Gone are the days where print ads were the end all to creative copy and marketing communication. In this new era of social media marketing, companies have fully immersed themselves in the interactive relationships with consumers. I am quite certain that the classic evergreen marketing strategies are still essential, because believe it or not, everyone has not fully converted to social media as a complete guide to brand information. Depending on the brand’s targeted market capitalizing on the new algorithm shifts on social media, ephemeral marketing could show huge benefits.
Ephemeral marketing is defined as “lasting a very short time”. The ephemeral marketing that I’m referring to is the Instagram, Facebook and Snapchat stories that boomed in recent years. Marketers are taking advantage of how interactive these 24 hours stories can be. You can add links to websites, direct to products, and other locations for your brand. Although these stories only last for 24 hours in the feed, Instagram has offered brands the opportunity to turn their best ephemeral marketing communications into versions of evergreen communications by adding the stories to their highlights on their profiles. I thought this was a genius move by Instagram to mitigate any pushback brands may have about using the function. Not only will brands connect with users who have FOMO (Fear of missing out) but they will still be able to connect with users who actually missed out on the story. Research has shown that brands that use this function have more interaction from the users due to the limited time the communication is available. Users find themselves constantly checking their favorite brand’s accounts for more stories.
I think ephemeral marketing is a great tool to use for companies that have a target audience of social media users. After all, brands should be where their target audiences are! Here are some of the top benefits for brands:
Evergreen marketing which can be defined as a marketing strategy that will last for a long period of time; an example of this would be your logo. This is a form of marketing that if you are trying to make a name for yourself you will keep it consistent over long periods of time. Brand recognition is important for developing brand loyalty, and consistency plays a large roll in its success. Evergreen marketing has more to do with making your brand presence known and having your content stay relevant over time. Developing concepts that will transcend through time is the main difference between evergreen and ephemeral marketing. This type of marketing is still a valuable and an essential form of marketing communication. In my opinion, brands should have a good mix of the two; especially if your target audience is heavily influenced by social media. Brands should first look to establish a solid consumer audience that have been loyal to their evergreen marketing (logo, tagline, keywords). This will encourage those loyal consumers to stay engaged with your ephemeral marketing strategies once they begin to develop.
It was a beautiful Sunday afternoon as I left the neighborhood
I grew up in and I realized how much I missed my city and how much it has to
offer. It had been a good day but, my energy was still off. As I followed my
partner back home, driving up pacific coast highway back home, listening the
Dom Kennedy, and surfing my hand through the wind.
She texted me, “Nipsey Hussle got shot.” As I watched the news,
debating on driving back over the hill and scrolling through Instagram trying
to find related news, my timeline was filled with photos of Hussle.
Hussle’s obituary
While I knew the late rapper, I learned so much more about
him after his passing, including his $100 mixtape, Crenshaw, he sold in
2013. Although you could download the mixtape for free, Hussle also decided to
sell the hardcopies for $100 and it was sold out in less than 24 hours. Hussle got
the idea from a book, Contagious, by Berger; in the book he explains that a restaurant
owner sold his cheesesteak for $100 and he thought to do the same thing. Hussle
says that he wanted to start a conversation and give customers an experience.
“But my goal was not to sell out, it was to create conversation,
I wanted to get people to get mad. I wanted people to say, ‘Why is this $100? I
gotta listen to this because if it’s not the greatest album ever, this dude crazy’.”
Hussle says in an interview with DJ Skee, “My model is F the middleman.”
Mixtape, Crenshaw
That wasn’t the first time Hussle sold $100 hardcopies, he
also did this with at least two other mixtapes. However, Hussle was more than a
rapper, he was also an entrepreneur and community activist in Los Angeles. In 2017,
Hussle opened his Marathon Clothing store on the corner of Crenshaw and Slauson,
a reporter says, “What Hussle calls, a smartstore where customers can purchase merch
and use an app to preview exclusive content.” Hussle wanted the store to have a
Starbucks like vibe where customers can use their smartphone in the store, scan
over an item and hear music or see a video of the brand. In addition, Hussle
created his own record label, had plans with city officials on how to build the
community, partnered with PUMA,
Today, fans use his taglines, “The Marathon Continues” and “All
money in, no money out”. The intersection of Crenshaw and Slauson to “Nipsey
Hussle Square.” Harlem proclaimed that June 1st is known as Nipsey
Hussle appreciation day. The Marathon Clothing store had to shut down for a
while in order to fulfill $10 million worth of orders. Since Hussle was a well-known
Crip from Rollin’ 60s in Los Angeles, Crip members filed for trademark of “The
Marathon Continues” tagline.
