Brands are finally starting to enter social media channels, and those that are yet to do so will have to in very near future. Social media provides some very real challenges for brands, but with these challenges comes some amazing opportunities.

It’s a complex game that requires some serious attention, skill and knowledge. Not unlike a game of Poker (yes Poker!)…

So what can Poker teach us about successful use of Social Media?

If you’ve never played before it’s a good idea to spend some time observing before you get involved. At the early stages of using social media, the best thing to do is simply observe. For one this process can aid learning about the various environments, on the other hand it can provide vital information. People are talking about your brand and you need to know what they’re saying. Find out what people think about your latest campaign or product, and take the feedback on-board. You can go to great lengths and at great cost to get feedback from customers, be sure to make use of the feedback that’s right at your fingertips.

When you start playing, you don’t play in one big high risk game, you go for lots of smaller low risk games where it doesn’t matter if you lose. You can’t just enter a social media environment and assume that as long as you spend the money and time you will be successful. You test the water with small campaigns or better still get involved at a level not representing the brand, set up twitter accounts, youtube pages, blog, find out what works and what doesn’t. It’s vital that you’re using these tools day in and day out if your going to be able to take things to the next level.

At the end of the day it’s always a gamble, but you often your chances of success will be higher than others. These days everyone wants to know the ROI, they want a guaranteed return on their investment. Unfortunately you can never guarantee success but you can use knowledge of what has worked and not worked in the past to inform your choices. It’s vital to keep track of other social media activity to help build this knowledge.

Timing is key. What will work within social media is completely context dependent. What might have worked a few months ago might not work this month, the right environment last week might not be the right environment this week, just because it worked yesterday doesn’t mean it’s going to work today.

Knowledge of etiquette is essential. If you don’t observe the un-written rules people won’t want to play with you, and you can’t play if you’ve got no-one to play with. There’s plenty of rules to follow set by social media sites such as copy-write rules on youtube and promotion rules on facebook. But just as important are the many unwritten rules which you can only discover by getting involved and actually using the tools. For example, Habitat learnt that you could use hash tags on twitter improve visibility in twitter search, but they didn’t realise the kind of backlash they would receive for mis-using these tags. As well as negative consequences not knowing the unwritten rules can also result in missed opportunity. For example, it’s generally considered unacceptable to communicate with customers via facebook, however the same cannot necessarily be said for some contexts within Twitter (in the case of an @reply). Assuming all reply options are out of bounds could result in a missed opportunity to communicate with your audience.

You have no control over the cards you get dealt and the decisions other players make, only the decisions you make. As much as you might wish you could control peoples behaviour and reactions to your decisions you have to accept that you can’t. Instead you need to be prepared to every reaction and learn how to respond when things don’t go the way you planned. For example when Pepsi were in hot water earlier this year over a potentially offensive ad they got straight on twitter to explain and apologise directly to those involved.

If you don’t play a hand at some point you’re not going to win. This game is happening, it’s going on right now, nobody is going to force you to get involved but if you don’t you will miss out.

You might get lucky once, but if you don’t know what your doing you’ll soon get found out. It’s not that common but sometimes you can just get lucky, the viral nature of the Internet means that content can almost come from anywhere. But hype dies even quicker than builds on the Internet, and unless you harness the power of any activity you won’t be seeing that success continue.

However…

It’s not all the same. Don’t think you can bluff your way through social media, bluffing can win you a game of poker, but it will only get you so far in social media. Transparency is essential, so lets see those cards.

Image: Kimberlyfaye

Obviously Lego is a toy of many peoples’ past, but this needn’t be a negative thing. Lego has used it’s history to create a whole new audience for it’s product – people who aren’t kids any more. Lego is retro, retro is cool, so now you’ll find the Lego brand in some rather unexpected places. So people are loving Lego again, but perhaps they feel they’re a bit too old to be making things out of blocks? No problem, Lego has teamed up with fashion label Paul Frank to bring you Lego products that you can wear. You can also get your hands on a section of Lego accessories such as cameras and mp3 players, not all of these are official Lego products, but all go towards keeping that Lego brand in fashion.

