Web 2.0
The Next Big Thing?
Sunil Gupta, David Shepard Associates
Josh Bernoff, Forrester
Jonathan Carson, Nielsen Online
sgupta@dsadirect.com
sgupta@dsadirect.com
Web 2.0
• What is it?
Things?
– Facebook
– Myspace
– Wikis
– Widgets
– Reviews and Ratings
– Blogs and microblogs
– Youtube and viral videos
– Mashups
– Virtual Worlds
– Podcasts and Videocasts
– …
sgupta@dsadirect.com
sgupta@dsadirect.com
sgupta@dsadirect.com
sgupta@dsadirect.com
What is Web 2.0?
• How things are done?
– Not just computers anymore
• Cameras, cell phones, gps devices
– Nor just Web anymore
– Not quite as geeky anymore
• Arianna Huffington is a leading blogger!!
• And, making money at it!!!
sgupta@dsadirect.com
What is Web 2.0?
• What is done?
– My “us” and me
– User generated content
– Existential
– Reputational
sgupta@dsadirect.com
sgupta@dsadirect.com
So transactional sites matter, but in a new way:
The seller / manufacturer is regarded as having authoritative factual information
about the product,
but the expert or the existing customer is regarded as having the authoritative
opinion or valuation about the product.
And the closer the relationship, the more trusted the opinion.
Get used to it.
http://www.websocialarchitecture.com/
sgupta@dsadirect.com
What is Web 2.0?
• An attitude?
• Where even greater
control/participation passes to
customers and users?
• Over content and resources
created by your company?
• Out of control?
sgupta@dsadirect.com
http://www.moma.org/exhibitions/2008/elasti
cmind/#/126/
sgupta@dsadirect.com
What is Web 2.0?
•
•
•
•
•
A serious business proposition?
Now? Right now? A little later?
For how much do I get in?
What are my odds?
How will I keep score?
sgupta@dsadirect.com
A Whole New World?
• A Brave New World!
– Over at this table, a game is starting called Blogosphere. Over at that one,
Social Media.
– In the corner are Wikis and blogs.
– There are many such tables. You sit at one.
– Who’ll be playing? We won’t know until they show up.
– What’re the rules? Those’ll emerge as the game unfolds.
– What are my odds of winning? We can’t say.
–
Should you play?
• Adapted from: Harvard Business Review, July-August 1996,
• W. Brian Arthur
Increasing returns and the new world of business, p.104
sgupta@dsadirect.com
Should you care?
sgupta@dsadirect.com
What’s the business angle?
Will the numbers add up?
• Josh Bernoff - Vice President, Principal Analyst, Forrester
– coauthor of Groundswell: Winning in a World
Transformed by Social Technologies
– a comprehensive analysis of corporate strategy for
dealing with social technologies like blogs, social
networks, and wikis, published in April 2008 by
Harvard Business Press.
– Scott Cook, founder of Intuit: "This book will rock
your world, if social technology hasn't rocked it
already . . . This book will be your bible."
sgupta@dsadirect.com
What’s the business angle?
Will the numbers add up?
• Jonathan Carson - President, International, of Nielsen Online
– co-founded BuzzMetrics in 1999, and served as
Chief Executive Officer until Nielsen acquired the
business in 2007
– At the time of the Nielsen acquisition, BuzzMetrics
had almost 200 Fortune 1000 clients, including 19
of the top 20 U.S. advertisers.
– In 2005, co-founded the Word of Mouth Marketing
Association
sgupta@dsadirect.com
Contact:
SUNIL GUPTA, Ph.D.
Senior Consultant
David Shepard Associates
sgupta@dsadirect.com
sgupta@dsadirect.com
Turning The Groundswell To Your
Advantage
Josh Bernoff
Vice President, Principal Analyst
Forrester Research
groundswell.forrester.com
Increasing interactive effectiveness
“In the next three years, do you think marketing's effectiveness will increase,
stay the same, or decrease in each of the following media?”
