MLB, not McGwire, should get most of the blame for the steroid era

Today, a not-so-shocking confession came out that Mark McGwire used steroids off and on throughout his career. He confessed that he used steroids in 1998, when he hit 70 home runs, which shattering Roger Maris’ decades-old record.

Pundits, sportswriters, and columnists throughout the country have been discussing this confession. Some say it was time for McGwire to come clean; others that McGwire started the “Steroid Era.” But I haven’t seen any writer actually discuss the circumstances around it.

1994 was the year that Major League Baseball decided that the rich owners and the rich players weren’t rich enough, so they decided to ruin baseball for everyone. The work stoppage started on August 12, 1994, and forced the cancellation of the remainder of the 1994 season and the postseason. MLB was the first sport to lose an entire postseason due to a labor dispute. Afterwards, people were angry. Fans in Cincinnati paid for an airplane to tow a sign reading “Owners & Players: To hell with all of you!” Attendance and TV ratings fell dramatically. Some teams, like the Montreal Expos, never recovered.

Then came Mark McGwire.

In 1998, McGwire started hitting home runs. And hitting more home runs. Then a little known player on the Chicago Cubs, Sammy Sosa, started hitting home runs too. Soon they were both on pace to beat Maris’s record. And soon, they whole country was following the home run race, and forgetting that they had sworn on a stack of bibles never to attend another MLB game again. When McGwire smacked number 62, he circled the basepaths, then hugged Roger Maris’s family in the stands. TV shows cut away to the scene. America loved baseball again. All was forgiven.

A few years later, we begin to suspect that that year might be tainted. Soon, confessions of steroid use–and names of other users–come to light. At first, the confessors are laughed at; soon, however, their stories are found to hold water. But America doesn’t get angry. Some of us don’t want to believe that the players were juiced. Some of us tried to justify it, saying that the players are simply entertainers, and the steroid-fueled entertainment bring in the big bucks. But enough people were angry about it that Barry Bonds eclipsing Hank Aaron’s career record of 755 home runs was not celebrated like McGwire’s record; indeed, many people booed Bonds during his travels. But the fans kept coming, people kept their TVs on the game, and the revenues kept pouring in.

McGwire may have been the first, but he still saved baseball, and baseball owes him–not just for those 70 home runs, but for being a sacrificial lamb. Did MLB know the McGwire/Sosa roided-up race would be the start of an era marked by cheating and deception?

Did MLB care?

Advertising above the fray

One of the biggest problems with advertising today is that there is so much of it. There are so many print ads that everyone ignores them. There are so many banner ads that everyone blocks them. There are so many TV commercials that everyone fast-forwards through them.

But today, January 6, Google rose above the loud, graphics-driven advertising fray. Google advertised their new phone, the NexusOne, on the Google home page, with a single line of text and a really tiny picture of the phone.

The NexusOne has received its own share of press in the last few weeks, with some people saying it’s going to be the biggest story of the Consumer Electronics Show (even though Google won’t be at the show). But the line of advertising–which essentially cost Google nothing–has also been written about on media sites and on, um, marketing blogs.

Google gets about 450 million page views a day, and for its very minimal investment, Google has put the name of its phone in front of over 100 million people. In one day. (Plus, marketing geeks like me are writing articles about it.)

When a company like Google can reach 100 million people in their target audience in a place people don’t expect to see an ad, that is much more effective than a traditional ad. Marketing above the fray was the source of an interesting book by Mark Hughes called “Buzzmarketing: Get People To Talk About Your Stuff” When your product gets discussed in the media, that’s good. When your ads get discussed in the media, that’s great. And when the medium of advertising gets discussed in the media, people start talking about your “stuff” in ways that make your brand noticed.

That’s part of the reason that Google is trading above 600.

The money comes from GM, the beneficiary is Lexus

Here’s a picture of a billboard advertising the new Buick Lacrosse, which sets Lexus in its sights.

This ad in on a billboard on my way to work and my kids’ school, so I see it approximately a jillion times a month. I have a HUUUGE problem with this ad on several levels.

