Scott Goodson's Cultural Movements Blog

How to have power and influence on the web in 2012

Let’s face it. 2011 has been one of the most eventful years to date. It’s been a time of numerous uprisings, protests and upheavals. But what’s really interesting and different about uprisings today is that individuals are starting their own movements in a bid to change the world for the better.

In fact, no period in history has seen so much ‘power to the people’. Each protest, each revolution, and each rebellion – they’ve all triggered by individuals who start new uprisings for a purpose, advocating for a brand or against state oppression, corruption, consumerism, inequality and police brutality.

Take the guy who took down Kayak and Lowe’s with his computer. Or take the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement. Or the North Africa rebellions. Or even the popular unrest in Greece. It’s been a year of revolution as people were prepared and able to fight for change.

Now technology and social media create the reach of the movements. But they are just a part of the movement infrastructure, the media channel (albeit much cooler than TV). Social media doesn’t supersede Movements. Your own movement needs social media, but more than that it needs a higher purpose.

TIME magazine agrees. It recently revealed the collective ‘protestor’ as its ‘Person of the Year’ for 2011, citing the change brought about by street demonstrations from New York and Spain to the Middle East.

The shared honor is usually handed out to individuals with last year’s winner being Facebook co-founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg. But given the international focus on this year’s protest movements, TIME felt it was worthy to give ‘the protestor’ a special mention. The meaning behind this is undoubtedly hinting at individual people power being the main theme of the past 12 months.

But why has 2011 been such a year of unrest?

Part of the answer can be attributed to the ever-growing global economic crisis. People are fed up with the financial meltdown and want to see positive change. Financial issues in America are affecting nations elsewhere. We’re all suffering in some way or another.

TIME’s top editor Rick Stengel said in a statement published last week: “Everywhere, it seems, people said they’d had enough… They dissented; they demanded; they did not despair, even when the answers came back in a cloud of tear gas or a hail of bullets. They literally embodied the idea that individual action can bring collective, colossal change. And although it was understood differently in different places, the idea of democracy was present in every gathering.”

But protesting is nothing new. We’ve seen protests in previous times but never on the same scale as today. What makes the uprisings of 2011 so different?

2011 has been a year of change and global movements sparked by individuals because of the web. Movements that used to be impossible are now achievable thanks to mass communication.

Just one person is able to have incredible influence and power on the web. They can start a small sustainable movement that then builds momentum and turns into a global force to be reckoned with. We all have the power to start our own movements and shout them to the world, gathering supporters along the way. Some have greater influence than others. But the playing field is still pretty flat. So why not take a page out of the playbooks of the best.

Apple for example has grown their loyalty and fan base globally by broadening their appeal and their network globally, creating thousands of opportunities for people to interact with the Apple Movement – not just in technology but in culture, music, film, tv —everything, including the immaculately designed clubhouse for fans — the Apple Store.

How you can make a huge impact is by building your own brand movement online. We can create our own online communities, launch our own websites and directly communicate with a worldwide audience through social media. We can make such an impact because of the web that we’re causing a huge shift in our culture and societies.

Measure the influence of your movement? There’s an app for that.

PeekAnalytics measures not only the size of the consumer audience, but their quality in terms of their network size, social participation and their ability to spread a message further. In this table we’ve summarised pull, total audience, identified consumer count, and consumer ratio.

According to Haydn Shaughnessy @haydn1701 these are the top 10 influencers in social media:

• Chris Brogan
• Ann Handley
• Gary Vaynerchuk
• Robert Scoble
• Scott Stratten
• Reg Saddler
• Jason Falls
• Scott Monty
• Mari Smith
• Pam Moore

He continues: “Individuals matter in a way that’s never been possible before. I’ve been discussing with personal data specialists PeekYou how we can understand this phenomenon better. PeekYou’s mission is to render the web into a gallery of identifiable people. So instead of those well known but mostly obscure names out there, you start to get the real measure of people”

Of course critics will question the algorithm on this to ensure the list is truly accurate. “There were objections too – that numbers don’t take account of quality and that PeekYou’s tools might be limited. Both those objections are valid to a point. I’m open to incorporating other tools but any tool is limited and numbers have a value if we’re careful about how we interpret them.”

