This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Find out more here.

About this blog

M&M’s Blog goes behind the headlines to offer a running commentary on the business dynamics within the international media and marketing industry. The M&M editorial team joins forces with industry experts and local market heroes to balance a bird’s eye view of global trends with the importance of local insight.

RSS feed Subscribe to blog feed

  • Five top tips for optimising international SEO

    28 November 2011

    Search Engine Optimisation (SEO) strategy for international brands can be a minefield. Without strategic, careful planning, brands can quickly find themselves exponentially overwhelmed. Multiple languages, multiple websites, multiple website platforms and even multiple alphabets conspire to make SEO across borders a difficult proposition. Consider these best practices for international SEO:

    Favour strategies that span borders

    If your strategy works without having to be tailored by market, that’s great! For instance, if you are working to improve visibility in several countries, and each country’s site is built on the same platform, look to optimise that platform first. For example, is it possible to improve overall site speed? Serving page resources from multiple hostnames would mean browsers downloading resources in parallel, boosting the speed of your sites significantly – with only one global change rather than a change per market.

    Ensure your SEO strategies are easy to understand

    International SEO typically includes more stakeholders, which can lead to confusion. Individual territories will have their own marketing managers with differing levels of SEO understanding. It is imperative to work with your SEO agency to communicate brand strategy with consistency and clarity. Distil plans into simple concepts that anyone in your organisation can understand.

    Produce Immediate Results

    Implementing SEO in several markets at once usually leads to roadblocks that hinder immediate results. If there is an opportunity to make an instant impact – take it! Bulk upload of stores to Google Places is a great example. It pretty much guarantees visibility on the SERPs for relevant geographical keywords in return for a bit of excel formatting with the brand’s store details.

    Minimise Local Resources

    Set a central strategy with your marketing team and SEO agency, and then ask team members in local markets to implement the strategies that directly apply to and benefit their market. Work with your SEO agency to prioritise work that can benefit your company's local people and then create standardized, repeatable processes to ensure local teams will do work that is applicable to them.

    Establish Brand / Agency relationships

    Introduce your SEO agency to appropriate teams within your company. Set ground rules, build trust, then cultivate a partnership so as programs develop and time constraints arise, the agency can go straight to the source for increased efficiency. This also enables you to focus on the big picture and keeps the minutiae to the relevant people in your organisation and agency.

    Richard Kirk is head of SEO strategy for Publicis Groupe’s Performics

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Bloggers' Gallery

    Tags: Online, Search

  • Euro mobile ad market: infographic

    28 November 2011

    The fabulous people at the independent mobile advertising network InMobi have just published their Mobile Insights Report: European Edition, Quarter Ending October 2011. Highlights include the fact that Android is the top operating system for the fourth consecutive quarter and that despite losing some ground recently Apple is climbing back with its iOS growing from 14.2% to 14.7% share.

    Rather than me boring you with more numbers, here is a fun infographic instead!

    Inmobi infographic

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Martina Lacey

  • No memory of what the ad showed? Perhaps the audience blinked!

    24 November 2011

    One of the consistent findings from ad pre-testing and tracking research is that bits of ads go missing from people’s memories. A key reason for this finding is that our brains can’t deal with too many concepts at one time. I am not just speaking for myself, there is plenty of evidence that our conscious work space is limited, and things that don’t make it to our conscious attention, get forgotten.

    So how does this memory loss happen? It all has to do with how our brains work. Our brains are incredibly good at focusing our conscious attention on things that are emotionally charged and relevant to us, and ignoring everything else.

    Think of the “cocktail party” effect, where we can suddenly hear our name being mentioned across a crowded room, even though we were not previously conscious of that specific conversation taking place. The use of our name – something emotionally charged and relevant to an individual – implies the conversation could be important to us so our conscious attention is drawn to it.

    The downside of the “cocktail party” effect, is that the conversation we were having with the person next to us, gets ignored for as long as our attention is distracted. A few seconds later, we suddenly realize we have no clue what the other person was saying to us.

    The same sort of effect takes place in video ads. Our attention gets directed to interesting and enjoyable aspects of the ad – the emotionally charged and relevant bits – and that distracts our attention from other elements. No attention, essentially means no memory.

    A related problem is that the brain takes time to create a conscious understanding of something (about half a second). As outlined in the Page and Raymond paper, this “attentional blink” happens when the brain needs time to form a representation of what it is seeing.

    Rather than me explain the attentional blink here, please watch this explanation by Dominic Twose, our Global Head of Knowledge Management. It is well worth a few seconds of your time.

