April 5, 2005

pure marketing meltdown denial

More controversy/conversation about fake blogs.
Frankly, it’s all a bit of a storm in a trea­cup. OF COURSE a blog can be “fake” and still work well, and be con­si­de­red a great blog… BUT ONLY IF the voice behind the mask is authen­tic. Monolo The Shoe Blog­ger is a fabu­lous exam­ple.
But if your voice/persona/alter ego comes off as pho­ney, whether it’s “real”, “fake”, or a bit of both, you’re going get ham­me­red, and not just by kvetchy blog­gers like me. But by the mar­ket you’re in.
Why is this so hard for some advertising/marketing/PR peo­ple to unders­tand? This has a lot to do with it. Pure mar­ke­ting melt­down denial.
[UPDATE:] Monolo sends me a note:

Hello to the Hugh!
It is most amu­sing indeed that you have today sin­gled out the Manolo for men­tion in your blog, for it was it just the last night that the Manolo he had dis­co­ve­red your witty and most per­cep­tive blog. Indeed he spent much time rea­ding and con­si­de­ring your Hugh­train Mani­festo. (There is much good in this work.)
As for the con­tro­versy about the “fake” blogs, you are exactly correct. It is the load of the dung.
As the aside, the Manolo he recently par­ti­ci­pa­ted, as the Manolo, in the inter­net focus group for the mar­ke­ting com­pany that was see­king the infor­ma­tion on how to build what the Manolo assu­mes is the “killer” marketing/corporate blog.
Many were the times during the course of this “dis­cus­sion” that the Manolo he tried to tell the peo­ples (who were clearly not lis­te­ning to this wis­dom) that it was not the topic, or the design of the blog, or even the “infor­ma­tion” that the blog deli­ve­red that deter­mi­ned the suc­cess or fai­lure of the blog, but rather the per­so­na­lity and the “voice” of the blog. And this it is the func­tion of the talent behind the blog. Of the course, the Manolo he could not but point to his own hum­ble efforts as the exam­ple of the blog that suc­ceeds, and very rapidly at that, by having the dis­tinct per­so­na­lity and voice, ones that mesh well with the pur­po­ses of the blog.
Which means, sadly for many corporate/marketing blog-builders, that much of the suc­cess of the blog depends much upon the talent of the blog­ger behind it. Hap­pily, when this it is rea­li­zed (howe­ver many years down the road) it means that the best blog­gers will be paid hand­so­mely. Of the course, the Manolo he is not hol­ding his breath while he waits for this to hap­pen.
Best of the Wishes,
Manolo

[NOTE TO SELF:] It’s FUN watching the dino­saurs die!

"Hugh's Daily Cartoon" Newsletter. A new cartoon sent out every weekday morning to your inbox [RSS version here.]. A wee chuckle to start your day off right etc.

18 Responses to “pure marketing meltdown denial”

  1. Dave says:

    I con­si­der the king of fake blogs to be Chris Ons­tad of Ache­wood (www.achewood.com), who does a num­ber of blogs in the voi­ces of indi­vi­dual cha­rac­ters from his comic strip. Some­ti­mes they detail frees­tan­ding goofy events, some­ti­mes they fill in backs­tory in the con­ti­nuity of the comic or retell an event we saw in the strip but from a dif­fe­rent character’s pers­pec­tive. It’s fas­ci­na­ting stuff. Like you say, it is fake in that these peo­ple don’t exist but it is indeed authen­tic. The expe­rience of rea­ding the strip is enhan­ced by rea­ding the blogs.

  2. Dawn says:

    I think the Manolo voice is irritating.

  3. Ric says:

    Hugh — do you like that Susan­nah has ‘gaping­void’ under “For Fun” in her Blo­gRoll, rather than “Buzz Marketing”?

  4. Niti says:

    I think I just fell in love with Manolo :P
    He *sounds* cute…

  5. jbr says:

    manolo makes a good obser­va­tion, but he may be mis­sing something that i believe is impor­tant to unders­tand about blogs.
    yes, the “voice”/certain something is an attrac­tion for a blog. cer­tainly, hugh has a cer­tain something and we con­gre­gate here daily for our dose of hugh. that cer­tain something is a unde­fi­na­ble qua­lity that is not unlike art.
    like nota­ble art, there is an ele­ment that attracts peo­ple to it. in hugh’s blog, it is his wit, artistry and understanding/demonstration of the mar­ke­ting dis­rup­tive nature of blogs. in kathy sierra’s blog, it’s her awe­some abi­lity to write con­cise, unders­tan­da­ble and enter­tai­ning posts. they each pos­sess the cer­tain something that attracts readers/viewers. they are each original/authentic.
    making the ana­logy to art is key for any mar­ke­ter
    assu­ming that a well writ­ten, inte­res­ting fake blog is sure to attract cus­to­mers. this is a false assump­tion. it’s like knock off art. it may look like the ori­gi­nal, but it doesn’t pos­sess the authen­ti­city or cer­tain something inhe­rent in great art/blogs.
    one other thing in the rela­tionship bet­ween blog­ging and art.…there are way more star­ving artists than notably suc­cess­ful. even with the long tail effect, of the 8.5 million blogs out there, not all of them are read or noti­ced. why? likely, because they are mis­sing the cer­tain something that exists in great art.
    hope­fully, this made some sense.…

  6. hugh macleod says:

    kathy sie­rra is a god­dess. is she cute? is she sin­gle…?
    *sigh*

  7. Piers Fawkes says:

    Somewhat rela­ted: we write a rather cheeky piece last week about fake blogs on PSFK:
    Could Spam­Blogs Ren­der Tech­no­rati Use­less?
    http://www.psfk.com/2005/03/could_spamblogs.html

  8. Piers Fawkes says:

    oh yeah. btw — we LOVE the Manolo!
    (and I hear the folk down at Bla­nik hate him — HeHe!)

