Filed under: Aggregation, Blowback, Brand Promotion, Brand Protection, Case Studies, Citizen Generated Media, Content Filtering, Content Management Solution, Content Management System, Controversial Marketing, Copyright Issue, Copywriting, Corporate Responsibility, Crisis Management, Google, Google YouTube, Honesty, Information Technology, Integrity, Intellectual Property, Internet Culture, Internet Strategy, Legal Issues, New Media Strategy, New Technology, Online Brand Protection, Peer-to-Peer, Technology, Television, Video Over IP, Viral Advertising, Viral Marketing, Viral Media, Viral Propagation, Viral Videos, Web Strategy, YouTube, YouTube Marketing

The current legal battle between Viacom and Google/YouTube is going to have significant ramifications beyond today’s headlines.  It’s getting surprisingly little play amongst much of the social media digerati, but it’s something we all need to be aware of.

The lawsuit and the proceedings around it are truly a sign of the times.  It’s a direct outgrowth of what we’ve been emerging via the internet over the past several years.  Sites such as YouTube have essentially become free communicative vehicles to not only view, but  share and alter video productions of all types.  The concept of “share” is important because most of us use it.  But in reality, it is a nice way of saying “distribute”.  And from distribute comes distribution - a fundamental with tremendous legal ramifications.

Alter is a tough one too.  The “mash-ups” that many in social media and digital marketing talk of enthusiastically can be as problematic.  As, I guess, it should be.  At least in some cases.  An artist creates an original piece of work.  Then distributes it, usually netting some sort of financial gain.  Others take it, and now because of new tools can alter it and redistribute it.  Many times this new process leads to lost potential revenue for the original artist. Read more…

2 Comments » Posted on July 11th, 2008 by Jonathan Trenn

Filed under: Ad Budgets, Ad Buys, Ad Sales, Advertisements, Advertising, Brand, Brand Advocacy, Brand Intelligence, Brand Promotion, Brand Reputation, Branding, Branding Online, Commercials, Internet, Internet Culture, Internet Strategy, Market Research, Marketing, New Marketing, New Media, New Media Strategy, Old Marketing, Online Ads, Online Advertising, Online Brand Promotion, Online Branding, Online Collaboration, Online Copywriting, Targeted Advertising, Technology, Technology Strategy, Web 2.0, Web 3.0, Web Ads, Web Advertisers, Web Advertising, Web Applications, Web Apps, Web Metrics, Web Services, Web Strategy, Website Design, What About Clients?, ads

In my last post, I talked of the coming disruption of the three way relationship between marketer, agency, and media property. Essentially it centers on the idea that marketers (who are often behind themselves) are becoming increasingly dissatisfied with the lack of digital savvy of their agencies and are now turning to media properties for strategic ideas and creative capabiliites. And these media properties are making themselves all the more ready, willing, and able to carry out the needs and wishes of the marketers.

I believe that that’s happening. But there’s still a big problem with that model. Consistent brand messaging

On a micro-level, this new way of doing things makes perfect sense. Crafting an marketing campaign tailored to the offerings of an online property could maximize the effectiveness of the campaign itself. For that media property.

But last I looked, most advertisers don’t use all their spend on one property. They’ll pick many properties in many channels. They’ll test here and there. They’ll sometimes concentrate on branding, sometimes concentrate on direct , sometimes (and the web makes this more possible, concentrate on both.

If the marketer - the company that is the end client - has to tailor each of its marketing messages to that of the publisher, chaos could result.

Publishers will need to realize this and further expand their services, sort of becoming almost full service for their advertisers. But still, this still could run into brand confusion as each publisher will owe it to their paying client to create the most effective campaign for their specific property or properties, leaving potentially different and confusing brand messages across several media properties.

Wise agencies should see this as the window of opportunity and work with publishers before they even get clients to formulate the framework for effective marketing campaigns that can perform very effectively over a cross section of properties and platforms.

2 Comments » Posted on March 6th, 2008 by Jonathan Trenn

Filed under: 2008 Elections, Ad Budgets, Ad Buys, Ad Sales, Election Strategy, Online Ads, Online Advertising, Political Strategy, Web Ads, Web Advertising, Web Strategy

In showing a sharp contrast that reflects the different mindsets of the campaigns of the two remaining Democratic candidates, Kate Kay of MediaPost writes:

Senator Barack Obama wants voters in Texas and Ohio to vote early, and his campaign is running huge video-enabled billboard ads to promote the convenient option. Yet, despite a desperate need to beat her Democratic opponent in the two states in Tuesday’s primaries, Senator Hillary Clinton’s camp doesn’t seem to be running Web display ads at all.

