Pinterest should be of interest to merchants in 2012

I finally tried out Pinterest this week. It is the first new Social Media tool I have tried since my underwhelming experience with Google+ this past summer. But I liked what I saw with Pinterest. It has its shortcomings and its limits, but I can see why it is growing so fast. Most importantly, however, I can see some very good applications for it with merchants.

Launched in March 2010, Pinterest allows users to post pictures, videos or discussions of things of interest to them and categorize them on to boards. People can follow other users and like ones “pins,” as is the case on Facebook. But it is not an all-encompassing tool like the aforementioned Social Media giant. I would say that Pinterest is most similar to Tumblr, though the presentation is much different. And this presentation should make Pinterest of particular interest to merchants.

Users can post pictures of themselves wearing particular brands of clothes, shoes or accessories. Those following them or searching on Pinterest can see those pictures and get an actual image of how those items will look when actually being used, as opposed to simply sitting on a rack at the store or on a shelf in a warehouse. By the same extension, merchants can post pictures of a few of their items (the site’s etiquette discourages using it purely for self-promotion) likely to stimulate excitement and, using Pinterest’s linking feature (you can add a URL after initially pinning something), redirect users to their website, where they can learn more and place orders.

Land’s End went one step further in November 2011 by launching a “Pin It To Win It” contest for the Holiday Shopping Season. It encouraged users to create pinboards with Land’s End Canvas products, with the winners getting a $250 gift card. In addition to engaging its customers, the contest served to drive people to the company’s website. And this tool worked far better for this kind of promotion than Facebook or Twitter.

I like Pinterest because it has a unique purpose and serves that purpose well. My main reason for disliking Google+ is because it tries to compete with Facebook while not offering anything extra that I find useful. Pinterest fills a void in the Social Media landscape. No wonder it gets over 1 billion monthly pageviews. No wonder Land’s End Canvas called Pinterest “the social media platform to watch in 2012.” Hopefully other merchants will see these same opportunities this year.

What do you think of Pinterest?

 

 

Advertisements

#McFail: How McDonald’s Twitter strategy went awry

The beauty of Social Media – the opportunities it provides for businesses to engage and interact with their customers, and vice-versa – can also be its curse if not done correctly. Just ask fast food giant McDonald‘s, which is cleaning up a major public relations mess after a Twitter ad campaign went so horribly awry that it earned the hashtag moniker “#McFail.”

As PaidContent.org‘s Jeff Roberts reports, McDonald’s launched a 24-hour campaign last week using Twitter’s “promoted tweets” function. This utility allows businesses, at a cost, to craft tweets that appear at the top of certain search results on Twitter. The idea is to get your tweet in front of Twitter users no matter when they happen to log on during the period of your campaign. You can read Twitter’s help center page on promoted tweets for more information.

In the case of McDonald’s, it used two different hashtags as part of its promoted tweets campaign. The first,

#MeetTheFarmers, went uneventfully. But at 2 p.m. last Wednesday, it switched to a new hashtag, #McDStories. The promoted tweet quoted a McDonald’s potato supplier, with a link to a video of a happy potato farmer. And that’s when McDonald’s lost control of things.

Twitter users began telling their own McDonald’s stories, and not ones that were exactly flattering to the company. Some were jokes by stoners, others referenced heart attacks (since fast food usually isn’t particularly healthy food) and others still referenced the ongoing fight between McDonald’s and PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals). Within a few hours, the hashtag had become a trending topic on Twitter. And as a result, the promoted tweet in question has remained a “Top Tweet” even nearly a week after the debacle occurred.

The moral of the story: you need to be very careful before launching a campaign, particularly one on social media where people can respond directly. Do your research and try to envision how people might interpret your message before you send it. Just because McDonald’s believed that the #McDStories hashtag would encourage the sharing of positive stories does not mean customers will see it the same way.

In hindsight, if McDonald’s might have been better off keeping the original #MeetTheFarmers hashtag. Instead, it got a Big Mac-sized social media fail.

