September 1, 2009

Who wants to be the next Matt Drudge?

If you’re starting a blog to develop your own online cash cow, well get in line.  There are thousands of people already in line ahead of you.  Sure, it might happen, and I wish you the greatest luck and success.  Truly.

Somewhere in the online abyss I read some rules for making money at blogging.  One of the rules was to never blog about something that was more than a few hours old since the news item would already have been spread throughout the interwebs and considered old news by most people.  Further, you should only focus on the newest bits of news and get it on your blog ASAP.

This is a great rule if you want to be the next Matt Drudge.  Most people either don’t want to be Matt Drudge or don’t have the ability to be him.

Most people start a blog to share their opinions and experiences with the world.  Maybe not even the whole world, maybe just a thin slice of it.

The best focus for a news blog is the local market.  Local news isn’t covered well online, and the coverage is getting worse and worse for local events on TV and in print.

The best focus for most blogs is a niche market…a blog focused on midwest artists or northwest poets for example.  There are a lot of niches without good coverage online that have a ready and willing audience.   The audience may not be extensive, but they’ll be focused and loyal if your content is compelling and if you invite them in.

Monetizing a niche may be difficult or impossible, but it may very well become a great side venture for you.  And, maybe one day it will become profitable enough to become your full-time job.  Although, sometimes a hobby is better than a job.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Consumers, Social Marketing

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

August 21, 2009

There’s a big difference between being anonymous and being anonymous online

There’s a big difference between being anonymous and being anonymous online.  A huge difference.

CNN posted a story about the outing of anonymous bloggers. They cited stories about bloggers forced to reveal their true identities when they had preferred to remain anonymous.  One example was PittGirl, another was Waiter Rant. PittGirl knew the heat was on, so she revealed her identity and then was fired from her job the next day.  Waiter Rant revealed his identity to cash in on a book deal and soak up the publicity.

This kind of blogger anonymity is common and understandable.  Most of these bloggers remain anonymous because they’re shy, or because they have a primary job that is completely removed from their blogger job.  The anonymity helps to keep the two worlds separated and happy.

The anonymity that some people seek online allows them to hurl insults and to harm the reputation of their target victims while hiding in the shadows of anonymity.  This type of cowardly, aggressive and offensive anonymity is also common, but should be eliminated online.

All anonymity is not the same and should not be treated the same.  The intent of the anonymous blogger or commenter must be weighed.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Social Marketing

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,

August 21, 2009

Suprise Marketing: Hasbro Celebrates the Candyland 60th Anniversary

Hasbro uses the most crooked street in America, Lombard Street in San Francisco, as a life-sized Candyland board.

Of course, a few cranky onlookers may turn their nose up at this blatant act of consumerism and capitalism, but most people will get a kick out of seeing a life-sized board game from their childhood and enjoy some good memories from a simpler time.

Hasbro has created some successful surprise marketing here and surely has generated some good buzz–conversations, discussions, comments–both offline and online.

That’s the whole idea of great marketing–getting people to talk positively about your brand, your products, your services.

If they aren’t talking about you, you’re not doing anything worth talking about.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Advertising, Consumers, Marketing, Social Marketing, Surprise Marketing

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

August 20, 2009

One small step for print media, one giant leap for marketing?

CBS and Pepsi have, to my knowledge, embedded the first video player in a print ad in the latest Entertainment Weekly.

This experiment is surely to spur several different reactions:

How cool!

How annoying!

How do you recycle this thing?

Whatever.

What about all the garbage this will create?

It’s only a matter of time before print and video merge.  Companies like eInk and others are creating thinner and thinner screens–or electronic paper– that can transmit still images for signs or books as well as video.  One day you’ll be able to wallpaper an entire wall of your living room and have it be your television and computer screen.  Or make your clothes out of thin screens and be a walking TV.  Or roll up a screen and carry it with you and be able to access online content anywhere at anytime without a bulky computer or PDA (the future of the Kindle?)

This technology can bring us all to a wild new level of marketing and advertising immersion.  Imagine video snippets and moving images on every sign, in every newspaper or magazine, on every label.  Yes, marketers can’t wait.

But, consumers may all be given seizures by the blast of video marketing attacking them at every turn.  Walk down a supermarket aisle and every package is dancing and flashing and talking and singing and playing music.  Like any new technology or platform video marketing everywhere will go through a growth and maturity cycle and become accepted and commonplace.  The technology will have its pros and cons and not everyone will be a fan.

Get ready, everyone.  The CBS and Pepsi example in Entertainment Weekly is simply the first small step.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Advertising, Consumers, Design, innovation, Marketing

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , ,

August 19, 2009

What is free speech online?

A New York Supreme Court judge very recently ruled in favor of a former model who wants to discover the identity of an anonymous blogger who posted pictures and disparaging comments about her online using Google’s Blogger.com service.  The ruling required Google to hand over any and all identifying information about the blogger to the plaintiff’s legal team.  Google handed over an IP address and email address.  While Google sympathizes with victims of cyber-bullying the company only provides information when required by court rulings or subpoenas to protect the privacy of its users.

Once the identity of the blogger is known, the blogger will certainly be sued for defamation.

The anonymous blogger’s legal team argued that the ruling would damage free speech online, that rampant name-calling is practically part of the DNA of the internet.

