Ever thought about how we’re living in the golden age of quite a few things?
Not that long ago, Sam Adams was the best craft beer option if you didn’t want a Budweiser or Miller Lite. Today, breweries dot the landscape with a multitude of options ranging from Lagers to Porters to IPAs.
We’re certainly living in the golden era of content. If you’re like me, you have a “content queue.” I’ve got at least six or seven recommended TV shows on streaming services I want to get to but haven’t had the time. Same for podcasts. There are three or four True Crime podcasts alone I keep meaning to start.
Speaking of podcasting, as I just returned from another content-rich Podcast Movement conference in Dallas, it strikes me that the industry is in the golden age of analytics.
In contrast to the radio industry, which relies almost exclusively on ratings services like Nielsen and Eastlan for its measurement, the podcast industry has so many tools to navigate it can be overwhelming. Generally speaking, it’s a great thing. Podcasters can easily access analytics directly from platforms like YouTube and Apple. Hosting platforms like Blubrry, Libsyn, and Anchor offer at least a baseline of statistics with a subscription that can cost as little as a few bucks a month and more for an additional charge. And in contrast to radio stations that hope and pray that the sample size will be reasonable, and ratings won’t show a strange inexplicable rollercoaster, if the software shows someone has listened to your show, they’ve listened to your show.
Chartable is an example of software that does a great job of taking analytics a step further. Some of these features include providing some demographic information, episodic retention analytics, and via Apple and Spotify integrations, the percentage of each episode that was completed. While all these analytics are extremely valuable and provide an important service to podcasters, they may also provide a bit of false comfort. Meaning, just because so many analytics are available doesn’t mean podcasters are getting all the data they need.
Example of a Chartable dashboard
As the radio industry learned a long time ago, ratings information can only tell you so much. Ratings tell you how people behave. They don’t tell you why they behaved that way. When you rely on ratings information to make programming and content decisions, bad things can happen. If the morning numbers sink three months in a row in radio, does it necessarily mean the show has suddenly declined in popularity or its content decisions suddenly deteriorated?
It does not.
Over years of doing research studies for radio, we’ve seen occasions where ratings declines made all kinds of sense, because the study indicated problems existed. Other times, we’ve seen stations with extremely healthy perceptual profiles go through extraordinary ratings slumps. Because we had a line of sight to that information, we were able to encourage the station to avoid rash programming decisions, and more often than not, the numbers came back around.
The sheer volume and reliability of research that tells you the “what” in podcasting is extraordinary. As podcasting matures, the medium must start embracing deeper levels of qualitative analytics that explain the “whys” of behavior. It is indeed helpful to learn at what point in an episode listeners tend to leave. But if you don’t know the reason why they’re leaving, you risk making the same kind of dangerous assumptions a radio programmer might make in a bad ratings book.
Podcasters who invest in a deeper understanding of their consumers’ behavior will have the best shot at creating strong, lasting, memorable brands. Now is the time to take the leap.
When I came up in radio, I worked my way up like so many of you. Weekends to Overnights to Evenings to Afternoon Drive. Music Director to APD to Program Director. In those early days when I was in my early- to mid-20s, I was immensely fortunate to have station leadership that showered me with opportunities to grow. As Music Director at WYYY/Syracuse when it was owned by NewCity Communications, I was invited into perceptual research presentations. They even flew me to company headquarters in Bridgeport, CT to participate.
The company paid for and encouraged me to attend the Gavin Convention (put on by The Gavin Report) and R&R, the conference put on by Radio & Records. In those days, these events were swarming with young programmers and talent. Of course, both trade publications are long gone as are the conferences.
A moment of silence for the once legendary Radio & Records trade publication.
The shrinkage in the number of opportunities to schmooze with others (Covid notwithstanding) has been detrimental to the industry. It’s great that company executives attend the events that do remain, but the ones that need the events most simply aren’t usually afforded the chance to go the way they were when my career could go in several different directions.
