Tag Archives: media trends

Where Have You Gone, Ashton Kutcher?

I heard you left Twitter the other day because you sent out a Tweet you shouldn’t have about Joe Paterno and the whole Penn State fiasco. And you’re right – it was dumb of you to jump to conclusions with that Tweet imploring the University to keep him before you knew the full facts.

But you know what, Ashton? It’s OK. Really. You made a stupid Tweet but it’s no reason for you to leave Twitter altogether (or hand it off to someone else to manage your account).

See, Ashton, while I respect you for trying to be more responsible, it’s exactly why I’d like you to come back. Because while you were apologizing, Magic Johnson was on Twitter calling Joe Paterno a “hero.” Within 5 minutes, he got a backlash so bad that he was trying to Tweet what he really meant by that. Last I checked, Magic is still on Twitter.

I suppose everything that comes out of Kim Kardashian’s Twitter stream is a stroke of educated genius? Or Paris Hilton? Or Perez Hilton? Or Lindsey Lohan? They’re still hanging around the Twitterverse.

You’re a Midwesterner, Ashton, so I know you must watch quite a few Bears games when you’re not shooting your sitcom. So you must remember when a few dumb NFL players last year shot off Tweets questioning Jay Cutler’s manhood when he bowed out of a playoff game due to injury? I’m pretty sure none of them were physicians with knowledge of the injury entailed, none of them were in the game and none of them were Jay Cutler, so they couldn’t know what the pain actually felt like.

Nope. They Tweeted anyway from a cowardly place that was nowhere near Soldier Field. And some of them, unlike you, Ashton, didn’t even say they were sorry for it. Gee, maybe they should leave Twitter too.

Point being, Ashton, is this: Celebrities, athletes and us common folk have all said things in our life, whether online or offline that we all wish we could take back. It’s what makes us human. We apologize for our shortcomings when it happens and we try to move on. Like you did. Why? Because we know this:

Tweets are not press releases.

They should not be treated as such.

The very thing that makes us enjoy this relatively new universe of social media is that we can feel closer to people we would never/rarely otherwise get to interact with in the real world. Some are respected authorities in our industry, some are celebrities. And in exchange for entering that domain, we should be willing to cut each other a certain amount of slack just as we would in the offline world. Particularly when it’s accompanied by a quick acknowledgement of the mistake.

Of course, I can’t suggest everything in the world is fine to say and allows you to be off the hook. That’s silly. There are extreme and dangerous exceptions, especially among intentionally hateful people who would use social media as an amplifier for their views.

But Ashton, you slapped your own hand in a way that suggests everything under your Twitter handle from now on will be screened and filtered carefully before it goes out – I don’t think that’s the answer. I’m just not in favor of a social media strategy that involves high screening by committee. I think I’ll see the Lochness Monster and Bigfoot hug before I see a fast-moving social media committee.

There has to be a certain amount of trust involved once you’ve given designated people clear guidelines. And yes, maybe they’ll still veer slightly off course from time to time, but come on. If every last Tweet and post has to be reviewed by multiple parties before it goes out, you’re defeating the purpose of being involved in social media at all because it’s probably not going to be as real-time as it should be. And THAT’S when you should get out or avoid social media because you’re missing the whole point of commenting on what’s current and relevant to an audience that expects that.

It’s a Tweet. It’s not an Official Company Position. That’s why people say things like “These views do not reflect my company” in their bio if they really have to.

So come back, Ashton. You screwed up and said something bad. It’s OK. I forgive you. I’ll even watch an episode of Two And A Half Men if it’ll make you feel better.

The mail system is changing forever. Not just on Saturdays.

It’s time we wish the first generation of direct mail and e-mail a happy retirement to Del Boca Vista. I recall stories of when ol’ direct made the eyes of David Ogilvy twinkle with glee. Or when e-mail came on the scene, a hot, young upstart in the electronic world.

But like all things, there’s a new generation of direct mail and e-mail taking over and doing things differently. A generation of mail made for new technologies. Therefore the people receiving their messages demand more. The people using them for marketing purposes had better demand more of themselves in how they create, strategize and measure.

Let me explain. The ways we use mail has worked well for some period of time but like anything else, they are evolving.

Younger generations such as Millennials are embracing alternative communication methods through social media and internal project management tools to get information and send information beyond the standard send-and-receive e-mail systems. They also are responding to those offline techniques that incorporate online communication for continuing the conversation and relationship. I hardly think the generations that follow them are going to revert back the other way. We’re only going to get more electronic, more segmented, more fast and more personalized.

Marketers have the choice of evolving with this development or not at their own disappointment, if not their own peril.

