WOM - Word of Mouth Marketing

03/23/2006

I accidentally seem to have stumbled into WOM circles on the web, either that, or everyone has just started talking about it. I find the subject fascinating for the moment, because on the one hand, it's a consumers dream and plants marketing right in their hands, on the other hand it has been used to deny power to consumers and trick them even more than before. So this article explores the bad side, the side that's not really word of mouth marketing at all, but something I'm not sure of the term for, 'stealth marketing' 'vile marketing'? anyhoo, interesting experts:

 

•  Among the more controversial are campaigns like one in which New York City advertising agency Interference Inc. hired dozens of models to pose as tourists at popular destinations across the country. Their goal: Demonstrate a new Sony Ericsson camera cell phone by getting real tourists to take their pictures with it.
• Among the agencies named in the complaint is Tremor, the word-of-mouth marketing division of Procter & Gamble. The unit uses about 250,000 teen volunteers to spread the word about new products in exchange for getting an early look at them.
• Interference Chief Executive Sam Ewen also has put people on subways to brag about financial advisers, and once sent models into bars to sit with packs of cigarettes in front of them -- waiting for someone to bum a smoke. Such campaigns are a small piece of his business, but Ewen isn't ashamed of bending the truth a bit.

Like all these despicable ways to make us as powerless as possible, the lovely people behind them go straight for the most vulnerable members of society, our kids. They target the 'coolest kids in their peer groups' and flaunt the need for other children to fit in.

On the good side, the real WOM, I've written a post at Decisive Flow. This is the sort that means you have t really impress your customer by providing exceptional service, then they will talk about it. That's like the ideal world I'm told will never happen. No need for advertising, your product succeeds on the happiness of your customers. 

09:03 Posted in consumerism | Permalink | Comments (3) | Email this

The death of animal rights

03/18/2006

Oh dear god. The Body Shop has just been aquired by Loreal, the crusaders against animal testing, the force behind ethical consuming has just said 'Actually, it's ok to harm animals, sorry, this was just a big markting thing'.

I remember walking past a shop a few months ago and seeing t-shirts proclaiming womens rights right alongside little tampon holders that has MTV splashed all over them. The contradiction almost made me laugh. Since when did encouraging women to take of all their clothes and gyrate to bad pop songs in porn style video clips amount to female rights?

I don't know why this hit me so hard. Maybe it's because when I was young, the only company I could ever imagine wanting to work for was The Body Shop, maybe because I spent some good time reading about Anita Ruddock, and actually admired her. Maybe I'm just terrified about what will happen now, that the biggest anti animal testing brand in the world has basically just commenced animal testing. Maybe it's because that everything that starts out so well, seems to get corrupted and become the opposite of what it was.

I don't even want to talk about it. Go read it at Body Shop: Extreme Makeover (I stole the picture from there too)

UPDATE: I posted a comment on Anita Roddick's 'blog'. I had to sign up three times to different areas of the site and to acces the video interviews of her talking about Loreal. I don't think I left a mean comment, just one asking if she could, for the sake of all of us who have supported her over the years and now feel slightly hurt, give us a reason why something like this would get her indorsement. - the comment may still be over to the right on my coComment recent conversations. Anyway, of course, comments are regulated over there, so it wasn't published straight away, however I went back today and three new comments have been published, all gushing over how much they 'trust' Anita. Mine was obviously not 'pro Anita' enough. It's a weird feeling when you see the worst aspects of PR in action. For a self proclaimed activist to silence other caring members of society is a little strange and does make me think it actually was all marketing all along. When you see yourself being censored, you wonder how one sided the conversation really is. The funny part about it was that Tim was always skeptical and I was (for once in my life) NOT. I'm sure there is a lesson there.

