Filed under: Uncategorized
The Campbells introduce GALLERY 2.0
For less than you would spend on a single print ad, we can create a deep and richly interactive online presence for your art organization. Merging our strongest assets (targeted messaging, media contacts, media usage monitoring) with yours (innovative and ever-changing content, built-in social networks), our Gallery 2.0 service establishes a strategic online platform for your gallery, allowing you to take full advantage of new media trends to reach new clients, artists and the media, without the costs of typical advertising and public relations campaigns.
With the Gallery 2.0 new media program, you will:
- Utilize blogging and micro-blogging services to actively garner mindshare among artists, clients, and media influencers
- Build strategic relationships and publicize to new prospects via Social Networking sites
- Generate unprecedented web impressions by targeting and linking to key image and video sharing websites
- Boost Internet search returns for your gallery and artists
Gallery 2.0 is not a blanket web marketing campaign. It is a highly targeted new media campaign, sensitive to the interests, dialogue and needs of the art world. We work with you and your catalog to create a program specifically suited to your goals.
Contact us to find out more.
Filed under: Language, Marketing, Public Relations | Tags: corn, food marketing, michael pollan
Even food fights for it’s due recognition. That the gustatory-industrial complex is heavy on lobbying and exceedingly light on nutrients is no surprise to just about anyone. Morgan Spurlock’s Supersize Me made an entertaining case against commercial food consumption in 2004. But while the movie may be Big Food’s loudest critic, the writings of Michael Pollan stand as the anchor to the movement against Big Food’s central command. Read and researched to a tee, Pollan’s work issues enlightened vicissitudes against Big Food, most recently with his book In Defense of Food.
What interests S2N is Michael’s assertion on Terry Gross’ “Fresh Air” last week that big food has won the PR battle over populist appeal: ““There is a real issue of perception of elitism. It’s one of the ironies of our society that junk food being sold by multinational corporations, like McDonalds and Kraft and whoever else, appears to be populist and food grown by struggling, scrupulous farmers is regarded as elitist…
There’s something wrong with this picture when agribusiness companies have seized the populist high ground.”
An excerpt for Pollan’s book on the Fresh Air site also notes that certain obvious food choices (think fresh fruit and vegetables) benefit from FDA courtships and a “good nutrient” marketing treatment (think pomengranate).
Just what are the syllogisms that have allowed Big Food to devastatingly win a heartland that could arguably be better served (and better fed) by diversified plantings and individual competition? Think of corn’s word arsenal: Corn fed boys. Corn fed beef. The corn side is crispiest. The power of lobbies and oft-repeated catch phrases hard at work.
I had a little personal experience with the power of sound bites vs the power of issues over the weekend. As I (along with the team at Wagner|Junker) helped dedicate a new public plaza in San Francisco’s oft-maligned Fillmore District, I found myself fighting the media’s derisive use of “jazz-inspired” to question how a public plaza could address deep seated concerns of a ravaged community. The sound bite “jazz-inspired” left much to be desired. However a great piece on S.F.’s ABC7 and a nice feature in the Chronicle dug into the issues and gave the property it’s due.
Filed under: Information | Tags: google anyalytics, people's history, PR, Public Relations
I’ve been getting periodic newsletters from the people at PR News for awhile now, and in an effort to shout them out (and plug the fact that they recently quoted my thoughts on the industry in their Best/Worst PR Advice book), I thought I’d touch on something they recently posted.
“The Internet as a Creature of the Past” alludes to the idea of the Internet as an essentially archival mechanism. It’s true, as one travels indiscriminately around the www, one is usually confounded by the incomparable mass of archived material on the web. From Flickr to Facebook and beyond, the Internet is more than a snapshot of contemporary connected living, its an exhaustive survey. But what role does it play in a true historical, archival way? Which introduces the question: what is history?
It’s possible with Internet tools (like Google Analytics) to view, like never before, the finer points of the popular people’s history. What do we search? What are our prevalent headlines? Where are our dollars going? Political and economic markers may someday soon serve as mere bullets on a timeline that is mostly populated by the trite, but undeniably human minutae of everyday lives.
