Derek DeVries – Imprudent Loquaciousness

In the kampy 70s-era Batman TV series (and movie), Adam West’s titular character was always trying to extricate himself from a supervillain’s trap by “reversing the polarity.”  It’s one of those pseudo-sciencey terms that pre-teen kids find believable (even nerdy kids who like Dr. Who).

Colleagues and I have joked before that the marketing budgets of some projects would be better spent bribing the very small target population than trying to break through the deluge of noise consumers encounter each day by paying for mass media channels (the very entities creating the noise).

Twitter.  Facebook.  Pinterest.  Linkedin.  Blogs.  RSS.  SMS.  Foursquare.  Google Places.

Thanks to social media there are enumerable ways for any organization to broadcast messages to its publics.  There are so many channels with such low cost barriers that the decisions marketers and PR pros need to make are all about how many to spend time on.

However, the focus on broadcasting often overshadows an important and underutilized feature of the Internet-connected world: the ability to reverse the flow of information to focus laser-like on a very tiny population.  I’m not talking about Narrowcasting.  The “casting” part still implies a lack of a quality relationship with each of the unique people you’re trying to enlist.

It is increasingly easier to be successful by focusing solely on good customer service or by serving a very specific clientele.  That’s the Long Tail at work.  Creating relationships.

Rather than spending resources buying access to a megaphone could you reallocate those resources to, one at a time, find the 25, 50, 100, 1000 people you actually need to make your campaign a success?  I bet you could … if you can just “reverse the polarity.”

Microsoft and Google are currently engaged in a battle over business productivity software; Microsoft Office vs. Google Docs.  Here’s Microsoft’s attempt at humor:

Here’s why this first salvo is an epic fail:

1. Who gets the “Moonlighting” reference? (I’m a TV nerd – I don’t count).  That show ended its run in 1989.  Could they have possibly picked a less culturally-relevant theme?  What’s next – an “Alf” gag?  Here’s some context for anyone under the age of 53 so you can “get the joke”:

2. “You want us to be your lab rats?” - “Pioneers.”  I’d rather be Google’s lab rat, knowing that a FREE product isn’t fully-developed rather than plunk down a ridiculous amount of money for Microsoft’s products that are in constant need of patches and fixes (and which don’t even communicate with each other).  Don’t get me started on XBox Live…

3. The video is hosted ON YOUTUBE.  Which Google owns.  So Microsoft’s argument is “Google’s products is inferior – that’s why we use them?”  Derpity derp derp.

4. One of the jabs Microsoft lobs at Google is an attack on cloud computing.   Cloud computing … like Microsoft 365 360? (Microsoft’s answer to the growing popularity of Google Docs).

5. Google killed off Wave and Buzz?  So … how is that different from Microsoft’s own versions of Office 2007 not being backwards compatible without patches?

Good luck Microsoft – you’re going to need it given that apparently your ad agency is actually staffed by people who look and act like John Hodgman’s PC parody.  Can’t wait to see what Google comes up with in response.

By now everyone with access to the Internet (and even a lot of people who don’t) are aware that Facebook filed for an Initial Public Offering.

If every other social networking platform in the history of the web is a guide, this signals the beginning of the end for Facebook.  Private corporations are freer from the pressure to drum up wads of cash in the short term than publicly-traded companies.  They are also more resilient in the face of economic challenges than private companies because they can absorb a period of shrinking profits instead of scrambling to implement drastic measure (like mass layoffs) to quickly cook the books for a pennywise short term jump in profits.

Here’s why Facebook will suffer from the rush to monetize the gigantic community of users it has amassed: Read more…

Since it launched in 2007, Twitter has gone from a single utility to a full-fledged social networking site.  Just like Facebook and Google+, it’s now launched “brand pages” that allow owners greater flexibility in controlling how their Twitter page appears.

Meh.

Don’t worry too much if you can’t rush right out and develop a gorgeous customized Twitter profile.  Most people won’t see it. Read more…

[This post is featured at Grand Rapids Social Diary as a guest editorial for May 24, 2011!]

QR or “Quick Response” codes have been around Asia since 1994, and a few years ago they finally started to pop up in the US.  There was a brief period a couple of years ago where they were a fad (a way for the tech savvy to show off).

Sadly, just like the ascot or Hammer Pants, that time has passed.  If you want to use QR codes now, you’ll want to have a very specific, well-defined strategy that makes use of their unique properties.

Here are some questions you’ll want to ask yourself: Read more…

Web storage and bandwidth are cheap.  The tools for creating a dynamic online presence are easier than ever to use.  Updating a Facebook profile or website takes seconds and can be done from virtually anywhere using a smartphone.  Everything is disposable – so it’s no big deal to create a web presence specifically for a purpose that has a short shelf life and then move on.

That means you can leap on opportunities to expand your business (whatever it is) as quickly as they arise.

That occurred to me as I ran across a site for custom pedestals crafted by specifically for Artprize by Doug Vandergalien.  I don’t know Doug, and I don’t know how long the site has been in operation, but it’s likely something that popped up very quickly and in response to the demand created by Grand Rapids “Artprize” competition.

It’s the same principle behind food vendors with carts; where a restaurant is bound to its geographic location to find demand (and must be proactive in how it selects that spot) – mobile vendors can go directly to the demand (reacting to where the demand congregates).

Can your organization, whatever it may be, be built in a way that can nimbly respond to new opportunities as quickly as they present themselves?  If you manufacture boats, can you retool to manufacture wind turbines?

If so – you can get your message out there more readily than ever.  In the ruthless meritocracy that the Internet-driven economy has become, a good product and simple message are all you need to reach your audience – and at very little expense.

Another Artprize anecdote:  I’ve befriended a couple of really talented Grand Rapidians – Derek Maxfield and Randy Finch of Ice Sculptures, Ltd. One can’t help but love their work and their ethos – so my better half and I offered to help them promote their Artprize entry – a sculpture titled “Frozen in Motion.”  A meeting over dinner, a few emails, and I was able to build a site for them (www.frozenartprize.com) in a few hours (and for less than $50):

Whenever something explodes into the zeitgeist, marketers, PR pros and advertisers give in to the temptation to reverse-engineer the success of the communication campaign to find what they can apply to their own projects.  This is going on right now with the success of Apple’s iPad release.

The problem is, I think there’s precious little we can glean from these successes because they come along because they’re “blue moon” examples.

• First, the time, effort, resources and luck that went into building the Apple Brand is largely what gave the iPad its credibility and reach (which caused the buzz).  Only a tiny handful of organizations will ever wield that power no matter how hard they work.
• Second, when something big like this happens – it mines and depletes the buzz.  The public’s attention span isn’t infinite.  Tunneling down with a second mine will won’t produce a second strike.
• Third, the real trick often isn’t reducing a success to a set of maxims – it’s knowing when those maxims apply and when they don’t (because none are absolute).  Seth Godin observes that the iPad case study is a good example of the success that happens when one doesn’t try to please everyone – however there are situations (like customer service) where pleasing everyone is critical.

Doubtless there is value in examining them and trying to gain insight – but we need to be careful about leaning on those insights too heavily.  They very likely don’t apply beyond the “blue moon” example.  At the very least, they won’t be nearly as powerful the second time around.