If nothing else, we’ve (mostly) all heard about the media darling that is the Old Spice Guy.  And we’ve heard countless debate on the effectiveness of this campaign.  There are two camps and they bolster themselves with plenty of data.

One of the first in the camp of “it didn’t work” was MaggieMcGary1 on socialmedia today. Citing an article in BNET, she states that sales were down.  ”Shocking.”  The BNET article actually has corrected itself recently, but they stated:

“But sales of the featured product—Red Zone After Hours Body Wash—aren’t necessarily tracking with that consumer appeal: In the 52 weeks ended June 13, sales of the brand have dropped 7 percent according to SymphonyIRI. (That amount excludes those rung up at Walmart.) P&G execs were not available to comment.”

This was quickly followed up by BL Ochman: “The bottom line: there is no such thing as a social media strategy. There is business strategy incorporating social media. But if that strategy doesn’t include sales, it’s nothing more than a tactic. Tactics don’t move markets.”

On the other side of the debate is PR Week who are reporting:

“The brand’s ad agency Wieden + Kennedy developed and coordinated 186 customized video responses that contributed to a 107% increase in Old Spice Body Wash sales over the last month, according to Nielsen data from Mike Norton, director of external relations for male grooming at P&G.”

So which is it?

Media Bistro asks us to wait and see.

But the interesting thing is to actually look at the numbers.  The “sales slump” was a 52 week number ended June 13,  PRIOR to the social media blitz.  The 107% figure is a monthly figure for the previous 30 days.  (measured by Symphony IRI in June).  This would include early data AFTER the recent blitz.

So we can assume it “worked,” right?  Well, Ad Age also points out that the campaign was bolstered with a high value coupon.  It also notes that the other P&G body wash in the category, Gillette, rose 277% in the same space in the same time.  And they didn’t have Mr. Mustafa pitching them.  (Granted, they are a smaller player in the space).

Back to Media Bistro, we will have to wait and see.

If … we are defining “worked” by sales register data. And that is the rub here.  Is it all about immediate sales data?  Kevin Green of Digital Influence Group said:

“Doesn’t the increase in connected consumers create significant opportunity to market products? Don’t get me wrong… I agree that more direct integration could have been included, but the value of the connection has to be worth a significant amount and the effort. Does engagement always have to include conversion? I would argue that it does not.”

And here is how I tie it back to Elasticity and a few opinions from our side of the debate.  First, let’s go back to the numbers.  Actually, let’s go to a comment on an NPR story they did on the Old Spice campaign.  A follow up to a popular story read that not everyone is comfortable and liking the “Old Spice Guy.”  One listener complained that Old Spice was the “scent of gentlemen,” and represented countless men for generations prior to ours that were true gentlemen.

Perhaps that is why the brand was on a slide (back to the 7% decline).  Today’s consumers thought of the brand as their grandpa’s brand.  One they didn’t want.  So to hold steady or even gain in a period is a good business outcome.  Even better, to appeal to a broader audience and begin to walk away from that perception is even better.  The business objectives may never be public, but they seem apparent.

When asked by our clients about ROI, we always ask what they are trying to achieve.  It may not always be about conversions.  It may be reputation, it may be perception, it may be search results, or numerous others.  Not all of which are measured by sales.  That said, they are measurable and we can prove results on any objective with true data, relevant and timely.

Second, let’s look at Triangulation. The original Old Spice commercial was slapped up to YouTube after it appeared and garnered a modest amount of hits (a few million I think).  After a traditional media blitz (NPR, Good Morning America, etc.) and social media engagement that linked the 3 pillars of the model, views went over 90 million.  True proof in action.

And finally, to sales.  There is a link from social media to conversion.  It often times appears in overlapping data points to draw the connection.  A client of Elasticity often employs several tactics to push sales campaigns and drives to an online channel.  When taking the social media component out of the mix, there is a trend line that can be drawn that shows a boost in traffic and conversions from the norm.  But when you layer in the social media components of the program in a week later, the trend lines spike and map back to spikes in social media activity.  This has played out multiple times in their conversion charts as well as those of other clients.

So at the end of this lengthy analysis, did the Old Spice Guy work?

I would argue that it, indeed, has.

1. It reached new audiences
2. It brought awareness to a brand that was beginning to slip into obscurity
3. It stopped and began to reverse a negative sales slide
4. It has shown signs (along with coupons) of turning sales into a profitable trend
5. It has shown the value of the oft-misunderstood social media “channel” (for those that think it a channel)
6. And it showed that slapping a video on YouTube won’t cut it.  You need the additional “topspin” of a well-thought out campaign with multiple parts that feed on each other.  It’s Triangulation and the highest visible example of its power yet.

