Viral marketing vs encouraging community creation
Dave Neary
Hi,
I'm new to the marketing game (about to start my first paid job with
"marketing" in the job title after years as a developer) so I'm still
not quite up to speed on the marketing vocabulary.
I was recently discussing something with a marketing colleague, and I
mentioned that (feature X of our software) had great potential to
encourage the aggregation of communities around the software (that is,
using the software to communicate about their passions). In reply the
said that the feature was indeed a great tool for viral marketing.
My question is, are we talking about the same thing?
Cheers,
Dave.
--
David Neary
bo...@gnome.org
Scott Brooks
cheers
scott
Rachel Clarke
It's a constant battle to shift the language and the understanding. I call out the word viral in any meetings and hopefully get a discussion going to about what they actually want. Which is not acheived by producing something funny or provacative (the usual viral categories) and getting lucky with it on the web. Viral has its place, but it is not a replacement for community (and brand) building.
Unfortunately, the word viral is getting too many connotations. They see a viral video on YouTube and think that is it - they are not seeing the community elements that underpin the success.
And I could rant abvout this for far too long but I need to go back to another presentation to explain to a client why they don't really want viral but something far different.
Rachel
This e-mail is: [ x ] private; [ ] ask first; [ ] bloggable
http://blog.bibrik.com
US Mobile: 917-215-2225
UK Mobile: +44 (0)7733 262642
Scott Brooks
cheers
scott
/pd
aggregation of communities =! viral marketing
Eric Skiff
Eric Skiff
Nonprofit Web & Database Admin, Consultant,
Podcaster, Pinko Marketer
718-809-8692
Blog : http://GlitchNYC.com
Podcast : http://AlternativeMusicShow.com
Puppets!: http://FeltUpTV.com
Citizen Rogue
Strong Community = Environment + Product + Trust
All three of those pieces have to be strong...'viral' isn't something that you create. 'Viral' is how word travels. I don't think anyone has any business in the creation of it. You can set the stage by creating a kickass amazing product for the right community (not this everything for the MySpace kids junk) and be part of that community, thus building relationships. If it still doesn't gather steam, you have to go back and take a look at the tripod (as CA calls it) and see what isn't balanced.
Remember, too, sometimes a product can be brilliant, but be totally wrong for the time in history or the community you intended it for. Like, if they had tried to make Flickr for families...yes, it would work great for sharing photos with loved ones, but many people are still hyper-concerned about putting their children's photos on a public site. 10 years from now, people may not be as concerned. Awesome, incredible, kickass product. Wrong community.
T.
tara 'miss rogue' hunt
agent provocateur
Citizen Agency (www.citizenagency.com)
blog: www.horsepigcow.com
phone: 415-694-1951
fax: 415-727-5335
Samuel Rose
are equaiting "viral" with a new kind of hype-genrating machinery.
I wrote about this here:
http://www.smartmobs.com/archive/2006/09/17/commentary_lon.html
I've been approached by people who wanted to hire me to help them
create "hype" online in different ways like this. In my case they
wanted me to help them understand the
psycho-social aspects of creating "viral" or other social-engineering
experiments. These people usually want to prove to investors that they
can "start a fire" online. So, in this case, they were trying to sell
an idea to venture capitalists, whoincreasingly are looking for people
with the ability to make online "hype" cross over into mainstream media
"hype" (case in point: lonelygirl15)
I like the pinko ideas much better. Giving people a reason to truly be
hyped about your product or service or whatever, instead of fooling in
one way or another them into doing this by "creating" a "viral" model.
It is possible to "create" a "viral" model, but it's not a good way to
build a quality user/customer/enthusiast-driven community.
