Measuring Up

Because of credible digital communications, I never looked “back”

Every few months my aching lower back acts up again. Like many, I’ve tried most therapies, from acupuncture  to intense physical therapy to regular chiropractor sessions. All of these have helped in making my back feel whole again for 4-8 month periods. But unfortunately, none gave any type of real lasting powers.

Ask 10 different people for advice on back therapies and you’ll get 10 different answers. Go on the internet looking for solutions and you’ll only find yourself tired, frustrated and more confused about the myriad of “guaranteed” procedures and doctors who can supposedly “cure” your pain. I was just about ready to end my Internet Google search, when this series of videos hit my screen.

; ;

In case you don’t have the time or desire to watch it, Dr. Howard Goodman (a back physician and chiropractor) discusses how something called spinal decompression can possibly help those who have inflammation or herniated discs (I have the former). What caught my eye about this series of videos (and kept me watching) is the simple, easy to understand and credible manner with which this specialist comes across. Instead of guaranteeing any type of magic solution, or trying to impress me with high brow MD knowledge, Dr. Goodman calmly explains to me what decompression is and how it can really help SOME patients (but not everyone.) He discusses it in the context of an alternative to surgery and then walks the viewer through symptoms that a candidate would have (and why.) Lastly, in layman’s terms, he describes the end benefit that this procedure can accomplish during a 6-8 week therapy timetable. I also like the fact that the entire intro video is only three minutes in length. (That’s plenty of time to explain to me the basics.) All the videos can be accessed from YouTube as well.

There’s nothing new about creating YouTube videos to educate and promote products, services and thought leadership. I just think that many in the medical field haven’t really figured out how to leverage this powerful Internet tool to effectively communicate credibly with target consumer audiences. With so many different medical “solutions” continually pushed to us, it’s incredibly hard to know which one is believable and really fits the problem at hand, or just pure snake oil (and there are quite of a few of those on the Internet these days.) So, guarantees and/or cocky promotions about medical pedigrees and language that I don’t understand are sure fire turnoffs for me.

After watching this video, I went to the Web site of New York Rehabilitation Center (which luckily happens to be physically located a block away from where I work,) and was further educated about the way decompression could really work for me. I also read articles (posted on the site) and did my own analysis on the doctors there to feel comfortable that everything seemed legitimate. In many ways, Dr. Goodman and his staff did everything right to successfully create a credible social media offering. The large amount of positive reviews about this video certainly helps to reinforce that. I think that others in the medical field should take notice.

Will this work for me? That’s a good question. I’m on to my 5th decompression appointment and the old back is actually starting to feel better. But, only time (6-8 weeks) will tell. I’ll be sure to report back to you how I’m feeling then.

Where social media is not socially accepted yet

I've spent most of this week in London. This trip has been extremely interesting because
I've had the pleasure of having long discussions with many government experts.

Their specialties range from working directly in high level government communications/advisory positions, to corporate public affairs folks, to very senior agency practitioners.

I learned quite a bit more about the inner workings of Her Majesty's government. And, although the viewpoints on a variety of topical challenges and opportunities varied some, one constant remained through all these meetings: social media is rarely being leveraged to communicate/persuade or educate key stakeholders in the public affairs world.

Don't get me wrong— it's clear that a few of the more progressive political candidates leverage the Internet to frame their message/brand and woo consumers. But, when I asked about whether campaigns (focused on motivating consumers to act) now target the most obvious virtual places they communicate and socialize in (i.e. Facebook, Twitter, target blogs, etc.), the answer was generally— no.

I'm naturally inquisitive. So, I asked why? And, the responses weren't too surprising. In most cases I heard, "Most within our industry have yet to really understand how to harness and, more importantly, not be afraid of this new medium."

