Welcome to Stage 9.

Disney has just launched their first (?) on-line production studio, Stage 9 Digital Media (summary, article).  And with the launch of their studio, they also introduced their first of twenty made-for-web series.

That’s right, twenty. (more…)

All the marketing pundits are starting to weigh in on the problems businesses are having in converting social media eyeballs into cold, hard dollars and cents.  In his article on the “Inconvenient Truth about Social Media Marketing,” marketing pro Aaron Wall says:

“There’s just one — major — problem with spending so much time and effort on capturing the eyeballs of social media users. Social media is easy to hype because there is a lot of traffic on social media sites. But if you try to do anything with social media traffic to convert it to revenue, you will be hard-pressed — unless you are selling CPM-based advertising.”

But that may, in fact, be just the problem. (more…)

I caught onto this article during my daily scan through blogs and articles.  It seems the effectiveness of ads run in social networking spaces (like Facebook, bebo and MySpace) aren’t as lucrative as originally thought.  But the real news isn’t the statement that Google’s $900 million guaranteed ad deal doesn’t look like it will pan out - the real news is that “the MySpace Generation may be getting annoyed with ads and a bit bored with profile pages.”

Yikes

(more…)

The medium you choose can be just as important as the message when making your brand’s appeal to minority markets. Spanish-language media in the United States is continuing to grow – reflective of the dynamic growth of the market domestically. Similar statistics for market and media growth can be found in the Asian-American community.Language difficulties in both markets (over half of Asian-Americans are more comfortable speaking their own language rather than English), means that native-language media tends to be overwhelmingly preferred to mainstream media.

Some facts about minority markets and the media:

Technorati Tags: Marketing, Advertising, B2B Marketing, Ethnic Advertising, Minority Marketing, Client Management, Leadership, Creative Thinking, Culture, Cultural Diversity

All comments (c) 2006, Brand Central Station - all rights reserved. For more information about BCS, please visit our website.

Staying focused on your own enterprises innovation efforts is important, sure, but how do you keep track of what your competitors are up to? Competitive intelligence is an important facet of any innovation program – and your contacts in the media can help.

Competitive intelligence programs are on-going efforts and are intended to give owners and management an on-going look at the marketplace so they can make decisions regarding new product developments, marketing, customer retention programs and the like. The media can play a big role in these programs – both in terms of what they report and what reporters actually know when contacted.

Here are some ways to do that:

1) Set up competitive clipping protocols. If you use print or online clipping services, set up searches for key competitors or their brands. Be careful when selecting keywords or search terms because you don’t want to have to search through the searches when you get them back at the office.

2) Create a historical view of your competitors’ media presence. Look at where they’ve been running ads and announcements in the trades and then compare those placements to the publications’ editorial calendars. It’s likely you’ll find some patterns. In the B2B space, especially, it’s common for advertisers to try and time their advertising creative with editorial coverage to increase the effectiveness of their ad. Knowing these patterns may help you predict where the competition is likely to strike next.

3) Use Google Alerts and other online search-oriented tools to scan the web. These tools are free and easy to use. There’s no excuse not to.

4) Engage in an active media relations program. The more time you spend with reporters covering your industry, the greater the likelihood you’ll hear about new market developments when they occur. Reporters have a job to do and sources to protect, of course – you’re not going to get them to violate those cardinal tenants. But being on good terms with a reporter can mean that you’re one of the first to be called when a new idea (a.k.a. a trial balloon) gets floated by the competition.

5) Work with the media to establish benchmark research (and follow-ups) on your sector or on key issues related to your sector. This kind of effort takes time and money but is generally very useful. In most cases, if the client pays for it, the results are kept confidential although the media generally gets the rights to publish an overview of the findings.

Remember, it’s the media’s job to uncover and report the news. It’s your job to find a way to stay on top of it (or, ideally, one step ahead). A good overview of competitive intelligence programs can be found here.