I’d love to know how historians weigh in on this idea of cyberanalytics and the writing of history.
Let’s look for a second at the word of words: The canned McCain line “I’m not Bush” from the October 15, 2008, presidential debate looked well rehearsed on the McCain side (with the candidate rolling straight into the next day with that line in his pocket) and well-prepared for on the Obama side (with a “not exactly” rebuttal on the air waves the next day as well). Same weapon – “I’m not Bush” – with different intended results. While time has shown that this statement has gained limited traction for McCain so late in the game, of more interest to S2N is the framing of this line.
A clear dialectic, rather than stylistic, point is made by both sides here. The definitive statement is unarguably true: if one intended to run against George W. Bush, one needs to have run in either 2000 or 2004. At the same time, the assertion that John McCain supported W. 90% of the time is broadly true. While electoral politics is battled on myriad fronts – policy, character, record, beliefs, etc. – the theatre of operations seems to be rooted primarily in the framing: what storyline resonates with the public and in what way can that storyline further a candidate’s platform? All else is seemingly secondary as the frame dominates headlines.
We’ve seen this throughout the campaign: pallin’ with terrorists, economy is sound, socialist tax policy, 4 more years of the same, etc. Increasingly, pundits argue that as McCain searches for a stronghold in the debate frame game, Obama has stuck to (and reaped the benefits) of consistent messaging (the economy), bolstered by headline-making real world events (banking collapse, economic stimulus package, Wall St. tumbles). Bernake may one day be dubbed the unsung hero in Obama’s bid, as the one who has put the frame squarely on the economy.
The upside of all of this? It suggests that Americans are a fairly enlightened electorate. An electorate that gives traction not to the war of words itself, but to the words that resonate most with real-world events.
One note: S2N tries to remain non-partisan, but as a California-based blog edited by a person who pays the bills as a lifestyle industries copywriter and fine arts publicist, S2N’s political leanings shouldn’t be too hard to glean.
Filed under: Advertising, Decoding, Language, Marketing | Tags: Advertising, Marketing, olympics, visa. decoding
A new category here: Decoding. Herein we’ll dissect the propaganda that interests us.
This first installment of Decoding targets VISA’s “Go World” campaign. It’s no secret that the misuse of credit has long been out of favor in Europe, is falling out of favor in the United States, and is not even a discussion in much of the rest of the world. So VISA’s got a heartstring-jerking campaign to bring credit card usage back in vogue.
Created by TBWA/Chiat/Day, the Go World campaign’s rallying image is long-jumper Bob Beamon breaking the world record in the Mexico City games, four decades ago. There’s a shot of him, head-on, jumping into the pit with USA proudly scrawled across his chest. The headline reads “Go World” and of course there are the Olympic rings and Visa logo off to the side.
Is this in the imperative? Go. Get out and see the world. Travel and make sure you bring your card.
Is this a cheer? Congratulations world on all you’ve done.
Why is USA so prominently displayed? Because Beamon’s accomplishment (and those of all Olympians, regardless of nationality or final standings) exemplifies the human spirit? Or because, despite current opposing arguments from the likes of the E.U. and China, the United States still asserts that it is the capital of the world? Or even further yet, banking is the real global juggernaut, not nation-states?
The website at www.visa.com/goworld gives surfers a chance to browse the tear-jerking stories of human athletic triumph. It allows users to tell there own. It’s a generous piece of anthropological marketing by Visa. It’s brand-sustaining at it’s most selfless–and yet in exploiting moments of such personal success, Visa’s ulterior motives are all the more clear, and all the more ugly.
But alas, the Olympics are here, and while we sit down to the TV to shed a tear and feel the goose bumps for Olympians past, present and future, we can’t help but believe that the marketing execs for VISA are doing the same. We are all human after all, and we are united by much more than that which divides us. So we let it slide, Visa. Because for these next few weeks, it’s not about credit crunches, and predatory marketers. It’s about the human spirit.
