My colleague Philippe gives a lot of training sessions and lectures on digital marketing at some of the bigger companies in Belgium. This results in an a list of frequent asked questions that he shared with us on his (interesting blog). Here they are:
- How far should I go in the dialogue with the users? Can I accept controversy on my website? What moderation level is acceptable?
- Is online advertising making sense without a decent website?
- Are there examples of 2.0 initiatives made by traditional brands that went totally out of hand?
- How can impressions be compared to television GRPs?
- How intrusive should I be? (expandable formats, videos with sound on by default)
- What does interaction rate (only available for rich media formats) tell me about the impact of my campaign?
- Does the long tail change anything to the way I should communicate with my target group?
- Why on earth do people use sites like second life?
Maybe trivial for some of you, but given the fact that these are ‘frequently asked’ I think we need to spend more time on clarifying this to advertisers.
So I had an idea. Why don’t I send this list of questions to some these marketers that I respect most, like Joseph Jaffe, CK, Mark Goren, Ann Handley, … remember the list I put up a few days ago. Hoping that they will reply on these questions, the idea is that I will this together somehow and post it back here, but also on the IAB Interact European Congress blog. What’s better than get some of the best marketers out there answer to these advertisers questions in front of a big advertiser audience?
And your all you others reading this blog, feel free to answer one or more of these questions, add questions that you got from advertisers, … I’d love to hear what you have to say on this.
[Update: I just noticed Philippe asked the first question to Joseph himself already, here’s his answer]
Technorati tags: advertising, qna, faq, digital marketing, iab, interact
'Cross The Breeze 
Thanks a lot, Kris!
Great initiative, Kris. I may need a couple of days (off travelling in a couple of days, trying not to fall too far behind) to respond, but I’d be happy too. Very cool.
“Why on earth do people use sites like Second Life?”
I can’t say I fully understand it, either — I have enough trouble keeping up with my First Life. But as HP’s Eric Kintz wrote this past week, “Second Life is another example of a web 2.0 property that marketers should explore and understand. It opens up a window into the future of 3D web… .”
That’s just it: Even if we don’t use it, others do. And for marketers, Second Life is a great place to learn how brands fit in various 3D virtual environments. What kinds of approaches work? What sorts of activities relate to results? It’s a test playground. And by the way, this applies beyond marketing and sales. There are many potential business applications in virtual worlds — including employee training and development, customer service, collaboration, you name it.
Why is it important to know about 3D virtual environments? Because that’s where the Web is headed, I’d guess. I base that not on my own use — (see point about First Life, above!) — but by observing how my kids interact with the Internet. Kiddie sites like Club Penguin and Webkinz are grooming my 10-year-old to actively and willingly embrace formats like Second Life, There.com, and any other virtual world that evolves from them.
The technology is only going to become smoother and easier to grasp. And when it does.. well, there’s a whole generation of kids who will be ready for it. The question is — will you?
“Does the long tail change anything to the way I should communicate with my target group?”
I think so mainly because you are dealing with a much smaller group, and have the chance/responsibility to deliver much more personlized messages.
Which are, in theory, far more relevant. And effective.
“Does the long tail change anything to the way I should communicate with my target group? ”
The long tail…and the shift to micro-niches…may change your target group. It may change into its own little eco-system of multiple target groups. So the way you communicate, dialogue and message with them may become more specific. And, with two-way communications (Web 2.0) you can also invite more involvement (what Huba & McConnell refer to as “The Participatory Economy”) from your target audiences and you can become closer to their exact preferences, wants and needs (as marketing is about serving these).
Also you can start creating more markets, instead of just serving them because there is so much room for innovation due to so many choices (the long tail is about more choice and more niches, no longer about audiences grouped by, say, age range). All told, communications become more dynamic and rich since we’re really homing in on preferences (so it’s now “psychographics” instead of “demographics”).
Thank you – this is exceptionally pragmatic !