A recent survey of senior marketing executives by Forbes Insights and MarketShare Partners said nearly seven in ten used analytics to measure the effectiveness behind their campaign efforts.
Marketers with large budgets seemed to be significantly more likely to measure their efforts, as compared to those spending less than a million; however many planned to adopt analytics at some point in the future.
This study is interesting, however it does leave the door open for some skepticism. It’s fair to say that if I have a $1 million + budget invested in a marketing program, I am surely going to want to understand the results of my investment. But then again, if I only have a small amount of budget to invest, (and I am not saying under a $1 million dollars is at any time small), I would certainly think a company would want to have proper measurement tools in place to ensure the campaign is drawing proper exposure for the brand and meeting any set KPIs. Naturally, when your budget is even smaller, chances are you are going to become more intensely immersed in your campaign - expecting great results.
The report also focused on how measurement is approached, internal vs. external parties taking on the responsibility. A high percentage of these marketers surveyed said they relied on internal parties to take on the measurement responsibilities. I understand this from a budget perspective, but I also question the authenticity of a campaign when internal teams are relied on, as sometimes numbers can be skewed, favoritism might play a role, and lack of objective expertise might factor in the final results. Bringing in a 3rd party to enforce your campaign’s results could offer stronger, and more exact results based on the type of system used, and of course, a bit more objectivity.
In the end, the study said more executives were happier with internal measurement programs than with external entities. However, they also claimed that most of them did not have a sufficient way to share campaign results with their fellow executives because a lack of process, continuity, and orderly way to present information.
All the more reason to consider a more processed and organized system that will measure your campaign results, and ensure that you are tracking EVERYTHING within your campaign. And these are more likely to be found within a 3rd party setting.
In a just-released Forrester research report, it said that most marketers should refrain from location-based services, citing that just a mere 4% of the US online adults have ever checked in on the “location game.” And only 1% update these services more than once a week.
The study revealed some interesting statistics, as it looked at a large number of location-based sites, including popular players such as Foursquare, Gowalla, MyTown and Loopt. And to add to the study, a whopping 84% of respondents said they had no idea or were not even familiar enough with such types of apps. This study comes at an interesting time, since 2010 was marked the year of location-based services, igniting fires under social media marketers - all trying to integrate location-based strategies into their marketing programs.
And to add to the bottleneck, the report said almost 80% of location-based service users are male, with close to 70% of them between the ages of 19 and 35, and 70% have college degrees or higher. Forrester also discovered that 38% were more likely to say friends and family ask their opinions before a purchase, in addition, this crowd was very open to mobile coupons and offers as well. This vertical is also more resourceful with research prior to a purchase where nearly 20% are more likely to consult their phones before buying to conduct more research and read customer reviews.
Location-Based Reality Stinks?
This certainly brings most marketers back to reality before jumping on the location game bandwagon.
Although this data cuts down a very small segment to target, it’s still very approachable when you consider products that live in the gaming, consumer electronics, and sportswear verticals. These are the verticals that lead the way with testing these applications, according to Forrester. However, the location space is full of brands that are already proving they are not just for the male audience. Big players such as Starbucks, Oil of Olay, Bravo, Gossip Girl, Campbell’s Soup, Louis Vuitton, Bon Appétit, Lucky Magazine, TLC, and PepsiCo are all currently experimenting with location-based services.
But as in any new technology, there is always the question of adoption rate, and to be honestly blunt, these networks are very much in their infant stages. Foursquare has just over 2 million users; Loopt has 4 million, and MyTown with 2.5 million - barely a drop in the bucket from a marketing standpoint.
And the next question is scale, when this will happen? As of now, the digital social network rulers such as Facebook, Google and Twitter are not fully involved in the location game. When their entrance takes place, this will help set the market more efficiently, creating a much higher adoption rate. And a drastic shift in competition for the current market.
Thoughts…
As Forrester always does well, and does often - it reports the facts. I don’t think marketers should completely avoid location-based service programs, nor is Forrester saying that. They are however saying that you should tread lightly and not expect any massive returns as you start to experiment in this sort of advertising.
However, the market always moves quickly, as we all have become aware of over the past several years in social media’s popularity. If digital adoption rates stick, I’d say we would be in a good place to give this just a bit more of time before more users begin amass on each of these networks.
Depending on your specialty, I’d say it’s reckless to not at least consider location-based services when considering new social media programs. Your brand’s demographic might not fall directly into what Forrester reports, however, you should consider the question of “When?” At exactly what point will the ‘branded’ location-based network space take off in popularity? When will they eventually act like your Facebook branded community does now?
I think the real question is: Do you want to get involved now, or several months or years from now when every brand on the planet is doing it?