Technorati Tags: Marketing, Advertising, Branding, Brand, Leadership, Client Management, Innovation, Creative Thinking

All comments (c) 2006, Brand Central Station - all rights reserved. For more information about BCS, please visit our website.

Media properties have found that the information they collect about their readers can be a tremendous value to their advertisers. But you have to know when and where to ask.

In the never-ending quest to improve profit margins and steal budget from competitors, media properties – especially trade media – have found new opportunities in the areas of market research and customer knowledge. They’re often in a prime position to gather input, opinions and other critical data from customers. That data, when combined with insights provided by reporters, editors, staff researchers and others, can be turned into useful information advertisers can use to make their messages more relevant, identify new market opportunities and (ideally, in the eyes of the media) justify increased expenditures with the media property to secure a larger share of the market.

There are sources of data available to a media property that may be of some value – and some, if not all of it, is available for purchase. Subscriber and/or reader information is very helpful in determining the qualitative nature of the audience who picks up the magazine. Editors and publishers often use this data (as well as information received from interviews and reader service cards) to determine editorial features and other elements of the annual calendar they assemble each year.

Marketers can use similar data to fine tune the offering they intend to present to the public. When it comes to developing creative and sales messages, information on the buying tendencies of the market receiving a certain publication can help determine both the creative angle. The same data may also prove helpful in determining possible sales promotion opportunities.

There is a difference between subscriber data and reader data, however. Marketers – especially clients – need to understand the difference. If a publication provides subscriber data, the general rule of thumb is that the subscriber data is verifiable (because subscribers pay to receive the magazine, it is assumed the information they provide at the time of subscription is correct). This data is collected (to a small degree) at the time of enrollment in the subscription and to a much greater degree through opt-in surveys (which indicate an interest in the subject matter and a willingness to participate openly and honestly).

Reader data, however, is typically gathered off “free” subscription efforts, reader service cards and a host of other methods. Because the person filling out the card is not paying for the publication, there seems to be less concern over the verifiable quality of the data received. For example, if someone wants to receive a free technology publication, they’ll be more inclined to claim a greater responsibility for technology specification and purchases than if they were paying for a subscription.

Some broadcast medias conduct in-depth market studies (using any one of a number of companies that specialize in this kind of research). These general surveys serve three, main purposes: 1) they provide interesting insights into Top-Of-Mind Awareness for a variety of local brands and in a selection of local business areas; 2) they generally reinforce the idea that television is the strongest media to build TOMA; and 3) they generally solidify the media’s claim that a long-term ad buy on their station is the best way to buy television. Even considering the self-serving nature of the research, there is still some value in reviewing the results of the survey from a market awareness standpoint.

Finally, most media properties can provide some kind of statistical information on the utilization of their web site and, more importantly, the measurement of your ad presence on their web site. To be honest, if you’re talking to a media representative who claims his employer can’t do that – stop talking. There’s no excuse for the absence of web analytics anymore.

As with the broadcast example above, almost all of this research (usually provided for free by the media property) is intended to convince you of the value they bring to your marketing program. If you can get involved with the media property before they conduct their study, however, there is a chance you can create a very worthwhile research partnership.

One last piece of advice about unsolicited research – specifically ratings and rankings. Almost every media entity can present their magazine, newspaper, broadcast station or web site as #1 in their market (usually given a very tight set of conditions). Don’t be fooled. While this information is somewhat useful (if you know what to look for), you’re far better off getting the assistance of an advertising agency or media buying firm to evaluate the audience numbers and ratings, if that’s a big concern for you.

Realize, also, that media reps can be a source of research for you as well. Many representatives from local and regional media participate in tip clubs, community activities and special promotions involving their employer that can generate tidbits of information of value to you. Get to know your local reps and learn what they do and how they get their leads, then see if there’s a way you can work that connection. Reps are used to it and will probably do the same with you.

Welcome to the world of marketing.

Technorati Tags: Marketing, Branding, Market Research, Customer Relationships, Vendor Relationships, Employee Training, Sales Training, Informed Decision Making

All comments (c) 2006, Brand Central Station - all rights reserved. For more information about BCS, please visit our website.

