Techno//Marketer - Matt Dickman on Marketing and Social Technology

Technology redefines categories and experience

I was not waiting on line at 5am for the iPad like some other people around the US. It's a device without a niche for me right now.

Think what you will of it, however, the technology behind the iPad and similar devices is helping to redefine categories that have had relatively little innovation in centuries.

Take the book industry. Now, I love my Kindle and it's innovative enough, but it uses the same paradigm as a print book. It works for what I need (quick consumption and ease of travel), but it is limited.

The experience of the Kindle is okay. It could be smoother and reminds me of what Blackberrys were like about 5 years ago. Get your hands on a new Blackberry and you'll see what I am talking about. It's smooth and easier to use yet still functional. The Kindle will catch up quickly.

Now, think about what publishing can look like on a device that senses when you tilt it or when you touch it. Have a look:

[video embed]

The experience that new technology provides opens doors and lets us shift our thinking about old standards and the experience that can be delivered.

If you liked this post, you can subscribe to the RSS feed or sign up to get updates FREE by email.

Technorati Tags: Marketing, Matt Dickman, Technology, iPad, Apple, User Experience

First//Look: Augmented reality

What do you get when you take a webcam, a piece of paper and some cool 3D animation? You get augmented reality (AR). This is relatively new though it's been experimented with for a couple of years at least. In short, AR is the combination of objects in the real world being combined with virtual objects using a webcam and some programming.

Sounds pretty cool eh? You have to see it to know what I'm talking about.

[Feed readers please click through to the post for the video]

Examples you can try yourself right now:

• Toyota iQ
  
• Volvo Ocean Race
  
• GE Smart Grid
  

Potential uses:

• The symbols that it uses can be printed on anything; paper, t-shirts, ads, etc.
  
• Any time you want to make a physical connection with virtual objects
  
• Allows interaction and engagement with printed pieces
  
• People are working on using mobile device cameras to do this while you're on the go
  
• It's just plain cool. Give it a try!
  

BMW looks at using AR to diagnose issues and help mechanics be more efficient

Turn the real world into a huge video game

Really bring Second Life into first life

This is pretty cutting edge, so not every company is going to be comfortable with it. The hardware barrier is pretty low (webcam) so this can hit a mass audience. It's great for presenting things when in conceptual mode (architecture, cars, etc.) as well as adding interactivity to existing items.

My advice is try one of the models above and think about the possibilities in your business. The hardest part may be to stop thinking of them.

[Hat tip to the Fleishman-Hillard digital team in St. Louis for putting this back on my radar screen.]

For my complete library of my videos for marketers, click here.

---

To help you stay on top of what is happening in digital marketing and social media subscribe to the Techno//Marketer podcast on iTunes. Stay informed and get access to new videos first.

 If you use another podcatcher you can grab my podcast RSS feed here.

---

If you liked this post, you can subscribe to the Techno//Marketer RSS feed in your reader or sign up to get updates FREE by email.

Technorati Tags: advertising, marketing, Matt Dickman, Techno//Marketer, technology, trends, video, virtual worlds, web2.0, Augmented Reality

Knowing (and paying) the price for interruption

Interruptive advertising is one of the building blocks of most traditional marketer's communications plan. TV ads break up 20 minutes of actual programming (unless you Tivo your content). Radio ads moan on and on while you trudge through traffic. Pre-roll ads on web video make you wait patiently for 15 to 60 seconds. Everywhere you turn, you are accosted by advertising.

There are consequences to doing this, especially in the digital space. I enjoyed reading this article on the New York Times site points to a Burst Media survey of 2,600 online video viewers. In the survey responses, 53.6% of people recalled seeing some type of interruption-based advertising (pre-, mid- and post-roll). 78.4% of those people said that in-stream ads are intrusive with 50.4% saying the ads disrupt their time. (This means the subtraction of value, not the addition of value.)

The in-stream, or mid-roll, ads (a trend that is rapidly growing and is particularly user un-friendly) had the most negative reaction by far. 50.7% of respondents said to have stopped watching the video when they saw an mid-roll ad and 15.3% were so angry they left the site all together.

