Archive for April, 2010

« Older Entries

Dear Adobe: Define “Open” Please.

Thursday, April 29th, 2010 by admin

Back in October 2009, developers and smartphone enthusiasts were both ready for the debate over Flash to come to a close. At the MAX Conference, keynote speakers showed off the new Flash Player 10.1 for smartphones and finally a clear picture of how smartphones were going to create a better interactive experience for consumers was painted. Blackberry was on board and so were Palm, Google Android, Windows Mobile, webOS and Symbian.

“Singular experience, multiple devices” is the motto behind the Open Screen Project led by Adobe and other industry leaders, and it made perfect sense (if everyone agreed on the definition of “open” that is). This project, which goals were to create a consistent runtime environment that would eliminate the barriers to publish content across multiple platforms, had tremendous support. For developers, this meant you could create a rich-media application that you would only have to build once. For marketers, this project would enable cross-platforms campaigns to thrive with minimal work and maximum results. Imagine… an interactive game or contest platform that could perform seamlessly across desktops, mobile phones, televisions, and many other consumer electronics.

As a consumer and marketer who has watched and listened to the industry support behind the Open Screen Project, it seems like this initiative solves one problem and creates another. Without a unified platform for rich media applications, the power lies in the hands of smartphone companies to dictate the level of creativity both marketers and developers can have. By creating a unified platform using Adobe Flash & Adobe Air however, the shift in power is only transferred from smartphone companies to Adobe.

“With a consistent and broadly adopted runtime, stakeholders can focus more closely on developing the next-generation experiences that will differentiate their devices, software, and services. Consumers ultimately win with richer, more interactive, and universal user experiences across devices…. The Adobe® Flash® Platform will provide the consistent runtime environment envisioned by Open Screen Project partners. This technology was chosen because it has the widest reach in the world across operating systems and devices, a community of more than one million developers, and leading authoring tools”. – Open Screen Project

This is why I think Steve Jobs’ letter to Adobe today makes sense. By joining the bandwagon and supporting Flash with the other smartphone companies, Apple would be giving up its control over the user experience its consumers on all iPhones, iPads, & iPods have. Instead, Apple is chose to ban Flash from all of their products and decided to focus on HTML5 and other open-source programming languages. Now, you must build iPhone apps using the approved programming languages or not be allowed into the App store.

So the war rages on…

“Adobe has characterized our decision as being primarily business driven – they say we want to protect our App Store – but in reality it is based on technology issues. Adobe claims that we are a closed system, and that Flash is open, but in fact the opposite is true.” – Steve Jobs

What I like about the letter is that it points out some very obvious facts that were overlooked in the excitement to create a cross-platform interactive experience. One is that, Flash products are solely sold through Adobe (which means they control everything from future advancements, to pricing and distribution). Believers in the advancements of the web as a whole, cringe at this thought. Adobe argues that Apple isn’t playing fair by creating a product that isn’t “open”, but I think they should rethink how they are defining it themselves.

By adopting HTML5, CSS & Javascript, Apple has reconnected with developers worldwide and given them the power to develop advanced graphics, typography, animations and transitions without relying on plug-ins. This is extremely valuable and supports the growth of the web in a light, but incredibly powerful way.

As an interactive marketer, the thought of having endless content on the web in Flash is also a scary thought. Search engines still have trouble interpreting flash which causes major complications for SEO and the overall vision of the semantic web. By replying on advancements of HTML, CSS, and JavaScript however, the web continues to grow in the direction of being more connected and understood, but still allows the addition interactivity that is so desirable with Flash.

“We know from painful experience that letting a third party layer of software come between the platform and the developer ultimately results in sub-standard apps and hinders the enhancement and progress of the platform. If developers grow dependent on third party development libraries and tools, they can only take advantage of platform enhancements if and when the third party chooses to adopt the new features. We cannot be at the mercy of a third party deciding if and when they will make our enhancements available to our developers.” – Steve Jobs

In conclusion, I think Apple’s decision was bold but incredibly smart. They point out over and over again that Flash was created during the PC area and has many technical complications when implemented on a touch screen device like the iPhone. I don’t even think there is an argument anymore that Flash is necessary to create rich media interactions either. (Right now there are over 200,000 apps in the App Store that prove it).