Social media will have people thinking that it is easy being
an entrepreneur and that things just happen overnight (like selling a $100
mixtape), but it is just not that easy. So, how did Nipsey Hussle brand himself
in a way that Los Angeles recognizes him as a legend and the world would
forever hear his name? While Hussle was well known, many people still didn’t know
who he was or what he did for the Los Angeles community until after his death.
Hussle was able to pull together the relationship between culture and marketing.
He was influential and has inspired many people, including myself.
Ten toes down.
References
Berger, J. (2013). Contagious: Why things catch on. Simon
& Schuster Audio.
Perhaps we’ve all been there… all excited about your big branding pitch, replete with concepts, colors, and logos… only to be greeted by tepid, and worse… non-sensical feedback from your client. As the biz dev guy, I cringe as I start to watch the most creative people I know sink into their conference chairs.
The problem is that — well, for us lucky ones on the pitching side of the table — our collective ego can crumble in an instant. Slowly, it turns into a finely-tuned defensive front, aimed squarely at Mr. or Ms. Client person with forced smiles, bitten tongues, and masterful shade aimed to the execs who apparently know what’s cool. But we wanted a warm, gooey hug after pouring our soul into this visual masterpiece (obvi), not veiled rejection!
Many experts, like Coughter (2012) and Huang (2013), stress the key is to prepare emotionally and intellectually for your pitch. While I agree, this doesn’t happen overnight. The actual preparation should start well before your creative folk even hit that adorable Adobe icon after the first concept meeting.
I know what you’re thinking… no kidding, you’re design team should be strategic? No way! Well it’s settled then, down payment on the yacht. In reality — and I don’t think this is a stretch — designers can be eccentric. Introverted. Fragile. Cooler than I’ll ever be. But too often, their strategic involvement is a quick debrief about the client, then it’s put on the ol’ headphones, open up 1000 tabs, make art, notify boss. For most firms, surely these designers gather ‘round for a show and tell, but HOW are they then explaining their design? Does it fit the concept? What do the colors, or shapes, or for some reason that funny bird they put on the logo really mean?
Here’s the rub: I bet they do know, but do they know they should convince the agency first? Is the work just pretty or cool… or does every element have a significance to the client? And have you provided a “safe space” for them to present their work — and empowered them to first convince your internal team why their design is right for the client.
While there are countless categories to examine about coaching your creative team to think strategically, here’s one tactical example that shows this in action at my firm…and it was born out of necessity. Overall, it means account managers should contribute as co-creative strategists as well — and get their you-know-what together first.
I’ll use one of my very first re-branding clients as an example, way back from 2012: Canine Country Academy — a small but posh dog training school, and a local favorite.
After discovery with the client, our first big idea was to re-think their brand strategy….not “Canine Country Academy,” but let’s re-launch as “Canine Country: Academy for Dogs.” This lead to the idea of emulating a travel site, almost as if the audience is planning a visit to a country made for dogs. This theme had legs (ahem…), and it applied in a neat way to their various dog training courses (Puppytown, Sportenberg) and other aspects of their customer experience (local customs, city officials, plan your trip…stuff like that. Branding is fun!) Kinda cheeky, but it sure resonated with the client. After approval, I simply explained the brand in a concept meeting with three of my designers, and sent them off to their Adobe palace.
When the first designs came back, our internal meeting was little rough… the work itself was fine, but the designs lacked any real strategic connection to the brand — most importantly, the designers could not articulate clearly the “why” of the design. There were a few that had merit for their own sake, but we just weren’t nailing the big idea here (some round 1 designs below).
