PRSA 2008 Lessons: Control vs. Credibility

Remarks: For chapters 3&4 and 5&6, I linked two things and had one post here (http://gct681.blogspot.com/2008/09/oldanip40-freedmanp-67-customer-service.html), and another post about short thoughts on amazon daily
(http://gct681.blogspot.com/2008/09/short-thoughts-on-amazon-daily.html). To complement, I would like to share one thing on lessons from the PRSA conference 2008 in Detroit.


First of all, I would like to share my Youtube videos taken at the PRSA 2008 confenrece. Each short intro starts with Korean language, but, the whole interview in English. So, wait for seconds:)

Interview with ipressroom Chairman
http://kr.youtube.com/watch?v=QjnnwsPorZc

Interview with the author of PR 2.0
http://kr.youtube.com/watch?v=eX3kLRn5SSs

Radian 6 Service - Interview
http://kr.youtube.com/watch?v=kgzkcBbiszc

Among these, ipressroom Chairman's interview was notable to me.
1/ Control vs. Credibility: Traditional PR was about "message control" in a sense, but, not any more. However, still, "old mind" tries to control their messages in communicating with consumers. Good example is corporate website. They only shows "good news" not "bad news." Advanced companies, like Southwest and Dell transparently communicate both good and bad news and respond to them. If a company tries to increase control, then, credibility goes down, according to Eric Schwartzman, the Chairman.

2/ Corporate Media: Now, any company can have media, not just New York Times or Wall Street Journal, due to social media technology, like blog. Right now, if you look at corporate website, say press room, it becomes "tomb of press releases" simply storing press releases. However, companies start to leverage their website as an interesting media, such as New York Times. One example to do that is UCLA news room site (http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/default.aspx), using not jus written contents, but, videos, sounds, etc. Traditional PR people rely on "other media" but, moving forward, they will have to create their own contents, and media to actively and directly communicate with audiences.

Corporate Press Release and Blogosphere (Ch. 14, p.171)

With the new media influence, traditional press release also changes. Now, companies start to produce social media release, not just (traditional) press release. Example, see http://www.edelman.com/news/. You will see two different formats: traditional and social press releases.

Social media release, a new format of press release in the social media, has different characteristics. First, traditional one was for company to journalist. Consumers had no access to press release. With the social media influence, now, press release becomes company to direct to consumers. Second, social media release has different formats. For example, core news facts; quotes; multimedia; links; RSS feeds; resources; tags; trackback and comments. Traditionally, companies try to 'frame' news to their benefit, but, in social media release, it is more of providing "stuffs to talk" to bloggers. Third, even bloggers engage in press release. If you look at the social media release, people reply to the press release contensts, trackback, etc. This didn't happen in the past.

Shull also talks about what companies can do to leverage their press release in the blogosphere. This is a big change for corporate PR. It used to target journalist directly, but, now directly target consumers on the net. Also, traditional press release is to "push our contents" to media, but, now, "pull consumers/bloggers interests and put them on our (press release) contents and formats."

So, from what's being changed in the press release, we still observe "power shift" from corporation to consumers.

Social Media, Social Networking (Ch. 18, p. 213)

Story #1: According to a media report, candidates for Obama's new cabinet, as a candidate screening process, their 'social media network', like myspace will be reviewed.
Story #2: Recently, I had a conversation with one of my friends in the US. At that time, he had a couple of job interviews, and told me that now companies review job candidates' social networks to find who they are, and who they are connected...

Here, Evans talk about the importance of social media, besides search engine. Social media is "social" because it really engages people. The above example is about finding out a certain people to engage with whom in what manners. Traditionally, companies use 'megaphone' to talk to consumers, but, with the social media, like blogs, now companies (can/should) share conversation with consumers.

Why the new marketing/Ad/PR/even journalism is 'conversation'? First, direction: in the past, companies 'shoot' messages towards consumer, but, consumers had few tools to talk to companies. Why? Publishing cost was high, so, only companies normally could spend advertising money, building fancy websites, etc. But, due to 'cheap technology'(for example, it costs nothing to produce your blog), now, people also have public channel to talk to many people. So, now, it is really two way street. Second, timing: if we consider real conversation offline, it happens on a real time basis, not one person says one thing, and much later someone responds. With the social media, now people can share opinions on a real time basis.

