Think See Do Differently

Boring PSA? Turn It On Its Head

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 13 Mar 2014 19:05:00 +0000

Look out AdCouncil, BSSP is re-writing how you do a public service announcement for a cause.

)

A coalition of conservation agencies and brands enlists Butler Shine Stern and Partners, Robert Redford AND Will Ferrell to challenge the notion of a PSA. In a PSA that started running on YouTube and Funny or Die, in talking-head fashion, Redford makes a conventional appeal, presumably from his desk somewhere in Sundance. Its a format that we've all become used to from countless charity and cause PSAs. Its some appeal or something about raising the level of the Colorado river. At least thank GOD he's not wearing an awful t-shirt with a pointless logo followed up by a parade of celebrities declaring "I am" or "We are all X." Redford gets my attention of course, if he's talking, it must be important, its just that after 30 seconds or so, I think to myself, nah, maybe not worth much more consideration, certainly not a donation.

But then all hell breaks loose when the traditional PSA ends and Will Ferrell pops up with a trademark counter-appeal. Why not move the ocean to help the Colorado river instead of raising the river? His movement Move the Ocean is a better idea to "un-disconnect the river." In 5 hilarious videos that can be seen on the website, Ferrell enlists legendary pro-surfer Kelly Slater, rebutts Redford, and develops a 5 point plan to save the river. The old school, unpolished website eventually leads you to a donate button which takes you to a Rally site. According to Mediabistro, the campaign began with a series of videos on YouTube and Funny or Die, and then will move on to Participant Media’s Pivot Channel next week. The campaign aims to raise 10 million dollars for the restoration of the Colorado River.

But wait, there's more. BSSP has also created a Raise the River website too. More traditional in nature, there are images of heroic volunteers and majestic shots of the Colorado. The site features the many nonprofit and corporate partners involved. The founding partners are there on the Team page - the Environmental Defense Fund, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, The Nature Conservancy among many others.

So what's the play here? Well its obvious Raise the River is the real campaign, with the shadow campaign Move the Ocean as the creative foil - but can you imagine the creative pitch to the founding supporters and even Redford himself? Cahones BSSP. Cahones.

Will the strategy work? Will this anti-cause cause campaign go viral? Will it convert into dollars raised? Does this make good on all the fragmented efforts of the conservation organizations before by reusing the video content of the Sonoran Institute for example?

Only time will tell. The fact is, folks might be jaded with cause marketing, but studies show a steady increase in beliefs and attitudes toward conservation, especially amongst young people. Ferrell (and the rest of the campaign) brides the gap between generations bringing broader appeal to an issue that young people might care about on paper and in research, but not so much in real life (their votes and wallets). Though pretty clever, it might not be enough to simply re-make the PSA. Perhaps the entire conversion funnel needs to be turned on its head too? Rally's role as the moneyman brings the donation cycle full circle, however, there doesn't seem much room to co-create in this campaign (at least not yet). Folks may forward this, share, tweet or like it, but BSSP's work isn't done. Sad to say, it ain't that hard to get an ironic comic to front their cause these days (see President Obama on Zach Galfinakis show, also a collaboration from Funny or Die).

The ongoing challenge remains in shifting behaviors and not just attitudes in the long-term to create real change. There are no less than 7 states and 2 in Mexico sucking up the river's water like a giant sponge. BSSP should keep going and consider how they reinvent people's approach to water usage too as a next step. There's just as much fun to be had and behavior change is not out of bounds for an ad agency. So kudos to the entire campaign team for focusing on awareness and advocacy first. They just have to be prepared to be as clever with the other parts of the engagement funnel, namely action, to knock make this campaign truly innovative.

For the full 5 minute video, visit BSSP.com

DamNation Premieres at SXSW

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:07:00 +0000

Sure Eric Snowden, Seth Rogen, and Lady Gaga are a tad more popular than dam removal. Yet, at its heart SXSW is still a festival about creative storytelling. So if you're a SXSW regular and on occasion wondered if you could take a morning off to fish the Guadelupe tailwater about forty minutes south, or maybe you thought about skipping the main festival to hit SXSW Eco next year, then Felt Soul Media and Patagonia's long-awaited documentary about dam removal might just appeal to you.

First, why should you skip a perfectly good Margarita happy hour sponsored by Playboy.com to see this flick? Its about dams for Christ's sake. Well sort of like the hit documentary about a spelling bee, DamNation is a truly universal and human story of how small wins make a lasting difference. What is wonderfully cool about its premiere at SXSW is that its not a story of some NEW technology that is going to wire up some global consciousness or net you stock options. DamNation is a story of a very OLD technology that lingers with us like a ghost whose exorcism is a very, very scary thing. How else could dam removal cause heart-rendering emotion, brother to curse brother, neighbor to foresake neighbor, excessive use of dynamite!?

Not in Austin for the showings today through Wed? Then keep an eye out for the tour coming to a city near you in 2014. DamNation will soon have its U.S. theatrical release in New York and select markets in April/May, followed by a nine-city U.S. tour of regional film premieres. The U.S. tour will continue to Seattle, Portland (OR), San Francisco, Santa Barbara, Santa Monica, Denver, Washington DC, New York City and Portland (ME). For more info visit DamNation.com

Keystone XL Ad - Don't be a Sucker

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sat, 01 Feb 2014 16:24:00 +0000

What's in a name? Sometimes nothing, sometimes everything. If you're a political junkie or just give a damn about the direction the President and Congress want to take this country, then perhaps you tuned into the SOTU last week...for the ads. Because you knew that every political action and advocacy group that had a stake in what the President was going to say were lining up to send a message. Think of it as the Superbowl ads of public policy. One such ad was developed for the NextGen Climate Action We Love Our Land campaign, called "Sucker Punch."

