Next Generation Advertising

[jeffoest]

My morning shower thought:

This is an idea I have for the next generation of advertising. I don't know HOW to implement it. I'm not that smart. But I think there is the possibility of something really important here.

Mommycast is the example I will use since the inspiration came from a previous thread started by Ferg yesterday. Before advertising/sponsorship, Mommycast dispenses unbiased information about products to listeners. This product information is trusted and reliable given the source. It's not "4 out of 5 doctors" but it is someone like you telling you about something that works for them. It's the best marketing any company could hope for and what companies strive to get: the personal recommendation.

Mommycast after advertising/sponsorship - listeners know they are steered certain ways so the product information becomes less reliable and less 'sticky' (in the words of Malcolm Galdwell) - i.e. less effective. Much like advertising today. You know they are paying for the message or 'recommendation'.

Here lies, of course, the catch-22 right? How to monetize and give the advertiser the ability to participate in something so richly effective for something that you just 'come up with' on the fly in your show. I use and love my XXXX and I'm going to tell you about it.

Podcasting is said to be the next generation of media. I don't disagree. It's got properties that are so different than other forms. A BIG component of that paradigm shift is the amateur caster. People like you and me. These thousands of amateurs talking about products (on their own - not because they are directly getting paid to do so) have enormous power in their ability to affect purchase decisions.

How to quantify that value and create a business model?

I'll leave that up to the smart people here.

It's next-generation advertising and I believe it's a MUST to accomodate next-generation media.

Wow - what an exciting opportunity for the advertisement industry. Will they take advantage of it? Will we help them?

Stay tuned.

[SFEley]

If I understand it correctly, Jeff, you seem to be suggesting a model in which podcasters make unsolicited endorsements and get paid for it. Is that correct?

If so, then one answer already exists: Amazon Associates and similar programs. If you had something else in mind, then perhaps you could elaborate some more.

[jeffoest]

If I understand it correctly, Jeff, you seem to be suggesting a model in which podcasters make unsolicited endorsements and get paid for it. Is that correct?

If so, then one answer already exists: Amazon Associates and similar programs. If you had something else in mind, then perhaps you could elaborate some more.

Sort of, yeah. But I guess I'm thinking of some type of solution that is more next-generation and transparent than simply a link that earns some money after you talk about an unsolicited product. You're right - it's a start in the direction but it's somewhat awkward.

The downside of the AA and the like is that you have to drive traffic to the podcasters website and 'force' them to buy the product through your site (or some other action that is a bit unnatural to the consumer such as remembering a product code, etc..). If I hear Joe Schmoe talk about a new exciting shampoo and I'm in my car running errands while listening and I've been looking to change shampoos, there is a great chance I'll stop at the grocer or drug store and give it a try. That's natural and not forced. What I'm NOT going to do? Go home, log in, look for that podcasters website, look for the link, click the link, enter my address, my credit card, get a log-in password to the site, and buy the product from there (and probably wait a week for the product). That is, if I even remembered the product it in the first place.

But no matter how I purchased it, I was influenced directly by that podcast. That podcast clearly provided value to the shampoo manufacturer. Again, how do you capture that value, that transaction, that idea?

I don't have a solution just concepts in mind. BUT I do believe solutions exist but I think those solutions exist only with out-of-the-box crazy thinking! lol

To really puruse this further, a media/advertisting/podcasting enabling company should put their most creative minds together for a couple of hours of brainstorming and see what evolves...

[Zany Aguirre]

To really puruse this further, a media/advertisting/podcasting enabling company should put their most creative minds together for a couple of hours of brainstorming and see what evolves...

Jeff

You're talking about the Podcast Media dot net solution again.

Watching the Podshow business model at work these last 6+ months, reading the Podshow contract specifics shared here and the discontentment with their business model voiced here at PCA by more podcasters then they have signed up has convinced us that our approach would be a welcomed alternative.

Presently, karate Kast is the first show we're really concentrating on and then maybe my very own Zany Aguirres Show (if I could fine the time to do another show!). We're hoping to open the flood gates to other shows that have expressed interest in our model and concerns with Podshows in the coming months. hell, we've only been working on it for the last 12 months!!

Good to see you on here Jeff. Looking forward to any new work you have planned.

Allan

[SFEley]

But no matter how I purchased it, I was influenced directly by that podcast. That podcast clearly provided value to the shampoo manufacturer. Again, how do you capture that value, that transaction, that idea?
Again, I'm wondering if you can go into a little bit more detail about what you're visualizing.

Let's build on your example of the shampoo purchase. Joe buys his shampoo, and the conspicuous factors that influenced his purchase deserve to be rewarded.

