Safespace invaders

Safespace invaders

From my experience with text message marketing I would classify it as spam. I might use Optus as my network carrier but when Optus sends me promotional material for movies or other stuff I get annoyed. First, because it was probably hidden somewhere in my contract that I consent to this being sent to me and I don’t like the fact that they’ve managed to slip that by me. Secondly, because my phone is a private space. It’s like those people on the street that talk at you to try and get you to “donatemoney to a cause, or people who knock on your door to try get you to join a religion or switch electricity providers. I hate them all.

So in a paper written relatively early in the mobile era (Retite et al. 2005) it’s stated that mobile advertising (text message advertising) has a positive effect on brand attitudes. This might be because people we’re not as connected to their phones as they are now and a little text message here and there wouldn’t offend them. But more recent literature has stated that this belief that it’s okay to send people promotional material via SMS needs to be re-examined. We now are much more attached to our phones, they are almost an extension of our being, and being sent SMS’s that aren’t from people we know are invasive and can in fact decrease brand attitudes (Kaan, 2014).

The more recent paper links the relevance and intrusiveness of the message to how it will affect brand attitudes. Relevance is key, and the feelings of intrusiveness can be diminished by increasing relevance. How relevant can a blanket spam message from your service provider be though? Maybe they don’t care because they know if they keep it to a minimum my brand attitude isn’t going to reach the tipping point where I leave them for someone else. This relevance intrusiveness brand attitude balance is something anyone engaging in text message marketing is going to have to consider.

Do you feel like you space has been invaded when you receive promotional material in SMS?

Varnali, K. (2014). SMS advertising: How message relevance is linked to the attitude toward the brand?. Journal Of Marketing Communications, 20(5), 339-351.

Rettie, R., Grandcolas, U., & Deakins, B. (2005). Text message advertising: Response rates and branding effects. Journal Of Targeting, Measurement & Analysis For Marketing, 13(4), 304-312.

TFW your virus fails

TFW your virus fails

One thing I absolutely detest is bull—-, my feelings are kind of relevant because obviously the same sentiment is held by a large portion of people.

Recently in my course covering IMC, we talked about integrating viral content into an IMC plan. I don’t think this is a great idea, because IMC’s are all about synergising media strategy to achieve the campaign objectives and viral content is something that is very unpredictable and unreliable.

Anyway I wanted to talk about a failure by Witchery Men’s that fall into the Homemade Failure of the Kaplan and Haenlein initiator outcome matrix. The brand tried to generate awareness and improve attitudes for their menswear branch. They did this via a poorly acted (another pet peeve of mine) video posted online, they then PR’d it featuring on morning shows and things that the target audience (,women who buy their male partners clothing,) consume.

The swindle went of for a couple of weeks, with people getting involved, trying to help this young woman find some guy who left their “beautiful” “silk lined” “beautiful stripped interior”’d jacket at a cafe. Eventually the truth surfaced and Witchery had to apologise and then deleted all the content on the channel they created to play with peoples emotions to promote awareness of their brand.

A lesson to be learned from this and creating viral content would be that honesty is the best policy. I’m totally okay with large corporations playing with emotive responses from people, as long as their honest with the content they use to do this.

What are your feelings towards brands that lie to people?

Do you have any examples of brands lying to people?

On Viral Videos

On Viral Videos

I was recently told about this youtube channel on the internet that demonstrates how certain viral videos are fake (Captain DisIllusion). In this video he talks about clickbait content and how these videos were fabricated to make interesting content for clickbait websites.

I’m going to run through the Kaplan & Haenlein paper on the criteria for making a viral video and apply it to the video talked about by Captain DisIllusion.

Two videos were talked about in this episode of his show, both about lightning. The one I’ll analyse is the surfer with dumb voice video. It has over two million views and weaselled its way into the highly reputable(heavy sarcasm), life destroying Murdoch Media news cycle.

The paper by Kaplan and Haenlein states that three elements must be present for a video to reach epidemic levels of attention:

1. Messengers-

Mavens, or people who are tuned into the marketplace and are members of a community that talks about these things.

Social Hubs, people/pages with large amounts of followers, meme pages on facebook are an example of this, or personalities on facebook that have massive amounts of followers.

Salespeople, shouldn’t have to explain this.

In the case of the lightning video it was posted onto a social hub, which was a clickbait news page on facebook that linked the video from youtube.

2. The Message-

It has to be memorable or interesting. If you watch the video the guy has a strange voice that seems like he had a stroke while watching Fat Pizza and someone nearly gets struck by lightning. It also only 46 seconds long so it’s easily digestible. These factors make it interesting.

3. The Environment-

The message should be spread to a wide variety of messengers. Simply put strategically spread your seed. The video was posted on facebook pages, reddit’s main video section.

I’m not donning a tinfoil hat, but if you were to claim that this video is using embedded marketing to advertise a product, the product it would be doing that for is the GoPro.

 

Andreas M. Kaplan Michael Haenlein