Those in the world of public affairs (whether in US or UK) tend to be much more about strategy and leveraging political connections than creativity (at least that's been my general experience.) But, on this side of the ocean there are countless examples of any number of dynamic association and/or corporate campaigns that have rallied consumer sentiment online to achieve lofty goals. I know of cases where a groundswell of online support came from consumers to push their Congressmen to vote down taxes, vote a certain way on a bill and even impact the new and progressive ways that legislators now communicate back to their constituents.

It's clear that this industry based in "the States" is much more savvy about leveraging the Internet and is probably a good two years ahead of their British counterparts. Success tends to breed more openness, familiarity and desire to take risk in previously unknown channels. What those who are still clearly afraid need to know is that it's impossible to control just about anything anymore. Once a good or bad story gets out, the buzz simply lets loose on the Internet. But, like anything else, if a client's story is positive, or the truth, and is communicated in the right, transparent (and maybe creative) way, this new medium called social media should become one of the most powerful and often used tools in a PA agency's tool belt.

On the reverse end, those who don't learn to adopt, accept and become ‘social’ will go the way of the British monarchs (who actually had power) very soon.

You need to "live it" to get it

This morning, I read about Rupert Murdoch's bold prediction to stop the flood tide that is swiftly forcing almost all online media/content to be free. More specifically, Mr. Murdoch announced that he intends to charge for all of his company's news Web sites. And, he confidently believes that this will create a counter revolution, allowing for all other media to follow suit.

Rupert Murdoch is one smart dude. He's established a global media empire in the shrewdest of ways. There should be an entire class in business school offering case studies of how this man successfully built the News Corporation from the ground up.

But this time, I think he's finally lost his golden touch. You see, from everything I've read, it appears that Mr. Murdoch has only actually been on the Internet once or twice (and never by himself.) So, it just seems kind of crazy for a man to think he can be the force that halts the Internet's natural evolution towards providing free content and actually find a way to reverse current consumer wants and demands... when he clearly hasn't even experienced what it's all about.

Free. Yes, we've all heard it many times. Free is the optimal word now for news and information online.

Why?

Well, it's pretty simple. There are just too many free blogs, information sites and knowledgeable Web columnists with opinions for the masses to read. And, when almost any news story (or opinion about that story) can be searched in a second and clicked onto for free, why in the world would consumers pay to receive it, even if it's coming from a newspaper that they subscribe to or read every day?

Of course, there are exceptions to the rule. Some folks like and need the special alerts, feeds and other information that can provide up to the minute news. Thus, any number of trade magazines and even internationals such as The Financial Times do make revenues from real subscriptions. But, those are anomalies (and we're not talking about a lot of money generated, either.) The fact remains that the media industry has never found a way to create a sustainable revenue line from consumer subscriptions. And these days, many are facing real uphill battles maintaining their only real source of income -- selling advertising.

Maybe Mr. Murdoch's entertaining announcement is nothing more than a blustery (but weak) attempt to bridge attention away from his weak earnings (off more than 30 percent this quarter.) Or maybe, he has some grander scheme in mind to prop up one or more of his media properties in the hope of catching the eye of a suitable buyer.

Either way, it makes no difference to me. It just feels like his provocative prediction would prove a tad more credible if the man actually put himself in the shoes of today's consumer by actually "living" on the Internet for a while. Lord knows, he'd certainly have a better understanding of the subject at hand.

Are hospitals pushing the boundaries of social media tools?

As a marketing professional, it’s great to see how some industries are starting to leverage social media for all of its brand building value.  Twitter, YouTube, Facebook and blogging in general, can supplement traditional marketing programs, or even replace major ad buys to really impact the level of visibility and direct response aimed at targeted end users. That’s really important during these tough economic times where cash strapped organizations need to find ways to reach their audiences with the most cost-effective approaches.

Now, with all of that said (or written), here’s one case that I believe has gone a little too far: Your brain Surgery! Hospitals See Marketing Tool. As you can read, hospitals are now creating YouTube videos of actual brain surgery operations.

