marginally subversive

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.

What is a medium?

A good friend offered me this advice on what a medium is:

"A medium is that perfume-laced, beautifully-crafted sheet of stationery where words that speak of love and life and truths are carefully chosen and written, and which is then encased and sealed with a soft, gentle kiss, and sent with the hope that it will be opened, read, cherished, and responded to."

--- --- ---

With that definition, how then do you define "media planning"?

For that, I have no ready answer.

 

a beautiful Thai ad for Pantene(R) Shampoo

I really liked this ad.

It's not your usual shampoo ad with a beautiful girl with flowy, thick, shiny hair - with experts extolling the value of their brand.

This simply tells a story.

And a beautiful story it is.

It's probably not realistic - but realism is overrated.  Just surf on TV and look at all the TV serials, sitcoms, and even so-called "reality programs".  

This simply connects, I believe.

Did it deliver the goods?  I am not sure.  But I am going to bet it rose through the clutter and simply created a difference amongst those who have watched it.

"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.

the marketing mix versus the marketing blend

I always trust one of my former colleagues to come up with great insights. 

And he has come up with something great yet again:  Marketing blend.

His inspiration: "blending music" as opposed to "mixing music".  (He loves DJ'ing - and he does great mixes... er, blends.)

He writes in his blog entry:

[ Rather than merely integrating communications across channels, brands could integrate everything they do – the full marketing mix – into a single, holistic approach. ]

He suggests that consumers - and audiences - should have a seamless experience right from the start of their journey towards buying and experiencing the product - a seamlessness that will require the breaking down of silos across different functional teams within the organization.

... that even R&D and product development teams ought to be a part of the creation of the marketing blend.  (Which - to me - makes perfect sense; the best marketing tool of a great product is a great product.)

... that sales teams and retail-push executives ought to be selling not just the product to retailers but the potential of the brand being a significant contributor to a more meaningful, more differentiating, more beautiful experience in-store.

... that social media, customer service, and PR people ought to be enhancing the experience of the consumers - and not be thought of as "by the way..." 

... that the entire organization be focused on delivering this seamless experience for the consumer

I wholly agree with his thoughts.

================

In my experience with working with fmcg brands, I have gleaned a quiet war (or at least, an incongruence) between marketing and sales.

Sales people believe that they are the ones making the money since they are the ones making the rounds; marketing people are just there to make sure they have ads, posters, and other materials to help them sell it to the retailers.

Marketers, on the other hand, believe that they are the ones making the money since they are the ones who are creating demand amongst consumers through their ads, communications programs, and others.

I think the quiet war may be even more pervasive throughout the organization - R&D people think that they are the moneymakers because they are the ones who came up with the product in the first place; customer services and corporate communications believe they are the ones who are the cash-cows because they make sure customers are always happy - and customers are kings and queens.

I think my former colleague's point really is be a marketing-orientated organization that is dedicated to creating remarkable, unique, and surprising consumer experiences.

And for that to happen, we have to step out of the 5P-thinking of marketing mixes into blended consumer experiences.

As a former boss said to me, "consumers don't delineate media experiences as marketeers do - they see the brand on TV, on press, on magazines, on billboards - but they don't see the "brand on TV", "brand on press"... they just see the brand".

And that is what really matters.

Mike Rowe, Dirty Jobs, and Castration: Great Story…

I like DIRTY JOBS on Discovery Channel – and Mike Rowe, I think, is one of those guys who create stories out of nothing – and engages you, involves you, and immerses you into his story.

This is what he does in this TED Video

The Future of the Communications

Cisco

 

For CISCO, the future of communications is on Mobile Internet – not just being able to access the internet through a mobile phone as a “by the way”, but as a real, basic part of our lives.

 

 

They call it 4G – and have even created a site for it.

 

Microsoft

For Microsoft, it is somewhat different – but still within the same category of “everywhere-everytime”.  This is an entry from Chris Brogan showing what Microsoft thinks the future of computing will be: it’s everywhere and anywhere – and every time and anytime.

 

<a href="http://video.msn.com/?mkt=en-GB&amp;playlist=videoByUuids:uuids:a517b260-bb6b-48b9-87ac-8e2743a28ec5&amp;showPlaylist=true&amp;from=shared" target="_new" title="Future Vision Montage">Video: Future Vision Montage</a>

 

 

Here’s the challenge to marketers and device-creators:  How can you leverage these to create the future – and be a part of the changing world of consumer-brand-entertainment landscape?

Making IKEA Catalogs Alive – and more engaging

This is something that I picked up from a colleague’s blog. 

I loved the idea of making a relatively boring medium (though IKEA’s is not boring at all, I should say – since I look forward to it!)  Other brands that do catalogs ought to think of the same way – bring the medium alive through another medium.  Or better yet: Bring the message to life and elevate it into the area of experience!

great = success?

Not always, I think.

And it all depends on how one defines great.

Mr. Godin asks which comes first - marketing or the product?

I believe marketing comes first - because marketing is all about doing undercover work amongst real people - and realizing that there is a need that can be filled.  And then getting under the skin of those who may need the product itself.  And then coming up with a solution - with the right price (and profit-making plans...).

