The Power of Influence

Passionista = Influencers

Wow .. sounds like Yahoo and Mediavest have found an interesting segment of people. People who are hyper engaged with a brand and 52% more likely than the average person to recommend.

Personally I find the 52% on the low side …. Our work (vocanic) shows that this group of people, key to a brands success, recommends at a rate of x3 or x4 that of an average user

Maybe I should drop these guys a line to let them know we have a way to identify these people online (Groundswell™) without the expensive documentary-style interviewing technique they used.

More information about the Yahoo/Mediavest study here

What is an Influencer?

Andy Sernovitz's blog addressed a question that is key to the word of mouth sphere - who is a word of mouth influencer? He breaks them down to four categories:

• Super-connectors:  Amazingly connected people who's word is gospel.   
• The Elite:  Highly connected and talky bloggers and social network players who have huge audiences and networks of connections.
• Customers & Employees:  Regular folks who are close to your brand adovcates
• The Influentials: Certain types of people are more active and connected, but they are regular citizens. These are the 1-in-10 people that others listen to.
• Anyone: Big networks of buzz volunteers

Andy goes on to say that word of mouth is spread by all sorts of people, in all sorts of networks. He says to plan a good campaign, you need to identify:

1. Talkers: Find one or more groups of talkers who are likely to talk about you
2. Topics: Come up with a WOM-worthy topic for each group of talkers. 
3. Tools: Use a wide variety of techniques to help the talkers talk.

Pretty similar to what we we do for our clients:

1. Find influencers
2. Arm them with a remarkable story
3. Create a trigger for conversation

Word of mouth is spread by everyone..but would you take the advice of the average joe on the street or an influencer?

96% for Boomers. WoM rocks for the 3rd age

Ok, so with the radically different media habit of youth and teens, its easy to see why Word of Mouth is a key media for reaching them.

But what about those aged 42 and over. The boomers. Those who grew up before the “interweb thingy”

A recent survey asked about travel. Boomers and matures (ages 60+) rely on various sources of travel information - e.g., TV, travel agents, radio, outdoor ads, print and the internet.

But they rely most on word-of-mouth recommendations, according to a survey of 30,000 consumers age 42+ by Focalyst, a joint venture of AARP Services and Kantar (via MediaBuyerPlanner).

Word of Mouth was cited by 96% of boomers and 88% of matures (+60) as the most-used source for travel information. Typically recommendations from friends and family (ie strong ties)

Word of Mouth was also cited as the most valued by 57% of boomers and 44% of matures.

A quote from the AARP (American Association of Retired Persons)

"....The study also found that when it comes to airlines, hotels, motels and cruise lines, “boomers” and “matures” display very little brand loyalty with only 10 percent using the same company all the time. Interestingly, word-of-mouth marketing proved extremely effective as recommendations from friends and family were the number one most valued source of information among these groups when making travel plans. For a population of this size, marketers who are able to take advantage of the multiplier effect with satisfied customers will be very successful..."

My question to you: Where is the word of mouth element in the marketing plans for most hotel, car rental, airline etc etc brands?

Marketing a TV Show

Interesting stuff coming out OTX ( an online market research company) about how teens learn about new TV shows.

Key facts here:

Using TV to promote TV works - 51%

Closely followed by word of mouth routes:

Friends/Boy/Girl Friends - 33%  (Strong ties)

Other kids in school - 25% (weak ties)

Family Members - 23%

Media that performs badly to promote TV shows to teens are

Newspaper ads - 7%

Radio ads - 12%

Outdoor - 11%

So ... next time you see an ad for a TV show on a billboard, newspaper or on radio - feel sorry for the guys who placed it!  (marketer, media buyer etc etc)

Full article here

Viral fails to deliver (which is why Word of Mouth is the future)

VIRAL MARKETING CAMPAIGNS ARE MOSTLY INEFFECTIVE, reports JupiterResearch, which found that only 15% of viral campaigns in the past year achieved the goal of prompting consumers to promote the marketer's message. (See here)

Think of it this way, when someone sends you a link, or a “viral” what are they recommending?

9/10 its the quality of the creative in the “viral”. By sending it to you they are saying I found this funny/weird/interesting – I think you would enjoy it too.

Does it say – I like the product, I think you will too?    No.

Can you strongly push a brand’s agenda in a viral? Typically no.

Just look at www.subservientchicken.com (one of the highest rated recent viral)  How big is the brand’s logo? Tiny right?  How strong is the product pitch in the viral? Even smaller.

So, to go viral a piece of advertising has to have little brand push, and to have such great creative that people will recommend viewing the creative to another.  (Which is why the creative based ad agencies LOVE to do virals )

And, no wonder that Viral tends not to deliver.

Contrast that with this …..

Two friends are talking at lunchtime, and one is saying “Hey, I tried the new Burger King Chicken Sandwich – it was awesome. Lets meet there for lunch so you can try it – your’r gonna love it! 

That’s word of mouth – and its easy to see how that DOES have a big impact on sales.

Concusion:

Don’t let your traditional agency confuse you.  Viral is NOT Word of Mouth.

When people forward a viral they are recommending the quality of the creative. Word of mouth is when people recommend your product to the friends.

The Future of Music

For those with knowledge of the music business, Rick Rubin needs little introduction.  From founding Def Jam records, to producing albums for everyone from Johnny Cash to Neil Diamond, and discovering artists such as the Beastie Boys and LL Cool J, there is probably no one on earth who can match Mr. Rubin's pedigree in the modern music business.

What's surprising in some ways, then, is his recent promotion; co-head of Columbia Records.

Why should that be surprising?  Shouldn't a record label have the premiere musical judge of talent as its head?  That makes sense, but for years the music business has done it differently.  "The music business, as a whole, has lost its faith in content," David Geffen, the legendary music mogul, said recently. "Only 10 years ago, companies wanted to make records, presumably good records, and see if they sold. But panic has set in, and now it's no longer about making music, it's all about how to sell music. And there's no clear answer about how to fix that problem. But I still believe that the top priority at any record company has to be coming up with great music.'

So installing Mr. Rubin as head of a major label seems like a smart move.  But aside from simply finding new bands, what  does Mr. Rubin think can be done to save the music business?  Piracy is rampant, iTunes has destroyed album sales and bands keep the majority of their tour revenues, not the labels.

One of the biggest changes made at Columbia per Mr. Rubin's suggestion is the addition of a word-of-mouth marketing department.  'The "word of mouth" department will function as a publicity-promotional arm of the company, spreading commissioned buzz through chat rooms across the planet and through old-fashioned human interaction. "They tell all their friends about a band; their job is to create interest."

Could a word-of-mouth marketing department staffed by twenty year old kids playing around on Facebook save one of the biggest record labels in the world?  Rick Rubin thinks it'll help.

Read the full article here.

Newspaper Online Ad Expenditures Up 19%, Print Ads Down 10%

You could see it coming....

"Advertising expenditures for newspaper websites increased 19.3%, to $796 million, in the second quarter compared with the same period a year ago, according to preliminary estimates from the Newspaper Association of America (NAA). "

This hides the fact that the fall off in print viewer ship for the younger audience is even steeper – so why do brands continue to advertise there?