Increasing
effectiveness
Increase
Stay the same
Interactive
Social media
86%
Search engine marketing
Mobile
Online video
Email
18%
3%
83%
15%
2%
Outdoor
11%
Telemarketing
11%
8%
Newspapers 6%
4%
19%
3%
11%
15%
42%
35%
49%
15%
Magazines
13%
41%
37%
16%
17%
23%
41%
21%
Radio
Declining
effectiveness
13%
62%
Direct mail
Yellow page
84%
73%
Static display ads
raditiona
T
4%
78%
Interactive display ads
l
11%
83%
Game marketing
Interactive
Traditional
Decrease
59%
49%
37%
29%
33%
Base: 235 marketers
(percentages may not total 100 because of rounding)
26%
40%
53%
64%
61%
Social media poised for growth
$12,000
In-game advertising
Mobile marketing
Social media
$10,000
$8,000
Emerging channels
marketing
spend
(US$ millions)
$6,000
$4,000
$2,000
$0
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Social media
$600
$1,500
$2,625
$3,938
$5,316
$6,910
Mobile marketing
$200
$270
$405
$709
$1,418
$2,835
In-game advertising
$240
$360
$504
$655
$786
$865
$3,534
$5,301
$7,519
$10,610
Total:
$1,040 $2,130
(numbers have been rounded)
Definition
► Groundswell
A social trend in which people use
technologies to get the things they need
from each other, rather than from
traditional institutions like corporations
The four-step approach to the
groundswell
People
P
O
S
T
Assess your customers’ social activities
Objectives
Decide what you want to accomplish
Strategy
Plan for how relationships with customers will change
Technology
Decide which social technologies to use
The Social Technographics Ladder
18%
25%
Creators
Critics
12%
Collectors
25%
Joiners
48%
Spectators
44%
Inactives
Publish a blog
Publish your own Web pages
Upload video you created
Upload audio/music you created
Write articles or stories and post them
Post ratings/reviews of products/services
Comment on someone else’s blog
Contribute to online forums
Contribute to/edit articles in a wiki
Use RSS feeds
Add “tags” to Web pages or photos
“Vote” for Web sites online
Maintain profile on a social networking site
Visit social networking sites
Read blogs
Watch video from other users
Listen to podcasts
Read online forums
Read customer ratings/reviews
None of the above
Groups include people participating in at least
one of the activities monthly.
Social Technographics Profile: Age Segments
Index
Online adults = 100
Online
adults
30%
Creators
25-34 35-44 45-54
163
92
58
25-34
17%
11%
35-44
35%
Critics
45-54
26%
137
104
75
161
87
71
170
90
48
124
103
93
73
96
113
19%
19%
Collectors
10%
8%
42%
Joiners
22%
12%
60%
Spectators
50%
45%
32%
Inactives
42%
50%
Base: US online adults. Source: North American Social Technographics ® Online Survey, Q2 2007
Key roles and their groundswell
objectives
Roles
Groundswell objectives
Research
Listening
Marketing
Talking
Sales
Energizing
Support
Supporting
Development
Embracing
Talking through MySpace
Thank you
Josh Bernoff
+1 617.613.5789
jbernoff@forrester.com
Visit our site at
groundswell.forrester.com
DMIX
Metrics for CGM Marketing
June 18, 2008
Jonathan Carson
President – International
Nielsen Online
Confidential & Proprietary
© 2008 The Nielsen Company
Introducing Nielsen Online
• The market leading toolkit for
online media planning and
competitive intelligence
– Audience measurement
– Consumer profiling
– Video tracking
– Retail measurement
– Advertising tracking
• The global measurement standard
for consumer-generated media
on the web
– Brand Tracking
– Threat Tracking
– Influencer Analysis
– Community Analysis
A fully integrated set of best-in-class products for consumer insights,
brand management, retail measurement and competitive intelligence
38
March 12, 2016
Why is CGM such a big deal?
39
March 12, 2016
WOM works better now
Which factors make
you most comfortable
purchasing a product?
The website
8%
Advertisement
15%
Newspaper/magazine recommended it
22%
WPP
A friend recommended it
76%
Best source for
advice on a
new product:
Television
21%
Newspaper/magazine
26%
Info services (e.g., Consumer Reports)
35%
Yankelovich
Another consumer
67%
Among best sources
for new ideas about
products:
1977
GFK/NOP
Word of Mouth 67%
40
2005
Editorial
47%
Editorial
40%
Advertising
53%
Advertising
50%
March 12, 2016
Word of Mouth 92%
Consumers trust WOM most
47 country Nielsen Company study finds WOM
the most trusted source of info across all
markets.
41
March 12, 2016
CGM trust increases with
exposure
Trust strongest in early adopter markets, U.S.
and Asia.
