Social media's place is where we can kvetch about a product's logo being BADLY covered up in a TV show, like we can't figure out what the product is, but all know that they didn't pay to put the laptop in the show, and so they fake it, and think they are fooling us by making a cuter logo, and also like how you say f*ck, and then legions of people are stumped as to what you mean, and by 'stumped', I mean, no one is fooled, curse you corporate america.
I don't write run-on sentences, but damn, that felt *gooood*.
Darren Daz Cox
· 9 months ago
The small talk is everything when it is an impulse buy. The more fun and creative the better.....
daddybrain
· 9 months ago
To answer your question, "if you’re Pepsi and you want to sell more, what other options do you have besides reminding people of your brand all the time?"
They could provide you with a product that wasn't junk in a can (or bottle) that was full of destructive ingredients. But then again, that is the reason for the small talk to begin with: to divert the consumer from the obvious fact that they are selling crap.
It's like Kellogs, who puts partially hydgronated oils in MANY of their cereals, Pop Tarts, Gummie Treats, etc. They say "Kellogs Frosted Flakes is a healthy way to start your day..." They leave out the payoff, "IF you like eating refined sugar, corn syrup and partially hydrogenated oil. Hey, so what if these things are linked to heart disease, cancer, obesity and other bad stuff. Just buy it and shut up!"
Chris, great question, and here's my take. Businesses have to think about the bigger idea they are part of, and that is where they can really get people involved above and beyond the chit chat. Patagonia is a prime example of a company that basically just sells outdoor clothing, got involved in the bigger idea associated with the outdoors, the environment, and enjoying the environment. They get 36,000 resumes for their 30 open positions for their corporate headquarters, because they stand for something bigger. As Kathy Sierra puts it, how do you become part of the bigger idea.
Laura Roeder
· 9 months ago
I think small talk and ambient noise are incredibly important for a brand. I have seen a huge increase in my business since I began doing a weekly mailing. This mailing provides valuable content, but I think more important than that is reminding people that I exist week in and week out. It's the same with twitter, it's mostly just "small talk" but it keeps me and my business on people's radar.
Susan Weinschenk
· 9 months ago
There is some research emerging on the topic of brands and the brain. A recent study (described at http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/07/08...) talks about the power of brands to affect purchasing through emotions. In that study brand labels and icons were flashed on the periphery of the visual field for a very short amount of time, yet they affected later purchases. Part of the role of that small talk may be to keep the brand in the visual field, to stimulate the unconscious impact that a strong brand already has.
Kate
· 9 months ago
I like the point you make about how Pepsi use marketing in their branding an event. I see O2 taking the same approach with branding music venues in London. Aligning a brand with a particular type of event or venue is certainly an effective way of ensuring the brand is noticed and it also allows participants in those branded particular events or venues to feel a deeper affiliation with the brand as oppose to its competitors - the brand has tied itself to an interest of the the event goers, a bond is formed and interest has been spiked.
Jenifer Olson
· 9 months ago
Well, I think social media can play a strong role in the branding and promotion of a product, and in that sense, could likely be responsible for driving a portion of any sales (good luck trying to quantify it). I also think there's a "tipping point" with all media (including social media) that, when reached, can increase a brand's penetration exponentially.
With regard to whether we settle into a brand, I think we do. Given a choice, I'd pick Coke. BUT, if Coke is unavailable - or if Pepsi is on sale - I'm very comfortable choosing Pepsi. Whether my first or second choice, though, that's still excellent branding considering all the different sodas on the market.
On a side note, I find it interesting that many restaurants and other establishments often offer one or the other, either Coke or Pepsi. So, maybe another key for brand penetration is the number and size of the exclusive distribution channels. Just a thought.
What works? Any marketing promoting the brand as conversant, hip, cool, savvy, inter-generational, global, involved, relevant, aware, fun, etc. What doesn't? Outright selling, especially pitching brands against each other. Which is not to say I wouldn't love a coupon. :-)
Ed
· 9 months ago
Simple. The brands that do not keep reaching out to advertise their tonic, (now through social media), are gone.
More than ever, you have to meet people in the rapid stream that is modern life. Beside them, off to side where they'll see you, but not in their way.
