Marketing Roadmaps -

Merging onto the Metaverse – the Creator Economy and Web 2.5

March 29, 2022 by Susan Getgood

The Creator Economy is the onramp to Web 3.0 and the metaverse. Let’s call it Web 2.5. We are still largely reliant on centralized platforms but shifting toward a new paradigm, where control and ownership shift from the platforms to creators and consumers.

In Web 2.0, creators are largely reliant on brand sponsorship and advertising for their income. While creators own their copyrights, the minute we share intellectual property on a social platform, we lose control of it, and we certainly aren’t compensated by the platforms even though they monetize it. The platform Terms-of-Service allow them to use it pretty much as they wish within the platform, and once shared, we have minimal control over how it gets shared onward. Even with content hosted on our own websites — where we have not extended a license to a platform — enforcing our intellectual property rights can be time consuming and costly.

The blockchain, the foundational technology of Web 3.0, disrupts this paradigm, and promises to return control of our content to creators and our consumption to consumers. Blockchain powers the transaction via cryptocurrency, manages the ownership /usage rights to content via NFTs, eliminates the middle layer, and creates the marketplace whereby both creator and consumer can directly benefit from popularity or scarcity. Today — limited edition digital art. Someday? First edition novels. Memberships. Limited run video content.

What does the Web 2.5 onramp look like? What are some of the forces/technologies driving us toward Web 3.0

Subscription services like Patreon, Substack and Only Fans where consumers can support their favorite content creators [side note — always pay attention to what the adult industry does as they HAVE to push the envelope to stay ahead of the censors]
Creator programs within the big platforms (YT, IG, TikTok) to keep creators “in the family”
Increasing value of first-party audiences (subscribers, website visitors etc) resulting from the anticipated deprecation of the cookie
Paypal, Venmo and Zelle make it easier to pay and be paid
Content management systems which store the content separately from the format in which it is displayed, powering things like RSS that make it easier to share content
Podcast directories (Spotify, iTunes, Google) that let us subscribe to our favorite podcast regardless of where it is hosted

All of these things are getting us ready for the paradigm shift.

We are still very much in the early adopter phase when it comes to Web 3.0, and specifically the period that marketers refer to as the Chasm (Moore, 1991), and the move from early adopters to early majority. Change is scary, and paradigm shifts even more so. What do we have to address to cross the chasm?

(Image borrowed from Crossing the Chasm – A Quick Summary)

I think we start with 3 things.

Simplicity — It’s all very complicated, at least to the average consumer. With so much jargon. We need to make things much simpler and easier to understand.

Security– We rely on central authority to maintain order as much as, if not more than, we distrust big business, financial institutions, and governments. The appeal of decentralization is offset by the fear that no one is in charge, that there are no controls. Block chain is its own policing agent but it’s hard for people to understand how.

Sustainability– Blockchain is computationally resource heavy. It needs big computers and lots of electricity to complete the underlying complex calculations that validate transactions. Bitcoin mining (the process of creating new blocks for the Bitcoin blockchain) is well known for its negative environmental impact. Newer currencies use a different technique, but there is a lot of jargon and everything is a bit obscure. This complexity inevitably leads will lead to consumer confusion, which means that Providers need to tell their sustainability story clearly and upfront.

The first point — Simplicity – is the key to crossing the chasm into mainstream adoption.

Getting ready for the paradigm shift from Web2 to Web3

March 25, 2022 by Susan Getgood

18 years ago, I started a blog.

More as an experiment than anything else. An exercise to understand a paradigm shift that was clearly in its early stages from what we now refer to as Web 1.0, a World Wide Web dominated by companies and mainstream media (in which consumers engaged with web pages largely in a read-only mode), to the social Web 2.0.

Starting with blogs in the early 2000s, and the social networks circa 2007 when Twitter launched and Facebook opened up to the public, the Web shifted to a community model. Commenting, sharing, liking. Consumers actively engage with content, and their contributions shape the conversation as much as the original.

As a marketer, I was fascinated by this shift in the media model, and used my blog and social channels to explore it as both participant and observer. I blogged pretty regularly for about 6 years and then sporadically thereafter. In part because I had less time but also because the paradigm stabilized. We’ve been actively in what many call the Creator Economy for the past 8-10 years.