What really crosses the line is that while one particular patient is having a craniotomy, she remains conscious, actually promoting her surgeon and the hospital all the while her doctors prod and cut inside her brain.  The hospital (Methodist University Hospital in Memphis) is excited, as over 21,555 people have now watched this video on YouTube.

Yuck. Talk about too much information.

According to Jill Fazakerly, the marketing director of this hospital, “The goal is to further our reputation as well as to educate the community, who will ask their physicians about our care.” That’s all well and good, but what about the very real issue of patient privacy? I have to believe that this hospital is opening itself up to some real legal risks by exploiting someone’s misery (and brain matter) on the Internet in such a graphic way.

The other obvious issue is simply whether this is a matter of good taste gone bad. Yes, the Internet has created a home for sites, stories and satires that would never have existed without it. And, creative marketing has been raised to an entirely new level of existence as well. But, hospitals, by their very nature, are supposed to be a tad more conservative and careful with anything involving their patients. Showing live brain operations on Web video as if they are the same as chef making a great soufflé is just a little crazy. And, I wonder about whether these respectable organizations will look a little too capricious and whimsical because of it.

Don’t get me wrong. I love some of the other ways hospitals have become digital marketing machines. Some doctors are blogging profusely about real life experiences, so that patients and others can comment and learn about the latest in surgery and treatment. Some surgeons actually Twitter from operating rooms before and after surgeries. That’s great as long as it doesn’t interfere with the welfare of any patient. Other hospitals (like University of California San Francisco’s Memory and Aging Center) have a Facebook page that has drawn participants for hard-to-fill clinic trials. This has allowed many people learn a ton of new information about what their love ones suffer from. 

As Ms. Fazakerly said so well, these campaigns are only supposed to enhance a company or organization’s reputation. The type of marketing discipline that a marketer chooses, or the strategy and/or tactic that it decides to implement will have a tremendous impact on whether the marketing campaign actually helps to improve reputation… or hurt it. The fact that hospitals are finding creative digital means is great. But, I’d rethink this literal inside view of what really happens behind the curtain. All it takes is for one video to go awry and a supposed reputation builder will turn into a full blown crisis.

Still searching for the perfect PDA

I'm sitting in the airport watching various passengers fumble around with their many mobile communications devices. It's a funny sight to see.

Let's see. There's the 20-something business woman who is constantly going back and forth between her iPhone (for music), a BlackBerry for email and another plain cellular phone to make calls. She seems to be a tad stressed searching through her bag to find each one.

I'm also sitting next to a mid-40s gentleman (my guess on age) who is desperately trying to receive emails from his iPhone. The problem is that they aren't coming in quick enough. So now he's turning on a laptop to wirelessly achieve download fulfillment. This guy is just plain frustrated.

I could point out three other people with similar stories... but you're probably beginning to see my point.

I think many of us are still longing to find that one-size-fits-all, perfect PDA. I know that this is true for me. Don't get me wrong. I'm perfectly happy with my latest BlackBerry. Because I only want to carry around and use one device for efficiency's sake, this one generally serves the purpose. The only issue at hand is that my calls (I have AT&T) seem to be quite expensive (and I'm not sure why.) So, while I choose to use it as a mobile phone as well, it isn't quite nirvana because my company is paying far too much for what is now a commodity feature.

I don't get why so many people like, or maybe the word is are 'satisfied,' with having to cart around two, three or even four electronic devices to fully communicate and be entertained. To me, that's simply a hassle.

But, then again, I'm still wondering why one of the many technology leaders out there hasn’t created a single device that can provide the masses with one-stop shopping across the board. Apple and RIM (the maker of BlackBerry) are racing to the finish line with something that can appeal to both consumers and professionals alike, but it just feels like this particular innovation should have become a reality by now.

Until that happens, I'll just keep using my BlackBerry to satisfy all my email/Internet/cellular needs (albeit at a higher cost.) And, I'll entertain myself by watching more soon-to-be fellow passengers stressfully switch back and forth among their many cumbersome gadgets to successfully live in this new digital age.

