Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Welcome, BDW
Thanks,
Justin McCammon
Steal this Idea: #2 - Making Radio Relevant Again
Ok, got an idea here that has two potential implementers: big radio (looking at you, Clear Channel) or small-indie-start-up net radio Jelli.
Right now, traditional, broadcast rado, kinda sucks. It's been sucking for a long time and it's only gotten worse with competition from I-know-exactly-what-you-want-to-hear-next, algorithm driven, internet radio. But maybe there's a way to improve the traditional radio experience and leapfrog it ahead of internet radio. Ok, at least catch it up.
Radio, like all the other so-called "traditional" media, is mainly a one-way communication channel. Sure, listeners can call in to make requests (and as of late, email or tweet them in too) but for the most part it's a DJ blathering on about something semi-relevant while queuing up the next corporate-mandated song. Since you (as the listener) have little input over what is played we tend to gravitate towards the station that plays the most of what we want to hear, thus freeing us from switching stations every other song while we're driving.
What hasn't hit radio yet (that I'm aware of) is the social, web 2.0 revolution.
Enter a service like Jelli (which I've mentioned before) that makes radio much more social. Now you're not just a listener, but an active participant in voting up what you want to hear next, voting down what you don't and chatting about what's currently playing with fellow users.
What happens is that traditional radio licenses (or develops on their own) a platform like Jelli's for their stations. Remember that one of my main criticisms about Jelli when I reviewed it was that you had everyone (and their musical tastes) in one room. As a result no one really got to hear what they wanted consistently. With an existing radio station that problem is taken care of as the filtering is already done. Those who listen to an indie rock station aren't going to be looking for Celine Dion. Those who listen to a classic rock station aren't going to be looking for, well, Celine Dion either. This puts listeners with similar tastes in pools together and lets them decide what is played.
But wait! OMG! How will radio make any money without ads!
The great thing about a platform like Jelli is that you are checking the home page a lot. It's updated constantly to reflect the ever changing votes determining what's played next so you are always paying attention, unlike other internet radios. This presents a fantastic opportunity for advertising to be inserted that will more than likely be looked at. And since you have additional information being captured (what's being voted up or down) you can make some assumptions about who's listening and serve them more relevant advertising. Got a lot of punk rock being voted up? Serve up an ad for a skate shop or tattoo parlor (obviously a stereotype, but you get the idea.)
But what about those listening in their cars, do they get a commercial free listen? I don't know, I can't solve everyone's problems all at once so I guess some things are going to have to be left up to those who implement this idea.
What about payola and all that cash that record labels pay big radio to play the same six songs over and over again? Fuck it. Seriously. It's time for radio to reinvent itself and obsolete itself before something else does. (I attribute the quote of "Obsolete yourself before someone else does to a Wall Street Journal about Netflix from a few years back regarding instant viewing. Smart thinking.)
The end result of all this is that radio stations get more engagement with its viewers, more two-way interaction, possibly more relevant advertising (which should lead to more effective advertising) and a path forward in our increasingly digital future. Who's gonna be the first to jump?
From: http://www.justinmccammon.com/2009/07/steal-this-idea-2-making-radio-relevant.html
Fast Fact:
Twitter: The difference between listening and talking
When you think about Twitter as a way to talk it seems kinda boring. I mean, how many cool things does one person have to say before it reverts to the old “What I had for breakfast” stuff.
When you think about Twitter as a way to listen it’s anything but boring. Go ahead, pick a topic and plug it in to a Twitter Search. See the real-time results? See the trending topics?
Now let’s take it a step further: listening and responding. Here’s what PF Chang’s did:
What will your company do to amaze its customers today?
From: http://www.reelmotioninc.com/blog/twitter-the-difference-between-listening-and-talking/
The Future
The Denver Egotist reports:
The Institute of Practitioners in Advertising (IPA) has just put out a report that warns, “advertising agencies face growth of just 1.2 per cent a year by 2016 if the industry fails to tackle the changes to the media created by sites such as Facebook, YouTube and Twitter.”
