Tag Archives: Marketing and Advertising

A Peek Over The Native Horizon

Sometimes you can get a glimpse of what’s coming over the horizon and I think I got one of those this morning.  I was catching up on some reading and came across a letter that the FTC sent out.  It was directed to search engines but I think it’s a harbinger of things to come as the digital ad business gets more deeply into content marketing and so-called “native” advertising.  You can read the letter here but in summary it says that ads in search results must be clearly identified as such:

Advertising

Advertising (Photo credit: Wrote)

Search engines provide invaluable benefits to consumers. By using search engines, consumers can find relevant and useful information, typically at no charge. At the same time, consumers should be able to easily distinguish natural search results from advertising that search engines deliver. Accordingly, we encourage you to review your websites or other methods of displaying search results, including your use of specialized search, and make any necessary adjustments to ensure you clearly and prominently disclose any advertising. In addition, as your business may change in response to consumers’ search demands, the disclosure techniques you use for advertising should keep pace with innovations in how and where you deliver information to consumers.

That’s why you see the yellow background, for example, on Google search results along with it saying “ads related to (whatever the search term is)”.  The point is for consumers to be able to distinguish results that someone paid to make prominent vs those that would otherwise rise to the top.  Makes sense.  The tail end of the letter begins to talk about this same principle as it manifests itself in social and mobile (and voice search as well!).   Which got me thinking.

Content marketing done well is a beautiful thing.  Hopefully you all consider this blog a good example of someone putting our content that’s informative and engaging.  My hope is that this will lead you to email or call me about working with you, so I think in part that makes this an ad.  If I ever write anything that I’m paid to put in here, I’ll disclose it (although I probably won’t do that in the first place).  That’s content marketing – using content to sell.

Native ads are a bit more insidious.  It’s about the creation of content that’s supposed to be useful and interactive like content marketing.  Someone defined it as any type of advertising where the placement appeared to be appropriate except it’s much harder to identify as an ad.  When an article is about cats and is really an ad for a retailer, that’s a problem.

I think it won’t be long before rules are put in place to crack down on this.  How will the FTC stop fake reviews, articles such as the one above, and other forms that don’t disclose they’re really ads (which might call into question the validity of what’s in the article)?  I’m not sure but I know it won’t be as thoughtful as if marketers figure it out for themselves.

What do you think?

Enhanced by Zemanta

3 Comments

Filed under Consulting

Meet HAL, Our CMO

Anyone remember HAL? Or more specifically, the HAL 9000, one of the great screen villains of all time? Sure you do – it’s the computer in 2001. Throughout the course of the film the computer runs almost everything, including the humans. When the humans rebel, it murders them (trust me, that’s not a spoiler and you MUST see the film if you haven’t).

Hal 9000 D - Chrome

(Photo credit: K!T)

HAL is on my mind this morning because of something I read in Media Post:

Adobe Systems released an updated version of its social media platform Thursday allowing marketers to predict the effectiveness of posts before they are published.  Using predictive analytics, the feature in Adobe Social learns as it goes, refining recommendations and increasing intelligence with each action. The platform pulls in historic data from similar posts and integrates it with image data on Flickr, check-ins on Foursquare and videos from Instagram, to determine the outcome for sharing, comments, and likes.

I’m well aware that many companies use testing to plan advertising.  Focus groups are a tried and true method and I’ve used them myself.  Copy testing is part of that.  What I find creepy, however, is when this moves over to social media and it points out a flaw in many companies’ thinking.  Part of using social is being real.  It’s why I have an issue with any sort of programmatic content in general.  There needs to be a human on the other end, and not just a human running an algorithm.

Another problem is in the last sentence, above.  Programming to generate likes and sharing is specious reasoning.  That’s the sort of goal that someone looking to impress a boss who has no understanding of social media would have.  After all – things can go “viral” and generate a ton of comments when they’re used as the butt of a joke or as something negative.  Nice metrics, horrible outcome.

I don’t know about you but I can feel when it’s a computer on the other end.  It’s the digital equivalent of those nested phone menus where you type or say a response to a series of questions.  Those infuriate me .  Maybe they do you as well.  As marketers we need to have the courage to be human in social media.  Auto responders aren’t as good as human responders (properly trained, of course).  Letting a computer dictate what does or doesn’t get posted over the nuanced judgement of humans is not going to be as effective in the long run.

What do you think?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Leave a comment

Filed under Consulting, digital media

One Man’s Relevant Is Another’s Spam

There is a factoid coming out of some research that will be our topic today.  I find it of interest because it’s a dilemma that I share to a certain extent with the folks surveyed.  While the topic of the survey was the use of email, one of the key findings resonated with me:

The greatest percentage of marketers still felt challenged to create relevant and compelling content that will really draw in recipients. This ranked as the No. 1 challenge among B2B and B2C respondents to achieving their marketing objectives, but it was also considered the most effective tactic, cited by 71% of B2B marketers and 65% of B2C marketers. If marketers can create strong content, they believe it really does work at converting consumers.

This survey was conducted by the folks at Ascend2 and Research Underwriters.  I can attest to the challenges of creating compelling content – you see the result of that struggle each day here on the screed.  However, I wonder about the definition of relevant.  After all, you don’t have to go further than your own daily conglomeration of inbound emails to recognize that what’s compelling to those sending the stuff isn’t always at the top of your interest list.

Let’s take it out of the realm of commercial email for a second.  You probably get a few emails each day from friends or coworkers that are totally useless.  By that I mean you can ignore them and be no worse off – no less informed or enlightened.  They’re the “thanks” emails when you say you’ll follow up.  They’re the mails sent to 25 people on a team about a meeting involving 5 of them.  I’m all for communication but that gets to the “compelling and relevant” issue found in the survey.

Take that notion to mail you’d send on behalf of a commercial enterprise.  If you’re and airline and you’re sending me information about special fares that don’t apply to the city in which I live, you fail.  If you’re a vet sending me a special offer for the dog that died last year, you fail.  You see, what I’ve found is that compelling and relevant also means reader-focused, segmented, and based on whatever user data I have such as best read posts, etc.  It’s not  just some formula that satisfies MY agenda.

Marketing is hard and getting harder.  So’s blogging!  Neither one succeeds without a laser-like focus on the user.  Right?

Enhanced by Zemanta

1 Comment

Filed under Consulting, Helpful Hints, Thinking Aloud