Free at all costs

I'm still in utter amazement how slow Time Out have been on this, to compound my disappointment they've brought onboard Smirnoff to brand the whole thing. This might make it free to the end user for the first 6 months and therefore help build up a loyal following who can activiely market the app to their friends but this does also erode what I think is one of the key strengths of the Time Out brand, it's impartiality.

Now I appreciate the commercial pressures of a traditional media company, relying on declining revenue from two key sources:

a) subscription and newstand readership of physical magazine

and

b) display advertising revenues (on and offline)

...but jumping into bed with a brand for a limited period in order to create a free app shows a little too much desperation in my view. Whilst 'free' does obviously play a part in creating a successfull app and take up in the short term, it is ultimately the utility that the app provides that will seal it's position in the app store chart in the long term. Don't get me wromg, I appreciate Chris Anderson's opnions on the subject but do we always need to strive towards free at all costs?





If we are to look at The Guardian's recent foray into the world of apps, we see a different approach. The Guardian are dogmatic about free online content but understand that there are environments where a consumer, who has a relationship with the brand, will be happy to part with their cash if they can see the brand is doing more than transferring content from the paper or website and creating something genuinely cool and useful for the out of home or on the underground context. Their range of iphone features seperate this digital offering from the site in a number of ways to offer a totally new experience for the Guardian reader - increasing the value and amount of interaction with the reader. It's still early days but I'm confident that the average Guardian reader will identify that the brand understands what the user does and doesn't want.



What I value both the Guardian and Time Out brands is that I ultimately trust what they say, if I'm looking for restaurant reviews or films to go and see I treat these sites as bastions of quality, intellingent comment. Suddenly teaming up with a drinks brand brings into question (for some) this impartiality and independence which most readers see as the core value of these two publishers.

Free is good, but should never be a sole aim, sweeping all else aside (core brand values included), can't Timeout see why they're the no 1 things to do site? it's because we trust them - this trust is the one thing that differenitates them from the competition, lose this and they're back on a level playing field with a number of inferior, younger competitors.

tiger vs jay-z

how will magazines adapt to life in a digital world?

Mag+ from Bonnier on Vimeo.

2000 - 2010: splintering scenes and technology

Panda Bear - Person Pitch, the surprise choice in Pitchforks top 10 albums of the decade

Just reading this Guardian piece debating whether Pitchforks 200 albums of the decade is a significant list that we should take note of. The answer for me from both a music fan and cultural observer angle is yes definitely. Those guys went beyond the guitar based music with the odd exception mindset that the NME and Q had to one where any album, whether it was from a Norwegian disco producer or Brooklyn 4 piece was listened to and assessed on a level playing field.

I've got to be thankful to them for some of my musical highlights: Clipse, Portishead, Grizzly Bear, Hercules and Love Affair, Mark Pritchards incredible 'feel the spirit' folk comp. Their level of music geekery is both completely impartial and unrivalled. They are the guys who spent sunday afternoon making mixtapes with the kind of attention to detail an ipod user wouldn't ever understand.

More intriguing than the who is in/out/massively overrated is the effect technology has had on what we've listened to. There seems to have been a splintering of tastes towards the second half of the decade as the information via digital platforms becase more accessible. This was the decade that the music industry changed from tour to promote cd to recorded music to promote tour and artist as a brand. As it became easier to find out about music beyond mainstream media channels (remember MTV anyone?) people went onto the web and explored - they came across sites like myspace and pitchfork and never looked back. The long tail theory for music at least has most certainly happened. This article in the Economist makes the point much better than I ever could, we've all seen the Kings of Leon reach world domination and know that bands no longer need a deal to get themselves out there, it's now the ones in the middle that face the biggest challenge in a splintering world.

This quote sums it up...

So what was so intriguingly odd about their top 10 albums of the noughties? I was immediately struck by the fact that seven of the albums were from 2000 and 2001, with one other record from 2002 and another from 2004. The only album from after the mid-decade point was Panda Bear's Person Pitch. Now what significance can be derived from this dense clustering (eight of the ten) of "greatest albums" in the first three years of the decade? You could interpret it two ways: firstly, music deteriorated as the noughties went on, or secondly, it grew harder and harder for people to reach consensus about which groups mattered, what records were important. The first scenario seems unlikely, so I'd have to go with the second. It resonates with how the decade actually felt: diasporic, scenes splintering into sub-scenes, taste bunkers forming, the question "Have you heard X?" increasingly likely to meet a shake of the head or a look of incomprehension


So there will always be the big hit making stadium touring mega stars. There is a human need to be part of something with other people and not all of us are prepared to spend hours geeking out online to find that swedish skiffle band to then go and check out in Mile End. We want human interaction, an excuse to be social and something that gives us an identity but there is a limit to the time and effort that we're prepared to put into it.

The big stars deserve every penny they get for holding onto their audience in a time when technology has created a profound change beyond 'the hit' - there is now a massive part of the market made up of splintering sub cultures, niches and groups all of whom can survive with very little corporate involvement of any kind.