There was an old adage about a push vendor who wouldn't advertise anymore because new competition reduced his revenues a bit. It got worse, and he angrily refused to push his cart to where his loyal customers were; that place where they liked to talk, where they were thirsty. Desperate, he nearly blocked the path with his cart, and raised his prices, and took away free lemons.
Now his son works for the man with 100 pushcarts.
Anja Merret
· 9 months ago
Sponsoring events is a reminder to consumers. It's also designed to contribute to the 'experience' of the brand and ensure that the brand becomes bigger than just drinking one can of soda. It's rarely quantifiable in terms of moving product out of fridges or off shelves.
Lisa Hickey
· 9 months ago
Chris, that’s a great question! Whenever I counsel a client on Social Media, one of the first things I challenge them to think about is this “What is the conversation you think you should be having day in and day out with the world?” Look at the comments you’ve gotten so far. We all want *something* good in any product or brand we are a part of. Whether that’s product innovation, or doing some good in the world, or creating a place or culture that’s wonderful to work at. Or being conversant in a “hip, cool, savvy” way. (thanks, Jennifer Olson.) Or, if you’re just “junk in a can”, (not my words), then is it that you have been a bridge between generations for decades – a small, shared experience in our culture that ties us together? “Say what you will”, about Pepsi, too :), but they get this. That’s why the idea of an “experience” works for them. But there is NO one size fits all solution for Social Media – that’s the joy of it! What IS the “bigger idea” behind the brand (as Karl Long says), and how do you express that day in and day out to the world in a meaningful, non-annoying way? Bravo to all who are helping to figure that out!
Whitney
· 9 months ago
For what it's worth, I gave up Pepsi as a brand when they got rid of diet pepsi with lemon. The diet pepsi with lemon was fantastic and I come close to preferring it over my omnipresent Tab or diet coke. But alone, a la carte, I just think it's too sweet to bear. i could just buy lemons and put it in myself, but then the grab & go options are more limited. I mention this to say that even though Pepsi has been a Super Bowl sponsor for years and I was exposed for a week or so at a time to free product as someone on staff, working as part of the Super Bowl on site staff, my opinion of the product still hasn't changed. No more exposure or reminders or the like are going to get me to change my mind. Sometimes our opinions and preferences about brands get entrenched because of our experiences, and no additional opportunities for trials are going to overcome the fact that the product is okay, but not my first choice.
Let's not even mention how far out of my way I have gone to obtain Tab, or some of my other friends who have driven across the State of Pennsylvania to get their favorite soda...That's brand dedication. People will move mountains to obtain their favorite thing- it becomes an emotional connection they don't want to lose. There are websites that help women find discontinued colors of lipstick and the like, for example. People lobby Ben & Jerry's to bring back retired flavors. We may all be whack jobs, but sometimes, there is no substitute. That's to say, by way of example, that I don't know if all the dollars Pepsi spends trying to make inroads is worth while. The preference, the taste preference, is basic and elemental. I think Pepsi should be very happy with being Pepsi, and be Pepsi, rather than trying to be Coke or anyone else. And if they bring back the diet pepsi with lemon, I know many people in my family alone would be very happy.
Jeff
· 9 months ago
Chris,
This made me laugh - "And if you stopped reminding people about the brand, wouldn’t sales just drop? "
If sales from your current customers/clients are that dependent on constant reminders then I contend you haven't developed much of a brand.
Other than that I enjoyed the piece - thx.
Beth Gwazdosky
· 9 months ago
As with any brand, top-of-mind awareness vs unaided awareness can be achieved through different means. Here with Pepsi, when you think of Chris Brogan at SXSW, he was at the Pepsi booth. Therefore study results of attendees would have a high level of brand recognition and imagery tied to someone (Chris) that everyone wanted to engage with in a conversation.
From that objective, good job Pepsi. Where was Coke? Personally I prefer Coke over Pepsi so it wouldn't drive me to buy it but in person at the event, sure I'll have a diet Pepsi. Maybe it's a suddle means of getting folks to re-try to brand or maybe work to repositiion it in the mind of post-SXSW consumers when shopping for their next pop.
