What does one do when their radio playtime is down on their "hot" new single, which is supposed to get everyone excited about your new album? If you're Talib Kweli, you begin a PR campaign to generate buzz about your album.
With the advent of the MySpace revolution, Talib and his label, Blacksmith Records, are taking full advantage of the online community. This is truly empowered interactivity.
1. TUNES: New songs have been released on his MySpace page. Users can comment on the songs, rate them, and even add them to their own MySpace page. New singles are released for purchase after a while on iTunes.
2. BLOG: Both his home and MySpace page link to his blog.
3. VIDEOS: Video premieres are announced ahead of time, generating excitement, and launched from YouTube. The benefits of YouTube are endless. Suffice it to say that YouTube makes videos very viral (easy to spread), allowing blogging, posting, embedding, emailing, and a ridiculously large amount of other interactivity features.
4. BULLETIN BOARD: Talib's homepage features a bulletin board. People who love and support his music provide free hype about Kweli. Buzz marketers take note.
5. INTERACTIVITY: An album art generator has been developed that gives fans a new level of ownership and interactivity with Talib, creating their own printable spec album covers for the upcoming release of Eardrum. This program makes people stop and interact with the web page. It's a surefire bet that anyone who clicks on the Flash animated link will spend five minutes playing with album art combinations. Five minutes! Try to get five minutes of a person's time with a billboard or a TV commercial! Impossible!
6. SECOND LIFE: Fans can interact with Talib on Second Life, the popular new program akin to The Sims, but in the real world with real people (including famous musicians and actors). This type of real (second) life connection really energizes brand believers, and it encourages them to spread the word of Talib's brand.
7. NO SHOW: Talib has seemingly gone underground. He has only one posted show, which won't take place until March. Less is more.
8. EXCLUSIVE: An online release of a FREE album is amazing. Talib took it one step further -- his collaboration album, Liberation, went live for one week only. The buzz generated about Liberation was amazing leading up to (and during) the first week of the new year. The buzz has exploded since then. Everybody wants to know where they can get a copy of the album -- it's not in stores and not for sale anywhere. He also gave an exclusive, live performance of his newest single "Revolution in Sound" on VH1, which was released on VH1.com.
Time Magazine's "Person of the Year" for 2006 was You. You, the consumer, have more power than ever. Talib (and his label) have recognized this. Several of the major websites pointed out by Time have been used to build buzz about Talib's new album. Talib is using MySpace, YouTube, and Second Life, among others, to promote his new album.
What's important to know is that no single arrow will slay any beast. It takes multiple outlets to capture the consumer.
Showing posts with label buzz marketing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label buzz marketing. Show all posts
Thursday
Brand Buzz: Secrecy (Fox: American Idol & Simpsons)
"OK, promise me you won't tell anybody, but..."
The whole school knew the next day. Ah, secrets. What's odd is that nobody would care if I shouted my secret.
If you want to rise above the noise, just whisper.
Fox has made its biggest hit, American Idol, a vehicle for building buzz. During last nights episode, the contestants went to a sneak preview of The Simpsons Movie.
This hits good brand buzz on two levels. One, obviously, is the secrecy. Nobody knows much about the movie. Even the trailers are ambiguous.
The second is exclusivity. These American Idol participants are hometown heroes. What do you think they're going to tell their friends and family? "I saw The Simpsons Movie!" And all of their friends and family have been reached through word of mouth marketing, via the buzz created by Fox's exclusive screening.
Zero ad dollars spent on all of those hearty buzz builders. Brilliant.
The whole school knew the next day. Ah, secrets. What's odd is that nobody would care if I shouted my secret.
If you want to rise above the noise, just whisper.
Fox has made its biggest hit, American Idol, a vehicle for building buzz. During last nights episode, the contestants went to a sneak preview of The Simpsons Movie.
This hits good brand buzz on two levels. One, obviously, is the secrecy. Nobody knows much about the movie. Even the trailers are ambiguous.
The second is exclusivity. These American Idol participants are hometown heroes. What do you think they're going to tell their friends and family? "I saw The Simpsons Movie!" And all of their friends and family have been reached through word of mouth marketing, via the buzz created by Fox's exclusive screening.
Zero ad dollars spent on all of those hearty buzz builders. Brilliant.
Wednesday
Brand Buzz: Controversy
The old mantra goes, “If you don’t have something nice to say, don’t say anything at all.” Whoever said that never built a brand in their life. As a matter of fact, we don’t even know who said it!
We do know who said “Et tu, Brute?” however. And we all remember “Vinni, vetti, vicci." Both statements were born out of controversy.
One of the most powerful channels through which to build a brand is through buzz marketing. The term “buzz” has, itself, become a buzzword. Buzz is synonymous for hype. Those who build buzz could be considered hype-makers.
There are limitless ways to generate buzz. Despite that, there have been navigable paths that have been followed time and time again. And one of the most powerful is through controversy.
Ask people about Bill Clinton, and their first thought is not his famous Third Way philosophy, his post-presidency war against AIDS/HIV and global warming, or the seemingly impossible passing of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993. Bill Clinton’s brand will forever be associated, first and foremost, with Monica Lewinsky. A built brand is nearly impossible to reconfigure in the mind.
