It’s very rare to find agreement on the Internet about anything. The web standard suggests that giving a person a public forum, plus giving them anonymity, equals a wicked web of arguments and vicious behavior.

Which is what makes today’s web blackout such a fascinating and shocking occurrence.

In response to the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA), two bills going through the House and Senate respectively, such prominent sites as Wikipedia, Reddit, Boing Boing and Wordpress have gone black, blocking web users from browsing their sites for a period of time ranging from 12 to 24 hours. Not only that, but Google has blacked out its logo and crafted a petition that encourages people to take a stand against these two bills.

But what are SOPA and PIPA? At the core of them, there is good intent. The idea is that web piracy engines – like torrent site “The Pirate Bay” – have taken the home of their business offshore, effectively insulating themselves from court orders that could put them out of business.

With that in mind, these two bills state that if your site contains anything that could be considered copyrighted material, it can be taken down with no warning. (For more on the bills, click here.) So the site can be removed from the Domain Name System (DNS, or the backbone of the entire Internet), and then removed from the indexing of search engines, ad providers and payment providers. A cascading effect is carried out that effectively removes every trace of your site from the Internet.

The problem lies in the fact that any site, at any given time, could contain copyrighted material, not just the “rogue sites” the bills target. Sites ranging from massive ones like Facebook or YouTube (the latter of which likely wouldn’t last a week in a post-SOPA world), to tiny web nooks like a family member’s blog or your best friend’s Tumblr page dedicated to the TV show Futurama could be affected, when the bills’ supposed intent is to only protect copyright owners from abuse. Nonprofit or low-budget sites might not have the resources to defend themselves against costly lawsuits. And larger companies could be forced to spend substantial time and money monitoring their sites for copyright infringement.

Many associate this with using a sledgehammer when a scalpel is necessary, as it treats a very specific problem with a very broad and general answer. It’s also what many experts consider censorship, and something that could very well “break” the Internet and send us “back to the dark ages.”

It’s yet to be seen how this will play out. While the vote for these bills isn’t until January 24, the White House sharing that it may veto them if passed. Interestingly, just today, the co-sponsors pulled their names from their bills.

There has never been a mobilization of the Internet quite like this before, making this a huge moment in its young history. Can it generate enough voice to wipe these bills out in much the way that the bills are designed to obliterate copyright infringing websites?  Time will tell.

Update: Thanks to the efforts of the millions of petitioners and the very prominent web sites that blacked their pages out on January 18, many previously pro-SOPA/PIPA politicians have withdrawn their support. Those changing their tune included prominent names like Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida (an original co-sponsor of PIPA) and Rep. Lee Terry of Nebraska (an original co-sponsor of SOPA), which strongly indicate a turning of the tide for those deeply concerned with what these bills represented.

As Rubio stated, “I have decided to withdraw my support for the Protect IP Act. Furthermore, I encourage Senator (Harry) Reid to abandon his plan to rush the bill to the floor. Instead, we should take more time to address the concerns raised by all sides, and come up with new legislation that addresses Internet piracy while protecting free and open access to the Internet.”

Interestingly, Rubio wrote that message on Facebook, a site that very easily could be negatively impacted by these bills.

These days, it seems the Internet knows what you want before you do. Facebook tells you who to be friends with, Twitter tells you who to follow, and Amazon tells you what to buy – all of which suggest that your online activities include a fair amount of predestination.

While many customers enjoy and even relish the fast and highly personalized offerings available from their favorite sites and brands, it has also triggered a development that JWT’s “10 Trends to Watch for 2012” calls “Reengineering Randomness.”

The randomness trend has some information-overloaded consumers hungry to go beyond the specified niches to which they’re pushed by their online tendencies. They’re looking for a little more surprise and coincidence in their lives – less predictability. After all, who doesn’t believe they are harder to define than what a few purchases online suggest?

