Content

You are currently browsing the archive for the Content category.

America’s Top Marketer’s Report Their Goals Have Changed

This might have been a street hawker’s cry five year’s ago, but earlier this week, it was proclaimed matter-of-factly by nearly all honorees at BtoB’s Best Luncheon in New York. The event was well attended by senior marketers who were there to hear each of the 11 nominees for marketer of the year.  One of the highlights was a panel of marketing executives who gave their observations and communication strategies for next year and beyond.  You can read more about the event here, and some analysis of the comments here.  For those of us in the room, the theme was profoundly consistent: the brand war is over, and efficient, customer-based communication rules. Some excerpts from the nominees, in their words.

“We are seeing high return on live seminars and panels.” – Oracle

“White Papers and product information are the key for customer engagements.” – Siemens 

“We are focusing on a shortening in our time to customer relationships” and “I see convergence media and building content as our focus.” – Kodak

“We are shifting to one-on-one marketing.” – Xerox

“We are generating more content to help business owners do business better,” and “Our small business focus is shifting to value-based marketing.” - American Express

These are direct comments from large B2B companies who have seen the future – and that future is relationship marketing and metrics to measure their success. Companies that once focused on broad reach media and enormous sponsorship marketing budgets are now working to create the own media channels. These leading companies are taking an active role in creating the content their customers receive, and are part of the process of delivering content they know is most relevant to their customer’s needs.  In effect, they are creating their own private custom media channels.

When top marketing leader’s share with each other as opposed to hiding their top strategies, the shift has already happened. Don’t ride the old school marketing approach of broad reach & branding into the sunset. It is no longer an option to throw marketing investment at media channels featuring no measurability. Re-evaluate your 2009 media strategies now, and work to gain relevance with your customers and mind-share with your best prospects. In this case, following the leaders is the boldest approach.

The International Association of Business Communicators recently did a special issue on content marketing.  Here is how they describe it:

Content marketing is about revealing the credibility of your brand through customer-focused information—with an authentic and trusted voice. It’s an opportunity to use creative thinking—rather than a big budget—to get better results than traditional marketing methods.

I was lucky to one of several contributors to add an article to the special edition of their bulletin.  I chose to talk about creating a content-rich private custom media channel rather than traditional advertising.  Here is an excerpt from the article:

When a company educates its current and prospective clients on its field of expertise instead of pitching them products or services, that company becomes a reliable source of information. Your company becomes the media, and you’re now in a position to provide thought leadership and build customer loyalty. You’ve established your company as a trusted resource, and your customer feels more confident buying from you.

It’s no surprise that more and more companies are creating their own private media channels with original content to speak directly to their customers. With content and private media channels, marketers can start to take prospects down the road of permission-based marketing, where marketers must first ask permission before sending content or advertisements to prospective customers. This method requires that people first “opt-in,” rather than allowing people to “opt-out” only after the marketing messages have been sent. It also helps to build trust and affinity between marketers and their potential customers. Eventually, you will get to the point where customers and prospects will welcome your content and messages because of the trust you have built with them. Trust and affinity lead to increased sales.

This tactic stands in contrast to traditional advertising and marketing methods, which rely on renting media channels from media companies at very high costs. In that model, prospects are seeing marketing messages such as ads in magazines, on web sites and television, and are likely spending little or no time absorbing them.

In addition, rented media relies on “interrupting” your prospect with your message, an inefficient way to get out your marketing messages that is more likely to build resentment than trust. When a company owns its own media channel, it is engaging in direct dialogue with customers.

Every day more companies are creating their own media channels with original content to bypass traditional media outlets. In so doing, marketers take control of their message and their audience. Not only can marketers speak directly to customer interests and concerns, but now they do not have to worry about marketing messages being surrounded by distracting—or even inappropriate—content that may conflict with their brand. In addition, the financial rewards of private media speak for themselves: For the price of a few ads in a national magazine, newspaper or broadcast network, a company can create its own custom magazine with original content for a targeted audience. We believe this trend will grow rapidly over the next few years as advances in technology and consumer behavior make it more feasible. There is no better way to drive marketing ROI than by surrounding your potential customers and prospects in a controlled environment that you own.

To read the whole special report – click here.

Are you a subject matter expert?  A subject matter expert is the “go-to” person for their customers and social network contacts.  These experts are seasoned professionals with references and a portfolio of proven success.  Subject matter experts get the customers, win the bids and are answering the phone rather than cold calling.

Interested in being an expert?  Then begin thinking like one.  An expert by definition is “having, involving, or displaying special skill or knowledge derived from training or experience.”  In other words if you can demonstrate that you know more than most and are recognized as a leader within a community you are an expert.

In the 1980’s it could take you years to establish yourself as an expert.  With today’s social networking communities you can be recognized almost overnight.  Let’s look at two communities and how to position you and your business as leaders.

LinkedIn:

LinkedIn is established to be a business networking community.  You have the opportunity to ask questions, answer questions and participate in discussions.  The more time you dedicate to positioning yourself the more you will differentiate yourself.  Include links to your sites (blogs included) and where possible share your books or white papers on the subject.  References also speak volumes.  Anytime you can say “don’t take my word for it, read what my customers think” the more credible your opinions and suggestions become.

You can also join “like-minded” experts on LinkedIn.  These are small groups inside of the larger community that often focus on a discipline (e.g. marketing, sales, recruiting, human resources, or accounting) or on a specific interest (e.g. events, public relations, consulting).  Groups are reflected on your profile and allow people to see your affiliations and interests.

Facebook:

Facebook is different as it was set up as a social site.  Both business and personal intersect here.  You can establish multiple Facebook pages that focus on your business and on you as an individual.  You can choose to combine it all into one page.  Post notes that include article leads with links as well as highlights from your latest activities.  Changing your status to include information on where you are speaking or a presentation you may have posted will drive others to review your work.  You can cross link both Facebook and LinkedIn driving your audience from one site to the other.

There are many other sites that work much like these two (Plaxo, Namyz, MySpace).  It is possible to stretch yourself too thin with social networks.  I recommend you pick two and really focus your efforts in developing your message through your profile, references and participation (e.g. status updates, Q&A). 

The path to being an expert is clear: a well developed profile, references from your customers, participation in online discussions and building a following of contacts who are looking to drive business with you and for you.

The reports of bad news from the world of traditional media have been startling.  Check this link to the I Want Media site and you will see story after story of layoffs and cut backs in everything from staff to frequency.  It seems that all sectors are being hit from consumer to B2B.  US News and World Report is becoming a monthly, and the Christian Science Monitor is closing the print edition.  The cutbacks are hitting all the big names: Time, Conde Nast, Rodale and G&J.  In addition, the troubles of daily newspapers have been well documented. 

This seems different than the usual end of the year cut backs that seem to happen in the industry.  It would be tempting to explain away this activity to a general economic slowdown and impending recession.  That is a big factor for sure and media companies are smart to pare cost going into 2009.  However, I think something bigger is going on than just recession based cutting.  The long talked about decline of print media may be gaining some steam, and approaching critical mass.

Traditional media companies are under intense pressure to transition their business from print to digital and alternative media.  The shift of business model is a killer because with rare exception, people do not often pay for online media vs. print subscriptions and the advertising CPMs for online are much smaller than print.  The web has become the default in most cases for information gathering and reading content.  In the past I never thought I would abandon the daily newspaper.  Now, I keep asking myself why am I paying $30 a month to have the Boston Globe delivered.  All the content is online for free and by time I get a chance to read it at night, the news is ancient.  In the “Green” age having a newspaper dropped at your door everyday seems very wasteful and not eco-friendly.   It now seems clear that information gathering and readership behavior has changed forever. 

