Greg Verdino

Day of the long tail

Tip of the hat to Karl Long for digging up this video, which was produced for the Computer History Museum to commemorate the release of Chris Anderson's The Long Tail and (interestingly enough) predicted the demise of  Tower Records.

links for 2007-03-25

• Top 40 blogs according to FeedBurner stats
  From the FranticIndustries blog.
  (tags: blogs blogging media socialmedia content)
• Hugh MacLeod's Social Media Presentation for Edelman London
  Great stuff - fantastic perspective on blogging and what it means for marketers.
  (tags: blogging blogs business socialmedia marketing web2.0 ideas)

links for 2007-03-23

• Fabjectory
  Get a real world model of your virtual world avatar.
  (tags: metaverse secondlife avatar gaming)
• Twitter: All Trivia, All The Time
  From BusinessWeek - could "enough already" backlash stall/kill Twitter?
  (tags: twitter community web2.0 startups emergingmedia media socialmedia technology)
• Metaversed | Virtual Business
  Nick Wilson's new blog focused on Second Life and other virtual worlds.
  (tags: secondlife blogs metaverse socialmedia)
• Seth's Blog | Purple Cow Redux
  Remarkable story about how Seth brought his Purple Cow book to market through self-publishing and smart marketing. I've read the major press release of Cow but didn't know how it was born.
  (tags: blogging marketing bloggers blogs brands books wordofmouth ideas innovation)

The video story nobody is talking about

I'm not going to write about the online video joint venture between NBC Universal and News Corp (sardonically dubbed Clown Co by Google, as reported by TechCrunch.)  I know it has turned into one of our industry's big stories this week, but frankly I think it is unlikely to have the level of impact everyone expects and there are many others who are already providing plenty of food for thought around this topic (see the linkroll at the end of this post if you want to read some of the coverage and commentary.)

But all of this talk about video -- along with some work we're doing here at Digitas to frame the future of video advertising for some of our clients -- sent me to comScore's Video Metrix report for some perspective.  Here's what I see:

In January 2007 (the most recent month for which comScore reports data), roughly 123 million people watched a total of 7.3 billion streams, accounting for roughly 18.6 billion viewing minutes.

And way back in October 2006, roughly 107 million people watched (wait for it) 7.3 billion streams, accounting for roughly 18.2 billion viewing minutes.

The stats during the intervening months have fluctuated up and down, but essentially online video viewership has hit a plateau.  Sure, more people are watching -- although the delta between 107 million people and 123 million people looks more like incremental growth than the exponential month-over-month growth that you may have been led to believe.  But those people aren't watching more...  In fact, with more people watching, the data indicates that each person is actually watching less...

Don't get me wrong; 7.3 billion videos is a lot of viewership -- particularly for a medium that essentially did not exist just a few years ago -- and if the media companies can find effective ways to monetize each view this could be good business.   But I would still suggest that the numbers are a sign of distress that, in the end, may mean that big broadcast and GooTube are fighting for control over something that has already peaked, rather than a medium on the rise.

I'd love to hear your thoughts.  What do you think needs to happen for online video to realize greater potential and resume its climb up the growth curve?

Clown Co round-up: PC Magazine, Advertising Age, LA Times, TechCrunch, Scott Karp, Charlene Li, CenterNetworks, Fred Wilson, Jeff Jarvis, Mark Cuban (and I'm sure I've missed plenty of others.)

Social butterflies

Yesterday's Boston daytrip was packed with impromptu social media meet-and-greets.  I had the opportunity to meet Peter Kim (pictured here enjoying some free Forrester Bootcamp snacks), whom I had previously only known through the blogosphere.  I grabbed lunch with Scott Monty, who I mostly know through Twitter.  And I met Forrester analyst Brian Haven, whose emerging channels reports I've read online.

