[border]

Posts Tagged ‘interactive’

I recently tweeted that lately the interactive industry was feeling to me like 1998 all over again (I qualified this by saying “the good parts”) and wasn’t really speaking about the financial bubble per se.   At the time I posted that tweet, I was coming off an unbelievable day of new business interest for our agency, several solicitation calls from web/social start-ups, and a couple of conversations that started out as “I need a viral video like Old Spice“.  The day reminded me of the period in time when we would get numerous calls each month where the caller would say “I need a website up and running asap, can you do it?”; “I’m a start-up .com and do you want to invest?”; “My Uncle’s cousin’s brother did the web design but can you program it?” and finally, “We want a viral video like The Dancing Babies.

The response to that spur of the moment tweet was interesting.  On the one hand, there were a couple of immediate and resounding “YES, EXACTLY” type of responses from a couple of the grizzled digital marketing veterans that were also around through the ’90’s.   I suppose I expected that.  But there were more than a few “What does that mean?” direct tweets and hallway conversations.  I realized that there are some very experienced 10 year veterans, who don’t have that historical perspective which caused me to really think about the parallels between those crazy late 1990 years, and today.

The digital marketing industry today is every bit as exciting for me as it was in those exuberant “we’re inventing something” years.  But at the same time we made a lot of mistakes along the journey that I’d like to work hard to avoid this time around.  So I started thinking about some of those mistakes that we made and how we might apply the learnings from them today — so that we end up looking back and saying “Man, 2010 was a crazy year, but a great year”.

(more…)

The Brunner Creatives weigh in on what they learned at SXSWi 2010.

fi3

Since SXSW Film and SXSW Interactive have overlapping schedules, and since there are a number of subjects that would be of equal interest to those who work in film as well as those who work in interactive, there is a whole series of panels under the heading: “Convergence.”  Registrants to either festival can attend.

Given my 15 years as a director before returning to the agency side in an interactive role, it’s no wonder that these panels are consistently my favorite. But this year, something’s different in the Convergence rooms.  Nothing has changed about my preference for the subjects discussed.  What has changed, however, is the makeup of the other attendees.

Last year, when panelists or speakers would ask, “Who in the room is in film?” about half the room would raise their hands.  “Who is in interactive?” would bring up the other half of the hands in the room.  But this year, more people — a lot more — are simply keeping their hands up as an affirmative answer to both questions.  Which says everything about the capabilities of online, the emergence of new production techniques, and the shift in the way people consume media.

Film didn’t get me into the web.  I was into the web long before it had the capability to do film — or, well, much of anything that we take for granted now.  But since I also was/am a filmmaker, film certainly has informed my view of the web, including some of my ideas about user experience, linear and nonlinear narrative in nonlinear space, the way things move — lots of things we consider all the time when we’re thinking about  and designing things with pixels.  Of course, once the web became capable of delivering video, the game changed for both film and interactive.  The makeup of the convergence panels this year is evidence of that.

Not long ago, if you were a filmmaker, and you were on the web, it meant two things: One, you were really a video maker, which wasn’t seen quite as good as being a “filmmaker.” And, two, the things you made weren’t usually seen in “legitimate” distribution channels — like TV shows, commercials, and theaters.

All that’s out the window now.  All of it.

HD Digital production changed the process and economics of telling a story with moving pictures.  Bandwidth and quality compression changed the delivery mechanism.  And now, no serious “filmmaker” — or “legitimate distribution channel, for that matter — can live without the web.  And conversely, the web experience is becoming increasingly dependent on content that moves.  Convergence isn’t complete.  Yet.  But it will be soon.  The Convergence panels prove it by putting film and interactive where they belong:  In the same room.

More answers to our two favorite questions.

One of the great things about South By Southwest Interactive is that many of the topics that are covered at the conference aren’t selected by the conference organizers, but by the digital community. The topics of the sessions at SXSWi are just as telling as the details of what is said in the sessions themselves. What’s important now, and what will be important, tend to dominate the discussions here. It’s a great barometer for helping focus our efforts and our attention over the coming year.

So what are some of the dominant themes this year? The mobile web and branded mobile apps. Content strategy. Tapping into the wisdom, content and influence of crowds. And a deeper dive into the psychology and sociology of the social web. Your brand may or may not be thinking about these things right now, but judging from the insights being shared in Austin right now by some of the leading minds in the interactive world, you will be. Soon.

And what isn’t being discussed? The question of whether you should be on social networks or not. That has been answered and we’ve moved on to an exploration of how to do it more effectively.

