All Things WOM

Josh Bernoff adds more to the discussion of “Sponsored Conversations” in this worthy-read Ad Age piece.

He readily admits it’s a controversial topic for brands to compensate bloggers for sharing their honest opinions about a company’s products/services. Josh stresses both the brand and the blogger must be upfront about the relationship and that the blogger must be honest in any opinion published on their blog.

At the heart of the “Sponsored Conversations” discussion is the fact that people trust people like themselves. The Edelman Trust Barometer has been measuring the credibility of spokespeople for years and in those years, the “trust” people place with other people they can relate to has increased.

Bloggers, for the most part, are people like us. They aren’t necessarily trained experts or schooled journalists. They are people more like us; passionate about gadgets, movies, music, and everything else that makes life interesting.

However, the 2009 Edelman Trust Barometer reveals the credibility of nearly every spokesperson is down around the world, including the credibility people place with people they can relate to.

Sure, bigger issues like the economic downturn and continued mistrust in government affected the 2009 survey results. But the decline in trust is worrisome for marketers wanting to tap into the credibility of everyday people as word of mouth advocates, especially with “Sponsored Conversations.”

My fear, as a marketer, is some of us will fall into the trap of “what gets measured gets manufactured.” We’ve measured that real opinions from real people are more meaningful than anything churned out by a company’s marketing department. The temptation for marketers to manufacture conversations with people in the real world and the online world is great. Maybe too great for some marketers to abstain from doing and from manipulating.

In his Ad Age article, Josh rightly warns marketers about not manipulating blogger-driven conversations, “Make sure any and all bloggers you work with make it VERY clear to their audience that your brand is involved in the development of the content. If you fail to do this you will put yourself at risk for not only a bad PR mess but legal trouble as well.”

One of the more important sessions at last week’s WOMM-U conference was on Ethics, Endorsements, and Your Next WOMM Program. Paul Rand, WOMMA’s Ethics Chair, and Anthony DiResta, former regional Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Director, discussed impending changes to FTC guidelines on testimonials in advertising.

Specifically, the FTC is seeking to ensure Advertisers and Bloggers are 100% transparent and always disclose when a blog post is being sponsored. “Sponsored Conversations” is the term being used to describe a situation where a business compensates a blogger in exchange for writing a post about a product/service a business provides. Lots of businesses are doing this and because it is a cost-effective marketing activity, it’s likely more businesses will be doing “Sponsored Conversations” with bloggers.

Additionally, the FTC is proposing to make Advertisers liable for the actions of their sponsored Bloggers and make the Bloggers personally liable for their actions.

Why? Well, the FTC is in the business of protecting consumers from unscrupulous business practices. The commission believes consumers must be protected from being influenced by bloggers who fail to be transparent and disclose they have been compensated by an advertiser. The worry, of course, is compensated bloggers may not give their honest opinion about the products/services they’ve been compensated to write about.

This issue gets muddier when it comes to defining compensation. Clearly, cash is compensation. But in-kind gifts and special access privileges are harder to define as compensation and payment. For example, is giving a blogger a book to review considered compensation? How about giving a blogger access to test drive a new car, is that compensation? Outside of cash, defining payment gets cloudy.

While there is much that is unclear with “Sponsored Conversations,” WOMMA has been very clear about its stance on Ethics and Endorsements as it relates to businesses and bloggers.

The WOMMA Ethics Code clearly asks businesses and bloggers to disclose their relationships and to disclose if the blogger received product samples or other incentives from a business.

The WOMMA Ethics Code also asks for honesty in all aspects of Word-of-Mouth marketing from truthfully disclosing relationships between a business and a blogger/customer and truthfully sharing authentic opinions with others about a product/service in online and offline conversations.

Designing and executing Word-of-Mouth marketing programs that follow the WOMMA Ethics Code of always disclosing relationships and always sharing authentic opinions is one way to avoid scrutiny and controversy.

Another way to avoid scrutiny and controversy when executing Word-of-Mouth marketing programs is to reconsider paying outright cash to entice bloggers and customers to either write something or say something about your business. (Just as in life, when money gets involved, issues seem to follow.)

Of course, the absolute least controversial method for businesses to get bloggers to blog and people to talk is to design products/services that are inherently worth talking about. (Yeah, yeah … easier said than done.)

