Future Efforts

In Wayne Friedman’s recent Media Critique, “Commercial Clutter May Finally Choke Content,” he touches on the media tidal wave that’s been churning since the 1990s, and offers his prediction for the fate of cable TV programming as "branded content in TV commercials". He then goes on to talk about his, and select marketing communities', "wonder and worry" for a commercial-saturated future, and for the possible endangerment of future marketing and advertising efforts in general.

And he kind of lost me on that last part.

Because, while the withering away of TV programming is one thing, equating it with the self-combustion of marketing and advertising is another. The most successful marketing efforts have never relied solely on the medium, they've always had a relevant message that connects with the target. Friedman's statement, “Perhaps younger adults don't really mind being sold to that much,” however sarcastic it may be, represents the sort of objective guessing that a lot of brands are using to ineffectively target upcoming generations. Isn't it time for all marketers, advertisers, brands to take a look through the windows... meet the consumers, and get to know the audiences rather than prospect them?

If they did look, they'd see that the future--today's youth--doesn't mind the media clutter. They’re just used to working around it. Fliers, coupons, pop-ups, billboards—if the message isn’t interesting, they’ll cut it out. Anyone in touch with the generation knows they like to mess around with pictures in Photoshop, cut up newspapers and rearrange the text, take a $25,000 car and put $50,000 worth of investments into it (or watch someone else do it), create plunky sounds with an old Casio keyboard.... as a result of media clutter, they are contextually experimental, process-oriented, and they pick and choose from different genres.

They like to re-fix, revamp, remix, refigure. So, they are constantly removing messages, adding messages, creating and extracting stories for their own entertainment. They take sections, splices, and overlapping layers, and combine them to create something unique and tweaked to their satisfaction. They’ve got their own white space, which they fill selectively. So, if companies aren’t worried that this burgeoning tech culture is going to find a way around their intrusive advertising efforts, then they might want to consider the fact that the upcoming generation is accustomed to piecing out them out altogether—unless the message is interesting enough to add to their collage. Meaning: forget about the medium for a second.

Even stepping away from the youth-specific bracket, the most important element of future marketing efforts isn’t how the message is “being sold” by a specific medium to consumers, like Friedman has posed, it's what consumers are doing with the message. More damaging than the repetition—which won’t necessarily deter every audience—is the artifice. When so much control is taken away from consumers (when molded, cliched "marketing" is stuffed down their throats), it doesn't allow for the kind of accessibility and freedom that makes it exciting for consumers to embrace a brand. And for Friedman’s “MTV generation” (that was painful to repeat), ownership and relevance of the brand message is more important than ever.

While they haven’t lost their enthusiasm for new stories, upcoming generations are much more selective and critical toward what they’ll accept. Advertisers might want to consider the fact that over-saturation could compromise any messages out there that might actually resonate with this audience. A copy of a copy of a copy probably won’t be valuable (no, not even in some neo-Warholian fashion) to a group that gets its thrills from slicing up templates, and is aware of prevailing commodities.

That said, the bottom line for marketing to ANY generation--whether your advertisements are running 23 hours a day, or once during TV programs--is that the spots will still be worthless if their content isn’t relevant. And by focusing on the medium rather than the message, agencies are scrapping any relevant content before consumers can take a look and see for themselves.

-LR

Taking it to the streets

It’s no secret that there has been backlash to traditional marketing methods over the past few years. And it’s not just that people are actually aware of marketing efforts now; it’s to the point where every consumer I know is trying to find ways around it. Because of this increased search for authenticity, there has also been an increase in grassroots product-based communication and word-of mouth endorsements, or, in other words… recommendations from your friends.

Companies like Yellowtail and of course, Amazon, have been smart enough to incorporate this conversational current into their websites. But what about the larger issue at hand, which is: WHO are these omnipresent product reviewers giving brands a run for their money with but a flick of the wrist? We’re acknowledging the power of word-of-mouth, giving credit to consumer-to-consumer recommendations, but what’s happening upstream? Who is throwing the babies in the water?

