Above the Fold

3 Ways Andrey Ternovskiy Could Monetize Chatroulette

2010-03-15T09:27:00.003-04:00

Let me just say this upfront: I'm not really a fan of Chatroulette.

A few days ago, I taped a piece of lined paper across my webcam and spent about an hour on the service. A lot of the people I saw were strange but pretty benign: many had their cameras pointing at arms or legs, I saw a young man sitting in his underwear, a few nice looking girls, and quite a number of old men in shirtsleeves. Then, inevitably, I found myself up close and personal with male genitalia. Before I had time to fully register what I saw and hit the "Report Abuse" button, I was Nexted, so unfortunately he is probably continuing to horrify other people as we speak. But apparently this is normal and to be expected with the site, so let's just say it's not my cup of tea and I probably won't be going back as a customer anytime soon.

That being said, I think Chatroulette's founder, 17 year old Russian Andrey Ternovskiy, is on to something here. With all the buzz surrounding Chatroulette these past few months, one wonders if it could rid itself of its pornographic association and turn into a legitimate social networking site or some kind of speed dating service.

Sure, it is really just callous voyeurism, but if you put aside the obvious distaste for the concept, you'll see that Chatroulette creates a social environment unlike any other you might have encountered before: it is an impersonal, anonymous, live meeting place that has no social context and shatters everything we know about what we should do after making eye contact.

It's not real life, it's not chatting, and it's not like being on a social network or dating site. Truth be told, I don't like it. But it intrigues me, as a lover of social media, as an observer of consumer behavior, and especially as a marketer.

As Andrey considers moving from Russia to the U.S., I'm sure he's thinking about how he might be able to monetize this service and start making some money off of it. From a product perspective, he is reportedly launching some new features, and he certainly needs to augment the Report Abuse button and somehow really fix the problem of people coming across random nakedness on the site. But what are his monetization options?

Option #1: Advertising
Of course, this is always the easiest way to start making some cash. Apparently, Andrey was running Google Ads/Adwords on the site but stopped recently. I didn't see any ads myself, but as people start warming up to the idea, some (possibly unsavory) advertisers are going to want in and start taking advantage of a captive audience. But banner ads flashing to the side are really going to ruin the experience, and if people are forced watch :15 commercials after every 5 clicks (a la Pandora), the site will lose its appeal entirely.

Option #2: Promotions
FCUK, the racy and risk-taking U.K. clothes retailer, just launched a promotion on its website promising a 250 GBP/$375 shopping spree to a man or woman who can prove, with a screenshot, that they managed to pick up someone on Chatroulette. Given its brand image, it's actually not a bad way for FCUK to appeal to its core audience. No word yet on the success of the promotion but I suspect it might be successful and open the door to other advertisers. Neither FCUK, nor its agency, asked Chatroulette for permission before running the promotion but if Andrey wisens up to what is happening, he could institute a fee-based model for such promotions that might work in his favor.

Option #3: Virtual Goods
If ChatRoulette doesn't get rid of the pervs, the above options will not attract advertisers. In such a situation, Andrey could explore creating a virtual goods economy within Chatroulette. Here's how it would work:

Nobody likes getting Nexted, especially if its by someone they liked and wanted to talk to. So what better way to signal that you'd like to get a conversation going than by sending a nice virtual gift? Users could buy currency packages beforehand in, let's say, $5 increments and have a gift panel right on the chat screen containing items ranging from roses to champagne flutes to racy lingerie, each with a different caption and price tag, thus indicating different levels and types of interest. When they came across someone they liked, they could click on the right gift and, within a few seconds, the gift would appear in the chat window. Their account would instantly be debited of the necessary credits.

The gift would help the sender show the nature of their interest and help initiate a longer conversation (i.e. help senders avoid being Nexted) as the receiver might be enticed to pay attention to someone who took the time to make such a gesture. When the credits ran out, the user would buy some more and keep on gifting to score chats. And Andrey would keep ringing in the dollars.

It will be interesting to see how the product evolves as Andrey starts meeting with U.S. investors and techies. The whole phenomenon might die a quick death if it remains a proxy site for porn. But seeing how much press Chatroulette has gotten in the New York, New York Times, USA Today, Fast Company and The Daily Show - as well as splinter sites like Chatroulette Map that have already popped up - it's possible Andrey might make it big with Silicon Valley insiders.

In which case he could always fall back on option #4: sell it all and retire before he turns 20.

How I (Almost) Got A Job Using Facebook Ads

2010-02-01T13:42:00.018-05:00

I've been searching for a full-time marketing job for about 6 months. It is difficult to be invited for interviews and get job offers, but the true challenge (for me) has been finding positions that:

(a) I am qualified for (the majority of job postings today are looking for entry-level college graduates or Director/VP level hires, neither of which work for a mid-level manager like me);

(b) I am passionate about (my interests include customer insight development, brand management, social media marketing, and start-up environments).

Having used all of the traditional methods to reach prospective employers -- event networking, alumni networks, LinkedIn, cold calling -- I decided it was time to try something different: Facebook ads. I would target people within the Boston area and advertise myself, try to attract the attention of marketing professionals and, hence, bring the employers to me.

THE CAMPAIGN
It took me a couple of days of tweaking to figure out what parameters delivered the most impressions and clicks, but this is how my plan shook out.

Targeting
The ads were shown to adults aged 25+ living within 25 miles of Boston or Cambridge, MA and who had graduated from college.

I initially included a list of 20 or so keywords, such as marketing, entrepreneurship, start-up and hiring manager but by doing this, my estimated universe would shrink from 500,000+ to approximately 15,000, reducing the probability of click-thru's dramatically. Also, keywords match with words that Facebook users list in their Profiles; many people do not provide a reliable or comprehensive list of their Interests and Activities, so I was not convinced that, for my purpose, keywords would be a particularly effective way of reaching marketers. So I limited targeting to basic demographic parameters.

Payment Model
As I was interested in driving traffic to my website, I paid for the campaign based on a CPC basis rather than a CPM basis. On average, Facebook suggested that I bid $0.40 to $0.60 for my ads -- after some initial tweaks, I bid them all at $0.75 and at that price it seemed almost guaranteed that my ads were being served very frequently.

