oh, to be plaid

There is a small agency in Danbury, Connecticut called Plaid that punches above its weight (especially if you consider that the combined weight of all – approximately – twenty employees is probably less than Mike Tyson before he got bloated, tattooed and crazy).

That small Connecticut agency really gets social media.

And yes, they get it beyond the Brand Flakes for Breakfast blog that just might be the best agency-run blog out there.

If I weren’t so lazy a blogger I would have gotten out ahead of their Plaid Nation tour, “a rolling celebration of creativity and a demonstration of social media in action” that is really a van full of Plaid employees taking to the street to make their pitch.

If you’re a small agency, you have to think differently.

This year the tour hit the California coast (with the obligatory stop in Las Vegas that may or may not have taken the live webcams down) from Oceanside up to Frisco with the whole tour broadcast live, twittered and otherwise leveraged by emerging media.

How’s that for a way to show that you get it?

The functional and attractive website lets you follow their progress, download freebies and listen to their theme song (why a theme song, you may ask? no clue…). It’s also a great way to sell the agency and their capabilities.

But will potential clients notice?

more video uploading madness

I have a friend who works at a company that is selling “user generated content solutions” which actually means that they have back-end technology for executing user-generated marketing programs be they contests or showcases or stuff like that. It was a great idea a while back and is probably still a money-spinner, at least for my friend and her company.

After stumbling upon yet another piece of consumer-generated video contest madness at Adrants today, this one by ForRent.com giving people a chance to win a $10,000 furniture makeover if they create a video that says why “through the eyes of their furniture” I had finally had enough.

I had to ask her how she could justify being an enabler for such feeble and thoughtless marketing.

UGC Gal: I am glad you called! You were ahead of the curve in ’06, now we have almost too much business. Perhaps I could show your team some of the new things we are doing.

Me: I think that user-generated as a marketing tactic is pretty played out. If I were you I would stick with it while the going is good while keeping my resume up to date.

UGC Gal: Is it a fad or an evolving space?

Me: User-generated contests are a fad. There is a significant first-mover advantage in the interactive space because so many tactics are new. UGC was new. Now the novelty was worn off and with it the marketing advantage and consumer interest.

How many brands have to hold contests or give consumers a chance to upload before they realize that not only is it not differentiating but that no consumers care (either to make the effort to upload or to go to a branded site to view amateur crap)?

Also, “evolving space” is a meaningless buzzword. Please don’t use it anymore.

UGC Gal: Contests are a fad, but community could be what this is
all about.

Me: Community of what? What would be the reason for a consumer to engage with a brand or with a group of fellow brand users online, especially if the requirement was for them to create something and then share it with others. What is in it for them as creators and viewers and community? Why is this something anyone would want to do?

UGC Gal: Look at it socially. People want to connect with like-minded people. UGC is about passion and intrinsic motivation; people want to grow the community of what they like or are committed to.

Me: First, most brands do not have any passionate enthusiasts. Second, even if I were, say, a passionate Duracell battery user, why would I want to join a community of other Duracell battery users? What could that community possibly do to make it worthwhile for me to create content for it and view content on it?

Even with a passion brand like Apple, what is in it for the consumer? Unless there is something in these videos or pictures that consumers create that shows me how to fix my Apple TV, someone like me, a passionate and long-term Apple user would have no use for it. Why would someone else?

And why is this good for a brand, especially is everyone else is doing it?

UGC Gal: The space is morphing into a utility-based marketing vehicle.

Me: But what is the utility?

UGC Gal: Utility is the combination of brand generated content and UGC. That is where we are headed. Content management.

This more than just creators of UGC content. Its about spectators and critics that also want to be involved.

Me: That seems like an awful broad definition of UGC, but even if we take it at face value what about the plethora of brands that people just don’t care about? What about the brands that don’t have spectators and critics that want to be involved?

UGC Gal: A brand manager is charged with speaking to and listening to its customers. Video content is and will be a more important vehicle. But video is just one part if it. It’s interaction that is the key, and how do you facilitate that interaction and how do you make it positive for the brand when blogs and comments aren’t controllable and agencies and other fronts just enrage consumers. We see ourselves as broader than just video contests.

Me: What does it really mean when you say “facilitate brand interaction” because it sounds an awful lot like an empty business phrase.

