Currency Marketing | CU Brand Blog

Welcome To North America's Premier Credit Union Marketing Agency

11/30/2007

News flash: user-generated content is dumb!

By Tim McAlpine

I was catching up on my blog reading last night when I stumbled upon this comment by Ron Shevlin on his Marketing ROI: Whims from Ron Shevlin blog.

"I think UGC (user-generated content) is dumb. (nothing like burying THAT statement in a comment where hopefully nobody sees it)"

Well Ron, I saw it and it stopped me in my tracks. I am compelled to comment.

Ron had an excellent discussion on "Hiding behind the veil of experimentation" that you should read before going further. As usual, Ron has given a clear and well-argued point of view.

I read Ron's blog regularly and tend to agree with each post. He is a thought leader in the marketing return on investment space and, trust me, his brain is at least 230% bigger than mine. I agree that companies should not be hiding behind experimentation for experimentation sake. I agree that every marketing initiative deserves measurement.

What I took exception to is the blanket statement deep in the comments that user-generated content is dumb.

I believe that a brand is no longer something that can be controlled from behind the marketing and public relations desk. I believe that successful brands in today's over-saturated marketplace have to engage with the audience in new and meaningful ways that create two-way dialogue.

User-generated content is not just people submitting goofy videos, personalizing a company jingle or amateurs producing a Doritos Superbowl Ad. As defined by the user-generated content kings at Wikipedia, user-generated content refers to various kinds of media content, publicly available that are produced by end-users. User-generated content is a two-way conversation. The comments on this and every other blog are examples of user-generated content.

I spend the lion's share of my time thinking about how to differentiate credit unions and I believe that credit unions need to work harder to engage members and potential members. We need to go beyond the safety of traditional advertising and get out of the statement-stuffer mentality of the past.

To say user-generated content is dumb is to ignore the crashing reality of Web 2.0 and the rise of social networking as the primary use of the web.

I don't think user-generated content is dumb. How about you?

UPDATE: Due to Ron's comment clarifying that he meant user-generated advertising and not just user-generated-content, I have adjusted the poll to read user-generated advertising instead. As Ron was the first to arrive at the scene of the crime, there were no votes cast. Sorry Ron, at least I am helping your Technorati ranking!

P.S. Hey Ron, you asked the Credit Union Warrior what it took to get featured on our blog. I guess you figured it out. I will agree that a great percentage of what is on YouTube could be considered dumb!

Comments

1) Ron Shevlin @ Nov 30, 2007
http://marketingroi.wordpress.com

I feel compelled to clarify and -- to a certain extent -- take back my remark. On one hand, my comment was intended in an off-hand manner, but that's no excuse (blogging and commenting is a public sport).

But on further thought, I realized I wasn't specific enough with the comment. UGC like user reviews and comments are very valuable and not dumb at all. Instead, it's user-generated advertising that I think holds little value. And more importantly, what I was really trying to rail against was this "student body shift left" mentality that so many marketers have displayed, glomming onto the UGC contests and campaigns like they're some sort of branding white knight in shining armor.

Having said all that... I think you should fix the wording of your poll.

2) Gene Blishen @ Nov 30, 2007
http://www.tinfoiling.com

Ron - so advertising is not content? Seriously I do agree with you in that user reviews and comments are valuable and can become viral which is what the marketers want to glom onto. Tim's writing "statement-stuffer mentality" is the stuff that T-shirts are made of. Remember advertising should be like sex -- always safe.

3) Ron Shevlin @ Nov 30, 2007
http://marketingroi.wordpress.com

@Gene: I don't know if it was for Doritos, or what brand of chips it was, but in one ad (TV commercial), there's a hot model (Ally something?) who takes a bite of the chip and things go bouncing off the wall. You going to to try and tell me that that's "content"? Or how about the financial services firm that spends its 30 seconds in its ads telling people how they help them "achieve their dreams". Content? Not buying it. There's a place for this stuff in the buying cycle (it's up front, in the awareness stage). But I'm having a tough time seeing my way to believing that a video submitted by some 23-year old art school grad of her friends dancing to a song written about a bank to the tune of some popular rap song can be considered "content". It's entertainment.

4) Terrell @ Nov 30, 2007

I have to admit, after reading Ron's post I was kind of confused...maybe it's because of the mixed messages I keep getting. On the one hand I hear that old ways of marketing (read: measurable) don't work anymore. I consistently hear that direct mail and billboards are dead. And then, on the other hand, I hear that experimenting isn't necessarily the right answer either.

It makes my brain hurt. All I know is the Young & Free campaign is AWESOME. And that I like this post.

5) Jeffry Pilcher @ Nov 30, 2007
http://www.webermarketing.com

Fight! Fight! Fight!

@Terrell: I'm with you (on all points). This is good stuff. I'll get you a beer at halftime.

Advertising as we know it is dead. The only thing propping up the average person's interest in ads is the invitation for everyone to participate. Once that dries up, what will advertising be left with? The Superbowl?

@Ron: If you mean that 'User-Generated Feedback' is okay but not 'User-Generated Content,' I'll have to disagree. As a marketer, I'm both very skeptical and very wary of handing over control, but I'm also very curious and very optimistic that the collective yield holds greater possibilities than my singular vision.

6) Jeffry Pilcher @ Nov 30, 2007
http://www.webermarketing.com

Now after reading the update/disclosure/clarification, I'll have to ponder the distinction between "content" and "advertising."