The ad was picked up by the Wall Street Journal, USA Today and HuffPo among others outlets and blogs. Some outlets really took a shine to the word "Sucker" and re-played it in their stories. And thus - a meme is born. Look at these headlines:

Keystone XL is a Sucker's Deal for America --And a Steal for Foreign Oil Interests (Huffpo)
Keystone Foe's TV Ad: 'Sucker Punch' Benefits China More Than US (Bloomberg)
Keystone XL is a Suckers Deal (UniteBlue)
Are Dueling Ads a Sucker Punch for Keystone? (Press Progress)

Now, whether you buy the ad's veracity or not (Washington Post gave it 4 Pinnochios), it follows in the grand tradition of political attack ads, and like it or not the formula works. What careful viewers should always do is form their own opinions and do the research on their own. What insightful wonks will see however is that the ad in its "over the top" way (Washington Post's words, not mine) creates ink, stoking a deeper examination of the facts behind the pipeline.

*Full disclosure, my employer, GMMB, has worked with Next Gen Climate Change.

Patagonia Rethinks What Advertising Could Be

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Wed, 08 Jan 2014 16:30:00 +0000

In a recent AdAge article, Joy Howard, the new VP Marketing at Patagonia states that their company's mission is very much a part of how they engage with consumers. That mission is to "solve problems in the world." Breaking rank with other outdoor apparel brands, Patagonia's response to black friday in 2013 was to produce and share a film called Worn Wear as an anti-black friday effort. Worn Wear tells the story of Patagonia product's usefulness by focusing on customer stories about the relationship they have with their worn clothing, and how maintaining, fixing and patching used gear makes the product better-than-new.

Described as an "exploration in quality in the things we own, and the lives we live," the message is clear - don't buy new - or if you have too - buy from Patagonia because their clothing will last. But that's the mechanics, the emotions that Patagonia taps into instead are pride in ownership, love, comfort, nostalgia and loyalty. Worn Wear, created by Patagonia surf ambassador family the legendary Malloys is a great example of how branded documentary can capture real and authentic stories about a people and their interactions with a brand to demonstrate the purpose or shared values of the company. Coupled with a deft PR campaign and Tumblr, the content is very accessible but appeals to the tribe that Patagonia has carefully cultivated since its inception more than thirty years ago. The film's goal is to subtly speak to the sustainability efforts of Patagonia, while entertaining and informing.

Though Howard did not reveal the spend behind the effort, its possible to guess that it was well under $500k and with limited media buy and strong reliance on earned media, and no doubt not tied to sales goals as a branding effort. The film appears successfuls. It has over 210K views, generated over 90 comments on Youtube and picked up by Businessweek, Fast Co, ABC, Mashable and several other popular consumer outlets on and offline. If the purpose was to offer an antidote to the over-the-top and hollow consumerism of holiday shopping, at least among its own fans, it worked. The Nature Conservancy tweeted about the campaign to its 250K followers and artist Ben Kweller shared his worn Patagonia gear to his 33k followers too.

Lately, Patagonia has been expanding its brand through some interesting brand innovations. While they clearly are not out to shift their brand away from apparel, they've recognized that meaningful lifestyle experiences can halo the brand, lifting it momentarily out of the everyday into a reminder that affiliation with the brand is a special feeling. To that end they recently launched a beer, salmon jerky, and plan to publish books again. Patagonia founder, Yvon Chouinard, is also an executive producer of DamNation, a new film on the restoration of salmon and steelhead rivers in the Pacific Northwest. The brand is becoming something of an social good impressario - which is quite appropriate in this age where consumers expect brands to live their values in their corporate behavior, and if meaningful enough, to help consumers curate their lifestyles.

Wounded: The Battle Back Home Brand Doc to Premiere on MSNBC

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 10 Nov 2013 16:10:00 +0000

I am super excited that Flow Nonfiction's work with the Wounded Warrior Project will reach a national broadcast audience through MSNBC beginning this Veteran's Day weekend. As you may know, I'm an advisor and sometime consultant of Flow and I can recall two years ago making the trek to Jacksonville to talk with Wounded Warrior about their incredible bravery, passion and dedication to helping Veterans return home to better lives. David Modigliani and I knew that branded documentary could capture the stories of these soldiers in ways that would make them accessible and meaningful to all Americans.

MSNBC will premiere the films on a monthly basis, beginning this Sunday at noon EST during a special Veterans Day broadcast of "Taking the Hill."

The Flow team has come to care deeply about the subjects of these films and the challenges they face. We hope you'll click through to watch the traile r and tune in this Sunday, November 10th at 12pm EST, for the series premiere.

Full press release and media contact info here.

Should Jews be NFL Mascots?

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 13 Oct 2013 14:37:00 +0000

Should Hispanics be NFL mascots? Should African Americans be NFL mascots? How about the Chinese, the Irish (well sadly they are at Notre Dame), but how about Italians or Catholics, Hindu's or Seventh Day Adventists?

Seems a silly question right? Yet Dan Synder, owner of the NFL Washington DC based Redskins continues to defend an untenable and racist position amid the politics of denial. Not surprising as the franchise simply hasn't learned from its own history.

NCAI’s Executive Director Jacqueline Pata has stated:

"There is one thing that we can agree with the Washington football team about - the name ‘Redsk*ns’ is a reflection of the team’s legacy and history. Unfortunately, the team’s legacy and history is an ugly one, rooted in racism and discrimination, including the origins of the team’s name. It is becoming more and more obvious that the team’s legacy on racial equality is to remain on the wrong side of history for as long as possible.

The team’s original owner, George Preston Marshall, named the team the ‘Redsk*ns’ in 1932, just months before he led a 13-year league wide ban on African American players in the NFL. Nearly 30 years after the race-based name was chosen, Marshall was forced by the league to hire the team’s first black player in 1962. He was the last NFL owner to do so."
And so Synder joins a list of white, priviledged men who state that they are holding onto "traditions and heritage" as a cover for their racist views. The KKK and many white supremacist groups use the same kind of language as Synder did in his open-letter to season-ticket holders:

"I respect the opinions of those who disagree. I want them to know that I do hear them, and I will continue to listen and learn. But we cannot ignore our 81 year history, or the strong feelings of most of our fans as well as Native Americans throughout the country. After 81 years, the team name “Redskins” continues to hold the memories and meaning of where we came from, who we are, and who we want to be in the years to come.We are Redskins Nation … and we owe it to our fans and coaches and players, past and present, to preserve that heritage."

