Privacy, Schmivacy

Spambot with actual spam

The column this week starts with replacing a dishwasher. But you are going to have to take a big long walk to get there with me.

In some of the news that I monitor this week, there was talk of white hat hackers taking advantage of security holes in the background browsers of Internet-connected televisions, with Nefarious Potential to follow. (Your appliance may already be a spambot!)

The TVs now come with cameras and microphones as part of their rigging, so the set can (a) save energy by dimming or turning off when you leave or fall asleep, or (b) monitor your attention for marketing and advertising purposes, because offline and online is eventually all going to be one.

But let's not get sidetracked. Remember, we're going to the dishwasher.

As most Internet of Things (IoT) devices tend towards economically friendly browsers like open source and Linux, hacks are easy and updates are intermittent. The entire situation has the potential to scuttle the industry before it really gets off the ground, especially if media and/or litigation decides to make a lunch of it, and, well, that's certainly possible. If for no other reason than there is a lot of venture capital / deep pockets in the IoT space.

Which all sounds a lot more dire than I'd like to make it, if only for the following factors.

1) Privacy skews at a demographic level. People who have grown up with connected everything have also grown up with cynicism, incessant trolling and social media that has always acted as a race to the most shared. These are also the folks who are going to buy the new stuff. Privacy enhancement isn't going to move gear, at least not in comparison to price and features, and as long as the IoT gear does things that the consumer finds to be of value, they'll trade off privacy in a heartbeat. They have for, well, decades.

2) Legislation isn't likely to happen. We live in an era where consumer-unfriendly measures like an end to net neutrality are going to provide all kinds of air cover to the IoT, as if much will get done in the polarized and charged environment that seems to be the new normal in the U.S. For something as esoteric as the privacy settings on niche gadgets, this will be a golden era of being able to hide in plain sight.

3) When there's big money on the table, *always* bet against crime. A few years ago, I was extremely concerned about fraud in the display ad business, since the work could be done anywhere in the world, and all of the solutions to the problem seemed to require an unrealistic amount of human bandwidth. (My livelihood was also tied up entirely in display.)

What has happened since is that the problem, while still a major concern, has likely crested and started to recede, because Facebook and Google threw a lot of resources at it, and the rest of the industry followed the leaders. Most estimates have the majority of fraud done by a few high volume actors, which means, in all likelihood, that the net is closing in on those folks.

There's still an unacceptable number of bad actors out there, and the situation needs to get better, but it's already on the way. IoT hackers are going to have a lot of talented people trying to take them out of the game, and more will come every day. Oh, and the very best hackers will also switch over from black to white hat coding, since you can do the same work but turn it into a stable career, rather than worry about, well, prison.

At the start of a new industry, the value proposition will always seem small, and maybe even a little ridiculous. Why would anyone want their refrigerator to be connected to the Internet, especially if it adds to the cost of the unit and contributes to a security issue? But when the connectivity creates a device that self-repairs based on remote monitoring, informs (or auto-replenishes) a shopping list in ways that makes life easier, alerts the user to when produce is about to spoil, or self-corrects energy expenditure when the unit isn't being used as much, all of which saves the user money?

Well, all of that is going to be something you won't want to do without, once you have it. There will be bumps in the road, and those who choose to do without. Kind of like every tech advancement ever, or (hey! we got here after all!) kind of like when dishwashers started turning up in kitchens.

The new ones do all kinds of stuff the old ones don't do. They are dramatically better than the one we got rid of, for less money than the old one cost. The tech that's inside the unit has all kinds of sensors and gadgetry, and we have become (damn near instantly) used to the new level of service.

Oh, and in the store where we got this, they put the dishwashers next to the fridges. Which had models with digital whiteboards and browsers, next to the models that didn't.

Guess which ones got all of the foot traffic?

* * * * *

Feel free to comment, as well as like or share this column, connect with me on LinkedIn, or email me at davidlmountain at gmail dot com, or hit the RFP boxes at top right. RFPs are always free, and we hope to hear from you soon.

The AdTech Two Step

Step One: Honey, Not Those Shoes

This week in Adtech saw two sequential stories that followed a pattern that goes back, well, decades. Let's do the dance.

Step 1 -- An adtech company finds an issue that affects customers (in this case, billing). Said company reports the issue, offers a correction, and tries to get ahead of any possible PR blowback by being, well, proactive about the whole thing.

Step 2 -- Media begrudgingly admits that adtech company did the right thing in reporting the error and fixing the problem, but that Steps Must Be Taken to prevent this kind of thing from ever happening again, because without some third party being around to protect clients, they are At Risk.

