Questions? Comments? Interested in contributing content? Please contact Vi Paynich, Editor-in-Chief, at vpaynich@retailing.org or 909-606-3406.
As I was running through the forest this morning with my writing partner Scout (below), it occurred to me as we stopped along the way 28 times for the pooch, aka “Sir Spritz A lot,” to mark the route by broadcasting his pheromones, that the basic idea of Twitter may have been around for ages, having originated with dogs.
Rick Petry is a freelance writer who specializes in direct marketing. He can be reached at rick.petry@me.com.
As this year’s ERA Government Affairs Fly-In comes to a close, the FTC’s view on testimonials and endorsements has been the hot topic. The following column addressing this issue first appeared in Electronic Retailer in March of 2007.
Disclaimer: Some readers of the following column may be amused and entertained; others may be put off by a perceived self-indulgent rant. Results may vary.
A few years ago, a client of mine who was sponsoring a car at the Indy 500 was gracious enough to invite me along. Just prior to the start of the race, a parade of stars was introduced. Who do you suppose elicited the greatest ovation from the crowd? Was it pop star and Proactiv endorser Jessica Simpson? Late night star cum racing team leader David Letterman? Jim “Gomer Pyle†Nabors singing “Back Home in Indiana†just prior to “Lady (thank you, Danica Patrick) and gentlemen, start your engines?†No, it was Jared Fogle. Jared Fogle? Yes, Jared–the Subway Guy.
I mention all this because as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) begins the process of reviewing its policy on testimonials in advertising, Jared and the billowing pants he used to wear when he was 235 pounds heavier are about to endure the kind of scrutiny serial dieters reserve for their waistline. The FTC is examining whether highlighting such extraordinary cases of success within advertising creates expectations in the mind of the consumer that are misleading or even deceptive, even though they may be accompanied by a disclaimer along the lines of “results not typical.†Given the prevalence in health, fitness and even financial direct marketing of such endorsements, this may threaten a core device advertisers have long employed to spur couch potatoes to take action.
The Jareds of the world are aspirational catalysts who inspire others to change their lives. Does anyone really think that by working out at 24 Hour Fitness, they can ride a bicycle like Lance Armstrong? No, but by endorsing this chain, Armstrong may lead the target audience to healthier living. Similarly, a tearful weight-loss infomercial testimonial that causes a viewer to pick up the phone could be viewed as a public service. Given the rate of obesity in America, shouldn’t these authentic testimonials be framed in a positive light?
In a world with scant heroes, perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised that commoner Jared received the greatest roar at Indy. Subway has tried many different campaigns in the near-decade since our bespectacled everyman first “ate fresh,†but keeps coming back to the icon that represents the ability of the average person to achieve extraordinary results. And what of the role of personal responsibility in making choices (something I would think our government would want to extol)? Having sat through countless focus groups, I can attest that consumers pay close attention to those mouse-typed disclaimers, and comprehend every word. The FTC should give them more credit. Perhaps a more appropriate disclaimer for such testimonials would be: “Individual desire or will may vary.†Fat chance.
Rick Petry is a freelance writer who specializes in direct marketing. He can be reached at rick.petry@me.com.
For more information about ERA’s government affairs efforts, click here.
This week’s Time magazine cover story is about the death of the traditional ink and paper newspaper and the threat of its extinction/replacement by online versions that rely on a shaky, single advertising revenue stream. Written by former Time managing editor Walter Isaacson, it suggests that, like the migration from illegal downloading of music on Napster to the iTunes model where consumers willingly pay a small fee for content, that a similar model is imperative for the survival of professional journalism. Given the degree of competition and the sheer volume of content available from sources that include citizen journalists on the web, do you think this construct is viable?
As an avid user of Wikipedia, I’ve been among the thousands who have willingly contributed money to their cause. Why? Because, as a writer, I value it as a resource and I rely on it daily. It is also a not-for-profit enterprise and does not rely on advertising and I acknowledge that if avid users like me don’t donate, it can’t possibly survive without some other major funding source. So, in a way, their cause really feels like it is our cause. I can’t say I feel the same way about The New York Times, which just required a $250 million cash infusion from Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim Helu to stay afloat, but should I? With the sea change in generational media consumption habits, is it realistic to think that we can migrate away from a feeling of entitlement with regards to free and easy access to content to a model where we pay a nominal fee to access articles?
Sounds like a tall order to me, but what do you think?
Rick Petry is a freelance writer who specializes in direct marketing. He can be reached at rick.petry@me.com.
WASHINGTON—On the cusp of the Electronic Retailing Association’s (ERA) self-regulation program (ERSP) completing its 200th case and a DRTV spot playing during the Super Bowl, ERA president and CEO, Julie Coons, has been named to The National Advertising Review Council’s (NARC) Board. Coons, who was brought on the board simultaneously with DMA CEO John Greco and IAB CEO Randall Rothenberg, recognizes that the perfect storm of the wary economy, the Obama administration and the broader acceptance of direct response marketing all played a significant role in the updated board appointments.