Not a great time to be an A&R man, an incredible time to be someone with a good idea and a nack of communicating well with people.

Google Goggles

keep it simple

courtesy of raxraxrax

public spaces, interactivity and post digital ramblings

This use of redundant street space is great. Phone boxes are part of our heritage yet if you see someone in one now you're convinced they're either cheating on their wife, plotting a terrorist attack or looking for some shrapnel in the rejected coins hole. It's definitely time for brands / the powers that be to reclaim the street and show they understand how technology has changed the we way we use these public spaces.




So how can we bring these iconic structures back to life, create usefulness and genuine value? The opportunities seem endless given their ubiquity, cosyness and the public affection for them. The recent resurgence in pop up shops looks like one avenue that could be explored.



I think the lesson here is that interactivity isn't exclusively digital, it's potential lies everywhere. This is a medium that is at it's best when it's two way communication rather than dictatorial and one way. I guess the risk summed up in that question: what if no one interacts? the answer to this is simple. It's a field of communication where aside from thorough research and intuitive planning, it must be understood that putting an idea into the public sphere involves the 'r' word. A great example of a campaign that nailed it was CP&B's Shocking Barack.



Here was Alex Bogusky's take on why the idea flew:

That’s the thing about this that’s so fundamentally different than anything that has even a tiny media buy connected. With media you know you’ll get something but here, there is a very real chance that absolutely nothing happens. Yet we were also confident that what we were doing mattered and that, maybe when something matters, it has a chance to get noticed.

Mark Earls nails it when he talked about lighting fires, don't get obsessed with the one big sexy idea, try stuff out, see what resonates and what doesn't and learn from it. Following this appraoch allows for a greater understanding of people like about you and what they don't, more importantly, it frees you from the shackles of focus groups, one way mirrors and bad sandwiches.

charging up the digital world

If the world becomes increasingly reliant on digital and the number of devices in the house increase then we'd better find a way of understanding how we're going to power charge our lives.

Maybe 10 years ago...

Whilst there are a few useful snippets in here that really jump out when you place the behavioural charateristics associated with the channels side by side, this chart does seem to be look at things from circa 1998.

The worrying thing is that it isn't, it's just appeared on boingboing today.



One great example of the ambiguity of TV has to be Channel 4's very recent decision to place all 4OD content within the brand new 'shows' section of Youtube. A fantastic resource that understands that people want good content to come to them in the places they hang out.

It's making less and less sense to silo departments in an agency context as content starts to flow like water between channels.

statistically...things are getting better

I mentioned the tripartite view back in september, the difference between perception and reality with regards to the state of 'things'

Colin Drummond picked out this very useful infographic from new scientist which puts data into the equation.

There are obviously numerous metrics for measuring this stuff but what rarely happens in the context of news reporting or conversation is the emphasis on data relative to x years ago. Instead the now is mentioned usually with emphasis on this period we're living through being the most dramatic and extreme time since...um, the last one.

it makes now feel important, looking back it usually wasn't, just another day slowly progressing towards better very gradually.

The thing is though, people rarely think in terms of statistics. They think in terms of personal experiences, emotions, connections, stories and the information they are exposed to. We need to frame brand communication within this context, if brands can make utility rather than vacuous messages then maybe people will start to believe that things are getting better.

Monday morning inspiration...

nothing like an entertaining clip to start the engine on a monday morning

Challenging Definitions

Live music is on the up, it's now practical and easy to share your experiences in real time, people will always want to share stuff that they think is cool. The Flaming Lips understand this, why should a gig just be a stage with people on it playing music to a crowd with pint in hand when there is the opportunity for so much more?

Their recent gig at the Troxy, London challenged this definition - it became a 'remarkable' event for the levels of interactivity an psychedelic madness on display. People who were there obviously connected with it, my facebook newsfeed has seen a steady stream of pics, bad videos and energised status updates all praising Wayne Coyne and his band of merry men. They were rewarded with conversation and attention, the digital currency.

Respect to the band for thinking big and challenging the parameters

the difference between trends and insights

If nothing else, Twitter is the most effective way of following trends in real time. It's like watching a brook turn into a white water rapid as ideas, topics, arguments gather or lose momentum amongst the connected world.

Here is a really cool visualisation of the world saying 'good morning'

GoodMorning! First Render from blprnt on Vimeo.

The thing is though, there is a stark difference between identifying a trend and identifying an insight or an opportunity for a brand to add value. Trends are merely patterns of behaviour and have little relevance to a brand unless they can be utilised.

Jer Thorp sums it up really nicely with the last line of his post on the project

"I’m guessing that in the hands of people with more than my rudimentary statistics skills, these kinds of data sets could tell us some interesting – and (heaven forbid) useful things."

So this is where the planner comes in, turning the noise into a fully functioning orchestra.

sort of revolution

I think this clip (via mashable) illustrates the now quite famous Clay Shirky quote pretty well:

"A revolution doesn't happen when society adopts new tools. It happens when society adopts new behaviours"

doing vs saying (part 2)

Think I'm pretty late on this but definitely worth mentioning as it ties in really nicely with the behaviour change ramble I posted last week where I talked about Katy and Rorys different takes on creating behavioural change for the better.

