categorystrategy

Steve Gillmor’s podcast pair (Gillmor Gang and Gillmor Daily) have enthusiastically embraced advertising sponsors and in turn generated a small-scale listener revolt. The Podshow network was created by Podcasting pioneer Adam Curry and business partner Ron Bloom to help the little guy quit his day job and become a full-time podcaster. They set out very publicly to change the advertising model for audio content from the intrusive and excessive model of broadcast radio to a highly targeted, personal model appropriate for the new audio format of the Internet generation.

What we listeners of Gillmor’s podcasts (backed by Podshow) got was something entirely unexpected – an aggressive embrace of the traditional radio-format advertising spot. A big business sponsor delivering the same spot day after day with no specific relevance to the podcast carrying it. But most disruptive was Gillmor’s admonishment to “Give them the respect they are giving us.” A fair enough perspective for early adopters to support the sponsors first out of the gate with an influx of money, and the legitimization that entails. But in this case “respect” was demanded before it was earned.

Steve Gillmor’s podcasts are by his own admission sausage-making conversations among a group of technology industry observers. Couldn’t his flagship sponsor Earthlink have delivered a conversational spot about the how Internet connectivity touches people’s lives? They could have had a Robert Scoble type spend a day with a digital audio recorder walking the halls and chatting with employees about why they think Earthlink makes a difference in the lives of its users. That could have yielded ten 30 second spots with content appropriate, and in a format similar, to the Gillmor Gang. And for his part Steve Gillmor could have let the advertising content speak for itself instead of wrapping it in several additional minutes of why we should listen to it. We listeners would have appreciated advertising content in the format we tuned into the Gillmor Gang for in the first place – a conversation. No need for admonishment for respect.

If Podshow is serious about inventing a new advertising industry they would do well to start with the premise of podcasting that got them this far. Podcast listeners feel they are part of the conversation. A one-way audio medium has accomplished that with narrowly targeted shows, often proudly amateurish production values, and the unbridled enthusiasm of hosts that don’t know if they have an audience at all. Can traditional advertising campaigns from big companies with big-budget advertising departments hope to engage the podcast listening audience? That demographic has already abandoned terrestrial radio in large part because of those very advertising efforts. I saw Kris Jacob, VP of Business Development for Podshow, speak at an analyst conference recently and it was clear that Podshow knew their target demographic and the opportunity to engage them with advertising appropriate for podcast content. Why then six months later do we have a listener revolt over their attempts? Gillmor for his part acknowledges the issue and shows some of that coveted respect for the listener dissent.

But the answer is fundamentally simple in my view. Start with the premise that podcasts are conversations and inline advertising should be the same. If the incumbents can’t produce it then turn the job over to the amateurs. They are doing a fine job with the main content already! Maybe that’s already happening on Gillmor’s shows, but I don’t know. I’ve already stopped listening.

Is your customer support response time noteworthy? For the right reasons? When expectations are set so low by an industry it becomes easy to delight a customer with a quick and personal response.

What do you do with a customer that comes to your site wanting to buy a product you make? Well, if you are Timex you turn him away. I recently saw a Timex watch in a magazine that I wanted. That’s a strong consumer impulse to make a buying decision off of a print image and act on it. That puts Timex in an enviable position at that moment. All they need to do is give me the product I am coming to them to buy. But the first strike against them was that I knew from experience that their website was a mess of flash animation and endless subcategory navigation. So I followed the print directions to look at “select Kohl’s stores.” Well, my local Kohl’s apparently wasn’t select enough so strike two, and onto the website. After spending far too long searching I resorted to the live help chat. Great feature by the way. Unfortunately, the very helpful woman on the other end of the chat told me that the watch in question was only available in those select stores and not on the company website. She would be happy to report my frustration at being unable to buy from them and I wasn’t the first person this happened to. Apparently it’s not enough of a problem for Timex to decide to actually have their advertised product line available for purchase on their website. Telling the customer in this way that you don’t want his business is the kind of retail conversation you don’t want to have. Strike three, Timex.

Quick, Microsoft is offering Hotmail Plus for $19.95 per year. The offer expires Feb. 28th 2006. What happens then? Well, they don’t say. Is it a good deal? Beats me, they also don’t say what the price was previously or what it will be afterward.

There are no links on the page to the actual service so I’ll just do a search. That’s a little inconvenient for me, the potential customer, but maybe it’s a great deal. It must be a really good deal if Microsoft is making me work for it.

OK, a Google search for “Hotmail Plus” does not turn up relevant results for the service itself near the top. But there is a paid listing at the right for Hotmail Plus. If I click that link I get taken to the main (free) Hotmail sign up page. Nothing about the premium service, the Hotmail Plus service that I am looking for. I’ll just dig in and check it out a little bit by clicking on the red button with an arrow that says “Get if free.” Oh, wait, that’s just a graphic that looks exactly like a button one would click to move forward in the sign-up or information gathering process. It’s a big red button with a right facing arrow. Fortunately for me, that patient user, there is an identical button below that actually is a link to move forward. Of course.

Now I am fully into the signup process for a regular Hotmail account. That’s funny, I clicked on a sponsored link that said “Hotmail Plus” that appeared when I searched for Hotmail Plus. But I am taking right into the sign up process for a different service. There’s no obvious mention of the premium service I was looking for.

So Microsoft is paying for my attention by buying a search term for a premium product. Then they are using that purchased attention to lead me to something I didn’t want, that’s free when I was willing to pay, and using a broken user interface.

Disaster.

Clutter is a quick way to tell your customers that you don’t care about them.  Grocery Stores and mass merchandisers based in Bentonville, AR are notorious for cluttered aisles and haphazard displays.  As a retail conversation, clutter is a way to talk past your customers without regard for their perspective.  And as a disturbing trend it’s spreading to more and more of our daily interactions.  As I stand in Starbucks I notice it’s becoming more of a retail store, not by having shelves of related products for sale, but by adopting the retail tactic of clutter.  There are baskets of merchandise on the floor, displays I have to walk around, and boxes of CDs and mints taking up most of the counter space.  Is it a sign that things may be going badly for Starbucks?  Or is it, even worse, a sign of the inevitable decline in all establishments retail toward a common clutter look designed to steal your attention?  I wrote my early posts in a Starbucks and I’d hate to see the loss of that second office quality.

In another medium, CNN may be acknowledging that cable news channels have cluttered interfaces by stripping down the look of CNNi, their international channel.  Hey, MSNBC, you want to differentiate yourself from CNN and Fox News?  Here’s an opportunity to offer a clean look and say to your customers that you won’t insult them with constant onscreen motion and clutter.