7/29/2010Posted by Leo Ryan, Influence Planning Director, Draftfcb London
This is a belated post about the digital culture smorgasbord that is SXSW. Earlier this year I was fortunate enough to attend SXSW and have written endless almost-finished-blog-posts and presentations about the amazing things I learnt and saw there. Now I have finally managed to (quickly) check my punctuation and spelling and roughly assemble my notes into an almost intelligible format...enjoy.
Some things that make SXSW cool...
The breadth: There is a very broad range of attendees: Compared to some 1 day conferences in London SXSW is incredibly good value. This low cost means that instead of a few clients from Proctor and Gamble and the creative digital director of BBH talking to themselves at the Grosvenor Hotel you get students, indy agencies, R&D guys from HP, tech and media startups, VCs and angel investors and every level of employee from interactive and marketing agencies including Draftfcb's healthy contribution that included junior creatives teams through to senior bods like Rob Sherlock and a raft of HR recruitment team swooping on any wandering talent.
The depth: There is a Massive Choice: Each session has about 21 different events from lectures to workshops, demonstrations and round-table discussions / debates. On the upside, what would be in itself a very good conference in Europe or indeed anywhere in the world is all on in one 60 minute session. On the downside obviously you can't possibly see everything or even just the things that you are really really keen to see. So completely opposite to TED where you get a single stream and lots of intense conversation around a single topic at SXSW you get lots of different conversations. To deal with the spread of interest the Draftfcb team split up and then shared notes after each session.
The treats: The Goody Bag was so heavy it could only be dragged back to the hotel and dumped on the floor to sift through. Containing all kinds of fun treats, stickers and flyers, some of them useful, most of them rubbish. Best one were the free Sticky Bits which I have only just re-discovered and distributed around the London office...
The BBQ: As a Queenslander born and bred I have strong opinions about BBQ. The Texans do it very differently but they do it very well. As evidenced by the regular damage we inflicted at Stubbs.
The Weather: Spring comes early to Austin. So while my family friends and colleagues were still shivering in London was in short sleeves and even managed a swim at the natural outdoor Barton Spring.
The Headsup: It is the harbinger of Things To Come. The products and projects launched or profiled at SXSW includes;
2006: Wikipedia2007: Twitter2008: Facebook Beacon (I didn't say they were all successful)
2009: Spotify2010: FourSquareSo what did this years SXSW presage?
1. The Internet of Things
The intersection of online and offline worlds. Newspaper Club printed a newspaper for the conference but took all of their content form the speakers and event data, Sticky Bits were handed out randomly and stuck to all manner of things (no, I'm not going there..) and naturally FourSquare and Gowalla were in high demand.
FourSquare added 100K users after SXSW. During the event we used it as a way of keeping track of who was in which talk, bar or party, sometimes with some hilarious results as we discovered a group who we'd invited to dinner had instead decided to meet separately, but only two blocks away...
QR codes on our conference passes meant that (for mobile phones with the software installed) you could just scan someone's pass and get their info into your contacts. No, it's not particularly new but when you see a gadgetally advanced crowd who all have iPhones and who all want to connect in a short period of time then you start to see the future of how this might be used.
2. There's an App For That
The SXSW iPhone app was a bit rubbish but it heralds an interesting thing; special purpose short term apps with very specific functions like a Nivea For Men World Cup App or a Matters *%^ Me Numbers App.
3. New kinds of businesses
There are some very different kinds of business emerging who are not hampered by legacy business thinking or technology who are really thriving in this new environment. Local Motors, Mint, SmartyPig, Vook, Newspaper Club are all very new types of business operating in traditional sectors; automotive, finance and publishing. There is a significant shift underway and we need to help clients to understand and adapt.
All in all an inspiring and invigorating event. MOre posts to come on some of my fave talks including Transmedia, Future of Publishing, Education 2.0. Once I get this pitch out of the way...