Citizen Rogue
Great point about appealing to investors rather than to the community. I find that is a very capitalist-centric thing, which I don't think behooves business. It's like, especially in American capitalism, the 'semblance' of success tends to mean more than actual success. Like the hype, PR engine is the core value. Example: Enron. We just finished watching, "The Smartest Guys in the Room". I was baffled that, through a series of business tricks, they were able to create this gorgeous smoke and mirrors show for years. That every business they actually had was losing billions, but because they traded on 'futures', they were raking in the dough.
Whereas business that is making actual money by selling great products and keeping their customers happy is limited in the system. In the end, the type of economic system that supports hot air over actual value is doomed to implode. I suppose that's why the bubble burst.
Then again, I know very little about economics. I'm just baffled by the justification of it.
Tara
/pd
Oh dont be baffled -- its called as the "American dream" - aka
"American capitalism" . As long as you can create smoke and mirrors and
make the "semblence" of success , then you are living the american
dream . Get rich or dying trying and F$%# the others as you move up
the food chain !!
"Seek honest, minimalist management. Look for companies run by a team
that explains things clearly and briefly. ... You can tell a lot about
the firm by reading an annual report or two. If management can't
explain the business in plain English, move on to another firm. If you
see phrases like 'creating knowledge-based value in emerging markets'
... someone is trying to pull the wool over your eyes, you lazy Fool.
Run."-Seth Jayson, "Stocks for the Lazy Investor," The Motley Fool
Samuel Rose
I have found a similar theme among different people who try to advise
realistic ways for entreprenuers to start and grow businesses.
For instance, check out:
http://www.antiventurecapital.com/venturecapital.html
It's worth reading all of that little article (disclaimer, he is trying
to sell books, but his advice is really good.) But, his point can be
summed up with this quote fromt that article:
"If your entrepreneurial goal is a company "built to last" it's
usually best to forgo venture capital. On the other hand, if your goal
is a company "built to flip" for a fast buck use venture capital if
it is available to you.".
I think that it *is* possible to have an engaged community help to fund
a company they are interested in, as long as they co-create the terms
of their contribution with the company, and as long as it allows people
to make small contributions (micro-investing) which leaves them with a
lower risk. These investors could be the same people who make up the
pinko-created enthusiast community. This is my idea for
http://www.communitywiki.org/odd/SocialSynergy/PeerInvest
and also
http://www.communitywiki.org/odd/SocialSynergy/OpenValueNetwork
But, PeerInvest is NOT a quick-money or get rich quick scheme model. It
is instead a "built to last" modle. Yet, it potentially and ideally
gives an enthusiast or customer or user community a way to share in the
profits of something they believe in, if they choose to.
It is also an Open Business model, mean to be shared as part of an Open
knowledge commons. People who use the model would be most successful
applying pinko principles in the way that they develop their products
or services (making it user-driven, and opening channels of
communication), IMO. So, it is really just another tool or technique
towards that end. (So is
http://www.communitywiki.org/odd/SocialSynergy/OpenValueNetwork which
is really a way to optimize and multiply value in the whole network of
a business: provider/producer, customers, employees, etc).
This is also a related theme in the emrging BarCampBank project
http://barcamp.pbwiki.com/BarCampBank
BarCampBank is really a think tank for develop useful peer to peer ways
of managing and dealing with money. I was inspired by the
http://communitywiki.org/en/CommunityWikiBank experiment.
So, you could imagine a small group of entrepernuers, who create a
start up project and attract a community of enthusiasts to help them
develop it into a quality project. The whole community decides to use a
PeerInvest model to fund the project (wherin everyone co-creates an
agreement, and pledges an investment if they are interested in
investing, and money is collected when agreed-upon milestones in
development are reached). Then, the community applies Pinko principles
for the way the "product" or service is marketed. And, the community
connects it's growing network of people via an Open Value Network
model. Maybe the community even created a peer to peer data "bank" for
exchanges of non-money and intangible value, like time? Maybe the
community develops or adopts microformat ways of measuring trust, and
other intangible values, and realtionships?