Now, that’s not to say that any individual web site or Facebook page, or video, or flash game or iPhone app, etc.  is necessarily mediocre.  There are many award winning pieces out there I’m sure.  But when you look at the effectiveness of a balanced campaign on the whole–where online and offline compliment each other and work with each other–there are few examples that are really worth the $250-$450/hr price rates you are paying at those agencies.  Hell, I’d venture to say there are few campaigns out there worth $150/hr.

I’d also like to extend an olive branch out to the digital groups of those agencies: it’s not your fault.  From the colleagues I’ve met in the various groups, you are immensely talented.  And when I meet you at the next industry event, let me buy you a drink.  Because the tension and frustration of what you deal with on a daily basis, being relegated to the last few slides of the presentation, or the last 10% of the budget (only to be the first cut when there are ‘write offs’ to be dealt out for ‘client satisfaction’ and ‘over-servicing.’) and countless other battles you endure take their toll.

But the problem is that the ‘leaders’ haven’t figured it out yet, so the talent is mostly wasted.

Let’s look at it this way.  Have you had a Kolache?  They are fantastic for breakfast.  They are also a big trend (if you can call a breakfast food a trend after bacon has so dominated the foodscape pre-noon).  So imagine you are at the fancy hotel itching to order your $25 eggs benedict and $15 hash brown patty.  But you heard about this Kolache and you want to try it.  Now, there is this fantastic Czech bakery right across the street that has the best, authentic Kolaches in the city.  And they are $5.  But the hotel doesn’t want to see you and your 3 business partners leave to try one.  That’s lost revenue.  So they decide to make you one.  That way, they can still sell their $45 oatmeal bowls to your friends and keep all that revenue ‘in house.’  The hotel is a big name hotel with critically-acclaimed chefs, so you decide to stay and try their version of the Kolache and pay $25.  This is a win-win.  You don’t have to leave the comfort of the familiar name hotel, and the hotel gets to try and figure out how to make a Kolache on your dime.

Was it good?  I’m betting not.  I’m betting that it was mediocre at best.

But that is how digital is done at the big name agencies.  Don’t just take my word for it. B.L. Ochman just wrote about it in Advertising Age. It’s a very scary and accurate look into the sausage factory.  And it’s true.  I still remember being in very similar scenarios.  The pitch is tomorrow and somebody ‘upstairs’ wants ’some digital’ in the presentation.  “Can you knock out a couple of slides we can ’stick’ in the presentation?”

Better yet, in competing with the incumbent for one particular project, a compromise needed to be struck on who was going to do what part of the project.  My agency’s response?  “Our focus isn’t really digital, so why don’t you guys take that part?”

Let’s play a quick guessing game here.  What do you think happened when our digital team took the deck we were supposed to ’stick in a couple of slides’ and actually put a bullet or two on EVERY other tactic to tie in digital across the entire campaign and make it look more integrated?

But enough about the process.

You may be saying that in today’s economy, no one has the room to take a chance.  I think the phrase is “nobody ever got fired for hiring IBM?”  So to protect your job, why not pay for mediocre.  And middle of the road is not necessarily a “waste of money,” as my blog post title here suggests.

Well, let’s look at why it is a waste of money.  If I were to add one more thing to B.L. Ochman’s post, it would be that when a client does buy off on slide 29, typically the work on that slide is relegated to junior agency folk who may be experienced in social media, but not as it pertains to actual PR, reputation or other business goals.  And what happens?  Well, look at Jennifer Leggio’s post last year on social media failures.  (there are plenty more of these–just Google ’social media failure’).

Or, how about at a recent example: Nestle.

Now there is plenty already out there on Nestle.  But I will link you to this blog that interviewed Porter Novelli.  One of the takeaways from the Facebook debacle?  “One of the things Nestle did wrong was to use a junior position to respond to the comments, but they should have used a more experienced senior position to deal with the online attacks. ”

This is not all that uncommon, though.  The same arrogance or misunderstanding of the medium that causes Slide 29 to happen are the same people that don’t think highly enough of the medium to put skilled people on the project.  And as much as I disagree with a few points in this next blog (will be another post I’m sure), it still gives a great viewpoint of how agencies still think of the medium: 10 Ways digital agencies F up social media

So, I come back to my thesis statement.  The large traditional agencies do mediocre digital work at best, and overcharge you for it.  Perhaps it’s time to break out of your comfort zone and go try that Czech bakery across the street?  I think you’ll be pleasantly surprised.  And at $5, what does it hurt?