11:45 Posted in consumerism | Permalink | Comments (2) | Email this | Tags: Politics

For Anyone Who Still thinks Advertising is Limited to those 30 Second Slots

03/16/2006

I find it amusing talking to my (older) sister sometimes. She firmly believes that subtle advertising doesn't exist, that cigarettes aren't smoked in movies because someone is being paid to smoke them etc etc. I'm such a cynic, I see the possibility everywhere that someone is actually being paid to advertise to me. Like that blog Dooce, which I really enjoy reading sometimes, especially the monthly letters to her daughter. The sheer amount of 'My daughter has constipation, now I give her 'wonder drug', I'll keep you updated of her progress.' 'Now I've combined 'Wonder drug' with 'wonder drug 2, lets see how this works.' as well as of course, her own problems, which sound horiffic, yet could also be a conveniant way to tell us about the latest depression drug (which she does... a lot). So people like me are suspicious no matter what, but anyway thats not the point. Today I found this site, Bzz Agent offers YOU the chance to "join the Hive and you will be given the opportunity to participate in Word-of-Mouth programs for some of the best products and services in the market today."

So here's my proof for all you cynics. People who get free products, then go around creating 'buzz' (talking to people, mentioning the product etc etc) and in return get 'Bzz Rewards.' It's meant to be better than those annoying ads that 'shout at you from the bus station'. I think, at least they told us they were advertising. Now days, you can't even trust a onversation with your best friend! :)

UPDATE: ha ha check out the Onion 

09:25 Posted in consumerism | Permalink | Comments (0) | Email this

Are IPods Terrible?

03/12/2006

Over the years, my family has always been a testing ground for my grand plans to change the world, one consumer at a time. I figure if I can convert my family, I can convert anyone (not that they are bad or lazy people, it's just than in my experience, your own family are the last people to listen to you. This is possibly because they changed your nappies and played cops and robbers with you and therefore can't really take you all that seriously).

I have noticed in the last few months however, times are a-changin. First it was my mum, who proudly raced up to me, hands full of environmentally friendly canvas shopping bags that she was stocking up on for birthday presents. Then my dad managed to get himself in the newspaper smiling at the Greenpeace protesters as he was walking out of parliament (all the politicians were avoiding them and going by car). And now I've become some sort of 'dear Polly" for every purchase they make. The latest is an email from my youngest sister saying:

"I'm thinking about getting an ipod shuffle and was just wondering how you felt about that?  Is it a terrible thing to buy/support?"

 Every now and then I get a guilty email from my mother saying "we didn't have fish and chips last night. We had KFC instead. It wont happen again".

Just going off topic a little. My younger sister has one of the biggest guilt complexes of anyone I've ever met. For some random reason, the phone company rang up and threatened to cut of their phone line because someone was making 'threatening calls' from it. She was the only one home at the time they were made (midnight and 2am) and after being in a panic about some intruder coming into the house, she has now convinced herself that she is the guilty party. 'I obviously made the phone calls in my sleep. I must have done it. I'm guilty." She is now convinced she is moments away from being sent off to jail.

 

13:04 Posted in consumerism | Permalink | Comments (0) | Email this

Coca Cola Threat to Quit Schools

03/04/2006

This has got to be a bad heading, because Coke is actually getting the boot, not threatening to leave. In the UK an uncharactiristically sensible and intelligent polition, Ruth Kelly, is finally demanding a ban of all the disguisting, unhealthy coke products in schools. She logicalises the move by saying that kids won't simply wait until after school to buy Coke, they will settle for a healthy alternative because thats all that's offered. Coke spit it's powerful dummy and said it may as well withdraw all vending machines because they will become financially unviable. Sounds like she responded to the letter with silence - someone finally unable to be bullied by the big guy. Coke went as far to claim (as you wold suspect)

"that many soft drinks provided "significant nutritional and functional benefits" As an example, one "no added sugar" product - which contains two artificial sweeteners - was fortified with vitamins and minerals."

Hmm would these be the same drinks that are spiked with speed and caffine? 

They also question Ruth's logic about childrens drinking decisions "The risk, it said, was that they might instead put off having a drink "until a more popular choice was available" - with a significant impact on their hydration, concentration and performance."