Queue the Influencers. If you haven’t already gathered, these are the individuals that have authority and presence within their respective social communities. Probably the most exciting element of this personality type is the basic trait that they’re very vocal with personal opinions. If you've ever made an Amazon purchase based on the ‘Customers who bought this also bought…’ section, you've experienced the Influencer phenomenon first-hand; people choose to trust certain individuals’ recommendations because the communication is rooted in a social landscape that they are either a part of, or would like to be a part of (but maybe don’t have the time or resources), and inherently trust.

So… these followers, or listeners, constitute a whopping 92% percent of the population. Which means that there are a lot of people out there receptive to interesting and relevant stories, share by the Influencers. But what makes certain brand stories resonate and others die a gory death, you query? If the person communicating the story doesn’t understand the audience, and if the story is not interesting and worth sharing—the plot will be lost, and deemed irrelevant. An outsider marketing within a community that can’t relate to what he has to say is the equivalent of a stranger knocking on apartment doors with free samples, and can be just as creepy.

Similarly, if a bombshell girl is handing out samples in a bar, she’s going to get attention, she might also get a name and address for a mailing list… but ultimately, she’s going to walk away from the consumer, without providing anything for her audience to digest and consequentially remember. This means that her relevance will not only be separate from the product she’s promoting, but, without the exchange of substantial information, it will also be fleeting.

To tie it all in…the entire philosophy of Influencer Marketing as genuine communication is shot when companies employ thousands of “stock promoters,” no matter how influential the company says they are. These are the people who like free stuff; they’re working for beer one week and razors the next. However, what you’ll end up getting is people who function exactly as they are stored; merely one of a thousand names in a database. The dirty truth is, if the brand these people are promoting doesn’t truly represent them, and if they are in fact tied into their social community, they’re going to instinctively separate the brand from their identity in social settings. This means that they’ll be ineffective Influencers. And if these people aren’t relevant within their social community, they’re not Influencers to begin with.

We want people to buy what they like. Whether it’s the 15-year old girl who loves Tab because she saw it in a picture with her mom from the 70s, or the 25-year old guy who basks in his knowledge of musical, artistic, and even brand obscurities, we know there is an audience and an identity for every brand. By tapping into this identity to work with people who are true to that brand and passionate about it, we can share the brand story in an honest and effective way, and ultimately increase brand volume.

Alright, I’m finished for now. I’ll be back with more rants soon enough, so please keep us informed of anything you’d like to hear, or any news about beverage marketing that you think is interesting….as you’ve probably picked up, we love hearing what people have to say.

-LR

Proper Communication

Our own Valerie Wolfe is a big fan of Advertising Age columnist Jonah Bloom’s perspective on word-of-mouth. Sometimes she’ll quote him loosely in social situations, other days you can catch her breezing through the halls with an article in hand nodding intently in agreement. So, because I respect Valerie’s opinions and because I want to be totally cool around the office and talk-the-talk, I picked up Bloom’s article in the February 13th Ad Age.

At Liquid Intelligence, we help foster increased brand volume through proper communication with the use of Influencers; so, I was right there with Bloom when he said “in today’s world, “the question for marketers and agencies is less ‘what single message do we want to send?’ and more ‘how do we get people talking about our product, learn from what they say and tap their conversation to inform other communication efforts?” Our marketing philosophy echoes the same sentiments; rather than communicate a static message to consumers, we work with Influencers who are already close to a particular brand, and together we develop the best ways to communicate honest brand stories and opinions to consumers. As Bloom implies, successful communication-based marketing (on a ground level) requires that companies identify what questions are being asked, and how to answer them in a way that resonates with the listener.

Reminds me of a story. A while ago, someone outside (way outside) of the business sphere found out that I worked at a beverage marketing firm, and asked me about marketing for the beer industry. “So what do you guys do, specifically?” he asked, of course, very generally. (For those wondering the same question, hang in there.) I’d been in similar situations before…“what is your thesis about,” “why does man exist,” etc.…and the conversational transition from loose pleasantries to weary logistical regurgitations makes for somewhat of a buzz-kill; the fact-based information overwhelming, the medium ineffective.