Klout also measures your Klout but there are questions here too.

Jason, StrawberryFrog’s social media wunderkid says: “While Klout defines itself as a measure of online influence, I believe the algorithm they use stresses quantity over quality. In other words, the amount of people you influence is equally, if not more, important than who those people actually are. Furthermore, the algorithm doesn’t account for topical disparities.

Is someone who is a thought-leader in the political sphere more influential than the curator of the Justin Bieber fan club? Of course! For now, I believe Klout lacks an appreciation for the hierarchy that embodies real world influence. As a result, it is entirely possible for a 13 year old girl who Tweets about American Idol to be more “influential” than either of us. It’s imperative to view your Klout profile as but one piece of information that must be combined with several others to truly measure your digital influence. As you know, it’s more than a numbers game.”

Keeping the gestalt in mind, there are a few tangible ways to improve your score:

1. Integrate all of your accounts
Ensure you’ve connected not just your Twitter account, but also your Facebook, LinkedIn and any other relevant networks such as LinkedIn, Google +, Tumblr, or Instagram.

2. The Golden Rule
It seems elementary: treat others like you want to be treated. Pose questions to your Twitter followers. RT others & add your input. Engaging with with other people will engender reciprocity.

3. Quality trumps Quantity
Fortunately, you’ve got this one covered. As Klout improves the algorithm for approximating influence, it will ideally begin to place more weight on who engages with your content. If not, I reckon the tool won’t be worth your time.

From a brand perspective, Klout is a whole ‘nother bag of tricks. They’ve established the Klout Perks program to target influential community members. The most successful Klout Perks integration I’ve seen was alongside the US launch of Spotify. In this case, having a high Klout score was the prerequisite to being one of the first invitees.

All of this underlines how much you, as an individual, can do to identify and spark your own movement. And your own movement will be the most important movement you will launch.

Keep this in mind when you think ahead for 2012. Can we see more people starting their own movements, revolutions, stand-offs, and manifestations at their fingertips? You bet we can. It’s an exciting time and today’s movements will make an impression for many generations to come.

"The Brands That Survive Will Be The Brands That Make Life Better"

There is a great piece today on "The Brands That Survive Will Be The Brands That Make Life Better" written by Morgan Clendaniel. His cool piece addresses a new study about consumer engagement which finds that companies that aren't making a difference--to the world and to consumers--aren't going to be around much longer.

Worth the read and spreading around.

Here it is here.

Anyone can write anything on the internet. Just ask Stuart Smith.

In today’s blog “The Politics of Marketing” written by Stuart Smith out of the UK he has made false allegations about StrawberryFrog which are emphatically untrue.

It’s unfortunate that this blogger sees fit to use the internet as a way to make untrue accusations and several blatant exaggerations.

It is no secret that people would be interested in acquiring StrawberryFrog. We have a unique global position. What a shock. Every year StrawberryFrog is approached by possible buyers interested in the agency because of our innovative approach, great track record and our significant blue-chip clients like Proctor and Gamble's global Pampers account, Pepsico and Emirates Airline. We have consistently wooed and won huge global accounts in competition with major corporate agencies.

I always wonder how stories of this sort come up – what is behind the tone and how facts can be so off base. Our business is doing well in the economy, there is one ongoing contract dispute with a former employee, and the claim that our suppliers in New York are not being paid is utterly false.

Which begs the question: what are the motivations behind the “unimpeachable” anonymous source for which Stuart Smith relies on his information. Could it be that a network agency is feeling threatened by our success and trying to undermine us through underhanded means? I suppose that is one approach you could take to try to poach clients. It’s very slimy, but it’s an approach.