It’s all very well appealing to new audiences, but this is no good if you end up neglecting your original and still primary audience. Lego are still providing products aimed at children, and key to this is the work they do around these products. Toys such as Lego face serious competition from digital content such as computer games and various online activities. Many brands would try and fight this digital technology, fortunately for Lego they are not one of these brands. Instead of working against digital technology, they have worked with it. Lego can’t stop kids playing computer games, so Lego have made their own, Lego can’t stop kids spending their time online on social networks, and online games, so once again they have made their own online content, and put themselves in the places people already are. More brand collaboration has enabled Lego to turn competitors into partners with the likes of SpongeBob Squarepants and Harry Potter Lego, and take the brand into new markets such as their recent tie in with Kickers school shoes.

Lego have not just been getting involved with the technology their audience are currently using, but they are heavily involved in developing the technology they will be using in the future. Augmented reality appears to be starting to take off, and Lego are one of the brands at the forefront of developing the technology and essentially directing the path it takes into the lives of their audience. Lego has used the technology to complement and assist the current product. Lego has installed AR terminals into their stores (above) in which customers can hold up a box full of Lego pieces to get a 3D image of what the product will look like when it’s finished. Then when the customer gets home they can even use AR to help them build the product.

Lego haven’t been doing the hard work by themselves, some of the best content has been done by Lego fans (see above) and can be found all over YouTube, and other Social Media sites. But then that’s what happens when you’ve built a brand people are happy to associate themselves with and most importantly when you’ve got a great product that lets your audience be creative.

Key to Lego’s success is synergy, isolate anyone element of the Lego offering and its very unlikely to perform at the same level, but together each element works along side one another which benefits the individual elemetent and the brand as a whole. Lego have managed to expand and evolve their product offering while staying true to their brand, be it amazing theme park rides or augmented reality experiences you can always trace it back to those original plastic blocks.

We might assume this spells the end for many traditional advertising channels such as billboards and TV, not if necessarily.

They just need to evolve.

Below is nice example of a billboard which is completely dependent on audience interaction. This digital billboard was recently installed at Brussels airport by the energy company Electrabel, and as people pass by it provides a thermal image of the heat energy given off by each person. A great idea based on what their brand is all about, and as the video demonstrates it clearly engages the audience.

Source: Blogilvy

Another great example of audience interaction in what is traditionally seen as a one way communication context will be provided by O2 in cinemas across the UK in the coming months. Prior to watching the latest ice age film, cinema goers will be able to participate in an interactive 3D game where their hand movements will determine the path of the spaceship O2 through an on coming 3D asteroid storm.

With the latest technology the audience can interact in communication channels that might never have seemed possible. The key of course is giving them the reason to do so. In the examples above the audience is drawn in by the new technology, but when this technology becomes established brands won’t be able to rely on the wow factor of the technology to engage the audience. This of course is true of all marketing using the latest technology such as Augmented reality and QR codes, it’s only so long the technology itself can be used to hook in the audience. Brands will either have to take the technology yet another step forward or they could concentrate on making the most out of the evolved channel and provide a genuinely entertaining or useful experience to engage their audience.

Here’s the latest TV ad for TV advertising, which I ironically saw on youtube.

Don’t get me wrong I thoroughly enjoyed the ad, it brings back memories of some great ad campaigns of the past and the context and comic timing does raise a smile. This ad would have been perfect before the emergence of digital media channels, but then of course back then there would have been no need for such a campaign.

The message of the ad is that TV can get through to your audience like no other medium, you can use it to push your message and it will get through. When the psychiatrist delves into the patients ‘deep subconscious’ he discovers nothing but classic TV ads. The context of this ad seems to represent the old way of approaching marketing, as a one way communication channel, where brands simply push their messages at their audience. However in our new digital world things are changing and as so is the  model, the brand audience now have the option to communicate with the brand, and with other member of the actual and potential brand audience.

The audience will no longer be satisfied with one way communication aimed at them (they might not want to be a a gibbering mess on a psychiatrist’s couch). Furthermore, brands should not be satisfied with this approach. No longer are they limited to aim at simply trying to push their messages into the audience subconscious, they can now truly engage with their audience, and can aim at building a relationship with can be of benefit to both brand and consumer. I’m not saying TV advertising doesn’t have a part to play, just that its approach will have to change, and integrated properly with other mediums it can play a key part in many campaigns.