The news is equally bad for print media on the advertiser side since print advertising is both expensive and un-trackable. Not a great combination in era of ROI based marketing.  The trend of companies communicating directly with customers and prospects is here to stay and growing.  The content marketing movement is clearly taking a bite out of traditional media.  Custom media is growing at the expense of print media in many cases.  More and more companies are bypassing media companies and creating their own private media channel.  In fact, we just launched a magazine for Aramark, the food service company, to talk directly to customers in the healthcare vertical.  You can see the details here. In addition, we are constantly talking to clients about digital magazines and online video to talk directly to their customer and prospects.  These sometimes are from budgets that traditionally had gone to traditional advertising.

Hopefully the people running media companies recognize the permanent status of these trends and are not just hoping for the market to “turn around”.   It is time for a new business model and cost structure.   However, the biggest change needed is mindset.  For today’s media brand the web needs to be the center of the universe and print thought of as an ancillary product.  This change needs to start at the top of these companies and they have to get out of their comfort zone.  Perhaps the news this month is the first step.  The first step of a long and tough journey that is now necessary for survival.

Here are the final predictions on the Presidential election from numerous Think Tank contributors.  We don’t want to be like the one-sided mainstream media, so in the interest in being fair and balanced here are a variety of opinions and predictions.

Check back here after the election for the post-mortem on the actual results.

Please take the time to read through and please comment or send me your own prediction to gplutsky@kingfishmedia.com and we’ll post them.

Sam Whitmore, Media Survey

Barack Obama will win by five percentage points in the popular vote and with a plurality of between 40 and 50 votes in the Electoral College.

The Senate will go 58-42 in favor of the Democrats.

Sarah Palin will be another winner, as portrayed on Fox News. Fox will side with her in its coverage of the rift that developed between her and John McCain. Her groundwork for 2012 will begin to be laid on Election Night.

Joe Pulizzi, Junta 42

Whether you lean more to the right or to the left, this election if firmly focused on the economy.  If you look at the history of US elections, when the economy is the #1 issue going into the election, there is almost always a change in party, or a “throw the bums out” philosophy. Over the past couple weeks; you’ve seen McCain work to distance himself as much as possible from the Bush administration to try to combat this issue. Nonetheless, it’s pretty clear that Obama will take the election, most likely by a significant margin considering the severity of the economic crisis.

Although there are many important issues being discussed by both parties (health care, abortion rights, Iraq), this election comes down to this one issue.  My prediction, with just a few days until the election, is that Obama will win the popular vote by at least eight percentage points, and take the electoral vote by amassing 363 total electoral votes to McCain’s 175.

Gretel Going, Channel V Media

As someone who is more concerned with the U.S.’s global relations than my own portfolio; who sees more importance in caring for those in need than buying myself yet another house; and who wants to uphold the freedom of choice that this nation was founded upon rather than convincing everyone that my way is the right way, I want Obama to win…and by a landslide.

If he wins by only a small margin it doesn’t send out the message that America’s not happy with the status quo. Considering how the rest of the globe views us—and how much they’re affected by our actions (and us by theirs)—I think it’s important that we send this message out loud and clear.

So while I’d love for Obama’s win to dramatically reflect this sentiment, I think he’ll only win by a hair. I’ll take what I can get, though.

Gordon Plutsky, King Fish Media

It is stunning to think that in a few days we may be electing a president who is the most liberal member of the senate, has socialist ideas on wealth, has questionable past associations and possesses a significant lack of experience and accomplishments.  To top it all off he is a black Ivy Leaguer with the middle name of Hussein.  It sounds like a movie script. Yet, the polls have him ahead and he is likely to win.  How did we get to this point? Let us count the ways.

He is not a Republican nor named George Bush.  All Bush II did was preside over an unpopular bungled war, the Katrina mess and an economic collapse – Quite a nice piece of work, cowboy.  (Don’t blame me, I voted for Gore and Kerry)

By opting out of the federal campaign finance system Obama has raised and spent over three times what McCain had at his disposal.  This advantage has allowed him to carpet bomb ads and build strong local organizations. (Prediction alert – In 2009, a scandal will erupt around the type and nature of some his smaller contributors who’s names are not being reported)  The Washington Post has the story here.

John McCain, while an inspiring person is not an inspiring candidate.  And, he is not the candidate of the base of his party who never embraced him.  What happened to the right wing “values” voters who helped elect Bush twice?  Will they show up on Nov 4th?  If not for Sarah Palin and her appeal to the right McCain would be down 15 points.  She is drawing huge crowds everywhere, well, except for Massachusetts and Manhattan – home base of the liberal elite.

Barack the Wealth Spreader has used class warfare in the way of promised tax cuts and other goodies for “working people” while demonizing “rich” people and businesses.  Obama has leveraged envy and resentment for all it is worth.  Ask not what you can do for your country; ask what Barack can do for you.

 obama-jeans.jpg  The O-Man on Casual Campaign Fridays

The end of journalism from the mainstream media as we knew it in the form of cheerleading for Obama. They fell for his message of hope n’ change like a teenage girl in love.  The vast majority of the media has been in the tank for him and did the dirty work to discredit his opponents.  First it was Hilary Clinton and then McCain before the brutalization of Gov. Palin.  Joe the Plumber and Bristol Palin were scrutinized more than Obama’s history with Bill Ayers.  It is beyond me why media business models (newspapers, magazines and broadcast networks) that are in real trouble chose to alienate half the county.  In the long term, this will not work out well for the national media.  They have lost all credibility.

And the biggest reason – the timing of the collapse of the finance and banking industry a few weeks before the election was probably point, game and match.  The drop in the stock market accompanied McCain down in the polls.  Books will eventually be written about the causes, but for right now, it is perceived to be the fault of Bush and the Republicans in general.  The general sentiment is to throw the Republicans out of office and give Obama a chance – this is a very legitimate rationale.  This fortunate timing is the reason why he may become the first Democrat in 44 years to top 50% in the popular vote.  The depths of the economic bad news will likely bring in voters who would never vote for Obama under normal circumstances.

The combination of Bush, the fundraising advantage, media bias and current economy are virtually impossible to beat.  However, there is one thought that is haunting me and that is Obama’s performance in the popular vote in the democratic primary vs. Hillary Clinton.  She beat him consistently down the stretch and would have won the nomination if there were a few more states left to contest.  In many of the big swing states the undecided voters broke for Clinton.  McCain has a history of closing strong and the polls are tightening after Obama took a big lead a few weeks ago.  Obama, who has not been in many tough fights during his charmed life, may not be a closer.  For these reasons I think it will be tighter than the polls indicate.  I am calling the popular vote for Obama 51.5 – 48.5, and the electoral votes 311-227.

This election battle will be over but not the war. Being the opposition party (and getting Bush off their backs) will energize the Republicans and conservative base.  The race for 2012 begins on November 5th.  Governors Palin, Jindal, Pawlenty, Huckabee and Romney, please start your engines.  However, if McCain pulls it off, Hillary Clinton lives to run another day.  Close your eyes and imagine this – October 5th, 2012 and Luke Russert is moderating a Presidential debate between VP Sarah Palin and Sen. Hillary Clinton.  That would be some sweet Karma.

Speaking of Sarah Barracuda, here is my talented wife Susan’s entry into her company’s pumpkin carving content.  It speaks for itself.

photo_10.jpg 

Larry Walsh, Ziff Davis Enterprise

The lead headline of the Nov. 5 New York Times will read “McCain Wins, Obama Launches 2012 Presidential Bid.” 