This is all possible right now, as far as I can see. Community
co-funded, community co-created, community co-marketed, community
co-governed enterprise. The "company" simply becomes the "enabler" who
works for the community, and who works to help keep the Open Value
Network optimized and multipying value to everyone in the network, and
who works with all of the people who make up the community. This of
course requires transparency, trust metics, peer review, and ways to
measure not just money flows, but intangible value flows, too. This is
all fairly new terroritory, and we are also discussing some of these
ideas in places like http://cooperationcommons.com/cooperation-commons,
http://openbusiness.cc/ and http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/ along with
the wikis that I link to above [disclaimer: I am on the board of the
P2P foundation, and an active participant in the Cooperation Commons,
not that I think that really matters, but just in case it does, there
you go:)].
I personally see Pinko conepts and applications as potentially being an
integral part of the models I discuss above.
> ------=_Part_49772_30133061.1160690207678
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
> X-Google-AttachSize: 3122
>
> That's an awesome article. I just posted it to the Pinko bookmark list.<br><br>Great point about appealing to investors rather than to the community. I find that is a very capitalist-centric thing, which I don't think behooves business. It's like, especially in American capitalism, the 'semblance' of success tends to mean more than actual success. Like the hype, PR engine is the core value. Example: Enron. We just finished watching, "The Smartest Guys in the Room". I was baffled that, through a series of business tricks, they were able to create this gorgeous smoke and mirrors show for years. That every business they actually had was losing billions, but because they traded on 'futures', they were raking in the dough.
> <br><br>Whereas business that is making actual money by selling great products and keeping their customers happy is limited in the system. In the end, the type of economic system that supports hot air over actual value is doomed to implode. I suppose that's why the bubble burst.
> <br><br>Then again, I know very little about economics. I'm just baffled by the justification of it.<br><br>Tara<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 10/12/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Samuel Rose</b> <<a href="mailto:samue...@gmail.com">
> samue...@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>I have also been finding over the past couple of years that some people
> <br>are equaiting "viral" with a new kind of hype-genrating machinery.<br><br>I wrote about this here:<br><br><a href="http://www.smartmobs.com/archive/2006/09/17/commentary_lon.html">http://www.smartmobs.com/archive/2006/09/17/commentary_lon.html
> </a><br><br>I've been approached by people who wanted to hire me to help them<br>create "hype" online in different ways like this. In my case they<br>wanted me to help them understand the<br>psycho-social aspects of creating "viral" or other social-engineering
> <br>experiments. These people usually want to prove to investors that they<br>can "start a fire" online. So, in this case, they were trying to sell<br>an idea to venture capitalists, whoincreasingly are looking for people
> <br>with the ability to make online "hype" cross over into mainstream media<br>"hype" (case in point: lonelygirl15)<br><br>I like the pinko ideas much better. Giving people a reason to truly be<br>hyped about your product or service or whatever, instead of fooling in
> <br>one way or another them into doing this by "creating" a "viral" model.<br>It is possible to "create" a "viral" model, but it's not a good way to<br>build a quality user/customer/enthusiast-driven community.
> <br><br><br></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>tara 'miss rogue' hunt<br>agent provocateur<br>Citizen Agency (<a href="http://www.citizenagency.com">www.citizenagency.com</a>)<br>blog: <a href="http://www.horsepigcow.com">www.horsepigcow.com
> </a><br>phone: 415-694-1951<br>fax: 415-727-5335
>
> ------=_Part_49772_30133061.1160690207678--
Scott Brooks
cheers
scott
ps gotten back to doing some of my own writing on my blog thoughtballoons.net
Samuel Rose
Who knows what they are doing with all of that data? Nothing "evil", I
hope...
