Riffs on advertising, marketing, media and society. ************************************************************************
We may not be interested in chaos but chaos is interested in us (R.Cooper)
We look at mobile phone 150 times per day! The most time goes to ordinary things like messaging, voice calls and clock!
Here is more detailed break down:
Messaging related 23 times per day Voice call related 22 times per day Clock 18 times per day Music Player 13 times per day Gaming 12 times per day Social Media 9 times per day Alarm 8 times per day Camera 8 times per day News and alerts 6 times per day Calendar 5 times per day Search 3 times per day Other random web browsing 3 times per day Charging phone 3 times per day Voice mail 1 times per day Other miscellaneous uses 10 times per day
The Havas Media Lab has conducted a research that shows most people wouldn't care if 70% of brands disappeared. Only 20% of global brands noticeably improve people’s quality of life.
People don't care about brands, people care about their lives and social ties.
It means we have to focus more on how to create a value for people, make their life easier, more meanigful. It means we need to shift away from just only focusing on what we should say as a brand.
People don't care what we have to say. They just want their problems solved.
Brands need to become meaningful and "enhance the well-being of individuals, communities and the environment, making people and society flourish."
Simple. Requires less bullshit and more great shit.
Interesting infographic based on a few studies, which focus on customer acquisition, retention and attrition rates. It gives an insight into how much the acquisition of the new customer costs.
A demographic study within the Nordics of people mobile phone habits, and social ’s media network habits...men and women, boys and girls, from 15 – 55, from all over the Nordic regions, and from all walks of life....
Definition of media got extended significantly over many years, starting from newspapers to social media that are media disseminated through social interaction or even people. Are people media? Are we the mere instruments conveying information that are currently losing trust of other people. Can our communicative abilities be reduced to objects that transmits information?
I don't agree with Armano's theory of decreasing trust in people as the result of overall decrease of trust in media, the correlation doesn't imply the causation. Following Armano's deduction, we could easily come to the conclusion that we are on the way to slow social disaster of mistrust and alienation along the growth of social media. This is oversimplifying of human relations built on trust. Trust is essential to human relations and is fundamental for social interaction and their development. The question lies in how far circles of trust stretch.
"Trust surveys" suffer from the lack of understanding of what people define as friends/peers. Those surveys deliver mere numbers without any understandings. Facts.
As I wrote two days ago, the main culprit here are "friends" and our language. We should maybe look at the decreasing trust in friends / peers as the result of the devaluation of friendship caused by media as Facebook. We have experienced rapid growth of our circle of friends with people who were in fact strangers to us.
The couple of last years we've been sticking to mantra "people trust people like themselves" (Edelman Trust Barometer) to convince business establishment to jump into social media wagon, to understand better how people act and activate the power of WoM.
We've always trusted the circle of friends, so called significant others and their recommendatiosn mattered a lot us as the key influential factors. We've done this and will keep on doing this as anything else would break the social ties and lead us to alienation.
Edelman comes with the new 2010 results of the Trust barometer and something interesting happens - friends/peers as those whom we trust drop from 45% in 2008 to 25% in 2010.
It is quite natural the question about our skepticism and our ability to trust arise.
I don't think we trust less our friends and peers. I don't think we've become more skeptical. I just think we are in the phase where we rethink the word friend / peer. The word friend got stretched widely due to social networks. We call friends people we've never met in our lives and people we have no common history with. We do have hundreds of friends on Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, Bebo...whatever you call it. The social networks devalued word friend. Anyone can be my friend today. It just costs one click and you have a new friend. But it ain't so easy and we are aware of that. We are aware that social networks bring also "virtual friends" we can't really trust because we simply don't know them, don't know their agenda and there is no really point of reference between our and their lives. Who are really those hundreds of people we follow on Twitter, we connect with on Facebook? We know the faces, we know the key facts we can find out from info tab and status updates. What really connects you with other people are common experiences...
Web revolutionized our lives for sure but there are still some barriers we need to overcome, like integrating online lives with offline lives. Meeting people we know online, exchanging offline experiences will be the way to create trust. Online relationships won't replace face to face time and sharing of real time experiences.
We still trust "people like us" but we are simply not sure whether Johns we follow on Twitter are really like us...
...and you will be able to trigger the change of behavior. Old and funny video demonstrating the power of group influence on individuals. In fact, there is nothing to laugh at but adopt this elevator psychology into communication efforts.
It is such a great tool to play around with - Web Seer - and visualize what's going on in people's minds when they google and explore differences and similitude, stereotypes, ideas by comparing 'Google Suggest' results. Plenty of interesting insights to dig for. I love how info-graphics democratizes data and make them more understanding-friendly.
