• Brands – Maturity, Transparency, Objectivity

    On the day that gay sex was made legal in India, I had wondered aloud on Twitter, whether condom brands like KS, Moods or even a deo brand like Axe – whose communication is all about attracting people (the female gender so far, since its a deo for men) – would use the occasion to provide a bit of a twist in their standard advertisements. As expected, none of them did. Which led me to wonder on the maturity of audiences and those of brands. (‘maturity’ for the lack of a better word, a more elaborate description follows)

    From an experience in an earlier place of work, when we had played on the visuals of Sai Baba and Jimi Hendrix and talked about music and religion, I have seen the fear that marketers have about how the consumer will react to a communication that could be taken as offbeat. In the case above, one could argue about hurting sentiments of followers (Sai Baba’s, according to the client, Hendrix’, worried the copywriter 😀 ), but there really wasn’t anything derogatory. Now that may be a subjective reaction, so let’s go back to the initial example. I’m reasonably sure that even if KS/Moods/Axe had thought of this, they might have decided not to pursue it.

    Is that because of a simple positioning mismatch that they perceive, or is it a fear to push the boundaries, of what they perceive as acceptable to their audience? Something that goes against the image they have created. But, as we keep discussing here, consumers are moving on. They talk to each other, and share their experiences about the brand, which may or may not work in advantage of the brand.

    Meanwhile, I recently read an article in the New York magazine, which got me thinking quite a bit on this subject. The article was titled ‘Say Everything‘, and talked about what the author perceived to be the largest generation gap since the hippie generation. While the extreme scenarios outlined in the article- of the kind of photos and complete transparency, of thinking of themselves as having an audience, of archiving their adolescence, of having a thicker skin than earlier generations- may not be what the average youth indulges in in his community, it does point to a generation which is growing increasingly uninhibited with sharing more and more of themselves with others on the net. The author points out that with surveillance cameras, transaction tracking etc becoming the norm, this complete transparency approach might be a saner route.

    In fact aren’t FB/Twitter status updates, and even online journals that many in my generation indulge in, also cases of living for an audience? The details of what they share might vary when compared to a younger user set, but this seems to be a trend that may not be scaled back, and in all possibilities, would increase. With the social tools that keep improving the ways to communicate, and share, can brands afford to cling to the kind of communication that they are used to delivering to the audience?

    In another article I read, YouTube blogger Kristina Horner, who was criticised for working with Ford Fiesta, makes a wonderfully simple, yet passionate argument that for “both bloggers and brands to be successful they need to accept that traditional advertising is not-effective (and even rejected) and that publishers like Kristina can find a win-win situation where a brand supports their work without compromise.”

    Would being completely transparent (yes, that is a bit of a redundancy, i guess) ensure that brands get a fair deal from the people they communicate to? Like I read in another context, would transparency fulfill the function that objectivity is supposed to?  But as always, transparency is not something that can operate only in communication, it moves to product, and many other functions within the organisation. So, as more and more consumers realise what Kristina has articulated so well, shouldn’t brands also take some initiative in changing themselves, and collaborating with their consumers?  That would take some maturity, i guess. 🙂

    until next time, audible audiences

    PS. For those missing the Tool Aid that is the blog’s staple diet, here are a few interesting reads

    The Sysomos in depth Twitter study that places India in the top 10 countries in which Twitter has been growing.

    The Razorfish Social Influence Marketing report.

    The Wetpaint/ Altimeter list of the world’s most engaging brands, and how there might be a link between engagement and financial performance

  • A bridge across time

    As I sat in the cafe, I occasionally turned around to watch the Metro construction. Vehicles and pedestrians jostled for space on the ever declining width of MG Road. Just before I got into the cafe, I was part of the crowd – most of which was cursing the mess that the construction was creating, not just then, but in many people’s daily routines, thanks to the regular traffic blocks and detours required.

    Detours. I had had a conversation with a friend a couple of days back on how, if I had the perspectives I had now, 5 years back, I might have done things differently then. I might have re-prioritised – things that I wanted to do, goals I set for myself, person I wanted to be,and so on. I said that blessed are those who can turn back, take a look and say that they wouldn’t have done things differently. I honestly can’t. Specific regrets I may not have, but a different set of perspectives, I wouldn’t have minded.

