Old Spice Reaps Rewards of Viral Campaign

Sometimes an ad for a product is so clever that you remember the ad but not the product. Not so with Old Spice’s new “Smell Like a Man, Man,” campaign which went viral earlier this year. According to a Nielsen report which was noted in Brandweek , sales of Old Spice Body Wash have jumped 55% in the past three months and 107% this past month. “Gary Stibel, CEO and founder of The New England Consulting Group, said his data also shows a lift for Old Spice. “We think that Old Spice is up. We don’t think it’s up in the double digits, but it’s up meaningfully, and we think it’s driven 100 percent by marketing.” What’s not measurable is how much help the campaign had from the news coverage it received. Type “Old Spice” into Google news and you’ll find more than 2,000 articles have been written by everyone from Business Week to MTV to. . . us. If P&G had bought ad space on all of these publications, the cost would have been astronomical, but now they’re a part of advertising history and that is, to quote another ad genius, priceless. The “Old Spice Guy”, Isaiah Mustafa, is now on his way to becoming a movie star with a role in Jennifer Aniston’s new movie. Now that’s how you breath new life into an old brand.

Content Mission: Journalists See Online Strong and Offline Fading

As the definition of a journalist gets stretched to the outer limits due to the proliferation of content farms and $10 per ‘article’ writers, it’s understandable that there is some concern in the ranks. It’s not there won’t be outlets for their work but it’s more about the state of the traditional outlets where most have made their living. Mashable reports on a recent survey which reveal these concerns In a survey conducted over May and June this year, PR network Oriella asked media moguls how the Internet was affecting their business, their publishing formats and even the quality of the content issuing forth from their newsrooms. In a survey of 770 journalists across 15 countries, the company determined that, while media creators are slightly more optimistic than they were last year about maintaining revenues vis-a-vis the rise of online ad budgets, many are still worried about whether traditional media formats can succeed in the long run. “Concerns about the viability of journalists’ traditional media channels (print, radio or television) have intensified,” the report reads. Of course, loss of advertising dollars leads the way for concern about viability of traditional media offerings. Since more and more people are moving online for their news, there will be fewer dollars available from advertisers who can support the kind of staffs that these outlets traditionally require. Since most people can see the chain reaction of these concerns the next obvious worry is if their traditional offline mediums will survive or just go away (if that hasn’t happened already). In the end, there may be no stopping these sweeping changes. Many act as if it’s the fault of the traditional media themselves but it’s really just people changing and moving to where they are more comfortable. Online is that place and not’s because the traditional media was bad. Where the trouble has come is the slow pace of adaption by traditional media of the online space. In essence, they have created their own troubles by waiting too long and having to react to this paradigm shift rather than help mold it. Traditional media, for the most part, missed a golden opportunity. Why did they miss it? I think it was because they were getting fat and happy by being unchallenged at the top of the media heap for too long. At that point you can lose your edge. They have simply lost their edge. With businesses being run by human beings this will happen. Most people want to go into cruise control when things are going well but they unfortunately lose focus at that point and are vulnerable to being replaced. Since I am part of the ‘new media’ side of the coin it’s easy to lob criticism at the traditional side of the media. The trouble with that is that I then become no better and could very well suffer the same consequences. For new media to really thrive we have to stay on top of the issues that face our industry as well. The primary one that I see is maintaining a high level of quality. With content farms churning out content that is more of a crapshoot with regards to quality this can end up being trouble. If enough readers and content consumers get burned they will look elsewhere for information. Delivery methods may change but quality never goes out of style. Right now, the online publishing world needs to be very vigilant regarding the state of the quality of content. There’s plenty of talk but little action and as the content farm mentality gains momentum the window of opportunity to take this problem by the horns is closing very rapidly. Could the online space suffer a similar fate to the offline space? Could the proliferation of lower quality content create enough discontent amongst content consumers that they will look elsewhere? Of course, where are they going to look, back to the offline space? Not necessarily but they may have less patience thus making it hard for even online entities to keep advertisers interested. So what’s your take?

Woot! The Associated Press Gets a Taste of Its Own Medicine!

You may already be aware that The Associated Press (AP) has gone down a ludicrous path of insisting you owe them money, if you quote one of their stories. Now it appears the news organization has been caught indulging in some double-standards, by quoting from Woot’s announcement that it had been acquired by Amazon.com. In light of this, the good-humored folks over at Woot have decided to point out the hypocrisy to AP. So, The AP, here we are. Just to be fair about this, we’ve used your  very own pricing scheme to calculate how much you owe us. By looking through the link above, and comparing your post with our original letter, we’ve figured you owe us roughly $17.50 for the content you borrowed from our blog post, which, by the way, we worked very very hard to create. LMAO! The post continues with an offer to waive the money owed, in exchange for the AP buying today’s Woot deal–a pair of Sennheiser in-ear headphones. Anyway, The AP, please send that proof of receipt to service@woot.com before the end of the day. We’re major digital players now. Don’t force us to pass this matter to a collection agency. I don’t know about you, but coming back from a long weekend off is always hard. But boy, it’s so much easier when you get to enjoy someone sticking-it to the AP. ( Hat-tip ) Join the Marketing Pilgrim Facebook Community

Google & Twitter Fight for Your Right to Break the News First

Did you know there’s a ruling before the appeals court that, if not overturned, might prevent you from using Twitter to share some hot news topic you just heard about? It might also prevent Google News from indexing a blog post until given the go ahead by the original source of the news? Crazy? Yes, but you can thank the antiquated laws of this country. You can also thank Google and Twitter for going to bat on our behalf. And on behalf of Theflyonthewall.com. Google Inc and Twitter Inc have asked an appeals court to overturn a lower court’s decision to bar Theflyonthewall.com from issuing immediate news on analyst research from several Wall Street banks…In March, U.S. District Judge Denise Cote said Theflyonthewall.com engaged in “systematic misappropriation,” essentially getting a “free ride” from its quick publication of upgrades and downgrades that can move stocks higher and lower. Google and Twitter are arguing that the law that give a period of “exclusivity” to to influential news organizations is obsolete. Of course, it’s not all a selfless act. If the ruling is upheld, then Google News might not be able to display news results until a certain amount of time had passed or Twitter could be barred from breaking news stories–something that it’s grown dependent on over the past few years. Will it get overturned? Who knows? You can never tell whether our judicial system will go with common sense or the common cent. However, if the ruling is upheld, it’s going to create some interesting scenarios. Like this one presented by Google and Twitter: “How, for example, would a court pick a time period during which facts about the recent Times Square bombing attempt would be non-reportable by others?”

Attorney Generals See Google Privacy as Means to Boost Careers?

Google’s facing more heat over the revelation it may have broken privacy laws when it “accidentally” snooped on public Wi-Fi networks. I had two choices with this story . Rejected, by a very close margin, was this amazing little factoid: Google said it accidentally gathered data from unsecured Wi-Fi networks…The practice has gone on at least since 2008. OK, do the words “accidentally” and “2008″ really go together. Can you image BP getting away with “we’ve been accidentally pumping oil into the gulf for two years?” I think not. However, I decided to go with the news that 30 attorney generals held a conference call to discuss whether they should take collective action. Now, I readily admit that I’m a cynic. My first thought was: attorney generals are only getting involved because this is Google and legal action against the search engine is high-profile enough to help their careers. I was about to squash that little voice in my head, then I read this: The call was led by Richard Blumenthal, the longtime attorney general in Connecticut…is now running for the U.S. Senate… Oh purleeze! Is there any politician left that will do the right thing, because it’s the right thing–and not because it will help with his career?