That Filter Problem

I start this post with a tip of the hat to my favorite political columnist and pundit, David Brooks. He writes for the New York Times, has authored several books, and has a regular commentary spot on the PBS Newshour. His wry humor and out-of-the-box thinking have entertained and educated me for many years.

In a recent interview, he used a line that had real resonance with me. Referring to the effect of political advertising, he stated that people use “an extremely thick filter” when evaluating these ads, and that it takes a lot to make an impact on the audience.

While this is undoubtedly true for people listening to political ads, it is also just as true for people listening to your business advertising. And for the same reasons.

To put it bluntly, people recognize that politicians have a lot at stake during a campaign, and therefore assume that much of the advertising they hear is full of purposeful miss-interpretations, half-truths, or just plain lies. History has proven this to be a pretty safe assumption.

To perhaps a lesser but none-the-less real extent, they feel the same way about business commercials. They have become jaded, sceptical, and extremely cautious about accepting what you say as factual.

You can't just say it, you have to prove it.

In this environment of consumers with “extremely thick filters”, just how much proof do you have to provide? There isn't a simple answer to this question but, in general, the more the better. However, this comes in conflict with another precept of advertising, “Keep it Simple”. There is only so much you can put into a short ad (print, radio, or TV) and the audience will only accept a limited amount of information.

• Sometimes, simply making a statement of fact will appear to the audience as proof:    “Our pizza has 20% more toppings than the competition.”
  
• Additionally, you can make a performance statement and invite your audience to see for themselves:  .“Come in, get a quote, and compare our prices to the competition.”
  
• Even better, if a little more cumbersome, is mentioning a positive statement from a 3rd party:   “The Daily Journal rates our service as the best in the region.”

Technically, none of these statements constitute “proof”, but if your target audience believes they are probably true, that will be enough to get past the “thick filter” and get them to respond.

Remember: Don't just say it, find a way to prove it.

 For more about David Brooks, click Here.

The B. J. Mendelson Theory

I saw a great interview on CNN this week, and it really struck a chord with me.

The interview was with B. J. Mendelson, and his new book is entitled

“Social Media is Bull Shit”.

The title, obviously, is designed to get noticed, and he has been getting a lot of press. I found a more extensive interview on Tech Crunch (link included at bottom of post), and then I spent some time on his website. What he has to say is of direct relevance to small business owners, and I want to share it with you here.

Mendelson is primarily known as a comedian, and he has made good use to social media over the years to promote himself and his favorite causes. One unique fact about Mendelson is that, although he has these negative things to say about social media, he has 770,000 Twitter followers. (The Tech Crunch interview explains how that happened.)

So, Why does he think that Social Media is B. S.?

Actually, he doesn't disparage the various social media components as communications tools. He is attacking the myth that social media platforms can be used to make people successful, well-known, and rich.

This myth is perpetuated by the media (it kind of feeds on itself) and, most importantly, the large number of marketers promoting themselves as Social Media Specialists. These are the people that convince small business owners, artists, writers, musicians, etc., that they can make a huge splash just by adroitly manipulating social media. Using some more salty language, Mendelson refers to this process as the “Asshole Based Economy.”

His personal experience, and that of many others that he interviewed for the book, is that social media is unable to build a reputation and won't create a fan base. For most of the people listed above, it is just a waste of time. And if you add in a consultant, it becomes an expensive waste of time.

Why does a guy with 770,000 twitter followers think it is a waste of time?

His main points are these:

• If you are already known in RL, then social media is a great way to stay in touch with your “fan base”.
  
• Much of the activity on Twitter, for example, is from celebrities, comedians, and journalists. These people developed their following in real life, before moving to Twitter.
  
• You can get Twitter followers and Facebook connections, but most of those people won't actually engage with you, buy your books or records, or go to your events. If you aren't already famous and worth knowing, social media won't make you so.

Practical Tip of the Day:

• If you aren't a major “name”, don't accept a marketing plan that claims it will turn you into a big social media presence overnight.
  
• It's your real life, analog activities that will build your reputation and your audience. You have to first develop this audience before digital communication platforms can be of much use.
  
• If you do have a customer list / subscriber base that is interested in hearing from you, give them valuable content. Not just what's on sale this month. 
•  

You can see the TechCrunch interview with Mendelson HERE.