It’ll be interesting to see where the FTC nets out on this important matter because lots of questions need to be answered. What ramifications are likely for Advertisers and Bloggers who run afoul of updated FTC guidelines? How will businesses and marketing agencies respond to the new guidelines as bloggers continue to gain more sway in helping to shape public opinion?

Let’s talk. The comments are open. The opinions will be varied. I’m sure you have something to share. Have at it.

Presentation:
Disney: Lessons Learned Using Social Media

Presenter said:
Duncan Wardle, Vice President, Global Public Relation at Disney, stressed the importance of marketing WITH consumers and not AT consumers. He explained how in today’s wired world the old thinking of impressions doesn’t compare with the new thinking of engagement. Duncan said, marketing departments of future should cease to be called marketing departments and instead, be called “Engagement Departments.”

Duncan didn’t stop there, he went further by declaring, “Brands who do not change from marketing to engaging will soon become nostalgia brands.”

To prove his points, Duncan walked attendees through two case studies: Disney Dream Job and Walt Disney World’s Moms Panel.

The Disney Dream Job program asked people to upload a video audition for their dream job at a Disney theme park. The response was overwhelming with Disney sifting through thousands of videos to post the five finalists online where millions of people voted for the winner. Duncan talked about how this program not only promoted the adoration people have for Disney, it also served as a highly successful employee recruitment campaign.

The Disney World Mom’s Panel was a program seeking to find Moms to share their knowledge and passion for Disney World family vacations with other Moms. The response was again overwhelming, with over 40,000 applicants for a 12-person panel.

Because the response was so overwhelming, Disney created an off-shoot panel, Mickey Moms Club, to capture even more advice from a customer perspective on how Disney can better engage with current and new customers.

By using social media to engage with customers, Disney has access to a focus group of its most important customer base, the decision-maker in the family … Mom.

Audience tweeted:
The engagement angle resonated with @mvellandi who tweeted, “Collaboration, co-creation, dialogue, *Partnership*.” @leslieforde continued the sentiment but linked it to results, “Biggest learning from Dream Job campaign, brought Disney vacation into consideration set via engagement.”

Both @spikejones and @jbell99 were impressed with how Disney gave up control of their brand to better engage with their fans. Spike wrote, “Hardest thing for Disney to do is to give up control. But Disney Mom’s Panel is not censored.” John tweeted, “I love that Disney allowed the moms in the Mickey Moms club to choose their name and logo – that is really a big move for the brand.”

@leslieforde chimed in with a comment about Disney using online engagement to foster offline engagement, “Invited 1k moms to host parties at home, number of moms, parties & attendees far exceeded plan.”

WOMMA says:
Disney understands new customers are going to look like and behave like current customers. So the more you know about your current customers and the more you engage with them, the more a brand will be able to appeal to new customers.

On May 13 & 14, WOMMA held its Word-of-Mouth Marketing University conference. Below is a video recap of a presentation from the conference.

The world’s two largest social networks, MySpace and Facebook, attract over 130-million users monthly. Thus the question has changed from IF you should use MySpace or Facebook to reach your customers to HOW. How can attention, affinity, and action happen best on each site? How do marketing messages spread differently between the two? How best to monitor and measure a brand’s performance on each site?

Those questions and more were answered by Heidi Browning from MySpace and Chris Pan from Facebook during the kick-off keynote to Day 2 of WOMM-U.

For smart recaps, I recommend reading posts from Josh Hallet, John Bell, and Ian Sohn. The moderator of the panel, David Berkowitz, also posted a good summary of the session.

I plopped my rinky-dink camera atop the banquet table in the dimly lit ballroom and captured much of the session on video. Because this session was so informative, written summaries fail to cover all the content. So, you should watch it for yourself and jot down your key takeaways.

VIDEO ONE:
In this segment you’ll learn about audience/demo profiles for MySpace and Facebook (0:00 to 2:45). Plus, you’ll hear Heidi and Chris share best practices from brands including Vitamin Water to Papa Johns Pizza to Starbucks to Cheetos to Aflac (2:46 to 9:35).

VIDEO TWO:
Both Heidi and Chris talk about the importance of creating engagement and community with users when designing marketing activities on MySpace and Facebook. Lots of great information in this segment.