1) It looks like a Lexus ad. People are driving past this ad and seeing it out of the corner of their eyes. I didn’t realize–until I was a passenger stuck in traffic in front of this billboard–that this was an ad for a Buick Lacrosse, not a Lexus. I had passed it at least 30 or 40 times. The design is tragically flawed: the word “Lexus” is placed prominently above the car’s photo. The car’s name, “Buick Lacrosse,” is at the bottom right, which is the last place the eye travels–and usually doesn’t get there when the billboard is zipping by at 65 miles per hour. The name placement is especially problematic because it’s so easy to be covered up by nearby signs and foliage. GM spent millions on a campaign that looks like a Lexus ad–and reinforces the Lexus message.

2) It requires the viewer to work too hard to get the point. First, one must have knowledge of Lexus’ marketing campaign. Unless you know that Lexus’ tagline is “the relentless pursuit of perfection,” the ad makes no sense. Secondly, one must fill in all the blanks: Lexus relentlessly pursues perfection; the “something” referred to in the ad copy is the Buick Lacrosse; therefore, the Buick Lacrosse is perfection, and Lexus is relentlessly pursuing it because Lexus wants to be as good as the Buick Lacrosse. Whew.

No one is going to work that hard driving by a billboard.

Not only that, but the viewer must think about Lexus’ tagline in order to understand the ad. From a branding perspective, you NEVER want to reinforce the competition’s message in your own advertising. Go where the competition isn’t — that’s why Pepsi is blue and Coke is red.

3) I was going to write that the message of the billboard is totally disingenuous. Really? Lexus relentlessly pursues the “perfection” of the Buick Lacrosse? But then I did some research, and it turns out that the Lacrosse is pretty competitive with the Lexus ES 350, and about $2,500 less. But when I (finally) understood the billboard, I thought that there was no way a Lacrosse could compete with the Lexus. Motor Trend even rates the Lacrosse a full star higher than the ES 350. (Really.)

So what could make this ad campaign more effective? If it were me designing the ad, I’d go for less cutesy and more straightforward. “Buick Lacrosse beats Lexus — for thousands less.” (I might even throw in a “Really.”) It’s not very sexy ad copy, but it might work flying by at 65.

Making Video Social

Here’s the edited transcript of last night’s Sacramento Social Media Club’s “Making Video Social.” I was livetweeting it. It was a great event, and I enjoyed meeting everyone!

@ronnieledesma We’re about to get started… @SMCSac presents “Making Video Social” Live video feed: http://ustre.am/2IWb #smcsac -7:03 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac What a boisterous crowd for Making Video Social. I think one of the presenters might crowdsurf later. #smcsac -7:05 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Good evening, all! I’m Paul Ardoin, and I’ll be livetweeting SMC Sac’s “Making Video Social.” We’re about to begin! #smcsac -7:07 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac As a company, what can you do with video? EA Sports’ “Jesus Shot” vid for Tiger Woods 08 created big buzz. #smcsac -7:12 PM Jun 16th, 2009

Zsavonne #smcsac Just learned a cool use of video called the “Jesus Shot” w/Tiger Woods and EA Sports.http://bit.ly/mv2Yo -7:14 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Wil Wells [@WilWells] from The Pear Lab [@thepearlab] presenting on amateur video for social media. He likes Chicken Tikka Masala, HTML 5, and Modo 4.1. #smcsac -7:15 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Wells: Good ideas and humor trump high-quality video. Basics to follow. #smcsac -7:17 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Wells: only necessary equipment: your computer, a video camera, and your brain. #smcsac -7:17 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Wells: New 720p HD flip camera can even shoot good green screen footage on tripod for under $250 #smcsac -7:19 PM Jun 16th, 2009

ronnieledesma The Flip auto uploads to YouTube and gives you 60 min of HD Video. #smcsac -7:19 PM Jun 16th, 2009

jennykoreny Wil Wells – The Pear Lab opening likes Indian food HTML5, using the word epic & this man ok I’m listening #smcsac http://twitpic.com/7laza -7:21 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Video is obviously compelling: everyone wanted Wells to keep playing the sample video. (Well, it *was* a vid about mullets.) #smcsac -7:21 PM Jun 16th, 2009

ronnieledesma Three things you need: 1. Equipment. Showed us his Flip camera. 2. Software: iMovie or Windows Movie Maker. 3… #smcsac -7:22 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Wells: HD/720p gives you more flexibility for color correction #smcsac -7:22 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Wells: No. 2: Software — Mac & PC are both fine for good-enough quality social media video. #smcsac -7:23 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Wells: The easier your equip & s/w is to use, the more video you will capture (& better quality, more creative, etc it will be) #smcsac -7:23 PM Jun 16th, 2009