If you are looking to try something new, here are some tips on how to choose an agency.

For further reading on Small Agencies vs. The Big Guys:
http://elasticthought.com/2008/09/a-case-for-small-agencies-part-1.html
http://elasticthought.com/2008/09/the-case-for-small-agencies—the-people.html
http://elasticthought.com/2008/09/the-case-for-small-agencies-part-3.html

Saturday Night Live has 30+ years of background in this.  They’ve poked fun at everything from presidents to popular culture and their Weekend Update has been the satirical news of record.  The Onion took a further step at creating new humorous antidotes, stories and otherwise and placing them out as a news media outlet (print, video, online, blog) like any other.

Then came the popularity of shows like The Daily Show and The Colbert Report.  The Daily Show taking what was started with Weekend Update and expanding to new audiences and The Colbert Report taking on the political blow-hard pundits who are gaining in popularity as of late.

But the traditional news media continued to stand firm.  They did not even acknowledge the other avenues existed.  The news was paramount.  And important.  Important enough that humor, parody and satire had no place.  And those that delivered the news?  Just as important.  There were no humorous angles to Dan Rather or Walter Cronkite or Edward R. Murrow.

And thus, public relations as an industry followed suit.

But things are changing now.  I’m sure there is no one instance that was the tipping point, but I’m going to go out on a limb and say it was the Daily Show.  An IU study found the Daily Show with Jon Stewart to be as substantive as network news.  A Rasmussen Report showed 32% of adults ages 30-39 believe that The Daily Show and The Colbert Report are capable of replacing traditional new outlets.  And nearly one-third of younger Americans see Colbert and Stewart as true alternatives to traditional news outlets.

That’s a big impact.  So how did traditional news outlets respond?  They started slowly.  They played clips on their shows (well, the cable news guys did–they have a lot of time to fill) to get a laugh, to prove a point that fit their political agenda, or attacked the satirical shows in retribution.

But then Brian Williams from ‘NBC Nightly News’ started showing up as a repeat guest on The Daily Show.  It was humorous, genuine, and a reach to cross into the audiences that watch the program.

But last night was a new milestone in my opinion.  If you haven’t seen the piece on Chatroulette, you must go now and watch it. (I’ll wait). Did you count the media personalities in that piece?  At least 5.  All 3 major new network anchorpersons (ABC,CBS, NBC) as well as some cable news for good measure– MSNBC and Fox Business.  And they weren’t just mocking the video roulette site.  They were poking fun of themselves.  They were poking fun of their industry.  And they were doing it on The Daily Show’s terms.

They showed that the news doesn’t have to always take itself so seriously.

Why?  Well, for one, to get viewers.  But it’s more than that.  It’s an attempt to show that they are human.  They are endearing themselves to their audience, or better yet, a new potential one.

And they did it through humor and self-deprecation.

So, if you made it with me this far into a long blog post, my question is this: why hasn’t the Public Relations Industry followed suit?  Why have they continued to act as if they are above the fray?  Why have they insisted that the news is more important than any humor based program you can think up.  (And by news, I mean EVERY press release ever written for any client need–big or small)  Why would they not follow the actual media they are working with?

This is not an indemnification of the industry as a whole, only to say this: lighten up, you may just actually be more effective as an agency/industry if you do.

We have found at Elasticity that humor, parody, and the lighter side of human nature have phenomenal appeal.  Stories are placed more frequently.  Programs take off and go “viral” with greater frequency, and we’re able to break through the clutter.  We’re able to endear our clients to their audiences.

Another example we talked about this week.  Ole’ Miss is replacing their beloved Col. Reb with a new mascot.  The story is that Admiral Ackbar is a leading contender.  We all heard this story and it took off like wildfire.  Do you think you would have heard about this story had they been thinking about replacing their mascot with a bear, or an eagle?  (though it may have been picked up by Colbert since he hates bears)

This is a highly controversial topic right now, and those who practice this type of communications are not taken serious.  But it is catching on.  There are more and more every day that see this.  And in time, the larger agencies may just play ball on our terms, much like the major news networks participated in Chatroulette.