VIDEO THREE:
Measurement matters to marketers. In this segment, you’ll learn how MySpace uses the momentum effect to evaluate success of a marketing activity. Facebook uses measurements of engagement to determine success/failure. Deep stuff. Watch, listen, and learn.

On May 13 & 14, WOMMA held its Word-of-Mouth Marketing University conference.
Below is a recap of a presentation from the conference.

Presentation:
Maximizing Online Video for Marketing Success

Presenter said:
Jeben Berg, creative director of Cross Platforms Solutions at YouTube & Google, threw out some startling stats about YouTube … it’s 81-million unique monthly visitors makes YouTube one of the most trafficked websites in the world … each minute, another new 15-minutes of video is uploaded to YouTube.

Obviously, YouTube is a media and marketing channel to be reckoned with and smart companies are finding ways to integrate YouTube into their marketing mix. Jeben explained there is “no single formula” for online video success. There are, however, lots of best practice tips on how to improve the effectiveness of online videos.

First, focus on great ideas rather than production values. Companies like BlendTec and its “Will it Blend” series begin with a singular idea — such as, will an iPhone blend? — to create simple yet interesting videos. According to Jeben, following the BlendTec approach of “high concept with low fidelity” is a recipe for creating compelling online video.

Second, think quantity more than quality. Jeben explained brands that post lots of videos gain the most viewers and receive the most must-see recommendations from friends.

Third, make the most out of your Title, Description, and Tags. Don’t get too cute with your video title names. Use key words and commonly searched terms in the Description of your videos. And, spend extra time making sure you Tag your videos with the most appropriate terms. Something simple as a good title, robust description, and relevant tags will help online videos get better visibility through search engines.

Jeben jokingly talked about how many CEOs of big brands have called YouTube requesting certain videos be taken down. As long as a copyright isn’t infringed upon, YouTube leaves such videos alone.

Audience tweeted:
@VirginiaMiracle was impressed with the short case study on how the rock band, Weezer, analyzed the stats behind their videos, “weezer used their YouTube stats to determine that no one in the state of Oklahoma cares about weezer.” By knowing how few viewers there were from Oklahoma, Weezer decided not to make a tour stop in the state.

In response to Jeben talking about the recent Domino’s video incident, @spikejones tweeted, “CEO of Domino’s called called YouTube and tried to play the ‘pull down the video b/c I pump so much $$ into Google card.’ It didn’t work.”

Jeben continued the Domino’s story about the company’s video response. @TravelPRPro responded, “Money Talks. Advertising does have influence. Domino’s response to employee hoax got prime placement on YouTube bc they advertise.”

WOMMA says:
Viral videos can give a company lots of attention. However, predicting what goes viral is nearly impossible. If you approach making a video with the intent of it going viral, you are setting yourself up for disappointment. Instead, use Jeben’s advice of focusing on a quality idea more than on quality video production. It’s interesting ideas that get people interested and when interest is achieved, online word-of-mouth is primed to spread.

On May 13 & 14, WOMMA held its Word-of-Mouth Marketing University conference.
Below is a recap of a presentation from the conference.

Presentation:
Yelp: Empowering Consumers with Local Knowledge

Presenter said:
In kicking-off the Word of Mouth Marketing Association’s WOMM-U Conference, Geoff Donaker, chief operating officer at Yelp, said, “The Genie is out of the bottle. You’re better off joining the conversation, than not.” Conversations about local restaurants and businesses fuel Yelp’s business. Donaker described Yelp as, “local search powered by community.”

It is the online community that provides Yelp with over 6-million reviews of local restaurants and businesses. 21-million people last month used Yelp to decide which restaurant to visit, car mechanic to use, and spa to be pampered at. With its broad reach and deep reviews, Yelp is changing the game of small business marketing.

Donaker told the story of a local carpet cleaner who used to spend $100K on yellow page advertising. Thanks to all the new business generated by positive reviews on Yelp, this carpet cleaner no longer spends money on yellow page advertising. Instead, this business is spending much of its advertising budget on improving it’s customer service, resulting in more positive reviews on Yelp.

Donaker also discussed how businesses have a love/hate relationship with customer-driven reviews. Businesses love how great customer service is rewarded with positive reviews. However, they hate the loss of message control. That said, the positive to negative review ratio at Yelp stands at 6:1.