ronnieledesma 3rd thing you need for amateur video: Uploading! YouTube or vimeo. Check them out. #smcsac -7:26 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Wells: Online video is good b/c people want instant gratification — on their terms. #smcsac -7:28 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Wells: If a picture’s worth 1000 words, how many words is 30 frames per second worth? #smcsac -7:29 PM Jun 16th, 2009

jennykoreny Looks are almost everything… HD’s quality can add credibility to your video podcast #smcsac -7:29 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Wells: Online video can establish you as an authority #smcsac -7:29 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Wells: Esp in this economy, making online video is easy and cheap — and no editing req’d #smcsac -7:30 PM Jun 16th, 2009

juliemarg #SMCSac green screen use aftereffects -7:32 PM Jun 16th, 2009

ronnieledesma http://twitpic.com/7lbs8 – Wil Wells of @ThePearLab talking Video 101. #smcsac -7:33 PM Jun 16th, 2009

Zsavonne #smcsac @ThePearLab recommends using vimeo over YouTube to upload video content -7:35 PM Jun 16th, 2009

briankameoka two examples using Flip type cameras (from @mediocrefilms) http://bit.ly/YrPZ and http://bit.ly/18k28D #smcsac -7:36 PM Jun 16th, 2009

paulardoin It’s pretty clear that Wil Wells makes great videos because of his talent, not because of equipment or software #smcsac -7:36 PM Jun 16th, 2009

briankameoka Those @mediocrefilms examples, one was 2 Flips, one was 1 flip, 1 Kodak Zi6 #smcsac -7:37 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Mike Henderson from 12 Horses: Creating content for specific audiences #smcsac -7:37 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Henderson: It’s easy to create video; it’s hard to create a brand. #smcsac -7:39 PM Jun 16th, 2009

briankameoka @paulardoin yeah, his stuff (Will Wells) was great #smcsac -7:39 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Henderson: Why bother with web video? B/c everyone watches video online; shows the experience of your brand. #smcsac -7:40 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Henderson: video allows consumers to become attached to your brand and then interact with your brand on their own terms. #smcsac -7:41 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Henderson: many ski resorts do bland stuff: weather report podcasts, repurposed tradeshow videos. No one wants to listen/watch that. #smcsac -7:43 PM Jun 16th, 2009

ronnieledesma Most popular video on YouTube: Evolution of Dance. People love it b/c it’s silly, it’s fun. – Mike Henderson, @Twelve Horses #smcsac -7:44 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Henderson: For ski resorts, people want to see powder footage, scenery, kids, races. (Not hi-gloss promo videos.) #smcsac -7:45 PM Jun 16th, 2009

ronnieledesma Audience member says “It’s awesome” about Evolution of Dance Video. I like: Make “awesome” video.” #smcsac -7:45 PM Jun 16th, 2009

Zsavonne #smcsac Mike Henderson with Twelve Horses says think about your brand and what your core audience would like to see when creating video -7:46 PM Jun 16th, 2009

ronnieledesma @TwelveHorses created awesome Alpine Meadows video. In one shot used a helmet cam for amazing shots. Real content. #smcsac -7:47 PM Jun 16th, 2009

ronnieledesma Find Mike Henderson of @TwelveHorses on Twitter as @mehwolfy. #smcsac -7:48 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Henderson: Know how (e.g., videographer, editor) is important. #smcsac -7:48 PM Jun 16th, 2009

jennykoreny Making video is simple, branding it is not. Authenticity is a good place to start @twelvehorses #smcsac -7:49 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Henderson: Authenticity, passion must show in social media/video, even in unexpected places #smcsac -7:49 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Henderson: And do what your competitors AREN’T doing; go where they AREN’T. (He must be a fan of Ries & Ries’ branding ideas.) #smcsac -7:50 PM Jun 16th, 2009

jennykoreny “your video isn’t working you should have a mac” “no it’s a QuickTime problem not cuz it’s a PC” battle of the platforms unfolding! #smcsac -7:52 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Q: How do videos prove return on investment? A: Hard to do ROI on any SM. #smcsac -7:52 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Henderson now showing sample videos from Nevada gov’t agency, Alpine Meadows ski resort #smcsac -7:58 PM Jun 16th, 2009

maxhansen In response to question asked here at #smcsac, to understand social media ROI, follow @kdpaine, subscr to her blog. She’s the ace. -8:00 PM Jun 16th, 2009

