marginally subversive

EyeTrackShop's findings: What attracts people to your Facebook pages - and what keeps them there longer?

The wall on all brand pages attracts almost all respondents' gazes. What you post matters. If you consistently create and publish great content -- items that really matter to your fans and add value to their day or contain an appropriate call-to-action -- you're more likely to attract and retain those readers.

Walls also attract the viewer's attention for the longest amount of time. Again, this reinforces the need for compelling content that builds on itself. Working in reverse chronological order (because that's how posts appear), Wall posts should compel the user to scroll down the page, keeping their focus and attention on your Wall. You should cross-reference previous status updates as a way to get visitors to scroll down the page and consume more of your content.

via www.entrepreneur.com

These are quite interesting findings on the use of the Facebook wall for pages that are active.  One of my favorite pages, Magnolia Chicken Station from the Philippines on Facebook does this farely well.  And I like looking at their recipes.  A few celebrities are also doing this fairly well - I like Vin Diesel's page. 

Thanks to Entrepreneur.Com for the idea and the photo below. 

 

how digital is shifting the world of media buying

The world of media buying has shifted dramatically due to changes in the consumer landscape as digital media became a significant part of the lives of consumers.

Through a friend on Facebook, I saw this video from PSFK.Com on the 'Secrets of a Killer Media Buyer: Future Success'.

There are three things that I got from the video:

1. Media buying is still about value-creation.  At the end of the day, it is about creating value for clients and generating the best deal.

2. However, the definition of value has changed: Value is no longer merely dollars-saved or the "best deal that you could negotiate and seal with all the bells and whistles for the clients for the lowest price possible".  Value is now about

(a) utility to clients - what's in it for them, they who are investing the money
(b) utility to consumers and audiences - what's in it for consumers

3. To achieve the best deal and realize the ultimate value for clients, you need data.  Because technology has paved the way for consumers to be entertained in terms of quantity and quality, we need data.

(a) The usual lines between 'traditional media' and 'non-traditional media' have been blurred by technology. 
"Video" no longer is just about TV - it now encompasses online videos (and the ad platforms supported by it), mobile videos, game consoles, handhelds, and even outdoor/in-store. 
"Radio" is no longer just what one hears on a radio set or on the car - but also in-mobile, on-the-web, on-demand, on-the-palm...  And press and magazines.

(b) To navigate through these choices, you will need data - how do consumers shift from one medium to another and why? 
[The "why" bit is almost-always missing - and is always a point of contention between me and most of the media planners-buyers that I work with.  But that's another story.]

(c) The kind of data that we need no longer will center on "how many people are exposed" - the usual impression-based metrics and currencies.  The kind of data that we need will need to encompass audience motivations, mindsets, and response. 

Here's the video:

 

 

Secrets Of A Killer Media Buyer: Future Success from Piers Fawkes on Vimeo.

so you're on Facebook - now what?

John Bell has a very interesting blog entry on what should come next after being present in Facebook.

He talks about the fast growth - and then slowdown - of Facebook adoption in the US, a trend that most people (including techwatchers and stock/financial market analysts interested in the Facebook IPO) thought was the beginning of the end of Facebook (and its billion-dollar valuation).

Bell differs - and I agree with him: something cannot keep on growing forever, specially if there is a 'built-in braking system' in its growth trajectory.  Sooner or later, everyone is going to have one Facebook account - until we reach that point where there's no one else to recruit into the Facebook population.  

Instead of questioning whether this is the end of Facebook, the question marketeers and communication strategists need to answer is "now what?"

Bell offers several thoughts:

1. Integrating Facebook as part of an overall customer/fan relationship management solution
2. Figuring out how to make social commerce work for the brand
3. More data about the brands' followers and fans (as soon as Facebook unlocks the data-vaults)
4. Creating new ways to engage and entertain and delight audiences and brand fans and loyalists through Facebook's unique platform (and other social media's)
5. Integration of Facebook into CRM legacy systems

I will add a few more to Mr. Bell's thoughts:

1. Having a clear role for Facebook and other social-media platforms, both digital and non-digital, in the marketing communications mix and in the customer engagement strategy of a firm

2. Identifying the real returns in financial value of activities in Facebook, other digital social-media platforms, and other "traditional, non-digital" social-media platforms, using metrics and currencies that are comparable to how we measure returns for TV, press, magazines, outdoor, and radio

3. Going beyond using Facebook and other digital social media platforms as "crisis portenders" or "PR-nightmare forerunners" - but using these and other non-digital platforms as "sources of brand/product and communication innovations".  

 

What do you think?  How else can Facebook be used in building your brands and your brands' businesses?  How can it be a part of a profit improvement program for a company? 

social media + video = ?

We've all heard about the Old Spice campaign - but I believe it's only the tip of the iceberg that is social video.

 

There is more that marketeers can do with social videos. And it's not just about 'seeding' videos in YouTube and other video platforms hoping that the audience - your audience - will share them.