Not for anything, but one of the complaints about the Clinton campaign is that hit has been too top down. To me, this is another reflection of that. Now, it seems she is running negative ads versus Obama, a somewhat necessary tactic but hardly inspirational.

Web ads don’t necessarily show dispersed control. But the lack of them shows me that a campaign is run by traditioanlists who see TV and direct mail as the only way to go. TV and direct mail are vital, but not as vital as they used to be.

Obama’s team is smartly placing ads on newspaper sites. Like here. And here. Truth be told, they’re not great ads. They show reconstituted TV ads - a bad idea. But at least they’re doing something.

No Comments » Posted on March 3rd, 2008 by Jonathan Trenn

Filed under: Abraham Harrison, Abraham Harrison LLC, Advertisements, Advertising, Brand, Brand Advocacy, Brand Promotion, Branded Entertainment, Branding, Branding Online, Broadcast Advertising, Commercials, Firebrand TV, Firebrand.com, History of Advertising, History of Marketing, History of PR, Intellectual Property, Internet Culture, Mainstream Media, Marketing, Marketing Conversation, Media Purchases, Messaging Online, Mobile, Networks, New Marketing, New Media, New Media Marketing, New Media Strategy, New Technology, Old Marketing, Old Media, Online Ads, Online Advertising, Online Brand Promotion, Online Branding, Online Facilitation, Online Marketing, Online Media, Online Messaging, Online Pitch, Online Video, Shameless Self-Promotion, Streaming Video, Super Bowl, Super Bowl Ads, Super Bowl Commercials, TV Advertising, TV over IP, TV-on-Demand, Television, Television Over IP, Traditional Media, Traditional PR, Video Over IP, Viral Marketing, Viral Media, Web 2.0, Web Ads, Web Advertisers, Web Advertising, Web Applications, Web Apps, Web Strategy





Yeah, I know. You hate commercials. You hate the sudden interruption of your favorite show to see three, four, or five thirty-second poorly created hard-to-differentiate video presentations on a product you don’t like, don’t want, don’t need, or don’t use.

Me too.

You want to get back to the show, the game, the newscast. See the bad guy get his ass nailed, the final two minutes of the tight game, or news on the latest scoop on the election cycle. The last thing you want to see is a series of presentations about pills that can make you pee better, a car that supposedly makes you cool, and a law firm that chases ambulances.

Me too.

But every once and a while, you’ll watch something that will catch your eye. It will make you laugh. Chuckle inside. You’ll be able to relate to it. Or you’ll be impressed because it’s impressive, not because the commercial is trying to pretend that it’s impressive with itself. Or you’ll think, shit, how did they do that?

Me too.

If that’s what happens, then that’s a commercial that will likely end up on Firebrand.

Read more…

No Comments » Posted on January 30th, 2008 by Jonathan Trenn

Filed under: Abraham Harrison LLC, Ad Budgets, Ad Buys, Ad Sales, Advertising, Brand Promotion, Branding, Branding Online, Broadcast Advertising, Broadcast Radio, Business 2.0, Facebook Beacon, Facebook Social Ads, Internet, Marketing, New Media, New Media Marketing, New Media Strategy, New PR, New Public Relations, Old Media, Online Ads, Online Advertising, Online Brand Promotion, Online Branding, Online Marketing, Social Meda, TV Advertising, Web 2.0, Web 3.0, Web Ads, Web Advertisers, Web Advertising, Web Strategy, Website Design

Two articles caught my eye earlier this week.

One was an AdAge article entitled “So Much for Engagement; Buys Are Still Based on Eyes”. It talked about a recent study by Advertiser Perceptions. Marketers and media buyers are looking to spend more and more dollars online. That’s because their first and foremost metric is reach - and that’s were people are going today. Online. But they see it more as a results oriented medium and are not doing it for engagement purposes as they don’t perceive that the online is good for engagement. This study was based on a survey of 2047 marketers and their media buyers.

The second one was a press release of a report put out by the Chief Marketing Officer (CMO) Council. It described how measurable ROI is becoming an increasingly important factor for marketers as they transform dollars online. Accountabilty is of prime importance as marketers look to measure the value of the programs they’ve created and the investments they’ve made. A result of this trend in 2007 was the relative high turnover of the agencies used - ad, web design, and PR - to carry out these programs. The reasons for the severing of relationships was often tied into “lack of innovation” and “no value-added thinking”. Hmm…

Read more…

5 Comments » Posted on January 18th, 2008 by Jonathan Trenn

Next Page »

  • blog advertising is good for you