Creative
I ran 3 different types of creative, all driving to the Career page on my website. Each was different in its own way:

(A) Rockstar: Straightforward pitch with a focus on key skills.

(B) Wicked: Used Bostonian-slang and humor to appeal to locals.

(C) Combination: Used certain elements of both above ads.

Timing and Budget
The campaign ran for 9 days, which included 7 complete days of advertising from 1/22/10 to 1/28/10. On the first day, I set my daily budget to $20 and almost spent it all. I then cut it down to $5 for two days, to see how impressions would be affected (they decreased proportionately), and then raised it back to $20/day for the remainder of the campaign. After the first day, I received enough clicks every day to spend my entire daily budget.

THE RESULTS

I have to say, I got a lot more clicks than I anticipated. I really did not think that anyone would click on my ad, so 184 clicks was a truly gratifying response.
Avg. CPC was $0.66, lower than my $0.75 bid. I could probably have bid lower and received more daily clicks.
The CTR was definitely very low - but does that matter if I was paying per click and maxing out my daily budget? Clearly I was receiving the daily traffic that I was willing to pay for. In a CPC scenario, does CTR matter?

Facebook did not provide demographic breakdowns of clicks, but its algorithms used that information to serve my ads to a more Female audience. The age group of 25 to 44 years seemed to be my core audience.
The most straightforward creative delivered the most Impressions and Clicks, followed by the Combination ad, suggesting that the "Wicked Pissah" title probably worked to attract attention, but the body copy needed to be more serious to invite a click.

THE RESPONSE
In addition to the above impressions and clicks, I was contacted by 8 people (4 men and 4 women), thus achieving a click-to-lead conversion of 4%.

2 people have their own business and wanted me to help them with marketing and PR;
1 person contacted me about applying for an position at her non-profit organization - it was a great position but not quite what I was looking for, so I connected them with a friend who is looking for just that kind of role;
1 person from a resume service gave me suggestions on how to improve my resume;
And all of them told me that they noticed my ad and were impressed by my efforts to find a job.

"I saw your fb ad and the sheer fact that you advertised your own resume as a marketer was beyond clever."

Overall, I was happy with the way the campaign shook out. Perhaps I didn't get that big job offer, but I enjoyed the opportunity to experiment with the Facebook ads platform, practice some online advertising, make a few new connections, and try something new with my job hunt. Would love to hear comments and feedback on how others have fared with using Facebook ads for job-hunting, or how I might have improved my final results!

5 Reasons Why Texting Has Raised Millions for Haiti

2010-01-18T13:17:00.004-05:00

**Update on 1/20/10: As of 1/19/10, the text message campaign for the Red Cross has raised $23 million (U.S. State Department).**

When Haiti was struck by a 7.0 magnitude earthquake last week, its tremors were felt all over the social media networks: news of the devastation in Port-au-Prince became a trending topic on Twitter; people were posting 1,500 Haiti-related status updates per minute on Facebook, and Google used its search engine expertise to help people locate loved ones in Haiti.

But amid all the bleak news of destruction, a more hopeful theme also began to get traction through the power and buzz social media: text message donations.

Everyone was sharing this information: cellphone users could (and still can) donate $10 to the American Red Cross by texting the word "Haiti" to 90999. Or donate $5 to the Yele Haiti Earthquake Fund created by Haitian musician, Wyclef Jean, by texting the word "Yele" to 501501. Or donate via other participating charities (the donation is charged to the user's cellphone bill).

And as of January 16, cellphone users in the United States had raised over $11 million via text message donations for Haitian earthquake relief, with $9 million donated to the American Red Cross and $2 million to Wyclef Jean's charity.

$11 million dollars! and counting. The Mobile Giving Foundation, which facilitates mobile fund raising for non-profit organizations, has hailed this event as a "mobile giving record".

What is it about this current situation that has made mobile donations such a powerful way to raise money for disaster relief?

I think that is has actually been a perfect storm of events that has led to this concept gaining traction:

1) Social media and mobile phone penetration sped things up. With 65% of the country having access to a cellphone - and 23% of them using smartphones - texting has become a national pastime; and when a humanitarian crisis like an earthquake demands immediate assistance, to donate via a simple text is probably the easiest and fastest way to help with fund raising. According to The Mobile Giving Foundation, mobile often outpaces on-line donor acquisition by a 3:1 factor, all because of the speed, access and ease of use.

Additionally, the high levels of social media penetration has helped speed up the outreach process and information on how to donate spread like wildfire over Twitter and Facebook. The American Red Cross Facebook Page has been providing regular updates on how the relief efforts are coming. Also, charities such as Oxfam are doing some great Search Engine Marketing and buying sponsored links on Google for keywords like "haiti earthquake" (see right).

Technology is speeding things up and the faster people know what to do and how to help, the faster we can see tremendous results.

2) Donations are texted to reliable organizations like the American Red Cross and Yele Haiti Earthquake Fund. There is no doubt that the credibility of these two organizations motivated people to donate. The Red Cross may be the world's most powerful philanthropic brand, and Wyclef Jean's motives - as a native and long-time promoter of issues in Haiti - could not be doubted as anything but completely genuine, so if anyone had been previously skeptical of mobile giving due to doubts about how and where the money would be spent, there was no reason to hold back now.

3) For once, corporate America isn't being greedy. All the major wireless carriers have waived text message fees for users sending mobile donations, and are making it clear that 100% of the donation is going to the charity, without any cuts for the company. They are also working to decrease the traditional 90 day lag time between when a donation is made and when the funds are received by a charity. Naturally, the urgency of the situation is also creating an atmosphere ripe for well-intentioned rumors, such as the hoax that American Airlines was flying doctors and nurses to Haiti for free to help with relief efforts. However, American Airlines is using the opportunity of debunking the rumor to tell people that it will provide bonus miles to people who donate to charities like the American Red Cross. When the brands you use make it easier for you to help a country in need, the barriers to entry into the world of mobile giving start getting worn down.

