A FOR COMPANIES

It is hardly news to anyone that the media as we once knew it is in a state of perpetual decline. Newspapers and magazines are struggling to stay afloat as everyone continues to turn their eyes away from the paper and toward their computer screens. And when their eyes go to those screens, they don’t immediately seek out the website of traditional media strongholds like the New York Times or Time magazine. No, they look for something different, something new – and so we have witnessed and participated in the rise of the blogger.

Blogs and bloggers have taken the place of newspapers and journalists in the lives of many. You could take the attitude that this is a good thing. After all, you no longer need a journalistic background to have your words read by millions and that makes for a more meritocratic system, ostensibly. If you’re good enough, people will read what you have to say – it’s as simple as that, right?

Maybe so, but what happens when you are indeed good enough, when you’re a blogger with a dedicated readership? Those who comprise the traditional media may not be an angelic bunch, but they are largely bound by a code of ethics whereby they will remain objective and refrain from making any endorsements for personal gain. But blogs and bloggers are subject to no such rules and in many cases they are young and easily impressionable. So what’s to stop them from being manipulated, indeed from allowing themselves to be manipulated?

In many cases this is exactly what happens. PR companies have long been the nemesis of the more ethically minded in the mainstream media, and now the temptresses have a whole new, vastly wider audience to sing their siren song to. With ever-more-refined subliminal techniques such as product placement becoming more and more prevalent, it’s becoming more and more difficult to ascertain when a product is being pitched to us covertly.

PR firms actively seek to choose suitable, established bloggers to help them with many of their marketing campaigns, as described in a recent article at sheposts.com. It’s as easy as looking up a blog on a ranking site like Alexa to see how many readers a blog has, then vetting the blog for ease of usability and to see if it matches with the aesthetic of the campaign they are seeking to promote.

PR professional Serena Matter describes her own approach: “I will focus my outreach efforts on the ‘tier 1’ bloggers I have found. Once I have finished outreach to those bloggers – and assuming I still have enough budget leftover – I will proceed with pitching tier 2 and tier 3 bloggers, as time and budget allows.”

If such practices were to take place in the regular news media there would be uproar. There is a difference between selling ad space and actively editorializing your content to skew a certain viewpoint for personal financial benefit, as many bloggers do.

Bear in mind that this kind of thing happens all the time. Maybe it didn’t hit me how serious this matter is until last week when I was looking for the best food for my beloved dog. I ran across a multitude of blogs, each promoting a certain brand. It all seemed a bit too coordinated for my liking and it soon became clear that the PR moguls were behind it.

How can one know the truth about a product anymore? Sure, it is undoubted that there are many upstanding blog writers out there who would refuse to partner up for a PR campaign, but for every one of those there is likely to be many multitudes more willing to take the easy money.

With no clear laws governing much online content as of yet, all we can do for now is reiterate: Be careful what you read. And, even more importantly, to our fellow bloggers out there: Be responsible and remember that your newfound power comes with great responsibilities.

By Mirela Gluck 

The Financial Times recently carried an interesting story about the 2011 Cannes Film Festival. The story wasn’t about the movies on show, but about the stars of those movies. It wasn’t about the acting ability of those stars either, but their saleability.

Big names associated with luxury goods, such as Chopard jewellers of Geneva, are said to have developed “a masterclass of celebrity endorsement” at Cannes. They set up exclusive invite-only events for the biggest stars, and dole out their jewelry specifically so those stars can be photographed wearing their pieces on the red carpet.

Among the list of those who toed the line this year were such stellar names as Robert De Niro, Jude Law and Uma Thurman.

“Images are sent out within hours of stars hitting the red carpet, while the sales force take high-end clients to the film festival to show Chopard’s new creations and give them the Chopard experience,” said one spokesperson.

It was reported that a certain pair of emerald earrings from Chopard’s Red Carpet 2011 collection were sold to a customer within moments of Uma Thurman appearing with them hanging from her lobes. Similarly we are told of Angelina Jolie’s selling power, she being the face of the Style of Jolie collection by jeweler Robert Procop. She has modeled Procop’s pieces at various premieres including that for the children’s movie Kung Fu Panda 2.

Of course all of this won’t come as too much of a surprise to many of you. Celebrity endorsed products have become an accepted part of the culture over the past few decades – even Justin Beiber has his own fragrance for God’s sake. But isn’t it all a bit cynical, even a little sinister perhaps?

Well, no, not really. What’s the moral difference between a celebrity advertising a product and a multi-million dollar marketing campaign that is similarly persuasive but features no familiar faces? Both are equally acceptable or unacceptable, depending on your perspective.

However, one important point to take away from this is that, on some level or another, you are being manipulated. If you are aware of this and continue to buy endorsed products, then we say fine, go ahead. But for those of you who blindly follow what the hottest stars are wearing, you should at least give this fact some thought, and see if you are making properly informed choices.

The idea behind celebrity endorsements is that they sell a lifestyle – people believe that they can somehow attain an element of the glamor and success of their favorite celebrity if they wear what they wear, drive what they drive, drink what they drink. Of course, rational thinking should tell us that this is a complete fallacy, but unfortunately rational thinking doesn’t always work as it should.

For instance, athletes –  another group of celebrities who regularly endorse things – have been shown to drive up sales of the products they put their names to by an average of 4 percent in a recent study. And the more successful the athlete, the greater the sales bump.