I wanted someone to explain to me what everything meant… “why the yellow?” Or “what does this little squibble mean?” I realized I had ill-prepared them to dig deep into their creative palette, only to do just “go do art.” Moving forward, I standardized a “Client Brief” form, which summarized key discovery information, the competitive audit, and the clear direction of the re-branding (click on link below to see).
Then, I formalized an internal presentation procedure that simulated a client meeting. Instead of gathering around a laptop, I challenged each designer to formally present their ideas, and to articulate how each of their designs aligns with the client’s strategy. This meant they needed to not only reference the Client Brief, but also explain color psychology, what their chosen fonts symbolized, or even the geometry of the logo. Moreover, they should include a deck, not just a design, that walks us through their thought process. This could include key words, mood boards, inspiration or whatever else played a role in their creation. The deck below in an excerpt from their internal pitch:
Granted, some of my senior designers were great at doing this informally, but weren’t too keen on the “mock pitch” so early in the process. However, one of my junior designers, Mia, really embraced it. She remarked that it forced her to really think strategically about the client, rather than the design itself. Before her presentation, she said “I keep hearing about the dogs from you, but the client seems to be more focused on making the owners better.”
With that, she presented a design that stressed communication: a sound wave symbol.
Next, she explained that pattern can be used as an icon, or expanded into an map-like shape (the Canine Country). She chose green and brown as their brand colors, but presented WHY…. she neatly referenced some authors, but remarked that she just wanted to conjure the idea of enjoying the outdoors. Good enough! (The accent colors were chosen as complements.)
Finally, she went for the gut punch:
“I read that the owner recently lost her own dog, so I found a picture of her beloved pup on her Facebook. So I made the sound wave icon her actual dog.” Tears!
Here’s what’s truly awesome: because of her hard work, the mock presentation generated a conversation about what truly happens at Canine Country. They train humans! This resulted in a great tagline, and really helped to re-direct the brand itself.
While it’s not the most amazing logo anyone has ever seen, it was an important moment for my company: we connected emotionally with my client! Plus, my designers were now informed in a way pitch experts like Coughter (2018) stress: they thought about “selling” the work! However, it was knowing that they had to that integrated into their design process, which ultimately lead to an emotional reaction – and a win — from the client. My design team got better, and I became a more prepared collaborator in the process. Taking it a step further, I started involving my design team in the discovery itself, which lead to even better strategic insight from our designers.
Overall, keep your designers engaged strategically with the client throughout the conceptual process —and get them to articulate their work VERY early. When the pitch rolls around, they will not only be rehearsed, but a trained seller of great ideas, with design to match … perhaps there will be no more need for shade!
Thanks for reading!
Tripp
PS Canine Country was sold to a new owner last year, and their website is now a tad wonky… but check ’em out here: http://www.caninecountryacademy.com/
References
Coughter, P. (2012). The art of the pitch persuasion and presentation skills that win business. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Huang, A. (2013, July 17). Drop Your Ego, Mr. Perfect Designer! Onextrapixel.com. Retrieved from website: https://onextrapixel.com/drop-your-ego-mr-perfect-designer/
When I was growing up the people I looked up to, besides my parents, were sports figures, like Michael Jordan and Bo Jackson, and actors like Bill Murray and John Candy. They were people who you knew something about.
For the last 10 years or so, social media has become
increasingly popular. It has grown to become
a powerful marketing tool with almost 42% of the population using social media in
one form or fashion (Mohsin, 2019). With
that sort of usage, influencers inevitably emerged. Sometimes these influencers are experts in their
field, sometimes they are celebrities, sometimes they are content creators, and
sometimes they are micro influencers.
Either way, these influencers tended to garner a fair amount of power
over their follower’s decision making.
Celebrities are the traditional, or OG, influencers. For decades businesses used celebrities to
market their products in various ways. While
celebrities are highly visible, they are also limited in numbers. Experts are respected because of the
knowledge they have and for their success in their field. The problem with experts is they can be
highly divisive, and they tend to not have the same reach as a celebrity. Content creators have come about pretty much
during the rise of social media and some have large followings. Finally, you have the micro influencer. They have a smaller following and are usually
focused on a specific area. Micro
influencers are abundant but are often less well known than celebrities and
experts.