No one would dream about taking away the ease and advantages offered with the personalization that today’s world offers all of us. However, brands can benefit if they consider how they can inject some surprise into the interaction. Witness the joy of those who had a unique experience thanks to the LivingSocial Taxi, or the meteoric rise of online’s Chat Roulette which pairs strangers from around for webcam-based conversations. These are just two examples of the power that true spontaneity continues to deliver.

People like to be reminded that they are individuals with minds, attitudes and opinions of their own. By delivering something unexpected and unique, your brand can break through the litany of other choices and stand apart through the simple recognition that “variety is (still) the spice of life.”

On any given night, millions of Americans can be found in front of a television – a favorite leisure activity for over 60 years. But these viewers are not all “blobs” on the couch; a recent study finds that nearly 80% of consumers are using their mobile phones while watching television¹. They’re texting, emailing, checking scores, calling and Facebooking. Brands have begun to notice and are now experimenting with a variety of ways to capitalize on this trend.

While many efforts to engage these “Mobile Multitaskers” are premature and fizzing out, several are rising to the top and have been quickly adopted by this 2-screen audience. Several examples follow:

- Twitter hashtags on shows are nearly expected by American audiences on hit shows such as #modernfamily, giving fans a platform to connect and participate in the show with other passionate viewers.

- Shazam links coupons to commercials for big brands such as Proctor & Gamble and Old Navy. When the app is launched during the commercial, users are provided with coupons and relevant deals activated by the audio track.

- - GetGlue rewards consumers with a digital badge for their media consumption and politely promotes shows to the digital community, with recommendations and even discounts from entertainment companies.

The bottom line is that brands need to adapt, think creatively for two simultaneous screens, and trust that mobile is becoming an increasingly strong strategy to compliment (not replace) traditional media and engage consumers.

What mobile executions have you seen linked to TV? What would you like to see?

1. http://razorfishoutlook.razorfish.com/articles/forgetmobile.aspx#01

Some days it’s hard to believe that there’s anyone or anything we can trust.

On top of a fragile economy and astounding divisiveness in government, media and elsewhere, scandal after scandal erodes our stability. Most top-of-mind recently, Penn State and Syracuse University child molestation allegations have further ripped the scab off public outrage, following a glut of other scandals… with the Catholic church, banks, politicians, on Wall Street, etc.

In an uncertain world such as ours, how can organizations like yours help consumers find the hope, personal stability and trust they desire?  

Be Transparent and Open

Consumers increasingly want to be part of the discussion with companies – and part of decision-making as well. It’s clear that information cover-ups (think Penn State) and “spin” receive far greater punishment from consumers than the original error. Include them, treat them with the fairness they expect and communicate with transparency.

Offer Self-Protection and Security

A world of uncertainty makes consumers long for stability and security. Everyone’s looking for a little control, protecting what’s “me and mine.” What can your organization to assist consumers in their quest to be smarter about risk, have greater privacy and protect their personal space?

Show Restraint & Common Sense

Build common sense into your process before something goes wrong: in customer service, product development, public relations and other protocols. To earn trust, you need to respond quickly to problems, empower employees to problem-solve, and offer the same attention and offers to loyal customers as those who are new.

Deliver on Your Promises Every Day

Don’t expect the long history of your company to keep it safe or safer when things go wrong. In our up-to-the-minute society, your brand is expected to deliver on its promises everyday, to be honest and to provide consumers assistance in navigating an uncertain future. Are you considering how you can build brand equity every single day?

Trust is hard to come by today but we all crave it. We want to believe in products, in people and in companies. Like never before, there is a wide swath of room for your brand to shine simply by doing the right thing (and letting others know about it, of course). Use the tips here to make a start.

Unless you’ve been living in a cave, you’ve heard of takethislollipop.com. This stalker-style video experience has taken the Internet by storm, ominously demonstrating how your “private” information may be accessed by people you don’t know thanks to your naivety. The takeaway of course is to encourage consumers to re-evaluate trust of social media platforms. Take This Lollipop may be the “It Girl” of the season, but plenty of brands have used interactive videos in efforts to create longer, deeper connections with consumers.