Just like everyone joined the Open Screen Project bandwagon, I bet the same will happen in the footsteps of Apple because it just makes sense. I also believe marketers must stop and take a look at these changes especially. Interactive campaigns and applications are now going to be possible without expensive Flash capabilities.

I suggest Adobe rethink its definition of “open” and follow the direction of where the web is going. Steve Job’s couldn’t say it any better…

“New open standards created in the mobile era, such as HTML5, will win on mobile devices (and PCs too). Perhaps Adobe should focus more on creating great HTML5 tools for the future, and less on criticizing Apple for leaving the past behind.” –Steve Jobs

Posted in Application Development, Marketing Trends, Mobile Web, New Technology, Social Media, Website Development | No Comments »

Social Media Marketing’s New Currency: Likes (Formerly Fans)

Tuesday, April 27th, 2010 by Harry Gold

OK, in case you haven’t heard, “Facebook Fans” are now “Likes.” Let me repeat that so it sinks in – no more Facebook Fans. Those consumer relationships we’ve been chasing so diligently for two years – gone. Now we are chasing “Likes.”

So instead of “Becoming a Fan,” you can “Like” a Facebook Page, a general Web page, and, I’m sure in the future, everything from banners, videos, and applications to actual locations – kind of like Foursquare. People will turn on the geo-location, walk into a restaurant, and “Like” it.

Not to be too conspiratorial or grandiose, but Facebook aims to become ubiquitous on the Web. This “Like” feature is part of the social graph concept Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has been talking about early on. Facebook’s trying to layer the social graph all over the Web and in many ways, when it goes mobile with geo-location, over everything.

Now, one of my big interests is how the lines between social media, online media, traditional media, and search marketing have been blurring. Along those lines, building a base of “Fans” has been a common thread that has woven into every facet of a campaign, transforming all campaigns into actionable social media marketing campaigns. Kind of like when website URLs first started being incorporated into ads – you actually had to tell companies to list their Web page address. So now, companies and marketers have invested vast sums of money (much of it going to Facebook) to building their community of Fans, tracking the success of these efforts by counting their Fans. They have also been thinking of new ways to engage their Fan bases.

Let’s explore whether we as marketers and media buyers will place the same ROI (define) metrics and value on a “Like” as we did a “Fan.” Will “Likes” become the new currency of social media marketing?

Potential Downside of “Likes” Replacing “Fans”

Let’s start by asking the following question with the knowledge that we don’t have a choice in the matter: Is a “Like” as valuable to brands and marketers as “Fans,” especially after spending millions of dollars over the last couple years trying to build communities of Fans? Will “Likes” have the same appeal? As a company, do you want a bunch of Likes or do you want a bunch of Fans?

In Facebook’s initial announcement of the language switch, it noted that people were currently clicking “Like” almost twice as many times as they clicked “Become a Fan.” Thus switching to “Like” would hopefully encourage users to make more connections. But is this because it requires less commitment?

To become a Fan shows a level of commitment. It shows that you don’t just “Like” this company or product – it says, “I am a Fan of this company or product” and shares that affinity with your Facebook friends. It’s a true and lasting connection and endorsement. It represents a consumer’s desire to deepen her relationship with a brand and to connect to that brand in the environment where she is connecting with people and entities she values. A “Like” is simply a thumbs up. In fact, in Facebook vernacular, popular culture and imagery is exactly what that is. A simple post can get a bunch of “Likes” represented by this “thumbs up.” It is really for people who are too lazy to comment. It’s like when the waitress comes over and says, “Is everything OK?” and you give her the thumbs up sign. It’s a quick acknowledgement of your satisfaction, but not a ringing endorsement of the chef’s great food.

