Instead of hanging out on my own blog site these past few months I’ve been hanging out in a number of other online spaces, blog and otherwise, doing research for my new book, BrandDigital, which I hope will demystify this potentially mystifying marketing space. In order to help others make sense of the digital territory I’ve had to make sense of it for myself which has meant, in part, creating personal profiles on a couple of the online networking sites of which there are many, LinkedIn, Ryze, Friendster, Spoke, MySpace, Facebook, Twitter, and EntreMate, to name just a few. Since beginning my book less than a year ago the number of these online hangouts have continued to increase, some supposedly more business oriented than others, some skewed to a somewhat younger demographic, and some promising to keep out the hoi polloi ( Aren’t we all hoi polloi online?). But in my perusing I’ve found that these sites are all pretty much the same and breed the same sort of behavior: As soon as you post your profile you have hundreds of people who want to ‘friend’ you; you run into the same ‘friends’ from site to site; it takes an inordinate amount of effort to keep your identity consistently updated across sites; and these sites can be incredible time suckers. In fact, whenever I log onto one site or another I think about one of the many interviews I had in preparation for writing my new book. This particular interview was with Phil McIntyre, an online marketing and production veteran who told me about a viral marketing initiative he created. It was a spoof of YouTube called “PhilTube” which, in the style of “The Office” parodied life in the digital-office age. In one episode the Phil of PhilTube calls out manically to his secretary “Hold all my calls. I’m blogging!” Even when told that some major mogul, a la Donald Trump, is on the line, Phil yells, “Not now – I’m blogging!”

Well, as I try to keep track of my all my online identities along with all the online identities of my ‘friends’ it’s occurred to me that sooner rather than later there’s bound to be a shake out. Social networking sites are becoming commodities. There isn’t one of them that stand out as offering something that much different or better than any other. As a branding professional I can tell you that this spells trouble. The best brands are those that set themselves apart by representing something relevantly different than their category equivalents. Or, as Bob Pittman, founder of MTV and now a partner in the Pilot Group, told me during another interview, “The best brands make the stuff we already do easier, more convenient or more fun. If you can make it better for me I’ll integrate it into my life. If you can’t, I won’t.”

As interesting as these online networks might seem now, they’re going to become tiresome, as commodities do. And, as much as we’d like to think we can, we can’t really keep track of four or five separate online lives and have enough time left for an offline life. One of these sites is going to recognize this. The brand of online networking site that does, that makes it simpler to integrate the activities of maintaining our personal lives online and makes it easier, more convenient and more fun will be the one worth holding the phone for.

Super Tuesday is upon us. Pundits are calling it the first national primary. I’m calling it a battle for the brands. From my BrandSimple perspective, the winner hands down will be Barack Obama. He’s identified the clearest, simplest brand driver of anyone running. His easily understood idea is sort of akin to Pepsi’s “choice of a new generation.” And whether people agree with this choice of a new generation they’re in full agreement that everything he says and does is in alignment with his well-defined brand idea.

Second on my best branded list is John McCain. His brand driver is more akin to Coke’s classic positioning, “It’s the real thing.” As an American hero with a stellar military record and an equally stellar senatorial record, he projects himself, what he says and what he does, as the real thing, at least when it comes to presidential timber. He comes across as authentic.

This leaves Hillary Clinton stuck in the middle, sort of between Coke and Pepsi. While she has plenty of supporters and just as many claims, she hasn’t identified a simple, clear way to define her brand. This could bode problems. As all brand professionals know, it’s really hard to win from the middle. It’s hard to win when consumers can’t quite figure out what you stand for. It’s hard to win when you don’t have a simple, clear idea driving all of your branding activities, be they ads or speeches, promises or platforms. If Hillary Clinton wants to make it to the top of the best branded list, if she wants to make it to the top, she’s got to get out of the middle. It’s hard to win from the middle. Just ask Dr. Pepper.

I love NBC’s 30 Rock. It’s a great television show. Given that it airs when I’m either helping my kids with homework or getting them ready for bed, it was easy to download from iTunes and watch it on my schedule. Note I said “was easy.” It’s not all that easy anymore. As a matter of fact, NBC has me in pause mode. You see, earlier this fall NBC teamed up with the Fox network and a number of media companies like MSN, AOL and Comcast, to create Hulu, an online brand that aggregates content from a number of places. Hulu is in beta right now, but the idea is that viewers would have to go to Hulu to download their favorite NBC or Fox shows. This is neither intuitive nor smart when it comes to reinforcing brand loyalty. Having viewers jump through this Hulu hoop creates an unwelcome EXTRA stop between brand and user. If they must control distribution and don’t want to pay Apple anymore, they should do it on the NBC.com site like ABC.

