What is Microsoft Doing With Bing?

What are the key words that I associate with a great search engine? Words like thorough, believable, unbiased, honest, integrity, consistent, user friendly, immediately come to me. There are others, but when I started writing, I was stunned that the same brand attributes I attached to a search engine are almost exactly the same as those I look for in a reliable news source. I am sure each of us has their own list of attributes that can fill in a particular blank, but I think you get the picture.

Why am I bringing this up? Well:

• First, I am in public relations and can see a spin a mile away
• Second, Microsoft's Bing just announced they surpassed Yahoo to become the #2 search engine in the world in just a few weeks
• Third, I noticed that when I enter a wrong URL in an Internet Explorer browser, I am automatically sent to Bing.com where the search engine is conveniently filled in with my error-ridden URL.

Now, while there is nothing inherently wrong with this "service", aside from it being incredibly annoying. While there is nothing illegal about this, it just reeks of being a shady marketing tactic. so much so, that I have begun to doubt Bing's integrity. I now wonder if the little lie they implied in their release is the way they do business in general. Yes, I now mistrust them. I have to ask, if they are willing to build a public relations campaign based on a little lie, how they are managing the rest of their business? Can I trust their search results? How do I know that the links they are sending you are truly an unbiased look into the web, or just another form of paid advertising?

Let me put it to you this way. Firefox's Mozilla established themselves based on the quality of their product. People tried it. They loved it. They passed it on. They raved about it. Mozilla Firefox then spread virally. There was no need for them to spin what was happening. It happened because Firefox was, and is, a great product - simple and true.

Unfortunately Microsoft failed to have the patience to let the consumer decide for themselves. In so doing, it has done a great disservice to itself by trying to spin something that is based in a false-hood. They did not do anything illegal, but their efforts were deceitful. They misled me, and a great many other people, with the idea that their product was just so popular that it took off by itself. When in fact, the growth was due to programming tricks like the default program on Internet Explorer. If you think I'm wrong, then try this little test. Enter the following URL into both IE and Firefox Mozilla - "www.google.colm".

On Firefox you will get an error message. On Internet Explorer you will get directed to Bing.com with your mistyped URL preloaded into the search bar: and Microsoft will tic off another person using Bing.

Bing - Unfortunately, I know Google. And you sir, are no Google - just a squeaky little program who's trying to buck the system. And in so doing, you are undermining your own service, your brand, and the brand integrity of the larger Microsoft.

Next time Think.


Think Cannon

www.thinkcannon.com

What's Eating You removes the slightest hint of integrity in this new show on Eating Disorders

After seeing their press release for the new reality show on E! - I can be nothing but appalled. While we all know that E! stands for Entertainment, with their new show, "What's Eating You," it also stands for "Extreme" or "Excessive" or "Exploitative" or just plain reckless and irresponsible. From their press release, this is not about help or health or saving lives. This is about trying to turn a deadly disease into entertainment - and that is wrong for those affected, it is wrong for advertisers thinking this is a way to reach their customers, and it is wrong for a brand - no matter how cheesy that brand may be. And yes, I'm speaking to you E!.

This is an excerpt from their release:

"From bizarre rituals to extreme habits, the worlds of the twelve brave participants will be an open book. From a woman who must put countless packets of artificial sweetener on anything she eats – including burgers and salads – to another who spends hours each day at different fast food restaurants, just to purge privately in a bevy of single-person bathrooms around town, audiences will follow the lives of people whose food behaviors are consuming and threatening their lives. Other stories include: a young man who will chew and swallow an entire pack of gum instead of eating food to feel satiated; a young woman who will eat ant-covered food out of a trash can, only to then purge in whatever she can find – her boots or even her purse; a young man for whom food is “dirty” and who, as a result, has a compulsion to wear rubber gloves before touching anything related to eating; a woman who drowns all of her food in gravy and has found other creative ways to eat around her gastric band and a young mother who wears layers and layers of clothes in the scorching Phoenix sun just to hide a body she feels is “sickly deformed” as a result of her pregnancies. In a particularly heartbreaking case, viewers also are introduced to a woman who was recently homeless and will drive 2 ½ hours to purchase her comfort food: white chalkboard chalk.

