Last week, tens of thousands of tech junkies flocked to Las Vegas for the annual Consumer Electronics Show (CES), eager to get their hands on the latest electronic gadgets, network with like-minded professionals, and maybe catch a glimpse of visiting celebrities. With so many savvy users in the same place, it’s no surprise that the event generated a massive Twitter buzz. We thought it would be interesting to let loose our VoxTrot Opinion technology on the CES-related tweetstream – here’s what we learned.

New TV and 3D technologies overwhelmingly garnered the most praise on Twitter, led by the Boxee Box, which directly links internet content to your TV, and four separate television manufacturers who launched 3D sets. The Boxee Box took top honors in the “Last Gadget Standing” competition for most exciting new gadget at CES (as judged by audience applause).

Mobile technology also got people at CES excited, making up 15% of relevant CES related tweets. This conversation was driven mostly by Google’s Nexus One, RCA Airnergy’s wireless charger and FLO TV’s mobile live TV player. There were far too many new gadgets to create a category for each of them, but rave reviews for all other consumer electronics at CES made up fully one fifth of tweets.

Not everyone was satisfied with what they saw at CES, however.

• Ten percent of people were less than impressed with the new technologies and exhibits they saw at CES. Some thought that 3D TVs and games were gimmicky, while others simply didn’t see anything that wow’ed them
• Another 13% thought that the atmosphere at CES was lacking, especially as compared to last year. This included seeing lower profile displays, fewer giveaways and fewer “booth babes”
• Finally, AT&T frustrated many iPhone users with spotty 3G and wireless coverage at the Las Vegas convention. The increasingly popular hashtag #attfail saw a lot of use as tech junkies lashed out at AT&T (13% of conversation)

With CES 2010 now a memory and a whole year of new technology ahead of us, we know that people will continue to tweet about their favorite (and least favorite) gadgets – and Crimson Hexagon will be right there to measure the conversation.

Tags: advertising, events, news, uh oh by dylan
Comments

Today CNN.com debuted what will become a regular segment… using Crimson Hexagon’s VoxTrot to understand what’s really happening in the conversation on Twitter.

Check it out, from about the 1:00 mark to 4:00…

Tags: company, marketing, news, research, social web, uh oh by mike
Comments

Today, brands have unprecedented access to their audiences. No longer reliant solely on research intermediaries conducting periodic focus groups and surveys, marketers now hear directly from their brand’s consumers. Via social media amplification, brands can quickly see how consumers are reacting to a social network redesign, or to an abrupt termination of a spokesman.

Many organizations are using this access to reach out and connect with constituencies—sometimes with surprising results. Back in 2007, Greenpeace asked its fans to help name (and save) a humpback whale. Internet users rejected mellifluous names like Libertad and Mira in favor of the less dignified (and arguably hilarious) Mr. Splashypants.

Similarly, this week, NASA’s poll for the new wing of a national space station allowed a write-in option. Comedian Stephen Colbert urged his viewers to submit his name, and Colbert was the winner in a landslide.

All this raises an interesting question: how much should your brand assets become a democracy? Indisputably, brands can be shaped by their consumers and audiences as never before. But when core assets are handed over, does the community risk becoming a mob? Or does an engaged community trump all? Henry Ford was famously at the other end of the spectrum with this attributed remark on user input: “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.”

Photo credit: Richard.Fisher

Tags: brand, social web, uh oh by admin
Comments

A nation seeking an escape from bad economic news, a massively popular Olympian, and drug use were an obvious recipe for a tabloid sensation.  So when the photo of Michael Phelps hunched over a bong hit the news, the social media reaction was predictably huge.

YouTube mined the funnier side of the episode while a number of blogger tackled the allegations a bit more seriously.

At the start of the month, the incident threatened to cast a pall the greatest story in sports since Lance Armstrong’s 7th Tour de France win. Kellogg’s pulled Phelps’s endorsement deal, removing the Corn Flakes box from his overburdened trophy case. Kellogg’s may have damaged their brand with the move, and one social media indicator we measured reveals that damage to Phelps’s reputation may have been fleeting.

Using Twitter to gauge the digerati’s reaction to the affair, it appears the verdict on Phelps’ behavior is a collective shrug.  Supportive Tweets for Phelps outnumbered criticism 2:1 consistently since the news broke at the start of the month.  That figure rises to 4:1 if one includes criticism of marijuana laws and their enforcement by the Richland County sheriff spurred by the incident.  In particular, the contrasting treatment of A-Rod’s steroid allegations anchored  assertions that drug enforcement is inconsistent or illogical.