  9. David Burn says:

    “But if your voice/persona/alter ego comes off as pho­ney, whether it’s “real”, “fake”, or a bit of both, you’re going get ham­me­red, and not just by kvetchy blog­gers like me. But by the mar­ket you’re in.“
    I hope your prog­no­sis turns out to be true. Sadly, it has not been true of TV, print, radio, out­door, etc. So, I’m not sure it will be true of mar­ke­ting blogs. Of course, it’s not pos­si­ble to talk back to TV, print, radio, out­door, etc. And now with fake com­ments and mode­ra­ted com­ments, I’m not sure one can suc­cess­fully talk back via a fake mar­ke­ting blog either.
    At least we have our own real blogs to ham­mer them with. Not that they’re going to lis­ten. “They” being the Clue­train­less masses.

  10. I See Pat­terns and The Zeni­fi­ca­tion of Nearly Everything

    I was wai­ting for the sub­way a month ago in San Fran­cisco. A pos­ter across the tracks read:

  11. jbr says:

    spea­king of fake blogs.…go to this new site and decide.
    if a real blog, this is ama­zing and that’s what bugs me…it’s almost too good/smooth.…reads like a script from a tele­vi­sion show…
    check it out
    http://bigpicturesmalloffice.blogs.com/bigpicturesmallofficecom/

  12. Tony May says:

    Not per­so­nally being an avid rea­der of NYTimes.com, I was bum­med to find your link requi­red username/pword to read the story. Other­wise, I agree with your com­ments on the fake blog com­ments. I have addres­sed this on my own blog and made com­ments about this on Scoble’s. What I don’t unders­tand is how (at least some) ad agen­cies unders­tand a client’s brand & brand poten­tial and the need to be authen­tic and how well that trans­la­tes to consumers…yet the clients do not. What is the deal with the gap bet­ween the two?

  13. Tony May says:

    Sorry about ope­ning line. Was meant for the Flat World link to NYTimes.com.

  14. Katherine says:

    “Sin­ce­rity. If you can fake that, you’ve got it made.”

  15. Katherine says:

    jbr: It’s fake. Or else it’s real, but the author just doesn’t get the cru­cial dif­fe­rence bet­ween a blog and a term paper or inte­rof­fice memo. Or else it’s real, but the author is a pom­pous ass who actually does sound like that.

  16. Ghost Blog­ging: a sch­muck researches the industry and tar­get audience, then wri­tes a pre­tend blog “post” for the client…
    …and the blog poses as the client’s plat­form fea­tu­ring his authen­tic and can­did voice pon­ti­fi­ca­ting and inte­rac­ting with tar­get audience.
    Fic­tio­nal Cha­rac­ter Blog: a non-existent brand per­sona poses as a real human blog­ger even though ever­yone is sup­po­sed to know that he’s an ima­gi­nary being (Bar­ney, Ronald McDo­nald, the Giant Mic­key Mouse of Dis­ney World, Chic­ken of the Sea tuna mer­maid, Pills­bury Dough­boy)…
    …and the unreal cha­rac­ter blogs about non-events and make believe inte­rac­tions with other fan­tasy per­sons, whilst voi­cing wha­te­ver pro­pa­ganda the com­pany or ad agency wants to put in his mouth.
    Yeah. Real good turn of events for the bloa­tosphere.
    What is the dif­fe­rence bet­ween a Fic­tio­nal Blog­ger and a Fic­tion Book?
    When peo­ple use a fic­tion book, they are not inte­rac­ting with the fic­tio­nal cha­rac­ters, they just read about them for enter­tain­ment.
    Hugh, can you think of other differences?

  17. frosty says:

    Wow, I’d never seen the Manolo before. Great stuff.
    Beyond the “fake blogs” there are also the “auto­blogs” — about which I wrote a little here: http://biztos.com/frost/etc/adsense-loop.html
    It would be inte­res­ting to do a fake-blogger-autoblog. Say, on mar­ke­ting. Have a nice little robot grab things off the web (maybe via Goo­gle) and blog about them in a par­ti­cu­lar style.
    Auto-generated text in a par­ti­cu­lar “voice” seems to work well in aca­de­mia: http://www.elsewhere.org/cgi-bin/postmodern
    Another thought: what if we could auto­ma­ti­cally trans­late Hugh into Manolo?

  18. “Open” to bloggers?

    Ame­ri­can Express is spon­so­ring a