If you attend any conference or workshop on digital best practice you will most certainly hear a session on privacy and permission. I can almost guarantee that you will hear the oft-mentioned “mobile is different because it’s a personal device” statement. The inference being that because mobile is the nucleus of our personal lives that marketing through it is treacherous and fraught with difficulties that are unique to mobile. I challenge this. I believe that any device that is used to connect to a digital network be it the web, mobile or IPTV is, or will increasingly become, a personal communication tool. Let me give you an example.
We feel comfortable as marketers delivering non-permission based display advertising to consumers via the web. Yet for years young people have used chat forums, gaming clans, Instant Messaging and, increasingly in the UK, social networking sites such as MySpace to exchange personal information with their friends – and you will find non-permission based display advertising in many of these sites. Sure some sites will state that they have a free ad-supported model and a subscription model and users are ‘soft opting’ if they chose the free option. But the default is free and site owners know it is the option taken by 99% of the youth market so this argument is questionable.
We also feel comfortable delivering opt-in email marketing yet email for the adult population (35+) is still the most popular way to share personal information over the internet.
So let’s get the mobile position in perspective. Mobile is just another device that connects consumers to their digital social network. Common sense must prevail and mobile should not be treated any differently to any other medium that consumers use personally. I use physical public spaces – high streets, city centers, shopping arcades - to communicate with my friends but this doesn’t stop non-opt in ambient advertising. Why should virtual public spaces be treated differently?
The consumer ‘advertising contract’ on mobile will take on many forms just as above- the-line does today. We will see non-opt in display, we will see contextual and we will continue to see permission based SMS campaigns for some time to come. But what will distinguish ads that work from ads hat don’t will be incisive creative ideas that consumers want to engage with. And the consumer advertising contract? Let’s use our common sense and stop singling out mobile for special treatment.
We feel comfortable as marketers delivering non-permission based display advertising to consumers via the web. Yet for years young people have used chat forums, gaming clans, Instant Messaging and, increasingly in the UK, social networking sites such as MySpace to exchange personal information with their friends – and you will find non-permission based display advertising in many of these sites. Sure some sites will state that they have a free ad-supported model and a subscription model and users are ‘soft opting’ if they chose the free option. But the default is free and site owners know it is the option taken by 99% of the youth market so this argument is questionable.
We also feel comfortable delivering opt-in email marketing yet email for the adult population (35+) is still the most popular way to share personal information over the internet.
So let’s get the mobile position in perspective. Mobile is just another device that connects consumers to their digital social network. Common sense must prevail and mobile should not be treated any differently to any other medium that consumers use personally. I use physical public spaces – high streets, city centers, shopping arcades - to communicate with my friends but this doesn’t stop non-opt in ambient advertising. Why should virtual public spaces be treated differently?
The consumer ‘advertising contract’ on mobile will take on many forms just as above- the-line does today. We will see non-opt in display, we will see contextual and we will continue to see permission based SMS campaigns for some time to come. But what will distinguish ads that work from ads hat don’t will be incisive creative ideas that consumers want to engage with. And the consumer advertising contract? Let’s use our common sense and stop singling out mobile for special treatment.
03/03: Advertising 2.0
I came across a great whitepaper today entitled Advertising 2.0 that discusses the impact of emerging mobile and web consumer communities on brands. Advertising 2.0 of course is a pun on Web 2.0, the label given to a group of technologies that facilitate social connections and exchange rather than the one-way 'top-down' publishing model of Web 1.0.
For those that don't have time to read the whitepaper I would like to paraphrase only one paragraph that neatly summarises its main thrust:
"Advertising has long been based partially on something called information-asymmetry. The company knows more than the consumer, and uses this information to seduce a target group...... but information asymmetries have been wounded by today’s connecting technologies.In fact, one might say that hyper connected individuals are less likely to be influenced by advertising. Also, hyper connectivity leaves no room for mistakes, nor does it allow advertising to lie or to omit the truth. Therefore, advertising will need to adapt and learn to communicate with consumers in a fair, transparent way. Consumers now have access to information they didn’t have access to before, and they will use it to judge advertising campaigns, and invalidate them whenever possible."
We know that brand performance relies on solid business basics, a great brand experience, clear positioning, and leadership in its competitive set. Get these right and the hyper connected communities Paul points to should discuss your brand positively and spread that magic word-of-mouth dust all over the web. But sometimes you don't get all of these factors right or uncontrollable external influences conspire to weaken your brands market share. This is where advertising plays its role. Research since the early 1970's has shown consistently that the strongest, most effective ads are those that deliver strong persuasive news with a big impactful creative that elicits what Millward Brown calls 'brand memorability'. I realise that today the best way to do this remains the 30-second TV spot, and all of the research points to this. But as Paul has eloquently demonstrated brands will need to learn how to influence consumers emotionally in a micro-fragmented media landscape - leave it too late and your competitors may own the hearts and minds of the thousands of micro consumer segments that will flourish in the fast approaching media democracy of Web 2.0.
For those that don't have time to read the whitepaper I would like to paraphrase only one paragraph that neatly summarises its main thrust:
"Advertising has long been based partially on something called information-asymmetry. The company knows more than the consumer, and uses this information to seduce a target group...... but information asymmetries have been wounded by today’s connecting technologies.In fact, one might say that hyper connected individuals are less likely to be influenced by advertising. Also, hyper connectivity leaves no room for mistakes, nor does it allow advertising to lie or to omit the truth. Therefore, advertising will need to adapt and learn to communicate with consumers in a fair, transparent way. Consumers now have access to information they didn’t have access to before, and they will use it to judge advertising campaigns, and invalidate them whenever possible."
We know that brand performance relies on solid business basics, a great brand experience, clear positioning, and leadership in its competitive set. Get these right and the hyper connected communities Paul points to should discuss your brand positively and spread that magic word-of-mouth dust all over the web. But sometimes you don't get all of these factors right or uncontrollable external influences conspire to weaken your brands market share. This is where advertising plays its role. Research since the early 1970's has shown consistently that the strongest, most effective ads are those that deliver strong persuasive news with a big impactful creative that elicits what Millward Brown calls 'brand memorability'. I realise that today the best way to do this remains the 30-second TV spot, and all of the research points to this. But as Paul has eloquently demonstrated brands will need to learn how to influence consumers emotionally in a micro-fragmented media landscape - leave it too late and your competitors may own the hearts and minds of the thousands of micro consumer segments that will flourish in the fast approaching media democracy of Web 2.0.
Sidebar
- Eat Up