I even had one meet-and-greet that was entirely virtual.  As I was getting ready for my panel discussion at the Forrester Emerging Media Bootcamp, I received an email from Christine O'Connell, wishing me luck.  Christine is a Digitasian, embedded in GM, who I certainly know of but had never actually met.  I haven't met her in person, but we are now connected in our digital lives - she even follows me on Twitter, which is how she knew exactly when to wish me luck.

As panel moderator, Brian Haven wrapped up the discussion by asking each of the guest speakers whether social media would one day be "like air," something that people (and the brands that want to reach them) simply can't live without. 

When considering experiences like the ones I had yesterday -- in which my relationships with so many people crossed over between the physical and digital spheres, all enabled by social computing technologies -- I think the answer is a pretty obvious "yes."  For at least some segments of the population (even if only media and marketing mavens), I think it already is.

I'm number one

The number one natural search result for "s&m parlors in nyc," that is.  C'mon Google, really?  Let's hope that Jimmy Wales really can fix search.

And to the gentleman who visited my blog in search of these services, might I suggest that you look here instead.

My avatar is disappointed in you

Finally, we have some first-hand data about how Second Life residents view in-world branding initiatives.  The data comes from an in-world survey conducted by community site developer Komjunity (yes, the same company I poked fun at earlier today - this is how I ran across their site) and while it will no doubt trouble many companies that have invested in virtual brand shrines, it shouldn't be surprising:

72% of respondents are disappointed with the activities of companies in Second Life

42% think companies are just fad-following and lack long-term commitment to the virtual world

More than 33% are actually unaware of the presence of brands in-world

Just 7% consider in-world activities to have a positive influence on brand image and future buying behavior

When questioned about the causes of their dissatisfaction, residents cited lack of opportunities for human interaction with the real world companies and the resulting empty sims that appear to have "died out," due to lack of interest (either on behalf of the brand itself or on behalf of the community.)

Anyone who has followed my personal Second Life crusade should be familiar with this thinking.  I've been harping on these very points for months and it is good to finally have some hard data to support my views.

The bottom line is that if your company is thinking about launching an in-world experience, stop and consider what you're doing and why you're doing it.

You shouldn't get involved with Second Life if:

• You want nothing more than a positive PR hit
• You think SL is just another place to advertise your stuff
• It doesn't tie to your other community building activities
• You don't have the resources or inclination to staff your sim properly
• You haven't thought through all the ways residents can reach out of the metaverse to communicate with your company
• You don't have a long term plan for keeping your sim fresh and full of life

Any company thinking about Second Life -- or any other metaverse -- needs to have a clear idea of how they want to engage the Second Life community, provide them with added value in return for which they may engage with your brand in-world, and directly involve them in your efforts to turn SL into a platform for sustained community building.   Do these things and you're off to a great start.  Don't and you are at best irrelevant to the SL community and at worst will actually do your brand very real harm in the virtual world.

Tip of the hat to Nick Wilson for twitting the link to an article about the survey.

Social network say what?

Here's a German company called Komjuniti that builds private label social networks for brands.  Sounds good and they've racked up some blue chip clients.  But do you think they really mean that they "micromanage" these communities?  That doesn't sound so good. ;-)

My first Twitter heartbreak

Well, at least Scoble is still my Twitter-friend. For now...

Are you at war with your customers?

Do you view marketing as an act of brute force against the consumer?  The odds are that your knee-jerk response is, "no." But the language you use when you talk about marketing may indicate otherwise. 

Is your marketing-speak peppered with words like target, campaign, preempt, and penetrate?

This post is not simply about semantics. We choose the language we use for specific, if sometimes sub-conscious, reasons.  And when we use the words of warfare to describe our efforts to communicate with and influence people it says something about the way see view our discipline and our role vis a vis the people who buy our products. 

Marketing isn't about us VS them - it is about us AND them.  It is not something you do TO a person, but rather something you do FOR them.

Try this.  When you talk about marketing, use words like partner, service, invite and collaborate.  See how quickly your entire marketing approach changes.