Even a great brand can be out of sight, out of mind. If you want your brand remembered, drive brand imagery / frequency messaging. If you think you're brand will be remembered without it being at the table, you may be a step behind in the conversation. So I believe it was beneficial for Pepsi to be present, connect people and not be selling.
Lara Dalch
· 9 months ago
Couple of thoughts on this.
"Ambient noise" - primarily in the form of advertising - is absolutely important in keeping a brand top of mind over time. (And with a CPG brand like Pepsi, point-of-sale and packaging/shelf presence are even more important, in my opinion.) However, it alone cannot create the emotional connection with the consumer, which is what branding is all about after all.
Experiential marketing, social media, and promotions allow marketers to create a dialogue of sorts with their consumers to create/strengthen that emotional connection. Trick is to add actual value to the experience and not become just another piece of the "ambient noise." This is where most brands fall down on the job. And to be perfectly honest, Pepsi's presence at SXSW, while impressive from a scale perspective, didn't strike me as much more than a logo slap on banners, content, and such. Maybe I missed something - would be curious to know what others thought about that specifically. (For brevity's sake, I won't include examples of event sponsorships that I think have been done particularly well. Happy to discuss off line though.)
As for whether or not those kinds of marketing efforts sell more product, well, isn't that always the problem with promotions/experential marketing? Measuring direct impact on sales is nearly impossible in my experience; but I continue to believe that brands who add REAL value to an experience benefit from increased brand loyalty over time.
Jennifer Shanks
· 9 months ago
Seems Pepsi made some sort of impact with their presence at SXSW and Chris Brogan's participation in their outreach stragety - we're all chatting about Pepsi in this thread.
Without quantifying the scale, shouldn't this qualify as (some measure of) success using social media as a forum for further developing brand awareness and personalization?
Lara Dalch
· 9 months ago
Hi Jennifer.
You're absolutely right that Pepsi made an impact simply by being at SXSW, although I'm not sure that our chatter about it is a good measure of the impact given that we're marketers and chatting about marketing campaigns is what we do. :) A better measure is probably the chatter on Twitter during the event. (Does anyone know if "Pepsi" trended at any point during SXSW?)
My beef with it - and reading my post again, I didn't make this clear - is that you really could have replaced "Pepsi" with "Cool, Hip, M18-24-Targeted Brand X" and had a similar experience. I'm wondering what was "uniquely Pepsi" about the whole thing. To me, experiences that could ONLY have come from that brand are the most valuable. (Admittedly, a tall order for a beverage brand.)
Thanks for prompting me to clarify.
Josh Hurlock http://twitter.co
· 9 months ago
Chris,
I believe small talk is important to an extent. A great amount of small talk shows that a business has not progressed much with the brand. For example, Pepsi does not need to constantly small talk customers. Nonetheless, I feel that small talk is needed here and there. This small talk should serve as a subtle reminder and make sure to not go overboard.
Veroniica12
· 9 months ago
Great question!
Social Media is, by nature, engaging. The challenge is how to make this engagement genuine, rather than repetitive and numbing.
Christopher S. Penn
· 9 months ago
Here is how you determine social media's ROI:
"How did you hear about us?" or "What made you purchase today?"
If the answer is never any of the social media channels, then you're wasting your time.
Ryan Miller
· 9 months ago
Chris,
I don't know if Pepsi's PodCast Playground presence at SXSW directly sold more beverages. But I do think that Experience Branding is super important and works, when the marriage is right. For instance, I don't know if Firestone Tires' PodCast Playground would work. There is no even an indirect line between the activity (PodCasting) and Tires. You could argue that Pepsi doesn't have a strong tie either, but I think they have tried to brand themselves more as hip, young, 'The Choice of a New Generation' - and so sponsoring a podcast experience may tie in. Could Coke have done the same thing - possibly. But off the top of my head I think of Coke as being branded more as 'classic' 'old school' (and that's not a bad thing).
Point is, if that experience can be tied to the brand it may work. Plus, if people are putting out tons of content from SXSW, it can't hurt to have lots of Pepsi logos in the bg.
Tom Pastre
· 9 months ago
Reminding is a way to keep the comfort level high in a brand. Constant small talk reassures the user that they're doing the right thing, won't have a bad moment, and will receive pleasure, even if it's a small dose, every time they drink a Pepsi, eat at McD's, brush with Crest, etc.