The headline might as likely read, “Obama Captures White House, GOP Aims to Capture House in 2010.”

In the closing days of the 2008 Presidential election season, one that began more than 24 months ago, predicting a winner is an invitation to foolishness. Obama/Biden is the likely winner, given the trending and momentum, but McCain/Palin show signs of closing the gaps in key battleground states in the final stretch. The final outcome: too close to call. The pundits are probably correct that the sheer volume of new voters and the anticipated record-high turn outs will likely break all of the previous statistical polling models.

But think about the previous time reference: 24-month road to the White House. Our Canadian neighbors dissolved their government, called for elections, launched a multi-party nationwide campaign and elected new leadership in a period of weeks. Americans, on the other hand, have created a system that will likely result in the perpetual presidential campaign. No sooner we cast our ballots will we immediately see contenders throw their hats into the ring for the next round of polling.

Should Obama carry the mantle of the Democratic party back to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, we’ll see Sarah Palin’s profile permanently elevated to national political leadership and Joe Biden positioned as the guardian of the Democratic leadership in Congress. And with every speech, every policy brief and every piece of legislation, Obama will be selling himself for another term in office.

Should McCain mount a miracle comeback, he will be charged as the caretaker of the GOP leadership and setting up the White House for a successor. Perhaps that successor will be Sarah Palin, but more than likely Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee or some other rising star.

In this new age of absurd politics, the American people lose because they will be overexposed and manipulated by a continuous stream political marketing designed to force reactionary decisions rather than long-term policy direction. “Change We Need” and “Country First” are not strategies, but taglines. And, sadly, those taglines are now being mistaken as positions and substance.

Assume Pennsylvania stays blue; Obama will take the White House with a 5 percent gross national vote margin and 300+ electoral votes. And with that the 2012 presidential campaign will begin immediately. I might as well cast my ballot in early voting now.

Brad Ketchum, King Fish Media

Definition of “change” (or changed, chang•ing, chang•es)
As defined by Answer.com in association with Webster’s Dictionary

Verb:
          
1. To cause to be different: change the spelling of a word.
2. To give a completely different form or appearance to; transform:changed the yard into a garden.
3. To give and receive reciprocally; interchange: change places.
4. To exchange for or replace with another, usually of the same kind orcategory: change one’s name; a light that changes colors.

Change is a word that has come to define the 2008 election and by itself, the very meaning of the word has come to represent one party’s entire platform. The platform for “change.”  But as we all know, change for change’s sake really doesn’t accomplish anything as the definitions above make quite clear: “to cause to be different; to give a completely different form or appearance; to exchange or replace with another, usually of the same kind or category.”

Clearly, no matter who is elected, they certainly will look different in form and appearance from the current administration. But we shouldn’t elect our President based on appearance, their oratory skills, the form they assume or how much they spend on advertising. We need to elect a President that views the current situation as one that needs fixing and improving in order to compete in a challenging global economy and environment. We don’t need government to be bigger, to tell us what to do with our money, to spend more of our money or to merely make change for change’s sake. Change needs to happen as a byproduct of steering this country back on course, not as a platform bereft of sound decision-making, ideals and understanding.

If we’re going to change the way government does business, change has to actually mean something. It has to be supported by ideas, theories, and facts. To merely elect a President who promises change isn’t much different then deciding when to remodel the bathroom. The bathroom is functional, serves its purpose well but its time for a “change.” The thinking is that if we change it, everything will not only look nicer (that olive green sink—yikes), but somehow will work better. But will it?

No matter whom you vote for in this year’s election, don’t mistake change for good or better. We all know that change means many things. Some good and some bad. Rather, vote for the candidate you think has the experience, ideas, values and facts that will help lead this country into the next decade. Do your homework. After all, that new sink might look a lot nicer, but in the end, it can still get plugged.

I have to believe rational minds will prevail and change for change’s sake loses. McCain by a stiff arm’s length.

Kate Fleming, Channel V Media

I’m sure I’m supposed to come down firmly on one side or the other, but right now I’m pretty firmly stuck between my optimist and my pessimist selves.

Optimistically—and, bizarrely enough, rationally—Obama wins on Tuesday.  Key groups that he has rallied—young people, African Americans—turn out in historic and unprecedented numbers to move things decisively in Obama’s favor.  Although there are protests from Republicans about voter fraud and issues at the polls, these are no match for the basic fact that Obama secured a clear and decisive victory.

Now for my pessimist self:  in this self’s brain, ominous scenarios keep swirling.  Many first-time voters, a majority of whom are Obama supporters, arrive at the polls to find challenges to their registrations, people are turned away at overcrowded polling stations (more likely to be in urban—and therefore—Democratic  strongholds), and we see something akin to 2000. Supposedly energized young voters stay at home.  And another 2000 repeat:  Obama wins the popular vote, but John McCain wins the Electoral College.  At which point I, along with millions of others Americans, descend on Washington for the largest protest in years.  But it makes no difference. 

McCain keels over days after he is sworn into office. President Palin, Todd, and the whole Palin clan take over the White House, and bring “Wasilla Main Street,” “Real American” values (none of your fancy “education” for us, dontcha know) to the country.  Suddenly, W looks like a wise leader.

I won’t believe an Obama victory until I see it!

Cameron Brown, King Fish Media

President, John McCain, by 17,200 votes as he wins NC, Indiana and Pennsylvania.

Tim Coffin

President, John McCain, with 51% of the popular vote

Colleen Brown

President, Obama by 10,500 votes

Brian Bucky

Obama - 54%
McCain - 43%
Ralph Nader - 3%

Ekem

Obama - 59%
McCain - 39%
Other - 2%

Kathleen Martin, RocketCom

Winners and Losers

No matter what your thoughts are related to the candidates this year, there are going to be some winners and losers this November 4th.
 
On the top of my loser list would be the majority of reporters in the media.  They have clearly demonstrated that neither truth nor facts are required for a news story.
    
Hollywood will also find itself on the worst dressed list for this election season.  Apparently playing a politician or person of importance on television has left these individuals delusional when it comes to their influence on the majority of voters.
 
Topping the winner list would be democracy.  With record turnouts expected at the polls and early voting lines being opened to allow all registered Americans to vote, the democratic process remains alive and well in the United States.
 
Each of us will also be winners.  While we may be paying more in taxes, healthcare, gas, groceries or anything else we purchase at least the campaign commercials are over.

Kimberly Jackson, King Fish Media

I’m Gonna Miss Sarah - er uh Tina Fey!

Five days till voting and I have just one thing to say:  I am really going to miss Tina Fey.  My favorite part about this election has been the resurgence of Saturday Night Live.  Our country may have needed change, but we also needed a good laugh.  Talk about delivering content that was just what the Comedy Doctor ordered!

Now for the important part: my prognostication for the election.  It was Tim Russert (boy do I miss him) who said “Florida! Florida! Florida!”  My prediction is “Ohio! Ohio! Ohio!  Ohioans have picked winners every year since 1944 EXCEPT for 1960 when they chose Nixon over Kennedy.  I am predicting Obama by a touchdown, 7% points overall across the country with a big win in Ohio.  I also am swinging out and calling Florida and North Carolina as Blue, not dark Blue, but Blue enough to add to the overall point totals.

