skip to main |
skip to sidebar
One-time association executive and part-time historian Tom Wheeler wrote a cool book a few years ago titled Mr. Lincoln's T-Mails: The Untold Story of How Abraham Lincoln Used the Telegraph to Win the Civil War.
It attributes the North's victory over the South to Lincoln's embrace of the telegraph, the "killer app" of the 1860s.
Lincoln, as history shows, was a super-skilled telegraph user, while his Rebel foes were, well, late adopters. (They were also late adopters of civil rights, but that's another story.)
Lincoln, Wheeler contends, took advantage of the real-time nature of the telegraph to direct the Yankees on the battlefield, enabling them to run circles around the Johnnies.
When Mr. Lincoln's T-Mails first hit the shelves, Twitter was only three months old, with hardly any users. But, had he foreseen its surge in popularity, I'm sure Wheeler would have agreed: Lincoln would have loved Twitter.
Of course, Lincoln couldn't have Tweeted top secret orders to his generals. But he could have used Twitter to rouse the troops who followed them.
It's easy to imagine some of the momentous microbursts that might have come from our most articulate president:
During the massive Union rout at First Bull Run. "Stop running! The Marine Corps Marathon is next week, you morons."
After the Union triumph at Gettysburg. "Rebs in full retreat. Stay tuned. Speech to follow."
After Lee's surrender to Grant at Appomattox. "Mission accomplished. Ulysses, you're doing a heck of a job!"
New Zealand-based writer and publicist Peter Heath has a compelling opinion piece in the new edition of IABC Communication World.
Heath argues that "serious-issue journalism" within the British Commonwealth's mainstream media has all but surrendered to "populism." TV news programs focus exclusively on trivia, while London’s The Times now resembles The Daily Mail.
What happened? Heath lays the blames on two doorsteps.
The rise of alternate news sources. "Serious-issue journalism (or at least detailed analysis and interpretation of the issues) is increasingly becoming the preserve of specialist outlets, driving mainstream media (print and broadcast) down the populist route."
The rise of "corporatespeak." In recent years, there's been "too little real and meaningful (for this, read “two-way”) engagement between organizations and the people important to them," according to Heath.
"We as communication practitioners need to be on top of these developments, not surprised by them," Heath warns. In fact, these two trends "should inform and shape the integrated communication programs we should be developing and managing for our employers and clients."
From a practical standpoint, what does Heath's advice mean for most marketers? I think it means:
- Forget the mainstream media. Unless you're promoting a luxury, a celebrity, a movie, an amusement ride or a sporting event, you won't earn coverage. Target your messages at the "specialists."
- Quit letting lawyers craft your messages. Unless you do, you'll never be "authentic." So you'll never be heard. Much less believed.
The masterful Brian Clark of Copyblogger has launched a nifty Podcast series called Internet Marketing for Smart People Radio.
In last week's episode, Brian stressed the importance of knowing who you're striving to be in the eyes of your social media audience.
Brian, for example, hopes to be seen by his followers as a "likeable teacher."
The Podcast spurred me to think about who I'd like to be perceived as.
Unfortunately, I can't decide at the moment, because of my dual personality.
On the one hand, I'd like to be perceived as social media marketing's David Ogilvy.
On the other, social media marketing's Lewis Black comes to mind.
How about you? Who do you want to be?
- It's magical to be surrounded by "fellow travelers."
- The chance something could go wrong in a live performance adds excitement.
- The chance something could go amazingly right adds even more excitement.
Regrettably, most people in the "'live' business" (such as restaurateurs, hoteliers and speakers) "work hard to avoid getting anywhere near any of the three," Godin writes.
Why do most producers of tradeshows and professional meetings work so hard to avoid these preferences?
I spoke last evening about this very topic with event designer Bob Hughes. We concluded:
- Most producers don't really understand their audiences.
- Most don't design their events from end to end; they merely "organize" them.
- Most don't report to executives who care whether the audiences have a satifactory experience. (The execs merely want to extract money from the audiences.)
Sound right to you?
I was a mere seven when Psycho was first released in movie theaters.
Fifty years later, the film's marketing campaign is still as vivid to me as it was in 1960.
As the grownups lined up in front of our local movie house, Alfred Hitchcock's voice played through a crackly outdoor speaker, advising them to keep the end of Psycho a secret.
Just inside the glass doors loomed a life-size cardboard cutout of the director with a sign that said, "The manager of this theater has been instructed not to admit to the theatre any persons after the picture starts."
Both warnings were echoed on the marquee and the outdoor posters wrapped around the building.
Before the release of Psycho, a lot of people thought it was okay to stroll into a theater at any point in the showing of a film.
Not after 1960. Hitchcock changed the way people went to movies. Theaters playing Psycho actually had to close the box office once the picture started.
Word-of-mouth turned Hitchcock's $800,000 production into a $15 million blockbuster.
What lessons can "the master of suspense" teach?
- Are you offering customers a new experience?
- Are you asking customers to talk about you?
- Are you surrounding yourself with a bit of mystery?
- Are you insisting on time limits?
