Digital Activism trumps Depression

Digital activism is a ‘nice’ phrase to refer to activists, and those who wish to fight "tyranny and oppression" (Heymont  1982), being able to do so, on a much more united and grater scale since the creation of web2.0.

However digital activism allows for individuals who may have previously not been interested in a topic/issue enough to actually get up and actively protest or participate in a situations resolution, now can, and do, with the click of a button or the completion of a survey. Which to some, such as Morozov (2011), would condescendingly refer to as ‘slacktivism’ in the book: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom: The Net Delusion.

However in my opinion whether it’s via a click of a button on Facebook or by energising an entire wave of digital activists to click on the button, if the internet can allow someone’s voice to be heard that previously couldn’t, it is a step toward fighting for something that we believe in, something that in this country is becoming increasingly scarce (Drew 2011). However this is not the case in Jordan. “The Jordanian Youth Movement used Facebook to organize the protest camp” (Bird 2011) prior the Government inflicted violence occurred. "Internet contributes to a form of 'ironic activism,' meaning that the practices that underlie certain forms of Internet-enabled NGO activity also reproduce neoliberal, market-driven approaches to dealing with social problems" (Wilson and Hayhurst  2009), that without the right direction, results in negative consequences.

Many suggest that the Tuition Fee Student protests in London (2010) wouldn’t have become as violent, if digital activism on social networking sites wasn’t occurring. This form of digital activism ‘gone wrong’ was named the “Riot Network”, prompting over 26,000 students to sign up to a Facebook page calling for a coordinated walk-out. It also enabled University students to coordinate and discuss police movements and direct anger toward police (Camber  et al 2010).  

The internet is utilised because of its position as the most frequently used interactive media platform, ranked "as the most-used channel at work and second after television at home, according to OPA's 'A Day in the Life: An Ethnographic Study of Media Consumption'" (Wood 2006). It is used by multiple target audiences. Its infrastructure can support numerous participants and situations, and the internet’s reach can potentially be global. But with digital activism, it isn’t necessarily an explicit choice to use the internet, it, in many situations, grows ‘naturally’ or ‘organically’ (Brodock 2010).

“Facebook and Twitter are the two most high profile social media tools being used for digital activism” (MacManus 2011) and are perfect examples of how digital activism can grow organically. I suggest this because Facebook allows people to interact with others from across the globe who find topics of interest they have in common, both positive and negative. If people from all over the world have a problem with something and they all unite on Facebook, and start talking about the issue, it provides them with a circumstance.

From this circumstance all of the people, from all over the world, will discuss what it is they think should be done about the negative issue they all have in common, and whether or not to take action, deciphering the goals they wish to achieve e.g. the Jordan loyalists stated on Facebook that: “We will not move an inch from here until our demands are met” (al-Khawaldeh 2011).

This is where it becomes active!

The group would then try and think of a strategy to implement and attempt to achieve their goals whilst looking at the big picture. In order for anyone to be able to achieve anything globally, nationally or locally they must implement tactics that will insight emphasis and conviction, draw in participants and unite them.

Most issues that arise when referring to digital activism are looking for change, whether it’s political, social or religious change. However it’s commonly suggested that “most digital activism campaigns are failures” (Joyce 2011) which explains why many people have “grown increasingly sceptical of numerous digital activism campaigns that attempt to change the world through Facebook and Twitter” (Morozov 2009), “In fact, the phrase “digital activism” is not even the consensus term for the use of digital technology in campaigning” as stated by Mary Joyce (2010) in her book: Digital Activism Decoded: The New Mechanics of Change.

And with the term digital activism being thrown around so lightly and only anecdotes and case studies being provided, how are we supposed to know what is successful. How are we as consumers supposed to know what is correct and incorrect in relation to an appropriate framework for a digital activist campaign, let alone reasons to be digitally active?

“Since most digital activism campaigns are bound to suffer from the problem of diffusion of responsibility” (Morozov 2009) how can we see through facts and figures and get to the SMART goals that were originally set by the majority consensus?

