advergirl

The triumphant return of Artie Isaac

2009-12-05T08:31:23-05:00

If you grew up in advertising in this town, there are certain legends you just know. The CCAD grad who built a national branding agency out of an old auto dealership. The fuzzy-headed agency founder known for stepping out of his sedan surrounded by Cheech-and-Chong-style plumes of sweet smoke. The soon-to-be mom who, pregnant and restless, cheffed up an ecommerce index that would be covered on CNN every holiday season for years to come. The uniting and dividing of a huge conglomerate agency designed to rule them all. The three friends who rallied a wholly unlikely new business win in Indy into a pharma empire. Ok, and, of course, the public affairs veteran who was heckled off the stage at the Addys after proclaiming (more than a few times) "green is the next internet."

But, there's one name, one man who we all know: Artie Isaac. With his round glasses and signature bow-tie, he is known Columbus-wide as one of the first to hang his shingle downtown and perhaps the only person ever to presume to run an advertising agency without owning a TV.

He surprised us all last year when he retired and sold Young Isaac to People to My Site. Of course, retirement for Artie looks as unlikely as do any of his other (ad)ventures. He built a crowdsourced speaker search site, started teaching at CCAD and OSU, became a regular at Luck Bros., and even launched an acting and playwrighting career.

See him next weekend (December10 - 13) doing a special fundraising event for local-favorite: Available Light Theater.

Xmas is a brand new adaptation of Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol, retold with all the joy — and contemporary complexity — of the season. Shared in the way only a bow-tie clad, PowerPoint-wielding accountant could. Here's the story:

For 30 years, Winford Doke, CPA, has been the venerated host of ConAm’s Annual Xmas Spectacular (read: office holiday party!), featuring Winford’ glorious rendition of A Christmas Carol.

However, four hours ago Winford Doke was fired, leaving his assistant, Artie Isaac, to take over the holiday duties.

Taking the stage with no time to prepare, and only Doke’s stubborn stage hand, Jo Anne, to help him through it, Artie faces down the ultimate December Dilemma.

Please join us! Cheer on a Columbus advertising legend and get to know great (smart, funny) local theater. The recommended ticket price is $15 (or pay what you want). You can also buy limited edition (numbered, signed) prints of this delightful Artie painting by awesome local artist Ben Harben at the show.

Website

Buy tickets

Columbus Dispatch Review

Alive and Unedited Profile

Facebook Page

The new influencers: Grandparents weigh in

2009-12-03T14:15:50-05:00

A new survey found a surprising trend: The nuclear family is losing ground to multigenerational living. More people are choosing to move themselves – and their children – in with Mom and Dad, often to cut costs.

Today, 6.2 million or 5.3% of all U.S. households are multigenerational – that’s up 120% in nine years.

These households are fundamentally different than those of the care-giving Oreo Generation. In 62% of these multigenerational cases it’s the adult children who are moving back with their parents, who are the grandparents. Three-fifths of these grandparents are providing some sort of financial assistance to their fully-grown children.

Three larger trends are making this an increasingly popular choice:

Grandparents are doing better than most financially. That’s because 55% of grandparents do not carry a mortgage, and grandparents control more than half of the country’s wealth. So while grandparents have certainly taken a hit in this economy along with everyone else, they are, in many cases, more solvent than their young married children with young children.

Grandparents are investing in their grandchildren. According to our recent national study, The Grandparent Economy, grandparents are spending about $32 billion on their grandchildren’s education, $11 billion on clothes for the kids, $6 billion on toys, and nearly $700 million on diapers.

Decision-making is increasingly multi-generational. Whether it’s what first car to buy, where to go to college, or who to choose for insurance, grandparent’s are increasingly part of the decision making, both with their children and their grandchildren.