ronnieledesma Creative commons music from garageband.com used in videos. There’s a good tip. #smcsac -8:01 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Henderson and Wells both use GarageBand for music; royalty-free. #smcsac -8:02 PM Jun 16th, 2009

maxhansen @SMCSac I use a lot of royalty-free music from podsafemusicnetwork.com . It’s the place to find Paul and Storm and some other greats #smcsac -8:04 PM Jun 16th, 2009

briankameoka The videos that Mike Henderson showed – youtube channel is http://www.youtube.com/skialpine #smcsac -8:05 PM Jun 16th, 2009

Zsavonne #smcsac People will look at bad video, but people won’t listen to bad audio. Pay attention to the audio & don’t cut corners. -8:06 PM Jun 16th, 2009

jennykoreny @barbiep an arguement against sandwiches is occuring, apparently skiing & snowboarding is better content for video #smcsac -8:08 PM Jun 16th, 2009

ronnieledesma Fab photos from PhotographerLink coming soon of @SMCSac’s Making Video Social event. Their photos look fantastic. #smcsac -8:09 PM Jun 16th, 2009

socialone Video common sense: if no one is watching it, either content is bad or u screwed up. LOL. #smcsac -8:10 PM Jun 16th, 2009

ronnieledesma Next up: Evan Solomon of @JustinTV! #smcsac -8:14 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Solomon: What’s the *live* video use case? (As opposed to prerecorded) #smcsac -8:16 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Solomon: live video feed of ferret cage; click a button & give ferret a treat #smcsac -8:17 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Solomon: live feeds of people playing video games gets 12 million views per month #smcsac -8:18 PM Jun 16th, 2009

ronnieledesma + @justintv mixes chat with video, “letting people talk in real-time,” rather than comments which are “not social” #smcsac -8:19 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Solomon: If people feel like they can interact with/have control over content, is also powerful #smcsac -8:19 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Solomon: small businesses have a lot of organizational advantages for live video #smcsac -8:20 PM Jun 16th, 2009

jennykoreny Commenting on video is not social, but chatting in real time is powerful. #smcsac visit @justintv to see how they are doing it right -8:20 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Solomon: Live video gives people the opportunity to chat in a different environment, and share their content #smcsac -8:22 PM Jun 16th, 2009

ronnieledesma Give people dead simple ways to share your video content. – Evan Solomon, @JustinTV #smcsac -8:22 PM Jun 16th, 2009

ronnieledesma + @JustinTV provides embeds for easy of spreading/sharing video. #smcsac -8:23 PM Jun 16th, 2009

ronnieledesma ‘I’ve seen data that suggests an account with 100 followers may have greater impact than one with 1000.’ Evan of @JustinTV #smcsac -8:25 PM Jun 16th, 2009

joshdmorg @justintv making some good points about diminishing return on twitter followers @smcsac – #smcsac -8:26 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Solomon: live video gets viewers for voyeuristic reasons; bad live video is more compelling than bad recorded video #smcsac -8:27 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Solomon on ROI: If you don’t have something to measure that you think has direct impact, you have nothing to improve #smcsac -8:28 PM Jun 16th, 2009

Zsavonne Evan @justintv concerning ROI whatever you think you can measure in social media, measure it! #smcsac -8:28 PM Jun 16th, 2009

jennykoreny Users do not have defense up towards video as they do other forms of communicating online (spam, emails) b/c it’s so new #smcsac @justintv -8:30 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Solomon: live video can help companies get sponsorships & gain visibility #smcsac -8:29 PM Jun 16th, 2009

maxhansen @SMCSac Short excellent piece on SM ROI. http://tinyurl.com/ltarha #smcsac -8:32 PM Jun 16th, 2009

ronnieledesma If there’s a video pro in the audience who knows video streaming & wireless audio enough to get @SMCSac started on the cheap… #smcsac -8:33 PM Jun 16th, 2009

SMCSac Solomon: Live video is a PITA to moderate; Search is harder on live content #smcsac -8:38 PM Jun 16th, 2009

Zsavonne #smcsac Join SPRA for social media panel discussion next week, June 25. Click here for more info http://tinyurl.com/mj4wfe -8:47 PM Jun 16th, 2009

