Email 3.0: Smiling Into HAL’s Eye

While ”The Role of Email in a Web 3.0 World” was mostly theory, I liked its feel-good flow. Moderator Christopher Marriott of Acxiom Digital got panelists comfortable without making viewers feel like they were sitting on the outside of an inside joke. It’s a rare and beautiful skill.

Marriott acknowledged it was late in the day and told us up-front that the panelists were debriefed on his questions beforehand. As a result, he said, they came laden with slides to answer three major questions:

1. How might the nature of email change as it goes more completely cross-platform?

2. Can email coexist with the semantic web (web 3.0) ... or co-opt it?

3. What role will The Consumer play in creating web 3.0 email?

Before we get too deep down the rabbit hole, let’s define web 3.0.

Web 1.0 was pure information-gathering. People used it to answer data- or fact-oriented questions like, “How are the White Sox doing today?”

Web 2.0 wedded information-gathering to collaboration. Today, the ‘net answers two questions: “How are the White Sox doing? And what do my friends think about how the White Sox are doing?”

The theory behind Web 3.0—the so-called Semantic Web—is that the ‘net won’t just be a place for interacting with friends and colleagues. The web itself will interact with you, learning what you want, who you are, and what you are likely to do in the future.

So even before you ask the question, Almighty Internets will turn to you and say, “THIS is how the White Sox are doing. By the way, you’ve won some cash in the office pool. Oh, and yes, Bob does think you’re fat.” (Okay, it won’t quite be this way. But you get the idea.)

Web 3.0 will know your intent when you interact with it—a concept Google grapples with as it seeks to evolve beyond contextual advertising, and that wannabe-rivals—like Powerset and Cuil—claim to have already mastered.

Hokay. So what does any of this have to do with email?

Email is a relic of the old guard. While web 2.0 is mostly a “pull” agent—that is, your friends know what you’re doing based on what your Facebook status proclaims—email marketing operates under the traditional “push” model—i.e., if you want your friends to know what you’re up to, you must mass-mail each one of them.

(As an aside, Google’s Gmail is helping put email into “pull” mode. Gchat, a chat box inside Gmail, enables users to broadcast status messages, a la Facebook, to email buddies. Of late, I’m using a lot less AIM and a lot more Twitter + Gchat.)

A few facts for the changing face of email:

Users under 24 don’t use email the way those over 24 do. Teens are more likely to text or hit Facebook than they are to shoot a two-line message through an email client.

But email’s not drifting into obsolescence; its perceived role in the user’s life is only changing. For me, getting a message across to friends is all about speed and efficiency. I can broadcast one message on Facebook or Twitter and ensure everyone who needs to know about it will get it right away—increasingly via mobile as smart phone-based apps for FB and Twitter grow more common.

There’s a certain formality to email that’s lacking in quicker communications. When I shoot an email to a new colleague, I read it carefully in hopes of creating the most favorable impression. And that’s a common sentiment: as the “Facebook generation” (users 18-24, 10 percent of the population) invades the workforce, they look at email as a skill crucial to mastering in the career environment.

There’s also a benefit to the response delay inherent to email. If my boss—or hell, a PR person—texts me with an unsavory (but often necessary) gig, they’ll probably think they’re being ignored if I don’t answer ASAP. But if they send me a message via email? Heeeey. I can mull for awhile, consider my options, provide a thoughtful response after maybe a few hours or—just between us!—even wait a day. People don’t assume you’ll read an email instantly.

And as Lauren McDonald of Silverpop pointed out, email remains a superior medium for certain types of communications. Flight alerts are preferred via email rather than via text-message. And here’s some exciting news: as smartphone sales increase (7.3 million sold in North America, 1Q08!), the likelihood of a user being exposed to an email more than once goes up: studies show that over 80 percent of those that read email from mobile devices also read them on PCs.

Unfortunately, current email marketing standards are pretty primitive. This is something that’ll have to change as we approach the hype-ridden and glorious Web 3.0. Quoting a JupiterResearch study, Ryan Deutsch of StrongMail said many companies send out radically different streams of email to the same customer.

If Web 2.0’s taught us anything, it’s that people want to be addressed as individuals, not as your “Dear Valued Customer.” Panelists encouraged listeners to explore customers on a ridiculously personal—slightly stalkerish?—level: Who’s your most frequent buyer? What flowers does she like? Does she have kids? Target her with a consistent message, preferably one tailored to her sensibilities.

But that’s 2.0 best practices. Practically the stuff of yesterday. Matt Wise of Q Interactive expanded on the hypothetical role of email in Web 3.0 in a manner most HAL.

At best, email 2.0 uses the past to determine the likelihood of future patronage. This person visited a baby site. Therefore this person is likely to want diapers. Wise calls this method “tremendously wasteful.”

In 3.0, Wise says, we’ll be able to predict future purchasing actions WITHOUT consulting a user’s past: They’ve never been to a baby site, but I predict they’ll want diapers based on some kind of algorithm that I can’t even wrap my brain around yet.

And while there’s little we can do now to divine who’ll love us tomorrow, people in the background are already working on making it a possibility. Your emails are being read. Your code is being deciphered. There’s facial recognition, heat mapping stuff, going on out there to try targeting advertising to you.

For those anticipating tomorrow’s online marketing environment, panelists stressed the following message again and again: when pushing email, think about when a user will receive it, where s/he’ll likely read it, and why they’ll want to open it.

A simple enough mantra for the bathroom mirror.

At the end of the sesh, a woman who represents a cadre of freelance photographers asked whether it’s more valuable for her clients to push their email marketing messages with images or text.

“Use both,” McDonald advised. The image is good, but describe it too. The latter will prove particularly helpful if recipients check the email from a phone. Many can’t render images yet, but that’s changing.

Conversational Marketing: Four Truths And One Lie

Posted by Paige Dzenis · Thursday August 07, 2008

Moderated by Nielsen Online EVP of Digital Strategic Services Pete Blackshaw, the Keynote Panel Conversational Branding: Are You Listening? examined the notion of conversation as it applies to marketers engaging with consumers. On the panel were Dell Social Media/Blog Outreach Senior Manager Rhichard Binhammer, Nestle Head of Digital Marketing Michael Moore, Edelman Digital President Rick Murray, BlohGer Co-Founder Jory Des Jardins and COmcasts Corporate Communications VP Jennifer Khoury. Out of the panel came four truths and one not so true bit of information. Can you guess the not so truthful approach to conversational marketing?

1. You need to really focus on reaching your customers with authentic conversation through all touch points. Jennifer Khoury, VP, Corporate Communications at Comcast Corporation emphasizes this point—if you’ve come up with a great strategy for authentic conversation make sure that it’s not just a one-off strategy. Customers calling your 1-800 line should be getting the same honest chat as people using Twitter.

2. A question from the audience about how to convince their uninterested management to invest in a digital strategy. Richard suggests going out and researching your brand and company, and having evidence of what conversations are already being held online about them. The rest of the panel agrees: this always wakes up CEOs—they’re never aware of what’s being said and it often shocks them and makes them more interested in getting involved.

3. An explanation of the best practice for creating authentic conversation. Richard Binhammer from Dell (with the longest title ever: Senior Manager, Social Media/Blog Outreach, Conversations Communities and Conversations) outlines the process for this—it’s about listening and then hearing. “If you walk into a dinner conversation, you don’t just sit down and start talking. You have to be prepared, you have to know and see how you fit into it all.” He mentions that there are four to five thousand conversations occurring every day about Dell. There’s a reason he doesn’t jump into all of them.

4. All people in online communities really want is free stuff. If you want people to promote your product, just send them a sample for free, and then follow up a week later with a crate of wine or a iTunes gift card. When they call you out for doing this or write negative reviews, send them a sternly written letter expressing how you’ll be sending the collection agency to get all that free stuff back unless they remove the offending posts.