6/24/2010
Posted by Soraya Eltomey, Corporate Communications Associate, Draftfcb
There is no denying it. The video content available via television, the web and mobile devices engages, informs and entertains consumers alike. But what does this all mean for advertisers?
To best answer this question, I sat down with Draftfcb New York VP, Group Media Director Bhavana Smith.
Bhavana 6/22/2010
Posted by Andrew Eifler, Media Supervisor, Draftfcb New York
I’ve been doing a lot of reading lately about the financial bubble/bust of 2008. Most authors I’ve read agree that one of the major forces that led to the meltdown was the creation and sale of exotic financial instruments that were very hard, or in some cases, impossible to value. Similarly, reflecting back on the technology bubble of 1998, one of the driving forces for the crash was people buying and selling stock in companies that had little or no cash flow. Citing both these cases, I think it’s safe to say that there are two telltale signs that indicate an industry is headed for some challenging times:
- Everyone foresees unlimited growth potential
- People are buying and selling things (assets/products) without knowing how much they are worth
Now, it’s not my intention to be the person on the street corner heralding the end of the world with a cardboard sign, but I do think it’s important to take a step back every once in a while and see where things are headed. For me – the area of interest is digital advertising.
Advertising, as a category, is tricky – it’s hard to value. Unlike financial instruments, the value of any ad (TV, print, or digital) can vary depending on who buys it and which product is being advertised. There is no underlying “asset” (as there would be with a financial security), but rather, what you pay for is the opportunity for people to see your message with the hope that it will affect their behavior. With a financial security, the discounted value of all future cash flows is the same no matter who owns it, but the intrinsic value of each advertisement can be different for every advertiser.
Additionally, as technology evolves, we now find ourselves in an increasingly fragmented advertising landscape. Advertising opportunities are no longer limited to TV, Print, Radio, and Online Banner Ads, but there are now digital advertising opportunities everywhere. Everyday publishers are thinking up new and untested forms of digital advertising, which they then try to sell to advertisers. Some of the more recent examples are iPhone ads, iPad ads, and social media ads. How could these new advertising products possibly be appraised and accurately priced in alignment with their long term value? It’s nearly impossible! But still, even without knowing how much they are worth, advertisers are buying these new digital ad products and encouraging publishers to continue creating increasingly exotic advertising opportunities.
Looking at the digital ad industry, one could argue that both of the signs are now true – 1) Everyone foresees unlimited growth potential (and publishers are investing heavily to pursue new advertising technology) and 2) people are buying and selling “new media” advertising products with no way of knowing how much they are worth.
I’m not saying that we’re on the precipice of disaster, but I do think it’s important to keep these things in mind – because another thing that all bubbles have in common is that just before the crash, no one sees it coming. 4/13/2010
Posted by Dan Brough, SVP, Director of Search Marketing, Draftfcb New York
After much anticipation, Twitter announced their official entry in advertising with the launch of "Promoted Tweets." This product has many, many similarities to paid search, specifically Google's AdWords program.
First, you may even be wondering if the name sounds familiar. Well it does. Google's YouTube product called "Promoted Videos" is a direct cousin to the uber popular "Sponsored Link," the only difference is video content over text in the ad placement.
Twitter advertisers will buy keywords (just like with paid search) to target users which have typed that keyword or keywords into a tweet stream. The advertiser's ad or "Promoted Tweet" will have top presence (just like with paid search).
Now for the most striking similarity. "Promoted Tweets" will be shown in the stream of twitter posts based on relevancy. Sound familiar? Twitter is calling this "Resonance" which will calculate a number of factors including, percentage of people who saw the ad, forwarded the ad, replied to the ad or clicked on the ad. If the ad does not reach a certain relevance threshold, the ad will be removed. This is almost identical to Google's Quality Score where a number of factors determine a sponsored links cost and rank on the page.
The only difference from the paid search model is the pricing. Twitter will charge advertisers on a cost per thousand (CPM) model initially. (Actually, paid search was on a CPM model back in the day.) It will be only a matter of time before the model shifts to mirror paid search's CPC or possibly even CPA/CPL pricing.
