Monthly Archives: November 2013

JP Morgan Twitter Disaster

Posted on by
Reply

Even if social media is something companies should tap on for the growth of their business, companies should still research and assess whether their type of business really suits social media. Social media is great but it’s not for everyone. Just early last week, JP Morgan‘s Twitter #AskJPM campaign turned into a fiasco. Considering the bad presses they have been getting for the past year, this move probably wasn’t the smartest thing for the company to do.

Below are some of the tweets that proved the campaign was a disaster:

 

It took six hours before the people behind JP Morgan’s Twitter account decided to call it a day for their campaign.

 

While six hours can be a long time to realize that the campaign wasn’t doing any good for the company, I think it was still relatively good for the people behind their social media team to be able to react to it within 12 hours. While this campaign is certainly a disaster, I think it would be quick to say that JP Morgan is that type of business that can’t benefit from social media. A Q&A campaign might not exactly be a bad idea for JP Morgan, but the way it was executed was definitely done poorly. If only JP Morgan had made a more thorough assessment of the Q&A campaign and recognized any potential backfire situations that may occur, then maybe, this campaign might have been not as bad as it ended it to be.

I think one of the things JP Morgan could have done to at least have made the result more favourable is changing the way they marketed the #AskJPM.

Based from the tweets above, it seems like JP Morgan just marketed the campaign as a Q&A. The scope and what this campaign can do for its followers (ie. Q&A for graduating students who want to work for JP Morgan) were not mentioned. It practically seemed that it was Q&A for all and that anything goes. And I guess JP Morgan can’t really blame Twitter users to be asking out-of-this-world questions. By marketing the Q&A campaign as an opportunity for interested graduating students to learn more opportunities in the company might have yielded better results.

Q&A campaigns can really yield good results even if the company doing the campaign has been having bad press or is known for some few bad things. A good example of this would be McDonalds. Their yourquestions campaign proved to be successful even though a lot of people have negative views on their food. This shows JP Morgan could have actually benefited from their #AskJPM campaign if they have only stated what the Q&A was for, just like how McDonalds clearly stated that the yoursquestions campaign was for consumers to ask any questions they have about their food.

 

 

Entertainment Industry Revolutionized By YouTube

Posted on by
Reply

While there are some who view the growth of internet and online sharing platforms as a bad thing, I think there are some real merits out there and shouldn’t be disregarded. YouTube is one these platforms that I think really changed the way the entertainment industry works. YouTube paved the way for many undiscovered artists around the world to enter the entertainment industry that would otherwise not be able to if not for the video-sharing website.

Traditionally before internet was widely accessible worldwide, there are very limited ways for someone aspiring to be a singer, comedian or actor, to be discovered or showcase their talent. Now, the world has become a smaller place because of YouTube, and people can show their talent with just a video and a click away. I personally discovered a lot of artists on YouTube that I really like. It’s good to know that people who really have the talent are getting the recognition their deserve through the help of YouTube. Personally for me, people who are in show business these days lack the creativity, content and talent, and YouTube has filled that gap by allowing individuals who initially did not have enough resources to make it into the business be able to. Many people who do covers of well-known songs really well tend to get scouted by talent agencies and are able to have a career in something that they’re really passionate about.

At the end of the day, I think even if there are some downside to growth of internet and these platforms, the benefits YouTube has given to many individuals are still something to be appreciated.

—

Here’s an video of a YouTube cover artist that I really enjoy listening to:

YouTube Preview Image

Giant Social Media Platform Scrambling for Its Life

Posted on by
Reply

Earlier last week, news came about Snapchat refusing the $3 billion buy-out offer from Facebook. If you recall, April of last year, Instagram was bought for $1 billion by Facebook. During then, I remember thinking how could Facebook benefit from buying Instagram, an app that did not have an existing revenue model. The thought of Facebook incorporating ads into Instagram did come into my mind, but I still couldn’t digest the thought of it. Sure enough, after a year, there are Instagram ads now – at least in its early stages, as mentioned in my previous post. But now with Snapchat, I am more confused as to how Facebook can capitalize on Snapchat if it was successful in acquiring it.