Because NewCity encouraged me to learn as much as possible and network within the industry, my knowledge base was allowed to grow faster. I improved, and my station improved. During this time period, people like Jon Zellner were willing to take a phone call and give me advice, years before he would become President of Programming Operations at iHeartMedia. I picked everyone’s brain at these conferences and followed up with phone calls. Management, consultants, talent, didn’t matter. If they were willing to talk, I wanted to listen.
2022 marks my 34th year in the radio industry, and Morning Show Boot Camp also happens to be celebrating its 34th year. I’m almost embarrassed to say last week was the first time I attended the event, as Sam Milkman and I presented “The Urgency of Branding” to an amazingly engaged and curious audience. Although we didn’t present until Friday morning, I’m glad I arrived on Wednesday and got the full experience because only one conclusion is possible: Morning Show Boot Camp is a treasure.
Step away from the sessions themselves (which were great), and you’ll catch the most important part: the networking. It sounds obnoxious, but radio people inherently know they are a special group, and there are few better feelings in the world than geeking out with other radio people (except, perhaps, hitting a post or a bonus). The reception at the Hubbard studios Wednesday night was packed.
At last week’s Morning Show Boot Camp, there was so much positive energy it was infectious. It was vibrant and excitable, and this group came ready to network and learn. There aren’t too many of these opportunities left where the focus is completely on talent (a nod to Conclave for sure and All Access Audio Summit for discounting registrations for those “on the beach”), but we can’t understate the importance. We need more of them. And companies should support the idea of talent attending them.
This week, I’m in Dallas for Podcast Movement, the world’s largest podcasting conference. Morning Show Boot Camp may be scheduled a little too close to PM, because every radio personality should get the chance to attend it at least once. It’s loaded with content creators, new ideas, and old-school radio conference energy.
When I left Syracuse for K101 in San Francisco in 1996, everyone at NewCity (which had just been purchased by Cox) was thrilled for me. Sure, the conference networking helped lead to that gig, but that didn’t threaten or bother them. They knew I made them better and they were cheerleaders for my success.
And right before I started at K101, I had about an hour-long phone call with a predecessor, Angela Perelli, who was so kind to take the time to offer me advice about the position I was about to take.
My new dog Daisy had surgery last week. She can’t keep still and wouldn’t stop biting her stitches after being spayed (earning her the nickname “Crazy Daisy”).
Then, my son had abdominal pains, sending us to the always fun emergency room. As awful as the ER is, hours of waiting to be seen do give you time to shift your mind to mundane things. This led to a discussion about coupons. And whenever the subject of coupons comes up, I sing the following in a goofy high voice: “Use any coupon…one dollar off…eat Quiznos subs…” My 19-year-old looks at me and says, “The Quiznos Spongmonkeys!!” To which I responded, “You know that campaign??”
My son was all of one-year-old when perhaps the most bizarre marketing campaign ever landed on TV screens. Two strange-looking creatures, one wearing a derby hat, and the other wearing a pirate hat playing the guitar, and singing about Quiznos Subs. There are less than 200 Quiznos locations left in the United States (down from a high of 4,700 locations in 2007), but I still think of it because of those stupid commercials. I love the dramatic pause before “They got a pepper bar” in this one:
Why in the world my teenager would know it is an entirely different story, however it makes total sense. If it’s something that captures Generation Z’s attention, there are myriad ways for them to discover it through memes on Reddit, videos on YouTube, and so on. We spent the next 15 minutes watching these commercials repeatedly and just giggling. That’s when it occurred to me…
The Quiznos Spongmonkeys were ahead of their time.
In 2004, people just didn’t get it. The humor was too out there, especially for a sub chain. But, as my son Lloyd put it, “If this aired today, my generation would be all up in Quizno’s. They’d be doing just fine.”
It’s always fascinated me that I still sing parts of a commercial that I felt barely aired. Like it was there, and then they were gone. And sure enough, the campaign lasted less than a year. How was it so darn sticky?
According to Trey Hall, Quiznos Chief marketing officer, in an interview with Slate, “the goal was to create a ‘dramatic’ ad that could compensate for their comparatively small advertising budget by catching viewers’ attention in a brief airtime spot. Featuring the bizarre, yet undeniably memorable, sponge monkeys in their ads would help them generate brand awareness and buzz around the sandwich shop.”
