VoxFortis

Blog publicity - double standard?

I read several sources today in my attempt to investigate the uproar over the Microsoft People Ready banner ad campaign. Gawker's coverage can be found here, but it's basically bloggers being PO'd that some of the more well-known writers participated in a Microsoft marketing campaign.

To be honest, I don't really have a strong opinion on the subject...I suppose I should, because after all, you are reading my blog. The thing is, people do them for different reasons. The blogger community can romanticize it all they want, but the fact is the more successful bloggers have turned their writing into a business. They generate money with it. You generally don't hear very many complaints about other ways in which they do that, be it as an affiliate or from Google Ads. So why does this strike a chord?

Is it because it's Microsoft? Maybe it's just that icky film that people can't seem to wash off their blog's pallor if they feel like the big M had anything to do with their sponsorship or existence. I'm not sure. Maybe it's the anti-establishment feel...that bloggers are the uncensored and unsponsored journalistic equivalents to the muckrakers way back when. That may all be true, but blogs have moved beyond user generated content into the realms of business generated content, like it or not. I cannot count the number of job listings I see to blog for some company or another. (They usually pay terribly, but that's another entry.)

What if the ad campaign had been for Apple? For the iPhone? Something tells me the reaction would have been very different.

What color is your teacup?

I'm learning a whole lot about working for a product vendor versus working as the retailer. It's very interesting to behold.

Retailers are brand-centric. Particularly in the consumer electronics space (where I came from) you're selling the same stuff as Best Buy, Crutchfield, Amazon, etc. There are distinguishing things you do to try and set you apart (how you merchandise, your personnel, etc) because after all, an iPod is an iPod. Some companies succeed at that better than others, of course, but you probably see where I'm going with that point.

Switch to the vendor side. Your business is the products. And yes, you sell the same stuff that other vendors sell, but you're on the flip side of being extraordinarily product-focused and possibly neglecting the brand. I'm finding myself in that kind of situation. A company that is traditionally product-specifically focused (which makes sense in their industry, but hurts them in the long run) is tasking me with revamping their website to be a brand experience.

I've become the default creative manager for this project because...well, I am the entire web team. Just the little red-haired (and incredibly sharp-witted, of course) girl in the cube. We're working with an absolutely excellent outside vendor, who asked the question I was dreading today:

We need to better understand the brand.

Man, don't we all. I have very vague concepts and words that I have heard over and over, but they're extremely generic. They're words ANY company in this landscape would use, and when pressed for differentiation I get one of two things:

1. A gulp and a blank stare.
2. Eyes intently focused on skirt lint. With fingers picking frantically.

Really, this creates a good opportunity. If there is no brand, then we get to build it.

Selfishly, it means I get a crash course in building brand identity, which is good because my former employer is infamous for failing miserably in that endeavor.

Silver linings, people. It's all about the teacup ride. There's lots of swirling, faces passing by with smiles and thumbs up...but really, it's me in the teacup turning that circle furiously to keep everything moving. Smiling when inside my stomach is breakdancing. You know the feeling.

Visual explanation

For those of you unacquainted with the signal of death that's emitted from the Xbox 360's power button, observe:

That little light right there will cost you either $140 in Microsoft fixes, or $399 for a new Box.

Red Circle of Death

Our Xbox 360 died this weekend. Le sigh. It was an at-launch purchase (I know, I KNOW, ok?) and had been freezing up every now and again. Unfortunately, it went to the big video game graveyard in the sky, with nothing more than a blinking red light to show for it.

*lip quiver*

It also means that all 100+ hours of Elder Scrolls is now gone. *twitch* The thought of starting that game over at the very beginning makes me break out in a rash.

That machine needs to be replaced, badly. Halo 3 and Assassin's Creed are just around the corner, not to mention all the unwatched DVDs that will accumulate from Blockbuster.

What a way to start a week.

Spokescreaturedom

Forbes has released America's 10 most-liked spokes creatures.

The Trix bunny? Seriously? I do feel a twinge of 80's "back in the day" warm fuzzies to see Tony the Tiger on there, but then I got curious about the criteria used for "most loved." According to the accompanying article, "For consumers to connect on a deeper, more emotional level, a character's struggles need to be familiar to them."