    The friend maintains that whatever path one takes, it would be impossible not to have some regret or the other. I can’t say I disagree. But i do maintain that it is possible to minimise. Does that mean that I am not happy now? Of course I am. But to paraphrase the tee that I keep mentioning says, it ain’t about the destination, its about the journey. The possibility of regret minimisation comes from a belief that if you are doing what you are meant to do, then everything else would fall into place. A faith.

    Faith. The book that I finished later that day had a theme that mixed faith, quantum physics and parallel universes. It had people with different levels of abilities regarding the different universes. One could sense it, one could travel through it, observing, without being able to alter anything, one could transfer objects through it without knowing where they went, and finally one who could travel through it and control it far better than all the above. It talks about every day being a momentous day when we make choices, which creates ripples across other people’s lives (like a butterfly effect on human destinies). It talks about destiny giving you a chance to set it right again. It takes the analogy of an oak tree for a human life. Too many right choices and you’ll have a trunk with a few branches, risks never taken, adventures never had, a life less lived. Too many wrong choices and you’ll have a gnarled tree, fruits never enjoyed, an existence too scarred, a life too consumed to be enjoyed.

    We would like a balance. The friend has made peace with the self on this matter. I need to work on it a bit more, and ensure that I don’t read this post years a few years later and say Oops, I did it again.

    Maybe years later, a new generation would thank the decision maker for the metro. Or perhaps they would curse it for being built for a lesser capacity than it should have been. Time, and context, that would form the perspective. Perhaps its too much to wish for the perspective and the destination before the time has been traveled through, step by step, baggage by baggage.

    until next time, step up 🙂

  • My Friend Sancho

    Amit Varma

    ‘My friend Sancho’ is the debut novel of Amit Varma, made famous by the blog ‘India Uncut’, which incidentally, is given quite a few plugs in the book. A blogger’s work – that explains why i picked it up. 🙂
    The book revolves around Abir, a journalist on the crime beat, who happens to be around during a police shootout, when he was only expecting to cover a routine arrest. It gets more complicated when he is asked to do a story on the victim, which leads to his friendship with Muneeza (Sancho), the victim’s daughter, who is sure that her father was innocent, and is unaware that Abir was present at the scene.
    Whether the book delivers or not depends on what you expect out of it. If you are looking for profundity that would make you contemplate the vagaries of the universe, you’d be better off looking elsewhere. But if you’re just looking for a light read, and a protagonist whom you’d find easy to relate to (net surfing, wise cracking guy who is still not sure what to do with his life) then you wouldn’t mind this book.
    I did expect the humour quotient to be higher than delivered, but it’s still not bad. The lizard, though it only has a ‘special appearance’ is entertaining. I also quite liked the way the story ended.

  • Aggregation and Segregation

    The ‘Morgan Stanley report‘, compiled by their 15 year old intern- on how teens (UK ) consume media- released a few days ago, got less than an enthusiastic response on the web, in spite of (or because?) their introduction stating that they don’t ‘claim representation or statistical accuracy’.

    While newspapers and radio find least favour with the teen crowd, with TV interest waning (except for spikes – sports/ specific shows), even the star on the horizon – Twitter is not spared their inattention, but Facebook, YouTube, and even Google are mentioned as regularly used services. Mobiles are used for talking and texting, and sharing files via bluetooth. (via RWW and TechCrunch) The report is based on anecdotal evidence (not statistical), so its no surprise that its been ripped on many sites. As TC mentions, probably the idea was only to spark off a debate, and not to showcase it as conclusive insights. It still shows how there is clearly not much data available on this age group, so anything goes.

    But I do remember a research published by Nielsen sometime back on how teens use media (US). According to that report, TV usage has gone up in this age group, teens spend less than half the time adults do on the internet, a quarter of them read a newspaper and texting is huge. In both reports, the relative unimportance of the internet is a revelation, especially when it is seen by many as THE medium that’s popular in this age group. As per a 16 year old’s post on TC, (this is anecdotal too 🙂 ) the other point to note is that the walled garden nature of Facebook is actually seen in positive light by this group. Twitter’s relative openness means that they have lesser control on who sees their status updates. The other factor is that they don’t want to waste money texting messages to Twitter, when they’d rather text their specific friends.