The lesson of the Quinzos Spongmonkeys is twofold.
Two, in case you hadn’t noticed (Exhibit A: TikTok), Gen Z is quirky. Straight-ahead marketing campaigns that worked in the past may not have the same impact they did in the past. Who knew that an 18-year-old pirate hat-wearing monkey would do the trick?
As a Starbucks Gold Card member, I’m used to getting periodic customer surveys from the company about my experiences at specific stores on certain dates. Most of the questions are straightforward and related to items that include food quality, store cleanliness, speed of service, and Covid protocols. But there’s a question that has bugged me for years. It annoys my family because I bring it up every time I get the survey.
Starbucks asks you to rate, using a 1 to 7 scale from “Strongly Disagree” to “Strongly Agree,” whether “The employees made an effort to get to know me.”
In the, oh…one or two times I’ve been in a Starbucks store or drive-thru when there was no line, I have in fact had a nice quick conversation with the barista. But the other 99% of the time, it is an eye of the hurricane, hair on fire situation behind the counter with overworked employees doing their best just to keep up. And, I think they do a pretty great job of it. But you know what they don’t have time for?
“Getting to know me.”
NBC News recently revealed that question is pretty important to Starbucks. So much so, that they use the “connection score” in evaluating store performance. Many workers say the connection score system has even helped drive union organizing efforts around the country.
In designing and analyzing questionnaires, we’re constantly asking ourselves and our clients what value and action can be taken from the answers to every question. And despite the fact that Starbucks added a “Does Not Apply” button you could conceivably check for the “getting to know me” question, it doesn’t seem quite fair to expect employees to have enough time to ensure “my food tasted great,” “got my order right,” prepared my order “in a reasonable amount of time” and “made an effort to get to know me.”
Seems like a lot to ask.
I love that Starbucks utilizes surveys, and like how they integrate questions within seasonal games on the app. But whether we’re talking about Starbucks, your brand, or any brand, we often come back to the “Three Best Practices of Questionnaire Development” outlined by our Senior Vice President of Research, David Baird:
#3: Ask the most important questions in the beginning.
#2: Don’t ask qualitative questions in a quantitative project.
And #1, the one that applies the most to the Starbucks example:
Ask questions that will provide actionable information. Make sure they are realistic and fair, and provide a path to make positive changes to the brand.
I’m guessing, after reading the title, a substantial number of Tuesdays With Coleman readers are saying to themselves, “It’s not the Duracell Bunny, it’s the Energizer Bunny!”
You’d be right…and wrong.
When I was a teenager, perhaps foretelling my career choice long before I got into research, I once walked around a department store just for fun asking people which battery brand had the bunny. To my amazement, a greater number of adults said “Duracell.” Everyone around my age knew it was Energizer because the commercials were always on. I couldn’t understand why so many people would get the answer wrong, except perhaps that they weren’t paying close attention. But it turns out, there was another reason.
Before the Energizer Bunny, there was in fact the Duracell Bunny. Duracell created the bunny in 1973. The Duracell Bunny even featured pink bunnies drumming and claimed to be the longest-lasting battery. Which may sound and look familiar.
In 1988, Duracell let its trademark lapse and was no longer running the campaign. That’s when Energizer swooped in and created a commercial in which a pink bunny is interrupted by a fresh, cool bunny wearing shades and carrying a big fat drum. When the other bunny stops drumming, the Energizer Bunny keeps going, and going, and….
Energizer then filed for its own trademark, which was followed by Duracell filing for a new trademark, referencing the original campaign. But it was too late, and Duracell ended up agreeing to an out-of-court settlement that gave Energizer rights to use the bunny in the United States and Canada, and Duracell the rights to use its bunny everywhere else.
There are multiple implications and takeaways from the Bunny Battle Royale you can apply to your brand:
Protect your brand. The most obvious lesson of all is to file trademarks on your most important intellectual property and don’t let them lapse.
Images are like icebergs. Slow to develop, slow to erode. Energizer’s use of the pink bunny initially caused brand confusion in the United States and Canada. In the short term, this resulted in Energizer’s market share decreasing compared to Duracell’s. This makes sense, as Duracell benefited from misattribution based on consumers’ previously held perceptions from the older campaigns.