You see for Synder, cloaked in the mask of heritage, he can even claim Native Americans don't mind being called an ethnic slur. History books are full of slave masters too who claimed their slaves were better off being chattel with kind and loving owners.

But lets talk about branding for a second, since this is a marketing blog afterall. A Google search of "Redskins slur" produces about 250K results."Redskins racist" produces abou 2.4 MILLION results. Now, I've spent enough time in PR to say these kinds of results indicate a real serious crisis, one that will affect the brand's value - never mind that the teams record is terrible. If Snyder was a truly good steward of his franchise's brand, he would be looking to protect - even enhance the value of the brand by getting on the right side of history. He can find polls to support his current position, but it doesn't change the fact that the value of his brand is eroding. Perhaps he feels because the team has no record to stand on - it will stand on tradition. There are quite a few brands that have taken that strategy, and most are no longer with us. Pan Am, Zenith, Texaco....OK, those you say are ancient history, but what about modern brands that are extinct, Borders, Tower Records, Circuit City? Those brands faced changing market conditions - and a healthy national disgust for racist mascots is a changing market condition as well. Only Snyder doesn't understand that brands are not brick and mortar, stadiums, logos or even names - they are perceptions in the mind of the consumer. And the perception of the name "Redskins" as being acceptable has changed, ergo, the brand Synder manages has changed.

So, whether its morally unacceptable to name your franchise after an ethnic or cultural group of people, its also just plain bad business to ignore the change in your brand's value. Modern brands evolve. Those that don't, simply die.

Sadly, Snyder is even a worse businessman for not seeing the upside of evolving his brand. There is tremendous opportunity in modernizing the brand, standing for a new level of morality in a league that has faced its own criticisms for not promoting better player safety, curbing drug use, and preventing violence from a small minority of uneducated thugs off-the-field. In truth, the commissioner understands that even one franchise in crisis means the entire league is in crisis. If Snyder won't act to protect his brand (by changing the name), then Commissioner Goodell should, as the ultimate chief executive on the matter.

Why Listening is the Key to Stories that Create Change

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 05 Aug 2013 16:10:00 +0000

Listening for the Story

Guest Post: Joel Johnson, GMMB for The Communications Network
Storytelling is a buzz word that gets thrown around a lot these days. In this hyper-connected culture, it’s no surprise that the art of storytelling is often looked to as an effective means of cutting through the clutter and making your voice heard. After all, uniting ideas and emotion through storytelling is an ancient device and part of our cultural DNA. Great stories capture our imagination, and authentic stories make us feel secure by connecting us and reminding us of things we hold to be true – good or bad.
But what often gets lost is a recognition of the important work that comes before a story is told – the process through which a story is unearthed, revealed and, in a sense, co-created. Some stories are discovered through experience, certainly, but even more – and many of the best stories – are found by actively listening. There is tremendous power in listening and being open to each other and the world around us, whether through online conversation, collaboration, or searching purposefully for new perspectives and fresh approaches.

Here’s one example: When NPR’s Michele Norris, was touring the country promoting her memoir, “The Grace of Silence,“ a book that explores how revelations about her family’s past led her toward a deeper understanding of herself, her family, and the issue of race in America, she struggled to find a way to spark open and honest conversations with her audience about race, ethnicity, and cultural identity. Her initial attempts were met with silence. So Michele began asking those at her book signings to participate in a short exercise; she asked them to literally fill out “race cards.”
In asking her audience to distill their thoughts and experiences about race into one sentence that had only six words, Michele was not only breaking the ice, but she was creating a mechanism for others to participate in and share their stories and experiences in a now-global conversation. This act of co-creation through listening is now online, and The Race Card Project has received tens of thousands of submissions from the web, by mail, by hand, and via Twitter. The project is also on NPR, and continues to expand as it offers a platform for more previously untold stories to emerge.
Here’s another example of listening to the voices that fall outside of your own creative landscape. Earlier this year, in honor of the 40th Anniversary of Roe vs. Wade, NARAL Pro-Choice America wanted to develop a campaign that celebrated the rights of the last 40 years, but also focused on the future of the movement to cultivate new and existing young champions of choice.

NARAL agreed to reach out to photographers of all kinds and give them the creative latitude they thought represented the issue and the spirit of the campaign. The result, “Choice Out Loud,” was a campaign matched beautiful photography with a powerful and effective mission. This was only possible because NARAL Pro-Choice America valued the creativity and contributions of others to tell the larger story about health and choice for women in America.

While storytelling is one effective tool in the communicator’s toolbox, we must also remember to first do the hard work of listening and opening ourselves up to co- creation. Not only is this an important first step, it’s the best way to break the silence and create more powerful, authentic, and participatory stories.

GMMB to Sponsor Innovative Conference: DO GOOD BETTER

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Wed, 03 Jul 2013 12:01:00 +0000

DON’T JUST LOOK GOOD. DO GOOD BETTER.

How do you change the world…and keep improving on how you do it? That’s a question we’re throwing out to some of the best minds in the worlds of technology, marketing, advertising and digital media. The answers will be unexpected, fresh–and yeah, world-changing. And you’ll hear them at a special one-day conference in New York City. It’s a rare opportunity for brands, non-profits, foundations and marketers to explore some very innovative new ways to solve big social problems, and improve on their current approaches Why are we focusing on doing good better? Simple. Many of the old ways of doing good are not good enough or taking advantage of the latest technologies and marketing tactics. A lot of companies focus on looking good without actually achieving their real and sustainable change. So brands aren’t benefiting from the increased market share that comes when it’s connected to a well-marketed cause, and causes aren’t maximizing their corporate relationships . We’re bringing in the game-changers right now doing the most innovative work in the space Here are just some of the head-scratching questions we’ll do a deeper dive on…

• How do you challenge and improve the current cause marketing model?
• What works well and what needs fixing?
• How can businesses benefit from supporting change—and changemakers benefit from working with business?
• How do you deepen the connection between business strategy and social responsibility?
• Consumers believe it’s not enough to just throw money at an issue–how do you make an authentic contribution?
• What are the new platforms you should be exploring?
• How should your creative team be telling your story now?
• Are you targeting changing behavior and not just persuading?

