For all of the things that the 70s are most famous for, its scientific offerings don’t spring to the forefront (unlike flares, hippies and the birth of nacho cheese Doritos). But after the flash and thunder has faded, it’s sometimes the quiet but insistent ideas that have the longest lasting consequences.
1976 saw the release of ‘The Selfish Gene’ by a young Richard Dawkins, in which he proposed a theory of how ideas spread from person to person – a science today called memetics. The gist of it is that there are units of cultural information called ‘Memes’ (pronounced meems) which are basically a bit of information – like a catchphrase, a story or even the knowledge of how to make something. Memes spread from person to person in a similar pattern to a virus (hence the terms ‘going viral’ or even ‘earworm’ for a song you just can’t get out of your head) – one person spreads an idea to many others, who each again spreads the idea to many others, and so on. Memes even mutate just as the ‘genes’ of a virus would do while transmitting from person to person – just think of the children’s game ‘telephone’.
So memes themselves have massive relevance to marketing – understand the science of how ideas and beliefs are transferred from person to person and you can manipulate that process to your advantage. It’s even more important when you realise the theory encompasses complex interrelated groups of memes – called memeplexes – such as an individual’s thoughts and feelings about a brand, or even a religion.
So much for the science. In practice, the term has taken an entirely different connotation in the online community – and one that you’re probably already familiar with.
Ask any user of content aggregator sites like Reddit what a meme is and they’ll probably link you to something similar to the picture above. The term has informally been associated with the kind of running shared jokes that would have once been called ‘private’ but are now shared around the world at the speed of the internet.
To ‘get’ the joke you generally have to be familiar with the original premise when the joke was first created (and sometimes the site it was created on). For example, the ‘Trollface’ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Trollface.png) meme is generally posted during circumstances where one individual is deliberately goading or tricking another (for example, if someone saying something that irritates you and then posts a trollface – they’re probably just out to annoy you rather than to make a point). Other memes simply use a familiar section of text rather than an image – like the “you just lost the game” meme that was popular last year, a section of text that was posted across the internet, and was usually cleverly hidden – making no sense whatsoever until you’re made aware of what it means (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Game_%28mind_game%29) causing anyone who reads that section of text to curse the person who posted it (sorry).
So the advantages of mastering ‘Memes’ (with a capital M, in the scientific sense) is obvious – but what does the deliberately irreverent selection of ‘memes’ (with a lowercase m, in the comedic sense) teach us about how to do our jobs?
If you’re willing to get your hands dirty and deal in the latest wave of memes yourself, you’re bound to reap a massive helping of attention. Memes generate vast amounts of web hits and interactions – just look at the popularity of memegenerator.net, the rise to power of icanhascheezburger.com, or the sheer existence of the juggernaut that is Reddit.com, which is a gravid breeding ground for a decent percentage of the ‘memes’ of the internet. Feature the right meme at the right time for the right brand and you’ll see a huge increase of attention.
Generally though, we can learn how to produce ideas that are strong enough to survive and even thrive when twisted and ‘mutated’ by the attentions of their chosen audience. Take the hugely successful ‘Old Spice Odor Blocker’ campaign for example (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpiGCLcsEbQ). Designed for TV, the idea spread to YouTube, where it was edited by fans as they passed it along resulting in literally hundreds of memetic comedic remixes (such as the nearly 500,000 views example here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2_DuFvyQYc&feature=related) that only served to strengthen the original message and spread the concept further than ever.
Boths ‘Memes’ and ‘memes’ are here to stay – and either we use our experience to manipulate them – or they’ll manipulate us.
As well as:
“What the f&*k is this?”
“I’m going to delete my profile…now. Bye bye”
“God give me the will to live”
…were just a few select comments I’ve been reading from my friends (on Facebook).
A sense of anger, bewilderment, and suffering was the popular tune last week, as Facebook began to roll out some new updates to how we consume other people’s Facebook activities.
