cgm

CGM Meets Primetime!

Tomorrow is a really big CGM milestone for me.  I'm helping organize one of the first-ever "summits" focused exclusively on consumer-generated media.  This is part of my real job at Nielsen BuzzMetrics.  We're having 100 or so clients here in New York for a deep, extended conversation on all aspects of the measurability and actionability of CGM.  Should be fascinating as there's such a diversity of approaches to leveraging CGM.  Needless to say, I'm pumped!

CGM, Traditional Ad Agencies, and Video-Inspired Renewal?

As I note in my ClickZ column this morning, it's been "fashionable lately to trash traditional ad agencies for being out-of-touch, out-of-the-loop, out-to-lunch, and missing-in-action on all things relevant to our unmistakable digital and 'conversational' reality."  But maybe, just maybe, that's too simple.  Maybe the advent of online video is represents a fresh opportunity for traditional agencies to reinvent themselves, and in the process, leverage and exploit their core strengths: story-telling, emotional bonding, branding.  And maybe, just maybe, consumer-generated media (CGM) is the best thing that every happened to the traditional agencies because it's demonstrating that long-form story telling has a world of potential and stickiness.   My piece, entitled "Will Video Save the Agency Star," articulates a number of reasons why I think agencies have a fighting chance.  

Super Bowl Ads, CGM, and Marketing Fusion

"Can a brand maximize ROI (define) on a major product launch or TV ad campaign without the active assistance of cross-platform "echo effect" tools, such as brand Web sites?"   This is the opening question in my most recent ClickZ column entitled "Super Bowl Advertising and Marketing Fusion: Razor's Edge."   The answer, I believe, is a big no, and this year's Super Bowl - an event marketers promote as a "word of mouth event" -- missed the mark in a big way on cross-platform marketing, which is essential for driving and nurturing consumer generated media and word of mouth.  One example I cite is Gillette Fusion, which fell short of fusing very their expensive Super Bowl ads with a meaningful online "engagement" experience.  Note how the website presently reads: "Come Back Soon to Experience It!"  This isn't to suggest Gillette TV spots didn't achieve meaningful TV "reach" levels, but rather, that the brand gave short shrift to what Stuart Elliot described in the New York Times last week as the "echo effect."  But there were other really obvious misses, including brand search engines firing blanks when users query "Super Bowl Ad."    My final takeaway from the ClickZ article is this:

• "TV advertising is hardly dead, but to work in this age of elusive consumer attention, it needs reinforcement, assistance, and, yes, an outlet for engagement. Web sites are a great place to start reengaging and, in the process, drive more fusion with marketing procedures." 

Let me end on a more upbeat note.  The good news for Gillette Fusion is that the product is just starting to get in the hands of consumers, which means it's well primed for conversation and word-of-mouth.  And I'll admit, it's a pretty good product.   Better late than never!

Intelliseek + BuzzMetrics = Nielsen BuzzMetrics

When I'm not blogging, or partnering with my wife Erika to take care of our precious little twins, to I'm helping companies and brands "listen to" and "leverage" consumer-generated media.  It's a great job because I really do believe companies and brands can do a much better job listening to the consumer.  I also sincerely believe consumers have so much to offer companies, both on the insight, "early warning," and media evaluation front.  Technology helps bring it all together. Today, I'm incredibly pleased to announce that that consumer-centered commitment is dialing up a big notch through the creation of a new company and brand, Nielsen BuzzMetrics, that brings together the company I work for, Intelliseek, and a company equally commited to excellence in consumer-generated media and word-of-mouth analytics, BuzzMetrics -- all under the Nielsen/VNU umbrella.  BuzzMetrics, worth mentioning, is a fellow co-founder of the Word of Mouth Marketing Association, and shares our genuine commitment to marketing ethics, consumer trust, and deep consumer understanding.  I'll let the release speak for itself, except to say that I am excited and energized this new development.  Also appreciate the good wishes and congratulations from folks in the industry,  from early investors like Fred Wilson and WOM evangelist Matt Galloway to the key bloggers in this space. 