Also the discussion of tradition versus digital agencies, who leads the creative process, which one comes up with better thinking and idea, etc. is completely absent. It has a topic in past years, but now it’s gone. Why? I believe it is because, to this forward thinking crowd, that question doesn’t really matter anymore. If you’re worried about what kind of agency should be thinking about what kind of ideas, you’re missing the point. Let the pages of Advertising Age and Adweek rehash that discussion - this crowd has moved on.

Don’t get me wrong: the prevalent topics here don’t matter because they are being discussed at SXSW. They are being discussed at SXSW because they matter. Much of the discussion is centered around how to more effectively connect with people. How to keep them interested in what you have to offer, how to earn and retain their trust and how to stay with them no matter where they are and what they are doing. This is extremely important for brands who want to stay connected to consumers in the face of the massive changes that are taking place in our use of technology, our consumption of media and our patterns of communication.

And to help the brands that we serve make and keep those connections in this new and changing landscape, well, that’s why we’re here.

Shaun Quigley, VP / Interactive Practice Director in Brunner’s DC office talks WOM with Capitol Communicator TV:

I loved the Droid campaign from the moment I saw the “iDon’t” ads, though my affection wasn’t about product preference or interest. I’ve also loved the Apple campaign ever since Justin Long came on board. Simply put, I love competitive depositioning and am fascinated anytime a company has the right product, leadership and balls-to-the-wall attitude to make it happen. But today my fascination skyrocketed when I finally visited droiddoes.com and checked out their micro site on launch day. I went to the live feed called “Droid Does Times Square” where it took me a minute to figure out that they were showing off the phone’s differentiating voice search functionality by letting passersby call in and “search Times Square just like the Droid does.” And with the micro site live feed, anyone in the world could participate. At noon on Friday Nov. 6,  it was a 3.5 hr wait to run your own Droid voice activated search.

 

 

droid-does-times-square

 

I forwarded this to my colleagues and said, “I have no idea what kind of emerging media this is, but it’s wild.”  Digital billboards in Time Square connected to mobile marketing, web integration, a PR campaign that yielded thousands of articles, experiential / engagement and here I am, blogging about it and boosting their social media results.  This seemingly small piece of a micro site had so many moving parts and pieces it had to take the kind of collaboration that in marketing sometimes seems unnatural or forced.   What caught my eye was how the idea works across all disciplines fairly seamlessly – one-to-one, digital, PR, media, creative, experiential, and mobile. Of course, the meeting of the minds that had to occur between giants like Google, Motorola and Verizon and their respective agencies must have been somewhat akin to herding really smart cats.

 

 

Switching gears slightly…I spent the first 8 years of my career in tech PR, and for 5 years, IBM was one of my major clients – which required me to get to know the tech services industry a little better than your average flack. And lately, I’ve been feeling like the marketing industry could take some notes from the tech integrators. IBM has long taken on Microsoft by pushing open source, open standards and open technologies, believing that the money is in the services and a longer relationship than could be established through the more transactional hardware and software industries (though other trends are changing that).  By being hardware and software neutral, they can provide the complete solution that’s right for their client’s unique need. Rather than pushing the same product or variation on it for everyone, they have the freedom to look at the entire business, and aren’t limited by corporate  requirement to incorporate their own products (though they certainly have them). It’s a model that’s served IBM well.

 

 

What if our industry moved towards “open marketing” model, where it’s not about the right digital solution or the right PR campaign or the right creative or the right social media strategy or the right customer loyalty program.  Yes, those things always have their place, but more often than not, there’s a bigger picture and a bigger opportunity. It’s a model that just puts a bunch of smart, un-like-minded individuals in a  room and lets them go at a client’s business. We’re seeing glimpses of it, and here at Brunner we’ve eliminated our individual profit centers to eliminate the pressures of unique P&L’s and have established dedicated, multi-disciplinary teams to do just that type of thinking. But it’s not a shift that took hold over night and it’s a constant cultural evolution. We’re always adapting because there’s a lot of power in a lot of minds and that’s not always easy to harness. It’s a process that sometimes seems like it can’t happen fast enough.

 

 

I’m not sure how many business out there are breaking down those walls fast enough, but I can tell you this much – it’s something Droiddoes.

Shaun talks about defining engagement with a brand as something more than a couple of clicks.

Read Ernie Mosteller’s full post at Adotas.com:  http://bit.ly/cfmL0

[excerpt]

As social media continues grow as the go-to function for web users, as brands continue to integrate social elements into brand sites and brand elements into social sites, the metaphor of marketing as a conversation ceases to be a metaphor. It’s real now. The conversation is happening. It’s live, and it’s in real time.

Full post at Adotas.com:  http://bit.ly/cfmL0