Creators, not Content

Paul Isakson blogged yesterday about advertising that does, rather than dictates. The conversation inspired me to post some ideas I've been kicking around about brand ambassadors that create content on their own vs. the content created for brand-driven contests.

Paul is an authority on natural brand ambassadors--after all, he was @don_draper, the original Mad Man on Twitter. AMC didn't have to ask viewers to come up with user-generated content; for a minute, they shied away from it because it was so new to them. Instead, Mad Men inspired a few passionate individuals so much that they gave their free time to the brand. And the Mad Men were so fun to interact with! If brands focused on nurturing relationships with these existing brand ambassadors, the content they create would overshadow any user-created video contest submission.

Natural Brand Ambassadors: Creators

• Natural brand ambassadors are already blogging and creating compelling content.
  
• They are viewed as authentic, not a marketing gimmick, because they are initiating the conversation.
• Brand ambassadors will keep creating long after any submission deadline has passed.
• By acknowledging the work of these creators, the brand comes across as responsive and appreciative. Social media makes it simple and cost-effective for brands to seek out and respond to their content.

User-Generated Contests: Content

• Don't get me wrong, contests and content-focused strategies have different value. A one-time call for submissions will generate PR and word of mouth spike instead of the steady low buzz of loyalists. But will that spike hold up in the long run?
  
• Spoofs and parodies can outnumber the valid entries. Remember the Tahoe ads? Eek...
• Everyone and their puppy has held a video/design/remixing contest at this point. Until marketers come up with something revolutionary, they're playing copycat.

First example: Obama and McCain. John McCain's campaign was so infatuated with Joe the Plumber that they invited supporters to explain on YouTube why they were Joe the Plumber. Sure, some diehard Repubs uploaded their American dream story, but another flood of Obama supporters filled the "I am Joe the Plumber" search results with parodies. Those on the fence may have been turned off by the blatant marketing gimmick.

Meanwhile, Barack Obama didn't ask for content; he nurtured his creators. Through social media, Obama gave his supporters opportunities to connect and create. He interacted one-on-one and let his supporters own a piece of his brand through text message updates and volunteer opportunities. Two of my favorite things that he got back in return:

Next up: Apple and Microsoft. I know Softwear isn't user-generated, but it's still content-focused instead of ambassador-focused. But check out the Apple t-shirts that fans have already naturally created. More authentic--and more interesting designs. Microsoft's bid for users to explain why they're a PC also seems flat and boring to me. Wouldn't that have happened on YouTube anyway without them demanding it? Some great parody came out of that, too: here's a fun one.

I'd like to hear your thoughts, including how Twitter is playing into this idea. Also, are there UGC contests that do work better than a strictly creator-focused strategy? Ideas, please!

BUTTONS! Fo' free!

Finally, a sponsored "gift" on Facebook that I can get behind.  This morning when I checked my Facebook for the gazillionth time, I noticed today's free gift was a "Obama '08" pin for my friends to adorn their wall with.  (Oh yea.... Facebook also offers a free "McCain '08" pin as well.)

Anytime I see a "free gift" on Facebook, I notice about a dozen or so friends who pass the gifts out with little messages, probably simply because it was free, and was a break from the normal "hey girl heyyyy" messages they type out on each other's walls (oh don't worry, I do the same thing).  What a great way for a company to sneak a message onto thousands of Facebook pages.  

So, sneak your message (whoever you may be voting for) onto your friends' pages.  Because the most important thing we will do in the next four year span is coming up really soon. 

VOTE, people.  VOTE!   

McCain launches UGC competition! Appear in a McCain ad!

Jumping on the User Generated Content bandwagon of 2006, John McCain shows his age once again by asking users to submit their own "I'm Joe the Plumber and I love McCain" video. Actually, you don't submit it, you post it on YouTube and send them a link.

See the details here:
http://www.johnmccain.com/Joe/

Straight from the website, the guidelines are:
* Your video must be 27 seconds long (3 seconds are required for a legal disclaimer)
* Use appropriate imagery, language and music.
* Do not use copyrighted music, pictures or videos.

And John McCains Ideas and Suggestions:
* Be creative! The video that most effectively tells why you are Joe the Plumber will be featured in a TV ad.
* Tell us why you are like Joe the Plumber.
* How would Barack Obama's plan to "Spread the Wealth Around" hurt you?
* Explain why you're voting for the McCain-Palin ticket.
* Tell your story simply and clearly.

And just like Doritos let you do, you could get your video on TV! No way! Except this time you only get to be on air in swing states, instead of the SuperBowl.

I think my favorite part is this: "How would Barack Obama's plan to "Spread the Wealth Around" hurt you?"
Lets get over the negative advertising people!

Seriously, why not ask people to explain How would McCain's plan HELP you, why do you have to go for the negative?

So does anyone have an over under on joke submissions? I am guessing that nearly every serious submission is doubled or tripled by a mockery.

It's Like a Pizza With Your Four Favorite Toppings, Only More Delicious

Today I discovered a tool that blends four of my loves: New York Times interactive features, Election 2008, maps, and media. The Times' all-encompassing Election Guide offers an ad spending breakdown between the two majors candidates, complete with their spot TV spending.




After geeking out with this for a good half hour, I came to a few conclusions...