This trend not only provides more financial stability for the children and grandchildren, it appears to have rewards for the grandparents as well. Many grandparents say not only that they love having their family back under their roof; they also love being needed again. They say it brings purpose to their days, and meaning to their lives. The physical demand of keeping up with the kids makes them feel younger; outdoor play burns off both calories and tension; and helping with homework provides mental stimulation.

AT&T and Apple: Co-op advertising done right

2009-11-24T09:21:40-05:00

Like most of America, you're probably watching the all-out holiday advertising war between the two leading cell phone providers.

Frustrated, perhaps, with the staying power of those fun "there's an app for that" ads (Apple is known for finding a clever idea and sticking with it to the point of complete exhaustion. It seems Justin Long will be playing Mac, for example, until well into his own middle age), Verizon fought back with the most emasculating force in advertising: sarcasm.

Their "there's a map for that" campaign exploited an AT&T weakness and caused nothing short of a war to break out in the courts and in prime time. In fact, if anything will get us out of this recession, it may be the unprecedented level of media buying between these two giants.

But, for AT&T and Apple, it's more than a brute force. The two have teamed up to leverage unique aspects of each of their authentic brands to change the conversation. The advantage they're both talking about is: the ability to use voice and data together.

AT&T - the category leader and uber-practical and sophisticated brand - brought in Luke Wilson to add a human element to its essentially intellectual argument: doesn't it make sense that you would talk and type on one device? At the same time, no less.

But, be honest, you've probably never thought about typing and talking together. Or, at least, it's not a feature you're looking for. That's where Apple comes in. They are the standard in consumer expectation. They seem to know what we need before we ourselves are even able to put words to it. They can make talk and type not only cool, but really, really desirable.

Together, the campaigns appeal to our egos and our brains. We want to try it, to make it our own. Suddenly this little-known feature is a game changer. Apple's ads create demand and AT&T's fulfill it. Rarely are cooperative campaigns so complementary and powerful.

Chances are: You're a more sophisticated Internet user than most teenagers

2009-11-22T09:58:27-05:00

Maybe it's an artifact of the native-adopter digital divide. Maybe it's merely a blind spot to our own complex behavior. Whatever the reason, what most of us think about how teens use the internet is wrong.

Myth #1: Teenagers are much heavier users of the internet than "we" are.

Fact: Even when you take out our work lives, adults 25 - 44 are the heaviest users of the internet. It's not our kids who are online all the time, it's us. Just at home, we're browsing ~34 hours a month, compared to 10 for the teen set. Even when it comes to relatively new behaviors, like watching video online, adults consume significantly more.

Check out these numbers from recent Nielsen research:

Myth #2: Teenagers are much savvier users of the internet than "we" are - connected around the globe, loose in social networks, generally leading the charge into a brave new world.

Fact: Just because technology has changed doesn't mean being a teenager has.

This is a sketch I shared at work recently about the profoundly different ways that "grownups" (us) and teens use social networks and media. Teens are much more likely to have a closer-in world view, to be cautious when putting themselves out there, to be worried about how they'll be perceived. While we're out boldly networking with everyone from our high school sweethearts to someone we met at a conference the other day, they're typing with the same people they sit across the lunch table with.

Personal convergence: What really goes on in the living room

2009-11-21T09:10:00-05:00

Convergence was the flying cars promise of our generation. One box that ruled our entertainment lives - feeding games, music, browsing, movies, telephone and more in one complex stream of multitasking magic in every living room in America.

Here, in reality - where the cars still drive on the road - convergence is much more personal and mobile.

Nielsen calls us a Three-Screen Nation.

We watch: 141 hours of television a month.

That's almost 5 hours a day. (A stat Pew echoed in earlier research)
Surprisingly, that represents an all-time high. The time we spend consuming entertainment on other devices adds on to our overall media experience, it doesn't take away from television

But: 57% of us go online at the same time

Our online experience at home is in front of the television almost a third of the time.
Sometimes we browse to complement what we're seeing on television, but more often it's entirely disconnected from it

And: We're increasingly device neutral.

