Dazzle Ships

Copywriting 2.0

It's not quite Marketing 'Obamania', but it is pretty funny.

Well spotted, Mitch.

-- Toby

  

Thorn in my side

 

 

On my way into work the other day, I noticed a poster for Blackthorn Cider inviting us to interact with the brand (that’s interact digitally, not manually). You can go online and send in a picture of something that gets your goat – socks and sandals being their example.

 

As I stood there on the train platform I was immediately struck by two big questions. What on earth has that got to do with cider? And, more importantly, why would I bother?

 

This is the latest in an ever-lengthening line of campaigns where brands have asked consumers to somehow get involved, take part, have their say, or some variation on the theme. And unfortunately, in my opinion, brands are getting this wrong more often than when they’re getting it right. So we’ve had McVities telling us to say which of their biscuits we’re ‘bonkers’ about (do people care enough?), Oxo asking families to record their own ads using a pre-determined script (a lot of effort with little creative freedom) and, of course, the Kingsmill Confessions idea (an idea that really didn’t use it’s loaf, in many ways).

 

Add this to the fact that it’s become the marketing bandwagon to jump on and we run the risk of turning consumers against the idea of interacting with brands in their marketing campaigns. Which would be a shame, as when it’s done well it can be fantastically rewarding for consumers, as examples such as Walkers’ ‘Do Us A Flavour’ stand testament to.

 

We delight in the idea that in a digital age we have empowered consumers and a changed relationship between them and brands. But let’s not try and force fit ideas where they don’t make sense, or forget the golden rule of finding and using genuine brand and consumer insights as the heart of our ideas.

 

Now, it’s all very well for me to sit here and slag off other campaigns, but how about some positive input, eh? Well indeed. So here’s a set of pointers that I think brands should bear in mind when looking to create campaigns such as these, for them to be influential and successful.

 

1. Build from a genuine, relevant insight

Ok, it’s an obvious one applicable to all marketing communications. But it’s being forgotten.

Asking consumers to get involved in some way is asking them to exert massively more effort in their relationship with a brand than just watching an ad. The idea has to touch something within them that they genuinely respond to. If we want to build it on the relationship between consumers and a brand or product category, we need to be sure that the relationship actually exists in such a way for consumers to actually recognise it and respond to it. So, DUAF worked because people already thought about what crisp flavours might be interesting. Asking them to come up with a flavour for Walkers was asking them to bring to the surface something that they already did, or at very least was not out of character with their relationship with the category. I would argue that asking them to publically say what they find annoying about the world, in the name of a cider, does not use an insight in the same way.

 

2. The devil is in the detail

In addition to having a good insight, we must use this insight well. In the realm of consumer involvement, the tolerance for getting the use of an insight slightly wrong is pretty narrow. You might get away with it when it leads to a privately-viewed ad. Far less likely if you’re slightly off target when asking people to give something of themselves, particularly in public.

The public thing is important here. It’s easy to see the internet from only the brand’s perspective – it’s a place where individual people can interact with the brand one-to-one. Nice and private. But it isn’t like that in the majority of these campaigns, and certainly not from a consumer perspective. They see us asking them to publically voice their opinion, publically showcase their acting skills, and then get ‘marked’ on their efforts by the rest of society. Perhaps with some irony, given the huge interest in the social aspects of the internet in the form of networks from the marketing fraternity, we risk forgetting about the social influences at play when asking people to participate.

Just because people behave in a certain way in their everyday lives does not mean they necessarily want to do the exact same thing in front of everyone. We need to be thinking about this in how we apply insights to shape our brand-consumer interaction. Who do we want to ask to do what, and will that work for them?

 

3. Don’t over-estimate the level of involvement

Given the points I’ve made above, we shouldn’t expect huge volumes of people to actually take part every time. Fairly obviously, the volume of involvement will depend primarily on how much effort you’re asking people to exert. Along with the quality of the insight and execution, naturally. Texting in a flavour idea is easy and people may do it in their millions. Writing and recording a minute-long ad is not that easy for most and will therefore receive fewer participants.

But this is not to say that asking people to do slightly more involved things is wrong. We don’t have to stay at the shallow end. What brands must do is set their expectations correctly and design the idea to involve different audiences at appropriate levels. A few people may make an ad, and love doing it. A huge number of people might then view these ads, cast a vote, and enjoy doing that. But all this must be planned and marketing forces, whether paid-for or organic, must be exerted in order to make it happen.