And as the token mom in the group, I am going to say to my friends and colleagues what I say to may kids, regardless of the outcome.  I didn’t vote for George Bush and my children know that.  One day, one of them called George Bush a bad president and a litter bug.  (For a 7 year old that was a real insult!)  I told them they were not allowed to say mean things about the President especially if they couldn’t prove that the comments were true.  They countered with “but mom you didn’t vote for him, so you must not like him!”  I explained to them all that no matter who I vote for and whether or not I like them - the person who wins is MY President too.  I don’t have to agree with him/her but he/she gets my respect because it is a very hard job to be President and we should be grateful for their service.  No matter what, we have two Americans who love this country so much that they are willing to work around the clock for the next  4-8 years (for much less money than your average CEO) in service to our county and in dedication of their lives to the American people. 

So Sarah Palin, have fun back in Alaska.  Somehow I believe that we haven’t seen the last of your folksy-good ol’ self.  Remember that Obama started off with a big night at the DNC 4 years ago and it has catapulted him to greatness.  Keep your rented wardrobe handy, you may need it again soon!
 

sarah-can-do-it.jpg

It now seems clear that we are heading into rough waters next year.  You can see the slowdown everywhere.  It will be interesting to watch how marketers respond to the challenge.  Some will overreact, shut things down and go dark to save money.  Yes, you will save money, but you are also sending a signal to prospects, customers and competitors that you are nervous and perhaps a company that will not be around for the long haul.  Other companies will just continue bad habits like overspending on “branding” and expensive, hard to measure ads in rented media such as broadcast television and print.  However, I think the smart companies will be opportunistic by mining their most valuable asset – their customer database.

This is a great time to talk to your customers with your own private media channel and accomplish two important objectives.  First, you can firm up their support and make sure they have a strong affinity for your company, and won’t be swayed to leave for a cheaper product or service.   More importantly, it is an opportunity to earn incremental revenue from a group of people who you have already acquired and sold as customers.  Now it is time to reap the reward of the investment you made to make that person a customer. 

This week I received a mailing at home from a company who does a great job of cultivating their customer base – Lowe’s – the home improvement store.  As a homeowner I am a pretty regular customer, and I prefer it to Home Depot, mainly because of the customer service and nicer atmosphere of the stores.  Recently I bought a storm door and had Lowe’s installed it for me since I am completely useless in that area.  I must have received 10 calls from Lowes and the contractor they hired to set up the appointment, thank me for the purchase and make sure I was satisfied with the installation job.  I was pretty impressed, and it left me with a great experience and strong affinity towards Lowe’s.

The mailing I received was sent to current customers and had two main messages.  One was to send two gift cards – one for $10 off a $50 purchase and the other was $25 off of a $250 purchase.  They called them “Project Starters” which is an excellent idea. The cards are a great method to give someone the motivation to get into a store and spend money with Lowe’s.  The other message was near and dear to my heart.  It was an offer to subscribe to one of three custom media magazine’s that Lowe’s produces for customers.  They gave a web address and an 800 number to subscribe and see back issues on the site.

Lowe’s is doing a great job of creating a content based private media channel to retain and market to their customer base.  When you combine that effort with superior customer service, you have a company that will do fine even during a housing and economic downturn.  I wonder how many companies will follow Lowe’s down the Private Media path of content marketing.  It is much harder than just going dark or the status quo, but the payoff is significantly greater.  There is opportunity in chaos and the companies who are smart in 2009 will emerge even stronger for the recovery.

After a year of campaigning, I am getting cranky with the whole deal.  Less than month to go and I am punch drunk - not to mention poorer thanks to the stock market.  Here are a dozen phrases or issues that I have had more than enough of hearing about.  Some of these are hardy perennials that come around every four years.  How about you?  Do you have a pet political peeve?  Send it in and I’ll post it here in the King Fish ThinkTank.  Click here for Part I
 

Wall Street vs. Main Street – Class warfare at its most insipid.  Didn’t Wal-Mart wipe out Main Street?  Shouldn’t it be Wall Street vs. the Mall?  It is silly when Obama is a classic cultural elitist and McCain is a very wealthy man.  Neither one of them is very connected to the working class family. 

My Plan – Every candidate crafts elaborate policy plans that become endlessly debated during the campaign.  These plans which are dutifully posted on their web sites are forgotten on Jan 20th.   None of them are realistic or have any chance of passing muster with Congress and the lobbyists who actually run Congress.  A giant waste of time for everyone involved. 

Scranton/Amtrak Joe Biden – Very tired of the way he has been reinvented into a blue collar guy.  He moved from Scranton when he was 10 - 56 years ago and has been in the cushy Senate since 1973.  I moved from Hollis, Queens when I was seven – that doesn’t make me a member of Run DMC.  Also, the train trip from DC to Wilmington, Del. is 80 minutes one way.  I used to commute for an hour each way on the Long Island Rail Road, where is my medal?
 

The Bridge to Nowhere – McCain talked about this snoozer endlessly during the primary and it picked up steam with Palin.  The media and Obama then went after it like it was a critical issue.  They actually started comparing it to John Kerry’s “I was for the war before I was against it.”  Not exactly the same scale and it serves to remind people how lame the last Democratic candidate was four years ago.
 

Talking Point Robots – It is infuriating how spokespeople and surrogates from each campaign go on cable news and just repeat the same talking points over and over no matter what question is asked.  Do they think they are fooling anyone?  My least favorite is the unctuous Bill Burton from the Obama campaign.  No matter what he is asked he blames Bush, ties Bush to McCain and closes with we can’t afford four more years.  He is very aggressive in his attempt to stick to his script.  The thought of him as Press Secretary in a potential Obama administration is too depressing for words.

Man Love for Obama – I can no longer watch MSNBC and witness Chris (my leg is tingling) Mathews and Keith Olberman moon over the O-man.  They are joined by a good number of their colleagues on every network except for Fox, of course.  I just don’t see it or find him all that dreamy.  Obama comes off to me like a humorless professor who looks down his nose at you because you don’t agree with him.  Has he cracked a single joke or delivered a laugh line in this entire campaign? Come on Barry, loosen up. Who knows, I guess he is likeable enough.

obamacigarette-mediuminit_.jpg  

Less than 30 days to go and then we can turn our full attention to something that really matters – Football.  
 

After a year of campaigning, I am getting cranky with the whole deal - last night’s “debate” was a low point.  Time to scrap the fake “Town Hall” format.  It does not work.  Here are a dozen phrases or issues that I have had more than enough hearing about.  Some of these are hardy perennials that come around every four years.  How about you?  Do you have a pet political peeve?  Send it in and I’ll post it here in the King Fish ThinkTank.
 

This is the Most Important Election of our Lifetime– I have heard this one every four years since I have been following elections – back to 1976.  A sense of historical importance can only be determined when looking back with a greater context.  “The Most Important Ever” is a pretty high bar.  This may not even be a very important election in the long run.   With economy and Iraq a mess, the next President doesn’t have a lot of leeway to get things done.

Earmarks – Enough Mr. McCain, enough!  Nobody cares, nobody comes out to votes on the issue and it is inside baseball.  McCain should not waste valuable debate time rambling on about earmarks when he should be talking about how Obama’s philosophy on business tax is to the left of Castro.

I Love Israel- In every election the candidates bend over backwards to profess their undying love of Israel and the Jewish people.  (Translation:  We love all that Wall Street and Hollywood money.)  Who knew the goyim loved us so much.  In fact, Joe Lieberman is McCain’s BFF!  Too bad Joe and I can’t get into John and Cindy’s country club. (easy, its just a joke)

The Abortion Dance – A specialty among Democratic Catholics such as Joe Biden.  It goes like this – “Because of my faith I am personally against abortion, but I support a woman right to chose.”  Huh?  Either you are pro choice or you are not.  I have a feeling St. Peter isn’t going to buy this one either.