4) The charities are looking for small donations. No mobile giving campaign has been set up to ask for more than $10 per text and this is key to the success of such a campaign. People find it much easier to donate when they know it is okay to give in small amounts and they won't be judged for not giving in the hundreds and thousands. Also, mobile donations tap into a younger text-savvy demographic and these amounts work for them and their limited budgets as well. When disaster strikes, every dollar counts and mobile giving is simply crowd-sourcing at its best.

5) The call to action hit close to home, and not just geographically. Haiti has been in the news for all manners of humanitarian crises, most notably the slew of hurricanes that hit the country in 2008, causing untold destruction and devastation. With Katrina still fresh in the minds of Americans, the season of giving having just passed us by, and the upcoming National Day of Service - today, Martin Luther King Jr. Day - Americans were likely more motivated than ever to do their part in helping a tragedy-stricken country that can't seem to get a break.

These are some of the ideas that come to mind immediately; I look forward to hearing some ideas from readers as to why they think the concept of mobile giving has gained so much popularity in this particular crisis. And here's hoping that the donations continue to flow in and that this earthquake in Haiti, though tragic, helps set precedent for levels of charitable giving.

Word of the Year: what does this mean for marketing?

2010-01-07T18:44:00.007-05:00

Happy new year! As 2009 dwindled to a close and we rang in 2010, everyone was publishing a list: the bests and worst of the past year; how the decade met or failed expectations of the 21st century; predictions for and trends to expect in 2010, and so on.

In recent years, one of the more interesting annually-bequeathed titles to watch out for has been The Word of the Year. As a lover of language and words, I have personally always been curious to know which word will be given the honor of defining and encapsulating the essence of year. But this year I wondered: what does the WotY mean for marketers? Can this Word give marketers a temperature of societal or cultural mood? To what extent can it predict socioeconomic trends that impact big business?

I decided to find out. Surprisingly, during my research I realized that there are actually four major Word of the Year lists compiled in the United States and each has a different methodology for selecting a Word.

1) American Dialect Society (ADS) is dedicated to studying the English language and seemingly originated the concept of Word of the Year in North America as it has been producing the list since 1990.

Words are nominated and voted on by ADS members who are all linguists and philologists looking to capture the impact of the biggest political or socio-economic news stories. So, as you can see, except for the 2003 WotY, metrosexual, the Words are less about cultural trends and may be less relevant to marketers (although one might say that the increased cynicism associated with these Words may be cause for concern about the national mood as a whole!)

[FYI: the Word of 2009 and Word of the 2000-09 decade will be voted on by ADS tomorrow - January 8, 2010. My guess is that the WotY will have something to do with Twitter, Obama, H1N1 or Teabagging, and the WotD might be social media (the Word of the 1990s was web). We will see!]

2) Global Language Monitor (GLM) is a company that uses complex algorithms to document, analyze and track words. Based on software that tracks word frequency, context and appearance in global print and electronic media, it announces a Word of the Year, as well as phrases that were popular.

This methodology is the exact opposite of the ADS, as it it is entirely free from opinion and is based purely on statistics.

3) Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary (MWOD) started publishing a Word of the Year in 2003 (probably as a marketing ploy, there are rather few ways for a dictionary to promote itself!)

From 2003 to 2005, the Word of the Year was that which had the most online searches and page-hits. However, in 2006, MWOD changed its selection process and instead asked users to vote for the Word of the Year. Then, this year (2009) it reverted back to the methodology of using the number of dictionary lookups for WotY. Clearly, a serious publication like MWOD preferred to be a barometer for the nation's true curiosity about the meaning of concepts such as Democracy and Integrity, rather than stoop to cataloging the nation's favorite pop culture references, such as truthiness and w00t, both of which still have not made it into the dictionary.

4) The New Oxford American Dictionary (NOAD), which is published by American editors over at the Oxford University Press, has been selecting its own Word of the Year since 2005 when it launched its official blog (although the Oxford University Press has been selecting a British Word of the Year since at least 1906). It seems that the blog and WotY list may have been started as a way to counter Merriam-Webster in the online lexicographic space.

A team of editors at NOAD compiles a list of words that have entered the language or changed significantly in their meaning using their own knowledge, reader contributions, and their own proprietary and ever-changing database which tracks word usage. They keep shortlisting the list it until they have arrived at the final word.

So what does this mean for marketers?

As a Word that largely reflects trends and news stories that are given attention to by the media, I think the GLM list is probably more useful to marketers. At the end of each year, we can see what quantitatively caught the national (and global) media's attention and infer what this means for consumers and the market.

For instance, at the start of 2007, it was clear that the 2006 WotY, sustainability, had become a key issue in the national media, and that paved the way for an increased green consciousness, an explosion of hybrid products and services, a rise in using ecofriendliness as a corporate PR tactic, and acceptance for films like Wall-E. In 2009, Twitter gained national recognition and was the first tech/social media word to make it to this list, proving that it (and social media) has established itself as a game-changer for communication, media and technology. Marketing people everywhere: pay attention. Start understanding Twitter and its repercussions for your brand, your customer service, your listening mechanisms, your HR practices and your public relations.

For a Word that might best reflect what people are curious about, the NOAD Word of the Year, with its nice mix of editorial judgment and actual numbers of dictionary searches, may be the best predictor of changes in human behavior and consumption patterns, although they tend to be somewhat prescient.

For instance, in 2005, news of podcasting was all the rage but it wasn't until two or three years later that the technology became widely spread and adopted by the public at large. Similarly, as a word, locavore (2007) didn't quite catch on but the concept has begun to take root, as Michelle Obama plants a White House garden, trends in remote-farming increase, and the global obsession with Farmville grows. Interestingly, however, it seems that NOAD recognized the need for picking more 'sticky' words, because the 2009 Word of the Year was unfriend, chosen for of its (obvious) "currency and potential longevity". I hope NOAD sticks to its original philosophy though; predictiveness is far more interesting (at least in hindsight) than currency!