BTW, Stuart Smith never tried to contact me about this story. It’s true that bloggers aren’t journalists, but you’d think they’d want to get their facts straight.

Co-optedalism - cashing in on the Anti-Consumerist Movement.

What is the power of a movement today?

What kind of impact can movement marketing really have?

How does a movement protect itself as it evolves and more and more people join the ranks around the planet? OWS is a good yardstick to find answers to these questions. Most interestingly the latter.

As the activists behind Occupy Wall Street (OWS) began their anti-capitalist demonstrations over a month ago, no one could’ve predicted that they would be fighting for the right to their own name to stop people from coopting their values and cashing in on their movement.

Strangely, that’s exactly what’s happening today.

The ongoing protests, which were originally started by Adbusters, a Canadian-based not-for-profit, anti-consumerist organization, are against social and economic inequality, corporate greed and alleged corruption in the financial services industry. Their slogan – ‘we are the 99%’ – refers to the differences in wealth in today’s society.

With copycat demonstrations spreading across the globe in over 900 cities worldwide, you can understand why the ‘Occupy Wall Street’ phrase has become a lucrative, household name. You could say that the movement has created a global brand in its own right. And when things get popular? People see opportunities to make a few bucks.

In fact, ever since the demonstrators started to camp out in New York’s Zuccotti Park, all sorts of opportunist traders have been quick to cash in on the OWS movement. There are vendors on every street corner selling Occupy Wall Street paraphernalia. On the Internet, you can easily find iPhone cases branded with the term. There’s even a condoms supplier capitalizing on the movement, if you believe some reports.

It’s not surprising that the group has applied to trademark its OWS phrase before anyone else tries to make any further money at their expense. They quite rightly want to protect themselves so their anti-consumerist cause isn’t undermined.

But they’re not the only ones filing an application to gain the rights. Others have put themselves forward for their own financial gain. According to recent news reports, another applicant wants to splash the movement’s name across a range of products, such as bumper stickers and t-shirts. And there’s others trying to apply as well.

It will be some time before we discover who has won the trademark. It could take up to three months for officials at the United States Patent and Trademark Office to decide.

No matter who gains ownership rights to the ‘Occupy Wall Street’ name, one thing is for sure. It seems absurdly ironic that the Occupy Wall Street activists now have to protect their movement from the very thing they’re fighting against – and that’s consumerism.

Scott Goodson is the founder and chairman of StrawberryFrog. Join the discussion about #Occupy on www.facebook.com/uprisingmovements

Does this ad campaign contain subliminal messaging?

From The Sydney Morning Herald in Australia

Advertising experts are divided over whether iiNet's latest ad campaign contains subliminal messaging in breach of the communications regulator's rules.

The telco embedded a two-frame message, which appears for less than one tenth of a second and can only be read when the TV is paused, in its latest ads around naked DSL and iiNet's BoB2 product.

The text contains a URL and the first 100 to visit the page were given a free iiNet gift pack. These have now run out after word of the message was circulated on web forums like Whirlpool, but iiNet is now giving away five iPads in a random draw.
Advertisement: Story continues below

The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) said it had yet to examine the ad to determine whether it broke subliminal messaging rules. It would only do so if it received a complaint.

However, the Free TV Commercial Industry Code of Practice says licensees must not broadcast ads which “use or involve any technique which attempts to convey information to the viewer by transmitting messages below or near the threshold of normal awareness”.

Ten, during its ARIA awards program in 2007, was the last broadcaster to be pinged by ACMA for subliminal messaging. The program was peppered with subliminal ads for KFC, Bigpond, Toyota, Olay and Chupa Chups.

“iiNet's ad probably does break ACMA rules around subliminal messaging,” said Tiphereth Gloria, digital and social media strategist at George Patterson Y&R in Sydney.

“They're more likely to be aware of the risks but they've chosen to do it consciously, knowing either way it's a win-win.”

She said there were two scenarios, either only the nerds see the message and then spread valuable word of mouth about iiNet's products on forums such as Whirlpool, or the ad gets banned, in which case iiNet receives even more free publicity as people would watch the ad just to see the subliminal frames.

