By Linda Forrest
Today on MediaBistro, I was directed to a piece on Portfolio‘s web site that talks about WashingtonPost.com‘s tinkering with its links on several microsites to enable instant pop-ups of additional data on mouse rollover that doesn’t necessitate leaving the site. This is nothing new to those of us familiar with WordPress blogs as the Snap feature currently used on this site and others does the same thing. Some grumblings in the media about the glut of interactive content on online news sites fly in the face of the theory I introduced yesterday in my post about online news and the process being the product. Is this indicative of a widespread dislike for too much dynamic content or a holdover of viewing the new media with old media sensibilities, the very point of the Buzz Machine article that spawned yesterday’s post?
By Linda Forrest
I read an interesting blog post today at Buzz Machine on the changing nature of the media. The post illustrates that news, unlike in the print-only days, has mutated online such that it’s a collaborative endeavour best summed up by the following Marshall McLuhan-esque line from the article, “In print, the process leads to a product. Online, the process is the product.”
The post has a number of charts and diagrams to help illustrate this point and it did get me thinking with the axiom that with online media, the process is the product. Indeed, since I began my career in media relations close to a decade ago, generating media coverage has changed considerably. It used to be that this was a clearly defined process and that once the article had been published, that was that. Now, with the organic nature of the web, a variety of other voices can be added to the piece in the form of comments, opinions, corrections, links, and any other range of inputs.
Well-known technology blogger Om Malik stated a month ago, “I have often said that the real value of blogs lies in the intelligence embedded in the comments.” and perhaps it is fair to extend this to online news as well – the news isn’t in the news itself in the traditional sense, but in the conversations that it starts and the resultant collaborative coverage as a whole. If indeed this is true, the challenge then becomes managing one’s brand and messaging as other inputs raise their voices and add to the conversation.
By Francis Moran
I had one of those conversations last week that frustrate the hell out of me and leave me wondering when, if ever, some technology executives are going to come to their senses.
I was at a session of the Ottawa Wireless Cluster on Thursday evening and I took advantage of the networking to renew an acquaintance with a seasoned CEO, someone who has helmed at least a couple of companies, bringing one of them public.
As usual, I asked him how things were going with his latest venture, now about four years old. He said things were alright, but that it had taken about twice as long as he expected to reach the level of business he currently has. Naturally, I asked him what he was doing to acquire that business. Such as, oh, I don’t know … marketing?
With no apparent awareness of the bitter and tragic irony at play, he proceeded to tell me his new company didn’t need — indeed, didn’t want! — marketing because it is the little upstart in the sector and he doesn’t want to tip off his competitors to what he’s doing. He said he gets customers through word of mouth, or by identifying prospects and going after them.
Now, I have nothing against a sales-driven customer-acquisition strategy and there’s no more powerful a channel than fabled word of mouth, but if it’s taking you twice as long as you expected to acquire those customers, maybe the direct route could use a little help. Such as, oh, I don’t know … marketing?
Naw, he said, don’t need it. In fact, don’t want it because, until very recently, his company was in “stealth.” God, I hate that word. Check out what I wrote about it in Mass High Tech Journal a while back. I have never been able to fathom why companies elect to be in so-called “stealth mode.” I have yet to come across one that was truly stealthy; that is, hiding itself from every prying eye. Most are talking to just about everyone — potential investors, candidate employees, suppliers, landlords, bankers, you name it — everyone except potential customers. In other words, they are simply failing to invest in marketing, and excusing it to themselves by pretending they’re doing something exotic and daring.
Fortunately, I also had the chance last week to at the same OWC event to conclude that conversation and go listen to a tech company CEO who really gets it. The featured speaker at the event was Nick Quain, founder of Cellwand, a gorgeous little company that has rolled out one of the wireless sector’s first premium directory assistance products, #TAXI, with others in the wings. I could write a lot about the product and the company’s strategy but for the purposes of making a stark contrast, suffice it to say that Cellwand executed effectively on the technology requirements and has racked up phenomenal success securing partnerships with wireless carriers to the point that the company now has blanket coverage in Canada, where it started, and is available on 150-million phones and counting in the U.S. It’s a textbook case study in building the right product and the right channel to market, and Nick did a great job of sharing the lessons he has learned along the way.
But, get this: He insisted that, phenomenal product, great carrier partners and blanket coverage notwithstanding, Cellwand is dead in the water without one more key ingredient. Such as, oh, I don’t know … marketing?
The CEO I spoke with before Nick’s presentation began was still there when it was over. I sure hope he was paying attention.
By Francis Moran
I wrote earlier this week about Sprint’s new all-you-can-eat rate plan, and the excellent black-and-white television commercial I saw announcing it. I wrote that I was particularly impressed that Sprint CEO Dan Hesse’s personal email address flashed on screen at the end of the commercial, a clear invitation, it would seem, to engage with Hesse.
Alas, it was not to be.
I took Hesse up on his implied invitation and dropped him a line. My colleague Danny Sullivan was closer to the truth when he said the email address might as well have been info@sprint.com, not dan@sprint.com, because sure enough, I did get a reply but it was bland pablum from some peon named Cindy.
An all-you-can-eat rate plan from a North American wireless carrier might indeed qualify as a “revolution,” as Hesse claims in his ad. But while I applaud Sprint’s move, it’s a sad commentary that what has been standard fare in most of the rest of the world when it comes to mobile phone rates passes as revolutionary here.
As a signal that Sprint was going to engage with its customers in a new, revolutionary way, though, it was strictly business as usual. Not revolutionary. Not awesome. Not even close.
Twitter
Tweets by @FrancisMoranRecent Comments
The Future of A&R – Walabe : [...] http://francis-moran.com/marketing-strategy/top-10-questions-every-strategic-communicator-should-ask... [...]
Traditional Marketing is Dead – Long Live Bikini Waxer Marketing | Scalexl : [...] pointed out by Alexandra Reid on the Francis Moran website content marketing is becoming more and more like journalism. So, it is not just about the content, [...]
It’s Summertime…and the Networking is Easy? | THE MERRAINE BRAIN : [...] In fact, summer is perhaps one of the times least used to network, yet at the same time has shown to be the most productive time to network. People tend to be in a brighter mood compared to during the gloomy winters-especially where I am from in England! Networking needs to be fun and not approached as another chore, like mowing the lawn. (http://francis-moran.com/marketing-strategy/social-media-strategy-why-meeting-in-the-real-world-matt...) [...]