There has been a lot of discussion and opinions circling since the release of the FTC's revised guidelines around endorsements and testimonials in advertising online.

Zócalo Group President/CEO, Paul Rand, provided some initial insights on the topic directly following the FTC's announcement last week and continued the dialogue at a panel hosted by the Publicity Club of Chicago. Fellow panelists included Esther J. Cepeda, Columnist at Chicago Sun-Times and Self-syndicated columnist of 600 Words; Toure Muhammad, Chief Creative Strategist at Bean Soup Times; and Daliah Saper, Principal Attorney at Saper Law.

The conversation centered around what an endorsement in the online space means - basically anything brands or marketers offer of value to someone who can publish it online - and what marketers and advertisers can do to ensure that the guidelines are upheld. In summary, transparency is key - endorsers should disclose the fact that they are given free products or services. Some interesting perspectives offered by Daliah Saper on the ambiguity around copyright infringement and defamation in the online space were also an important focus of the panel.

From an agency perspective, I found the following key takeaways helpful:

• In a post, the consumer should be given the information they need to make their own purchase decision. They should be able to say to themselves "I know blogger x got this product from company x, so I will take that into account when considering the product for myself."
• As agencies continue to communicate directly with consumers who have the ability to publish content, open communication becomes more important than ever. Encouraging full disclosure becomes imperative as marketers have less control over how their brand message is shared.
  
• Disclosure needs to be clear, open and simple. It should be easy to see in the body of the article or post so that there is never any question regarding intent.
  
• Marketers have an obligation to guide and train the bloggers they choose to work with - often times, these individuals haven't had the same level of training a traditional journalist would receive through school, or their employer.
  
• Legal departments are taking different approaches to social media. Copyright infringement can be found in everything from a brand name's hyperlink to a competitors website to a song being played in the background of a YouTube video. It's important to be aware of a brand's legal department's stance on sharing content via social media. 
• If incorrect or negative information about a brand is shared, or if full-disclosure is not evident, then a marketer or brand has a right to approach the writer, asking for edits or to have the conversation taken offline. It's easy to overreact when new rules are put in place, but engaging a legal team should continue to be a last resort.
  

What is your opinion of the new guidelines? Will this change your marketing approach?




Permalink 1 | TrackBacks (0) |

In Google's unremitting attempt to take over the web, the search engine giant recently launched Sidewiki, which is a new tool connected to your web browser making all websites social. The tool opens a sidebar on any web page that allows anyone with a Google account to post and read comments about the Web pages they visit. Commenters can offer their positive and negative opinions as well as offer links to additional resources on the topic.





In a different intro video, Google touts the benefits of the Sidewiki, but fails to address any negative impact resulting from spam or controversial comments appearing on pages alongside more valid opinions. Customer reviews will now be front and center. Google's Sidewiki has an algorithm that will sort the comments - from valuable to least valuable. The problem for website owners is that they have no control over the comments. They can't edit them. They can't delete them. And anyone using Sidewiki will have access to all of the comments left behind. As former Forrester analyst Jeremiah Oyang notes: "The impacts are far reaching, now every web page on the Internet is social and can have consumer opinion - both positive and negative."

The unknown makes the Sidewiki murky water for clients, leading to some important questions:

• What will happen to blatantly erroneous comments?

• Can protesters target a company with Sidewiki comments and bombard them with negative commentary?

• Will companies eventually be able to buy ads on their competitor's Sidewikis?

• How will corporate blogs or CSR sites be affected by this emerging tool?

The Sidewiki illustrates the importance of developing a plan for monitoring and crisis control should negative comments surface. Only a week old, it still remains to be seen how many people will adopt this new form of interactive communication; however, given the popularity of social media, consumer generated content is quick to spread. For companies still sitting on the sidelines - NOT having a social media strategy is no longer a viable option.





Permalink 1 | TrackBacks (0) |

I wish I could take credit for coming up with the term, "freemium," but I can't. The term was actually coined a few years ago to define the way in which many web-based products would give away their services for free in the hope that word of mouth would spread faster. 

Permalink 1 | TrackBacks (0) |

On Monday, I was speaking on a Panel at the NAD Annual Conference in NY.  One of the other panelists was Mary Engle from the FTC.  Just prior to us going on, Mary's colleague, David Vladeck (Director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer protection) made the announcement that the FTC was going to be unveiling its revised guidelines affecting endorsement and testimonials for advertisers online.  The panel, not surprisingly, became much more lively with the timely news.