I couldn’t really see putting ads on Snapchat would be effective given the nature of the app, which is that the video – once watched – is gone forever. Also, users also have the option of whether or not they want to view the video. There is a possibility that once users recognize that it is an ad, they would stop watching it. Given these reasons, I still couldn’t understand how Facebook can monetize Snapchat, just like Pooja. In her blog posts, she listed why she thinks Snapchat refused the offer. Initially, I agree with her points but later realized she was just looking at the buy-out from the same perspective I had, which was what synergies will be created from this acquisition.

It’s true that there so much misalignment in their positioning, but what is Facebook never planned on using or capitalizing on Snapchat? What if Facebook only wanted to get rid of the competition? Reading this article made me realize that maybe Facebook did just want to get rid of its threats. With more Facebook users switching to messaging and photo-sharing mobile apps, Facebook is desperate to keep its territory in the social media space. Spending $3 billion to keep its company afloat might not be such an unreasonable move for a $120 billion company to make.

Facebook Might Be Losing It

Posted on by
Reply

Back in the early 2000s, Friendster was the biggest thing in the Philippines and was essentially the Facebook of people back then. Not long after, Multiply was the biggest thing. And at least in the Philippines, the rapid adoption of Multiply marked the demise of Friendster. I know myspace was huge in North America, but in the Philippines, that was not the case. Following Multiply was Facebook. Just based from these, it seems that social media platform, albeit widely used at that time, do not last for more than a decade. And I think Facebook might be nearing its end soon.

In 2008 when I first started using Facebook, I found Facebook an all-in-one online platform wherein I can have fun playing online games with my friends, interact with them and share things I enjoy. This might one of the many reasons as to why Facebook was quick to replace all those other social media platforms. However, I can’t speak for everyone, but in 2011, I started losing interest on Facebook. I saw a trend where people in my network started being less active online – less were playing online games and less engagement in general. A recent research done by GlobalWebIndex confirms the decrease in activity of Facebook users, especially the teens. The research defined “active on Facebook” as doing more than just “liking” a separate page on the web and was done surveying teenagers in 30 countries. These teenagers seem to be shifting to mobile chat applications, such as WeChat, and photo-sharing apps namely Instagram and Snapchat.  Tom Smith, CEO of GlobalWebIndex, said, “There is a clear, definitive shift to mobile in general..”

I think one of the many reasons behind this shift to mobile apps is not necessarily because teenagers are more on their phones than computers, but because things that you can do on Facebook are starting to decrease. With people being less active on Facebook, there is only so much you can do on an online platform that is based on social interaction. What do you think?

Instagram Ads may be the next Pinterest in producing business results

Posted on by
Reply

While going through this article that talks about the success of Instagram ads, I saw some thought-provoking comments from readers. One that really struck me the most was this:

The article talked about the yielded results from Michael Kors’ Instagram ads which led to 33,000 new followers and a 370% increase in likes. This then begs that question: Now what? When you think about it: Instagram ads, if it persists in the future, makes Instagram very similar to Pinterest. Similar in a way that these Instagram ads, when done in a right way, can also lead to consumer purchases just like how Pinterest is subtly able to do.

To answer Ron Schott’s question, companies who benefit from these Instagram ads through increase in number of followers and likes, can gear their Instagram ads to also produce business results. By strategically using attractive and relevant photos and subtly providing a link of their website on the photo caption, these ads can also result to consumer purchase.

As a consumer, if I keep seeing sponsored photos like these on my newsfeed, given that its not excessive, it would not take too long for me to actually seriously consider buying a Michael Kors bag. Keeping one’s brand relevant and visible in consumers’ daily lives can really eventually led to consumer purchase.

