BrandDigital | BrandSimple: The Blog

It was with great interest that I read a recent article in the New York Times about how Silicon Valley entrepreneurs are turning away from tradtional PR to spread news of their newly-hatched companies and turning straight to the tactics likely to make them richer entrepreneurs – digital technology and, in particular, the technology that facilitates word-of-mouth. You don’t have to be an entrepreneur, or even a Silicon Valley resident to understand the innate capabilities of digital technology to spread news, be it good or bad, truth or heresay. The reason for my great interest in this Times article was how it echoed the sentiments in a piece I just wrote for this week’s print edition of Brandweek magazine about GM’s “Reinvention” campaign. In it I explain that while this once-mighty brand set forth its new promise to become a more efficient company in a series of television ads, this top-down pronouncement isn’t going win any friends or influence people. It’s only when people start tweeting, blogging and spreading their experiences under the digital magnifying glass that proof of its promise will be validated – and credible.

Most of us have heard about Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs – you know, the need to gratify hunger, thirst, shelter before moving up to less elemental things. But a hierarchy of human needs relative to our digital life? Absolutely. People divide online pursuits into several tiers, the bottom, or most elemental, being the utilitarian stuff like checking emails, looking up addresses, chatting with friends, and the higher tiers being the more diversionary, like watching favorite shows on Hulu. It’s become apparent to me and many other branding professionals that when trying to engage people online, it’s critical to understand where they are on this hierarchy of digital behavior. In my most recent article in Forbes Online, I explain in greater detail why timing in marketing messages is everything and what some of the best brands are doing – with very gratifying results.

(Image courtesy of Shannonpatrick17 via Flickr)

(image courtesy of M. Keefe via Flickr)

Tweeting, texting, posting , poking – we all know that social networking helps us keep in touch with what’s going on out there. It’s been my observation that many companies are using the same digital tactics and techniques to help its employees keep in touch with what’s going on in there – inside the organization, that is. As brands become increasingly “humanized” by digital technology that both connects everyone and makes everything transparent, smart companies are helping their employees better understand “who” their brand is, and what it represents to consumers by setting up internal social networking programs. To see how this works, and what leadership teams at Best Buy, Schwab, and Wells Fargo are doing, take a look at my
recent article in Forbes online.

Will Twitter soon replace Facebook as the online social connector of choice? As the number of news stories about who’s tweeting whom seems to increase with the number of Twitter users, it’s a question being asked by marketers who use social networks as part of their branding initiatives. But this isn’t the question they should be asking. Instead, the question, or rather, questions, that smart companies are asking are: What’s the difference in how consumers are using these social sites and how should branding strategies be built, as a result? I address these questions in my recent column on Forbes online, which includes input from Ford’s head of social media, Scott Monty. As far as smart marketers are concerned, when it comes to Twitter versus Facebook, it’s no contest.

(image courtesy of luc legay via flickr)

Geez, now what? As if the economy, world affairs, and health care reform weren’t enough, it seems President Obama has one more dilemma on his plate to deal with. According to recent reports, the technological infrastructure in the White House is not nearly as sophisticated as the digital tools the man and his campaigners used during the campaign, a factor that helped win the election. While this might seem like a minor issue, it’s actually a major issue. You see, Obama’s brand promise was all about change, especially when it came to making governmental workings as transparent, connected and inclusive as possible. Without a top-notch digital infrastructure, he can’t execute on this part of the brand promise, or not exactly in the way he promised. In this day and age, in a world where trust in brands, trust in all institutions, is at an all-time low, it’s critical to make sure that you’ve got what it takes to execute on a brand promise, especially something as important as a promise to keep the lines between brand and consumer open. While Obama’s promise of change was genuine, if he can’t get the geek squad out to the White House as soon as possible, it won’t matter how genuine it was. These days, if you don’t have what it takes to execute on your brand promise, your brand will seem just plain disingenuous.

What makes digital content go viral? In a year during which both a truly awesome presidential election and truly awful financial crisis held sway, there was no dearth of online video, both reality and parody. Some of it people watched and passed along with abandon. Some they just watched and abandoned. As a perpetual student of digital behavior, it’s fascinating for me to see what strikes a common chord and goes on to make the viral hit list, and what just dies on the online vine. From a marketing point of view, in many cases the most virally catchy stuff is the result of brilliant creative thinking and execution. Not expensive, mind you, just strategically innovative, like the Burger King Flame campaign aimed at adolescent-minded guys for whom the idea of a meat-scented body spray is pretty sizzling. Keeping the creative bar high in the contest for online eyeballs is definitely one way to assure your content will catch on. The other, I have to admit, is just plain luck. In many cases, dumb luck. Take a look at our colleagues at Sterling Cooper, and you’ll see what I mean. (In the meantime, if I were you, I’d opt for brilliant creative.)

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.