Category Archives: Huh?

August 6, 2014 · 1:15 pm

Experts? Hardly.

You may be following the saga of Foursquare as it tries to find a business model that works.

Foursquare Logo

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The bloom of collecting badges has clearly worn off and almost every app has some sort of check-in feature to let your friends know where you are. Now Foursquare seems to be moving in a direction that will let them compete with Yelp (which has a good business model) and are splitting off the check-in part of the service into another app (Swarm).
Maybe you got the same email I did the other day which talked about their new feature called “Expertise”:

In the new Foursquare, we want to reward people who share their expertise, helping other people to great experiences. When you leave great tips, you make progress. And, the more people like or save them, the faster you’ll earn expertise.

It goes on to say that all of the tips you post thereafter will show they were posted by an expert.  On behalf of people who actually DO have some expertise on a few things, may I call BS?  I’ll even go further: I’m offended.

I’m offended because any moron with the price of dinner and a mobile device can write a review which may be complete blather and very inaccurate. I have no problem there.  But if they do so 10 or more times, does that really make them an expert or just a blithering idiot?  How is anyone to recognize the real experts?

I’m offended  because Foursquare is doing something that I find offensive among a number of content companies.  They are using the very same audience they sell to marketers to make their product.  The reward to the consumer for doing so?  An ego trip:

Once you’ve earned an expertise, we both mark your tips as coming from an expert (so the world knows), and make sure more people see them because they’re high quality. And, when you’re looking for great things to do when you’re at a place, you can see which ones come from experts.

How about something more tangible – a gift card, a weekly sweepstakes, anything that reflects the value of the contribution?  Foursquare seems to believe the famous Woody Allen quote that showing up is 80% of success.  If you show up at a place and write about it, you’re a success – an EXPERT!  My take?  Hardly.  Yours?

1 Comment

Filed under Consulting, digital media, Huh?, Thinking Aloud

Tagged as , , ,

July 29, 2014 · 8:54 am

Trusting Sponsored Content

We’ve explored the subject of branded content or advertorial or deceptive editorial or whatever you want to call it here on the screed a few times.

English: Example of a variable data tear sheet...

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Some data on the subject that I came across from Contently is worth a minute of your time.  They were spurred to do the research by a statement from the CEO of Chartbeat, an analytics company, who claimed that only 24% of readers were scrolling down on native ad content compared to the 71% of readers who scroll on “normal content.” Since that content is advertising that is supposed to integrate seamlessly with the site’s other content and, therefore, get the sponsor higher brand engagement, that number is pretty disturbing.  For my money, not quite as disturbing in some ways as what the subsequent study found.

Putting aside that most of those surveyed disagree about what exactly qualifies as “sponsored content”, some of the other findings were:

  • Two-thirds of readers have felt deceived upon realizing that an article or video was sponsored by a brand.
  • 54 percent of readers don’t trust sponsored content.
  • 59 percent of readers believe a news site loses credibility if it runs articles sponsored by a brand.
  • As education level increases, so does mistrust of sponsored content.

In fact, the study found that people would rather have to deal with banner ads than sponsored articles, and the more education the consumer has the greater chance they feel deceived by a piece of branded content.  The fine print labeling it as something not quite the same as other editorial does nothing to change consumers’ views.

Way back in October of 2012, this is what I had to say on the subject:

I’m not a fan.  Obviously I’m a big fan of ad-supported media – I worked in it and sold it for decades.  I do think, however, that doing this in digital in particular is an issue since there is so much content out there and users’ expectations of editorial integrity…are not met when the line is crossed.  It calls into question all of the legitimate reporting.  I get that people might ignore advertising but pay attention to this.  They need to know it’s not the same as other content.

My views haven’t changed.  Have yours?

Leave a comment

Filed under Consulting, digital media, Huh?

Tagged as , , , ,

July 24, 2014 · 11:21 am

We Need Smarter Social Thinking

Sometimes it feels as if it’s one step forward and two steps back with respect to marketers and social media.

English: Southwest Airlines 737-300 N310SW. I ...

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The latest example of this comes from a company that generally has a consumer friendly reputation, Southwest Airlines.  I’m willing to cut the home office a little slack in the tale of woe I am about to relate.  But only a little.

Southwest, like every airline, has a top tier of frequent passengers.  These are generally heavy business travelers and are the ones any airline executive will tell you really pay the bills since they’re often flying full fare and doing so frequently.  They receive perks, and in Southwest’s case one of them is priority boarding.

One of their “A-list” flyers was traveling from Denver with his young children (ages 6 and 9) and wasn’t allowed to board early because they don’t have VIP status.  We can debate if that was a mistake by the gate agent or bad corporate policy but what happened next is really the point.  He told the agent ‘Real nice way to treat an A-list. I’ll be sure to tweet about it,’” according to  WCCO.  He went on to do just that.  According to him, it was “Something to the effect of, ‘Wow, rudest agent in Denver. Kimberly S, gate C39, not happy @SWA.’”  Here is where things get interesting and, from a social marketing perspective, just silly.

Southwest’s social crew does a great job listening.  As an aside, they thanked this same traveler for a nice tweet about an agent a month ago.  They saw the tweet and must have called the gate agent about the unhappy customer.  The agent proceeded to remove the man from the plane (upsetting the children) and to demand that he delete the tweet to be allowed to travel.  He did so and according to all involved there was no bad language and threats made by him.  The agent did threaten to call the cops.

Since this incident (for which Southwest has apologized to the traveler) there have been TV stories, newspaper articles, and many screeds such as this.  The guy kept tweeting about it too.  Southwest offered the guy three $50 travel vouchers.  He has said he’ll never fly them again.  So much for an A-list passenger’s business.  I suspect the social crew at Southwest didn’t intend for the agent to take the action she did but someone should have thought about that being a possibility.  I mean you call someone up and say they pissed off a top status passenger and now it’s on Southwest’s “permanent record” and what do you expect?

As marketers we need to have thicker skins when we’re in the social stream.  If you were speaking with a number of business partners and one said something a bit off-putting, you’d probably make a mental note and let it go.  At worst you’d say something privately later.  This just threw gasoline on an already lit fire.  That fire has gotten brighter as it gets more oxygen from all that’s being written about the incident.  It’s hard enough to develop an A-list customer.  Retaining them should always be a top priority, maybe even if it means bending the rules (like expanding priority boarding to kids under 18) from time to time.

Thoughts?

Leave a comment

Filed under Consulting, Huh?

Tagged as , , ,