    So there are similarities within the age group and there are differences too. This is not the first ‘generation’ study out there. I remember reading at least a couple of comparative studies on how different generations use the net, or technology per se, and there again were trends. There were also quite a few articles on Gen Y (those born between 1980 – 95) – their top social networks (take a look, you’ll find very interesting sites, which you might not have heard about before) , how marketers goof up when targeting them, and a favourite post (and video – The Lost Generation. yes i know it is inspired 😐 ) of mine that talks about the motivations of different generations.

    Trendwatching had the concept of Generation G ( G for generosity), with the trend drivers of recession and consumer disgust, longing for institutions that care, and giving being the new taking, and sharing being the new giving. It also gives ways in which corporates can join this generation, and talks about joining being a fundamental requirement if they wanted to stay relevant to this generation.

    The Morgan Stanley report and the backlash that followed made me wonder as to how, even as we admit that there is indeed media fragmentation and user fragmentation, realise that a ‘one size fits all’ approach will not work, and that digital media gives users so much of content that there is choices galore and something for every niche, we still try to figure out broad patterns to carry out segmentation, and create some structure around all the crowds that inhabit all the spaces – real and virtual. We even call it social media so that we can put it under one umbrella and make a single plan for all the sites that come under it. Is it because marketers are afraid that dealing with an unstructured audience means fresher, better ideas all the while, without easy ways of targeting, without ready made templates and without real knowledge of how it will all end up?

    I also wonder whether this is a transition phase when new media are evolving, along with new communication protocols, or is this the way it is going to be from now on – a thoroughly fragmented audience which cannot be fitted into any stereotype – not even as Gen Y Facebook users? As the costs of distribution become lower thanks to multiple platforms/channels with fewer audiences and reversals of content demand-supply chains, will the spend actually be on the creation of multiple kinds of communication that will be designed with a tiny audience in mind, and the content creators could be anyone – a brand manager/ creative agency/ consumer or a combination, and the activities of a brand are as unstructured as the real time arena it operates in? Do you think it would ever come to that, or is this just the chaos in between while we figure out new ways of sorting consumers for new forms of media?

    until next time, agents of chaos 🙂

    PS. While on generations, read yet another great post from Umair Haque – the Generation M manifesto

  • Imago

    That I worship Bill Watterson and simply adore Calvin & Hobbes is not a secret. In fact, it mostly irritates people when i quote from that unique mix of humour/sarcasm/wit and profundity. But no, this is not a gushing post. A few days back, when a friend was talking about her kids, I told her to be thankful that they weren’t like Calvin. She said one of them does have imaginary friends. I am not sure about kids these days, but I simply cannot remember any imaginary friends I might have had in my childhood. To be very fair to everyone concerned, I am quite befuddled even when it comes to recognising real friends of that era and erm, a few eras later too.

    But I wonder about the character of these childhood imaginary friends, and why they exist. Is it loneliness? Considering the minimal baggage that we have at that young age, are they confidants of doubts and thoughts that we think we can’t share with others, even if they are of the same age? Calvin has his club, theories about society and education, ‘scientific experiments’ etc which he shared with Hobbes. Is it because he felt that he would be laughed at, if he shared them with others?  Hobbes usually attempts to give him a more mature perspective on all the stuff he discusses. I’d like to ask the kids with imaginary friends about the conversations. 🙂

    Maybe, as we grow up, our baggage grows and as we conform to the norms around us, we figure out that imaginary friends have to go? Or it is perhaps a need that gets filled or forgotten about amongst other priorities, as we acquire new real people – friends, relatives or any other relationships along the way, and maybe figure out that we can share different things with different people, and not have to reveal ourselves totally to everyone? And that takes away the reason for having an imaginary friend to whom we confide all?

    Real people bring their own baggage, they perhaps shield us a bit, and tell us things that we want to hear. They perhaps validate our beliefs and thoughts and inferences, either because they don’t want to be the people who deliver the bad news or they don’t care enough. Of course, I am not taking away anything from the good friends that we manage to get, if we are lucky enough – the conscience keepers. But they’re human too, and their objectivity would waver, they’d have their biases. Perhaps, we should build an imaginary friend all over again, our own objective self, one which can show our own prejudices without fear of retribution.

    until next time, object of my imaginary attention 🙂