I don’t know a lot about the technical back end side of Instagram, but if if they can customize the platform in a way that Instagram ads for Michael Kors (as an example) will only show to its intended target market, Instagram ads might be a better option for companies than have affiliated marketing with Pinterest, as these (Instagram) ads can be directed to the right consumers unlike Pinterest.

Going back to Ron’s question, what I can say is that having more followers allows for greater reach, while having more likes makes the Instagram ad/post eligible to be placed in the popular page, which increases exposure. These both can lead to higher potential sales, and I think are quantifiable results and real benefits.

Capitalizing on that $1B Acquisition

Posted on by
Reply

I can still remember learning about the news of Instagram being bought for $1 billion by Facebook last year and could not justify the amount spent for the buy out. That time, many saw Instagram as a platform that did not (previously) have a revenue model. Months following the acquisition, I recall having at least two notifications from Instagram about the coming of Instagram ads. My initial reaction was annoyance and maybe a hint of indifference. Probably not as forward-thinking as the people behind Facebook, I never really saw how Facebook could capitalize on Instagram through ads. Reading this article, however, made me have a different perspective of Instagram ad – I thought Instragram ads may not be so bad after all.

How these ads work (it seems like) is that these ads will appear on your newsfeed and/or on the popular page. Michael Kors, aside from GE, was one of the first few brands to try Instagram ads. From the article above, their Instagram account experienced tremendous growth in likes and number of followers. However, it was not surprising to find out that there were some negative comments (20%). Personally, I think this will just be a phase and that consumers will start getting used it to eventually. I actually do not mind having nice ad photos on my feed once in a while. A maximum of three ads evenly spread out on my feed would be something tolerable, if not appreciated, only if it is smart images and attractive content.

As mentioned by this article by Forbes, image-centric networks will see tremendous growth as visual content is becoming more critical in the success of online content strategy. That said, there is real potential for Instagram ads. Cost of the ads do not seem to be public yet, but based from the strong results of these first Instagram ads, it wouldn’t be surprising if its very costly. Should Facebook set strict but not entirely limiting guidelines (for the benefit of ad buyers) on what content should be on Instagram ads, then Instagram ads may just solve some of the challenges faced in online advertising.

Does Being Viral Make It Successful?

Posted on by
Reply
YouTube Preview Image

 

In just five days, this new viral ad by Volvo has garnered over 22 million views. I know in the advertising industry, having an ad become viral has become a a standard goal and can be seen as a metric for a successful ad. Having one’s ad go viral does provide real benefits, as it leads to many user generated content and publicity thereby increasing the exposure and reach of one’s ad. However, this Volvo ad made me think twice if having your ad become viral is enough to be considered as a successful ad campaign.

One of the reasons why this ad has gone viral is because of the unique stunt done by Action star Jean-Claude Van Damme. When I first saw the ad, my attention was drawn to the split rather than the great steering control of the trucks or Volvo. This made me think what the objective of the ad was.

At the end of the ad, Volvo had to leave a note stating that the purpose of the test done in ad was to showcase Volvo Dynamic Steering. There is a considerable good of amount of viewers of this ad who probably just shared it because of the stunt and did not think too much of the Volvo trucks. While being viral provides more greater reach, I tend to doubt if the message of the ad was clearly communicated to the viewers.

YouTube Preview Image

 

An example of an ad, albeit viral, did not seem to successfully communicate what it intended to. An ad by Internet Explorer became viral because of a majority of Internet users could relate to it but did not necessarily agree to its message, which was essentially Internet Explorer is now back and better. In the end, the ad, although relatable to its target market, was not enough to entice its previous users to try them again. Relating this back to the Volvo ad, I think the Volvo ad might also have the same fate – although viral, the message was not clearly communicated. And for me, an ad, depending on its objective, is only successful when it is able to communicate its message and have actionable results done by its consumers (i.e. People switching to Internet Explorer).