Jan 19, 2010 — RJ
By definition, a meme is a unit of cultural information that is transmitted verbally or by repeated action from one mind to another. The best memes captivate a community and allow individuals to expand on them using their own creative power. Understanding how memes affect online culture can be an essential asset when building a brand.
An example of solid viral marketing, as we know it, was seen for The Simpsons Movie. Instead of just building a site with trailers and other typical promos, the Simpsons Avatar Creator was made, allowing users to create custom Simpson-esque characters of themselves. These characters soon became plastered all over Facebook and other social media sites, generating an incredible buzz.
That’s a start.
Imagine, now, if the idea of creating a custom Simpsons character was never officially supported. What if people started creating individual avatars with the limited resources they had available, simply to show support for a product they loved? Now, that’s the kind of brand you need to be building. Even if the final creations didn’t look as polished as something coming from an official Avatar Creator, it’s going to add the community support element brands should strive for. Give your customer base some clay to mold, and the creative ones will do the work for you. If your brand is strong enough to prompt the spawning of natural internet memes, you have a winner.
If you disagree with the awesomeness of internet memes, you can fill out a complaint form and receive compensation for the time you wasted reading this blog here.
Oct 26, 2009 — RJ
I can’t complain too much about the Mac / PC war because it
sure brought with it some epic new operating systems. I’m running Windows 7 on
my PC and Snow Leopard on my Mac, and I couldn’t be a happier nerd.
Both companies seem to be focusing less on providing tons of
new features and more towards rewriting code and making everything actually
work efficiently. In short, Microsoft made Vista actually work, and Apple made
Leopard better. This is finally making sense. Really, what’s the point in
having a plethora of new features if nothing works well?
It seems like you guys are finally on the right track. Keep
it up. Maybe next time we can hope to eliminate a step and have these new
operating systems work correctly the first time they’re released. ?
Oct 15, 2009 — RJ
In 1981 the Dead Kennedys released In God We Trust, Inc. on cassette with side B left blank, accompanied by the message, “Home taping is killing record industry profits! We left this side blank so you can help.”
Props.
Over the last 28 years, the rest of us have been catching up. Now, the insurmountable rise of social media marketing is finally making even the most corporate businessman loosen his tie and sign up for Facebook. Bands completely bypass traditional record companies, opting to promote themselves and connect with fans through social networks. In fact, social media marketing has become one of the most effective ways to build a brand or promote products and services.
Perhaps it’s just the latent punk in us… but we get a moderate wave of satisfaction knowing that some drooling internet nerd can get as much exposure posting to a few social media sites than a corporation once got only by running a commercial during the Super Bowl. Anarchy - or, democracy - or, both. It's a new day, grandpa!
Jul 28, 2009 — Kevin
Gestalt: Ahh, it's a Panda!
I don’t know about all of you, but I could certainly use more of nothing, especially in logo design. Let’s clarify what I’m talking about: negative space. But is negative space really nothing? It’s just as important as the positive space, and so often overlooked. Maybe it’s everything.
The brain’s perception of form is incredible, so take advantage of it! The superb WWF "Panda" logo above takes advantage of the Gestalt Principle of Closure. Closure occurs when an object is incomplete or a space is not
completely enclosed. If enough of the shape is indicated, people
perceive the whole by filling in the missing information.
All in all, I could definitely use more design that takes advantage of our perception of shape and form. The longer your audience stares at your logo the better.
Mar 24, 2009 — Emily
 Times are tough. If your company is like most, you're trying to figure out how to save an extra buck or two wherever you can. You need to prioritize what is most important and how that is going to fit into an ever-shrinking budget.
One area that seems to get cut at the first sign of economic hardship is advertising and marketing because, when compared to payroll or rent, it can easily be viewed as a superfluous expense. Full disclosure: obviously persistence in advertising is very important to us here at 3dB Creative — our livelihood depends on it — but more importantly, did you know that the livelihood of your company could depend on it as well?