5. Bloggers are an important gauge for public opinion. Jory Des Jardins, Co-Founder and President of Strategic Alliances with BlogHer spoke about how bloggers are changing, and become savvier to pitches from brands and agencies. A press release isn’t going to start a conversation—it will get word out, but that’s no longer good enough. Use familiar bloggers as a testing ground for your conversation strategy—have them tell you what does and doesn’t work before you send it out to the digital masses.

Related topics: Chicago, ad:tech CH 2008, CH 08 Sessions

Home » Mobile Marketing Jumps the Shark—In A Good Way

Mobile Marketing Jumps the Shark—In A Good Way

Posted by Paige Dzenis · Thursday August 07, 2008

Mobile Marketing is about to jump the shark—sorry, nuke the fridge—in a very good way. Yes, a lot of new marketing strategies sit on the cusp of mainstream popularity, but mobile marketing seems to be different. Why? In today’s Making Mobile Work: Real World Examples ad:tech Chicago panel, not one audience member asked, “How can I get my company to agree to invest marketing dollars in mobile?” This is perhaps a happy indicator the medium is on its way to mass acceptance.

So what was there to learn about mobile marketing in the real world?

- It’s ideal for targeting the business demographic, but quickly gaining traction with others. Like beepers: First it was all doctors and lawyers—but a few short years later, everyone had one. So while most mobile sites and apps are optimized for smart devices, smart devices will soon catch on with the masses, not just the business classes.

- Think about the unique thing mobile devices can do that other platforms cannot. For instance, you can instantly present a contact number for a user to add into their address book.

- Users are more likely to download apps to mobile devices. Unlike computers, most of us haven’t yet gotten a cell phone virus so we’re not yet skeptical of clinking on links to download. Also, the service carrier monopoly we all hate is working in our favour here, by keeping unsavory third-party clients away from the dot mobi. 

- Mobile users have different usage patterns. One study showed that mobile access peaks at lunchtime—for workers unable to access personal email or websites from company computers.

- The mobile device is ubiquitous. Survey says it’s one of three objects we can’t leave the house without. (The other two? Wallet and keys.) So plan your marketing strategy accordingly: we’re talking about targeting people out of home, on the go, and always wanting to stay in touch.

- Mobile messaging is short and concise—so adjust your message accordingly! There’s a lot that can be said in 35-140 characters. Make every word count.

Mobile has arrived, and it’s not just for the cool kids anymore.

Related topics: Chicago, ad:tech CH 2008, CH 08 Sessions

Home » How Hasbro Lost the Fight for Scrabble’s Soul

How Hasbro Lost the Fight for Scrabble’s Soul

Posted by Angela Natividad · Thursday August 07, 2008

Tuesday night at ad:tech Chicago wrapped up with a keynote by author Clay Shirky, ”Here Comes Every Customer: The Former Audience is Talking Around You.”

The Big Idea, if intro speaker Drew Ianni is any authority: “The internet is the most important thing to happen to the human species.”

That’s a pretty high and mighty manifesto. Upon taking the stage, Shirky tried conveying the same idea with more precision—and a much higher word count.

“We’re living through the greatest expansion in human expressive capability in history,” he began. Only four other “expansions” were just as crucial: the printing press, point-to-point communication (telegraph/telephone), recorded media, and harnessing the electromagnetic spectrum (ie., conveying images and sound over the air and into radios and TVs).

There was a vast asymmetry to these models. The media that was good at creating groups, such as TV and radio, couldn’t support conversations. And the media that could support conversations (the telephone, par exemple) was bad at creating groups. (Unless you had party line, but Shirky didn’t go into that.)

This is what makes the ‘net such a dream-snatcher. It is the digital carriage for all previous media: sound, images, moving images and sound. It supports dialogue between many at once, and even introduces a Darwinian element: When a person buys a computer, the internet doesn’t just get a new consumer of content; it also gets a producer.

You see? You see?! Those dear tubes have made us both recipient and creator—a deliciously self-perpetuating duality we can now revel in, like asexual fish.

What’s more, conversations that take place on the ‘net continue to be relevant, even after they’ve died. Shirky used the example of a forum thread he found. The thread was months old; its passionate participants had long since wandered off to lob diatribes elsewhere. But because the discussion that brought them together is published online, people like Shirky can still cull useful information from all the opinions, anecdotes and experiences they left behind.

As one of his closing cautionary tales, Shirky rehashed the geektacular drama between Scrabulous and Hasbro, mainly to illustrate how the ‘net invests people with power over a brand’s destiny. By now you know the story: two brothers created the Scrabulous app for Facebook. Scrabulous is a Scrabble clone whose popularity became what I guess could be called “a worldwide phenomenon.” The site logged over half a million users per day at its peak.

Hasbro and Mattel, which own global rights to Scrabble, did nothing for months. Then one day, almost on a whim, they demanded that the app be removed from the Facebook community.

A cadre of dissidents promptly launched a Facebook group called “Save Scrabulous.” Now it’s got so much clout that when a user searches “Scrabulous” on Facebook, it’s the top result.

Hasbro tried making nice with disgruntled Scrabu-lovers by claiming to “understand [their] passion for the Scrabble brand”—words that were repeatedly mocked by internet trolls because it’s not the brand users love, it’s the damn game, and shouldn’t the world’s second-largest game maker be able to make that distinction?!

Since its cease-and-desist, Hasbro hasn’t won back any Scrabble players. Meanwhile, the Scrabulous creators built another Scrabble clone with a different look and feel (thereby avoiding more legal issues with you-know-who). It’s called Wordscraper and is apparently very popular.

“What did Hasbro do wrong?” Shirky asks, following up with the tactic keynote speakers so love: answering his own question.

Inaction at the beginning! he stressed. If Hasbro had a problem with Scrabulous, it should’ve said something or released a competitive game, right at outset. Its long silence set the expectation it would just let Scrabulous be.

“Inaction by the company no longer means inaction in the marketplace. It just means other people besides you will do the acting,” Shirky preached, a message I found oddly meaningful.

Another thing Hasbro failed to realize: nobody cared about its acknowledgment of their “passion.” People weren’t looking to have a conversation with Hasbro; they were looking to converse with each other. Where Scrabble and Scrabulous were concerned, suddenly that was the only dialogue that mattered.

Wrapping up, Shirky left us with a statement I considered long afterward. “If you’ve got more than five customers, someday they’ll start talking. And [when that happens,] you might not be invited to the conversation.”

Related topics: Chicago, ad:tech CH 2008, CH 08 Keynotes, CH 08 Sessions

Home » Search Marketing - Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow

Search Marketing - Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow

Posted by Brent Terrazas · Wednesday August 06, 2008

Talking about the current state of Search Marketing and what lies ahead in a panel called “The State of Search - A Maturing Marketplace or Poised for More Growth?” was Jon Diorio, Group Product Marketing Manager for Google, James Colborn - Director for Microsoft; John Anagnost, Global Director for Ogilvy; and Rob Murray, President of iProspect. This panel gave all in attendance the opportunity to learn more about how the industry is changing, in both tactics and marketplace perception. Above all, each panelist all agreed on one important observation - Search Marketing is changing.

The shift in SEM is not seen in just one or two categories, but across the board. We’re witnessing a transition from directory and keyword-based search to use of rich semantics and a focus on user experience.

For publishers, the shift has went from CPC and Paid Inclusion to the arrival of Paid Engagement and Consumer Rewards. Marketers are in somewhat of a “Cooperation Phase” with great transparency, increased collaboration and an overall greater understanding of “true search contributions.” Even consumers have changed. We’re now seeing a user who is no stranger to searching for information or products on the internet. Basic searches that might have been pretty prevalent in years past, like “hotel,” have been replaced by a slightly more detailed inquiry: “London hotels.” From there an even more specific search has been noticed, leading the way to inquiries into “Cheap London hotels.”

Still savvier users invent more obscure searches than what has been typically thought of in the past, going from niche search engines and toolbars to applications to further segment their desired search results. Application toolbars for search may add convenience for the user but also changes the game as consumers are not visiting the main search website.

