The Next Level In Fake News: Content Attacks

As Seen On Not TV

There's a hard and cruel line in political science, which is that the people get the government they deserve. The concept is that if there's a tyrannical despot, and the people aren't rising up to overthrow, they are enabling it. That if there's corruption and graft, that the people are, on some level, comfortable with it, haven't been socialized or educated away from tolerating the practice, and so on.

It's a fairly cold and inhumane perspective, especially when it comes to moments like a violent overlord that is propped up by foreign action, but it's got the feel of truth about it. If you aren't prepared to commit to political actions to the extent that your opponents are, they will prevail. (A fairly famous quote from a recent symposium at Harvard of "I wouldn't want to win the way you did it" comes to mind.)

We pivot now to marketing and advertising, as we always do, because that's why you read this column.

The recent presidential election, and the continuing investigation by the CIA, is now at a point where it is clear that foreign powers tried to influence the results through the use of fake news stories that were designed to go viral. Whether or not these stories were successful in changing enough hearts and minds to sway the result is going to be open to interpretation; after all, very few people vote for just one reason or point, and it's not as if millions will recant their vote (or have the opportunity to).

But that's not the point.

The bigger issue, to me, is that the actors who just made money with fake news about politics aren't just going to go into hibernation now that they have developed skills and techniques, and where that goes next could have strong implications for our field. This also presumes that interest and traffic about politics eventually goes down, which might be an incorrect assumption. But anyway, let's move on.

I have one more concept to add to this message of worry, and that is towards a creative interpretation of ransomware. Ransomeware, in case you aren't up on your cybercrime, is a type of software that's designed to block access to a computer system until a payoff, usually in untraceable bitcoins. But instead of a program that's downloaded by mistake, fake news ransomware could come in the form of negative viral content about a brand or service, then the ask of the brand owners to pay for the content to get scrapped before social sharing.

If all of this seems a little far-fetched because people aren't going to be read and share a listicle about the top 10 things that experts don't want you to know about (targeted brand or service), well... I've got a pizzeria in Washington DC where the employees might want to have a word with you, in regards to your naivete about how much people will believe.

So what, if anything, can marketing and advertising pros do to try to safeguard against this threat? Much of the optimal practices that you should already have in place, frankly. Content that cross-links to well-established blogs in your space, so that organic search results won't pull up clickbait. Customer service that's so strong that your clients shout down the bad actors, or evangelize for you as part of a grass roots recovery plan after attack. A diversified revenue stream, so that an attack in a single consumer category doesn't imperil the entire business. An active social media program, in multiple channels, that helps get the word out about any issues you are encountering.

There's been a longstanding tendency in marketing and advertising circles, especially on the direct side, to deride the value of a Facebook like, a Twitter re-tweet, a Pinterest pin, and so on. But what you should really be doing is to stop trying to put a hard ROI figure on these activities, and start seeing them as an insurance policy against a content attack.

After all, the reputation -- and business -- that you save will be your own.

* * * * *

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 (Price) Race To Nowhere

Only one place to go

Twenty years ago, in the throes of the Christmas season, I knew what my big gift idea for the year was going to be. I wanted to get the woman who eventually became my wife a high-end leather jacket.

This wasn't the kind of purchase that you'd do over the Internet, especially not in those low bandwidth days. Fortunately, I knew people in New York City who trafficked in high fashion circles, and knew the right places to go. They also knew *how* to shop in such a setting, and prepared me accordingly. So instead of relying on a credit card, on the instructions of my experienced friend, I pulled my cash out of a bank machine, then spent the better part of an afternoon going from shop to shop in Lower Manhattan.

After four or five stops, we finally found what we were looking for, at a price that, to my non-New York eyes, seemed high but fair. It was, after all, a really nice coat. My very sharp friend agreed with the choice, and then approached the shop keeper.

What followed was something out of a play. My friend offered half of the price. The shop keeper looked at her as if she had insulted his ancestors, but she didn't flinch or seem in any way taken aback. He repeated the sticker price, at which point she noted the seasonality, how the coat was more of a fall piece and wasn't likely to move in January, and her original offer. He came down 10%. She went up 10%. He complained about his costs, and talked up the piece. She shrugged and made as if to leave. We got halfway out of the shop before he came down another 10%. She replied with 10% more, final offer. With a frankly uncomfortable amount of venom, he agreed to split the difference for a final 5% less, or 25% off the sticker price, but only if we paid in cash. Which we did, in a transaction that somehow didn't involve sales tax.

The whole experience took about five minutes, saved me a significant chunk of change, and gave me quite an education. From what I learned later about fashion, the shopkeeper probably still made significant profit from the transaction. (The fact that he was willing to risk his margins to avoid paying sales tax also shows that even at 25% off, he might not have paid full price for his goods, either.) But to me, and to anyone who might have witnessed the conversation in what wasn't an empty store, we were all quickly trained to the idea that paying the full price was just a mistake.