So, with the two direction and real time, social media becomes a real conversation tool between institutions and lay people, and this is the first time ever in our history.

Google as a Message Test Tool (Ch. 19, p. 220)

What is the most advanced consumer research tool in the world's history? The answer will be Google. Marshall showed an example. There is a young author called Tim Ferriss who wrote a best seller "4-hour workweek." I also bought this book and read it before. It's about new lifestyle, where you work 4 hours a week, and enjoy your life! I didn't know this guy used google ad to test the title of the book. He tested a different titles through Google ads, and decided the final title, which was a very successful. From this case, we can see a couple of aspects why internet/google becomes the best consumer research tool. First, the speed. As the author pointed out, it would take weeks or months to do this through traditional ad system (like classified ad), but, now we can do hours or days. Second, cost. Relatively, it costs much less to do this test. Third, you can do it alone with a little technical knowledge.

As more people spend more time on-line, internet sites like google becomes a great consumer research laboratory. I came to think "search engine" does not only mean "information search engine" but also "consumer search engine..."

Perry Marshall on How online businesses can use Google AdWords (Page 219)

Marshall starts out with a very important point, are people searching for what you are selling? What he means with this is that even is something sells, it doesn’t mean that people will search for it. He takes toilet paper as an example. Everybody buys toilet paper, but has anyone ever searched for it? Another problem he mentions is if you have a new product that people don’t know exist, how are they going to search for it? He gives the example of someone inventing a pill that will prolong your life for ten years. Everybody would be interested in this product, but how many people searched for “live ten years longer” this morning?

But let’s say that people are searching for your product. Marshall makes the point that AdWords isn’t necessarily the best place to advertise in order to draw customers to your page. He has found another use for it. He proposes that you use AdWords as a testing place for your new add campaigns. There are a few key elements in how AdWords works hat makes this possible. First of all, AdWords rewards good ads. If allot of people click on your ad, the ad will get a higher position in the rank, and/or will cost less/click. It also lets you post multiple ads against each other, thus allowing you to test what campaign is best. You also get a good idea about how your ad stands compared to the competition.

So after you have tested different ads and finally come up with the best one you can start advertising in other places, like banners or affiliates.

To me this sounds like a very smart thing to do. It is very easy to use, and most likely very cost efficient considering all the great data you will get out of it.

holy grail of advertising

On page 233 Kevin Lee, as many marketing heroes before him, briefly speaks about social networking, though it quickly leads him to the topic of narrowcasting. Narrowcasting is basically about one on one marketing, in opposition to mass marketing, which Lee sees as the Holy Grail of advertising, which would be sort of an everybody wins condition. Nobody really wants to deal with advertising, but if you don’t have a choice, most people would like to see something of relevance, and marketers want to more efficiently target the receivers, and this is where narrowcasting comes in with its’ targeted ads. Lee sees social networks as a place where narrowcasting could happen. I guess it’s because this is a place where you can find out what individuals actually want, and at the right moment make them an offer that they won’t see as intrusive. Because I still believe that one of the biggest problems with advertising in with a social network is that users find it intrusive. I think these are Internet users that are relatively used to online ads, and therefore are used to simply ignoring them, but in a social context this disregard would quickly be replaced by annoyance, which of course would have the exact opposite effect the marketer’s after. However, if the ad’s related to something the receiver wants or needs, this annoyance will probably not chip in. More likely that it actually will be welcomed! A win win situation! This is probably a way more costly way to market ones’ product, but it’s definitely a more efficient way that will pay off in the end. I could see this as being the future of advertising.