With all of the various influencers out there, more and more
people are being influenced by individuals who the users know nothing
about. In the early years of social media,
the early adopters gained followers and staked their claim to their piece of
the pie. These early adopters made lots
of money and showed others how they could also make a living “influencing”
others. This ability to make money by
influencing others gave way to fake profiles and bots which was seen especially
during the 2016 election.
As social media platforms became bigger and bigger, more and
more people jumped into the influencer arena.
The early adopters who had already gained followers and made their money
continued to flourish while newcomers flooded the market. It was during this time that the bots and
fake accounts really started to flex their muscles. These fake accounts and bots mixed in with all
the new influencers coming into social media and quickly found footing with
certain populations. With no formal
background checks or way to verify who some of these accounts are, any
information they spread should be looked at with a fair amount of skepticism. I find myself trying to check where my
information comes from but even then, it can be difficult in the massive social
media world. So the question becomes,
who is influencing you?
This title is pretty shocking and seemed like it was said back
in the 1950’s, but it wasn’t. US banks were
allowed to require a male co-signer up until 1988 if a woman applied for a business
loan. As disturbing as this may sound this
type of ethical behavior is what caught my attention from our recent readings
involving ethics and the gray area. We
all know there is inequality in the business world and it’s prevalence in gender
pay gaps, lack of women in leadership roles and the challenges of entrepreneurship
and business ownership are just some of the issues face. In this blog I will talk about what has
changed, the numbers and sources you can access to help you achieve your dream
of becoming the business owner you always wanted to be.
Congress’s enactment of the Women’s Business Ownership Act of 1988 (HR 5050), it set guidelines/policies and provided access to programs that support public/private sector initiatives. This act also provided funding to Women’s Business Centers where entrepreneurs could seek technical assistance in business formation, education/training, finance, and support services such as business networking. According to the National Association of Women Business Owners (2018), women-owned firms (51% or more account for 39% of all privately held firms and contribute 8% of employment and 4.2% of revenues.
If you are a startup another source is seeking investors from the Venture Capital (VC) world. According to Business Insider (2019), an analysis was completed by Axios (2019), which showed that the VC world is dominated by men, but women have been making strides increasing from 5.7% in 2016 to 9% in 2018. City Lab (2019) reported that VC’s invested over 130 billion dollars in U.S. based startups and only 2% of that went to female founders. Forbes (2019) came out with an article discussing the purchasing power that women have and their influence in the decision making even if they are not paying for it themselves. For me this a no-brainer for the business and investor world to make a better effort in how they operate. Fortunately, there are some forward-thinking VC’s that are making that decision and are reaping the payoff for doing so. BCG (2018) reported that women business owners that received early-stage capital from investors receive significantly less than their male counterparts. In their research they found that businesses founded by women have a higher ROI as much as twice per dollar invested, than those founded by men.
I would also like to share this success
story of a VC called Cue Ball who went looking for the next Star Bucks and
found its first investment in a nail salon called MiniLuxe. This is a great article of how a male VC group
that took the time to understand what the business was about and what it could
be.
I’m also sharing some podcasts that are
focused on women entrepreneurs that help with inspiration, building confidence
and pitch strategies.
Another great resource is the women founded website called The Skimm, this is a women’s go to resource for personal finance, to career, health and more. There are tons of articles, a newsletter, a podcast and a book that I am sure will give some valuable information on the issues you are concerned about.
After digging into this subject, it is shocking to me that it took the government to enact a policy on making loans to women entrepreneurs in 1988 without having to have a male co-signer. It is also baffling to me that corporate America still doesn’t understand the buying influence of women and the purchasing power they possess. I am happy to see that there has been improvement since HR 5050 was enacted, especially in the last couple of decades. I am also happy to see that women are making some ground in the VC arena and the increase of women-led start ups in the last few years. This is a great start but there is definitely much more work ahead to change how the business and investor world values women. I think this issue affects everyone, because we all have a mother, sister, daughter or niece and I would want them to have the same opportunities and treatment that I have as a male. Do you feel corporate America can do more on their own or do you think government should step in and push them to change?