While people ages 18-24 are slightly more likely to stay through a mid-roll ad, the worst finding for advertisers was around the recall of the ads. Only 21.4% of people who recalled the ad said they pay more attention to mid-roll versus other ad formats. 

If you're a content creator, does it really make sense to run mid-roll ads if people are abandoning your content? You have to ask yourself where you place your value, ad dollars or content distribution. Moreover, if 1/3 of people leave your site altogether, you're hurting revenue from sponsors and other advertisers not to mention your reputation.

From an advertiser's view point of view, why would you do this? The negative impression of the ad's placement is weighing on your brand. If your goal is to have people take action or remember your product/service, this is definitely going to work.

There are, however, better options. Create a "skin" for the video where your branding surrounds the content, but doesn't encroach on it. Align your ads with content that makes sense and is in your audience's focus. The worst thing you can do is take a 30 and plop it in the path of web users who are trying to get the content they value. You're not adding anything to that situation. The 30 second spot is dead online as well (just in case you were wondering). 

What other advice would you give to advertisers lining up for these placements? What ads have you appreciated or received value from and how have they been placed?

This all leads up to a post I have been working on for a while that will premiere tomorrow. "3 is the new 30".

T//M podcast #001: Harley-Davidson's sturgis widget

What a way to start a podcast series! I've been doing a lot of video lately and have been wanting to do a weekly audio podcast series for a long time. I've been biding my time for the right situation to present itself to get out of the gates with a bang and that's just what happened recently.

In the first ever episode in my weekly audio podcast series, I had the pleasure of interviewing Scott Beck the Marketing Director for Harley-Davidson Motorcycles (thanks to Sean Scott for setting this up). Harley recently partnered with agency Carmichael Lynch in Minneapolis to create a new type of widget. They threw out the conventions and created something remarkable. The widget, timed to launch with the Sturgis motorscycle festival (attended by over 500,000 riders), broadcasts live streaming video from the festival grounds to Harley fans around the world. It includes audio and really gives people a window into the whole experience.

I was able to talk with Scott and Jon on my phone, but could see and hear them in the widget. So very, very cool. I hope you like episode one and please bear with me as audio editing is really new to me. These podcasts will never go over 26 minutes in length (the average commute time in the US) so you can download, consume and start implementing in short order.

Any feedback or comments would be greatly appreciated. Enjoy!

Leave audio comments at +1 (206) 350-2186 or drop me an email at mattdickman@gmail.com

How can you listen? There are three ways:

1. Download the MP3 file for episode 1
2. Subscribe to the Techno//Marketer podcast on iTunes
3. Subscribe using another podcatcher using my podcast RSS feed here

Episode guide:

"Fresh, filtered and focused content for new marketers"

0m28s Welcome to episode 1

1m12s Overview of my goals for the podcast

1m50s Intro to interview with Scott Beck, Director of Marketing for Harley-Davidson motorcycles

5m30s Interview with Scott Beck and Jon Campbell of Harley Davidson

18m55s Interview wrap-up

22m15s Kudos to Todd Andrlik's Power150 for its partnership with AdAge

Notable items:

• Sean Scott at Carmichael Lynch
  
• Harley-Davidson
  
• Download the widget to your iGoogle page
  
• Special kudos to the Carmichael Lynch creative team of Linda Birkenstock and Mike Haeg
  
• Subscribe to this podcast on iTunes
  

Technorati Tags:
interactive marketing, marketing, Matt Dickman, Techno//Marketer, technology, video, Podcast, Harley Davidson, Sean Scott, Scott Beck

Metrics shape our perceived value; why the formula matters

Okay marketers. Let's say you are prepping to run an ad campaign for a mass, commodity good and you have to rank your ad buys over the top content networks. How would you rank the following and what metrics would you use? Go ahead and try it.

• AOL
  
• Ebay
  
• Fox Interactive Media
  
• Google
  
• Microsoft
  
• MSN/Windows Live
  
• Yahoo
  

Would you have ranked them by total audience knowing that you could reach a more robust and accurate subset with targeted ads? Or, would you have opted for total page views thinking that the more pages served the more eyeballs will take a look? Better yet, did you opt for the new Nielsen-suggested standard of time on site knowing that time leads to engagement and better eyeballs? You may be surprised at how different these results are.