Filed under: Public Relations | Tags: election season, Marketing, obama, propoganda, Public Relations
Democratic presumptive nominee Barack Obama will deliver a powerful exclamation point to end the Democratic National Convention in Denver. And we’re not talking about one of his characteristic, throat-lump speeches. We’re talking about the admission of the general public to a hitherto party-insider only event. Obama’s finale acceptance speech will be taking place at Denver’s INVESCO Field–which means 76,000 people will be in attendance.
Now that’s a statement.
Let’s quickly look at a couple of implications the DNC (with groundswell wizard Howard Dean at the Helm) hopes to make:
- This isn’t all about Obama: this is about a movement of the people, by the people, for the people
- Transparency (open air, open attendance) vs. closed doors (current administration, McCain’s acceptance speech to limited, indoor crowd a short one week later)
- Momentum: numerically speaking (assuming protests are non-existent, or quietly quashed) this presents a potential visual back-breaker very early on in the season. One concern for the Obama campaign though: indoor events like McCain’s are notoriously louder than outdoor arena events
All in all, this seems like a bit of a gamble for the Obama campaign, mostly in that something like this has never been done before. But if all goes well, chalk it up as another success for a campaign machine that most pr and marketing professionals will agree, regardless of political orientation, is as formidable as any in modern history.
One last note about presidential elections: from a professional standpoint, election season is for pr practitioners what the Olympics are for athletes. This is a chance to see the very best propagandists in our country compete at the highest level, sometimes cleverly, sometimes viciously, sometimes with great poise and principle, sometimes entirely unscrupulously. Have fun watching the game unfold.
There’s been quite a bit of research on the topic of email marketing, and one thing is very, very clear. It doesn’t work.
Unless there’s a relationship.
Non-profits, arts and culture institutions and lifestyle organizations can potentially derive big benefits from email marketing, provided list subscribers are just that–subscribers. Working with a list composed of true subscribers allows pr/marketing managers to create loyalty through VIP incentives, insider news, etc., and because subscribers are on board on their own volition, there’s a mutual wish to see the organization succeed.
Patron Technologies (one of the myriad email marketing companies out there, and arguably a good if a bit pricey one) recently held a seminar on effective email marketing. Here are a few bullets I walked away with:
- Subject lines should be consistent, clear (even boring) and no more than 50-60 characters. Even if the email is never opened, a clear subject line will be read as it’s deleted. Subject lines with all caps and typical spam words (sex and impotency seem to be the biggies) tend to get caught by filters.
- Names, dates, locations and actionable links should always be at the very top of emails, well within the preview pane of most inboxes
- Utilize every opportunity to grow your subscriber base–events, promotions, etc.
- Keep email information clear and highly on-message (more expansive body copy should follow clear and clever headline copy)
- Offer VIP, preview and insider info in mailers.
- Utilize tracking methods to repeatedly target non-opens while not overly marketing to those who open emails.
It has always seemed to me that public relations professionals are, for the most part, a self-policing group. With reprisal for unethical behavior coming most notably from such career-hindering actions as damaged media relationships, severed client relationships, and (in extreme cases) defamation lawsuits, practitioners therefore develop ethical stature not by proving adherence to an ethical code, but through an absence of proven violations against said code.
We can only hope that self-policing and fear of reprisal proves to be a strong enough ethical barometer. The Institute of Public Relations released a study on the role of ethics in the profession. I truly believe that papers such as this are a must-read for all communications professionals.
View Shannon A. Bowen’s paper at the Institute for Public Relations.
In short, NEWSgrist linked to this great law school paper discussing property rights, information distribution and absorption, and the ever-increasing role of an ever-evolving audience. I meant to post this months ago, but as the material is (for the short term) timeless, why not post it now?
Filed under: Language | Tags: Advertising, Language, poetics, Public Relations
Found this recently…not sure who it’s by, but the whole piece is called Grief Poetics:
A sea blood red takes
a drink
An executive makes a fist.
Somewhere
a father makes a
fist; while
a
dancer
pushes editorial space,
justifies a need
for sad,
sad stories.