It’s ironic, in a way, that while the communications profession is busy trying to find ways to promote collaboration and social interaction through media channels like blogs, wikis, whiteboards and the like, that true collaboration is being taught online everyday in places like Second Life, an online role-playing game developed by Linden Lab of San Francisco.

And what seems to be the greatest skill taught to people so they can collaborate freely? Believe it or not, it’s autonomy. The ability to act on your own.

Hiro Pendragon, writing in Flack Attack, acknowledges the apparent dichotomy of it all:

“It may at first seem ironic to approach the idea of autonomy, when thinking in the scope of a global virtual community such as Second Life. When the whole basis of an online world is to provide a place for to interact in common space …”

Like the real world, every aspect of the virtual world of Second Life is subject to the influence of other people. No player is truly alone. There is a difference between being alone and autonomous. As Hiro writes in his article: “…autonomy is not a state of separation from our environment, but a distinction from it while still existing in it.”

Virtual media environments, like Second Life, are uniquely suited to promote autonomy by teaching collaborative skills.

“Autonomy is an ideal greatly supported by virtual worlds. We have an opportunity to interact with people across the globe. This opportunity creates the greatest set of cooperation that we can currently achieve.”

And the benefit of this collaboration is innovation.

“The bottom line is that collaboration leads to innovation. People together exchange ideas that lead to new thoughts. Larger projects require more than one person. Really large-scale projects require interaction of several organizations.”

“As working relationships become larger and more complex, we need to investigate tools to make it easier…”

Technorati Tags: Marketing, Branding, Collaboration, Partnership, Hawthorne Effect, Customer Relationships, Vendor Relations, Leadership, Culture

All comments (c) 2006, Brand Central Station - all rights reserved. For more information about BCS, please visit our website.

We’ve spent a great deal of time talking about the power and importance of a corporate vision. Once you’ve gone through the process of clarifying a vision for your company and you’ve had a chance to share it inside your organization, there’s still something you need to do in order to bring your vision to life.

You need to make a public declaration.

The media – whether it’s a blog, a corporate newsletter, television, local newspaper, whatever – has a way of making promises firm and turning ideas into commitments. And depending how you handle it, vision-related media coverage can be tremendously validating. But don’t do it just for yourself.

Every key constituency group has a relationship with multiple sources of news and information. The time you invest in understanding those people who mean the most to your brand and what matters most to them pays off as you craft and present messages that reflect the values and beliefs represented by your vision and the promises made by your brand.

Don’t consider the publication of your corporate/brand vision to be a one-time effort, however. You need to realize that media messages don’t last long at all (consumers are exposed to millions of commercial messages a year), so in order to build recognition of your brand and its unique attributes you’ll need to reinforce your vision and messages in the media over and over again.

Hey, this brand-building thing isn’t easy.

Technorati Tags: Corporate Vision, Brand, Branding, Media, Publicity, Public Relations, PR

Monday Night Football ended its run on ABC this past week, marking the end of a television institution. MNF will be moving to ESPN (ABC’s sister network) next year for more money per game. Numbers for NFL games on Fox and CBS, on the other hand, have remained fairly consistent (and profitable) over the past year.

You can read the whole story on MediaPost.

Technorati Tags: Media, Television Advertising, Television, NFL, CBS, Fox, ESPN, Monday Night Football

All comments (c) 2006, Brand Central Station - all rights reserved. For more information about BCS, please visit our website.

Outdoor and out-of-home media has always been a quirky discipline. Creatives love it because, in general, the format is very visual, the canvas is large and from a cost-efficiency standpoint, one-off concepts are not out of the question.

Media planners and buyers aren’t necessarily crazy about the medium - demographics, traffic counts and other metrics are only somewhat reliable, there are still a lot of independent players in the business with odd terms and conditions and everyone has a different idea as to an effective strategy that has as much to do with geography as it does with “reach and frequency.”