Another study by the Journal of Consumer Research, seeking to explain why we are so susceptible to this seemingly obvious marketing ploy, found that “we seem to have an inborn belief that objects can impart the “essence” of those who have handled them or owned them before us.” Apparently this is an evolutionary by-product, because way back when we were still living in caves it made sense to use things that others had already proven were safe and successful.
So there we have it folks, scientific proof that we are hardwired to fall hook line and sinker for a celebrity endorsed product over a regular one, even if they’re practically the same. Just be aware of this next time you get the urge to buy that new dress because you saw it on Natalie Portman, or that new face cream because Jennifer Love Hewitt says it’s great, or… well you get the idea!

Image Credit: AP

Following a nationwide survey of American online shopping habits, new light has been shed on why consumers buy what they buy. The survey was conducted by SteelHouse, an exclusive behavioral commerce platform created by marketers for marketers. In conjunction with Chicago market researcher Synovate eNation, SteelHouse asked 1,000 Americans: “What kind of online shopper are you?”

The survey aimed to discover trends among American shoppers from different socioeconomic groups. The American online shopping market has been a notorious one to pin down and define from a marketing perspective, primarily because of its sheer diversity.

The SteelHouse survey reads between the lines of American consumer diversity and finds some intriguing and surprising results. For instance 25 percent of men say they would buy premium brand name products compared to just 16 percent of women.

Arguably even more interestingly, consumers in the highest income bracket ($75,000+) look for coupons, discounts and free shipping more so than people who make less money. 32 percent in the higher income group say they buy only when there’s a discount (compared with 28 percent overall) and the same percentage say they buy only when shipping is free (compared with 27 percent overall). But they’re also the ones who are most likely to buy premium brand names: 29 percent of the highest income category regularly buy premium goods, compared with 15 percent of those who earn under $25,000.

It also provides us with an insight into the divided mindset of the average American shopper; though 40 percent say they always shop with a purpose to find something in particular, 30 percent say they regularly browse with no intention of buying.

Of  most interest to online retailers and their marketing departments may be the fact that 12 percent of those surveyed said that they would never buy from a website on a first visit, even if a discount was offered.

“It’s clear that simply giving the same offer to every online shopper is not the way to increase sales,” said Douglas. “We’re people, we approach shopping just like everything else – based on our personalities and ingrained behaviors. Retailers that understand and act on these different shopper personalities in real time are the ones that will be successful.”

The survey results also offer some conclusions that are more in line with our preconceptions, such as the fact that women feel more strongly about discounts and offers than men. Who knew?! Specifically, a third of women say they only buy when there’s a discount, and nearly that same amount say they only buy when free shipping is part of the deal, where as less than a quarter of men said the same thing.

Here is a full summary of the survey results:

44%  I read product reviews before I buy.

39%  I always shop with a purpose – I look online only when I’m searching for something in particular.

32%  I check out coupon sites to get the best price.

30%  I browse products regularly, even when I have no intention of buying.

28%  I buy only when there’s a discount.

27%  I buy only when there’s an offer for free shipping.

20%  I buy premium brand name products.

18%  I often start the checkout process but don’t end up purchasing.

12%  I never buy on my first visit to a website, even if a discount is offered.

11%  I never shop online.

I cannot hide my satisfaction at being on the distribution list of some of the most prominent large public relation companies. Of course I’m sure that there are some other 2999 bloggers on their books too, but I choose to believe that I am more than just a name, and that they actually read my articles from time to time – or that at least they come to check out our comprehensive list of sample sales!

I spent many years of my life moving between various schools, getting degrees and learning generally useless things in so many fields that there are too many to count, but my degrees are not in literature, English or journalism. And yet here I am publishing this magazine, being responsible for what thousands of eyes glance at every single day. An intimidating task, one might say, but never more so than when I publish something that is not considered mainstream or when my Eastern European sarcasm takes over and I don’t seem to share the enthusiastic American way of looking at things.

I dearly love this planet we all call home and yet, when it comes to eco-issues, I am not really involved in any conservational activity to speak of. On the other hand my mailbox is permanently swamped with emails from PR companies bragging about their client’s eco-friendly programs and initiatives. And from there comes the thorny question: do these companies “go green” to bring attention to their companies and increase sales, or do they do it to for the right cause? And does it even matter why they do it, as long as the end result is a positive one?

I was once again flipping through the Financial Times this weekend when I came across an article written by Vanessa Friedman. Entitled “Earth Day and a sea change,” in it she makes a similar point to my own: are brands using these issues just to increase sales? This is what Friedman had to say on the matter:

“The cynic would say such brands are simply using these issues as window dressing to drive sales, and to a certain extent I agree – though at the same time, responding to these issues to any extent, even for self-interested reasons, is a good thing. After all, if someone gives money to a cause to assuage their feelings of guilt, it still has a knock-on positive effect on the cause. I mean, April is also the beginning of benefit season, and you can’t tell me that all those hedges spend thousands on tables at this and that black-tie gala are doing it just because they feel deeply about the charity involved; they are also doing it for social/political/cultural power. But that doesn’t lessen the amount of money they raise.”

And I have to say that agree with her; if, as they say, “the road to hell is paved with good intentions,” then perhaps it’s also true to say that the road to making money is paved with good intentions too, whether rightly or wrongly.

By Mirela Gluck

Image credit: Annie Leibovitz, WWD