Be patient and track results. If Energizer had dumped the bunny after a couple of years, it would have never captured perceptions and a place in North American pop culture. It only happened because Energizer was consistently aggressive with its marketing. By consistently conducting perceptual research, brands can track the increasing, maintaining, or decline of key images to make sure the investment is worthwhile.
On May 4th, Delta Air Lines sent an email to their database with the subject line “Updates to Your Delta SkyClub Access.” In the email, Delta explains that, due to an increasing number of guests to the clubs in recent months, the airline would begin restricting access to the clubs to three hours before your flight and during connections. The email included this fateful line: “With the exception of arriving Delta One customers, Club access will be unavailable for arriving customers without a connection.”
Delta’s social media channels lit up almost immediately following the email. While many complaints were of the general variety, a key theme emerged. Customers who use Delta for business trips (a crucial client base for most airlines) enjoy using the SkyClub when they arrive. Delta was barraged with examples of customers who use the clubs after a flight prior to a meeting, including getting changed or even taking a shower in some locations. Others mentioned using the space for last-minute preparation.
Regardless of the specific angle, it was clear Delta had irritated many of its most loyal customers and the feedback was there for the airline to listen to.
Surprise, it did.
On May 12th, Delta sent another email with the header “We’re Listening to Your Feedback.” In it Delta acknowledges the negative response: “We heard your feedback in response to the updates, including that some customers want to visit a Club to refresh after landing or to recharge ahead of a meeting.” The email goes on to reverse the previously announced policy change: “Arriving customers – with or without a connection – will be able to enjoy the Club upon arrival, as you do today.”
It’s probably safe to assume many customers of any company harbor a certain level of cynicism that their feedback will be listened to, much less acted on. If you think about when you made changes to your own brand, a great many calls and meetings likely took place before the changes. It’s a hassle to change something back. Perhaps even more of an obstacle is the requirement that it requires admitting you were wrong.
But listening to and acting on customer feedback is in the DNA of many of the most successful brands, including ones we have the privilege to call clients and strategic partners. Most brands don’t have the advantage of having 1.6 million Twitter followers, allowing Delta instant valuable feedback on their decision. Qualitative research like our Campfire Online Discussion Groups and 20/20 Focus Groups allow our clients to understand the “whys” behind what their listeners like and don’t like about what they offer. This deeper level of feedback provides a competitive advantage for those that utilize it.
The willingness to make strategic changes based on feedback, particularly when it is contrary to what you thought was the right decision, should be celebrated.
Embrace listening to your customers, and the rest will fall in place.
A few weeks ago, my 18-year-old son Lloyd (he’ll be 19 next week) was in the car with me and he was (I know this will shock you if you’re the parent of a teen) watching a YouTube video. “Whatcha watching?” “Good Mythical Morning,” he replied. Good Mythical Morning is a daily YouTube show hosted by Rhett & Link, which celebrated its 10th anniversary this year. I peppered Lloyd with questions about the show, including why and how he watches. This led to a longer conversation later that day, which I’ll detail below.
Radio is unsurprisingly having a very challenging time reaching Generation Z, well explained in Fred Jacobs’ recent blog, “Radio Broadcasters Don’t Know Doodly-Squat About Gen Zs.” He’s right. But it better learn. As a A) media researcher; B) former radio program director; and C) parent of a Gen Z kid, I couldn’t really help but have an unofficial one-on-one interview with my son about it (insert Dr. Evil laugh).
Fun fact: I have a quirky connection to Rhett & Link, which I’ll share at the end of the blog.
Jay: Who are Rhett & Link?
Lloyd: They are a comedy duo on YouTube. They’re hilarious, and host Good Mythical Morning each day. They also own their own company, Mythical Entertainment.
Jay: Is Good Mythical Morning the only show they have?
Lloyd: No. There’s a show after the show, Good Mythical More. Rhett & Link have a podcast called Ear Biscuits. And then they have other channels and shows for other cast members, like Mythical Kitchen, a cooking show.