42
March 12, 2016
CGM reaching critical mass
80
73
Posted Product Reviews
Read User Reviews
58
60
Forwarded Info Found Online
Actively Participating in CGM
40
27
30
20
0
% of Online US Adults
*From AC Nielsen Homescan and BuzzMetrics
43
March 12, 2016
CGM dominating online ad
inventory
2 Year Growth
Pageviews, among top 100 properties
139B
Search
12
11
10
20%
Commerce
28
27
25
29%
Community
9
20
27
182%
19
20%
19
6%
Communications
23
19
Content
150B
37%
94B
28
2005
23
2006
2007
Analysis: McKinsey
Data Source: Nielsen//Netratings
44
March 12, 2016
Result: $5B CGM advertising market 2012
Analysis: McKinsey, eMarketer, PQ Media
45
March 12, 2016
How we capture the opportunity
46
March 12, 2016
CGM presents a data paradox
• Vastness of data is exciting… but
overwhelming.
– Nielsen’s Blogpulse.com: 79MM blogs id’d, 94k in
past 24 hours.
– 18,000 Yahoo Groups for dog owners; 671 on
soapmaking.
• Qualitative insight fascinating… but tough to
plan around.
47
– “The stuff you can wash is amazing. Stuffed
animals… antique quilts, comforters, electric
blankets, 22 towels…
I'm much in love.”
March 12, 2016
The New Metrics
Media activity transitions from passive consumption to
active engagement/participation.
Old Question:
Which program did consumers watch?
New Question:
How did consumers engage with my content?
48
March 12, 2016
The New Metrics
Distribution model goes from broadcast-based to
search- and referral-based.
Old Question:
How large an audience was assembled?
New Question:
How many consumers forwarded my message?
49
March 12, 2016
The New Metrics
Context in which marketing messages are presented
becomes terribly important.
Old Question:
On which program should I advertise?
New Question:
Who is linking to my content, and what are they saying about
it?
50
March 12, 2016
The New Metrics
Targeting is less about demographics, more about
passions and interests.
Old Question:
How do I reach 25-34 year old males?
New Question:
How do I reach young males in the market for a new car, who
have expressed interest in a particular competitive
vehicle?
51
March 12, 2016
The New Metrics
Influence matters.
Old Question:
How do I balance reach and frequency?
New Question:
How do I reach the individual consumers who carry the most
clout?
52
March 12, 2016
The Ultimate CGM Case Study:
The Superbowl!
53
March 12, 2016
CGM dominates Superbowl Ad
Buzz
Budweiser/Bud Light Aggregated
Nationwide Insurance
Snickers: Mechanic
Doritos: (2 Aggregated)
Bud Light: Rock, Paper, Scissors
GM: Robots
Coca-Cola: Aggregated
GoDaddy.com: Marketing
Blockbuster: Mouse
CareerBuilder.com (2 Aggregated)
FedEx: (2 Aggregated)
Taco Bell
Chevrolet: Car Wash
Garmin: Navigation Maposaurus
Sierra Mist: (3 Aggregated)
Bud Light: Reception
Emerald Nuts
Coke: Video Game
Toyota Tundra: (2 Aggregated)
Chevrolet: Ain't We Got Love
Sprint: Broadband
E*Trade
Bud Light: Classroom
Bud Light: Slap/Fist Bump
Honda: Full Line
SalesGenie.com: Sales Guy
Budweiser: Dalmation/Spot Wink
Bud Light: Great Apes
0%
54
7.9%
7.2%
6.0%
5.3%
4.6%
4.3%
4.1%
3.2%
3.2%
2.7%
2.5%
2.5%
2.2%
2.2%
2.1%
2.1%
2.0%
2.0%
1.9%
1.8%
1.7%
1.5%
1.3%
1.2%
1.1%
5%
20.6%
9.8%
9.8%
10%
March 12, 2016
15%
20%
25%
Superbowl Buzz winner: Nationwide
 Marketed to influencers weeks before the Game.
 Aggressively promoted ad on their website
 “Send to Friend” efforts drive virality
 Provided “extras” on the site
 Google search advertising
 Video leaks on YouTube
 Coordinated PR effort
55
March 12, 2016
2008: Pepsi takes the Nationwide strategy
Top 10 Brands associated with pre-SuperBowl Ad buzz
Simple formula:
• Britney Spears
ex
• Leak news in
advance.
• Advance PR.
• Big online push.
• Demeaning
creative.
56
4.35%
4.00%
Pepsi
3.22%
Budweiser
2.29%
Toshiba
1.24%
1.40%
Audi
1.21%
1.19%
Go Daddy
0.94%
Victoria's Secret
Cadillac
0.86%
0.56%
Bridestone
0.83%
0.74%
0.0%
2.92%
2.16%
2.06%
Doritos
Coke
3.81%
1.33%
0.61%
0.50%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
Jan-08
2.0%
2.5%
3.0%
3.5%
4.0%
4.5%
5.0%
Total Timeframe: 11/1- 11/30
Buzz volume is percentage of 13,550 messages about SuperBowl ads, 11/1/07 – 1/29/08
March 12, 2016
Pays off with strong initial Buzz
Simple formula:
• Britney Spears
ex
• Demeaning
creative.