Clients, on the other hand, seem to love out-of-home media - when they see it. If a client doesn’t see his or her campaign, then it probably isn’t working. (As a point of reference, when I ran an agency, we made sure to include at least one billboard location on the route between our client’s home and office so he’d see it every day when he drove to work.)

But while the concept of “convergence” is making a lot of noise in the electronic media (i.e. television, radio and Internet), it’s also driving some significant change in the out-of-home market. This piece in MediaPost, announces a strategic partnership between Yahoo! and Clear Channel that underscores how the Internet is changing the face of outdoor. The new, digital billboards will eventually appear in 200 malls across the country. These boards will be more than just flat panel displays suspended from the ceiling … these things are big:

While this new technology and Clear Channel’s involvement is interesting on its face, I suspect it is just the beginning. The technology exists to take this same ad serving scheme and deploy it across kiosk-type displays as well. The combination of the large displays with kiosks carrying the same or complimentary messages gives an advertiser a significant one-two punch when trying to engage a consumer.

More importantly, by adding a Point-of-Sale device to the mix, out-of-home media steps to the head of the pack when it comes to evaluating the effectiveness of traditional, main-stream media.

Superior customer demographics, high-level engagement, targeted creative, big, bold and interesting … who ever would have thought that out-of-home media would be leading the way in the ongoing integration of traditional and new media?

Every now and then, you read something in a trade journal or newspaper and then have to stop and ask “What were they thinking?”

That’s what I did this morning when I read a CNET alert on a change in how the big TV networks view TiVO. Here’s the crux of the story:

“For several years, advertisers and investors have watched with a keen eye the entry of DVRs into the mass market. Some predicted that the features that let viewers skip ads and watch programs at their leisure would spell the death of ad-supported broadcast TV and its prime-time programming schedule.”"But in their research on the use of DVRs, the television networks said the technology offered an opportunity to attract viewers who might otherwise miss shows when they first air.”

The inescapable conclusion of the six major networks: DVR’s will actually boost television audiences and increase the commercial value of television. Audiences will go up because viewers will be able to watch the shows they want to watch - commercial free.

So the obvious question (at least to me) is “How does the commercial value of a product go up if its value is due to the fact that it doesn’t have any commercials?”

In other words, what advertiser would pay to be in a show whose ratings (and, presumably, their ad rates) are higher because viewers cut out the commercials? Don’t think for one second that tv reps won’t try to avoid answering that question. They’ll gladly use the improved ratings (Nielson will start including DVR playbacks in their audience estimates) to justify increased rates and demands for larger shares of media budgets.

In the defense of the television industry, they have tried to identify an escape route in this research. They claim that over half of the DVR users surveyed say they will “go back and watch an ad that interested them.” But how does the quality of that impression or an impression made while a commercial plays in fast forward compare to the quality of an impression of an ad that just runs as part of the telecast?

There are two points to underscore here:

1) Television, like other main stream media (e.g. newspaper, radio, outdoor) is in a world of trouble as marketers become conditioned to expect more precise audience metrics - similar to what they get from medias like direct mail and online marketing. Interestingly enough, television is probably closest to a solution and the DVR could be part of the answer. It’s all part of that “convergence” thing we were talking about just a couple of years ago.

Gotta love technology.

2) Television ratings have never truly reflected the audience size or make-up of the people who watch commercials. Nielson’s “science” of ratings is much more like a sophomore art project despite the advanced math and convoluted formulae.

How can I make this assertion so confidently? Ask yourself one simple question … when do most people get up from the television to run to the bathroom? Get another beer from the ‘fridge? Tuck the kids in to bed?

Attempting to extrapolate the number of viewers watching a particular spot on a DVR will be a near impossibility without a complete re-thinking of the ratings methodology. Maybe that’s an opportunity to build more accountability and accuracy into the system?

Like I said … “you gotta love technology.”

A recent B2B Online story reported that 87 percent of business executives say they “… have a defined set of news sources that provide fair and balanced coverage - and they ignore other sources.”