Well when looking at how all of this can effect or be applied to marketing communications, it could be suggested that the Smirnoff Nightlife Exchange project was a form of digital activism. I suggest this because it was a digitally active campaign that was looking to impact on the social lives of club goers across the globe. It used the social networking platform Facebook which allowed people from all over the world to campaign for their country, and county, to experience another cultures nightlife. I myself participated in the campaign, and together with thousands of others, have secured the oppertunity to have Miami’s nightlife come to Southampton, my home town.

So is it safe to say that ‘Digital activism’ no longer has to be as depressing as it is described e.g. being used to over through tyrants and dictators. Well I do hope not. What do you think?

Cookies don’t crumble, they collect!

On watchdog the other night many consumers were appalled when watchdog, “using the Freedom of Information Act,... discovered that the DVLA sold nearly 1.1 million names and addresses to private parking companies last year” (Rizi 2011). Well if they think that is bad they do not want to know what is going on whilst they are online!

Internet Privacy isn’t real. If internet privacy was real Cookies wouldn’t exist, Digital Advertising Agencies wouldn’t exist, many shops and organisations that started online wouldn’t exist e.g. Amazon.co.uk.

I know it all sounds a bit dramatic, but it’s true. The only way that you can buy something online, or sometimes even browse a website, being “tricked into giving away our personal information” (ScienceDaily 2009)... So no privacy there. The only way advertising can make money online is if they know where someone is and how frequently their advert is being seen or clicked on e.g. (CPC) Cost per Click or Cookies. In all fairness advertising is all over the internet, so no privacy there either.  

This type of information is being mined as you read this blog, information that you could only make private if you kept web browsing as a thought. However we, as a race, seem to find it necessary to send, almost vomit, all manner of information into the internet constantly via numerous different communication platforms such as: Blogger, Facebook, Flicker, Foursquare, LinkedIn, My Space, Newsgrounds, Twitter, YouTube etc.

The information that we are voluntarily giving away is very private and in some cases, as seen in the video below, unwarranted and very personal. Many consumers seem to be blissfully unaware of exactly how and what happens to their information once enter is pushed, the mouse is clicked or a purchase is made and that you do not have to upload something onto YouTube inorder for someone else to be able to view it.

As you can see in the video, consumers know that they are sharing personal consumer information with the world on a site such as YouTube, in this case about a passion for the, World of Warcraft PC Game, another online platform that requires a lot of personal information being ‘given’ to the internet post purchase but prior to actually being able to play the game e.g. Credit card details, address etc. And with there being over “12,000,000” (Mrs.katie evans 2010) players, that is a lot of private information being whimsically exchanged for entertainment.

A massive “41% of consumers are unaware of any of the different types of cookies” such as 1st Party, 3rd Party, Flash / Local Storage and only “20% delete or clear their browser’s cookies once a month or less” (Butner 2011). Consumers are not aware of the fact “they are being tracked” (Bilstad and Enright 2011) or ‘stalked’ from webpage to webpage, every word on Facebook analysed by companies such as Radian6 who’s technology culls “brand mentions from data streams including public Facebook user status updates, Page updates and wall posts” (Constine 2011), and every purchase on every website quantified and recorded by cookies, companies and companies with cookies, all explained perfectly by the video below.

However as an Advertising practitioner the groundbreaking technical advances that I have been speaking about above as scary privacy invaders are going to make my job in the future a lot easier. Data mining for advertisers is one of the most rapidly prominent methods of targeting and profiling consumers.

Privacy for advertisers and consumers is in fact, although blatantly a well hidden one, a bad thing when it comes to data mining. Advertisers need information from consumers to be able to do their jobs with as much precision and insight as possible (Perner 2010). Advertisers want companies, such as PayPal, to have consumer’s private information, if it will facilitate the ease of the advertised products purchase. Advertisers want to know where consumers are and if they are single or not so that they can advertise products accordingly.