Now, this is not to say that the news is all humorous, nor to say that no news is actually legitimate.  Only to say that humor often times breaks through clutter and the news media is starting to catch on.  You don’t have to be 100% serious 100% of the time.  Having a “human” face often times endears you to your audience.

And isn’t that what “public relations” is all about?  Endearing yourself to your audience?

]]> http://goelastic.com/theblog/index.php/2010/03/does-humor-belong-in-pr/feed/ 1 http://goelastic.com/theblog/index.php/2010/01/elastic-marketing-its-more-than-you-think/ http://goelastic.com/theblog/index.php/2010/01/elastic-marketing-its-more-than-you-think/#comments Thu, 21 Jan 2010 23:16:07 +0000 Brian http://www.goelastic.com/theblog/?p=594 We’ve all heard what is wrong with marketing and advertising.  From what I gather at most conferences, blog posts, and industry quips, it needs to be more interactive.  It needs to be engaging.  I think they also say it needs to be more social, and a few other things I can’t remember now.  It all jumbles together at this point.  What’s funny is that you never hear someone actually say that it just needs to be good.

And it needs to be found.  There are so many ways for people to bury communications methods these days that the big industry money maker this year is going to be promoting promotions.  Really, it is.  Advertising for advertisements….  Really.

So look out for the great new buzz terms: “viral seeding” along with “tradigital” and “increasing visibility of your program.”  While they seem rational enough terms (well, except for tradigital), make sure they aren’t adding to the budget to push something that won’t fly in the first place.

Now, we get asked a lot about Elastic Marketing.  As an agency, we’re often dubbed a “hybrid” agency that sits somewhere in the middle of a Ven diagram with overlapping circles of advertising, PR, and social media (and I guess digital gets thrown in there too).  And we do our fair share of ridiculing the status quo in our pitches, so it’s only fair that we share what it is we do a little more here online.

A recent client was ecstatic when he “figured it out.”  He said we were “like an episodic, story-based sitcom” that “played itself out online and offline.”  And I have to say, that’s pretty accurate in some measures.  In a way, it’s a more modern version of the soap opera.

I may have to explain that a bit here.  Wikipedia defines a soap opera as “an ongoing, episodic work of dramatic fiction presented in serial format on television or radio.  The name ’soap opera’ stems from the original dramatic serials broadcast on radio that had soap manufacturers such as Procter & Gamble, Colgate-Palmolive, and Lever Brothers as sponsors and producers.”

Now, we’re not into dramatic fiction, and we certainly aren’t television producers.  What we do is episodic, but those “episodes” aren’t necessarily in chronological order and most likely play out on a multitude of channels.  Rather, our storyline is something that organically plays to a specific cause.  Say, for example, bringing the mustache back into popular culture.  That may include blog outreach, traditional PR, event marketing, and advertising.  And it’s not something that goes away after a short run on TV.  This particular example has been going on for over 4 years.

So does your company want to change the status quo?  It may be something as simple as getting people to eat more potatoes.  It may be getting you to understand and appreciate rail liquor.  Hell, it may be to grow a luxurious mullet.  Whatever it is, there are a series of episodic events online and offline that can better get your program goals into the popular vernacular.  To actually get people to care about what it is you are doing.

And that is where Elastic Marketing comes into play.  We get that snowball rolling downhill.  We get the mullet talked about and have it show up where audiences actually care to hear about it.  People start talking more about potatoes and celebrating rail liquor.  And not because we virally seeded the campaign, but because people actually sought it out and cared to listen.  That’s Elastic Marketing.

(none of the above examples relate to any past or current client we are actively working with.  any resemblance to anybody in any close approximation with mullets, rail liquor and potatoes is purely coincidental.  and if you know of anyone in any close approximation to monkeys, mullets, mustaches, Mr. T or wee people, please contact us immediately)

That being said…..

Last week an old colleague of ours trumpeted on Facebook that the agency he works for was named “Agency of the Decade” …. again.  Aside from the fact that he doesn’t work for Edelman it struck me as odd that this would be something to boast about.  Especially from a Public Relations company tasked with forming “relationships” between the companies that pay them and the publics they speak to.