This is bad news for non-traditional media sources (after all, nobody likes to be ignored).What might even be more interesting are the following findings:

• 87% agree that they have a defined set of news sources that they trust to provide them with fair and balanced coverage and that they largely ignore other sources.
• 75% of business executives said they trust news shows on public television or National Public Radio, and 78% said they trust national newspapers such as The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal.
• 59% of executives said they trust commercial broadcast news, including network television, cable and commercial radio networks.
• Only 21% of business executives said they rely heavily on independent sources such as Internet chat rooms, blogs or other alternative media to get news and information.So, what’s really going on here?

Could it be that non-traditional (and apparently broadcast television) news sources are so unreliable to cause such a lack of support and/or respect? Possibly. Non-traditional news sources are notoriously under-edited and often fall below the standard for thoughtful journalism and/or criticism set by other, more reliable sources.

Could it be that venerable newspapers like the NY Times or Wall Street Journal tend to give more time and space to a story - giving, in the very least, the apperance of balance and fairness through the shear mass of content generated on a particular subject?

Or could it be that executives find the medias that agree with their view of the world and then stick with that, ignoring contrary or conflicting points of view?I suspect it could be a combination of all three.

Thanks to MarketingVOX for the tip.

All comments (c) 2005, Brand Central Station - all rights reserved. For more information about BCS, please visit our website.

I ran across this post by BusinessWeek’s Jon Fine while working on one of our other blogs (Much Ado About Marketing) and felt compelled to chip in my two cents’ worth … particularly about the last item in Fine’s post. As part of his wrap-up, Fine reports that the Newspaper Association of America plans on “mov(ing) advertisers away from buying newspapers based on (declining) circulation, and mov(ing) them towards buying on total audience.”

There are a few, fundamental problems with this plan. As a savvy media player, it’s important you know how to address and deal with these issues:

1) The problems with pass-along. Counting total audience is problematic for one, primary reason. No one really knows how many people actually read the paper. Sure, newspapers and magazines talk about a “pass along” rate - a kind of magic number you use as a multiplier to the paid circulation to come up with an estimate of how many people actually picked up and read the publication. But pass along rates are bogus at best.

Some publications may offer up research to substantiate their claim, but there is no science to determining either the rate at which a publication is passed along or the active interest (read: customer value) of the person who may be interested in picking up a used publication they didn’t have to pay for.2) The harder you figure, the fuzzier the math. Even if you could figure out how many people actually picked up the paper, daily readership figures for a paper in general and, more importantly, specific sections is just advanced guesswork. Any newspaper will tell you that on any given day only a percentage of their subscribers actually read the paper. In fact, that’s a great argument for advertising frequency in newspapers. It’s also a fundamental problem when trying to determine a credible reach for a newspaper.

Ads in the front of publications are read differently and with different frequency than those ads placed in the back. But that may not be a bad thing … more on this point in a moment.3) The market demands a higher standard. Guessing what the number is won’t cut it any more. As clients, we are becoming more and more conditioned to receiving nearly instantaneous feedback on our marketing programs. We are becoming comfortable with looking for performance out of our marketing media channels - selling a “total audience” figure based on guesswork just won’t cut it.

All of this leads me to a conclusion you might not expect: Newspapers are a viable and worthy advertising medium, but they should realize the answer to their problem lies not in finding a way to convince clients they deliver a mass audience but rather an engaged and interested one.

After all, how do most marketers gauge the success or failure of a new marketing initiative? By the results and feedback generated from their efforts, right? Sometimes that feedback isn’t provided in an obvious metric like gross sales or awareness scores. Sometimes that feedback comes in the form of positive reinforcement from friends or family. Sometimes the feedback is the result of personal exposure to the medium itself.

In fact, many PR and advertising campaigns live or die based on the coincidental timing of someone making “the right call” during an active a campaign. The lesson learned: “… sometimes getting the message out to thousands of eyeballs isn’t nearly as important as getting the message out to the right set of eyeballs.”