Audience tweeted:
@ErikNYC mentioned the beauty of Yelp’s customer-driven model is that “when the customer wins, the business wins.” Echoing sentiments from the presentation, @gamedayjreau tweeted, “It’s always about customer service at the end of the day.”

In response to a case study example of how negative reviews can become positive for businesses, @leslieforde commented, “It’s worth engaging vocal customers gently. Reaching out to angry customers can change negative perception.”

WOMMA says:
The love/hate relationship with customer-driven conversations is real. Word-of-mouth offline and online can not be controlled, only sparked. A business cannot ethically control what customers say about them. One of the best ways to spark word-of-mouth conversations is through delivering outstanding customer service and providing remarkable products.

For any business wanting to spark word-of-mouth conversations, it must first spend time and money to gain utmost confidence in their services and products. This confidence will give a business thick enough skin to withstand negative reviews as well as a solid foundation from which a virtuous cycle of positive reviews will fuel business growth.

Expect lots of tid-bits to be shared from WOMM-U 2009. But first, here is list of immediate recap information.

1. Interviews with presenters and attendees (from BlogTalkRadio)
2. In-depth Blog coverage (from Josh Hallet of Hyku)
3. Flickr Photo roll (from Josh Hallet of Hyku)
4. Smart tweets tagged with #WOMMA (from WOMMA)

Over the next couple weeks, we’ll be sharing video ditties from the Conference as well as digging deeper into some of the major themes discussed in the ballroom sessions and breakout groups. Until then, then should satiate ya!

Live blog.
Live video.
Live tweets.
Killer photos

Follow all the WOMM-U agenda action any way you like.

Last night at WOMM-U, Gary Spangler from DuPont hosted a conversation for brand marketers learning to better navigate the social media waters. John Andrews, Wal-Mart’s Sr. Manager of Emerging Media, led a brands-to-brands conversation about lessons Wal-Mart has learned from its social media endeavors.

This video snippet is in response to a question on how Wal-Mart is measuring success with tapping into conversations happening online.

Suzy Welch, business writer, has an intriguing way to quickly analyze the consequences of decisions. When faced with making difficult choices, Suzy will 10-10-10 it. Meaning, she will take a few moments to consider the consequences of a decision that may occur in the next 10 minutes, 10 months, and 10 years.

Suzy’s 10-10-10 model is a simple (and smart) way to analyze immediate, short-term, and long-term consequences of a decision. Plus, it’s so applicable to making important marketing decisions, especially in today’s online social world.

Except, we need to amp up Suzy’s 10-10-10 thinking to account for how quickly information spreads online. 10 minutes. 10 hours. 10 days. That’s a more workable 10-10-10 consequences model for marketers dealing with issues worthy of explosive online conversation, such as the marketing disaster recently faced by Dominos Pizza.

Because it took Dominos more than 24-hours to respond, the company was singled-out as being uncommunicative and unresponsive to the groundswell of online commentary on twitter and various blogs. Similar slow-reacting critiques have been hurled at Motrin (#motrinmoms) and Amazon (#amazonfail).

Dominos, Motrin, and Amazon all suffered immediate consequences of not making a decision on how to respond within 10 hours of the incidents they faced. The online chatter spiked and to an extent, took on a life of its own. However, these three brands did ultimately respond and the twitter storm receded within 10 days. For Motrin and Amazon, sales haven’t suffered from these missteps. Time will tell if the gross-out video will hurt Dominos sales this quarter.

We are still learning that responding quickly to marketing matters discussed online is vital. Using the10-10-10 rule should be helpful for companies in similar situations faced by Dominos, Motrin, and Amazon.

For example, within the first 10-minutes, a company should acknowledge what is happening. No answers. No explanations. Just an immediate acknowledgement using whatever social media tool a company feels most comfortable using will work. However, within 10-hours, a company should go beyond acknowledging to responding by explaining what happened and what specific actions the company is taking to address the issue in order to reassure people they can trust the company again. If done right and timely, negative consequences will be minimized 10-days after the initial flare up.

Is responding within 10-minutes realistic? Probably not. However, a response within 10-hours is realistic and expected in today’s always-on information cycle.

We keep learning the faster the response, the less damage done. If a company fails to respond quickly to these flare-ups, the consequences can last 10-years and not 10-days.