ABC has made the wise branding choice to reinforce its relationship with viewers by directing them to ABC.com for downloads. I don’t have to think twice about how to watch ABC shows on my schedule. It’s easy, it’s smart and it’s intuitive. ABC shows - ABC.com. Search made simple. No jumping through hoops. I like that.

Building a brand is hard enough today what with so many brand choices and so many media choices. The idea is to make things easier for consumers, not more complicated. NBC is risking its well-respected brand name by having an intermediary brand host its shows. It’s created a step between me – an NBC advocate – and my interaction with its brand. This Hulu hoop doesn’t rock.

Landor’s third annual list of the top ten Breakaway Brands was released in the November 2nd issue of Fortune magazine. The ranking is based on a comprehensive survey that measures brand momentum over a three year period in terms of financial gain and brand strength – how it’s appraised by consumers. As I looked over the newest top ten brands two things immediately came to mind. First, the brands on the list represented a broad spectrum of categories. TJMaxx to iPod, Stonyfield to Gatorade’s Propel, Costco to Barnes & Noble, with a few relative old-timers thrown in for very good measure. Second, the brands on the list all delivered especially well on the fifth in my top ten list of what it takes to be a strong brand. (You can see the other nine in my book, BrandSimple.) And that is, making sure that your brand strategy – what your brand represents to consumers – is in absolute alignment with your business strategy, or what you deliver. In other words, can you validate the brand experience?

While this has always been essential to brand success, it’s never been more important than in today’s totally transparent, digitally-enabled consumer environment. If you don’t keep your promise in today’s marketplace, you’ll get found out and taken down in an instant, whether by blog, text or brand-damning digital video. Should you have any doubt at all, take a look at the video of the sleeping Comcast repairman on YouTube, complete with background music by the EELS. Each of the companies on the top ten list of Breakaway Brands have the entire organization focused on delivering the brand experience just as consumers expect it to be delivered. The brand strategy is inseparable from the business strategy and it shows both in Wall Street satisfaction and customer satisfaction.

It’s interesting how quickly you can get mentally thrown back to an embarrassing moment in your life you thought you’d buried forever. This happened to me a couple of days ago when I was talking to someone about the role social networks play in building brands. It was during this conversation that I was jolted back a couple of decades to a party in Los Angeles that was hosted by a friend who had worked in advertising but was now in the film industry. There I was, a young ad guy surrounded by beautiful people who were discussing things film people discuss in that intense short-hand only those in the know know. I desperately wanted to fit in and given that I knew nothing about scripts or production deals nor did I have a part to offer in a film, I started to make up personas for myself. In one conversation I was an astrophysicist working at NASA. In another, I became a marine biologist even before George Costanza claimed to be a marine biologist. Little did I know that film people know their whales from their penguins. Long story short and segue to my point, I was found out in a flash and went back to New York dragging my phony personas behind me.

This tragicomic episode abruptly came to mind when the person I was talking to about brands and social networks likened this online scene to a party. Before you even go to the party, he said, determine who’s going to be there. Once there, listen to what people are talking about and what’s meaningful to them. Once you’ve assessed this, if you’re going to talk, say something relevant. Your goal is not to get noticed simply for being disruptive. More important, we both agreed, was that for branding to succeed in a social network, it’s critical that the brand remain true to its persona. For instance, for a venerable financial brand to come into a 20-something online space and start behaving like a 20-something would immediately make the brand appear less than credible. If you’re a venerable financial brand, behave like one. Just make sure to offer up financial advice meaningful to a 20-something crowd. Your goal is to earn trust, not scorn. There’s no room for opacity or disingenuous behavior at online branding parties. People will sniff you out and likely snuff out your brand on their next blog or IM in an instant. Bottom line, if you’re thinking about taking a branding initiative to a social network, make sure you know who’s going to be there, what they’ve been talking about before your arrival, and how you can engage in the conversation in a way that’s meaningful to them – and to your brand. If you don’t do this, more than likely you’ll appear to be nothing more than an inexperienced ad guy trying to be something he’s not.