UGC Gal: Brand control. Brand authenticity. Review and approve. That is what our company stands for.

Me: So you create a place for people to connect and be honest about the brand…but then you control it for content. Why wouldn’t a consumer just go to their own blog? Why wouldn’t they read an independent blog?

How do you manage what is, by nature, an uncontrollable space?

UGC Gal: By creating brand-built and managed sites for consumers to give an honest dialogue to a brand where the brand can put their best foot forward.

Me: How is it honest dialogue if brands control it? And again, why? Why would a consumer want to do this?

UGC Gal: Research shows that they do.

Me: Common-sense shows that they don’t.

UGC is so dead that those stuck schlocking their wares in that arena are forced to try to broaden the definition to cover anything that a consumer says about the product…and to monetize it they have to tie it to a brand. But the key lesson that has to be learned is that, with the unlimited non-branded sites and contents, you have to have a compelling reason to go to something branded.

“Sharing” and “uploading” just aren’t compelling on their own.

colle + mcvoy’s virtual spray paint

Minneapolis agency Colle + McVoy, who seem to have a perfect combination of great work and really fun clients, has launched a new website for the hip-hop group Atmosphere that lets you tag other websites while listening to tracks from the group’s new album. No site is safe, not even mine:

There is a lot that is going on as far as marketing for the music industry is concerned, with Radiohead and their unique, for lack of a better work, online pricing top of the list.

Of course, that sort of strategy isn’t for everyone…but no matter the act, people want to interact and spend time with a musical group that they like. Or at least interact and spend time with content from that musical group online. They want to be “involved” and have a much higher tolerance for fun/pointless utilities and be asked to do things than they would at a brand site. Because brands are boring. Something like this would not work for a brand.

It does work, however, for a band. Or group. Or whatever. Good on Colle + McVoy for understanding that there are certain sites that people look for more stuff on, sites like those for their favorite musicians, and building something to suit.

viral marketing, a definition

Viral Marketing: A once revolutionary, now overused, technique based on consumers spreading information about a product among themselves, to which consumers are now so hip that the mere mention of it induces eye rolls, as it if weren’t enough that most companies using viral marketing campaigns now are flogging products no one wants to tell their friends about.

From The Dictionary of Corporate Bullshit.

spreading std’s on facebook

An astute (and hopefully not afflicted) reader tells me that April is STD Awareness Month and the American Social Health Association is using the MorphMonkey Facebook application to raise awareness of that fact.

As a rule, I am careful how I use Facebook and its applications. Going overboard could get a little weird and I do have an addictive personality, so…you know. At any rate, the Morph Monkey application lets you morph people’s pictures together on Facebook.

It also can infect you with Chlamydia:

This is definitely worth a chuckle and gets its message of easy infection and easier spreading of STDs in a wink and a smile sort of way. It may not change behavior, but it did made me cognizant of chlamydia for the first time since 8th grade health class and anyway it seems like awareness-building was the objective.

The key here though is that this message was tacked onto an application that people enjoy using, so there was a reason for them to engage with it, and was not overly intrusive. Just a simple message, albeit in a pop-up style form, and that was it.

Well done.

dr pepper marketing video wins at youtube awards

Since its launch, the viral Cherry Chocolate Rain video for Diet Dr Pepper by Tay Zonday has been lauded, not least by me…but more impressively in the second annual YouTube Video Awards.

Though an ebullient Zonday went a little far when he described the award show as “the new Emmys…the next Oscars…the next People’s Choice Awards” when it clearly is more a low-budget American Idol, it’s an understandable overstatement. After all, he had just won.

And he had won, in a very post-modern way, for a spoof of his own video:

This video saw him to victory over such other viral video hits as I Got A Crush On Obama and Chris Crocker’s tears of pain over Britney Spears…not quite Oscar-level competition, but enough to give him his fifteen minutes and to give Dr Pepper a huge marketing victory on the back of a viral video that is rumored to have cost around $200,000 all told.

One wonders how much their ridiculous Pauly Shore stunt cost. I guess you win some and you lose some.