So, marketers: keep an eye on the Global Language Monitor and New Oxford American Dictionary Words of the Year. They're not rock-solid indicators of what is to come, but with 2009's winners being Twitter and unfriend, they do provide a candid snapshot of the national consumer psyche and help us hone in on major trends, and force us to reflect on what these changes -- such as the increasing penetration of social media, acceptance of changing technology, and the development of online social mores that differ from in-person communication -- mean for consumers, brands and marketers.

Made (By Way Of) China? A Global Brand Campaign

2009-12-23T20:50:00.001-05:00

Let me talk to you today about a product. I don't know anything about how much it costs or why it is better than its competitor, but I do know that it was made in Switzerland. Hm. You may think that I'm speaking of a high precision watch, or gourmet chocolates perhaps? Let's say the product was made in Italy. Your mind probably went towards images of glossy leather shoes or designer fashions.

Now let's say that the product was made in China. What do you think now? Yes. Exactly.

In the global economy, the label "Made in China" has come to represent a number of negative qualities: low-cost, low-quality, copycat goods that are produced in mass quantities. Many of us may not know the names of or have opinions about actual Chinese brands, but as a country of origin, China has gained a notorious reputation. We may buy products that have "Made in China" on the label, but might not expect the product to last very long, or might cynically expect to someday hear that the product contains hazardous ingredients has been recalled.

The Chinese are entirely aware of this, and to combat these very perceptions, China recently launched the country's first global brand campaign through a 30-second commercial, which has been airing on CNN (reportedly on U.S., International, Asia and Headline News) since the end of November. The ad was commissioned by China's Ministry of Commerce and a number of trade associations and was produced by the Chinese arm of international advertising agency, DDB.

The 30-second spot shows Western actors interacting with a number of products boasting a "Made in China" label, but with a postscript. Running shoes have a tag that says "Made in China with American sports technology"; an MP3 player is labeled with "Made in China with software from Silicon Valley"; a commercial airplane is stamped with "Made in China with engineers from all over the world". The spot ends with the tagline, "Made in China, Made with the World."

Let's discuss what this commercial does right. The strategic concept does hold water: after all, in a networked global economy, most products reach the shelves after having been through a highly fragmented and complex supply chain. The ad reminds audiences that although the label says "Made in China", many other companies and people were involved in the production process. In fact, more than 50% of Chinese exports are "processing exports", i.e. China becomes involved only in the final assembly and shipping phase of the production process. The label says "Made in China" but it should really say "By Way of China".

From an execution perspective, the warm and fuzzy message of global partnership does get conveyed through the soft visuals and mellow voice of the narrator. Also, the ad does succeed in portraying China as a little bit more modern than we're used to; not being subjected to images of the Great Wall, Tiananmen Square, and Mao is a little refreshing.

But the plus points end there.

The strategy to show the involvement of other countries may have been well-intentioned, but what the commercial essentially conveys is that for any given "Made in China" product, there were actually many more reliable non-Chinese cooks in kitchen watching over the process. By saying, "sure we made it, but Silicon Valley actually thought it up", they are creating an unavoidable comparison between themselves and a platinum brand; instead of elevating the Chinese by association, the parallel damages their credibility as innovators and relegates them to mere manufacturers.

Another thing: even though the commercial is intended for a global audience, it speaks with a very Chinese voice. The phrase "American Sports Technology" means nothing to an American. The ad would be far more effective if we saw a runner lacing up a shoe that read "Made in China, with Reebok technology"; after all, Reebok represents something to the average consumer. Using generic representations of other nations as ingredients in your own nation branding doesn't really work.

From an execution perspective, the ad fails in making the "Made in China" brand relatable. Chinese-made products are bought by people from every ethnic and income background, but the actors are all middle to upper-class Caucasians, reflecting a non-diverse (perhaps stereotyped?) mindset of Westerners. Also, the taglines suggest partnership with "French designers" and "engineers from all over the world" -- where are these people? If China would like to prove that other nations and people are involved in the production process, why not actually show them, instead of simply the end consumer?

One way to also enhance the image of Chinese brands would be to also include... some Chinese brands. Why not show a businessman using a Lenovo laptop? Or people using China Mobile phones? This way, the generic "Made in China" identity benefits from being associated with individual successful Chinese brands, they gain more Western exposure, and everyone goes home happy.

This new commercial was not really reviewed by the national media here in the U.S, and seemed to have slipped by the marketing press entirely. Perhaps the Chinese don't want to make a splash about it, seeing as the ad is being run only on one news network and news of campaign was only given to English-language channels in China, not the more important and influential Chinese networks. Perhaps this is just a project that a handful of bureaucrats were assigned to complete. But it still remains an intriguing case study in global marketing and perceptions of global consumer culture. For all the reasons that China is mentioned in the mainstream media, it would be nice to see some coverage on issues like this as well.

Designing a Custom Twitter Template

2009-12-15T00:56:00.000-05:00

I recently launched my new website, and decided that I wanted my Twitter profile page to have the same look and feel as the site. I figured that repurposing the site design and uploading a new background to Twitter would take just a few minutes.

As it turned out, it was incredibly challenging to get the dimensions of the page and columns correct. I searched Google for this information but the dimensions that others provided did not work, and I could not find these guidelines on Twitter.com. I had to use trial and error to get it right, and ended up spending a couple of hours on what should have ideally taken a few minutes. So, in case anyone else would like to create a custom background, I decided to post the dimensions for the Twitter profile page.

Based on a display resolution of 1280 x 800, the canvas size of the Twitter page is 1265px wide and 700 px high.

Within the page, there are essentially three columns created by the "main" Twitter box, which lies in the center of the page and includes the sidebar which displays your bio. Here are the dimensions of these three columns:

Left edge of page to Left edge of Twitter box: 230 px
Width of Twitter box: 790 px (230+790=1020 px)
Right edge of Twitter box to Right edge of window: 245 px (1020+245=1265px=total page width)

Hope this helps!

4 Strategies to Creating a Killer Facebook Page

2009-12-12T11:56:00.000-05:00

Slate.com's The Big Money recently published its rankings of the top 50 brands using Facebook Pages. While it was helpful to have a shortlist of the top players on Facebook, the list didn't really provide any concrete advice to marketers. The rankings outlined the criteria that were used to make the decisions - "fan numbers, page growth, frequency of updates, creativity as determined by a panel of judges, and fan engagement" - but other than providing the number of fans each Page had, there was no real strategic/creative explanation for why one marketer was better than the other.

