chrisbrogan.com - Latest Comments in The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

Simulateur De Pret Bancaire — Wed, 05 May 2010 22:04:09 -0000

Wow the blog is too good and I don't know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.

simulateur de pret auto

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

Beth Pinson — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 13:37:59 -0000

Make the customer excited. With the economy tight, the customer is in charge and they want to be excited. Businesses have to meet customers on a level that makes them feel engaged. Walter Pinson speaks on this in his blog Hyundai schools us on Relationship Marketing

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

Natasha Wescoat — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 20:55:13 -0000

I think it's a conscience issue. If we feel like we are free to say what we wish, and the product empowers us, we are always more likely to share with others or shout at the rooftops. Direct benefits to advertising and word of mouth seems to be the antithesis to sharing something you love. It's almost like we're being TOLD to share, rather than welcomed...to share. Regardless of the good intentions of advertising incentive programs.

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

app — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 10:06:44 -0000

What's funny is how some people react to celebrity endorsements of product & services.

I am not sure if James Earl Jones did anything to increase the number of people that saw Verizon favorably, but I know a number of people that felt that him taking that job lowered their opinion of him. They lost a lot of respect for him for endorsing a product and attaching his name, face, & voice to it. They felt he was better than that and taking a job like that was beneath him.

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

Susan Weinschenk — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 17:49:50 -0000

I have a chapter in my book about social validation and another about similarity. People look to others to know what to do (esp. if there is uncertainty). I think some of what you are talking about here is about this concept of social validation. People listen to other people, especially if they think they are similar to them. On the other hand, people don't really know why they do what they do (another chapter in my book). But they like to think they do, so they make up reasons for their own behavior. Advertising works, and people buy what celebrities say they should... The answers to your survey questions might not match real behavior during the buying process.

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

app — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 13:48:33 -0000

Whether anyone wants to admit it or not, consumers have a vested interest in the success of products & services that they use and feel strongly positive about.

If these products fail due to bad marketing, the consumer loses what they love. And in some cases, that can be quite painful.

Word of mouth advertising can make up for poor marketing when enough consumers that love a particular product tell others about it.

Anyone that loves a product and out of their own free will tells others about it, without any thought of monetary compensation, still hopes to receive compensation, in the form of continued product availability, even if this thought is only lying just below the conscious surface.

For most, this is enough compensation and they consider their endorsement an investment in their own consumer happiness. And for many, accepting money in exchange for an endorsement somehow may imply (subconsciously?) that they would rather have the money than the product, itself.

These feelings may partly be the basis for the mistrust of paid endorsements in general, as if to say that if you accept money you don't really love the product. (also goes hand-in-hand with the general mistrust of people that trade words for money, is that being paid to say anything also equals being paid to lie)

But I wonder if they would feel the same about bragging about their favorite toothpaste, if the company offered them a years supply of the product they love as compensation. Would they trust a celebrity endorsement if the compensation wasn't money and was product, instead? Would that have any effect on the consumer's perceived integrity of the endorser?

BTW: Thank you very much for this article. Between this one and a recent conversation with my daughter about providing free advertising for lesser known products she loves, on Facebook, I managed to squeeze a related blog post out of it.

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

Lena — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 08:31:59 -0000

I honestly don't know what to think of this :)
Interesting thread and good reader comments.

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

Laura Zavelson — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 07:10:14 -0000

I think the one positive thing about content marketing is that the amount of influence you have is only as good as your last recommendation. In advertising, there really isn't a trust relationship so if they tell me about a product and it's terrible who am I not going to trust? The manufacturer, certainly. But it's not like I know what agency made the ad. They have a chance to "get" me again. People have had enough of those experiences so what can they do but not trust any of them. Hence the downward trend in advertising effectiveness.

Celebrities are a nice try if we could trust them, but they generally have another job. What do they care if we buy the car and it sucks and we stop trusting them. We'll probably still go see their movie/golf match/whatever.