Now, let's pivot to the current state of affairs in e-commerce.

There are a myriad number of ways to avoid paying full price online. Comparison shopping among vendors can happen with just a couple of clicks. If you've got the time and inclination, abandoning a cart and seeing what might come your way in a retargeting offer can drive significant coin. Checking coupon sites for codes, or just typing in common keywords before checkout, can pay off handsomely. Using a rewards credit card, buying in bulk, taking advantage of seasonal discounts, bundling purchases to avoid paying for shipping... it's all there for you, and you don't even have to handle cash or haggle.

The challenge this brings to marketing and advertising professionals is considerable. How do you protect your margins while still driving enough revenue to matter? Can you protect your brick and mortar stores while still having a competitive online presence? And when connectivity gets even more ubiquitous, and wifi more widespread, are we all on a race to the bottom?

The answer, as far as I can see it, can only come from protecting the brand through extraordinary value and customer service. My favorite grocery store has exceptional prices across the board and a down-market esthetic that makes me think they'll always cut corners; I don't check their prices or fliers, because life is too short. Instead, I just load up on stuff when I'm there. The company that makes my poker cards just has a better product, so I wait for them to go on sale, or just pay full price if I have to, because there's no substitute. When my wife and I researched our most recent car purchase, we tried over a half dozen models, but wound up fixating on one model in particular... which led to a purchase with less leverage, since the only thing we could do was pit different dealerships against each other.

But if your brand doesn't have exceptional service or value, and there's no way to invent it with your work?

Well, then, you're in the race with way too many other entrants. With the fading hope that new prospects won't find out about all of the ways they can cut your margins...

* * * * *

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 Internet Of Insertion

This Goes Inside A Cow; Ouch

On my Twitter feed (you aren't signed up for my Twitter feed? It's @davidlmountain, please, feel free) over the holiday, I noted how one of the things to be thankful for is that, in this lifetime, you aren't a dairy cow. (Yes, I'm presuming and yes, marketing and advertising is on the way. Patience.)

Another thing to be thankful for: that you aren't a dairy cow 130 miles northwest of London, where, if Bloomberg.com is to be believed,cows get Internet of Things transmitters placed inside the first of their four stomachs, so that they can be remote monitored for illness, going into heat, and so forth.

The weighted sensor is said to be about the size of a hot dog, and will last about four years, which is about as long as a dairy cow is productive. Given the expense of such animals, and the amount of product that a farmer can expect to receive from a healthy animal, as opposed to an ill one, it's a clear win for the farmers, and the animals don't have a say in the matter. But it also lends itself to a clear if this, then what thought exercise.

My dog, and maybe yours as well, has a microchip in his leg. It's about the size of a grain of rice, and he got it when he was a puppy. It causes him no pain, and he's in no way aware of it. It's there on the off chance that he ever gets lost and found by a professional with the right technology. My children, and maybe yours as well, have phones that can easily give the location in the event of crisis. My car, and maybe yours as well, has a transmitter on the windshield to allow for toll collection at speed, and the newer model that my wife drives has much more than that. All of that can be used to track our movements. Oh, and the vast majority of our purchases comes through digital technology, which is to say, easily trackable movements. My credit card, and maybe yours as well, rewards me to use it, and carrying a great deal of cash isn't just unseemly, it's dangerous.

Much of this is so commonplace now as to be barely worth mentioning, and yet they all add up to an ever-thickening web of connectivity, which only seems noteworthy when it's, well, new. Or invasive.

Now, we'll add another moment of technology, which is the introduction of a supercapacitor that can be charged by human body heat. This may seem like a development that doesn't have immediate consumer utility, but that would be wrong. Just imagine, for instance, a mobile phone that you just need to hold to recharge. Useful, right? So much so that it may be ubiquitous within a decade.

Where does all of this go next? Well, for my money, we're going to see real movement in wearable health monitoring technology, especially once the battery charge is more or less an afterthought from body heat. It's one thing to know how many steps you've taken, or your standing heart rate. It's quite another to know when someone with a chronic condition is at risk for any number of factors, or for someone who is post-surgery to be able to recuperate, safely, at home. No one wants to lose a loved one for any reason, let alone something that technology could easily prevent. Becoming a bio-mechanical hybrid also seems, well, off-putting. But probably less than being at risk. (Also, it leads to revolutionary possibilities in targeting, ad effectiveness, and so on. See, this all comes back to how we pay the bills.)

The question comes to this: where will the push/pull of utility versus discomfort, privacy versus health, security versus expense, fall?

Because, well, I love my dog. That's why I had him chipped.

And I don't love my kids any less...

* * * * *

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.