A turnaround if I’ve ever seen one

I meant to write this post two weeks back when Amazon, the online retailer, came out with its third quarter earnings. This former dotcom shooting star has quite a turnaround story. I think that Jeff Bezos and the rest of its management team deserve a lot of credit.

Remember Amazon over a decade ago? It was one of the first fast moving “we will be bigger than General Electric” dotcoms that shot right out of the gate in 1997 to become everyone’s darling. The company quickly went from selling books online, to just about everything from CDs, movies, furniture, groceries, jewelry and even commercial freight goods. Boy do I remember those days well. Amazon (and thousands of other dotcoms) had little need to make profits (or revenues for that matter,) because they were being funded by almost any venture capitalist and private equity company who could buy in. So instead, the company focused on expanding as much as possible to build consumer traffic to its site. "Insignificant" considerations like costs, sales and profit were comically overlooked. No, Amazon was going to change the state of commerce forever and all it had to do was build, build and build itself and everything else would be taken care of.

Yup. Then, the world woke up and the dotcom world imploded. For a good four to five years, Amazon was fighting for its life and at times looked as though it would die and be laid to rest in the same dotcom cemetery as so many other high fliers.

But, Jeff Bezos is a fighter. Through the early 2000s he pushed like hell to turn this backwards business model around. I remember how he cut more than half his costs by selling off warehouses (he stopped holding on to all his own inventory,) cutting back on marketing, staff, travel and everything else that could be sliced away. Finally, in 2002, Amazon squeezed out its very first tiny profit. That was a positive sign, but even then the business worlds (especially analysts) were doubtful that his much smaller, streamlined model could work. And, in the next four to five years, we heard very little from Amazon as the company focused its efforts entirely on a real turnaround.

11 years after it was founded, through more turmoil than can be imagined, Amazon demonstrated good earnings recently in its third quarter announcement. The company now turns over $15 billion in annual revenue and met its earnings per share forecast, which is a critical test for anyone looking at the company’s stock. More importantly, once again, Amazon is seen as one of the leaders within the world of Internet retailing. And, that is big.

How did it go from near death to a successful company? Well, if you go to Amazon.com, the answer becomes quite clear. Its model is focused around three compelling criteria that all consumers want:

1) Very good prices
2) A broad selection of products in key categories
3) Convenience

I’d say that the third point is the most appealing one at times. Let’s face it, commerce on the Web is pretty amazing, but it certainly isn’t convenient. Amazon makes sure that each shopper’s experience is as easy as can be.

Amazon also has become very strategic in what it sells, as well as innovative in how it plans to make money. The company decided to drop its “inch wide and mile deep” strategy by cutting so many of those product lines which made absolutely no sense (like groceries,) and instead focused on innovating through newer offerings surrounding digital products that it could lead the way in. For example, it’s Kindle offering (online book reader,) is selling well to those steady customers who buy Amazon’s core products (books.) Amazon created Unbox, which allows shoppers to download movies and TV shows right onto their computers. It launched an mp3 store that rivals iTunes and has participation from every major music label. And, Amazon is even leveraging its digital acumen to become a leader of its own technology (and rents out part of its back end infrastructure to other companies.)

In a nutshell, the company went back to the basics and has again built a solid reputation for itself in this very way. There aren’t a lot of companies that earn a second chance after such a disastrous first one. Granted, there are a lot of questions for any retailer or business now that they’re stuck right in the middle of this terrible economy (and Amazon’s stock has taken a hit just like so many others.)  But, Jeff Bezos and his senior crew deserve to take a bow because they’ve done an admirable job.