Be careful when offering web offers and specials

When a consumer spots a brand on social media, they expect some degree of interaction with that brand. It could be an actual conversation. It could also be a special offer, either offered directly to social media subscribers or through a third party such as Groupon.

As one small business here in Philadelphia recently learned, you need to be careful with such offers. If you don’t know the risks and too many consumers take you up on the deal, you can find your business in a world of financial hurt.

Problem Number 1: Not knowing how Groupon web offers work

The business in question, Food For All Market in Philadelphia’s Mount Airy neighborhood, is a small specialty grocery/deli shop for people with food allergies. Last year, it entered into a three-month deal with Groupon allowing an unlimited number of customers to get $30 worth of merchandise for $15.

The first problem came about because the store’s owner, Amy Kunkle, got caught up in the buzz over Groupon and web offers and didn’t quite know what she was getting into. In addition to the actual discount, Groupon also took an additional $8 for each sale made using the offer. So while the deal was $30 of merchandise for $15, Food For All was actually losing $23 on each $30 sale. It was almost giving away $30 of inventory on each sale.

Problem Number 2: Too many consumers taking up the offer

According to Newsworks.org, 451  consumers used the Groupon offer during the three-month period, an average of five per day. Between the steep financial hit on each sale and the number of customers taking advantage of the offer, Food For All came out $10,000 in the red during this period.

While a major chain business could survive a hit like that, Food For All could not. And this week, it began a liquidation sale, and will soon close its doors completely.

This story is not to say that businesses should avoid Groupon and other web offers entirely. They can be very valuable for drawing attention to your brand, bringing in new customers and hopefully keeping those customers once the offer ends. But there are lessons that other small businesses like Food For All can learn from this unfortunate story.

Do your homework about web offers and how they work: Like with any communications tactic, web offers won’t succeed if you don’t utilize them properly. Make sure you do your homework before offering that great discount.

The steeper the discount, the shorter the length of the offer: Had Food For All only offered this special for a day or a week or even just on one day a week for three months, it would probably still be alive today. But it couldn’t handle the financial hit from giving away more than 75 cents on each dollar of a $30 purchase. If you want to do a big special like this, limit it to a short period of time.

Read the fine print before signing on with third parties like Groupon: This is self-explanatory. Make sure you completely understand what you’re agreeing to before signing the contract.

Consider getting insurance to protect you: When businesses run contents where they could potentially be on the hook for a large prize (such as TV game shows), they sometimes take out insurance policies to protect themselves against the resulting financial loss. If you’re going to offer a major discount that could go viral and be utilized by too many people, you may want to look into getting insured as well.

 

Romney steps in it with “I like being able to fire people” gaffe

Mitt Romney has by all accounts run a clean and smooth – if unexciting – campaign for the Republican nomination for President. And given the remarkable shortcomings of his opponents – lack of money, lack of campaigning skills, poor personality, etc. – that is all he has needed to do to position himself to win the Republican nomination and make Barack Obama have to fight like hell to keep his job next November.

Until today, that is.

Speaking to  a crowd in Nashua, N.H. on the eve of Tuesday’s New Hampshire primary, Romney, the former Massachusetts governor and CEO of Bain Capital, said “I like being able to fire people who provide services to me.” Watch the whole clip below:

Yes, Romney was speaking strictly as a consumer and the importance of having the freedom to go to someone else if you’re not happy. But he never should have said that specific line for two very important reasons:

1. It makes him seem callous to the plight of the millions of Americans that are unemployed

2. Most importantly, it reinforces the narrative of Romney that he is a real-life Gordon Gekko who can’t relate to middle class Americans and will gladly fire you if it will make him money.

Reason #2 is most damaging because those are the gaffes that stick. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the Chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, called Romney a “job cremator” this past weekend. And as Mr. Media Training‘s Brad Phillips noted today, a gaffe that reinforces a broader idea that people already consider to be true is also going to be considered truthful even if it is taken out of context or isn’t true at all.