While I'm sure we're all very pleased Coke has our children at number one in their priorities, I am amazed at how weak these massive corporation's arguments are as to why we should continue to fund their bloated profits. I really hope this goes through and that someone is wise enough to realise that a great alternative to vending machines (If coke does decide not to share it's toys) is a WATER FOUNTAIN!

Origional article 

 

08:10 Posted in consumerism | Permalink | Comments (1) | Email this | Tags: Coca Cola, schools, obesity, UK, Coke, Caffine, vending machines

Corporate Organics - Any Good?

03/02/2006

"is having a 100 per cent Organic Fair TradeTM coffee with your Big Mac really a sign of victory for the organic movement?."

Does Corporate Organic change the Organic Landscape?  Looks at how another buzzword can be contorted to mean something that's not all that great at all, while those really achieving change can be shafted out of the market by the big pretenders. Yet another thing to look out for if your intentions are to benefit the world, not hurt it.

 

08:06 Posted in consumerism | Permalink | Comments (0) | Email this | Tags: Ecology & Environment

A (Non -Typical) Day in the Life of A Small Business Owner

02/28/2006

So yesterday, we were sitting down to another long day when my friend Claire called. Claire has one of those to-die-for jobs that involves her going out on a boat very day (or twice a day) to swim with dolphins and watch people lik eme go crazy with excitement. She still remarks after months that she feels like she's cheating the system, to actually get paid to be in heaven all day. Anyway, turns out, there were two seats free yesterday, so we dropped all ou timportant business plans and grabbed our snorkles.

If you are yet to give it a go, I must say it's different from what you'd expect. Despite being told that dolphins don't just cuddle up to you, I still expected them to cuddle up to me. But they delight in their ocean playground and leave you extremely aware that this is their home, not ours. They swim like nothing else and they are the most beautiful things you'll ever see. I think they like humans because we are marvelously unsophisticated when we leap into the water with bright yellow flippers and flap around like lunatics.

In unrelated news, when I was uploading the dolphin photos, I saw one we took of my dog the other day.... Seems like she has cottoned onto the feel of the wind between her teeth... We were motoring down the motorway (duh) and she had her head stuck defiantly out the entire way, regardless of how ridiculous she looked. 

17:44 Posted in consumerism | Permalink | Comments (0) | Email this

Status of the 'big brands' slipping amoung teens

02/26/2006

For those of us hanging out for the day the world realises Coke is just a softdrink, not hard to make, not particulary yum, terribly bad for you and reliant purely on it's branding for survival, this was nice to hear.

In a recent survey of global teens (I'm not sure how many but assume Global is a little farfetched), "Coca-Cola still topped the chart in terms of name recognition, followed by McDonald's. But Coke fell to eighth place when it came to likeability, and the burger chain dropped all the way to No. 32. Disney and America Online also nose-dived in appeal."

I am also happy about that, after discovering my health and fitness freak sister, who bikes about a hundred kilometers a day and still struggles to keep up with her boyfriend who is even more hard out, and who are both rumoured to exist on protien shakes, also consume vast quantities of Coke zero (or whatever it's called). To my shock and dismay, being largely outside the drug world, when I enquired about the other drug labelled on the back "caffeine and Ph something or rather", I found out that this drug is a large component of speed. Yes the illegal drug, the one doctors also force feed any children they diagnose with ADD or ADHD or 'inability to cope with boring situations'. So there you go. No wonder Coke zero is the drink of choice for all those health concious, dieters of this world. This drug supresses appetite and gives you a nice buzz.

I hope you die a horrible death coke :)

11:32 Posted in consumerism | Permalink | Comments (0) | Email this | Tags: coca cola, coke, drugs, dieting, brands, consumerism

Sony, I download your music

11/14/2005

I don't download music, simply because there are so many other people who do, I just get whatever I need off them, and at the moment were having a little musical drought anyway. However, I have no problem whatsoever with downloading music, in fact I think it's a strong method of telling a company exactly how you feel about what they do.  this guy says it better than me. I quite enjoyed the comments too.