These types of applications will grow; they will be built beyond a cliché, cornball badge to tell your friends on Facebook or Twitter about. Monetary, if not branded products will soon replace these and be offered in place of a ‘real’ incentive for checking-in. We already have started to see this in mobile coupon deals that Starbucks offers.
These incentives will get better and will have a stronger support system as the adoption rate increases.
We’ve just started in this game kids…just give it time.
Every four years, a spectacle across the world takes place that rivals no other event, the World Cup. And with the event set to kick-off June 10, digital enthusiasts expect it to ignite digital interactions online. During the last World Cup in 2006, social media was not as impactful as it is today. YouTube, then independently owned, garnered just about 100 million video views per month, compared to the more than 6 billion it nabbed in the beginning of 2010. Facebook was a college and high school only network for college students, and Twitter was a star in @bizstone’s eye. As for video streaming, the World Cup did not live stream games on the Internet, so if any, streaming was barely existent except for maybe pirated networks.
Fast-forward four years later, Facebook has more than 450+ million users worldwide, and Twitter broadcasts more than 50 million tweets a day. This year’s World Cup is expected to see unprecedented amount of traffic via social networks and other digital activity, and is should create a landmark moment in our short digital history.
Live Streaming the World Cup
First, let’s start with the live streams. In the US, ESPN/ABC and Univision have all the rights to the broadcast in English and Spanish, and those will also extend to the web, where ESPN3 (formerly ESPN360.com), owned by Disney will be streaming all the matches live. All streams will be carried for free with an ad-supported model involved.
And even though football is not an American-friendly sport (known as soccer in the US), you can expect the streaming audience in the US to be huge. Of the total 32 teams involved in this year’s tournament, 11 have US-based populations of more than 1 million, according the Census Bureau surveys. This is something to surely ignite several major US expatriates that will be looking to power behind their team, whether it’s via television or digital media.
Outside of the US, the potential for streaming video is impressive. A recent study from Universal McCann, shows Internet users in select countries who watch video online from 2006 – 2009, and the numbers are considerably higher in terms of percent viewed. Brazil, China, Spain, South Korea, and Australia all spout impressive online video watching percentages and surely will translate come this year’s World Cup. However, let’s make this one point clear, outside of the US, it is almost always acceptable to stop everything, even work to watch World Cup games on TV; school, work, it all stops for the World Cup.
In Argentina for example, the minister of education grants his country’s schools permission to broadcast World Cup games inside the classroom. His reasoning you ask? He said the games hold a ‘pedagogic’ value, and also said that his students would most likely skip school to watch the games in any manner, so what better than to just allow the students to watch the games in the classroom anyways. Read the rest of this entry »
Guess who just had a birthday - YouTube! The video channel that has established itself as the ’standard’ when it comes to watching videos online, announced there 5th birthday, and that the platform has exceeded 2 billion video views per day.
As part of its 5th Anniversary, YouTube is launching the YouTube 5 Year Channel to help celebrate its story and retell the history of YouTube and how it first began. This is all part of a larger campaign just launched, “My YouTube Story” , where users can submit their YouTube story and explain how its community has impacted their lives. Documentary filmmaker, Stephen Higgins, has been assigned the task to help pull all these moments together on the channel.
It’s quite amazing what YouTube has become. In just five years time, it has more than 2 billion video views per day, nearly 1/3 the world’s population. In addition, there is more than 24 hours of video uploaded every minute to the site, every day! Also on the YouTube 5 Year Channel, you can see an interactive timeline of the key moments in YouTube’s growth - starting at the beginning, back in 2005.
What do you think of the new achievement, has YouTube made an impact on your life?
Internet video has changed the way we consume online media, with video watching have evolved in just 5 years with YouTube, we are still going through the juvenile moments, and most marketers are still trying to grasp how to properly use video in their marketing channels.
Justin Foster, Founder and President of the Video Commerce Consortium, and
Co-Founder and VP Market Development at Liveclicker, said “any retailer that is unable to, on a product level, drive conversion rates up at least 25% through the use of video, is not implementing video effectively.”
Recently, eMarketer.com released a study that estimated 66.7% of US Internet users—147.5 million people—are watching video online each month. By 2014, that figure is forecast to rise to 77% of Internet users, or 193.1 million people. In the same period, online video advertising spending will surge from $1.4 billion to $5.2 billion.
Surely there will be quite a bit of experimentation in 2010 with online video, but if you are not currently using video in your marketing programs - there could be a wide loophole you are currently ignoring.
Foursquare – you’ve heard of it, probably even might be a member yourself. The quick-growing location-based social network is beginning to make reputable noise in the social space, and since August, traffic and user growth has soared for the new social noise maker.