The 40 Million Americans Without Health Care - This group makes an appearance every four years, and not so much during the in-between years.  The Democrats always promise that they will insure them and make them the centerpiece of many a speech.  It will likely never happen since the 300 million who do have insurance are not interested in seeing a decline in service or quality to socialize healthcare.  We will be hearing about them again soon – in 2012.

The Pundit Parade – How sick are we of the same talking heads making the same comments on every cable news channel.  They are all there primarily to push their consulting business, speaking careers, books etc.  You know what they are going to say before they say it.   For how much longer is Paul Begala and James Carville going to be living off the fact they helped get Bill Clinton 43% of the popular vote in 1992.  How about Mary Matalin?  Her claim to fame is working for Bush 41’s unsuccessful reelection campaign, advising Dick Cheney and supporting Fred Thompson’s very brief presidential bid.  Well played Mary, well played.

Check back Friday for Part II

Dear Steve Schmidt, Chief Strategist McCain Campaign,

After watching Sarah Palin light it up against Biden and draw huge crowds this weekend, I feel compelled to give some you marketing and media advice.  Love how you energized McCain and pulled ahead after the convention, but it has been all down hill since then.  The bail out timing was a bad break, and no matter what happens now it is Bush’s fault and by association McCain’s.  That may have been a tipping point in a year that should be a Democratic layup equivalent to Carter’s post-Nixon/Watergate win.  The RCP poll average has you down six, but the numbers have been volatile and may not be that accurate.  You still have a chance, time to take the gloves off and hand the ball to your point guard – Sarah Barracuda Palin. 

Your media missteps nearly killed your hottest brand, but it is not too late to salvage it with a new custom media approach.  What you have pulled off so far is impressive. As Alaska’s Governor she had no reason to be expert on issues such as internal Iranian politics, nuclear proliferation and Wall Street regulation.  You had five weeks to prepare her to debate a guy in who has been in the Senate since 1973 in front of 70 million people and you did a decent job.  However, you messed up the press relations and almost sunk her (and your campaign) by feeding her to the mainstream media on their terms.

What were you thinking?  I admit I may have given the interview to Charlie Gibson, who knew he would be a condescending ass? However, feeding her to Katie Couric was criminal.  The entire concept of network evening news is old school and a relic.  It has not been relevant or important since the 80’s.  In today’s media landscape, the consumer is in control and news is a commodity that is available on demand, 24/7 on any platform. The idea of influential people sitting down to watch 22 minutes of news at 6:30 every night has gone the way of parachute pants and knit ties.

Let’s face it, the mainstream media (MSM) is in the tank for Obama and has shown a willingness to do his dirty work by attacking McCain and Palin.  What possessed you to give into them and send Governor Palin to be interviewed by a woman who is floundering with horrible ratings and is on the verge of being fired?   Couric’s back is up against the wall and you gave her a chance to matter again – and you gave her complete control over content, camera work and editing.  You made people talk about Saturday Night Live again for the first time since the days of Eddie Murphy playing Gumby, damn it. 

Did you cave from the pressure of the MSM?  Did you actually take them seriously when they said it was the role of the media to vet candidates?  I don’t recall reading that in the Constitution.  The coastal liberal elite think that people in flyover land are too dumb to decide for their own, so it is their responsibility to decide for them.  They decided this one back in January, ask Hillary.

Here at King Fish, we have a philosophy called Private Media.  You need to own your own private media channel, not rent the old one from the MSM.  I suggest you create the Sarah Palin channel, to talk directly only to the voters that matter – swing voters in the key swing states.  Forget the traditional media of the networks and print media; you don’t need them – not a bit. They are losing significance and influence in the lives of Americans.  It is not coincidence that the networks and newspapers are the ones whose business models are most under attack.  You can get better marketing ROI handing out flyers in front of Penn Station than advertising during NBC’s new shows (hey, let’s remake Knight Rider).  The New York Times and its junior varsity team The Boston Globe have turned themselves into daily Obama campaign bulletins.  Is it any wonder their profits and stock price are declining?  The Times is cutting costs, sections and staff while losing what was left of their objectivity.

It is time to keep Palin away from these faltering outlets and have her talk directly to voters.  You will take heat for this strategy.  A hue and cry will come from people in NY, Boston, and LA who mock and hate her.  Who cares, let the NPR crowd stew over their soy lattes; you have already lost those states.  Focus on your target market – swing voters in swing states who identify with her and feel she is “one of them”.   Let the voters decide on Nov. 4th and let the chips fall where they may.

You are sitting on a pile a of cash, so buy up half hour time slots in critical local market to run infomercials and promote the hell out of them.  Create the shows as town halls where people can see Palin speak directly to voters with no media filter.  Embrace social networking to a much greater extent than you have – go viral with web video in a big way.  Enlist word of mouth marketing with PTO groups and churches in Middle America. Try some live streaming video web casts with Sarah where she can answers question directly from voters, and not from agenda driven members of the media. 

The game is well into the 4th quarter, put the ball in her hands and have her attack and bust the zone.  You can’t wait for Obama to make a mistake; he won’t, he is too good a politician.  Have her hit him hard on Ayers, taxes, and “the white flag of surrender” in Iraq.  Sarah Palin needs to take her message directly to the right voters and forget about traditional media.  The web, live events, you tube, email and word of mouth will be your media vehicles.

It still may not be enough since it seems that a slim majority of American are ready to cast their lot with Obama because he is a blank canvas to where they can project their hopes, dreams and fears.  Look on the bright side; if you and Gov Palin (or Gov. Jindal or Gov. Pawlenty) takes him on in 2012 you will have an actual Obama record to run against instead of slogans and promises.  No matter what happens over the next four years, good or bad, you can hang it on him.  It may be fun to take the easy route, it has been for Obama.

Word of Mouth (WOM) marketing is certainly not a new sensation; in fact it’s not even a hot buzzword anymore.  The reality is that much of what began under the banner of WOM is now being spoken of in the lexicon of social media.  Blogs, Wikis, User Generated Content (UGC) and the whole social media world are really built upon many of the principles started years ago with WOM. 

No matter what you call it, there’s now an environment capable of propagating the reality of your products quality and comparative value into the marketplace at blinding speed.  All these channels of communication and exchange make information available to a larger group of people at a faster rate than at any time in history.   

Even in this world of radical transparency and information exchange, I continue to be amazed at how much energy goes into messaging and marketing that attempts to gloss over product deficiencies rather than directing more focus and resources on fixing the underlying issues.  Often the result is marketing that dooms a product to fall short of expectations and to subsequently be raked over the coals of public opinion.   This kind of thinking completely misses the opportunity to tap the exponential power of social medial and WOM and fuels those folks who love to expose faulty products and the companies who make them.

Addressing core product issues isn’t always possible for a variety of reasons.  Lack of funding, short timelines to get a product to market or a host of other factors create the need for compromises.   No product, even fantastic ones, will likely go to market without their creators secretly wishing they could have slipped in a couple extra cool features.  

In the end, it comes down to the truth of your product.  Despite great marketing, huge media buys and all the other traditional marketing trimmings, a less-than product is destined for a very short half-life these days.  In contrast, high-quality offerings taken to market with savvy use of social media/WOM channels are likely to enjoy a longer run and do so with smaller marketing budgets. 

Next time you’re planning a go-to-market strategy, don’t underestimate the marketing value of a great product.  Waiting for, or pushing for, that next feature could be the best marketing decision you’ve ever made.    
 