18:44 Posted in consumerism | Permalink | Comments (0) | Email this

One for the luddites

10/29/2005

I just had a conversation with my father who has just arrived back in NZ from Hawaii where the chiefs of defence from the Asia Pacific region were having a conference. The keynote speaker was an (American?) expert on Globalisation, the point of his speech was that anyone who disagreed with Globalisation was living in a fantasy world, because of course, all products these days were conceived in one country, designed in another, made in yet another, and sold in another. True. Because I didn't actually listen to the speech it is now beside the point. The point is, this weird thing we all do, we do it with the environment, we do it with GE, globalisation, virtually any time someone says 'woah slow it down a bit... is that actually what we want?' we accuse them of being luddites.

I haven't kept up with the debate about globalisation because it's true, these mass things tend to get quickly off track and overpowered by those who are keen to jump in the next bandwagon of 'cool'. As with those who post banners round town saying 'NO WAR', I get quickly annoyed. Whats the solution? Anyone who jumps round singing the latest hippy catchphrase is actually doing more harm than good to their cause of choice. It is them who allow the people who own the media and a lot of the massive multi nationals that are leading this globalisation to be justified in their little newspaper articles writing off the non-conformists as crazy, non thinking loonatics. As with everything, the 'leaders' of these protests, those with actual realistic, rational concerns get drowned in the noise created by their blind followers. And don't think anyone's going to take the times to trawl through it all to pick out the rational arguments, it isn't in any of our global power's interests to point out the wrongs of what they are doing.

I am 'anti war'. I spent a lot of my school years studying history, politics, conflicts, resolutions, in every single one of those classes the only thing that was EVER talked about was war. You wouldn't know that there has actually been massive massive non violent revolutions the world over. And they have been successful, less lives have been lost and they have happened in some of the most aggressively run dictatorships. Have they taken longer? Well that really depends on when you classify something as over. Is it over when America says 'the wars finished', is it over when they implement a new government? is it over the decades later when the country is still in ruins under a government that represents another country? I think there is another way, I think it has to involve the people within the country, because as I learned, the only truely successful revolutions have been led from the inside and SUPPORTED by the outside. When Iraqis got to a state they were so dissatisfied with their hideous leader, they should lead a revolution, confident in the belief that we 'the good guys' would back them up, not have someone else come in and tell them what is hapening to them is wrong and they may now die by accident because of a war someone else is running. And the funny thing is, we're all so trained to think violence is the only way, any other method seems just a bit thick and naieve. Yeah whatever, like I'm ever going to believe that an entire country can be so 'evil' that guns and smart bombs are the only way.

So back to globalisation you're probably thinking. But that is this form of Globalisation. 'Globalisation' is global warfare, is the fact that to boost ones oil imports another must be trampled. 'Globalisation' is also that fact that it doesn't matter in what country I go shopping these days, I'll still end up facing those disguiting golden arches, or some clothing chain store, or the world's super store Walmart. Yay.

I hate these stupid definitions of things. Globalisation means a global world ( I would use 'community', but as we can see from this form of globalisation, it doesn't really meet any definition of community I'd be happy with). Globalisation is not what were doing now, thats simply one way globalisation can look. Same as Communism is not what you read in Animal Farm, its just one way it can evolve. The same people who are telling us that we're stupid to not believe in globalisation, are the ones who have always thought that for one group to succeed, then the vast majority must suffer. That is why there was Apartheid, that only ended a few years ago. That is why Black americans were forced to join a civil rights movement that took decades, that is the very foundation of capitalism. I'm sorry, but there is not a chance I'm going to believe a word uttered from the leaders of countries who have been incredibly successful at looking after their own interests to the detriment of whoever got in their way. I don't want their form of globalisation. I'd rather ask the Chinese factory worker (of whom there are far more than any of the so called experts and government agencies and CEO's of our most globalised countries.). What do they think of globalisation?