Source: Nielsen/NetRatings, U.S., home and work, May 2007

Take a look at the chart to the left. The first chart shows each network based on total unique audience with Google in the lead. It is followed by Yahoo, MSN/Live, Microsoft and AOL. Remember AOL's last-place position in this chart for later. There is a gap of roughly 20 million people between first and last place.

But you may not have wanted to go with total audience, instead you want to use page views as your metric. Well, in that case Yahoo is your network of choice. Yahoo is followed by Fox (including MySpace), Google, MSN/Live and EBay. In this case there is a roughly 20 billion page view difference.

However, you may be detered by page views and total audience and find yourself looking at total time on the site. In that case AOL comes out of nowhere to take a firm lead (remember they were last in total audience). They're followed by Yahoo, MSN/Live, Fox and Google who drops like a stone. There is a difference of roughly 17.5 billion minutes between AOL and Google.

So what the heck does this mean to you? Let's look at each network to see what the metrics tell us.

AOL - The AOL network is where to go if you want people who spend a lot of time there, but they are not generating a lot of page views in that time. There are an estimated 90 million people in the audience.

Ebay - EBay pops up only in the page views metric as you would expect. Each listing is a page and visitors crank through them quickly. Total audience is lower as is the time on the site.

Fox Interactive Media - The Fox network, while not large, generates quite a few page views and stays engaged with that content longer when you consider its size. I think MySpace has a large part to do with that summary. as people stay engaged, but constantly churn through pages of friends as well as adding content.

Google - Google is still the king of search so if you're looking for SEM and you want the volume, this is your stop (according to 2007 April figures from Nielsen//NetRatings, Google has the largest share of U.S. based web searches at 55.2% (Google Acquisitions), Yahoo is second at 21.9%, MSN is third at 9.0%, AOL is fourth at 5.4%, and Ask is fifth at 1.8%). The downside of Google is that people are coming for a specific task and jumping off hence the low engagement times and high audience.

Microsoft - The Microsoft audience is large as you would expect, but that's where the company's advantage ends. They don't show up on the total time on site or the page views metrics.

MSN/Windows Live - MSN represents Microsoft's consumer facing entity and their Live search function. Live has been picking up some momentum in total search volume, but they've a long way to go to catch Google. MSN comfortably sits in the middle of the pack on almost every point. They dip below when it comes to page views. It's a large audience that spends an average amount of time on fewer pages.

Yahoo - Yahoo comes out the best of any network when you look at each metric. They have the second largest audience, the most number of page views and the second most time in minutes. This should be an attractive combination to marketers especially in targeted display ads. Yahoo still lags behind Google for SEM where there is still a 30%+ gap.

In the end, no matter who you are or who you are marketing to, it comes down to a few key factors:

• Find your audience. If they're not using Google then you're wasting your money
• Relevance is key. Making hyper-targeted ad buys will help make sure relevance is there and waste is minimal
• Nobody likes iterruption. The last thing I want is to have my visit to a network interrupted by your ad. Give me some value and be relevant to what I am looking at. If I'm in the auto repair section, don't offer me camera equipment.
• Think outside the banner. Look at sponsorships or creating value-add programs to hook users.
• Think social. Engaging with the community on a social level will lead to more success. Think about shifting dollars to social/conversational media. You may get more bang for your buck.

What do you consider when you run ads? Have you started shifting dollars to digital? Are you shifting those dollars to social media? Let me know in the comments.

Technorati Tags:
strategy, marketing, Search, SEM, Google, advertising, interactive marketing, trends, social networks, Microsoft, relevance, Techno//Marketer, Matt Dickman, social media

Would you purchase through a banner ad?

I saw a very interesting article over at TechCrunch today about a company who is purported to be reviving the online banner ad. The company, Tailgate, is allowing e-commerce to happen inside a banner ad. You can see an example of this here.