Jay: How many of these shows do you watch or listen to?
Lloyd: I watch Good Mythical Morning and Good Mythical More, I sometimes listen to Ear Biscuits, I listen to the AHot Dog Is A Sandwich podcast from Josh & Nicole, and I watch the Mythical Kitchen channel.
Jay: How often are you listening to these shows?
Lloyd: I watch Good Mythical Morning and Good Mythical More every weekday. The others are a little more random.
Jay: How long are they?
Lloyd: An episode of Good Mythical Morning and the after-show are about 20 minutes each.
Jay: 20 minutes is pretty quick. What kind of content are they doing?
Lloyd: It’s usually one topic per episode. Like the Shuffleboard game, where you have to guess the era a food came from. Or when they had on someone from the Swedish embassy, and you had to guess is this food Swedish or not? Is this game Swedish or not?
Jay: You said you watch every day. Why do you feel you need to watch it every single day?
Lloyd: I feel like they really care about the Mythical Beasts, which are the fans. They do surveys all the time, like the Mythical Census I just filled out a few days ago. It was about me and what I enjoy. Like, what’s your demographic? When did you start watching? How many Mythical Entertainment shows do you consume? Stuff like that.
Jay: A show that does research! Be still my beating heart. What other ways do they engage with listeners?
Lloyd: They love to do interactive things with the Beasts that influence what goes in the show. Like on Instagram, they’ll say something like, “Which food do you prefer?” Then on the next episode, they’ll reference which food the fans picked.
Jay: Do they often customize their content based on input from their fans?
Lloyd: About an hour ago, they posted on their Twitter “Are there any weird nicknames you call your grandparents and why?” So they’ll probably do that on an episode.
Jay: Anything else they do that’s unique for their fans?
Lloyd: The Mythical Society. You have to pay to be a member, and there are tiers. But every quarter you get a free collectible item. Like this quarter, you get a vinyl copy of them singing Brooks & Dunn in the year 3000.
Jay: (laughing) I’m looking at their website for that and it’s pretty amazing. There’s no chance you’d know who Brooks & Dunn are without Rhett & Link.
Lloyd: That’s true. Oh, they also have their own convention.
Jay: What?
Lloyd: MythiCon. It’s going to be in Austin in October. I want to go but the cheapest tickets are $299, up to $649.
Jay: Oh, my goodness. In radio, that would be a Non-Traditional Revenue gold mine. What entertainment do you consume throughout the day?
Lloyd: I like YouTube, I really like having it on as background noise. You’re not going to know these channels, but Nexpo, Barely Sociable, Blame It On Jorge…these are Lost Media, conspiracy/internet mystery channels. I watch all those when they come out but they don’t come out as often as Rhett & Link. I also love commentary YouTubers such as Eddy Burback, Kurtis Conner, Drew Gooden, Danny Gonzalez. They’re comedy but they don’t do it every day. More like every few weeks.
Jay: When you listen to music, what do you listen to and how do you listen?
Lloyd: If I’m trying to relax or do art or study, I’ll listen to Lo-Fi Hip Hop beats. Or I’ll listen to my Liked Songs playlist. All on Spotify.
Jay: How often do you consume YouTube versus Spotify?
Lloyd: Probably three to four hours of YouTube, about an hour of Spotify.
Jay: Do you listen to any morning radio shows?
Lloyd: No.
Jay: Why not?
Lloyd: I’m just not interested in them. I listen to Spotify, which has radio shows on it. From what I’ve found so far, nothing is on par with Rhett & Link. A lot of radio morning shows are topical and make you have to think about what’s going on in the world. Even if they’re comedic, they still talk about the news, and I don’t want to hear about that. I watch the news for that.
Jay: It sounds like when you’re seeking entertainment, you want an escape from reality.
Lloyd: Right. The news helps me get the information I need, but Rhett and Link help me get my mind off things.
Jay: Can you name any radio morning shows off the top of your head?
Lloyd: No…I know there are some on Sirius? Or the local stations…ummm…I can’t name them.
Jay: If radio wants to reach 19-year-olds, can it do it?