Overall, this product will allow brands into the direct stream of 'real-time' conversation. Just as paid search is used to combat negative results on a search engine results page, major brands will adopt "Promoted Tweets" to get out in front of an issue or simply position their brand at the most relevant time and place.
I feel Twitter is off to a solid start with this product but they will need to be conscious not to oversaturate users tweet steams with irrelevant or obtrusive ads. Just as it took paid search years to evolve and perfect its model, the same will be true for Twitter. 4/7/2010
Posted by Michael Fassnacht, Global Chief Strategy Officer
A lot of cities around the globe would love to become one of the hotbeds of innovation and creativity for the digital world. San Francisco and Silicon Valley have been long established in North America, Bangalore in India has had a strong reputation for the last decade, Shanghai has made huge strides over the last 5 years, now Sao Paulo and Buenos Aires are trying to get some well deserved recognition for digital expertise and innovation.
Good old Europe has been always more fragmented with almost every European capital claiming to be on the forefront of digital brilliance. Realistically there are currently two cities that are thriving for this European lead position: Berlin and Stockholm. It’s less an outright competition than the moderately passionate debate by citizens of both cities over dinner tables and bar stools. Both cities have the advantages of large numbers of educated young people with entrepreneurial drive, Berlin has the advantage of lower living expenses and a significantly larger domestic population, Stockholm had an early start in focusing on digital services and products, and has the advantage of high affinity for anything English and American.
The key hurdle for a true lead position in the digital arena is the emergence of one true global digital company that changes consumer behavior in most countries. It is not a coincidence that Silicon Valley has such dominant role due to the fact that almost any leading digital company has been started there: Yahoo!, Google, Facebook, Twitter, and now we have to count even Apple as part of the digital 800 pound gorilla family. Can Berlin or Stockholm generate a company that is as groundbreaking as these firms or are they going to solely focus on being digital service innovators who work with these large players as their center of universe?
The good thing is that innovation is not a zero sum game. That’s why it’s not Berlin or Stockholm? It’s hopefully Berlin and Stockholm. 4/2/2010
Posted by Josh Dysart, Manager, Corporate Communications
Passing by the Apple Store this morning, I was reminded that tomorrow marks the launch of Apple's latest innovation, the iPad.
I went online to catch up on the news, and I was reminded yet again. And again. And again. It's everywhere.
That got me to thinking. What does the iPad mean for advertisers and agencies?
So before he started his day, I had the chance to sit down with Draftfcb Chicago's Chris Miller, EVP, group management director, digital, to get his thoughts on that very question.
His answer is in the video below, and after watching it, I'd love to hear what you think.
Interview with Chris Miller 3/26/2010Posted by Michael Fassnacht, Global Chief Strategy Officer
Studying literary theory in the eighties or early nineties one could not escape the intellectual brilliance and confusion that the literary theory of “Deconstruction” brought to the discourse at most European and North American Universities. Reading and rereading books by thinkers like Derrida, Lyotard, or Foucault was the challenging main stable of anyone who wanted to participate in a new understanding of old and new texts within the academic discourse. Their claim of the death of authorship, their fight against a (or any) dominant narrative, and their endless dissection of short elements of any texts taught an unique way of reading and thinking.
The mid nineties seem to signal the slow decline of this particular branch of literary theory. But over the last year the sudden and strong critique of many social elements of the Web 2.0 universe (nicely summarized in Sunday’s New York Times article by Michiko Kakutani), could give one the impression that the success of Web 2.0 turned Deconstruction from a literary theory into a way of life of the modern Internet user. This life is defined by:
- The loss of any regards for original authorship: Everything is borrowed, reused, repurpose, rewritten, recreated, sometimes with the clear reference to the original version, more often without any regards to it. The original has died, now everything is just the endless copy without necessary reference to the original and without acknowledging its character as a copy (Philosophers like Derrida called this a “Simulacrum”)
- Any central narrative has been lost: The Internet allows not just the accelerated speed of any news but it empowers an endless stream of smaller and smaller stories (e.g. cat chasing its own tail, Spitzer explaining his affairs, Democrats passing the Health Care bill) without necessary any broader significance or prioritization. Neil Postman meets Jean Baudrillard.
