Melissa Campanelli’s The View From Here: Two Signs That ‘Traditional’ and ‘Social’ Online Marketing Are Becoming One

Two announcements were made this week that in my eyes signify a true integration of traditional and social marketing.

Two announcements were made this week that in my eyes signify a true integration of traditional and social marketing.

The first was the announcement that Omniture and Facebook have joined forces to provide online marketers with solutions to optimize Facebook as a marketing channel. The partnership builds on the Facebook analytics and Facebook application analytics capabilities Omniture announced last year.

This alliance is designed to help companies integrate Facebook as a marketing channel and connect to relevant conversations with the site’s 400 million active users.

Initially, “the two companies will focus on the most fundamental needs of online marketers today: the ability to automate Facebook media buying and access analytics that measure customer engagement on Facebook,” according to an Omniture press release.

The solution, for example, will enable advertisers to buy media and track media on Facebook through Omniture tools such as SearchCenter Plus. It will also enable them to generate reports designed to understand ad effectiveness of Facebook pages and other Facebook applications.

The two companies will continue to expand their partnership as marketers increasingly use Facebook to optimize visitor acquisition, conversion and retention, Omniture said.

The next announcement came from email marketing provider ExactTarget, which announced this week that it has acquired CoTweet, a web-based collaboration platform that allows companies to manage multiple Twitter accounts from a single dashboard, support multiple editors, track conversations, assign roles and create follow-up tasks.

The acquisition will enable ExactTarget to offer marketers a solution for managing communications across all interactive marketing channels, including social media, email and mobile.

A key reason for the acquisition was because ExactTarget was finding that while “organizations are moving quickly to try to capture the potential of social, they’re also discovering that it’s siloed and not integrated effectively with other forms of digital communications,” said Scott Dorsey, ExactTarget co-founder and chief executive officer, in a press release. “By combining the power of ExactTarget and CoTweet, we can provide businesses with a complete solution to tie together all forms of interactive communications and drive deeper customer engagement online.”

I’ll bet there’ll be more announcements like these to come in 2010, as digital marketing software and service providers really begin to understand the impact social media is having on consumers and marketers alike.

Melissa Campanelli’s The View From Here: Sears Experiments With a New Google Email Tool

The most interesting news of the week came to me via an email alert from Chad White, research director of Smith-Harmon, a Responsys company, and founder of the Retail Email Blog. The alert said Sears was testing a new Gmail functionality and, in the words of Chad, “was pretty cool stuff.” It directed me to his blog posting on the subject.

The most interesting news of the week came to me via an email alert from Chad White, research director of Smith-Harmon, a Responsys company, and founder of the Retail Email Blog. The alert said Sears was testing a new Gmail functionality and, in the words of Chad, “was pretty cool stuff.” It directed me to his blog posting on the subject.

Knowing that Chad is an authority on email — and a very smart guy — I decided to take a look.

Sears, according to Chad’s blog post, “will be wrapping up beta testing of a potential new Google offering called ‘Enhanced Email,’ which allows a form of browsing to occur within an email viewed within Gmail.”

In a limited test of the functionality last month, White wrote, “Sears was able to include seven ‘pages’ containing 20 best-selling products that its Gmail subscribers could browse using the navigation within the module without leaving the email.”

Here’s where it gets even cooler: When a subscriber hits the “next” link in the module’s navigation, White wrote, “the current set of products slides out of the box to the left and the next set of products slides in from the right in one smooth motion.”

Pretty cool, indeed.

For his blog post, White interviewed Ramki Srinivasan, the manager of email innovation at Sears, who said the set of products for the browsing module is displayed at the time of open, not the time of send, “which allows the information to be as current as possible.” He also said the test saw “higher opens, clicks and revenue per email,” but stressed that it’s too early to make any final assessments on the functionality.

In closing, White said Enhanced Email is just one more sign that the inboxes of the future will allow much more activity to occur within them. As a result, marketers will have to come up with “new ways of measuring email success and of thinking about email strategy, particularly the relationship between email and website landing pages,” White said.