Volkswagen have created a platform for such thinking, a really refreshing find given the template that many car brands follow for shifting units (I once stayed in a hotel in the highlands where three seperate camera crews were filming car ads at the same time on pretty much the same winding roads)

I'm sure given the success of this, the brand will look to direct more of their thinking into this 'fun' realm.

Here is an example which would sure make me take the stairs...



hugh de winton

new office = a new place to scribble

I've been trying to work out what the best thing about our new office is and I think I've finally come to a decision - it's the floor to ceiling white board space which dominates the board room. a great place to scribble it all down. here is our first attempt - somewhere in there is the makings of a great strategy.

doing vs saying

Behaviour change is at the core of almost all brand communication briefs. The brand are trying to make something happen, simultaneously inspiring, differentiating and ultimately making a few quid.

I mentioned recently the need the need to do rather than simply say - suggesting that saying should be used to help people discover the doing. If there ain't much doing then the brand needs to go back to the drawing board and asks some big questions about who exactly the are.

On this topic two really interesting talks have broached on this subject from very different angles. On the one hand is Rory Sutherland, head honcho at the IPA who made a brilliantly entertaining talk at the recent TED conference in Oxford promoting the importance of perceived value as a behavioural change mechanism (the diamond Shreddies example feels like it came from deleted Nathan Barley episode).

Katy Lindemann of Naked Communications talked of the need for play at this years Playful event (really wish I could have gone - looked great), it is after all at the root of learning. This approach entails a need to put something out there, but places the thing that is out there as a product or idea in beta, not finished but ready to be improved by the people the brand is trying to connect with through collaboration . The play bit is the learning and the value, combine this with a sense of connection with other people and you hit two key human needs - fun and social interaction.

Make it easy for the idea to spread and the most vital connection between people will happen.

If big organisations did follow this mantra of Katy's we could all be having a lot more fun and reading a lot less 'research' or top down communication that ignores our need to smile and ultimately have fun. Feels so weird that we should forget sometimes what seems so obvious.

Playful 09 - Gamechanging & Change Through Play

View more presentations from Katy Lindemann.

hugh de winton

it happens when no one is watching...

Great interactive outdoor from Amnesty International

speed, honesty and fairness, that's all we ask

Fascinating day so far watching two stories unfold...

1. Jan Moir



Mail journalist has the audacity to speculate that Steven Gately's death was not the result of natural causes, blindly ingnoring the coroners verdict in a bid to push her homophobic agenda. Twitter erupts, facebook follows suit and now messrs Brooker and Greenslade are all onboard writing articles. The pressure is well and truly on all in a matter of hours.

2. TFL



Blogger notices elderly gentleman being manhandled by TFL staff. Blogs about it, gains traction - public appalled. Terrible timing given that Boris put the costs of London transport up yesterday. TFL respond within a matter of hours via You Tube and promise full response asap.

What has struck me has been the speed with which things have happened in both narratives. From initial snowballing to widespread public denunciation can be a matter of minutes given the technology available.

All eyes on the Mail to see what they will do. The last time I checked the Jan Moir hashtag, there was 1014 tweets in last 29 minutes. If this carries at the same speed for the rest of the day, The Mail will have achieved a quite respectable 10,000 negative comments from the public in one day. Even by the this papers standards this is good going.

hugh de winton

Jan Chipchase

Jan Chipchase is an intriguing man. On the one hand he's probably got one of the coolest jobs in the media / tech / strategy as head of research at Nokia design, obviously a very intelligent, intuitive bloke with a unique understanding of how we all operate. On the other hand he specialises in a particular line of stating the bleeding obvious, travelling around the world before uncovering news that phones are as important as keys and wallets. Here he is in 2007 at TED...



So until the other day, I wasn't particularly overwhelmed with his work. This all changed however when I took a good look at the speech he made at the PSFK organised good ideas salon, a meeting for some of todays more interesting thinkers.



Here are the ten key insights Jan shortlisted, look beyond point one (yes, I did indeed cringe) and there is some real goodness in there:

* Keys, money, and a cellphone are the three most important things that people will carry with them. This puts cellphones in the category or items required for survival.
* Universities don’t always turn out the best researchers. Chipchase always ensures that those traveling with him have the mental and emotional capacity to support their ‘book intelligence’ with ’street intelligence’.
* Global brands effect spaces in which those brands have not reached. An example of Afghanistan’s very own Kabul Friend Chicken was given, wherein the same logo and brand colors were used for a restaurant mimicking the fast-food chain.
* There will be a generation of people that will have their entire life translated into data. This data will be fed into services and products that attempt to guarantee their satisfaction and personalized relevancy.
* Limitations spawn innovation
* The cone of uncertainty is also the cone of opportunity
* Interesting does not mean relevant
* History is not absolute
* Everyone has a story to tell, but not always a space to tell it
* Human behavior changes slowly

For me, I think he's really touched on something with 'interesting does not mean relevant'. Ideas are central to good brand communication but it doesn't end here. There's plenty of interesting stuff, relevance in this context equals benefit and therefore value. I'll look to explore this territory over the coming weeks

over and out

Hugh de Winton

RG/A: Technology and Platforms

Great stuff from Bob Greenberg (Chairman, CEO & Chief Creative Officer) & Barry Wacksman (EVP, Chief Growth Officer) of RG/A. It's a little long but well worth it if you've got a spare 37 minutes and 56 seconds.



