So, in this month’s edition of Forbes, there is an article entitled “Blogola” about Ted Murphy and his company, Izea Entertainment. The article describes how Izea compensates bloggers to write reviews of its clients’ products.  Clients include some heavy hitters like HP and Sears.  Since it seems that the payment is made for favorable reviews, the watchdogs are baringtheir teeth.  Companies, however, seem to still be on board to some degree.  Consumers are standing in the middle of all this.

This poses an interesting question for marketers: Is this ethical?  If you’re like me, your first reaction is “no way.”  It is my belief that bloggers and other social media connectors are like journalists and their opinions should be their own unsullied ones, not veiled advertisements.

OK, with that out of the way, we do need to realize that bloggers are not exactly like journalists, and the blogosphere and other social media are still in their wild, wild west phase.  That is, some people just do whatever they want, and truth be told, there aren’t strict ethical standards woven into the fabric of social media like there are with traditional journalism.  So, let’s put this argument aside.

Here’s the real rub.  Despite the church and state wall that is supposed to exist between the editorial and advertising functions of traditional media, do you suppose that some stories get picked up to support an advertiser, or that some get squashed to protect an advertiser?  I’m not saying this is the rule, but the exception rears its head more often than the average consumer would think.

So marketers, what to do about this?  This is likely the marketing ethical dilemma of this decade, if not the century.  Bloggers and companies that walk this line well and keep their audiences in mind will be the winners in the race for the hearts and minds of consumers.
 
Brain PR 07/24/2009
 

Those of us who have been in the business of PR for years can get stuck in the rut of “press releasing for print pieces.”  While writing press releases to get mentions and articles in print media is still vitally important to our vocation, brain science has shown us that things that are visual, interactive, and enduring are more engaging and memorable than the printed word alone.  With this in mind, it is essential that marketers use photos, illustrations, and interactive technology as a part of their MPR programs to maximize the effectiveness of campaigns.  As pointed out in Tom Wujec’s talk at the TED conference, imagery can help clarify a point and make an idea or concept more engaging.   These are crucial factors in all aspects of marketing, but even more so in MPR, since in MPR we are giving up control of our message to media and word-of-mouth. Additionally, making these visual and interactive material available to connectors* gives them a useful tools for spreading the word and adds an extra incentive for doing so.  OfficeMax’s “Elf Yourself” campaign is a simple example of this, but one of my favorites.  Clearly, visual and interactive components are powerful and should not be ignored in MPR efforts.

Wujec also mentions “augmenting memory through visual persistence.”  For us, I suggest this means weaving the same imagery (interactive or static) through all of the elements of a marketing effort. Yes, folks, I mean branding. It sounds obvious, but in many organizations MPR operates separately from sales and marketing. This silo mentality increases the likelihood of transmitting mixed signals to customers and other stakeholders via unaligned messages.

 *See “What’s a Connector?” blog post.

 
 

Connector is a term that you will see me use frequently in this blog, so I wanted to take a moment to clarify just what it means. In Marketing Public Relations: A Marketer’s Approach to Public Relations and Social Media (Pearson-Prentice Hall), I defined MPR as any program or effort designed to improve, maintain, or protect the sales or image of a productby encouraging intermediaries, such as traditional mass media, the electronic media, or individuals, to voluntarily pass a message about the firm or product to their audience of businesses or consumers. These intermediaries are connectors.  If you’ve read the Tipping Point:  How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference, you will notice that this is a variation on Gladwell’s use of the term.

 
 

This past week saw the passing of pop icons Ed McMahon, Farrah Faucet, and, of course, Michael Jackson.  While their lives and accomplishments were featured in great detail in many media venues, I’d like to recognize Billy Mays who also left this world last week.

Billy was a great American pitchman in the tradition of many great hucksters and hawkers dating back at least to P.T. Barnum.  With ventures going beyond fast talking TV commercials, his star appeared to be on the rise.  Yes, he was a salesman and an advertiser.  But he also understood MPR.  Loud and sensational, his spots never failed to create some buzz, both on the Internet and through word-of-mouth.  Aided by an impressive batting average in endorsing products that actually lived up to their hype, Mays could spread the word with some credibility and get products sold.  Of course the buzz from Billy’s spots didn’t rival that of Super Bowl commercials, but I’ll go out on a limb and suggest that most Americans have talked about one of his products or ads or snuck a second peek at one on You Tube.  Big consumer products companies like Church & Dwight (makers of Arm & Hammer products) recognized his position as a marketing icon, and so should we.  We’ll miss you Billy Mays!!!

Take a look at one of Billy’s last interviews promoting his show, Pitchmen.

Reflection:

Why was Billy Mays so successful in blending sales promotion, advertising, and MPR?