I’ve been thinking quite a bit about Nikon and alli. Not because I am considering becoming a customer of either because, in order, not now and not likely.
Because the blog campaigns of both have taken a few hits lately. Some deserved and some not so.
Let’s start with Nikon, which loaned expensive digital SLR cameras to about 50 marketing and PR bloggers this spring. No obligation to write, and a promise of a discount if they decided to keep the camera after the review period. Doesn’t sound like a bad program, does it? Seems to respect the bloggers. Not that different from other sampling programs the company has done.
Many bloggers, myself included, didn’t have any major problems with the campaign. The outreach was well within recommended guidelines, and the recipients of the loaner cameras all disclosed their participation in everything they wrote about the camera.
Well, Chicken Little, get out of the way and NEVER underestimate our collective ability to navel gaze. In the eyes of some marketing bloggers, there were serious flaws with the program, and recipients of the loaners couldn’t be objective about the program, let alone the camera. [Note: I am not a camera recipient.]
Did the value of the camera, far more than the usual product sample, create the problem? Perhaps, but readers are smart enough to filter what they read, provided there is full disclosure. Which there was.
Another criticism was that the 50 or so chosen participants were people with whom Nikon’s agency already had relationships. Uhmm. This is one of the key recommendations we make in blogger relations — know your customers. If marketing types are likely prospects for a product, which in this case they are, why shouldn’t you reach out to them? If your goal is to get people talking about your product, why wouldn’t you select a group that would be highly likely to try the camera and then tell others?
Some bloggers felt strongly that blogger relations programs should always benefit the larger community, not just those selected to participate. They asked, how does giving cameras to some benefit all? This is a lovely thought, but not terribly practical, and not really necessary. We cannot expect every outreach, from every company, to benefit every member of the community. It’s nice when they do, and I am a firm believer in companies giving back. But sometimes, they just want a little talk about their products, so they reach out to influencers. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
The one thing I would fault Nikon on is not getting more involved with the people trying the camera. Hands off is one thing. No engagement is another. If the recipients are part of a community you want to reach, you ought to at least talk with them….Doesn’t have to be a focus group or even structured feedback. I’d also like to see the company do some sampling programs with other bloggers that would be equally interested in Nikon cameras. Not just this group of marketers.
But these are quibbles. Overall, I still put the Nikon campaign into the "good" column.
Now to alli. My oh my, what a blogstorm Debbie Weil set off with her request for comments on GlaxoSmithKline’s blog for weight loss drug alli. Read all about it and then come back.
Was asking for comments wrong? Maybe. But that’s not what I want to talk about, and that horse is pretty dead anyway.
It was the wrong question. The right question, as I left in a comment on Debbie’s blog, was Why wasn’t the blog getting comments? If Debbie had asked this question, the response would have been far different.
I don’t think the alli blog and bloggers are fake in their concern or desire to help people lose weight. Sure, they have commercial imperatives, but they really seem to believe in their product. So why no comments?
Quite literally, because nobody wants to talk about this shit.
I commend the folks at GSK for their frankness about the side effects of alli. But, let’s face it, how many people want to read about "treatment effects?" Or write about their own, assuming that is even allowed. When we keep reading about how potential employers are googling us to find out about our pasts, who would want to admit that they depend on Depends?
The problem with the alli blog, and the conversation or lack thereof, is that it focuses on the product, not on people. And that’s the wrong focus.
People may consider taking this drug, but not because they want to be alli users. Not because there is any cachet in being an alli user. I think we are all quite clear on that. They’ll consider this drug because they want to lose weight and other alternatives either haven’t worked or don’t appeal.
That’s your community: people who want to lose weight. So if you want to serve the community, you provide information and resources that meet the needs of the community. Sure, you can provide information on your product. It would be silly not to. But everything can’t be branded, sanitized, corporate-approved alli content. That’s a bit dull. And doesn’t inspire comments.
So let me step into my monday-morning-quarterback chair and share some thoughts on what I think might work better. And perhaps start a little conversation.
A big part of the alli message is that you have to change your lifestyle, not just pop a pill. Exercise more. Eat better. So, find some experts, preferably people who are already blogging on these topics, and ask them to write for you. Find a food blogger who writes about low fat cooking and ask her to write a food column. I am certain that a major worry for many considering alli is how they can continue to eat well with their families. Offer a recipe makeover that takes a family favorite down to reasonable fat levels.
In other words, give back to the community before you ask them to buy from you. And make sure that what you are offering is useful whether a person ever takes the drug or not.
Link out to other reputable weight loss sites and resources. Do you run the risk that the dieter might go with South Beach instead of alli? Sure, but you run that risk anyway. By being open, by providing access to alternatives, you move away from simply being a corporate product site to becoming a real resource for the community.
And that’s how you become part of the community.
Now, a company, GSK or any other, doesn’t have to do any of this. In which case, I’m not sure it really needs a blog.
If all you want to do is push information out, stick to a Web site. Nobody really expects to talk to you there.
Tags: blogger relations, Nikon, alli, ethics
Allan Jenkins says
Susan, that’s the best take… far better than mine… on the problems with the alliconnect blog.
Mary Schmidt says
Susan,
You hit on the core problem. I checked out the “blog” and it’s a PR pitch. I give Debbie and her client some credit for trying to make it more interesting (bloggy, if you will) but – no – it’s not a conversation, aand that’s the true value of blogging.
Eric Eggertson says
Thank you for summing up the issue so neatly. Now all I have to do is link to it and write “What Susan said.”
Common Sense PR says
What Susan Said (about the AlliConnect Blog)
After much blathering around the blogosphere, and several writers/podcasters coming close to Susan Getgoods point, she steps forward and explains what was wrong with the AlliConnect Blog.
