BrandStand

January 20, 2010 | Robin Lybarger

“Tweet Me” = A Sign of Affection?

In my normal day of perusing the oodles of e-newsletters I subscribe to, I ran across an article in USA Today about how Sweethearts is debuting a “Tweet Me” Sweetheart candy for this Valentine’s Day. The article quotes the VP of Marketing for New England Confectionery, maker of Sweethearts, explaining that the inclusion of the Tweet Me Sweetheart is “in recognition that society is changing the way to say ‘I love you.’ ” Really, could it be?

As a PR professional, I am an advocate of social media, but as a human being I surely don’t agree that this is the evolution of how we show affection. I would love to know who came up with this statement. I think the idea to include the Tweet Me Sweetheart is clever, and the brand received a huge story in USA Today (also linked on the Huffington Post), as well as coverage in the Boston Herald. Also, I am blogging about it (as are others), Twitter is a partner, and there are tweets rolling in about it. But I would have recommended focusing on the fact that the brand responds to what is happening in the culture. The article also talks about its iPhone app, which sounds interesting and further demonstrates NECCO’s ability to evolve with the current happenings. For what is a smart partnership and a great campaign for building conversation about the brands, I would have expected a smarter statement as to the “why.”

In the end, the brands fit really well together … short and sweet. But I have to admit that personally, when it comes to showing affection, I prefer a call, a note, flowers or a hug.

6 Comments

January 14, 2010 | Lisa Wieting

Social Media Census

The 2010 census is campaigning through Twitter…along with Facebook, MySpace, Flickr and YouTube, in the hopes of generating a higher percentage of participation this time around.

This is an open letter to people who do not see the benefit of social media in marketing – namely, my husband, who thinks “social media marketing” is just an excuse to cruise around on Facebook while at work and who to this day is the only person I know without an account. First, let’s take a quick look at the history of censuses. They began during the early Pharaonic Period in Egypt and were used to issue land grants and for taxation purposes. The first U.S. census was conducted in 1790; a census is done every 10 years to record the population, which also helps determine the number of United States Representatives each state receives (thank you Wikipedia).

So, the goal is to count EVERY American. In 2000, the census counted more than 281 million people…talk about a daunting task. This year, though, they have social media to help the campaign. Below are reasons why I think this is cool:

1. If this ancient practice can evolve into the social media landscape, any business can.

2. The U.S. Census Bureau’s sole goal is to reach as many people as possible, and it is turning to social media to help accomplish that. Those wary of social media in business, think about it…the census needs to reach everyone. If social media can help with that, it can certainly help reach different target markets and customers.

3A. I can’t remember hearing a word about the census 10 years ago. I was also in college and had recently turned 21, so that may have had something to do with it. Different priorities.

3B. My 22-year-old brother HAS heard of the 2010 census because it’s being talked about on Facebook and in different blogs he reads. That doesn’t guarantee he will participate, but it certainly presents a better opportunity.

4. It’s mind-blowing to think about how social media/online applications will be utilized in the future and even more exciting that we have the opportunity to help shape it. Will the entire census take place through Facebook or iPhone apps? That means my husband probably won’t be counted as a human because he still won’t be on Facebook.

5. It’s interesting to watch how social media continues to infiltrate different aspects of our lives. We no longer have to look for information, it finds us. The census found me, and for the first time, I will be accounted for.

No Comments

December 18, 2009 | Lisa Wieting

The Pepsi Effect

“Pepsi to Skip Super Bowl After 23-Year Run” – New York Times
“Pepsi Not Advertising in next Super Bowl” – Toronto Star
“Pepsi Takes A Pass on Super Bowl Ads” – CNN Money

CNBC, CBS Sports, NPR, Chicago Tribune, Wall Street Journal the list goes on and on.

If you haven’t heard (you must be living under a rock), Pepsi will not be advertising in this year’s Super Bowl for the first time in 23 years. Instead the soft drink conglomerate will focus on a new marketing effort that will appear mostly online. I can’t help but think…NOT advertising may be one of the most genius PR stunts in recent history.

Lets guesstimate that Pepsi spent $20 to $30 million in Super Bowl ads last year. I’m sure they were clever, well produced and probably featured super stars like Justin Timberlake. So, let’s tack on another couple million dollars just for celebrity endorsement, creative concepts and production. This year, Pepsi pulls their ads sending shockwaves through the advertising world. Not only are they focusing on an “online” marketing strategy vs. traditional advertising but also saving millions of dollars. On top of that, by simply announcing this decision, they have generated millions of dollars in free publicity for this yet-to-be-created online campaign. Everyone’s interest is peaked…what could be so big that Pepsi isn’t advertising in the Super Bowl. You can bet that I will be on alert for this new marketing campaign.

Looking at the bigger picture, what does this mean for traditional advertising? If Pepsi pulls out of the Super Bowl, will Budweiser soon follow suit? Is Pepsi realizing the power of online is more powerful than the Super Bowl? Is this truly a publicity stunt? Time will tell if this move will pay off for Pepsi but this football fan is much more intrigued by Pepsi’s “Non-Advertising” campaign than any 30-second commercial with Justin Timberlake.

Follow the continual stream of news about Pepsi’s big Super Bowl decision on Bing News: http://ow.ly/No97

No Comments

December 18, 2009 | Jeff Cohn

A “fish story” of a different type.

Some companies understand that every customer transaction (we call it brand touchpoint) is an opportunity to build that brand with the customer. One of the key ways to get this done is through internal brand strategy whereby everyone within the organization understands their role in living the brand. No one understands this more than Southwest Airlines with their empowered brand of travel. Their people are trained to understand the brand and live it everyday. From rapping flight attendants to gate agents who make the inexperienced nervous flier comfortable, they are well versed in the brand and have the freedom to create fun and efficient flying experiences for their customers.

This went through my mind last night as I dined at Bonefish Grill, a national chain of fish and seafood restaurants. Our customer experience was minor but it does speak to the power of empowered brand trained employees who live their brand and those that don’t. Bonefish is in the latter category.

My friend ordered the sea bass. This item is offered in 6 and 8 ounce portions. He ordered the smaller portion. The waiter, who offered exceptional service in every way, came back and told us that they had run out of 6 ounce portions and that he could order something else or accept the 8 ounce portion. My friend said he would accept the 8 ounce portion, but didn’t think he should have to pay for the larger order. The waiter agreed that this was something they should be able to offer and said he’d go to bat with management. That was that. Until his order was placed on the table that is.

My friend was given a piece of fish no more than 6 ounces. We were all somewhat surprised by this. He asked the waiter, “so…did they find a 6 ounce piece of fish” and the waiter said that they had taken a larger piece, took off 2 ounces and served what he ordered.

We all looked at each other in amazement. Someone in management would rather throw out 2 ounces of fish than unexpectedly delight the customer. We asked about this and the waiter said he was just as surprised and would get the general manager. Apparently the kitchen manager made the call.

The manager came over, was very apologetic about what happened, and handled it well.
But this was a huge missed opportunity to build the Bonefish brand with some regular customers! Rather than bring the customer a small extra serving at no additional cost, the kitchen manager only saw his job to live to the order. He had no understanding on his role in creating a memorable experience for the customer, and thereby building the Bonefish brand with us.

We were filled to the gills, but our brand experience of Bonefish Grill was certainly, well, fishy…all because of two key missing ingredients. First, the waiter should have been empowered to do what it takes to satisfy the customer and build the brand. And second, the kitchen manager needs to know that, despite being behind the scenes, his decisions can impact customer’s brand touchpoints everyday. Will we go back to Bonefish? Probably. But our expectations of their brand are definitely lower.

No Comments