Have any of you experimented with Enhanced Email? If so, would you like to tell us about it? If you haven’t yet tried it, are you interested in checking it out? Let me know by leaving a comment here.

Nurture Your Subscribers to Higher ROI in 2010

Email subscribers want only one thing from us: help. They want to be more informed, more beautiful, given raises, be heroes to their kids and make better business decisions. Given the amount of poorly targeted messages in my inbox, however, it seems many of us have forgotten this central tenet. Generic is boring; custom is compelling. Response goes up when messages engage and nurture subscribers.

Email subscribers want only one thing from us: help. They want to be more informed, more beautiful, given raises, be heroes to their kids and make better business decisions. Given the amount of poorly targeted messages in my inbox, however, it seems many of us have forgotten this central tenet. Generic is boring; custom is compelling. Response goes up when messages engage and nurture subscribers.

The inbox is essential in 2010, but it’s also fiercely competitive. Social networks drive their businesses through the inbox, and more and more marketers are sending more and more promotions. Your message must stand out amid this noise.

Sending the same message to everyone is the opposite of nurture — it’s numbing. It has the opposite effect, driving disengagement and dissatisfaction. Too much email in short time periods will not only depress response, it’ll increase complaints (counted by ISPs like Yahoo and Gmail) every time someone clicks the “Report Spam” button. Even a small number of complaints will prevent your messages from reaching subscriber inboxes — all your subscribers, not just those who complained.

It’s painful enough imagining the slow death of your email response rates when subscribers are bored week after week. Even worse, imagine the drop in revenue if all your messages are blocked by Yahoo due to high complaints. Ouch! It’s worth taking the time to nurture instead.

The ideal is to offer subscribers what they need before they realize they need it. Luckily, you can get pretty far even without deep resources. Test a few of the following “baby step” ideas now; then integrate the hardest-working into your ongoing calendar this year. Since not all subscribers have the same value, focus on those with the highest potential.

1. Educate prospects. Many marketers have both prospects and customers on their house lists, each receiving the same promotions. Probably neither are inspired by something watered down for the masses. Never assume prospects know anything about your content, editorial personalities, products or benefits. Consider a series of messages or offers that move prospects through the sales pipeline.

2. Treat customers better. Email is a great way to treat your best customers special. Certainly VIPs are easy to find and celebrate, but also take that same approach down the line. Identify your cusp customers, and invite them to participate at higher levels while showing them the benefit of doing so. Every once in a while, just thank your customers. You’ll be surprised at the response you get.

3. Listen. Let subscribers tell you what they need through their actions. Even if you can’t overlay behavior and demographic data, use the data you have. Customize transactional emails based on purchase. After a click, trigger a context-specific email with content recommendations — which could be sponsored advertorial — or premium services. Replace static landing pages with deeper microsites focused on particular topics to capture more page views or present more detailed offers when prospects are “in market.”

4. Test subject lines. Many campaigns go out without any optimization testing. Yet even simple A/B testing of subject lines can improve response by 5 percent or more.

5. Customize by age. Watch response by vintage (the length of time the subscriber has been on the file), and determine when subscribers go “inactive” — defined as no open, click or conversion/response activity in the past three months.

Quickly send out a “win-back” campaign to those who may be on the verge of going inactive. Don’t wait two years to send a win-back. Once subscribers start ignoring your emails, it’s difficult to re-engage them.

Audit your past 90 days for a “nurture appeal.” Are you blasting or engaging? Broadcasting or customizing? Talking or listening? You’ll likely find a number of points of vulnerability where you’re not optimizing your nurture potential. The payoff is real: Satisfied customers click more, buy more, and engage frequently with advertising and offers.

Let me know what you think; please share any ideas or comments below.

Sending Emails From Magazine Pages?

I came upon something very cool in my web travels last week. AdAge.com was showing a video of Jim Marggraff, chairman and CEO of a company called LiveScribe. He was discussing his company’s Pulse Smartpen, a real pen that contains a computer and a high-speed infrared camera that can access the internet. When used with LiveScribe’s dot paper — plain paper printed with microdots — the Smartpen enables a wide range of paper-based applications.