The art behind building the brand of Obama

I’ve read reports that Barack Obama’s campaign has raised more than $650 million through September. Let’s have fun and take a guess that the total amount raised through this election will be around $800 million. It wouldn’t be too farfetched to surmise that most of these funds are somehow leveraged to build the Obama brand to become the candidate of choice. After all, those $$$ are paying for his staff (who spread his gospel,) advertising, public relations, digital communications, large events, more fund raisers, travel costs and many other line items that are focused on “getting the word out” about this candidate.

Assuming you agree with my hypothesis, let’s compare this brand building initiative to what the biggest corporate marketers in the world spent last year. It’s kind of astonishing – Barack Obama’s presidential campaign would be ranked 36th among this prestigious list of corporations. This means that more resources are invested in building the Obama brand than that of Colgate, Microsoft, HP, Viacom, Wal-Mart, Cannon and Samsung.

Think about that for a second. All of these companies spend a lot of money on brand building. But, those budgets are spread across hundreds or thousands of products/services, as well as on the mother brand itself. This dilutes the impact that any one marketing initiative can have on a specific product or corporate brand. Obama’s campaign (on the other hand) continues to singularly focus (like a laser beam) on pushing out the same core messages to America for almost two years now. Just as importantly, the essence of who Obama is (his brand essence some might say) has been consistently choreographed and emitted to the American public in the same strategic manner as well. This has to be one of the largest, concentrated brand-building campaigns of all time.

Of course, brand building isn’t just about the $$$ being spent. And, creating a Presidential brand isn’t an easy assignment. For every ad, email, speech, conversation or article that pushes out the brand of Obama, there are countless negative forces being aimed directly at his reputation. Most of the time, this waters down so much of the positive image that is trying to be built. And, among many disparate audiences, those negatives are believed and taken as gospel (i.e. the man is connected to terrorism.)

In my estimation, this is precisely why Senator Obama’s campaign advisors (brand builders) deserve so much credit. You see, from the day Obama announced his Presidential bid, it’s clear that his advisors had a strategy to reinforce a number of core attributes/beliefs that the Obama brand would stand for. Love or hate the man, the brand of Obama has never wavered (through all the attacks and adversity) and in these final days before he probably becomes our next President, it’s fair to say that the excitement generated because of the Obama brand is a large reason for this success. The Obama camp has brought back so many of JFK’s attributes and brand promises to attract those same audiences that made “Camelot” so appealing to young people in 1960. These include:

-    Fresh, invigorating, change that young people want to be a part of; a new way of thinking; standing for something higher in life; freedom from the old way of politics; something that stands for a greater good; a man who is charismatic and cares.

Yes, I know it’s also about the economy… stupid. That certainly helped to turn the tide on any Republican candidate. Additionally, as I wrote about a few days back Senator McCain’s choice for a running mate certainly didn’t help matters. But there is nothing subtle about the way Barack Obama’s brand has been masterfully built.  I tip my hat to those campaign wizards who had the foresight to make it happen.

UPDATE: Frank X. Shaw has posted his own response to this topic over on Glass House. His post focuses on the concept of "fragile branding" in politics. Meanwhile, see Todd Defren's post about Obama "CMO" David Plouffe, Talya Bosch's post on America as a brand in relation to the political election, Ted Weismann's post on negative depositioning in brand differentiation (political and otherwise), Indra Gardiner's post on Obama's campaign and how it coincides with Seth Godin's book Tribes, and our own Sam Ford's post on "real America" as a brand and Matt Purdue's post on successful Obama strategies that businesses should learn from.

Another reason advertising on the Web stinks

So, I’m all juiced up (sorry, bad pun) to go on ESPN to watch the live Clemens hearings. ESPN has great content. I can choose between 15 different videos offering everything from Clemens opening speech to McNamee’s first remarks, etc. I call up the McNamee video and as I lick my lips in utter anticipation, all of a sudden…a UPS, “What can Brown do for you?” ad comes on first. And, it lasts a good 45 seconds.

This not only wasted my time, but it really irritated me.