A little background, first.  (and this is not meant to be a depressing, doomsday post — stick with it).  A quick Google search for “job growth in the last decade” will bring up multiple versions of the same headline.  Here are a few:

• “Off the Charts -Job Growth Lacking in the Private Sector” - NY Times
• “Lost Decade for Job Growth” – MarketWatch (Wall Street Journal)
• “A Lost Decade for Jobs” – BusinessWeek

In summary, at no other time since the depression have we added 0 jobs in a 10-year period.  (actually, we lost over 200K)

Add to that the fact that salaries have remained stagnant in the last decade as well.  College reports indicate that starting salaries have remained constant, or if they grew, grew slower than inflation.  (if you are doing the math on your own salary, keep in mind that you would have to have a 25-30% increase over the past 10 years to keep up).  NPR has been reporting similar stories that most Americans have seen little to no growth in their compensation over the past 10 years, as well as other media outlets.

But you can’t blame a PR company for the economy, right?

Let’s look at a different trend–social media.  Many attribute the beginnings of social media to the Cluetrain Manifesto.  An excerpt:

“Most corporations, on the other hand, only know how to talk in the soothing, humorless monotone of the mission statement, marketing brochure, and your-call-is-important-to-us busy signal. Same old tone, same old lies. No wonder networked markets have no respect for companies unable or unwilling to speak as they do.”

And these companies often made use of one of the best humorless, monotone generators there is: the PR firm.  A humorous look:

They say that behind every great joke lies a foundation of truth.  And the truth is that social media is a rebellion against corporate speak.  A statement, a movement that says “stop talking to us through the inhuman tones written by your marketing group, your corporate communications group, and especially…your PR company.  talk to us like human beings.  And for once, just tell us the truth.”

Oh, and one more thing.  Have you had a conversation lately about customer service?  I don’t think you need a link to a NY Times article to know that customer relations is worse than it’s ever been.

Let me repeat that.  At no other time has the relationship between the public and the companies they/we deal with on a daily basis ever been worse.

So why would a company that makes its business on forming “relationships” between companies and the public boast about being the “Agency of the Decade?”   Why would there even be such an award this decade?  A decade where everything from jobs, to salaries, to general disdain for the American public has had such low performance?  In a time when the fastest growing movement (social media) stemmed from wanting to put an end to the PR dribble companies and agencies were spitting out?

If there was to be an “anything” of the decade as it relates to actual public relations, it would have to go the many early adopters of social media.  it would go to the founders of Facebook, and MySpace, and Twitter, and YouTube, and LinkedIn and countless other social media enabling sites.  NOT some public, conglomerate-held PR agency that won the award based on billings growth.  It was social media that actually began to improve the relationships between companies and public.  And will continue to do so.

So… agency of the decade?  It’s kind of like the Biggest Loser, only you are not healthier after winning the award.

There is an interesting sub-text in the article that is even more interesting.  Beyond the easy attack of large agencies being slow to maneuver (It’s hard to steer the Titanic), there is the other context of sub-contracting.  Most of the time we hear it as a partnership, but it tends to be a vendor relationship at best.  The rationale behind this is actually something quite funny.  Ever heard this before: “I know enough to be dangerous and can handle the meeting, but I bring the real experts in when needed?”

That statement has evolved into a business model for a lot of agencies.  Hiring the general contractor (so to speak) to breeze through a client meeting, and bring in the experts to do the plumbing, electrical work, etc.  Not a bad model if you’re building a house.  But this model doesn’t work for digital marketing.  And here’s why–a general contractor is great to execute on the architectural plans that have been made for them.  Going with the general contractor as your agency assures you that the strategy (the blueprints) will be mediocre at best.  Just enough to be dangerous.

Where does this leave those agencies, then? They are becoming middle-men.  And what’s interesting about being a middle-man in digital marketing is that digital is all about removing the middle-man.  The technology is there to allow for 1-1 conversations, to allow for savvy architects to handle the multiple experts, to give the tools and crowdsourcing to make the general contractor irrelevant.

And let’s not mention that the world of digital moves so fast that it would be like completely re-learning plumbing every other month.

So can you blame the big brands of the world from going straight to the smart agencies?  Cutting out that guy that knows just enough in the client meeting to bringing in the real expert?  It’s an added layer (read: expense) that they don’t need any more.

What they need is a smart architectural firm.  An agency that knows the intricacies, all the ins and outs, and how it all comes together into one picture.  Someone that says “I know enough to make this program sing and will make the meeting really productive and efficient.”

I envision those firms then outsourcing (I mean partnering) with the larger agencies to knock out the production.  It’s puts the current model on it’s head.  But it’s so crazy it just might work.

Now to find a good general contractor to help us pull the whole thing off….

There is a long background to this term, but it is the “gut feel” that I’m curious about right now.  Where it was maligned in earlier criticism of former President George W Bush, and then reiterated from the New York Times to Canadian Parliament, it seems to be gaining in popularity.  And most often in the social media field right now.