OUR HYPOTHESIS: WHAT A DIFFERENCE A DAY MAKES. Whether your focus is cause, corporate or agency, Do Good Better is a dynamic day that lets you build stronger cause marketing programs—even co-create new initiatives with new partners…
• See how cause marketing can boost your brand’s share.
• Discover marketing-driven solutions to social issues.
• Find out which corporations and non-profits are breaking new ground—and how they’re doing it.
• Identify new language for marketing and tech programs that have a social benefit.

WHO SHOULD ATTEND? Changemakers Ad agency creatives Marketers Technologists PR pros Storytellers Innovators Planners Social scientists Non-profit leaders

REGISTER NOW. Space is limited, and judging from the early buzz, tickets will be going fast. So reserve now.

Our Speakers:
Jeremy Heimans, CEO and Founder of Purpose
Andrew Essex, CEO of Droga5
Sheena Wright, President and CEO of United Way New York City
Lee Hirsch, Documentary Filmmaker
Gary Bagley, Executive Director of New York Cares
Christine Church, Director of Marketing, The National Campaign To Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy (Bedsider Campaign)
Amy Choyne, Chief Marketing Officer, Kenneth Cole
oel R. Johnson, SVP Account Planning, GMMB
Jorge Luis Fontanez, VP; Marketing Manager, Chase Community Giving
Morra Aarons-Mele, Founder and CEO of Women Online and The Mission List
Christopher Gebhardt, GM and EVP of TakePart / Digital Arm of Participant Media
Paull Young, Director of Digital at charity: water

Location: Crosby Street Hotel, New York, NY
Date: July 31, 2013
Time: 1:30 pm -5:30 pm

Our advisory board:
Jeremy Heimans, CEO and Founder of Purpose
David Eastman, CEO of JWT North America
David Shulman, CEO of Organic
Joel Johnson, SVP, Director of Account Planning at GMMB
Morgan Spurlock, Filmmaker

Meaningful Brands Outperform

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:04:00 +0000

Too Small to Fail Launches

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 14 Jun 2013 15:37:00 +0000

Exceedingly proud that my agency is supporting Secretary Hillary Clinton's first private effort since her role leading our nation's State Dept. Announced at the Clinton Global Initiative meeting in Chicago this week, Too Small to Fail is especially poignant to me as a new father. In the short four weeks of life of my daughter, I've literally watched her grow, adapt and learn who provides her comfort, sustenance, and succor. And I feel incredibly blessed to have been there with her every single day of her first thirty days of life along with my wife at home. In the next four years, I know that every stimulus in her environment, the air she breathes, the food she eats, the experiences she has with my family and our friends and soon her peers, will shape her long-term success in life. These are in fact, the most critical years of her development. Of course this is a continuation of a long commitment of service to children. Clinton has been involved in so much since the mid-90s that I wonder if anyone recalls "it takes a village"?

Clinton will focus her considerable influence, knowledge and passion on early childhood development, ages 0 - 5, in conjuction with the her husband's Clinton Global Initiative and in partnership with Next Generation, a nonpartisan group that promotes scientific research about early childhood development. Go to TooSmall.org to learn more.

Only Children Can See This Important Message

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 06 May 2013 15:30:00 +0000

This standout work shows you can be smarter and targeted in traditional formats in an age of digital engagement.

"ANAR Foundation manages in Spain the european unique phone number 116 111, to attend children and teenagers under a risk situation. On this telephone number, only for minors, they can find the help they need in a totally anonymous and confidential way. But, how can we get our message to a child abuse victim, even when they are accompanied by an adult their aggressor?"

This standout work shows you can be smarter and targeted in traditional formats in an age of digital engagement. I can't help but think Grey uncovered a powerful insight that told them that the people who need help most (children) could also help themselves if they were informed. Following that assumption, did they see the opportunity for advertising to become more relevant, even functional, by digging for a meaningful behavior change (self-informing)?

The Future of Purpose-Driven Brands

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 22 Mar 2013 01:49:00 +0000

In the March 4 Advertising Age, Rance Crain takes aim at purpose-driven ads, speculating that the approach of some marketers like P&G and Pepsico have not seen a sales lift by doing purpose-driven marketing, and therefore, marketers should dump it. Crain suggests that selling has become too “tacky” and that being purpose-driven seems to assuage the guilt of marketers. He also outright suggests that the approach elevates craft over the sales department.

Now, having worked on P&G, Unilever and Pepsico brands in the past, and been subject to their brand keys, brand agency leadership models and so forth, I can objectively tell you that these marketers have never given up, not once, on the simple fact that they exist to sell products and that all of their energies should be focused on that. However, these companies are doing what they always do best--and that is to follow the consumer. Being purpose-driven is a good response to changing times because no chief marketing officer worth his or her salt knows they can lead the consumer purely by selling. We've seen the statistics--consumers (and employees) want to buy and be loyal to companies that care about their well-being. They want brands that don't ravage the earth's resources. They want to recommend and advocate for brands that properly position shopping and consuming as having consequences.