According to co-founder Dennis Crowley, the platform is closing in on 500,000 individual users, with about 70% of the user base in the United States, and their international arm growing quickly – especially Tokyo, according to Crowley in an e-mail interview. These users are also checking in at an astonishing rate of 1.5 million check-ins a week.
If you are not familiar with Foursquare, the concept is simple – you sign up for an account and then you began the process of checking-in wherever you go; the majority of check-ins that are being done are through GPS-enabled mobile devices.
This social city-guide and game rewards you then for doing interesting things. The motive is to encourage people to discover new places and challenge you to explore your neighborhood in new ways. The rewards attached to this are tied to pseudo ‘badges’ a user is given for unlocking new places, times you check-in, how often, ultimately working your way to become the “Mayor” or “Deputy” of that locale.
In addition, the platform makes it very easy to connect your updates to your Twitter and Facebook profiles – seemingly synching your entire network with each update you post on Foursquare. Something that was not in place last year when Foursquare introduced themselves at the SXSW, but is working it’s way into a much more seamless process in 2010 and allows for a much higher engagement and viral distribution.
The concept is quite ingenious and despite it’s evolving stature; it is beginning to make quite the name for itself. Just in the past month, it’s been reported that Foursquare inked several major media partnership deals, including Bravo TV, Zagat, Warner Bros., HBO, the History Channel, ExploreChicago, and more.
These “branded” type of channels could be, if used and marketed properly, great engagement tools that focus around brand awareness, content sharing, and goes one step further and creates a physical presence with your brand using local stops where you instruct users to go. With the user taking part in the brand’s “game”, it allows the brand to create custom badges with Foursquare directly to keep user’s engaged and work toward further outreach goals.
Zagat @ Foursquare
Zagat’s official Foursquare page is calling the partnership “Foodie Love” and there is a custom badge to go along with taking part in the Zagat experience. The page offers people to follow Zagat and then take part and in various venues where Zagat wants users to check-in from, mainly a variety of restaurants throughout the country; check-in there, become a Zagat Foodie, and unlock the Zagat Foodie Badge. And through further engagement – Zagat is going to have a online video series on their website called “Meet the Mayor” where they will feature discussions with prominent Foursquare mayors.
Harvard @ Foursquare
The prestigious Harvard University has also partnered with Foursquare to create a channel where they list locations, experiences and ideas for students and visitors to go and check-in – taking part in the Harvard community; soon unlocking a custom Harvard Foursquare badge. Whether that helps with the admission process…I’m going to say doubtful – but hell of an engagement tool!
New York Times @ Foursquare
The NYT recently closed a deal with Foursquare and created a branded channel that is celebrating the 2010 Vancouver Olympics by sharing tips on what to see and where to go in Vancouver and Whistler. And if you check-in to two recommended venues you get to unlock the Olympics badge.
Conclusion
There is no doubt that Foursquare is growing quickly, with the focus mainly on gaining users, not revenue at the moment, according to Crowley; with now nearly 500,000 users, this number is likely to grow fast! After the Bravo TV deal was inked last month, a number of major brands, as shown above, came knocking at the door to work with Foursqaure, no doubt helping them earn some revenue. And with the ability for locales to offer up free food, drinks, discounts, coupons just for those who might become the “mayor” or “deputy” of their venue; being on Foursquare could soon become like being on Twitter…maybe? In addition, Crowley did confirm that Foursquare is working on creating actual incentives for users who garner specific badges and points in their account - not just pseudo “Mayoral” titles.
To that end, Foursquare is working on a set of services and tools, according to AdAge in early February, to begin offering paid services on a three tiers: one for small (local) businesses, one for retail chains, one for large marketers. Begin throwing these offers around, and soon Foursquare will move pass just the “engagement” level that these major brands are seeing above as far as click, follows and check-ins; and offer nailed-down analytics (impressions, clicks, friends, etc…) and deals could be sold against impressions such as web ads, clicks such as search ads, or even what Kunur Patel in AdAge said, “ a completely new model: cost per check-in.”
Foursquare TV Commercial
Update: A tweet today, February 24, from the Foursquare Twitter account said that there is a rumor that a Foursquare commercial could be running tonight on Bravo alongside the show Sheer Genius from 9 to 10 PM. The rumor quickly went to fact is going to be a 20 second spot that highlights Foursquare’s new partnership with Bravo TV. Watch the ad spot here (something I’m sure will garner a few more users…):
The idea that there is an overabundance of content in today’s digital spectrum is no surprise. In earlier times, newspapers, magazines, and various publications alike made a push once the web turned circles in the early 2000’s and content distributors rushed to get their publications online. This rush has since grown, and seen an extreme swell of content on the web, much of it free, much of it paid – creating the big issue that stands in front of publishers today: how do I further monetize?
