Thanks Dr D!

Thanks to all the hard-working folk down at Dr D Studios (George Miller's animation company) in Sydney for listening to our presentation on monetising social media. It was a real pleasure to meet many of you afterwards and hear about the personal projects you're all working on beyond the realm of Happy Feet 2.

I was particularly excited to read a few emails afterwards stating you'd opened your own online stores!

Thanks again, and keep the virus spreading!

Social Media - The False Security Of Talking

We humans are a social creature. It is our ability to network, coordinate, and share our experiences that allows us to develop, progress and ultimately improve the ways in which we do things here on this lonely planet in the corner of the Milky Way.

The cultural embracing (read "devouring") of technology (especially mobile/internet technologies) over the last few decades has flashed a lot of binary chatter across our eyes in the form of blogs, podcasts, status updates and tweets. Indeed, I often find it hard to not receive an email or notification every five seconds about what someone I remotely know is doing or thinking or reading or listening to or...

You know the feeling.

We can only assume this increase in visible babble is gold to the inboxs of big business keen to hear how their brands are being perceived and discussed by consumers.

What's more, the immediacy of the internet and social networking suggests corporations and commercial entities can react faster than ever before in the history of advertising to customer reaction and suggestion.

Until recently, I took this as a simple logical truth. This is why I was surprised to read last month that a social media survey conducted on behalf of PRWeek and MS&L (interestingly for PRWeek and CA Walker) found that

"marketers don't make changes to their products based on customer feedback, despite monitoring feedback being one of the most common business uses of social media in the first place"

The survey continues to state that an amazing 70% of marketers don't make changes to a product or marketing effort based on feedback from consumers on social media sites. This shows a high level of skepticism in the corporate world towards the weight of review social media can provide. Whether this is the result of limited implementation/strategy timeframe, lack of experience with social media, professional hesitation, the global nature of social media (and the need to impliment a global campaign) or a fundamental conviction there is no ROI with social media is hard to say.

Let's take a look at why the 271 interviewed CMO's and MD's use social media:

• Managing and monitoring customer feedback
• Understanding the consumer and competitive landscape
• Reaching key influencers

"Customer feedback should be the front lines of product development," says Jim Tsokanos, MS&L’s president, North America. "Marketers need to act on information culled from social sites and are missing out on a key opportunity to improve and shape their products and programs based on what their consumers need and want."

Tsokanos also stated that "if brands do not have a social media presence, consumers will create one for them." I found this very interesting and possibly a professional reasoning as to why marketers might shy away from including social media budget in their campaigns. If the fans are going to do it anyways, with a "roots up" element to it that no amount of tricky flash or online giveaway can compete with, then why spend thousands on a social media element to a brand campaign?

Obviously there are incentives in consumer information and additional behavioural monitoring that can be analysed when your fanbase passed through your own servers, but can 39% of senior marketing executives saying none of their current marketing budget is dedicated to social media programs truly believe the wiki culture of the internet will do their job for them?

Hopefully they learn soon it's not about what people are saying about your brand, but rather are brands listening? That is the new competitive advantage.

Sneezing Panda & The Need For "Remark-ability"

Following up my last blog, an interesting quote from Paul Williams, founder of Idea Sandbox:

“The key of it is, people passing the word about you. …It just boils down to ‘what does it mean to be remarkable?’ So remarkable, that people remark.”

Depending on your mood when you read this, you will assume Paul Williams is either a genius or a retarded badger.

Sadly I think defining "remarkability" is an impossible task. Few concepts are more subjectively beholden to the individual than "does that impress me?" Look at "Sneezing Panda" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzRH3iTQPrk), which on a conscious level doesn't impress, inspire, or amuse me at all, but I've certainly watched it several times (including slow-motion)!

I can hear the usually-silent intellectual in me screaming "It's so stupid! A panda sneezes! It doesn't even get eaten or attacked by the other panda! In fact, the most action is a chewing motion! Don't watch it again! Please? Oh God, he's watching it again in slow-motion! Why is this popular!?"

As my intellectual mind slips back into dark silence I ponder the question - what does make this "remarkable"?

Personally I think I might have just accidently summed "remarkable" up. When we are entertained and we don't know why, we find ourselves in the realm of remarkability. Maybe we feel inspired to pass on these clips and content so others around us (namely those we trust and associate with - friends, family, co-workers) may define this x-factor we ourselves are unable to understand.