What would you think if suddenly tables were turned and this world we live in with the joys of globalisation and war and Genetic engineering by a trick of fate, tomorrow delivered you into another group? If you always lived with that possibility, would you still be singing the praises of this world? or would you be doing everything in your power now to ensure there was something a little more beneficial to us all, 20% may have to tone down our living a bit so that the other 80% don't have to live in conditions we wouldn't accept for ourselves. Because when you think of it like that, maybe we would be thinking of a few more solutions, maybe we wouldnt accept this form of globalisation, or the newspaper articles telling us about these stupid greenies and luddites, maybe we'd have cause to wonder why our universities teach us that the only form of conflict resolution is war, and that we'll all be shopping in Walmart forever more. Maybe if it was our lifestyles on the line we'd actually question some fundamental beliefs and give this globalisation thing a good turn over, this human nature thing a little more exammination. Maybe, when we feel that tiny bit of smug satifaction when experts are telling us theres nothing we can do (and we think, phew, no point in getting all moralistic about this, I can't do anything anyway), we should recognise it and wonder if maybe we're just feeling lazy in our wealth, and maybe they are only saying it to create a dull, unquestioning mass .

I love the idea of a global world. I love the idea of democracy, but I don't for one second think that what we have is even close to the ideal of either of those. What I do think, is that there are other, easier, less destructive ways, they wont come through spraying slogans throughout the cities, they wont come from governments or experts.

12:40 Posted in consumerism | Permalink | Comments (0) | Email this

Degrees of seperation

09/26/2005

I can't stand passive consumers. The people who buy anything from anyone, with no thought to what they are actually doing, supporting. I also can't stand people who accept shocking customer service or a really sub standard product and don't do anything about it. The people who think companies rule the world and there is nothing they can do about it. No, it's not as conveniant to have to examine the back of every package to see whether it has been tested on animals, or to ensure a new juice range isn't just another brand produced by global polluter and human rights violater Coca Cola, or to stop eating at global fast food chains because you don't want to go on a trip to deepest africa and see the neon lights of Mc Donalds. No, I wont by any product made by a child sweatshop worker for Nike, or buy eggs from a company that treats chickens like living machines. I will never respect a smoker, because I have seen cigarette companies blatantly advertise to children and addict thousands of people in third world countries who can hardly afford food, let alone another price rise in the cigarettes that used to only cost them 10 cents while market share was being established.

But because I am not directly involved, in this society, it is ok for me to give my monetary support to those who abuse children, animals and the environment, in ways that would bring me to tears if in my backyard. Not only is it ok, its normal. I just dont buy it. I don't think it's fair that when I'm at a party and a doctor next to me lights up his cigarette and proclaims the beauty of free choice, I can't explain to him that his version of free choice is opressing thousands, without sounding argumentative. I don't think its fair that noone who pollutes and injures and wastes and kills never has to even label the fact clearly so that I can see, that I actually have to spend hours of my time just trying to get beneath the layers of secrecy. It's ludacris that a company that blinds and injures rabbits so that their new shampoo may possibly give a little more shine does not even need to tell me about the process, and instead can spin a web of half truths and deliver them via ther PR manager.

And here is why I blame those passive consumers. Because companies are not all powerful, it is an illusion. They get all their power from us, and while we let them sell us any old thing because we have put enough degrees of separation between ourselves and the things that go into the products we buy, the 'bad guys' flourish. Does it not annoy you people that if you were to ever get sick, really sick, those pharmaceutial companies you contunually run to every time you get a cold, or a headache, sore throat or minor injury, have been actively undermining the authenticity of 'alternative' medicine, to a point that you no longer have any choice over the treatment? 

Yes it is harder, but it's even harder when the majority of the population leaves it up to a few. And its even harder than that, when those same lazy consumers make it unsociable to challenge the norm and use their mass power, not againt corporate greed, but the very people who are trying, in their own minor way to make change.

 

20:55 Posted in consumerism | Permalink | Comments (5) | Email this