And then offering it.

Through another step in the marketing process - promotions (which happens to include advertising...)

In my mind, I think marketing pervades the entire process - and that it is a neverending process.

Way after the purchase has happened and the need has been fulfilled, the process starts again. 

Marketing is about real people.

---

I never studied advertising nor marketing in university.  I was studying maths, stats, body parts of cats and sharks and fish and chicken, and human brains (real, preserved, formaldehyde-soaked human brain).

But I was told that marketing has four P's: Product - Place - Price - Promotion.

A former colleague told me that there's a fifth P - and it's the most important one of all: People.

Marketing starts with people.  Marketing ends with people.  And gets restarted again because of people.

Thanks to Quasimodo for the photo.

Beyond social media buzzwords: It's your business that matters and how you think and what you believe that really matter...

This article from AttentionMax struck me.  Its premise is simple:  most agencies and media publishers still don't get social media right.  In terms of coming up with social-media solutions, most are found wanting - and too "buzz-wordy", rather than really actionable.

To be sure, there are a lot of promising attempts on both the media and agency sides. But most are short-sided. In fact, most seem disingenuous or uninformed, as evidenced by the advertising community’s excessive and ambiguous use of words and phrases like “conversation,” “viral,” “engage with your customers” and “let the community do the work for you.”

It seems that I am not the only one who is beginning to be frustrated by the buzz-wordy, ambiguous words and phrases that pepper most ad and media companies and publishers' presentations.

I believe that social media is important:  but how exactly do you manage it?

I believe that you can't manage something that you cannot control - and you cannot control what you cannot measure.  If we follow that line of reasoning even further, you cannot measure what you do not understand.  And you cannot understand unless you observe and organize.

But social media is chaotically organized.  It is perhaps one of the most glaring examples of "simplexity":  social media is simple - and its premise is simple.  However, because it involves complex 'variables' (people - lots of people!) it just becomes complex to be captured and organized in math formulas and even structures and MECE processes.

And yet, we know that social media needs to be considered because of its sheer power in influencing others.

How then?

Here are my suggestions:

1. Go beyond the marketing plan.  And yes, go beyond the media plan.  Go beyond these measures of "opportunities to be seen".
2. Use the marketing plan, the ad-messaging and media plan, and the PR plan, and the 'viral plan' as a means to achieve something bigger - the business' bottom-line/
3. Create a strategic plan centered on consumers and community of consumers.  The problem with most marketeers is, they want to get everyone and anyone to love their brand and contribute to their business.  C'mon: you can't please everyone!
4. In doing so, forget the buzzwords - unless we have a real understanding of how to operationalize them and get them to act and benefit a brand, forget about using "engagement", "connection", "involvement"... etc.
5. Viral videos aren't the end-all/be-all of a campaign - or word-of-mouth or facebook ads or widgets.  The end is getting new business in:  from existing community-revenue-sources, from communities that are not yet open - but could be open - to the business.
6. Tactics ain't going to cut it: the short-term is good, but the longer-term is what really matters.  Don't sacrifice the long-term goals and vision of the brand and the business for the sake of one sponsorship or one community.
7. Be prepared to invest:  Just because you have a database of people who wanted to be members and "friends" with your brand doesn't mean you've hit it big time.  Invest in them.  Listen to them.  (And I mean that in a very non-buzz-wordy way...) 
8. Bring out the data.  If you have a "loyalty program" (which is a misnomer, because these databases are most likely just gathering 'electronic dust' somewhere in your server's hard drive), check and let the data tell you what they've been doing with your brand.  If you are lucky, you'd find nuggets of information and knowledge about these individuals who have taken the time to get involved with your brand.  Get to know them.
9. Make marketing your 'integrative thinking department' - where sales, procurement, finance, operations, admin, customer service, supply management, frontlines converge. 
   In fact, get MORE out of your marketing department beyond checking ads, approving media plans, and berating your agencies as if they were less than human.  (And if your marketing director is one who is still involved in selecting what programs to buy into, fire her - she has bigger things to do - and bigger issues to solve - than looking at specific programming your brand is buying into.  She's wasting valuable company time - fire her and get someone in.)
10. Get everyone to understand what it's all about: the business and its sustainability.  From everyone internally to other external stakeholders.  It's not about the frigging Cannes awards or that left-right pagination on the main paper.  It's about the business and its sustainability.

OK.  No item in the list above mentions anything about social-media.  (And my English paper teacher would probably fail me...)  But that's the whole point:  the whole point about social-media is you can't fully engineer it - you can't fully engineer how people react to your brand and your business because, well, they are people - and people are complex.

The only way you can fully maximize and benefit from social-media is when the brands' companies are themselves organized and are firm believers of creating remarkable brands and businesses that would benefit and reward their consumers.

(And just because you're the biggest financial institution with the biggest number of credit cardholders doesn't mean you're the best and that everyone loves you - it just means you have the muscle.  But not everyone likes muscle guys [and girls].)