“It’s Greek to me” has long been one
of the most aggravating sayings to me. The Greek language is dear to my heart
and to my heritage. It was the first language I learned as a young child and a
language I continue to brush up on as time permits. The aggravating part comes
when the phrase is used as a statement of non-understanding and confusion. “it’s
Greek to me” just didn’t work for me in these instances. In work and school
settings when proposals or assignments were not clear or understood by the
group, the use of this light hearted saying did not always help me to
understand how confused the group was actually feeling. Although, overtime, I came
to make it my mission to above all, try to make instructions, projects and
pitches as simple as possible. The goal being to lessen or better yet alleviate
the it’s Greek to me declarations.
In Marketing, I tend to use this “It’s
no longer Greek to me” mantra more than I think. Keeping ideas in the creative
process simple is a challenge that does not include shorten timeframes and quick
pitches. Keeping it simple often takes more time and analysis. Becoming more
aware and comfortable with the Marketing tools available has been a great time
saver. The ability to know that one tool will work on a project and another
will not be a helpful insight that would normally take time to differentiate.
One of the tools I recently become familiar with is Hootsuite.
Hootsuite
is helpful in managing multiple social networks, connecting with
customers, and growing your brand on social media. It helps to get results you
can measure, saves time on scheduling social media posts and helps to capture
what is being communicated on social media.
Ryan
Holmes, the founder and CEO of Hootsuite, seems to somewhat buy in to this keep
things simple way of doing business that I have shared above. Ryan shares an ancient
Greek saying that he thinks can supercharge business decisions.
He tells about the serenity prayer that is sometimes
used as helpful advice when facing challenges in life as well as for addictions
and other ailments. His take is that this application when translated can be
used in a business context. The translation he shares is as follows: “what is
up to us, what is not up to us”. The stress and frustration that can be alleviated
by implementing this phrase as a business tool can open doors as oppose to
close them. Worry about things you can’t control can be paralyzing. Making the
most of all the information, budget and creative teams you have is in your own
control and should be a freeing force in a business setting. Embracing control
of your own vision, building the best campaign possible with the resources available
and not worrying about factors out of our control are some area where this motto
can help to simplify decision making options in the marketing business setting.
With vertical screens draped to encircle the stage, projections of pink and gold glittered explosions swirl around her crying brown eyes. As the beat of the kick drum booms; the bass drones; and the lead guitar wails, she ascends from a trap door center stage. This is it! I’m sitting in the MGM Grand Garden Arena seeing one of my favorite singers for the first time live…the first time live in person that is.
Its been 15 years since the nation watched her emerge from the stage of one of the most recognizable brands in the United States: American Idol. Now a powerhouse brand of her own, Carrie Underwood has had an interdependent relationship with the reality show that was her benefactor and she shares in the brand equity that was created on Fox. Perhaps not your traditional view of co-branding. But, I, along with many others, bought into marketing of the show and the brand that would be Carrie Underwood.
Underwood’s American Idol Audition
Capitalizing on what Berger calls “social currency”, American Idol involved the nation in getting to know the contestants and choosing the winner. I can still remember talking to friends weekly asking: “Did you see ‘so and so’s’ performance last night?” Recalling how great it was or how it was likely to be the nail in the coffin for that contestant. You wouldn’t be caught dead missing an episode of American Idol especially during the final shows; and I remember Underwood’s final performance vividly. I had just moved to California from Tennessee, a state rich in country music stars; and watching her sing in victory that night just felt like a little bit of home away from home.
American Idol Season Finale – Underwood wins
With another live finale performance on American Idol May 19, 2019, Underwood continues to show her support for the brand; and yet Underwood is far from the young 20-something year-old crying in shock and disbelief as the winner on the fourth season of American Idol. She is now a seven time Grammy winner; dons eleven Billboard Music Awards; thirteen AMA’s; nine CMA’s; and is the face of Calia, her workout line. In addition, Underwood took over as the musical voice of the NFL in 2013; has been co-hosting the biggest country music award show for the past eleven years; AND she’s the mother of two with her second son being born just this past January after she experienced three miscarriages from 2017 to 2018. As she showed off her ripped post-baby abs just last week on Instagram, could she be any more strong and amazing? A true ‘Champion’ to quote a song title off her latest album “Cry Pretty”. Yet another exhibit of co-branding as she teamed up with rapper Ludacris on what became a battle cry for more than one sporting event in 2018.