However, the Chris Brogans and Seth Godins and TwitterMoms of the world are different. Their recommendations actually affect their JOBS. So why do I care whether or not they're getting paid to make recommendations? That's generally why I'm seeking them out in the first place. And the first or second time they tell me something is great and it sucks I'm going to stop trusting them. If that happens a lot they will lose influence and poof! no more job. For the consumer, the content advertising model has less risk and lower switching costs than the traditional advertising model and so it's less about who is getting paid and more about the trust. (and the transparency of the revenue stream is part of that trust)

I think this issue is more about the internal ethics required of the recommender because it's darn hard to get something for free or get paid and then have to say it's bad.

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

CrystalsQuest — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 03:10:55 -0000

Mary, I disagree. Money doesn't corrupt. Money is an amplifier - if you're corrupt already, it'll make it more obvious. If you're generous already, it'll let you be more so.
It's too easy for people to blame their own motivations on the things that they use to express them.

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

Scott — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 01:01:02 -0000

Chris, I have to agree with Janet's comments here. Before moving online I spent a lifetime in retail sales and marketing. I can recall a rigged survey I once ran on in-store promotional signs where we surveyed customers as they entered the store, had special promotional displays setup on the sales floor specifically matching the survey questions, and then monitored the customer's purchases as they cashed out. This was all permission based by the way, nothing Big Brother about the checkout monitoring.

An overwhelming majority of the shoppers who took the survey went on to make purchasing decisions that directly contradicted their given responses. I can't recall the exact numbers so many years later, but the bottom line was people lie when asked what motivates their purchasing decisions.

I'm not sure it's as much about trying to rationalize or "fit in" by saying what's expected, so much as it may be that there's a difference in the thought process of many people from when they're in discussion mode to when they're in shopping mode.

I myself believe that paying more for a cup of coffee than a gallon of fuel is insane, $40 a gallon for coffee seems crazy to most people if you say it out loud, yet if I'm meeting a friend and they suggest the local coffee shop I order the $4 cup of coffee every time without a second thought.

The difference is my thought process in conversation or sitting here at my desk vs. standing at that coffee counter.

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

Janet Ryan — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 23:54:55 -0000

Chris, consumers want to think of themselves as rational, and answer rational questions with rational answers. But most buying rationalizations appear (based on latest research...which I'd have to look up to cite properly) to happen after the buying decision, to convince ourselves we were right. Beyond that, consumers lie on surveys regularly, especially when asked for that opinion in an open forum. we can't help, we give the politically accepted 'right' answer, and usually have n oidea what the truth really is.

Back in my print media days, it was widely known (in industry) that if readers told the truth about magazine readership, the New Yorker would have tens of millions of paid subs and Playboy/Hustler, none.

So, do celebrity endorsements influence consumers work? of course they do. If you pay attention to a shoe ad simply because a sports star got your attention, that ad was more effective than if you'd changed channels or turned the page. Does that make endorsements a surefire approach...of course not, needs the right magic combination of celebrity fit, product perception, marketing objectives, sales process, channelmix...and even then all can collapse when your celebrity gets bad personal press. So its a very tricky and costly solution that is only sometimes right.

Content marketing? Absolutely. I am convinced it is the future in a UGC/ "consumers control the medium" world. But I don't think it will come from paying consumers to endorse (there is, as your survey showed, a high ICK factor to that one). I think it will come from marketers, media and leading edge consumers interacting authentically to find the case by case examples,

Just my $0.02...@janmaran

Janet

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

Mary — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 19:16:39 -0000

No getting around it, money corrupts.
I'm put in mind of the honorable tradition of critics, producing published reviews of art, performance, literature. These thought leaders' endorsement of the product is essential to the latter's success, but any salary is paid by the publisher, and (supposedly) no influence of money has sullied the critic's respected and educated evaluation.
If the publisher is the critic, however (as in the case of a blogger), even more must the separation of monetary reward and detached judgment be made clear.
If your blog claims to be an honest reporting of your observations, and if its content is intended to be taken seriously in the long term, what you write can't be connected to financial reward.