The number of people watching mobile video increased 70% from last year
Those who watch video online increased their viewing by 46% compared to a year ago

Oh, and, by the way, we're starting to watch ads again.

Adweek recently reported that a greater percentage of time shifters (fancy media-buyer talk for DVR users) watched network TV ads during the first week of the season versus a year ago.
Perhaps because advertisers are starting to get what it takes to be part of our entertainment instead of mere sponsors of it. They're telling better stories, making us laugh and, occasionally, even thinking the same thing we are. My favorite of the moment.

Bookshelf: Five Must-Buy Marketing Reads

2009-10-06T13:04:55-04:00

My office is piled high with books. Kind of unexpected for a woman who can't get through a single day of work without her delicious tags, RSS feeds and twitter archives. I get inspired online, but that's never slowed my appetite for books. Industry books, fiction books, culture books. I like the ones that go deep on how to think about an idea, that give a clear and fresh perspective.

There are a lot of new and old marketing tomes on my shelf (and more on my boss's shelf ... he's very sneaky with nabbing those things), but five really stand out this year:

The Next Evolution of Marketing.

This one was the reason I started this post. I've followed author Bob Gilbreath for years. He's the wicked smart chief strategist at Bridge Worldwide and he's written the MarketingWithMeaning.com blog since its inception.

Bob looks at how break-through brands are connecting with today's sophisticated customers. What he finds is that to really make an impact, the marketing itself has to add value to our lives. The case studies are all entirely repeatable (after all, why buy a business book if you can't quote it later and sound brilliant in a meeting??) and the insights are, well, meaningful.

Get a free chapter: I got a note from Amanda Hill asking that I pass on word that you can download a free chapter to preview the book today. They'll even make a donation to a good cause (ok, the cause is making more advertisers, but still) if you do. Get yours.

Four more faves:

Igniting the Brand
This skinny volume by Jonathan Cahill is full of ideas that worked. Quick sketches of marketing strategies that paid off big for large and small companies the world over.

Here Comes Everybody
Clay Shirky is a natural storyteller. His enthusiasm and curiosity come through in every story about how technology is changing our culture. The examples go deep on how our expectations are evolving and how that's changing the way we see the world - from where we spend our time to who we trust to what we shop for.

The Whuffie Factor
Tara Hunt makes one of my favorite arguments brilliantly - that the currency of the social web isn't revenue, it's reputation. Her native look at how people and brands use it concentrates on the basics of how to socialize your brand: authenticity, listening, engaging, and trusting.

Putting the Public Back in Public Relations
Social media has changed no industry more than public relations. The last few years have represented nothing short of a revolution of the model. Brian Solis takes a thoughtful approach to what public relations means now, with lots of real-world examples on where communication and expectations are going.

What I'm reading: Social network impact and connecting with college seekers

2009-09-29T17:11:09-04:00

Getting to know millennials:

I've been working with a lot of higher ed clients lately. Projects that let us connect to some of the country's most glass-half-full, do-some-good, look-toward-a-brighter-tomorrow audiences: kids shopping for their perfect-fit colleges and their proud parents. A few recent tags:

Gen Y and Boomers Reshaping the Workplace: Harvard Business Review has an interesting look at the demands of the workers who sandwich my generation >> Boomers and Ys want unique kinds of flexibility that deliver not only balance, but broader impact.

What Colleges Don't Know About Applicants: Wow, game changing study excerpted in the Chronicle with lots of incidental, fabulous quotes, like

... it costs four-year public colleges more than $400 to secure an applicant, and four-year private colleges more than $2,000

Parents use the rankings to ask, "What's the best college?" when they should be asking, "What's the best college for my child?"

The Millennial Primer Library: Brand Amplitude has put together an interesting set of white papers and other boot camp basics on the trophy generation. Check out the introductory slides in "Using Social Media to Connect With the Most Connected Generation"

Specialization Helps Colleges Move Up the Ranks: Andrea Jarrell pairs selectivity with strategic specialization in the formula that has helped colleges make big jumps in the all-important U.S. News rankings.