Digital media might be popular, but from a marketing standpoint, it has not been easy on publications. Ad rates on the web could not match what was being garnered in print, essentially endangering the publications lifespan because of a lack of monetization. What saving-grace could be sitting in the weeds waiting to peek it’s head over – mobile device, and by that, I mean devices that are MOBILE.
As mobile devices increase in use (seen in the eMarketer.com study above), publications are flocking to create applications that can live and function within this new space. Everything from portable phones, to the hot, soon-to-arrive e-readers, tablets and other wireless internet devices; content distributors are seeing these ‘apps’ as the opportunity to both expand their reach and monetize their content at the same time.
Mobility In Play
Conde’ Naste Publications were one of the first to deliver full magazine issues on apps, staring with GQ’s December issue. By mid-February, according to Advertising Age, it sold nearly 7,000 copies of the December issue app and more than 15,000 copies of the February issue app at $2.99 each. When comparing this to the magazine’s print publication, which averaged nearly 194,000 single-copy sales per issue over the second half of last year, it’s not anything mind-blowing – yet. Conde’ Nast refers to this as a start to something much larger, as they prepare to get in a position to make a major play on the iPad, which is opening many content distributor’s eyes. They have also planned to create digital editions of Wired, Vanity Fair and a number of other titles.
When considering the outcome, you have to imagine that a number of people who might download single issues of a publication, could, most likely be, already not a subscriber. And if you charge $3 for that one download, think of 100,00+ people taking that same idea and applying it to their app collection – that will all start to add up.
Also, Zinio, which has been selling digitized copies of its magazines for display on computer screens for years, recently created a free iPhone app that optimizes digital editions of its publications for the iPhone. Within the first few weeks of release and 20,000 downloads later, it surpassed the New York Times app as the No. 1 News application.
It’s also interesting to see how a number of publishers are not just “unlocking the safe” of web content to a mobile application, but actually releasing specialized apps that draw in related information, but still sell and monetize the brand at the same time. Rodale, best known for its Men’s Health and Women’s Health publications, offer apps that range from 99 cents for a Men’s Health Ultimate Fat Burning app to $4.99 for their Eat This, Not That! Diet app. All of this is not just timely craze being built in branded modules that will live for just a period of time. Advertiser’s see the potential behind these types of apps and the ability to reach more targeted users outside of something like a Facebook or Web widgets were every marketer’s obsession years ago.
E-readers & Tablets…And the iPad!
This isn’t just all hype – there is something very serious brewing behind the potential of advanced e-readers and tablets, most notably, and always setting off the first alarm when they announce anything new, Apple’s iPad and other similar devices, are going to be a new source of potential income for newspapers, magazines and other print publications looking to make a big push.
E-readers and tablets are going to become effective content distributors for content publishers, and in no doubt will grow in terms of advertising revenue and further branded distribution. According to a Mashable article from February 18, Director for Digital Publishing at the Donald W. Reynolds Journalism Institute at the University of Missouri, Roger Fidler, said major news companies such as the New York Times, USA Today, and The Washington Post will be focused on creating customized content standards for e-readers and tablets. He also predicted that within 10 years time, a majority of subscribers to newspapers and magazines will be reading digital editions delivered to mobile reading devices.
As of February 10, there were 99 newspapers from around the world already available on Amazon’s Kindle – and this current Kindle model is subscription-based without advertising. Newspapers get about 30% revenue from having their content on the Kindle, something likely to change because publishers have some leverage because e-reader vendors must have content to succeed and newspapers will have the ability to do more rich presentations – content will evolve in the end game.
With that being said, that rushes the issue of staying competitive and enters the first question – “who can hit the ball out of the park to start?,” so to speak. For example, the iPad’s rumored debut turned official last month when Apple announced a March launch date and featured a full-color device with touchscreen; something the Kindle falls well short of at the moment. However, it is being predicted that Amazon will introduce a similar color device before the end of 2010.
iPad Will Reign…for now
With the pending launch of Apple’s new device, Wired Magazine has been planning, for more than 6 months already, to launch an iPad-only edition of the publication this summer that includes rich media content. Wired’s Editor-in-Chief Chris Anderson showcased a demo of the Wired Reader app at TED recently. The publisher of Wired, Conde Nast, also plans on launching iPad versions of GQ and Vanity Fair as well.
From a marketing and advertising standpoint, users that gravitate toward the e-reader subscriptions are looking for similar experiences they draw from the print publication. Those who will want to get even more out of that experience will be more attracted to the iPad. That being said, I see more of a harmonious relationship between the two, rather then one trumpeting over another – and this good news based on what experts reveal could be separate advertising models on each device.
