I recently read the book Breaking Open The Head by Daniel Pinchbeck on a recommendation and was very intrigued by the connection of the internet to shamanistic ideas.

One particular passage talks about the Burning Man festival which takes place in the Black Rock Desert of Nevada at the end of August.

“The rapid growth of the festival and it’s flawless self-organizing structure are direct products of the Internet. Among the attendants at Burning Man can be found a tremendous brain trust of scientists and technicians, Silicon Valley Engineers and CEOs… Briefly escaping corporate jobs or university labs, they find release in flaunting their tools before a live and jubilant audience. “Black Rock City shows it’s possible to create a society based on play,” said Russel Wilcox.

In reading that so many internet associated people attend such events, one can see how and why the idea of the online social network was born. The ideals of current online social networks are found and inspired through these real-world settings. Life imitating art imitating life to a point. Can the online space replace the human connection of a face-to-face conversation? Probably not. But that’s where the challenge lies in gaining a connection where LOL and emoticons truly emote.

As the real world and these events foster “mind altering” and “mind expanding” through a variety of methods and, yes, substances, the online space is a prime inducer of opening the mind. Granted, watching too many YouTube videos has the opposite effect, but as a whole the internet is many people’s drug of choice through its vast landscape of content. I doubt the military saw the internet having this effect to such a social level.

Social networking takes us to these alternate realities. It lets users take on any persona they wish. It let’s people connect with those familiar and close to them as well as complete strangers. It’s an out-of-body experience. These crossovers from the physical space into the online space is where Web 3.0 is being born. Content generation with social interaction that explore connections in an alternate plane.

Share on Facebook

This post summarizes an ongoing conversation I’ve had over the past couple years with Brendan Light, SVP Research and Development at Buzzback Market Research: a super smart guy at a super smart company.

The Internet. It happened fast. One day, I was a high school, checking out images of college campuses on CD-ROM, the next, I was emailing from a “terminal” in my college library. The transition from analog to optical media-based digital content to Web-based content happened in a heartbeat and big business (and subsequently, big advertising agencies) had to adapt…fast.

So what happened? Everyone reacted instinctively and created an advertising convergence culture…and I don’t mean this in the good, Henry Jenkins way. This was more a convergence of media aesthetics–the creative executions that populated the Web evoked familiar print and TV advertising styles. Even digital DM and CRM programs were really just ports of their offline brethren–not systems reconfigured to take advantage of interactivity. At the time, it was more important that clients and consumers wrap their heads around the medium in a way that was familiar. There’s a silly phrase: “we only use 10% of our brains.” Well, we marketers (and our clients and consumers) have only been using about 2% of the Internet. It’s nobody fault, really; no clients (or consumers) were really prepared for the power of this fully operational battle station. What’s sad is, since the advent of online channel, nothing much has changed. Online Advertising still rarely equates to Interactive Marketing. Digital, it turns out really just means not analog.

But, as the search for engagement valuation continues, there could be a way for agencies and brands to work together to create a different kind of value system redefining, or at least taking some of the pressure off of the idea of “engagement”. To do it, we have to up the ante: it’s time to define and differentiate Interactive Marketing from Online Advertising.

How? When? Where? Whaaaaa?

The onset of the Semantic Web means more powerful targeting. Targeting that could get very close to simulating an online, controlled research panel. Tools like Buzzback’s suite of creative research applications (or ones like them) could provide back-end qualitative and quantitative analysis, as well as a flexible creative platform that will allow individual advertising executions to double as learning labs for valuable market research.

A new form of compelling interactive units would be more dynamic, always morphing and relating to user interaction on a collective and individual basis. Because the creative is more responsive, interaction rates would increase and clients would receive new types of valuable data that’s far more actionable than what they’re getting today (think about it: in addition to today’s conventional tactics, these high-powered units could inform product designs…or anything else a client would usually get from a focus group).

This approach could help close the gap between what’s measurable and what’s actionable for our clients, increasing the value of the creative and the placements.

Some people might scream, “you’ve got your chocolate in my peanut butter!” but the combination of creative advertising and market research could be the most powerful and most valuable convergence we’ll see.

What would it take?

1) A Reality check. Focus groups and surveys are dying. Research companies need to upgrade their approach and enroll their clients in this shift. I expect it would also take independent research companies and creative shops buddying up. If either expect to be successful without the other, they’re mistaken (unless they can spend lots of time and money building a best-class department).