So I decided to assess some of the top brands from this list and glean my own set of strategies about what makes any Page effective, and how marketers can use these 'best practices' to achieve their own Facebook success.

Disclaimer: Before diving into these insights, it's important to underscore the fact that any Facebook page will be most effective when it is one of many social media tools that all fall under an umbrella social media strategy that is tied to all other marketing communication efforts. Today's media landscape is incredibly fragmented and any brand has a higher chance of making an impact when there are multiple opportunities for the consumer to interact with it; social media helps by expanding a brand's self-referential presence on the web.

That being said, here are 4 strategies on how Facebook Pages can play their part in creating your Web 2.0 presence:

1) Content: pick a format and do it well.

The new mantra of Web 2.0 marketing is think like a publisher and Facebook Pages allow brands to publish and share almost any kind of creative content in order to engage with their customers and turn them into fans. While you should be utilizing all forms of social media to promote your brand, consider developing a waterfall content strategy specific to Facebook, i.e. concentrate on sharing one type of content on your Page so that you can develop your Facebook personality in a focused way. This will help you concentrate your creative energies and create an identifiable content theme for your brand.

What you choose to share must, of course, suit your brand personality and resonate with your target audience. Pringles (2,786,000+ fans) emphasizes the whimsy of its brand through a string of amateur, but funny, videos that resonate with its young and edgy audience. Gap (489,000+ fans) focuses on letting users explore products through various experiential apps that offer a social/sharing element and appeal to a young, connected and tech-savvy audience. For instance, Gap recently launched a Holiday Factory app (see right) which analyzes the key words in the Information tab of a user's profile and generates a funny holiday tale, like a Mad Libs game. You can then post the story to your profile and share with friends.

Key Takeaway: Specialize in providing a particular type of content through your Facebook Page ~ whether it's photos, videos, blogposts, or apps ~ and try to be innovative and exciting in how and what you deliver, so that your Page can be a place that fans will visit again and again.

2) Engagement: give your fans the opportunity to share their own content.

Customers love hearing from their favorite brands but can feel even more connected when they interact with other fans, and a common sharing activity allows them to channel their enthusiasm in a creative way. An effective way to engage with fans is to provide a dedicated space for them contribute their content and due to Facebook's excellent photo sharing capabilities, encouraging fan photos is a popular choice.

The ASPCA (205,000+ fans) uploads pictures of pets that are up for adoption, while also inviting its fans to upload pictures of their own pets. This taps into the passions of a typical pet owner (wanting to share photos of your pet) and flipping through albums of cute animals helps create a stronger sense of community around the work the ASPCA does.

Similarly, Starbucks (5,160,000+ fans) communicates with fans through freqeunt status updates and often encourages them to submit photos and videos; currently the page has over 1,400 fan photos of Starbucks products, merchandise, store fronts, and adults/children/friends interacting with them.

Another good way to engage with fans is through Polls; you can ask them entertaining questions or simply do market research - chances are they will respond to make their voices heard. A number of brands I surveyed had a Polls tab but none had utilized them effectively, giving up after asking 2 or 3 sporadic questions. Given the popularity of the 25 Things About Me meme and the Social Interview app (now the 3rd largest app according to Inside Facebook), it is clear that Facebook users love answering questions. Use this opportunity to make them feel like someone at their favorite brand cares about their opinions.

Key takeaway: Create an atmosphere of sharing and collaboration on your Facebook page and provide reasons for fans to share content, whether it's based on different themes or a new campaign or product launch. Comment on fan submissions and thank them for taking the time to upload them, so that they feel appreciated and involved.

3) Landing Pages: make a great first impression.

One of the more recent Facebook Page features is that each tab now has a unique URL, so you can decide which tab will be the default landing page for customers. Think creatively about how you can use this: customers could land on the Wall tab dedicated to user-generated content (as mentioned in #2 above) to show that they are a priority for the brand. Or they could be directed to a tab dedicated to your current campaign to raise awareness. Or to the latest app/feature which you are looking to promote to increase favorability.

Skittles (3,521,000+ fans) does this very well; its current landing page ties into its "Taste the Rainbow" campaign by taking you to its Holla app where you can dial an imaginary public telephone and holler at the Rainbow (which appears to be a 20 year old male). Whatever message you leave for the Rainbow can be posted to your Wall and shared with friends.

Bigger brands can use their tabs strategically by dedicating one to each type of campaign they are running. McDonalds (1,462,000+ fans) appears to have one for every segment they target: a Local tab to build local communities; a McCafe tab that appeals to young, urban coffee drinkers; a Quality tab that is likely to interest moms; and an Angus Axiom tab which might attract meat-loving men.

Key Takeaway: Give the structure and navigability of your Facebook Page the same attention you would to your website. Consider where you users to land first (and why), and organize your tabs strategically, whether it is by campaign, target audience or content.

4) Integration: create a holistic Facebook experience.

Facebook's success comes from the fact that it is a complete social networking site, supporting every aspect of a interpersonal communication in a 2.0 world (wall posts, chat, emails and more). Leverage this existing communications infrastructure to enhance your presence and show that you understand how your Facebook audience works.

National Geographic tied in with Causes, the site's 2nd largest app with over 30 million subscribers, to raise awareness and donations for 4 causes, including protecting gorillas and big cats (although the app has historically not performed very well in terms of fund raising, the tie-in likely raised awareness for NatGeo's issues and Facebook Page). Similarly, H&M (1,375,000+ fans) has an app that allows users to gift each other Jimmy Choo shoes, tying back to the Gift app which is popular for its fun and creative spin on aspirational 2.0 generosity. Both are examples of how brands can leverage existing Facebook memes.