Cherry Chocolate Rain was a winner all around.

more thoughts on tassimo’s webisodes

After posting yesterday on the webisode campaign for Tassimo by Ogilvy & Mather, I ambled over to Adrants and read Steve Hall’s take on the campaign:

It’s not funny. But Who Hired Bob does two interesting things:

1) It offers a $20 rebate on a TASSIMO hot beverage machine in exchange for your email address, and
2) It does that “choose your own adventure” thing at the end of each webisode, which we’ve already professed to like a lot.

I agree with Adrants that the webisodes aren’t funny, and that both of the points that he brings up are interesting.

The high-value coupon offer for a simple e-mail address not only helps to populate a consumer database that, if utilized properly, could be a first step to a continuity program and actual consumer conversation. Also, coupons of that sort of value have drawing power (and extendability to packaging and in-store, which could be used to drive people online). Not to mention that consumers who download a coupon have a higher propensity to actually buy the product, which is nice.

The “choose your own adventure” aspect is also a nice touch in that it adds some interest to otherwise dry webisodes. Anything that gives consumers the opportunity to engage is interesting.

Despite both points of interest, this program still falls flat because of the lack of awareness-driving tactics that tell consumers that this content exists online and gives them a reason to view it. As commenter Toad says, the idea that consumers will just be flipping around the internet and find the content just isn’t realistic.

Commenter mpaige hits the nail on the head by saying that “the content needs to be produced and THEN (ironically) you need run TV ads to get the word out about it the show…TV commercials are still a critically important way to reach people.” They, and other awareness tactics are critical when you want people to find your brand in the vast information dump that is the internet. They need to know it is there, need a reason to go, and need clear direction how to get there.

Also, it helps if the content that awaits is engaging and relevant.

The primary issue right now, though, is that it is content just floating in the internet space with nothing to drive consumers to find it. And they won’t find it on their own.

if you (just) post it, they will (not) come

During my morning perusal of AdPulp, I came across the news of Ogilvy’s new advertising pitch for Tassimo coffee makers…which is going to consist of webisodes and a consumer-generated contest:

“Creating original, entertaining content gives Tassimo both cultural currency and permission for further conversations with consumers,” said Joseph Frydl, director of Ogilvy’s branded content and entertainment group. “Purely interruptive marketing simply cannot accomplish that.”

Beyond the fact that these webisodes, which has acting and production values that make it look like something that ran on my high school’s internal television channel, just aren’t original or entertaining, the idea that some webisodes, a website and a promotional overlay will start conversations with consumers is simply wishful thinking of the sort that somehow seems to convince clients, but reasonable people know are just empty words.

Even if we assume that the creative execution and promotion are relevant and compelling to the target, how, exactly, is said target supposed to hear about all of this online content? “If you post it (on YouTube), they will come” just doesn’t hold water, as the 49 total views that the video has gotten in its five days of being posted on YouTube show.

That “interruptive marketing” that gets derided in the press release is critical to telling consumers why they should go online and search out a specific piece of content. There is so much content online, and there are now so many brands who are doing the “webisodes and consumer generated contest,” that consumers need a compelling reason to get involved.

Tassimo not only hasn’t give them a reason, it doesn’t seem like they even think that building awareness is even worth their time. That is a bad move.

And this is a bad, unoriginal and poorly-produced idea.

ferrell’s campaign for real beauty

Will Ferrell, who is starring in the upcoming movie Semi-Pro, is featured as part of a viral campaign to support the movie…the campaign is direct mail-ish and features Ferrell in what can only be the next iteration of the Campaign for Real Beauty:

The cover of the card says “Let’s get sweaty.”

pauly shore: appearing in a dr pepper promo this month

Just yesterday AdPulp had the story about Roy Sutherland of Ogilvy touting promotions. Sutherland proposes that sales promotion be put at the heart of the ad agency because “brand building ideas are not the same as behavior changing ideas.”

Allow the critic to interject that though he is correct that they are two different things, and that’s why companies usually retain an ad agency and a promotions agency. You know, so both agencies can bring their expertise to bear when appropriate based on brand and business objectives.

Sutherland goes on to suggest that good sales promotion agencies “make people buy and hopefully they’ll love you” rather than “make people love you and hopefully they’ll buy”.

I completely agree with Sutherland on what good promotion agencies do. Not exactly a convincing argument for why an agency like Ogilvy should move towards promotions (though maybe they’re just throwing in the towel on this advertising thing…it really hasn’t gone well for them lately). It’s more an argument about why promotions are an important part of the marketing mix and why promotions agencies, who usually get disrespect from the ad guys, really don’t deserve it. Because they do good work.