Controversy sparks us. We read People Magazine, gobbling up gossip of secret romantic entanglements and feuding celebs. We watch Borat, anticipating his next off-the-wall ethnic slur or sexual reference. We listen to Eminem, knowing full well that parents think he’s the antichrist. Our attention was captured by Enron’s book-cooking, and by Barry Bonds’ steroid usage.
Hence, when Monica Lewinsky was sprayed across the headlines daily, Americans told public researchers that they were sick of her. 48 million people tuned in to watch as Barbara Walters interviewed her.
American Idol is one of the hottest shows on television. And American Idol is really one man: Simon Cowell. Forget Randy Johnson and his fake “I’m a thug”-isms. Forget Paula Abdul and her over-nicities. America tunes in to see Simon say something destroying.
Off camera, Simon is described as pleasant and thoughtful, commonly saying “please” and “thank you.” On camera, he plays a dream-shattering villain. He knows that controversy generates buzz, and buzz generates ratings. The gasps and boos he receives are the best buzz currency that Fremantle Media, owners of American Idol, could hope for.
In the oversaturated market of reality TV, American Idol stands alone at the top. Most reality shows that fail, do so because they fail to generate buzz.
It seems that American Idol wrote the book on controversial buzz. Just today, February 13, 2007, Idol leaked information that they are in talks with Michael Jackson, America’s most hated pop-star, to do a collaboration show.
Again, research and common sense seem to suggest that this is a marketing disaster. But Monica Lewinsky’s interview still serves as a reminder. What’s more, Idol is being very straightforward about their intent: to generate ratings. Controversy + honesty = incredible buzz.
Mark Hughes wrote, in his incredible book Buzz Marketing, of a young John McEnroe. McEnroe was ranked highly, but he remained a relative unknown. Then, at Wimbledon, he whipped his racket across the court. Wimbledon, being known the as purest vestige of tennis etiquette, was not prone to such displays. The crowd booed, shocked.
What McEnroe realized, however, was that he now owned the crowd’s attention. He threw another tantrum. Again, the crowd reacted, eyes peeled on McEnroe, waiting to see what he would do next.
Upon his return to the States, McEnroe stepped off of the plane to a frenzy of press members. The British press had branded him as the “Bad Boy of Tennis.” This image ignited McEnroe to the memorable status he has today.
Pete Sampras’ career was in full swing (pardon the analogy) at that time, as well. Pete was soft spoken and kind, a true ambassador of the sport. But it was McEnroe that generated buzz for tennis, a kind of buzz that Sampras could only dream about creating.
And, even in their post-career years, Sampras has gone under the radar, while McEnroe commentates the four majors for ESPN and CBS. McEnroe’s move was a calculated one. Sampras is a brand. McEnroe is a brand. While Sampras was a more successful tennis player, McEnroe is a more successful brand.
One final note about controversy. It is ill-advised to spark controversy for the sake of controversy. Be smart about any decisions to invoke this attention-grabbing method. Be certain that the branded image you wish to portray is in line with controversy you spark.
ClearPlay fought for censorship rights against the Hollywood elite, eliciting support from the likes of Intel and Wal-Mart along the way. Pepsi challenged Coke drinkers to try their product in blind taste tests, infamously being dubbed “The Pepsi Challenge.” And Anheuser-Busch assigned two different advertising agencies to their account, creating a friendly (or not-so-friendly) spirit of competition amongst rival agencies.
Do something different. It may make you feel uneasy. It should make you feel uneasy. Uneasy is good.
Let the media frenzy begin.
We do know who said “Et tu, Brute?” however. And we all remember “Vinni, vetti, vicci." Both statements were born out of controversy.
One of the most powerful channels through which to build a brand is through buzz marketing. The term “buzz” has, itself, become a buzzword. Buzz is synonymous for hype. Those who build buzz could be considered hype-makers.
There are limitless ways to generate buzz. Despite that, there have been navigable paths that have been followed time and time again. And one of the most powerful is through controversy.
Ask people about Bill Clinton, and their first thought is not his famous Third Way philosophy, his post-presidency war against AIDS/HIV and global warming, or the seemingly impossible passing of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993. Bill Clinton’s brand will forever be associated, first and foremost, with Monica Lewinsky. A built brand is nearly impossible to reconfigure in the mind.
Controversy sparks us. We read People Magazine, gobbling up gossip of secret romantic entanglements and feuding celebs. We watch Borat, anticipating his next off-the-wall ethnic slur or sexual reference. We listen to Eminem, knowing full well that parents think he’s the antichrist. Our attention was captured by Enron’s book-cooking, and by Barry Bonds’ steroid usage.
Hence, when Monica Lewinsky was sprayed across the headlines daily, Americans told public researchers that they were sick of her. 48 million people tuned in to watch as Barbara Walters interviewed her.
American Idol is one of the hottest shows on television. And American Idol is really one man: Simon Cowell. Forget Randy Johnson and his fake “I’m a thug”-isms. Forget Paula Abdul and her over-nicities. America tunes in to see Simon say something destroying.