- Any text has the same authoritative value: The article by a Nobel or Pulitzer price winning author has the same authority, reach, frequency, and influence than a blog entry or tweet by a celebrity with a large followership. The quality of one’s craftsmanship seems to be less important than the loudness of someone’s megaphone.
It’s sometimes difficult to realize that one uses the same critical arguments to analyze the negative aspects of Web 2.0 that conservatives have used against Deconstruction 20 years ago. But it seems to me that it’s critically important to be conscious about the positive and negative impact of the Web 2.0 Discourse than just blindly following every dimension of it. Enlightenment was always about being conscious about the supposedly given truths in a particular time. And today, the positive impact of Web 2.0 has become a dogma. But anyone who has truly understood the theory of deconstruction realizes that the deconstructive analysis of the main narrative in any given time (here the Web 2.0 universe in which the literary theory of deconstruction is being transferred into a life philosophy) is part of correctly applying this theory. 3/23/2010
Posted by Kati Llewellyn, creative recruiting coordinator, Draftfcb Chicago
After five days at SXSWi, it's hard to know where to begin, as my head's still swimming with loads of new innovations, technologies, and ideas. I suppose, then, the best way to go about this is to keep this entry organized & present highlights.
Before I get going, however, I’d like to kick things off by saying this was my first-ever trip to Austin for the SXSWi conference, and, for those who have the awesome opportunity to go in the future (one I sincerely hope you’ll take advantage of), here are some tips & tricks to navigating & getting optimal value from the event that I’d like to touch upon. The 6.5 wrap-up:
- Fear Not- It Is A-OK to Exit a Panel:
If you want your badge money’s worth, don’t be afraid to walk if you’re not getting anything from the material being presented. Quietly exit the room & track down one of the dozen panels going on at any given time that will be of more use to you.
- Stay Powerful
Bring your extra chargers. All of them. And extra batteries. Bring an extension cord (you’ll make friends this way, trust me). The seating arrangements in most SXSWi conference rooms don’t allow for easy power-ups. Prepare yourself for a regimen of sitting on the floor near the back of the room every third presentation or so to charge up. Bring a notebook & pen just in case.
- Tether Yourself
Learn to tether your smartphone to your laptop before leaving for Austin. This way, if anything happens with your computer’s wireless during the conference (my wireless card broke- I was less than prepared), you can utilize your data plan to Tweet, blog, and take notes on your laptop which, during highly informational panels, moves a heck of a lot faster than typing on a smartphone.
- Netbook It
If your hotel is a hike from the conference center (word to the wise- if you know for sure you’re going to SXSWi 2011, make hotel reservations NOW), you will carry a backpack around all day, including to all the post-6pm events (read: parties). Laptops are heavy. I brought my work laptop, but in retrospect, I would’ve gotten along fine with my (much, much lighter) personal netbook.
- Resort to Paper
Smartphone service can be SLOW (or nonexistent) during SXSWi. There are computers in the convention center one can utilize, but there are also lines to get to them. Have your pocketbook schedule on you at all times, as it can be the quickest way to figure out where you’re headed to next.
- Don’t Overbook
I got excited. I had five events per timeslot on my calendar for most of the weekend. I don’t have clones or special powers, so this was a dumb move. No matter how many events you WANT to see, narrow it down to two per timeslot (a backup option is good in case the first event is full) & you’ll be at optimal productivity. Even so, be fully prepared for your schedule to fall apart at some point- go with the flow if it’s taking you in a positive direction.
- Be Badge Conscious
Badges contain your name & the name of your company. Wear them to events where you want to network, and take them off at events where you might embarrass yourself. You know, the ones with open bars. Thankfully did not learn this one the hard way.