What Crain fails to do is to acknowledge that purpose-driven marketing is one spoke of a larger business movement that begins in the supply chain and extends far beyond point of sale into a company's over-all behavior in the marketplace--all with the aim of adding value. Look at it this way, if corporations are people under the law--then they better start behaving like good neighbors if they want to be a recognized member of a community. The shared value approach developed recently by academics has influenced Nestle to the point that they literally re-wrote their mission and are investing in the communities that produce their product’s ingredients. On the agency side, there has been a new crop of shops focusing on brands and social change, including a well-known PR firm has launched a global practice focusing on the field. And at my firm, for nearly 30 years we've helped brands tap into their power to improve lives. So we’ve witnessed firsthand the tremendous benefit brands receive when they create real change.

Ask an advertising executive if they want to work on brands that inspire them and make a palpable difference. And you're not likely to hear back, 'nah--I just want to sell stuff.' The industry itself has woken up to the fact that advertising can play a bigger role in the lives of consumers beyond shopping. The 4A’s recently announced a contest to "advertise" the industry after research lead them to the insight that most consumers believe advertising has the ability, even opportunity, to change the world for the better. At the SXSW Interactive festival this year, no fewer than a dozen panels were focused on the intersection between social good, technology and branding, with the support of top brands, innovative start-ups and marketers looking for new techniques like the ones my panel presented on about how branded documentary and social storytelling affect change.

Crain's view will seem fair if you haven't seen the impact of a campaign that moves people to make wiser decisions about their health (the Campaign for Tobacco-free Kids), or the lives improved by more conscious capitalism (1% for the Planet). It’s a view that proposes brands exist to do one thing, and one thing only, sell. We need more of the top marketers and voices of this movement to speak up and demonstrate that companies create value to consumers, companies and communities are not trendy, they are catching up with a consumer who is already demanding the best behavior of brands.

Joel's SXSWi Picks!

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 08 Mar 2013 17:49:00 +0000

SAT March 9

1130am
Introducing the Giving Graph

Hilton Austin Downtown, Room 616AB

1230pm

Make Me Care: Digital Storytelling to Affect Change

Austin Convention Center, Room 5ABC

330pm

Al Gore on The Future

Austin Convention Center , Exhibit Hall 5

SUN March 11

GoodXGlobal (11am to 630pm, Austin City Hall)

On Sunday, March 10, 2013, GoodxGlobal will host a first-ever day of events at SXSW Interactive dedicated to the local and global power of technology for social good. Hosted at Austin’s City Hall, the inaugural GoodxGlobal will convene local and international nonprofits, social entrepreneurs and startups for a day of programming, while also supporting expanded representation from Africa and other developing regions.

Presented by the World Food Program USA, Social Good Summit Austin, United Nations Foundation and global non-profit tech company Ushahidi, GoodxGlobal will explore how both domestically and internationally, digitally and physically, innovations in technology are transforming the face of communication, funding and ultimately, the human condition. The event is made possible by partners Edelman and Constant Contact, with additional support from sponsors Water For People, EffectiveUI, ONE Campaign, DAI, GOOD, Lifeway Foods and Partnership for a New American Economy.

ALSO...

11am

Conscious Capitalism: Liberating the Heroic Spirit of Business

Austin Convention Center, Ballroom D

1230pm

Cory Booker: The New Media Politician

Long Center, Dell Hall

1230pm

Behavior Change as Value Proposition

Austin Convention Center, Ballroom A

330pm

Big Data Democracy: The Rise of Analytics

Wanderlust

5pm

How to Make the Internet Care

Austin Convention Center, Room 5ABC

MON March 12

930am

Death by Demographics: Killing Off Your Ad Budgets

Austin Convention Center, Room 12AB

11am

Measuring Social Change & Media: Beyond BS (workshop, requires RSVP)

AT&T Conference Center, Classroom 204

330pm

A Conversation with Steve Case

Austin Convention Center, Exhibit Hall 5

5pm

Sparking Social Change with Content Integration

Austin Convention Center, Room 12AB

SXSWi - Do it like a local

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 28 Feb 2013 19:01:00 +0000

For the 2nd time, Flow Nonfiction drops DO IT LIKE A LOCAL, a killer guide to SXSWi 2013, this time with special guest Top Chef Paul Qui!

Measure Twice, Cut Once

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 22:58:00 +0000

In an era of big data, its easy to lose sight of goals when you can measure everything. What data is more important? Which data drove the decision/purchase/vote? What was the value of the contribution? Were we effective?

Addressing these questions is more important than ever because its easier to falsely correlate success with other movements in the broad amount of data we can collect. And yet, we all know that clients are spending the least amount of their resources to measure. And we know that agencies are willing to get away with letting them. In fact, we don't want to know most times. Even folks doing long-term behavior change are guilty of this--saving lives is a great metric, but if you can't say how and why so someone else can replicate it or improve upon your strategy later, you're doing yourself a disservice.

I like organizations that get serious with the numbers, that resist the urge to sweep them under the rug, postpone the meeting or pass the buck until they get audited. New York's The Robin Hood Foundation has taken a ruthless, ultra-transparent approach to measuring effectiveness called "Relentless Monetization." Their aim is to spend philanthropic money (donations) wisely--that means correlating every red cent to a measurable impact. And not sloppy metrics like "job saved" or "schools built." Nope, they put a price on success.

In a contrarian manner, The Robin Hood Foundation uses counterfactuals--that is they estimate how much good they could do without the help of the donations. In this way they are able to make more effective grants. A counterfactual thought occurs when a person modifies a factual antecedent and then assesses the consequences of that mutation. A person may imagine how an outcome could have turned out differently, if the antecedents that led to that event were different.

Michael Weinstein Counterfactuals Video from Robin Hood on Vimeo.