History/Implications:

Last updated in 1980, the new changes will better promote full-disclosure between advertisers and endorsers, protecting consumers from deceptive marketing.  Bloggers and celebrities are also affected under the Guide, requiring transparency in endorsements made when material connections are shared.  In other words, if a marketer/brand provides a product or service with the specific intent to receive a positive "review" in return, the endorser must share this relationship with consumers.  Although the Guides aren't official law, deceptive practices will be challenged by the governing FTC Act.


Perspective/Insights:

Beyond my role as President/CEO of Zócalo Group, I've been serving as President-elect of the Word of Mouth Marketing Association (WOMMA) to help brands and partners understand the  best way to understand and follow these proposed Guidelines.  

More information on the ways these new changes will affect how we, as marketers, do business are forthcoming; for now, I wanted to share with you some of my immediate reactions to Mary Engle and David's announcement of the FTC's revised Guides.

• The power, reach and impact of word of mouth marketing and social media is clearly recognized.  Obviously, the market has evolved (particularly in last few years) since the Guidelines were first introduced in 1980 and changes are necessary
• The Guidelines formally reinforce that ethical transparency and disclosure is crucial for marketers and advertisers today; anything less won't be tolerated. 
• The Guidelines look to be very consistent with the preliminary Guidelines that the FTC reviewed a few months ago.  The biggest distinction appears to be more examples that bring different scenarios to life and help marketers understand the FTC's perspective and best practices.
• It's becoming even more crucial for companies to have a formal policy for how they are going to engage online - and how their employees will engage as well.
• Marketers/advertisers are ultimately responsible for adequate disclosure online; however, bloggers (particularly those who are more professional "reviewers") also have responsibility.
• A great deal of discussion has focused around the question, "What is an endorser,  and how does that distinguish them from the average consumer?"  Different rules apply against a formal paid endorser vs. an individual who is simply trying and reporting on a product or service.
• The FTC is particularly sensitive when it comes to advertising, marketing and engaging kids - new education efforts targeting this group are being announced.
• The Guidelines are consistent with the WOMMA guidelines; brands can go to www.womma.org/ethics to get hand- on, practical insights on how the guidelines can be applied.
• My overall sense from both David and Mary from the FTC is that they are working hard to provide clarity, direction, best practices and insights to marketers on the best ways to operate in this new realm.  Guidelines from WOMMA should provide strong support in coming months.
  

Upholding Transparency: Today and Tomorrow

WOMMA will continue to play an active role in helping marketers and consumers understand the FTC's revised guidelines for endorsements and testimonials, with sessions held as early as this week to provide a full analysis of how these changes will impact your business.  Zócalo Group is also a resource for you as we evolve to an even more transparent interaction between marketers and consumers.  Please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns (312-933-6272).



Permalink 1 | TrackBacks (0) |

If you were to believe recent reports - or a recent skit on the Emmys - television is dying because more people are watching tv online.

However, in an effort to drive further word of mouth about new shows, many producers, directors and actors are using social media to generate awareness, recommendations, and viewership. Although sites like Hulu have helped this process (and there are plenty of ways to access television shows online), social media allows them to direct recommendations and content sharability (for example, embeddable videos). Cable companies, television stations and even the TV Guide are all using social media to drive viewership and engage their audiences.

Most television shows utilize the power of Twitter as a way of building awareness of their brand, but in unique ways. For example, Dollhouse star, Eliza Duskhu, has been using the service as a way of engaging current fans. The new Fox show, Glee, has also been cited for its presence on various social media platforms. The hit AMC Series, Mad Men, earned initial favor through its unique Twitter strategy, and has even expanded to the point where one can create a Mad Men-style avatar.

In addition, blogs that focus on television are also beginning to engage via social media. For example, blogs like TV Squad (which focuses on reviews and news) and Televisionary (which has a more industry focus) have a strong presence on both Facebook and Twitter. Even noted critics like David Bianculi from NPR (a personal favorite of mine) is developing an online presence via blogging and Twitter. Even though they may be posting blog content, this helps drive conversation around various television shows, as fans will engage with particular favorites.

Although social media can create huge buzz for a program, sustaining conversations and viewership requires a strong social media strategy and diversification among these channels.

When ABC premiered its revamp of the British show, Life on Mars, last year, it used a
Twitter account to drive conversations around the first episode (even providing a code for embedding the premiere episode into blogs). However, the Twitter account closed soon after the premiere episode aired, followed by a decline in ratings and finally, a cancellation of the program altogether. ABC's Life on Mars may have  had a little more staying power had it used social media strategically, engaging viewers and critics throughout the series rather than dropping off after the first episode.

So, for all you tv addicts and savvy internet users, how do you think television, or the entertainment industry in general, should use social media to engage (or reengage) their audiences?

 

Permalink 1 | TrackBacks (0) |