I got into an interesting debate with a coworker about using an iPad (or physical goods/money in general) as a contest prize. I posited that it’s a bad idea as it brings in people from outside your community who don’t care about your product. He pointed out that it doesn’t matter if they’re outsiders – you can generate a lot of buzz with money/prizes. Neither of us is wrong, but this illustrates a common disconnect between creating advocacy and creating buzz through a contest (or any initiative, really).
Buzz is people talking about you.
Buzz can be positive or negative. Buzz is momentum. Buzz is what it sounds like – a bunch of voices talking about your product.
Buzz can definitely be good – people want to be in the loop, and if everyone is talking about something, they want to know about it too.
Buzz can be bad – people can be saying bad things about your product, or buzzing about the buzz-creating campaign itself, not your product. Buzz guarantees conversation, but not what kind.
Advocacy is people who like you talking about you.
Advocacy is people who care about your product talking about it to other people. Actively, without a campaign urging them to.
Advocacy is always good (but not always easy to get). Advocacy may not be as loud as Buzz (though it can be), but it’s far more effective.
Ways to get Buzz:
- Do something outrageous
- Do something controversial
- Give away a lot of money/prizes
- Get someone well-known to talk about your product
Ways to get Advocacy:
- Build a fantastic product
- Show your customers the same respect and support you’d like them to show you
- Establish relationships: between you and your customers and between customers (people desire validation from others when they like something)
- Give away something of only of value to your community (so only those that actually like you already get involved)
- Do something generous for your community
There’s a great slide in this ESSENTIAL deck that says “whether someone can be influenced is as important as the strength of the influencer.” In other words, for all the talk of influencers on the web, it depends on whether the people they’re exerting influence on can actually be influenced. And as the research in the aforementioned deck (and a million other places online) says, people are most influenced by their closest friends. Advocacy (one-to-one, personal) vs Buzz (many-to-many, impersonal).
So the question is not whether prizes are bad or not – the question is whether you’re trying to create Buzz or Advocacy. They seem similar, but they are in fact very different beasts.
Do you agree? What are your examples of successfully getting Buzz or Advocacy?
Photo courtesty of David Blaikie.
was difficult. If I were going for best groove I’d call out Gunman. Most intruiging might be Bandoliers. But No One Loves Me & Neither Do I is such a brilliant combination of pop, rock, and HEAVY that you can’t help but rock the hell out to it. Just try.
was possibly the best surprise of the year.
is certainly not my favorite Wilco album, but “Wilco (the song)” is great. For anyone who’s ever hid from the world in their headphones, this song proclaims “tired of being exposed to the cold/the stare of your stereo/put on your headphones/before you explode/Wilco’ll love you, baby”. Amen.
are strikingly beautiful in comparison to the fuzzy robotic tunes on the record proper. “Soft Shock” has an incredibly unique set of instrumentation that suggests folks but then goes somewhere completely different with the melody. I could listen to this song for a long time.
is perfect for you. How can you not love the out-of-tune singing, laugh, and “screw it” affectation at the start of “Sliver”?
Dry Erase Girl is Going to Re-convince Executives That There is a “Viral Button”
Just when you thought it was safe to go back into marketing – Dry Erase Girl attacks.
If you’re not familiar, follow the link. I won’t claim any superiority here: I absolutely and completely thought this was real, and spread the story. It was clever and well-done, and the creators deserve credit. However, this is a terrible thing for people in the social media space.
Cheapo executives are now going to re-focus on the notion that if you hire the right people and post on Twitter enough, something is guaranteed to be viral.
I’ve been in this position before: “create something viral, Evan, and keep it cheap”. The problem is that you can’t fully predict what will become viral. Sure, there’s more and more science around virality that can increase your chances, but at the end of the day there is still too much chaos to be able to really predict what will go viral (one article states “Mind-opening and emotionally rich articles are more likely to make the most emailed list, as are more practically useful, surprising, and positive articles.” Wait, so you mean GOOD articles?). You can post at 11am, include pretty girls, make sure to make it lo-fi, etc…but you can’t guarantee a hit. Much like a musical hit, it’s part talent and part randomness (or part huge-amounts-of-money, at which point you can’t really call it viral).
Don’t point out Old Spice Guy – I think (thankfully) that most executives saw that there was both a great deal of effort put into this campaign as well as a staggering of the different parts – they were ready for the character not to catch on and to nix the YouTube campaign.
But White-board Girl is the epitome of cheap & viral: written on napkins, shot with a cheap camera, not promoted by celebrities. I wouldn’t be surprised if within minutes of the announcement that she was fake that executives were emailing their underlings saying “do this”.
Am I suggesting that viral content isn’t something we should strive for? Absolutely not. But viral content is fire, fire, fail, fail, aim, aim, fire, fire, fail, MAYBE win. Don’t bet on anything more than that.