September 27, 2005

Nikki, you're right. Why do "green" products need to look so frumpy? Answer is, they don't. The manufacturers, I think, go for safe styles and colors because they figure the market is limited so go conservative. That's so wrong. Look at the VW Beetle. Don't you just love seeing a lemon yellow one or that delicious green color they have? Aren't they so much more eye-catching, alluring, and enticing than the basic white, black, silver, whatever palette? I don't like all these neutral metalic colors at all. I think what's behind them is that it makes it easier for the manufacturer...like we were saying yesterday about GM...but doesn't allow for customers to celebrate their individuality. The heck with that!

Ford has gotten on the green bandwagon too. They're going to increase their global hybrid production ten fold...to approximately 250,000 units by 2010, and flexible fuel vehicles to 280,0000 annually by next year.

Toyota is also about to launch a brand of gas/electric power train.

That's just the car people. What about the rest of us? What are we doing to be green...and how are we communicating it, spreading the word - both to enhance our images and to get others to follow suit.

Web Ad Spending On the Rise

JupiterResearch predicts total spending on local online ad sales will reach $3.2 billion by the year end, a 26% increase from 2004. The report predicts the local market will total $5.3 billion by the end of the decade.

The ways in which online ad dollars are being spent are increasingly sophisticated and complex. And I'm so very grateful that we have such a smart media director (Michelle Evans) and staff that can create really powerful, effective, and measurable online ad programs for our clients.

Oh My Gosh, It's Almost Holiday Season

Well, not quite...although Natalie told us today when and where our annual holiday bash will be held.

Retailers are expecting a slow season. They'll start earlier than ever with the decorations and hoopla, in hopes of improving the season by extending it.

Personally, I think it's senseless to buck the trend, fight the prevailing sentiment. And I think that sentiment today is directed toward our fellow Americans who have been so horribly devastated, uprooted, and dislocated by Katrina and Rita.

The most satisfying kind of holiday giving would be related to those people, in my opinion. How can retailers provide us with opportunities to help out those people instead of our usual gift recipients? Certainly that would be a creative way to do corporate gifts. Instead of yet another anonymous corporate gift, I'd much rather get a card that said that in lieu of a gift to me a gift had been given to a Katrina/Rita victim.

I say that...but I don't ever get corporate gifts. Once, many years ago, I did receive a coozie (sp?) from Pam Hesse. I'll forever be grateful to her!

I'm digressing. Is age about to set in?

Point is...retailers need to be more creative this holiday season. Advertising earlier and/or more isn't going to do the trick. It's thinking-cap time.

September 26, 2005

It's Not Where It's Made. It's How It's Made.

Remember the big "Made in America" craze? Well, that one's dead.

No one cares where things are made any more. In fact, it seems as though virtually everything is made in China. Well, not the dinner you had at that restaurant tonight...but probably everything other than the food and drink.

HOW things are made is what has currency with consumers today. That means, does it include recycled products, are the materials environmentally safe, is the manufacturer environmentally responsible?

You notice it more and more on products. Manufacturers are telling you how things are made, and that can be a powerfully positive message. Smart manufacturers are cleaning up their acts, getting "green," and sharing that info with their customers. Good moves.

Nature Rules

Being green isn't just for manufacturers. We're facing an environmental crisis, and every business is going to benefit from not only being "green" but also telling their customers/suppliers/employees/shareholders/etc. how they are being part of the solution.

Henry Romaine recently returned from the Arctic where he said there is stunning evidence of the effects of global warming.

Joni Thomas is in Las Vegas this week. If she ever tears herself away from the tables and Barry Manilow, she might go over to Lake Mead where she will notice the water is at frightening low levels.

These and hundreds of other anecdotes are part of the same story. We are depleting our precious natural resources.

It's pretty clear that the government isn't going to do anything about it, so it's up to individual businesses to take the lead.

I see this as a tremendous marketing opportunity. Businesses can identify a myriad of ways in which they can help be part of the solution and then they can win great favor (and more converts) by spreading the news.

That's a marketing and communications challenge...and telling people what you're doing is every bit as important as doing it. Maybe more so.