We’re always wary about businesses, either products or services, changing. New Coke, way back in 1985, is probably the most famous example of a brand changing their product for the wrong reasons, and last year’s new Gap logo is probably the most recent worldwide brand getting it wrong (well, before Netflix and Qwickster, but that’s another blog post altogether).
Let’s not forget that Facebook has changed things before. And we complained before. But we got on with it, and use it even more than we did do.
But there was a sense, a feeling in the air, that this change was different. This made the 6pm news – an incredible indictment of how the world has also changed over the last ten years.
We forget that Facebook is also a free to use service, which, despite its incredible growth and how it’s embedded itself into our culture, is still not a pre-requisite of being able to live a happy life, whichever path you choose. Who would have thought that we’d ever get so up in arms at something that 1) is free to use and 2) is not something they are forced to have?
But that’s by the by. People were furious. They still are.
On 4th October, the new timeline profile officially launches. It’s been available to developers (or faux developers like me) for the last week, and after a little bit of playing around with it, I didn’t like it. It seemed a bit complicated with too much going on and I didn’t know how to do stuff that just a hours ago was second nature.
A couple of days later, I sussed it all out. I found that I actually had more control over what I wanted to see and how I was seen to my Facebook friends. Stuff I had forgotten about from years ago, was all incredibly easy to access. The new profile timeline allowed me to see that Facebook wasn’t just a thing for now, it was now a thing for past, present and future. Your timeline allows you to document your life, the way you want to, and it’s all wrapped up in a beautiful “Cover photo”, which you can change within an instant.
They’ll be more resentment once these are live for all next week. But this isn’t Facebook’s ‘New Coke moment’. Time will pass, and you’ll love it just as much as that first time you received a friend request.
Like? Yes, lots.
Steve Garside, Account Manager
N.B. – The four people mentioned at the beginning of article are all still on Facebook.
Over 7 years ago I carried out a large qualitative research project for a leading mobile operator on the appeal of 3G services. We looked at Location Based Services including offers ‘on the move’, video telephony (a la Apple Face Time), traffic navigation and a whole host of other new developments.
In one form or another the vast majority of the services we researched have been adopted (or are in the process of being adopted) but, looking back, two things really stand out for me.
The first is the time it has taken for change to happen. 7+ years ago I confidently stood in a room full of senior clients and told them that the market was there and consumers wanted these types of services. What I didn’t foresee was the very long time lag involved. Granted the infrastructure might not have been in place (and it’s still not quite there) but the speed of adoption has been, in my eyes at least, painfully slow.
I guess this partly tells us that consumers can struggle when faced with too many new ideas and choices being given to them at once. I remember at the time thinking that they were like kids in a sweetie shop not quite knowing what to pick first. But I guess it also serves as a warning to those of us in the marketing community who feel that Augmented Reality, QR codes and other such innovations will be in everyone’s hands and minds within the next few months.
The second thing that stands out for me is the unpredictability of technological evolution and adoption. Some of the ideas in the research met with hearty guffaws. Why would anyone want to stand in front of the Eiffel Tower and receive information on their mobile when they could just look at an information board at the base of the tower? And yet that, in essence, has become one of the driving thoughts behind Augmented Reality (which I’m sure will be a great hit one day). Consumers in focus groups could not foresee (and neither could we) the development of Augmented Reality in its present guise. If the same idea was presented now (and consumers could actually see how it could be applied), I’m sure the reaction would be very different.
So what does all this tell us? For me there are a couple of key lessons. I think that research when used properly can help us understand the underlying demand for most things (but not all). What research is weak at, however, is in predicting time frames and the shape of technology adoption. Perhaps more importantly I think it is good for us to remember that technology adoption can take years, even when we know the ideas are good ones. I’m glad that we in the marketing community are in the forefront of pushing for these new technologies to be adopted but I’d be wary of placing too much emphasis on their return within campaigns early doors. I hope Augmented Reality, QR codes and the like will be adopted quickly but will they be? Who knows?
By Graham Ellor, Digital Planner
I hope I am not making anyone too jealous. Contact Juri Zaech if you are. He might do one specially for you.