    ;

     

    Dom demonstrates just how easily our attention can be diverted (although he tells me it took months to learn the trick itself).

    Now think about all the elements competing for our attention in the typical TV commercial. Every element on screen is a potential focus for attention. And think about how quickly scenes get presented. Every change in a scene risks an attentional blink.

    Is it any wonder that some content never gets noticed? And if it is not noticed, it won’t be remembered. That is not a problem if it is an inconsequential scene, but what if that scene is important to the overall impression of the ad, or worse still, the brand itself? If the impression is not linked to the brand in people’s memories, it is not going to have any effect on attitudes or behavior.

    Do you have examples of the cocktail party effect or attentional blink you can share?

     

    This blog post was spotted on Straight Talk with Nigel Hollis

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Nigel Hollis

    Tags: Advertising

  • R.I.P HMV

    24 November 2011

    When I was younger I used to love going to HMV to buy a CD and add it to what was a very impressive CD collection, if I do say so myself.

    However, like the rest of the world I have moved on from buying a physical copy of the new Pixie Lott album (which is amazing by the way) and I am instead listening to it on Spotify, possibly purchasing it on iTunes or god forbid downloading it illegally!

    HMV has been one of the many victims of the digital evolution and has been desperately looking for ways to change its model to still be relevant to consumers. One of its earlier strategies was to focus on selling headphones and concert tickets and relying less on selling actual music. Admittedly I do buy my overpriced headphones at HMV, but is this the brands salvation? I don’t think so.

    Today HMV announced round two of its resuscitation. It is teaming up in the UK with video-on-demand (VOD) movie rental provider FilmFlex Movies to launch its Hmvon-demand movie service, which sounds promising on the surface due to the fact VOD is a major buzz category at the moment, but when you look under the hood it is all just a little unfortunate.

    The new service is only available via the web on the PC with future plans to extend the service to a range of digital devices. HMV, this IS the future and you should be offering those services now. Do you think that people are walking around with phones the size of bricks because they need to see bigger numbers when they make a call? No, they are consuming media and launching this service with PC-only capabilities is a fail.

    Did I forget to mention that there are also plans to EVENTUALLY offer download-to-own and cloud-based services?

    Who wants to help me get a head start on writing HMV’s obituary?

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Martina Lacey

    Tags: Online

  • We wish you a ‘connected’ Christmas

    16 November 2011

    Recent research has predicted that this year’s online Christmas shopping is to reach a record £7.75bn ($12.3bn) over five weeks. That consumers are spending so much online isn’t surprising. Not only are they escaping the crush of people fighting for last minute bargains on the high-street, but the online user experience has become a richer and more interactive journey. As we enter the age of the “internet of things” when almost any device or surface can have an internet connection and video can be displayed almost anywhere, how will our Christmas experiences change?

    The report by IMRG Capgemini “forecast that online sales will be up 14% year-on-year for the five weeks from November 28, with nearly half the amount expected to be spent in the first two weeks.” It also claims that mobile will become a more popular way of shopping and Chris Webster, vice president of head of retail and consumer products at Capgemini said the amount spent via online shopping was due to “both need and convenience.” That consumers “hunt down the best bargains online to get the most out of our Christmas budget, but also because we can, easily and conveniently.”

     

    New devices and platforms such as mobiles are increasingly driving on-the-go shopping (79% of smartphone owners use their devices to aid in shopping and 74% make a purchase according to Google in April 2011), and means the shopping experience has become a multichannel journey. Online video has played a significant role in this as retailers like ASOS, net-a-porter and Marks & Spencer have used video to enhance the customer’s experience. From how-to videos with instructional demos on how to apply make-up or tie a bow-tie, to product videos that show how clothing moves and feels on the model. Static images have never been able to showcase the detail and quality that video can.

     

    But times are changing. Cisco has claimed that by 2015, 1 million of minutes of video will cross the internet every second and by 2020 there will be 50bn connected devices in homes around the world. So how will consumers interact with this new internet? And how will the Christmas shopping experience change?

     

    This year brands such as M&S, John Lewis, Morrisons and Boots have created Christmas campaigns full of beautifully wrapped presents, celebrities and delicious food.  While nowadays customers enjoy these campaigns, take note of the products on their Christmas list or browse via tablet, laptop or smartphone, the connected TV could create a very ubiquitous Christmas in the future.  It has the ability to connect a broadcaster’s audience to a brands product page, embed social media conversations around a recipe and allow you to play a game-show that rewards you with QR code discount vouchers – all from the comfort of one screen.

