Also file this under viral video too….
This morning as I was laying in bed deciding if I should get up. I start thinking of the strangest of things. One of them being direct response marketing, which is built on the premise that the customer is required or prompted for an immediate response. Of course it comes in many forms. “Act now”,… call this 800 number within the next…”order now and we’ll also add…”. You all get the point.
So my thoughts were, can there be a business model that ties in social media to direct marketing? I immediately went and Googled, “direct response marketing and social media”, and the results look like this:
Thats great, the results show 3 links with stars that point back to Emerson Direct sites. Apparently we are one of the few companies actually engaged in thinking and writing and actually trying to meld the 2 disciplines into a viable working business model that clients and companies can utilize in driving traffic, sales, and eyeballs to their products and services.
Ok so here’s the deal. I looked at the first result on the page and the original article came from Hollis Thomases at Clicks, the article Social Media Advertising: No Direct Response Proposition asserts that because of the ROI driven impatient nature of most DR marketers, the social media marketing model does not work. A valid point given the amount of time it takes to establish and grow any social network. But is it really? Or is that just a knee jerk reaction? Given the explosive growth and the phenomenal nature of social networks, my question would be, Why wouldn’t you want to go after targeted traffic congregating in one place? Isn’t that the challenge? To find that traffic, that demographic, so that you can market to it?
Hollis states that:
The problem with reconciling direct response (DR) advertising and social media is that to most advertisers, it’s all about a mathematical equation. If the numbers don’t work, they see the campaign as a failure. This mentality just doesn’t jibe with how social media ad campaigns succeed. Social media is about nurturing. In fact, the process is really more marketing than advertising, period. So unless the DR marketer is comfortable with the “D” standing for “delayed,” channel your ad dollars elsewhere.
I can again, partially agree with that but… Here are some questions that marketers and advertisers can ask themselves:
1) Why can’t Youtube, Flickr, and any type of VOD(video on demand) be a vehicle for a DRTV type of marketing? There are already a ton of advertisers taking advantage of viral videos. What do you see in the first 10-20 seconds of a lot of the video you see? A quick spot. What about URL’s watermarked on the bottom of videos? Why or what is stopping a DR marketer from tryinig to piggyback or create a DR spot that is used only in a Youtube type format? has it been done? I’m not sure. But I’m going to venture to say yes it has. Perhaps because of the fear of a low ROI or the time it takes for some of these social media sites to evolve it has driven marketers into a position of paralysis by analysis?
Isn’t a viral video a type of DRTV? Think about it, it spread so rapidly because the RESPONSE is so instant! The same holds true for direct mail for example. Isn’t a viral email the same as direct response mail? Your response to the email is direct, immediate and viral. Your attention is captivated and you must act. And what do you do? You send it to your favorites, the people that are most like you. Targeted, immediate and impressionable.
So the question remains: Can you or do you build relationships, which is the basis of social media in favor of a direct and immediate reponse? Or is there a happy medium? The only way for DR marketers to find out is to try. Sure it’s easy to say it doesn’t work and to fall back on what you know, but why would you ignore one of the most amazing technological advances to come along since Google?
Here are 3 great examples of viral videos. The viral elements are so apparent when using these 3 videos as examples of viral marketing. In short order, they can all scale quickly, which means that the viral growth is exponential, i.e. it can spread quickly. The sharing of the link or the video is effortless, and lastly it’s humorous/touching/strikes a nerve. The first video has been viewed over 900,000 times. Which is a pretty solid number.
Now 900,000 for a viral video might seem like a large number but if we look at the numbers associated with Jimmy Kimmels F@cking Ben Affleck Response to Matt and Sarah video, you’ll begin to re-think what is construed as a viral video.
Currently that Jimmy Kimmel video has been seen almost 9 million times. That’s right, 9 million times. I would suspect that the Hey Jude video will eventually spike pretty high. But as you can see, the power possessed by a truly viral video can reach far and why and travel quicker than a tornado warning. Now admit it, right now you are thinking of sharing this post with someone who might appreciate it? It’s not hard to do, you merely send the link and off it goes. Quick, efficient and no sweat for you. Viral.
To finish off this post, here is the viral video that prompted Jimmy Kimmel’s response video. The Sarah Silverman-Matt Damon Video has been seen by almost 13 million people and blogged about over 1900 times. Make that 1901 times.