And with that, Robert Murray from iProphet took the stage with the claim that “By the year 2013 all forms of marketing will drive people to search.” SEM (Search Engine Marketing) is the most cost-effective form of advertising. No other form of advertising can give you the same detailed consumer behavioral data. From location of the user, browser used, ad copy and even the keywords searched for, this is all data that can help a marketer better understand how users interact with their online marketing.

Another subject briefly discussed was experience planning. Online marketing efforts should try engaging the consumer, helping mold the way they search for products or services. This can be done through semantic research and a carefully planned-out user experience. Specialized SEM teams should be formed, each focusing on segmented aspects of the marketplace. This will leave Marcom teams to focus on what’s really important: nurturing prospects through the brand experience ultimately leading to a sale.

Related topics: Chicago, ad:tech CH 2008, CH 08 Sessions

Home » The Current State of the Internet Economy

The Current State of the Internet Economy

Posted by Brent Terrazas · Wednesday August 06, 2008

With Kevin Rowe, a Principal for Lake Capital, moderating a session on the current state of “The Internet Economy,” my ad:tech Chicago experience began (that is, after a five hour flight delay due to bad weather in Chicago). Participating in the discussion were Matt Moog - Founder and CEO of Viewpoints Network, Gian Fulgoni - Executive Chairman and Co-Founder of ComScore and Matt Spiegel - CEO of Omnicom Media Group Digital.

With increasing gas prices driving—no pun intended—consumers away from in-store shopping, it’s safe to say inflation is currently the biggest threat to traditional retail sales. That said, though there still has been a noticeable decrease in growth for online advertising, something that hasn’t really been seen since the mid 90’s. While online sales have continued to grow, multiple research studies show that for every one product purchased online, four to five were purchased in-store after using the web for product research. The only real exception to this rule seems to be multi-channel retail outlets like Amazon.com (which recently released its second quarter sales, more than doubling what analysts projected for 2008).

Many companies lump any dollars spent on maintaining or “upgrading” their corporate site in with the online advertising budget. The panelists agreed that this was a poor practice. Corporate websites should fall under a branding budget, rather than take away from the online media buy. Also, most brands do not leverage their corporate website as a vehicle for third party revenue. An example given was Expedia.com, which makes over $200 million per year in advertising revenue in addition to any actual sales made via the popular travel portal. If a brand isn’t using their own website as means to drive people to their retail stores or as a new source of revenue, then they are missing out on a large piece of the online pie.

Another key take-away from this session was the importance of connecting the consumer’s online behavior with their in-store experience. Countless brands use their website as an e-commerce platform, however failing the brand experience when they do not allow for consumers to use their stores as an extension of the online purchase. This includes offering in-store pickups and the ability to return or exchange a product purchased online in a local store. Because of this, these brands tend to inhibit a repeat online purchase from consumers who would prefer not having to ship off products that require service.

The old metric system of judging CPM or related clicks against impressions is outdated for today’s online behavioral model. The session even closed with Matt Spiegel from Omnicom Media Group Digital stating that the most important thing that needs to happen in the next few years is the emergence of a more robust analytical model. There has to be a better, more standardized method for tracking consumers who make their purchasing decision online but visit the store to actually buy the product.

Related topics: Chicago, ad:tech CH 2008, CH 08 Sessions

Home » The Not Really Viral Panel About Branding Viral Paid More Heed to Word of Mouth

The Not Really Viral Panel About Branding Viral Paid More Heed to Word of Mouth

Posted by Paige Dzenis · Wednesday August 06, 2008

First things first: this panel had little to do with viral marketing or branding. The case studies discussed were well thought-out developed plans, put into the hands of carefully chosen influencers. All very controlled, it seemed. True viral campaigns, on the other hand, have a lot less structure and a lot more audience involvement. They’re co-created and only work when the customer has control or influence over the content and its distribution.

Rather than a razor sharp focus on viral marketing, a misnomer in itself, the “Viral Branding—Creating Brand Ambassadors” panel was about word of mouth and how to get products into the hands of targeted consumers. All but one of the speakers came from companies with member groups that have signed up to participate in product pitches. Essentially, these companies enable brands to target known populations and this strategy is almost always fail-proof. Aliza Freud, Founder and CEO of SheSpeaks, explained that you’re speaking to people that want to be targeted—they sign up for the site, give their personal information away at the outset, and have opted-in to be advertised to.

SheSpeaks handpicks who is sent what product—the case study discussed today was about an OPI nail polish marker. (In a clever move, Aliza passed a few of the markers around the room. The other women didn’t seem to care. However, I, the advertiser’s ultimate dream, clicked one open and immediately wondered where it was for sale. Sigh.)

“Even if they didn’t like the product, after every program participants always feel better about the brand. Because they feel like they’re suddenly important to the brand, they’re being listened to,” Eliza said.

What about metrics to back it up? House Party’s Mindy Davis discussed the impressive array of measurement tools they use to evaluate each campaign—the House Party business model is clever, unique and well-orchestrated. Like SheSpeaks, it delivers products to people who have signed themselves up, however they’re required to host a party and pass samples out to their friends. Yes, sounds house-wifey and pyramid schemey at first. But take a look at the metrics if you can find them. You’ll wish you came up with the concept.

Related topics: Chicago, ad:tech CH 2008, CH 08 Sessions

Home » Strategic Media Planning 3.0 - Investing Still Pays Off

Strategic Media Planning 3.0 - Investing Still Pays Off

Posted by Krista Neher · Wednesday August 06, 2008

The Strategic Media Planning 3.0 Panel (what is 3.0 anyway?) at ad:tech focused on the value of testing and treating marketing as an investment.

One of the key themes of this session was looking at marketing as an investment where returns come over time and not necessarily all from an immediate bump in sales.  There is inherent value in learning how to optimize strategies over time, and investing in the learning is important for an organization to continue to build and grow over time.  Like any investment a balance must be struck between short term and long term gains.  I think that marketers, agencies and vendors can all learn from this balanced approach to marketing.

Testing and learning, especially in the age of digital, is important in helping brands to build an edge by leveraging new technologies.  The panel suggested that organizations have to “move from an idea of learn and do to do and learn” and change the framework of the organization.  Conversational marketing really facilitates this and digital makes the test and learn process more fluid and rapid.

On the topic of testing, the panel suggested that some portion of the test will have economic returns however some will truly be a test.  No longer plan and execute – we have a much faster iteration cycle.  It is no longer a test, it is an investment (yes, actually an investment in learning).  Structure your tests so that there isn’t as big a risk and so that you can always learn something, even if the overall campaign doesn’t work out.

Clients have more pressure than ever for delivering results and want to focus their dollars to drive results.  At the same time the internet has ushered in a proliferation of new techniques and tools for marketers to try.

This brings the question: “How can marketers make choices and priority calls in testing and learning, particularly in a down economy?”

There is information overload, and clients have seemingly unlimited options on what they can test.  The agencies really need to drive the clients towards prioritization of what is tested.  Don’t test everything because you can.

Bart Sichel from McKinsey said that companies that enter a downturn without cutting spending typically come out ahead of those who make deep cuts. 

Scott Howe, VP and General Manager, APS, Microsoft suggested testing stories and thinking holistically about marketing spending.  Marketing testing often focuses only on the final touch-point in their spending however marketers should look to test an entire holistic campaign vs. individual elements.

And if you are a provider hoping to get some of those test and learn dollars allocated to your hot new ideas?  The panel offered the following advice:
o Do research
o Bring analytics
o Try to understand what the marketing objectives are
o Mock-up some visuals

So, I’m not sure how any of this is 3.0. But I think the panel offered really sound advice on how to frame marketing spending and testing as well as overcoming some of the barriers to building a successful testing campaign.

