So, it’s been about a week since the launch of Murdoch’s Daily- an iPad-only (for now) paid application for news and original content. In their words, “Daily is a category first: a tablet-native national news brand built from the ground up to publish original content exclusively for the iPad.”
It follows on the footsteps, and some success, of Flipboard- another iPad application built for consuming content. FlipBoard and the Daily both use the iPad to present content in a visually stunning way. But FlipBoard simply repurposes the content, the Daily creates it’s OWN content – a risky step for the publishing industry, already on shaky ground. We’ve all heard about declining circulations in newspapers, and publishers trying to figure out how to make money as more content moves online.
Well, here’s why I like it.
- Someone has to have the guts to try something new in the fast- changing publishing environment. The world is being turned upside down by this new media thing, and if anyone is gonna make a run at it, it should be a guy with deep pockets and plenty of resources. If he screws up, so what? We’ll learn what worked, make tweaks and move on.
- It’s fresh, but polished and credible. It’s sort of a cross between Twitter and the NYTimes. If breaking news happens- we’ll get the fresh news online somewhere (Twitter?) then read an in-depth article about it the following day. Twitter=fresh but not necessarily accurate. NYT- still have to go through the long editorial/publishing process. The Daily is somewhere in between. The recent breaking news in Egypt is a perfect example of how The Daily was able to quickly adapt to changing stories…
- Interactive. This is an obvious one. (check out the video below to see it in action). You get everything in a nice tidy package. Well written articles, video, polls, social sharing, ability to leave “voice” comments and more. And, the ads didn’t feel like ads. If I liked them I clicked on them (some with video). If not, just a swipe to ignore and keep reading.
- Local customization: It obviously knows that I’m from Boston, and naturally picked my weather forecast and sports teams so I could get custom news (and tweets) which mattered to me. Too bad I’m not a Boston-sports fan… :-)
- It’s short and sweet. Let’s face it, our attention spans continue to decline. This content is written for that commute on the train, something to quickly read on the couch, or, my favorite, something to read before I go to bed.
Video below will give you a feel for what I’m talking about. What do you think? Have you tried it? Would you try it?Worth it?
By now we’ve already met at the water cooler and discussed what ads from Super Bowl XLV we liked. By all accounts, it looks like that Volkswagen, Doritos or Chrysler won the battle.
The Winning (old) Formula.
These advertisements won because of a simple formula. No, they didn’t involve cute animals, scantily clad women, or stupid “physical” comedy. They were popular because of what I call the “Can I watch it and “get” it in a loud crowded bar” formula. This formula simply relies on the following elements.
- You may miss a few seconds of the advertisement if you look away (while you are ordering your appetizers), but you still get it.
- You can watch this advertisement with the volume turned completely down, or you’re at or party that is REALLY loud, and still get it.
- It’s simple. Let’s face it, you might have a couple cocktails on Super Bowl Sunday. Don’t make me think too hard
- It tells a story.
Now, think back on why the Volkswagen ad was so good. We all can relate to Star Wars (simple) can watch this with the sound turned down, and tells a wonderful story. And, the bonus here was that you actually are intrigued by the new car. Remote car starter? Cool, maybe I’ll check out the new Passat…
Same goes for the Chrysler ad. Sure it would have been nice with the music (if I couldn’t hear it) but you get the general message. Chrysler is rebuilding, rethinking and “restoring” itself to the glory days. I might not even know who Eminem is, but I still “get it”.
If you still don’t believe me, take a look at Apple’s 1984 Super Bowl advertisement with the volume turned down…
Where Social Media comes in
I’m still amazed and impressed at how Social Media played such an interesting part of this year’s Super Bowl. My favorite was BrandBowl 2011. Brain child of Mullen’s Edward Boches and a joint partnership with one of the heavy hitters in the social media measurement world, Radian 6. This year, they partnered up with the Boston Globe and enjoyed tremendous success by encouraging Super Bowl viewers to tweet about the ads using the #brandbowl hashtag during the Super Bowl. BrandBowl2011 counted up more than 300,000 tweets to calculate tweets AND sentiment. And that’s where the interesting part comes in- sentiment. They quickly (and in real-time) got a feel for what advertisements worked and perhaps why they didn’t work. Edward, you probably already know this, but we’re watching you closely here- can’t wait to see what BrandBowl 2012 has in store for us.
The Winning (NEW) formula for next year
So, let’s combine the old winning formula with new technologies and create a new recipe for advertising success…..It should look something like this….
1 cup of story-telling
1/2 cup of simpleness
1/2 cup of GOOD images, people, scenery
4 tablespoons of social
3 tablespoons of mobile
2 teaspoons of instant feedback/gratification.
Here’s a quick example….
Let’s say McDonald’s wants to introduce another new hamburger called “the McSuper” …In the first quarter advertisement, there’s a simple story about the new hamburger featuring six new ingredients. At the end of the ad, there’s a call to action. Choose your favorite 3 ingredients AND what city you want the McSuper to launch in. Simple, right? Everyone breaks out their mobile phone and texts or tweets their “vote” to McDonalds. If you’re not near your mobile phone, head over to your computer and “vote” on McDonald’s facebook page or website by halftime.
For the next hour, McDonald’s scrambles to collect the data, and produces the video, a la Old Spice. In the fourth quarter, McDonald’s releases the ingredients of the perfect McSuper sandwich and where it’s going to arrive.
Think it would work? Or are you just getting hungry?
Some data hit the interwebs last week breaking down recent trends in corporate social media use. With the amount of time we spend working with and talking about social media, it’s easy to forget not everyone thinks these tehcniques are valuable and is willing to integrate them into a larger corporate strategy. The good news is, that according to Burson-Marsteller, most Fortune Global 100 companies are using social media platforms.
It reported Twitter as the most popular, with 65% of the largest 100 international companies having active accounts, compared with 54% on Facebook, 50% on YouTube, and just 33% with corporate blogs. That pattern was reversed in Asia. More businesses there were likely to rely on corporate blogs than Facebook pages or Twitter. The study also showed that only 20% of these companies use a combination of these platforms together.
So, progress has been made: businesses have tried these tools and sticking with them long term. The remaining challenge, then, is for companies to find a comprehensive and definitive way of defining and measuring success. That’s where Paul Gillin comes in.
Since December, Paul Gillin has been conducting his own study on multi-channel social media strategies. His quick findings are that:
- The metrics companies are using are all over the map
- Few organizations are taking a disciplined approach to measuring ROI
- There is a consensus emerging on what’s important and that companies are starting to focus on the metrics
What the Burson-Marsteller study doesn’t show(as an article on ReadWriteWeb pointed out) is if social media marketing techniques are gaining “significant corporate acceptance”. There are people at these companies using these platforms, but we’re just not sure how integrated their tactics are with the company’s overall strategy.
What interests me is the gap between the industry interest in Twitter and the low number of young users, teens and college students. According to the New York Times, and my own experience with teenagers, they prefer texting to tweeting. Will they see the light when they get older, or will we have forgotten about Twitter 10 years from now? That’s something for another day….