Here are my questions/issues with this. While I think this is a good idea in theory it has inherent downfalls, not the least of which is the fact that banner ads are not very effective and these particular ads could pose a security risk, or a perception thereof, for consumers. I've learned to tune ads out no matter what site I am on and a lot of other people have as well. Here's my quick take:

[Feed readers click through to the post to see the video]

The Good:

• Capture impulse buys on complementary sites
  
• Let people see your top sellers before coming to your site
  

The Bad:

• Banner ads are mostly irrelevant for consumers
  
• Banners are interruption based (which is hopefully on its way out)
  
• People block banners out of their consciousness when surfing with a goal in mind
  
• There is a lack of trust (phishing and other scams)
  
• Also there is a lack of perceived security (no matter how secure it is)
  
• No way to identify authenticity of the offer or the host
  

How much better would the same advertiser money be spent to reach out to influential brand evangelists and/or bloggers? Why not join in the conversation instead of trying to interrupt it?

Overall, I think people still have some trust issues with e-commerce in general that need to be overcome before something like this has a real chance of making an impact. I'd be interested to hear from the company behind it on how they plan on reassuring people that their information is safe.

What do you think? Would you ever submit your credit card info through a banner?

---

To help you stay on top of what is happening and to filter the myriad options, you can now subscribe to the Techno//Marketer podcast on iTunes. Get updates in real time when new videos become available.

If you use another podcatcher you can grab my podcast RSS feed here.

---

Technorati Tags:
marketing, advertising, interactive marketing, trends, ecommerce

Time to wake up marketers; move beyond banner ads

I was surfing around this morning and did a search for Omnicom's Cutwater agency (creators of the new RayBan commercials). I followed the link through to a nice story on AdWeek.

I hadn't checked out the AdWeek site for a while so I clicked through the home page and saw a surround ad campaign for Discovery Channel. The surround features three independent ads of different sizes all working together. This particular one was a clever play on the Discover Channel show Deadliest Catch where Alaskan fishermen risk their lives in the Bering Sea (yes I do watch this show, it's addictive).

What caught my eye, however, was the image the page was using as a background. I almost clicked away, then I said to myself, "Holy crap, they actually tiled the client logo as a background". This Web -2.0 tactic (yes, negative 2.0) is oh so very 1995. I know because I did it in 1995 when it was cool. Most importantly, it adds zero benefit to the campaign.

So anyway, here you have this (mostly) well thought out ad campaign in the right place for the audience and it's all thrown out the window with this ill-advised mistake. What would you say if you were Discovery and you saw this? Would you be impressed to see your logo tiled as a background or would you be upset that it looks completely amateur?

Now, I am not one to propose a problem without a solution so here are a couple options that the agency who created this could have proposed to add some real value to the campaign and still stay in the same parameters of the medium.

The series Deadliest Catch is all about the challenges of the sea. It follows a few fishing crews in Alaska and shows just how dangerous their job is. The sea (and the weather in general) is almost a character in their story. They fight storms and the sky is always ominous. So in a couple of minutes I went to iStockphoto and pulled an image of a threatening sky. Now imagine this image as the background. It sets the mood right?

Similary, I went to Discovery.com and visited the show's page there. A number of wallpaper files are available for download. So why not pick one of those images like you see below? They're accessible, dynamic, tied into the show and also set the mood.

If you were creating an ad for the print version of AdWeek would you tile your client's logo to take up the white space? Absolutely not! My point is, when you're creating online ad campaigns, ask yourself what you can do to make each implementation unique and help move through the clutter. How can you use the medium to convey the message and engage the audience for that brief exposure? Well thought out online ads go beyond the IAB standards and use the full inventory to tell one congruent story and, in the end, engage more potential customers.

I see shockingly few really good online campaigns. The medium is limitless so why are people still applying traditional thinking? Here is a litmus test. If you can send your online ads to a magazine and have them run as is, you need to SERIOUSLY re-think what you're doing online. Reach out, engage, tell a story and give people a reason to click.

Technorati Tags:
marketing, advertising, interactive marketing, Techno//Marketer, Matt Dickman, Paul McEnany, AdWeek

Interaction rates in rich media

A while back on my trip to NYC I met Mark Goren (this photo is of CK and Mark at that event). We hit it off and have a lot in common with where we are in life and our interests in marketing. I was honored when he asked me to do a guest post on his blog in part of his Question A Day series.

Without further ado, please head over to Mark's blog and check out my take on the answer to the question "What does interaction rate tell me about the impact of my rich media campaign?". Enjoy!