Gets me thinking about Noam Lemlshtrich Latar's paper about the
emerging mass datamining and prediction of human behavior:
http://burdacenter.bgu.ac.il/publications/membersPublications/Psycho-SocialDNA_Socio-Cybernetics.pdf
> ------=_Part_152758_22649893.1160767680260
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
> X-Google-AttachSize: 13645
>
> as i think about this ....the spread of gmail was 100% viral in the truest form. Imagine the social network structure that was built when they rolled that out.?<br>cheers <br>scott <br>ps gotten back to doing some of my own writing on my blog
> <a href="http://thoughtballoons.net">thoughtballoons.net</a> <br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 10/13/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Samuel Rose</b> <<a href="mailto:samue...@gmail.com">samue...@gmail.com
> </a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>Thanks Miss Rogue,<br><br>I have found a similar theme among different people who try to advise
> <br>realistic ways for entreprenuers to start and grow businesses.<br><br>For instance, check out:<br><br><a href="http://www.antiventurecapital.com/venturecapital.html">http://www.antiventurecapital.com/venturecapital.html
> </a><br><br>It's worth reading all of that little article (disclaimer, he is trying<br>to sell books, but his advice is really good.) But, his point can be<br>summed up with this quote fromt that article:<br><br>"If your entrepreneurial goal is a company "built to last" it's
> <br>usually best to forgo venture capital. On the other hand, if your goal<br>is a company "built to flip" for a fast buck use venture capital if<br>it is available to you.".<br><br>I think that it *is* possible to have an engaged community help to fund
> <br>a company they are interested in, as long as they co-create the terms<br>of their contribution with the company, and as long as it allows people<br>to make small contributions (micro-investing) which leaves them with a
> <br>lower risk. These investors could be the same people who make up the<br>pinko-created enthusiast community. This is my idea for<br><a href="http://www.communitywiki.org/odd/SocialSynergy/PeerInvest">http://www.communitywiki.org/odd/SocialSynergy/PeerInvest
> </a><br> and also<br><br><a href="http://www.communitywiki.org/odd/SocialSynergy/OpenValueNetwork">http://www.communitywiki.org/odd/SocialSynergy/OpenValueNetwork</a><br><br>But, PeerInvest is NOT a quick-money or get rich quick scheme model. It
> <br>is instead a "built to last" modle. Yet, it potentially and ideally<br>gives an enthusiast or customer or user community a way to share in the<br>profits of something they believe in, if they choose to.<br>
> <br>It is also an Open Business model, mean to be shared as part of an Open<br>knowledge commons. People who use the model would be most successful<br>applying pinko principles in the way that they develop their products<br>
> or services (making it user-driven, and opening channels of<br>communication), IMO. So, it is really just another tool or technique<br>towards that end. (So is<br><a href="http://www.communitywiki.org/odd/SocialSynergy/OpenValueNetwork">
> http://www.communitywiki.org/odd/SocialSynergy/OpenValueNetwork</a> which<br>is really a way to optimize and multiply value in the whole network of<br>a business: provider/producer, customers, employees, etc).<br><br>This is also a related theme in the emrging BarCampBank project
> <br><a href="http://barcamp.pbwiki.com/BarCampBank">http://barcamp.pbwiki.com/BarCampBank</a><br><br>BarCampBank is really a think tank for develop useful peer to peer ways<br>of managing and dealing with money. I was inspired by the
> <br><a href="http://communitywiki.org/en/CommunityWikiBank">http://communitywiki.org/en/CommunityWikiBank</a> experiment.<br><br>So, you could imagine a small group of entrepernuers, who create a<br>start up project and attract a community of enthusiasts to help them
> <br>develop it into a quality project. The whole community decides to use a<br>PeerInvest model to fund the project (wherin everyone co-creates an<br>agreement, and pledges an investment if they are interested in<br>investing, and money is collected when agreed-upon milestones in
> <br>development are reached). Then, the community applies Pinko principles<br>for the way the "product" or service is marketed. And, the community<br>connects it's growing network of people via an Open Value Network