Underwood and Ludacris at 2018 Radio Disney Music Awards
Its likely this champion’s strength was formed growing up on a farm in Checotah (“the Gem of the Prairie”), Oklahoma, as Underwood did. She also played sports and graduated at the top of her class in high school and college. So, maybe this well-rounded girl with intelligence, talent and a strong work ethic didn’t really need the American Idol brand that she helped propel along with alumni Kelly Clarkson, Ruben Studdard, Fantasia Barrino and Jordan Sparks to name a few. Or did she? Without American Idol, would the young singer have risen to the superstar status she inhabits today? Sans a time machine to go back and change history, its hard to say. But what can be said with certainty is that there is, if executed well, an advantage to participants in co-branding scenarios. For example, the American Idol brand was publicized and marketed so well that even some of the show’s losers went on to forge their own successful brand.
In a more traditional sense, the world of marketing and advertising world has created some mega hits for B2B branding partners. We can see this exemplified from Bonne Bell and Dr. Pepper with their soda flavored lip balm in 1975 to GoPro and Red Bull’s first co-branding event in 2012. But the string of co-branding relationships that resulted from fifteen seasons of American Idol just might be the platform that enabled the show’s re-launch after it took a short hiatus. But with some of the lowest ratings ever this past season, it seems no coincidence that American Idol brought back its MVP Carrie Underwood for a performance on the 2019 live finale show. As the most successful American Idol winner, ranked by the St. Louis Post Dispatch, this Gem of the Prairie might be exactly what the show needed to breathe life into another season of American Idol in 2020.
Well played American Idol.
References
American Idol: The Power of the Brand. (2007). Newsweek Academic. Retrieved June 1, 2019 from http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A161444709/AONE?u=usocal_main&sid=AONE&xid=245631c9.
Berger, J. (2013). Contagious: why things catch on. New
York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
Bernazzani, S. (2019). 13 examples of successful co-branding
partnerships (and why they’re so great). HubSpot:
Marketing. Retrieved June 2, 2019 from https://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/best-cobranding-partnerships
Bonaguro, A. (2018). A history of hosing: Carrie
Underwood and Brad Paisley since 2008.
CMT News. Retrieved May 30, 2019 http://www.cmt.com/news/1800514/a-history-of-hosting-carrie-underwood-and-brad-paisley-since-2008/
Cassia, F., Magno, F. & Ugolini, M. (2015). Mutual
value creation in component co-branding relationships. Management Decision, 53, 1883-1898.
Checotah. Oklahoma Historical Society. Retrieved June
1, 2019 from https://www.okhistory.org/publications/enc/entry.php?entry=CH011
Halperin, S. & Bronson, F. (2016). 15 forces who built a juggernaut. Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved June 1, 2019 from http://link.galegroup.com.libproxy1.usc.edu/apps/doc/A448901331/PPOP?u=usocal_main&sid=PPOP&xid=36bc77e1
Johnson,
K.C. (2018). We rank American Idol winners from least to most successful. St. Louis Post Dispatch. Retrieved June
1, 2019 from https://www.stltoday.com/entertainment/music/kevin-johnson/we-rank-american-idol-winners-from-least-to-most-successful/collection_c2ba4679-1a6f-58c4-b85f-5459d892942f.html#1
Kennedy, G.D. (2018). American Idol returns – but will
it have the same glory? Los Angeles Times.
Retrieved June 1, 2019 from https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/music/posts/la-et-ms-american-idol-return-20180309-story.html
“Hey mommy, you’re funny…funny wooking.” That was the joke my then four-year-old loved
to tell anytime she heard the word “funny.”
(And yes, her mispronunciation of “looking” is as cute as it sounds.) While I have to admit the kid was pretty good
in her execution of the joke, it still got pretty old pretty fast.
IHOP, similarly, is at risk of repeating a joke that
is getting old or by some accounts, already was.