We're already seeing some movement among the major automobile companies. For example, GM is making its SUV's slightly more fuel efficient, and it plans to aggressively promote this improved gas mileage.

Speaking of GM, Jack Trout continues to use GM as the classic example of line extension gone awry. In a recent Harvard Business Review column, Trout notes that early GM had way too much line extension, with the various GM brands cannibalizing one another. Then Alfred Sloan came along and narrowed each car's market by narrowing price ranges, and GM captured more than 57% of the U.S. market. Unfortunately, by 2000, the lines were fuzzy once again. And GM's market share has dwindled.

Why do they have such similar cars, regardless of whether they are Chevrolets or Buicks? Because it's easier and more cost-efficient for them to manufacture cars that have more similarities than differences. That's being company-focused, rather than customer-focused. And, by following that philosophy, GM has been on a steady decline.

September 22, 2005

I agree with you, Jay, that fragmentation is a good thing insofar as it provides people with more choice. "Good Night, and Good Luck" focuses on an elected official who used his position to discredit others with inuendo and misinformation. He didn't appreciate or respect the difference between dissent and diloyalty. This is incredibly relevant today. For example, according to this administration, if we disagree with the Iraq War, we are not patriotic.

According to McCarthy, if we disagreed with his specious allegations against innocent people, we were Communist sympathizers and unworthy of holding a job or anything else.

This got way out of hand - as it threatens to get today, 50 years later. And it was the media - specifically Ed Morrow and his producer Fred Friendly - who had the guts to expose McCarthy.

Today, one wonders whether the media - now part of major corporate entities facing great consequences for taking on any segment of the government - would have the guts to do anything about a McCarthy. AND - and this was Brian Williams' point - if only one network took on a McCarthy, would it have a large enough audience to create the necessary impact?

A Lovely Example of Collaboration

We were talking about collaboration yesterday. And I just read this great little anecdote about collaboration in the music business.

Harold Arlen was a remarkable composer, who wrote numerous legendary songs like "I've Got the World on a String," "That Old Black Magic," and "One for My Baby (and One More for the Road)."

He wrote the songs for "The Wizard of Oz" with lyricist E.Y. Harburg. The movie needed a special ballad that would take Dorothy from black-and-white Kansas to colorful Oz. Arlen struggled with the song and finally came up with something to which Harburg wrote lyrics.

They played it for their dear friend, lyricist Ira Gershwin. Finding is so beautiful, Gershwin cried. But he thought the song ended too abruptly and needed a coda, which he then improvised for the composer: "If happy little bluebirds fly/Beyond the rainbow/Why oh why can't I."

It sure makes sense to listen to the advice of your peers!

September 21, 2005

Collaboration

There's no question that the best way to develop sound strategies is through collaborative thinking...teamwork. Some of our associates met this morning to discuss strategies for a prospective client, and I was impressed yet again by the intelligent thinking of our people and the way in which they complement each other. I kept thinking that if only clients - or prospects - could see this brainpower at work they sure would be impressed. Working together, with seamlessness between discipline, sure does produce better thinking...which, in turn, produces better results for our clients.

Mixing with the Media Stars

People who know me know that I don't drop names. But tonight was unusual, to say the least.

I went to a small private screening of George Clooney's new movie "Good Night, and Good Luck," which focuses on legendary CBS newsman Edward R. Murrow's successful unmasking of Joe McCarthy, the heavy-handed senator who spread fear through the land with his witch hunt for Communist sympathizers.

These were dark days in our country's history. They deserve constant reminding and study.

The film is brilliant, and more relevant today than ever before. It opens in a couple of weeks, and I couldn't recommend it more enthusiastically.

In the small screening room and at dinner afterwards, there was a star-studded group of the greatest broadcast journalists of our time. Dan Rather, Brian Williams, Tom Brokaw, Barbara Walters, Walter Cronkite, Morley Safer, and Andy Rooney were just some of the people who were there.

McCarthy's witch hunt was exposed by Murrow and that led to censure hearings during which attorney Joseph Welch delivered his legendary "Have you no decency..." speech, and McCarthy was finally put in his place.