The annual One Young World summit (co-founded by David Jones, Global CEO of Havas, and Kate Robertson, UK Group Chairman of Euro RSCG) took place last weekend, in the cosmopolitan city of Zürich. Distinguished counsellors such as Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu, Sir Bob Geldof or Fatima Bhutto were invited to facilitate the debate and dialogue among the 1,200 young delegates around six key topics: politics, global business, media, the environment, health and religion.
Another passionate campaigner was Jamie Oliver. The celebrity chef did everything to catch the attention of the governmental delegates and encouraged them to fight with him against the “obesity plague” that claims 5.5 million victims every year. Jamie voiced his fears over the rapid expansion of obesity: “For the first time in the world, obesity kills more people than starvation. It is affecting our children and 42million of them under 5 suffer from obesity”.
Once again, the premier global forum for young people of leadership calibre summit was a resounding success! Even the people who couldn’t attend were highly involved thanks to today’s numerous social media platforms. Over 13,000 people from 156 countries, 2321 cities and 2294 companies watched the summit online.
The 2012 gathering will be in Pittsburgh but if you can’t wait until then you can join the on-going online debate by tweeting about what is “broken” in your part of the world. Simply use the following hashtags conversation: #fixhealth, #fixenvironment, #fixbusiness, #fixdialogue, #fixmedia, #fixleadership
Silicon Valley it might not be, but I for one applaud the selection of “Tech City’s” location in and around Shoreditch in East London. Known as East London Tech City (or Silicon Roundabout!) the scheme has already received backing from tech giants such as Google, Facebook and Intel.
I’m not sure that any location selected by the Government would have been welcomed with open arms and minds. Outside of London? Somewhere else in London? Croydon? They have all been touted as alternatives.
Some of the criticism aimed at the Government has been around the level of funding for the plan and indeed the participation (or lack) of organisations. But would it have been different if the location had been different? Probably not.
Okay so the timing of the initiative wasn’t perfect and the slowdown of the economy and general lack of confidence in the short term future has had an impact on this. This landscape has affected organisations putting their money where their mouth is. But in principle it was, and still is, a great idea.
And yes, the infrastructure in terms of transport isn’t perfect, but to be honest that doesn’t seem to have slowed the amazing development of the area around Old Street, Shoreditch, Hoxton etc into a vibrant and growing hub of creativity. And that is a big plus for the selection of the area, as well as the focus it should get (if managed correctly) as the Olympic year approaches.
Also, let’s not forget that many of the tech giants started off in even humbler backgrounds. The favourite start point for the darlings of Silicon Valley was the garden shed: Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard founded HP in a garage, as did the Google Guys and Steve Jobs for Apple’s first tentative steps; and Zuckerberg worked up the billion dollar future of Facebook in a university dorm.
Our office is just on the fringes of the area in Farringdon; but I work with or know of some great marketing agencies that are based in and around that area. Whether that’s the global scale of LBi, or smaller agencies such as Nearby Digital who work with the local communities. These guys really understand how technology and ideas go hand in hand.
Why do I see that as an advantage? Well I see technology being inspired and working at its best not when it sits in isolation from the rest of the world in an ivory tower (or indeed Silicon Valley), but when it works in tandem with some of the ideas generated in the cauldron of real life.
I believe in finding the mix between Tech, Creative and Insight to develop solutions for my clients’ business problems. In fact as I write this piece, sitting next to me, is my Head of Technology, Creative Directors and Head of Planning. I believe that establishing a tech centre of excellence in the heart of one of the creative centres of the world will encourage and foster just that opportunity for Technology to drive creativity and vice versa.
Of course the real question is whether or not the Government and the blue chips of the tech world (both new and old) follow through with their commitment above and beyond satisfying the next photo or sound bite opportunity? I hope so.
I recently completed a fundraising event. You know how it goes – you sign up months in advance, barely glance at the sum of money you’ve agreed to raise and get on with the training, only remembering late in the day that if you don’t raise the money then it’ll have to come out of your own pocket. And of course, if you’ve signed up for it then there’s probably a personal reason for wanting to support this particular cause, so it would make good sense to raise as much as possible, otherwise why bother?