JennaLanger The #smcsac event tonight made me realize i need to start utilizing my webcam! Anything in particular I should record myself doing? -11:43 PM Jun 16th, 2009

mehwolfy #smcsac helmet cam videos: http://tr.im/oNIn, http://tr.im/oNJ4, http://tr.im/oNLH & http://tr.im/oNKo (last one ductaped to my ski pole!) -8:16 AM Jun 17th, 2009

Livetweet alert: SMC Sacramento’s “Making Video Social”

Making video social

Tomorrow, Tuesday, June 16, I will be livetweeting Social Media Club Sacramento’s “Making Video Social.” The event is live, and if you want to come in person, it’s at the Peppers.TV office in Sacramento (near Mather Field) at 7:00 PM. (Networking and snacks start at 6:30.)

The event is free — you can sign up here.

You can follow my livetweet by following me, @paulardoin. Also, I have become enamored of TweetChat.com lately. Go to TweetChat.com on Tuesday night, sign in with your Twitter username and password, then enter the room with the #smcsac hashtag. The feed updates automatically, and only sends updates with #smcsac. I’ve used TweetChat.com for a few livetweets before, and it is often the difference between tolerable and intolerable! (A few of the SMC-Sackers like HootSuite, which I haven’t used yet.)

So remember: follow the #smcsac hashtag on Tuesday night. I plan to post a lightly-edited version of the transcript here on Wednesday.

Livetweet tomorrow, learning about real men.

A real man, apparently.

I’ll be livetweeting MarketingProfs’ “How to Create Advertising Campaigns that Make Men Do What You Want” webinar at 9AM PT/noon ET. You can follow me at @paulardoin on Twitter, or register at http://mprofs.com/sem205 for the real thing. (I think it costs money to register.)

And if you’ve never met me, you might think “Why does Paul need to know this? Isn’t he a man?” And technically, yes. Yes I am. I’m even hetero. But unlike most men, I don’t like to get my hands dirty, I don’t like working outside, I scream like a little girl at horror movies, and I don’t like fishing or camping. Instead, I read The Frisky online and I can name all four Designing Women. (I do like watching sports on TV, and I hate Andrew Lloyd Webber musicals, so they let me keep my Man Card. For now.)

So I think I might actually, you know, learn something.

Twitter and Facebook are different. Treat them differently

Mashable has a recent post about updating your Facebook feed from Twitter. If you haven’t done this before, this can seem like a good idea, and a way to get involved in more conversations with less effort. Automatically adding your tweets to Facebook? What could be easier?

However, I highly recommend against automatically updating your Facebook status with your Twitter feed, for the following reasons.

1) Twitter has its own dialect. Your Facebook followers won’t understand the retweets, hashtags, and references to other Twitterers. When I auto-updated a few months ago, I spent more time explaining my tweets to my Facebook friends than I saved on sending two separate messages.

2) Twitter and Facebook have two separate audiences and two different purposes. Facebook makes it much easier to thread conversations; Twitter, by its nature, requires more of an immediate response. Posting the same thing to both places only works some of the time — I’d estimate 10% to 25% of the time. Take a look at the content on your wall on Facebook; much of this content wouldn’t fit on Twitter, and if posted, would require significant changes to make sense to a viewer.

The Mashable post mentions third-party tools that can post to both Facebook and Twitter; TweetDeck and Seesmic Desktop are two of the most popular. If you’d like to post things in both Twitter and Facebook, I recommend using one of these tools and modifying the post.

Examples:

Appropriate post on Twitter: Will people pay for MCT’s 1-page FB guide 4 biz? I’m curious, but not for $ <link to MCT’s guide>

Appropriate post on Facebook: MCT just released a one-page guide for using Facebook for business. I’m curious to see what’s in it, but I don’t think it’s worth paying for. <link>

Certain things that are short and sweet can be posted on both: “I just got the new version of the latest Wii game,” for instance. But the Venn diagram of what’s appropriate on both services has so little overlap that it’s not practical to blindly post your Twitter feed to your Facebook status.

Top-down branding: Reports of death are greatly exaggerated

Is branding dead?

I attended the MarketingProfs webinar “What Matters Now in Branding: Ten Ideas to Get Refocused” (membership req’d). Jonathan Salem Baskin presented some good content and was thought-provoking.

However, Baskin’s main point–one that most of those Ten Ideas were based on–was that top-down branding is dead.