The defining elements of the Creator Economy

The shift of content creation from mainstream media as the dominant paradigm to a democratized media landscape where both MSM and content creators are credible sources of information.
The accompanying change in “influence” No longer restricted to celebrity spokespersons and mainstream editors and pundits. Consumers began to use their voice to impact the marketplace – of products and of ideas. These gave rise to influencer marketing, and the expansion of branded content (FKA advertorial) as a business model to include influencer endorsement. Authentic consumer endorsement of products and services they use and love, not cookie-cutter broadcasting of marketing message points.
Innovations in monetization that allowed independent content creators to reap the benefits of their work — ad networks, influencer marketing agencies and platforms that connect brands with creators, sponsorship communities like Patreon etc. This led (inevitably) to the rise of the personal brand, and (more interestingly) a rich content landscape that offers a more level playing field for creators to find their niche.

It wasn’t that there wasn’t interesting stuff happening in the marketplace. It just wasn’t revolutionary, so I focused on the work. And more or less stopped writing on the blog. We are now on the verge of the next paradigm shift, from Web 2.0 to Web 3.0 and the Metaverse. I can’t think of a better place to work this out for myself than back here on my blog.

So what exactly are Web 3.0 and the metaverse? Apart from constantly evolving.

Web 3.0 refers to a number of technologies and web developments that collectively shift the paradigm from centralized platforms to decentralized, distributed computing (powered by blockchain technology) and interoperability. Cryptocurrency is an example of blockchain use, but there are other applications such as contracts, games and copyright management. Interoperability means that information can be easily shared/accessed across smart applications. Other technologies that are considered part of Web 3.0 – Artificial Intelligence, Augmented Reality, Virtual Reality. The end game (and we are quite a ways off) is ubiquity. Everything is interconnected and interoperable.

The metaverse is a construct that represents the result of all these technologies coming together to create an interoperable, interconnected virtual 3D world that reflects the “real” world while eliminating/reducing barriers. In the metaverse, you can attend a concert in Berlin while sitting in NY. Not just watch a live stream – be there, sitting “next” to your friend who is in Berlin. And you both can buy NFT limited edition concert t-shirts, with or without a real world element.

Exciting stuff. Some things more than others, but lots of stuff to explore. In my next post, I’ll dig into where we are today.

Resource: Nice roundup of tools and technologies that support the Creator Economy by venture firm SignalFire.

The changing nature of influence – from Lil Miquela to Fashion Ambitionist

June 21, 2019 by Susan Getgood

Lil Miquela is a fake “person” who seems real. Until the company that created her revealed that she was a virtual influencer last year in a publicity stunt, her 1.6 million followers presumably thought Miquela Sousa was just another teen Instagram star, not an avatar designed specifically to attract follows and likes. She has partnered with brands like Calvin Klein and Prada, and according to the NY Times, more than 80,000 people stream Lil Miquela’s songs on Spotify every month. She’s also not the only virtual influencer in the market, designed to be the perfect spokesperson. Some are more transparent than others that they are constructs; for example, KFC’s newest Colonel Sanders.

Fashion Ambitionist is a real person whose journey to matrimony, as documented this week on Instagram and pitched to sponsors, can best be described as staged spontaneity. For those that are not familiar, the short story is that her boyfriend is whisking her away for an amazing proposal in a faraway and romantic locale, with a variety of stops along the way. All of which is being documented in her Instagram stories. Supposedly, she is in the dark (at least about the details if not the ultimate objective), with everything being orchestrated by her boyfriend, friends and staff of her website. Maybe. There is a detailed sponsor deck for potential sponsors to evaluate the opportunity, so on some level she has to be in the know. It is after all her brand. In the end, though, it doesn’t matter whether or what she knows. It all feels a bit fake, even though they are undeniably real people and the whole thing is (at least somewhat) entertaining.

Fake person appearing real. Real person appearing fake. All in the service of finding followers and influencing them on behalf of brands.

There is no doubt that both Lil Miquela and Fashion Ambitionist have influence with their followers. But is this influencer marketing?

Yes. And no. Or at least, it is not consumer-to-consumer influencer marketing grounded in the genuine authentic endorsement of a consumer sharing her story and experiences with a product with her friends and yes, followers.

