I've been so busy as of late that I let this one slip through. A friend of mine from Google, in addition to a few folks from Connell Donatelli, sent me this link last Thursday called Google CEO Calls Net Key to Whitehouse but I never commented. So, better late than never.
First of all, of course Google is correct that the internet is key to gaining the Whitehouse in 2008. The examples that Eric Schmidt gave are the obvious ones which include postings on YouTube of Rep. Murtha and Sen. Allen, Kingdom of Bahrain having screen shots from Google Earth posted comparing lavish homes with the average person's home, and of course Google Bombing the election courtesy of some liberal bloggers. Ok, so what's a politician supposed to do with these? Simple, stop ignoring that this can happen and be proactive about using the internet.
- Allocate at least 25% of advertising budgets online. Why 25%? Well on average companies today spend about 5% online and what is that going to look like by 2008?
- Organize your online teams between website, advertising, and social marketing.
- The social marketing person will be in charge with blogger outreach, consumer generated media, and monitoring the blogosphere
- Use search marketing and display advertising to promote your message; don't just rely on what people might say, control the message just like any other medium
- Build ad units that really take advantage of the medium; at a minimum stream your offline commercials in banner units (Just Stream It)
I witnessed some of these examples referenced by Schmidt. In the case of YouTube postings a simple way to combat the posts was to make sure your own messages are posted on YouTube earlier enough in the process as well as running search ads so that the YouTube postings don't appear so high in the results; you can no longer ignore 323K views of these videos. Why? Even politics is effected by the Long Tail of Marketing: reaching smaller niches of people in very cost effective methods or said another way, a few 1000 people viewing a not-so-flattering video can cost you an election.
Speaking of ignoring things, I still believe Google should do more to combat Google Bombing certain words. I firmly believe that this impacts their brand and shows that a small group of people can manipulate the results. Google Bombing the mid-term elections was really started too late to impact the vast majority of targeted campaigns, but the fact remains that people believe that they can manipulate Google's organic search results. Sure, campaigns are starting to embrace the internet, but the internet should do a little more to customize tools and reach out to the market place; ending Google Bombing would be a start in the right direction.
Is the internet key for 2008? Well it is a key component in messaging and strategy. Just like anything else in the world, a good product will sell itself, but it sure helps when marketing channels are used effectively. Stop trying to fight what's happening online by sticking with the same old ways of marketing; use the Long Tail to spread your message out more to many groups of small niches.
PardonMyFrench,
Eric
I saw this article when it came out. The title makes you think it's going ot be profound, the article itself was rather weak. Schmidt points out cases of abuse (googlebombing) or just getting called out (youtube and g-earth). Bottom line is these guys are being held to a higher standard, they better have their ducks in a row and cleaned out all the skeletons. "Information is power" has never rang more truly.
Posted by: Matt Dutremble | December 06, 2006 at 10:23 AM
Well said Matt.
Eric
Posted by: Eric Frenchman | December 06, 2006 at 10:47 AM