It could also be suggested that we as Advertisers are helping the consumer by ensuring that they are having a pleasant time on the internet, in the sense that they don’t have to look very hard for something they like, or if they go back to a website looking for a product, it shouldn’t be too far away, we even go as far as suggesting other ‘wonderful’ products that a consumer might like, “producing special content targeted to specific users” (Bilstad and Enright 2011). It sounds brilliant to me.

Privacy may be an issue, but if privacy was ‘in’, it would be an injury to all marketing communications, not just Advertising. But as we all know Facebook founder, Mark Zuckerburg suggests privacy is no longer a social norm. What do you think?

SEO isn’t ever going to go!

Search Engine Optimisation (SEO) is a brilliant and very useful tool for the majority of organisations. It is the process whereby an organisation such as SEO Consult outlines a strategy that will give a company “prominence for key terms on search engines such as Google, Yahoo! and Bing, whilst being transparent enough to accommodate” the organisations individual voice.

However Adwords is a direct route to Google, the “most popular search engine in the world”

(Laycock) and is therefore the most useful tool for getting your organisation into the eyes of the consumer. According to McGaffin, Adwords and SEO aren’t all that organisations need to do to have their organisation or brand name readily accessible to a consumer and that “many companies have an under-used resource that could generate hundreds if not thousands of quality links”. McGaffin goes on to suggest that this resource was “public relations”. And in a sense, however much I may wish to deny it as a loyal advertising practitioner, he is right. Yes you do need SEO, but without anything to be optimised what’s the point?

Organisations can pay for PPC, CPM, as well as the “site-targeted advertising for text, banner, and rich-media ads” (Gaffer), but without a ‘digital buzz’ surrounding your product/orgnisation/brand, without relationships between organisations (B2B) which I touch upon in my blog B2B Mobile Marketing – What’s next?, and more importantly within the digital age, without relationships with consumers (B2C) that are interested in, or have a lifestyle (according to cookies) that would accommodate similar products, you are only scratching the surface of the digital landscape.

It’s all very well suggesting that ensuring a websites content allows for Adwords to optimise the most relevant information, however if there is no substantial information or ‘buzz’ consumers will not be able to obtain the information which they require to truly gain a feel for a brand and engage in a the decision making process (DMP) as suggested by Jeffrey M. Stibel, Brown University.

I think that SEO is brilliant. However all components of digital availability mentioned above must work in conjunction... an amalgamation of various digital strategies, including social networking, that allow for truly ‘organic’ growth of information that consumers are able to find easily without being tied up into the frustrating mess that is search engine spamming or Spamdexing (Eaxbytes). An annoyance to all consumers, don’t you think?

Brands are everywhere: Product Placement

. 

Definitions of Product Placement

·         BusinessDictionary.com: Product placement is “an advertising technique used by companies to subtly promote their products through a non-traditional advertising technique, usually through appearances in film, television, or other media”.

·         Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary: Product placement is “when a company advertises a product by supplying it for use in films or television programs”.

·         MediaDictionary.com: Product placement is “a form of marketing in which a branded product is prominently featured in something such as a film or television show.”

·         Ofcom: “Product placement is when a company pays a TV channel or a program-maker to include its products or brands in a program”.

Product Placement (PP) is something that I have been interested, concerned and intrigued with for an extensive period of time, prior to my arrival at university, and long before the Nestlé SA's Dolce Gusto coffee maker appeared on ITV PLC's "This Morning'" television show! Which you can see in the video below, humorously pointed out by The Telegraph.

TV product placement makes a typically English debut

In this example it is clear that BusinessDictionary.com has got it correct in suggesting that PP is the subtle promotion of products which was so slight that it has been suggested by Barnett, The Telegraphs Digital Media Editor, that the “Marketing chiefs at Nescafe surely will be praying that This Morning’s producers encourage their presenters to cast even a cursory glance at the white Dolce Gusto”.