This time, it was Facebook with an ad impression correction. Clients were overcharged by a fraction of a percent, because the error was only on a limited series of platform and browsers. Since the whole thing was (a) not really a big deal on the numbers, (b) happening during an era where you can't go a single hour, let alone day, without some new attraction in the So Many Rings U.S. Political Circus distracting everyone, and (c) not really enough of a reason to step away from a dominant provider, it slipped by without much notice. (And yes, last month something similar happened with Google and YouTube. You get the point.)

But for me, it sticks in the craw... because it's part of what seems to be an eternal double standard when it comes to online advertising. To wit: has anyone ever called television ads that are skipped, muted by remote control, in close proximity to controversial content, or just ignored by the viewer... unviewable or worthless?

Because that what online ads that aren't seen by the viewer, no matter the reason why, are called.

Outdoor ads are placed in venue where a known number of cars will pass by, and priced accordingly. No one knows how many of those ads are seen now, especially with an ever-increasing amount of in-car options, but as an advertiser, you'll pay for those cars just the same. Radio, print, podcasts.. all of those ads, paid for on an impression count that's optimal and theoretical.

Only digital, with its relentless ability to quantify so many things that the non-quantifiable benefit is usually disregarded, tells you how much isn't optimal. For this, it's punished, in a process that promises to go away as the world matures and the market gradually takes over for other mediums, but in the interim, we're still doing this dance.

What isn't accepted, either then or now, is that you *can* add to your branding online, because those ads aren't worthless. (Which we can tell, naturally, with metrics, because nerds, we never stop trying). It's slow and arduous, and no one wants to do it without offline air cover, but brand awareness does rise for folks who see your work online. Especially if it's well-targeted, clever, with strong offers and good execution.

You know, the same way it works offline. Because the customer and prospect base is increasingly the same in both places.

So since we know how this dance ends -- more and more marketers using data to make more and more decisions, from an ever-rising level of accountability because digital doesn't really take steps backward...

Well, can't we just skip some steps? Maybe admit that digital has impact that isn't measured, that analog is subject to all kinds of issues that has always been more or less baked into the price, and that the world is more complex than an either/or answer?

Because, well, this dance is getting old. And it's pretty clear that the music's not stopping, and that, for the most part? We're calling the tune.

* * * * *

Feel free to comment, as well as like or share this column, connect with me on LinkedIn, or email me at davidlmountain at gmail dot com, or hit the RFP boxes at top right. RFPs are always free, and we hope to hear from you soon.

Cord, Cut

You'll Rarely Miss It

I've been traveling on business for the past few weeks, as part of a long-term relocation project. For the next 2 to 14 months, I'll be living by myself, away from family, while situations shake out and we figure out the next place for all of us to be.

This also means that for the first time in my life, I'm completely without a television... and, also, access to all of the entertainment options that cable television brings.

What I wasn't prepared for was just how little I'd miss it. (By the way, this is a huge part of why AirBNB can be viable now. All you need to host now is fast and reliable Wifi; the one place that I've stayed in the past two weeks that had cable, it was unwatchable due to pixilation. But I digress.)

With the exception of NBA playoff games -- which I've picked up at various sports bars and gyms, aided by the West Coast time shift -- I haven't looked at anything outside of my Netflix queue for weeks now, and probably won't for the next few months. I've picked up topical stuff from online sources, but for the most part, I've just been watching less and less, and getting more done. (There's also a new gig that's pretty all-consuming right now, and promises to continue to be that way.)

I am long past the event horizon of people who should be cord-cutting, and if the NBA playoffs had been more compelling up to this point, maybe I'd be more annoyed by the loss of access. But the fact of the matter is that you can find most of the content that you are looking for via the Web now, and there isn't so much that demands a full screen, immersing experience to be enjoyable.

Eventually, my living conditions will change, and I'll have more than my own entertainment needs to consider. Perhaps I'll break down and go back to a bundled package or satellite system, especially if I'm entertaining others, or my football laundry has a particularly compelling year. Maybe once my Netflix queue stops being quite so compelling (new "Master of None"! new "Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt!"), this will also feel more like deprivation.

But, still? Something I've had for decades and decades just went away, and I'm not missing it -- at all. If you run a cable company, or a broadcast network, and that doesn't put a little fear into you, I'm not sure what will. (Also, um, if your livelihood depends on 30 second spots that feed such things.)

* * * * *

Feel free to comment, as well as like or share this column, connect with me on LinkedIn, or email me at davidlmountain at gmail dot com, or hit the RFP boxes at top right. RFPs are always free, and we hope to hear from you soon.

Five Quick Points From A Changing America

Road Trip!

This week's column was written near the end of a very long road trip. Eleven years ago, I drove cross-country from the Bay Area to New York for work. This week, I'm making the reverse trip for a new gig. Here's the differences from the country, as they relate to marketing and advertising.