Intel for example, took a different approach when it celebrated consumers’ online activity with “Museum of Me.”  Intel aggregated the user’s Facebook activity and inserted top highlights into a custom exhibit that displays friends, latitude and longitude, and top status post words. In a sense, it brought sophisticated value and meaning to a consumer’s social media identity, often considered insignificant.  

But take a hint from interactive video champ Doritos. In 2008, this snack food giant created the spooky site Hotel626.com that brought back “two flavors from the dead”.  This terrifying experience united mobile, online video, and social media into a fully immersive experience without ever showing a Doritos bag.  This campaign was so successful, it’s still a main feature on Doritos’ website today.

While these are just a few examples of interactive video, many more exist that provide enormous opportunities for brands to build trust with consumers in new and engaging ways.  What are favorite executions that you’ve seen? What would you like to see from a brand?

In a New York Times Magazine piece called “The Surety of Fools,” Professor Daniel Kahneman[1], writes about the “illusion of validity” – an illusion that “remains compelling even when you know that what you see is false.” He refers, specifically to our desire, when facing a difficult question, to often answer an easier one instead without realizing it. And, to our tendency to have an “exaggerated expectation of consistency – to think that the world is more regular and predictable than it really is.”

Kahneman points to the poor results he and colleagues had with soldiers in an armed forces’ psychology branch in predicting their future performance in officer training and combat. After evaluating the soldiers’ behavior for one hour in an artificial situation involving a group problem-solving exercise, they issued confident declarations about their findings – only to find out later that their predictions of future behavior were little better than blind guesses.

Yikes. This got me thinking about the poor state of trust in business today, and the way we test messages and evaluate likely stakeholder behavior with products and brands. We use focus group research and other artificial situations, as the best information we can get for our time and money. Like Kahneman and his colleagues, we make up a story about consumer behavior based on what we know, but not allowing for what we don’t know about an individual or group’s future, which is “almost everything that would matter.”

Still, as a believer in research to try to understand some of the complexities of consumer dynamics, I defend it. It is, in fact, often the most efficient information gathering tools available to us. Still, we can ask: are advertising messages that build trust more art & science or a mere rolling of the dice? And as “experts” in consumer behavior and advertising, how can we effectively defend our qualifications – earning a client’s confidence that we’ll help build trust for their products and services?

Kahneman suggests two questions that determine trust in the intuitive judgment of “experts”:  First, is the environment in which the judgment is made sufficiently regular to enable predictions from the available evidence? True expertise is learned with time, experience and good feedback when mistakes are made. Second, does the “expert” have an adequate opportunity to learn the cues and the regularities? If you’re a client, you’d better be sharing information with your advertising partner: sales data, consumer research, trends and challenges, etc., as this information is critical if partners are to develop expertise you can count on.

If and only if your Agency experts can pass both of these tests, can you trust that they’re offering solid judgment with reasonable predictability. – predictability you need desperately in these times. Because with trust in business in such incredibly short supply today, you can use all of the help you can get to build lasting relationships with your stakeholders.

It’s not surprising that these divisive times have eroded trust – in business, government and in media. Globally, just over half of us now trust businesses and government. And trust in media has crept below 50%.¹

As business owners, we all consider trust important. After all, it increases retention, boosts spending, enables premium pricing and provides a lasting competitive advantage for your brand. But did you know that when trust is lacking, more people (57%) will believe negative information about a company after hearing it just once or twice. And just 15% will believe positive information when told the same number of times.

So, globally:

• The public is highly susceptible to bad news about organizations,
• putting the burden on them to communicate more,
• and in a greater number of channels.

Expensive. Especially if you’re not sure which messages are likely to build trust most effectively with your stakeholders. How does your company measure up with its stakeholders on the following trust dimensions?