At dinner, Brian Williams - who was back from New Orleans and then, after dinner, heading for Houston - told us that "The shared experience of America is no longer possible. We reach 11 or 12 million people a night, but back then Murrow and other network newscasts reached more than 40 million people."

Williams said that every morning, when he meets with his staff, each person has watched something different the night before. What a change that is from the Murrow years when most people watched the same programs and shared those experiences together.

Under today's circumstances, how do we develop, maintain, and strengthen enough of a sense of community? How do we keep our country from getting too fragmented...where people listen or watch only the news and opinions with which they agree?

How do we make the seminal changes that are necessary to get our country on the right track?

The fragmentation of our communications has many benefits. We get to watch what we want, when we want. But that doesn't necessarily mean that we get to watch what we ought to watch. By self-defining our interests, we may be limiting ourselves and our knowledge.

George Clooney's father was a newsman. This movie - which is shot in black and white to match up with the real-life footage of McCarthy and others - is a tribute to the best qualities of news operations. It speaks to the challenges and values that are on all of our minds today. And it sure makes you think.

September 20, 2005

Post-Katrina Consumer Landscape

We're seeing some of the same dynamics we saw after 9/11. People are nesting at home, treasuring time with their families, being grateful for whatever they have. People are relying more on their faith, and my guess is that church attendance is continuing to rise. There's a real need for community.

But there are at least three new dynamics at work. One is the recognition of the power of nature, and the understanding that we must learn to co-exist with nature. That means more awareness and respect for the environment.

A second new dynamic is the concern that we're each going to have to be able to fend for ourselves. We cannot rely upon the government, even though it was supposed to be more prepared than ever to deal with a disaster.

And a third new dynamic is the extraordinary outpouring of concern and support for the victims of disaster. There's a charitableness (is there such a word?) at work today that goes far beyond what we saw after 9/11.

Some of that may be fueled by the extraordinary number of fellow Americans affected by Katrina. But more of it, I believe, is a result of the fact that so many poor people were affected...so many people who do not have the resources to help themselves. The media has helped us come face to face with the reality of those people and their lives. They are our fellow countrymen...our fellow human beings.

We emerge, then, from Katrina as a different consumer community...more concerned about values like family and faith, more concerned about our environment, and more charitable toward one another. Those dynamics have major implications for marketers.

Martha Off to a Slow Start

Daily Variety called the debut numbers on Martha Stewart's new daytime show last week "just a modest success." I have thought that she wouldn't do so well trying to present a different personna on the air. But time will tell.

Another post-Katrina effect is the even greater appreciation of authenticity. (Many people felt that the Administration's response to the disaster didn't ring very true.) If Martha Stewart - or anyone else - portray themselves as something they're not, I don't think the audience will stick around.

September 19, 2005

Hiatus caused by trip to hike the trails of Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks. No e-mail and no phone and no TV and no newspaper. It worked for Lewis and Clark. And it still works.

Mountains are beautiful, dramatic, awe-inspiring. That's a generally accepted perception now, and has been for a few centuries. We are conditioned to share that perception...in a way not dissimilar to the ways in which we are conditioned to enjoy certain other sights, sounds, tastes and smells.

It's important to recognize that these responses are conditioned and not absolute. Michael Kimmelman points out that the ancient Greeks felt repelled by mountains, the Romans found them desolate and hostile, and Martin Luther believed them to be part of God's retribution for man's fall.

It was the romantic writers of the 18th and 19th centuries that changed our perceptions of mountains. So that now we view them, go "aaah," and do so because of a response that is not isolated and absolute but rather instead has been conditioned by all that we've heard, read, and been taught.

The distinction is critical and an essential element of effective marketing. Great products resonate with a memory or conditioned perception that each of us has. Everything - everything - is relative. Making the connections, evoking those memories, resonating with those perceptions...these are the hallmarks of great product marketing.


Wal-Mart Goes Stylin'

I can't resist reading anything about Wal-Mart. I had the same problem some years ago with articles about Michael Ovitz. I couldn't resist them. Then I realized that Michael Ovitz is totally irrelevant and I was wasting my time and needed serious psychiatric counseling. Wal-Mart is NOT totally irrelevant. Not by a long shot.