Related topics: Chicago, ad:tech CH 2008, CH 08 Sessions

Home » The Long Tail – Quality vs. Quantity

The Long Tail – Quality vs. Quantity

Posted by Krista Neher · Wednesday August 06, 2008

One of the hottest revolutionary buzzwords leveraged in this contextual social media participatory web 3.0 panel was “Long Tail.” The panel “The Long Tail of Social Media: Analyzing the Value Proposition for Publishers and Advertisers kicked off with each of the panelists defining what the long tail actually is.

VP Jeffrey Graham of Marketing, Customer Insights, the New York Times defines “the long tail” from a content perspective and specifically as the breadth of content – not the top 10 stories, but the other, lesser viewed pages.

Jennifer McLean, VP of Marketing, Director, Distribution at Technorati, said the sheer amount of content that Technorati indexes, and the growth of blogs, were primary growth stimulators for the long tail of blogging.  What makes a blog interesting is that the content tends to be very niche vs. what is seen on larger sites.

Shiv Singh, Social Media & Global Strategic Initiatives, Avenue A Razorfish defined the long tail in a more traditional sense – there are the large mass sites, however the long tail is comprised of the smaller niche sites that in aggregate are larger than the few big sites.  Additionally, Shiv says that the social influence levels are much stronger on the smaller sites due to the intimacy of the relationships.

The conversation evolved into a discussion about social networking and how companies can better engage and participate in social media.  Many companies are coming in late to the game when there are already well established networks and are having difficulty building social networks on their sites.  Many publishers are adding social networking features to their sites however building community around them seems to be a problem.

Jon Gibs, the facilitator brought the conversation back to (you guessed it) measures.  He broached the subject by talking about how current measurement tools (like Neilson and Comscore) are not providing the right measures for social media or the long tail.

Jeffrey Graham made a great point in that the industry needs to move away from eye-balls.  I couldn’t agree with that more – especially since eyeballs don’t necessarily mean relevance or quality in an interaction.  His recommendation was to look at the relationship between the interactions and the quality of the impression.

A great question was posed by Shiv “What value would we place on this conversation?” – the point being that not all conversations are created equal, and not all conversations can be measured.  It is also important to look at the pass along effect, the impact of the impression and the cost of creating the interaction.  Linking back to marketing objectives (awareness, closing a sale, etc) is vital to creating a successful interaction.

Measuring anything online is a challenge, and the long tail clearly presents some additional issues given the quality vs. quantity discussion.  At its core the conversation is more about quality (in the small niche sites of the long tail) vs. quantity (getting a ton of untargeted hits on a large site with a broad content focus).

Related topics: Chicago, ad:tech CH 2008, CH 08 Sessions

Home » Widgets: The New, New Thing!

Widgets: The New, New Thing!

Posted by Steve Hall · Wednesday August 06, 2008

Widgets are the rage! Widgets are the new, new thing! The new, new must-have! Widgets are web 7.0! Widgets! Widgets! Widgets!

The Chicago ad:tech panel, “Widgets and Applications - The New Media Network,” covered what’s going on in the world of widgets. Panelists included Omniture Senior Director of Product marketing Chris Duskin, Slide GM Advertising Sonya Chawla, Gigya VP of Sales Ben Pashman, Avenue A Director of Emerging Media and Video Innovation Jeremy Lockhorn and Sprout Co-Founder and CEO Carnet Williams.

Lockhorn described the “old” ad world as Ad 1.0 or a world in which advertising was all about interruption and intrusion. He described the “new” ad world as Ad 2.0, a world in which people are not interrupted and that exists where the people are in an unobtrusive way. This, according to Lockhorn, is the world in which widgets live. So what are widgets?

Gigya’s Pashman defined widgets as “a portable chunk of code that can be installed and executed within any separate html-based web page by the end user.” He added widgets should add to the conversation rather then screaming like old media does. Conversely, applications are “built for a specific platform and are not portable.” A widget should be simple, shiny and sharable.

Widgets, according to the panelists, should be thought of as elements of social media and not a replacement for advertising banners. They reside on a web page but contain ever-changing content that can, and should, live on indefinitely. They are not to be thought of as campaigns, rather a form of branded content distribution.

Moderator Duskin framed the panel in four parts; distribution, content, measurement and optimization. Pashman pointed ot the biggest decision facing a marketer when considering the use of widgets is whether to build or sponsor already existing widgets. Networks like Pashman’s Gigya exist to serve marketers looking for the network approach rather than the build approach. Touting 142 million widget users, Gigya offers marketers an easy way to dive into the widget world.

While everything involving metrics usually boils down to sales or brand awareness, widgets can address many needs such as a movie studio concerned with getting the greatest number of people watching a trailer for an upcoming movie. Rather than force old media metrics on widgets, panelists advocated the creation of widget-specific metrics in advance of launch so as to properly determine success.

In terms of measurement, the notion of a widget as a research device was explored. Since it’s not necessarily easy to target a widget to a particular audience because they are distributed by website publishers and users, the way they spread and where they end up can be analyzed to determine which audiences are interested in the content of the widget. It’s sort of targeting in reverse. You monitor where the widget travels and then examine the demographics of the websites it ends up on.

The net? Widgets are little branded content packages that can maximize a brand’s exposure and create engagement on an ongoing basis. How’s that for a summary buzzword phrase?

Related topics: Chicago, ad:tech CH 2008, CH 08 Sessions

Home » The Hunting of the Snark: Finding Value in Online Video Advertising

The Hunting of the Snark: Finding Value in Online Video Advertising

Posted by Angela Natividad · Wednesday August 06, 2008

There are three types of ad:tech session:

• Roundtables, which look like opportunities for Socratic discussion but are actually ideal hostage scenarios for greedy salesmen.
• Polite affairs where a moderator, charged with exploring a given topic, poses questions in hopes of getting cotton-mouthed executives to divulge things they’re not supposed to.
• The kind where a moderator—contemptible creature—invites panelists to pitch the audience one by one, and the topic be damned!

”The State of Online Video: Going Beyond the Pre-Roll” was the third type.

Things kick off with Josh Chasin of comScore mumbling figures into the mic, followed by Smith Forte of Current.TV. Then Rebecca Paoletti, director of video strategy at Yahoo, takes the stage.

Yahoo has two primary video ad methods:

1. Advertisers provide TV creative, which is immediately converted into a video ad. When a user mouses over it, he has the option of interacting with it in some way or visiting the website. The method is favored because it is simple and easy to execute on a whim.

2. Yahoo creates interactive (rich media) units for advertisers. “Anything you can do in a microsite you can do in the four corners of a video player,” Paoletti explained. This model only comprises 10 percent of Yahoo’s video ad revenue; the company looks at it as a “next step” and is pursuing ways to get clients more interested in “engagement metrics” (as opposed to gauging the quality of a campaign purely by click-through to a website).

“These are the basics—what we sell day in and day out,” says Paoletti.

But there’s a wildcard in the mix: advertisers that want to be producers; that is, content contributors. To illustrate how Yahoo serves their needs, Paoletti shows us the homepage for Yahoo Sports Minute, sponsored by Dunkin’ Donuts. See it for yourself: sports content shares slightly less-than-equal space with Dunkin’ leaderboards, embedded TV spots and widgets.

Does this make Dunkin’ Donuts a content producer? Because the method looks suspiciously like a page takeover. I doubt anyone would visit Sports Minute specifically to see Rachel Ray’s controversial Dunkin’ Donuts scarf spot.

I raise my hand.

“I don’t understand the difference between the ‘content producer’ and the standard ‘video advertising’ model.” Nobody would ever confuse Dunkin’s presence on Sports Minute for content; they’d just perceive it as an overzealous ad buy.

“Good question,” Paoletti begins. A pregnant pause develops before she explains that Yahoo also helps with amateur video-style deployments on video.yahoo.com—think Ray Ban’s ”Guy Catches Sunglasses with Face” by Feed Company—“but that’s not something I wanted to get into today.”

At that point, moderator Josh Chasin of comScore interjects to say he has questions for his fellow panelists, but would hate to take away from audience Q/A time. “How many of you plan to ask questions at the end of this?” he asks (and with a straight face!).