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

Mickie Kennedy — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 17:44:14 -0000

While I agree that money changes everything and that celebrity endorsements do not say much about the quality of a product (except that the company has a high advertising budget), I do think that the endorsement brings awareness to a product. Many people will pay attention to an advertisement with a celebrity and then, at a later time, subconsciously rememeber or recall the product name and purchase that because they have heard the name before.

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

Hajj E. Flemings — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 17:37:25 -0000

I am sorry we live in a business world, product endorsements, commerical, and ads have been around for a long time and it is ethical for people to get paid. There are a variety of reasons people endorse products for one a person could be finanically distressed and really need the money.

People have to do their due diligences and be accountable for their own decisions. Every person has a motive when they push a product, the motive could be to help someone out or for a financial benefit. I feel that the social media space is some what behind in its approach to whether it is ethical, right or wrong to get paid to endorse products. A word of advice don't take anything at face value.

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

chrisbrogan — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 15:54:52 -0000

@Joe - I haven't, but it sounds lovely.

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

Joe Mescher — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 15:15:02 -0000

I can see it now Chris...

Cut to you sitting in an oversized leather chair, wearing a tuxedo and holding a crystal tumbler full of Canadian Club (think Bill Murray in "Lost in Translation"). :-)

Seriously though, I've got no problem with a person being compensated to endorse a product, especially if they genuinely believe in its value.

The quality of their message will be directly tied to how straightforward their endorsement is anyhow.

Speaking of whiskey, ever tried Tullamore Dew?

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

Brian Martin — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 15:02:26 -0000

Successful advertising and marketing strategy is deeply rooted in science and strategy. Sure you can talk about celebrity advertising, or the hypothetical decline in advertising, but successful marketing takes more than just paid placement.
You mention Martin Lindstrom, who I've interviewed in my podcasts. If you truly interested in the science behind why we buy, might want to listen to it.
Being in the advertising and brand management industry for years, there are more optimal venues and ad placements for certain brands. Advertisers take in account optimal consumer dwell time - when is the best time to reach the consumer. We find in-flight advertising and vacation based venues are the best for reaching consumers during their dwell time.
For social media, would you say it's on your blog? Is it on Twitter? Is it through a sponsored post? If you do sponsor a post, would consumers take your recommendations seriously?

@Jacqueline, you make a great point. One of the most solid ways to reach a consumer is through sampling. A consumer who tries a product and relates back to a positive experience is more likely to buy.

To brand successfully, advertise successfully, and market your product successfully takes engaging your consumer in multiple ways. Engaging in social media is only one avenue - but still you reach a niche market to which the blogger reaches. Advertising in-flight or even on TV, reaches a broader market in general.

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

Michael Murray — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 15:00:41 -0000

Good survey!
Highlights the current incongruities even within out own community.
Until our mindsets shift into something slightly more practical (easy for advertisers to exploit) this area will always be one difficult to tackle.

I for one must cast a ballot against the "anit-celebrity" sterotype.

I believe them to be very successful.
I love John Legend, and his endorsement of Bailies is perfect.
Don't tell me people don't buy Air JORDANS anymore.

I believe that celebrity endoresement has become so commonplace that we not only do we not appreciate it anymore we avoid it.

Today the everyday man and the nonsensical seems to be selling far better.

Better ad tactic would be to place these very popular faces in some very awkward positioning for audiences to consume their brands. It would have the appeal of a car wreak. Can't quite look away.

For example.

What if Joaquin Phoenix' recent antics (and beard) were to endorse an aftershave?
Or Salma Hayeks overseas aid mission were sponsored by Land Rover?

Give us our celebrities being authentic about the brands they represent!
I love Demi Moore much more now that I can see her for who she is on twitter. No media bias or awkwardness. Double goes for her hubby.

So there....

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

Rebecca — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 14:52:19 -0000

Take a look at the Walmart 11moms campaign - the moms are supposedly not getting paid, but do enjoy benefits, and there's been a bit of divide (some publicly and some privately) over whether it's viable, right and fair. There's also many that love it. Companies do what they can, but they will always upset people because that's the nature of corporate vs. individual.