Also, it not only applies to Facebook Fan Pages (or whatever we are going to call them in the future), it applies to everything. It is more casual. So the bigger question is, will people who connect to your brand via a “Like” have a lower engagement rate (people who comment and post on your company Facebook Page) than people who are fans? Does “Liking” indicate as much desire to participate in a company’s social presence as becoming a Fan?

Finally, will this lower level of commitment create so much “Like” clutter that it no longer matters – sort of “Like Spam”? If liking a brand, article, Web page, video, or anything else on the Web is the equivalent to the thumbs up you give the waitress in a diner, will it cease to have value? Will brands and media buyers spend money on Facebook Engagement Ads to get a Like instead of a Fan? Will people pay attention to them when they are so ubiquitous they stream like trending topic tweets?

Now the good news is, when you “Like” a company’s business page (what Facebook seems to be calling Fan Pages now) it shows up in the news feed of your friends. I’m sure this was done to prevent a revolt from the thousands of Facebook advertisers that do Engagement Ads specifically for that impression echo effect. However, when you “Like” an item on the Web, not all of the “Likes” seem to be going into your feed and profile. For example, in a test, “Likes” from IMDB went into my news feed and got posted to my profile, but “Likes” from a blog post just got posted to my profile. So this may minimize the “Like Spam” I am referring to.

So, the downside for the immediate term has three main points:

  • We need to change our approaches and terminology fast, and change can be hard. Marketers and brands will quickly have to reevaluate the value of a “Like” vs. a “Fan” and modify their campaigns accordingly.
  • Although more people may “Like” us, the potential for lower engagement levels is out there. Companies will need to work harder to keep consumers who “Like” them engaged with their social activities.
  • Will this lower bar and commitment levels clutter the news feed and people’s profiles with tons of meaningless “Like Spam”?

And if you can think of any other downside to the change, please comment below.

The Potential Upside of “Likes”

My next column will explore the upside of “Likes.” These upsides will include the fact that we may have the potential to get more “Likes” than we did “Fans” and that “Likes” can be weaved into our marketing infrastructures and media programs in whole new ways. I’m sure more opportunities will surface – even within the next two weeks – so it’s not all doom and gloom!

Please comment and let me know what you think, and of course tweet and share this column with the icons above!

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in ClickZ | No Comments »

Yes, Facebook Advertising Really Does Work!

Sunday, April 25th, 2010 by Ty Velde

If you build it, they will come.

In the world of online marketing this one of the most often quoted statements within the context of failure. While you might have the coolest site, most cutting edge application or cleverest content, if you have not formulated a plan to drive traffic and awareness, you are bound to fail. By now, most online marketers do realize this and all one needs to do is look at the Google profit machine to confirm that this lesson has been well heeded.

However, in the world of social media marketing this just does not seem to be the case. Many organizations spend untold hours planning their social media strategy, prepping content and designing their Facebook pages, only to find out that after six months of invested time and money, only a few hundred Facebook users who have stated  they they actually “like” it.

For some reason, when it comes to social media many organizations spend a lot of time developing a great presence with great content, which they assume should just attract a huge base of likeminded individuals that want to like the page. But, when it does not happen they are left scratching their heads and wondering where they went wrong.

One way to change this is by leveraging Facebook’s advertising platform.

It’s very cost effective (CPC model) and if you are looking to grow your Facebook  community, it really does work. Not only does it garner numbers, but due to its hypertargeting, or as I like to call it “micro-targeting” features, it enables you to connect with the right kind of people. This last feature is very important, because if you want to grow a presence on social networks, you not only need to grow your base; you need to connect with people who want to engage with your brand and also with each other. Therefore, targeting the right user base is very important, as this is what will enable you to facilitate and grow “community”, which in my opinion is the hallmark of social media marketing success.