     

     

    It’s not surprising to see such a high figure from the Capgemini report, but it will be interesting to see how connected TVs enhance the online shopping journey. Much has yet to be decided when it comes to content on connected TVs; how will audiences navigate around the content? How will they find it? How will they make purchases? While these questions create uncertainty for the TV ad industry, it should create a sigh of relief for customers around the country fighting Christmas crowds on the high street.

     

    By Chris Gorell Barnes, chief executive, Adjust Your Set

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Bloggers' Gallery

    Tags: Connected TV, Online

  • Does the internet really suck as a branding medium?

    15 November 2011

    Alan Pearlstein, recently posted a provocative statement in an AdAge article titled, “When Will Brand Dollars Move Online? Maybe Never.” He stated:

    It's time to face the reality that the Internet sucks as a branding medium.

    I find myself somewhat conflicted by the sweeping nature of Alan’s assertion, even if I do sympathize with his viewpoint. The thrust of Alan’s argument is that the Internet is an archetypal direct marketing medium, and it should be valued as such. Different media, he proposes, have different strengths and should play to them.

    But one of the problems with the Internet - as I have observed before - is that it is not just one medium. It is the counterpart to many different traditional channels. While I totally agree that in today’s world the brand building power of display ads is typically small, I do not believe the same is true of online videos.

    But that point apart, I find it hard to argue with Alan’s proposition that TV is a far better brand building medium. But it is not just because TV commercials evoke an emotional response from their audience. After all, online ads evoke an emotional response as well, even if the emotion is the frustration you feel when you get a pop-up instead of the page you asked for. Nor do I believe it is impossible to evoke a positive response to a display ad. Dynamic Logic’s database shows some ads to be very effective. But it may be more difficult to evoke a true emotional response online simply because of the way the medium is consumed and processed by its audience.

     

    The thing that makes the Internet such a great direct response medium – with the exception of some video content – is its “lean forward’ nature. The audience is actively engaged with the content and is consciously searching for items of interest. As a result, not only do people find it easy to ignore irrelevant content, they consciously process the content that they do find relevant. If something is of interest, they can take as much time as they like to make sense of it and figure out how it might apply to them. Their instinctive emotional response tends to get subsumed as people consciously engage with the content.

    By contrast, TV is a lean back medium. Typically people sit back and follow along with the content and consume it passively. Their attention is directed to anything that promises to be interesting, engaging or enjoyable. Content is not processed semantically, but episodically as a series of images, ideas and feelings that is rarely thought about at the time of viewing.

    This is a tremendous advantage for the brand marketer, because entertaining and engaging content is viewed, even for brands in which the viewer has no current interest. That makes TV a great medium for seeding ideas and feelings which come to fruition at a later date when people actively think about the brand, when researching or shopping.

    On balance, I find Alan’s proposal that “the Internet sucks as a branding medium,” to be overstated. Sure, it works better as a direct response medium, but only on average and only in some forms, e.g. display ads. Online video behaves more like TV and that makes it a powerful brand building channel.

    So what do you think? Is Alan right?

     

    This post was spotted on Straight talk with Nigel Hollis

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Nigel Hollis

    Tags: Digital, Branding

  • Why are major US brands increasing their spend on TV?

    10 November 2011

    For years we have heard how TV’s power is being eroded by digital video recorders (DVRs) and alternative digital media. So how come The Association of National Advertisers (ANA) reports that 47 percent of major U.S. brand owners have increased their TV advertising budgets in the last two years?

    I continue to believe that TV is unique in its ability to combine the compelling nature of video with broad reach. And it seems like I might not be alone.

    Quoted in the ANA’s press release, Bill Duggan, Group Executive Vice President of the ANA states:

    There was much chatter in the past about the television medium and 30 second spot being dead, but this survey has shown that TV advertising is very much alive - perhaps even more so than in the past. Even with the risk of competition from other media platforms and the use of DVRs, there are still many opportunities for marketers to optimize TV into their marketing mix.

    As my colleague, Dede Fitch, points out in her latest POV, DVRs have definitely not had the disastrous impact on TV viewing that was expected five years ago (and I take some pleasure in having said so then). In part, this is because fast forwarding through a commercial pod requires you to attend to the screen far more diligently than you would while watching normally.

    But there is another more important reason. Like Dede, I think the proportion of time shifters and commercial zappers is far higher among the advertising and market research industry than the remainder of the population. Most people watch TV in order to sit back, relax and be entertained. If nothing else, they have to find the remote before they can zap the commercials.