social networking between businesses and customers

On page 213 Liana Evans speaks about social networking, a topic that’s been covered pretty thoroughly in Online Marketing Heroes and definitely more than once before by myself in these blogs. There’s nothing really new brought to the table in Evans’ interview, and my choice of question to focus on may not have been the best, but I find the whole area of social networking and social media quite intriguing, so I still find an interest in looking at different thoughts on the topic. Evans speaks about the potential of social media for businesses, and focuses on the great advantage of having the ability to communicate with ones’ customers. Conversation about ones’ product with the actual end users can help in shaping the product according to the users’ wants and needs, letting a company more effectively satisfy their target consumers. And customers will find satisfaction not only in getting a product they actually want, but also simply because they are actually being heard. They feel that they can make a difference, and they feel that the company cares about their opinion, which I think will greatly increase the probability that the customer will return to the website for further purchases. Just by opening a line of communication like this can be a far more effective marketing strategy than any traditional advertising approach. And the whole web 2.0 trend with social networking and social media gives a company the ability to have deep conversations with individual customers or potential customers.

beyond the basic text website

On page 189 Lee Odden makes the recommendation that blogs be the first media a company should get into beyond the basic text website. This makes a lot of sense, and not merely because of the technical reasons Odden gets into, like making the website easier to find in a search engine, or giving the website the advantage of having a RSS feed. Of course these are two of the strongest reasons for starting a blog on a company website, since it significantly increases the visibility of the website by providing a “free” search engine optimization and granting access to a further channel of promotion (RSS feed). It seems to me to be a very easy out of the box way to make your website more visible and increase content. But other than increasing visibility I think having a blog also may increase the number of returning customers. As Odden says, a lot of e-commerce websites are mostly static, i.e. there isn’t really much changing on the websites. The way I see it this could actually discourage customers from returning to your website. Lets say a potential customer finally finds your website through your excellent marketing strategy, and finds your website really interesting etc. This customer may then return a few times, but if nothing really changes on the website, if it’s not being (visibly) updated, or no new content is added, this customer may, at least the way I see it, 1. Get bored with the website and therefore not return again, or 2. Loose trust for the website, seeing that if a website isn’t being updated questions arises like, does the company still exist, or is it even a serious company? Having a blog is an easy way to give a website some life, making customers want to return even if they haven’t got any further planned purchases. Having blogs may also increase a websites visibility through word of mouth. Today there’s a lot of ways to promote your website using all types of media and social network channels, but I agree with Odden that blogs is a good entry point, both because of its simplicity and the advantages that comes with that simplicity.

social media adoption in the business community

Ed Shull speaks about how businesses are adopting social media marketing and mentions something I find quite interesting, i.e. “the thing with big companies is that very few of them truly want to be innovators”. In this quote Shull uses the word want, as in it being a conscious choice, however as he continues to speak he leans more towards an incapability to think outside of the box, which I actually rather see as the reason few companies take steps towards innovation than not wanting it. The whole web 2.0 trend has taken the Internet by storm and has quickly become a natural part of Internet users’ lives, so it’s only logical that this be adopted by the business community. But of course as with everything new it’s hard finding entry points since it requires a lot of creativity and out of the box thinking. There has to be innovators. And I think it’s the fear of making fools of them selves or of wasting money that holds companies back from taking these innovative steps, which is the reason it always takes some time before new markets and channels are adopted, as with the whole concept of online and search engine marketing. As for “social media marketing”, I believe that the adoption time will be even longer, since it requires an entirely different line of thought. Companies have to let go of the traditional, reason being that with social media they will now be entering a roam that is closer to the users at heart, at a more personal level. I think web 2.0 users have a greater tendency to find any marketing attempts in this area of the Internet as more intrusive. I kind of see it as an advertising campaign being launched in an individuals living room. The impact of this will most probably not be very positive. No, social media marketing definitely requires some more finesse.

The Advertising Change Experienced by Traditional Ad Agencies, page 226

Reading the interview with Kevin Lee of Didit was a quite refreshing experience and a well needed brake from all the talk about search engine optimizations and blogs in the previous interviews. Lee gives us the traditional marketers’ perspective on the change brought upon us by the Internet. On page 226 (and 227) he explains how the traditional advertising agencies are handling the change.

The traditional approach in marketing is to simply buy loads of exposure with only some attention paid to getting the right audience. It’s a kind of mass marketing where the important factor is how many people you can reach.

However, the new way of looking at advertising, from the customers’ point of view, is that people nowadays only look at ads that are relevant. Also, there is the fact that targeting and finding segments becomes easier with the new technology and dynamics of the Internet. In addition, as we’ve read in previous interviews, it is much easier to track actual revenue (or rather: sales) to certain advertisements. This raises the bar for what ad agencies must do to please their customers.

