A few years ago I did a seminar for Kendall-Jackson, the big wine-maker.
The attendee who paid most attention was Jess Jackson, the firm’s 70 plus billionaire boss.
Before that, in my first board meeting at the Ogilvy group, I noticed that David Ogilvy took more notes than anyone else.
There’s a moral there. The best people study more.
I may not be an Ogilvy or a Jackson, but I try to keep learning, especially about the new media.
This morning I read that Rich Schefren claims that the real reason Obama won was better social marketing. I quote:
Since the conventions, blog posts mentioning Obama outnumbered those referencing McCain by more than 3 to 1.
–Obama’s number of MySpace friends grew steadily over the past few months while McCain’s remained relatively flat. By election day, Obama had almost 4 times the number of friends McCain had
–While those MySpace figures are remarkable, the Twitter stats are even more eye-popping. Obama had nearly TWENTY FOUR times the amount of followers that McCain had.
UNBELIEVABLE!
And it doesn’t end there. I found similar numbers for FaceBook and YouTube usage as well, with Obama clearly outpacing McCain.
Obama’s tactic was a masterpiece–targeting the younger, more technically literate crowd (many who had never voted or even bothered to register) and hit them right where they live–on social networking landscape.
The subsequent result was a MASSIVE following that grew larger and larger by the day. And those same people made a huge impact at the polls.
So what does this all mean? …
Well, what it means, as usual, is that good ole Rich is about to sell me something – which comes as no surprise.
But what it also means is that Rich is appealing to all those simple folk who like to think there is a nice easy pat answer (and solution) to everything, and who keep buying all these “I’ll make you rich” nostrums.
Of course, Rich will give you very good advice, as do most of the others like him. But sorry, nothing in life is that simple. Not even remotely.
First of all, it was not just the “younger, more technically literate crowd (many who had never voted or even bothered to register” that swung it. It was also the older, black, not very literate crowd – like the 103 year old man whose example was often quoted.
And it was not just social marketing. It was overwhelming TV advertising. It was being black but not too black. It was being a better speaker. It was “the economy, stupid”. It was reaching into neighbourhood churches. It was not having Sarah Palin. It was guilt about race. It was many things.
By coincidence, last week I did a one hour webinar for my Eadim students called “Your army” which dealt with the way so many people think one weapon will win a war. I didn’t mention Obama. I started by quoting Sun Tzu and suggested 10 different weapons you can use to achieve your ends, to a variety of audiences.
The real problem with most marketers was well put by Neitszche. “To a man with hammer, everything looks like a nail.”
Well said, good old Bird.
I would kill to learn the 10 different weapons you gave as examples to appeal to the audience. Definitely stretch my thinking.
Old school, fundamental direct marketing still trumps new age fads marketing.
Be Well.
Tian – I have a book somewhere about precisely that. Sorry, can’t get off my lazy behind to rummage through the bookshelves, but the one I remember most clearly (because it related to my degree) was the needle gun, deployed by Prussia in the war with Austria-Hungary in 1866. Essentially the first breech-loading rifle, it meant out-firing the enemy by 5 to 1. That was the end of Austria as the prime Germanic power.
The problem with these decisive weapons is that once they’ve been used, everyone has to come up with their own version – or something better – which renders them useless. So they tend to have one or two applications before everyone sues for peace (eg Japan after it was atom-bombed) while they develop their own version.
Equally interesting, I would imagine, is decisive tactics – again, it’s battlefield stuff, not not really into the realms of wider political strategy, but just as effective as a great new weapon. I know Napoleon is credited with a few revolutionary (ho, ho) battlefield moves as well as some pretty decisive changes to the practice of military logistics.
Final point: this whole thing about decisive weapons is why the defence industry (and more particularly, the defence industries of belligerent entities) is such an engine for scientific discovery.
I lied, Tian Yan. The weapons I listed were 14 in all:
Research
Advertising
Sales Promotion
Point of Sale
Packaging
PR
Product placement
Guerrilla
Word of mouth
Workplace marketing
Sales people
Experiential
Sponsorship
Cause related marketing
I also suggested that audiences often overlooked but often more important than the average customer were:
Employees
Distributors, retailers, brokers, intermediaries
Shareholders
Your staff – especially your sales force
Then I gave a few examples.
Sorry, took that weapons reference a bit literally… Still, I guess the general point about new weapons, their effectiveness and development is still valid!
Richard…
I really enjoyed that viewpoint from the warfare paradigm. A little surprised at first, but your story was so compelling, I read everything.
The best war metaphor I heard for marketing is from Clausewitz.
“Victory with concentration of superior force at the point of attack”.
Very curious about your degree now…
Drayton…
Thanks. 10 + 4 weapons. That’s powerful. Curious about workplace marketing, how do you use the workplace for this matter?
Didn’t read it anywhere in your books.
Be Well.
Drayton,
Looks like that list is so good… you had to say it twice.
I have especially agree with this: “Your staff…”
Too many people forget they wouldn’t have a business without their sales force, and treat them like dirt.
Very good points, Drayton…and I think you hammered it right!
However, one detail question: what's “black but not too black?”
There's a strong & growing black middle class in the States who have done what many of their white counterparts have done by shedding redneck/lower class characteristics.
This idea that they are becoming white or whatever is a bit counter productive, imo.
Just needed to say that…
Drayton,
One of your better entrys in a long time. And one I can agree with to boot.
Eli
Drayton truly nails it. Obama’s marketing was overwhelming and decisive.
The list of 14 weapons is truly classy. While the foolish can’t see the forest for the trees, Drayton effortlessly rattles of the the genus and species of every tree in the forest.
“It was being a better speaker. It was “the economy, stupid”. It was reaching into neighbourhood churches. It was not having Sarah Palin.”
…It was not being an erratic nut-job like John McCain.
It was not being the candidate of the incumbent party with the low appoval ratings.
It was not voting with Bush 96% of the time.
It was having the positive message.
It was being the taller, more attractive candidate.
I think that, at best, politicians are flawed people in a flawed system. And, unfortunately, it seems to be the ones with the combination of the most ambition + the fewest principles that tend to get to the top.
So, god knows what Obama is going to turn out to be.
But, he’s not John McCain and he’s not one heartbeat away from turning into Sarah Palin, so I think the Americans chose the one option that might not be a disaster.
Steve
Well said, good old Bird.
I would kill to learn the 10 different weapons you gave as examples to appeal to the audience. Definitely stretch my thinking.
Old school, fundamental direct marketing still trumps new age fads marketing.
Be Well.
Great post, Drayton – as usual. Dan