I figured “designed”, but this question really stuck with me, and I’ll admit that I changed my answer after my initial reaction once I really began to think about it.

See, in design school, we are taught about iconic designers such as Paul Rand, Milton Glaser and especially Ivan Chermayeff & Tom Geismar. Their work (in specific cases) is thought to be iconic, and it really is. IBM, I Love New York and the NBC logos are perfect examples of what it means to be “iconic”. They are easily recognizable and more importantly—identifiable.

These logos, and many more, are so well designed. They are all simple, clever and unique. These are obviously the reasons they are iconic. I thought.

So many times in design school, and my early years of professional design (it will be two years in August), I wanted to design a logo or a wordmark that could stand up against Apple, Nike, McDonald’s and FedEx to name a few, but I wasn’t hitting the mark I wanted to hit, and I never understood why. My designs shared the same qualities as the “iconic” logos, but they never had that instant “pop” or emotional connection that the big brands all had.

That’s the key – big brands. And once I got to this conclusion, that’s when I changed my answer.

A logo doesn’t sell the product. It only identifies it. The (important word to follow) BRAND sells the product. But what is a brand? A brand is nothing more than a promise. It’s that emotional connection a consumer has with a company or product. It is what they come to expect. It is how they differentiate company from company and product from product.

The logo only identifies these connections, it doesn’t create them.

The brands, and subsequently, the logos succeed only because the product has stood the test of time. It is desirable to consumers because they have had, or know somebody who has (look at the designer talking about Social Media), a positive connection with the company or product. More positive connections = more sales = more $$ = bigger advertising spend.

The more I see the logo, the more recognizable it is and finally the more identifiable it becomes with the product or company.

So, with all that said, here’s a question of my own:

Assuming that iconic logos seem to be more the result of a big wallet, can a brand succeed in evoking emotion and making a connection without an identity? Can you fall in love with a faceless person if he or she is saying all the right things? I think we have a little “chicken or egg” conundrum here, and thoughts are welcome…

Cheers!

Kyle

In my professional development, before being an employee with SGC, I joined a local organization called Ad 2 West Michigan; in a year I was elected to the role of Chair of Public Service, where I have worked with my friend and professional club associate Ray Cashbaugh (Chair of Creative), as well as the handful of dedicated, to build our charity campaign for the Wealthy Theatre (located in East Grand Rapids).

Ad 2, a division of the AAF (National), is a club for young professionals in Advertising, Marketing, and Public Relations between the ages of 18 and 32. In light of my involvement, I had planned to join the AAF and Ad 2 for their National Conference in Orlando, Florida, as a representative of Ad 2 West Michigan even before my employment with Steketee Greiner; imagine my pride to represent not only Ad 2 West Michigan, but also a rapidly growing company driven by an innovative spirit. The passion I have for my relationship to SGC allowed me to network with professionals in the Advertising industry with a vigor that perhaps Seth Godin would be proud of.

At the conference, my already deep respect for the AAF’s role in my industry grew as I saw the number of clubs that had come to represent not only their industry, but also their hometowns, in an effort to learn, network and most importantly, have fun! On the young professional side, I was awed that leadership flew in from cities such as Denver; Washington DC; San Francisco; Madison and even as far away as Honolulu, Hawaii to support the conference for Ad 2.

During the week, one speaking engagement stuck out as specifically motivating. Gary Ware, an Ad 2 member and professional from the San Diego area (Ad 2 SD) led a workshop on how to use Social Media effectively for a club and graciously allowed me to attend (I even offered to Live Tweet with the #aafconference Hashtags). As a professional engaged in the emerging industries related to digital communications and Social Media I found that Gary and I had much in common with our views of Social Media. What interested me most from this talk was that Gary had inspired a room of ‘traditional’ Advertising professionals to engage both him and their peers in an attempt to learn and share successes.

Knowing the times I’ve seen advertising and thought “hey, Social Media could really help out here…” it’s fantastic to see traditional professionals looking to merge industries – even if the cutting edge hasn’t been their primary focus so far in their career.

So special thanks to Gary as well as the AAF National Conference, for reminding me that it’s not just about advertising, and it’s not just about Social Media – it’s about getting the consumer engaged with brands we promote to the extent that they are willing to not only purchase a product, but spread positive Word of Mouth (WOM) across their social channels (both offline and online). The added benefit of Social Media to a traditional advertising campaign comes from the ability to measure this WOM and determine ROI faster, and more affordably than traditional surveying alone.

For example: Tampax produced a very unusual (or is it revolutionary?) campaign about an adolescent named man named Zach who struggled with getting a period won best of show at the Addy’s; I can’t help but think that ‘Zach’s’ engagement through Social Media led him to not only win Best of Show but the loyalty of the consumers he engaged with in the digital landscape. You can view the official clip from the AAF [Here].