Two points

1. Technology

Maybe it was just their smooth talking and powers of persuasion but I definitely took out of it that as the digital world develops and grows at the continually alarming pace, it is those agencies that are structured with technologists at the heart of it that will create the most succinct and in tune work.

On another note, it will definitely be easier for these agencies to (for example) move into TV spot advertising and steal work from traditional agencies than it will be for traditional agencies to restructure to develop and create digital platforms. Technology is now at the heart of what we do - agencies need to reflect this.

2. A Role For Campaigns

A second and to me central point to 'the future' is the role of the campaign (I wrote about it here). Their importance is definitely waning but perhaps here we have found an answer as to how they will work within the new continual beta context within which we are now entering. Simon Kemp and I discussed this briefly recently, whilst a platform/idea/or new brand strategy might be a irresistible and an automatic cue to start booking tables at every award ceremony going, the campaign is what pushes this platform and enhances discovery. Without this key step, the brand and agency fail to achieve the potential value. So, in conclusion, let's talk about campaigns as the key to discovery and stepping stones that go on top of the platform, not instead of.

hugh de winton

New Launch - Stylist

Picked up the launch issue of THE STYLIST - the new weekly free magazine handed out on the tube in London from the publishers of SHORTLIST. It will be out every Wednesday complimenting the Shortlist on Thursday and Sport on Friday.

What did I think of it? As with Shortlist, very professional, some excellent in-depth journalism and complimented with stylish big name advertisers.

But there was a nagging doubt. Just as I find it patronising that Shortlist is only handed out to men and targets that audience, the stylist perpetuates the old fashion myths that women just want babies and only work to go shopping. It is a shame in this modern age where we should be defined by music, hobbies, interest not gender or race that a publishing vehicle exists to enhance these stereotypes further.

Granted, there are hundreds, thousands of female only magazines, but would like to think these have moved on from what to cook for your husband or how much time we spend putting our make up on.

So, good female audience for reaching the young, urban London Market, but a bit more inclusive editorial to show the advertisers in a good light.

Online overtakes TV as largest sector

Picture courtesy of the guardian


The big news of today has to be the online overtaking television to become the biggest advertising sector in the UK market. Not only is this news evidence of the ferocious growth of the online industry but it also points to the UK's pioneering position on the worldwide map as the first major economy to see this shift in power happen.

The milestone marks a watershed for the embattled TV industry, the leading ad medium since the 1960's when it so famously became the channel of choice above press for many of the major brands of the day. The resulting years have produced iconic ads, characters and national institutions yet it's dominance has been eroded by the ongoing fragmentation of the media landscape and move into an increasingly mobile and digital world.

Should we really be as surprised as many of the media news sources seem to be? afterall, we've seen these macro trends for sometime now displaying TV viewing in the traditional, family in the living room setting, decline year after year. My feeling is that we shouldn't - it's a largely predictable news story when it's taken into account how many hours individuals spend on the two media channels. It would be wrong however to see this news as 'bad' news for the TV industry - afterall it is simply not the case that we can draw a clear line between what is TV and what is online. If you are to look at a popular TV show now - it will start on one of the two channels but converge across both to where that audience is. it will take in TV channels, interactive websites, twitter feeds, facebook pages, youtube channels, sky+ offerings and additional red button extras.

In this respect advertisers have never had so many options, surely that's not a bad thing, it's just rather daunting and therefore requires very careful planning and expert opinion to ensure marketing budgets reach the right audiences at the right times with the most relevant message.

visualising data

there has been an explosion in the amount of data visualisations coming through at the moment, have to admit I've found almost all of them via people cleverer that me on twitter.

here are a few of my favourites. got me wondering when we're going to start see the cleaner end of these designs being used in the world of brand communication.

three interesting sites to check

flowing prints

geopanch

good.is

hugh de winton

(oh) dear lily

Dan Bull's brilliant reposte to Lily's recent anti-piracy rants.

The content, channel, tone and mash up choice are all the evidence you need as to why Lilly's arguments are so futile in todays environment. As Dan says, it's about readjusting your sails and letting the wind (read audience) take you.

if you google 'lily allen piracy' this video is second up on the organic listings, there you go the power of the web - if only lily understood this (but then again she surely does?)