This week the NY Mets gave us an example of what happens when you don’t understand the current media landscape.  They fired Manager Willie Randolph on Monday night, and did it via press release at 3:15 am east coast time.  The team was in Anaheim on the first day of a west coast trip.   So, they made poor Willie fly all the away to So Cal, manage a game (he won) and fired him after the game.  As I am sure you know by now the Mets have been getting killed in the media for this low rent move on a classy guy.  They are spinning all kinds of stories such as they didn’t want to fire him on Father’s Day to they didn’t make up their mind until Monday.  The sad truth is they actually thought that if they did it in the middle of the night it would lessen the news and press impact since it would be a day before the NY papers could jump on it.  That was a questionable strategy in 1978 or 1988, but in 2008 it is beyond moronic.  That “strategy” backfired and blew up in their face.  They got beaten up on every available media platform for nearly three days – print, talk radio, blogs, sports web sites etc. 

At the heart of this mistake is a lack of understanding of today’s media environment.  It is always on, and always in search of content.  The explosion of media platforms, brands and choices has eliminated the concept of “news cycles” as we knew them.  On demand content and viral distribution have made traditional news cycles obsolete.  In addition, the proliferation of media platforms has created a situation where any “hot” bit of content and news is blown out of all proportion.  Many of these media outlets thrive on scandal and controversy.  The search and hunger for edgy content seems insatiable.  How else do you explain Lindsay Lohan’s mother and talentless sister getting a reality show.  More shame for us native Long Islanders.  Wasn’t Amy Fisher’s sex tape enough humiliation? 

The media narrative ended up being about how clumsy, heartless and dumb the Mets management appears to be.  The net result is the Mets did some real damage to their brand image, and maybe their bottom line too.  We are in a new media world, and if you follow the old rules you are sure to get burned.

I recently contributed another article to Chief Marketer on the topic of face to face events.  Specifically it explains how to use events as a lead generation and lead nurturing tool.  While working for several media companies I had responsibility for publication branded events and custom events.  One thing I learned is when using events as lead gen tool it is critical to scale your event (and budget) to the anticipated return.  Many people do think of live events as custom media, but they can be very powerful tools as part of a private custom media solution.  Click here to read the article. 

Just a short word on the passing of Tim Russert.   I spent much of last week thinking about and writing about media bias in the news organizations covering politics.  It was quite a shock to learn about his tragic death, as he was one of the last objective unbiased journalists on television.   Even though he worked his way up the ranks in Democratic politics he was equally tough on both parties.  You could make a case he was the most important journalist in America today.  Many people, including me, turned to him on Meet the Press and election night coverage to make sense of it all in a straightforward manner.  You could trust him because you felt he neither had an agenda nor was self promotional.  The timing of his loss before a historic election is a blow for this country.  We would hope that someone would fill the void, but it will be an impossible role to fill.

Nearly everyone I spoke with over the past few days felt like they lost a close friend.  He was such a presence on television, you actually felt like you knew him.  Just another reminder that as Buddhism states everything in life is impermanent.  It was heartbreaking to watch so many of his friends and colleagues talk about him all weekend.  However, listening to the tributes he was clearly a man who made the world better and lived every minute of his short 58 years.  Personally, I agree with his impressive son Luke, who said that if Tim could hear what was being said about him; he would be the most excited to hear that Bruce Springsteen paid tribute to him and played Thunder Road in his honor.  As a fellow Springsteen fanatic, I was very touched by the gesture from Boss who like Tim Russert is a master story teller with an ear to the common man.  Here is a passage from Thunder Road, a beautifully written song about vulnerability, yearning and redemption.

We got one last chance to make it real
To trade in these wings on some wheels
Climb in back
Heaven’s waiting on down the tracks
Oh oh come take my hand
Riding out tonight to case the promised land

In an interesting bit of timing, the NY Times ran a story today about perceived media sexism toward Hillary Clinton. (A topic covered here yesterday) In a shocking development the mainstream media (NBC, CBS, CNN etc) strongly disagree with that notion.  They seem almost dismissive of the claims.   They are also quick to say that Hillary Clinton’s defeat was caused by her own mistakes and they are not responsible for her loss.  That is true, Hillary has no one to blame but herself, and Barack Obama played by the rules and won the nomination fair and square.  However, that does not absolve them of their actions, nor does it lessen the anger many feel towards them.

There is this passage and quote from MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann:

There was “constant reflection and analysis at MSNBC, and I must say there was constant good faith in trying to make certain Senator Clinton was not treated unfairly.”

Now that they have been called on the carpet they wrap themselves in objective journalism.  Ironically, Olbermann has made a name for himself making fun of Bill O’Reilly and the right wing bias at Fox News.  I don’t know if he realizes that he has become a liberal version of his friend Bill.  I used to enjoy watching him, but his rants have taken on an air of self righteousness and he has lost his ability to be objective. 

There are several problems with the mainstream media defense tactics.

As the old cliché goes – perception is reality.  Many Clinton supporters and women’s groups including NOW (click here to read a column from their President) are angry at the bias, and NBC/MSNBC and CNN have lost credibility with many viewers.  They can defend themselves all they want, but it won’t change the way many women (and men too) feel about the way their candidate was treated while her opponent got the kid gloves treatment.

I wonder if the many of the biggest offenders (who are generally men in their 50’s and 60’s) fully realize the way the media world has changed.  Every one of their comments is stored on the web forever, and can be easily passed around.  And, there is an army of bloggers to offer a counter opinion and analyze their comments.

The bottom line is they can deny it all they want, but we live in a new media world.  My advice would be to really reflect on how they handled the nomination process rather than trying to spin it away.  No one is buying it.

On a separate and personal note – Happy Father’s Day to the #1 reader of the Think Tank blog – my Dad, who is one of the smartest guys I have ever met.  The lessons I have learned from him are too numerous to recount here, and I use them every day.  Happy Father’s Day!!
 

Before we leave the process that will eventually name Barack Obama as the Democratic nominee, let’s take a look back at one of the factors in this contest that helped him beat Hillary Clinton.  It can provide us some clues and insights into how he may fare against Senator John McCain this fall.

There has been much debate whether sexism played a role in the defeat of Hillary Clinton.  She and her campaign made a couple of well hashed over errors:  they underestimated Obama’s appeal, had no organization in the caucus states, and used Bill Clinton incorrectly.   Watching Bill Clinton in the 2008 campaign was like watching Willie Mays play for the Mets in 1973 – painful to watch a star whose time has past.  She was significantly hurt by the actions of Florida and Michigan to break the DNC rules which cost her big states she could have won.  And, it seems like she didn’t connect with the voters until she went from frontrunner to underdog.

A big factor in the race was a media bias for Obama and against Clinton.  This manifested itself in a mainstream media that seemed to be openly promoting Obama, while gleefully participating in the steady stream of sexist comments and jokes aimed at Hillary.  It was open season on petty analysis of her appearance, emotions and of course, the comments about how she came across as a bitchy woman.   Take a few minutes to check out these clips.   One is a brilliant piece from the Daily Show and other is a home grown video from YouTube.  Both illustrate numerous examples of the mainstream media taking sexist shots at Hillary.  It is sadly comical to watch a bunch of middle age white men (Mike Barnicle, Chris Matthews, Glenn Beck, Pat Buchannan, Wolf Blitzer) make statements that essentially says that Hillary is a shrew and a harpy who men don’t want to listen to because she sounds like a nagging wife.  Makes you wonder how happy these guys are at home.

In addition, journalists such as Keith Olberman of MSNBC and Frank Rich of the New York Times all but anointed Obama while never missing an opportunity to take a shot at either Hillary Clinton or John McCain.  By the way, making fun of McCain’s age is also fair game, and even sometimes the injuries he received as a POW.  Obama’s lack of experience and a real record and his relationship with Rev. Wright received as close to a free pass as you can get in today’s 24/7 media.