In recent days, volume has slowed to a trickle as the story has come to a conclusion  with no charges being filed against Phelps.  The swimmer remains suspended from competition and has withdrawn temporarily from the public eye. However, based on Twitter I’d say the swimmer will be able to easily forget this one, even without lighting up.

Tags: brand, social web, uh oh by edward
Comments

Online and offline, consumers are passionate about their brands. Tropicana recently swallowed a mouthful of pulp with their redesign of their flagship product Tropicana Pure Premium Orange Juice.

The redesign is drawing thoughtful critique and strong commentary online, but Tropicana insists that it’s not the volume of negative buzz that swayed them to revert to the old design. The online outcry is a “fraction of a percent of the people who buy the product,” according to Neil Campbell, president of Tropicana North America. Rather, Tropicana says it is rolling back the design because the negative reaction came in part from some of its “most loyal consumers.”

To me, this feels like an arbitrary and false distinction. Too many companies are still mentally dividing the universe into the angry hordes online who bring down brands and the loyal purchasers who exist primarily in an offline world.

Heads up to marketers: these worlds are officially colliding. As women 55+ make up the fast growing group on facebook, it’s time to re-think assumptions about how and where consumer opinions spread. It’s a new reality that every individual is armed with a printing press, and a new necessity to understand how online information sharing can ignite to influence a wide swath of consumers.

Photo credit: justinlai

Tags: brand, customer voice, marketing, uh oh by admin
Comments

Agencies and a few brave clients converged on OMMA Social in San Francisco earlier this week. The most debated panel was about “Personal CPM” (a term championed by Charlene Li back in 2007).

In short, personal CPM reflects each person’s value as a publisher of content with influence. Everyone will develop their own number which defines their worth to an advertiser or a marketer. Accordingly,  companies will market through high-CPM individuals rather than market to the unwashed masses directly.

The prolific David Berkowitz raised the creepiness issue. Is marketing through someone and piggybacking on their personal brands somehow creepier than direct messages?

Maybe—to me the real issue is that things we do offline constantly seem creepier when they’re brought online. Marketers sell through the credibility of other people in other media all the time: from celebrity endorsements (Boomers can buy Vuitton if Keith Richards does) to product placements (Ford’s a lot cooler when Will Smith is driving).  One of the panelists mentioned that he was happy to hand over his grocery store card and embedded personal info to save a buck—and, presumably, does not worry about the invisible transactions that may or may not occur later that day (like their correlating his love for cinnamon with a cinnamon cereal promo, or, more nefariously, selling his love for Ho-Hos and cigarettes to a health insurer.)

Online, these brand piggybacks on people’s credibility are more visible in a new medium where authenticity is still valued. Everyone’s creep factor will be different on this one, and the murky definition of creepy leaves us with Justice Potter Stewart, who famously said of obscenity: I know it when I see it.

Photo credit:  Lara604

Tags: advertising, marketing, uh oh by admin
Comments

We’ve written before that summarizing opinion is complex, and that understanding the meaning behind product reviews can lend more insight than averaging the “star ratings.” I encountered a terrific example of needing this context tonight.

In a situation that any working parents reading may relate to, by mid-December each year I’ve abandoned the fantasy of gifts purchased months in advance and am racing to online shopping destinations with quick shipping. My first stop tonight was for a video game for my son, a game that I remembered was pretty popular and well received. When I checked out Spore on Amazon, I was surprised to see a 1.5 star rating with over 3,100 reviews. Did I have the wrong game? I IMed a friend for advice.

Turns out, the game itself is pretty cool. But the DRM (digital rights management) designed to prevent piracy is a ludicrous opt-in, leading gamers to review it negatively. Here’s a sample:

First of all, the game incorporates a draconian DRM system that requires you to activate over the internet, and limits you to a grand total of 3 activations. If you reach that limit, then you’ll have to call EA in order to add one extra activation. That’s not as simple as it sounds, since when you reach that point EA will assume that you, the paying customer, are a filthy pirating thief.

So, the bad reviews make sense: there’s a strong negative associated with the game but it’s not about the graphics or the gameplay, features that might matter to me (or the gamer). Getting to the why (without having to read an adequate sample of the thousands of reviews) was vital. Automating the process might have been even better,

Oh, and the punchline? Apparently EA managed to deter potential customers, annoy their existing base, and still end up with Spore as the most pirated game of 2008.

Tags: customer voice, research, uh oh, uncategorized by admin
Comments

Less than 6 weeks ago, Pepsi was grabbing attention in the blogosphere with leaks of their new branding. The company followed up by sending the new cans to 25 of the blogging elite and soliciting feedback on Friendfeed. Reaction to both the logo and the campaign was somewhat mixed, but Pepsi deserves credit for adopting a direct and fresh style to generate buzz beyond the tired milieu of the insider blog or vanilla social network presence.

The company’s in the spotlight once again after publishing ads for Pepsi Max in a German magazine featuring a black-humor take on the suicide of a personified calorie.  The (suspiciously crisp) images of the ads have been inciting a fiery backlash centered around the fact that most people don’t find suicide all that funny (surprise!). Recall GM’s 2007 Superbowl spot, which showed an assembly robot throwing itself off a bridge, was withdrawn amid public criticism.  Pepsi’s already pulled the ad but the question remains: what the devil are they up to?

Pepsi is a Fortune 100 company with a colossal marketing engine. Having bought two spots in last year’s Superbowl, they surely were aware of GM’s snafu. For me to believe that their publishing a highly controversial advertisement in a single magazine in Düsseldorf is some kind of fluke requires excessive suspension of disbelief. Yet, by publishing on such a small scale and then quickly retracting, Pepsi has achieved the corporate equivalent of plausible deniability.

Normally this type of ‘gaffe’ is a challenge to a brand’s reputation. I think there are still a few dents in the Kevlar over at Motrin marketing, and they were making light of baby slings, not suicide. But what’s left to criticize Pepsi® for? The ads have been withdrawn, there’s no real physical evidence to speak of, and the ads’ short reach diminishes perceived accountability. I’ve noticed that while many commenters lambaste the subject matter, there is surprisingly little bile toward Pepsi for choosing to employ it.

So Pepsi has managed once again to initiate massive word of mouth interest in their brand at nearly zero cost.  They’re clearly gained a tolerance for risk and I can’t wait to see what’s next in Pepsi’s special ops marketing campaign. I just wonder in their quest to stir up buzz they’ll end up poking the beehive just a little too hard.

Tags: advertising, brand, marketing, uh oh, uncategorized by edward
Comments

For everyone that missed the excitement: Motrin, a staid J&J brand, had a social media campaign blow up in their faces last weekend. They posted an online video, aimed at mothers with young children, that was perceived by some ‘Mommy Bloggers’ as condescending and preachy.  A firestorm rapidly ensued on Twitter, video parodies appeared on Facebook, and the social media cognoscenti emerged to offer their counsel to the surprised brand managers. Motrin, to their credit, reacted quickly, pulling the advertisement and issuing an apology within 48 hours.

To borrow a phrase from State Farm’s ad campaign:  Now what ?

Counterintuitively, Motrin is in a great position for its next foray into the social media conversation. The outpouring of customer opinion, albeit negative, has been a fire-hose of feedback on the Motrin product and brand. This feedback can be a valuable resource for Motrin when constructing their social media engagement.

Motrin has the opportunity to use this episode and its unsightly residue in the blogosphere to learn three things that will help their future social media efforts

1. What were people’s initial perceptions of product or brand?
This incident probably generated more text from consumers about Motrin than has been written in the last five years.  The insight mined from these comments can be used to help steer future product innovations or marketing planning .

2. Who are the key influencers in the social network?
Knowing how opinions spread, the key channels, and the node influencers, will help Motrin avoid future problems. By understanding whom they might reach out to and give them a roadmap to spread desirable messaging.

3. How long will the damage last?
Motrin will learn how badly this incident has tarnished their brand, if at all. (Personally, I view this as a case of ‘any publicity is good publicity’). Motrin has found itself with a naturally-occuring case study for gauging the ROI of social media investments.. This lesson can help them weigh the benefits of social media marketing, as well as understand the pitfalls.

Tags: advertising, brand, brand monitoring, uh oh by edward
Comments

Quite a few people are talking about the tombstone Sequoia showed to their portfolio CEOs last week.  We can’t argue with the message (either Halloween or fiscal), and we’re wondering with the rest of the world — just how far will all this go? Or, as another Boston-area CEO put it, “how many other little bomb-lets” are going to go off in the next few years as the repercussions of the liquidity crisis continue to echo?

We’re all about public opinion here, and so it’s with great interest that I’ve been listening to some other high tech CEO’s who say if they weren’t reading the news, they wouldn’t know there was a crisis going on. Despite the general gloom and doom, some companies particularly some hedge funds as well as select mobile/IT/telecoms are thriving. I’ve spoken with companies heading into Q4 with record pipelines and significant deals already closed.

Certainly, there is hard evidence and facts upon which this crisis is based, but what fraction of it is caused by the mere perception of jitters and panic?  By the overwhelming majority of stories being heard on the news?  What would happen if we gave some voice to the small minority who are actually experiencing a boom? According to some in the know, now is the time to “look out, but take advantage of the openings.”

Tags: company, news, uh oh by Candace Fleming
Comments