Hugh de Winton

start with nothing

i think this is a really interesting thread and could be a very positive step for the ad industry if adopted. i previously wrote about it here...and here

Context, Value & The New Marketing Economy

View more documents from Helge Tennø.

courtesy of helge tenno

A great starting point for any activity should be the notion that the communication / idea / campaign / product or service that the brand is trying to communicate is completely valueless until placed in the correct context. When this relevance is achieved, only then is value created.

the key bit here though is that it's no longer exclusively up to the brand to place the brand in the right context, it's a collaboration with the audience. If that initial idea isn't strong enough then ideas suddenly have to get shoehorned into channels and lose credibility

If we always started with this approach, I think we'd see a lot less intrusive or irritating brand communication. The very thing that serves no purpose to anyone and erodes trust in brands across the board.

hugh de winton

alex bogusky on planning

5% - not such a bad stat?

There have been quite a few misleading and confused headlines recently talking about how only 5% of those surveyed would pay for online news. This stat is automatically talked about as a paltry, minute percentage that won't even get near to saving the newspaper industry from the impending doom. My viewpoint is that the future is brighter than that being portrayed should these stats be correct.

3 points:

- It's as if there was an expectation that people would say they were happy to pay for something that they currently get for free. Of course that was never going to be the case. We shouldn't be surprised in the slightest by the stat.

- 5% is actually a reasonable amount and could potentially create a viable model if there is enough extra value / content behind the paywall. 5% of 2 million unique users is 100,000.

- The BBC will always be a player in this debate. It's presence has create a need for innovation from the newspapers, all we've got right now is aggression and bitterness mainly from the father and son combo over at Newscorp.

Hugh de Winton

87 cool things

Paradox of choice

An experience whilst shopping for jeans, inspired Barry Schwartz to explore the concept of 'choice' and it's effect on consumer satisfaction.

In brief, he concludes that consumers are less content with their purchases, and with life in general, due to the plethora of choices that they are forced to make. The implication being, that if you are not happy with your choice, as a consumer, you feel it is your fault. You could have done better - you should have made a better choice. Ironically though, society still lauds 'choice' as a positive thing. People go to stores because they have a large selection, or wide range.

The result of this disconnect, he reports, is that the likelihood of people to participate in / act on something is directly proportional to the number of decisions that they have to make in order to take part, whether it be buying a product or opting in to a service. The more choice, the less the response.

From an action point of view, does this mean that a product has to give the impression of giving consumer choice, but in actual fact, make the decision for them? If this is the case, then it suggests that branding is as important as ever. Also, any assistance in store is invaluable, supporting the strong role that BTL still has.

Although a consumer might think they appreciate the full range of sauces in the supermarket, they're only ever going to leave with Heinz Ketchup.

Ed

digital to physical

You can probably tell by now that I'm a fan of blogs. I read a load of them, write my own and seem to find myself evangelising about them during times when I really should be doing other stuff. It's an online platform but my thoughts exist across every platform, there feels as if there is some of this stuff (well a few bits) that deserve ink and paper and a greater sense of permanance.

If twitter is a constant stream of babble, self promotion and the occasional nugget and the blog is the work in progress, inviting the wider audience to collaborate and improve, the book represents an invite into the physical finite world of stability and permanance. This move from the digital to physical creates value, it's the LP compared to the MP3. For aslong as we talk digital we need to remember the spark that can be created when these same ideas can be transported into the physical world.

As our world becomes increasingly digital, this is an area with ever increasing potential. As the cloud fills up and our shelves empty I think there will be a nostalgia for the days of piles of records, books and other stuff that seemed to define you.

Here are a few sites / stories / ideas on the subject

- Blurb.com - site allowing bloggers to transform their hard work into a beautiful looking book

- top blog it's nice that turns blog into mag

- Springwise spots a trend to create personalised magazines

Hugh de Winton

Nice try but it aint dying, it's changing

I posted recently about all this apocolyptic chat going on amongst those willing on the death of 'advertising'.

It might make a good headline and fair enough who doesn't want to have a rant about the amount of bad advertising out there but announcing the imminent extinction of something like this is ridiculously far fetched.

Now I know this article from jeff Goodby is in Ad Age but take the time to read and digest it. We just all need to calm down a bit and work out what's important.

Goodby has written this as a response to Garfields 'Chaos Scenario' - well worth a read. In fact, Garfield reminds me of some of the characters featured in Jon Ronson's wonderful book 'them'

I guess the theme is adworld isn't dying, it's changing and most importantly this change has made advertising a very exciting place to be for the very large majority of people who work somewhere within it.

Hugh de Winton

Murdoch's plan doesn't come together

Not long after Murdoch announced his intentions to charge for content, his evening freesheet, The London Paper, closes.

Despite maintaining a regular circulation of half a million, the afternoon free newspaper was making considerable losses of around £16million year after year and the decision to close was announced yesterday.

High operating costs and a competitive marketplace have made survival difficult for the London Paper and London Lite, and are quoted as the reason for the closure, although speculation is that this is first blood from Murdoch’s ambitious scheme to charge for all content across the News International portfolio.

Furthermore, it looks likely that Murdoch will be flexing his considerable media muscles to persuade other titles to follow suit, to fireproof his controversial move. The real stumbling block though, will be the BBC.

