More than just PR
Friday, October 26, 2007
It seems that the marketing giants like Interpublic and WPP Group are coming to terms with our Web 2.0 world. Just this week, Interpublic announced a partnership with word-of-mouth marketing company, BzzAgent. WPP Group has also partnered with them in the past. BzzAgent is a social networking medium comprised of marketers and an assembly of volunteers who try out products and/or programs in turn for their honest feedback. After feedback is given, BzzAgent marketers interact with their volunteers, poking and prodding at their experiences. Common sense suggests that if an experience was negative, BzzAgents would attempt to rectify the problems and have the volunteers change their minds. It's not so much an innovative idea as it is a natural progression of marketing research possible on the Web. Just ten years ago, this type of company simply wouldn't make it. It wouldn't be practical to get people's feedback via phone or snail mail and then redistribute it to the masses. But in this day and age, it makes perfect sense. After all, BzzAgent deems that 80% of people believe word-of-mouth over advertising. Of course, now-a-days, word of mouth doesn't just happen face to face. Most of it takes place online, and it is essential for all companies to be involved in those conversations. Labels: Marketing, Public Relations, Web 2.0
posted by Gina Bolotinsky
0 comments
Google's Advertising Paradox
Friday, October 19, 2007
So here's an interesting notion: Google has built its empire on its Google ads yet Google itself, probably the most famous brand of our time, does not and has not ever invested significantly into its own advertising.
So in the olden days, before we "googled" everything, how did we find out about Google? Why did we use it instead of Yahoo or Alta Vista (remember them?!)? From what I can recall, it mostly started by word of mouth. I heard about Google from the mother of the children I used to baby sit. She told me that a silly little thing called "google.com" is the best search engine! "Google?" I asked. "Really? What a stupid name."
But the name stuck in my mind and when I came home that night, I gave Google a go. To my surprise, Google was fantastic. I told all my friends about it and we, along with the rest of the world, have been googling ever since.
I imagine that this was the experience most had and what lead to Google's sprint to the top of the search engine food chain. The AP's Michael Liedtke pointed out in an article on this topic that rather than throwing money into frivolous advertising, Google put its dollars directly to its actual business, which involved perfecting the art of search.
"This advertising aversion has freed up money for engineers, computing hardware and other resources that fuel Google's search engine while leaving plenty of profit to keep shareholders happy and lift the company's stock ever higher."
Google serves as an example for many aspects of business. Its unique approach to marketing, however, is worthy of exploration for any professional in this industry. The key lesson from this particular advertising model, or lack there of, is that quality will always overcome being bombarded with a company's message.
Back when I was baby sitting, literal word of mouth had much more longevity. Before I heard about Google, I would have to actually ask my friends' opinions of things in order to gain perspective on them. Now, all you have to do is go online and you can get the opinions of millions.
The bottom line is a company's main concern, in its beginning stages especially, needs to be the quality of its product or service. Once that is perfected, they can think about giving us a call. Labels: advertising, Adwords, Google, Internet, Marketing, Public Relations, search
posted by Gina Bolotinsky
1 comments
Eco-Friendly Blogging
Monday, October 15, 2007
Happy Blog Action Day! Have you heard of it? It may be why many of your favorite blogs are environmentally-focused today. Everyone blogging about the environment on the same day is supposed to bring about increased awareness. With Al Gore's recent Nobel Peace Prize topping the news stories, it's hard to imagine that there are many out there who are still unaware of a thing called climate change.
Blogging seems environmentally responsible, saving untold amounts of paper. Online media may have a key part in avoiding the bulk waste of daily, weekly, and monthly print publications. Although, I can't help but think that it certainly isn't save on energy being used to power all the computers of people reading the blog entries. It’s hard to tell if power savings outweighs paper savings, but if you think about the power used in the process to cut trees, ship trees, turn them into paper, ship them to a printer, print on the paper, and then send it to a newsstand or to a reader, I have to think that in comparison computers are looking pretty green.
Besides reading blogs, what can we do to stop global warming? Turn off and unplug your computer at night and set it to go into sleep mode for the times during the day when you aren't using it. Lower the brightness setting on your monitor. Upgrade to an LCD screen, as it uses less power than older models. Don't print out what you can read on the computer. And if you do need to print something out, try to print on both sides of the paper. All these little changes add up and are important because we’re all in this together.
posted by Jessica Ek
0 comments
The Growing Internet
Friday, October 12, 2007
Yesterday, a bylined article on the topic of our soon-to-be antiquated Internet infrastructure was published on CNET by Michael Keenan from UC San Diego. In it, Keenan stressed the significance of the fact that in the near future, the Web will no longer hold the demand that we are putting on it.
