The Art Of The Sell

Or Clinton

Confession time: I watch political conventions, because, well, it's possibly the most naked sales pitch you will ever see this side of buying a used car. And if you don't have a fondness for an artful sales job, and by extension, artful sales people, you really shouldn't be in marketing and advertising. It's kind of like being a coach or an athletic trainer and hating sports. So I've been watching a lot of the Democratic National Convention this week, after catching a fair amount of the Republican National Convention last week. Sort of like how ad people always watch the Super Bowl ads.

The RNC, as you might have heard, was a very different experience than usual, with unconventional celebrity choices, notable moments of dissension and controversy, and a culmination in an unusually long and varied speech from the nominee. Judging from the immediate polling afterward, it provided a small but significant boost to the campaign, surprising a fair number of observers who, it seems, have run into no end of surprises in this cycle.

So far, the DNC has been much more in a traditional vein, albeit with the speed bump of placating the runner-up's supporters more than usual. Tonight's approach was particularly telling, because the sales job fell to a former president, Bill Clinton.

In a season of unprecedented experiences and moments, this was one of the more gentle ones. The former President gave a speech that would have been traditional from a female spouse with no political past, centering around their relationship and meet cute moments, or points along the way of their journey as parents... and if you weren't familiar with him before this evening, you might not even realize he was the leader of the free world for eight years while married to the candidate. To a nation that has known this political pair for over a generation, it was a fairly new approach while still following traditional patterns.

And while as a marketing and advertising professional, I admired the originality and craft, I also had the opportunity to see how it played to an entirely new demographic. My youngest daughter, recently 11, has become almost oddly interested in the campaign, showing exceptional attention to the coverage, even to the point of opting out of her usual games and distractions, and sitting still for longer than, well, she sits still for anything. With no real prompting or urging from me, because, well, I basically don't want to jinx it.

Bill Clinton's speech worked for her, not as much as Michelle Obama's, but still, she made it through the whole thing. She's very excited to hear what Chelsea Clinton says next, because she relates hard to the idea of family talking about their mom, and the idea that a mom and a grandma could be President clearly energizes her. The soft sell, predicated around the relatable human moments of buying a home, asking a girl many times to marry you, and taking your child to college -- that got her, hook, line and sinker.

And sure, she's unsophisticated, and can't vote, and might be swayed by some other pitch, because she's a kid. But on the other side of things, she's smart, understands that she's being sold, and keeps asking about what the other side might say to what she is being told. (That last part, I have to admit, makes me very proud of her.)

My gut tells me the positive and evocative pitch is a better pitch, and that you attract more flies with honey than vinegar, especially in a cycle where both candidates have big challenges to overcome. But the proof is always in the data, and we won't see that for over 100 days, when most people will have forgotten all about these two weeks.

But maybe not.

Because that's the nature of really good sales pitches. They tend to stick with you.

* * * * *

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 Wrong Questions

The coffee is tired, too

As a marketing and advertising consultant with access to proprietary data and analytics, I get asked any number of questions by our clients on optimal creative practices. I'm always happy to help, and always do what I can to answer the question directly... but the answers rarely close the matter. I'd like to take some time to discuss why, and how to get to a place where the questions are likely to drive to a better conclusion.

The simplest stumbling block is when a client becomes fixated on the answer to questions that only have, at best, temporary answers. These include points like optimal dayparting, mobile formatting, subject line conventions, call to action language, and so on. Even when you actually have a good answer to one of these fishing expeditions, it rarely satisfies, especially since a perceptive client will understand that you are answering the point with something like frustration.

But it goes beyond the understanding that tactics will need to be checked, or might evolve over time. Moreover, it's the stratification of winners or losers, as if the march of a campaign is always a smooth ramp upward.

Because, well, it never works that way.

What happens instead is a matter of stops and starts, with gains punctuated by drops, based around seasonality, the rise and fall of certain practices, and how other, outside influences might impact your marketing channel.

There are optimal practices, and winning tactics... but there are no golden calfs, no rules that can never be broken, no tests that are definitive and closed. Even the most basic points, such as making sure there is a call to action or fast access in a scan or preview mode, might become losers later. But there are orders of priority in regards to testing, and moves that are unlikely to be your best or most pressing point to test.

That's where the comprehensive nature of data and analysis kicks in and becomes meaningful. Typical marketing and ad pros usually have visibility into just how their individual handful of campaigns did in the real world, and even in the best and most rigorous of cases, they tend to tap out after a dozen or so cells in a calendar year. After all, you are in the business to provoke better engagement, rather than run a response lab as a social experiment.

But if you are at the wheel of an adtech provider that serves multiple clients, hopefully with a wide number of sub-brands?Well, that's when the visibility becomes incredibly useful, and if you are very fortunate, inspirational on a cross-category basis. (I've been fortunate enough to be in that position for over 15 years now, at four different gigs, and it never fails to make me seem, well, far smarter than I actually am.)

So the right question isn't what specific creative practice is optimal, at this time and in this execution. Rather, it's what's new to the field in the last two to four business quarters, even if it's not 100% germane to what you are trying to promote right now.... because that can, and will, inspire the next breakthrough. Preferably in a clean test cell, which will hopefully convince some future client to test something

And if we wind up with a client that wants to just do what they do, regardless of our recommendations?

Well, that is valuable as well, if only to continue to give us a control against the likely better idea...

* * * * *

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.

Intentional Disasters, Or The New Way To Market

More Free Media

I really tried, honestly, to avoid writing about the Republican National Convention this week.

You see, as a consultant, it does me no good at all to get into the red versus blue nature of American politics right now. We've done work for all kinds of concerns, and for people on both sides of the aisle, and will continue to do that in the future.

But when you have something like what happened last night -- where Republican nominee Donald Trump's wife was caught plagiarizing a far from coincidental amount of speech from Michelle Obama during the Democratic convention eight years ago -- and you have to start wondering. Or, at least, I do. (Don't worry, this all comes back to marketing and advertising later.)

I can't quite square my mind around the idea that this was a simple mistake, sabotage on the part of a spurned speechwriter, or anything but, as unlikely as it sounds, intentional. Because the plain and simple fact of the matter is that Trump's branding efforts are so unrelenting, so much about dominating every news cycle whether for good reason or bad, that I can't quite discount the idea that this was the political equivalent of an Easter egg, or a news media cheat code.

In an era where political conventions are naked infomercials, and the public has an untold number of other entertainment options, making a spectacle of yourself might be defensible. Especially when, if you are Trump or one of his advisors, some part of you know that free media has been the key to your success all along, and the efficiency of paid spots has been under serious doubt for the entire cycle.

So why not sprinkle in a plagiarism minute? It's not as if it's going to shake your supporters, given that the candidate has said literally hundreds of other things that have stopped the media cold in the past year. Ginning up a controversy seems like second nature to the campaign, and the media seems incapable of not jumping into it with full force. If this sort of thing is damaging Trump's chances of winning the election, I'd wonder what has changed in the past 24 hours, as opposed to the past 12 months.

And if this pays off in the long run, and our field winds up covering the events of this campaign as the first and most brilliant example of a ju jitsu style of reverse marketing?

Well, the field would get a lot more, um, creative. Yeah, I guess creative is the most diplomatic word...

(Oh, and if you want to think about how that might look, consider the long-running Domino's ad campaign, where the chain denigrated its past efforts at food. And did that for years, to considerable free social media exposure.)

* * * * *

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.