> <br>model. Maybe the community even created a peer to peer data "bank" for<br>exchanges of non-money and intangible value, like time? Maybe the<br>community develops or adopts microformat ways of measuring trust, and
> <br>other intangible values, and realtionships?<br><br>This is all possible right now, as far as I can see. Community<br>co-funded, community co-created, community co-marketed, community<br>co-governed enterprise. The "company" simply becomes the "enabler" who
> <br>works for the community, and who works to help keep the Open Value<br>Network optimized and multipying value to everyone in the network, and<br>who works with all of the people who make up the community. This of<br>course requires transparency, trust metics, peer review, and ways to
> <br>measure not just money flows, but intangible value flows, too. This is<br>all fairly new terroritory, and we are also discussing some of these<br>ideas in places like <a href="http://cooperationcommons.com/cooperation-commons">
> http://cooperationcommons.com/cooperation-commons</a>,<br><a href="http://openbusiness.cc/">http://openbusiness.cc/</a> and <a href="http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/">http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/</a> along with<br>the wikis that I link to above [disclaimer: I am on the board of the
> <br>P2P foundation, and an active participant in the Cooperation Commons,<br>not that I think that really matters, but just in case it does, there<br>you go:)].<br><br>I personally see Pinko conepts and applications as potentially being an
> <br>integral part of the models I discuss above.<br><br><br><br>Citizen Rogue wrote:<br>> That's an awesome article. I just posted it to the Pinko bookmark list.<br>><br>> Great point about appealing to investors rather than to the community. I
> <br>> find that is a very capitalist-centric thing, which I don't think behooves<br>> business. It's like, especially in American capitalism, the 'semblance' of<br>> success tends to mean more than actual success. Like the hype, PR engine is
> <br>> the core value. Example: Enron. We just finished watching, "The Smartest<br>> Guys in the Room". I was baffled that, through a series of business tricks,<br>> they were able to create this gorgeous smoke and mirrors show for years.
> <br>> That every business they actually had was losing billions, but because they<br>> traded on 'futures', they were raking in the dough.<br>><br>> Whereas business that is making actual money by selling great products and
> <br>> keeping their customers happy is limited in the system. In the end, the type<br>> of economic system that supports hot air over actual value is doomed to<br>> implode. I suppose that's why the bubble burst.
> <br>><br>> Then again, I know very little about economics. I'm just baffled by the<br>> justification of it.<br>><br>> Tara<br>><br>> On 10/12/06, Samuel Rose <<a href="mailto:samue...@gmail.com">
> samue...@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>> ><br>> ><br>> > I have also been finding over the past couple of years that some people<br>> > are equaiting "viral" with a new kind of hype-genrating machinery.
> <br>> ><br>> > I wrote about this here:<br>> ><br>> > <a href="http://www.smartmobs.com/archive/2006/09/17/commentary_lon.html">http://www.smartmobs.com/archive/2006/09/17/commentary_lon.html</a><br>
> > ><br>> > I've been approached by people who wanted to hire me to help them<br>> > create "hype" online in different ways like this. In my case they<br>> > wanted me to help them understand the
> <br>> > psycho-social aspects of creating "viral" or other social-engineering<br>> > experiments. These people usually want to prove to investors that they<br>> > can "start a fire" online. So, in this case, they were trying to sell
> <br>> > an idea to venture capitalists, whoincreasingly are looking for people<br>> > with the ability to make online "hype" cross over into mainstream media<br>> > "hype" (case in point: lonelygirl15)
> <br>> ><br>> > I like the pinko ideas much better. Giving people a reason to truly be<br>> > hyped about your product or service or whatever, instead of fooling in<br>> > one way or another them into doing this by "creating" a "viral" model.
