-
Website
http://www.chrisbrogan.com/ -
Original page
http://www.chrisbrogan.com/content-marketing-upshifts-behind-the-jpg-purchase/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
One of my favorite examples of the fully integrated content marketing approach is EAS founder and "Body for Life" author Bill Phillips's creation of Muscle Media magazine. He ran into "transparency" problems with his MET-Rx relationship and learned from it with this later approach.
With Muscle Media, everyone knew that a majority of the ads were for EAS products and many of the articles supported his book "Body for Life" but the approach worked. People ate it up because they were fans of his approach and the products were at or near the best in the market.
Mike
@Mike - That's interesting. I think that's a risk, too. Having it be all about one product might not work if there's a single product. But Adorama is a retailer of multiple products. Would that make it different?
@bookerx3
I think this is bigger. I think it starts with the audience and finds the sponsor, as opposed to the other model. Mileage may vary.
I think the key has been TRANSPARENCY, as well as CHOOSING our sponsors carefully (meaning, brands that are already trusted and loved in the community you're serving). For us, ZIO is an arts-and-entertainment site, so we've worked mainly with media and luxury brands: Apple, HP, Sundance, HBO, MSFT and Toyota. It's tricky business to build and keep an audience online --especially an online video watching audience-- so to jeopardize that for 1 corporate backer who wants their logo in every shot I think is really unwise. I'd rather find a partner who your viewers already like and trust, and promote them in your show...far less likely to create a flurry of negative comments.
At the risk of seeming self-promotional, I'd like to point our new online video series, VIEWFINDERS...I loathe self-promoting posts, but it happens to be on point, and timely (as it just launched today.) Adobe sponsored the series, which profiles a new photographer every day and then culminates in a reality-show-style "challenge" where they defend their portfolios. (http://tinyurl.com/czkffc) As a sponsor, they are incorporated in 4 ways: (1) they have the right to have one of their employees appear as one of the "judges" in the show; (2) their products are on screen for the 'challenge' presentation (Lightroom and Photoshop products are used as presentation tools, and only by the photographers that already know and use those products); (3) we produced 30 second post-roll video ads for them, using one of the VIEWFINDERS guests who is a very passionate fanatic of their products; (4) we wrote surrounding blog posts that include "Quicktips" on their products, and are labeled as "sponsored by Adobe."
It's only been live 5 hours, but already the blogosphere has responded positively to the videos, syndicating them based on pure interest. I would love to hear what people here have to say: did we cross a line? Is this interesting content, in and of itself? Do you think the sponsor is mentioned *enough*?
We hope to do more sponsored-series that are authentic and where the sponsor is involved in ways that do not offend our audience. This is new territory for everyone, and it's critical to agree on the best way to brand our entertainment.
What a timely post! But, that's usual for you isn't it? : )
I think you have hit a key point. It is much more about building your audience and then finding a sponsor. This is contrary to how it has been.
This is what I am aiming to do now with Shama.Tv. I am working on growing that audience, and if it works out-sponsorship will follow.
- Shama
Good post Chris. Bang on!
I love your point about tutorials.
I'm in the process of starting a digital publication called The Style Sample Magazine, targeted towards a very specific niche audience: fashion bloggers. It's an extremely passionate group that wants/deserves recognition, and all content (photos, articles, illustrations, etc.) is created or submitted by the bloggers. The point here is that the audience came first, then the product, then (perhaps) a sponsor.
Though the magazine is currently the very definition of a labor of love (no ads, no paid media, etc.) created for and by the community, I can't help but see the potential in "building projects that are ideal for a sponsor/owner."
Look at what American Apparel did on Chictopia: they used three of the most popular members of that online fashion community--members they knew were loyal to their products--in their advertising on the site. It's authentic, accessible, and aspirational. I can definitely see this sort of thing becoming more common as organizations try to find different ways to connect with their customers.
Couldn't agree more. I've been preaching about this "next wave" since 2007 and actually thought 2008 would be the year it would take off given that the cost of digital creation and distribution has all but reached zero. Thus, it is actually cheaper for a brand to create a community around smart, interesting content than it is to create a single national ad campaign.
I'm not sure I agree with those in the comment stream that say you have to build the audience first. Certainly easier to get a sponsor that way but I think it could actually work better the other way around.
Find a smart, "get it" advertiser that wants to build a Micro-Content community around a passion (one that uses their product obviously) and then build a high-quality content stream and deliver that stream where the consumer is - much like Gary V does. You don't have to go to WineLibraryTV - you can see his shows on Vimeo if you choose.
Done right, the content is the ad and thus no traditional styled (this content brought to you or splash banners/pre-rolls) are required. It's seemless and transparent as the brand isn't trying to "sell you" but instead providing you good content you want to invite into your life.
Won't work for every brand, but if your product is used as part of someone's passion -- I think this marketing approach is a no brainer.
@TomMartin
Today, that idea makes too much sense. Built in audience, great content, loyal following, credible brand...why buy advertising space and rent when you can own it outright.
To Marc's point - smart marketers won't screw this up, although the potential is there to want to sell sell sell, when they should be focused on true engagement.
Regarding Sarah's point, I understand about you (CB) being jaded regarding "traditional" custom publishing. Most "popular" custom publications for the last decade don't present themselves like being all about the customer - like MyFord magazine or even some of the inflight magazines, which are also custom. That said, I've worked on (and seen) some amazing corporate publications that have some incredible and loyal followings that completely focus on the customer's informational/entertainment needs. Look at Corvette Quarterly for instance. If a reader somehow doesn't get an issue of that panic ensues in the streets. That is a beloved custom publication. Also, some of the b-to-b custom pubs are amazing (and I would argue have better content than some of the trades that fill the space).
Anyhow, this is much bigger (to your point). Had a conversation with a group of marketers today that in five years it will be hard to distinguish between a media company and a product/service company. Media companies are learning how to be marketers and sell product. Marketers are learning how to be publishers and create consistent and relevant content to customers. It then makes sense for marketers to look at purchasing a play like Adorama has.
Kudos to Adorama...and much more of this to come.
Thanks Chris.
If I'm a mobile technology company, I'd be all over that.