The evolution of communication channels means that the brand audience can easily talk to brands, and to fellow audience members, and with a bit of luck they won’t have to talk to psychiatrists.

The ten web brands on which Britons spent the most time last month, including Facebook and Google, accounted for 45% of all UK internet time during the month, compared to less than 42% in April 2008

Source: Brand Republic

The Lesson:

It has never been more important that brands have an good online presence outside of their brand website.

Social Media: Do you need to reinvent the wheel?

It’s claimed that in Mesopotamia (part of modern day Iraq) 3500BC one of the most important tools ever was invented. That tool was the wheel, however the original use of the wheel is unlikely to be the use that most people would automatically associate it with in the current day. In 3500BC the wheel was used in pottery as what we would now call the ‘potters wheel’, and it was not until 3200BC that the wheel was used for transportation (contrary to evidence from the Flintstones…). This is a clear demonstration of how the use of a tool is not necessarily defined by its intended or original use, all that really matters is if the tool can be used to achieve specific goals.

Jump forward 5000 or so years and we can see how the same principles of a tool can be applied to modern day Social Media. The first thing to make clear is that Social Media is a tool, it is something that can (and in the case of many brands should) be used to help you achieve specific goals.

Twitter was positioned (and still is on the homepage) as a tool for people to let friends, family, and co-workers know what they’re doing. Of course people do use the service for this use, but many others have found many other ways to make use of twitter. For example many people are using the service to exchange information with people they’ve never met, and using the information provided by the service as a real time search of almost any subject. It’s not important that these uses were not the intended use of the tool, all that matters is that the tool is helping people achieve their desired objectives (what ever these might be).

Youtube was originally set up with the goal to allow ordinary computer users the chance to post their video content online. There is no disputing it has been successful in this aim, however, if you look to the most watched on youtube you’ll see that this is not the only way people are using the tool. In fact the majority of most watched videos on youtube are actually music videos, many of these have not been posted by ‘ordinary computer users’ but by large corporations, furthermore, many users are not actually watching these videos but simply using youtube as a music player. Once again the original use of the tool remains (as with the wheel and twitter) but the tool has really shown it’s true potential when it has been used in ways that were not necessarily intended.

So as with the wheel there is no correct way to use Social Media tools, the key is to find how the tool can work best for you or your brand, and in some instances this might even require discovering another way in which the tool can be used. Potters used the wheel in a very different way to cart vendors, just as groups of friends use twitter differently to brands, and how budding film makers use youtube differently to record companies. But even though there is such variation in the use of the individual tools no one group can claim to be using the tool in a manner better than the other, success is completely context relevant.

The most successful tools will have many uses and appeal to many different people, but even the most successful tools can’t be used by everyone. If there is no way the tool can be used to achieve your objectives then it’s not the right tool for you, you’ll need to find a different tool or tools to achieve your objectives. So therefore just because brand A is using a social media tool with great success does not mean brand B can use the same tool in the same manner to achieve similar success. Brand B needs to find a way to make the tool work for their specific goals or maybe even look to different tools altogether to which their goals are better suited.

Image: Cartype

This is a great little video from Germany that provides a little bit of marketing history and nicely demonstrates how our new digital culture is changing everything. For some people the content in this video is hardly anything new, but it’s presented in such a great way that it can serve as a little reminder to some, and as an education for others.

Source: Michael Reissinger

Illegal music downloading has been a hot topic ever since Napster appeared way back in 1999. Since then we’ve seen the introduction of broadband Internet and the emergence of BitTorrent peer to peer sharing, now people can download a lot more than music and all with speed and ease.

Currently the owners of a site called the Pirate bay, which helps people to make use of BitTorrent technology are being taken to court by the media companies which own the original content. It appears these media companies think this course of action the best way to deal with the problem.

But you have to question whether legal action is the answer, and if the technology is actually a problem, but rather an opportunity. What’s more are brands missing a trick?

We’ve already seen some artists decide to allow fans to download their music from their sites, this ranges from samples to full albums with fans deciding how much they pay for the download. However, most people prefer free while artists tend to like getting paid, maybe this is where brands can step in.