I came upon something very cool in my web travels last week. AdAge.com was showing a video of Jim Marggraff, chairman and CEO of a company called LiveScribe. He was discussing his company’s Pulse Smartpen, a real pen that contains a computer and a high-speed infrared camera that can access the internet. When used with LiveScribe’s dot paper — plain paper printed with microdots — the Smartpen enables a wide range of paper-based applications.

What types of applications, you ask? Marggraff describes a few in the video.

If he gives someone his business card (which has been created with dot paper), for example, and that person writes a note on the back of it with a Smartpen, he’ll get the note in his email inbox right away.

“We call it self-addressing paper,” Marggraff says.

Wow.

Another example involved a magazine — printed on the special dot paper, of course.

“You can take a page in a magazine and encourage readers to write to the editor,” Marggraff says. “[While they’re reading the editor’s article] They [can] write a note to the editor, and it [automatically] goes to the editor’s inbox.”

Or, he says, you could read an article that may mention the book “Outliers.” You may want to remember to buy it. Instead of writing down the name of the book on a piece of paper and forgetting about it, “you’ll be able to take your [paper and] pen and write the words ‘buy’ and ‘Outliers.’ Your pen may say, ‘Searching, $19.95, Amazon.com. To purchase, sign.’ So [you’ll] be able to sign the paper, and [you’ve] bought it.”

“This is all about aligning the paper and digital worlds,” Marggraff says.

Indeed.

Do you think this is cool? A fad? The future? Let me know by leaving a comment here.

DMA International E-mail Guide Available

Did you know that “forward-to-a-friend” or “member-get-member” marketing techniques in e-mail are currently permitted in Argentina, Hong Kong and Israel, but not in Hungary or Poland? Or that while Canada does not have legislation specifically addressing the issue of e-mail marketing, key legislation for e-mail marketers is the federal privacy law, or PIPEDA. Or that in China there is no legal definition or best practice that specifically defines “opt-in?”

Did you know that “forward-to-a-friend” or “member-get-member” marketing techniques in e-mail are currently permitted in Argentina, Hong Kong and Israel, but not in Hungary or Poland? Or that while Canada does not have legislation specifically addressing the issue of e-mail marketing, key legislation for e-mail marketers is the federal privacy law, or PIPEDA. Or that in China there is no legal definition or best practice that specifically defines “opt-in?”

These were just a few of the facts I learned thumbing through the Direct Marketing Association’s very useful International Email Compliance Resource Guide. The book is a compendium of e-mail marketing regulations and practices for individual countries.

The report is valuable for two reasons:

  • International e-mail marketing is growing. Many companies today are looking for new opportunities to market their products and services abroad while the economy here is in the doldrums.
  • To my knowledge, there really isn’t easily accessible information of this nature available on the subject of international e-mail laws.

Here are some of the topics the DMA touches on in the guide:

  • affirmative consent;
  • legal definition of opt-in;
  • forward-to-a-friend;
  • privacy policy in e-mails; and
  • other best practices.

For the guide, the DMA developed a questionnaire targeting key areas of legislation regarding e-mail regulations and data protection. The questionnaire was then administered to preselected respondents who were knowledgeable about their country’s e-mail laws.

Responses varied from country to country based on the questions they answered. In cases where no questionnaire was submitted, a link to the relevant law is provided as well as contact information for local DMAs and/or departments of data protection.

I strongly suggest you check it out. To do so, click here.

Just When You Thought You Were Safe…

Ever hear of malvertisements? Reshipper fraud?

I didn’t either, until these two fraudulent practices were discussed during the opening session of the Authentication and Online Trust Alliance Summit 2008, which took place June 4 to 5 in Seattle.

Ever hear of malvertisements? Reshipper fraud?

I didn’t either, until these two fraudulent practices were discussed during the opening session of the Authentication and Online Trust Alliance Summit 2008, which took place June 4 to 5 in Seattle.