University's Crisis of Purpose: This New York Times series looks at how colleges struggle to meet almost irreconcilable demands and deal with the wave of criticism on issues ranging from the cost of college to universities’ intellectual quality to their supposed decline into unthinking political correctness.

Millennials Set to Do Nothing Short of Changing The World: In this ebook - Generation We - Eric Greenberg and bestselling author Karl Weber explore the emerging power of the Millennial Generation, show how the Millennials (and their supporters from other generations) are poised to change our nation and our world for the better, and lay out a powerful plan for progressive change that today’s youth is ready to implement.

Impact of our word of mousing:

And, of course I'm endlessly fascinated by the impact we have when we act, share and talk in our everyday, increasingly-online lives. A few top picks from my usual reading list.

Enthusiast vs. Influencer Marketing - Another smart take from Whuffie girl Tara about the the differences in targeting those who wield huge broad-ranging influence online and those who truly love us. I had a similar experience last month. I was featured on a wildly popular, but out-of-my-category-entirely blog. I expected a big uptick in traffic from my A-List association, but in fact - I got nearly 10x the referrals from my own network that week.

Happiness Is Contagious - Mitch takes a highlighter to the top quotes from the recent New York Times mega-piece about how good behaviors — like quitting smoking or staying slender or being happy — pass from friend to friend almost as if they were contagious viruses. And these social signals can even skip a link - spreading to a friend of a friend without affecting the person who connects them. No surprise, the article is by my favorite newsie - Clive Thompson

What if there is no crowd? Sarah Perez covers some recent research by Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) professor Vassilis Kostakos that pokes a big hole in the prevailing wisdom that the "wisdom of crowds" is a trustworthy force on today's web. The findings showed that a small group of users accounted for a large number of rating - there is no crowd, just a big gang.

The Media Crisis, Part 4: Consumers (will people buy their eyeballs back?)

2009-09-29T10:44:23-04:00

We’re spinning in part because people would universally rather rent their time out to marketers than pay for content. Look no further than the backlash against Murdoch’s call for micropayments to see how sure we are that content should be free … or, by free, I mean, bought by someone else.

Content is cheaper than you think.

Here's some surprising news: it’s not that expensive to pay for your own content. Maybe I should tally your bill.

Ok, let’s borrow from the average prime time, broadcast ad placement (the Cadillac of media buys) and some Pew research about the shocking amount of TV we all consume … ok, divide that, carry the one. Here’s what I’ve got:

And that’s assuming that all the programming we watch is in prime time (the most expensive space). Add in a few repeats of the The Wonder Years and the occasional Sunday morning tour of homes show and I’m betting we can get that number down near $60. And, that’s if we want to buy our content outright vs. share some of our buying power with well-intentioned marketers (like me.)

The trends point to paid content

I think we will pay for it.

And, advertising will have to change.

Five converging trends point the way:

Failure of the old monetization model: We’ve agreed on that by part 4, right?

The democratization of access: Less expensive computers, free public WiFi, cheaper home connectivity. We’re saving where we used to spend big, potentially freeing up resources to pay for the content instead of the connectivity.

Contracting news space: Consolidation of our news sources has created fewer voices (and oft-repeated content). The number of authors is actually much smaller than the number of venues (fewer owners of ideas = fewer people who have to agree on the cost of content)

Distrust of traditional media: Pew recently reported that 63% of us don’t trust the mainstream media – a number that has doubled in a decade. That trend is all tied up in our distrust of advertiser influence, corporate ownership models, etc.

Boredom with reality programming: Where once we were satisfied with strangers sharing a hot tub, now we demand acrobatics and morbid obesity to attract our bored attention. Eventually, the cheapest programming will run out of new tricks.

