Corporate Eye

...compare, compete, excel

Susan Gunelius

Susan Gunelius

Google Changes Algorithm Making It Even More Important for Brands to Become Publishers

The evolution of social media and content marketing (during their to-date short lifespans) has been telling companies and brands something very specific for years:

Brands need to get social and think like publishers, not marketers.

At first, the reason for this shift in strategy came from the need to interact and engage with people by creating and sharing valuable, useful, and meaningful information. Those needs still hold true, but with a new Google algorithm change, there is another piece that has jumped up to the top of the priority list.

In Google’s new algorithm change, websites with fresh content will be ranked higher than sites with dated content. This has long been a part of the Google algorithm, but now, it’s taking on much greater significance and will affect 35% of Google search results.

What does this mean for brands?

Well, anyone who said blogs are dead over the last few years was very, very wrong. From fresh blog posts to Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn updates, brands need to spend time creating amazing, shareworthy content.

It’s not surprising that this day arrived. Paying for links can only get a company so far. Quality content that’s published frequently has long been the best strategy for building long-term, sustainable, organic growth. However, for many companies and brands, it took the mighty Google to make them realize short-term tactics only work in the short-term.

Remember, quality should always be your top priority when it comes to content marketing. By updating your content frequently, Google will reward you, too.

Time to get writing!

Image: Flickr

5 Companies Control 64% of Global Digital Ad Spending

Digital marketer Darren Herman published some statistics related to digital ad spending on his blog last week that give an interesting perspective to what’s happening in the world of online advertising these days.

According to his research, five companies controlled 64% of the $64 billion in revenue generated from digital advertising in 2010 (per ZenithOptimedia).

Here is the 2010 advertising revenue breakdown by company according to Darren’s research:

  • Google = $29.3 billion
  • Yahoo! = $6.3 billion
  • Microsoft = $2.1 billion
  • Facebook = $1.9 billion
  • AOL = $1.3 billion

Together, these 5 companies generated $41 billion in advertising revenue in 2010. Of course, Facebook is still fairly new to the digital advertising game, so there is no doubt that this breakdown will look very different when 2011 numbers are available.

However, Google is clearly the leader in the world of digital advertising — by a landslide. That’s not a secret, but sometimes seeing the numbers right in front of you, as they are above, is still amazing. Can one company continue to be so dominant in its industry? How long will Google live the good life? These are the questions that can only be answered by time.

It’s important to note that the figures used in Darren’s analysis might not be perfect, but they can certainly be used to demonstrate Google’s online dominance. Furthermore, Google generates most of its digital advertising revenue from its paid search advertising product. As Pareekh Jain mentions on Business Insider and explains on his blog, this part of Google’s business is dominated by the four BFSI keywords (insurance, loan, mortgage, credit), which generate 59% of its revenue.

Therefore, two things are certain: Google is a force to be reckoned with in the world of search and digital advertising, and there is room for a creative competitor to gain a foothold in the digital advertising space. A single dominant player can only remain at the top for so long.

What do you think about these numbers and the state of the digital advertising industry? Leave a comment and share your thoughts.

Image: stock.xchng

Key Google Employee Heads to Twitter but Shares Google Success Insights First

For nine years, Karen Wickre managed the Google blogs product and everything that goes with it as senior media liaison. This month, Wickre announced on her personal blog that she was leaving Google and heading to Twitter where she’ll take on the role of editorial director.

However, before she heads to Twitter, Wickre shared her insights about Google’s culture and success on her blog and it’s a great read (follow the preceding link to read it). For anyone who has wondered what makes Google not only a coveted place to work but also so successful, Wickre’s blog post is a must read. To sum it up, here are the things that Wickre talked about in her post:

  • Wisdom of the crowds. Wickre writes, “There’s also crowd-wisdom to be found in teams, where everyone is free to have thoughts and suggest ideas that get serious consideration. And no small number of these succeed.”
  • Questions are valued. Wickre explains that at weekly Google All-Hands meetings, employees are encouraged to ask questions about anything and everything. She explains, “Questioning product development or strategy (even about what’s already underway) is fair game. The point of asking is to understand better, raise unconsidered angles, improve on something or bring it to light. The assumption is: asking > information > exploration > greater intelligence > better outcome.”
  • Humor is strength. Wickre writes, “There is a humorous sensibility that makes much of the work more pleasurable and improves the output of ~30,000 people.”
  • Creativity is encouraged. Wickre explains that Google encourages its employees to have outside pursuits. She writes, “Many avocations are celebrated with company exhibits, talks and meetups.”
  • Agility is key. Wickre cites Google’s flexibility as one of its most valuable assets. She says, “It would be easy for an unbelievably successful company to start codifying The Playbook and refer to that and that alone for all future roadmaps.”

Wickre’s insights are spot on and show that she truly “gets” the Google environment. Twitter is fortunate to have her joining its team. I’m constantly amazed at how poorly the Twitter blog is maintained with nothing more than product news and updates published. The Twitter brand should have a powerful and distinct brand voice, and hopefully, Wickre will be given the opportunity to develop that voice.

In the meantime, review the five factors of Google’s success listed above. Are they integrated into your company culture? And looking at this story from another angle, does your brand have someone like Wickre leading the charge to build your brand voice? If you don’t you need to get started right now!

Image: Flickr

Brands Haven’t Given up Direct Mail Yet

A decade ago, consumers’ mailboxes overflowed every day with a plethora of direct mail sent from every type of company you could think of. Today, our mailboxes are a lot less cluttered, and that’s a relief for mail recipients. The reason is simple — postage is expensive! However, direct mail isn’t dead yet.