In case it isn’t clear yet, the future is digital. The future is about how brands will listen as well as talk. Those who embrace this will find a lot of opportunity in coming years. Those who don’t will continue to grumble while the world changes around them.
From: http://www.reelmotioninc.com/blog/the-future/
The Future is in your Hands
Literally. Pull your phone out of your pocket and look at it for a second. It is the future. This is where you will place your next order for…everything.
Chipotle released a mobile ordering iPhone app and the demand was so overwhelming it crashed their servers.
The mobile revolution is here.
If you thought the web revolutionized your business, just wait until mobile hits. Now consumers can get the information they want, anywhere they want, to order whatever they want. Are you ready to serve your customers in real-time? Are you ready to listen to their suggestions? Make sure you can answer a resounding, YES.
From: http://www.reelmotioninc.com/blog/the-future-is-in-your-hands/Fast Fact:
Do you REALLY want to hear from me?
On one side was the suggestion to give them feedback on your experience and get $1 off.
On the other was a $2 off coupon. No work required.
I wonder which one most people do?
We live in an age where feedback is more valuable than ever to corporations. Every day thousands of consumers interact with them through new mediums like twitter and thousands more through more traditional means like phone surveys. Corporations should realize the value of those willing to reach out to them and reward them for their time. Rather than give me the lowest value coupon they offer for taking five minutes of my time, Papa Murphy's should offer free breadsticks or similar side with my next order. By giving me a side item like that they can give me greater value (worth $3.99 or whatever) that probably only costs them half of that. Now that's a win-win.
From: http://www.justinmccammon.com/2009/06/do-you-really-want-to-hear-from-me.html
Social Media Sizzles for Bacon Salt
Those of you who’ve been reading the blog know we’re kinda big on social media around here. And sure, we could quote statistics until we’re blue in the face, but is anyone actually using this whole “social media” thing to build a brand?
Enter Bacon Salt. The seasoning that’s well, exactly what it sounds like: bacon flavored salt. This product, only 18 months old, is growing quickly thanks to a social media presence that began before there was even a product.
According to Adweek, Bacon Salt founders Justin Esch and Dave Lefkow began their venture creating a Myspace profile for Bacon Salt and then taking the time to search for and befriend everyone on Myspace who mentioned bacon in their profile. There were 37,000 such users.
Did it work? Indeed, orders began pouring in, exceeding their capacity to fill them. Then the Myspace attention transfered over to other sites and before they knew it Justin and Dave had a hit on their hands. But they’re not the only small company to find success in social media:
Bacon Salt is not the only small company to thrive in harnessing the power of social media while larger brands stumble. And not all the small players are producing sexy products like up-and-coming musicians. Other examples include blender manufacturer Blendtec. Its “Will It Blend” video series has been a long-running hit on YouTube. Midsize brands like Zappos have also thrived, using social media channels like Twitter as a rolling focus group and customer service channel.
It seems that in the social media arena small business actuall has an advantage:
Lefkow and Esch, out of necessity, provide the personal touch. They found the more they listened and engaged with their customers — each spends hours each week personally responding to e-mail messages and even don bacon costumes on the road to hand out samples — the more sales they made, the more buzz they generated.
So next time you think that social media is just for big business, think again. Small businesses have the advantage with a personal touch and a message that hasn’t been run through 10 lawyers before posting. It’s a rare opportunity for small businesses to have an advantage like this, so make sure you’re getting the most out of your web presence by working with a company that knows social media and how to apply best for your business. Your customers are waiting.
From: http://www.reelmotioninc.com/blog/social-media-sizzles-for-bacon-salt/
Tweet your next sale
Adpulp highlights how one bar in Portland, OR is using Twitter to publicize it’s rotating beers on tap. Here’s what they had to say:
Bailey’s Taproom in downtown Portland has that kind of audience and they are executing a drive-to-purchase strategy perfectly. Bailey’s features “20 Rotating Taps of Craft Ales and Lagers,” so it’s a natural for them to use Twitter to share updates. In a similar vein, thrift stores, wine and liquor stores, grocery stores or any store that offers “specials” can use Twitter to their advantage.