The Future of Planning is Behavior Change

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 20:21:00 +0000

So I'll let you in on a little known, but publicly available secret. The government wants you to change your behavior. Behavioral economists have heavily influenced the recent Presidential election in the US and even the UK's new government. But what behaviors? Well, there's voting, quitting smoking, paying your taxes, saving, and a myriad other host of societal issues that the government wants to nudge its citizens to do on a daily basis, primarily through policy and program design. Turning to guidance of behavioral scientists like Dick Thaler, James Fowler, Dan Ariely, and Todd Rogers, governments are re-examining how to use the power of our social connections as well as our own predicatably irrational behavior to influence us. No, there's no sinister agenda here, its basic economics. We don't save enough, we eat poorly, we buy things way beyond our means. Human beings are wonderfully, messily, inconsistent, poor decision-makers, and that's costing us and the government, a lot of dosh. So the search has been on to set a new policy-making path for government, one where they take a more liberal paternalism approach to our well-being.

This has enormous implications of course, for the field of communications and marketing. As a planner I've spent most of my career searching for elusive insights to inform storytelling to persuade people to buy things. Most recently, I've shifted my intent to focus on persuading people to do things for the common good--that is, I've added a social mission to my work. But I find that the old ways of doing my job just don't apply. I don't want to sell malaria nets. I don't want to sell you on the horrors of childhood obesity. I don't want to perusade you to vote. I want to change your behavior, for the long-term.

Now, I've preached again and again to my students at NYU and junior planners, "it's just advertising, we're not doctors or lawyers or cops out there saving the world, so don't take it so seriously." But when you start talking behavior change, well, that's a whole other ballgame. Suddenly we have to seriously consider the messages we're making, the ethics, and the outcomes. I'm not alone in thinking that planning as an advertising discipline, is going to have to find a new basis in reality. Gareth Kay and Mark Earles are thinking the same thing. Its partly because the pseudoscience of advertising isn't working anymore, and its also because we've gone so far down the rabbithole, that there is no other more desirable outcome for communications but behavior change. You can only fix the "low-calorie" or "stain-resistant" or "finer fit" dilemmas of product advertising for so long before you become more concerned with the lives of the consumer than the profit margin of "extra-light" or "lightly-toasted" stuff. To put it simply, shifting from persuading people to changing their behavior is inevitable. And we're not alone. Companies and brands have done the math. Our western bad habits are making us bad investments. That's why the concept of "shared value" is so valuable to Nestle, and "performance with purpose" is getting Indra Nooyi's butt kicked on Wall Street. The truly visionary companies realize they have to change the behaviors of their markets and suppliers for the better, or those markets won't be around to sell to in the future. Its no longer us vs. them, but us AND them, that figure in their long-term profit projections.

While I can't say that this approach is right for every brand, agency or planner, here's the thing. I'd encourage you to put aside your Malcolm Gladwell for a moment and start reading the real work of practicing psychologists and behavioral economists right now. These fellows go deep, to the academic level, and they research, they test, and they learn, they also peer-review. No bit of thinking is guaranteed or fool-proof, but if you say your an expert at communications, you better damn well know how people behave and why. If you need proof that this is where planning is heading, go online and watch Rory Sutherland (ex-IPA chair, Vice Chair at Ogilvy). He'll give you a crash course if you stick with him long enough, and he'll lead you down the rabbithole to the great thinkers in this new area and endgame for communications. It may be years before we figure out how to use this stuff in our daily work, but it will take lots of planners at different types of agencies figuring it out, and sharing. So in that same spirit, here are some resources to get you started. Yeah, I know its a lot of reading, but if you're a planner that ain't no thing.

Nudge
The Victory Lab (and any writings by Sasha Issenberg)
Mindspace
Connected
Judgement and Uncertainty
Predictably Irrational
The Paradox of Choice
Gut Feelings
Herd
I'll Have What She's Having
The Art of Choosing
Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion

And I've created an Account Planning Playlist here with hundreds of hours of video on the state of planning and the concepts behind behavioral economics and behavior change for you to browse.

I would be curious to see how CRM planners will feel about these concepts, after all, who better understands the application of the science of choice to advertising?

Social Proof Or Something Else?

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 21:52:00 +0000

Underpinning the powerful concept of Positive Deviance (a behavior change tactic), is "social proof," which works on the premise that when someone just like me does something, I’m more likely to try it myself. However, this video also demonstrates that social learning "cascades" quickly from a few early adopters to hordes of new dancers. Its like a trend curve come to life here (an example from a previous post). Why the cascade? Well, there's less perceived risk if everyone's doing it right? And the risk here is the risk of looking stupid, which clearly the very first dancer appears to be when he's dancing by his lonesome. But consider this, has the risk really been mitigated just because more people are doing it? Instead of one person looking stupid, its now lots of people looking stupid. But something changed, right? Something else has taken place when the cascade commenced and suddenly more and more people joining up changes the acceptability of the stupid action. The aberrant behavior becomes a new norm. Voila.

So what's my point? If you want to be stupid or brilliant or change the rules, find a few other people around you who are stupid too, and invite them in, the rest will follow quickly. You can't change the rules on your own, but you can do it with just a few fast followers. Conversely, negative behavior norms only need a few fast followers too before it cascades, so there's something to be said about the heuristic, "nipping bad behavior in the bud."

The Astronaut Meme in Advertising

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 20:49:00 +0000

In further proof that the behavioral economists and uber-planners like Mark Earls have it right, people are irrational, great copiers and rather unoriginal, witness the Astronaut meme circulating thought the collective unconscious of the advertising industry at the moment. There are no less than 3 major campaigns in the market that promise to send you to space, either literally or figuratively, from Toyota, Red Bull and Axe (Unilever).

But is there anything wrong with copying? Hell no. Its perfectly reasonable to spot a good thing and copy it. I do find it funny however. Lets look at when this meme has emerged. It comes when Obama has basically defunded and deprioritized space exploration in America, taken it private and dashing the hopes of young engineers in America. I mean lets face it, if you were a young girl, bright in engineering who had just finished space camp, would you rather be an Astronaut for NASA or an Astronaut for IBM? The meme also comes when American confidence in government, and major institutions of all kinds is at an all time low (see this poll). And it comes at time when technology has become commoditised, lowering the barrier on what's possible by the individual, not the government or collective.

