(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...There’s been a lot of hullabaloo about the growing tactic of companies sending free products to prominent bloggers so the blogger can subsequently use the item and then write a review about it. Many feel that the whole idea of having an honest open dialog is under threat.
This fear is somewhat warranted, as slick marketers and unscrupulous bloggers could easily take advantage of an unknowing audience. We’ve seen flogs and misleading videos designed to influence people one way or another. It can be relatively easy to do and get away with. That’s going to continue to happen. But things like that happens in every discipline of marketing be it online or offline.
So I’d say, done correctly, that this is a completely legitimate practice. We should let marketers give it a shot before we pick up a shot gun and try to <<BOOM>> blow it out of the sky.
It’s a matter of our industry developing guidelines of best practices. And it’s a matter of bloggers - ones that need to be carefully selected by the marketer on various levels by the way - of fully understanding and respecting the responsibility they have to their audience, to the company, and even to themselves.
Here are a few reasons why I think doing this is legit:
We’ve long talked about how online communities are new forms of focus groups and how companies should listen to their customers.
And this is very true. Conversations are happening. People are learning from one another. They’re sharing information and giving guidance. Today many read product reviews both offline and online. And they’ll go to online forums and ask questions. They’ll google a product name. Or they’ll head over to Technorati and see what the blogosphere is saying. So they’ll check out blogs.
This tactic of providing samples to key bloggers can give a company an entry point into markets they want to be in. That’s because the company is allowing itself to be part of the conversation from a promotional aspect. Their entry is transparent, but they’re letting others do the talking. It’s done out in the open and it is done with full risk of poor reviews. That means the company is actually letting control of their message.
If we want companies to listen to us, if we want them to engage us, and if we hope that they do it online, then this very well could be one way. It goes back to Seth Godin’s point of STOP MARKETING AT PEOPLE. When this tactic is done correctly, then it’s breeding trust through people who have earned a certain level of legitimacy with their audience. And these people, these bloggers again, need to understand and respect that legitimacy.
But it goes further. The blogger must also understand the role he or she is playing. Not only to the audience, but to company that has sent a product that she or he has agreed to review. I’ll get into that later.
Now this part will work if the next part remains true:
We’ve long talked about how people in the blogosphere speak with passion, with a true voice.
To me, this has been both overhyped and underrated. Overhyped because it makes it seem that everyone out there is pure of motive and agenda while having extraordinarily keen insight into the things they talk about. That’s a bunch of crap. Pure bunk. We all bring our biases and preconceived notions on everything from consumer good to politics to, well, marketing strategies. Many could easily end up having hidden agendas or biases, some that we aren’t even aware of. And many, while being relatively intelligent, many not know how to speak to a larger audience that has diverse views and needs.
At the same time, I’d have to say that the importance of engaging those who blog without secret agendas and have limited biases or at least have some inkling as to how to control them, who respect their audience and the role that they play - however large or small - cannot be underestimated. It shows that the company respects its customer base and potential customer base and the means by which they get information. It shows the company respects the intellect of it’s customers as it looks to connect with them emotionally. It’s not something that every company can do, and it’s not something that can be done for every product or service, but it is a way of interacting that goes beyond the traditional marketing spin.
This is becoming all the more essential because:
We’ve long talked about how traditional marketing is losing its effectiveness.
It most definitely still has its place. It ain’t dead. But ain’t what it used to be. Not by a long shot. Marketing mediums have proliferated. Years of canned marketing pitches have taken their toll. People’s attention spans are shorter and they’re more demanding about how a marketer takes up that attention.
Respected bloggers are viewed as having knowledge and insight. They’ve often earned trust by what they bring to the conversation. They’ve developed and nurtured a following. Bloggers hold the attention of a target audience. And they won’t (or shouldn’t) be held hostage to canned marketing messages that they have to spew out.
This doesn’t mean we in marketing should be given a free ride– that’s in part two.
Filed under: Blogger Outreach, Conversation Marketing, Online Outreach
Loading ...
1. Blogola is not a legitimate practice. Bribes are bribes.
2. As to: “We’ve long talked about how online communities are new forms of focus groups and how companies should listen to their customers. And this is very true. Conversations are happening.â€
Depends. If you are in the echo chamber, it seems like the whole world is the echo chamber. It’s not.
Also, you are not making the distinction between valuable managed focus group and a mob. Before you make the claim above, it would be a good idea to understand the dynamics of a mob.
3. “This tactic of providing samples to key bloggers can give a company an entry point into markets they want to be in. That’s because the company is allowing itself to be part of the conversation from a promotional aspect.”
Samples. In theory.
4. “That means the company is actually letting control of their message.”
I could go on and review the rest of your piece but why? You’re just going to blow that Web 2.0 delusional crap. In the words of Woody Allen, it’s nothing a fist full of Prozac and a baseball bat could cure.”
Then, Amanda (or whomever you are), don’t bother going on and reviewing the rest of my crap. I’ll be out most of the day and will continue to write moe crap later tonight.
Jonathan Trenn (or whatever that is), I suspect you will.
Truth is, I listen to a lot of call in talk radio and many of the people who call in don’t have a computer, might be able to borrow a computer, and then have to sort out the internet. This same myopic view of ownership of technology happened with television, too. All of us middle class city-slickers “all” had TVs in the 40’s when rural areas weren’t completely saturated with TVs until well into the 60’s.
Furthermore, none of the members of my blogging classes have ever visited Usenet, Forums, or Boards.
Finally, nobody knows much about Technorati.
Our “everybody is online” and checking forums and asking questions and checking Technorati is really nobody.
There is still such an amazing opportunity! 15-years into the Web, and we’re not even close to saturation, to say nothing of either ubiquity or super-saturation.
That is why I still include SEO in all of my campaigns! Why? Because a majority of our fellow online denizens are still writing keywords in the Address bar, resulting in search.
That is about as far as the online discernment has gone. Even for me, most of the time.
I also think that the trouble with online ethics has less to do with unscrupulous blogger than with super-affiliates. We never talk about affiliate marketers. We’re fighting over a single Vista ACER Ferrari laptop while Affiliate marketers are making hundreds and thousands of dollars — millions — a year…
And we never talk about them! Why are we sniping each other? So lame.
Anyway, great post, Jonathan. You really make me think. And any post that gets the lovely Amanda over here, just makes me proud!
You’ve made several good points, though I’m increasingly uncomfortable with how slippery the slope gets without clearer standards of disclosure/transparency/or something. The tech blog scene is lively but I think “elitism” has crept in to the degree that the flow of information is controlled by too few bloggers. It’s not control as in “conspiracy”, rather more like “don’t bite the hand that feeds you” and an echo chamber where a few drive the direction of the conversations not because they are the “best thinkers” but because they are the “best linkers”.
[…] have to say, that just like my last post, I come away believing that blogger outreach is legit. But after reading a lot of comments and […]
Blogger Outreach: What gives?
“There’s been a lot of hullabaloo about the growing tactic of companies sending free products to prominent bloggers so the blogger can subsequently use the item and then write a review about it. Many feel that the whole idea of…
[…] Blogger Outreach: What gives? (Part One) […]