Assuming that Facebook is one of your many social media tools, use your Page to integrate all of these channels through links, RSS feeds and specialized boxes. Add your blog and Twitter updates, embed your YouTube channel videos and share your Flickr photos through Facebook. You can approach this creatively as well: Coca-Cola (4,014,000+ fans) has a Feeds tab where Flickr and Twitter feeds are aggregated, so a user only has to go to that one tab to see constantly streaming social media updates. Red Bull even pulls in tweets from sponsored athletes and brand ambassadors on a dedicated Athletes tab to benefit from those updates and the related brand associations.

A final note on integration: try to stay on the Page. H&M is guilty of this - many of its links and features take the user back to the official H&M website and I feel that this works against the brand. Facebook users are used to having a seamless experience and should be able to benefit from all the features of a Page without leaving it, or at least without leaving the Facebook site.

Key Takeaway: Offer a holistic user experience that ties back to existing Facebook features and integrate all your social media feeds to create a stronger content echo. Most people don't have to leave Facebook to communicate; try to do the same with your Facebook Page.

With these 4 key strategies in mind, you should be able to develop an successful Facebook page for your company and your bramd. What do you think? Do share your comments.

Note: all fan numbers are current as of 12/8/2009.

Additional Resources (via @mashable):
What is a Facebook Page vs. Facebook Group?
How to set up a Facebook Page.

Keep an Eye on Google Goggles

2009-12-08T12:44:00.002-05:00

Yesterday, Google announced a number of new features, most notably its new capability for providing real-time search results (including Twitter feeds) which has gotten a great deal of attention from the press. But what intrigued me most is their announcement of the Google Googles feature on their mobile blog.

Google Goggles is a powerful image-driven search application, which is currently available only on Android phones (strange and disappointing given how pervasive the iPhone is, but we're going to assume that it will eventually be available on Apple devices as well in the near future!) The app allows users to take a photograph of anything and submit it to Google - just as you would a typewritten phrase or voice memo - to get a list of search results. The concept is certainly not new, but the feature's strength lies in the variety of functions that can be performed by using simply one app - shopping, mapping, scanning and, of course, Google search.

The power of visual search has thus far mostly been limited to shopping apps. Most notable for me has been the Amazon.com app, which allows you to submit a photo of a product, visually search through the site, and decide on the spot if buying a product/book in-store is cheaper than buying it online on Amazon.com. I have used this feature so many times (and found the better deal on Amazon) that it has almost become a shopping ritual for when I'm buying certain products such as books and appliances.

But with Goggles, visual search extends beyond the ability to buy and becomes another easy aid to simply gather information, at the click of a button. The ramifications for a Wikipedia fiend like myself are huge. Plus the integrations with Google's mapping functions will have an immense impact on Augmented Reality applications - point your camera at a scene and poweful algorithms coordinate with a GPS and compass to make names of stores pop up, along with information about them? I can see a number of crazy games and marketing ploys coming out of this feature.

I also find the business card scanner/OCR function of Goggles rather exciting; thus far, if you wanted to take a photo of a business card and download the information into your phone's contacts, you had to either pay $3.99 and upwards for an iPhone app, and in some cases, wait 24 hours for the data to return the result. But Goggles offers this functionality for free and downloads the data instantly.

I'm looking forward to having this functionality available on the iPhone. It'll be an significant improvement in the way we search for information, and will offer a definite leg up over the current voice search capability, which is great in theory but has very spotty performance... at least for with those of us who have dubious American accents!

4 Criteria for Successful Online Video Advertising

2009-12-03T16:18:00.000-05:00

When it comes to online advertising, we've certainly come a long way since the dreaded pop-up ad. Email marketing, display ads and paid/organic search have become the bread and butter of online advertising, but the place at which the true capacity of online advertising and customer engagement intersect is, quite clearly, online video.

According to Nielsen, online video usage shot up by 53% vs. a year ago in May 2009. This is huge news. Of course, television isn't going away anytime soon, but such an extraordinary surge in consumption habits, thanks to Hulu and YouTube, can't be ignored. As broadband penetration increases and "eyeballs" begin to move increasingly towards online video, it is only logical that advertising follow that very same path. And according to the Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB), digital advertising revenue in the first half of 2009 was up 38% from the same period in 2008.

One place where online video is making successful inroads is on news websites. CNN.com's recent web re-design has a dedicated Video tab as part of the main menu, the first to be seen after the Home tab. ESPN.com places its video player up front and center on its homepage, and the Wall Street Journal recently introduced its own webcasting channel "The News Hub", which broadcasts a a twice-daily live video newscast.

But while online video content is growing, how to make online advertising work still remains a game of trial and error. As seen on these news sites, most advertisers are still using online video as an extension of their TV campaigns - running their ads as pre-roll before relevant content or, such as in the case of WSJ, sponsoring the "News Hub" channel on a monthly basis.

I believe that for online video to be successful, advertisers will have to think outside of the box in terms of creative and execution. The ads will need to meet the following 4 criteria:

1. Have engaging storylines and compelling content;

2. Utilize creative ad placement that really brings the screen to life;

3. Provide some kind of value to the customer through interactivity and participation;

4. Require the customer to opt into the ad (accidentally rolling over a rich media ad and being forced to endure a commercial or hunt endlessly for a X/close button is getting tiring).

Some good examples of online video done right are Apple's recent executions on the New York Times homepage. Apple extended its "I'm a Mac" campaign to online video by taking over nytimes.com for a day with multiple video placements. See below:

May 18, 2009

November 11, 2009

The videos did lack that element of interactivity where viewers become part of the storyline or where viewer participation yields some kind of value benefit, but they delivered on the other criteria. The videos began playing as soon as you arrived on the site, but they did so on mute and therefore they ran unobtrusively on the sides until you clicked on the Play button and opted to watch them - at that point they interrupted the "auto play" function and started from the beginning so you could follow the storyline. I found this to be a noticeably helpful feature, and with the content being funny and creative, it scored as a fairly successful execution.

What other criteria would you recommend for successful online video executions? Are there other noteworthy examples that you have noticed in the recent past?

Twitter Features I'd Like to See

2009-11-25T09:24:00.000-05:00

Twitter has been releasing a number of new features lately. Notable ones include: grouping the people you follow in public and private lists; the new re-tweet button that allows you to RT automatically; and the new geolocation API which lets users share their exact locations, opening the door to numerous location-based apps (a la Foursquare), and more accuracy during moments of breaking news (a la the recent Iranian election).