New Medium = New Content
With the advancement of the iPad and many competitive devices, similar in functionality coming soon, media companies won’t simply be able to re-purpose content. According to Alan Mutter, an independent media analyst, who spoke to Mashable.com in a recent article, said content needs to be richer, offer more user control and interaction, and has to let the user manipulate it in a way that it becomes highly individualized.
Sport’s Illustrated recently created an iPad demo prototype on how that capability could be leveraged:
Mutter said that although he has reasons to be encouraged, it will take time before a mass amount of publishers go running to this new platform and spend a healthy investment to create these new formats. That will not happen until proof is made that they can generate significant revenue and ultimately become a clear marketing and advertising channel.
What is success here? Mutter said that when a number of around 100,000 subscribers are reached through e-readers and tablets alone per publication; then media companies will consider them successful tools to gain additional advertising revenue.
It’s All Dollars and Cents
In the end however, these are all cutting-edge devices that are clearly going to shake the content distribution channels at their very core. The hope is to generate not only additional advertising revenue, but also separate subscriptions, and potential syndication from other websites – all could be included in a new model of “charging for service.”
Mutter said, for example, CNN charges $3 for their iPhone app and the New York Times just gives it away for free.
A recent report from Gawker.com said that a New York Times source said that an iPad model of the NYT could run a user up to $20-$30 per month. Why such a high price…they are scared! Even more, they are worried that an advanced device like the iPad would have print subscribers cancelling pretty quickly, and running for the hills with their iPads in hand.
In the end however, it is about two pieces to this paradigm: The idea of having content optimized for the platform (whether it is an iPad, e-reader, tablet, iPhone, Android, other mobile device, even a gaming device), and then most importantly - coming up with the model that people will pay for.
I guess we’ll just close our eyes and see what happens in the next few months…
I know where you are, I know where you could be, I know pretty much everything about you.
And I’m not even your friend – at least (REAL) friend. It’s no surprise that social networking allows me to know this about you. I can see what you just ate, because you tweeted it, what you just got for Christmas, because you put it on Facebook. And now I can even see where you are all the time, because you went ahead and checked-in on Foursquare, or you Google Buzz-ed a random thought, and oh yea, you forgot to shut off that geo-location feature that is set to be on automatically when you activate your Google Buzz account…doh!
Sure, these publicly announced check-ins, random personal thoughts, and location-sharing networks might get you a cool new pseudo badge and allow you to become the Mayor of your workplace or the supermarket next door, maybe even the Target down the street – but one key thought that revolves around all of this – I know what you are doing, I know where you are, I know pretty much everything about you.
Social Networks & Privacy?
Privacy seems to be the 800-pound gorilla in the room that everyone notices is a big problem, large enough to be spoken about daily, but we more or less undermine it and sweep it under the rug and think it will clean itself up later somehow – aka….someone else will deal with it… or even worse – maybe nobody cares?
In the past, we’ve gone through the trials and tribulations of privacy wars on Facebook, and after that battle, their new policy now allows for more individual control and openness at the same time. That battle has slowed, and has now turned into the discussions around the new dangers of location-sharing networks such as Foursquare, Google Buzz, Loopt, even Yelp’s new check-in feature, maybe even clever Twitter or Facebook searches will yield some good results as to where you might be. As each of us get caught up in the novelty and bonuses associated with our behavior – what dangerous doors are we opening by taking part in this?
This leads into a larger discussion around the privacy associated with social networks, but to be honest, if we are taking part in this phenomenon daily – do we care about privacy? Sure there are certain Facebook pictures you want to keep targeted to just a select group of friends, and on Twitter you want to grant permission to a select group of people to see your tweets; privacy exists – but what is privacy if we are taking part in social reality anyways?
The 24/7 personal openness we display as social media users ties to our inherent behavior to play to our strengths. Social media has changed the way we live on and offline and has us living in much more “open” environments, compared to our parents and other Generation X’ers who lived in “closed” worlds and had “separate” behaviors. Social reality now combines all of that for us!
All of this sharing allows people to play to their virtues, even more in a social media world. People find their triumphs in social media accomplishing and well deserved from a societal standpoint, as well as a boost in their own individual behavior (aka EGO). If I tweeted from the top of mountain and said “About to hang-glide from 4,000 feet in Peru, what a life!”, compared to “Watching ‘Charles in Charge’ reruns on Mondayz…”; clearly it’s cooler I am doing the first rather than latter, but social media, despite its privacy concerns, allows us to live that behavior and feel accomplished for letting the world know what WE are doing. Does it matter that it related to hang-gliding or watching mundane television – no… I am letting the world know because I feel that I need to, to maybe feel that accomplishment in society.