It is easy to see how Lil Miquela herself should perhaps be categorized as social marketing, not influencer marketing. Influencer marketing works because we like or identify with the person who is recommending a product, trust that recommendation is grounded in his or her own experience, and are therefore more likely to take action ourselves. While Lil Miquela seems real, her endorsements and actions are fabricated. She’s neither authentic nor genuine and her recommendations are simply advertisements. We can like and enjoy her content, but we are engaging in a pleasant fiction. We may share her content with our friends, but we should know, they should know, that they are engaging with an avatar, and responding to an ad, not another human. I strongly advocate for deeper disclosure than the simple #sponsored when it comes to avatars.

Fashion Ambitionist is a harder call. On its face, she is simply doing what all social influencers do – telling her story and weaving in brands as part of the tale. Just on a more dramatic scale. It’s not that different from what influencer marketing agencies (like SHE Media’s internal team) do when building programs for brands: we recruit influencers who love a brand to create sponsored content, although we don’t forget the sponsored disclosures. Since there aren’t any on these posts, either no one sponsored, which is sad, given the effort apparently expended, or they are violating FTC guidelines, which is just bad.

Except this Fashion Ambitionist stunt is different. Our goal with influencer marketing should be to have consumers create content that shows how brands are part of their lives. Not to have them stage their lives to provide a vehicle for brands. It’s a fine distinction.

It’s also unfortunately one that increasingly we collectively are not making. People are staging their lives for brands or trying to present some perfect image of themselves on Instagram in the interest of likes and followers. This isn’t authentic consumer storytelling. It’s a performance. Nothing wrong with it as a marketing activity; we should just understand what it is. Furthermore, when social posting detracts from actual enjoyment of the event, it’s not a good strategy and we are not getting the authentic engagement we wanted. Don’t miss the moment because you are trying to get the picture.

Note that I am not arguing against staged marketing opportunities. Flash mobs are fun. Virtual influencers are engaging in a creepy way. Some people are enjoying the Fashion Ambitionist content. In general, parties and events are a great way to create moments that can be shared across social media. Our BlogHer events have been providing sponsors with opportunities to connect with female consumers for more than 15 years, robot-free.

All these things — flash mobs, events, parties, virtual influencers – are opportunities for social marketing to tap into the desire of consumers to share content that excites them.

Influence, certainly. But influencer marketing well done isn’t just staging the event or making a social splash. It’s not about how much someone was paid to create content, and I am definitely not arguing that influencers shouldn’t be compensated for their work or that compensation somehow corrupts an endorsement. We don’t love a brand any less when it asks for our help in its marketing efforts.

Influencer marketing done right is about harnessing consumer passion for brands and connecting them to opportunities to share their love in the context of their own story. It’s about helping the brands reach those consumers in the right way, with the right opportunity, at the right time.

The influencer marketing moments that make my heart sing? Those are rooted in love.

A mom creating a sponsored post for a sunscreen and sharing a moment of joy of her child at the beach. A family test driving a car for a week and sharing their hectic, happy and not-so-happy moments along the way. A makeup lover sharing her tips, tricks and favorite products with her followers on YouTube, always trying out new things. Sometimes sponsored, sometimes not. A home chef leveraging her love of cooking into sponsored content opportunities and her own cookbook. Fans of a much-loved TV franchise sharing their excitement about the reboot.

Those moments when we capture that lightening in a bottle and connect a brand with its customer and make influencer marketing magic.

I love that.

— UPDATE 6/24 —

NY Times article on Fashion Ambitionist’s wedding stunt. Spoiler: they are married, sort of. French law has very specific residency requirements to legally marry in the country, so the stunt ended with a fake wedding. Which is perfect in its own way.

The lines between real life and entertainment are forever blurred thanks to reality television. Social media didn’t create this phenomenon; Fashion Ambitionist’s wedding stunt was no different than your typical reality show, which is why it captured public interest. If you were entertained by it, great. If you thought it was ridiculous, fine too. Different strokes for different folks.

But don’t confuse it with the principled practice of influencer marketing. The pitch wasn’t very good. Hard to read, light on the specific value for brands. Sponsored disclosure was terrible. The burst of followers is likely to be fleeting. It also was a lousy advertisement for Fashion Ambitionist as a legit influencer.