Try and imagine what would happen if these same middle age white male commentators used jokes and negative stereotypes about Obama’s race in the same manner as they did with Hillary Clinton’s gender.   When anyone even hints at race, such as Geraldine Ferraro, they are treated like a pariah.  Remember when a bunch of guys showed up at a Clinton rally held up signs and chanted “iron my shirts”.  It was laughed off as a prank.  What if it was an Obama rally and those hilarious frat boys were yelling “shine my shoes” or “fry my chicken” Not so funny, is it?  In fact, it is horrible.  However, it is hard to argue it was much different in terms of negative stereotyping.  Unfortunately, this gender bias affected the way the race was reported throughout the primary season.  Next, we will take a look at how media bias may have shaped the race.

Last week my city, Beverly, MA held an election that may offer a small preview of this November’s election.  Here in the Massachusetts we have a wonderful law to reign in government called Proposition 2 ½ passed by referendum during a tax revolt in 1981.  Here in the bluest of blue states we have a segment of people who love their taxes.  It basically states that property tax can’t increase by more than 2.5% per year, except if the people in the town vote to over ride the law for a specific reason.  In our case it was to help fund the school system that is running at a deficit due to the usual suspects – increasing teacher healthcare and pension costs, unfunded state and federal mandates and exploding special education needs.  If it passed, the average homeowner would pay roughly $190 more a year in property tax and one of the six elementary schools in town would be saved from closing. 

It was quite a battle, a real steel cage street fight.  What struck me was the anti-government venom.  It was aimed at the Mayor, School Committee, City Council, Teachers Union and anyone who even walks by city hall.  There was also a generous helping of class warfare as the working class and seniors resented the upscale moms who led the fight for the over ride.  One of the leaders of the over ride movement made the classic marketing mistake of saying it would only cost “a latte a week” to fund the tax increase.  Oh boy! Talk about not knowing your audience.  That statement became a rallying cry from the working class people who wouldn’t go inside a Starbucks on a bet.  The moms (and some dads) were dubbed the Latte Divas by the anti-tax people who fought it out on the Salem News web site message boards.  I would read the forums and the anger was palpable.  The parents were advocating raising taxes “for the children” or our property values would plummet and the city would become a slum overnight.  Opponents ranted back about how unions, the government and entitled parents were ruining America, and how they can’t afford another cent is this bad economy.  Over rides for schools usually pass in small affluent bedroom communities, but in economically diverse Beverly (pop. 40,000) it was crushed 63% to 37%.  And, a real class division opened up in once cohesive community.

It was a fascinating look at how social networking and web 2.0 tactics shaped the debate.  The pro over ride parents (Yes! For Beverly) had their own blog, Facebook page and email distributions; and the forums on the local newspaper sites became ground zero for battles pitched by people from both sides using anonymous screen names.  Some of the postings were pretty mean, and would never be said if a real name had to be attached or it was face to face.  It is much easier to work up some real anger when hiding behind a made up name that can’t be tracked.  It got me thinking about the nature of these anonymous posts which are found all over the web on all types of sites.  Does the anonymity produce true and honest feelings that are hidden by social convention, or is it an excuse to be rude.  There is something freeing about putting the usual political correctness aside, but debates can escalate quickly.  It is an interesting situation for companies who host these types of forums, especially when someone can be slandered on your site.  Monitoring your site is a must to protect your brand.

In addition, I could tell that there were some “PR plants” in there spouting the talking points from each side.  I don’t think many “average citizens” know the intimate details of municipal finance, collectively bargained teacher’s contracts and academic studies on the benefits of lower class size.  There were more than a few people with not so hidden agenda’s passing themselves off as John and Jane Q. Public.

This local battle may be a microcosm of the upcoming Presidential election. We will hear some of the same issues and charges from both sides.  Elitism and class division, education, taxation and the economy will be issues out front and center.  2008 will be the first web 2.0/social networking presidential election.  The ground war is going to move from mainstream media ads and direct mail to the web in a big way.  The blogs, video sharing sites, forums and online fundraising are going to be humming.  This may help Obama and his more youthful supporters, but the same tools can also make any scandal viral or misstep magnified.  We are in somewhat uncharted media waters, and as the cable news talking heads like to say “only time will tell”

Kimberly Jackson and I both wrote about the same topic this week, independent of each other, so here is a short introduction and both postings.  We were both taking a look at a private media channels created by personalities that are aimed at our respective demographics.  Oprah is for Kimba, the influential working mom and community organizer, and Howard Stern for me and my adolescent sense of humor.  While the content of each private media channel is very different, the net result is the same – a high affinity environment of trust.  Time and time again it is proven that in today’s media jungle the best way to get your marketing messages across is to pair them with original content that connects with your target audience.  Oprah and Howard may not have much in common, but they understand the power of intent based marketing as well as anyone today. 

No one in media today understands the concept of private media channels better than Howard Stern.  At first, his much trumpeted move to Sirius Satellite radio seemed like a way to get out from under the thumb of FCC and their constant monitoring. However, Howard had something more in mind than the freedom to drop an occasional f-bomb and in-depth stripper interviews.  Back in the prehistoric early 90’s he dubbed himself the “King of all Media” because he was successful on syndicated radio, did a highlight show on E!, had best selling books, and an autobiographical movie.  He was in all media, but they were not integrated and he was essentially renting channels from huge media companies who owned the shows and profits.  He now has two dedicated stations on Sirius (soon to be merged with XM), his own web site and Howard TV which is an On Demand pay service.  All three platforms are tightly integrated, and users pay for the radio show and TV shows, while the free web site is a promotion for both.

The radio channels are interesting because they create a unique environment for the show.  There is a news operation to report on news about the show and characters; and each day there is a wrap up show to talk about the events of that day’s show.  Each show is treated like breaking news on the radio, TV and web site.  It is very addicting to tune into – you get immersed in a parallel world Howard is President and Fred, Artie, Robin, Gary and the huge cast of characters are the cabinet and members of Congress.  The wrap up show is like MSNBC for the whack pack (Howard’s most loyal fans that have become part of the show). 

The net effect is a very high affinity environment that produces two sources of revenue – subscriber fees and advertising/sponsorships.  At a time when it is getting difficult to get people to pay for content, Stern fans are happily forking over money to be able to be a part of his private media channel.  Additionally, the integration and cross-promotion is critical to creating the feel of a private media channel.  Howard Stern may not be to your taste, but there is no denying he has been a media pioneer for the past 25 years.  Keep an eye on him, and you will get a sense of what the future of media channels may look like.

Have you seen the Oprah Network lately?  Number one ranked talk show; hit magazine; satellite radio; oprah.com… all complete with enough content to fill the digital divide.  She shares her wisdom including what we should read and eat; how we should live our lives for the ultimate fulfillment; how we should decorate; who we should help, admire, adore or vilify.  Can one person really be so well rounded, so educated, so omnipotent that she can maneuver the masses with such finesse?

It’s no secret that authors hope to be hand picked for her outrageously popular book club series.  Sure, past endorsements include well-known’s such as Faulker, Tolstoy and Angelou, but many lesser-knows have been vaulted to stardom (or purgatory) with the same passion.  Whether it is Jeffrey Eugenides discussion of children born with both male and female sexual organs in his novel Middlesex or the Gabriel Garcia Marquez with his politically charged love story in Love in the Time of Cholera, these authors become the preference of many mommy book clubs in the US.  Equally, the backlash experienced by James Frey, author of A Million Little Pieces, originally billed as a memoir turned out to be a wild work of embellished fiction.  Oprahs’ anger at being duped resonates for him today as he publishes his next work Bright Shiny Morning.  Every interview for his newest effort seems to begin with his previous experience on Oprah. Her condemnation and distaste for his dishonesty will likely follow him for the rest of his publishing career.