The latest on Wal-Mart is that they are going for more upscale customers by introducing more fashionable merchandise to their stores. Target's stock is up about 18% this year...and Wal-Mart's stock is down by a similar amount. So, what's Wal-Mart's response: Try to be more like Target.

Strange, I think. K-Mart tried to be like Wal-Mart and look what happened to them. Target found its OWN niche, and they prospered. Now, is Wal-Mart going to become a 'me-too' brand?

Wal-Mart has launched a fashion show in New York, taken a multi-page ad spread in Vogue, and will flood the airways with new fashion-focused ads.

Racks will be less chock-a-block with clothes. New, more fashionable merchandise will be more attractively displayed.

Is Wal-Mart being true to its brand?

Maybe not with the emphasis on fashion. But I think the wider aisles, better displays, and more attractive lighting that they're proposing will certainly improve their shopping experience.

Wal-Mart may see Target as the enemy, but I believe it's Costco that is eating Wal-Mart's lunch. And, it may have something to do with the way Costco pays and treats its employees.

September 7, 2005

You're right, Jason. And another thing that's interesting to note with actors is the extent to which they are able (or unable) to move from one medium to another. The actor who connects with us on the small TV screen often bombs on the movie screen. Or the personality who is absolute king in one context (Letterman on late night) flops miserably in another (Letterman hosting the Academy Awards).

All of this points out the complexity and mystery of effective communications. When communications work well, they look effortless. When they don't, one realizes how difficult they really are.

How Will Our World Change?

I don't think we've even begun to get our arms around the impact of Katrina. Horrific acts of comission and omission have occured in our own country, by our own citizens...and by our own leadership. The looters actions are no worse than the government's lack of action. As we are all Americans, we are all complicitous. I happen to think this tragedy will affect our entire national culture...and that, of course, has major implications for marketing and communications.

This is not something that was done to us. We did it to ourselves. And now, in the sober light of day, we are all wracked with anger, disgust, and desire to do something. We want to be part of the solution. But we're not really sure what to do.

If we all look for ways to help, those of us in marketing and communications can serve an enormously valuable purpose. My guess (my hope) is that communities across the country will identify ways in which they can be responsive to what has happened. That means they'll take in people whose homes have been destroyed and lives uprooted. That means they'll seek ways to save energy and make us less dependent upon fossil fuels. That means that they will need to raise money and raise awareness for these and other initiatives. And that means they'll need marketing and communications.

After all, the ideas and initiatives won't amount to much, if they can't be effectively communicated.

So this is OUR opportunity to be part of the solution. We should run toward it.

My guess is that all of us in our industry could think of ways in which each one of our clients could - in some way - also contribute to being part of the solution. Maybe they have a fleet of trucks (or buses). They could consider converting them to bio-diesel. That would help the environment, decrease our dependence on fossil fuel, AND enhance their image. Our job: suggest it, help get it implemented, and communicate it.

I am firmly convinced that "business as usual" became irrelevant when Katrina made landfall.

September 6, 2005

If Only You Could See and Hear Me...and I, You.

Here's a sobering study in this time of techno communications.

UCLA professor Albert Mehrabian found that 55% of meaning in an interaction comes from facial and body language and 38% comes from vocal inflection. Only 7% of an interaction's meaning is derived from the words themselves.

We intuit this already, but we hide behind the ease of the Internet and communicate all too often in an impersonal context. I remember reading a study that showed the amazing paucity of words spoken daily between husbands and wives. Could that number have been even further reduced by web communications?

Deborah Tannen must have a thing or three to say about that.

Nothing beats face-to-face communications. Nothing. All the other stuff is fine and expeditious and time saving and so wonderfully easy (and, to a great degree, safe).

But "safe" has no "soul."

September 5, 2005

Tony Danza? Melissa, it's time you quit that maternity leave and came back to work! Next Monday can't come soon enough! We've missed you.

So Obvious...So Overlooked

The most important part of communications is listening.

And that's what's so stunning, shocking, embarrassing, and heartbreaking about the government's response to the Katrina catastrophe.