(For those who dont follow PR/marketing blogs, a s…
Yvonne DiVita says
Well…I commented. As a favor to Debbie. But, when I asked for an interview… I was given the usual red tape and runaround. They’re ‘afraid’ to let me interview. They want to approve my questions. I think Debbie can slowly turn that blog into a more useful net presence, but only if GSK loosens up a bit.
CK says
“…and NEVER underestimate our collective ability to navel gaze.” Interesting, I see this as such an exciting time to be a marketer and more so a community that can discuss program formats and such.
Being the program was introduced in, what, April?, and it’s now late July–I think we’ve come a long way in all learning what we find does and does not work. We can use that in our work and to advise other colleagues. Since BRPs will be around for years to come I think that a few months of discussion are warranted. And I feel blessed to have been able to navel gaze with so many fine marketers.
Jonathan Trenn says
Susan
In the end, a company like Nikon is going to look to see if the program created value for them. Did this effort enhance the brand? Did it sell more product? And the audience, the readers of the bloggers that were chosen will need info from these bloggers to help them become better informed potential camera buyers…with a hopeful nudge in the direction of Nikon.
Did that happen? I don’t know. It seemed everyone (most of the bloggers and their audiences are in the marketing/internet arena) ended talking about whether or not the program was the way to go about it. Not about the camera itself.
I wrote and posted a new blog entry last night, writing some stuff that you’ll likely disagree with Susan. Interested in your take. You can see it here:
http://marketingconversation.com/2007/07/26/if-i-was-to-setup-a-blogger-relations-program/
Jonathan
CK says
Susan: Were you in marketing in Web 1.0 days (I truly don’t know and sincerly ask)? Because you should have seen the myriad conferences and multiple-months discussions over marketing programs (e.g. email, SPAM policies, Web best practices) when that medium was new.
This discussions (what you label “navel-gazing”) is not new, it’s part of progress. I sure don’t want to be 20-years back when no one felt comfortable discussing practices “out in the open” and kept practices close to the vest. What’s more? I’m glad more are coming on board and voicing their opinions.
Kami Huyse says
Wow, I missed this on my maternity leave, but I completely agree with you about this. When you focus on your product you miss the boat in this arena.
Geoff Livingston says
Full disclosure: I commented as a favor to Debbie.
The alli controversy’s interesting. Not so much the controversy (anything in email is subject to blogging), but the fact that there are blogs that are well read, yet do not get comments.
We see this a lot in DC with federal and public sector related blogs. For example, Chris Dorobbek says FCW Insider rarely gets comments, but he gets tons of off-line chats based on entries. Are they really not successful if there are no comments?
Susan Getgood says
Thanks for all the comments everyone. I love it when something I write gets people thinking, and I know you all do too.
In comment/answer to some of your comments. I have no problem with analyzing programs of others and having full and frank discussion of issues. I just believe we collectively are holding the Nikon program to a different standard than we might another program simply because it was targeted at marketing people. The ultimate test of a program is, does it achieve ITS goals, not whether the community does or doesn’t like it.
As to whether I was in marketing in the Web 1.0 days, the answer is yes. Google me and you’ll see that I worked for an Internet and Spam filtering company for ten years, and was very involved in many of the issues CK referred to in her comments.
Susan Getgood says
Geoff — I don’t think a blog has to have comments to be successful. Some high profile bloggers maintain that the way to comment isn’t on the blog itself, but in a post on your blog. Assuming you have one, which is where I believe that argument falls apart.
But you do have to find some way to talk with your readers, and let them talk with you. If email, or Twitter or Pounce or whatever works for you, that’s fine, as long as you bring it back to the blog somehow.
Jonathan – I read your post, and will definitely leave a comment. We agree more than we disagree 🙂
John Cass says
Good post Susan.
Your point about making the GSK blog interesting is all about relevancy to me. Stonyfield Farms did not write about Yogurt but about organic farming and healthy kids. More about the interests and lifestyles of the readers. I think you are right about the content strategy.
In the same line I think the Debbie’s comment outreach strategy was off base as it was not relevant to many of the people approached, who were marketing people rather than interested in weight loss.
CK says
“The ultimate test of a program is, does it achieve ITS goals, not whether the community does or doesn’t like it.”
Do people buy things they do not like? When there are so many other options?
I understand that Nikon did the BPR in order to engage more marketing people –in the community–to buy and be aware of Nikon offerings (cameras). I know that marketers read marketing blogs…so shouldn’t it matter that the very people who read those blogs like a program? To me that speaks to the objectives being that Nikon wanted to increase sales (I’m sure you agree that’s their core objective). See, while 50 bloggers (in the marketing community, as I understand) got cameras, Nikon’s focus isn’t the 50–it’s who is influenced by the 50 (influenced to buy and refer the cameras.) I always look at customer/prospect reaction as a core objective, btw.
So if the community is the customer, then it does matter if the community likes it–and ends up buying.
another note: what’s wild is that Nikon got a lot of ink…but back to positioning 101, the way that this community is remembering it? Not as camera co. but as the camera BRP program.
Susan Getgood says
A couple of final comments, and then I am going to move onto something else. I don’t think the entire marketing/pr blogging community hated the Nikon campaign. And beyond us, few people even will know or care about it 6 months from now. Quite a few of the bloggers who received cameras were already known photo-enthusiasts — BL Ochman, David Parmet spring immediately to mind. And they are still taking pictures with their cameras. Who knows what the long term results of the campaign will be?
Hopefully, regardless of where any one of us fell on this campaign, we all learned something that we can apply in our own work. For my part, I just hope that one of the learnings wasn’t to not reach out to marketing bloggers because we analyze everything to the nth degree 🙂