Our built-in microwave oven broke a couple of months ago. Not a big deal in the general scheme of things. But a big deal in a household with two young kids where microwave cooking is mission critical to keeping peace at meal time. We bought the brand of microwave we did (a well-respected premium brand) because we associated the name with all sorts of positive brand imagery. “No problem-o,” I thought, as I went online to search for a brand- authorized repair service. Finding one, I called to make an appointment. Much to my surprise, the outfit operated like most utility companies, telling me a service rep would be there on the date specified, but within a five-hour window. Feeling a bit less respectful toward the premium brand, I acquiesced after a bit of polite discussion regarding the policy. The rep came on the appointed day, said we needed parts which would take a week to order, at which time I’d have to set up another service appointment which would, again, be within a five hour window. To put it mildly, I reluctantly agree. The repair guy arrived a week or two later with the parts he told us were required and realizes that a misdiagnosis was made. We’d need different parts. Repeat last sequence of events, with one minor change. The repair rep missed the appointment. At no time during the five-hour window did anyone show up. No need to go on with the repair saga. It’s just context for the rest of the story, to whit: During this process I communicated with the Customer Experience Center of this well-respected premium brand and told them about the terrible experience I was having and that it had the potential to sever my relationship with the brand – for more than just five hours. It was not the experience I expected from the brand whose name was associated with all sorts of positive brand imagery. I was told that the brand had no control over its after-sale service providers. These firms were independent contractors and I’d have to deal with them myself. Needless to say, no more experiences with this brand. The relationship is over. Diagnosis: Bad oversight of the customer’s entire journey with the brand. Moral: Give up any part of the customer experience and you give up the brand.

One of the points I make at the end of my book, BrandSimple, was something I lifted from Andy Grove, former CEO of Intel, who commented “Only the paranoid survive.” His quote referred to those charged with managing Intel. My reference applied to anyone charged with managing a brand. While many factors drive brand success, one of the most critical is the ability to stay relevantly differentiated in your category. To do so takes a bit of paranoia.

I thought about this the other day as I read that Kodak would be dropping its sponsorship of the Olympic Games effective at the end of next year’s summer events in Beijing. A sponsorship that began over 100 years ago with an ad printed in the program for the 1896 Olympic Games in Athens. I thought about it even more as I walked by a local photo processing store on my way to work where a “Going out of Business” sign hung in the window. This store was one of the many in its franchise, all going out of business forever. I think the changes in the photography industry should be a good wake-up call to any brand not paranoid enough to worry about staying relevantly ahead of its category curve.

Shutterbugs used to have one or two relationships with photography brands – cameras and film. There wasn’t too much competition for brand managers to worry about, especially those vying for the amateur market. Kodak was comfortably in a leadership position, doing the sorts of things that leadership brands should do, like sponsoring Olympic Games. The Kodak brand was ubiquitous. Then, in the blink of a shutter, it wasn’t. The problem is that it wasn’t paranoid, or at least didn’t become paranoid enough fast enough to transform its core business in an industry as hyper fast as technology. Today there are dozens of brands competing for attention in this category. Photographers have lots of options in brand relationships, beginning with digital cameras and going on and on and on to camera phones, digital printing a la HP and Canon, online posting brands like Flickr and Snapfish, plus a good number of products from a small brand called Apple. In a market with so many consumer choices and so much change, brand survival isn’t good enough. With a nod to Andy Grove I’d say only the paranoid succeed.

I recently returned from a trip to China where I had the privilege of speaking at the Economist Conferences’ Fourth China Branding Roundtable. The visit coincided with the translation of my book, BrandSimple, into Chinese. On my last day in Beijing, I was having breakfast and perusing China Daily, an English-language newspaper, when I came upon a full-page ad that captured succinctly – better than any economist’s speech could – two of the most powerful signs of China’s emerging economic growth. The photo in the ad was one of the many spectacular skyscrapers rising up across Beijing as far as the eye can see. The copy, brilliant in its simplicity, read, “Believe in the power of brands.”