Off camera, Simon is described as pleasant and thoughtful, commonly saying “please” and “thank you.” On camera, he plays a dream-shattering villain. He knows that controversy generates buzz, and buzz generates ratings. The gasps and boos he receives are the best buzz currency that Fremantle Media, owners of American Idol, could hope for.
In the oversaturated market of reality TV, American Idol stands alone at the top. Most reality shows that fail, do so because they fail to generate buzz.
It seems that American Idol wrote the book on controversial buzz. Just today, February 13, 2007, Idol leaked information that they are in talks with Michael Jackson, America’s most hated pop-star, to do a collaboration show.
Again, research and common sense seem to suggest that this is a marketing disaster. But Monica Lewinsky’s interview still serves as a reminder. What’s more, Idol is being very straightforward about their intent: to generate ratings. Controversy + honesty = incredible buzz.
Mark Hughes wrote, in his incredible book Buzz Marketing, of a young John McEnroe. McEnroe was ranked highly, but he remained a relative unknown. Then, at Wimbledon, he whipped his racket across the court. Wimbledon, being known the as purest vestige of tennis etiquette, was not prone to such displays. The crowd booed, shocked.
What McEnroe realized, however, was that he now owned the crowd’s attention. He threw another tantrum. Again, the crowd reacted, eyes peeled on McEnroe, waiting to see what he would do next.
Upon his return to the States, McEnroe stepped off of the plane to a frenzy of press members. The British press had branded him as the “Bad Boy of Tennis.” This image ignited McEnroe to the memorable status he has today.
Pete Sampras’ career was in full swing (pardon the analogy) at that time, as well. Pete was soft spoken and kind, a true ambassador of the sport. But it was McEnroe that generated buzz for tennis, a kind of buzz that Sampras could only dream about creating.
And, even in their post-career years, Sampras has gone under the radar, while McEnroe commentates the four majors for ESPN and CBS. McEnroe’s move was a calculated one. Sampras is a brand. McEnroe is a brand. While Sampras was a more successful tennis player, McEnroe is a more successful brand.
One final note about controversy. It is ill-advised to spark controversy for the sake of controversy. Be smart about any decisions to invoke this attention-grabbing method. Be certain that the branded image you wish to portray is in line with controversy you spark.
ClearPlay fought for censorship rights against the Hollywood elite, eliciting support from the likes of Intel and Wal-Mart along the way. Pepsi challenged Coke drinkers to try their product in blind taste tests, infamously being dubbed “The Pepsi Challenge.” And Anheuser-Busch assigned two different advertising agencies to their account, creating a friendly (or not-so-friendly) spirit of competition amongst rival agencies.
Do something different. It may make you feel uneasy. It should make you feel uneasy. Uneasy is good.
Let the media frenzy begin.
Tuesday
Brand Confusion & Singularity (UPS)
Whatever happened to brand singularity? Am I supposed to get my mail from UPS now? I thought that they shipped packages. Ah, brand confusion, how I despise thee.
Mail Boxes Etc. was a genius brand built in 1980, in
Targeted specifically at small business owners, MBE created a steady flow of business through word of mouth marketing. They were an easy-to-talk-about brand. Features such as real street addresses (versus a sketchy looking PO Box) and package acceptance/delivery were small business hot buttons.
They have been awarded time and time again for their public relations campaigns. Businesses are built through PR, and maintained through advertising. Mail Boxes Etc. didn’t launch a national campaign until 1995—15 years after its inception.
MailBoxes, Etc. was bought out by the United Postal Service in the spring of 2003. UPS proceeded to immediately kill off the MBE brand. This, of course, was euphemistically called “re-branding.” When a brand stands for something in the mind, it is nearly impossible to change it. UPS stands for package delivery. Mail Boxes Etc. stands for business services.
So what did UPS do upon its acquisition of Mail Boxes Etc.? Like most corporations with deep pockets and antiquated marketing ideologies, they threw money at the problem, launching the biggest of such efforts in franchise history. A 10-week advertising campaign was aired across the nation.
They held an event for the opening of the first of the newly redesigned UPS Stores in
They also changed the UPS logo for the first time in forty years. A bit more newsworthy, but still not very earth shattering.
The features that made MBE so attractive were absorbed by UPS. Instead of keeping a winning brand, UPS shoved them under their umbrella. This has created a short term success, but at what cost?
This year, Entrepreneur magazine’s “Franchise 500” named The UPS Store at number five in all franchise opportunities, and number one in the postal and business services arena. They have been first for 17 years.
But are they succeeding in light of the UPS brand, or in spite of it? In the battle of weak brands, a weak brand can achieve success. When UPS stamped their logo all over MBE stores, they diluted the brand. Needless to say, the great factors of an MBE mailbox still remain (a real street address vs. a PO Box, package pickup/delivery). The problem is, however, that a hole has been left in the market. Until a true, focused brand champion arises from the ashes, UPS can (and most likely will) dominate unchecked. This brand confusion has created a soft spot in an otherwise rock solid brand.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