I am not going to break this down from a psychological level, but I am sure there is some reality to this opinion in how people perceive themselves and why they take part – not caring about the privacy concerns we always feel so bullied with. In a recent study from the Future of Privacy Forum, 42% of Internet users are concerned that websites are collecting too much information about them, but then again with Facebook recently overtaking Yahoo! for the #2 top spot on the entire Internet - I don’t know if that reflects privacy as much of a concern anymore?
And as we go forward into the future, there is no doubt that Privacy will become more of an issue, especially as more and more individuals begin to feel violated, whether in an emotional online attack or a physical attacks, such as when video podcaster Israel Hyman was robbed after we tweeted that he was out of town, and the fact that studies have already been done to show how social networks are being used as tools to further provoke attacks on a person – in the next two years, privacy and further security will certainly come to a boiling point, it will be interesting to see what happens at that point.
What are your thoughts around privacy and social networking – does it really matter and is there anything we can do about it?
Social media is still a fairly new type of marketing tactic; it requires thought, proper leadership, planning and typical branding practices that go along with setting up any type of marketing plan. However, it is still a form of media that can feel an extremely negative backlash when campaigns go bad, more so than any other type of marketing campaign in the current age.
Let’s dive right in…do you recall when Dominos’ employees posted a video to YouTube of them doing unsanitary things to customers’ orders on camera. This one video went on a viral roller-coaster, and almost destroyed the brand overnight. It took many apologies and a strong effort by the CEO to speak to fans directly, using social media channels as his outreach tool. Almost immediately, a company-sponsored video was posted to the Dominoes YouTube channel that showed the CEO apologizing to the public in a very informal, candid approach.
It is moments like this that still add shock value to what social media encompasses. Triumphs and great successes in social media can be met with cheer and joyful praises when everything goes in a positive direction – where social media fans and followers triple overnight and bloggers pick-up your campaign like it was just mentioned on Oprah – these are the true victories of social media. However, one wrong move, one video, one comment, one posts that might send the wrong message, no matter the origin, can tear away your sanity and drive your campaign and brand through a wall overnight. All the blood, sweat and dollars used to guide your brand into social media bliss were just flushed away by that video someone posted, that comment that went up by mistake, that message that was taken the wrong way – social media can drain you the same way it might make you a star.
Because of the sensitivity surrounding social media, everything is not always ‘sunshine and lollipops’. Companies traditionally understand the value of crisis management, but as gossip and complaints can spread through social channels faster than the eye can blink, this new interconnectedness of consumers and complaints has brought about a renewed importance in crisis management – social media style.
Let’s use another example in crisis management, on August 13, 2008, a video was posted of a Burger King employee taking a bath in a kitchen sink of a restaurant. Within a few days, the video was viewed more than 800,000 times on Break.com and YouTube, and was picked up by major news outlets, both on and offline. The number of negative impressions that was generated by this one video was equal to many months of traffic to BurgerKing.com.
Burger King responded through traditional PR channels, talking to reporters and sent an email to news outlets that said:
“Burger King Corp. was just notified of this incident and is cooperating fully with the health department. We have sanitized the sink and have disposed of all other kitchen tools and utensils that were used during the incident. We have also taken appropriate corrective action on the employees that were involved in the video. Additionally, the remaining staff at this restaurant is being retrained in health and sanitation procedures.”
Their response was sufficient, but could have been delivered with a more personal approach and to a wider audience had they explored the social media channels as a additional outreach tool. Instead of just informing consumers with a positive response in traditional media, they could have done a better job to inform consumers who are exposed to the information in social media by pushing across a message with their own video response. Despite the fact that they told the traditional world of their response, consumers are still going to see the disgusting videos online through YouTube and other video channels – wouldn’t a company-created video response help alleviate the stomachs of those who might just fall upon the original video on YouTube…I think so.
Agreed, a positive, company-sponsored video won’t get as much play, nor be as viewed as often as the scandalous video would be, but by responding to the situation, it could have increased the possibility of reaching consumers where it truly mattered. So when someone goes to search for “Burger King sink”, your favorable and more informative video would be tagged with similar titles, descriptions and keywords as that unfavorable video – creating a quick reactionary tool that allows that video viewer to see the truth.
In an age of social media, it is best to think about fighting fire with fire when it comes to managing a crisis within social media. Press releases and emails to TV and print outlets are good and necessary, but won’t drive as much authority and interest as a social media driven response. With the speed of how quickly the viral age is turning, it’s important to understand that the world is moving at a much different pace then it used to – it’s time to keep up with that.