    Digital Video Recorders

    This raises another question about the supposed demise of TV. Are alternative digital channels really a threat? Dede suggests that rather than worry about DVRs, advertisers should be more concerned about smart phones and tablets providing even more distraction to the viewing experience.

    She may well be right, but I can’t help feeling that good old fashioned laziness is going to keep most people in couch potato mode. And besides, if these devices help promote a more social viewing experience then it can only be a good thing for broadcasters and advertisers alike. That’s why Twitter’s announcement that its users will be able to vote for contestants in The X Factor is so interesting.

    So yes, there are threats to TV’s supremacy out there, but I think they are overstated. I think TV plays very well to a major proportion of the viewing audience who just want to chill out and be entertained.

    On that count, Hulu and Netflix might be a bigger threat than social media, but I think the biggest challenge is the need for broadcasters to provide compelling and interesting content. And the same applies to advertisers. If you want people to watch your ad on TV, there is no substitute for a compelling piece of creative: something gripping, something enthralling or something funny, or something so engaging people not only want to watch it again, they want to tell their friends about it too.

    So what do you think? Is TV going to take the majority of ad dollars for the foreseeable future? What alternatives will challenge its position?

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Nigel Hollis

    Tags: TV, Ad Spend

  • Social media engagement strategies – are brands getting it wrong?

    10 November 2011

    Research released today by TNS has revealed that 61% of UK consumers do not want to engage with brands via social media. This figure is 1% higher than in the USA and 3% more than the average for a developed country. Britons are challenging marketers to raise their game. At the same time, consumers are becoming increasingly demanding and in order to stay ahead of the competition, businesses need to carefully consider their engagement strategies.

    The internet is the greatest relationship tool in history, yet businesses haven’t yet created a working relationship model. Brands therefore need to become social, creating relevant, exciting content and fostering successful relationships. When a brand understands consumer preferences, everybody can profit from social transactions.

    The explosion of social media has seen a huge development in customer engagement. Every big brand nowadays has a corporate Facebook and Twitter account, yet many still do not understand how to properly engage with their audience. Social media is an ideal platform for brands to create online presence, but only if it is used properly to build ongoing conversations. Users are looking for real value exchanges, complete with rewards, rather than a dull offering. While social networks have opened up conversation between brands and users, it is clear that these conversations are not yet having a positive impact on consumers.

    While many may consider the survey as proof that Britons are less susceptible to online marketing, this is not the case. Rather, Britons are looking for real engagement, as opposed to being bombarded with marketing messages. In today’s digital world, marketers have the opportunity to target customers via multichannel platforms and to send messages to them wherever they are. However, this easy access to customers has led to messaging which focuses on quantity rather than quality. Brand messages must always be valuable if they are going to result in conversions and purchases. While brands have been quick to jump online, it seems that many haven’t considered the messages that they want to convey.

    Social media should focus on the consumer rather than the brand, providing a place where customers can express their opinions and tell businesses what they want. The results highlight the amount of digital waste within the marketing world. Lots of brands are making noise which does not necessarily engage their customers in interesting or exciting conversation. The real question is – how can brands stop this wastage and approach the 61% in a way that will encourage them to interact on a deeper level?

    Brands will have to work diligently to turn this sentiment around, creating valuable social experiences for customers, whether that is through the use of game theory and rewards, or using more subtle techniques. In order for social engagement to work, brands need to offer both rewards and a fun, valuable experience. Customers need to be able to take something away from the experience. This is why game mechanics are so effective; competitive elements and fun drive engagement and capture attention. A social business engine thus becomes necessary, to manage these relationships effectively.

    2011 was the year that brands leapt aboard the social media bandwagon: 2012 should be the year that these brands re-evaluate their social strategies to encourage deeper and more effective engagement.

    Jonathan Lakin, chief executive, Global Dawn

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Bloggers' Gallery

    Tags: Social Media

  • What Google+ Pages mean for marketers

    09 November 2011

    Google + launched at the start of the year and is Google’s best effort to date to break the social networking headlock that Facebook has applied so expertly in recent years. Leveraging the huge user base of Google accounts for services such as Gmail and Picasa, Google + has over 40 million registered users and it has grown faster than both Twitter and Facebook.

    Up until last night the platform was only available to individual users with a Google account – however, the introduction of Pages for businesses, brands and places will increase the amount of consumer centric content and we should expect to see awareness increase further over the coming weeks. You can read more about Google + Pages here and here.