I could explain that Influencers are a personality type, Influencers are those who try things because they are new, Influencers make up 8% of the North American population, but how do these facts really translate to the guy in front of me with the Wicked Quick shirt on, drinking Makers on the rocks while straining to hear me over the sounds of Lust for Life ripping through the bar? He doesn’t care about the science behind Influencer Marketing anymore than he cares about the Smirnoff Ice special down the street; and that’s not saying he does or doesn’t need to, it’s just not that relevant to his lifestyle—even if it is relevant to the brand looking to increase sales.

Eventually, his intended inquiry surfaced: he wanted to know about what we did for Pabst. This wasn’t the first time I’d been asked about Liquid Intelligence’s P.B.R. campaign, so I had the answer down, easy. Before thinking it through, I launched the spiel, “First, we identified the influential people within some of the grassroots movements,” it began. I was into it for about 5 minutes, when suddenly a Sabbath song came on… and he signified that he’d heard enough from me by walking away mid-sentence to do pull-ups on the door frame near the emergency exit. I was caught off-guard. So, I wasn’t as captivating as I’d thought? Was that his way of digesting the layers upon layers of sophisticated marketing insight I’d just unveiled? Should I start working out?

I’ve since realized, over the course of several Influencer Marketing campaigns with Li, that people are, at all times, choosing what they want to listen to. As it turns out, you can hold someone’s attention with information they perceive irrelevant for only so long, generally until they find something better to put in their ear. Just like people choose a genre of music to embrace, or a radio frequency, they choose specific channels of communication through which they’ll accept information, those which are interesting to them… and those that sound good.

To expand on that, even if you have a great story, it won’t translate unless you communicate it properly--and to communicate it properly, you need to know, first, what information resonates with your audience and, second, the proper channels through which to communicate it. If I were transported back one year to the same bar, facing the same question, I would tell Jared about the local bands that came to embrace Pabst, and the concerts (Independent Music World Series, etc) we organized with people around the city--most of people he probably knows. I’d even tell him about the flukes, or the unplanned; muddy rooftop parties in the rain that lasted until 4 AM, the slacker party which never got a solid date pinned down, the impromptu wedding at a tattoo parlor in Baltimore. All of it is colorful, all is relevant, and all add to the story behind the brand…and it is the back-story that prompts someone to embrace a brand… ultimately increasing brand volume.

These days, when talking with my friends who aren’t pursuing interests in the marketing arena, the facts behind what goes on at ‘the factory,’ are neither captivating nor relevant. For such parties, I communicate the Influencer concept along these simple lines: “You know Mike, he’s an influencer,” or, “Nika is an influencer.” Through this relativity-based explanation, the basic framework is conveyed without having to incorporate lengthy facts or impotent adjectives; extraneous information that wouldn’t stick with this group.

It’s utilizing pre-established groundwork to tell a story in a compelling way. Even though, on a pop-level of the marketing industry, Influencers are occasionally described as ‘cool’ people within their communities, should I phrase that to some of my non-industry friends I would not only be leaving them with an intangible, I’d also be opening myself up for scathing ridicule. Most likely they’d gather around to laugh at the prospect of corporate America really knowing who is ‘in the scene;’ since, as far as they’re concerned, the only scene that truly exists is their own.

So, what LI considers proper communication doesn’t mean manufacturing information that is easier to swallow, or manipulating information to fit a mold. It just means identifying your audience and delivering communication from within their world (or from within the world in which your audience strives to exist); it’s a strategy that works because it can only be accomplished if the speaker himself legitimately operates within said environment. Which makes it honest and authentic. I like it because it’s not in the twisted, brain-mining vein of some of the marketing agencies trying to sleaze around today.

That said, what does communication have to do directly with marketing? Evvverything. As Jonah Bloom says, “today the most important communication is not the marketing monologue but the dialogue that takes place.” Around these parts, we like to think of a brand as a concept or a story, as opposed to an absolute statement. And while there are a million ways to communicate an idea, only a few will resonate with the target audience; finding out what’s appropriate for, and the best way to communicate your brand is the sort of challenge we fly with.

