Skip to main content

Digitally-inspired brands

The IAB’s Mixx conference in New York was extremely well organized and featured a diverse roster of speakers, including Chrysler CMO Deborah Meyer, eBay CMO Michael Linton, CBS President Les Moonves, TV host Charlie Rose, BBDO chief Andrew Robertson, digital media author Clay Shirsky and Heroes executive producer and creator Tim Kring. Although the event didn't break new ground, it did illuminate several themes that brand marketing professionals would be wise to embrace. Here’s my take-away: Stop the debate over brand vs. interactive. Interactive marketing is, in fact, our most powerful brand building strategy. More and more marketers intuitively understand this. The question then is why we’re not yet using this medium to its full potential. One reason is that too many people in advertising define "brand" through the narrow lens of a product’s TV or print campaign. Consumers build brand impressions through a complex mix of first-hand experiences, peer opinions and, yes, intangible and emotional imagery. Ignoring true consumer behavior is not a recipe for success. Inspired, planned and crafted properly, interactive advertising has the power to tap into each of these brand-building elements. It can inspire deep engagement, allowing customers to interact with and customize their own version of the brand. (Witness Nike+.) It can expose customers to the opinions of like-minded peers. (Witness Apple’s community ratings.) It can immerse customers in highly emotional and engaging brand narratives. (Witness HBO’s Voyeurs campaign.) So why are these examples the exception rather than the rule? First, in listening to the conversation at Mixx, we continue to cling to an outdated vocabulary that Don Draper might be able to recognize:
  • “Traditional” vs. “non-traditional.” (TV will become a digital medium next year. Traditional?)
  • “New media.” (If you want to make a 24 year-old laugh, refer to the web as new media.)
  • “Brand advertising” vs. “interactive.” (See paragraph five above.)
  • “Above the line” vs. “below the line.” (I never really knew what this meant to begin with. I doubt consumers do either.)
  • “Media” vs. “Creative.” (Need I elaborate?)
  • “Off-line” vs “On-line.” (Is a billboard with an SMS call to action really off-line?)
Second, we use misguided metrics to gauge interactive advertising, placing too much emphasis on the “last ad” metric (i.e., the last click the customer made before buying) as the best measure of effectiveness. This metric ignores the influence of other media and messages that drive us to that last click. New research from Microsoft’s Atlas Institute suggests that the “last ad” standard ignores the impact of of other touchpoints, presumably product experiences, sampling, advertising, social networks, by revealing that 71% of sponsored search clicks are navigational in nature – i.e., the consumer typed in the precise brand or product for which they were looking. Third, we have too many specialists and not enough hybrids. Don’t get me wrong, we need people who are subject matter experts, if not zealots, on TV, interactive, mobile, PR, et al. Without access to their expertise we are merely posers. But we need more hybrids, people who are passionate about ideas regardless of platform. These are the professionals that will crack the code because they most closely resemble how consumers think and behave. All of us, specialists and hybrids alike, need to view interactive as a human experience and not a channel. We need to think more like event marketers, retail environment architects and product designers. The people working in these disciplines understand that well-crafted experiences convey a compelling and lasting brand idea.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Are there other brands you find inspiring other than Nike, Apple, and HBO?
David Murphy said…
Here's a few...all for different reasons:

Toyota Yaris test drive:

http://www.toyota.com/vehicles/minisite/yaris/experience/index.html

Nike Golf "tiger swing portrait":

http://www.nike.com/nikegolf/index.htm?resetGlobalID=true

Louis Vuitton "journeys":

http://journeys.louisvuitton.com/

The Philips Bodygroom Manalogues:

http://www.manalogues.philips.com/

Axe Gamekilers:

http://www.mtv.com/ontv/dyn/gamekillers/series.jhtml

Patagonia's Footprint Chronicles:

http://www.patagonia.com/web/us/footprint/index.jsp
Anonymous said…
i think "method" is incredible.

their brand is reflected in every single thing they do. be it the product itself or any of their advertising. their "come clean" campaign (CrispinPB) was incredible done 5 years ago!

lets add to this list...

Popular posts from this blog

What makes a premium brand premium?

I was thinking the other day about the DNA of premium brands . One thing is certain -- it's a relative idea. For example, Hyatt is not a premium brand if you're used to staying at a W or a Ritz Carlton. But if your vacations to date have been holed up in a Holiday Inn, then by all means a stay in a Hyatt is a premium experience. Another thing is certain -- a brand is considered premium only when we believe it is worth the price. And that's where we can dig deeper. Why are we willing to pay more for a product when there are others that provide the same service or function at a lesser price? I have spent a good part of my marketing career developing strategies and ideas for a wide range of  premium brands, including American Express, Sony, Callaway Golf, Hilton, Jaguar, Land Rover – even the Toyota Prius.  Through these experiences I have come to believe that a premium brand is built upon specific tangible and intangible attributes that give it a sense wort

Zen and the art of an EV roadtrip.

I remember the anxiety I had when I cut the cord and switched from Cable TV to streaming.   Could I still watch live sports? Would I get all my favorite programs? Sure enough, with YouTube TV, the answer was a resounding yes to both questions.   Now I’m cutting a new cord — the gas pump — as I take my new Mustang Mach-E on a cross-country trip.   And like the time I cut Cable TV, I'm experiencing the same questions.  Will it have the range for a long drive?  Will I waste hours recharging along the way? Well, today is Day 1 on the Mach-E's first ever long distance drive , as we say farewell to Detroit and head to La Quinta.   For those of you thinking about buying an EV, I’ll be sharing daily posts to help alleviate so-called “range anxiety.”   (Trust me, in pressing the start button this morning, I’m taking a big trust-fall to shed the comfy muscle memory of ICE vehicles.) Today’s cool feature:   The FordPass app which plans the route and most efficient charge points, then send

Super game. Dull ads

As a passionate Giants fan it is safe to say that I had a good time yesterday. But as an advertising professional I felt a bit underwhelmed by the caliber of the advertising . Many were entertaining. But few possessed that intangible Super Bowl-ness...big, pop-cultural, fun. Even fewer seemed to have anything relevant to say about the brand, such as the Planters "uni-brow" spot. I loved the Bridgestone "screaming animals" spot, but it would have been a much better spot for the Saab featured in the spot than the tires the car rode upon. As for Bud, good spots, but I've seen the dog and horse thing before. Tide's talking stain was funny, but did it have Super Bowl-ness? My fav? The Coke "balloon float" spot. It was classic Coke (for Coke Classic). Big. Entertaining. Unexpected twist. Utterly charming. And Charlie Brown finally won something. Coke is about smiles. And that spot was just that. The Audi spot that I wrote about last week