• Leak news in
advance.
But the quiet winner may
been a boring
•have
Advance
PR.
household product!
• Big online push.
57
Top 10 Superbowl Ads for buzz in 2 days following broadcast
Pepsi: Timberlake
6.7%
E*TRADE (aggregated)
5.2%
Audi
4.4%
FedEX
4.0%
Diet Pepsi Max
3.9%
Lifewater: Thriller
3.7%
Tide
3.3%
Budweiser: Horse/Dalmatian
3.1%
Coke: Parade Balloons
2.9%
SalesGenie (aggregated)
2.6%
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
Buzz volume is percentage of 6,962 messages about SuperBowl ads, 2/3/08-2/4/08
March 12, 2016
Timberlake Pepsi call to action falls flat
Topic
% of
Sample
Sentiment
Very Positive
8%
No Opinion
24%
Humor
Physical Comedy /
Stunts
34%
24%
Positive
More than one-third of messages about Pepsi’s
Justin Timberlake ad focus on the humor of the
commercial.
Leans Positive
Consumers found the general physical comedy
of the advertisement humorous and stunts
exciting.
Mixed
3%
Positive
45%
Negative
17%
Very Negative
3%
Cameos
Mixed
Consumers were mixed about seeing the many
cameo appearances by celebrities and athletes
in the commercial, in particular Tony Romo drew
negative reaction.
Lack of Brand Mention
10%
Neutral
10% of messages lacked the Pepsi brand name
within the post.
Timberlake Sex
Appeal
8%
Very Positive
A small portion of female bloggers commented
on Justin Timberlake's “sex appeal.”
Amazon.com
3%
Neutral
There is minimal discussion about Amazon.com.
When discussing this ad, many consumers
simply referred to it as the Justin Timberlake
commercial, failing to make mention of the Pepsi
giveaway campaign.
PepsiStuff.com
2%
Neutral
Some consumers include the link to Pepsi’s
microsite, PepsiStuff.com.
Positive
While discussing Justin Timberlake in the
advertisement, a few consumers make mention
of Timberlake’s restaurant “Southern
Hospitality.”
Southern Hospitality
March 12, 2016
17%
Key Finding
2%
58
Tide Campaign Dynamics
Strong
integration w/
Youtube
More indexed on Google for “discovery”
Serves as catalyst for userparticipation around “stain”
experiences (w/humor)
Respectable build-up of onequity user contributions
59
March 12, 2016
Consumers “organically” link MyTalkingStain.com
Source: Nielsen Blogpulse.com
60
March 12, 2016
“Talking Stain” effective, viral quality praised
Topic
% of
Sample
Sentime
nt
Very Negative
2%
Negative
8%
72%
Very
Positive
Humor
54%
Very
Positive
More than half of “Talking Stain” ad messages focus on the
humor of the advertisement.
Creative
21%
Very
Positive
Many consumers believe that Tide’s ad is creative and brilliant.
19%
Very
Positive
Consumers deem Tide’s ad message and connection to the
brand clear.
Clear Messaging /
Relate to Ad
Very Positve
67%
CGM Site Reference
March 12, 2016
Nearly three-quarters of messages about the “Talking Stain”
ad notes that the commercial is a favorite or ranks within the
top ads of the Super Bowl.
Top Ad / Favorite
Mixed
2%
Positive
21%
Key Finding
17%
Positive
A large number of messages include discussions or a link to
Tide’s microsite “mytalkingstain.com.” Many marketers view
this site as a “brilliant” way to keep consumers captivated.
Video Link
16%
Positive
A large number of posts include a link to the video or an actual
post of the video within their message. Some note its high
chance of “virality.”
Purchase Intent
9%
Very
Positive
Though limited, some consumers note their intention to
purchase a Tide-to-Go pen in the near future.
Annoying
5%
Negative
Some consumers find the ad “annoying.”
“Bruce Almighty”
Comparison
1%
Neutral
One consumer notes the similarity between the “Talking Stain”
ad and a scene from “Bruce Almighty.”
61
What it means for Direct Marketing
PR
Persuasive
conversationalists
Advertising
Direct
Creative masters
Brilliant targeters
CGM Marketing requires interdisciplinary skillset
62
March 12, 2016
Thank You
Jonathan Carson
Nielsen Online
jonathan.carson@nielsen.com
63
March 12, 2016