Last year, when it changed its name to IHOB to bring attention to its burger offering, the joke felt old from the start. Consumers and competitors alike were either making fun of the brand or expressing frustration with it. And while Twitter sentiment made it seem like the joke was on IHOP, sales of its burgers reportedly increased after the campaign. Now the joke is back, with IHOP announcing a big reveal of what the “P” stands for.
Once again, reactions aren’t positive. My personal
favorite is from Twitter user Grace Giulini:
So, when does a marketing campaign or gimmick go too
far or get too old?
Certainly, campaigns that are offensive or unethical fall
into the “too far” category. But many
other campaigns, like this one, aren’t offensive or unethical; they’re just
annoying.
If we zero-in on campaigns that are annoying, how does
a brand know when it’s gone too far?
While I don’t believe there is a concrete answer for
this, there are definite metrics that can be measured to help the brand itself
determine when it’s time to kill a campaign or gimmick. The most concrete measures are sales and
ROI. If both are positive and met expectations,
then the campaign may try again. Using
Facebook’s store visits metric could help as well as it ties back to a specific
post. Transaction counts could help as
well in measuring whether the added awareness of the brand led to more diners.
And maybe it’s just that simple – driving awareness
especially for a brand that might not be at the top of everyone’s radars. In IHOP’s case, they got the attention – and the
sales – they were looking for last year, which is impressive for a brand with a
third the Twitter followers of Wendy’s and McDonald’s, and three-fourths the
followers of its closest competitor, Denny’s.
The brand is certainly generating buzz this year as well, even though
not all of it is positive (much like last year). I suppose only time will tell whether this
campaign continues to have legs. I’m sure we’ll read about the success of it (although
I doubt we’ll hear about it again if it failed), and if so, we might be talking
about this again in May and June next year.
While I hope not, I now feel committed to see this through and find out
what the “P” stands for.
How about you? Do you think IHOP has let the joke go on too
long? Are you tuning in to find out the
big reveal? And more importantly, if you
do tune in, what do you think?!
As you may have heard recently, Grumpy Cat, the lovable and unhappiest cat to ever grace a meme, passed away earlier this month. When the news broke, I quickly noticed that not only was I a little bummed, but that co-workers, friends, and family were also feeling down about the famous feline’s crossing over the rainbow bridge.
If you are on Instagram, you have likely noticed that Grumpy Cat is not the only famous pet on social media. Jiffpom anyone? From Lil Bub to Nala Cat, there are endless profiles featuring a zoo of animals. Influencer marketing, said to be worth up to $10 billion, has an entire branch dedicated to pet influencers, and businesses continue to invest more in this sector.
Intrigued, I did a little digging into some of the most notable deals inked by our furry friends. Top animal influencers have been tapped to work with impressive brands. Loki the Wolfdog worked with Mercedes-Benz to promote the 2017 GLS SUV, as well as Google and GoPro. Jiffpom is quite the big deal in a small package having worked with Target and Nature’s Recipe.
Grumpy Cat created a commotion when she first appeared at SXSW in 2013 in connection with her Friskies deal. Fans waited in line for over three hours to take a photo with her. An estimate conducted by AdAge revealed that Grumpy Cat made over $100 million from her deals including a movie, sponsorships, and merchandise. Grumpy Cat paved the way for pet celebrities. The boom in animal influencers has even spawned talent agencies dedicated to representing these furry animals.
So why are pet influencers so popular? In some instances, they even have a bigger following than *yawn* human social media influencers. A quick comparison revealed that Nala Cat has 4 million followers, while Ashton Kutcher has a mere 3.3 million followers. Another look shows Doug the Pug with 3.8 loyal followers, minimizing Tori Spelling’s 1.3 million followers.
Check out the list below for some of social media’s most popular animal influencers:
The first reason why animal influencers are a good choice for business is simple, animals are not as risky as celebrities. This is actually a great advantage for brands. Working in corporate law, I can share that talent and vendor agreements can include language around behavior concerning the way an individual represents a company during the term of the agreement. In short, a company does not have to worry about a pet getting intoxicated or making bad decisions.
Second, consumers are three times more likely to buy a product endorsed by a pet influencer than a celebrity influencer.