In Joe's fictional case, the influences that led to his shampoo buying were:

* 65% the podcast he just heard on the way to the drugstore
* 15% the fact that his girlfriend uses the same shampoo
* 8% the shampoo company's own advertising
* 4% another podcast he heard three weeks ago
* 3% the fact that the bottle had a cool design
* 3% a TV news report he saw last week about animal testing in shampoos, in which this manufacturer was one of three named that does not spray concentrated chemicals into the eyes of cute little bunny rabbits
* 2% that the shampoo was on the middle shelf instead of the bottom

So. Who gets rewarded? Just the podcast he heard while driving in? Or both podcasts, his girlfriend, the news affiliate, the store's stocking clerk, and minor bonuses to the manufacturer's ad agency and package designer?

Who pays the bonus? Let's say the shampoo costs $2.88. Is the drugstore responsible for allocating, say, $0.14 of that and putting it into a universal "influencers' incentives" account, to be split up by some central agency? They'd certainly have to capture the data above, since nobody else can do it. What's the drugstore's incentive to do that work and share that money? Do they get a kickback too, or will there be laws requiring it? And is there a secondary layer for rewarding the influences that caused Joe to choose that drugstore to buy the product instead of some other store?

Finally, the really tough question: how do you figure out what the influences were in a purchasing decision? The obvious answer is a questionnaire, but then we're back to the "not natural" problem again. Nobody wants to fill out a form for a $3 purchase.

For out-of-the-box solutions, the only thing I can think of is telepathy, and even if that were possible I'm pretty sure I don't want the part-time register girl at the corner Walgreen's reading my mind.

(And yeah, I know you're almost certainly going to say "I'm just brainstorming here." So am I. I think a lot more needs to be developed on this before you can even call it an idea. There might be a fine idea somewhere deeper in this, but what I'm reading on the surface is a wish.)

[jeffoest]

*deleted*

[jeffoest]

[quote=SFEley](And yeah, I know you're almost certainly going to say "I'm just brainstorming here." So am I. I think a lot more needs to be developed on this before you can even call it an idea. There might be a fine idea somewhere deeper in this, but what I'm reading on the surface is a wish.)

That's a strange response. So I should not have written the above since it's not flushed out? Are you saying there is no value in my morning thought because you are not creative enough (like me) to think outside the box we live in today? Are you saying that someone smarter than us could never take a fraction of this and create more thought and build from it?

Do I have to not only throw out concepts based on the world around me AND develop them in the confines of today's practical processes to please you?

:-)

Blame ME for your lack of imagination or insight? C'mon. Please...

[smjacob]

I find some potential in the idea itself but I don't think theres an actual market right now. And I'm referring only to audio ads not to the visual ones (which already have an effect on web users). Considering recent developments in IT I agree that this is one way for the future publicity but right now I don't see an implementation as being viable. Think of a site with a podcast about a pharmacy online (https://www.planetdrugsdirect.com/) company. Well once I personally would have entered I would make everything for the commercial to stop. And I will definitely wouldn't push Play.

[myles]

Good effort Jeff, hope your idea will prevail in the market soon.

[WyethDigital]

Wow. Old discussion, old problem. And still one that's not been solved. Leaving behind the mechanics of Jeff's idea, I had a thought about it, too.

Taking Jeff's example of the Mommycast (http://www.mommycast.com/), and how sponsorship has now made their recommendations less effective because they're getting paid to recommend a specific brand, I would be curious how getting paid in any capacity to recommend products would be as effective as spontaneous, unpaid endorsements of products?

It's kind of like that classic gag on Futurama where the Professor, at a horse race, laments the decision of a "quantum finish" by exclaiming "No fair! You changed the outcome by observing it!" In other, less obscure words, just by knowing that you'll get paid to endorse a product (any product), you are going to make your motivations suspect to a segment of your audience (how much of that audience is up for debate, IMO). For example, you may, just for the paycheck, endorse products when you've never done it before, thus making your podcast sound like a Paul Harvey "news" report. Or worse. Now that's something I know would drive people nuts!

Now, I'm not saying Jeff's idea is off-the-wall crazy. Not be any means! In fact, I've recently been aware of a growing trend among product marketers to try and take advantage of just such endorsements. To give a personal example, we were recently asked if we used a certain product in our cosmetics-themed shows; and if we did, would we allow the company to put our video on the front page of their site? They would be happy to send us a discount code no matter what our decision. Of course, we told them no (not for free). Not because we don't like their product, but because we value ours. Video, and to a lesser extent, audio podcasts are costly to make. And running a full out ad for them in our show for a discount code on their website is undervaluing the message and the messenger.

The problem isn't that Jeff's idea isn't happening; it is! The problem is that it's the product marketers that have all the control and the independent producer isn't getting offered fair compensation. I think Jeff's right. We need a mechanism to put some control back into our hands.

Eric