2) Pliability. Clients and agencies need to develop more flexible strategic plans…or develop them more frequently. Part of what makes this model so interesting is how actionable it is…but agencies can’t do anything if they’re constricted by a plan that’s 6 months old. There’s really no way to predict where a conversation with consumers will go…and the most valuable reactions will be in response to the most current consumer activity. So the way most plans and spending forecasts are developed today, they probably couldn’t support this system well enough to extract the value.

3) A Breakout Hit. Money is money is money. How many times did clients ask for Subservient Chicken (without any idea how many chicken sandwiches it sold). Even though this new hybrid model would be more efficient for clients, engaging for consumers and flexible for agencies, it better not taste like medicine. A great execution for a popular brand that yields amazing results (anecdotally as well as statistically) will help this become reality. How do we increase the chances of that happening? Simple. Make sure that all your online advertising ideas are embedded with interactive marketing smarts.

Share on Facebook

MIT’s Technology Review just published it’s list of 10 Emerging Technologies for 2008. The one piece that resonated with me is Sandy Pentland’s exploration into Reality Mining especially in relation to social networking, new media and interactive.

Reality mining “is all about paying attention to patterns in life and using that information to help [with] things like setting privacy patterns, sharing things with people, notifying people–basically, to help you live your life.”

This becomes a hot topic for a few reasons. First and foremost is, once again, privacy issues. Data capture is part of our daily lives – credit card usage, cookies on sites, social network profiles, company swipe cards – and as technology continues to slowly infiltrate more of our lives, we become more tolerant and accepting of what information is divulged and distributed. Everyone has see the movies with the FBI trying to trace the criminals phone call with the criminal hanging up just before being caught. However, most people don’t think about that even with mobile phones being on all the time A simple Google search on his/her name would surprise a lot of people.

Reality Mining has been a reality for years. And as mobile phones become more prevalent with WI-FI, Bluetooth and GPS-type systems (ala iPhone,) in addition to the laptops we carry around and use, the continual social network is our daily life. And as mobile technology advances, our blip on the grid becomes more prominent. The Human Cyborg ideal continues to press forward. Professor Kevin Warwick first started research into this in 1998 by planting microchips in his arm for recognition of systems in his lab.

The major benefit of Reality Mining is from an anthropological standpoint. How people interact, where they are and when they are. Tying this information into disease outbreaks, advertising models (when a person sees an ad, what do they do right afterwards?) and general healthcare and “human maintenance.” Smartex in Italy is working on clothing that does just that.

It’s a bit of the God factor (being omnipotent and omniscient) that is also fascinating. Knowing where your friends are at any time, knowing what they’re doing, where to get the food your phone knows your craving. It’s bringing the idea of Facebook, Google Maps, Dodgeball and other sites into the physical space. The ultimate social network. Maybe even a step closer to SkyNet.

Real-time in real-time. Very meta.

Share on Facebook

A fellow co-worker and myself were discussing various social aspects and the new trend of how people use space. As in, where they spend most of their time. The topic was very interesting where we initially narrowed it down into three areas. Home, work and the ThirdSpace (or Being Space as TrendWatching points out)

commercial living-room-like settings, where catering and entertainment aren’t just the main attraction, but are there to facilitate small office/living room activities like watching a movie, reading a book, meeting friends and colleagues, or doing your admin.

BEING SPACES charge us for eating, drinking, playing, listening, surfing, working, or meeting, just as we would at home or in the office, while successfully reintegrating us into city life 

An all too common example is the way Starbucks has made the coffeeshop into a living room type setting.

I also believe that in addition to these three spaces, there is a 4thSpace - online and social networks. A place where people go as a virtual home, from their landing page on Facebook to iGoogle. People dwell in one or two of these spaces at any one time. Usually one is physical with the second being virtual (ex: sitting at home playing Xbox Live, in Starbucks surfing Facebook, etc.)

The Four Spaces
1 - Home
2 - Work/Office
3 - Being Space (Starbucks, Borders Books, Panera Bread)
4 - Virtual Space (Facebook, iGoogle, MySpace) 

The intriguing aspect of 4thSpace is that it continues to exist without us after we place our identity into that realm. With MySpace, there are pages of deceased members that still garner visits and posted comments. So much so in fact that those that have passed now warrant their own sites like MyDeathSpace.com. The virtual identity becomes, or takes the place of, a real presence. Granted, social networks also allow users to be someone (or something) other than themselves, but the 4thSpace allows comfort in a setting where the other three spaces may not.

People unfamiliar, and even the familiar, become known by their page or avatar. Xbox Live, Facebook or when SecondLife was viable allows users to drop in for a visit and say hello. No one home? Leave a message and they’ll get back to you.