Third, just as animals are known for their loyalty, charm and appeal, they possess traits that brands want to be associated with. A company can match up with a pet influencer that represents the same characteristics in line with the brand’s image. If a brand wants to convey strength, how about a Clydesdale à la Budweiser? Perhaps a brand wants to convey loyalty and love, insert basically any fluffy pet influencer here. Some brands may also want to support a charitable cause. Lil Bub, a special needs cat, has worked with the ASPCA to raise over $400,000 for animals in need.
Finally, during a time when there is so much division and negativity on social media, pet influencers make people feel happy. So the question I leave you with is…who is your favorite pet influencer and why?
Disclaimer: This post is not about a trend in advertising. It’s not about a brand’s genius new strategy. It’s also not about how technology is changing communication or the cultural habits of some consumer group. There are no embedded videos or flashy pictures either.
I was inspired by an opinion piece in the New York Times last week written by an Israeli professor, Yuval Hariri. Dr. Hariri has a background in medieval and military history, so obviously this is super relevant to our class! I will now attempt to summarize his findings and pose some questions that I hope you might find interesting.
What is more powerful, truth or fiction? Most people would likely say truth and, indeed, we learned a lot last week about the need for brands to remain truthful to their customers. The thinking goes that by misrepresenting reality, leaders will eventually lose to rivals who offer a more truthful path. Hariri goes on to define two types of power: Power that is used to manipulate objective reality (creating man-made things outside the realm of the natural world), and power that is used to manipulate human beliefs.
According to Hariri, human success stems from our ability to organize and cooperate on a large scale. And to get people to cooperate at that scale, we must share a common belief/story. But here’s the thing: that common story doesn’t need to be true. In fact, fictional stories actually have many advantages over truthful ones.
First, fiction is local, not universal. This is advantageous because it helps distinguish insiders from outsiders. Second, if all you have to do is believe a true story to show your loyalty, anyone can easily fake loyalty because it’s easy to believe a truth. Having faith in a leader when they tell the truth is easy, anyone can do it. But having faith in your leader when they make outrageous, obviously untrue claims…that’s loyalty! Finally, especially in politics, telling the whole honest-to-goodness truth has proven to be a losing strategy. We may say we like the truth, but no one actually wants ALL of the truth. Even our more “honest” political leaders are far from completely truthful.
Now you might say “But Ben, as handsome as you are, I must disagree! No one can maintain a lie forever. The house of cards will eventually collapse. People who believe irrational stories will inevitably become irrational in other parts of their lives and then the system falls apart.” In fact, this has proven time and again to be untrue. The article gives many examples from history of times were societies were perfectly capable of believing unscientific, irrational lunacy while also excelling in science, technology, and other areas. The human brain is phenomenal at compartmentalizing.
Now here’s the interesting question that Hariri asks: Is this so bad? Essentially, leaders have a choice. To unite people through a shared fiction or let people know the whole truth and lose group cohesion. The most powerful movements in human history tend to opt for social cohesion over unadulterated truth. The tradeoff of losing some rationality for a huge amount of social cohesion has proven to be an attractive one. How many untrue myths about America do we insist on believing just for the sake of maintaining group cohesion?
So, obviously, this got me thinking if this has any relevance to advertising. Yes, we’re taught that brands should always be honest. They should always be transparent. They should always act ethically and value good behavior over a quick profit in the short term. But, to what degree is that really true? How often do we hear that good advertising is all about storytelling? This was even one of the main points of our live session this week. We’ve already learned that pitches are also about presentation and storytelling. But deep down we ALL know that the best stories are fictional. The stories that bring us together and get us to act and think as one are fictional stories (or at least, they’re not the whole truth).
I know I’m being a bit contrarian, but how much of this “ethical advertising” is bullshit? Obviously, there’s a difference between a blatantly misleading advertisement and a well-crafted fictional story. But can we drop the act just a little bit? If advertising is essentially storytelling, then by definition isn’t it untruthful? One question we might want to ask is not “How can we be more truthful?” but instead “What degree of fiction can we get away with?”
By the way, here’s the link to the original article. I suggest you read it! That’s also my reference. It’s right there…do we need references?? Anyway, yeah there is it!
