*mobile mayhem

Mobile marketing is often misunderstood. I’ve heard several people bring it up in the context of “I want to start using mobile marketing,” or “How can we make mobile marketing work for this client?” Comments like these are confusing to the savvy marketer. To me, it’s like saying, “I’d like to start using the Internet.”

As we all know, there are many options for advertisers when it comes to the Internet (e.g. contextual, banner ads, pop-ups, SEO, e-mail blasts, etc.). Mobile marketing should follow the same strategic process as any other marketing tactic.

First, the target audience needs to be determined. If this tactic will appropriately reach the target audience, from both a demographic and psychographic perspective, then it can and should be included in the potential media mix. Next, a creative idea that works with the rest of the campaign, has a strong call-to-action and is both important and relevant enough for consumers to pay attention to should be developed. It is also beneficial (or almost imperative, really) if the company Web site has an application that can be easily viewed on a mobile device.

If your mobile marketing idea meets these criteria outlined in the strategic marketing process, then surely  it makes sense to continue exploring the opportunities. If not, give it up.

As always, please feel free peruse and provide feedback anywhere possible. If you like what you see…*send to a friend.

*ask your doctor

I work for an advertising agency whose niche is hospital communications. Not surprising, my company (and I) would argue that healthcare marketing not only drives patient volume but can be beneficial in educating the community.

I do recognize, though, that there are also risks associated with sharing health-related information with the general consumer, and they center around the phrase, “ask your doctor.”

Advertisements for prescription drugs tout the wonders of modern medicine. They show happy, carefree people (ahem, actors) enjoying life more now than they did before due to use of a particular drug. Oh yeah, and it may have a few (or nineteen) possible side effects.

Drug reps are benefiting from direct to consumer advertising, as prescription drug revenues are soaring to never before seen heights. Not surprisingly, exposure to drug ads leads to increased requests for prescription medications. However, this can be a danger to the consumer because ad messages can be manipulative.

How? The call-to-action invites people to present that drug as an option to their doctor “just to see” if prescription X is right for them. At that point, that drug is the most current in the physician’s mind, so the prescription is written and the happy (for the time being) patient goes on their merry way. But was it the right solution?

The well-known health Web side, WebMD.com, also encourages the “ask your doctor” phenomenon. WebMD provides users with the (alarming) opportunity to basically self-diagnose, by simply entering each of the symptoms they’re experiencing and then providing a quick, computer-generated solve.

In fact, many people go into the doctor these days just to get the script. They walk in and say, “I have [insert symptoms], which means I have [insert ailment], and I would like a prescription for [insert drug]…please.”

No doubt, this level of access to health information online (and its pervasion in the mass media) is frightening in its influence on consumers.

As always, please feel free peruse and provide feedback anywhere possible. If you like what you see…*send to a friend.

*disguised marketing

When did advertising become the drunken uncle that nobody wants to invite over for the holidays?

As marketers, we are trying everything from hats and make-up, to the Groucho Marx Glasses, to get advertising back in good graces of consumers.

Think about it…we utilize everything from advertorials to blogs (CEO blogs), and advergaming to crowdsourcing, to try to disguise our marketing efforts, all in hopes that consumers will take notice and remember (subconsciously even) these messages the next time they open their wallet.

So, with all of these options available, what’s the best way draw in your consumers and increasing the probability of a transaction? The answer is simple. Put your information in places where those who need it can find it, and wait for them to come to you. That’s right, I’m talking about search engine optimization. There is no doubt that consumers are continuously scouring the Internet for information. Search engine optimization allows you to put that information directly into the hands of those who are searching for it. Sounds like a pretty worthwhile investment.

As always, please feel free peruse and provide feedback anywhere possible. If you like what you see…*send to a friend.

*online shopping tastes good

Textbooks, DVDs and shoes are all items I regularly buy online. But food? Until a recent conversation with a coworker, the thought had never crossed my mind. So, I decided to do a little research on this mom’s “savior,” www.peapod.com, an online grocer.

My findings:

The roles of brand names and packaging are very different when shopping online versus shopping in-store. When shopping in a store, the packaging and presentation are central to the success of a product. They aid in the customer’s purchase decision, working together to catch their eye. Online, however, the brand name is of greater significance, as the shopper is more likely to purchase a recognizable brand because they are familiar with the product’s quality and taste.

Handily, Peapod allows customers to craft “personal lists” and acquire “previous orders” that are saved by the company’s database. Customers can add or delete items on their personal list. These can be created for everyday purchases or special occasions. Peapod also saves everything customers have purchased in the past under previous orders. This makes shopping quick and simple. The efficiency of personal lists and previous order records may direct a greater number of people towards online shopping. Even if regular grocers made lists such as these available, they would not be nearly as effective, since customers will continue to acquire items in the store that they did not intend on purchasing. This is due to strategic product placement. For example, grocers position items such as milk and bread in the back of the store to ensure customers walk by infrequently purchased items before they arrive at the necessities.