Whilst this does not signal the end of free media and content, it does illustrate the fact that content providers are going to have to work hard to invent more revenue channels, without ruining the reader’s experience.

Chris Anderson, author of ‘Free’ and editor in chief of Wired magazine, talks about this three-party system. In this he notes that ‘a third party pays to participate in a market created by a free exchange between the first two parties.’ In essence, the London Paper is not selling papers to readers, but readers to advertisers.

The issue is that they are not generating enough revenue through selling traditional advertising space. Rather than ditch the brand, they should be looking at other non-traditional ways to fund the enterprise.

Ed

ideas, campaigns and all that

There is nothing wrong with the big idea, it gives brand communication clarity, coherence and if all goes well a consistent and unique brand identity. Mark Earls recently argued it's declining in importance as markets and brand communication moves more towards two way conversations, why take the risk on one key insight when we can create content and push numerous ideas and distribute them at a very low cost, he said. We'll soon see what people react to and what resonates - from this we can develop phase two developing a conversation based on the learnings, all the time building relationships.

My thoughts on the matter focus more on the concept of a campaign - the very word seems to indicate a start and end date, a wrap party and a board meeting where everyone is held to account and dealt with accordingly. This is not how the rest of the world operates. People have identities, they morph, get influenced and have idiosyncrasies which we can choose to love or hate. People now expect their brands to operate in much the same way, if a brand invites you to participate, it should not be from date x to date y but instead be seen as a connection that will developed and elevated.

The idea is the most important thing but for me, of almost equal importance is the approach the brand takes to world of individuals it is about to communicate with. Do not put an end date on it, be ready to redevelop that idea having listened to what they're saying, create varieties on it. Show that you've moved beyond 'campaigns' and understand they couldn't care less which campaign you're currently working on. Light fires but only do so if you're prepared to elongate the conversation and understand it's the start of something that might not have a foreseeable end date.

Hugh de Winton

strategy explained

it's nice when you come to the end of a long day and you find a quote that just nails it...

"The Japanese don’t use the term “strategy” to describe a crisp business definition or competitive master plan. They think more in terms of “strategic accommodation,” or “adaptive persistence,” underscoring their belief that corporate direction evolves from an incremental adjustment to unfolding events. Rarely, in their view, does one leader (or a strategic planning group) produce a bold strategy that guides a firm unerringly. Far more frequently, the input is from below. It is this ability of an organisation to move information and ideas from the bottom to the top and back again in continuous dialogue that the Japanese value above all things. As this dialogue is pursued, what in hindsight may be “strategy” evolves. In sum, “strategy” is defined as “all the things necessary for the successful functioning of organisation as an adaptive mechanism."

.......Richard T. Pascale (1984). “Perspectives on Strategy: The Real Story Behind Honda’s Success," California Management Review

exteme sports society

we're loving the new viral from microsoft, you really have to do a double take to realise it's the result of some very clever post production.

Megawoosh
by jeffdu74

Media Salesperson of the Quarter, Q2 2009 - Mind The Curb

Anthony,Ry and Paul from Curb

Hugh from AdConnection presenting Anthony with his prize.

AdConnection says about Curb:
Curb have been great at all stages of the campaign. From initial planning to implementation, there has been transparency, speed and attention to detail. This was all massively important considering it was our first foray into the world of street stencils. Thanks to Anthony and all the team.

Curb says about AdConnection:
We were thrilled to be able to work with AdConnection and wagamama on their first ever clean advertising campaign. The flexibility and highly targeted nature of the media meant that we were able to directly target high footfall areas around the specific locations and as a direct result of the campaign we have planted 120 trees in the developing world."

RIP John Hughes

Freeloading should be encouraged.

'freeloading' is often used to describe someone getting and using something for free. When applied to media, brand communication or advertising in some form the definition is often skewed and misused - usually put in a negative, head shaking context at the lack of money being exchanged.

Going along to an event for free, sampling free music, spending 15 minutes freely viewing something is not 'freeloading'. That content creator is winning the battle in the attention economy, that is, as long as they can work out how to monetise this attention they earnt further down the line.

Participation is the first step, not the horrible vagueness of 'awareness'

'freeloading' is an archaic and outdated term for the days of top down, sales at all costs brand communication.

we're now in a time where we should be actively encouraging freeloading within the right parameters.

digital stuff

new cohen brothers!!!!

Censorship of the web

Following a censorship strategy means creating increased hype around otherwise mostly average content. This happened recently when Nike deleted a rather unremarkable clip of a non nike endorsed player humiliating one of their own, Lebron James. If left up it probably would have had a limited shelflife, once Nike deleted it - this immediately gave the impression that the brand thought it was a big deal and in turn created a herd like stampede to track down the clip.

here it is - all a bit average if you ask me.



and some reaction



The Phonographic industry proved once again to be as archaic an organisation as we all thought recently by deleting one of calvin harris's official videos. This then prompted a twittering tirade from Harris and a number of news organisation reigniting the debate around piracy and the phonographics rather misdirected attempts at stalling it.