All of these features are extremely important steps towards increasing the usability and versatility of Twitter as a communications tool. But there are definitely more improvements that Twitter can make. Here are a couple that are at the top of my list:

1. People You Have In Common
Twitter could borrow Facebook's ability to see the people that you have in common with new (or potential) friends, and one would ideally be able to see common people and lists. Why? Because knowing how someone came to follow you allows you to establish a better relationship with that person. You know the context within which they found you and it opens up the opportunity for a proper dialogue. To be honest, it also reduces a little bit of the creepiness factor that comes with anonymous following. And it also tells you who your most influential advocates are on Twitter: is it a friend that re-tweets you a lot, or the fact that you're on a particular list? What activity is getting you your followers? In marketing terms, you have a better idea where your "leads" are coming from, so you can "optimize" your content better and increase your Twitter followers.

2. Favorite alerts
To further "optimize" your stream, it would be helpful if Twitter improved the Favorites feature. Currently, users can see each others' Favorite tweets when browsing profiles, but if someone Favorites my tweet, it would be great to get an alert right away, and also see it in a column somewhere (in the same vein as the new re-tweet feature). This will allow me to see what's popular among my audience and tweet more about that kind of content.

3. "Bookbinding"
Services like FastPencil are rapidly changing the concept of publishing as we know it. The application allows people to collaborate online to write, edit and publish a book, and it also offers the ability to publish a blog into a book, with each post serving as a separate chapter. This kind of "bookbinding" feature would be an excellent addition to Twitter. The ability to index all tweets, export them to Word or Excel, make them searchable and sortable by date or @reply would really allow users to have a portable resource and history of their tweets. They could search their own data with a lot more ease, and also leverage these "published works" as part of their creative portfolios. Even if this feature is far off in terms of viability, a step in the right direction would be to do away with the "More" button and go back to a numbered page system for profile pages. It would be great to be able to see back to my very first tweet so that I can search my own data more easily and effectively (the Search field doesn't always oblige).

Those are the top 3 features that come mind at the moment. What kinds of improvements would you like to see on Twitter?

AT&T hits back at Verizon with sloppy, stop-gap measure

2009-11-20T12:44:00.002-05:00

The wireless war continues between AT&T and Verizon. In my last post, I felt that Verizon's aggressiveness might have been somewhat unwarranted but a federal judge clearly disagreed with me, as he dismissed AT&T's lawsuit that Verizon's latest campaign makes it seem that AT&T offers no coverage in large portions of the country. Not to be out-done, AT&T went full speed ahead on plan B: a counter campaign called "Side by Side", which launched last night.

I sincerely wish that AT&T had not executed plan B. Here are all of the things that are wrong with this ad:

1) A side by side comparison? Nothing reeks more of "panic-driven PR move by the second-best guy". AT&T is a household name and, yes, the second largest wireless provider in the country, but it isn't going to lose a large percentage of its subscribers in the few weeks it would have taken to develop a more creative, witty, polished and compelling ad. Rattling off facts with no story behind them doesn't do anything to reinstate any credibility in AT&T's offerings or brand, and if anything, is likely to take away from both.

2) No mention of the iPhone. The ad alludes to the 100,000 apps but considering that the iPhone is AT&T's strongest weapon and both Verizon ads take it on directly through "There's a Map for That" and the iPhone Misfit Toy, shouldn't the retort have included at least a mention of the iPhone? Maybe AT&T wasn't able to get Apple's sign off on this in time, or maybe Apple wanted to have nothing to do with it, but it is a glaring hole in this comeback strategy.

3) Luke Wilson. Seriously, Luke Wilson? He's a funny actor but he looks exhausted and jaded, like he just got off a 10 hour flight (he may well have). Is that really what you want your brand to look like? Verizon has hipster teens and cutesy toys - and you fight back with a A-/B+ list funnyman, through a script that has no personality and does not leverage his brand (i.e. humor) in any way at all. Except for that last comment about AT&T not having a V in its name, which would have sounded a lot funnier if Wilson had actually made fun of what it means to have a V in your name. For instance if the line had actually been (my words in bold): "Cool name that starts with a funky letter, like, hmm, V? Oh yeah, it got one." it would have been somewhat more effective.

To me, this ad was a mistake and it was clearly created to satisfy top executives at AT&T who wanted an immediate response, however sloppy, to stave off the news and analyst hounds; this much is obvious by the fact that the TV ad was accompanied by a print campaign in the Wall Street Journal. I recognize their point of view, but as an AT&T customer and iPhone user, I would have preferred if they had addressed me, since I'm the one who generates revenue for them and is likely to jump ship as a result of Verizon's ads.

It might have been wiser if AT&T took a week or two more to come up with a far more effective and creative ad campaign, and meanwhile used other tactics, such as social media, as a stopgap measure. AT&T could have reached out to its 27,000+ fans on its Facebook page through fact-based news updates, or by creating an application or game that allowed iPhone lovers to somehow express their Verizon/Droid rivalry (and win, of course) in the vein of Burger King's Whopper Sacrifice (although that was unfairly shut down by Facebook).

Would've, should've, could've; it's all done now. We can only hope that AT&T gets its act together quickly and is actually able to come back with something more solid, something that helps it prevail over the lawsuit dismissal and its own failure of an ad, otherwise it probably really has something to worry about as Black Friday approaches and people start lining up outside Verizon stores for the new Droid phones.

Related Post: Verizon: holiday cheer or churlishness?

Subaru's insult is Snuggie's compliment

2009-11-19T10:06:00.000-05:00

Let’s face it: the Snuggie is the brand story of this recession. Widely described as being, essentially, a "blanket with sleeves", somehow the Snuggie always manages to elicit very strong emotional reactions in people: some are in awe at the sheer genius behind the concept, others can’t help but roll their eyes in complete disdain.

Well, for those who fall into the latter category, worry not, there’s a car for you. Snuggie haters can unite over the new commercial by DDB Canada for the Subaru Outback. It starts off with 11 seconds of a Snuggie ad, which is interrupted by a rugged outdoorsman ripping the ad out with a crowbar and suggesting, “you should get out more”.