With the help of trained medical professionals, highly experienced therapists and nutrition specialists, these patients will attempt to begin the long, painful and often shocking journey to recovery. JD Roth, Executive Producer and CEO of 3 Ball Productions, said, “One might assume that a show about severe eating disorders would focus solely on participants’ bizarre behavior around food; but this show really is about the incredible fortitude and strength of people with intense obstacles to overcome, and how they strive to get their lives back on track. We’re very proud to be working with E!, not only in shedding light on a dangerous issue, but also in offering hope and a path to recovery.”

Seriously? Is this the work of anyone even remotely responsible? Regardless of what their logo says with the big E!, it is just plain EXPLOITATIVE. There is a difference between an article labeled "Stars, they're just like us," and a show that focuses on the very worst of a disease. Their press release alone reads more like a script for a freak show barker than for television programming. I could expect to see this in the darkest recesses of the Internet, but not on an FCC controlled medium like television.

If you are wondering how a legitimate brand could produce programming that delves into a subject like eating disorders responsibly - just look at A&E's "Intervention" [www.aetc.com/intervention/about]. Their approach actually does focus on hope, on redemption, and on life. They even went further to create something called the Recovery Project, to create outreach material, and to encourage people to participate in helping others. It is a responsible approach that positions the A&E brand in a responsible light.

E!? nothing of the sort. Even before their show goes live, they are focusing on "a young woman who will eat ant-covered food out of a trash can," who will "purge into whatever she can find - her boots or even her purse," or of another who feels she is "sickly deformed."

As for the producer of the show - 3 Ball Productions - they were the company that produced The Biggest Loser. A show that has been blamed for actually causing a contestant to develop an eating disorder. It is hardly any wonder as to the integrity of the producers behind the show when they've received some startling reviews by their own employees.

All in all, E! actually has a good brand for the type of programming they have developed in the past. So why would the risk undermining tne value of their brand and the brands of their advertisers by producing content like this? There is only answer - greed and a desire for short term profits over long term growth. It is a shame. But that is what happens when you make decisions that aren't focused on brand growth.

E! we can only watch and see what happens.

Think Cannon

Eat, Pray, Love & Home Shopping Network? Really?

I recently read about the new movie Eat, Pray Love. Well, not actually about the movie, but about the merchandising deals they are putting together to help promote it. Now, don't get me wrong. I'm all about branded entertainment and licensing deals. I am also all about trying to find a novel way to target a niche audience. But only in the right CONTEXT. Because if content is king, then context is truly the queen.

To create branded content deals effectively means thinking beyond demographics and viewer patterns. It means looking deeper than basic psychographics in order to find the emotional core that has brought a group of customers together. Because that is the glue beneath any customer base. Hence my outrage and my blog.

When I learned that the people behind the marketing of "Eat, Pray, Love" put together a deal with HSN as a way to promote the movie, I was leery. When I learned their strategy was to create a win/win opportunity to pay for some of the marketing by selling products "tied to the theme of the movie," my brain scratched like an old LP. Selling products? Tied to the theme of the movie? Have none of them read the book?

Not to jump to quickly, I took a look at what "products tied to the theme of the movie" meant. Did they mean the Perlier-Italian beauty products "brought to you by the Royal Borghese family" for two easy payments of $19.93? Did they mean Hutton Wilkinson's "Balinese inspired Love rings in simulated Ivory" at $29.95? Or perhaps they meant Lancome's "Eat, Pray, Love Juicy Tube Lip Gloss" for two easy payments of just $18.00. However they came up with their product mix, or even the idea of the co-branded promotion, congratulations. I think you have done more harm to a growing and beloved brand than I have ever seen. Perhaps if we buy a complete set we can get our balance, love and spirituality for just three easy payments!

Did the creators of this marketing program completely forget about context? Did they fail to look at the truth behind the Eat, Pray, Love phenomenon? Did they disregard how deeply the readers of this book care for the character and for the author's life experiences? To find that message of hope, rebirth, and love being splayed to hawk wares on HSN is not only a shock. It is a complete disregard for the intelligence of the brand's fans, and for the lessons from the book itself. Even worse, it undermines everything it takes to create a truly effective brand-driven marketing campaign - context and compassion for the brand and the customer.

