adMISSIONs

Who is king?

A once-great empire left in his wake, Disney CEO Michael Eisner gave a speech to the Hollywood Radio and Television Society  days before his departure from Mickey's throne saying, "content isn't actually king, as the saying goes, but that it's more of a steadfast queen, the true power behind the throne, who loyally serves whatever king currently holds the distribution scepter."

Setting aside his dubious legacy at Walt Disney's magical world, Eisner has a good point: what good is content if no one sees it. Distribution really is king. Long live the king.

Think of it this way: what you're selling is content, how you're found is distribution. And, oh how that is changing...

Maslow's Hierarchy remains unchanged by technology; we still seek to be recognized, have esteem and so on. And since most customers are human, you can be sure technology isn't driving any change in their motivations. Ah, but how they're able to act on those motivation is exciting for you and terrifying for legacy marketing channels.

What Eisner omits from his comments is erosion of corporate dominance in distribution. Technology has created a world of democratic distribution where your customers are shaping their experiences, casting votes with their attention and dollars.

How you get that attention and the dollars that follow comes down to making your message matter and making sure it can be found. After all, great content without solid distribution is the stuff liquidation sales are made of.

Giant squid caught on film

TOKYO (AP)-- When a nearly 20-foot-long tentacle was hauled aboard his research ship, Tsunemi Kubodera knew he had something big. Then it began sucking on his hands. But what came next excited him most -- hundreds of photos of a purplish-red sea monster doing battle 3,000 feet deep.

Okay, I know this has nothing to do with marketing or advertising; I tried for about fifteen-minutes to come up with a plausible thesis about possibilities-made-real, etc. But, the fact is I really just wanted that headline to show up on my "recent posts" list on the right side of the page.

Forgive me.

If you can't beat 'em, buy 'em

In what they may consider a bold initiative, major media companies are increasingly fighting audience erosion by trying to out-do what their on line competitors are doing. Proof positive comes in today's Wall Street Journal (subscription required):

Driven by fear of losing advertisers and audience to the Internet, large media conglomerates are spending billions in a spate of acquisitions and aggressive Internet initiatives, and are likely to keep on spending.

Companies like Viacom Inc., News Corp. and Time Warner Inc. worry that they will miss the rapid expansion of Internet advertising while their own, more-traditional sources of revenue growth are slowing. Some hope to directly challenge the giant portals like Yahoo Inc. and Google Inc. -- Web sites that serve as gateways to the Internet. Others are transferring some of their most valuable content to online sites, even though that risks alienating their traditional distribution partners.

"Traditional distribution partners." Like a cross-country runner in cement sneakers, legacy players can see the finish line but can't seem to get their feet moving that way. Going through the motions and trying to "buy" the channel screams out of old-line thinking isn't going to get it done. When rules change, your game has to change.

Are you doing the same thing? Remember push vs. pull. (see: They Just Don't Get It) Denying this shift is akin to lamenting the halcyon days of 50¢ gasoline; it's a new world. Dig deep, pay up and keep driving.

Sea changes for media

The ocean went away. That's chilling description of what happened moments before last Christmas' Tsunami. Well, Happy New Year because the ocean's going away again and the astute are headed for higher ground. I'm talking about the Tsunami-like changes sweeping through and redefining what we once knew as "the media."

An early observer of this sea change, former FCC Chairman Michael Powell described the shift as "Application Separation." In the old days you needed a tower, a license, equipment, people, money, etc. Today all you need is Internet access.

Terry Heaton's report summarizes Powell's view: "one no longer needs to own the infrastructure in order to publish, distribute or broadcast content. This is turning the media world upside-down, and most of the traditional media response, I'm sorry, falls under the category of "they just don't get it."

Terry's insights and advice are food for thought for broadcasters and marketers alike. Do you think the choice of channels is the only place where an increasingly sophisticated consumer is exerting their will?

Here's how I see Terry's action plan for broadcasters adapted for marketers...

Rising cost for share of mind

I want strawberries.
I want strawberries.
I want strawberries. 
I want strawberries, dadddddy.

My three year old regularly uses the same old marketing approach still in wide use today: say it enough times and people will believe it. In the days of limited media choice there was some truth that idea. But, there is today nearly unlimited media choice and for marketing saying it does not make it so anymore.

Share of mind as a concept of taking ownership of consumer’s attention is getting to be an expensive proposition. Marketing is sales. Sales is persuasion. Persuasion as a marketing exchange happens when you capture the consumer’s imagination.

I advise clients that unless we can carve out our own space in their mind, we’re just another float in a passing parade of pretty floats. Ownership is an option: own a medium--television, radio, outdoor, etc. If you can’t own it all, own one outlet--say a radio station. Can’t own the station? Own a daypart. Own a day. Own something. (And be consistent with it!)

General Motors takes it to a whole new level with an aggressive ownership of the Tonight Show and integrated promotion on several other programs. Lauded as innovative and aggressive, their strategy is really an old trick from deep in the bag.

It’s a prime example of marketers seeking to create mass impact in a world of declining mass reach outlets.

This is also marks retreat for Chevrolet from failed efforts to “blog” the new HHR vehicle they’re hyping in the campaign; new tools blew up, so they return to the proven path...

Read the story in AdAge.com