--McCain has spent more nationally ($17.7 million/18%) than Obama ($12.0 million/9%). If this continues to be his strategy in the next 18 days, it's great. I just read an article about how he can't depend on swing states anymore, because polls are starting to put Obama in the lead regardless of how the last 6 undecideds vote. If he can't tip the scales in his favor on a state-by-state basis, McCain needs to campaign--and spend--more nationally. Meanwhile, Obama has a solid foundation locked up. Now his strategy is to flood the airwaves in states that are still up in the air.

--Both candidates are spending similarly in major Ohio cities, but McCain is heavying up in smaller markets like Wheeling-Steubenville ($400M McCain, $163M Obama) and Lima ($231M McCain, $87M Obama). Smart. Neutralize Obama's message as best you can in Columbus and Toledo, but don't pile additional weight on top. Voters in the biggest DMAs have to be saturated by ads at this point. Put additional funding into the smaller markets to gain your advantage.

--Obama is spending the shit out of McCain in Florida. Seriously.

--Obama has more of an all-or-nothing market strategy. He skipped states like South Dakota and California that were set in red or blue from the beginning. For states that seemed to give him an early shot, like North Dakota and Montana, or early worries, like Minnesota, he enough money to actually make an impact and kick off a strong plan before changing strategy and dropping out. McCain, on the other hand, sprinkled his spot spending from coast to coast regardless of how set in stone those votes may have been. Seems weird to me. I wonder if the reporting system is accidentally counting some national buys as spot?

--Before you think to yourself, "Poor Philadelphia. They must see a political ad at every commercial break," remember how spot pricing works. There are going to be tons more eyeballs on the ad that airs in Philly than the ad that airs in Minneapolis, so the Philly placements cost more. If this map could be viewed in weekly TRPs instead of just dollars, my life would be complete.

--Check out DC spending. This isn't an effort to sway voters (DC voted almost 90% for Kerry in '04). It's a PR move to endear government employees and media to our next Commander in Chief. Obama is outspending McCain 2 to 1...who's unprepared to lead now, huh, J. Mac?!

--But don't forget, this is only TV spending, and we all know who's been ruling the interwebs this year. Internet spending probably follows TV pretty closely, except in cities with higher indices of Internet news readers.

And I'm not even getting into the ability to break down the ad spending by issues! I really need to pry myself away and get some work done this afternoon so I'll stop. But if you find me at the bar tomorrow night for a Yaybia birthday party (D, Booze, E. Lam, and I all have October birthdays!), I'll probably start gushing to you about this very map. Prepare yourself.

Political Ads, Bias, and Credibility

I believe in traditional news media, especially in election years when the public is hungry for the truth and fact checking is only a click away. It's true that some channels lean right while others veer left, but I still trust both sides' coverage to be honest, if not 100% nonpartisan. A little bias is unavoidable, and even healthy. But generally, both sides of the media do a relatively good job of digging up the facts.

I understand why news organizations accept political advertising. As a media professional, I'd be fuming if CNN wouldn't accept campaign ads. Viewers are clearly interested in the election and seeking information. Demographics for these channels describe the likely voter: older, white, higher income, and so on. So I get it. But when I read a story on Washington Post this morning, I couldn't help but be surprised by these Obama ads:




I'm reading a story about the debate, and there's Obama's hopeful face staring back at me. Does this bother anyone else? Maybe it's only a problem in online and print, where the content is directly juxtaposed with the ad. Something just doesn't feel right about this very evenly balanced, non-partisan coverage...sponsored by Obama for America.

The media is already drawing record eyeballs with their pre-election coverage. I think CNN or Fox News could generate some awesome PR--not to mention a credibility boost--for refusing to air political ads, even just for the last month leading up to the election. But do they dare risk pissing off these campaigns and the agencies that represent them? What do you think?

As far as online and print, obviously the Post accepts political ads, but I couldn't find any info on nytimes.com or wsj.com. Even cnn.com and foxnews.com seem to be relatively light on ads. Anybody have any info on whether these guys have banned Obama and McCain from their sites?

Context FAIL

New York Times: "McCain Seeks to Delay First Debate Amid Financial Crisis" flanked by FIRST DEBATE FRIDAY NIGHT! CNN banners. Granted, this is breaking news. But somebody on the CNN media planning team needs to have their servers hold off on those for a hot minute.

Microsoft Defines Themselves: You Heard It Here First!

Remember my gripes about Microsoft letting Apple continue to define them as the bumbling, bland, old PC? Turns out CP+B had a plan to combat that image all along. The New York Times has reported that the next round of ads will directly battle the "I'm a PC" tagline, going so far as to find a John Hodgman lookalike to complain that he's been stereotyped.

Y'think?

Reportedly, the campaign's new twist involves real Microsoft users talking about the pride they take in their machines and the work they produce with them. Okay, fine. I guess I need to see the spots first, because there's still something missing for me. At least they're actively countering the identity their competitor has carved for them. No brand should ever be content in letting their image come from their competitors. Even if it starts in an us-them comparison, the attacked brand (Microsoft) needs to spin it in their favor ASAP, or even use it to target a group of people who will appreciate that trait.

(Kind of reminds me of the Presidential campaign. As soon as McCain whispers "inexperience," Barack spins it into "change," and so on...)

New Microsoft campaign is scheduled to begin today. Keep your eyes peeled, yaybies!