If the Eat, Pray, Love brand were a laminated table. You would not be selling the plywood beneath the beautiful laminate. Yet this is what the marketers seem to be doing in this case. They're selling the commercial elements around the brand. And isn't that what got Elizabeth in trouble in the first place? An attraction to worldly indulgences instead of finding that balance between the material and the spiritual?

What is almost criminal about this effort to promote an quickly beloved brand, is that the marketers behind it risk destroying the brand altogether, all for a few quick bucks. Why not think long term? Why not think outside the commerce box? Why not look for the truth behind a story that obviously resonated with so many? After all that is what attracted so many people to this book. Not $19.95
angles, but the experiences of one woman.

I just hope Julia has what it takes to transcend the Home Shopping Network's commercialism and bring out the truth behind Eat, Pray, Love. For the brand's sake if no other...


Think Next Time.


Think Cannon

Andrew Cuomo - Showing a Scary Brand Consistency

There was an incredible article that was at once innocent, insightful, and scary. I appeared in the New York Times this weekend [Sunday, June 20, 2010] about Andrew Cuomo. Well, not about him, per se, but about his choice in partners and their ability to cook. It also speaks to the truth behind the Cuomo brand and to what we could expect from him if he assumes office in the future. Now, I know politicians are famouse for their ability to spin facts. But this article adds a new way to uncover the truth - I call it the lasagna factor.

To some, my take on this article may seem a throwback to another era of housewives dutifully putting a hot meal on a table. But to me, nothing speaks about character as honestly as food does. And this one speaks to Mr. Cuomo's character. Now, I don't mind that he chose a "perfect housewife" to round out his reputation for a harsh personality. After all, he was called the dark prince" when he first joined politics on his father's campaign at the young age of 24 for a reason. I do wonder what he must have done to be called the "dark prince" while working for dad's campaign at the tender age of 24. But that is neither here nor there.

The article innocently enough deals with the lasagna recipe his girlfriend, significant other, or whatever he wants us to call her, had included in her cookbook. Simply put, it was disgusting, and something that does not bode well for the food channel [condensed Cambell's tomatoe soup instead of a sauce? cottage chese?]. Now, I can't speak for all people, but I think the levels of disgust that come in the form of 144+ comments [at the time of writing] on his choice of mates and their recipes from around the country are consistent enough to add credence to a Lasagna test for all candidates.

Andrew Cuomo's own mother refers to the recipe in question by noting "that is not how you make a lasagna." It is as if readers from every walk of life can ascertain the true nature of a person by the food they make. And they are disgusted that Sandra Lee's "recipe from a sponsor jar" approach tells us exactly what he is peddling - a badly wrought image that will crumble faster than a highschool cafeteria lasagna.

To me, Sandra's lasagna brings to mind a larger question. If this is they way his significant partner cooks and acts [i.e., badly and as a bought and paid for pitch person], if this demonstrates her belief in the integrity of a family meal, then what does this say about the way he will manage the State of New York?

Perhaps it says nothing at all. Or perhaps it says that if he will compromise on one of the most basic of needs for himself - the food he eats and the company he keeps - what will he do for the State of New York?


In my opinion, something as simple as lasagna speaks to the very essence of who anyone is. It is a family meal that centers on the love of simple food, of real ingredients, and on putting in the time to make it right. Is this who Andrew Cuomo is? Because this recipe speaks of a person who couldn't care less about the food they eat, or the people they dine with. It speaks more to a person willing to sell out his own integrity to build an image he wants to portray, rather than to be himself. It speaks to a person who is trying hard to create a brand for himself that is diametrically opposed to the real him. We saw what this approach led to when Elliot Spitzer became Governor. We also saw what happened when the "green petroleum" company BP failed to live up to their brand.

So for me, the humble dish of lasagna says it all. It says I do not like where Mr. Cuomo is going. And yes, I can say that, after reading Ms. Lee's recipe, all of this can be tied to something as simple as a lasagna recipe and the way a person cooks.

http://alturl.com/tjdx

Just take a look at the recipe yourself. The lasagna tells all!

Jeff Cannon

Think Cannon

http://www.thinkcannon.com/

Is Twitter Weighing Itself Down, or who created the Fail Whale?