-LR

A Letter From Atlanta

Partner Ted Wright’s words to the Editor of Forbes, in response to Jack Trout's take on Word of Mouth. Article link at bottom.

Dear Sir –

Wow. I don’t know which day I was sadder, the one when I found out that Santa Claus was not real or today, the day that I found out one of my marketing heroes, Jack Trout, was no longer innovative. I’m really upset. If there comes a point in the life of Jack Trout where he “just doesn’t get it” anymore what hope is there for any of us mere mortals?

With all of the data out there clearly saying that word of mouth is what drives sales and adoption in the United States, and that broadcast media (TV, radio, newspapers, magazines) is rapidly losing what little power to move markets it still retained, it is beyond me how anyone could doubt the power an organized word of mouth campaign could have on the life of a brand. Word of mouth isn’t confusing at all. Simply, it is people telling people stories about brands or services that they have used or heard about. What is confusing about this? Organizing word of mouth campaigns might not seem revolutionary or “new” to a marketing god like Jack Trout but there are lots of companies out there that have not even investigated this effective marketing discipline and spent millions or billions on communication channels that are less and less effective over time.

With tips like, “A third-party endorsement of your product has always been the Holy Grail,” “Buzz can kill you if you don't have the right product” and “You just can't buy mouths the way you can buy media,” we’d all be silly not to listen to Jack. Right? So let’s all follow Jack’s suggestion and keep shoveling money into advertising because it’s been proven to be so effective in today’s marketplace.

On a personal note, for my friends who are reading this, the day that I publish or even write a paragraph bemoaning the fact that I must learn new vocabulary about anything--much less my chosen profession--please take me to my local golf course, show me to the first tee, take the keys to the office out of my hands and wish me luck. My remaining employees will thank you for it.

To paraphrase my hero, it’s a sad day when I could even think about telling one of my CEO clients , “You just put a big chunk of money into hiring Jack Trout? Good luck”. How very sad I must feel today.

Ted Wright
Partner, Liquid Intelligence
Atlanta, Georgia

http://www.forbes.com/columnists/2006/03/02/gm-harley-marketing-cx_jt_0307trout.html

Word

Recently, Partner Ted Wright offered up this response to Mike Hoffman’s Inc. Article, “Lies, damn lies, and word of mouth.”

To brief; in his piece, Hoffman draws on the practices of companies like BzzAgent to address the topic of full disclosure, and grapples with various subsets of word of mouth marketing, specifically attempting to gauge the methods' effectiveness and longevity.

Here’s what Ted had to say.

Full Disclosure: Liquid Intelligence is a WOMMA charter member and I’ve spoken on the topic of word of mouth at several industry conferences including WOMMA.

Mike, thanks for the interesting article about WOMMA and word of mouth. I was particularly interested in your idea that the conventional wisdom today is that “everybody lies.” The inference I picked up from that sentence was that maybe the effectiveness of word of mouth suffers because people think that everyone lies. This is an interesting point and gets close to what I think distinguishes good word of mouth programming from GREAT word of mouth programming. To be most effective, a word of mouth program should have its recommendations come from people (we call them Influencers) who are perceived as experts by the person to which the communication is being sent.. Most often this perception has been established by previous conversations or actions but can also be established by something as simple as the Influencers personality, speech or style of dress.

Example - I have a friend who is a chef. I know him and his wife and have been to their house before and seen book shelves full of cook books, chef autobiographies, histories of kitchen tools, etc.. Last week he told me about a great new restaurant. I booked a reservation the next day without hesitation, further research or consulting others. Since we have a three year old, “going out” requires a logistics to rival a small invasion so this was no small leap of faith. I took this leap because I perceive this man as an expert in fine dining. If he had talked with me about a new CD he was listening to or car he enjoyed I would not have reacted in the same way because I don’t perceive him as having a particular expertise in those areas.

Finding experts who are also Influencers, getting them to listen to a brand story and then having them adopt the story as their own are the three keys to having a GREAT word of mouth program. Internally we refer to it as having Influencers that are “close to the brand”. When you have word of mouth programs that are populated by people that are close to the brand, then questions like “Are we obliged to talk about a product we don’t like?” which you noted crop up in programs like the ones created by BzzAgent don't even get raised.