It could be argued that direct mail offers a significant opportunity to brands today simply because there is far less clutter in consumer mailboxes than there is online or in email in boxes. However, email is far more cost-effective and efficient, particularly when it comes to turnaround time, testing, and tracking. Brand managers can track the performance of an email marketing campaign by the second, by individual click, and more. Tracking direct mail is not quite as easy or accurate. It’s also incredibly easy to integrate email marketing into social media and content marketing initiatives. Again, it’s not quite as easy for direct mail.

Despite the reduction in the amount of direct mail consumers receive in their mailboxes these days, marketers are still looking for ways to guarantee their direct mail pieces stand out from the pile of bills and local car dealership postcards that arrive every day. Considering the fact that banks and financial companies continue to be some of the largest users of direct mail marketing, it’s not surprising that they’re also the ones that continually try to stand out from the crowd in an effort to communicate, “Don’t look at that other pre-approved credit card offer — look at me!”

Many of these companies are sending direct mail via overnight and express delivery carriers. For example, in the United States, companies are bypassing the United States Postal Service and sending direct mail via FedEx and UPS. Just a week or so ago, I received a mortgage-related offer from a financial institution via overnight delivery (not through the United States Postal Service) that I actually had to sign for. Not only is this an added expense for the sender, but in the United States, it can be illegal.

Direct mail is hanging on, but as consumers and media have evolved, so must direct mail. There are definitely still opportunities for brands to connect with consumers via direct mail campaigns, but the rules have changed. It’s not just about trying to stand out in a cluttered mailbox anymore. It’s about sending a really great offer and integrating that offer into your entire marketing plan (which includes online marketing, social media marketing, and even email marketing). We’re in an interesting phase of brand marketing evolution where an appropriate tagline might be, “Integrate or die.”

Image: stock.xchng

Will Google’s New Dynamic Search Ads Change the Way Brands Advertise?

Google announced a redesign coming to its popular Google AdWords program called Dynamic Search Ads last week. While the program is still in beta, Google is claiming that Dynamic Search Ads have been in development for two and a half years and just might change the entire way Google sells advertising in the future.

Dynamic Search Ads will be generated for advertisers based on the content found on the websites where the advertiser wants to send customers. Google reports that advertisers in the beta program are seeing 5-10% increases in clicks and conversions for Dynamic Search Ads and a “satisfactory ROI.” Advertisers won’t have to give up their traditional keyword ads through Google AdWords to use Dynamic Search Ads. Currently, Google is marketing Dynamic Search Ads as a complement to keyword-targeted advertising.

When an advertiser participates in the Dynamic Search Ads program, the advertiser selects the website content to target its ads. Google indexes pages in the program and dynamically generates an ad when a person conducts a relevant search. The ad will include a headline based on the person’s search query and the text of the ad will “be based on your most relevant landing page.” Once the ad is generated, it enters the auction process and completes using the normal AdWords process but if the advertiser already has an eligible keyword-targeted ad in the pipeline, the keyword ad will be used.

Advertisers can choose whether they want to target their whole websites, specific categories of products on their sites, pages with specific keywords, or pages with certain text in the URL. Furthermore, advertisers can use many of the features used in traditional AdWords campaigns, such as adding negatives, accessing reports, and more.

Advertisers can get on the Dynamic Search Ads interest list by signing up online or larger advertisers can contact their Google account representatives directly.

It’s certainly not surprising that Google is heading in this direction — it’s not the first time the company has tried something like Dynamic Search Ads. The trick is to convince advertisers that giving up some control to Google is a good idea. Only performance metrics will determine whether Dynamic Search Ads are truly a good idea or not. For consumers, Dynamic Search Ads would be a coup if they resulted in fewer spam ads, higher quality ads, and more relevant ads.

What do you think of Google Dynamic Search Ads? Will it change how brands advertise online as Google suggests? Leave a comment and share your thoughts on what Google is referring to as “the future” of AdWords.

Emotional Brand Advertising Is More Impactful than Logical Brand Advertising

In a recent study that was published in the Journal of Neuroscience, Psychology, and Economics (via Neuromarketing.com), researchers from UCLA revealed some interesting findings that show how people neurologically respond to different types of ads. Using real ads, the researchers studied subjects’ brain activity as they viewed a combination of real ads based on emotion and ads based on logic.

Following are two ads from Pfizer (not used in the study) that show the difference between an emotional brand ad (left) vs. a logical brand ad (right). You can click the images to view them larger.

Pfizer smoking  Pfizer Glaucoma

According to the study, logical ads have a greater affect on brain activity than emotional ads in terms of stimulating more of the brain. However, emotional ads were found to be more impactful. The researchers explained that the brain responds in a profound way when presented with emotional ads. When study participants were presented with emotional ads, “activity was lower in areas of the brand that help us inhibit responses to stimuli.” As a result, emotional ads successfully seduce consumers to buy products rather than persuade them as logical ads do by presenting information.

What can brand managers and advertisers take away from this study? It’s time to do some testing! Experiment with logical and emotional advertising and see how each performs. As this study demonstrates, it might make sense to skip all the text, information, and logic, and appeal directly to consumers’ emotions regardless of the category where your brand resides.

Human beings are inherently emotional and our emotions affect our decisions in all aspects of our lives. That includes advertising. This data supports what marketers have continually tried to convince executives and the data-driven leaders in companies — appealing to emotional triggers works.

What do you think of these study results? Have you experimented with emotional and logical advertising for your brand? Leave a comment and share your opinion and experiences.