“The convergence of the decision by NARC to welcome ERA to the board and the economic conditions and the continuing evolution of this industry is incredibly synergistic. It gives us an opportunity as an industry to work more closely with the well established organizations representing the advertising community, which will definitely increase our prominence both with the government and industry players alike,†says Coons.
The Better Business Bureau, NARC and various associations are eagerly waiting to see how the recent changes in Washington will affect advertising regulation, which up this point has been widely self-regulated. “We must be vigilant to see what changes are made at the top, particularly with the FTC. We need to be vigilant in this era in which there’s clearly going to be a focus on greater business regulation, but we do have a very good track record. I am not overly worried today, but again, we must be very vigilant to ensure that these new policy makers and appointees understand the tremendous success of ERA’s self-regulation program,†says Coons. Currently, ERA’s ERSP program independently reviews direct response advertising claims and then refers cases to the FTC when its recommendations are not acted upon.
Coons is eager and excited about ERA’s newly positioned role and believes that in the end it will be a major win for the consumer who can expect a greater level of comfort in remote transactions. “This is a result of the electronic retailing industry working with NARC and pursuing a dialogue with them about the changing landscape of reaching the consumer. To their great credit, it also serves as a recognition on NARC’s part that electronic retailers are a very important marketing channel and should be appropriately represented to ensure consumers are protected against false claims,†she says. Coons sees her role as ensuring that the direct marketing industry has an equal voice within the advertising community. For more information on ERA or its government affairs initiatives, please click here.
Late last week, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) granted a request for a 60-day extension filed by ERA and other prominent advertising associations. Our request focused on the significance of the changes for direct marketers and for “new media.†These changes could dramatically affect both industries, so it is essential any changes are made with caution. The period for comment will now last until March 2, 2009. The previous deadline was January 30th. The vote for the extension was unanimous. This extension is only the first step in our advocacy efforts. Moving forward we will lead a coalition of trade associations to seek a solution that is beneficial for our member companies and for consumers. If you would like to learn more about this issue, please click here. Do not hesitate to contact me if you have any further questions.
Tomi Turner is ERA’s legislative manager. She can be reached at (703) 908-1022 or via e-mail at tturner@retailing.org.
Even staid JCPenney gets in the viral marketing game this holiday season with this short, “Beware of the Doghouse,” which uses sly humor and Internet-based marketing to spur clueless gifting husbands to visit their local JCPenney fine jewelry counter.
What do you think, folks? Will it work?
Rick Petry is a direct marketing strategist and creative services professional and a past chairman of ERA. He can be reached at (503) 740-9065, or via e-mail at rick.petry@me.com.
Acquiring new customers is a challenging and costly endeavor in the best of times, let alone during an economic downturn. This is why converting first-time customers into repeat shoppers is incredibly important to e-retailers. To that end, online marketers must effectively re-engage new customers by combining individually targeted promotions and offers with one-to-one product merchandizing. Personalization-based marketing and merchandizing services, when deployed wisely and cohesively across all sales channels, can greatly improve an e-retailer’s bottom line while positively impacting the consumer’s overall shopping experience.
Too often, e-retailers rely on traditional techniques to encourage buyers to return. These tactics range from promotional discounts to free shipping. While useful in obtaining new customers, these techniques are not as effective for re-engaging one-time customers and don’t leverage the capabilities unique to online retailers. What’s more, these techniques often eat into profits and typically result in training shoppers to wait for such discounts at the retailer’s expense.
Personalized direct marketing, however, is a cost-effective alternative proven to help e-retailers build customer loyalty without giving margin away unnecessarily. By enticing customers with relevant product promotions after they leave the store—for example, recommendations made in a confirmation e-mail or personalized offers in e-mail marketing campaigns—e-retailers can increase the frequency of repeat visits and average purchase size. Once a customer has responded to an offer, it’s important to continue presenting the most personally relevant products to that shopper based on his or her previous and in-session behavior throughout the online shopping experience.
Online shoppers have grown accustomed to searching through an overabundant inventory, spending time browsing for items on a site that does not quickly (if ever) recognize who they are, remember what their interests are, or predict what they are most likely to purchase. The amount of time spent searching and browsing can cause the consumer to abandon a shopping cart, purchase fewer items or shop at another store. Personalized product recommendations give consumers a more relevant experience, similar to the personal interaction they expect at their favorite brick-and-mortar store, providing customers with recommendations tailored to their particular tastes and needs. So, what are the best practices for implementing personalized product recommendations as part of direct marketing campaigns? (more…)
Loading ...