I believe that this particularly subtle example of PP in UK television was done in order to coax the masses of the United Kingdom into believing that this is how product placement will continue to be, and that it will not become garish and blatant, thus lulling them into a false sense of advertising security. But that is just what I am thinking, how about you?

Well I’m afraid, and sorry to be the first advertising practitioner to cast the first stone, but if we continue along the trail of thought that the UK is always 2 years behind the USA and that “Britain and America governments read from the same page” (Apollo) then it is only going to be 2 years until the clip you see below, becomes a regular occurrence in Coronation Street, Hollyoaks or any other of your favorite TV programs, providing that they abide by Ofcoms PP rules and regulations.

And going back to the comment that British and American governments read from the same page – I do hope not because you can see what page the American government is reading from... One that seemingly wanted the president of the Unite States of American (at the time George Bush) to do a bit of product placement for Dell.

PP is also happening in films that are aimed at the children of the UK. I only mention this because Ofcom have made it seem as if the new legislation in the UK isn’t going to harm or reach children e.g. “Products cannot be placed in… children’s programmes”.

But what is the point in this legislation if PP is already occurring in one of the most exciting and current blockbusters, that is ultimately aimed at children e.g. Transformers.

Transformers has been ‘transformed’ (pardon the pun) into a vehicle for PP. The PP was so frequent and obvious within this film that it has even been suggested that Transformers was “Not a film” but a “commercial!” for numerous different brands (vdrinker08). See if you can notice them (leave a comment and see if you noticed them all).

So taking Transformers as a foundation example, isn’t Columbia Pictures blockbuster ‘the social network’ an entire film dedicated to the product placement of Facebook? Is it not completely and utterly advertising the pants out of the Facebook brand?

From the front cover, the name of the film, and the entire storyline, the social network is definitely “a form of marketing in which a branded product is prominently featured in something such as a film” (MediaDictionary.com) even if it is indirect, thus making it an example of PP that  “will cost Mark Zuckerberg more than $100M” (Tyrrell).

PP is even being used for techniques of digital communication and digital advertising as you will be able to see in my previous blog ‘QR Codes to the Rescue!’ and the QR Codes CSI moment.

If PP is so common and has been seeping and peeping into our everyday lives, for a long period of time, and generally goes unnoticed, and more often than not unchallenged, why is it that we are uncomfortable for PP to occur during our (DDI)‘Daily Digital Interactions’?

Well trust me (or don’t) if people knew the truth they would be twice as more ‘uncomfortable’ with Digital PP. So I thought I might assist with that. Sorry!

Did you know that companies such as Marathon Ventures “can place a product, virtually any size, in almost any location”, they “could place one product in a first-run telecast, a second product when that program is rerun, and a third product when the show goes into syndication, and another product when it goes on cable,” says Brenner, the president of Marathon Ventures, in: ‘Product Placement goes digital, gets lucrative’. The process is called (DBI) digital brand integration and it is the newest form of PP.

Ultimately the only advertising worth its salt is that which; arrives to its audience via the correct media vehicle, at the correct time, in the right way for the given product. PP and particularly DBI do this in many ways. It embodies all of the ideas around the ‘celebrated celebrity’ (celebrity endorsement), ethos advertising, credibility, trend setting, consumer appropriation, appropriate media, proliferation and fragmentation of audiences and their viewing times, and provides them in one costly, but potentially very effective advertising package, don’t you think?

And with that my concern is heightened, but will fall on deaf ears, my interested is stronger than it has ever been, which I cannot see declining in the near future (especially with the new UK PP legislation) and my intrigue, similar but not exactly the same as my interest, has grown in the sense that I want to know where it all ends, but that discussion is for another blog.

I’ll have a think!

Brand on the inside, Brand on the out: Seamless Brands

Can a brand really be seamless down to the last thread?

Every brand has an identity that is built into its core. Every brand will incorporate various plans and techniques that are gathered up into an artistic ball of typography, copy, psychology, extensive research etc... that finally (and hopefully) results in a beautifully executed brand that resonates with its intended audience.