Tentative hands flutter up. Three panelists haven’t even spoken yet; how can we know whether we’ll have questions?

Chasin’s burst of inquisitiveness yields one clear benefit: the evil plot to make us sit through elevator pitches gets totally derailed. For the next now-to-whenever, the panelists talk shop. It’s nice to see them get on so well at the expense of everyone else’s time.

A few scraps tossed out at random:

“There has to be a way to get beyond counting clicks, otherwise publishers won’t get credit for their buying influence” over the long-term, says Simon Assaad of Heavy Corp.

Paoletti: there is no average CPM for video across the board, because any number of variables can change the cost of a buy. Video “needs to work, but just doesn’t work” as a dependable ROI model.

Paoletti also says the future of digital video is mobile. Assaad, a contrarian at heart, confesses, “I’m actually not interested in mobile” and lamented embedded video was never really explored as an ROI platform.

“75-80 percent of video consumption online is not being taken advantage of by advertisers!” he says with feeling.

He goes on to say the recession drove advertisers into the arms of ad networks, whose company “would have made our skin crawl a few months ago.”

Chasin wonders if there’s a place for long-form video online. Forte points out Hulu’s click-thrus for streaming shows is great. Plus, it doesn’t cannibalize network TV. “This is catch-up viewing. It’s a new industry,” he beams.

Allen readily agreed, followed by Paoletti. Forte said short-form video isn’t very good for ad click-thru because attention spans are shorter.

From a user perspective, I think pre- and post-roll ads should be confined to professional videos. People accept that a reasonable amount of advertising is a fair exchange for content that cost money to produce and is being provided at no cost. Nobody makes mental allowances for ads in amateur work.

I ask whether there’s a practical benefit to putting amateur-style videos on YouTube. Forte calls them “mood setters” that help position the brand’s vibe. No more, no less.

Chasin turns to the audience and asks if there are anymore questions. A random audience member quips, “Can we hold you hostage?”

Related topics: Chicago, ad:tech CH 2008, CH 08 Sessions

Home » Drinks! Dinner! Dancing! Bottle Service! Yes, It’s An Ad Conference!

Drinks! Dinner! Dancing! Bottle Service! Yes, It’s An Ad Conference!

Posted by Steve Hall · Wednesday August 06, 2008

Last night after the first day of the ad:tech Chicago conference ended, UnsubCentral’s John Engler organized a dinner at the Chop House for about 16 people including Powered COO Mark Drosos, Direct Response Technologies’ Matt Haag, Frontline Direct Sales Manager Barbara Stratte and Marketing Director Cari McClure, Adconion Media Group VP Kristian Wilson and Account Manager Alexis Berger, Spiderbait Strategist Dante Montverde and StoryQuest’s Tim Keelan among others.

Also enjoying some of Chicago’s finest beef were Adrants’ Co-Editor Angela Natividad and the ad:tech blogging team Paige Dzenis, Brent Terrazas and Krista Neher.

Like any dinner with 16 people across two tables in a loud restaurant, the discussion varied widely from work topics to wine selection. None of which, sadly, can be currently called to mind. The food was amazing. The wine was great and the people excellent company.

After dinner, the clan headed over to Enclave for the DoubleClick-sponsored ad:tech After Party which was packed on arrival but began to thin out until the lights came up at midnight. ad:tech VP Don Knox, Content Director Warren Picket, Programming Chair Drew Ianni and Finance & Operations Administrator Dana Offuitt, among others where there.

The music was, well...how shall this be put...OK. but that didn’t stop a few from hitting the dance floor. Have fun picking yourself out in the photo album.

After the lights came up and more than a few thought it was simply much too early to end the night, several cab loads headed over to Manor which was just beginning to crank. Complete with bottle service, graciously provided by Lashback Sales Director Timothy Kastner, platform dancers and music that was...well...how shall this be put...several steps better than the music at Enclave, the night shifted, notably, in a new direction.

With black-suited, earpiece-wearing, Secret Service-like bouncers admonishing anyone who dared take photos of “our girls” (the platform dancers) because, well, “we have our own professional photographer,” the self-important ego-fest was complete. And what’s an ad:tech without some self-important ego? This is advertising after all.

Related topics: Chicago, ad:tech CH 2008, CH 08 Parties

Home » The More Things Change the More They Stay the Same - CPG Roundtable

The More Things Change the More They Stay the Same - CPG Roundtable

Posted by Krista Neher · Tuesday August 05, 2008

One of the themes of the discussion was “the more things change, the more they stay the same”.  While interactive and digital offer exciting new platforms, the basics of marketing haven’t really changed.  We often get caught up in the “web 2.0” (or now 3.0) and forget that the basics of marketing remain relatively unchanged. 

Andy Markowitz, Director of Digital Marketing and Media at Kraft Foods talked about going back to basics with marketing “it highlights and accentuates the need to go back to a value proposition that consumers care about”.  You still need to find the right value proposition and the right scale to have a meaningful conversation with consumers and create an ongoing dialogue.  While the methods have changed the basics are the same.  The internet has given us a richer way of communicating with target audiences.

The real change is HOW you do it.  How do you interject yourself into conversations?  One of the new opportunities is that consumers can now talk back.  Kevin Doohan, Director of Interactive Marketing at ConAgra Foods used a great analogy about how the internet is reverting us back to the “corner store” mentality – people want to interact with companies who know them and who care, and the internet provides an opportunity for companies (large and small) to build actual relationships with customers.

The conversation then shifted to tips for the three key stakeholders – marketers, agencies and vendors – to work together better.

Vendor Tips
Andy Markowitz kicked off the conversation by pointing out that “Customization and personalization is new Mass Market and we need to find a new way to break through the clutter.”

We aren’t realizing the full potential of interactive marketing and to do this we need to figure out a way to streamline the process.  All of the panelists said they were inundated with vendors and it is difficult for the vendors to break-through the clutter.  While there is an interest in learning more about potential new venues for communicating with consumers online, figuring out the best tool for a given target audience can be an overwhelming task. 

Brad Santeler, Director of Media at Abbott said that it is difficult to ascertain the unique selling proposition offered by vendors and how they truly are different versus other alternatives.  The marketers’ goal is to bring in the new ideas, however vendors need to be more concise and really get the point across – the panelist said that >10% of vendors get the point across accurately instead they are littered with buzzwords.

Marketer Tips
Focus on results versus activities.  Sounds simple, right?  Not always.  While it is easy to spend energy focusing on the activities that are planned, the actual results – what will the brand get? – are what will really drive your brand. 

Ask yourself some of the following questions: What is my brand problem, and what is the hurdle to growth?  How to do you measure the effect of breaking down the hurdles?  What is engagement worth?  What is an email forwarded about your brand worth?  The question is how these elements work together holistically.

Can’t We All Just Get Along?  Best Practices for Working Together
The panelists answered the question: What are the best practices for working with vendors and agencies?
o Vendors and Agencies can research the brands.  Do your own research prior to pitching a marketer.
o Marketers can create opportunities where they share events with strategic vendors/agencies and share marketing objectives and strategies to give vendors the opportunities to share ideas.
o Tactical vs. Strategic – Many vendors focus on the tactical elements without incorporating them into the broader strategic plans for the brand.

And now for Everyone’s Favorite Game – Marketing Measures!!!!
If you can connect your in-process measures to your outcome measures you can focus on your in-process measures, which are naturally much easier to measure.  The measure may not always be the sale.  What are the actions that your campaign targets and how do you measure the success?  Focus on the in-process measures, and how they link back to the sales objectives. 

Don’t measure everything because you can.  Focus on the measures that relate to your objectives.  You may end up optimizing off of something that doesn’t truly tie back to your marketing objectives.

Key Take Aways
To conclude the session presenters offered some key take aways:
- What makes you unique and relevant?  Focus on what you are offering that is unique.
- We are all on the same side of the table – we all benefit when we work collaboratively.
- Share information to help grow and improve the industry.