Many articles and studies have been published recently on the positive affects of aggressive and innovative advertising during a recession. Perhaps it seems a bit counterintuitive at first: Why waste money if your company has already built a name for itself? Besides, your competitors are cutting back on advertising as well. Right?
Wrong. The reality is that if you cease to exist in the public eye, then you cease to exist, period. If your company puts itself out there via advertising during a time when everyone else has decided to hunker down and wait for the storm to pass, you've already outshone the competition. You have a face for the public while the public is wondering if your competitor still exists. Convincing potential customers that your company has staying power gives them confidence in your product, creating trust, creating a bond, creating revenue.
Economists say that advertising is actually less effective during times of economic boom because everyone with an idea has the money to market it. It's hard to break through all the static in that situation and many companies tend to get lost in the crowd. During times of recession, on the other hand, persistence really pays off. More than one report points to the fact that clever and consistent advertising during the Great Depression helped to boost the long term vitality of brands such as Fortune Magazine, Time Magazine, The New York Times, Revlon, Purina (yes, the pet food brand), La-Z-Boy, Texas Instruments, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola, Kraft Foods... the list goes on and on.
Granted, we haven't hit Great Depression lows yet, but it sure would be nice to avoid it if possible. And according to one study, advertising during the recession of 1985 boosted sales by some 200% in the post-recession economy over those who did not advertise. I guess what we're saying is that advertising is by no means an expendable luxury — it's a critical investment.
So there it is. Some food for thought — or rather, some thoughts for success.
Need more convincing? Here's a list of sources:
http://www.allbusiness.com/marketing-advertising/advertising/260415-1.html
http://www.adrants.com/2009/03/smart-marketers-advertise-during-a.php
http://www.scribd.com/doc/7450921/Innovating-Through-Recession-Andrew-Razeghi-Kellogg-School-of-Management
http://www.mpdailyfix.com/2008/11/statistics_on_advertising_duri.html
http://blogs.bnet.com/intercom/?p=1558
|
|
Oct 25, 2009 — Erik
OK, so we all know that the print media industry is slowly, painfully, contracting... and perhaps ultimately dying. One need only look at the once bountiful page counts of publications from Maxim to Popular Science to see that advertisers have fled print media fast, and in droves. And thanks to Craigslist, newspapers including even the Los Angeles Times and San Francisco Chronicle are, well, not doing so hot.
Far smarter people than yours truly can provide thoughtful insight into the way forward for these publications and their talented editorial staffs. Perhaps it will be websites with premium (paid) content sections, or selling content through affiliate networks, rights managed content, timed content delivery, or a half dozen other ideas.
But the one solution I know will never, ever save print publications is the "digital magazine." Haven't seen a digital magazine? Lucky you. These are Flash-based "replicas" of a print magazine, with animated pages that actually turn and make "whooshing" noises, and navigation which makes Flash websites circa 2003 seem intuitive and easy to use (and that's saying a lot). The "pages" of these magazines, sans proper re-layout for a different medium, most often require zooming in and zooming out continually — a weird modern equivalent of your grandfather and his bifocals.
Of course, it's easy to see the allure of digital magazines for nervous print publishers. They can simply turn over their finished PDF files to Speedy Digital Magazine Vendor Inc., have the pages animated using a proprietary Flash-based system, add a few links, and -- bam -- they're off to the races. No messy HTML coding, re-layout of information, or need to lift a finger. And they can email the digital magazine link to their subscribers and tout larger "worldwide" circulation numbers to potential advertisers. It also gives them something of an "interactive" presence, so to speak.
Unfortunately, as far as most readers are concerned, this interactive experience sucks. Yes, digital mags offer the ability to navigate their pages via thumbnails, to link to websites, and to incorporate video and motion graphics. But other than that, they are diametrically opposed to everything that digital information delivery (i.e. the web) is supposed to be about.
