December 23, 2007

so what’s all this new marketing stuff, anyway?

Send to Kindle

0712ifyoutalkedtopeople.jpg
Some peo­ple call it “The New Mar­ke­ting”. Some peo­ple call it “Mar­ke­ting 2.0″. Wha­te­ver name you care to give it, I get asked about it a lot. Here are some ran­dom thoughts, in no par­ti­cu­lar order.
1. “The New Mar­ke­ting” came about because of two uns­top­pa­ble for­ces: [A] The inven­tion of the inter­net and [B] the begin­ning of the demise of what Seth Godin calls the “TV-Industrial Com­plex”. Thanks to the inter­net, as Clay Shirky famously sta­ted in 2004, “the cost and dif­fi­culty of publishing abso­lu­tely anything, by anyone, into a glo­bal medium, just got a whole lot lower. And the effects of that inc­rea­sed pool of poten­tial pro­du­cers is going to be vast.” While this was going on, large com­pa­nies found out that peo­ple were star­ting to ignore their ads. We have too many choi­ces, too many good choi­ces, and we’ve got­ten too good at igno­ring mes­sa­ges.
2. Seth Godin is quite rightly the world’s most res­pec­ted wri­ter on mar­ke­ting. That being said, a lot of peo­ple haven’t heard of Mark Earls yet. They’re both friends of mine, so I don’t want to com­pare them too much. Seth is a mas­ter of taking com­pli­ca­ted ideas and pre­sen­ting them in a way that any Ave­rage Joe can unders­tand. Mark is more of a Mar­ke­ting Geek’s geek. His stuff makes uncom­for­ta­ble rea­ding for anyone in mar­ke­ting who hasn’t been stretching him­self lately.
3. The most impor­tant asset in The New Mar­ke­ting is “having something worth tal­king about”. This makes cer­tain mar­ke­ting peo­ple squea­mish. A lot of us grew up in an era of flashy com­mer­cials for rather unins­pi­ring pro­ducts, and something in our DNA makes us believe that’s the pro­per way to go about things.
4. If I had one big insight from the last year, is how The New Mar­ke­ting has everything to do with how your pro­duct or ser­vice acts as a “Social Object”. Kudos to Jyri Enges­trom for tur­ning me on to it.
5. My second big insight from this year was lear­ning that, even with a fairly every­day pro­duct, you can create social objects simply by using your pro­ducts to make social ges­tu­res. That’s what we did with Stormhoek. The mes­sage wasn’t, “Here’s why you should buy our wine”. The mes­sage was, “We think you’re kinda cool, and we like what you’re doing. We’d like to be part of it, somehow.” And much to everyone’s sur­prise, it wor­ked rather well.
6. Blogs were the big story for 2005. You­Tube for 2006. Face­book for 2007. What’s the big story for 2008? I have no idea. Nor do I think it mat­ters. For the big story, really, is always going to be the same. Web­si­tes comes and go, but “Cheap, Easy, Glo­bal, Hyper­lin­ked Media” will be with us fore­ver, save for Nuc­lear Holo­caust.
7. A lot of what fuels The New Mar­ke­ting is quite simply, the most impor­tant word in the English Lan­guage: “Love”. It’s hard to get someone to read your web­site if you’re not pas­sio­nate about your sub­ject mat­ter.
8. I’m trying to train myself to avoid “Mic­ros­mo­sis” i.e. mis­ta­king of a mic­ro­cosm for the entire cos­mos. If you got all your news from blogs, you’d be for­gi­ven for thin­king that there are just two phone com­pa­nies– Apple and Nokia. But Sony, Moto­rola, LG and Sam­sung sell a lot of pho­nes, too. Just not to our friends.
9. My Defi­ni­tion of “Web 3.0″: Lear­ning how to use the web pro­perly without it taking over your life. I’m not hol­ding my breath.
10. Why is it so hard to explain The New Mar­ke­ting to large com­pa­nies? Because the peo­ple who work there are simply not pre­pa­red to relin­quish the idea of con­trol. Live by metrics, die by metrics etc.
11. I find all this more inte­res­ting when I don’t take it too seriously. Like all things inter­net, it’s far too easy to get carried away.
[UPDATE:] Robert Sco­ble lea­ves an inte­res­ting comment:

Friends are going to be the big story in 2008. Here’s a post about why it’s wrong that I’m a gate­kee­per bet­ween my friends and you.

Be Socia­ble, Share!

"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.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

20 Responses to “so what’s all this new marketing stuff, anyway?”

  1. MikeTheBee says:

    Maybe we need a new term. Mktg by Bull­ying or Bar­ke­ting or Mull­ying perhaps.

  2. Friends are going to be the big story in 2008. Here’s a post about why it’s wrong that I’m a gate­kee­per bet­ween my friends and you: http://scobleizer.com/2007/12/23/i-love-my-friends-but-why-am-i-between-them-and-you/

  3. Sampad Swain says:

    Neat,concise and just to the point…Liked the post very much..Kudos to you Hugh!!