We hear you, Ted. -LR

Example of WOM Creative

We were reminded of an example of Influencers creating WOM creative. As Kerry Stranman at Motivequest (www.motivequest.com) recently commented on the WOMMA (www.womma.org) website - "As New Balance was repositioning itself against Nike, it looked to its heritage in amateur athletics in its "For Love or Money" campaign. They created a space online & asked consumers to post pictures of themselves and tell their "everyday athlete" story. The stories that were generated ("I run because I almost lost my mother-in-law to cancer and it was the one thing I could control...") allow the consumers to feel a sense of participation in the brand, and gave the brand a level of authenticity that straight-forward advertising can't do alone."

If we all thought a bit, I'm sure we would come up with other examples. Now,if you want to get technical about it, it would be great to find out if those Influencers that visited the site actually helped New Balance reach their objectives - wonder if it was sales or pulling together the community?

Mobilizing Your Message

Ok – so before I start writing about how to produce creative for word-of-mouth, can anyone remember when the last time was that so many people around the US got together and actually protested something with such vigor? I’m talking about the immigration debate that is going on right now and the hundreds of thousands of protesters gathering and marching in cities around the country. Talk about a word-of-mouth campaign. A single issue...a myriad of messages and stories…all mobilized by Influencers in the community.

Ok-back to the creative. One of the great debates that exist with word-of-mouth has to do with control. Traditional marketers are all about top down marketing; strategies drive tactics. A question we at the shop here have always had is “How can you come up with long term strategic plans when you cannot predict the future –especially your competition?” We believe in tactical-based strategies when it comes to word-of-mouth. In other words, strategy needs to be developed from a deep knowledge in the actual tactics of the business itself. With an obvious nod to Al Ries and Jack Trout’s book, Bottom-Up Marketing, the only way you can nurture the type of story that people want to talk to others about is by creating half the story…from the marketers’ perspective. This is the creative. By giving people whom we call Influencers half the story, they have a trigger to complete it and make it their own. It’s kind of like that movie with Sean Connery where he’s a writer and he has the kid from the hood take some of his stuff so he can write some of his own stories. When you're ready to execute the Influencer Program, the result of this collaboration between marketer, agency and Influencer is an authentic story that you helped nurture and bring to the surface. Oh, by the way – you can control certain elements of the creative even if the Influencer has a 50% ownership. You can have an underlying creative platform that’s steeped in the brand essence and that won’t change. You can make certain everything follows that. AND you have to constantly reinvent the triggers…because…sing with me…..now that you have that relationship with the customer/consumer that you’ve always wanted, keeping things fresh should be at the top of your list of priorities.

I think it was Hispanic DJs in LA that rallied everyone…normally competing against one another, they rallied everyone to the cause – very cool.

How Do You Create WOM Creative?

I don't remember any other discipline going through so much analysis that everyone forgot about the heart of the matter - the story!

WOM is all about sharing interesting stories, yet everyone who talks about WOM talks about how it can be tracked or how you find the people that need to be "talked" to, (like a channel)- but what about the stories themselves? Very rarely are we talking or debating what constitutes a great story - what we at the agency here still call the "creative". Yes - it is possible to have authentic stories communicated from one person to the other and still call those stories "creative".

Imagine a WOM agency in the very beginning of a program or effort - where those creative types are manufacturing storyboards or concepts. What if that creative material came from actual customers of yours instead of your agency's creatives? I'm not talking about a contest, (now seemingly a tactic that everyone has done), where people send in a commercial. I'm talking about actually going to talk to consumers and customers to learn about what their experiences are with your brand, your sales force, your delivery folks and ultimately the people in your organization. Are people saying good things about the brand or company? Do they have great stories? What about their needs?

What I'm talking about is having a relationship with your customers and consumers. If you have any type of relationship with them, we, (meaning you, the client and us, the agency), have the ability to creatively nurture the right message - the creative. In our world, that means creating so others can create.

More tomorrow.