I thought advertising on the Web is now supposed to be about how the consumer wants it and where the consumer wants to read/see/hear it. That’s not the case with video ads. I am so annoyed with UPS right now… that I’ve just become a big FedEx fan.

P&G’s “Men with Cramps” campaign is an example of Marketing 2.0 at its best

Stuart Elliott’s column yesterday about P&G's new marketing campaign to sell Therma Care, its new menstrual cramps product, is a big hit in my book.

The early results show that the campaign is generating a tremendous amount of consumer impressions (over 11 million to date), which should yield a real increase in awareness and product sales. Yet, I actually think that the more significant tidbit here is how a giant marketer like P&G is clearly taking a leadership position by leveraging and integrating the newest digital marketing disciplines with traditional advertising and public relations strategies to build real results. As a marketer, I am also excited to see that this company is willing to take some risk by being a little edgy to make this campaign as appealing as possible to target audiences.

I love the campaign theme because the marketer came up with a BIG IDEA by creatively turning this strictly female issue on its head to spoof the opposite gender and tap into some well deserved empathy. To hit the ball out of the park, P&G’s agencies came together to develop and integrate a number of eye catching approaches that just work so well together: a fake institute, web site, documentary, video clips on YouTube and it was all started through a teaser classified advertising campaign calling for men who are suffering from menstrual cramps.

Maybe part of why I’m so enthusiastic is because we created a similar strategy themed campaign for GE’s Washer and Dryer products a few years back through a campaign called “National men to laundry month.” This program also served to take advantage of the commonly known fact that men hate to do laundry and made fun of men, while simultaneously grabbing their attention in a variety of ways. I only wish that the current digital opportunities were more fashionable then (or at least more accepted), because we could have exponentially increased the results of our program through this medium.

I plan to use P&G’s campaign as a great case study with many of our clients to show them how we can leverage the digital space in all of its glory to integrate with our traditional program ideas to build greater ROI. Hopefully, many marketers will begin to take notice.

Law firms need to see digital marketing as more than just having a web site

Larry Bodine posted an interesting blog on the need for law firms to leverage their web sites more in the overall scope of marketing activities. Forrester Research reports that only 15 percent of law firm marketing budgets are currently allocated to online or digital marketing initiatives. And, Larry believes that they need to focus more money and energy on leveraging their sites to promote their activities and offerings.

I think that Larry has a valid point. But, these research findings coupled with my own similar law firm experiences demonstrate that law firms are really missing a bigger opportunity in the digital marketing realm by not taking advantage of other smart online initiatives to proactively create thought leadership visibility and expand their reach to target audiences. 

Two examples of smart digital marketing that law firms should really think about are blogs and webinars. Lawyers tend to be very conservative and somewhat fearful when thinking about the back and forth social interaction that blogs create and potential liabilities that could exist. There’s nothing wrong with showing some concern. But, blogs can also provide lawyers with a new way to provide a fresh and timely content distribution channel on important topics, cases, and points of opinions for prospects, clients and others. The other unique fringe benefit that often emerges is that each blogger often creates his/her own distinct personality...something that lawyers don’t always convey through traditional seminar marketing.
 
This leads me to webinars (or seminars held via the Internet). I know that some law firms conduct these. It just seems like the industry has a long way to go before webinars become a commonly used marketing initiative. Forrester’s research pretty much confirms this. Webinars are definitely going to become as important as traditional physical seminars soon. Life today is all about time management. If executives believe they can obtain the same information or learn about a particular topic just as easily, why would they take the added time out of the office to go to a lunch or breakfast, when everything can be delivered at their desktop in 45 minutes? They wouldn’t. More importantly, webinars vastly cut back on the cost and time resources needed by law firm marketers to plan and implement a successful event. 

Over the last 15 years, I’ve watched law firms change from believing that marketing was a dirty word to now having very sophisticated branding and lead generation programs. They need to continue to open their minds to the digital landscape because the opportunities to connect to their target audiences are tremendous.