Now, on to content!
Going in, I had some expectations of content trends- geolocation & privacy most notably.
Geolocation's impact at SXSWi was highly noticeable even for those following along at home. On Day One of the conference, Foursquare, a current leader in the geo space, reached a record-breaking 275,000 check-ins. On Day Two, they hit 347,000. And by the end of the event, users had unlocked more than 10,000 new badges, two of which, (I think) I’m proud to say, belong to me!
SXSWi attendees utilized Foursquare to discover popular panels, popular events, and, yes, popular adult beverage establishments, where, by the way, at one of which I witnessed a couple in the throes of passion up against a Digg poster- only at SXSWi.
Despite all the Foursquare hype, however, my favorite geolocation findings came from SCVNGR's Seth Priebatsch. SCVNGR is "a geo-gaming platform that enables anyone (individual or institutional) to quickly and easily build location-based mobile games, tours, and interactive experiences that can be played by anyone on any mobile device." And geolocation-based mobile gaming isn't all just fun & games- it has very real agency implications- those on the client development end as one might expect (yes, SCVNGR does license its technology), but inside the agency as well. I spoke with Chris Miller & Ross McLean immediately after this panel and, as a result of this conversation, realized that from a recruiting standpoint, a game in the SCVNGR platform- one where you highlight challenges based on various locations you'd like users to visit (this can take the form of tours, augmented reality games, and more)- would be enormously helpful (not to mention impressive) to visiting candidates or recent hires new to Chicago in terms of getting them involved with the digital space & showing them the best Chicago has to offer according to us.
The highlight of privacy talks for me was not Danah Boyd’s enlightening opening keynote (some of which is available here: http://bit.ly/92kj7e), but the “Making Content Relevant To Me, Here and Now” panel which, most notably, featured Hunch.com’s Chris Dixon (#hunch dominated the Twitter hash tags for this panel). Hunch.com is a service that makes recommendations for people by “using collective knowledge for decision making.” It asks questions & uses your answers + some fancy algorithms to make correlations. For instance, Chris Dixon revealed in his panel that there’s a strong correlation between those who like to dance & those who prefer Macs. There’s your recommendation, dancers. Conservatives prefer iceberg lettuce & liberals prefer arugula. That sort of thing. Hunch.com is fun to use & take suggestions from, but its biggest breakthrough in my opinion is its treatment of user privacy. Instead of monitoring web consumption behaviors, Hunch’s business model is this: users answer questions of their own accord, get recommendations based on these questions & correlative data, and click through to Amazon or wherever else to buy said recommendations. Only THEN, at the final step of this journey, does Hunch get paid. It’s not the be-all end-all of consumer privacy treatment, but it is notable (plus, like I mentioned, fun) and has online click-through strategy implications for clients apprehensive to traditional web behavior monitoring techniques.
I also attended several talks on the issue of spreading digital within a large agency, but don’t want to delve in too deep here, as many ideas from these SXSWi segments are tied in with an upcoming internal presentation on spreading digital knowledge at Draftfcb. If you’re curious now, though, please look into my Twitter content (@katidfcb) from Monday, March 15, 2010.
Finally, not that I know what it IS or anything, but there might just be some information on my favorite talk of SXSWi & more (including beer & food, or so I hear) at Draftfcb’s inaugural internal Digital Technocracy event this Thursday, March 25, 2010. Just saying.
For more information now that’s not shrouded in secrecy, head to http://www.youtube.com/sxsw#p/p for a wealth of video content from SXSWi. And for a (slightly less educational) taste of Austin, please visit my Flickr and/or Youtube channel.