Which advertiser wouldn't know how to influence people and change their behavior or preferences. There are no clear simple rules. Advertising is the people business and people factor is what makes it unpredictable. However the years of experimentation, testing and measuring allow us to draw out a few clear conclusions, which I stumbled upon on Faris blog.
The Journal of Advertising research run a special issue that concerned the advertising and the ways it works. Here is the one of papers by Les Binet and Peter FieldsEmpirical Generalizations about Advertising Campaign Success (thanks to Faris)
One of the most interesting statements is about the vague role of rational arguments in advertising:
"The most effective advertisements of all are those with little or no rational content."
(Les Binet/Peter Field)
Emotions, needs, urges working on subconscious level is what drives human behavior and we need to tap into it, but the problem is that often we rely on consumers opinions (focus groups and other types of research) that are mainly driven by post-rationalization.
Lot of great material, theories and things to take into consideration when planning the next campaigns. You can learn a lot but it is important to keep in mind that:
"No single theory or group of theories can explain it all, because advertisements work in such different ways. There is no point in looking for an overall theory."
(Nevill Darby, quoted in Advertising Frameworks, Giep Franzen, Brand New Brand Thinking)
"There are lies, damned lies, and statistics" (Churchill)
Who is the average consumer? Does he / she exist? How do we define it? Or does average consumers exist, isn't just a mathematical construct that was aimed at making easier for us to explain world?
People are different, we are the individuals with different stories that shape us, stories that are driven by our mind, our bodies and social environment we are living in. Every human is the patchwork of different stories that make him/her a person, not an average consumer. The average consumer is a type of urban myth to me.
Woman, 34 years old, urban, modern, income above average, lives in apartment, career oriented, heavy user of internet, buys organic food, interested in technology, owns mobile phone, heavy consumer of culture, blah blah...Yes, it could be me...but the above description brings more questions.
Can a human being amount to this?
Average consumer is just a construct that derives from the single story and is intended to make easier for us to work out things like strategy, advertising, etc. But the concept of average consumer doesn't really 'disenchant' the world, it makes it single storied and mass produced.
...listen to Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie inspiring talk about the single story as the source of misunderstanding and stereotypes that keep us away from seeing the whole picture
Yes, I am aware it is difficult to work with the concept of individual when we talk communication, it is difficult to capture the complexity of people's lives but we can try with replacing or at least enhancing demographics with needs, motivations and more focus on the social aspects of human's lives.
While most of researches stays grounded (mostly to computer screen), there are two guys who decided to take off to conduct very fascinating consumer research. Dustin Curtis and Alaska Miller have bought JetBlue All-You-Can-Jet Pass that allows one month of unlimited travel, any available seat for $599 and took off for 30 days adventure to talk to "hundreds of people with rich backgrounds and histories" that can be found on planes.
"(...) They have fascinating stories. We want to
tell some of them. Our plan is to strike up conversations during our
flights and see if maybe, after 30 days of constant flying, we can get
a good understanding of the average jetBlue flier."
I wonder how JetBlue will capitalize on this great initiative. There is the serious possibility for JetBlue to get interesting knowledge about their customers and their secret lives, none of questionaire can reveal. Plus there is plenty to learn about how their own services and staff works. There are already some complaints from Alaska Miller.
If they should live up to their claim about bringing humanity back to air travel, they should listen and learn from the real people.
I look forward to seeing final result of this 30 days trip into the secret life of fliers.
Facebook leads sharing but whats interesting is how many people use Twitter to share - it is the same percentage as per mail, which is interesting taking into the consideration the fact how many people use mail vs. people using Twitter. After all, Twitter is tailored for sharing as it makes it easy, accessible and fast - just exactly as sharing opportunities should be.
"Groups tend to spend most of their time discussing the information shared by members,
which is therefore redundant, rather than discussing information known
only to one or a minority of members. This is important because those
groups that do share unique information tend to make better decisions. ... Ironically, ... groups that talked more tended to share less unique information."
It is very interesting in relation to focus groups and diverse forms of works where any kind of information is shared or decisions should be taken. Such behavior and tendency to focus on the widely shared informaiton can lead to serious bias of conclusions and decisions taken.
Denmark has the proud 6th place on the ranking over countries and its Facebook active users with 2.1 mil. Facebookers. The growth within the last 3 months isn't quite impressive when compared to other countries, but you must take into consideration that it is already 40% of Danish population is on Facebook which is pretty impressive.
You can find more information on the demographic trends on Facebook.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=451f5e54-7bc2-4cca-8858-6a6784439a3b)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=20c753c2-f530-4424-8d55-4bf0e3c7d768)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=be28ff65-5a14-432c-8598-4abb06be35a2)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=5d4446c6-2562-44aa-b069-69c30eaca52b)
Recent Comments