To me, this ad is simply amazing. I don’t think I have ever seen this form of ingredient branding (if you could call it that) in a commercial before. Normally, brands leverage the positive emotions associated with other brands in order to enhance their own image, such as a PC manufacturer gaining credibility by saying it has “Intel Inside”. But rarely do you see a company mocking another brand, from an entirely different category, to establish its own identity and positioning. What is even more astonishing is that Subaru allegedly bought the rights to the Snuggie ad. So, Snuggie thinks it is perfectly legal and acceptable for the car manufacturer to run this ad. What? Normally, you would expect a brand to want to safeguard its image – instead, Snuggie is perfectly happy to be the butt of Subaru’s joke. Do they truly believe that any publicity is good publicity?

My guess is that this is a carefully crafted business decision on their part, since the ad only reinforces their identity as a ridiculous, seemingly pointless brand and that image is what got them their cult following in the first place. In fact, the company often insists that they always wanted to be a little cheesy and attract customers through humor. Whether they expected the Snuggie to become a pop culture cult phenomenon, complete with hundreds of Facebook groups (fans and haters) and spoof videos on YouTube, is still unknown.

Consumer reactions are another thing to consider. As a Snuggie owner, I’m not ticked off by the Subaru ad. In fact, I think it’s hilarious. Maybe it’s because the Snuggie is so widely mocked, or maybe it’s because it is just a cheap and low involvement purchase – but it doesn’t really offend. What does that say about the brand?

That’s not to say that people who own Snuggies aren’t judged. After I bought mine (in an attractive bubblegum pink), I posted a picture of it on Facebook and I came under fire almost instantly. One friend said that it looked great and she wanted to get one too, but the other ten comments were all in the vein of “Snuggies are evil!” and “Oh no, you didn’t!”

None of these people are particularly outdoorsy, but I’m sure they will love the new Subaru ad. They might also approve of the Lippi-Selk sleeping bag, an insulated sleeping bag with arms and legs that you can wear outdoors! When you’re driving around in your Subaru! Well, maybe not.

But like it or not, the Snuggie is, at least for now, a resounding success. It has sold 5 million units, raised over $300 million in retail sales, and was rated by AdAge as one of the hottest brands of 2009. Snuggie held its own fashion show during New York’s Fashion Week, showcasing its new zebra and leopard prints, and has now launched an entire line for kids and dogs .

What is the secret to Snuggie's success? Who knows. Most As-Seen-On-TV products attempt to create a need where none exists, but maybe there really was an underserved, untapped market of people who felt disproportionately cold in their arms than in any other part of the body, and the Snuggie’s predecessor, the Slanket , just creeped people out by its name. Or maybe people just couldn’t stop laughing at the annoying and exaggerated way that the Snuggie actors shivered before they put on their oversized monk robes. Whether or not the craze lasts, the Snuggie is clearly a case study that will be examined for a very long time.

Verizon: holiday cheer or churlishness?

2009-11-16T03:13:00.000-05:00

Verizon is planning some pretty aggressive anti AT&T holiday advertising. As reported by Fast Company, a new ad starts off in a traditional winter wonderland filled with toys and Christmas carols, but very quickly you realize something dark is afoot. Listen closely to the ad, and veiled beneath the cheerful holiday music is a song about “The Island of Misfit Toys”. As these abandoned good-for-nothings sing about their woes, they are joined by the iPhone who has been banished to the godforsaken land because of its bad AT&T network. At first they are all surprised, but after realizing what’s wrong with him, the little blue plane claims, “You’re going to fit right in here”, followed by a rather maniacal cackle.

Alright, perhaps it’s not all that maniacal, but it does raise a question about negative advertising. It certainly isn't new - Verizon recently came under fire for another ad they ran called, "There's a Map for That" (punning on the popular iPhone ads) where they used a network coverage map to illustrate how bad AT&T's coverage is; they even put up comparison maps in their store windows. AT&T sued them for misrepresentation in return. I'm beginning to wonder that they may have been justified in doing that.

Granted, the AT&T network has some legitimate problems - such as dropped calls, slow downloads and calls going directly to voicemail - and Verizon is justified in moving aggressively to promote its reliable network. But at what point do you stop making a case for yourself and start to paint yourself as a cutthroat, insensitive brand? The iPhone has a lot of fans, despite the network, and by taking it on with this passive-aggressive approach, does Verizon risk alienating diehard fans?

Another thing: Apple is already expected to become carrier-neutral in 2010 once its contract with AT&T expires, and I'm sure Verizon will want to be an iPhone vendor (rumors are already swirling that a new iPhone will be launching for the Verizon network). By running an ad in which the iPhone is called a "misfit toy" (if only because of its association with AT&T) I can't imagine they're winning a whole bunch of points with Apple.

It’s clear that this type of advertising (facts + veil of cuteness + sardonic humor) has been legitimized by the Mac vs. PC turf war. I’ve been a big fan of the “I’m a Mac” campaign, but those ads have begun to get somewhat below the belt. They are increasingly less based on facts (no viruses, no security issues), and now raise questions about Microsoft’s integrity. They sound a lot more personal and are subsequently less funny and less enjoyable. I own numerous Apple products and love them all, but I am beginning to feel a little less proud that the tete-a-tete’s between Mac and PC are turning into sound petty school yard fights. I wonder: at what point do the diminishing returns of aggressive behavior begin to set in to negatively impact a brand?

Then again, this may be an entirely moot point in the wireless category. After all, to what extent are people attracted to phone handsets by the brand personality they exude, versus the simple facts of cost and performance? Unlike Asia, where a cellphone is largely a status symbol, perhaps most of the American audience is fairly brand disloyal and therefore mostly insensitive to aggressive advertising?

Or, perhaps this ad isn't as negative as it seems at first blush. For all I know, I may just be disturbed by the sight of abandoned toys (remember Velveteen rabbit?) and/or sentient toys with a distinct evil streak (a la Chucky), and there’s just some major transference happening here with the new Verizon ad. I bet that never came up in a focus group.