The surprise of Felix Baumgartner's sponsored jump into space came as a pleasant surprise...Oh yes, I could go into space if I wanted to, or if I had enough sponsors. How capitalistic. The Toyota campaign however, seemed to talk to a spirit of self-reliance--and the practicality of choosing a RAV-4 when well, everything else in your life is going to pot. It's a "smart" wish at a time when we wish the world was more inspiring, predictable, safe, fun, well...just "more" of what's better than now (which is just a bit depressing). And the Axe ad campaign is the most escapist of all the fantasies. Axe will train you, then drop your butt off in space, presumably making you more attractive to women, a hero. Brilliant, if the world is beating you down and you can't get a date, here's a brand that can help.

One can't help imagine what the meme would look like if it were in the hands of a Chinese ad agency, or maybe an Iranian one? In fact, we have such an example, because surely China and Iran are doing just about everything for propaganda's sake these days. Iran just "lofted" a monkey into space as a prelude to their first human-manned space flight. Its incredible, its as if they're saying, we're civilized too, we can do it, just you watch. If you're an Iranian, its safe to say you're about as depressed as an American at the state of things, and so why not, space flight is a good fantasy to have as well.

What's absolutely interesting though about the meme and its circulation around the globe is the way it is entering our consciousness and playing out, revealing more about our lack and apathies, than our true hopes and dreams. Astronauts in ads or propaganda doesn't really sell the optimistic future anymore, rather it throws a blanket over reality, and perhaps that is where our marketing efforts should concentrate, not on bailouts or weather ballons, not on Sharon's EKG or Clinton's chances at running, but on the small, everyday good things that we can do in our lives, things that are already going well or getting better, that could use some copying, some meme-ing so they too could spread about the world and maybe show up in an ad or two. Surely ad execs can find some good real behaviors worth copying? It strikes me as simple, the planner and the creatives, didn't really work hard enough to answer the brief. They looked to the base qualities of their brands and the base instincts of their audience, and phoned it in. Well, maybe they 're as depressed as the rest of us.

Remarkable Times Remarkable Work

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 24 Jan 2013 01:14:00 +0000

The last few days have been remarkable. We saw the second inauguration of an African American to the Presidency of the United States, the 50th anniversary of the "I Have a Dream" speech, and the 40th anniversary of Roe vs. Wade. I'm quite proud to be living in these times, and working at an agency that has played a role in celebrating these important movements. Here's the trailer for a new campaign celebrating the 40th anniversary of Roe vs. Wade for Naral Pro-Choice America aimed at empowering and recruiting a new generation of women to the cause. Its remarkable work by 40 great photographers capturing the faces and voices of a new generation.

For the full film and experience, go to Choice Out Loud.

Wardrobe Malfunctions and Obliquity

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 18:03:00 +0000

The other day I had a very important meeting with several CEOs who were tackling a major social issue together. I was going to share research that could really spur them into action. I went to bed early the night before, got up early, ate well, reviewed the presentation again. I was early to the meeting, and I wore my best suit. Just a few minutes before I was going to enter the meeting, I decided to hit the restroom...I wanted no distractions during the crucial presentation. Again, this was important meeting. Wouldn't you know, but as I zipped-up my fly, the zipper got stuck.

Ok I said to myself, I did eat pretty well during the holidays, but this is a friggin Paul Smith suit, the zipper should work. I didn't panic, I tried to jiggle the zipper. It broke.

Ok I said to myself, the zipper's broke, but its not that bad, I just have to pop it back in. I didn't panic, I tried to pop it back in but I didn't know how to do that.

Ok I said, I can fix this...I'll just calmly go out to the lobby, and ask for a safety pin. Which I did, and that's when the administrative assistant said the CEOs were ready for me. I didn't panic, I asked for the safety pin, retreated to an office figuring I had about 30 sec. to clip my pants. I laughed, "this is kind of like a bad movie, a funny bad movie." The safety pin was just to damn small, and "hmmm, why are my hands shaking?"

That's when I started to panic. I asked for and received a very large safety pin, which I clipped on, and looking down, realized that I looked ridiculous. I had made the problem worse because the silver pin might as well have been a neon sign pointing at my crotch. I started running through scenarios....
1) I could leave, just bail, there was enough coverage that I would not be missed, I wasn't CRUCIAL to the meeting.
2) I could go in without the safety pin, but how was I going to go around and shake hands with my fly wide open?
3) I could....

Just then my scenario planning was interrupted by the admin staff who suggested I try one of their loaner suit jackets on. If it was big enough, I could close the jacket and it would cover my crotch. Hallelujah it seemed I would be saved!

Ok I said, I'll try the jacket. Even though it ruined my finely English-tailored image, I was willing to compromise here. And now I was definitely late. The jacket was too small and didn't do the job. Now I really panicked. That was it, scenario 2, 3, and 4 were off the table and I was just going to bail. I sighed with disappointment. The very reason I moved to DC and took this job was to make a difference. I've presented to CEOs plenty of times before, but never on an important social issue. I tried to console myself with the fact that there would be other opportunities.

And then my pity party was interrupted once again by the admin staff with a suggestion. "Why don't you take your jacket off and hold it in front of your pants as you enter the room, and then just sit down quickly."

The simplicity of the solution was astonishing. I felt like as if a Zen master had rapped me over the head to achieve a moment of clarity. I thanked the admins profusely and entered the meeting all smiles. The meeting went well and I left later with no one the wiser except my colleagues and the staff.

As I sat listening to the CEOs debate strategy, I couldn't help but analyze my wardrobe malfunction. Certainly the episode had something to teach me. I realized that while I was bravely trying NOT to panic, to stay calm and rational, it was my own perceived rationality that was nearly my undoing. I kept trying to attack the problem directly even though I was unprepared to solve it. Let's see how.

1) I wasn't a tailor, and 2) I didn't have the resources, but I blindly kept trying to solve the problem on my own. 3) I didn't really ask for help, when I did, I asked for the solution that I thought was right--the over-sized safety pin--and I was wrong.

