Showing posts with label Social media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Social media. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 23, 2013

If it is dark, please let it stay dark.

I started my day with reading an article written by Mr. Manish Tewari in the morning paper titled “Is virtual civilisation the breeding ground for anarchy?

This blog is about marketing & not politics, so why should I even bother blogging about a politician’s personal PoV. I have a few reasons:
  1. My business is directly impacted by the consumers’ usage of Internet, or restrictions there-in.
  2. Social media plays a very important role in my life and that of my community at large.
  3. The writer happens to be the Minister of State for Information and Broadcasting, Government of India and hence his views could end up framing policy.
  4. And frankly, it just got my goat.
I would recommend that you read the article in full. It did take me 4 attempts to fully decipher the English, but it was worth it.

The long and short of it is that Minister views the freedom of expression on the internet as a possible problem and says the Internet today represents the largest ungoverned space on Earth” and it a space which can cause a lot of harm & anarchy and “hence it is the responsibility of the stakeholders to deliberate the need to strike a right balance or in other words find that ‘equilibrium’ between ‘Right to Privacy’ and ’Right to Anonymity’.”

The article is a smart play of words to try and project a neutral stance, however, I think the leanings are for everyone to see.

My view is that there is a very large number of folks in position of authority (and lots of editor types of traditional media formats) who have not been able to come to terms on a media format where:
  • The audience has an independent view, talks back, voices disagreements openly and does not shut up when you ask them to.
  • The audience actually creates the conversation without waiting for a role for the formal "know it all" moderator.
  • The audience listens & believes more to the views of other like-minded audiences, rather than to “well drafted & controlled releases / media bulletins”.
The folks who profess end-of-world scenario and fear “anarchy”, are mostly media usage experts of yesterday’s media. They are too used to a “in-control” media and hence are unable to come to terms with the vibrancy of the newer formats of social media. I believe most do not understand the social media in not new. After all social media is just conversations amongst folks using the preferred "locations of conversation" of the day – which today happens to be Twitter, FB, WhatsApp, SMS, etc. as much as the neighborhood chai shop, beauty parlors and a barista.

Folks are doing on a Twitter what they are also doing at a coffee shop – talking, sharing, expressing – all of it freely – and about everything from movies, to music, to cricket, to politics. Of course the newer technologies, allow conversations over greater distances and faster.  

The fact is that we Indians are an expressive and opinionated bunch – we always have been. It is just that earlier our conversations was not “readable” – today they are.  Voice has changed to text, images and videos – as they tell a better story.

Social media is all about 2 way conversations, it about listening and talking – in fact it more about listening. However, when I glance thru’ some of the social profiles of the doomsayers, I can spot at least one, fairly obvious issue. These guys don’t seem to be interested in listening to “social conversation”, or even having a conversation, they just want to talk. A one-way speech syndrome; similar to writing a “safe” column in a national daily, is the kind of controlled engagement that they seem to prefer.


Above is a snap shot of the Twitter profile of Mr. Manish Tewari, the author, who follows NO ONE. I guess no one has anything to say that he is interested in.  Of course it is his social profile and he can choose to use,  not use, or how to use Twitter, however, what worries me is that he will influence, if not take the decision, which might impact the freedom to use SM.

I would be equally worried if a bald guy was to take a decision on the need of combs in the world. 

The other aspect that the Minister talks about is the propagation of hate by faceless virtual folks and the danger that poses to the society at large. Now normally these are viewed as areas of “national importance” and I do not have expertise to write on this, however, I will stick my neck out on this (at least a bit) and make two points: 
  1. It is well understood that the best way to address the hate speech is to fight it with more speech, not less. I think in this video Mr Eric Schmidt of Google does a better job of explaining the context than I could ever do.  In my personal experience, I have mostly found the discussions / conversations on SM to be passionate, personal and balanced. And just like it would happen on the streets, once in a while one comes across content which is malicious, trashy or just obnoxious – and one does what one should do, either ignore it, or retort or discuss and warn others about it. To handle that kind of content, what is needed is mostly common-sense and a little education -  definitely not the big brother on the back to validate what one should or should not see. 
  2. I remember years back, when the mobile phones were a new add-on to lives, there was a lot of debate on how terrorists and anti-social elements would end up using them and hence they should be disallowed in sensitive areas. However, overtime, it is the same devices, which are enabling crimes to be tracked by locking on to GPS location of the users, and monitoring content. On similar lines, anti-national social media users can be traced far more easily than if the activities where being done without the use of technology. Yes, there would be challenges, but footprints on the internet are far more traceable. What is needed is relevant expertise and SOPs to handle such a menace. 
What was good to note that the media house that carried Mr. Tewari’s article, its sister publication had an article on the same day about India’s declining Internet freedom and how any blow to the Internet’s free functioning is a blow to individual freedom.  