I cannot commend Draftfcb enough for its strong participation in this event (including a presentation by Draftfcb Chicago’s own Russ Unger!). A few years ago, SXSWi occupied only one wing of the four-floor Austin Convention Center, and this year, it engulfed the entire building, so clearly, there’s something to this whole digital thing ;) I’m thrilled to be part of an agency excited to tackle the medium & hope our presence at SXSWi and conferences like it grows even further from this point forward. If you have any questions about the event that weren’t answered here, please contact me on Twitter or at kati.llewellyn@draftfcb.com & I’ll be happy to share more of my learnings. Thanks for reading! 3/11/2010Posted by Michael Fassnacht, Global Chief Strategy Officer
Google’s Search algorithm is one of the most fascinating analytical initiatives (or should I call it a project) that exist in our field today. Enough books and articles have been written about it that linger between unveiling its inner workings and increasing the cloud of its secrecy. The weekly meetings of all of Google’s critical Search Engineers in the never ending attempt of improving the quality of its search results are probably one of the most interesting meetings, close in importance and impact on people’s daily lives to the president’s weekly “Mood of the nation” briefings and discussions.
One of the more intriguing elements of this weekly meeting and for me the foundation of Google’s long lasting superiority resides in the changed philosophy of how to do testing. Its core principle is that every search query is part of at least one test (more likely multiple) there is no separation anymore between non-tested activities and the usual small percentage of separated space of testing. Wired editor Steven Levy describes it well in this month’s magazine:
“There are so many changes to measure that Google has discarded the traditional scientific nostrum that only one experiment should be conducted at a time. ‘On most Google queries, you are actually in multiple control or experimental groups simultaneously’ says search quality engineer Patrick Riley. Then he corrects himself. ‘Essentially,” he says, ‘all the queries are involved in some test’. In other words, just about every time you search on Google, you are a lab rat.”
It’s a fascinating detour from most marketers more conservative testing philosophy where testing only happens in a well shielded space. I am curious to see how we could translate this Google approach of 100% covered, constant, and multiple testing to other marketing activities.
3/3/2010Posted by Michael Fassnacht, Global Chief Strategy Officer
Browsing through some of the most recent books about web analytics I could not stop realizing that we are still in the early stages of understanding consumer’s behavior in the digital world. Most analytical approaches are continuing to focus primarily on traditional website metrics: unique visitors, bounce rates, etc. It feels like web analytics have stalled in understanding consumer behavior on individual websites and have failed to push themselves into a larger digital universe, that include any digital medium, from the web to mobile to ebooks, and in best case even beyond the digital sphere.
Some of these books are attempting to understand “Engagement” and suggest different ways of build the right engagement metric. But in most cases it is just a compilation of traditional website metrics. Most marketers are still trying to understand consumers in a channel centric and specific way, whereas consumers have long moved beyond the separation of all the different media, communication, and sales channels. They consume and interact with brands and services first, with channels last.
Quite often this fallacy can be explained by the fact that we look at things that can be measured instead of asking ourselves what should be measured. The vast and immediate access to data and metrics are not just overloading our systems to decipher anything meaningful, they are hindering us as well to really identify of what should be measured.
The biggest strategies of moving the digital metrics discussion to a next level should be:
- Move beyond metrics that are only relevant for one channel to metrics that are relevant and actionable across multiple channels.
- Realize that website metrics are only a very small portion of all relevant metrics. It’s more productive to go broad than going too soon very deep.
- Set not only standards of how to measure certain things but more importantly understanding what is a “good” and what is a “bad” value in certain metric category. I have seen so many marketers who look a comprehensive metrics sheet and can only utter “interesting”, since there is no context to evaluate these figures.
- Don’t overemphasize “real-time” metrics that give everyone an illusion of constantly optimize every single marketing output. Yes, it is important to build a learning organism and mechanism but it’s not the most important action to deploy it in “real-time” manner (which means actually a delay of a few seconds, minutes, or hours) as extracting the right recommendations from the analyzed metrics. We focus too often on the optimization of the very small variable (e.g. blue or red color in a banner) versus understanding the truly big variable (e.g. ivest in paid search or in DRTV).
It’s still early in the world of “digital metrics." We are at best an excited and curious young adult, at worst an overeager, naïve, and overly aggressive teenager. |
|
|
|