    The key differences that we can see at the moment between profile pages and business pages are:

    Pages can’t add people to circles until the page is added first or mentioned
    The default privacy setting on your page profile is public (so be careful with those office party pictures!)
    Pages have the +1 button
    Pages can’t +1 other pages, or other stuff on the Web
    Pages don’t receive notifications via email, text, or in the Google bar.
    Pages can’t use the Hangout (video chat functionality) on mobile.
    Local pages have special fields that help people find the business’ physical location.

    As we understand it, everyone should now have access to be able to create their business or brand page which can fit into the following five categories:

    Local Business or Place
    Product or Brand
    Company, Institution or Organisation
    Arts, Entertainment or Sports
    Other

    For local business that have already claimed their Google Places, there is currently no way of connecting the two as Google want to keep Places tied to Google Maps and local search while the Pages functionality will focus on keeping customers or fans engaged.

    What this means for Social Media Marketers:

    It’s going to be very similar to running a Facebook brand page. You access your page through a personal account but you’ll have the ability to choose whether you want to act as yourself or the business page.

    You can do many of the same things that a personal account can do, including:

    Share photos
    Share videos
    Share links
    Conduct Hangouts– this is a feature which we think could be a real USP for Google + Pages over the other major social networks, as brands can conduct ‘How To’s’ or ‘face to face’ videos with customers or Fans. The Muppets + Page have already posted a Hangout with Kermit and Miss Piggy (unfortunately we missed it but will be there for the next one).

    Pages can follow people, but not until they’ve first been followed. This is a welcome development to the way Twitter currently operates, where business accounts follow a load of people in the hope of getting a follow-back. With Google +, you will need to earn the follow.

    Apparently it’s cool for a business to have multiple Google+ pages. So if you are a company with multiple brands, that’s certainly a bonus – but only if you have a good reason for each entity to have its own dedicated page.

    There’s likely to be Google+ API release in the future so expect a wave of development to be done with that in the form of apps, similar to what we’ve seen with Facebook.

    What this means for SEO Marketers:

    The launch of Pages is going to have an impact on SEO as not only are these going to be included in the Search results (as yet unclear exactly where) but how people interact and share with the + pages is likely to be fed back and used in the calculation of the Search results.

    Google is encouraging business and people to connect (and it wants that data), so it is important not only to set up your business profile but engage with your customers through this channel. This will have obvious benefits for users and customers but will also feed positive data to Google to help improve your position in the Search results.

    As well as this you are able to search directly for a Brand or business by entering the ‘+Site’ query – for example +Pepsi

    What this means for PPC and Display Marketers:

    The Google+ Page will serve as both the social hub connecting all aspects of a brand’s presence across the Google network. Google’s +1 has been spreading across the web for months and brands will now be able to connect the dots via these pages.

    We think Google+ will have an impact on the targeting and delivery of both PPC & display on Google as user adoption rises. Marketers who leverage the +1 button may see benefits through visibility, relevancy and targeting and performance.

    That’s our 2 cents worth for the moment. If you are a current I Spy client then expect a call very soon to discuss this further and

    You can check out the I Spy Page here. It will get more interesting soon (don’t worry!).

    Ed Hartigan, Crowd Control account director, I Spy Marketing

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Bloggers' Gallery

    Tags: Social Media, Google

  • People do actually buy products

    03 November 2011

    People buy products 

    Reading this week’s news around Yahoo! purchasing Interclick is simply another example of the dynamically changing online advertising technology marketplace.  Not a day seems to go by without some sort of announcement, many of them around new technology solutions to help drive relevance, effectiveness, targeting, insight or all of the above.

    As a result, the whole world of targeting has become ever more complex. Whether it’s audience-based or behavioural, geographical, contextual, demographic, lifestyle, remarketing, what seems often lost is the fundamental fact: targeting is about reaching people. At the end of the day, it’s people who actually spend money and buy things – not locations, characteristics, cookies, sites, sections or technologies.

    One thing I’ve noticed is that targeting seems increasingly driven by ‘audience profiles’ like ‘image conscious’, ‘risk taker’, or ‘adventure seekers’ which help paint a mental picture but are impossible to transfer into actionable targeting.

    In a similar manner, criteria that may at first appear relevant (e.g.  product X appeals to males 45-60) actually can limit potential. If a female in the 25-35 age bracket is interested in the same product, she’ll never be reached with the advertising as she does not fit the criteria.

    By starting with ‘people’ – that is, those who are potentially interested in buying your product – you then can look for the right audience, irrespective of if they are male, female, young, old, cautious or risk takers. If you can find those whose online activities suggest a real interested in finding out more about a particular product,  or even they are in buying window for it, then surely these are the people you want to reach? It’s fundamental but something that seems to be all too often forgotten.

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Stuart Colman

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. Next page