Top-down branding is when (according to Baskin) the company connects its name/products/services to thoughts, concepts, and emotions, and presents those connections to its customers and prospects through media, advertising, Twitter, customer service, presentations, etc.

Baskin believes that successful “new branding” is letting the brand organically find itself through reality, changing context, and community that will be driven by customer behavior and customers’ actions.

I have a lot to say about his various points, but foremost: If you want to be a successful marketer, do not believe this. It is false.

The worst part of this advice is that it kind of looks like it’s true. Top-down branding efforts have been less successful in recent years. Customer loyalty is down. Brands that were once strong are weaker. Social media is all the rage; branding has been replaced by “conversations” and “engagement.”

The most important thing about branding, however, has not changed. I’m from the Ries & Trout school, and the most important thing about a brand is to own a concept or phrase in the customer’s mind. (Baskin says that brands cannot do this; he’s wrong.) When you think facial tissue, you think Kleenex; when you think networking, you think Cisco; when you think about high-end cameras you think Canon or Nikon. Even catchphrases — “the choice of a new generation,” “the ultimate driving machine,” and (my recent least-favorite-tagline-ever) “the difference is drinkability” get ahold of an association/concept in your brain and won’t let go. That’s the way to own the market and affect customer behavior, and top-down branding is essential to that.

Baskin’s #1 point was “tell the truth” — that being ingenuous won’t help a brand, such as when the oil companies say they’re green. In general, I agree that one will have an easier time when you can put your money where your mouth is — when your products and services are actually as good as you say they are, and when they have no flaws. But what if your products and services DO have flaws?

Chevron created a famous “People Do” campaign to showcase their environmental concern. Commercials talking about saving butterfly mating grounds or marshlands or eagle habitats were all over the airwaves. According to Grahame Dowling’s book Creating Corporate Reputations, 34% of the viewers of the People Do ad featuring the eagle habitat had a more favorable opinion of Chevron after the ad, and 75% of the viewers said they were more likely to buy gasoline from Chevron (p. 177). The message was that Chevron was an oil company that cares — and they owned that concept in the customers’ minds.

The keys to this successful branding were simple: repetition and consistency. Chevron’s environmental ads started running back in the 1970’s, and grew to a 71% awareness rate. Even today, although very few people believe oil companies care about the environment, I’d bet that many still believe that Chevron isn’t as bad as the other oil companies — and Chevron has been rewarded with a 22% sales increase (p. 178).

The truth you tell, while it has to be true, is yours to tell. If you’re targeting teens and hipsters, the Burger King mascot (that creepy, crazy King) lets people know that Burger King is the fast-food place for them. If you’re targeting kids, Ronald McDonald tells consumers that Mickey D’s is kid-friendly. Your products and services must fulfill your promises to the consumer, but when they do, top-down branding can work.

This is by no means the only element of a successful top-down branding campaign. (For instance, if your brand is already firmly wedged in your prospects’ minds, it’s almost impossible to change–witness the death of Smith Corona PC’s, because Smith Corona is a brand for typewriters, not PCs.)

But don’t give up directing your message just because people say you can’t do it in today’s social-media-centric world.

Credit cards: the new corporate menace we keep funding

Andrew Martin of The New York Times wrote an article detailing how banks will be charging more to their customers who pay in full and on time each month. The article implies that it’s because the Obama administration is attempting to curtail the penalties, raised interest rates, and other fees the credit card companies are charging.

Many people in the U.S. today are dependent on credit cards for their monthly expenses. The credit card industry has pushed for–and gotten–a largely cashless economy. We pay many of our monthly bills through credit cards. Online storefronts like Amazon and iTunes pretty much require credit cards. Hell, Southwest Airlines won’t even take cash if you want to buy a beer on the plane.

What the Obama administration is doing, though, is setting an artificial price ceiling. Anyone who’s taken a basic economics class knows that artificial price floors and price ceilings don’t work–because they go against the laws of supply and demand. And the problem is that the demand is fast outpacing the supply. We still want credit, we just don’t want to pay what the banks are selling it for. If we want it to change, we–all of us–must lower our demand for credit.

Banks left and right are cancelling people’s credit cards, lowering credit limits to below their current balances, and even offering to forgive a portion of customers’ credit card debt if the customers agree not to use their cards anymore. It sucks to be a credit card customer right now. And with the average household holding almost $10,000 in credit card debt, many people don’t really have a choice.

