places.

Today is a unique date; it’s 2.1.12. The numbers 2.1.12 immediately bring to my mind one thing, and that is the much-heralded Rush album 2112. In 2112, a man discovers an ancient guitar, learns to play it, and his subsequent enthusiasm and excitement are crushed by the ruling classes of this dystopian future where technology is routinely abused to control the society and repress its inhabitants.

While I was thinking of this album, I was also at dinner with my family and in front of me was the familiar visage of a red Heinz ketchup bottle (you know – the new ones that are stored upside down so the ketchup comes out even faster). On the plastic bottle was a QR code, and one of the people I was with had not seen one of these before and wanted to know how they were used. Being a technology and marketing geek, I immediately extracted my iPhone from the pocket of my jacket and commenced taking a scan of the QR code to see what magical wealth of information it surfaced.

I held the phone still, waited patiently for the “click” of the scan, and the delivery of the content, however my pay-off was sub-par as it returned a message “Sorry, the sweepstakes ended 9/30/11”. To me, that wreaked of a missed opportunity and one that could have been avoided with some basic planning.

In that future world imagined by the members of Rush, technology was used for repressive purposes, whereas in our world it is used to provide more information and create more connections. The entire advent of social and mobile media are intended to create faster connections between people, as well as between people and brands. The use of the QR code exemplifies that connection, making it possible for brands to provide more detailed information, and an experience for their consumers that they could not have otherwise had. That being said, when you employ these tools you need to make sure you plan through the consumer interaction carefully and fulfill on the implied promise of that interaction.

Upon further review I noticed that the Heinz ketchup bottle said there was a contest and I could enter by scanning the QR code, which was obviously outdated. Either the restaurant was holding onto the ketchup too long, or the decision to run the content message on the packaging wasn’t thought out well enough. I checked the ketchup bottle, and the date was still far enough in the future, so I return to the missed opportunity for the mobile interaction. If you promise a contest, you need to fulfill upon the contest.

In a dystopian future, technology can be used to lead along the masses, and create a singular vision that allows for the government to mold and shape the minds of its inhabitants. Of course, a contest can be used in the same manner, but hopefully with more positive benefit!

Or it might be a stretch to try and unite the two into a common theme.

Either way, its fun to be inspired to think about a mundane occurrence (like a QR code) from a new perspective and that is what the Rush album had me doing. In the case of the Heinz QR code snafu, why not rotate in a new contest, with regular winners and more information to keep the QR code active and fresh? What about having the contest initially printed and placed as a sticker on the bottle, so it could be removed after expiration? More than 3 months after the contest had expired, do you think Heinz would have replaced the contest with something better than the “trivia game” content they placed there? There’s no pay off to the new trivia contest, and that left me kind of bummed. I took the time to interact with their bottle, and got nothing in return for it. Not even a coupon.

CPG companies tend to try things in the digital space, and only invest half way in them. If you are going to commit, you should commit fully to driving that engagement to ensure the return is a strong one.

All that being said, I got over being bummed about the lost interaction. I went home, kicked up my Spotify account and listened to 2112 for the first time in a long time.

Here’s to hoping that my next social/mobile interaction is a good one!

9 campaigns that won with humor

Catalyst S+F — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 04:37:09 +0000

Humor is one of the hardest things to do well in digital advertising. These nine efforts of 2011 succeeded in a whole range of ways. Take a few minutes and give them a look. It will be good for you to laugh. You see, laughing builds up endorphin levels that help us deal with the stressful situations in our hectic workdays. Better stock up now, you’re going to need them today. Because in 10 minutes, you’ll be getting a call about how all your click tags are redirecting to the wrong site. Just kidding.

Axe: Clean Your Balls

No brand stands more erect than Axe when it comes to consistently thrusting itself inside. Our popular culture, I mean. This is a brave brand — as brave as a Trojan — with a ménage à trois formula including pretty woman, double entendre, and impeccable comedic timing. Millions stalked this video on YouTube, Yahoo, AOL, and more. “Clean Your Balls” is just another notch on the headboard for this hot playa. But don’t expect this campaign concept to last long. Axe’s MO is to come and go, scoring new themes, formats, and executional styles while always leaving us wanting more. Let’s all hope this brand’s edgy character never gets put to bed.

Office Max with JibJab: Elf Yourself 2011

It’s simple, customizable, G-rated fun. Every year the action gets better and the tools even easier to use. The Elf Yourself concept is a new Christmas tradition everyone looks forward to. And it makes Office Max come to mind right when people begin to get their holiday shop on. My favorite part of this effort is…no edge or snark required. This is something everyone can enjoy.
(http://elfyourself.jibjab.com/)

TomTom: Bert and Ernie

Driving gadget sales with something other than tech talk — that’s the road TomTom took with this viral campaign. When you’re facing a traffic jam of devices and competitors, sometimes it makes sense to change lanes and leave all the performance factoids behind. The new Bert and Ernie voices for TomTom devices put a little fun in the shotgun seat — at a time when work commutes are getting longer, and people need a little chuckle. Say Chuck + Ull. Chuckle.

Audi: Slider

Every day, ads appear in new places. Airline trays. Urinal cakes. Golf balls. Golf cups. Just when you think there is nothing left to use for marketing, along comes a stroke of brilliance. Make the slider into a race car. Who could resist unlocking the Audi magazine delivered in tablet editions of leading magazines! OK, this is more fill-you-with-smiles versus yucks, but it’s just too brilliant not to highlight!