So this begs the question of, “Why aren’t more small businesses leveraging Twitter to their advantage?” I’m sure part of it is that a lot of businesses simply aren’t familiar with the wide range of social media sites out there like Twitter that they could use to reach their customers. And of course, you’re not going to reach all or even most of your customers via a single service like Twitter.
But think about the advantages you would have if you took the budget you were going to spend on a small local newspaper ad and funneled it into a Twitter campaign run by a local marketing firm. Sure, more people would probably see the newspaper ad, but none of them would be able to respond to it directly. Or follow it, so that they’d be notified the next time your company had something to say. And they couldn’t start a conversation with the ad like they could with you on Twitter. So even though you might be reaching fewer people (for now) Twitter might just offer you higher value because of it’s interactive nature.
From: http://www.reelmotioninc.com/blog/tweet-your-next-sale/
Fast Fact:
The Need for Pure, 100% Not-From-Concentrate Talent
On a tip from Adpulp I just read this Newsweek piece on Peter Arnell. You know, Tropicana (and Pepsi) re-branding dude. Or maybe douche is more appropriate.
This quote from Arnell (single out on Adpulp as well) pretty much sums it up:
Arnell also can't understand the kerfuffle over his work for Tropicana. "Can you imagine such mishegoss over a freaking box of juice?" he says. "I can't believe that for the rest of my life I'm going to be known as Peter 'Tropicana' Arnell." He says Tropicana overreacted to complaints. "I have my own perspective on it. But it's not my brand. It's not my company. So what the hell? I got paid a lot of money, and I have 30 other projects. You move on." (Neil Campbell, president of Tropicana North America, says Tropicana will continue working with Arnell.)
If the Newsweek article is half true (and I believe it's more than that) then Arnell is a prime time asshole. But it's not really my place to berate Arnell, I'm sure he has his own not-a-fan club that will take care of that. Rather, this brings me to a plague of advertising: great minds getting recognized and paid for their greatness and then slipping into a coma of douchebaggery.
I have no doubt that Arnell is a fairly smart guy, you need to have a pretty good head on your shoulders to run an organization like his. I have no doubt that the countless other CDs and CEOs and other C-level executives that have risen to similar postions around the world are talented as well. But why do so many have to turn into ass-clowns?
Is it the money that corrupts? The power? The corner office?
I don't have an answer to that question.
But I do have a solution.
Bring in the juniors.
That's right. Let's give those who have no reasonable claim to fame or fortune the chance to attain it. Let's re-inject the passion into the system. And let's make it a booster shot straight to the heart.
But, you might say, won't the juniors just become old douches in a few years?
Yes, some will. It is inevitable. But we must continue to flush the system of impurities while gulping down a nutrient-rich double dose of high energy, fresh idea spouting youth.
I believe that deep down, most people are good. Even most people in advertising. I've run into far more immensely talented, genuinely caring souls than I have asshats in my brief ad career.
So what are you waiting for? Clients, juniors, seniors, and everyone in-between or outside, I'm calling on you to boycott the bullshitters and champion the pure, passionate individuals around you. Flush out the old, move up the truly talented in the ranks and backfill with juniors.
Ummm, you taste that? That's pure, 100% not-from-concentrate talent. And it will do this industry some good.
From: http://www.justinmccammon.com/2009/04/need-for-pure-100-not-from-concentrate.html
Shooting yourself in the foot
The RIAA, the MPAA, the whomever thinks they should sue the fuck out of their customers next group, you are all sorely short-sighted.
Bottom line: Piracy will continue until legal alternatives are actually useful.
I could drone on about all the bullshit that has gone on with copyright infringment in the last decade or so, but I think we all know the story by now. Instead, I'll try to offer some insight.