After hearing a Southwest Airlines presentation on social media, the question was asked about what tools they use to monitor, gauge trends, measure, and qualify conversations to join and which to avoid, and general research practices.  The answer?  Roughly “gut feel.”  Actually, it’s more like “when you are participating in the space, you have a general feel for what is going on and you can generally tell what needs to be done and where to go.”  (paraphrased)  And if it weren’t for the 4 or 5 other Fortune 500 companies that have responded in the same manner within the last month or so to the same question, I would have let it go at that.  From podcasts, to presentations, to blog posts, they are heralding the intuitive properties of some of their youngest employees guts.  (maybe because they are in better shape than some of the older ones?)

But why gut feel?  Why would these companies not want further evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or other means of quantifying this field that is becoming more and more important to brand perception, company reputation, and purchase decision/behavior?  Marketers for years have used data from focus groups, point of purchase data and a myriad of psychological data to hone their craft.  Yet with social media, Fortune 500 companies are letting their online reputation be managed by gut feel.  And in some cases, those guts have only been out of college as long as social media has been around.  Barely enough time to truly understand the company’s many efforts in other channels, or understanding of crisis communications, corporate reputation as a practice, or otherwise.

But they know how to use Facebook and Twitter.

Now, I’ll grant you that I learned a lot from Malcolm Gladwell in Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking but I’m not sure he was promoting “gut feel.”  He does argue that “intuitive judgment is developed by experience, training, and knowledge.”  And granted, with the immediate nature of the online world, there will need to be some gut calls made in response.

But to publicly celebrate gut feel?  To eschew intellectual examination?  I’m not sure if that is truly what is best for the companies, their online presence or the practice of social media.  I still remember the episode of “The Office” where Michael drives his car into a lake because that’s what the GPS told him to do.  Perhaps a combination of technology, tools AND gut feel will be the answer.

Until then, I look forward to a representative from one of these Fortune 500 companies that explains the intellectual side of their thought out, reasoned, and evidence-based plan.  As much as I like Stephen Colbert, I hope that the practice of Social Media or it’s “best practices” are not shrouded in truthiness and that those that learn from these presentations do not go away thinking that they, too, can manage their company’s online reputation on gut feel.

Illustration: Timo Elliott

To quote a summary: “What makes this report even more interesting is the correlation of engagement and financial performance. The analysis groups each brand with the greatest depth and breadth into a category titled “Social Media Mavens”. On average, those who were classified as “Social Media Mavens” grew 18% in revenue over the last 12 months. On the other hand, the companies who were least engaged with consumers on the social web unfortunately suffered an average of 6% decline in revenue.”  (credit: Altimeter Group)

This obviously is a great story to tout to our clients to show not only social media’s relationship to the bottom line, but to emphasize the need to actually use the tools you/they spent money building.  It reinforces the participatory part of social media and the payoffs that can come from it.

However, we want to put forth a corollary finding that we are actively pursuing.  If your clients are anything like ours, social media is just part of the mix.  You are playing alongside email marketing, banner advertising, pay-per-click, paid sponsorships/links and other channels that get measured with the click-through-rate (CTR) percentage.  What we’ve learned through these programs is that the higher the overall “sentiment” is for the company, the greater the CTR.

To repeat:  the more engagement there is online, and the more that engagement is positive in nature, the more likely people are to engage with other digital marketing tactics (i.e. click through to the company’s target location).

This makes logical sense to us.  If you dislike a brand, you will be less likely to click through one of their other online advertising properties.  On the contrary, if you are neutral to positive about a brand, you are more likely to click through.  Now, we are not diving into the waters of words/colors/message and placement where a purchaser is more likely to purchase.  We’re simply making a connection from sentiment to CTR.  And depending on what type of agency you are, this could either make you a great parter to the other agencies in the mix for your clients, or improve your own digital marketing tactics if you have them all under one roof.

But this outlines how important reputation online becomes.  And it brings the “online reputation management” discussion out of the the confines of corporate communications, and broadens that internal discussion to marketing and other areas within the company.

Admittedly, we have a small sample base right now.  Companies and marketers are not likely to publish their CTR percentages, so we’ve relied on our own experience, clients, experiments and those of our friends in the industry.  If you have access to CTR percentages, or if you’ve found similar results, we welcome your comments here.  Together, we can put together the next “big” finding in social media and it’s importance in the world of communications.