> <br>> > It is possible to "create" a "viral" model, but it's not a good way to<br>> > build a quality user/customer/enthusiast-driven community.<br>> ><br>> ><br>> > ><br>
> > ><br>><br>><br>> --<br>> tara 'miss rogue' hunt<br>> agent provocateur<br>> Citizen Agency (<a href="http://www.citizenagency.com">www.citizenagency.com</a>)<br>> blog: <a href="http://www.horsepigcow.com">
> www.horsepigcow.com</a><br>> phone: 415-694-1951<br>> fax: 415-727-5335<br>><br>> ------=_Part_49772_30133061.1160690207678<br>> Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1<br>> X-Google-AttachSize: 3122
> <br>><br>> That's an awesome article. I just posted it to the Pinko bookmark list.<br><br>Great point about appealing to investors rather than to the community. I find that is a very capitalist-centric thing, which I don't think behooves business. It's like, especially in American capitalism, the 'semblance' of success tends to mean more than actual success. Like the hype, PR engine is the core value. Example: Enron. We just finished watching, &quot;The Smartest Guys in the Room&quot;. I was baffled that, through a series of business tricks, they were able to create this gorgeous smoke and mirrors show for years. That every business they actually had was losing billions, but because they traded on 'futures', they were raking in the dough.
> <br>> <br><br>Whereas business that is making actual money by selling great products and keeping their customers happy is limited in the system. In the end, the type of economic system that supports hot air over actual value is doomed to implode. I suppose that's why the bubble burst.
> <br>> <br><br>Then again, I know very little about economics. I'm just baffled by the justification of it.<br><br>Tara<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 10/12/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Samuel Rose</b> &lt;<a href="mailto:
> <a href="mailto:samue...@gmail.com">samue...@gmail.com</a>"><br>> <a href="mailto:samue...@gmail.com">samue...@gmail.com</a></a>&gt; wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt
> 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>I have also been finding over the past couple of years that some people<br>> <br>are equaiting &quot;viral&quot; with a new kind of hype-genrating machinery.<br><br>I wrote about this here:<br><br><a href="
> <a href="http://www.smartmobs.com/archive/2006/09/17/commentary_lon.html">http://www.smartmobs.com/archive/2006/09/17/commentary_lon.html</a>"><a href="http://www.smartmobs.com/archive/2006/09/17/commentary_lon.html">
> http://www.smartmobs.com/archive/2006/09/17/commentary_lon.html</a><br>> </a><br><br>I've been approached by people who wanted to hire me to help them<br>create &quot;hype&quot; online in different ways like this. In my case they<br>wanted me to help them understand the<br>psycho-social aspects of creating &quot;viral&quot; or other social-engineering
> <br>> <br>experiments. These people usually want to prove to investors that they<br>can &quot;start a fire&quot; online. So, in this case, they were trying to sell<br>an idea to venture capitalists, whoincreasingly are looking for people
> <br>> <br>with the ability to make online &quot;hype&quot; cross over into mainstream media<br>&quot;hype&quot; (case in point: lonelygirl15)<br><br>I like the pinko ideas much better. Giving people a reason to truly be<br>hyped about your product or service or whatever, instead of fooling in
> <br>> <br>one way or another them into doing this by &quot;creating&quot; a &quot;viral&quot; model.<br>It is possible to &quot;create&quot; a &quot;viral&quot; model, but it's not a good way to<br>build a quality user/customer/enthusiast-driven community.
> <br>> <br><br><br></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>tara 'miss rogue' hunt<br>agent provocateur<br>Citizen Agency (<a href="<a href="http://www.citizenagency.com">
> http://www.citizenagency.com</a>"><a href="http://www.citizenagency.com">www.citizenagency.com</a></a>)<br>blog: <a href="<a href="http://www.horsepigcow.com">http://www.horsepigcow.com</a>">
> <a href="http://www.horsepigcow.com">www.horsepigcow.com</a><br>> </a><br>phone: 415-694-1951<br>fax: 415-727-5335<br>><br>> ------=_Part_49772_30133061.1160690207678--<br><br><br>
> ------=_Part_152758_22649893.1160767680260--