Many people hate how Wal-Mart treats their employees. Many people hate how Microsoft treats their customers. Many people hate the oil companies. Yet all those companies keep making money hand over fist. If you don’t want to give those corporations power, stop giving them money. When banks (or Wal-Mart, or Microsoft, or Chevron) make it painful for their customers to stop doing business with them, it’s very hard to lower the demand.

Yet it happened. One year ago, the price of gas hit $4.59 a gallon. That made it more painful for people to pay for gas than to stop driving. So people stopped driving. The number of miles driven by Americans went down for the first time in decades. Demand for oil went down 5% as people chose to drive their more fuel-efficient cars (and stopped driving so much). Oil went down from $135 a barrel to $55 a barrel. Gas went down from $4.59 to $1.99 in 6 months.

What does this have to do with marketing? Right now, people do not want to do business with many banks. This is a great opportunity for some financial organization out there to position themselves as the customer-friendly bank. Want to move your credit card debt to a fixed lower-interest account that isn’t going to nickel-and-dime you? I personally would jump in a heartbeat. Especially away from Citi, who have royally screwed me over the last three months. (But I digress.)

Marketing cannot be successful without customer service–especially in the age of social media, which provides the world with an instant (and very noisy) bullshit detector. Imagine Citi trying to promote their “live richly” campaign now. Or any of the big banks trying to market itself as the touchly-feely bank. The opportunity I mentioned in the above paragraph will only work for a financial institution who has kept a good reputation through this whole TARP mess. Local credit unions may be good candidates.

Whatever happens, banks are going to have a tough time marketing to their customers now. They’ve been able to gloss over their horrible customer service shortcomings because they had the credit that their customers wanted. Now that they don’t, the banks have a public relations mess on their hands in addition to their financial woes.

Starbucks: Defensive or differentiated?

Is Starbucks refocusing on coffee, or running scared?

Joe Senft, a marketer from New York, tweeted about a MediaPost story about Starbucks’ new marketing campaign. This lead to a little bit of debate about whether Starbucks is 1) refocusing on their core competency, or 2) getting defensive because of the recent attacks from McDonalds and Dunkin Donuts (among others).

The first ad, which is the one that appears on the right, is off-message and is definitely defensive. In fact, the ad almost challenges the reader to get that cheaper cup of coffee to determine whether the “price” is worth the money savings. (And…what is the “price” exactly? I think they’re referring to taste, but I suppose it’s possible that they’re talking about all the fair-trade buying Starbucks does.)

But the other ads (previewed on the Starbucks blog – scroll down) are pretty good. “This is what coffee tastes like when you pour your heart into it.” That’s attacking McDonalds, albeit indirectly. The unsaid message: if you want good coffee, don’t go to a hamburger joint or a donut shop. It’s not a defensive position: it’s a different position, and it positions Starbucks’ value proposition squarely in front of the coffee lover.

I do have to say that one of the problems Starbucks has had over the last couple of years is that they 1) added so many stores that their coffee quality started to suffer due to inexperienced managers and baristas; 2) they diluted their “third-place” Italian-coffee-shop-style value proposition with breakfast sandwiches and family-friendly movies (Al Ries, Laura Ries, and Jack Trout would have a field day criticizing the branding decisions on that); and 3) their Pikes Place Roast is an inferior brew to the “coffee of the week” they had pre-2008. (Not everyone agrees that it’s inferior: Peter King, the Sports Illustrated writer, loves PPR and writes about it frequently in his column.)

The result is while the new message is good — “It’s not just coffee. It’s Starbucks” — the message seems a little disingenuous. Yes, it’s Starbucks, but what is Starbucks? It used to be coffee, then it was breakfast, then it was Akeelah and the Bee. Yes, Starbucks, you say you pour your heart into it, but that new barista won’t stop talking to her friend long enough to take my order.

Hopefully, this new marketing campaign signals a focus on coffee and the third-place experience that made Starbucks so successful in the first place. Letting go of thousands of employees and closing underperforming stores will allow Starbucks to hire better “partners,” who care more about customer satisfaction than talking to their friends. And perhaps this will allow a rebranding or a divestment from Starbucks Entertainment and other non-core businesses.

In other words, if Starbucks doesn’t talk about how bad others’ coffee is, but about how GOOD theirs is–and they back it up by improving the coffee and the in-store experience to what it was in 2004–Starbucks could streamline and again be a force to be reckoned with.