It would be a real shame if you tube as an outlet for creativity was thwarted by a few people employed to return us to the years before the music industry changed forever. If they do succeed we'll probably be seeing less of this kind of genius (below) being passed into our inboxes

breaking news...Augmented reality

really feels like augmented reality has taken a big step forward to the front of the stage over the last 10 days with a number of bloggers and campaigns giving it it's well deserved moment in the spotlight.

Here are a few key articles

Let's hope this doesn't jinx it - NMA gets all excited

Trans media mogul Faris Yakob looks at the future potential

BMW / Dare Digital win the IAB's campaign of the month with their rather marvellous Z4 paintbrush

identiyfing value

I'm getting the feeling that Mark Zuckerburg is taking lessons in leadership from Gordon Brown. The lack of consumer understanding has risen more than once as have the embarrasing u-turns on privacy policies.

Here they go for another one...but the facebook users have started cut and pasting this message into their status boxes urging others to do the same. I've seen at least twenty of my friends do it in the last couple of days.

Online Display Advertising

it has long been argued that display advertising is less effective than search. whilst this can't be denied - the facts are there to be compared - the effect of online display is nonetheless an important element of the media mix.

we generally use search as a support medium for TV, print or radio advertising, and we can measure the effect of this activity with overall site analytics - particularly if we are testing a regional campaign.

we have recently run a TV campaign for a client in the north west and have seen web visits increase by over 200% since the campaign went live. we have also seen brand related search terms increase and therefore the cpc's have lowered as a result by up to 30%.

can online display have a similar effect? there have been very few studies undertaken on this subject, and it's an area that we're looking at researching, but display is a vital ingredient in the media mix. not only does it drive brand awareness, but it also works with search to deliver results.

there are few mediums that have the reach of the internet, and being able to buy millions of quality impressions at low cpm's is surely an advantage especially when you compare to tv costs of buying premium programming.

the targeting technologies involved with many of the networks are also now very sophisticated, so it's important that the industry understands the impact of online display which we're able to track in a lot more depth than we can with, say TV advertising.

getting view based conversion data (or conversions from people that have seen the display activity) demonstrates how people are using the web - click based conversions are less prevalent these days and some London agencies are starting to dismiss view based conversions as part of their CPA deals.

cpa deals are no longer what they were a year or two ago, working to effective cpa's are a better way of working. getting our clients to understand this and the fact that view based conversions are important and does demonstrate the effectiveness of online display.

it's our job to educate our clients on this effectiveness and having online display support tv or radio campaigns is vitally important as it provides another gateway to clients' sites.

the effectiveness of search won't be questioned for sometime in the same way that online display has been, but used in the right way and in line with other media, it can be an extremely powerful tool that delivers results.

Sonics are ace

I was walking past the Golden Arches today and I heard somone whistle McDonalds sonic logo and I whistled it back without even thinking. Just goes to show how important sound and inparticular, melody is when it comes to getting a message remembered. Now that's viral. Putting ideas and stories to music has long been recognised as an effective method of passing oral tradition.



At the weekend I am going to stand near a McDonalds whistling the sonic, and see how many people whistle it back, or turn around and head in!

Spotify: something changed

something weird has happened, i've gone from spotify evangelist / advocate / the bloke who won't shut up to spotify part owner. What I mean by this is that somewhere in the last couple of days of listening, the ads have really started to grate, music as free has lost it's excitement and now feels like the norm. I guess this is how the brand monetise things but I'm not giving in that easily, afterall with roots in record collecting I still believe in the ownership of music as a wonderful thing.

the reason I say part owner is that I feel that because i've travelled up and down the long tail searching, compiling, sharing that when some punk nips in with 'hi i'm adam from spotify' it no longer feels right but spotify stepping into my personal space.

Is this something that's happening to other users? spotify seems to have now reached the critical mass, what are the next steps? will users get annoyed enough to pay for premium? hard to tell - for me it depends on their previous behavior. It's very hard to sign up for premium if you've spent years of your life trawling through dusty record shops looking for that elusive sonar kollectiv 12"

the beginning, not the end

love this idea that the release of a creative project into the public domain is not the end of the creative period but merely an invitation to develop it further, remix and in will.i.am's words 'flip it.

excalty how they're going to do this is TBC but it will surely excite and engage their most serious fans to a level that we haven't really seen yet in mainstream music.

the whole thing would have Beardsley wriggling uncomfortably in his grave...

1 million dollars

The medias take on illegal downloading seems to me completely ignore any questions around elasticity of demand or the wider positive effects of an individual downloading for free (somehow) a bands track. Thank god for people like Ben Goldacre to set the record straight on whats really going on.

It's simply not the case that when a person downloads a tune illegally they are making the statement 'this is a tune that I would pay x for'. They are instead simply saying 'this is a tune I'd like to download for free', no question has been asked about their preference at a higher price. Therefore when the Sun bounds a figure around of £120 billion, it might sound impressive but it's in no way correct.