Iain McDonald, creative director and founder of digital marketing agency Amnesia Razorfish, said he did not believe the ad was a case of subliminal messaging as the content itself, given that it is a slab of text, “could not be digested subliminally”.

“Whether it breaches regulation is another question but it seems that reading the message is only possible if a person uses a pause button in this instance and at that point it is obviously no longer subliminal,” he said.

“My opinion is that iiNet are trying to innovate and have some fun with the audience, not manipulate them directly.”

The Communications Council, the peak body representing marketing agencies, is examining whether the ad breaches subliminal messaging rules. However, the issue is so unprecedented that the council said it may not have a firm view until next week.

An iiNet spokesman said the people who bought its products were marketing savvy and saw through traditional pitches, so the company's last few campaigns have taken a “tongue-in-cheek approach”.

“The competition in this ad was a fun way to reward our fans while poking fun at the outdated notion of subliminal TV advertising,” the spokesman said.

The hidden message read: “Wow. Impressive. You not only spotted this in our TV ad, you found a way to read it. That can't have been easy. This whole page only lasted two frames. That's less than one tenth of a second. Well done, sir or madam. We're going to reward your awesome pausing powers with a little gift. Type this link into your browser: iinet.net.au/2framefreebie. And yes, you can tell your friends. But let's keep it to a maximum of a hundred, ok? And hey, watch for more two frame freebies in our next TV campaign.”

McDonald said the campaign could have ongoing benefits as “once word has spread through viral and media people may start associating iiNet ads with embedded hidden rewards and potentially pay more attention and be less likely to skip”.

But on the same token, he said consumers did not like to be manipulated, “not even for a micro second”, and there would be a “backlash” if iiNet was found to have breached subliminal messaging rules.

Gloria said subliminals in TV and cinema advertising had been around since the 1960s, mainly in the US. She said it was “not a transparent, ethical or genuine way of advertising” but it had never really been proven to work either.

“What iiNet have done here is taken the talkability factor related to 'easter eggs' - technology (gaming, programming) techniques of adding fun, hidden features only accessibly by keyboard hacks or lateral thinking – and brought them to an old medium, TV,” she said.

Many advertisers are trying to get around the fact that so many people skip ads. Australian TV networks have been increasingly including advertisements inside the program content itself.

In Britain, advertisers are creating ads that are designed to be viewable at up to 12 times normal speed.

The ads feature lingering shots of brands, logos and famous characters linked to products.

“They say that when viewing on fast forward, you actually pay more attention because you want to catch the moment the show starts again,” wrote Scott Goodson, founder of global advertising agency StrawberryFrog, in a blog post earlier this year.

Chris Coughlan, director of research consulting at analyst firm Telsyte, said he thought iiNet's campaign was smart advertising.

“iiNet wouldn't have Telstra's deep advertising pockets, and this ad will fly through the social media channels and generate much more interest than if it was just a standard TV spot,” he said.

 

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/iinets-easter-egg-may-breach-subliminal-ad-rules-20111026-1mj4a.html#ixzz1btln37jP

You can't silence Social Networking

Social networks were invented for one reason only – so we could communicate. So what do you think happens when someone tries to stop us talking?

Over in the UK, a well-known, highly-paid soccer star tried to force Twitter to reveal the identities of Twitter users, who had effectively ‘gossiped’ about him and revealed he was having an extra-marital affair. He felt he was able to do this, because he’d taken out legal protection, which meant that no one in the UK media could talk about it – and if they did, it was legal action and possible jail time.

But the ‘UK media’ doesn’t include social networks. And so he was powerless to prevent the rumours. But as soon as he revealed his plans to make Twitter fess up, users turned against him in their thousands.

It unfolded second-by-second. Tweeters united in a makeshift ‘Cultural Movement’ of their own, effectively sending out a message ‘we won’t be silenced’. Within hours Twitter traffic swelled by 22% as people flocked to the site in their droves to not only confirm his identity but spread it amongst others.