It’s a fascinating topic that is vast in it’s research potential, especially with user trends and emerging technologies with the additional social aspects and implications. As we get drawn into The Matrix a bit more, it’ll be nice to know how cozy it will be. Or when a Starbucks opens a Starbucks in it. Trust me, NYC is close already.

Share on Facebook

According to a Forrester Research report, regardless of what happens to the economy, social media spending will remain strong. This flies in the face of what happened in the last downturn, where advertisers put their money into old standbys like television.

Now this doesn’t mean that advertisers will simply be spending more money on ads on social media websites. Josh Bernoff, Forrester analyst said:

Placing ads in Facebook will suffer right along with placing ads on Yahoo! and in Time magazine. That’s going to get cut across the board.

Where spending will be strong seems to be in the development of communities and within existing ones.

Which is where companies should be spending it in the first place.

Share on Facebook

Check out this eMarketer chart reflecting the levels of familiarity Canadian marketing executives say they have with social media.

Anyone else find it interesting that more company owners (likely 50+) would say they are very familiar with social media as their customers, while junior staffers (likely under 30 years old) would say they weren’t as familiar as their customers?

If this were the case, you’d think that big business would have figured out social networks by now.

I think it’s just a case of the old guard thinking they know everything, but maybe that’s just me. And if you’re a junior marketing manager that doesn’t think you know as much about social media as your customers, then I feel very, very, very sorry for you. Polish up your resume.

Share on Facebook

According to the new Myers Emotional Connections™ Research Report on Audience Attentiveness to Advertising, websites visited for TV and/or Movie information generate the highest awareness of advertising among all age groups except 55+.

Forty-five percent of teens 15 to 17, 41% of adults 18 to 24 and 33% of adults 25 to 54 who visit websites say they are likely to pay attention to ads appearing at TV and movie sites.

What is also very interesting about this report is that ads on these types of websites perform better attention-wise (31.10%) than those ads on TV (28.40%).

Newspapers rank first in advertising effectiveness, but my hunch is that is because readership skews much older, and less of other media (especially digital) is being consumed.

What does this mean? If your brand is purchasing media, make sure your media buyers have an understanding of the TV/Movie-related online behaviors of your target audiences.

Share on Facebook

In a Google/Nielsen study of 2,000 US moviegoers, we again confirm what we’ve known for years — online content and advertising impact moviegoing audiences’ moviegoing decisions.

Highlights from the study:

TV and the Web hold almost the same amount of sway over potential moviegoers–as 68% of respondents said that TV was influential in their decision to see the film, while 66% said the same about the Internet.

24% of moviegoers polled said they had watched the trailer for the movie they’d just seen online
91% of these said that it was “very or somewhat” influential in their decision to see it.

Moviegoers who had seen ads and content were:
68% more likely to search for more information on the film
130% more likely to visit the official movie Web site
23% more likely to talk to others about the movie than their info-only counterparts.

Respondents who’d seen both ads and Web info pertaining to the movie were 40% more likely to recommend it to their family or friends.

The report also found that the number of moviegoers who said the Web was their first source of information about the movie they had just seen increased from 8% in 2006, to 13% in 2007–a 63% increase year-over-year.

Here’s the rub, though: No matter how much research comes out saying that online advertising impacts moviegoing, it will always be just part of the equation. A very important part, but a part nonetheless. Television advertising is still (for now) what most directly impacts overall audience awareness for a film.

Why? Because there is such a disproportionate amount money spent on television, that it is impossible for online to make a dent. If you watch television frequently, there is no doubt that you will see the same ad for a film a dozen times. For each one of those ads run above the optimal frequency you could have “owned” the homepages of some of the most popular sites on the web in a way that is more targeted, more relevant, and more engaging.

The problem is that the movie business is such a high-risk business, that there just isn’t that much room for experimentation when there is lots of money involved. And that’s got to change. That might mean minimizing the costs of making a film in favor of using dollars to explore new ways of marketing films.

What’s interesting is that while Hollywood continues to not put enough money on the web, the industry that I’m starting to pay attention to the web the most, is the one that’s Hollywood’s favorite ad dollar receptacle: television.

The television industry sees the writing on the wall. Will Hollywood step up?

Hollywood’s online budgets are bigger than they ever have been. But it’s still not enough. And when they do get the money (they will — it’s inevitable), will they know what to do with it? Will they be able to strike the right balance between paid advertising (without too high of a frequency), content distribution, promotions, and buzz-generating/word-of-mouth-driving/zeitgeist-entering ideas?

I sure hope so. If not, I know someone that can help.

Share on Facebook

Trust me. It’s worth it. I’ll share all the results (along with my insights) with you after the data collection period closely.

I want to know all about you.

Click here to take the survey.

Share on Facebook