A good example that Lee mentions is that by getting an advertiser to buy a couple of Superbowl spots they could get billings worth $6 million having put in a very small effort. Comparatively, to get $6 million worth of billings in well targeted advertisements (narrowcast media) won’t be nearly as smooth a ride.

In some way this development is related to my belief that advertising on niche web sites will grow, that I discussed in my previous blog post. Successfully aiming the advertising dollars at the right audience has always been important, but now there are the tools (and economies of scale thanks to the universality of the Internet) to do so much more effectively than before.

Taking Advantage of Social Networking, page 214

Liana Evans has a somewhat fresh approach to social networking, thinking of it not only as the core networking sites that Facebook and MySpace mainly are (especially Facebook is all about managing the network of your contacts). Evans places social web sites, which I would simply call communities, in the same category as the networking sites, and thus answers the question about how to take advantage of social networking with suggesting targeting communities.

I believe that the networking sites, primarily Facebook (at least at the moment), will be very effective in targeting certain demographics, such as specific regions, age groups etcetera. However, niche communities, such as the movie communities IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes mentioned by Evans in the interview, offer a different kind of information that may perhaps be even more valuable than the demographics of Facebook.

The reason for me believing this is that it is obviously often much easier to place a product within an interest range than within a demographic range. For example, if you are selling fishing equipment it makes sense to go to a fishing community, while targeting a certain demographic based on age, income, sex, location etcetera may be a pretty inaccurate targeting method.

Combined with the universality of the Internet that lessens the importance of location demographics, I believe this seriously undermines the value that Facebook can offer advertisers. Of course, Facebook may address this by simply encouraging people to list their interests in their system, but I believe such lists will never really be as accurate an information source as who actually visits the niche web sites.

In summary I believe the smaller communities that are focused on certain interests and hobbies will carry a relatively large portion of future advertising budgets.

Question on Page 222

Guerrilla marketing is an unconventional system of promotions, running on a very low budget, by relying on time, energy and imagination instead of big marketing budgets. Typically, guerrilla marketing is unexpected, where consumers are targeted where they would not be expecting, which can make the idea that's being marketed memorable. The marketer uses all of his or her contacts, both professional and personal, and must examine his company and its products, looking for sources of publicity. Many forms of publicity can be very inexpensive, others are free. When implementing guerrilla marketing tactics, small size is actually an advantage instead of a disadvantage. Small businesses and entrepreneurs are able to obtain publicity more easily than large companies; they are closer to their customers and considerably more agile. In order to sell a product or a service, a company must establish a relationship with the customer. It must build trust and support. It must understand the customer's needs, and it must provide a product that delivers the promised benefits."Guerrilla marketing is specifically geared for the small business and entrepreneur. It should be based on human psychology instead of experience, judgment, and guesswork. Instead of money, the primary investments of marketing should be time, energy, and imagination. The primary statistic to measure your business is the amount of profits, not sales. The marketer should also concentrate on how many new relationships are made each month. Instead of concentrating on getting new customers, aim for more referrals, more transactions with existing customers, and larger transactions. Forget about the competition and concentrate more on cooperating with other businesses. Guerrilla Marketers should always use a combination of marketing methods for a campaign. Use current technology as a tool to empower your business. I think this is not true that what firm sell so people will search for it. For example given like toilet paper people buy it and often not search for it online. It is also hard to advertise a problem that people do not know. It is obvious that one of the very first things you should test is what domain name people actually like to read in your Ads.

Jill Whalen on why Google has become so popular (Page 199)

The main reason why Google took off was simply because it was a better search engine than the competition. Whalen gives a quote, “Try this; if you can’t find what you are looking for with Alta Vista or the other engines, try this one.”. This is exactly how I remember it. Back in elementary school I was looking for something for a class assignment and had a very hard time finding the information I needed. Then someone suggested that I try to search with Google instead, and it worked. I didn’t switch exclusively to Google form that day on, but when ever I was looking for something I included a search with Google. For me, I think what made the scale tip over was when I noticed the simplicity of the Google design compared to for example Alta Vista, something that Whalen also mentions as part of Google’s success.