Manufacturers and retailers pray for the Oprah nod of approval.  Last week, Oprah did her Favorites of Summer in which each audience member won lots of her hot picks for hot summer items.  Audience members received gas grills, clothes, CDs,  make up, etc. – you could tell the few men in the audience had no idea what was going on when Oprah announced the theme of the show, while their female counterparts jumped up and down in anticipation of their forthcoming booty!  Tummy Yummies were on her list and I would love to see the sales spike reported for this company who designs pretty tees that also minimize the not-so-rock-hard tummies!  

Cover Girl Lash Blast Mascara also got the thumbs up.

“This was the first time anybody’s come to the offices with a scientist to explain how [the makeup] works,” Gayle says [Oprahs BFF Gayle is also on staff at Harpo ]. “This is the scientific explanation: A dual polymer system keeps the mascara from migrating underneath your eyes. That’s code for it doesn’t smudge.”  

Did we really need a scientific explanation for how the mascara works?  Oprah gave us one and maybe that is the key to her success.  She takes nothing for granted in quest, not even the fact that we just buy mascara without understanding its unique merits.  Marketing tip here?  Never assume that your product it completely understood by your target market, no matter how main stream or simple.  Oprah doesn’t.

Her endorsements reach further than store shelves.  This year she has thrown her support in the presidential race to Barack Obama.  I wonder if Barack was forced to pick one supporter out of his many backers, if Oprah would out rank John Edwards in importance. She might even make a great vice-presidential candidate!   Her endorsement on Larry King may be one of the most pivotal moments in the dog fight between the potential first woman/the potential first African-American to seek the Presidency of the United States.  Her weight, no pun intended, may just prove to be what tips the scales in the democratic decision making process.

The Oprah network reaches far and wide.  Her influence is felt in so many categories.  “Self help” or “help others” she can influence us by providing what we see: the whole story.  She investigates, reports and summarizes those topics for which most Americans, especially American women, have neither the time nor the resources to research.  We put our faith in Oprah.  We believe what we see on her couch, in her pages or on another media platform.  We rush to spend our time and dollars, and even our votes with a confidence that if she says it good enough, it must be.  Maybe it is the humble beginnings, if a poor black girl who had many speed bumps throughout her life can become a media mogul, then amazing things might happen to us regular folk too.  Maybe it’s that she just calls ‘em as she sees ‘em and for us that simplicity of message resonates.  Whatever it is, there is not doubt, that in Oprah we trust!

The cable giant bought Newsday on their home turf of Long Island for $650 million after a bidding war with Rupert Murdoch and Mort Zuckerman.  When billionaires place that much value on a local newspaper (albeit in a lucrative market), maybe the demise of newspapers is not as close as we think.  It is fashionable among media pundits and bloggers to pile on the newspaper business and declare it done for.  They always point to the fact young people don’t read newspapers and get their news on the web.  Has anyone bothered to ask what the newspaper subscription rate has been historically been among young adults – I bet it has always been low.  Not a huge priority at that stage in life.  And, what happens when these hip kids who have no use for newspapers and land lines get older and have kids, houses, careers, etc. 

I do agree that some of what newspapers currently do is obsolete.  National and global news is a commodity – either online, on TV or from the wire services.  Having it appear in a local newspaper serves very little purpose to the reader, who has probably already seen or heard the story in another more immediate platform.  For newspapers to succeed in the future they need to think locally – people love local news – the more local the better.  Reading about politics and tragedies in foreign lands is important but it really has little effect on the average person’s life.  However, they sure do like reading about their own slice of life in their town and region.  These stories have a real and emotional connection, and who doesn’t like keeping up on local gossip.  I may not know all the facts of what’s going on in Darfur or the real difference between Sunni and Shiite; but I know the gory details of an upcoming property tax increase vote in my town and the story of the kid up the street who was arrested for drug possession.

To take it one step further, instead of expending resources by having international and national news bureaus, redeploy those resources into good old investigative journalism on the local level.  Some of the best work from a newspaper is when they uncover crime, corruption or some other injustice in their backyard.  The Boston Globe did a great job this year exposing Mitt Romney’s illegal alien gardeners and some questionable ethics from the current speaker of the Massachusetts House of Representative, Sal DiMasi.  Newsday has a long history of doing that on Long Island, and I hope the new owners will be committed to that tradition.  There is real value in providing this type of content and service to a community.  And, it builds readership affinity for the advertisers, most of which are small local companies who do not run big web or TV campaigns, and rely on the local paper to get their message out.

The local angle is why I think the Cablevision/Newsday deal will work.  They can create an integrated media channel (print, web, cable, events) for readers and the local advertisers who want to reach them. In addition, Newsday now has ownership by people who actually live in the community and have a vested interest.  The days of the big remotely-owned newspaper chains and the homogenization of news that it brought may be over.  Maybe it is time that the local paper goes back to the future and becomes a major player in their community.

Although still the number one show on network TV, American Idol has seen a steady rating decline this year to it’s lowest totals in five years.  Many theories have been offered  - lackluster contestants, people growing tired of the format, a general post-strike decline in viewership to name a few.   I would suggest another reason why the show has generated almost no buzz this year and people are tuning out.

In the past AI has been a masterful example of combining content and sponsorship.  In this age of permission based marketing, they came up with a formula that was compelling to fans while providing companies like Coke, AT&T and Ford a great marketing vehicle.  Once this show became a huge hit – the producers and FOX amped up the tie ins and revenue opportunities.  They produce records, concerts tours and TV shows.  The voter results show was expanded from 30 minutes to an hour to sell more commercials.  And, they added more promotional deals with iTunes and with “guest mentors” who had new albums to hawk.  Slowly but surely, the marketing and advertising overwhelmed the content portion of the show and this year was the tipping point.  For example, the addition of an AT&T sponsored segment where “random” fans call in to ask questions is nothing but filler and painful to watch.  You almost expect Ryan Seacrest to come out one night wearing a sandwich board with an ad for Maaco Auto Body shops.

I am a fan of the show, but felt like I just spent two hours a week watching an infomercial.  The desire for promotion really hurt the perception of this year’s contestants by forcing them to sing songs by artists who are not relevant to today’s audience.  Two weeks of Beatles songs were a bore – for today’s kids, it does not mean that much, and for those of us over 35, we have heard them a million times.  Then they moved on to Dolly Parton, Mariah Carey and Neil Diamond –who shockingly, all had new albums and tours to promote.  Can anyone name me three Dolly songs? Mariah has more #1 hits than anyone – but are any of them remotely memorable.  However, the highest rated show on the unintentional comedy scale was “show tunes” week with Andrew Lloyd Webber. 

You get the feeling it all about driving sales and playing it safe for the sponsors.  It is just a little coincidental that contestants who are different (i.e. possibly gay) or edgy (tattooed) find themselves gone early and the bland survive.  The success of the incredibly boring and cloying David Archuleta (known as the “Gasper” on Idol fan site Vote for the Worst.com) is symbolic of that trend.  He may be the single least entertaining person on television.

For the show to be successful past next year, the producers really need to examine the balance between content and marketing.  While we often profess that content based permission marketing is the wave of the future, AI is a cautionary tale of what happens when the mix gets out of balance.  I know we are all in business to make a buck, but guys, take it down a notch or you will kill the golden goose.