 

Social video, was defined by ReelSEO as follows: 

Social video advertising involves a push to intentionally draw attention to a video or video campaign (and its product, service, solution, event, etc.) in a public medium in order to promote one or more conversion goals (views, shares, leads, sales, attendance, or some other form of engagement).

via www.reelseo.com

I beg to slightly differ though - because I think that there is more to social video than just drawing attention.

I think social video involves drawing attention to a certain video, engaging and enchanting audiences to share them - and more importantly, to participate in a dialogue with the brand behind the video.  The brand can then choose to respond to these in videos or other platforms of social media.

The success of the Old Spice campaign is not just because the first video was funny and was (probably, likely) seeded and promoted properly.  The key to its success was how it used the social video platform to create a conversation with its target audiences.

I am sure it was difficult - you have got to have your ear on the ground, weed through the comments (and the likes and the dislikes), and respond quickly via a video.  But hey, that's the price of success. ":D

In case you've never heard of it, here's the Old Spice Guy.

LinkedIn as part of a social media campaign?

via www.emarketer.com

... I believe that LinkedIn is a totally different animal from Facebook and from other SNS.

I also believe that SNS in general are very different from other traditional digital and non-digital forms of advertising media.

I think for LinkedIn to be successfully used in a social media campaign, it needs to do more and be more.

One thing that it does NOT have to be:  A Facebook for the pros.  

It does not need to compete for ad dollars by proving that it delivers "more traffic, more awareness, more engagement" - more than Facebook, MySpace, Friendster, or any other SNS. 

In and of itself, LinkedIn is a totally different medium - and social media strategists ought to take note of this significant difference of LinkedIn from the traditional SNS.  

[Anyone who uses LinkedIn (or any SNS for that matter) to drive brand awareness and who measures its success trough "awareness changes" is misguided.]

 

consumers, brands, and the social marketing landscape

I was going through my RSS reading list and something caught my eye from Adrian Chan and Andreas Weigend at Gravity 7.  His latest entry was informative, inspiring, and thought-provoking - and is definitely worth a read and a discussion.

Of all the things that he said - and he said a lot of good things - these are just some of the few that really struck with as they are things that I have always believed in:

(Oh - and I will quote without shame because I believe Adrian Chan of Gravity7 has ensnared these thoughts so beautifully.)

1. Conversations are at the core of marketing

Conversation is the new marketing. Markets are no longer made by the brand, around brand image, and by means of brand messaging. Markets are made by consumers, through their connections, and interests as related in conversation. Distribution through conversation is the new mode of production.

2. Advertising, marketing communications, promotions, PR, digital, newspapers, magazines, TV spots, internet ads, digital ads, social ads - all these are not about eyeballs, reach, frequency, 'engagement'... It's about the brand and how it connects with consumers - and how consumers connect back.

This is not just a matter of the eyeballs having turned from one screen, the TV, to another. It’s not just a matter of changing medium – it’s about talking now instead of looking. And this is new, even still, to many brands. Of course brands like to see themselves mentioned and reflected in consumer opinion. But then so, too, do consumers. Consumers are the new brands, and they do their branding in person. Conversation is the highest form of shared value, individually produced, and mutually engaging. ... Conversation is the new marketing because it is the right way to engage with the medium.

 3. Brand management, brand creation, brand strengthening - heck, BRANDING is all about the relationships that consumers have with a named-product that happened to have elicited a significant relationship with the consumer.  A brand is a result of consumer's response.

It is the brand that now wants to be seen in the proximity of the consumer, not the consumer who desires to identify with the brand. The social self is now so self-constructed and socially connected that consumers expect to see themselves reflected in the brands they relate to. Consumers make brands in their own image, revealing this in their own words and interests.

 

 

[ Consumers own the brands they want.
Consumer loves the brands they choose to love.
Consumers can unlove a brand they choose to unlove.
And consumers don't just fall in love because it is the best in the world relative to others - consumers fall in love with brands because for them, it is worth loving. ]

 

Microthoughts | On Social Media Planning

> Social media planning - as a part of a company's marketing campaign - stems from a simple principle that should be accepted company-wide: that the whole company, from the CEO to the frontline soldiers, are a ***marketing communications medium*** for the company.

> Social media planning is also not about getting other people to talk about you, your brand, your services, your greatness - real or perceived. It is about creating platforms and reasons for them to speak to you and to others.

> Social media planning is not about facebook, twitter, Ning, blog seeding (which I abhor!!!). It is about connecting people who have a similar passion towards a brand and/or a belief and facilitating their conversations amongst themselves and participating.