In his opening keynote. Craig Spiezle, chairman AOTA and director, Internet security & privacy, Microsoft Corp., explained that while more and more e-mail is authenticated today and online ad revenue and online holiday spending are increasing, “trust continues to be an issue,” he said.

For example, he said malvertisements continues to be a goring trend. Basically, malvertisements are a new breed of Flash ads appearing on Web sites that can infect a PC with viruses or spyware when the user simply views the page they’re loaded into. No clicking required.

“With malvertisements, mail servers or Web servers are being compromised, where consumers see a legitimate ad for something like an auto manufacturer, they click on that ad, and are actually now taken to a deceptive site, and malware is out on the machine,” said Spiezel. “It is unknown to the consumer, site owner and the brand owner of that advertisement…That is a real problem that we are seeing more and more of.”

Reshipping, or postal forwarding, scams was discussed in a session by Tom Donlea, executive director of the Merchant Risk Council, a trade association for supporting merchants in preventing online fraud and promoting secure e-commerce in global online payments.

Donlea explained that these scams involve fraudsters asking individuals through the Internet to repackage stolen goods — frequently consumer electronics — and forward them, often outside the United States. Scammers ask victims to shell out their own shipping charges, and pay reimbursement and compensation with a fake check.

In addition to seeing their own paychecks bounce, those who fall for reshipping scams may be liable for shipping charges and even the cost of goods purchased online with stolen credit cards.

Donlea said the scams usually originate from Vietnam, Nigeria, or Eastern Europe, and they usually target romance sites/chat rooms.

“Interestingly enough, Christian single sites are on patrol for mules as victims,” he said.
In addition, he said that sometimes the scams are presented as at-home job advertisements.

Donlea said the MRC is working with the U.S. Postal Inspection Service to talk to individuals who are doing the re-shipping and explaining that their activity is illegal.

“They have claimed several thousand packages, and we are working with the merchant community to return those goods and to establish coordination with the public about how to avoid these scams,” Donlea said.

To create online trust, these issues must be dealt with, and the industry is doing everything it can to make sure these practcies are curbed.

Vendors in the Interactive Marketing Space React Positively to New FTC CAN–SPAM Rules

Vendors from the interactive marketing space are reacting positively to the news from earlier this week that the Federal Trade Commission has approved four new rule provisions under the Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing Act of 2003 (CAN-SPAM).

According to the FTC, the provisions–which are intended to clarify the Act’s requirements–address four topics:

Vendors from the interactive marketing space are reacting positively to the news from earlier this week that the Federal Trade Commission has approved four new rule provisions under the Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing Act of 2003 (CAN-SPAM).

According to the FTC, the provisions–which are intended to clarify the Act’s requirements–address four topics:

(1) an e-mail recipient cannot be required to pay a fee, provide information other than his or her e-mail address and opt-out preferences, or take any steps other than sending a reply e-mail message or visiting a single Internet Web page to opt out of receiving future e-mail from a sender;

(2) the definition of “sender” was modified to make it easier to determine which of multiple parties advertising in a single e-mail message is responsible for complying with the Act’s opt-out requirements;

(3) a “sender” of commercial e-mail can include an accurately-registered post office box or private mailbox established under U.S. Postal Service regulations to satisfy the Act’s requirement that a commercial e-mail display a “valid physical postal address”; and

4) a definition of the term “person” was added to clarify that CAN-SPAM’s obligations are not limited to natural persons.

Quinn Jalli, Chief Privacy Officer for online marketing firm Datran Media said he believes that legitimate marketers will embrace the new regulations, as they significantly reduce the complexity of complying with the law in a joint-marketing scenario.

“The FTC’s position is well in line with the prevailing philosophy in the industry, and the new regulations align the law with common-sense expectations,” he said. “[The new regulations] are a win for marketers and consumers alike.”

In a press release, Matt Wise, CEO of Q Interactive, an interactive marketing services provider, also announced support for the FTC’s revised definition of e-mail “sender”.