It's important to be as much a part of the conversation as possible. I personally think that one issue with the Walmart 11 moms campaign is that Walmart isn't speaking themselves. Have endorsements, absolutely, but make sure you and your company are also a large part of the conversation.

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

Steve — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 14:50:44 -0000

I've been interested in this topic for years Chris because it seems like the perfect model for social networking. Social Networking today has two pieces: an ad driven business model that gives users functionality for free - MySpace, Facebook, etc.

Those two pieces support walls. Walls to keep the users in - and all their communications too.

What you're proposing removes the walls.
- Build me an "online home" with no restrictions in or out (controls, but no restrictions)
- Everything I send out - IM, e-mail, blog, link - has advertising representing my interests and choices.
- The "online home" host keeps the revenue in exchange for "free" or could split it with me and/or the destination site too. Whatever.
- The advertisers get direct access to people I know and presumably influence. Aka - targeted advertising to my friends, family, associates, etc.

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

CrystalsQuest — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 13:48:05 -0000

I love those little quotes under the stories in Readers Digest. One of them I read years back that stuck with me is:
"People will always prefer the calm seas of despotism to the turbulent waters of independence" (can't remember the author)
It's sad but true, but that's STILL no justification for becoming a despot.
Advertising/not advertising should be a matter for personal preference, and not something that's forced down your throat like bad medicine or, worse, religious dogma!

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

Tracey Hope-Ross — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 13:16:25 -0000

Hi Chris,

We've seen the same trends among the Mom demographic as well. Mom WOM is strong:

67% of Moms would rather get information from someone they consider a peer than a “celebrity” Mom.

94% of Moms rely on recommendations from other Moms when it comes to purchasing decisions.

The large majority of Moms read consumer-written product reviews online before making even small purchasing decisions. Since Moms now invest more time and effort researching their purchasing decisions, they feel compelled to share their findings with others. We've found Moms, especially, are leaders in this movement.

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

Jason Kintzler — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 13:15:19 -0000

In short, Brand Relations should be led by PR, not the traditional "ad man." Now is the opportunity for the PR industry to emerge as more of an asset to brand than ever before. Become the "branding through communications" agency similar to the way ad firms have in the past. Ads are about "push", but today's marketing is not.

re celebrity endorsement: I think the misperception here is that brands pay celebrities to endorse products. I manage two outdoor brands and can tell you that our celebrity sponsorship is about branding, not endorsement. What I mean is that, they are an extension of our brand. The represent what our brand is about, and they add exposure to the brand. I don't believe people are listening to what they say about our brand, but I do believe people associate products with people - and that's an entirely different thing.

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

Holly Buchanan — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 12:24:09 -0000

In the research I've seen on women and WOM, women are especially alert to incentives that might taint their recommendation. Spreading WOM is often about strengthening relationships. Do it wrong, and it could hurt your relationships with your friends and your social standing.

and yes, there's the social relationship theory from Predictibly Irrational mentioned by several other commenters.

I think it comes down to a perception of "incentivising" vs. "appreciation."

Incentivising your customers implies giving something with an expectation of getting something in return. It also implies lack of freedom to say what you really think (aka, you're probably not going to get the incentive if your review is negative)

appreciation is about a more one-way transacation with no expectations of anything in return, and no restriction on what you can say (aka, you send a free product to a loyal customer, but they have the right to give it a positive review, a negative review, or no review it at all)

It's a fine line - really a perception thing. But Transparency and authenticity have to be built in.

Re: The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

Gab Goldenberg — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 12:11:51 -0000

Excellent point about people who are already passionate being turned into brand advocates.

I'd argue it's a question of self-respect/dignity - people can't be made to feel as if they've been conned. That's why my intro to marketing course in CEGEP taught us that after a purchase, people talk about it with friends/family to validate their decision and be comfortable with what they did - they're seeking reassurance that it was a good buy (compliments on how nice the car is matter too, but that's besides the point). That's why folks are OK with paid reps, so long as the relationship is disclosed - they feel they can make an informed decision, and avoid being taken advantage of. Perhaps more than self-respect, it's an instinct of self-preservation?

Fascinating the depth of comments you get here.