In other words, if you are mapping out your strategic plan to grow your own influence, this may not be the model to choose. It all depends on whether you want to be famous or infamous.

Because the difference between the two? It matters.

3 tips to make sure your influencer marketing works

June 16, 2019 by Susan Getgood

Does influencer marketing work? Of course word of mouth marketing works. It always has and always will. The endorsement of a consumer like you (or whom you aspire to be like) has always had power.

What makes social media marketing work is the social. The connection and conversation between and among humans. Respect, trust and drive toward community (homo sapiens expression of the pack instinct.) Digital media is simply the delivery mechanism that allows our communities to discard geographical considerations and allows us to replace, when we choose, the proxies offered by mass advertising with other consumers.

In the early days of influencer marketing, when it was small dollars and called blogger relations, we were perhaps collectively sloppy about the metrics. Potential reach as an example. Which is fair enough when you’re experimenting with a new tactic, but a non-starter as the tactic matures and acquires increasingly larger budgets.

To prove influencer marketing works, we have to address expectations, objectives and investment, and we just can’t show that it works. We have to demonstrate that it works BETTER than another tactic. That’s the RETURN on investment part. We also have to design our program for success. Good results from an influencer marketing program aren’t happy accidents. They are the result of solid planning that matches the tactic to the KPI and defines a clear, measurable and realistic objective.

Recently, the business press in our little corner of the world was full of headlines about @arii, an Instagrammer who unfortunately failed to sell the minimum number of products required in her test launch, and then complained, including about folks who got press kits and didn’t post.

Her Instagram complaint spawned a social media field day. Pundits wondered if influence was dead. Others pointed out the serious flaws in her business plan. For myself, I wondered why you would fail so spectacularly and then tell everyone.

Clearly, she didn’t have the influence she imagined, with her 2.6 million followers, or a solid business plan. It’s nice to have both, but it’s the solid business plan that is absolutely necessary. With a better plan, that she personally didn’t have the audience she needed for her product, might not have mattered.

Here are three influencer marketing lessons we can take away from her unfortunate tale.

Know your audience. Research your influencers. Does the audience generally engage on similar topics or like/share items similar to the one you plan to promote? Likewise, with anyone you identify as a potential influencer? Influence is that moment where endorsement sparks action. Without action, there is no influence. This action doesn’t need to be a digital action, but it is far easier (and cheaper) to quantify based on digital history. When the stakes are high, we also do consumer research that can quantify the full social impact, not just the social media impact. From her results, we can guess that she didn’t do rigorous due diligence about the audience, or the folks she identified as influencers (those who got press kits), and just assumed that her followers would buy and post about anything she presented them with. Hard no.
Consult qualified experts. We don’t know if she had advisors, but it certainly sounds like she did not. Your business plan and your marketing strategy will always benefit from seeking advice. Even if you decide to stick with your original plan, the process of talking it through will expose its weaknesses, giving you the opportunity to fix before, not after, launch. Don’t fall so in love with your idea that you aren’t receptive to criticism or alternative approaches.
Be honest about weaknesses and threats. We are generally great at identifying the strengths and opportunities in our idea. Not so much the weaknesses and threats. There were likely many weaknesses in this plan, but I want to focus on one: the belief that her follower number on Instagram translated into real reach. Some percentage of a following that large is bound to be bots even for influencers that have never purchased a single follower. An even larger number is lurkers. At SHE Media, we use a REACH RATE to understand the percentage of an audience that is actually viewing the content: IMPRESSIONS or VIEWS/FOLLOWERS. Likewise, ENGAGEMENT RATE looks at the engagements in the context of the views, not numbers of followers. ENGAGEMENTS/ IMPRESSIONS or VIEWS.

I’ve been doing social media marketing for 15 years and marketing for even longer, and no matter what the tactic or communication vehicle, the fundamentals always matter. Digital and the rise of social media have changed how we execute against our goals – all the stuff in the middle – but the start and the end are still and always the same.

At the start, you identify your unique value and the audience for that value, analyze your SWOT (Strengths/Weaknesses/Opportunities/Threats) and determine key objectives (awareness, purchase etc.) At the end, you evaluate your performance against the objectives. Applaud your successes, fix the things that didn’t work and do it all over again.