These characters have struggles? I think that's a little far-fetched. "Most loved" is likely tapping into some nostalgia, which is fine by me...let's just call it what it is. Snap, Crackle and Pop are hardly ready to be seen on the latest episode of Intervention.

Speaking of iconic spokespeople, in case you haven't heard, the Clintons spoofed The Sopranos in an attempt to...um...er...do something. Yeah.

Do not pass Go...

Sometimes it's amazing how much I can take for granted that people understand websites. I don't mean that in a snobby way, and I truly believe that a lot of professionals fall into that trap...it's something you do every day, so it becomes second nature to you. It's a habit. It's part of your world. Looking up your company's AOV and conversion from the previous day always happens right after you pick up your Starbucks. Everyone does it, right?

Then you'll get questions from people that are fascinated by one of those things...those things that you glance at and pay no more mind to than the junk mail you flip through when you walk into your house in the evening. Those things that jerk you back into the "real world" and not just the online one that you work in daily.

I was presenting a marketing plan in regards to the website for my employer today. The company I work for is very good at what they do, but they're very old school, and the Internet isn't something they'd ever had to rely on previously. They've never had a person whose sole responsibility was web strategy, which makes it a very gratifying position to be in. It's new to everyone, so I can make the sandbox the way I want it...build some sandcastles in this corner, maybe a moat around certain parts, decorate it with shells...you get the idea.

And really, that high level stuff is the fun stuff. Focusing on that all day just intensifies that nasty habit of assuming everyone is on the same page as you. You assume you're all playing Monopoly, and suddenly the questions you're getting are way back in the realm of Connect Four.

Today, that question came from someone that said, "So are you saying you can measure how long someone stays on the site?"

It's such a simple question, but it taught me a lot in two seconds. Many people I interact with every day want to "understand more about the Internet" but they don't know what they should ask, and obviously I have no clue where to start.

But questions like that are an extremely good wake-up call. My hunch is there are MANY businesses out there that run a site because they know they're "supposed to" but they don't understand what it should be doing. (As is the case with my current employer.) They don't know how to portray their business, sell their widgets, let alone look at what's going on with their site to figure it out...because they don't understand the capability.

If I could teach that stuff full-time, I would. Running my own business doing something along those lines would make me a very happy marketer. Someday, perhaps.

For right now, I have to nod and reply, "You'd be amazed at the things we can measure." You've gotta start somewhere, and it's not always with building hotels on Park Place and Boardwalk.

Semel sashays into the sunset

Maybe I should Google Yahoo sashay to see if I spelled that right. Hmm.

Terry's out, Yang is (back) in, plus a side of Sue Decker. (Check the mugshots here to see the players.) First, the official letter from Semel to the Board:

Dear Fellow Board Members:

I am incredibly proud to have led Yahoo! these past six years, and I want to thank the Board for the opportunity to serve such a pioneering company during this exciting, still early stage of the Internet's development.

Since the day I arrived in Sunnyvale in the spring of 2001, I've been fortunate to work with some of the most remarkable, innovative and dedicated people I've ever known. At that time, following a collapse in Internet advertising, Yahoo! was facing severe challenges. But since then, by working together, the people of this great company have been able to achieve extraordinary growth and deliver substantial value to our shareholders.

Today, we are again addressing challenges created by dramatic changes in the needs of audiences and advertisers. And of course none of us is at all satisfied with the company's recent financial performance. Despite these difficulties, however, Yahoo! continues to have tremendous fundamental strengths. We remain the leader in Internet advertising and a powerful competitive force in markets around the globe. In addition, we have achieved a great deal over the past several months, such as our recent successful launch of our critical new Panama search marketing platform, which puts us in a strong position to shape a very bright future for Yahoo!.

As you know, we have long talked about the importance of ensuring a smooth succession in Yahoo!'s senior leadership -- and more recently, about the need for a leadership team committed to carrying Yahoo! through its multi-year transformation. As we discussed my future goals and plans, I was clear in telling you of my desire to take a step back sooner rather than later. I know we all agree that Jerry and Sue, with their superb talents and intense dedication to Yahoo! and its people, are the perfect combination to carry us forward. This is the time for new executive leadership, with different skills and strengths, to step in and drive the company to realize its full potential -- it is the right thing to do, and the right time is now.