Similarly, there is some point of purchase advertising on the Peapod site; however, these are not as successful as in a regular store. Why? Because online shoppers are less likely to stray from their list. In a store, customers can reach out and grab these attractive or conveniently placed items without much thought. Nevertheless, POP advertising is represented on Peapod. Within the cart, which lists the items selected for purchase, there are alternating “pop-ups,” reminding the customer not to forget their Christmas day essentials, for instance. In addition, when a product category is first selected, two random images appear next to the brand, type, or size options. While it definitely has a presence, it’s not quite as successful as in-store POP.

Overall, I find the online grocery shopping experience to be positive and efficient; however, this method also requires that you be home for delivery. Since I spend so little time at my apartment, I think I’ll stick with my tried but true grocery store. After all, it too is open 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

As always, please feel free peruse and provide feedback anywhere possible. If you like what you see…*send to a friend.

*lovely day for a guinness

Mobile marketing? Annoying. Bar promotions? Delightful. Mixing the two? Well, if you’re the winner of the St. Patrick’s Day trip to Ireland, that’s a pretty sweet cocktail.

I have always disliked receiving text messages from advertisers. Not only are they intrusive, but my cell phone provider used to charge me for this unsolicited communication.

However, on my last trip to the local Irish pub, it must have been a lovely day for a Guinness, because I decided to do the unthinkable: I opted in.

Guinness posters lined the walls of the bar. Beside the delicious looking pint of stout on the advertisements, read the message, “Win a St. Paddy’s trip to Ireland. Text Guinness to 74859.” For some reason…I did it! I text messaged the advertiser. I sent my information to them! Then, immediately following, I ordered a pint of the black stuff. (I needed the full experience.)

While I haven’t yet heard whether I am the lucky winner of this holiday adventure (I don’t even know how many winners will be selected), I did stumble (no pun intended) upon a March 2008 Yahoo! study measuring the impact of a similar mobile campaign implemented by Guinness the previous year. Executive summary: the Guinness brand has strength.

This campaign’s exposure, using a less invasive marketing tactic that asks consumers to opt-in instead of delete upon receiving, led to a 12 percent boost in brand favorability and even positively impacted purchase intent for irregular/non-drinkers of the product.

My goodness, my Guinness!

As always, please feel free peruse and provide feedback anywhere possible. If you like what you see…*send to a friend.

*avoid this place

Movie reviews. Hotel reviews. Electronics reviews. It seems you cannot make a decision on anything these days without finding out what others think about it first. It’s no wonder these Internet communities—where Web users can be influenced positively or negatively—are about as successful as word-of-mouth in driving sales for a particular product or service. Nevertheless, how accurate is the information posted on these sites?

According to an October 2008 Rubicon Consulting study, most (90 percent, in fact) of the visitors to these sites are “lurkers,” people that read or observe what’s going on but don’t make contributions. Merely nine percent make an occasional comment, post a review or offer advice. That means that one percent of those who access a Web community account for most of the contributions. One percent!

A frequent visitor to metromix.com (and self-proclaimed “lurker”), I decided to test the accuracy of this Web community’s reviews. All it took was a simple search of El Jardin Café to solidify (in my mind) this study’s theory of participation inequality, which says one percent of users remarks don’t translate to the opinion of the masses.

Case Study: Restaurant Review

El Jardin Café

2.6/5 stars

While I won’t be joining the cast of Top Chef anytime soon, I know good food and good service, and my El Jardin experience (just days ago) was nothing short of a 4.8. However, the low rating wasn’t the only surprise. User reviews read, “Average All Around,” “Terrible Food, Terrible Margaritas,” and harshest of all, “AVOID THIS PLACE!!!” But, wait. Me, my friends…we rave about this neighborhood gem.

So, this begs the question:

Will I add a review in hopes of increasing El Jardin’s “star power”? Probably not. Like I said, I’m simply a lurker.

Please feel free peruse and provide feedback anywhere possible. If you like what you see… *send to a friend.

*cruel intentions

I joined the ever-popular social networking site Facebook in 2005, back when “Facebook stalking” was a common phrase that meant you spent hours scanning the page (and pictures) of the cute girl that sat next to you in Marketing 101. Since, Facebook, the company, has become the stalker. No longer must you peruse her page daily, scanning for those ever slight changes or additions (Ahem, I never did that…). Why? Because Facebook will do it for you.

Enter…the News Feed.

Instead of wasting hours searching (ridiculously) each day for these updates, the News Feed provides you with the highlights: “Nick Trowbridge has changed his profile picture.” Or, as noted above, “Jennifer Beio is having a busy Wednesday.” (Yes, I care.)