Namely, the web is about linking, about commenting and interacting, about searching and finding, about opening new worlds through infinite windows and communities – not containing them in some kitschy "it's like a magazine, but it's not" format, unseeable to search engines. Furthermore, billions of people already have a proven tool to navigate information on their computers; it's called a web browser, and whether you're using Firefox, Safari, or (gasp) IE, at least the buttons are all roughly in the same place, and they all pretty much work the same way. We don't want or need to devolve back to quirksville Flash navigation. That already happened in 2001.
Make no mistake. I love magazines, I grew up on magazines, I still read magazines (at lunch and in the bathroom at least). And the talented editorial staffs at many magazines and newspapers, due to tough economic times, are now working twice as hard, with half the resources. The best-researched, most useful articles I read every day are still written by these same people. Only now, these articles appear online, and they're called "content." I look forward to a better solution for all parties involved.
Jul 10, 2009 — RJ
Website Pop-up Take-overs. Hello… 1997 calling!
During a recent Google search, I found a link that looked promising. After loading the page, I was soon interrupted by a giant ad that obscured all the content I actually cared about. Haven't we grown beyond this as a race? Are there still web designers stuck in the '90's?
As soon as a page takeover ad begins blocking the content I came to view, I’m hitting Cmd + Back faster than I can change the TV channel on a Billy Mays commercial. An effective web advertisement should grab your attention from the side while you're enjoying the content you came to see.
Stop being annoying. Try being clever.
May 01, 2009 — Emily
We have a bone to pick with the Auto Industry. Now there will be no talk of the bailouts; it is not our job to give economic advise. We do feel, however, that it is our place to inject thoughts about marketing this hot topic industry.
It seems safe to say that the Auto Industry is responsible for its own demise. The times they are a-changin', and Americans, as usual, expect to be the ones breaking ground on the future. We expect the best built car with the best technology.
The industry claimed to be living up to these standards for – well forever – and for a good while they had us fooled. Everybody believed they needed to have the biggest car available with the most powerful engine.
Why did we believe that these monster cars were something we should want in the first place? Advertising. Now granted, it is not the advertisers fault that these commercials were made. They were no doubt given a list of items that the client wants to use to market their product and the advertising companies just came up with creative and compelling ways to get that message out there.
Then the game changed. People began to realize that while it may be inconvenient the truth is that our earth is in a fragile way, and it is necessary to be conscious of what kinds of cars we drive and how much gas it takes to get where we're going. In short it is time to go green!
Most Americans have gotten this message loud and clear. They are on board with the environment and being friendly to it is the newest and most profitable trend out there.
So why are we upset with the Auto Industry? Well it seems they've gotten the message as well: Big is out and green is in. They understand that the people want fuel efficient cars. So are they producing better cars? Not really, they are just advertising the same cars and putting a different spin on it.
Recent ads from all three major US automakers boast how good their fuel economy is. Meanwhile, according to the website www.fueleconomy.gov the miles per gallon for the Ford F-150 have gone from 14 city/18 hwy in 2004 to 14 city/21 hwy in 2009. So we guess you could say there has been some improvement, but are we really going to count 3 miles as a win?
The same holds true for the the Ford Escape, the Dodge Durango, the Chevy Avalanche, the Ford Explorer, the GMC Yukon and Envoy, the Chrysler 300 and the Chevy Impala. In fact, virtually every car with a 2004 model and 2009 model only vary in gas milage by a 5 miles at most.
Given the facts is it any surprise that the U.S. Auto Industry is dying?
I guess what we're saying is this: just because you change your marketing angle doesn't mean that you have improved your product, and without a quality product to back up your advertising, it would appear that you are just running some marketing scheme to trick consumers. Obviously it's not working. We can get cheeper cars with way better gas milage from most any other country. Clearly going green is more than just a trend to consumers, it's high time the U.S. Automakers get on board, and not just in marketing.