Do you remember CNN’s live stream of the inauguration, or when TNT did a live stream webcast of the NBA All-Star Game? If you did happen to catch both of those online events at the respective websites, you would have noticed that Facebook played a large part in those particular events.
Each of these events integrated the Facebook Connect-enabled live stream widget. And now Facebook is making this available to all websites and developers who can now incorporate this technology on their sites.
This event now allows brands to consider using this Live Stream ‘Chat’ Box on their websites or applications. However, it is not only built to function around live events, but could be used simply for any reason on a website – but that is the point of it. And another great aspect of this client comes right from Facebook who said “the Live Stream Box can handle a very substantial load, supporting millions of simultaneous users.”
The one downside of the Live Stream Box is that the content posted to it will not be archived or accessible for any APIs. This client is to be utilized as a one-use chat room that can be thrown away at a later point.
However, the true benefit of this is the ability to increase the engagement level, and keep a user’s interest on your website, and increase the amount of time a user might engage on it.
The process is quite simple in how this client functions – a user comes to your site, and if they are already signed in through Facebook, they will be able to start chatting right away (if they are not, they will be asked to sign-in before taking part in the chat client), and each ‘chat message’ a user submits is posted back to their Facebook profile with a link to the website they just came from (Your Website!!). This in turn shows up on their news’ feeds, and so on – the viral propagation has begun.
Becoming a star on the Internet these days does not seem as far fetched as it once might have been. Social networks have become a ubiquitous tactic in helping connect individuals with family, friends, and strangers alike. And over the past several years, a number of those random individuals have become overnight sensations – all thanks to the Internet.
Do we all remember Tay Zonday? After his composition “Chocolate Rain” became an overnight Internet sensation in July 2007, garnering more than 40 million views to date, this Minneapolis grad student went from no one to someone, in mere seconds.
He has appeared on the Opie & Anthony Show, G4TV’s Attack of the Show!, VH1’s Best Week Ever, Lily Allen and Friends, Jimmy Kimmel Live, and Maury where he performed Chocolate Rain on national television just three months after posting his video to YouTube. He made the front page of Sunday’s Los Angeles Times, the Toronto Sun, Chicago Tribune, Star Tribune, People magazine, and even has appeared on CNN for a televised interview. He’s made appearances on Fox News, and even made it on to an episode of South Park.
And that’s just the beginning of it! Singer John Mayer mimics Zonday’s keyboard riff with his guitar in concert regularly. Even Green Day drummer Tre Cool recorded a cover of Chocolate Rain, which he posted to YouTube. He’s even been mentioned in episodes of The Office, 30 Rock and It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia.
And this is from a YouTube video, a YouTube video!? Think of it, one day a college student decided to sing some strange, yet catchy song, records it, and ends up becoming an overnight star. Comedy Central, Dr. Pepper, Intel, the rock band Weezer, NASA, Warner Brothers, and BBC have paid Zonday to appear in a variety of promotions.
Zonday is just one of many YouTube celebrities who happen to have corporate sponsors, and are paid for product placement in their videos online. Some have even quit their day jobs or changed careers to accommodate their YouTube filming schedules. And a handful of individuals are also official “YouTube Partners,” meaning YouTube cuts them a share of ad revenue.
Some might think of this notion as absolutely foolish, some might think of it as a form of humble genius – nonetheless, they are stars, overnight sensations that have proven their worth in numerous inescapable maneuvers.
Those mentioned above hold our deserved scrutiny, but they are from years past. Ergo, who shall we take notice of now in 2009? Who will be the next Tay Zonday to speak highly of? - Leaping on to the national stage and then slipping back into anonymity, this seamless performance seems to act as a contagious flu anyone might catch.
And in 2009, only can a deceased cat, a 48-year-old Scottish woman and Dominos pizza employees have so much in common. For just a brief second, we read, watched and spoke about these individuals at some point - all thanks to the Internet, and the instant-celebrity, be it a person, video or website might deliver us.
Drum Roll Please.
Here are just a few of those viral sensations that have struck 2009 in more than just simple terms: (some personal grading was also applied here based on impact)
Keyboard Cat
This sensation began with a video clip of a decade old cat appearing to play the keyboard. Add in a video-savvy 22-year-old to the mix, and marry that clip with another of a person falling down an escalator – you have stardom my friends.
This one video attracted the attention and interest of millions, including comedian Stephen Colbert. The AP reports Brad O’Farrell, syndication manager for MyDamnChannel.com in February 2009, put the keyboard cat into motion. Since that point in time, hundreds have taken the keyboard cat clip and combined it with a video clip of an embarrassing accident – the result is absolutely hysterical in some cases. The keyboard cat’s (aka Fasto, who’s said to be long dead) performance is meant to play the person “off the stage.”