The Media Crisis, Part 3: Advertisers (looking for their lost sheep)

2009-09-28T10:28:00-04:00

Advertisers are looking for ways to connect with consumers in an increasingly fragmented and frankly expensive marketplace

The wild west of content

You’ve heard it called the democratization of content. We’re moving from a consumer society to a producer society. Anyone can build a soapbox. And, some of us, can build an entertainment empire.

That’s the second problem. Not enough critical mass.

Or more simply: Too much choice

We all want different content. The web brings us a seemingly limitless supply. Up against pretty flat demand. Not only does the old advertising model not translate to new consumer behaviors, it doesn’t translate for advertisers' bottom lines either. They can’t routinely get enough of us watching any one thing to deliver a compelling audience share.

According to Nielsen Media Research, in the last reporting period, CBS's prime-time audience was down 2.9%. ABC was down 9.7%, Fox was down 17.5% and NBC was down 14.3%.

We’ve abandoned appointment-TV for downloaded movies; broadcast for cable; the box in the living room for the computer on our lap. We get what we want when we want it – don’t expect us to show up based on the TV guide’s demands. Wait, do they even print that anymore?

Diminishing returns, dwindling investment

If you think publishers are frustrated, you should talk to these advertisers. How do they connect with their consumers when we’re all off in our worlds and fast-forwarding / page flipping / and out-right avoiding even when their ads do come on.

What the law of diminishing returns could not influence, the deep recession has. Now the advertiser exodus, too, is under way. As of mid-February, 71% reported having slashed their 2009 budgets, and 6% more said the cuts were on their way.

How does American enterprise thrive if it can’t connect with consumers?

It’s the under-addressed question in this snowballing crisis. When we talk about consumers paying for content, we skip over how brands get into the conversation. Can we really rely on WOM networks to do the work of mass advertising? Do we all want to turn into blathering mouthpieces for our favorite brands?

The Media Crisis, Part 2: Publishers and Creators (working for scratch)

2009-09-27T10:21:00-04:00

The fundamental challenge for publishers is actually twofold: Perceived value of content and the age-old story of supply far outstripping demand.

Give us your product for free.

People increasingly prefer their content on demand and on the web. We want to watch TV online. Read news online. Learn how online.

And, we’re used to getting it for free.

For free.

Compare that price to the price of creating content. An episode of CSI costs $2 million to create. Heck, even John & Kate Plus 8 cost in excess of $600,000 per show.

We’ve gotten away with this lasting disconnect by relying on advertisers to foot the bill. By renting out our eyeballs in exchange for our media fix.

We hoped that traditional advertising model would continue to pay for it. Websites charging by how many people might see your banner or video or, oh wouldn’t we like to forget, popup. Traffic would again be kind. Sheer mass would pay the bills.

Problem is: the traditional 30-second spot / full-page print ad model doesn’t translate to our online world:

We’re never going to click those darn banners. We are “evolving avoiders.” Wherever the ads are, over time, our eyes learn to skip over. By consistently displaying their texty little ads on the right rail, Google actually changed how we view web pages. No longer do our eyes travel in that easy backwards C. Now we dart across web pages in a quick F shape, using an evolved blind spot to skip the right rail.

There aren’t enough of us to watch in-stream ads. The one bright spot in online advertising has been integrating video advertising into programming. The recall is higher; the brand interaction better. So much so that advertisers will pay more for every set of eyes (vs. television). But, they can’t get enough critical mass online around any one show to meet the production budgets of America’s prime time favorites: CSI, House, Gossip Girl. (Oh, how I love Gossip Girl)

Where does the money come from now?

How do producers fund programming as the Internet shifts from being media’s value add to its prime outlet? We haven’t figured out how to price it or even who to charge.

They call it a problem of monetization. Bob Garfield gets a little pluckier and simply decries that” we are, most of us, exquisitely, irretrievably fucked.”

Here-here.