Related topics: Chicago, ad:tech CH 2008, CH 08 Sessions

Home » ad:tech Chicago Exhibit Hall Full of Activity

ad:tech Chicago Exhibit Hall Full of Activity

Posted by Steve Hall · Tuesday August 05, 2008

Chicago ad:tech is, by far, a smaller show than either new York or San Francisco. THough that doesn’t stop vendors and attendees from mingling en mass in the exhibit hall.

Related topics: Chicago, ad:tech CH 2008, CH 08 Exhibit Hall

Home » I Don’t Want to Have an Online Relationship With My Mustard!

I Don’t Want to Have an Online Relationship With My Mustard!

Posted by Paige Dzenis · Tuesday August 05, 2008

The power panel “Developing Developing the Big Idea - Creative Strategy and Execution in the Digital Era started out with a big idea—moderator Jeff Marshall told the audience that he had hoped for us to be able to Twitter in questions. Fun! I refreshed my Twitter in preparation… But this was quickly dismissed for logistical reasons and instead Jeff gave out his mobile number so we could text in any queries for the panel.

And from there, the conversation about “big ideas” regressed away from anything we’ve come to know as part of web 2.0 or this new “digital era” and instead highlighted case studies still dabbling in established online technologies.

Michael Piekarski, Creative Director with imc2 discussed their podcast campaign for Diet Coke Plus. A cute idea, tarnished a bit by the logic that “because podcasts are successful, this campaign will be successful!” Users can choose from a variety of podcasts—house party themed, zen themed, etc—and then download it to “enhance their lifestyle—just like the vitamins in Diet Coke Plus enhance your diet!” (Okay, perhaps I added in the last part, but that’s what was being implied.)

And how were Diet Coke Plus and/or music fans being driven to the site? Web banners! Um, really? The big ideas of the digital era are still reliant on web banners? Such is the case.

Jessica Boggs, Creative Director with AlphaZeta, Inc. showcased their work on the Aon Client Focus microsite—which had a clean, sleek layout and was built to divert Aon’s “intellectual capital” to their clients. In non-jargon speak, I took this to mean: displaying videos, PDFs and other info in a content-viewer format with an easy-to-use backend for uploading and monitoring content.

To answer the question “what role should a brand play in a consumer’s digital lifestyle?” Jamie Anderson, VP/Digital Director of Cramer-Krasselt took the mic and revealed Corona’s yet-unlaunched web portal—a virtual beach, just begging for customer interaction. What I found most interesting was that the site has had no press but it’s already getting traffic. This is where those who don’t have a liquor client on their agency roster get insanely jealous. Booze: It’s like you don’t even have to try to get customers interested. They just Google you all day long for fun and pump up your metrics.

Out of everyone speaking on the panel, Jamie was the most laid-back and compelling. Responding to questions about consumer engagement online, he remarked “It’s not about online relationships—it’s about the actions you take online and how they translate into the real world—how you measure them and how it benefits the consumer, [more so] than the brand.”

The last case study presented was from Dominic Lee, Digital Creative Director at Leo Burnett North America. It was exactly what you’d expect from Leo Burnett—a well thought out and executed campaign to increase awareness about Hallmark’s new line of (RED) products.

Full disclaimer: I do not like the (RED) campaign at all. It’s all fluff and no substance—but does give anyone involved a nice fuzzy feeling about “doing something good”. However, this makes Leo Burnett’s mostly-Facebook-oriented Hallmark campaign pure genius. Facebook is, after all, the capital of click-to-show-you-care.

However, this insight seemed lost on an audience that burst out in laughter when someone told a story about a daughter being upset that her mom was on Facebook. Like I said, big ideas about the new digital era… there’s still a lot to be desired. 

Related topics: Chicago, ad:tech CH 2008, CH 08 Sessions

Home » No Undies Today. What’s a Girl to Do.

No Undies Today. What’s a Girl to Do.

Posted by Angela Natividad · Tuesday August 05, 2008

Lots of flight cancellations en route to Chicago yesterday because of a big lightning storm. (It was dazzling from the airplane window, in a fatal attraction sort of way.) I was supposed to arrive at O’Hare around 6:45pm, but my flight got tossed and I was put on an 8:40 flight out of Philadelphia which was delayed, then delayed, then delayed. We finally made it to Chicago around midnight.

My luggage is lost.

Arrived at Red Roof Inn near 2am. The concierge was nice. Flight delayed? he said. Yes, I said. I asked for toiletries—toothbrush, shampoo—and he said he didn’t have any because the lobby was flooded with water in the afternoon. Failing to see the logic there.

Went upstairs to wash face. Facial soap was already open. Decided to just lay down and die, but couldn’t sleep. It is now morning, late morning at that, and I smell like airport man musk.

Online encouragement from well-meaning friends (plus boyfriend):

John Engler - “Sorry about your baggage. I made dinner plans tonight. Try to shower.”

Steve Hall - “I have man shower stuff if you want to use it.”

Benj - ”HORROR STORY. Read the comments! Doesn’t look good.”

David Griner - “Now pull yourself together, woman. Sexy blogging is about opportunity, and you’re missing out. You should be posting tweets about ‘no undies today, what’s a girl to do,’ etc. Don’t make me send you back to Big Dave’s Finishing School.”

Related topics: Chicago, ad:tech CH 2008

Home » Ad:tech Kicks off with the Age of Performance Branding

Ad:tech Kicks off with the Age of Performance Branding

Posted by Krista Neher · Tuesday August 05, 2008

Ad:tech kicked off with a great start!  Drew Ianni the Chair of ad:tech introduced the keynote speaker and shared some key info on the state of the industry.  A few key pieces of information:

- Online Advertising is growing – from $25B to $50B in 2012
- IAB reported $6.8B in Q1 with growth of 18% (not bad for a slowing economy)
- Key Trend – Consolidation: 300 “networks” to a few dozen by 2010
- $$ still flowing to innovators: Apps/Widgets, Social, Mobile, Niche
- With the state of the economy, ad budgets are tightening, however digital and online continue to show growth

The stage was set with an optimistic outlook for digital marketing, and Kevin kicked it off by asking the audience: “What comes to mind when you think of performance and brand building?” After a short silence (probably because the coffee hasn’t kicked in yet), the audience threw out some suggestions:

- Search
- ROI
- Increased Sales
- Growth

According to Kevin, growth comes largely from being more relevant to the marketplace. There are two things that are really driving this: 1) Gathering and using better insights from the people that matter to you the most and 2) Telling more stories more often to people who matter to you.

Marketers used to search for connections with the right consumers based on insights.  The industry is now shifting, and consumers are looking for you.  Consumers are interested in interacting with brands.  The FanPages on facebook are a great example of how consumers are actively engaging with the brands that they love.

There are 3 key forces driving this shift in the industry:
1) Technological Breakthroughs
2) Search as the BIG idea
3) The effectiveness decade

The technological drivers of change are the democratization of information, accessibility of information and accessibility of storage.  The democratization trend is highlighted by the growth in user-generated-media; anyone can create content and post it to the web and build a global audience.  The brands that will perform well are those who are engaged in the content game.  They focus on content and not just advertising.

Accessibility to information has increased dramatically with the growth in broadband internet; more and more households have access to high-speed internet (64% of households).  Additionally, storage costs are plummeting – think of the ipod and memory cards and how much data they can now hold for a fraction of what they cost a year ago. 

For Brand Builders, there are more tools for brands to connect with consumers.  Americans are watching more user generated video and there is a proliferation of information and content being developed for the internet.

With the growth of online content search becomes a more important field.  The brands that will perform best in this era will be those who can understand search and how it works.  Marketers have more power to tell the right stories to the right consumers at the right time.  Keep in mind – this presentation is from a Google guy – obviously they love search.

Search is important because it connects consumers with all of the information that they care about and it connects marketers with the consumers that they care about.  According to Kevin 50% of all sales (online and offline) are affected by web research despite only 6% of sales taking place online (I know – I was surprised by this).  Many CPG brands think that their categories are not heavily searched (particularly because they are low involvement purchases), however even these categories have a lot of search (check out the google Keywords tool to see how much your category is searched).  If you include related subject areas (ie. if you sell deodorant, how often do people search body odor) the opportunity represented by search is clearly large for almost any category.