When most people think of brands in this way, they look at the actual iconography of the logo, and at the brand image and the metaphor that it implies. Which, don’t get me wrong, is very complex stuff for anyone to process without a trained eye or with. And I’m definitely not suggesting that this is the wrong way to look at the brand, nor am I suggesting that there are better ways to look at a brand.

What I am saying is that brands go further than what we can see as consumers. Brands should be seamless from beginning to end, but also: throughout, upside down, inside out and when cut in half.

Most positive experiences lead to an increase in brand equity (Keller 1993; Janiszewski & Osselaer 2000). A lot of brands (if necessary) look to increase their ‘relative’ brand equity which results in an increase of a product’s perceived value, therefore increasing the amount of money any individual is likely spend (the whole point of consumerism).

Because “certain mixtures of positive experiences (e.g., thoughtful, extended, affectively mixed, etc, may lead to more equity than a simple stream of consistently uniform positive experiences” (Haugtvedt et al 2008), it is important to ensure that a brands identity doesn’t contradict or differentiate itself and that it builds and reiterates its intended values.

So it seems fairly easy doesn’t it? Well you would be wrong!

So as I have mentioned in my previous blog (Interactivity: Quid pro quo?) consumers are exposed to around 3000 advertising messages a day, so the need for your brand to be consistent, effective, recognisable and efficient ‘down to the last thread’ is important on every level of consumer interaction.

The requirements of ‘seamlessness’ leads to, and can embody many different forms. For a brand to truly resonate with an audience and create a true and consistent brand experience the smallest consumer interactions must be taken into consideration. Everything from phone manner, error pages and packaging, location and tonailty must all ring true with the brands personality (Nedungadi 1990)

So a brand like Innocent would be a very good example of what I have been rambling on about for the last 420 words. Their building is officially referred to as Fruit Towers, the phone that you ring is called the Banana phone and their packaging speaks to the audience in an adorably simple and childlike or ‘innocent’ fashion. This can be seen in the pictures below.

There are other ways that brands can maintain a seamless brand personality down to very minor and unexpected interactions with consumers e.g. 404 error codes. This blog picture below is an image that is taken from Jim Beans 404 error page, seamless with the brand itself. If you click on the image it will take you to the blog ‘The 100 most funny and Unusual error pages’. 

Each of these individual traits and brand characteristics and personality that come across must not only make a brand what it is, but take into consideration that they must differentiate themselves from their competitors. Creating a culture that embodies all that is your brand, and what you as an organisation wishes to present to the consumer.

"To make and keep a promise that matters".

Drill down into this definition and you will discover the "make" implies everything your brand does with respect to sales, marketing and spreading the message. The "keep" implies everything your business does to ensure support and delivery of that promise. The "promise that matters" is what sets your brand apart from your competitors. Once you digest this definition and align your external marketing message with internal culture and operations, you'll have this "seamless" thing nailed.

The extract above came from The Seamless Brand. After doing my research and looking at the information that I’ve provided in this blog, The Seamless Brand is without a doubt the most informative and comprehensive digital reference to Seamless brands. It will do a much (more extensive) better job at explaining the innards and outers of the concept of a brand being seamless. I suggest that anyone interested in a further explanation of seamless brands and the depth which the discussion surrounding the topic can go, The Seamless Brand is the blog to check.

For anyone who just fancied having a think about seamless brands I hope that I have been able to quench your thirst and aided in your understanding in any way. I know that writing it made me think. How about you?

QR Codes to the Rescue!

Smartphone’s and Android’s such as Blackberry’s and I-Phones allow for and provide major opportunity for an increased move into digital advertising and marketing.

With Microsoft and Nokia deciding to pair up and make an ‘android baby’ that will compete with the market leaders as mentioned in my blog: B2B Mobile Marketing – What’s next?, I suggest that many more millions will be poured into digital and mobile advertising.