I firmly believe that the governments need to use social media to communicate more and bring about increased transparency, rather than create a fear psychosis about a potential need to clap down. We are better off with it being the largest ungoverned space in the world. 

Unlike some, I love a healthy conversation; so will be happy to respond to your views, even if they are not in sync with mine. Do share your views. My twitter handle is @vijaysingh and I do follow.

Saturday, September 28, 2013

Change in focus of IT spends.

Interesting to note a shift in the focus on IT spends with the CPG companies. While CPG companies have traditionally viewed technology as a necessary business expense to be managed in the most efficient way possible, during the past few years, CPG companies have grasped the commercial potential of the burgeoning supply of information about customers’ behaviors, needs, and wants. 


The volume of data emanating from point of sale, in-store engagement, mobile platforms, and social media is exploding and unleashing value from technology in ways that go beyond operational efficiency. This is leading to a fundamental change in what businesses expect from technology. 

Read the full article here

Thursday, September 26, 2013

How to get your content shared.

Came across this Infographic that I thought was really neat. 

View the original here

Tuesday, December 18, 2012

Online and offline channels converge - 2013 and onwards.

Rebecca Lieb in her recent article titled 7 digital marketing trends to watch in 2013 refers to online and offline channel convergence as one of the big trends to watch out for. 

While she broadly refers to it as media becoming more digital, and that we're seeing digital messages appear in new places. Out-of-home channels such as billboards and digital signage - as well as TV screens - are hosting streaming and social media, I would like to suggest a step further. 

I would suggest the emergence of an increased seamless interoperability between the online and offline media and the blurring of the boundaries of the media formats. For e.g. a QR code on a print ad / OOH media leading the consumer to the website / mobile app with an ability to order the product via an eCommerce site or from a store. 

Saturday, November 3, 2012

Forget Engagement, Consumers Want Simplicity

Loved the recent article by Patrick Spenner in Forbes where he writes that brands are trying too hard to engage with consumers via social media and that marketers are generally pushing out too much information, causing people to over-think purchase decisions and making them more likely to change their minds about a product, be less confident in their choice and less likely remain loyal to the brand.

He commends that brands need to simplify the decision-making process, so much so that consumers actually think less about the decision. Marketers can do that in three easy ways by helping consumers: 
  • Trust the information they receive – providing recommendations by consumer advisors, ratings and reviews.
  • Learn effectively without distraction – simplifying the research process by offering clear and streamlined brand-specific product information targeted to each decision stage.
  • Weigh options confidently – making transparent buying guides and brand differentiated information easily available.
When used together, this approach is known as Decision Simplicity.

Not only is Decision Simplicity the number one driver of likelihood to buy, but the impact of simplifying purchase decisions for consumers is four times stronger than the favored marketing strategy of engagement.

Thursday, April 26, 2012

Mobile and Social Steering Future for CPG.

"We see a merging between social and mobile as two really popular platforms coming together, not only for ecommerce, but also to drive multichannel behavior. It’s just incredibly dynamic, and we’ve really adopted an integrative planning framework that takes into account the consumer journey and how the consumer is using digital channels and platforms. That’s become the driver for how we plan our entire marketing strategy and budget."
It was good to read this interview of Jeff Jarrett, vice president for global digital marketing, as he spoke about the most effective ad formats for consumer packaged goods, and how online CPG sales have required the industry to establish a larger footprint in digital. Read the full interview here where-in he talks on strategies, RoI, impact of mobile & social media and the changing consumer behavior. 

A must read for all FMCG / CPG marketers on how the trends are shaping up.

Tuesday, April 24, 2012

The evolution of the "path of purchase".

Conventional wisdom has always been that most brand purchase decisions are made in the store. 

But with the new, digitally empowered consumer entering the store better prepared than ever before, is the new reality that most purchase decisions are made at home or on the way to the store?

This wonderful white paper by The Hub seems to suggest that the truth most likely lies somewhere in between.

The white paper goes on to list how can manufacturers ensure that their brands are included in the consideration set and make the final cut. They must identify shopper needs and behaviors at every phase along the path-to-purchase and deliver relevant experiences that shape purchase decisions, from pre-purchase to point-of-purchase, from consumption experience to post-experience reflection.

The consumer’s media consumption methods have changed and therefore the relevance of methods in which a brand can be relevant to them. The 24x7 access to socially connected devices is the single largest factor to change dynamics of marketing. The white paper reemphasizes what we are trying to create with AaramShop – an integration of the Zero Moment of Truth (ZMOT) with the First Moment of Truth (FMOT) of the brand. Read more about it here.

Tuesday, April 3, 2012

Where tomorrow‘s customers will place their trust.

One thing is clear: mass marketing has had its day. For decades people have consumed what they learned about through the constant barrage of advertising – and what was available in the shops. Retailers stripped their shelves of everything that only sold occasionally, in order to free up valuable shelf space for the real top sellers.