Example of the problem:
One of the few shows I watch regularly on TV is Rescue Me. It is easily one of the most well-written and thoroughly interesting shows to be broadcast in a long time, but I digress. I choose not to pay for cable, so I have to rely on streaming internet sources for my Rescue Me fix since it plays on FX. Turns out that some dumbass at the network decided that the streaming episodes on Hulu should come out eight days after they play on broadcast TV.
Eight days.
Now if I'm an avid fan, and I have friends who are avid fans and I want to discuss episodes with them you have completely broken down my means to do so in a timely manner.
So what do I do? I bit torrent the episodes the next day. It takes about 20 minutes to download and I can watch them in HD without commercial interruption. I'd gladly save myself the hassle and watch them on Hulu with commercials, but they aren't available when I want them. So they lose.
Solution:
Make the episodes available online at the same time it is broadcast. Build in a chat room functionality. Get me engaged with other fans. Maybe get advertisers to sponsor special promotions to engage us during the normal broadcast commercial breaks. Make it a community.
Remember how CNN and Facebook teamed up to stream the inauguration with a live chat with your FB friends next to the streaming video? Bring that sort of engagement to TV shows. Let me crack jokes alongside SNL. Let me use your networks so you can more accurately gather stats about who watches your shows (and make nielsen families a thing of the past.)
The alternative is that the big networks drive more and more fans away in seach of better solutions. There is no reason why the big networks shouldn't implement something like what I'm suggesting. In fact, it's in their favor to capture and grow these online communities now before consumers form habits of getting their media fix from someone else.
Think long term solutions. Offer your fans what they want, when they want it.
Obsolete yourself before someone else does.
From: http://www.justinmccammon.com/2009/04/shooting-yourself-in-foot.html
The Death of Mediocre
There's a fascinating video in Hugh's latest post with Clay Shirky discussing "Gin and the Cognitive Surplus" at Web 2.0 in San Francisco. And this is what really got me thinking.
(read the transcript here)
What Clay is talking about is the shift from media as consumption (i.e. watching TV) to media as producing, sharing and yes, still consuming but to a lesser extent. He estimates that Americans spend 200 billion hours watching TV in an average year. If the whole of Wikipedia represents 100 million hours of human thought then all that TV watching is equal to 2000 Wikipedias being created each year, if all of that time was shifted to something else. Of course, all of that time isn't being devoted to other projects, but even a small shift can create big changes. Think of all the things you see on the internet and wonder "Where did they get the time?" Well, there's your answer.
So back to Hugh, and his 95-5 "dreck intolerance" principle. If we take and combine it with Clay's thoughts, what do we get?
We get people moving away from TV due to the fact that 95% of it is shit, or dreck. We get people moving into other realms, for example the net where 95% of it is still shit, but it's a much bigger pile overall. I don't believe that anyone can claim to even have read 5% of the net. You'd be hard pressed to have even viewed 1% of all of the sites that are out there. Compare this to the fact that most of us have seen 95% of the channels offered on TV (even the obscure cable ones.)
What you get is the internet as a giant filter. There are so many sites you can possibly go to, you can only possibly go to a small handful.
Therefore, you only spend time going to those that interest you.
And thus, the internet filters out the dreck, the boring, the mediocre, even the very good for the most part (look at all those Youtube videos with 10 views.) That is the shift that Hugh is talking about when he discusses what is really killing advertising (as we have known it.) Watch TV for a few hours (as Hugh mentions) do you think any of those ads you saw would garner more than a few thousand views on Youtube, where people have a choice in their consumption? Most likely not. And yet they are still produced because too many people in too powerful a position still believe that the public is a consumer waiting to be force-fed.
Those who understand that every eyeball has a choice, that every input must pass through a filter, that people want to share and interact with what they consume and that modern media consumption is no longer a well-balanced plate but rather a limitless buffet of choices, those are the people who will prosper in the future.
The producers, whether they be ad agencies, bloggers, or something else, who continue to survive on mediocre output will find that their days are numbered.
Mediocre is dying a slow death.
Thanks for taking the time to filter through the dreck and find this post.
From: http://www.justinmccammon.com/2009/05/death-of-mediocre.html
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