Technorati Tags:
marketing, interactive marketing, Conversations, technology, MarkGoren, Techno//Marketer, Matt Dickman, Interaction Rate

I Joost don't get it

I've been writing this post in my head for some time now and it's high time I post it. There is a lot of hype around the new video service Joost. The problem is, after using it pretty extensively, I don't get the hype. I can't stomach the kool aid. The product has a contemporary, web2ish look about it, it has some good content in the channels, but some things aren't sitting right with me. Let me explain.

First and foremost, can anybody tell me why the service is delivered through a standalone application. This drives me insane. The technology driving the web has evolved enough that making people download another application to watch the content seems absurd. The chances of me installing the application are pretty good, but like many, many other apps I will soon forget about it. My web browser is becoming my hub for content. If you're not delivering through the browser you're losing me as a customer. Lots of companies are delivering through the brower. YouTube or course, Jalipo and blip just to name a couple, but Joost lacks the social networking options those sites have.

Second, the content is good, but I can get most of it on time-shifted TV through Tivo or through other video sharing sites or by going direct to the provider. Joost is signing deals with those content providers, but I think they're trying to position themselves as the cable company when they're really just a MTV. They're aggregating other produced content, but unlike MTV they're not adding new value. The content providers see Joost as another distribution point in their digital strategy, but it's not the only player. Where is the user generated content? Users are creating high quality content that, for the moment, seems to be locked out of Joost's model.

Third, the quality of the video in Joost is not that great. It's certainly not TV quality and is right on par with YouTube (see my first question). They're alleging themselves the new TV for the web. Why are they recreating the TV? This is the Internet. The TV model has issues. Issues which could be solved with some new thinking. This is just a re-package of what we've seen to date. Yes it looks shiny, but like many things web2.0 looks can be deceiving. My big question is how will I get Joost to the TV when I want it?

Finally, Joost is relying on a passé advertising models which users may be less inclined to accept. Paul McEnany and I seem to have BSP on this one. Technology allows for innovation. Innovation in content and delivery. It allows ad networks to get creative and add real value to their clients. So what is Joost doing? They're pre-rolling 15 and 30 second spots in front of video clips. Didn't they get the memo about the death of the 30 second spot?

We're still early in Joost's history and there is certainly room to improve. Room I hope they take advantage of before somebody else knocks them out. Don't take my word for it though, see for yourself. I still have four tokens that will go to the first four people to email me. What are your thoughts? Anybody have another opinion?

[Update: All of the tokens are gone. People are definitely interested. I'll be anxious to see their take.]

Technorati Tags:
marketing, video, innovation, interactive marketing, social networks, YouTube, technology, Joost, Paul McEnany

Like giving birth

There are some projects that you work on in your professional career that you invest yourself in a little bit more. You take them extra personally. You dedicate yourself to the project outcome being a success. The journey is rewarding and paved with tears, hard lessons and moments of pure, inspired innovation.

I had one such project launch a couple of days ago and I'd love to share it with you now. Disclaimer - I work for DigiKnow, an interactive marketer in Cleveland, OH, and one of our sweet spots is sports and entertainment. We've built sites and systems for some great sports teams over the years.

About a year ago, we came up with an idea for revolutionary venue marketing product and were extremely fortunate to partner with the Cleveland Cavaliers to get it done. The marketing team at the Cavs was fantastic and as driven as we were to come up with the best possible solution. The final product is a patent pending marketing system called SeatServer.

The product, located here http://seatviewer.cavs.nba.com, combines Flash and AJAX technologies to deliver a smooth, realistic experience. The solution shows real video views from each seat section, allows the team to add an up-sell message in each section (e.g.; "Did you know that for $10 more you could sit in the lower bowl?"), incorporates the team schedule and a lot more (check out the interactive 360 video in the seating chart pull down). On top of that, the team can showcase premium seating options and give you personalized directions from your front door all the way to your seat.

Sports teams are certainly becoming more aware of the fact that the experience is more than just what happens inside the arena. It starts when you come online, extends as you leave your house and concludes when they get back home. The more value teams can provide throughout that process the more successful their online efforts will become.

Do you have a project like this in your career? What did you learn?

Technorati Tags:
strategy, marketing, video, innovation, interactive marketing, trends, usability, Web2.0, technology, XML, AJAX