They weren't listening.

They weren't listening when the Times Picayune wrote story after story about the need to strengthen the levees.

They weren't listening when it was crystal clear that Katrina was headed right for the Gulf Coast.

And they weren't listening when hundreds of thousands of people were hurting, Big Time.

Paula Zahn's interview with Michael Brown will live in infamy as - perhaps - the penultimate object lesson in "not listening."

Most of us cannot imagine ever being as insensitive and unresponsive as our government has been over the past week. But can we learn to sharpen our own listening skills in the worlds in which we operate?

One helpful "handbook" that I've always liked is Deborah Tannen's book You Just Don't Understand. She focuses on the different ways in which men and women communicate. We all occasionally fall into little traps of knee-jerk reactions that make us unresponsive to the person who is trying to communicate with us.

Our business is communications. So, we darn well need to keep working on our listening skills. Otherwise, we could end up with another kind of job...like working for a thoroughbred horse association, for example.

Getting Online in Crisis

The impact of the Internet was acutely felt during this past week. Michelle Evans shared some great statistics with me.

According to comScore Networks, on August 29th, more than 1.7 million searches were conducted containing the words "Hurricans" and/or "Katrina."

Traffic to RedCross.org on August 31 reached nearly one million people, more than 32 times the average number of daily visitors from August 22-26.

And then - on Wednesday, August 31st - according to Nielsen/NetRatings RedCross.org attracted more than 1.1 million people. That's more people than logged onto RedCross.org during the entire month of December (in response to the tsunami disaster)...and it's 10 times the normal traffic to the site.

Also on the 31st, CNN.com reported that there were 15.7 million video plays of its Hurricane Katrina coverage over the Monday-Tuesday period. By the next day, CNN had received more than 10,000 e-mails from citizen journalists.

Alas, very little word came from New Orleans. On an average day, 700,000 people used the Internet there. But, by last Tuesday, that number declined by 90%.

I just logged on to Amazon, and there's a big Red Cross appeal on their home page. Hopefully, many many websites are doing the same. My guess is that the people of this country will listen...even if the government doesn't.

September 1, 2005

Cable Booming

This summer (can it be almost over?!), there was a 9.9% decline in broadcast TV viewership, and a 5.2% INcrease in cable TV viewership.

Our great media director, Michelle Evans, has explained to me some of the reasons for cable's continuing growth.

One reason is more good programming, like The Closer on TNT.

A second reason is the fact that episodes of hit network shows are often being shown on cable later the same week that the shows have premiered on the networks.

And a third reason is that cable has been very savvy about identifying niche audiences and growing them. For example, the Scripps cable channels - that include HGTV and The Food Network - have been very successful at attracting more affluent viewers. Those channels expect their ad revenue to increase 22-25% this year.

The heat is on cable. And so are the price increases. Advertising costs-per-thousand increased about 4% on broadcast TV for the coming fall season, while they increased on average 11% on cable.

You can see the dynamic. It costs much more now to reach 1,000 viewers. And there's an ever-increasing fragmentation of the market, as cable channels increase their viewership and new channels come on line.

What's that mean for advertisers? It means be darn sure you've got someone mighty smart (like Michelle Evans!) overseeing your media planning and buying.

Out on a Limb

I'm going out on a limb and predicting that the New Martha Stewart will bomb. Ms. Stewart is apparently staging her comeback in a new guise...warm, cuddly, laid back, self-deprecating, informal, unscripted, and perfectly happy to laugh at herself making a mistake.

I have always believed that TV is a truth serum. Personalities come through loud and clear, and there's no hiding, no faking. The genuine article rules. And her audience - boomers - you know what they admire most? Authenticity.

Ms. Stewart's success has been predicated on the personality that came through loud and clear in all of her television appearances over the last many decades: extraordinarily talented, organized, knowledgeable, and helpful...with not one missed beat, not one hair out of place. There was the rest of us. And there was Martha.

My sense is that she is every bit as extraordinary as she has come across all these years.

So why now go for "the common touch." I just don't think it will ring true.

And...Oprah owns it.