 

4. Have a clear, motivating reward

People need a reason to take part. An acid test as to whether an idea will work and generate consumer interest is to simply ask ‘Why would they bother?’. If you can’t give a solid answer to that question, there’s something wrong.

Whether it’s money, recognition, social kudos, fame or an altruistic glow, we need to design campaigns to push their buttons. We have much more in our arsenal here than simply monetary prizes. Fame continues to be an extremely powerful motivator as the cult of celebrity continues apace.

And while a brand offering reward is motivating, it can be so much more motivating if the reward is such that it reinforces the belief that the brand is genuine in its desire for consumer involvement. So, while ‘Do Us A Flavour’ offered a cash prize for the winner, it was the promise of 1% of future sales of the crisp flavour they invented that really sealed the deal. Proving as it did that Walkers were serious about their desire to get consumers to create a viable new product for them and really join the company.

 

5. Know where the gravity of interest is

Consumer interaction campaigns quite often come in various parts. Consumers submit something, people view what they’ve done, people vote, a winner is chosen. There’s a story to be told and our use of communications follows this. We need to launch it, celebrate involvement and then go out with a bang, right?

However, not all parts of the story are necessarily equal, in terms of consumer interest, and we need to weight our effort accordingly. There is likely to be a centre of gravity within the story, where the interest for the consumer is particularly strong. This is going to be where the insight is exerting its influence most strongly. So, for ‘Do Us A Flavour’, the gravity sat toward the front of the campaign, where people were asked to come up with their own flavour ideas. While the voting and announcement of a winner were vital parts of the campaign, it was this first part that was most powerful for consumers. Contrast this with the Doritos ‘You Make It We Play It’ campaign, asking people to create the next Doritos ad. Here gravity was positioned towards the end of the campaign, where the winning ad was revealed and the reward of fame from the campaign was realised.

We need to look at the idea once again once the story is outlined and, given our resources are never limitless, apply effort most heavily at the moments where the gravity lies.

 

With these thoughts in our minds we can create marketing ideas where consumers want to get involved, and their involvement has a benefit for them and for the brand. Rather than asking them to take part in something they couldn’t care less about, just because we can.

 

-- Alex

 

I wish I'd thought of that...

I try to avoid, as much as possible, bigging up the competition on this site, but in this instance I'm afraid I don't really have a choice.

So, hats off to blmquantum for the new Domino's widget.

 

Part app, part affilate network, the Domino's widget can be downloaded and installed on your web page or profile.  Any orders via your site are then rewarded with 0.5% of the order value.

Simple and brilliant.

(Thanks to Jon for the spot)

-- Toby

Getting some perspective

Via Campaign a couple of weeks ago I was directed to Nestle's Facebook page, just as it was going into meltdown.  But more on this is in a minute.

The Campaign piece was basically a transcript of an exchange between Nestle and a couple of people on their Facebook page.  You can read it here.  The basic gist was that Nestle politely asked visitors to the page not to use versions of their logos.  This seemed to cause disproportionate levels of agitation.  A certain Darren Smith invoked freedom of expression (yes, freedom of expression), whilst Paul Griffin flounced out with 'You just lost a customer, won the battle and lost the war! Happy?'

My God, I thought, if this is the new 'empowered consumer' then we're in deep shit.  Because they behave like petulant children. Darren - freedom of expression?  Really?  You want to be 'free' to use a Nestle logo?  On their page?  And if you can't that's violating your freedom of expression?  Get some perspective.  Try here.

And Paul, thanks for the lecture on the niceties of social media marketing, but really, do you think anyone gives a shit?  Do you think that Nestle's going to go down because they ask people not to use their logos, on their page?  Do you really think this is 'Big Brotherish' ?  Get some perspective.  Try here.

Then something really interesting happened.  I went over to the page to check it out myself.  Right in the middle of a concerted assault on Nestle beacuse of their use of Palm Oil.  An assault that lead to this.

At last, some perspective. Some genuine grievance.  A great example of social media putting on pressure for real change.  Not a couple of idiots bleating about logos.

As Jon Howard commented on PunkPlanning, the problem with the digerati is they place so much emphasis of the 'ethics' of social media that they've forgotten about the 'ethics' of business.  Quite right.  If we're going to have a debate, let's make it a serious one.

--  Toby