I’m going to go against the orthodoxy of my fellow social media practitioners. I’m going to commit heresy. I’m going upset the apple cart of the proverbial echo chamber.

The new 2008 version of Where the Hell is Matt YouTube video isn’t going to live up to it’s intended purpose. It will be something that many of us will talk about, blog about, pontificate about. Then it will go away.

Here’s the video if you haven’t watched it:

The reason this campaign will not live up to hype is because it is a direct example as to how social media fails to act as a promotional vehicle. Viral, yes. Promotional, not so much. Sure, some aspects of it may make us feel good…but so what? The object of marketing is to enhance a brand, sustain longterm sales growth, and create profit. I doubt this will really do a great deal for much of the above.Sure, it may result in sales increases for the sponsoring company, Stride Gum. But that’s only if sales right now are very low. They’ll get some good press. But unless they piggyback on it in a couple of months, it will be a social media version of a one hint wonder.We’ll all love the concept. We’ll be inspired by it. The sense of this one guy dancing away throughout the world with citizens of all these countries. We’ll be amazed.

But that’s it.

Read more…

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…

T. Boone Picken’s, Texas oil man, 1980’s corporate raider and current manager of BP Capital Management has something new up his sleave. And it features an internet strategy.

In 1997, he shifted his focus to natural gas. and 10 years later, in 2007, on wind energy. He formed Mesa Power LP in west central Texas and is constructing what will likely be the world’s largest wind farm. The project will feature thousands of wind turbines and cost hundreds of millions of dollars. This follows his belief that natural gas remains the best alternative to oil for motor vehicle fuel. That’s why he formed Pickens Fuel Corp eleven years ago.

Now, with $4 a gallon gas prices, he’s funding a public affairs effort to help us cut out oil as a our primary fuel for transportation, substitute it with natural gas, and then substitute the use of gas for other types of energy needs with, you guessed it, wind energy.

Today, he’s launched an online public affairs effort to convince Americans to look to natural gas and wind as proper alternatives. He points out that we currently import 70% of our oil - up from 24% in 1970. What’s new about his effort, is that much of it is bein launched online.

He’s got a YouTube channel.
They’ve got a page on Twitter.
A fan page on Facebook.
And a page on Mypace.

They even have an online community that they’re building.

Pretty neat concept. I’ll be following this campaign to see how effectively they use social media.

Let’s take a look at the debate between Brian and Loic, point by point.

Point #1

Brian Solis: Understand You’re Not the Only Story in Town
Loic: Who cares about stories, you can get traction and users if you have a good product

Where do I start? First of all, Brian’s spot on in that many top executives in startups overvalue what the product or the service or whatever it is that they’re introducing. They don’t understand that the battleground for attention from key influencers and potential customers is filled with other players battling for attention as well. Sometimes it’s necessary to get someone to help craft a pathway through that battlefield, from someone one that understands which weapons and shields are needed. How to break through that clutter. Because on that very same battlefield are others looking for sweet victory as well. And that’s just the battle to get noticed.

Sometimes that’s having someone who can help craft and deliver a great story.

And, yes, sometimes, one of the best weapons is having established a blog and with that, a burgeoning community. Loic has done that and kudos to him for that. He is a great example of what he’s writing about.

Some of those competitors on the battlefield may not be direct competitors in business. No matter. They are still competing for mindshare of the audience a startup wants to reach.

CEOs need to understand this. They’ve worked their tails off for a significant period of time to produce something. That’s quite an accomplishment in itself. But many automatically think that whatever they’ve produce “sells itself” that it’s a “no-brainer” causing people to automatically understand why they should buy it. This is called hubris.

Hubris kills. For example, a trivia question. Guess who said this last fall:

“I’m in it for the long run. It’s not a very long run. It will be over by February 5.”*

History is filled with failed startups let by overconfident individuals that failed to realize they need some sort of marketing plan to get the word out, to position the product, to clarify key features and benefits. They decided to start companies and then implemented marketing as an afterthought. In other words, their companies have no stories.

While the atmosphere is much better today, I’ve seen decision makers that refuse to get this. It’s as if they seemingly believe that press rooms of major business publications had fax rooms where eager young interns hang out excitedly to retrieve their press releases and run to the editors with all of your important info. If you lack a story - and a decent product - it’s much more difficult to gain traction.

No, Loic, good stories are often needed. Stories can explain complex products. Stories can differentiate between competitors. Stories can offer insight that go beyond a series of sentences on a press release. Just as blog posts can. Blogging and trying to develop a community can work - but not really in time to help that start up. Unless they’re already a know quality like you. It also helps when you have a Web 2.0 type service that connects people such as Seesmic.

A second major point regarding Loic’s comments is that not all good products can get traction. Just as not every great guitarist gets that major record deal, just as not every great aspiring actress gets the big break, not every great product gets noticed. There are a bunch of factors that influence success. As Jim Kurkral commented on Loic’s post, “Even people with great products can still fail getting coverage.” Coverage in industry press, coverage in mainstream press, coverage in blogs. Nor will all creators of great bloggers be able to form online communities.

For that matter, not every product that meet with success is of top quality. Sometimes it’s luck. Previous reputation. Timing. Or a great story.

*Trivia answer: Hillary Clinton, (self)presumptive nominee for the Democratic Party in the U.S. Presidential race, describing how quickly she’ll win the nomination.

Wow. ComScore is reporting that, in December, more than ten billion online videos were viewed by US users. And they’re saying that around 140 million Americans made these views. That’s about 28% of the population.

Google properties - essentially meaning YouTube - accounted for 32.7% of that figure, followed by a flurry of news oriented sites. Second was Fox Interactive Media which both covers news and host MySpace videos.

Here’s a cut and past from ComScore’s press release:

  • 77.6 million viewers watched 3.2 billion videos on YouTube.com (41.6 videos per viewer).
  • 40.5 million viewers watched 334 million videos on MySpace.com (8.2 videos per viewer).
  • Online viewers watched an average of 3.4 hours (203 minutes) of online video during the month, representing a 34-percent gain since the beginning of 2007.
  • The average online video duration was 2.8 minutes.
  • The average online video viewer consumed 72 videos.

Some of this can be blamed on the writers’ strike that was occurring, but I’m betting that this is showing a continued behavioral shift that’s more geared toward online video watching and less about the demise of television. To be sure, TV doesn’t command the attention it once did, but the greater point here is that online has now become a full force in its own right.

The questions abound for those of us in marketing. What is the best way to use promotional video? What is the best way to integrate advertising? How do media properties monetize this - the viewing habits of 140,000,000+ people?