“You’re Sitting on Your Assets!!!” Many brands have great content that can’t be found and therefore are not being fully utilized.  Maximize your ROI by taking your existing assts and make them more relevant and searchable (maximize your exposure).  Heinz had a great execution with an online video contest – they had over 1 million views of the call to action video, 4k qualified contest entries and over 100k hours spent interacting with the brand.  While the results sound good, without an understanding of the costs and ROI it is difficult to assess how successful this contest actually was at increasing sales relative to the costs.

“If you build it they will come” isn’t typically the best marketing strategy for online.  People have to be able to find what you built at a time that is relevant to them.

Three key questions (Kevin calls them “steps of faith”) to ask when looking to spend online (these are all rhetorical questions – the answers are all intended to be yes):

1) Can online campaigns drive brick and mortar sales?
-Dove created a holistic online campaign which showed a 25% increase in dollars spent on the brand with the majority being new customers.
2) Search…. Great for direct response but can it help build my brand?
- Search engine results have shown increases in unaided awareness, purchase consideration and purchase intent.  At the same time, competitors showed decreases across the same metrics.
3) If I have a great video asset, should I put in online or on TV?
-Both.  Google tested 3 categories with the same creative on TV, online on youtube and online embedded in content.  Content is shown to be as effective online as on traditional TV.  (again, remember, this guy works for google)

These are actually really valuable considerations when looking at your existing strategies online.  Are you fully leveraging what you have?  Are you tracking your results in meaningful ways?

As the session closed, Kevin offered three key takeaways that are really valuable things for marketers to consider.  Ask yourself these questions when assessing your digital campaign:
1) Unimaginable scale…. Use it.  Take advantage of all the opportunities that the internet offers.
2) Are brand assets performing hard enough?  Have we made our assets findable and discoverable?
3) Measure in terms of brand-building metrics.  Are we measuring against brick and mortar sales?
Ask yourself these questions when evaluating the current state of your marketing spending and when looking to design and execute future campaigns.  Ad:tech is off to a great start, and the keynote was rich with information and food for thought.  Stay tuned – the conference is just getting started here and there is much more to come.

Related topics: Chicago, ad:tech CH 2008, CH 08 Keynotes

Home » Come to ad:tech Chicago For Free! (Sort of)

Come to ad:tech Chicago For Free! (Sort of)

Posted by Steve Hall · Sunday August 03, 2008

Often times, one can’t always afford to go to or get their employer to pay for every ad conference they want to but if you’re in Chicago August 5-6 and want to go to ad:tech, there’s quite a few things you can attend for free. If you grab an exhibit hall pass by they end of the day, August 4, it’s free. You can use that pass to wander the exhibit hall to check out the latest offerings from online marketing companies, attend the Tuesday evening party at Enclave, the Avenue A/Razorfish Wednesday lunch forum on social media, the many Google sessions on Google AdWords and other Google products, the AdShuffle ad serving seminars and several other offerings which you can check out here.

Related topics: Chicago, ad:tech CH 2008, CH 08 Conference Info

Home » Chicago ad:tech Conference Highlights Local Marketing Leaders

Chicago ad:tech Conference Highlights Local Marketing Leaders

Posted by Steve Hall · Tuesday July 29, 2008

When a conference is held in a particular city, it’s always a good thing to include speaker and panelists from that city. After all, it’s kinda nice to get inside the head of people working across the street from you and vying for some of the same business. Chicago’s ad:tech conference has gathered together a large collection of Chicago-based speakers including Edelman’s Rick Murray, Starcom’s Chris Allen, Leo Burnett’s Dominic Lee, Kraft Foods’ Andy Markowitz and many more. Check out the full list here.

Related topics:

Home » Chicago ad:tech to Offer Insight With Collection of Case Studies

Chicago ad:tech to Offer Insight With Collection of Case Studies

Posted by Steve Hall · Tuesday July 22, 2008

During the Chicago ad:tech conference, several case studies will be presented to help illustrate what companies are doing online, what works and what results they are seeing. First, Stardoll Senior VP Matt Palmer and EVP and GM Matt Palmer along with Universal McCann SVP of Digital Mike Racic will talk about how a major clothing retailer took advantage of Stardoll for a back to school campaign.

Amtrak Senior Director of Loyalty Marketing Michael Blakey and Carlson Marketing Interactive and Mobile Global VP Doug Rozen will share with attendees how Amtrak and Carlson teamed to create a multi-platform customer loyalty program. And Wall Street Journal Digital Strategy & Operations Executive Director Richard Trumble and Action Engine President and CEO Scott G. Silk will explain the strategy they used and the results seen from taking the Wall Street Journal mobile.

Other case studies include work done for FTD a dn ox News Mobile. Check out the details here.

Related topics:

Home » Fulton’s and Rock Bottom Replaced by Enclave for Chicago ad:tech

Fulton’s and Rock Bottom Replaced by Enclave for Chicago ad:tech

Posted by Steve Hall · Tuesday June 24, 2008

Not that a few won’t end up atop Rock Bottom at the end of the night anyway but it’s nice to know that, for the first time in, like, forever, there will be a party at the Chicago ad:tech that won’t be held at Rock Bottom or Fulton’s. Nope. This year, it’ll all be happening at Enclave, a swanky nightclub where Kim Kardashian has been know to appear - not that that matters to anyone, of course.

ad:tech has a sponsor or two for the party but companies looking to tap into the creme de la creme of online marketing would be wise to contact ad:tech to get in on the action. After all, let’s be blunt, someone has to pay for all those expected free drinks. We can’t have conference attendees actually paying for drinks. That, as you know, just isn’t done in this business!  Contact to get in on the action.

Related topics: CH 08 Parties

Home » What Happens in Miami…Can Also Happen in Chicago

What Happens in Miami…Can Also Happen in Chicago

Posted by Steve Hall · Sunday June 15, 2008

Whoa. Weren’t we all just in Miami getting our interactive (and, um, other things) on at ad:tech? Indeed we were but now it’s time for the Chicago version of ad:tech. OK, OK, so it’s not hot, sunny, sand-filled Miami Beach but it is Navy Pier and Lake Michigan which provides an awesome skyline view of Chicago. That is, if you have a friend with a nice big sailboat who’s kind enough to take you out.

Someone will have a booze cruise. Someone will have a party at The W. CIMA will have a party at Fulsom’s. And, no doubt, one night we’ll all end up atop Rock Bottom at the end of the night. Aside from that, there will keynotes from author Clay Shirky and Google CPG Industry Director Kevin Kells. There will be three panel tracks covering Media and Branding, Tactical Marketing and Emerging Platforms.

Conversational Branding will be explored as will mobile, search, viral, the death of he banner, new media economy and, yes, of course, social media.

Related topics: CH 08 Conference Info

Home » ad:tech Miami May Not Be Forever, but Boy, Friendship Is.

ad:tech Miami May Not Be Forever, but Boy, Friendship Is.

Posted by Angela Natividad · Friday June 06, 2008

I was in the hallway late yesterday, typing between sessions and recharging my computer at one of ad:tech’s precious outlets, when a shadow fell across my monitor.

It was Paige Dzenis of Brand Infiltration. She towered over me, smiling expectantly.

“Hello,” she said. We made small talk. Suddenly she cried: “Wanna go to the beach?!”

No one in the last five years has asked me to go to the beach. I don’t like sand, and I also don’t own shorts or flip-flops. (These were decisions based on principle, not convenience.)

I contemplated this in a moment of brain-lapse as the silence grew uncomfortable. “Suuuure,” I said slowly. We exchanged numbers and Paige walked off.

A few hours later, Steve Hall, Brent Terrazas, Paige and I—a small, proud ad:tech-blogging cult—went to the beach. Paige had absorbed a $14 mojito and was festively dressed in a blouse and tiny shorts. She reminded me of Audrey Hepburn in Sabrina—you know, when she goes sailing with Bogey.

Steve and Brent made a conscious effort to look J. Crew casual: big canvassy man-shorts, slippers and button-downs. They did a lot of foot-shifting and standing-around with their hands on their hips.

For the repugnant walking-through-sand part of our journey, I took off my high-heeled boots, peeled off my socks, rolled up my jeans and followed gingerly behind the others. The air was salty, the sun low in the sky, and the horizon looked clean and empty.

“We have to touch the water, right?” Steve said.

“Yes!” Paige exclaimed. Far in the background I made a scornful noise, which Brent humored with a sympathetic glance.

The water drew near. Topaz waves slid back and forth with almost exaggerated regularity. “Look at the WAVES!” Steve shouted.

“You call these waves?” said Brent. “You sad East Coasters.”

Paige plunged her feet into the wettest part of the sand, waiting for the waves to come back. I put down my shoes and inched toward the water.

Toe dip. Ooh. Warm. It was nothing like the beaches in Northern California, where icy water makes swimming an agonizing waffler-fest of will and terror.

I put my feet in.

“You can get to Cuba in two hours from here by boat,” Brent said.

“I think I can see it,” I kidded.

The waves got meaner as the wind picked up, and I’d waded too far to avoid the ones crashing toward me. I tried stumbling back, but it was useless. I was soaked.

And It was amazing! I raced back up the shore, then down again and up again, playing tag with the sea like a puppy sorely inept at playing “catch.” More than once the waves attacked with success, and I almost fell over, screaming with psychotic glee. Steve, Brent and Paige froze and watched.

“You’re like a kid who’s never been to the ocean,” Brent said. Then he made some sort of palsied gesture, coupled with shrieks, that I think were supposed to pass for me.

“You guys hungry?” Steve said. “Let’s go have dinner.”

“No!” I exploded. My hair was soaked, my blouse clinging to my skin and my underpants almost certainly waterlogged. I couldn’t go back to the way things were. But I did feel hungry, so I waded reluctantly out of the water and followed the others.

The ocean had become my friend.

We went to Jerry’s, whose menu is so overwhelming that you long to push Alt+F. Steve and Brent had sandwiches, Paige got a pizza crust salad and I had steak and lobster. At some point during the meal Paige made a sound like, “Ohhhhh kyooooooooote!”

A pair of homeless kittens had approached the table, nosing for scraps. One was small and gray; the other was black and had cheeky eyes.

“Don’t feed them,” said Brent.

Paige fed them. Brent glared. “I’ll stop now,” she said, splashing two more man-sized crumbs onto the concrete.

We resumed dinner, then one of the kittens leaped onto a ledge beside Paige and drew close.

“It’s so cute!” Paige exclaimed. She reared back, met eyes with the cat and made this long happy noise. I froze to watch; she kept going, and the volume kept escalating. She was SCREAMING with cute overload.

“You’re screaming at the cat,” I said. And with admirable effort, Paige ceased.

“I’m such a fan of animals,” she said. I love Paige.

We ended the night at a club called Dream. The party was sponsored by Terra, which Brent doesn’t like for reasons he’ll explain in a different post. It had an ‘80s theme—Flashdance playing on a projector, “Let’s Hear it for the Boy” blaring overhead—and at some point, channeling an earlier incarnation of myself, I leaped up and down and did the cute-overload shriek.

Around 1am the musical selection devolved into pure bomba. Brent seized me and tried twirling me into submission, which was a terrible failure, then we all decided to go home.

Brent, Paige and I walked off into the humid night, arms swinging, all chummy and whatnot. (Cue Flashdance soundtrack music.)

Related topics: Miami 08 Parties

Home » SEM is a Tool, Not a Divining Rod

SEM is a Tool, Not a Divining Rod

Posted by Angela Natividad · Friday June 06, 2008

Here’s a taste of what I heard at ad:tech Miami’s The State of Search in Latin America.

How do you think search fits into the marketing mix?

“Research suggests AdWords placement impacts brand recognition,” said commercial director Andreas Huettner of Google in Brazil.

Do you think LatAm is behind [in terms of search marketing’s maturity]?

“We are definitely behind. Which is why we were on an evangelization mission.”

The Google director’s “evangelization” comment sparked a condescending panel-wide lament about how “traditional marketers” just don’t get search and are reluctant to try it.

These men talked of traditional marketing like it was some backwater village ritual. And, like overzealous missionaries, they failed to see the logical fallacies in their brave new religion.

Search advertising, the pay-per-click (PPC) component in particular, is presented to hesitant marketers as a direct marketing tool we all just have to “master.” The pitch is deceptively simple: play your keywords right, and you’ll invest a little and get a lot back.

As the popularity of PPC search increases in Latin America, saturation will drive prices up, admitted Alexander Kavinsky, director of New Products and SEM at Midiadigital. “But as of today, search is quite effective and quite cheap in LatAm.”

What he’s saying is, Get in now. Those clicks are waiting to be plucked off the vine.

But what happens after saturation? Prices go up—and as they do, the likelihood of making a profit on your investment goes down. In the American market, no amount of “optimization” conducted with a Google or Yahoo consultant can motivate a PPC campaign in a saturated industry to so much as break even.

I’ve experienced the panic that comes with realizing great keywords no longer convert well. And even if click-through can be cajoled into improving, prices climb faster, absorbing any profits I could hope to cull from PPC.

When my company slipped into high monthly negatives in on their PPC campaigns, I approached my employers, who told me not to worry. As long as they go negative no more than $10,000 per month in search, they can afford the loss.

“Why is it okay to go negative at all?” I had asked.

They attributed it to branding. “Seeing us at the top of the sponsored listings sends a strong message” to rivals, affiliates and customers, my bosses argued.

The company already shined in organic listings; we were always among the top 3 results in our sector, so we hardly had to throw cash at a “branding” problem that didn’t exist.

“Search is definitely helping branding and branding is definitely helping search. A number of published studies have been done, where you can see how they interplay,” Kavinsky crooned, echoing something we heard repeatedly in that short hour: Search helps with branding. Trust us. There’s been research.

But when the panelists pulled the “branding” card, they never made a distinction between sponsored and organic search; neither did they give us data or names from this valuable “research.”

“Look it up,” they kept saying.

Here’s one report I managed to find on branding and SEM. Like our panelists, it claims there is a correlation between SEM and branding.

And, like our panelists, it fails to draw a distinction between organic and paid search, but puts all the weight of branding on keyword selection—which suggests paid search is what helps your brand, organic be damned. “What is an effective SEM campaign based on? Yep. Keywords. Choosing them is both an art and a science,” it reads.

Unfortunately, no amount of keyword selection will help you fare well in sponsored search if your market is saturated.

In direct marketing, a marketer conducts a campaign under the cutthroat impression that he will spend X and yield 2X. If he fails to break even, he either makes a measurable change—or he simply stops.

This is the beauty of the backwater approach: it’s results-based, and nobody’s trying to pop philosophize otherwise. You spend, measure and judge the quality of a program by the result. If you don’t realize a profitable response in a certain window of time—say, between 2-4 weeks of sending out a mailer—something is wrong.

You don’t keep doing the same thing every month because it’s “good for branding.”

“Pay-per-click is a direct marketing tool,” snapped Jolie O’Dell, an armchair social media consultant. “And it should be treated like one.”

So why do search experts ask us to treat PPC advertising differently?

If a PPC campaign stops pulling its weight because of market saturation, you can tinker all you like; it won’t make a damn bit of difference. My advice to the branding-obsessed is to get SEO-savvy. Whatever searchers might feel about sponsored listings, we know for sure they trust the sites that rank well in the organic listings. (As an added perk to merit-based means, organic won’t cost you $10 per click.)

If you can afford to “brand” indiscriminately across both sponsored and organic, more power to you. I hope you’re making the on-paper lo