Jerry and Sue will make an unbeatable team. Jerry has long been recognized as an Internet visionary. His incredible experience and close involvement since founding the company 12 years ago have given him unique insight about the industry and unparalleled knowledge and understanding of Yahoo! and its potential. We are equally fortunate to have Sue Decker, one of the most talented executives in the industry, as our new President. Since joining Yahoo! seven years ago, Sue has taken on an increasingly broad and important role in driving our strategy, and she's shown even greater skill and leadership as she's taken on more operating responsibilities in the last eighteen months. No promotion could be more well-deserved. Jerry and Sue have been great partners to me, and I am excited to have the opportunity to continue working with the management team and the rest of the Board in my new role as non-executive Chairman.

I am a huge believer in Yahoo! and its people. We have a unique array of audience, advertising and technology assets that will become even more valuable as the Internet continues its rapid growth. And, I have no doubt that, with its new leadership team, Yahoo! will realize its enormous potential.

Sincerely,

Terry Semel

 

---------------

So what was the feeling at Yahoo? Various Internet news stories have relayed that employees didn't hear any communication on this until they read about it in the media. One unidentified employee is quoted as saying, "All [Semel] did was show up for the bandwidth boom and then ride it all the way to the bank. Damn, I love Hollywood!"

I don't know that it's as simple as all that. Despite the strides Yahoo! has made, Semel is not leaving at a high point for the company. That endless battle to catch up to Google rages on and their recent earnings performance likely left few people glowing. (Well, except for competitors.)

CAN Yahoo ever really catch up to Google? Are the two companies just built on different foundations, and mirroring is a waste of time? I tend to think if Yahoo's plan is to spend their existence catching up to Google, they're going to get exhausted. From a consumer standpoint, I don't think I could name the differentiating factors of Yahoo vs. Google, other than the visual interface. Maybe it's time for Yahoo to take a hard look at themselves and figure out what makes them the company they are, instead of what they don't have while they're trying to be something else.

HBO's taking bong hits

I read this morning that Billabong, the surf gear company, is partnering with HBO to "create excitement" for John from Cincincatti.

There are a few things that come to mind, especially when I read stuff like this before my morning coffee.

I cringe when I hear "create excitement." It's a falsehood. Maybe "create interest" is more accurate, but I feel like "excitement" is something better applied to things that people give a hoot about. Excitement conjures up mental images of carnivals, scary clowns, and pony rides, not Hawaiian-print button-up shirts. It's compounded by the fact that the surfer demographic isn't one I can see showing overt excitement about a clothing line. Apparently there will be co-branding at flagship Billabong stores, and some point of purchase materials for their "Catch the Wave and Win" sweepstakes. (Shudder. It's too early to get into cheesy sweepstakes names.) You can also apply online here.

Here's the thing. Brand association can certainly be sexy, but I always feel like it has to be appropriately done. Take Sex and the City. Carrie Bradshaw become synonymous with Manolo Blahniks, but it worked. It was never the sole design line referenced, and it fit into the context and characters of the show. You certainly didn't go into a store that sold them and saw a "Runaway Runway Sweepstakes!" sign by the register. (Ok, obviously not too early for cheesy sweeps.)

I question the motive behind the partnership, mostly because I think HBO would probably stand more to gain than Billabong. I have not watched John From Cincinatti, though it's sitting there on my DVR collecting dust, but from what I've heard, it needs all the excitement it can get.  I found this suprisinng based on the promos I saw which cited the NYTimes and the NYPost using all the rave phrases you'd expect, but Jossip.com may have uncovered why the show doesn't remotely match those reviews...because those reviews don't even remotely exist, possibly.

Is HBO ever going to produce another drop-dead hit (pun completely intended) like The Sopranos? Maybe not one big enough to be considered a cultural icon, but they certainly turned out great shows with others like Rome, Six Feet Under, etc. Maybe they need fresh blood, or maybe they're hitting some kind of mid-life crisis. Either way, I think it's clear that crappy shows can't be saved simply by taking a Bong hit.