Why don’t brands essentially buy the content or rights and distribute it for free through their digital content. This has already been done to some degree but the content has always been limited, brands would need to offer the same content from their chosen artist that is available on sites such as the pirate bay. It might sound like a waste of money, but think of the traffic you could drive to a brand site, the publicity gained, the potential brand image transformation, and how much money is spent on trying to achieve all this already. The brand wins, the artist wins, the consumer wins.

Of course this would only be available to a limited amount of relevant brands and artists, and some people will still choose illegal downloads. However, even though this is by no means the answer to the whole issue, it might be something some brands might want to consider as it doesn’t look like the answer is coming anytime soon.

1. It lets brands join the conversation about their brand

2. If you don’t someone else will!

Source: Thisisanad

A large part of defining our personality is based upon the links that we have. There is a lot you can tell a lot about a person by the friends that they have. In a digital context you might find out a lot more about a person by looking at their facebook friends or links on their blog, rather than reading the personal details they have provided.

A brand is essentially a personality and there is no reason reason why the same rules don’t apply. Peoples’ perception of a brand will be altered and defined by the links a brand holds.

Brands can make use of links and associations to their advantage. They can collaborate with other brands which posses associations or audiences they desire. For example recently LG have been collaborating with fashion brands such as Gucci and Hugo Boss, to obtain associations of luxury and style.

One of my favourite examples was when classic British shoe makers Loake collaborated with sports brand Puma. Puma gets a healthy dose of luxury, and history, while Loake gets an injection of style and potentially opens up to a new younger audience.

Get it right and everyone’s a winner. On the other hand, get it wrong and you might have quite a job to end the perceived associations.

Tomorrow Sony will launch it’s new virtual world ‘Playstation Home’ . The world will be accessible to PS3 owners and will allow PS3 owners to navigate a vast virtual world, playing games, watching videos, shopping, and communicating with other PS3 owners.

There seems to be plenty of hype around Playstation Home, with Redbull and Diesel already confirming a presence within the virtual world.

Though Hype aside we need to ask ourselves if people really want this? Virtual world Second life is hardly thriving, Reuters just pulled their presence, and Google is scrapping their ‘lively’ virtual world. Furthermore, People seem pretty satisfied with the more simple and direct online services offered on the xbox and wii. Are sony just over complicating the matter, people want to play games and watch video online through their games consoles but maybe they just want to get to the content and functions as quickly and easily as possible.

On the other hand sites such as Club Penguin, a popular virtual world with the younger age demographic show the next generation might be more willing to experience a virtual world. Furthermore, Sony are not pushing this mainstream but to potential and current PS3 owners who are likely to be more willing to experience a virtual world.

Time will tell if the virtual world is a success, brands might be wise to see if people are happy to sacrifice speed and ease for a more involving experience before they invest in this or similar virtual worlds.

People like user reviews and research proves they can be very influential in the decision making process. Brands are often worried about negative reviews so don’t allow them on their site, but they need to understand that that’s not going to make the bad reviews go away, they will just be found somewhere else. Why not provide the service on the brand site, in an area you will have some (not a lot) of control over, and where you can easily join in the conversation and talk directly to your customers?

Other brands might use the excuse that their product isn’t suitable for reviews and that people won’t be intersted in reviewing or reading reviews of their product. A quick look on the around the net shows you this is far from true, I managed to find a number of reviews for all sorts of products including monster munch (many flavours!).

Innocent have always been switched on when it comes to digital marketing, and they’ve now introduced user ratings of their products on their main site. Innocent understand the value of the medium, not so long ago they used the channel to defend/explain their decision to allow McDonald’s to stock their smoothies, they understand that there’s no hiding any more so you might as well get out there and make the most of it.

Innocent

This move will hardly please their retailers, but then brands weren’t exactly pleased when retailers launched their own brands to compete with their brands. Selling direct might enable brands such as P&G to sell at a lower price should help them to compete with retailer own brands.

The service is currently only available in the US and it is not clear from the title (essentials.com) or the content that you are buying direct from P&G, the only clear indication can be found in the terms and conditions. If the site is a success then P&G might start further promotion of the site and that savings can be made from buying direct.

P&G are not the first brand to sell direct to the consumer via the internet by a long stretch, clothing brands such as Nike and Levi’s have been doing it for years, incidently both have just made improvements to their online shops, including further product availability.

The success of various brands and the current climate is likely to inspire other brands to offer the same service in order to cut prices and increase sales.