From a recent post on her Instagram, @arii seems to have taken the lessons of her failure on board. That is a great start for her next endeavor and I wish her the best of luck!

Instagram unlikable? A brief analysis of the impact of the proposed “unliking” of Instagram

May 6, 2019 by Susan Getgood

Last month, digital hobbyist Jane Manchun Wong discovered some inactive lines of code in Instagram that would turn off the display of likes on Instagram posts. Initially, Instagram claimed no immediate plans to test the functionality, but about 2 weeks later at the F8 Conference on April 30th, Facebook announced that it would shortly begin a limited test in Canada.

It’s a small but significant change. You’d still be able to like something, but the exchange would become a personal exchange between you and the content creator. Only the content creator will see who liked something and while content creators can see who, it appears that there may not be a running tally. In other words, they will have to manually count the likes. Instagram also seems to be testing other variations such as hiding the number of likes from the post creator and giving them the choice to see the likes.

Should Instagram turn on the “feature” across the platform, it would impact the social nature of Instagram.

Likes beget likes. It’s human nature: we are more likely to appreciate something when we tangibly see that others have also liked it. It doesn’t even have to be an endorsement by a person or people you admire. A volume of affection signals to us that this is something worthy of our attention, of our like.

Likes are also a key reference point for determining influencer value and the fees Instagram influencers are able to earn for branded content. The more you have, the more you are worth.

As a result, likes have become the next battleground against inauthentic content. Turning the public display off would be a fast, albeit drastic, path to shutting down a source of fraud.

The currency of likes is so strong for popularity that people have died trying to get impossible shots on mountains, towers and other wildly unsuitable places. It’s a strong argument for the platforms to address the issue, particularly with regard to children, which I will address in another post.

Reaction to the potential change has been mixed among influencers and brand marketers.

Some commenters channel Chicken Little (the sky is falling) while others like Dara Pollak of theskinnypignyc.com think it would not be such a bad thing. Says Dara:

Doing away with likes would put the focus back on the quality of the content, instead of just the numbers. Obviously, brands have to rely on numbers for their campaigns to show ROI, but they also should be paying attention to the influencer’s overall brand message to see if it aligns with theirs. If it doesn’t, the content would be disingenuous and likely fail anyway.

As a creator, it’s hard enough as it is to stand out, and when you’re constantly comparing yourself to others in your industry, it becomes an unhealthy obsession. I’m not speaking for everyone, as I know some people thrive off that form of competition, but I think that’s part of the problem. What used to be a fun industry is now just riddled with competition and envy. At this point, taking away likes won’t do away with that entirely, but it might bring a different and welcome change.”

Let’s look at the commercial implications of an “unlikable” Instagram.

Likes evolve into a more personal connection with the content creator. They can still be an indicator of the value of the content to the audience, just without the network effect that tends to inflate them. NOT seeing likes works the other way too; when we see something with few likes, we are perhaps less likely to like it – even if we do. Removing the social cue makes likes more authentic.
Comments become the principal social interaction on Instagram. This could drive increased authenticity and better conversation. The truly engaged comment and converse. Engagement rates will decrease, but the quality of engagement will be better.
Third-party measurement tools and models will be impacted; the degree depends on how reliant they are on publicly displayed information. If the change is released broadly, I’m inclined to believe that the Instagram Business API will support the data privately for marketers and approved API partners.
Conversion metrics will become even more important. Clicks to site, affiliate sales, strong calls to action to drive purchase from intent to action. Not surprising considering Instagram’s ecommerce initiatives, the latest of which, Instagram Checkout, enables users to buy items they see on the app without ever leaving it.

What should we do?

This is only a test. Instagram has not implemented this broadly. When/if it does, the final version may look very different from what is currently being tested.

That is, after all, the point of a test.

However, it doesn’t hurt to be prepared, so I recommend a few things.

Make sure your sponsored Instagram posts offer real entertainment or information value to the viewer. Creating great content is never a mistake.
Think about the call to action. Don’t rely on the more passive behavior of the like to measure success. Encourage an action – comment, swipe for more, check out the link in bio etc.
Review your measurement models – how you report success – and make sure your tools are keeping up with the platform changes, and will be able to support you, come what may.

This is a developing story. I am sure I will write about it again.