• Reliability: You behave consistently and predictably in ways that meet expectations
• Integrity: Your organization is honest and forthcoming, will uphold its promises and commitments and will not act immorally or unfairly
• Transparency: You communicate openly so that interested stakeholders can evaluate the routines, processes, and decisions of your organization
• Competence: You perform in the manner that is expected or promised
• Benevolence: You care and will act in ways that are in your stakeholders’ best interests
• Brand Identification: You have a strong brand that offers value congruence, and the perception of a shared identity with key stakeholders

Each of these dimensions holds greater or lesser weight with your many audiences – from those internally to external individuals like legislatures and stockholders. When you align the right messages with the right stakeholders trust is yours, acting as a protective agent that earns real benefits to your organization.

The number one ad spender in the world, Proctor & Gamble, spent more money on advertising in their year ending June, 2010, than ever before: $9.3 billion.  As a share of sales,  that’s 11.3% — the highest ever for this massive company known for brands such as Old Spice, Tide and Crest.

And it’s 8% more than the year prior.  Companies like General Mills, Hershey and Kraft also increased ad spending this year, often raising prices on their products too. In this economy, with rising prices and all of the cheaper generic products available, brand marketers often sacrifice a little margin to maintain media spending, fearing sales decreases without it.

Again, because of the economy, it can be a great time for companies or organizations to purchase more media time, increasing share of voice. Many shoppers are playing tight with their wallets and looking for deals. That’s spurred P&G to spend more money on TV and online, but also to increase direct marketing, including coupons and point-of-purchase promotions. However, some companies, not seeing the lift they expected from coupon and promotion performance, are simply increasing effective brand advertising to get products into use (from pantry to table), along with product innovation.

Bottom line: it’s more important in this economy to be brave – with your advertising ideas, innovation and even ad spending than ever before. And creating engaging advertising that links the right memories to the right brand is not easy when audiences are distracted and time poor. More on how and why advertising works by clicking here.

That’s your smartphone talking. Nearly 50% of us are now advance users of the devices[1] yet people are craving a break. In fact, “de-teching” (the process of taking yourself offline), is a trend that’s making both news and interesting advertising.

A handful of companies are putting the idea of unplugging at the forefront, making it part of their brand strategy.

·   In its latest commercial, Nestea exaggerates the frantic, day-to-day life of a person of the 21st century. Distractions prevent the ad’s characters from focusing, so they invariably miss out on something. The tagline, “Welcome to this moment,” invites you to take a breath and “enjoy each moment like it deserves” – with Nestea.

·   Switzerland is working to brand itself as the country to go to disconnect. Using Facebook Connect, the Swiss campaign employs a funny duo of older villagers chatting on Facebook. When you connect to their ‘chat window’ using Facebook Connect, you find a conversation featuring you and your Facebook page, with witty comments about your status updates and photos. Ultimately, the message is that you are spending way too much time on Facebook and its time for you to head to the Swiss mountains. A promotional offer follows.

·   Finally, a commercial from Thai mobile company DTAC encourages users to “Disconnect to Connect.” The commercial features a series of people focused on their phones, oblivious of the people around them. When they put their phones down, a compelling life erupts around each of them starting with a young daughter drawing a picture for her daddy.

If you see yourself in any of these ads, you might think about what’s really important in your life. And Switzerland awaits.

Sources:
Nestea: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=qRty9GuQaUY

Switzerland:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJKp8bAfNUk
 

DTAC: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17ZrK2NryuQ&feature=player_embedded

Contrary to popular belief, Digital media is not necessarily the “cheap alternative” for marketers – in fact, it can cost even more time and money than some traditional advertising. The high-volume, low-dollar, high-complexity nature of Digital programs makes it the most labor-intensive medium in the advertising industry.[1]  According to the American Association for Advertising Agencies a few key primary drivers can contribute to higher costs:

1. Growth in labor intensity: with agencies providing continuous engagement throughout campaigns, labor time is extensive when compared to a few years ago when agencies produced a traditional advertising campaign and sent it out, waiting to the end (or middle) to evaluate and measure

2. Shift from external third-party production to in-house agency resources: to stay at the front of the curve and deliver a consistent level of quality, agencies have to continuously develop internal capabilities and devote time to training

So, while the exposure created by Digital media sources comes at a loftier price than may be expected, the results can make it entirely worthy. The upside is that Digital advertising can be both more targeted and more trackable, resulting in a higher known ROI. Advances in technology have created pretty remarkable outcomes for some brands. (Think: Old Spice “Smell like a man, man” campaign that had over 40 million views and saw a 107% sales increase.) Going Digital can help you expand brand awareness, increase sales, and create stronger consumer relationships.