Feb 06, 2009 — Erik
For those recently emerging from a deep slumber, MySpace is the most popular social networking site in the world, with 110 million "users." This qualifies it as one of the most trafficked sites on the 'net, hands-down. But, in a rare case of popularity trumping basic usefulness on the web, most people over the age of 16 (even those who actively use MySpace) know that the whole site is a major epicenter of suckiness. These people may not be able to list the reasons why MySpace sucks, point for point, but they know it deep in their web-surfing hearts.
Unfortunately, as a marketing agency, we're sometimes asked by clients (and potential clients) about social media marketing (SMM) on MySpace. We normally tell these clients fundamental reasons why it might not be the best idea. The strongest reasons "against" are the absolute inundation of the site by spammers, the lack of good data on users, security flaws, no strong search functionality, and the general impossibility of getting things to look consistent and perform properly.
According to our friends at SEOmoz:
With MySpace, you are always going to be spamming when you create a regular profile for your company. Artists of various creeds have specialized profile options, but if you aren't a singer, filmmaker or comedian, you'll be creating a regular profile along with the world's fifteen year olds. [And] it's impossible not to look trashy when you're faced with MySpace's profile options, such as "Who I'd like to meet" and "Heroes." Some of these options remain on your profile page, even if you do not add any content to them.
Of course, it's "easy" to tweak your profile on MySpace and get it to do things like match your brand colors or add a logo. But that's about it. Then, the next logical step is to start "friending" people. Unfortunately, thousands of other companies have already beat you to it, thanks to spammers who use friend-adding programs to automatically add as many friends as possible. So you will most likely be seen by the people you attempt to "friend" as a company who has no real or genuine interest in engaging them on anything more than the most base level (spam). This is in direct contrast to a site like Facebook, that has effectively managed to protect the integrity of the site by having marketers set up "pages," restricting the number and type of "broadcast" messages, and basically encouraging users to only "friend" actual friends.
Don't get us wrong. If your customers are already on MySpace -- and you have a youth-oriented brand with "pull" -- then by all means set up a profile and (damage) control your image. Heck, you may drum up some genuine buzz on the site, as our friend Dan at Couch Guitar Straps has managed to do by working long and hard at it. But if you aren't a big youth-driven brand or a band, then you don't really need to get into MySpace. It gets a big 3dB Creative "minus" as a marketing tool: the time it takes is not worth the results you'll get versus other, much more useful social news or networking sites.
* PS - If all this hasn't convinced you to avoid MySpace as a marketer, then check out this report, which shows MySpace users are less educated and affluent than Facebook users.
Jan 23, 2009 — Erik
OK, so it's great that the networks (ABC, NBC, FOX, et al) are finally getting the point and setting up sites for us to watch their content legally. (Rather than just finding old Seinfeld episodes on hack sites or on Chinese YouTube). But how do these network-created sites stack up against Chinese YouTube? Here's my scientific analysis:
1) The commercials on all the network sites, while limited to 1 per break, are increased in volume by at least 300% compared to regular TV. While I don't mind the fact that we have to watch a few commercials, when they interrupt the show every single minute-and-a-half, Jamaica me crazy. I'm back on Chinese YouTube.
2.) The audio from the commercials is like 4000 x louder than the show, so forget wearing headphones or trying to sneak in an episode of Family Guy on your lunch break at work. You better be guarding that volume scroller with your mouse like it's the nuclear launch button, lest you go deaf or piss off your coworkers. Winner: Chinese YouTube.
3.) The server speed. Let's be honest, NBC, ABC, FOX and Comedy Central have sites that everyone in the universe might use to catch up on TV shows. Yet their servers can't keep up with demand. Not even close. Glitchy video? No patience. Back to Chinese YouTube.
4.) This is the kicker. The navigation and indexing for the majority of "legit" broadcast TV sites look to be the work of Flash-happy mouth-breathers. We don't want slick interfaces or weird, non-standard scrolling. Give us a Search box, related video thumbnails, and get out of the way. Chinese YouTube has the navigation right, and you can search for shows in English. But, alas, individual episode titles come back in Chinese. Navigation winner? The network sites. Barely.
Chinese YouTube: 3
Network Sites: 1
|