The reasons why we're even here debating it right now are two fold

- the music industrys inability to understand consumers behaviours and motivations due to their reluctance to give up on the cd as cash cow/tour as promotion for cd business model
- the speed with which all things digital have changed the world we live in

Footnote - yesterday was mostly spent compiling and sharing spotify playlists, all made possible by invention and a willingness for some labels out there to understand the new music industry business model. I might even download the rhythm and sound album tonight via itunes.

extra footnote - think it's going to have to vinyl - need the bottom end

Getting closer

Mark Herd's excellent article on how things spread got me thinking, if you combined Faris Yacobs 'talent imitates, genius steals' mantra, Charles Leadbetter's 'you are what you share' and Herd's 'pull not push' then we're getting a lot closer to understanding what spreads, what doesn't and how.

The three schools of thought overlap and complement each other well, afterall we can't possibly say that ALL dissemination of ideas or content is down to copying (Herd). There are other factors at play, most notably the constant quest for personal identity (leadbetter) through sharing and communication. A really interesting case study for all of this is the fixed gear communinity who have taken recominant culture to a new level. Just check out the 350 pages of bike porn here. what started out as functionality and a search for identity within the bike world is now a fully fledged creative movement with numerous brands trying to get their dirty paws on it (anyone noticed how vans have checked tack recently?)

Heads in the sand

journalists seem to think they're exempt from the ongoing debate over how newspapers are going to reverse their fortunes. Afterall, no journalist should have to let those toxic commercial thoughts even cross their mind during the writing process.

Well those with their heads in the sand waiting for the big hitters to come up with a solution are missing a trick.

Building up yourself as a brand through the various web 2.0 opportunities could create the kind of model that papers have to look at as we see the gradual unbundling of media. If I now look at the toolbar across the top of my screen, it features ten of my favourite writers and two newspapers. If I was forced to pay, it would be a genuinely hard decision as to who I'd cut off the list. These individuals have gained a position of trust and have been promoted in my own little world to become my filters on business, media, culture, music etc etc. There is a value here which could be expolred further.

Simon Cowell I salute You

Could simon cowell be the worlds most astute comms planner?

He manages a piece of content that is divisible into a number of smaller parts that on their own stand up as entertaining, compelling and opinion forming to all those who see them. They are easy to spread and even easier to bring up in conversation.

The really clever bit however is Simon, unkowingly has created a transmedia media campaign of epic proportions.

...Heard about Susan Boyle? google it, check it out - decide you don't like it...oh but whats that? some topman replica attempting Bill Withers 'aint no sunshine' with surprising aplomb. But is it as good as the original? lets check it out...wow, he's amazing. i need more bill withers, live album from 1972 carnegie hall!!! i need it now, click, 2 minutes later I'm there in 1972 at carnegie hall listening to Bill telling a story about his grandma's hands. oh and I've just spent 7.99 without really knowing it - caught in the impulsive moment that only a certain type of thing can give you, usually music. (you can kind of see why Plato was so worried about it in the republic)

But how is the whole thing being monetised? well we all know about this bit...that's when we've got to duck for cover or leave the country as the leading lights of the programme are paraded up and down the country and squeezed for every last cent.

I salute you simon.

No one is going to die

Talk of the 'death' of newspapers is so frustrating. It's sensationalist, ridiculous and most importantly untrue.

What happens to really make me want to bang my head against the exposed brick work of the office however is that this forecast seems to point to the end user being delivered a worse, less convenient experience than they've enjoyed for the last x amount of years.

News is news, it is not a format but the content that goes onto the format. content will always live as long as people communicate, interact and generally do things like claim 22k for dry rot in a house for which they don't even know the post code.

consumers are shaping the way news is delivered based on their behaviour and consumption habits, where we see one decline that we might feel quite nostalgic about, over the hill is a truly exciting new era. we're lucky in that we can have both right now, the future is in our collective hands - if we want to finger through an in depth article in a well presented magazine, there will be a potential revenue source for a publisher and the free market will do the rest. If we don't want to and would rather go digital to find that same piece then an opportunity appears out of nowhere online.

Joel Johnson documents this really well, just check the comments below to understand why a magazine is different to a website.

description of an ad...

Looking back, it was all simple pre digital/mobile/web 2.0. An ad was a certain format, shape and description - for both the creative, planner and consumer the ground was well trodden and each part of the process knew their role within proceedings - consumers paid attention or didn't, the advertiser would then go back to the drawing board and talk it all over.

How does this compare to now? well planners and creatives are just about keeping up with the options available yet I doubt the consumer is, does your average man on the street understand behavioural targeting, buzz marketing or why they've been offered that quite cool application for free?

Does it really matter? not necessarily yet there is one danger that threatens to damage the already cynical consumer - should a consumer engage with content to quite an extensive level it is very important that they know the creators and intentions behind it. without this advertising industry risks damaging further it's reputation with the brand wary individual. We're in a very exciting time of brand engagement right now yet some self regulation is surely needed to ensure that our audiences retain the view that advertising can be fun, compelling and of interest to their needs and objectives. It only takes one or two examples of deceit or dishonesty to contaminate the ad industry's image as a creator of value in peoples lives.