This morning I logged into Twitter for what I thought would be a simple post. I came in at 102 words, incorporated a short URL into the message, as well as a few hash marks, and clicked to Tweet. Low and behold, that magic whale came up and told me "Something is technically wrong. Please try again in a moment."

Hmmmmmm, something is wrong? I waited. I clicked again. The same white whale came up. Is something wrong I asked myself? I saved my message, logged out and logged back in. Only to receive the same message. Is something wrong with me? Or is it Twitter? Is the hardware not up to the task Twitter created? Did the people behind this phenomenon underestimate the power of their own PR and media placements? Did they not read their own coverage? Or perhaps they just didn't trust it.

Well, I just could not resist. So I went to the old reliable standby - Google. I Googled "Twitter Whale." There were 8,440,000 results - and none of them good. That's more than Moby Dick gets, and he's been around a long while. I then Googled "Fail Whale" as the Twitter whale is being called by 2,450,000 sites. Hmmmmm, I think they may have started another phenomenon without even trying. I also think they could stand to learn something from the American auto industry. In fact, I think they could learn something from a book on customer experience in order to realize they have a massive problem brewing. Or has it already been over-brewed?

Don't get me wrong. It's great that Twitter was created. It's great that it grew so quickly. In many ways it has become the 21st Century version of the 1-sheet that Winston Churchill created when he told his staff never to approach him with an idea unless they could reduce it into one 8 1/2" by 11" of paper that is known as the 1-sheet so many of us rely on. Twitter forces us to put our ideas into a concise line of text that is less than 140 characters. Not so easy for many people who just love to ramble.

However, those 140 characters of brilliance [Beiber, Kutcher - are you listening?] are not worth much if they require forty-three minutes of re-clicking a "submit" button. That comes out to almost 3.4 minutes per character typed. At $100 per hour [a billing rate for most agencies], that comes out to about $5.67 per letter.

TWITTER - ARE YOU WORTH $5.67 FOR EVERY CHARACTER I TYPE?

I really don't think so. You're making newspapers seem inexpensive!

Really Twitter, I love what you've done for us. But even Kardashian is cheaper than that. And she gives good tweets.





think
thinkcannon
Think Cannon

Chevy - Still screwing up the old fashioned way

Is it really true that Chevrolet just issued a memo telling its employees not to refer to the brand and company as "Chevy?" Is it really true that they decided the best way to upgrade their brand was to have consumers start calling the company by its full name? Haven't they heard that they don't really own their own brand, but their customers do? They are now brand stewards, but they are still not listening to their customers.

The last time I ran into something like this was in my college days when a very drunk, line-backer looking frat boy accosted me in a party for calling his organization a "frat." His logic was that calling his house a frat was like calling our country a, well you get the picture. I did not get the logic back then, and I still do not get the logic now. Hey, but maybe that same guy is now consulting for Chevy. Who knows, stranger things have happened since college...

Anyway, back to the case at hand. In the memo issued by Chevy [oops, Chevrolet], they refer to such momentous brands as "Coke" and "Apple" as a rationale for why they are insisting on using the full brand name. Uh, "Coke" as in Coca Cola? Or Apple as in when was the last time you heard an Apple product refered to as an "Apple" - what was it 1984? Now Appled products are referred to by their product names iPod, iPad, iFad. Oh wait, for a while people were calling one of the greatest consumer electronics product, the largest computer manufacturer as of late a "Mac." Oh, but that's short for what Macintosh?

Perhaps the marketing execs at Chevy [damnit] are watching too much MadMen? Or perhaps they have chosen to overlook the changes in the advertising industry for the past twenty years, but this decision by Chevy [there I go again] is not even retro. It's just bad marketing.

Newsflash Chevy - YOUR CUSTOMERS LIKE CALLING IT A CHEVY. MOST OF THEM DON'T EVEN REMEMBER WHAT CHEVROLET WAS IN THE 50's. So let it go. People have loved the Chevy ever since Don McLean sang about it. What they don't like is the old stodgy idea of Chevrolet, Nuclear bomb shelters in the back yard, the Cold War, and McCarthy [not the former Beatle].

I have posted the memo below. Please, don't drool when your chin hits your keyboard.