Michael explained that when the Internet was created, its size and use was undermined, but the limitations of the structure were not truly felt until recently. After all, it was not that long ago that we used the World Wide Web for just email. Now-a-days, we use it for pretty much everything. In Keenan's words, "[t]he Internet has gone from a complement to everyday living to a principal platform for business and personal activities."
While his article went down the path of discussing the sad state of broadband in the U.S., which, by the way, is in 15th place worldwide, behind countries like South Korea, I would like to go back to this notion of the Internet's importance in our role as influencers. I think this idea is hard for some to grasp because those Internet-free days or days of it being "a complement" are not too far gone. Yet, it is undeniable, we don't just use it to stay in touch with family and friends, but for essentially any information that we need. At which restaurant to eat; how to get there; and what to do afterwards. We decide all these things and more from the information we get online.
This is why it is crucial to have an optimized website. Meaning, your site needs to come up in search results that are initiated by words that are associated with your business. What am I talking about? For kicks, try typing "pr firm" into Google. In the first 2 pages of Google results, you will find 3 or 4 actual PR firms, one of them is Connors Communications. Is it such a leap to say that many businesses begin their search for a PR firm just this way?
In another article in MediaPost, Anand Subramanian writes about the concept of "The Long Tail" and its importance to advertising. He references eMarketer's 2006 report that found that "Internet users spent 61% of their time online outside of the top 20 domains, which includes most major social networking sites and web portals."
For advertising, it means that media buyers need to spend money outside of the top 20, and for public relations professionals, it means that we have to channel these niche markets with as much vigor, if not more, than those top 20.
But don't panic! This should come as a relief. Of those top 20, perhaps half are actual news sites like The New York Times and Google News. We all know the challenge in getting placements in this type of media. What these results indicate is that by compiling a list of relevant and attainable blogs and niche news sites, our PR campaigns can be even more effective than hitting the New York Times once or twice. Labels: Internet, new media, optimization, Public Relations, search, The Long Tail, Web 2.0
posted by Gina Bolotinsky
0 comments
Advertisers do not buy media
Tuesday, October 09, 2007
One notion that has consistently irked me over the years is the concept of a "media buyer". Rupert Murdoch is a media buyer. He made an offer the Bancrofts couldn't refuse. Now he can essentially do whatever he wants with the Wall Street Journal as long as it remains profitable for shareholders. Advertisers, however, use the term "media buyer" to designate someone that negotiates with the media for the use of their time and/or space to deliver a message. Doesn't the word "buy" denote ownership? Ads are about media renting. And, to be honest, advertisers merely rent the medium as a communication vehicle. They are not really renting the reputation of the media outlet. When a company places an ad in the Wall Street Journal, they are not paying to have Walt Mossberg write a favorable review. Ads in nearly every medium are denoted as such, or else you lose the credibility that brings people back. In other words, ads are not the reason people consume media (except perhaps for fashion magazines when some ads can become art in and of themselves). How effective will advertising be in the future as a one-way communication vehicle? Behavioral targeting or geotargeting helps make advertising relevant, but it's still rarely the message that consumers really want. People consume media because they are looking for specific answers or entertainment. Isn't it better to be in the conversation or in the path of research instead of trying to force feed a message that people actively try to avoid? So when iMedia asks if we pay too much for media, the answer depends on who you are. If you're Rupert Murdoch, then no. If you're Joe Advertiser, then probably yes. Labels: advertising, media
posted by Adam Edwards
0 comments
Blogging, Inc?
Friday, October 05, 2007
Douglas A. McIntyre from Wall St. 24/7 suggested in an article earlier this week that big media companies might start buying popular blogs. The reason for it being that the blogs of some newspapers and other news sites have not captured the same volume of attention as blogs like the Huffington Post and TechCrunch.
Rather than trying to compete, it would make sense for big media companies to just eat these blogs up. After all, relatively speaking, they wouldn't cost very much and would be fairly easy to maintain. AOL is already ahead of the game on this one with its purchase of Weblogsinc, which includes Engadget.
I suppose it's not really a novel concept for a big company to swallow up a small, popular fish, but will writers of these blogs be interested to sell? For many, I assume, it will be a personal decision. Do I want to maintain my own business and my complete creative freedom or do I want to hand the reigns over and feel secure in the financial footing of a media giant?
Regardless of what the likes of Michael Arrington might decide, if these purchases were to become rampant, our role in attracting the attention of the influencers would once again begin to narrow.
Another thought worth contemplating is how the public would react. Is it the independent nature of these blogs that we value or do we just like the writing style and quick turnaround these have over the traditional media channels?
This concept certainly raises a lot of questions and it will be interesting to see how this aspect of Web 2.0 unfolds. Labels: blog, media, new media, Public Relations, Web 2.0
posted by Gina Bolotinsky
1 comments
 |