Looking Back, Moving Forward

What's ahead for 2006?   There's lots of glazing through the crystal ball right now, but a few really stand out.  ClickZ editor Rebecca Lieb hits the nail on the head on so many key fronts in her link-rich piece, published today, entitled Where are We Going? Well, Where Have We Been?.  Top of her rear-view mirror informed list: "Video, Video, Video" (200% agree), RSS Feed Advertising (mostly agree, but reserve some skepticism), CGM and Buzz (of course I agree),  blog networks (yep), Adware firms cleaning up (three cheers!), and Pay Per Call (need for information to assess).  Other "year ahead" columns I've enjoyed:  Dave Winer, Bambi Francisco, John Battelle (on mobile developments), and Thomas Hawk (a compilation of predictions).  Jason Calacanis also hits some good ones.

Black Friday Part II for TypePad: CGM Cost and Consequences

What the real cost of TypePad's server crash on Friday, December 16th?  This is an important question, and can help us navigate a host of critical issues and questions related to the power and impact of consumer generated media (CGM).  First some background: the web's largest hosting service of blog (the highest form of consumer generated media) basically crashed, which meant over a dozen of this author's various blogs were completely inaccessible for a full day.  Millions of others were affected. Complaints were rampant, frustration was high, and discussion -- as evident on Slashdot -- extensive.  Post event headlines on blogs were witty and harsh -- e.g. The Glitch That Stole Christmas, and plenty of news articles gave this play, often drawing from blogger-based frustration. Interestingly, the most read bloggers were more forgiving than the rank-and-file, it seemed. Glenn Reynolds implied this was a good problem to have, while Steve Rubel professed continued loyalty.  Niall Kennedy of Technorati, meanwhile, rushed to capture an highly informative interview with Anil Dash.  I, of course, feel a tad awkward because I just trumpeted on this blog Typepad to evangelistic extremes over their recent innovative "choose your recovery" customer service recovery strategy.

Real Costs:  The real cost to Typepad as a result of this incident is that the passion and evangelism we express toward this service is now a bit of a "holding pattern."  We're not bashing the brand -- and in many respects the "switching costs" are too great for active bloggers to trash the hand that feeds them -- but we're on guard.  Yes, TypePad ostensibly has more server capacity, but the same factors constantly "wow" us -- the adding of feature and feature after feature, from "add water and stir" podcasting and video integration - now make us wonder if more growing pains are around the corner.  So it's not that I'm on the path to "bad mouth" the system; I'm just holding back.  But that has real ROI consquences.   My overt or unconscious evangelism for Typepad -- in webinars, in conferences, in ClickZ articles, in workshops for the Word of Mouth Marketing Association (WOMMA) -- has probably led to over 100 paid accounts for SixApart.  I'm just not sure anyone can take that level of "free advertising" for granted anymore.   Like other consumers, I must be mindful of the integrity of my recommendations. Word-of-mouth, or CGM analysis, is all about understanding root drivers of consumer conversation or recommendations to others, a point Jackie Huba and Ben McConnell effectively nail in Church of the Customer blog.   Most of the positive and negative CGM we see on blogs, boards, forums, and ratings & review sites flows directly from product or service experiences.  Brands that win with consumers generally receive a positive "CGM multiple," with the biggest reward coming through more favorable comments in search engines.  Brands that disappoint get rewarded with negative "brand residue" across the web, and this is painfully difficult to erase.  TypePad will endure and keep growing -- and I'll keep adding new blogs to its network -- but we now have reminders dotted across the web that this service is far from perfect.

CGM & Electronics

David Pogue's New York Times piece this morning centered on "electronics" hits the hammer on the nail.  The piece is entitled "10 Ways to Please Us, the Customers."   What the argument doesn't note, but which elevates the importance of his commentary, is the depth of virality and CGM around such experiences.  As we learned earlier about iPod users (arguably the gold-standard in CGM creation), active users of electronics products tend to shape and spread CGM at higher levels than other segments, which means their good or bad experiences have a greater impact, often intercepting other consumers during the "purchase cycle" or indexing via Google or other search engines where buyer prospects and other "influencers" can find them in a highly targeted needs-based manner. Interestingly, the electronics category produces more indexable or archived CGM than just about any other category.  But let's not get too overly simplified here.  There are many ways to cut an electronics experience, and certain issues drive higher levels of virality. Poque notes: "Thou shalt not charge tech-support fees for thine own mistakes."   He also raises red flags over "rebates." The big "aha" here -- informed by advanced text mining -- is that issues related to "billing" or "fees" in the electronics category elicit a higher emotional reaction, often to the point of outrage.  Depth of emotion and spread of CGM share a symbiotic relationship. Key Takeway for Brands:  Understand how certain experiences catalyze CGM, even at the broader "category" level. 