  4. Douglas Karr says:

    2008? Micro-sites. Tech­no­logy has evol­ved that we don’t require a Face­book or mons­ter app to join and socia­lize with folks. For a cou­ple dollars a month, we can create our own micro-social net­work on the niche of our choice — and we can do it without adver­ti­sing and influence from the mons­ters. Thanks in part to Ning.com for the evo­lu­tion of social networking!

  5. Niall Larkin says:

    @Mikethebee I think Damien Mulley might already have designs on such a term

  6. Geoff says:

    Exce­llent car­toon Hugh, good to see you back after your ‘rest’

  7. scott r says:

    We seem to be living in a “post-cynical” age. I’m in my mid thir­ties, so I’ve grown up in a maels­trom of adver­ti­sing on all media. In many ways, adver­ti­sing never pro­perly “sunk in.” When I was a kid, my mother tells me, I used to play with my legos or Star Wars figu­res in my room and would come out to watch ads then go back and play when the show came back on. I had built up, in essence, an immu­nity to adver­ti­sing to the point that it became purely enter­tain­ment. By the time I’d got­ten out of college, “viral mar­ke­ting” was all the rage which, frankly, made me a little sick to think that the per­son next to me at a bar might be pushing a pro­duct — sub­cons­ciously or not. That was 10 years ago.
    What’s left? I think you hit the nail on the head, Hugh, when you brought up love. A desire to inc­rease mar­ket share is no lon­ger enough. It’s got­ten too trans­pa­rent. We have so many choi­ces at our dis­po­sal, that the effect, often, is a type of com­mer­cial paraly­sis. One has to have more than a “pro­duct” or even a “brand” in order to stand out. And the only way to do that is to sin­ce­rely love what you’re put­ting out there and for the peeps that are hel­ping you pro­mote it have to love it too.
    God help ya, Hugh, but you really seem to love Mic­ro­soft, and you com­mu­ni­cate it very effec­ti­vely. which is something the folk at the Blue Mons­ter don’t do so well. It might make all the difference.

  8. Thanks for some of the most insight­ful rea­ding I’ve encoun­te­red in my attempt to edu­cate myself for a job I’m pas­sio­nate, but not know­led­gea­ble, about. And the com­ments are icing on the cake.

  9. I always gain tre­men­dous insight when I stop by…this of course was no exception…thanks for “loving” what you do. It does have a posi­tive impact on others in search of ans­wers.
    Many bles­sings in the coming year! :)

  10. Great post and links. thanks

  11. Ain’t it the truth Hugh…as an add on to #10.….not only is about con­trol, but its about peo­ple in the orga­ni­za­tion thin­king that what they did 3 or 4 years ago is going to work still and the cons­tant pres­sure for them to gene­rate the “leads” Gotta have the leads man.…gotta have the leads.

  12. Divya says:

    Awe­some thoughts! I just wan­ted to add that I notice with the Face­book phe­no­me­non, a lot of my “non-geek” friends have star­ted sha­ring stuff on the net, which just actually makes the occu­rence of “Mic­ros­mo­sis” slightly les­ser.
    Pro­bably, in the future, we are just going to expand our net­work to inc­lude the non-geeky stuff online too (so, now you would know about LG, Sam­sung and other phones!).

  13. Thanks for an insight­ful Christ­mas day read
    I like the idea of social objects; puts some res­pon­si­bi­lity on crea­tors of online enti­ties to think hard about the what’s and the why’s of their crea­tions and why anyone would care spen­ding time loo­king at it and then choo­sing to interact/join/register/buy/comment/signup/vote/rate/share/email/print/bookmark
    We have reached the age of eye­balls and atten­tion indeed!

  14. Dennis H says:

    It would be good to unders­tand more on what hap­pe­ned re: Stormhoek. Having a sizea­ble foghorn hel­ped I’m sure. Can you really attri­bute suc­cess to the social object thing? What about the blog halo effect? Or suc­cess in making it into MSM? I’s there something about wine that makes it spe­cially sui­ta­ble as a social object? What do you do about stuff that requi­res a ser­vice component?

  15. Greg Smith says:

    New mar­ke­ting, eh? It’s still “wank” words to me.

  16. hugh macleod says:

    Greg, if you are so obverse to “wank” words, how do explain your home­page?
    http://www.prlab.com.au/ ;-)

  17. […] one article on mar­ke­ting in your life, this is my pick.] A User’s Guide to 21st Cen­tury Eco­no­mics So What’s All This New Mar­ke­ting Stuff, Any­way? Ear­ning Your […]

  18. […] article on mar­ke­ting in your life, this is my pick.] A User’s Guide to 21st Cen­tury Eco­no­mics So What’s All This New Mar­ke­ting Stuff, Any­way? Ear­ning Your […]