That is all in the past. In the new online economy of the “long tail”, providers increasingly earn their money with niche products. Thanks to limited costs for storage and for the “showroom”, it is well worth their while to offer the unusual and the quirky as well.

Consumers like niches. They no longer want to be one of the masses; they want to own things that are rare and unusual. Small groups of aficionados grow up – “social networks”, which replace the mainstream as a peer group.

These networks take over the job of communication. Information about “cool” new offers travels round in no time. Providers who want to be noticed in increasingly fragmented markets must therefore make themselves visible in these circles.

The explosion of choice makes heavy demands on consumers. To reduce the flood of information, they go along with a calculated risk: they trust the recommendations and tips of others. They increasingly take decisions for emotional rather than objective, factual reasons.

Facebook Considers Adding The Hate Button.

Just imagine the impact on your brand's Facebook centered marketing strategy if you have more "hates" than "likes" on your brand's timeline. 

When the original Like button was announced, Mark Zuckerberg made a bold prediction there would be over 1 billion Likes across the web in just the first 24 hours. Sources at Facebook say Mark is estimating 2 billion Hates on the first day. Facebook studies have shown the sad fact that people hate things on the Internet more than they like things. There’s also an internal debate on whether the new button should be called “Hate” or “Dislike.”

Since the tiny Like button makes up such a huge part of Facebook’s revenue, the introduction of the Hate button could raise Facebook’s valuation further ahead of the IPO.

If FB decides to add the button, then personally I think "dislike" has a better ring to it than "hate".

Read more about the possibilities of hate button here

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Deals May Get You in the Door, but They Won't Build Relationships.

2010 & 2011 were all about "deals". Everyone chased the "new & shiny objects" However, there is an increasing concern on the value of the "deal customers". Marketers have avidly sought social-media fans in recent years, often using deals or sweepstakes to boost numbers. But are they really attracting the right people? 

Data from social-media analytics firm Colligent suggest many brands have attracted lots of deal seekers. And while these consumers may be profitable, they're not the most-effective brand advocates, according to some analysts and social-media executives. 

Brands that build fan bases using sweepstakes "end up with a very difficult time trying to get those fans to engage," said Justin Kistner, director of social products at analytics firm WebTrends. "They were never with your brand in the first place. They just wanted a chance to win that iPad," he said. "We call it garbage fans." 

Twitter now is even touting its relative lack of deal-seekers among brand followers as a selling point vs. Facebook. 

Monday, March 19, 2012

Understanding Frictionless Sharing

The term frictionless sharing refers to one’s online activity on his or her social network and connected personal profiles being automatically shared without having to click a button. Anticipating a potential decline of social button usage, Facebook launched frictionless sharing so that the volume of content on Facebook would continue to grow at an accelerated pace. Frictionless sharing potentially eliminates the need of social buttons as a way to share content with social network connections. When end users approve frictionless sharing applications, all media consumption is automatically posted to their profiles for the world to see.

Many companies like Spotify, The Washington Post, and The Guardian have already adopted frictionless sharing, and we can expect more companies to do the same as people grow tired of clicking multiple buttons to share content across their social networks. While frictionless model continues to be controversial – especially around the invasive quality of its functionality – some reports suggest that many people have come to accept information sharing as the price one pays to participate in social networking. However, it’s only a matter of time before the passive sharing of content causes too many privacy violations to be ignored – forcing more people to question the need to “pay a price” at all.


The Social Media Advocacy Model

In theory, as social media becomes more common place, organizational audience engagement objectives, strategies and tactics should evolve past acquisition towards advocacy. is quite sure some consumer brands are heading in this direction but, in his experience, many companies and agencies still seem to be focused on driving audience awareness and using “likes” and “follows” as success metrics.

To spark some discussion on the topic Mark thought it might be helpful to present an encapsulated view of advocacy. This brilliant infographic aims to present advocacy at a glance, explaining where it sits on the audience relationship spectrum while visualizing the steps organizations can follow to move connections towards becoming advocates.

Key Points About Integrating Traditional and New Mediums

Some brands have been forged in the digital fire while others have had to (or eventually will have to) jump into it. The biggest problem Michael sees here is we are trying to treat these two entities as one.

These are two very different situations and need to be treated as such. Those outside the bubble, who did not build their business in these channels are interested in what digital has to offer, but they don’t always need it just yet. It’s not that there isn’t a juicy opportunity, but balancing multiple channels (especially a mix of traditional and digital ones) is no easy feat.

Michael writes that we often try to show traditional brands the success digital brands have experienced. It is alluring, but it isn’t always relevant. Rather than enticing prospects with purely digital examples like Zappos or even those who have long had digital efforts like Levis, one needs to understand a few key points illustrated wonderfully here in a recent post by Michael Schechter.