So Is CGM Actionable?

How "actionable" is consumer-generated media?   Brands are often looking for guidance on this important question.   After all, who wants to listen just for the sake of listening, right?    My ClickZ column this morning offers a few thoughts on how brand and companies can leverage and exploit consumer-generated media, from optimizing websites to driving greater efficiency in media buys.

Teen Bloggers Wearing Too Much on Their Hearts?

USA Today features a story (plus a side story and a couple sidebars) echoing tough questions we have all heard in the past about teen blogs.  Are teens sharing "too much information" in such a public arena? Is there a risk of teens wearing "their heart on their blog."  The article stops well short of endorsing a moratorium or ban on teen blogging -- few consider that appropriate or realistic-- but it does underscore many of this vulnerabilities and sensitivities.  The issues of marketing to teens is already under the radar. As new technologies continue to unfold that continue to super-charge social networks, I suspect even more questions to emerge.  Marketing simply need to be proactive in thinking it all through.  

Beyond the "The Conversation Gap"

Uber-blogger Steve Rubel hits an important theme in a recent post entitled "Mind the Conversation Gap."  He describes a technique he puts to work in brand consulting that highlights the extent to which brand are receiving their "fair share" of online conversation.  I often employ the same technique with clients and prospects, albeit with different terminology such as "CGM Deficiency Syndrome" or "Talk Deficit."   Irrespective of terminology, I enthusiastically agree that the technique hits a real sweet spot in arresting and captivating the attention of brands who have little idea that their brand is divorced, detached, ostracized, or exclused from the broader conversation.  It also helps re-engineer brand thinking from a "there's no buzz about my brand so I don't care" mindset to a more actionable "what marketing triggers am I failing to execute to make me part of the broader conversation" framework.   Put another way, the absense of conversation, buzz, or CGM tells as rich a story as the having truckloads of it.

Interpretation Nuances:   I'd be remiss if I didn't suggest there that it's not always a good thing to be part of the conversation.  P&G's Tremor brand has significantly closed the "Conversation Gap" in the context of broader conversation about buzz-marketing, but is that a good thing for the brand?  Context matters, and search engines often remind us that bad conversation is permanent.   Indeed, there may be some instances where brands benefit from "less than fair share" of the conversation.    Our role as experts and consultants (Rubel, Blackshaw or whoever) is to help brands appreciate and understand such nuances.

Builds on the Model:   As long as we're talking "gap analysis," we probably should extent the metaphor to other areas where we can measure how brand data or behavior figures into the larger picture.  Here are a few that I typically employ:

• The Blog/Feedback Gap:   Often brands want to blog (start conversations) who have a history of doing a horrible or inadequate job of listening to consumers through their existing tools.  My most common refrain for brands who want to jump into blogging is "Before you blog, first look into the mirror, and then call your 800 number."  It's critical that we look at "new" tools through a broader lens of current corporate DNA.  We don't want to set brands up for failure.  In large companies especially, failure is viral. 
• The Listening/(Web) Site Deficit: Most brand websites consistently fail to provide content that's relevant, germane, or "in touch" with broader CGM conversations.   Go find an pocket of active CGM related to a brand or category then type relevant keywords from that conversation into a brand website search engine.  Most of the time the search engine fires "blanks."  Same with the FAQ, or even the feedback form scripts.  How can a brand expect to be referenced or revered when they snub the obvious building blocks of relevant conversation.  Bloggers are constantly giving me an excuse to write about them. They are "in touch" with the broader conversations.  Most brands are not, and hence they often don't receive their "fair share."

This topic itself is a very important conversation, and it should continue.