Credit where credit is due... or even where it isn't

I will admit it. I don't like James Joyce.

As a recent college graduate with a degree in English, this statement could have me censured. Or ex-communicated. Or whatever it is they do to English majors who don't like one of the greatest writers of all time. I can recognize why he is great. I read Ulysses, The Portrait of an Artist as a Young Man, and several of his short stories. I love that he's Irish. Great. I don't love his writing, but I can still appreciate it. My real problem stems from the hordes of people who hold him up as perhaps the greatest writer ever. The stare at his words until an olive on a dining room table becomes a metaphor for man's plight of self-discovery or some such bit of non-sense, and I don't like it. What's worse, I've always had this sense that Joyce was smart enough to never disagree with the interpretations of his work and so eventually, a story he thieved from the Greeks came to mean EVERYTHING EVER. When I read his works, I can't help but feel like he's peaking out from behind the text, whispering, "haha! I'm smarter than you!"

And I hate that.

But it is his inaction to correct other's interpretation of what his stories mean that has given him ultimate power as an author, and the corrupt side of me appreciates that. In communications, we all could take a lesson here.

I realized this while cruising the photos presented on "Stumbleupon," and after a series of photos of the night sky (we get it folks... stars are pretty) I came upon what could have been the most iconic image of the modern era.
http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/8A0xsL/animalnewyork.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/PARTING-SHOT-VAN.jpg (my actual stumbleupon link)

It's got everything. Violence. Unrest. Passion. Tension. Sex. Love. All of it in a single frame, and for the week that followed those riots in Canada, the world was obsessed with that image.

People wondered if it was a statement of love over violence or the ultimate act of civil disobedience. We couldn't get enough.

Then the press actually found the couple who proceeded to ruin it for everyone. Turns out, she fell, he was comforting her. That's it. No statement. No grand gesture. She might have twisted her ankle.

Now the image is nothing more than a picture that you find when (appropriately) stumbling online and it has all the impact of another image of stars in the night sky. If the couple would have taken a page from James Joyce and agreed to every interpretation of what was happening, that image could have fixed the global economy (probably not, but we'll never know now).

How does this apply to marketing?

When institutions develop brands, there is usually a great amount of work put into developing key features of that institution that should be represented continually throughout all communications. Organizations may call them Brand Pillars or Drivers, but the function is the same. No matter what is produced in marketing, the advertisements should stem from that platform. This is great in development and for internal development and makes everyone's job on the marketing team that much easier.

The problem occurs when those marketing messages are sent out into the real world and consumed by target audiences. Suddenly, the interpretation can shift. In fact, those "incorrect" interpretations of your advertising may lead you to more effective advertising in the long run.

What it boils down to is this. No matter what someone sees in your advertising, there is no point in correcting them (as long as it is good and can be supported in some way). Take credit even when it may not be due. This "Of course I meant to do that" attitude can save you a lot of headaches and help your brand find its audience more effectively.

James Joyce did, and it has worked out well for him.

Customer advocacy in advertising: Domino's and GQ

If I had to pick my favorite ad campaign of the last few years, it is easily Domino's Pizza relaunch. It helps that the new pizzas are delicious and I appreciate the bold move to change everything. But when they asked for customers to provide the photos for their new pizza line, I was floored. Talk about standing behind your product.

But then they raised the game. They couldn't have expected everyone to return fantastic shots, and they could have hid all the haters if they wanted. But they used that, too.

This is all about using customer advocacy in your advertising, and in the modern marketplace, it is essential. Combined with a quality product, this campaign turned me, and many like me, into consumer advocates for their brand. This customer service seems to have trickled through their organization, too. Check this - http://everydayfunnyfunny.com/funny-special-pizza-delivery-instruction/

This brings me back to my previous rant about Netflix (check out my last blog for more). There was no effort given to understanding or taking care of your customer, and that's just horrible. Well, while cruising the internet today, I caught another group who agrees with me.

GQ magazine posted the following note in their articles that reviewed a series available for streaming on Netflix:

Dear Netflix,

We love you, but you're killing us. This week you announced price hikes and reduced subscription options. Don't get us wrong: The content is wonderful. Keep it coming. But the sting still lingers, and we cannot in good faith recommend that our readers use you this week. We have no choice but to look to other sites. Consider this our (very) minor protest.

Sincerely,
GQ

Read More http://www.gq.com/entertainment/movies-and-tv/201107/stream-this-misfits-hulu-netflix#ixzz1SC63t04S

I have to give it up to Netflix. They are risking a large amount of advertising dollars by taking this stand, but in the process, they are making a bold stand for their customers. It may impact immediate dollars, but such consumer advocacy is likely to spur many lifetime subscribers, and such honesty is likely to endear brands promoted by GQ to their consumers. It is a long game, but I think it is one worth recognizing.

Back with some thoughts on Netflix

I've been away from this blog for a while, but since I'm applying for jobs again, might as well come back to it. I also got a good source of inspiration earlier this week.

Netflix hit me with a blast informing me that my monthly subscription could go one of three way come September. I could:

1. Get less service for less money - I just have to make the choice of whether I like streaming movies or getting DVDs in the mail more. I have to also think carefully as to whether I want a smaller selection and longer delays in streaming or a wider selection, but not get anything instantly... but hey, I save $2.

2. Keep both streaming and a single DVD at a time program for a slightly larger than 50% increase in cost per month.

3. Cancel.

As a consumer, I'm angered from every angle. Yes, I understand cost of business goes up. Yes, I understand wanting to move customers from one service to another. But you're giving me three bad options, one of which includes "take a walk." For a company that prides itself on customer service, that is just awful.

As someone involved in marketing, the move makes even less sense, mostly because of the lack of care and insight used.

Consider what Netflix has built their brand around - Innovation, customer service, and cost-friendly entertainment. This announcement flew in the face of all of the pillars. There is no innovation in the way they are limiting service. There was no corresponding announcement of increased streaming options or a special promotion for streaming devices. If the hope is to push people to the more cost effective streaming option, then there should be more help in getting them there. This did not happen.

According to an article in adage (http://adage.com/article/mediaworks/netflix-s-prices-caused-a-customer-service-uproar/228704/) customer service reps were all over the map in helping customers make this choice. There was no company line or game plan in place. I was left wondering if the phone reps were only notified shortly before the customers because of the scattershot reaction and lack of preparedness. This is not the customer-friendly help that I've got in the past when calling in for help.

And finally, suggesting that customers may just want to quit service in the announcement email is sheer insanity. DVDs are not tobacco. They can't shrug their shoulders and say "then quit" knowing that their customer won't - this is especially true when competitors like Red Box, Hulu, and even Blockbuster are starting to cut into Netflix's success by offering slightly tweaked but equally useful services to the same customer.

In the end, this is a terrible move by Netflix, and I'm not specifically saying it is because of the service and price changes. Companies must remember what their brand is built around ESPECIALLY if that brand is successful. The crew at Netflix dropped the ball here, and they will feel the results over the coming months.