There are many examples of this throughout history, both in politics and otherwise. Lyndon Johnson’s “Daisy Ad” during his 1964 campaign reinforced the narrative that his opponent, Barry Goldwater, was a crazy reactionary who would bring about nuclear war with the Soviets (a huge concern during the height of the Cold War). Almost 25 years later, a Political Action Committee that supported George H.W. Bush for President ran the “Willie Horton Ad” to reinforce the notion that Democratic nominee Michael Dukakis was soft on crime, even if the Massachusetts program referenced in the ad was actually passed more than a decade before by Dukakis’ predecessor.

You are what people perceive you to be, and people take far better to messages that reinforce what they already believe to be true than to ones that tell them that what they believe to be true is wrong. And while any gaffe is damaging, a gaffe that reinforces people’s negative impressions of you is particularly damaging and hard to shake.

How much will this hurt Romney? In the primary, likely not much. The New Hampshire primary is Tuesday and the South Carolina primary is the week after. Romney still holds commanding polling leads in both states and if he wins both, the GOP race is essentially over. The other candidates won’t be able to get the money and other support needed to overcome Romney’s momentum, and they’ll quickly coalesce around the nominee.

But expect this gaffe to be repeated plenty of times by Obama’s campaign, the DNC and whatever PACs get behind Obama during the general election campaign. It is hard to make one gaffe stick for 10 months, but this one could do so, especially since the economy is THE issue of the 2012 campaign. Voters may not be happy with Obama’s job performance (I am among them), but if they don’t consider the challenger to be a better alternative, they’ll re-elect the incumbent.

Beating an incumbent – even one as vulnerable as Obama – is very difficult. Gaffes like today won’t help Romney any.

FDA pharma social media ‘guidelines’ leave pharma wanting

While most of us (myself included) were preoccupied with our holiday celebrations, the FDA quietly released a Social Media guidance.

Sort of, anyway.

Ad Age‘s Rich Thomaselli reported last Friday that the FDA announced new Social Media marketing guidelines for pharmaceutical companies. But the document, titled “Guidance for Industry Responding to Unsolicited Requests for Off-Label Information About Prescription Drugs and Medical Devices,” only covers the discussion of off-label information.

For that reason alone, it falls far short of what the pharmaceutical industry not only was looking for, but needs.

“What everybody was expecting was actual guidelines around social media,” Jim Dayton, senior director of emerging media for Overland Park, Kan.-based InTouch Solutions, a pharma-centric digital-marketing agency, told Ad Age.

“I still think it’s monumental,” he added. “The FDA finally addressed the digital channel in a specific way by mentioning Twitter and YouTube in the document, and those have never been mentioned before. But this is an industry that wants specific instructions and rules, and that didn’t happen here.”

The document provides pharma companies with instructions for responding to consumers who use Social Media to ask about potential off-label uses for prescription drugs. A thorough, complete Social Media guidance – the kind the FDA held a public hearing more than two years ago to develop – would have been far more encompassing. Perhaps it’s no wonder then that the FDA released these guidelines during the Holidays (when they’re less likely to get noticed) and did so without even a press release.

“We understand the level of interest and wanted to get out what we had available to provide guidance,” FDA spokeswoman Karen Mahoney told Ad Age. She also added that this was just “the first of multiple planned guidances that respond to testimony and comments from the Part 15 public hearing that FDA held in November 2009.”

But when will those guidances come? And why does it have to be done piecemeal? This is all the FDA could get done in 2+ years?

 

What is to come in 2012?

It’s hard to believe, but another year is almost over. Christmas is only a few days a way, and a week after that, we’ll flip the calendar to 2012.

What will happen in the year to come in communication? In healthcare? In public relations? What new technology (or technologies) will emerge? Which existing technologies will be relegated to the dustbin of history, like coin-operated pay phones? What great advances will happen in healthcare and healthcare delivery? Which organization will build a strong foundation for years to come with strong, carefully planned and executed public relations efforts? Which organizations will be tarnished by bungling their public relations, particularly in a crisis situation?

We can ask those questions at this time every year. But here are some unique ones to think about as 2011 comes to a close:

1. Will Google+ seriously challenge Facebook? I was not impressed with it when I first got on, and I still use it only rarely. But it does appear to slowly be catching on. Will it become real competition for Facebook in 2012?