It turns out that the best solution came when I gave up control over the situation and let others in to collaborate. Also, solving the problem required "going around", or taking an indirect route. And finally, it required native knowledge.

The admins in just two recommendations solved the problem. First the coat, then my jacket should be used to cover my wardrobe malfunction. In fact they came up with an even more elegant solution. When I picked up my folio, they suggested I just use that and keep my coat on for the meeting.They completely bypassed trying to fix the zipper itself. This is an excellent example of obliquity. Economist John Jay expresses obliquity as the principle that complex goals are best achieved indirectly.

"Obliquity is necessary because we live in an world of uncertainty and complexity; the problems we encounter aren’t always clear – and we often can’t pinpoint what our goals are anyway; circumstances change; people change – and are infuriatingly hard to predict; and direct approaches are often arrogant and unimaginative."

I arrogantly assumed I could solve the problem without the help of the admin staff--who surely must have come up against wardrobe malfunctions in the past. Whatsmore, the staff knew the layout of the boardroom and thus knew that I could enter relatively easily, with a very short trip to my chair to lower the risk of my inadvertently exposing myself. But I will never forget the turning point in my own behavior that gave me the confidence to go ahead with their plan. The admin said to me, "Joel, leaving may be the smart thing to do, but you'll really regret later that you didn't just go in now." The admin realized that I couldn't see the big picture, that the wardrobe malfunction was actually a rather minor thing, and easily solved. In my various attempts and failures, I was behaving predictably irrational and thus on the verge of depriving myself of a very valuable opportunity.

So, what are the lessons here that strategists and planners can take away from my wardrobe malfunctions?

First, if you are in the business of problem-solving, get help, its very unlikely that you're the expert, and sometimes you only have to look around to realize you're surrounded by experts with native knowledge based on prior experience.

Two, the best solution maybe an indirect one, where you attack the problem by NOT taking it head-on, but instead shaping your solution around the context of the problem instead of the functional mechanics of the problem.

Three, problem solving requires an objective outsider's POV on occasion. Rationality is subjective and while you may think you are providing a well-considered solution, you may in fact be behaving quite irrationally and need a reset (my zen moment). And that this is likely to come from someone else observing your challenge. This is a simple forest-for-the trees approach.

Incidentally, I did admit to being rather embarrassed about the whole thing, but not until AFTER the proper solution presented itself. Another indication that I was behaving irrationally--I wouldn't humble myself to ask for help. I believe this was because I was going into a room full of CEOs. What if it had been people with less status, say a room full of mechanics or the very admins who helped me? I think I was influenced by who I was going to see to a degree that I thought I would display the confidence of a CEO in solving the problem. You know, this happens when you prepare yourself to impress someone. You adopt what you perceive is their attitude and behavior a little. And therein lay my downfall, because no good self-respecting CEO would do what I did. They would survey the landscape, examine several routes before acting to avoid making the situation worse, ask for or command help immediately, and preferably from an "insider" with native knowledge. Or at least I LIKE to think that's how a CEO would behave.

For more on the principle of obliquity, see below:

Brave Ads Focus on Change

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 11 Jan 2013 23:06:00 +0000

Since I joined GMMB I've become a believer in using communications to support behavior change. If you look at the most-awarded campaigns of the past few years, you'll notice that we (the industry) now believe the best work should no longer fixate on creating brand preference as an output, but tangible action as an outcome instead. Think Tapwater Project and Fuel Band.

So, of the ten nominated TED Ads Worth Spreading the ones that stand out to me as the most brave are the ones that lead to real change. Sure, I admire transparency (part of the remit), but those that simply focus on polishing the brand, clever films like Three Little Pigs, don't hold a candle to campaigns like Make the Politicians Work from URA.RU (a Russian newspaper). In effect, the campaign intervened again and again to get the attention of the local government, using shame as the trigger. And they didn't rest on a one-time change, they enabled the citizens of their city to break the social norm to keep the change going. No easy feat.

Here's Make the Politicians Work.

I'm also impressed with the Save the Troy Library campaign. Good bit of reverse psychology used here to GET OUT THE VOTE.

JWT: 100 Things to Watch in 2013

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 03 Jan 2013 22:37:00 +0000

JWT: 100 Things to Watch in 2013 from JWTIntelligence

5 Years of Purpose via Edelman

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Wed, 02 Jan 2013 18:22:00 +0000

by EdelmanPR.Browse more infographics.

Branded Doc - The Rationale

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Wed, 05 Dec 2012 16:01:00 +0000

Last year at SXSW I sat down with the Flow Nonfiction team (client) and shared with them my thoughts on why branded documentary might just be cause marketing's best marketing tool. The results--a nifty short film also featuring P&G's Sara Montante and DeVries PR CEO Stephanie Smirnov among others--that provides an insider's look into the genre and the benefit it can bring to your brand.

PEOPLE ARE GOOD, SANDY'S A B*TCH

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 29 Nov 2012 20:40:00 +0000

Heart breaking but inspiring film put together by filmmaker Joe Carter (VAN RIDES) while he worked for P&G brand Duracell and clean water non-profit Waves for Water covering relief work in NY who were affected by Hurricane Sandy. Its unclear if its a Duracell-branded film, but it hardly matters. Duracell brought its Duracell Power Forward Fleet where it was needed most, sharing more than 125,000 batteries, recharging more than 1,000 cell phones and helping more than 10,000 families recover through-out the aftermath.

-PEOPLE ARE GOOD- from Joe Carter on Vimeo.

Waves for Water has coordinated a full-fledged Hurricane Relief Initiative in response to Super Storm Sandy that has absolutely decimated the North Eastern seaboard, ocusing primarily on the surf-based coastal communities in Jersey and NY to start. We look at W4W effort specifically as a vessel for the surf community to funnel their support through, specifically addressing the families and businesses of the surf communities that were wiped out. According to their website, they've raised half a million dollars already.