Old Style Marketing vs Social Evidence

Traditional marketing ain’t dead yet.

Old skool, that’s how we roll
I was in a meeting last month and one marketing manager’s idea of promoting a sponsor was to slap their logo all over the place. I was partially against it because he wanted to slap that logo all over my social marketing channels. But it also struck me as bizarre and I couldn’t put a finger on it as to why it did.

I wrote down at the time that in “old marketing” you slapped your logo around, made sure that you took every opportunity to get your jingle, brand elements, company name, tagline, in front of anyone who would listen or look.

Isn’t this the type of marketing we are trying to change by being more social through blogs, social networks, and the like – socializing around media and stories that emotionally connect people to a product or brand? Isn’t “new marketing” about stories, causes, experience, and action?

Prove it to me, friend
A few weeks back I was browsing the Health Care Social Media EU stream on Twitter (#hcsmeu) and found some great nuggets that were relevant to this brain wave:

@garymonk asks if the EU wants folks to be bombarded by irrelevant un-targeted krap.

@garymonk: Does the EU really want consumers to be bombarded by the irrelevant untargetted crap of yesteryear? #hcsmeu ^NC

In a later message in that discussion, @arbeiza is on to something when asking how we can support evidence in a social context. And @angel189 then coins a great term “social evidence based medicine” that I think has the kernel of what I am trying to get at.

Q2 @arbeiza asks: How can we support claims w/ evidence in a social context? Will tht hlp 2 reinforce opinions, fight trolls/haters? #hcsmeu (via @hcsmeu) RT @drpenzesjanos: You just cioned it. RT @angel189: #hcsmeu Q2 Is the term "social evidence based medicine" going to be coined ? (via @andrewspong)

As @angel189 goes on to say: “Stop Marketing. Start Socializing.”

#hcsmeu "Stop Marketing, Start Socializing"

I think the cognitive dissonance I am feeling with all the logo-slapping is that marketing is not just about being social, but about tapping into the “social evidence” that a customer should care about a product or brand.

Social Evidence
We as marketers need to find, promote, reveal, and share stories that contain evidence that can be socialized (with the best evidence coming from our customers’ social network, not us). The only way to get past the noise of all that logo-slapping is to connect with customers with evidence they can understand within a trusted social framework, a social framework that they are part of and create the stories of, a social framework that contains the sources that influence these customers in their choice of brands, causes, belief systems.

What do you think?

Closing
And I could say that this isn’t a big revelation. But while I was at the Mecca of Social Media (aka SXSW) I was appalled (disgusted, shocked, disappointed?) with the complete dominance of old style, slap-the-logos-on-the-boobs-and-any-other-surface-you-can-think-of old marketing that the very hipsters of SXSW are trying to tear down.

As one old pal said, you can spend 40MEur on some big gimmicky marketing campaign or post a great story on a blog (albeit, his influential blog) – you still get one post on Engadget.

Every day, as I reach out to our audience of patients and families, each post is carefully crafted to be relevant, cognizant of the stories readers socially share as evidence of the amazing things our hospital does. This is not how they fit in my brand story, but how I fit in their stories, their evidence of how we are part of their lives.

And when I get that right, I am theirs.

SXSWi field report, part 1 | Dentsu London

"But as SXSWi ramped down, and the cool kids filtered in for Music, the decision was simple: I'm going back next year. It's the meeting place for friends old and new, a place to get inspired, a break from the norm, underpinned by the sunshine, amazing food and generous hospitality of Austin. If you're not having fun at Southby, you're not trying hard enough."

Bookmarked in Delicious.

Read this article…

Microbiopolitics and the Post-Pasteurian Age

Cross posted from my new fledgling blog Practical Microbes

I can’t believe that I haven’t written about this amazing paper from MIT anthropologist, Heather Paxson. Heather has been doing research into the culture, business, and politics around cheese. In this paper (link below), she talks about the politics around cheese made from raw milk.

Raw milk, milk that is not pasteurized, is making a comeback (check out this article from the globe). And it flies in the convention of our predominantly sterile mentality (morality?) of antibiotics, pasteurization, anti-bacteria soaps, latex glove, masks, and hand sanitizers. Since the Ghost Map was drawn, we’ve been getting better and better at separating ourselves from microorganisms.

One big guy who changed how we deal with microorganisms was Loius Pasteur (ironically, I work a few blocks from a road named after him). Based on his work, we regularly “pasteurize” things like milk through high heat and pressure to kill all the microorganisms, good and bad.

Our pasteurized world has indeed been good to us health-wise. Indeed, my wife, a vet, knows all too well what could happen if one ingested spoiled raw milk. Why take a chance? Though I do think there might be a middle ground, what with all the understanding and science we have. But there’s something indicative when you have to sign a waiver to buy raw milk.

Which takes us to the raw milk cheese. The process of making cheese uses microbes to turn raw unpasteurized milk in to a safe and stable product. That’s why humans have made all sorts of “controlled spoilage” foods. And the microbes that grow on cheese can be beneficial to our health (much like folks now claim with live yoghurt).

But the idea of a product made from unpasteurized milk flies in the face of our ingrained Pasteurian ideals. Paxson analyzes the microbiopolitics that arises from this cognitive dissonance.

Paxson is not some anti-Pasteurian extremist, she knows that there’s a reason we keep an eye on the microbes on our food. She also knows that, at least with cheese making, worrying about raw milk does not make sense, considering the microbiology and tradition of cheese making. And the cheese maker she profiles is a great example of the balance of careful practice of microbiology and deep craft of cheese production.

In the past few years, there has been an increase in the numbers of reports regarding asthma, intestinal diseases, skin conditions, superbugs, and other health effects from a sterile, Pasteurian world gone too far. Paxson’s work fits in that discussion thread. To me, the discussion around raw milk cheese will do more (more so than raw milk alone) to awake us to a post-Pasteurian world where we understand the role of microbes in our life and food (check out this raw milk cheese manifesto, too).

And if you’re curious about practical uses of microbes and the future balance between man and bug, you’d read her article (download the PDF or go to Paxson’s site). And then let me know what you think of the coming Post-Pasteurian Age.

Image from Boston Globe