But let’s remember, the increasing share of Digital should not be considered the end of traditional media. Few, if any of us, confine our media usage to any single device or format. Smart marketers recognize that multi-channel consumers require multi-channel marketing strategies encompassing both online and offline media. Digital is another platform to reach your audience —with all mediums considered in your strategic communications plan.

SOURCES:

Advertising Age: Out of Digital Chaos, a New Stability for Media /By/ Michael Zimbalist

AAAAs: A Marketer’s Guide to Understanding the Economics of Digital Compared to Traditional Advertising and Media Services by Joe Burton

Adweek

It’s your smartphone. For some it seems as essential to life as water to the body. But if you’re finding your uninterrupted time is nonexistent, blame this device and other technology. (Surely it’s not you who can put it down/away.)

Yet, according to a recent study conducted by The Futures Company¹, we don’t enjoy the constant disruptions these devices create. In fact, 53% of the people who maintain that technology is central to their life would like “time off” from their machines. And, strangely, youth – especially boys between the ages of 12-17 – are most irritated by mobile interruptions (53% vs. 38% for their parents). While teens remain the number one group for sending/receiving texts each month, 50% of them occasionally turn off their cell phone when they don’t have to.

And individuals are not the only ones with the yin yang response to digital devices. Businesses are feeling some pain, losing an average of $10,375 in productivity each year to chat, email, Facebook, Flickr and the like. A company with 1,000 employees can lose more than $10 million a year as a result of these distractions!²

So how can marketers help the distracted and those distressed at distractions? Be sensitive to the disruptive potential of your new mobile idea. Efficiency is key. Can your app serve dual purposes: help someone organize their life – and help you reach your bottom line?  What kinds of products or services can you develop that allow uninterrupted time?

Some great examples of apps that create efficiency for consumers are the Weight Watchers app, Amazon Price Check, and Nike Workouts. These apps provide a substantial benefit independent of the brand. The brand then takes its opportunity by being relevant to the person. Can you think of apps, products or services that create efficiencies or otherwise give consumers a break from distraction?

You introduced a brave new advertising slogan, logo (gasp!) or brand extension and, after the initial excitement and hoopla of the big announcement, were roundly beaten for it in the press and on social media. After all your careful preparation and hard work, every comment stings. You know it’s the right thing for your brand because you did your homework ahead of the launch, internally with staff and leadership, and externally with customers and other stakeholders.

So why the post-launch flogging? And what’s your next move?

First, high praise for doing the planning necessary to make change. Let’s assume you meticulously took steps likes these, below, to “ensure” the success of your launch:

·   You had clear objectives about the results you were after before making the change

·   You cast a wide net, involving the right people, building their trust and encouraging their ownership and advocacy

·   You told a compelling change story and over-communicated about the change – why it was necessary and how it would happen

·   You diplomatically honored the past and those who created the original work as you readied for change

·   You took feedback during the testing stage and adapted as necessary

·   You did a soft launch with employees, giving an “exclusive” to the best salespeople for your brand

·   You developed both an integration and a training program to smoothly merge the change into and throughout your organization, as well as those of vendors and other stakeholders

And still the resistance …, which you need to understand, is normal. It’s true. People have an innate resistance to change, sometimes finding themselves inexorably attached to things they never knew were important to them until those things changed. Sameness helps people feel in control of their lives and, when you change, you disturb their comfort zone. Consider also that we live in an age where everyone is an expert – commenting on Yelp!, TripAdvisor and hoards of other sites that encourage consumer ratings. As the late economist John Kenneth Galbraith once said: “Faced with the choice between changing one’s mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof.”