Bottom line: Your message will not be nearly as effective if you ignore the ways to inject more technological applications into that direct mail or e-mail while adding inbound marketing mechanisms into your efforts.

We have to act as if direct mail in its most traditional form of “here’s our message, call this phone number if you’re interested” is irrelevant right now in terms of the call to action. We have to act as if spammers are ruining the quality of e-mail communication by the day.

It doesn’t mean mail is over. It means old direct mail and e-mail marketing messages are over.

Farewell to Direct Mail Marketing as We Know It

Let’s pick up the bugle and play “TAPS” for traditional direct mail as we’ve known it – a static piece like a postcard that merely asks your recipient to call or e-mail you without leading them anywhere else isn’t working hard enough. Even before the U.S. Postal Service decides to trim a day or more from its schedule, you should be re-evaluating conventional direct mail – not whether or not to use it necessarily but how you will inject a much-needed online component into that DM.

Direct mail with no online component such as a landing page or QR Code to scan or code to enter when they get to a website for a discount/prize….is probably going to get about a 1% response rate at best. So if you want to send out some general postcard to promote your business and get awareness, it’s your dollar. But expect no less than 99 out of 100 people to pitch it in that format. It’s good to at least have that expectation so that you’re not surprised (and if you are pleasantly surprised, that’s gravy). If you want better than that, the next generation is about driving the recipient to a personalized URL. You should be doing that right now if you’re using direct mail. Do you want a static piece that provides a response at best of awareness without likely action or do you want a piece that potentially drives the person online to take action and possibly even find long-term connectivity through a social network?

In the second half of this topic in my next post, I’ll talk about why you should bid adieu to the first generation of e-mail marketing right now too.

 

 

The Day the Borders to E-Readership Came Down

In the age of the Kindle and the iPad, the concept of traditional book stores closing these days is becoming commonplace. I fought this trend in my own mind because as much of a digital person that I am, I enjoy the physical nature of a book. Traditional books speak to my sentimental side too — I can remember my grandparents having a marvelous collection of titles that they had accumulated through the years. As a kid, I didn’t know what most of the contents were, but it spurred the imagination to see so many books lined up high and back-to-back against a wall.

So when a flagship book store closes like the one Borders Books and Music had across from Water Tower Place on 830 N. Michigan Ave., it serves as the official signal that, like it or not, the e-reader has won. Think about what a store like this had going for it: A prime location on the Magnificent Mile. Close proximity to shopping and restaurants. 3 floors of regular activity.

And yet, even here, it wasn’t enough. Soon, I believe we’ll be looking at book stores the same way we look at the occasional record store these days – “wow, they still have these things? Who goes there?”

In other words, if you think the Kindle and iPad are popular now, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet. Of course people have them. But I’m talking about a different tier than where we are now. You know how every 3rd person on the street has a smartphone in their possession? This level of mainstream adoption of the e-reader isn’t far behind. The way it is unthinkable for most of us to not have an iPhone, Android, etc. in this day and age will be the way we view the concept of not having an e-reader. Laptops and smartphones will be more important to our daily lives and for connecting with others, but gaining information for news and entertainment purposes in a format that is the most akin to a book or magazine will rank high on our priority list too.

For marketers, it represents a potential new opportunity to a degree. I don’t know how receptive someone might be when immersed in an e-book to suddenly see an ad float nearby but some may put up with it to pay less (not unlike other models where you need to pay extra for ad-free). Personally, I’m skeptical until I see numbers that this will lead to converted sales, but if the goal is more brand awareness without annoyance, it may not be a bad route to at least evaluate in the right circumstances.

What I’m interested in is, now that we’re being pushed toward this medium, how will different audience segments adapt to e-readership and what does it mean for even greater interaction electronically. For example, what does it mean for awareness of transit advertising when even more commuter eyeballs within that bus or train are drawn to Kindles and iPads? Does the age ceiling of the audience raise higher and become older than ever?

In a world without Borders or Barnes & Noble or Virgin Megastores (A library? What’s that?), the choices we’ve had as far as physical options for books are falling like dominoes. The challenge from here for agencies and marketers will be how to engage in sophisticated media planning when the media for the masses we’ve known is looking ever more like a Personal Cloud of media controlled by the consumer. The noise you heard from Michigan Avenue of the doors locking at Borders is just one more pillar to fall in that direction. But as I’ve said before with newspapers, the desire for news and entertainment didn’t die. The format for how people desired the content merely evolved. There’s no point in fighting this evolution either. But make no mistake as a result of this one and other evolutions like it: Marketers need the technological tools for understanding media consumption and shifts in audience behavior to be more advanced than they’ve ever, ever been.