Sometimes.

Other times, like when you read a story about how Dr Pepper is using Pauly Shore and Las Vegas weddings to promote its new Diet Cherry Chocolate Dr Pepper, you remember why you reflexively look down on promotions as un-strategic, un-creative and frivolous.

An agency is not at fault on this one however…based on the press release, it looks like the Dr Pepper marketing department laid this egg, which just goes to show you that though a marketing department can occasionally come up with a good idea (the Cherry Chocolate Rain viral video), they really shouldn’t be trusted with creative thinking more than sporadically.

To “convey the luxurious indulgence of Diet Cherry Chocolate Dr Pepper” the good folks at Dr Pepper marketing decided that “nothing says luxury like a Las Vegas wedding on Valentine’s Day – with comedian Pauly Shore on the guest list.”

I am currently doing all that I can to resist an urge to tie their idea of luxury (Valentine’s Day wedding in Vegas hosted by a brand, Pauly Shore within 1,000 miles of the venue) with their location in Texas. That would be a crude stereotype about Texans and their taste and aesthetics. Perhaps it would impugne on their class as well. Biz, don’t do it. Resist! Resist!

Seriously though, who thinks that this is luxury? Who thinks that this is a good idea?

Besides Dr. Pepper marketing, of course.

Las Vegas weddings, especially those broadcast live online by Yahoo and Dr Pepper, are trashy. They are one of the many things that Britney Spears does while drunk. Let’s break this down SAT-style: Vegas weddings are to luxury like Bob Garfield is to reasoned discourse.

Oh, didn’t I mention that these totally luxurious weddings are going to be broadcast live on Yahoo?

What an oversight! They are. And it only adds to the totally awesome luxury of the event.

If you head on over to the promotional website you will see copy (clearly written by an over-40 marketing-department lifer with an MBA but no discernable copywriting ability) that tells you to “get here, get hitched and get funky”…and all you have to do to “get funky” is to sign up for a ceremony in one of three chapels that will be set up for the event at the Hard Rock Cafe.

I know, I know – the fucking Hard Rock Cafe?

This couldn’t get more 1991 unless Pauly Shore was involved. Eh? He is? Oh.

To bring this idea back into this decade, Yahoo, who is partnering on this program, is going to bring whiz-bang technical add-ons like Flickr photo sharing, customizable e-cards to propose (this idea is so ridiculous that I just punched myself because someone needed to be hit for it) and content from its other content channels so there is something actually happening at the website while it is up.

To conclude, this idea is completely ridiculous.

The brand goal is to position the soda as luxurious indulgence. Sorry, but Pauly Shore and Vegas weddings just don’t get you there. You would be better off with someone like Diddy or Jay-Z. At least when I hear their name I don’t check IMDB to make sure that they are still alive.

The business goal, as spelled out in the write-up in Promo, is to drive trial. How, exactly, is a online broadcast of Valentine’s Day weddings supposed to drive trial? Will Pauly Shore’s electric personality and huge following make it happen? Maybe Flickr will get “cans in hands” but I doubt it. Maybe the teams who will “be roving Vegas to encourage people to tie the knot (hey, good idea, encourage people to have a shotgun wedding in Vegas…so much for corporate responsibility)” will drive trial. But I doubt it unless they are, at the same time, actually giving out samples.

This program doesn’t hit the brand objective. It doesn’t hit the business objective. It has Pauly Shore prominently involved. Same with Vegas weddings. The promotion actually encourages people to get married at a Hard Rock Cafe and broadcast it live on Yahoo.

There is so much wrong with it that I can’t even be snarky about it…words do not have the descriptive power to convey just how awful this idea is. I feel like beating someone to death with a Dr. Pepper can.

This is why I hate marketing, marketing people and myself for being tainted by being in the same industry. I am going to go have a hot bath and scour myself with soap in the hope that I can clean off the slime that has oozed out of this idea and somehow gotten on me. Then I am going to shave my head and become a Buddhist monk so I can pray, fast and otherwise sacrifice to make up for my sin of being in an industry that does things like this.

Think I am being hyperbolic? Re-read the idea. I might be under-exaggerating its awfulness.