So, of course, you’re going to hear about your change. What to do:

·   Both monitor and participate in consumer-led media (social media, editorials, etc.) to keep communications in balance

·   Deal proactively with resistance and, if necessary, be timely with response (note the word “necessary”)

·   Measure results early and often – and share the news

·   Create wins – and celebrate them internally and publicly

·   Stay true to your integration plan – or evolve it – but keep it on track

·   Most of all, be patient. Change takes time. In 6 months or a year, you’ll wonder what the fuss was – and so will most of the people who created it.

I could be the last one in the building to see this but, recently, I noticed that our work is shifting in a new direction. In the last few months, we’ve been producing a ton of longer format, web-based videos. I mean a bunch. And no two are alike. Some are serious and speak to corporate culture or audience benefits. Some are lighter and a little unexpected — created for internal purposes and usually shown at company get-togethers (where beer may be involved).

Whatever the subject, each is tailored to a smaller, more specific audience. Clients seem to love them because they can be turned around in pretty short order, it makes their web presence more engaging, they offer another way to tell a story and, relatively speaking, they’re not too expensive.

We’re still doing lots of mass media television and radio. It remains the silver bullet for reaching masses of people and establishing a positive brand. But the constant evolution of web-based — more personalized video  — is altering my creative world. For years I’ve never had more than :30 or :60 to tell a story. Now I have two-five minutes. No fences.

I love where things are headed. I just may not be the first to notice change — even when it’s staring me in the face.

To check out some of our recent videos, click here. 

Is Facebook untouchable? Can a brand be so big, ubiquitous and embedded in our lives that significant ethical and PR blunders are, if not forgiven, quickly forgotten or swept aside as trivial?  Or is it simply no big deal that they admitted to using a PR firm to spread malicious information about Google's privacy practices? One thing is certain: if you're a social networking company with a history of privacy issues of your own, the last thing you ought to do is to scare consumers about sharing digital information.

No matter what you think about this story and its aftermath (there are three viewpoints below), the act and earlier moves and responses from Facebook make a strong statement about its true brand values. Should we be suprised they continue to live them?

"News, outrage":

http://technolog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/05/12/6630501-facebooks-google-smear-campaign-outed

"C'mon, it's done everyday":

http://blogs.forbes.com/marketshare/2011/05/19/in-defense-of-burson-marsteller-sort-of/

"Tempest in a teapot":

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2385423,00.asp

... the Goods Are Odd.  True about Alaska? Well, 2010 census demographic detail is yet to come but, in 2000, Alaska had just slightly more men than women (1.07:1). So why the ongoing stereotype about the state?

Consider that the 1980 census reported 113 men to every woman here and, had Alaska been included in the 1960 census (the state was only a year old), the discrepancy would certainly have been larger still.

And what of men in Alaska? Well, many (not all) fulfill the Alaska man stereotype - rugged, self-reliant, adventurous - toughened by a life spent outdoors. With spectacular opportunities for recreation, a sometimes-challenging climate and plethora of resource-based jobs (fishing,mining,oil), Alaska tends to raise and attract that sort of man.

So, I've been thinking about Alaska lately - still young and shaped by a unique type of man - and the lingering effect of that maleness just 50 years into statehood. And I understand a little bit more about why there seem to be a predominance of women in advertising here.  Most men come to Alaska for the types of jobs for which the state is known.

And, it's oh so clear too why we're no shopping mecca. The linear man, is not shopping socially and does not enjoy "the hunt" like a woman might. So while Alaska retail shopping is changing quickly (in our favor, women), the state still has more than its fair share of "outfitter" stores, sporting goods stores, Army/Navy stores and the like.

Finally, from a marketing standpoint, it's critical to understand that people are different here ... demographically ... attitudinally ... they can be a little elusive.  It takes special expertise to navigate this unique landscape, and it's always an interesting journey.