What a joke.

The biggest problem with the internet is that people feel they can hide their identity and anonymously hurl insults and post rude, malicious, hateful and hurtful comments.  In the shadows, certain people feel they can say something that they otherwise would never say in the real world where their identity would be known.

This court case has nothing to do with limiting free speech.  It aims to eliminate anonymous hate-postings.  If someone wants to post insults online, then do so using your real identity.  This court case should help to reduce the degree of over-the-top hate in postings and bring them more in line with common criticism.

As the internet matures and becomes more and more entwined with our daily lives, it’s sure to grow more comfortable with being the World Wide Web and less the Wild Wild Web.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Social Marketing

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

August 16, 2009

Everyone’s worried about measurement

It’s not just digital marketing that’s worried about measurement.  Nielsen is directly in the cross hairs of the major TV companies, big advertisers and some of the biggest ad companies.  Top TV companies are banding together to form a new measurement consortium.

I guess Nielsen was a good friend when ratings were rosy and TV was the central entertainment vehicle for most Americans. Unfortunately for Nielsen, this summer has been a huge disappointment to the major networks–all the new shows are duds.  Beyond the recent bad news, it’s been a slow decline for the major networks and network TV for almost a decade.  Video games, the internet and online media, and the fragmentation and specialization of entertainment choices have all eroded the viewership and power of the major networks.  The average age of a prime time viewer is now 50.  Younger viewers are ignoring the major networks.

Of course, advertisers are demanding to know what they’re paying for.  If fewer people are watching, and the people watching are getting older and older on average, a lot of brands have no reason to advertise on the major networks.  Their demographic is best targeted somewhere else since they certainly aren’t watching TV.

So, Nielsen is caught in the position of “shoot the messenger” when the news is bad.

But, Nielsen is probably not completely innocent either.  Their measurement process has been a source of frustration for the networks and advertisers in the past.  And now with more and more TV not being viewed on a TV, there’s a larger chance that their ratings are inaccurate.  With so much riding on the accuracy of the ratings–billions of dollars of advertising and the survival of the TV networks themselves–both Nielsen and the networks need to get it right.

For now it seems that the networks are taking matters into their own hands, and are smartly bringing the major advertisers and ad companies with them.  Nielsen continues to work on measurement improvements with the hope that this current showdown will subside.

What we’re witnessing is the death of TV as we know it…or knew it.  Consumers want entertainment to cater to them, they want personalized and controlled entertainment.  The days of staying at home to watch a TV show when it’s aired are over.  Tivo and DVRs put an end to that.  Sites like Hulu and products like Slingbox or SlingPlayer let you watch TV wherever and whenever you want.  And now some “TV shows” are purely internet properties.  You won’t find them on TV at all.

The internet is converging with TV.  What the major networks will need to figure out is how they’ll live in the converged world, how they’ll measure viewership and how they’ll charge for advertising.  Nielsen is trying to figure it out but won’t be ready to implement the “converged measurement process” for another 2 years.  The major networks are trying to figure it out themselves.

The evolution of media consumption will continue to outpace the metrics.  One certainty is the TV world as we know it will never be the same again.  Technology advancement and entertainment fragmentation will keep advertisers, agencies, consumers and entertainment companies quite busy.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Advertising, agency, Consumers, Marketing

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

August 6, 2009

Charging fees for free stuff

Rupert Murdoch of News Corporation stated that the company would begin charging for content across all online properties by year end.  The new approach to news delivery was precipitated by a steep decline in operating profits.  Murdoch also called out Amazon’s Kindle for a potential, impending confrontation over who owns the subscribers and the level of subscription fees.

Advertising supported free content just isn’t cutting it for News Corporation.

Remember, News Corporation also owns MySpace which is a free social networking community…for now.

News Corporation has not revealed how they’ll charge for online content.  They have some experience with subscription fees for The Wall Street Journal online.

How will consumers react to fees for previously free content?

Murdoch believes that consumers will be willing to pay for premium and unique content.

I’m certain that a small percentage of consumers will willingly pay for content from The Wall Street Journal or FoxNews or News Corporation’s other news outlets. Unfortunately for News Corporation, the vast majority of consumers will go elsewhere for free content.  Those other free news sources will then see a traffic spike and their advertising revenues should increase.  News Corporation will be forced to offset the traffic losses with subscription fees because, while it could argue that paying subscribers are a premium audience, it will be difficult to increase ad rates with a steep drop in traffic.  Competitor news sites may be able to increase ad rates given their likely traffic increase.

A few years ago The New York Times charged for online content access, but when the newspaper dropped subscription fees for content access, traffic spiked as did ad revenue.

News Corporation will regret this knee jerk reaction to losses stemming primarily from the global economic recession.

Maybe Starbucks should become members only to increase revenues.  Pay membership fees and receive a personalized (and collectible!) Starbucks RFID membership card.  Of course you’ll still need to pay for the coffee on top of the membership fees.

Not a member?  No coffee for you.

RFID cards will be required to enter stores or to open the new gates at all drive-thrus.

Sound good?

There’s a huge difference between free and formerly free.  If your business model is built around offering something for free…great.  It works for a lot of businesses in a wide variety of industries.

But if you suddenly want to charge fees for what used to be free…be prepared for a backlash.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Consumers, Marketing

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,