"just build me a website!"

via www.usability.gov

i am a proponent of structured thinking and strategic planning. even quick-decision-making scenarios (QDMSs) arising from, say competitive moves or supply problems or below-expectations results, should be - in my opinion - well thought-out.

my mantra: always go back to the strategy which lays down the raison d'etre of the campaign in the first place.

so it follows that when someone tells me "just build a website!", i cringe.

building a website - particularly for big brands and brands that wish to compete for audiences' attention in a highly fragmented, attention-contested medium like that internet - is a major undertaking.

TV ads follow a certain process - so do print ads. but i believe that the process of building a website is far more complex.

when one builds a website, one does not simply build for one's self: the website's users' satisfaction is what's key.

usability and usefulness. relevance and timeliness. loyalty and repeat-visits.

these are just some of the variables that are in play.

and websites - like TV or print ads - need to be responsive to changes in consumers' mindsets. but the expectations of audiences from websites are far greater: you need to change quickly, lest you lose them.

why? because they are in control.

i found this map from Usability.Gov that talks about building a usable, useful, and relevant site.

it looks complicated - because it is complicated.

(visualizers will probably cringe at the site of this flowchart - but it is the reality. there is a better way of visualizing this, I am sure, but for now, just bear with the visual.)

so what do you do?

1. Plan.
2. Analyze.
3. Design.
4. Test.
5. Refine
6. Repeat.

(I added the last one.)

and no, this can't be done overnight.

SEO and SEM: So which one are you going to employ?

Search engine optimization (SEO) is actually a component of search engine marketing—a function of the SEM process, if you will. SEO is the act of optimizing a website for organic or natural search engine listings. Search engine optimization is arguably the most cost-effective function in a search engine marketing campaign, yet still just one element.

Search engine marketing (SEM) is the process of marketing a website via Internet search engines; whether by improving rank in organic or natural listings, paid or sponsored listings or a combination thereof.

via www.strategic-ranking.com

Search strategists and tacticians have a way of plunging my head into a little bit of a spin.

When all I wanted was an answer to the question "How do I deploy digital strategies into my communications plan to increase revenue potentials?", we almost always eventually get lost into a discussion about how important search is.

I have no grudge about search. But I don't want every "digital strategy meeting" to always end up a search-driven strategy - because, well, there are so many things in the digital medium - on-PC, on-phone, on-TV, on-OOH - that need to be considered. Not to mention the different nuances a business or a brand needs.

The other thing that really gets me going: this thing about SEO and SEM - as acronyms.

Search tacticians and strategists tend to "interchange" the two.

So - finally, here. A differentiation of the two - one that is clear, one that is straightforward, one that is actionable.

This one is from www.strategic-ranking.com.

So... go. Search!

“if it ain’t broke…”

I have gotten into so much trouble with this philosophy: ‘if it ain’t broke, break it’.

I think that we have put so much premium on “experience” and on “what’s working”.  The truth is, there are so many changes in the world these days – particularly in the field of communications, technology, and marketing that the old models no longer simply work.

And if they do work, they do so at a very high premium – either in terms of costs or in terms of risks.

A lot of people still think that it’s business as usual – that it’s all about getting as many revenues as possible, getting as many consumers as possible. 

My take is simple: It’s not business as usual.

And it applies to markets where technology is very well-developed – such as the UK, Australia, and Singapore – and to markets where technology is yet to be seen and felt.

True: these developed countries are at an advantage with regard to net penetration and communications, but emerging countries are not too far behind:  There are, in these emerging markets, a group of people who find a way to get around the limitations that the infrastructures their governments and supposed innovative telecommunications companies impose.

Take the proliferation of internet cafes in Ho Chi Minh, Hanoi, Cantho (in the South) and Danang (in Central) in Vietnam.  A lot of marketeers that these cafes are only for backpackers – people who wanted to get in touch with loved ones back home.  But when one entered these cafes in 2003, you’d see university students reading English articles, writing emails, chatting away, and essentially connecting with the rest of the world.  PC ownership?  Very low.  But internet cafe visits?  An entrenched part of the lives of the youth and young adults.

Or the high incidence of in-office surfing in countries such as the Philippines in the early 2000s.  Because there was low in-home PC ownership, well… use the office internet regardless of how slow it was.  Stay late at night to do one’s email on yahoo.com, mailexcite.com, or hotmail.com.  When IT admins started to ‘crack the code’, they tried to ban certain sites and services.  What did these Filipino “yuppies” do?  Internet cafes in malls.  These days, we’re seeing a resurgence of mobile phone and handheld internet access.

I can’t emphasize it enough:  Things have changed.

And things will continue to change.

The rules of the past may no longer apply.  And should they still apply, they will need to adapt to the current scenarios that we now face – and current environs that we now are in.

The only way, I believe, that we can keep up is if we look at these rules and try to push them to limits – and even break them if necessary.

Sure: It is scary.  No one knows what the future holds.  And that’s what rules are supposed to do.  But sometimes, it is our own fear that stops us from trying, from experimenting.

So go on.  Break the rules.  Or at least, have the balls to test them to their limits.