While those of us who now have full-time jobs (and full-time grad school commitments) can appreciate the thoughtful nature of these “upgrades” in helping to reduce time lost in cyberspace, there is one News Feed update that, in my mind, has cruel intentions:

“[Insert sad person’s name here] is no longer listed as in a relationship.”

Back in 2005, a couple may confide the news of their fizzled partnership with a few close friends, so even the most intense Facebook stalkers may not realize an altered relationship status on someone’s profile (well, not for at least a few weeks). No longer do people have these crucial weeks to rebuild their spirits, as Facebook puts the news as a “highlight of the day” on the homepage…for all of their friends and family (and acquaintances) to see.

It’s no wonder that, these days, the Facebook breakup has become more official than the actual face-to-face conversation that typically concludes a relationship. I mean, you’ve already broken someone’s heart; do you really want to be the a-hole that notifies the masses?

As always, please feel free peruse and provide feedback anywhere possible. If you like what you see…*send to a friend.

*the minority report

Author Anais Nin was quoted as saying, “We don’t see things as they are. We see them as we are.” Each culture has its own values, traditions and perceptions of what is right or wrong, appropriate or inappropriate, in different situational and cultural contexts. Globalization is sweeping nations and spurring a significant international economy. No individual throughout the world sees things the same way as everyone else. Perceptions differ, and as globalization continues, more companies need to be aware of this . Marketers and advertisers, specifically, need to understand the different elements of advertisements that could be misinterpreted due to each cultures distinctive values.

All too often international corporations fail to tailor advertisements to the specific needs of the target audience, in the country of origin. Cultural significance and minorities should also be considered as an integral part of the marketing strategy. In today’s global society, it is imperative to understand and consider cultural perceptions in the market in which advertisements are placed.

A specific example of this in the United States is the clothing retailer Abercrombie & Fitch. A&F has elected to use provocative sexual photography in many of its marketing and collateral materials. Some of the imagery, which is explicit, even by westernized standards, may not be effective or appeal to minority audiences.

As always, please feel free peruse and provide feedback anywhere possible.  If you like what you see…*send to a friend.

*market with caution

Today, more and more marketers are aiming their advertising dollars at children. Research has shown that, for some brands, “securing” these young customers from infancy throughout life (i.e. cradle to grave) can mean revenues of up to $100,000 for any one advertiser.

It is argued that advertising and marketing encourages unhealthy levels of consumerism among children, since kids often want the things they see advertised. They beg their parents to buy these products featured on television or merchandise associated with their favorite movie and TV series.

A great example is the recent children’s movie Cars. Awhile back, I walked through a Target store with my three-year-old cousin. I was overwhelmed by the amount of Cars merchandise on shelves throughout the store and impressed with this toddler’s awareness of and responsiveness to the characters from the movie.

Of course, the toy section offered replica cars for each of the characters from the movie, but there were also stuffed toys, beach towels, books, CDs, shoes, clothing, breakfast cereal, juice boxes, fruit snacks, motor oil and even tissue boxes available with the Cars logo and characters.

This example goes to show how easy it is to capture and mold the minds of children and as integrated marketing communications practitioners, we should use a certain level of respect and restraint when speaking to this young audience.

As always, please feel free peruse and provide feedback anywhere possible.  If you like what you see…*send to a friend.

*dangers lurks

When we fear that violence on television and in video games is causing rage and violent behaviors among our children, we add ratings to prevent kids from taking part in activities not suited for their age.

When drivers are getting into accidents while talking and text messaging on their cell phones, we outlaw cell phone usage while driving.

Recently, two Internet-related stories have garnered a lot of press. Both resulted in suicides among young people.

A 13 year-old girl from Missouri committed suicide in October of 2006, when the mother of a former friend whom she had a falling out with, created a fictional boy for her to confide in on MySpace, then abruptly ended the relationship. This story has been in the news lately because on Wednesday, November 26, the mother who created the character was found guilty of three misdemeanors.

On Wednesday, November 19, a 19 year-old man from Florida threatened to kill himself on a chat room blog. Upon doing so, instead of receiving support from those whom he was chatting with, he received provoking messages encouraging him to commit suicide. The teenager then took his own life by overdosing while others watched via webcam. Rather than reaching out to help or to authorities bloggers encouraged the man to ingest more pills and debated whether or not he had taken an enough to kill himself.

Many people might argue that these incidents did not occur because of the Internet… that it was the actions of the people that caused the harm… but the cell phones weren’t driving the cars, and the video games weren’t forcing kids to fight (at least literally). I am not suggesting that Internet is all bad, but like TV, video games and cell phones it should be monitored and approached with caution.

As always, please feel free peruse and provide feedback anywhere possible.  If you like what you see…*send to a friend.