2. Will organizations reevaluate and improve their crisis communication plans? We saw the tattoo scandal at Ohio State and the horrible sexual molestation scandal at Penn State – they were just two examples this year of poor crisis PR. It’s an area to which many organizations do not devote sufficient resources or planning, and they can and have paid a huge price for that. Hopefully this year’s prominent crisis PR disasters taught them a lesson.

3. Will more pharmaceutical companies get serious about social media, even with no FDA guidance on the horizon? One of my favorite reads in the area of pharmaceutical marketing – Rich Meyer’s World of DTC Marketing blog – praised Sanofi’s “Why Insulin?” Social Media campaign as an example of how pharma companies can creatively and effectively use Social Media while not running afoul of the FDA. With no specific FDA guidance likely to come anytime soon, pharma companies can and should learn from Sanofi’s example. Will they? The cutbacks to marketing that many pharma companies made this year won’t help any.

4. Which Presidential candidate will do the best job crafting and selling his/her story? Next year will be a presidential election year (the Iowa Caucus is on Jan. 3!). Which candidate will put forth the best story? Which candidate will be the most effective at selling that story? And how much of an impact will the stories told by PACs and outside groups – who were greatly enabled by last year’s Citizens United ruling by the Supreme Court – have on the election? While I do find the partisan bickering in Washington to be tiresome, I do find campaigns themselves to be fascinating, and the upcoming election will definitely be fascinating, no matter which side you want to win.

That’s all for me in 2011. It’s been an interesting year for me in many ways – finishing my masters degree, helping build a start-up pharmaceutical company into a tangible product that could attract a merger with a major pharmaceutical company and now looking for the next opportunity.  I leave you with what, in my opinion, is an underrated holiday song from an underrated movie. Happy Holidays, and all the best for 2012.

Overreacting can worsen a PR crisis

I have written here several times about the importance in PR of responding as swiftly and unequivocally as possible to crises. But you can’t panic either. Overreacting to a crisis can exacerbate the problem just as much as trying to ignore or hide it, if not make it worse.

Let’s look at the recent case of Lowe’s, the home improvement retail giant. It came under fire from the Florida Family Association, along with dozens of other businesses, for advertising on the TLC reality show All-American Muslim. The association, a social conservatism activist group that is known to protest TV shows, movies, businesses and other things its Evangelical Christian supporters find offensive, called on Lowe’s and other advertisers to withdraw from the show because it considers the show to be “propaganda that riskily hides the Islamic agenda’s clear and present danger to American liberties and traditional values,” according to its statement on the matter.

Lowe’s response to this complaint from one group of Evangelical Christians was to pull all of its advertising from the show, and this move has brought it under even more criticism, from all religious sectors. In a statement released Monday, Lowe’s claimed that it made this decision not just because of the Florida Family Association but because the show is “a “lightning rod for people to voice complaints from a variety of perspectives — political, social and otherwise.” But it doesn’t matter – Lowe’s has been branded as gutless at best, as bigoted at worst.
I’m not sure I’d go so far as to call Lowe’s bigots, but I would definitely call it gutless and guilty of pandering. Yes, there is a significant amount of Anti-Islam paranoia in this country; it has been here for many years and has only gotten worse since the 9/11 attacks more than a decade ago. But the vast majority of Americans do not share the views of the Florida Family Association and similar groups.  And businesses, like people, need to show guts to do the right thing. Pandering to one group of Evangelical Christians who (wrongly) associate all Muslims with terrorists is most certainly not the right thing.
Lowe’s would have been much better off addressing the Florida Family Association’s complaints but continuing to advertise on the show and explaining why. It could have even used the moment as an opportunity to do a public good. Instead, it made a panic reaction that only hurts its brand.
Lowe’s experience should be a lesson for all public figures and entities. You need to be proactive and emphatic in responding to problems. But you can’t panic either.
What other examples can you think of like this, where a person or business overreacted to a crisis and made their PR problem worse?
%d bloggers like this: