Marketing Pilgrim Published: “No One Appears Neutral (or Happy) About New Net Neutrality” plus 3 more

No One Appears Neutral (or Happy) About New Net Neutrality
Is Email’s Future Really in Doubt?
Online Ad Spending Beats Newspapers by Year End
Don’t Let Bad Service Negate a Great Campaign

No One Appears Neutral (or Happy) About New Net Neutrality

Posted: 22 Dec 2010 04:55 AM PST

I will be very honest with you on this one. I lost interest in this whole net neutrality concept a long time ago when I started digging into it more. The more I looked into the various arguments and thoughts about what should or should not be, the more confused I got.

You see, I used to be the kind of person that would make a stand on one extreme of something without truly considering the other side. Honestly, it's easier. Over time I have tried to look at both side of any issue (save a few but they aren't for here) so I could be impartial until someone made an argument that was so compelling that I had to take a side.

With net neutrality though, I can honestly say that I have never seen a bigger cluster $%@ in my life. This whole 'argument' has just resulted in what I will deem 'informed confusion' for me. Who's right? Who's wrong? When you can't really figure it out is when you realize that everyone is a little bit of both and you throw up your hands and say "I'm done!".

What I have learned is that trying to be in the middle on an issue (maybe any issue) is near impossible. This whole joke of an FCC 'ruling' is evidence.

The folks at ars technica did a good job of showing just how ridiculous this whole thing is by giving views from both sides of the aisle, which shows that no one seems to be happy with this result.

First the views from the right.

Republican FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell unleashed a biblical jeremiad against the order, accusing the FCC of becoming a “vigilante” which was taking this action only to help President Obama meet “a misguided campaign promise.”

Today was one of the “darkest days in recent FCC history,” he said, adding that he had received a final draft only at 11:42 pm the night before the vote. As for ISPs, “Nothing is broken in the Internet access market.”

He ended darkly by noting that the FCC’s “regulatory hubris” was a disease that could, thankfully, be cured by the courts.

Now the left.

“Despite promising to fulfill President Obama’s campaign promise of enacting Network Neutrality rules to protect an open Internet, the FCC has instead prioritized the profits of corporations like AT&T over those of the general public, Internet entrepreneurs, and local businesses across the country,” thundered Sascha Meinrath of the New America Foundation. “These failures place the Internet in peril of evolving into a system that will more and more resemble another cable network rather than an open Internet.”

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) said that “the FCC has failed to protect free speech and Internet openness for all users,” by not applying the same rules to wireless.

Even the Future of Music Coalition, which represents artists, lamented the fact that net neutrality “seemingly falls short of offering full protections.”

Nice work FCC. You have managed to get the right and the far left (ACLU) angry with you on this one. In other words, you screwed up big time.

I have decided that I am going to sit back and watch the legal histrionics on this one. Rather than form an opinion on the current state of affairs I am going to wait for the next current state of affairs to see if there is any more clarity. With the current head of the FCC, Julius Genachowski (who is a lawyer after all) I suspect clarity will be in short order. Let's hope his tenure at the head of the FCC is as well.

Honestly, since this is in the hands of politicians and lawyers I can only guess that the stupidity has just begun. Meanwhile, if I wake up each day and have Internet access for the same price I am paying and I can do most things I usually do on the Internet (which is surprisingly boring actually) then I'll be happy no matter which side 'wins'. Of course, thinking this way will set me up for major disappointment because some change is on the way and these days change is not always a good word.

So what's your take? Which side are you on and why? Make an argument for me to see it your way. PLEASE.

Pilgrim’s Partners: SponsoredReviews.com – Bloggers earn cash, Advertisers build buzz!

Is Email’s Future Really in Doubt?

Posted: 22 Dec 2010 03:48 AM PST

The headline appears to be a little alarmist but there are articles written all the time that appear to be trying to bury e-mail as a communication tool for now and the future. In most cases I can't tell if this is intentional or not but oftentimes it looks like e-mail gets painted as something for those who are older, less tech savvy and, dare I say, uncool.

Here is a demographic breakdown (courtesy of comScore by way of NY Times Bits blog) of year over year web based e-maill usage rates for e-mail by demographic segment. On the surface, one could say that e-mail is definitely on the decline.

In a recent article from the New York Times the picture of how the younger set views e-mail is summed up in this assessment.

The problem with e-mail, young people say, is that it involves a boringly long process of signing into an account, typing out a subject line and then sending a message that might not be received or answered for hours. And sign-offs like "sincerely" — seriously?

Lena Jenny, 17, a high school senior in Cupertino, Calif., said texting was so quick that "I sometimes have an answer before I even shut my phone." E-mail, she added, is "so lame."

On some levels, I get that. I myself am not a big text user and actually probably use instant messaging as my communication tool of choice if an e-mail or phone call is not involved. Of course, I grew up in the generation that saw e-mail as the 'newest, coolest and fastest' way to communicate when held up to things like snail mail and faxes.

My concern here is not that young people don't use e-mail but rather this assumption that e-mail will ride off into the sunset as the older generations pass away. It's pretty dangerous to be even considering this. Why? Because while these young people may not like e-mail they will still need to understand it and have the skills to manage it when they get to the 'grown-up' part of life with a, gulp, job.

If personal use of e-mail drops off then that will impact marketers who are trying to reach people in their spare time away from the office. E-mail in the business environment will remain essential because of the digital paper trail it leaves and the ability to manage archives of conversations and ideas vs. text and instant messaging. Who is really at risk are the Yahoos and HotMails of the world.

The numbers testify to the trend. The number of total unique visitors in the United States to major e-mail sites like Yahoo and Hotmail is now in steady decline, according to the research company comScore. Such visits peaked in November 2009 and have since slid 6 percent; visits among 12- to 17-year-olds fell around 18 percent. (The only big gainer in the category has been Gmail, up 10 percent from a year ago.)

Here is an instance that makes this scenario very clear as to the disconnect between the way that the younger set communicates vs. the way they will have to communicate when they age out of the OMG, RU and other abbreviated forms of communication that they consider is normal communication.

Adam Horowitz, 23, who works as a technology consultant for a major accounting firm in New York, spends all day on e-mail at his office. When he leaves it behind, he picks up his phone and communicates with friends almost entirely via texts.
Yet he sometimes feels caught between the two, as when he texts with his younger brothers, ages 12 and 19, who tend to send even shorter, faster messages.

"When they text me, it comes across in broken English. I have no idea what they're saying," said Mr. Horowitz. "I may not text in full sentences, but at least there's punctuation to get my point across."

"I guess I'm old school."

Old school? At 23? What does that make the rest of us? Octogenarian school?

As marketers this difference between the young vs. the older and personal vs. business use of e-mail will shape how we try to reach particular market segments. It’s not easy to figure out is it? My question is not so much as to whether e-mail will or will not survive but rather where will it survive? Will e-mail marketing to personal e-mail addresses become a T-Rex? Will e-mail marketing providers like Constant Contact, iContact and others see a shift in their business as less and less people turn to e-mail for personal use?

What does your marketing sense say about the future of e-mail as a communication device and a marketing tool? RU buying into the 'death of e-mail' talk? Where is this all headed, IYHO (In Your Humble Opinion)?

Online Ad Spending Beats Newspapers by Year End

Posted: 21 Dec 2010 06:07 PM PST

We’ve seen it coming but the day is finally here, by the time we ring in the new year, spending on online ads will have passed newspaper ad spending for the first time ever.

According to eMarketer, print advertising in newspapers will fall to $22.8 billion while online ad spending will rise to $25.8 billion. They expect the difference to be even more significant by the end of 2011.

This past October, the Associated Press published a report that noted a 5% drop in newspaper circulation and an 8.7% drop the year before that.

Says the report:

Circulation declines hurt newspapers financially not only because they are losing revenue from subscriptions, but also because the bulk of newspaper advertising revenue is still generated by printed editions rather than their websites.

The only good news for newspapers is that their online arms are seeing a rise in ad spending, but it still only makes up 11% of the overall ad spending in the category.

You don’t need a study to confirm the fact that more people than ever are getting their news online, on their phones and on TV. So is the daily paper doomed to become a relic of the past? Perhaps the mid-term solution is to forget daily delivery and go to a weekly format. One big Sunday paper loaded with the top news and commentary stuffed with the coupons and comics. It would cut down on the number of available ad spaces in a given week, but it might be what’s needed in order to keep newspapers from folding completly.

The statistics do show that the decline in subscriptions is leveling out but that can’t be more than a temporary stop-gap. Five years from now, when everyone is walking around with a wireless tablet in their pockets, will anyone be interested in getting their fingers dirty with newsprint? It’s hard to imagine.

What are your thoughts? Do you still enjoy perusing the Sunday paper?

Don’t Let Bad Service Negate a Great Campaign

Posted: 21 Dec 2010 02:52 PM PST

My hobby is entering giveaways. It’s probably akin to a gambling addiction but it doesn’t cost me a penny and I win some pretty cool stuff. Last week, I won a $25 gift certificate to a gourmet food company that I had never tried.

Last Friday was free shipping day, so it was the perfect day to get the best out of my win. Except for the fact that the system they use sees a gift code as a discount code so I could only use my gift certificate or get the free shipping, not both. Why? A gift certificate is money, not a discount. Determined to fix this, I called the company’s toll free number in the early evening, California time. I was directed to the “customer service” line which was a recording saying they were closed. Hmmm.

Next, I tried to email my question. I got a response on Monday. Three days after the fact. The response was one line. “Call us to discuss.” Seriously? So I called and got a very soft spoken, uninformed woman who seemed to be looking around the office as she spoke, desperate to find someone with knowledge to put on the phone. She couldn’t find anyone and said they’d have to call me back.

Incredibly, they did call me back and I explained the issue and was told, yes, this is how it is, can’t have free shipping and use a gift certificate. Also, my detailed order had disappeared from the shopping card so I had to start over.

Now, right here is where the customer rep should have said, let me take your order over the phone and we’ll deduct the $14.00 shipping for your trouble. No. Her response was, ‘well, at least you still have the gift certificate so you’re not out anything.’ I then commented on the fact that it took three days to respond to my issue, let alone the fact that it was the holiday season. She informed me that the business is closed on weekends for religious reasons. Now, I appreciate their devotion, but is that anyway to run an online business? No customer support, not even a guy responding to emails over a weekend leading to a holiday?

Now you could say, hey, Cynthia, back off, you’re getting something for nothing, right? But I’d say, that’s not the point. The point is, their company made a marketing decision to get bloggers to offer a giveaway. It was a good decision because giveaways are a great way to introduce your brand to new people, like me. I had never heard of the company, so I was a potential new customer. But what the marketing person accomplished, they wiped out with bad customer service and a quibble over $14.00. They could have offered me an extra item for my trouble and I would have paid the shipping and been happy. I would have been out singing the praises of the company instead of telling everyone I know not to buy from them.

My point is a simple one – marketing is hard work. Getting potential customers through the door, virtual or otherwise, is hard work. Don’t let bad customer service ruin everything you’ve worked for. You don’t have to have highly-trained customer service reps working round the clock. In this case, an apologetic, properly written email on Monday morning would have gone a long way.

Here’s what I recommend. Ask a friend to buy something from your company. Follow the whole process from clicking through an ad or email to the final delivery. Then ask them to grade the process including ease of purchase, the tone and effectiveness of emails, packaging and delivery time, and, if they do have a problem (maybe you could make one happen), the customer service response.

Test your own systems and I hope you’ll be nothing but pleasantly surprised.

Join the Marketing Pilgrim Facebook Community