Let me get another beer...

7) terrell @ Nov 30, 2007
http://blog.veritycu.com

Jeffry, you should have a Pyramid Snowcap Ale. It's fantastic, and potent.

8) Jeffry Pilcher @ Nov 30, 2007
http://www.webermarketing.com

Dude!!! That is freaky! I've got one in my hand RIGHT NOW! I went to the Weber Marketing fridge and there was nothing but darks and porters... and one Snowcap. Terrell, can you see my office with binoculars or something from where you are?

9) Caleb Chang @ Nov 30, 2007

@ Jeffry - all the peeps on Twitter know what you're drinking because we're all following Mark Weber and Mark is watching you :) Going to sign-up for Twitter now?

10) Tim McAlpine @ Nov 30, 2007
http://www.currencymarketing.ca/blog

I love how our blog has become a Twitter competitor. We have just taken it to the next level!

11) Jeffry Pilcher @ Nov 30, 2007
http://www.webermarketing.com

Funny. Nice try. Mark is at a Big Important Meeting right now.

And there's no chance he's on Twitter. (But he can see the fridge from his office...hmmm).

12) Jeff Hardin @ Nov 30, 2007
http://www.cucommunicator.wordpress.com

Tim - thanks for posting this. I'm with Terrell in that there are a lot of mixed messages about what works and what's effective these days.

I will say that with the updates and clarifications, I agree with both of you. The two-way communication offered by Social Media is ignored at the peril of any business that thrives on good customer relationships.

On the other hand, user generated ads, as Ron seems to suggest, in my view are mostly dreck. But I also think that 99% of all advertising is dreck (so I guess the UGA is at least cheaper).

Finally, if Ron's brain is 230% larger than yours Tim, I'm in deep, deep trouble ... since I figure your nogg is about 230% larger than mine. :)

13) Ron Shevlin @ Dec 01, 2007
http://marketingroi.wordpress.com

Terrell: Now you're confusing ME. I keep reading how the old ways of marketing -- i.e., unmeasurable, mass marketing -- is dead. And yes, I read, too, that direct mail is dead thanks to the Internet. But at no point in my original blog post did I ever recommend NOT experimenting. In fact, I urged firms to do a better job of experimenting, or rather, create a more strategic framework for experimenting -- and measuring the impact of those experiments (which I called tests). The UGC campaign that the bank I alluded to is running will generate a lot of submissions. Big deal. What does it buy them? More business? Deeper relationships? If they say yes, I'll say how do you know? And I'll bet the $7 in my pocket they don't have a good reason for that.

And I just forwarded a transcript of this whole page to Mark Weber.

14) Trey Reeme @ Dec 01, 2007
http://www.treyreeme.com

@rshevlin, I believe your last comment is a good summation - that creating a strategic framework for experimentation and then measuring the impact is the key.

I didn't think you were referring to Y&F Alberta, btw. I assumed you were referring to something on this side of the border. Am I correct?

15) Jeffry Pilcher @ Dec 01, 2007
http://www.webermarketing.com

I believe Ron is referring to Wells Fargo's Rose Bowl TV commercial video contest:

http://backstage.wellsfargo.com/centerstage

The contest asks people to make their own "music video" using a song they supply. This is one of the major flaws with how this promotion was designed. It's going to lead to a bunch of similar executions. I expect many of the videos will look alike. One thing is for sure: They will all sound 100% alike, and that is going to be borrrrriiinnnngg.

16) bg @ Dec 10, 2007
http://makethelogobigger.blogspot.com

The UGC or UGA term is just too all-inclusive now. I call it user-generated response, not advertising, because from an client POV when they run a contest, they put in place restrictions that no agency would ever have to deal with when presenting an idea. From music, to art, to message, and agency has far more leeway during the initial concept presentation. Joe consumer gets told: no copyright material, no profanity, nothing unsafe, use this logo, etc.

True user-generated content is either Snakes on a Blog or Mentos and Coke because nobody on the brand side was expecting that. It's a concept that comes out of having no restrictions, and that's the buzz that brands want to be a part of.

Stuff like that literally changed the brandscape for how consumers treat products in the online space. If that had been a brand-sponsored contest though? No way you get the same result because it would’ve been watered down.

The Doritos Super Bowl spots are really just the typical ad agency stuff they would run for :30 spots, but because the general public was 'let in' on the process did it generate more interest for the brand.

My 2¢.

17) bg @ Dec 10, 2007
http://makethelogobigger.blogspot.com

(Sorry for the User-Generated Grammar.)

Add a comment

BLOG SEARCH

SPEAKING

NCUF Real Solutions Conference
01-21-2010
Orlando, FL
+ Visit site

CUNA Business and Marketing Council Conference
03-23-2010
Washington, DC
+ Visit site

33rd Annual National Directors' Convention
08-06-2010
Las Vegas, NV
+ Visit site

Interested in having Tim McAlpine speak at your next credit union event?
+ Tim's profile (PDF)
+ Visit speaking page
+ Book Tim now!

*Name:
*E-mail:	(Will not display with comments)
Website:
Comments:
	Enter text shown in the image below:

News flash: user-generated content is dumb!

Comments

Add a comment

BLOG SEARCH

BLOG CATEGORIES

ARCHIVES

OUR WRITERS

FAVOURITE BLOGS

RECENT POSTS

OUR PODCASTS

SPEAKING

WORTH READING

SITE RANKING