> FedEx, FedEx everywhere. The offline retail apocalypse that's happening in malls across America isn't temporary. It's in all of those FedEx trucks, filled to the brim with online orders, that are all over the highways. I've been passing them every few minutes, honestly.

> America got casinos. It used to be that casinos were just a Nevada thing, but now there's racetrack outfits and slot machine hook ups in most states. They don't have the prime Interstate locations that go to food, lodging and fuel, but you'll still see them easily enough.

> You can drive faster now, but you won't. Speed limits are up to 80, but we need infrastructure something bad. Single lane highways and hundreds of miles of repairs are common, especially in Western states that look like they've seen hard times. Even in times of high employment, you'd have to think that this would be a bipartisan win to get the roads fixed. No one likes potholes. (Also, you'll pass people now just doing the speed limit, because, well, the roads. Also, I suspect, people wanting to avoid speeding tickets, because enforcement is at the same levels as before.)

> Radio has changed. In my scans, I've found less religious and talk radio than a decade ago, and more demographically targeted music -- mostly Spanish and middle-aged, which is to say, the people who haven't completely migrated to online yet. I'd also bet that it's gotten less lucrative, because the ads are less plentiful, and for much more in the way of local brands. But there's something to be said for classic hip-hop that's brought to you by incontinence medications...

> Online aps aren't done changing the place. I've stayed at three locations during this trip; two AirBNBs, and one traditional hotel. The AirBNBs were far more comfortable, offered much more in the way of space and amenities, and were also better deals for the money. I really see myself using that site more than hotels moving forward, especially for solo business trips. And as for those convenience stores... there's an app on my phone that tells me gas prices now, as part of a crowd sourced community. Which has led me to drive right past the big beautiful store right on the Interstate, and to patronize the slightly dusty one a half mile away, where the gas was a lot cheaper. The lesson, as always: connectivity changes everything. Even places that don't look like they'll ever change.

* * * * *

Feel free to comment, as well as like or share this column, connect with me on LinkedIn, or email me at davidlmountain at gmail dot com, or hit the RFP boxes at top right. RFPs are always free, and we hope to hear from you soon.

Be Very Very Quiet, I'm Selling FUD

Our Hero

In some of my past gigs, I've led creative efforts for low brands -- lead generation white labels that transferred the prospects to a third party -- in various fields. With nothing unique to pitch and no differentiating positive traits, these campaigns were an interesting creative challenge, especially when you had no real brand marketing concerns to address.

Fortunately in these roles, I had access to great data, an in-house and vendor creative team that were very skilled and quick at their jobs, and analytic insights that gave us what we needed to iterate for future turns. We made a lot of money on these projects, but that's kind of besides the point. Instead, what I want to discuss today is something that we referred to internally as FUD -- fear, uncertainty, and doubt -- and what we learned from executing these campaigns.

FUD campaigns can work when (a) the campaign is in a consumer category where the consequence of a poor choice was substantial, and (b) you had a prospect list that, well, responded to fear without just associating your brand with the negative stimulus. But keep in mind these five points. .

1) You have a very small window of time to sell the fear. Visually, your piece has to communicate the value proposition in a glimpse, preferably with a headline that doesn't waste a single character. Copy can (and should) go long after that glimpse, but if the ad looks like work, and negative work at that, it's not going to perform well. (Pro tip: when you are doing FUD work, make sure to have just text versions in your creative mix. They work more often than you might think.)

2) It burns out creative personnel. As a manager, I had to be careful not to give too many of these approaches to the same copy and design teams, or risk turnover. Creative pros don't always need the piece to go into a lead position in their portfolio, but too much of this mechanical work can make even the most productive teams lag and look elsewhere.

3) Innovative players in a space can move the ground out from under you -- especially if consumer satisfaction from presumed premium brands isn't that high to begin with. Consider how an ever-growing number of consumers are willing to accept rides and lodging from strangers, albeit ones with qualified feedback and presumed vetting from the innovators in the space. So we have two major pillars of the travel sector that are under attack at all levels of price, because the FUD of a poor ride or lacking stay just isn't all that much higher than, well, the FUD of the same thing from a brand.

4) Brands that go for FUD usually don't have anything else going for them. There's a reason why most of the FUD work we did was for our own white labels, with the small aside for comedic executions that target other players.

5) Winning campaigns will get duplicated by shrewd competitors. After all, there's no barrier to entry here.

As a creative pro, I hope you don't have too much FUD in your professional life. Or, for that matter, your personal one.

* * * * *

Feel free to comment, as well as like or share this column, connect with me on LinkedIn, or email me at davidlmountain at gmail dot com, or hit the RFP boxes at top right. RFPs are always free, and we hope to hear from you soon.