Growing Your  Base via Facebook Advertising:
An Overdrive Case Study

Objective:
A company needs to quickly grow their Facebook base, but do so within the correct demographic…those younger than 35 with very specific interests.

A secondary objective is to increase users engagement and activity on the page, as they are looking to create a “community hub” for users to share and exchange ideas and content with each other and with the brand.

Situation:
Upon the launch of this company’s Facebook page, initial promotion was very subtle as they purposely did not want to reach out to a mass audience, as they were very concerned about the “Right” kinds of people liking their Facebook page. This conservative approach resulted in a minimal number of users liking the page in the months following the launch. Such that six months after launching only around 500+ users had liked the page.

However, during this same time period the company had come to view their Facebook presence as strategic priority, but knew that in order to derive value from it, they needed to grow their base and do so very quickly.

Strategy:
It was decided that the best way to quickly remedy this issue was to do a very targeted Facebook ASU ad buy targeting only US based users, under 35, with very specific sets of interests. This ensured that not only would they reach the correct demographic, the interests of those targeted would be aligned with the ethos of the company.

All in all, after the user profile was created, Facebook estimated that the company had the opportunity to reach approximately 2.1mm users. 

Implementation:
When the campaign was launched they opted to go with “Become A Fan” ad units (please note that this occured before the recent change to “like”), as these kinds of ads enable users to become a fan in two different ways. First they could click on a specific call to action within the ad itself and become a fan without leaving the page they were currently viewing, or if they chose to click on other areas of the ad they were taken to the company’s actual Facebook page, where they could become a fan there as well.

The messaging associated with the ads also spoke to the unique elements of the company’s community. Therefore, the messaging was not just about their product, but more about the lifestyle they represented. This was important as the message have needed to have appeal, but the company also wanted to tailor it to incite interest among specific groups of users as to what their community was all about. Therefore, the messaging worked both as a filter and also as a means to set expectations as to what kind of community the user would find upon deciding to like the page and visiting it.

The Result:
When all was said and done, the campaign drove a total of 60,000+ clicks to their Facebook page in less than 30 days and acquired 23,000 new fans, for a conversion rate of over 35%! (Again, please note that this occured before the recent change to “like”).

However, it also acquired an additional 4,000+ fans organically during this time period, so total new fan acquisition during this time period was 27,000+, which equated to fan growth of over 3,000%. Therefore, when the campaign concluded their fan page had over 28,000 fans!

Not only did the campaign grow their Facebook base, it also really fostered community. This point was emphasized that during the course of the campaign they saw a huge increase in interaction/engagement (96% growth), in terms of comments, wall posts and likes. They also saw a huge uptick in fan photo uploads as well, which increased by over 2,000%. Therefore, the campaign not only grew their Facebook user base, it also acquired a highly engaged network of individuals who actively wanted to connect with brand and also with each other.

Beyond just the numbers, the campaign was very successful in reaching and targeting the correct demographic. At its conclusion, 95% of their base and 78% of recent user engagement was comprised of individuals less than 35 years of age. Therefore, the campaign was not only very successful in connecting with the right target to grow their base, and but that it also helped facilitate targeted user-to-user and user-to-brand engagement as well.

Conclusion:
Outside of its massive audience and reach, one of the great things about social media is the ability to target a very, very specific audience. While many media properties claim to cater to very specific demographics and niche markets, which is supported by reams of data, the fact of the matter is that this data is mostly “representative” of the site’s audience as a whole. What I mean here is that while your desire is to reach users with specific needs and interests, in most cases you are targeting an audience profile, not specific individuals.

However, on social networks such as Facebook, users provide reams of very, very specific information about themselves…age, interest, hobbies, location and more. This information has in turn been compiled to enable you to create very specific profiles of targets you want to reach, based on age, sex, interest and more. This ultimately provides access to an incredibly targeted advertising platform that when leveraged correctly it can lead in very solid, targeted and tangible results.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Social Media, Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

« Older Entries