All in all, I’ve returned more passionate about my industry; it’s a pretty amazing world out there, and I hope to continue to share my passions around Social Media strategy, emerging technologies and Advertising (AAF/Ad 2 specifically!) in the near future.

In the meantime, don’t hold back. Love us or hate us – find us on Twitter: @stekteeegreiner.

And as always, if you’re looking to talk to us about our innovative views in this market, contact us through www.steketeegreiner.com.

Additional Links:

You can follow Gary on Twitter: @GaryWare

His Presentation is loaded  [On SlideShare]

Credits for the Tampax Campaign:

Tampax “Zack Johnson”

Agency: Leo Burnett, Chicago
WW Chief Creative Officer: Mark Tutssel
Chief Creative Officer: John Condon
Executive Creative Director: Becky Swanson
Creative Director: Dave Loew, Jon Wyville
Copywriter: Dave Loew
Art Director: Jon Wyville

Post by: Andrew Rushmore

I responded, “Why would you not put your personal information on the internet? Granted, there are opportunities for the uninitiated to be taken advantage of, but with a little guidance, levels of your personal information can open a massive world of consumer opportunity. Connectivity is a key concept of our collective future. Marketing, entertainment, retail and just about anything that requires a speaker and an audience have an enormous platform to deliver a message about their goods or services. Personal information is becoming exceedingly helpful in allowing them to tailor that message specifically to you, and maintain its relevance in your life. It’s an exceedingly intelligent concept that is only going to get larger and more encompassing.”

As my father returned complaining he would be unable to mow the lawn due to a broken mower, I was pleased to hear my mother recommend that maybe he should get online and connect with the hardware store, so they could help him find a new one; one that was just right for him. I think she’s getting it. It’s not too late for anyone.

Barth Wilson

You can find a copy of the presentation that Brian Steketee presented below.

The presentation covers the basics of Google Analytics and AdWords as well as some more advanced features and considerations.

Download Here

Thank you once again for your interest and happy measuring!!

David

It’s that time of year again, the birds and bees are out and about making whoopie, and in the bustling metropolis of Chicago the Word of Mouth Marketing Association is preparing to welcome all (including a few of us from SGC) attending the 2010 School of WOM at Swissôtel Chicago, May 24-26.

The reason I say all this is to shamelessly promote the event and to encourage anyone in the industry that hasn’t signed up to attend to do so if you can. We’ve been involved with WOMMA for almost a year now, and the School of WOM is a “shouldn’t be missed” event, if you’re at all into WOM marketing. In addition to presentations by some of the leading voices from some of the world’s biggest brands on their approach to WOM, there will be a number of great discussions around creating sustainable word of mouth campaigns, how to measure the effectiveness of your efforts and more – much more than this simple post can hope to contain.

So, to all you WOMites out there, get registered, jump on your plane, train or automobile and make your way to Chicago. The weather is nice this time of year, the food is great and I’m sure we’re all going to walk away in an enlightened state of mind.

David

The beauty of where this all goes – AdAge Viral video chart

http://adage.com/digital/article?article_id=143824

As I spent some time today on AdAge getting my daily dose of what’s happening and who’s who, I came across a great article that was talking about the most successful viral campaigns of the week. What was intriguing and also wonderful at the same time is that AdAge was referencing “Visible Measures” viral ability chart as a reference guide to who was winning the race. So there we have it – a publication that was once dedicated to a traditional advertising model paying homage once again to the power of digital and and non-traditional. Google’s Chrome video took the lead with an impressive 1.86MM views on a new spot they published online. Toyota was close behind with 1.85MM views regarding a campaign they put together for the Sienna.

What I love most about this example is the market’s willingness to understand and give credibility to the power of digital and social media. However I must say there is a great opportunity to provide more insight into this report than just how many views have been achieved. There is so much more data available to help you understand the true impact and connection that these impressions have had with the eyeballs that have viewed them. If harnessed correctly, marketers have the ability to make those moments so much more impactful to both the brand and the consumer experiencing them.

Brian

As we began to monitor conversations around the initiative and the participating cities in the digital landscape, several cities stood out as clear leaders. These leaders had over ten thousand Facebook fans alone, with some breaking twenty and even thirty thousand. Pictures, tweets, blog posts, videos and more all supported the digital media presence of active cities, showing how very hands on participants became – fiber became a catalyst for community growth in cyberspace and beyond. And I say beyond, and this is a key learning for everyone, because the cities that controlled the largest share of digital voice were those that not only pulled together strategies for deploying digital media but carried it through to PR and experiential activities as well.