This is a great example of how users can take a moment someone creates, and ‘recycle’ the content on their own to produce user-generated content that allows users to decide the hilarity behind who the keyboard cat will “play off” next. Rating: A+
Susan Boyle
If you have not heard of Susan Boyle, chances are you’ve lived in a cave for the past 6 months. Her melodramatic tale began as a 48-year-old reality show contestant for the U.K. reality TV show “Britain’s Got Talent.” When this very sweet, and very unassuming individual belted one of the finest versions of “I Dreamed a Dream” for what would eventually be the world, never did she see the stardom marching her way. Camera crews and interviews on several major news broadcasts, including the NBC Today Show – caught Boyle off-guard and soon she was thrown into a newly found fame courtesy of the Internet.
And even though this unemployed Scottish church volunteer did eventually lose the contest, the online video of her debut performance was downloaded more than 200 million times, and had the paparazzi camped outside her home, and had Oprah and Larry King begging for interviews.
Rating: B+ (Sorry, she lost…can’t give you points for that.)
25 Random Things About Me
This 2009 e-mail chain-like fad fascinated Facebook users and took them to another level. Chances are if you are on Facebook, at some point you saw this pass into your inbox. And you either loved or despised the forwarded message, reluctantly giving in or galloped to quickly toss into your trash bin. The overall point of the fad was to share 25 random things about yourself, and then forward it to 25 other Facebook users.
PC World Magazine estimated that more than 5 million motions of the chain letter forwards populated Facebook pages in just one week. The fad grew to such a massive following; a Facebook user spoofed it with a “25 Things I Hate About Facebook” video. Facebook quickly followed up with the user, Julian Smith, and worked with him on other videos.
This 2009 sensation had a prolonged spike in mainstream media, and did help Facebook further its popularity. Rating: A
Dominos Pizza Videos
In May, videos of Dominos pizza employees violated public health laws when they decided to have ‘fun’ with people’s food while preparing it and recording the entire segment on video inside the Dominos pizza kitchen.
Their antics, which eventually made it to YouTube, sparked a PR nightmare for Dominos pizza, where the company made a public apology from the CEO online via YouTube.
This drew the eyes of several million people, damaging the brand greatly overnight. But, like any other Internet sensation, these moments are short-lived, and what was once a wildfire, seems almost like it never happened.
In the end, an interesting study was done by MediaCurves.com, where they obtained American’s perceptions of the event’s apology, as it revealed that 65% of respondents who would previously visit or order Domino’s Pizza were less likely to do so after viewing a “prank” video. The results can be seen here
Rating: B-
Runners Up:
The Obama Puppy: The moment President Obama promised his daughter’s a puppy, the world had no choice but to care. Bo, the Portuguese water dog eventually made his way to the White House and the ‘online’ world went into a frenzy. Online polls, kennel associations, blogs, and users across all social platforms scratched and clawed to want to help the Obamas pick the breed. Rating: B
The AIG Bonuses: When the world found out that $165 million was paid out in bonuses by insurance giant AIG, the world fought back. Both the public and government officials were outraged by the event of a crumbling company to release bonuses of this size after receiving more than $170 billion in taxpayer funds to stay afloat. As in the case of the Dominos Pizza event, this saw a large spike, then quickly bottomed out and lost interest. Rating: B+
Conclusion.
There is one interesting point about viral sensations that strikes me, the time involved. People seem to obsess for a short period of time, and then poof…it’s off to the next ‘hot’ thing. In this tiny village we all live in, there is nowhere to hide, nowhere to run, nowhere anyone won’t find you. The Internet, in an exceptional way, has transformed our lives into ‘live’ events. We can record, we can tape, we can see what others are doing and transmit that event quicker than ever before, to a stage where the entire world can view. Some might argue this and describe our ‘personal space’ as being lost and violated – It’s hard to disagree. But, in reality, it has been, and apparently we are OK with that. There is a reason we share our lives on the Internet with both friends and strangers, why each of us try and climb the plateau and look over to see who might be looking up at us on occasions. When taking this into perspective, it’s all relative, whether your Joe the Plumber or a big brand like Microsoft – there is point to all of this madness. You want to see me, and I want to see you. We might be trying to play those subtleties off on occasion, but in the end – why fight it? Enjoy the self-absorption, swagger with the best of them and remember, narcissism will always get you somewhere in this world.
become the Mayor of your workplace or the supermarket next door, maybe even the Target down the street – but one key thought that revolves around all of this – I know what you are doing, I know where you are, I know pretty much everything about you.