So back to the charity’s website to find the sponsorship forms to circulate to your nearest and dearest, however this won’t raise enough, you’re going to have to look further afield. Scan the website for more ideas and find their useful little link to set up your own fundraising page. It’s all so easy, you can send the page to all your contacts, share it on facebook, twitter and myspace and all from the comfort of your own sofa!
Having set all this in motion the donations started to trickle in, not as fast as I would have liked, but I found that every time I updated the blog a few more came in. I guess that people parked the original begging email and forgot about it then were prompted by the chirpy updates coming at them from various angles! Friends and acquaintances started to engage with me much more than normal and passed on my page to others so that the time I did the event I’d exceeded my target, mostly via online donations. I felt that it was worth the effort, and the charity will benefit by about three times as much as it would have done if I’d used the tried and tested route of cake bakes, begging and ritual humiliation usually connected with this sort of activity.
I know, I work here, I shouldn’t be at all surprised by the success of this, but it’s one thing to talk about it to our clients, something else entirely to feel the exhilaration of making it work!
By Pip Pembroke, Business Development and Communications Manager
Mathew Fitzmons, our Head of Planning, is looking into Social Media in an editorial article of the Figaro digital. He argues that it is not always the answer to every question – event though it is an evergrowing communication channel.
First things first, I am an early adopter. I like new gadgets, I was one of those fools that spent £349 on a 5GB iPod in 2001 on a first generation iPod, I craved the iPad, I had HD TV when there were only a handful of channels. I get that we need to keep developing and striving for better and brighter things. So I am not a dinosaur when it comes to new technology and its uses and I am not adverse to change. But I am getting increasingly frustrated with clients thinking that Social Media is the answer to their marketing needs or to put it another way: “Social media is the answer, now what was the question again?” Yeah, right!
Social media operates in a category of its own, because it has to. Social media is not purely an awareness channel, nor is it a direct/1-1 channel. It is good at these things but not brilliant – there are better channels. We see buzz being generated by clever campaigns on Facebook but does that buzz amplify itself outside the self-congratulatory world of readers of the marketing press? I doubt it. I don’t see the national press running stories on the impact of the latest Honda Jazz campaign. We know social media helps us reach an audience, cheaply, quickly and if we are lucky it multiplies our media spend because lots of people get to see it/play with it.
But what does it return? This is the nub of it for me, how do we prove it works? And please don’t say it is about the number of fans you have – BBC news has 61k fans whilst a group demanding bigger Cadbury creme eggs has 100k. Are creme eggs really of prime importance to 40 per cent more people in the UK, than the BBC news?
Marketing is about sales. Let’s not kid or delude ourselves: we sell or we die. Yet more and more budget is being diverted away from channels proven to sell: direct response, DM, eDM and pushed into social media. Why? It can’t be because Facebook ads work really well because a study in America has recently shown that click through rates have dropped from 0.063 in 2009 to 0.051 in 2010, and the CPM has gone up. And I have yet to see any robust ROI calculations for marketing spend on Facebook. Yet still the money flows in.
We all know the stats about Facebook; 500m users, it would be the fourth largest country 35m people update their status everyday (7 per cent) with 60m status updates daily. But in an environment dominated by how much things are worth, why are we not seeing the harder calculations – sales and returns.
Now I am sure it is coming, but until then clients need to remember that marketing budgets are delicate things and they can be easily moved or even removed. Don’t put them in danger, do the things that are proven to work until those things that say they work can show you they do.
For the time being, the major benefit of the social media boom is that it has overtaken porn and is now the no. 1 activity on the web!
As we are all too aware, the convergence of technologies and the rise of the social media have meant that today’s consumers are more empowered and connected than ever before.
Now with a global ‘stage’ to share their opinions, insights, moans and groans with other like-minded folk, consumers have found their lost voice and the megaphone through which to shout their message or feelings about brands, the corporations that offer them, life and whatever is pre-occupying them that day.