Within 24 hours of him revealing he was taking on Twitter, his name had been mentioned over 56,000 times and there was a dramatic rise in online searches for the soccer star across the world. In effect, he had scored an own goal. Instead of stopping the gossip, it merely fuelled it, effectively confirming he was indeed the player at the center of the scandal.

But why such a dramatic reaction? Because we won’t be told what we can and can’t say, especially when it comes to social networks. It’s like trying to sue someone for talking about you.

Here in the US, we have a much more liberal attitude to free speech, but the UK legal system is now baffled about how it goes forward from here with these so called media gagging orders. You can’t gag social networking. It’s so intrinsic to how we communicate these days, any attempt is futile.

The very fact that so many people united against this attempt demonstrated how much our system of communicating has changed with a new and significant other now involved; active participants, i.e. the general public. And it will certainly shape the legal future of ‘injuctions’ in the UK. It just shows you what people-power can achieve, and it is one of the reasons why Cultural Movements are so potent.

But what does this mean for marketing management? How does this new reality affect how brands build and market their own products and services?

As everyone now knows, social media introduces a two-way conversation bringing brands directly in touch with their customers. Consequently, it can both create and solve marketing problems, and the real-time, instant nature of online conversations means that brands need to think of themselves less like a granite fort protecting itself from intruders and more like Agent Jack Bauer of 24 fame: on a constant state of high alert and action.

Find an advertising agency in New York

As a CMO, it can't be easy to find the right advertising agency for your brand these days. My agency, StrawberryFrog based in New York, has attracted clients ranging from P&G to BlackBerry, from Jim Beam, the Smart Car, Wal Mart to Heineken, even the city of Dubai. How do clients find the right agency? How do you know whether you're getting the best service for your brand? The internet has created too much information. A few companies have excellence in sourcing quality partners such as P&G. But for the rest, how do you find a the right partner customized to your needs? Or are you stuck with an off the rack solution? What is the science behind finding the perfect match? How do you know which agency has the right level of innovation and modern thinking? Is it those with great legacies of the past? Does it matter that an agency is 50 years old or is this a great risk for old ways of thinking?

Is it fundamentally the work? Is this the right yardstick?

Is the best option to ask a fellow CMO or perhaps an agency consultant such as Select Resources?

Perhaps, you need a PHD to reach the right conclusion.

I will be opening day two of the Mirren New Business Conference at 8:30 am on Tuesday 12 April 2011, in New York.

How do you think brands can find the best agency for them? I would appreciate hearing your comments.

Finding an advertising agency in New York

As a marketer, it is increasingly difficult to find the best marketing and communications agency partner for your brand in New York and the US for that matter. StrawberryFrog based in New York, has been delivering for some of the most iconic brands such as P&G, The Gap, Wal-Mart, Heineken, Pepsico, BlackBerry, Morgan Stanley, and this latest global work for Jim Beam, the city of Dubai and the smart car. But how do clients find the right agency? How do they know if they are truly getting the best service for their brand? There are so many sources of information. A few companies have excellence in sourcing quality partners such as P&G. However this is not an easy task.

I will be opening day two of the Mirren New Business Conference at 8:30 am on Tuesday 12 April 2011, in New York.

How do you think brands can find the best agency for them? I would appreciate hearing your comments.

What is your brand against?

By Scott Goodson From Harvard Business Review online

http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/02/what_is_your_brand_against.html

What Is Your Brand Against?
4:39 PM Tuesday February 15, 2011
by Scott Goodson

FEATURED PRODUCTS

HBR's 10 Must Reads: The Essentials
by Clayton Christensen, Thomas Davenport, Peter Drucker, et al.
$24.95
Buy it now »

HBR's 10 Must Reads on Leadership
by Diana Mayer, Andrew McLean, Robert Goffee, et al.
$24.95

Companies understand that to be successful they and their brands need to stand for something. This results in bold and principled declarations to the world: "At Acme Amalgamated, we're committed to X. We believe in Y. We care passionately about Z." Unfortunately, in the end, it all starts to sound like generic ad-speak.