That China is building buildings is a very visible sign of its emergence as a major player in the global marketplace. More noteworthy to a brand guy like me, however, is that China is starting to emerge as a major player in the building of brands. Chinese companies are beginning to understand that only by doing so will they be able to compete on the world’s economic stage. In fact, I believe that Chinese companies have reached and are ready to jump over – way over - a brand tipping point. In just a few short years the growth of branded Chinese products and services has grown exponentially. From Lenovo to Haier appliances, companies across every category are following world-class, best-in-class branding practices in order to become the formidable competitors they want to be. Yes, international brand presence, Starbucks to BMW, is everywhere you look, a powerful economic dynamic in any language. The logos of familiar global brands dotting the city landscape are as ubiquitous as the new construction projects. However, although not quite as high a percentage as the imported names, the number of Chinese companies represented in this branded mix it is a powerful statement especially given how new the idea of brand competition is to this country. “Believe in the power of brands?” The Chinese do. And they’re beginning to build them almost as quickly as they’re building their cities. From what I’ve seen so far, the power of these brands will be monumental.

It was about 25 years ago that Johnson & Johnson suffered one of the worst nightmares a consumer products company can face. Seven people died from ingesting Extra Strength Tylenol capsules that had been laced with cyanide. It was the first known case of death caused by deliberate product tampering. This incident recently came to mind after a number of people (too young to remember the Tylenol scare) asked me if brands suffer permanent damage when there’s a consumer product quality problem like the recent Mattel situation where it was discovered that many of its popular toy brands were manufactured with toxic components. My answer to their question is “no, not if.” Brands can actually come out stronger if they do two things very well.

The first thing a brand must do to save its good name is to react really, really fast – jump in and quickly address the situation frankly and honestly. Now, reacting really, really fast these days is really, really hard. Given the Internet and its finger-happy bloggers, the whole world knows what’s going on within seconds of its happening. To stay ahead of the busily pointing fingers, brand organizations have to be closely connected to what’s going on in the blogosphere. Good companies have teams in place to monitor and listen to the incessant online chatter about their brands. They have contingency plans in place and people empowered to act promptly and aggressively should the need arise. Seemingly nanoseconds after news of Mattel hit Wi-Fi networks, for example, its CEO issued a statement that the company would immediately recall millions of toys from retailers’ shelves along with put into place significant new manufacturing procedures. While this will cost the brand millions of dollars near term, these instantaneous actions should help mitigate brand fallout in the long term.

The second thing a brand should do in challenging times is to do more than consumers expect it to do. In the case of J&J’s Tylenol, this meant not only an instant recall of the product but the development of new tamper-resistant bottles along with the development of tamper-resistant caplets. While the company’s share price and its share of market took an immediate plunge right after the scare, its more-than-expected actions helped it regain its number one brand position by the end of the year. It remains the top-selling analgesic in the country.

Stuff happens. There are all sorts of potentially damaging situations a consumer product brand can face in its lifetime. Whether it allows itself to be defeated by the situation depends on how quickly the brand reacts and if it does more than people expect it to. While it may be an expensive proposition, saving a strong brand name - whatever the cost - is priceless.

Whether we like it or not, it’s a multi-tasking world. One of the reasons for this state of affairs is the plethora of innovative multi-tasking digital devices at our disposal. Mobile phones that take pictures, surf the Web, download music and give us GPS directions when we’re lost. The more digitally accelerated a gizmo, the better we like it. At the very least, it gives us bragging rights. At the very best, it makes us more productive.

So I just don’t get what Sony is thinking by aggressively marketing and advertising its Sony Reader? Yes, this different-looking, book-shaped electronic device is designed to allow us to easily download books and read on the go, but that’s all it can do.

For that I can buy a book-shaped book for about the same price as any of those in Sony’s library – without the need for batteries.

And if I really want to read books in a paperless way I can do it on an Apple iPhone that can also keep my pictures, music let me surf the web and call my book group buddies at the same time.

In my book, BrandSimple, I explain that the most powerful companies in the world establish a simple, differentiated meaning for their brands and ensure it’s something people will care about. Difference without relevance is a very expensive proposition, especially in the digital device category. While the high resolution print on the Sony Reader screen is impressive, it’s going to stay different for about the same amount of time it takes you to read this blog. Life in this category moves very fast. That’s why it’s called digital acceleration. While every other technology brand is working hard to figure out the next different and relevant multi-tasking combo to offer its busy users (including the ability to digitally embrace reading material), Sony seems to be lost behind the library stacks. I would suggest that before any more money is spent engineering the fine print, Sony step back, look at the big picture, and figure out how to differentiate itself in a meaningful way.