JasonFalls
· 9 months ago
Your post leads down the path I've been arguing for a while - that much of social media activity (and even advertising for that matter) is not easy to measure. I love the statisticians and metric folks who say a billboard has this much impact and a mention on a certain blog has that much impact. But the truth is they don't really know unless you define success as an exact measure (like impressions or clicks, etc.). But am I going to walk away from SXSW and buy Pepsi? Yes. Am I going to do so because of their activity at SXSW? Probably not. I've preferred Pepsi over Coke and others for years. While the Pepsi area at SXSW gave me more of a swell of pride over one of my favorite brands getting actively involved in the social media space, it won't move the dial on sales for me personally. Will it for others? As much as I love Katie Payne and the rest of the measurement folks, we'll never really know.
lemonade diet
· 2 months ago
Great question!
Social Media is, by nature, engaging. The challenge is how to make this engagement genuine, rather than repetitive and numbing.
All Comments
I don't write run-on sentences, but damn, that felt *gooood*.
The more fun and creative the better.....
They could provide you with a product that wasn't junk in a can (or bottle) that was full of destructive ingredients. But then again, that is the reason for the small talk to begin with: to divert the consumer from the obvious fact that they are selling crap.
It's like Kellogs, who puts partially hydgronated oils in MANY of their cereals, Pop Tarts, Gummie Treats, etc. They say "Kellogs Frosted Flakes is a healthy way to start your day..." They leave out the payoff, "IF you like eating refined sugar, corn syrup and partially hydrogenated oil. Hey, so what if these things are linked to heart disease, cancer, obesity and other bad stuff. Just buy it and shut up!"
Peace,
babbo
www.daddybrain.wordpress.com
With regard to whether we settle into a brand, I think we do. Given a choice, I'd pick Coke. BUT, if Coke is unavailable - or if Pepsi is on sale - I'm very comfortable choosing Pepsi. Whether my first or second choice, though, that's still excellent branding considering all the different sodas on the market.
On a side note, I find it interesting that many restaurants and other establishments often offer one or the other, either Coke or Pepsi. So, maybe another key for brand penetration is the number and size of the exclusive distribution channels. Just a thought.
What works? Any marketing promoting the brand as conversant, hip, cool, savvy, inter-generational, global, involved, relevant, aware, fun, etc.
What doesn't? Outright selling, especially pitching brands against each other.
Which is not to say I wouldn't love a coupon. :-)
The brands that do not keep reaching out to advertise their tonic,
(now through social media),
are gone.
More than ever, you have to meet people in the rapid stream that is modern life.
Beside them, off to side where they'll see you, but not in their way.
There was an old adage about a push vendor who wouldn't advertise
anymore because new competition reduced his revenues a bit.
It got worse, and he angrily refused to push his cart to where his loyal
customers were; that place where they liked to talk, where they were
thirsty.
Desperate, he nearly blocked the path with his cart,
and raised his prices, and took away free lemons.
Now his son works for the man with 100 pushcarts.
I mention this to say that even though Pepsi has been a Super Bowl sponsor for years and I was exposed for a week or so at a time to free product as someone on staff, working as part of the Super Bowl on site staff, my opinion of the product still hasn't changed. No more exposure or reminders or the like are going to get me to change my mind.
Sometimes our opinions and preferences about brands get entrenched because of our experiences, and no additional opportunities for trials are going to overcome the fact that the product is okay, but not my first choice.
Let's not even mention how far out of my way I have gone to obtain Tab, or some of my other friends who have driven across the State of Pennsylvania to get their favorite soda...That's brand dedication. People will move mountains to obtain their favorite thing- it becomes an emotional connection they don't want to lose. There are websites that help women find discontinued colors of lipstick and the like, for example. People lobby Ben & Jerry's to bring back retired flavors. We may all be whack jobs, but sometimes, there is no substitute. That's to say, by way of example, that I don't know if all the dollars Pepsi spends trying to make inroads is worth while. The preference, the taste preference, is basic and elemental. I think Pepsi should be very happy with being Pepsi, and be Pepsi, rather than trying to be Coke or anyone else. And if they bring back the diet pepsi with lemon, I know many people in my family alone would be very happy.