“Since CAN-SPAM’s inception, there has been pervasive confusion in the marketplace over responsibility for including opt-out links in e-mail, which has led to inconsistent execution of the unsubscribe process, increased risk of unsubscribe list abuse, additional and unnecessary costs for advertisers, and an overall reduction in the efficiency of the medium,” Wise said in the release.

Q Interactive said that under the revised ruling, companies advertising with e-mail can now designate a single e-mail “sender” responsible for adhering to the rules of CAN-SPAM, which include having the “sender’s name in the e-mail “from line” and providing a working opt-out link and physical address.

The FTC’s revised “sender” definition, Wise said “eliminates the confusion and frustration over multiple opt-out links for consumers and makes it as easy as possible for them to unsubscribe from unwanted e-mails, which, in essence, is the primary purpose of the CAN-SPAM Act.”

Opening Up a Dialogue About Spam

I learned about an interesting survey yesterday.

It basically was focused on the fact that many legitimate advertisers following the e-mail industry’s best practices still find themselves not connecting with consumers due to the spam button.

I learned about an interesting survey yesterday.

It basically was focused on the fact that many legitimate advertisers following the e-mail industry’s best practices still find themselves not connecting with consumers due to the spam button.

As a result, online marketing services provider Q Interactive and marketing research firm Marketing Sherpa conducted a survey to look into consumers’ definition of spam. What did they find? For starters, that there is a big disconnect between what consumers see as spam and what is considered to be spam by the interactive community.

According to the two firms’ “Spam Complainers Survey,” the definition of spam has changed from the permission-based regulatory definition of “unsolicited commercial e-mail” to a perception-based definition centered on consumer dissatisfaction.

In fact, according to the survey, more than half of the participants–56 percent–consider marketing messages from known senders to be spam if the message is “just not interesting to me”. In addition, 50 percent of respondents consider “too frequent e-mails from companies I know” to be spam and 31 percent cite “e-mails that were once useful but aren’t relevant anymore”. (Respondents could select more than one answer for multiple questions in the survey.)

When it comes to using the “report spam” button—the primary tool Internet Service Providers (ISPs) provide consumers to counter the problem—nearly half of respondents (48 percent) provided a reason other than “did not sign up for e-mail” for why they reported an e-mail as spam. In fact, underscoring consumers’ varying definitions of spam, respondents cited a variety of non-permission-based reasons for hitting the spam button, including “the e-mail was not of interest to me” (41 percent); “I receive too much e-mail from the sender” (25 percent); and “I receive too much e-mail from all senders” (20 percent).

The surey also found that there is a pervasive confusion among consumers regarding what they believe will happen as a result of clicking the “report spam” button. Over half of respondents, 56 percent, for example, reported it will “filter all e-mail from that sender” while 21 percent believe it will notify the sender that the recipient did not find that specific e-mail useful so the sender will “do a better job of mailing me” in the future. Even more indicative of the lack of understanding, 47 percent believe they will be unsubscribed from the list by clicking “report spam” while 53 percent do not believe the button it is a method to unsubscribe.

Not surprisingly, accompanying this confusion is the frequent misuse of the “report spam” button. The survey found a large number of consumers, 43 percent, forgo advertiser-supplied unsubscribe links in email and simply use the ISP’s “report spam” button to unsubscribe from an advertiser’s list—regardless of whether or not the email fits the consumer’s definition of spam. Moreover, a full one in five consumers (21 percent) use the “report spam” button to unsubscribe from e-mail they specifically do not consider spam.

To address this problem, Q Interactive has called for ISPs, marketers, advertisers and publishers to come together with industry associations such as the Interactive Advertising Bureau to agree on a solution that is beneficial to consumers and all interested parties. To begin the dialogue, Q Interactive suggests two points for discussion:

* Replace the broken “report spam” button with buttons that more clearly indicate consumers’ intentions such as an “unsubscribe” button and an “undesired” button.

* ISPs should categorize e-mail senders based on their practices to identify and reward senders who follow best practices in transparency and permission.

For the good of our industry, we should all pay heed.