Lanvin: Dancing

The democratization of…well…everything, is perhaps the biggest trend of the last decade. It seems even to be affecting the couture fashion business, if this Lanvin video is any indication. The genius of it is that the clothes continue to be defined by a design elite, but the approachable execution makes the brand more contemporary and relevant. Sort of…exclusively inclusive. Either that or that last sentence was a complete pile of crap. Either way, it’s fun to watch models that lack rhythm.

The last Testament of God: The Tweet of God

Verily I say unto thee — scratch that. Verily He says unto thee. To support the release of the book “The Last Testament: A Memoir by God,” Yahweh and his able acolyte David Javerbaum provide bits of sage wisdom that are at once biblical and hilariously un-PC. Writing a very funny book is one thing, but offering up a stream of consistently funny tweets every day…for weeks…shows a tremendous commitment to Twitter and its power to drive buyers. It’s a darned popular Twitter account. Of course, the slogan “Follow God. Or be smited.” may have something to do with that.
(https://twitter.com/#!/TheTweetOfGod)

Jimmy Kimmel: Hottie Bodies Humpilates

Millions seek out Jimmy Kimmel’s promotional parodies the instant they hit the web. It’s a brilliant strategy, because it captures the essence of what makes the show different in a very crowded late night talk show market. And because celebrities need to be good sports to be on the show anyway, Jimmy makes the most of their good nature in these excellent uber viral promos.

Jameson’s: Jameson’s1790.com

This complex and engaging brand experience asks the user to identify the thief of a barrel of Jameson’s. What makes ‘er inneresting is that the thief is one of your friends, and the game asks you to determine which one by revealing clues based on their Facebook activity . These clues are seamlessly embedded in high quality videos starring eccentric Oirish folk. In addition to the concept and the watchability, the experience also incorporates great little dexterity games. When you identify the crook, the experience goes viral on your Facebook page and that of your criminal friend.
(http://www.jameson1790.com/)

Toddlers and Tiaras: Miss Ultimate Sexy Nevada

Reality TV’s biggest train wreck was beautifully spoofed in this parody featuring Tom Hanks and his daughter. Was it an official Toddlers marketing effort? Dunno. But clearly they garnered a lot of cooperation from the pageant circuit for this send up, and I am certain it got more than a million extra people to park their middle-aged rumps on the couch for the season premiere. There are so many superb lines in this masterpiece of tight writing, physical comedy, and spot-on timing. I think the best is when Tom tells his daughter “Don’t be a hooch.”

Do You Have Industry Déjà Vu? (Mediapost 1.18.12)

Cory Treffiletti — Sun, 22 Jan 2012 09:00:03 +0000

Do you have industry déjà vu? I do! Doesn’t it feel as though the primary issues of the day we face today are the same issues that we faced eight or ten years ago? Is this a sign of the cyclical nature of the business or have we literally stalled?

Ten years ago, or somewhere thereabouts, we were dealing with the business based on click-through, we were dealing with the beginning of attribution models, and we were dealing with the development of brand advertising online. We were faced with the questions of whether it’s best to be spending on content or via behavioral targeting. We were dealing with our position as a media vehicle and how we fit into the overall marketing mix. Over time one would think some of these questions have been addressed and that new questions would have risen to take their place, but it doesn’t feel as though it has!

In our defense, we’ve grown really fast and we’ve certainly accomplished a lot, but the business is still in need of some standards. The business is still too complicated to command a leadership position in the marketplace, at least when it comes to a comparison against television and other media. Its been stated time and time again, but its easier to spend $10MM on TV than it is to spend $2MM in digital. And the fact is I wrote that exact same sentence last year, five years ago and ten years ago as well. At some point we have to come to terms, make some decisions, and set the stage for growth and expansion.

If I can foresee a trend, it’s that the next year or two should be focused on the simplification of the models and the further commoditization of the business. I personally don’t see commoditization as a bad thing. I see it as a step towards maturity. I see commodization as a way for brands to spend more money, for agencies to become more efficient with their time and for publishers to generate higher margins. Of course the question remains, how do we do that?

The easiest way for this to happen is for everyone in the industry to come to a positive middle ground. I spent the first 15 years of my career building digital ad agencies, and the last 4 helping publishers and start-ups, and in almost every situation I hear that, “what you have is close to what we need, but we need a little more”. That “little more” is what keeps us from coming to resolution, and from my perspective that “little more” is not a necessity. It is a hindrance more than anything. Without that “little more” we could actually standardize and get a lot of things accomplished!

I was a culprit of this while on the agency side, so I admit to taking some of the blame. Much of the time my job was to take something that a publisher had and “make it more tailored to our needs”. Of course, “our needs” was attempting to generate differentiated positions between our agency and the competition, but looking back I think that differentiation should have been on the creativity of our brains rather than the minor differences in technology. Every agency has a trading desk. Every agency has a dynamic ad server. Every agency has similar tools, but every agency has different people and those people are the defining element, whether it be in media or creative. The people are what you can’t commoditize and their creativity is what will propel the business.

Knowing that people are the defining factor means the rest of the business can be standardized from a media perspective. Industry groups like the IAB and others could probably help here by setting the stage for standards in reporting and the ever-discussed “digital dashboard”. By helping brands and publishers come to a single agreement on what they should be looking at, how often, and where they should be looking at it, we could come to a standard on the media side of the business. With that standard would come commoditization and that could help us become more efficient with our time!

Sometimes déjà vu is a nice feeling. It provides comfort and it provides a sense of peace, but I don’t think that we as an industry are ready for comfort and peace. We are a business that is driven by entrepreneurs and evangelists and we love to push things forward, so maybe we can find some new things to push forward if we can wrap up the loose ends that we’ve overlooked?

What do you think?