--------------------------

Chevrolet Team,

We wanted to write you a quick note requesting your support of our Chevrolet Brand. When you look at the most recognized brands throughout the world, such as Coke or Apple for instance, one of the things they all focus on is the consistency of their branding. Why is this consistency so important? The more consistent a brand becomes, the more prominent and recognizable it is with the consumer. This is a big opportunity for us
moving forward.

As you know, we are investing substantially to improve the consistency of our retail facilities through the EBE process. Aside from the facilities aspect of our branding, there are many other ways in which we can demonstrate this consistency. One way to achieve this is with the use of Chevrolet vs. Chevy. We’d ask that whether you’re talking to a dealer, reviewing dealer advertising or speaking with friends and family, that you communicate our brand as Chevrolet moving forward.

We have a proud heritage behind us and a fantastic future ahead of us … speaking to the success of this brand in one consistent manner will ensure Chevrolet becomes even more prominent and recognizable than it already is.

Thank you for your support of this effort!

Alan and Jim

P.S. We put a plastic “Chevy” can down the hall that will accept a quarter every time someone uses “Chevy” rather than Chevrolet! We’ll use the money for a team building activity.

Yves Saint Laurent Scores With The Met's Partnership

Last night I had the tremendous opportunity to attend the New York Metropolitan Opera's premiere of Rossini's Armida. Starring Renee Fleming and directed by Mary Zimmerman, this was not only a stupendous opera, a chance to see the stars on the red carpet, and a delicious evening of food, music, and talent - it was an opportunity to see how a team of true professionals execute a brand-driven partnership with bottom-line results.

For those who know nothing of the opera, don't worry. I can send you some links from the professionals of tone and oration. For those of you who are tired of seeing photos of celebrities like Chloe Sevigny and Maggie Gyllenhaal flood the social blogs, well, that's just part of the realities behind building brand's awareness and securing its position in the hearts, minds, and souls of its clients.

For you branding and marketing wonks, you may want to know that the premier last night was the latest in a multi-year partnership that Yves Saint Laurent created with the Metropolitan Opera. It started years ago when YSL was looking for ways to connect with their clients in an authentic and compelling manner. After looking at its own historic affiliation to the opera, and the passion both its employees and its clients have for the arts, it settled on an unprecedented collaboration to the opera art form via New York's Metropolitan Opera.

The result? Just Google "YSL Armida" - there's 15,700 website links that come up. Google "Yves Saint Laurent Armida" - there's another 16,200 website links. Google "Yves Saint Laurent opera 2010" - 12,800,000 links, and an additional 641,000 links for "Yves Saint Laurent Opera." If you want to see what these 13 million links look like - just click on some of the shortcuts I have added below and ask yourself, how would your brand enjoy this kind of reach and frequency...

So net/net - what's the media value of this? I can't even begin to guess. But this alone is in excess of thirteen million links; and we're not even googling the past operas like Filles Du Regiment that YSL collaborated on in 2009. When you combine the online coverage with the added value of being associated with celebrities like Bette Midler, Christine Baranski, Julianna Margulies, Parker Posey, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Peter Sarsgaard, Patricia Clarkson, Chloë Sevigny, Ginnifer Goodwin, Emily Mortimer, Alessandro Nivola, Camilla Belle, Sid and Mercedes Bass, or Ann Ziff - the result is, well, it's unbelievable.

As important YSL's own internal celebrities - Valérie Hermann (CEO, Yves Saint Laurent), Stefano Pilati (Creative Director), and Laura Lendrum (President - Americas) - were able to reach out and touch the people that truly matter most to the company - their high-end and beautiful clients. Again, what would your company do if it had the chance to actually touch some of your most valuable customers in the flesh?

So to all you marketing wonks out there - take heed when someone tells you it's impossible to reach the high-end, high-value clients in a meaningful way. Take heed when people tell you it's impossible to put a value to event, online, and non-traditional marketing. A partnership like this one, that is created with a brand's true nature in mind, is nurtured through a passionate belief in the core values a brand represents, and extends through direct contact with customer, clients, and prospects can have a real and lasting value to both the brand and the clients.

YSL - well done...

Oh, and for just four of those links ...


http://www.tiny9.com/u/WWD
http://www.tiny9.com/u/sevigny
http://www.tiny9.com/u/camilla
http://www.tiny9.com/u/broadway_world







Jeff Cannon
www.thinkcannon.com