As Google’s March 26th deadline loomed closer we monitored even more excitement online as many cities saw last minute increases to their fan bases. This was likely tied to the flood of nationally recognized events various cities used for promotion, as well as the effect of word of mouth and the variety of media coverage that backed the buzz around Google’s fiber initiative.

So here we are, just over a month since the fiber ‘storm’ passed. It’s been interesting to watch how conversation around the initiative in the digital landscape waned. The leaders in the Facebook space continued to grow, but each added just a few thousand fans since the deadline. And many of the cities vying for Google’s fiber have seen a significant drop in their online conversation since the deadline for the RFI. Basically, Google thanked everyone for applying and relegated share of online voice to its position in its decision making process, and, for the most part, most participants gradually stepped back their efforts. Really, the only major additional event since the close of the application process happened on April Fool’s Day (April 1st) when Google changed its site name to ‘Topeka’ as a tip of the cap to Topeka, Kansas which changed its name to ‘Google, Kansas’ as part of its campaign.

What is surprising is how little uproar there appears to be from all of the cities that invested a great deal of time and money in participating in this initiative. We were expecting to find a good of negative sentiment against Google for not choosing a city faster and leaving America waiting with no clear date on when the selection would be made. With the large number of content contributors in cities such as Grand Rapids, Duluth, Topeka, Greenville (South Carolina) and Pittsburgh, one could draw the logical conclusion that a high number of comments and negative content speaking out against Google would appear in the digital space, or at the very least, the conversations would intensify generating more content around their desire for Google’s fiber broadband. But that isn’t the case. Something more interesting is happening: there are new initiatives being driven by cities that submitted applications to Google focused on creating local support for broadband fiber lines, regardless of what decision Google makes. That’s an interesting twist and a really brilliant example of how powerful WOM can be. In this instance, though Google created the initial groundswell, generating a mass of interest on a large scale, the bit of subject matter seems to be of greater interest than the actual Google campaign itself. That sounds like it should naturally be the case, but think about it. This is a solid example of WOM being used to sell a simple, good idea. I like to think that even if Google never intended to pull the trigger on installing broadband fiber anywhere, the awareness for the technology that this campaign raised would justify the investments.

To illustrate what’s currently happening, on April 15th “Google Island” (Sarasota, Florida’s Facebook page) posted:

“Due to the overwhelming support and momentum from the community…our leadership at city and county are putting together a team of key people to continue to push a broadband agenda.”

It sounds like Sarasota is pretty committed to fiber broadband (whether it’s from Google or not). That begs the question: did the mayor really need to jump into a shark-tank to spark activation with consumers? The honest answer is maybe. We tracked spikes in online conversation and activity around events such as the Google, Kansas rename, Duluth’s idea of renaming all firstborns Google and many other similar events that all certainly raised awareness for the fiber initiative and educated consumers on the value of having it available throughout their respective cities. The question now shifts from “How do we get Google’s attention?” to “How do we develop a strategy that will take the online interest generated by awareness for broadband fiber and translate it into something tangible for our community?”

Two people seem to be addressing that question. Jay Ovittore and Craig Settles started an initiative to carry the momentum of Google Fiber into something tangible by supporting communities and their leaders as they try to create fiber broadband on their own, without ‘winning’ fiber from Google. You can get more information on Communities United for Broadband here.

In another initiative that has popped up after Google’s deadline for RFIs had passed, Greenville, (South Carolina) has taken the initiative to make a website where people can vote for cities which they feel are most deserving of being awarded Google’s fiber. Not surprising, Greenville’s enthusiasm, which has been constant throughout the submission period, earned their city over 300,000 votes on the site. However, Asheville, North Carolina recently took the lead with over 400,000 votes. Duluth, Minnesota came in ‘third’ with over 12,000 votes with other cities on the list having far fewer votes, but the ‘ranking’ is open until May 6th.

The initiative is a great vehicle to continue to generate awareness, but there are questions as to how this site will ultimately contribute to getting broadband fiber connectivity. However it plays out, it will need to generate an opportunity outside of the Google initiative, because according to Greenville Online, a South Carolina news outlet, Google’s Product Manager Minnie Ingersoll said, “To be clear, our decisions will be based entirely on the responses and data we’ve gathered for our Request for Information.” She added, “This web site is not authorized by Google.” But the brains behind Greenville’s efforts thus far have been diligent, and it seems likely that they’ll look to create an angle to position their cause.

So where does all this leave us? Shark tanks, babies named ‘Google’ and more brought us to here, and now all the people who put so much time and energy into their efforts on behalf of their respective cities are playing a waiting game while Google decides how they want to proceed. And yet, many of the people involved in all of this don’t seem content to wait and are now turning their efforts toward picking up the broadband fiber torch independently of any help from Google and continuing their local groundswells in pursuit of what they set out for – better connectivity.