Here's a modest suggestion: If you really want to show the world what you believe in and stand for, how about telling us what you standagainst?

Recently, my agency StrawberryFrog launched a new campaign for smart car that was rooted in this kind of oppositional thinking. We understood that the smart car brand stands for some pretty good things: efficiency, economy, reduced environmental footprint. But put way, it sounds rather dull and predictable.

By defining instead what smart is against — over-consumption, excess, thoughtless behavior — we began to craft a statement with more of an edge. As we boiled down the idea some more, what emerged was a simple yet powerful declaration of principle, stating that we are "against dumb." It felt a little more gutsy and provocative than your typical ad line, which may be why the campaign immediately drew press attention. At the same time, by giving customers something to rail against (everything from gas-guzzlers to oversized Venti lattes), the campaign created a vocal community of smart car advocates. In a short period of time, the brand more than quadrupled its audience.

Marketers may be reluctant to take a stand against anything because it can feel controversial or divisive. But the truth is, some of the boldest marketers have been doing this kind of thing successfully for quite a while. Think of Apple, which in its early days came out strongly against conformity and the "Big Brother" world of computing (represented then as now by the larger, more conservative IBM). Later, fashion brands such as Diesel railed against all kinds of establishment views; in its ads during the 1990s, Diesel even seemed to be against advertising itself, which resonated well with its youthful, independent-minded customers.

The marketing writer Adam Morgan has said that brands sometimes need to create "fake monsters," so that everyone (meaning all your potential customers) will come together to fight the monster and save the village. But I would amend that to say the monsters aren't or shouldn't be fake — they ought to be based in real concerns and issues in today's world.

Wherever there's a possibility for improvement, you can speak out against entrenched ways or status quo attitudes. Or you can defend tradition by taking on trendy new attitudes and behaviors. Either way, there's no shortage of things worth taking a stand against. Just be sure that the cultural values and behaviors you take on do indeed run counter to your brand philosophy. These can be matters large or small, serious or playful. A campaign we once did for IKEA took a stand against being a "gray mouse" (which is to say being timid and safe in one's choices). A more recent one, for Sabra hummus, directly challenged the bland, unadventurous eating habits of many Americans.

One caveat: Don't simply take a stand "against" your competition. You may hate your competitor's guts, but nobody else cares; the outside world is looking for you to take on something more meaningful and interesting.

Defining what your company is against has longer-term benefits than a compelling ad campaign. Thanks to social media, more companies now understand that consumers want to participate in a real conversation with brands. To make this conversation (or any conversation) work, there must be an honest exchange of views. A big part of that is for both sides to be willing to say, "I'm for this" and "I'm against that."

And if you want to expand that conversation so that it becomes a cultural movement built around your brand — which is something that all marketers should be striving for today — then you need to give that movement a sense of purpose and action. The truth is, it's often easier to rally people against something than for something. Just think of some of the most successful social and political movements through history — up to and including the current Tea Party movement. More often than not, these movements start with people protesting against or saying "no" to something.

Which is not to suggest that your campaign, or the movement you're trying to lead, should amount to one big gripe-fest. The conversation you have with the public may start by pointing out something wrong, but ought to move beyond that to offer better alternatives, ideas, and actions you can help people take. If you can do that, it's possible to transform negative energy into a positive force — both for your customers and for your brand.

Scott Goodson is the founder and chairman of StrawberryFrog, a global cultural movement agency whose clients have included P&G, Emirates Airline, Jim Beam, Heineken, Pepsico, Natura Brazil, the Smart Car, and India's Mahindra Group.

More on: Branding, Marketing, Strategy

Location, mobile ads will revolutionize commerce

Location, mobile ads will revolutionize commerce: http://bit.ly/g4NzeM