So, is this the beginning of the end for traditional methods advertising? I don’t think so! Ultimately digital advertising is going to rapidly increase with technology such as Augmented Reality (AR), 4G, Physicality (see first blog), Near Field Communication (NFC) etc... These advances in technology are going to increase the digital divide and those ‘in the know’ are going to rapidly overtake those that aren’t (very similar to the capitalistic division of class).

However a particular piece of digital technology created by Denso Wave in 1994, is something that isn’t going to prevent the increase in digital advertising and does in fact assist digital advertising, but it will allow traditional methods of advertising to further their abilities and have increased value.

What I am referring to are QR (Quick Response) codes. QR Codes are specific matrix code initially created to allow their individual contents to be decoded at high speed. They were originally used for tracking Toyota car parts in the manufacturing process and have now become “the biggest driver of traffic to mobile Internet by far” (Findel-Hawkins, Sales Director Nikkei BP Europe).

I am suggesting that QR codes will assist traditional methods of media to receive an increased level of budget because they provide direct links from static or non-interactive advertisements (or TV) to web pages and applications that allow for the purchase of brands/products as well as numerous other levels of interactivity. For example the QR code I have on my facebook page and that you can see below directs people directly to this blog.

“As mobile phones and other locative media develop, we will see new data layers added to the urban and outdoor environment” (McStay – Digital Advertising).  People by nature are inquisitive about their surroundings, so the idea of knowing secrets or gaining information that we cannot see at face-value is psychologically built into our genetics as a positive, whether it is general inquisitiveness or greed.

QR codes ignite this innate desire and in many situations provide us with something for nothing, another incentive, free stuff. For example, if I hadn’t of told you what the QR code above was for, wouldn’t you have wanted to know? And with QR codes being thrust at us left right and centre they are bound to catch on, in an even bigger way than before. QR codes are even being used in plots for globally viewed television shows e.g. CSI, as seen in clip below.

The application of QR codes is barley limited if at all and can be placed on practically anything with visual elements in particular traditional methods of advertising such as:

• Billboards
• Buildings
• Business Cards (2^nd intended purpose after tracking car parts)
• Doors
• Leaflets/Letters (Junk mail)
• Packaging
• Posters
• Products  
• Promotional Giveaway Items (e.g. Mouse mats)
• Television

QR codes can even be placed on ‘traditional’ media within Virtual Environments such as 2^nd life.

All of these media vehicles can have QR codes placed upon them which can contain Url’s, SMS’s, Phone Numbers and Text (Mc Gregor).

Television fragmentation has lead to budgets being spread across various channels. QR codes can be moulded quite easily to suit a particular target audience via different and varied media channels e.g. offering products or discounts for products that the TA can relate to.

After all, it is suggested that “a relevant context, matching a brand to a related advertising environment is assumed to put shoppers in receptive frame of mind increasing the potential impact of the brand’s message” (Plummer et al 2007).

If for example you wanted to target mums with a QR code that provides them with a discount (purchase/trial incentive) on Monster Munch multipacks, it can be done via a daytime television advert and then once the mums have purchased the crisps, different codes can be placed on the individual packets of crisps, which could, in turn lead to a game or a gaming website or money off an individual packet of Monster Munch, that the children can then use.

One of the biggest issues of QR codes is supposedly that people aren’t going to be able to scan them if they are on television because they will leave the screen before people have the opportunity to scan. I originally believed the same thing.

However looking at the way in which people are watching TV in this day in age, technology such as SKY+ allows for people to pause, rewind and then also fast-forward TV. This suggests that people are very able to scan the QR codes.  If people don’t want to stop their TV for whatever reason, then as you can see in the video below, there are other ways to prepare the TV audience e.g. a countdown.

The dynamic qualities of QR codes and their increasing familiarity (decreasing the barriers to entry), entwined within the innate use of mobile telephones, is a surefire blend of variables that will result in an increased amount of traditional advertising because of the value and brand interaction that they can add.

That’s what I’m thinking! How about you?