This made me laugh - "And if you stopped reminding people about the brand, wouldn’t sales just drop? "
If sales from your current customers/clients are that dependent on constant reminders then I contend you haven't developed much of a brand.
Other than that I enjoyed the piece - thx.
From that objective, good job Pepsi. Where was Coke? Personally I prefer Coke over Pepsi so it wouldn't drive me to buy it but in person at the event, sure I'll have a diet Pepsi. Maybe it's a suddle means of getting folks to re-try to brand or maybe work to repositiion it in the mind of post-SXSW consumers when shopping for their next pop.
Even a great brand can be out of sight, out of mind. If you want your brand remembered, drive brand imagery / frequency messaging. If you think you're brand will be remembered without it being at the table, you may be a step behind in the conversation. So I believe it was beneficial for Pepsi to be present, connect people and not be selling.
"Ambient noise" - primarily in the form of advertising - is absolutely important in keeping a brand top of mind over time. (And with a CPG brand like Pepsi, point-of-sale and packaging/shelf presence are even more important, in my opinion.) However, it alone cannot create the emotional connection with the consumer, which is what branding is all about after all.
Experiential marketing, social media, and promotions allow marketers to create a dialogue of sorts with their consumers to create/strengthen that emotional connection. Trick is to add actual value to the experience and not become just another piece of the "ambient noise." This is where most brands fall down on the job. And to be perfectly honest, Pepsi's presence at SXSW, while impressive from a scale perspective, didn't strike me as much more than a logo slap on banners, content, and such. Maybe I missed something - would be curious to know what others thought about that specifically. (For brevity's sake, I won't include examples of event sponsorships that I think have been done particularly well. Happy to discuss off line though.)
As for whether or not those kinds of marketing efforts sell more product, well, isn't that always the problem with promotions/experential marketing? Measuring direct impact on sales is nearly impossible in my experience; but I continue to believe that brands who add REAL value to an experience benefit from increased brand loyalty over time.
Without quantifying the scale, shouldn't this qualify as (some measure of) success using social media as a forum for further developing brand awareness and personalization?
You're absolutely right that Pepsi made an impact simply by being at SXSW, although I'm not sure that our chatter about it is a good measure of the impact given that we're marketers and chatting about marketing campaigns is what we do. :) A better measure is probably the chatter on Twitter during the event. (Does anyone know if "Pepsi" trended at any point during SXSW?)
My beef with it - and reading my post again, I didn't make this clear - is that you really could have replaced "Pepsi" with "Cool, Hip, M18-24-Targeted Brand X" and had a similar experience. I'm wondering what was "uniquely Pepsi" about the whole thing. To me, experiences that could ONLY have come from that brand are the most valuable. (Admittedly, a tall order for a beverage brand.)
Thanks for prompting me to clarify.
I believe small talk is important to an extent. A great amount of small talk shows that a business has not progressed much with the brand. For example, Pepsi does not need to constantly small talk customers. Nonetheless, I feel that small talk is needed here and there. This small talk should serve as a subtle reminder and make sure to not go overboard.
Social Media is, by nature, engaging. The challenge is how to make this engagement genuine, rather than repetitive and numbing.
"How did you hear about us?" or "What made you purchase today?"
If the answer is never any of the social media channels, then you're wasting your time.
I don't know if Pepsi's PodCast Playground presence at SXSW directly sold more beverages. But I do think that Experience Branding is super important and works, when the marriage is right. For instance, I don't know if Firestone Tires' PodCast Playground would work. There is no even an indirect line between the activity (PodCasting) and Tires.
You could argue that Pepsi doesn't have a strong tie either, but I think they have tried to brand themselves more as hip, young, 'The Choice of a New Generation' - and so sponsoring a podcast experience may tie in.
Could Coke have done the same thing - possibly. But off the top of my head I think of Coke as being branded more as 'classic' 'old school' (and that's not a bad thing).
Point is, if that experience can be tied to the brand it may work. Plus, if people are putting out tons of content from SXSW, it can't hurt to have lots of Pepsi logos in the bg.
Social Media is, by nature, engaging. The challenge is how to make this engagement genuine, rather than repetitive and numbing.