Perhaps the 53 million viewers of Sneezing Panda are all simply looking to each other to define why they were transfixed for that 10 seconds of their lives, and why, despite no logical reason to watch it again, we find ourselves compulsively pressing the replay button.

Perhaps viral media is actually a form of crowd-sourced psychiatry, where by sharing the videos we are instinctively opening a door of communication to discuss what it is about them that made us pass them on in the first place.

If that's the case, then that's fairly remarkable as a concept unto itself.

"Word of Mouth" or "Viral"? Inspirations from "Word Of Mouth Marketing" by Andy Sernovitz

Recently on a trip to Thailand I was fortunate to pick up a copy of Word Of Mouth Marketing by Andy Sernovitz.

Apart from the author's surname this book is easy reading for anyone interested in word of mouth marketing. Although not tailored to social and digital media, the fundamental ideas it presents are surprisingly applicable to the online world.

Without attempting to republish the book, I thought I would share some of the interesting (albeit often straightforward) concepts Sernovitz raises presented in the context of viral media.

One of the best points Sernovitz makes comes early in the book where he discusses how social networking sites are an extension of friendships, and are therefore guided and regulated by the same rules. Trust, respect and honesty are just as valid (if not more so) in digital relationships as they are in real life. He also addresses how YouTube, Metacafe and other video streaming sites are as much a conversation as they are a screen, and only videos with earned trust and respect are forwarded on or talked about.

This is an issue I've seen countless brands fall into the trap of. Without an understanding of the paradigm shift from an aging culture of viewing to a contemporary culture of searching, brands too often seem to assume "if we post it, they will come". This simply isn't the case, irrespective of how expensive the production budget was or how big the media buying budget is. It is the conversational side of these sites, the basic interaction of running commentary (although less glossy in execution and far more simplistic in presentation) that is their real heart and source of popularity. I feel this is too often overlooked or ignored in online media campaigns, and that by saying "it's on YouTube" media strategists feel (falsely) that the job is done.

Even worse, I've seen companies embark on a shilling campaign (shilling is the term used to describe a company posing as a customer) in a poorly cloaked attempt to incite sales of their product via the comments section of these sites. Such action shows a complete misunderstanding of the social system YouTube and the likes are build on, and this ignorance of culture can only have a negative effect on brand image to the savvy constituents of these online communities.

Sernovitz also outlines four rules for what makes something most likely to be passed on via word of mouth in broader marketing terms. I found this interesting to read as quantifying success for viral media is certainly a guessing game at best. What tips one video into the realm of "viral" whilst another remains behind is hardly a science, but I feel the author has done well to focus on a succinct and core set of rules for viral video that appears all-encompassing:

1. Be interesting - No one talks about anything boring so do something/anything special
2. Make people happy - viral media is rarely depressing. Thrill/excite your audience!
3. Earn trust and respect - Making people proud to be associated with your video is most of the battle.
4. Make it easy - People are lazy, so make passing the video on as simple as possible.

These four rules give a good structure for anyone thinking of implementing an online viral media campaign and set a framework that, although not ensuring success, certainly improves your chances.

Beyond the constitution of the content you create, Sernovitz analyses the mechanisms by which viral video can spread as far and wide as cyberly possible. Whilst again there is hardly any new reading here, Sernovitz does well to make his points clear and simple. Below I have amended what he coins "The Five T's" to an online media context.

Specifically:

1. TALKERS - Find people who will talk about you (your digital evangelists).
2. TOPICS - Give people a reason to talk. It starts with a message that can spread, no matter how stupid the message is (look at your inbox for proof).
3. TOOLS - Help spread the message on blogs, Twitter and email.
4. TAKE PART - Join the conversations on blogs/Twitter/Facebook. Reply to emails and participate in discussion boards.
5. TRACKING - Measure and understand what people say, and do it regularly!

As I said before, much of this is nothing new and disturbingly elementary, but I feel it important to share my belief that despite the changes in the technology and the ever-increasing connectivity of our societies, many of the fundamentals of our behaviour remain eerily familiar. Grasping the basics of the complex machine that is the internet is crucial to mastering its potential to reach new and expanding audiences.

PS: More information on Word of Mouth Marketing can be found at www.womma.org

Arrival

Here I am... My first blog into the interweb... May God have mercy on us all!