They are starting conversations and building virtual communities around topics and interests that unite them, including possibly their dissatisfaction with your brand.
Of course brands want to join the party, or to host their own parties in the virtual communities that these consumers inhabit, with a view to turning these conversations into positive brand sentiment and ultimately sales.
But in general brands find themselves in an unfamiliar, almost alien territory. Unlike traditional channels where brands can set the agenda, and control the conversation through careful scripted press releases and beautifully crafted advertising, the consumers holds court in the social environment and brands have to evolve to fit in and be accepted.
Consumers are expecting brands to engage with them in a totally new way not only in social environments but increasingly through the more traditional channels too. Consumers are demanding honesty, integrity and a human response. They don’t want to be talked at but to be part of a conversation and to be listened to seriously.
The rules of engagement for brand are thus being redefined:
- Be human, don’t be afraid to admit mistakes and then show how you will rectify them and reveal the people behind your brand, their skills, idiosyncracies and passions
- Always act with honesty, ethics, social responsibility, integrity and transparency
- Stimulate, facilitate and join in the conversation, don’t try to control it
- Help unite communities around a common cause / interests and show passion / empathy with that cause or interest
- Focus on serving not selling – bring something of interest to the table something that enhances the conversation or engages / entertains / enables. Sales will follow indirectly though positive
- Engage community members on an emotional rather than rational or corporate level
- Show commitment – don’t just dip in and out of communities and conversations be a fully paid up committed member
I was trawling through Facebook Studio the other day to pull out examples of brands that have become experts in engaging with consumers in this alien world and happened across a Facebook community created by Milk Bone, a US based charity. Milk Bone is a charity that raises funds, trains and provides dogs as assistants to people with disabilities, transforming their lives.
http://www.facebook.com/itsgoodtogivemilkbone
As a charity Milk Bone are obviously familiar with trying to engage potential donators on an emotional rather than rational level but they have pushed this to a whole new level. Shunning their previous corporate approach to Facebook, they decided to focus their Facebook presence around a small puppy called Noble.
The Facebook page tracks Nobles life on a daily basis and has followed his progress from new born to adorable, hyperactive puppy to his graduation to professional carer dog.
Through telling and tracking Nobles story, Milk Bone has managed to engage with their core audience on a much more emotional level, in a way that was much more appropriate to the Facebook environment.
Noble has built up a massive Facebook fan base who have developed a great fondness for Noble. They share his story with their friends and generate word of mouth, they add comments and content regularly to his page and most importantly they have, by proxy, become fully paid up supporters of his cause (both in terms of advocacy and donations).
Noble’s fame reached its peak when he was chosen to star in a TV ad for the charity extending this much more emotive and human approach to engaging with todays consumers into an offline environment.
For me Milk Bone has proved that they can cross the alien divide and have found a way to communicate with today’s connected consumer.
A study commissioned by the agency Beyond using data from 1,003 US consumers in April, reveals that 17% of the mobile population are using a social location-based app, such as Groupon or Foursquare. Concerns over an individual’s whereabouts, i.e. giving a burglar the perfect window of opportunity to rob ones’ home, and privacy were why 48% of mobile phone users don’t use such apps; whereas 50% don’t own Smartphones and of those 99% don’t consider status, e.g. Mayor or badges enough of an incentive to share their location.
Despite Foursquare being launched well before, Facebook Places and Groupon are proving to be more popular with ‘check-in’ users. It won’t be overnight, but it is almost inevitable that changes will occur as social location-based apps become more popular and Brands need to keep pace. Combining these social location-based apps with a timely practical use, i.e. discounts/coupons in your area at lunch time, will allow Brands to access and engage more consumers, who in the recession are looking for ways to save.
Social location-based apps:
Facebook Places, Groupon, Living Social, Twitter’s location features, Yelp checkins, Foursquare, Gowalla, Foodspotting, Path, Instagram, Soundtracking and Aroundme
Who doesn’t like an infographic? Check it out for more on the study.
Posted October 7, 2011 2:30 pm by Oliver 0 Comments
Filed under: Trends | Tags: