Admittedly I’ve been a little under the mainstream media radar lately, but it’s getting harder and harder to avoid the “movement”. So, is Occupy Wall Street great marketing, or listless babble? I came across two blog posts on the subject. You can check out both sides of the argument by going to this post http://su.pr/1TRTHS and this post http://su.pr/2HhYY5. Draw your own conclusions.
Farber’s post is a little crass, but does make a strong argument. I’ve watched the news and one thing is clear, the protestors don’t care for Wall Street. Not the street, but I think Wall Street as the embodiment of what they believe to be capitalism run amuck. Maybe Farber is being too hard on them.
The pro-protest blog post was written by Critithinker. The fact that the author remained anonymous kind of proves several points made in Farber’s post, isn’t the lack of corporate transparency part of the problem? Critithinker believes old school marketing could learn a few things from OWS, or the “movement”.
We’re not about to jump in on one side or the other. To be honest, both make valid arguments for the use of old and new approaches to marketing. If they work together you might truly see something new and different we could all use to sell not just social exasperation, but products and services as well. I just don’t want OVLG; no reason to Occupy VLG for helping companies who’s shares trade on Wall Street. We’re just trying to pay our mortgages, keep the lights on and create jobs.
There are many skeptics when it comes to consumer purchases that can double as a charitable act. The concept of “One for One,” created by the popular shoe manufacturers TOMS and highlighting the concept of buying one pair and giving one away, is the center of debate. The question often proposed is, do people buy these products just to feel good about themselves or is it really the great cause it claims to be that lures them in? I am confused by this argument.
Does your intention when buying really make a difference in the greater scheme of things? People are still getting what they need because of your purchase, correct? In this article by Joe Ippolito, questions are raised about whether shoes are the greatest need and although he also agrees “doing some good is better than nothing,” he points fingers at these companies and whether or not they can be trusted. I applaud these companies and if there is a need, no matter how small, I don’t think we should shy away because it might not make the biggest “impact” according to the critics.
In just under four years, 600,000 pairs have been given away causing lives to be saved. It is hard to look at that statistic and deny that they are doing something right to get their product noticed and that they have people who believe in their cause. Watch this video that was sent out during last holiday season and see for yourself, are you a believer?
(Mary O’Connor is back at Auburn University finishing up her senior year. This will be her last entry and we appreciate all her work on our behalf. She is someone we’d gladly hire at VLG.)
Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you know Hulu.com is an increasingly popular way to catch up on the latest t.v. shows.
eMarketer expects 33 percent of U.S. adult Internet users will turn to viewing a full-length episode online at least once a month this year. The percentage of people viewing television shows online over the past two years showed significant increase and that number is expected to rise even further.
This is a huge opportunity for advertisers looking to increase and expand visibility in the digital market. Americans love television, but where you watch the shows is changing. Advertisers need to continue adapting to this digital movement. It’s time to ditch old school t.v. spots and adopt a new format that leverages the Internet.
As the saying goes, “you only have one chance to make a first impression.” Companies spend a lot of time and money on brand awareness. Make sure your efforts aren’t lost in the crowd, because brand awareness might not help you achieve revenue goals. Will your brand be remembered?
What you think should be obvious to customers doesn’t always ring true. Breaking through the clutter to grab individual attention doesn’t necessarily mean you need a moon walking bear when a bouncing ball will do.
For additional awareness tests check out DoTheTest.co.uk. (Contributor: Mary O’Connor)
Spirit Airlines is walking a thin line between humor and heartache with a recent advertising campaign.
Their oil spill jokes on their website and email promotions have gone too far for most customers. Spirit was quick to comment to complaints with this rebuttal.
“It is unfortunate that some have misunderstood our intention with today’s beach promotion. We are merely addressing the false perception that we have oil on our beaches, and we are encouraging customers to support Florida and our other beach destinations by continuing to travel to these vacation hot spots,” according to SpiritAir.com.
Believable? Is Spirit trying garner publicity by creating controversy? One thing is for sure, in a time as sensitive as this, with so many lives affected, Spirit went too far! What do you think? (Contributor: Mary O’Connor)
Social media is quickly becoming the norm for peer-to-peer communication and information dissemination. Now companies will have to join the fray. If your company hasn’t, it’s time to jump in. Consumers can make noise and you’ll need to respond faster to complaints or questions.
Michael Bush from Ad Age states, “By rewarding complainers with lightning-fast responsiveness, are marketers training consumers to publicly flog them rather than take the discreet and often-frustrating route of calling customer service?” Interesting point. Put another way, will consumers cry wolf to get a refund, save a buck, or game the system?
Does it make sense to train consumers to think the best way to get a faster service is to bash your brand, to tell every one of their friends and connections about a terrible experience, and do it all in the public domain. With the power of social media how will companies respond? Sometimes meeting customers where they are, in the social media centered world, is not the best venue for solving all of your company’s problems. But then again, maybe it is.
An Associated Press article states that California’s legislature is considering a bill that could potentially lower state debt. The bill allows the state to begin researching digital license plates. Ad placement on the digital plate would generate a revenue stream for the debt riddled state. Smart Plate, a San Francisco-based company, is developing electronic license plates, but has not put them production quite yet.
On one hand, this may boost the state’s economy, but there is the question of driver safety. Although the automobile ads would only appear when a car stops for at least four seconds, there are several other factors to consider. Theft, personal property rights and media buying all come to mind. Do the benefits of economic growth outweigh the possible safety hazards, or is it the other way around?
What an interesting, pop culture driven world we live in.
Advertising Age released this chart based on an online tracking service Trendrr Pro to analyze the various articles featured on Google News. Over the six-week period, the web engine displayed more articles about popular culture and social media than reports on the latest military efforts. Facebook, Twitter and Apple top the charts, followed by stories about Iraq and Afghanistan.
Pop culture opportunists Lady Gaga and Miley Cyrus appear fail the “newsworthiness” test. It’s quite interesting to see where Americans’ priorities lie in terms of newsworthy stories in the midst of war.
When Toy Story 3 premiered across the country on June 18, 2010, it grossed an enormous $41,148,961, breaking records for the single-highest opening day gross for an animated film. The marketing strategy for this film is both innovative and unique, targeting 18-24 year olds who grew up alongside Woody and the gang the first two films. (Editor’s note: holy crap! Twenty-four year olds grew up watching Toy Story.)
Marketing experts attacked Disney’s most controversial tactic, their decision to release a free “cliffhanger” screening of the first sixty five minutes to college students. Hoping to capture enough buzz and anticipation, skeptics questioned whether or not this audience would pay $10 to see the last thirty eight minutes. Why not just find it for free on the Internet.
Was this new and risky marketing strategy a failure or a success? Looking at the numbers, I’d say a success.
There are so many search engines people use on an every day –- no, every hour –- basis and juggling all of them can take an excessive amount of time. Between Google, Yahoo, Facebook, Twitter, Amazon, YouTube and the unlimited amount of other websites designed to search for products, images and other online — driven content, it can be quite grueling to manage all your search. One website comes to the rescue!
Favitt.com, an “all in one” search engine, enables single-keyword search across multiple websites at once. Favitt simplifies and personalizes the online searching process, making it the only search engine website totally customized to your needs. By creating your free account, you are allowed to add all the sites you frequent. It also allows you to customize the home page by uploading images onto the background.
Upload multiple images and Favitt will shuffle through them for a new background experience every time. This fun, effortless website is a one-stop tool for the inquisitive online junkie. It’s easy to say that Favitt is the multi-search engine made simple.