In short, an ad placed in the front of the newspaper or magazine where it will be seen by nearly everybody isn’t nearly as valuable as an ad placed in the back of a newspaper or magazine where someone who knows what they’re looking for can find it quickly and easily.

If newspapers learned this lesson, they would understand the importance of selling access to an engaged audience who cares about what’s in the paper over selling to an undefined, uninterested and unengaged mass public.

Technorati Tags: Marketing, Journalism, Public Relations, Newspapers, Circulation

All comments (c) 2005, Brand Central Station - all rights reserved. For more information about BCS, please visit our website.

Blogs, podcasts, discussion boards - they all constitute the part of the blogosphere we refer to as “social” media. That means these tools are often written by civilian, non-journalists and encourage feedback (usually in the form of posts) from readers and other like-minded individuals.

This recent post on the CNet site, however, shows one of the inherent weaknesses in the social media model. Spammers or, worse yet, well-intentioned but clueless bloggers can do more damage to the brand they are promoting no matter what their intent.

In this particular case, it’s the Microsoft Xbox 360 that is the vehicle for a reckless and less-than-successful bid to convince the video game blog “Joystiq” to cover the US introduction of their product. Here’s a summary of what happened:

Over the weekend, editors at the video game blog “Joystiq” reported that they received a series of crudely written e-mails. Each one, purporting to be from a different writer, alerted them to the fact that Xbox 360 kiosks–which play demos of games and show off the next-generation Microsoft console’s multimedia capabilities–at Wal-Mart stores would soon be featuring a playable demo of “Perfect Dark Zero.”For example, writes Joystiq editor Vladimir Cole, PootAmbassador penned a missive that went, “A sales associate at Wal-mart said they get a playable demo of Perfect dark 0. Has anyone else told you or am i the only one who knows?”

To make matters worse, the phantom publicist continued to post comments on the Joystiq blog - usually using poor English and names that sound more like something that would come out of a late-night, fraternity party than anything else.

The offending flack didn’t seem to realize that the techno-geeks at Joystiq would be able to track all of the messages back to their originating IP address (which they did) or that action can be taken against them thanks to the CAN-SPAM law.

All of this work (if that’s what you want to call it), is lumped into the category of “buzz marketing” by the mainstream marketing and business press. This poses a potential problem for buzz marketers and other WOM providers. As long as there are buzz/word-of-mouth marketers intent on using “stealth” to trick journalists and consumers to pay attention, they’ll always face a skeptical public and an even more skeptical media.

Let’s face it, lying to the public is bad policy and a very bad practice. I hope the XBox 360 doesn’t suffer as a consequence of this action.

Technorati Tags: Media, Buzz, Marketing, Microsoft, Xbox 360

This post found on the blog for the ANA (Association of National Advertisers) provides the advertiser’s point of view on what’s wrong with the FCC’s proposed revisions to the Children’s Television Act. In short, the FCC is suggesting a “hard cap” on the amount of commercial speech including educational messages, PSA’s and the like. Probably more significantly, the FCC is moving to limit the way web addresses can be promoted inside children’s programming.

Good or bad, the ANA’s contention that “the FCC’s rule changes threaten the continued viability of children’s programming” is a little hard to swallow. What the regulation will do, in reality, is force the media channels that carry children’s programming to increase their rates. The shows that command a worthwhile audience, then, will survive and those shows that don’t will either change or go away. Marketers looking for opportunities to create a strong educational message may have to consider a new broadcast platform … public television.

The ANA is a great advocate for their members and for commercial speech. They serve an important role in American society. But we need to encourage a worthwhile debate on how we teach kids to be good media consumers. Our future depends on it.

Technorati Tags: Advertising, Marketing to Children, FCC, Association of National Advertisers

========== Other Media Notes of Interest:

Search Engines Prepare for Behavioral Targeting

Civility Returns to Broadcast Journalism? CBS’s John Roberts Apologies for Comments

Possible Death Knell for US News & World Report?