Intermedia

My favorite piece of spam, ever

Like everyone else, I get an awful lot of spam from companies that are mostly looking to give me tips on foreign stocks, transfer money into my bank account, or enhance various parts of my body. Thanks, but no thanks.

Today one particular piece of spammage hit my inbox that had perhaps the best subject line ever -- "Personal Message No. 1361349748." You may think it's ironic, but I think it's genius (I really don't, but I'm trying to make a point here). Why pretend that you know me with a personalized message when we both know better? Just come out with it -- "You're just a number to us. Want to buy some skin cream?"

I think there's a nugget of a lesson here. Personalization is key today, but it's got to be handled with care. As we ask people to share information on affinities with, it's important to deliver with relevant, targeted content -- not just a boilerplate message with a name field filled in for that perceived personal touch. This requires some extra work though. The information collected (beyond name, address, etc.) has to match up with content that can be delivered. So, for example, if a college form asks for academic interests, a good customized communication piece has to deliver on those interests. The prospective student says she likes biology, then the next email newsletter she gets should have a spotlight on biology. Same goes for the guy who said he likes theater -- swap out bio and give him something on the new show going up. It isn't necessarily about screaming "We know you!!!," it's more about ensuring that the content sent is in line with the information they've taken the time to share. Value is being added simply by sifting out the content rather than dumping it.

Greater expectations for relationship building

I feel like I know Seth Godin when in reality, I've probably never been within 50 miles of the man. Well, maybe we both happened to be in the same city at the same time, but that's neither here nor there. The point is that, because I'm a regular reader of his blog, I kind of feel like I know the guy. He's a good blogger -- posts regularly, is conversational, interesting, etc. which gives a reader the sense that you know person. Great, but this makes me think how this dynamic will impact the relationship-building expectations that prospective students, alumni, and others have when it comes to colleges and universities.

New media is challenging the structured ways in which relationships are built and managed. People expect to have access to all levels of people without paying attention to title or position. So why shouldn't a prospective student feel like he or she can get a sense of what professor X is doing in the lab, the studio, or in the field? Why can't alumni reconnect with former profs and learn about new ones not from brochures and magazines, but by connecting directly with the person via blogs, video, podcasts, etc. This level of communication is going to carry the day moving forward -- it's unvarnished and contextual... real.

I think the question isn't whether colleges and universities should be doing this, it's really about whether new generations of students -- and, increasingly, alumni -- will tolerate us not doing it.

The movies are not 2.0

I went to the movies the other night and had a reminder of just how important it is to develop new rules for advertising in new media.

We all know that movie start times aren't to be taken seriously. Count on 10 or so minutes for a short film featuring dancing popcorn and singing candy and a few entertaining previews. It's part of the deal. But there is a line. I went to a 6:45 movie that didn't start until almost 7:10 because the good people from various TV networks -- you know, the ones you're trying to get away from when you go to the movies -- and consumer products companies were showing me commercials. Commercials in a movie! Not a new development, I know, but a recent post about advertising and podcasts on the very good Content Matters blog made me think a bit more deeply about new media and targeted advertising.

The role of control
From an advertising standpoint, movie theaters are a targeting dream. You know who is sitting there based on the demographic profile of the film's target audience. They are captive -- it's pretty hard for them to ignore your message when they're sitting in front of a 20 foot picture of your product and your jingle is being being blasted at arena concert volume. It makes perfect sense for them to advertise there except for one thing: it's really annoying. And this is in a situation where the audience has no control.

New media -- podcasts, online video, blogs, rss, even TiVo/DVR -- is all about user control. It's their content and they can tap into it when they want, where they want. There is nothing more frustrating in the on demand era than being forced to sit through a commercial. It's essentially the online equivalent of a door-to-door salesman. At best, he might pick off a few people interested in the next great vacuum, but most either learn to ignore him, or actually get angry. Not very productive.

The affinity opportunity
The real value and opportunity for advertisers in the new media era rests with the expression of affinity. From a targeting perspective, this is great. Does your client sell orange pool floaties? Great, there happens to be an orange pool floatie lovers podcast that gets outrageous traffic from pool floatie devotees. This is a rare case in which advertising actually adds value rather than fills space or bombards people with a very general message.

The key here is focus and restraint. An advertising message that is actually focused on the group's expressed affinity will make sense -- perhaps they'll even respect that you seem to know something about them. It's the real or perceived transition to one-to-one advertising. This is the restraint part. There has to be some demonstrated ability to focus on the long end of the tail in new media rather than blanketing people, old media style.

It's a little trickier than it may seem, but I would be willing to bet that the payoff in terms of attention, loyalty, and (ultimately) ROI, is well worth it.

Am I softening on specific social sites?

What will be the fate of all the new, organization-specific social networking sites? I read about MyNBC on Andy Plesser's BeetTV blog and had to wonder, Why? Why would anyone sign up for yet another site, with yet another password, and join another narrowly focused group?

Millions of viewers agree that NBC offers great content -- content that is available anywhere thanks to the wonders of television. I sit in my den, there's NBC. I go to a friend's house, NBC. Hotel? NBC. Brilliant. They're everywhere and all I have to do to access their content is click a button. Their shows (well, some of their shows) have loyal networks for whom social sites are perfect. They can argue about whether last night's contestant on Deal or No Deal should have picked suitcase number 23 or why David Hasselhoff is allowed to judge someone's talent. Perfect. The question though is why these folks wouldn't just create a group in Facebook or MySpace. Why should loyal Office fans logon to MyNBC rather than just hooking up in Facebook? Ask and you shall receive -- they answer the question right there on the homepage:

"Ok, but what is myNBC? We're glad you asked! myNBC is gearing up to be your one stop shop for exclusive access to NBC shows and characters. Think of it like a super fan club, except you don't have to leave your sofa to join.

"You like Kenneth the Page? We've got Kenneth the Page. You like behind the scenes secrets from cast and crew? Yep, we've got that too. And the best part? If we don't have what you're looking for, just send us some feedback and we'll try to make it happen.

Pretty good -- so as a fan of The Office, I can get exclusive dish on Dwight Schrute? Pretty cool. I hope it's true. If they deliver on the promise to provide behind the scenes secrets and really act like a "super fan club," they may just have something here. But, we'll have to wait to find out. The site is still in its early stages and much of the good stuff, like groups, hasn't been built yet. I've signed up and will give them the benefit of the doubt, mostly because I want to see if they can pull it off.