No matter how things turn out, the most relevant insight in all of this is that a good idea is a good idea (high speed broadband fiber connectivity), and if you craft a solid strategy for communicating its value proposition (like Google did), people will take ownership of the idea and respond. And regardless of who owned or owns the share of voice online for this initiative and ultimately who Google chooses to work with to install Google Fiber, this campaign is a fantastic example of how effective (and ineffective) traditional and non-traditional communications can be used together to not only generate awareness, but to inspire whole communities and affect real change.

On that note, and based on Google’s post on its official blog that it will be making its selection “…by the end of the year,” we have decided to take a step back from our weekly reports, evaluate the number of cities participating in online efforts around the initiative to make sure that we have the most inclusive list possible and then resume our efforts on a regular basis until Google makes its final decision. Again, we’re not saying in any way that Google is using online share of voice as a factor in its decision making process, but we still want to make sure that everyone knows who the top contenders are around this metric and what they are doing to try to get Google’s attention online. And given Google’s tip of the cap to Topeka today, the question has to be asked: does it hurt to go out of your way a bit to stay top of mind in the digital world?

So, look for our next report sometime in April, and thanks to everyone who continues to send in insights and requests on behalf of your city – we are taking as much relevant information into account as we can. In the meantime, make sure you continue to include your city in your tagging strategy, as we’ll continue to base our search for data on the participating cities, and please don’t hesitate to email me at david.greiner@sgandco.com with questions, concerns and anything else I should know is going on in your world.

Finally, and this is way past due, thanks to Martin at Zettaphile for his efforts in compiling the original list of Google fiber cities on his blog. It was our starting point.

Thanks and again, best of luck to everyone!

David

Before you hit up the comments section and start a debate over which one of you hates ME more, please hear me out. I am not trying to be a rogue designer that just wants to be different (and tick people off in the process). And it’s not that I didn’t pay attention during Typography 210 (or something like that), where we were told which fonts were good, which were bad and which was the greatest (Helvetica, supposedly).

I also understand that Helvetica is arguably over-used, but that doesn’t even bother me. Honestly, it is a nice typeface; it has great, safe characteristics which make it viable for a lot of applications and mediums.

But…I can’t stand the capital ‘R’. The descender is awkward to say the least. For a typeface with such little connotative character, where did this rolling leg come from? The rest of the family is so sterile, so defined, so geometric, but the ‘R’ is so, so confusing.

To me, it looks likes Max Miedinger played “Pin the Tail on the P.” Sure, he put it in the right place (impressive for having been blind-folded), but that is to be expected from such letterforms displayed in the rest of the  family.

Or maybe his hand slipped when finishing out the letter. Many long nights have been put into his work, the accidental yawn / slip could be expected.

Whatever the case may be, I can’t stand it. Now, I realize that I have been praising the rest of what Helvetica has to offer, so I guess I have to retract my previous statement a bit. I actually hate 1/26th (not counting numbers or punctuation, who needs those anyway?) of the entire family (from 27 to 93).

And I thought I was the only one that had this growing internal irritation with Helvetica. I mean, it’s so universally loved that there was a movie made because of the impact and popularity of the typeface. But I have 2 “R’s” in my last name, and seeing it set all caps in Helvetica makes my left eye twitch a little.  Luckily, in my research (to prove I am not crazy) I found this guy. It’s comforting to know I am not alone.

Unfortunately, I don’t think I will ever like the capital ‘R’ in Helvetica. I don’t change my appetite much, considering I still don’t like grapes, bananas or many other forms of fruit.

I want to hear from you though. Let me know whether your a lover or a hater (of Helvetica that is, not me).

Cheers!

Kyle

Below is the second in our series of reports ranking the online share of voice for the cities participating in the Google fiber initiative.

This report updates our initial metrics based on the insights we’ve collected from our research, which includes all of the direction submitted through blog comments on our first report and emails we’ve received directly. And on that note, thank you to everyone who took the time to contribute to this research on behalf of your city. As we hope we’ve shown in these reports, active participation is essential to any good online efforts, and yours is much appreciated.

Please note that if your city did NOT make the top 10 in our report, it is no indication that you are in any way not competitively positioned in the initiative. Again, Google has multiple factors in their decision making process, including how interested a community is in working with Google, community support, local activities, needs and resources, approved construction methods, local regulatory issues and area broadband speeds. And though most participating cities assert that online interaction in their campaigns will increase the chances of favorability in their selection, ultimately Google will decide which factors are most relevant.

The second report is available for download here. Just click on the image below.
And please reach out to us through the comments below or by email to david.greiner@sgandco.com if you have any questions or comments on the information and insights we’re presenting.

Download Media Kit (6MB ZIP)