Lloyd: I don’t know. I mean, I listen to SiriusXM because the stations I listen to are very specific to what I like. And there aren’t that many options on the radio. I just don’t know what they could do to make me listen more because Spotify and Apple Music are so predominant in my generation. I have a friend whose radio in the car is broken. And they’re not getting it fixed because they can just listen to Spotify.
Jay: Have you seen any advertising for any radio stations? Could be billboards, TV, social media, Google ads, anything?
Lloyd: I saw one in New York for a radio station, but that’s literally the only one I ever remember seeing.
Jay: Do you remember which station that was for?
Lloyd: I don’t.
There’s lots to unpack in this single 20-minute interview. On the one hand, the prognosis for radio’s ability to reach Gen Z may seem out of reach. On the other hand, I see multiple insights that radio could use to refine content and better target the audience. Keep in mind, that it’s only one interview. I’d love to see audio brands (not just radio) invest in qualitative research to meaningfully explore the deeper “whys” behind Gen Z consumption.
I promised to tell you about my quirky connection to Rhett & Link.
In early 2007, when I was program director of 96rock (WBBB/Raleigh), we ran a contest for a listener to be our Grammy Awards correspondent. Listeners needed to send a video of themselves explaining why they should win. We picked a video submitted by a pair of guys most (including us) hadn’t heard of at the time. Those guys went to the show and snuck onto the red carpet (without credentials).
This is the video they submitted:
At the time, the program director in me was ticked that Rhett & Link didn’t even mention our station in the video. But the other part of me watched the “Project Lionel” bit in the video and knew they were superstars in the making. Who knew that 15 years later they would be making the one show my 18-year-old couldn’t miss?
As we celebrate this 4th of July week in the United States while many fortunate readers of this blog may be on a beach somewhere, we present the first Tuesdays With ColemanSummer Beach Reading List. Oh sure, you might be one of those who prefer some escapist fiction on your chaise lounge. But if you prefer to keep your nose firmly entrenched in business, marketing, and research strategy like some people we know around here, we’ve got just the five books for you, listed in no particular order.
BLUE OCEAN STRATEGY by W. Chan Kim and Renée Mauborgne (recommended by Jay Nachlis)
The theory behind Blue Ocean Strategy is that most brands swim in “red oceans” – bloody, shark-infested, highly competitive market segments. Blue Ocean brands effectively create new market segments, eliminating competition.
2. THINK AGAIN: THE POWER OF KNOWING WHAT YOU DON’T KNOW by Adam Grant (recommended by Sam Milkman)
Generally speaking, people don’t like being wrong. But when we let go of views that are no longer serving us well, the opportunities are boundless. I wrote a Tuesdays With Coleman blog last year called, “Your Worst Enemy At Work Is…” that explained just how dangerous pre-conceived notions can be. One of the things that makes research so valuable is that it can challenge or validate pre-conceived notions in a completely un-biased way. This book takes the natural human fear of being wrong and flips it on its head. It argues that when you embrace reconsidering what you believe, the most amazing things happen.
3. WHAT GOT YOU HERE WON’T GET YOU THERE by Marshall Goldsmith (recommended by Meghan Campbell)
This book focuses on 20 bad habits that are putting up obstacles to your success. It’s a leadership meets self-help guide that will likely make you aware of more than a couple things you didn’t realize you were doing.
4. HOW BRANDS GROW by Byron Sharp
This gets a nod from multiple members of the Coleman Insights consultant team, after it made the rounds a few years back. I referenced Sharp’s book in the 2018 Tuesdays With Coleman blog, “Don’t Change Your Radio Station.” As Sharp says, “Again and again it appears in numerous product categories, markets and countries that there is a fundamental law of brand size. Big brands have markedly large customer bases.” Building a big brand takes time (a lot of time), and the biggest brands are consistent about what they deliver. Sharp’s book is a poignant look at the art of brand building.
5. FOCUS by Al Ries (recommended by Jon Coleman)
We could list many Al Reis and Jack Trout books on this list, but we’ll stick with the favorite of our founder, Jon Coleman. As Jon explained in his Tuesdays With Coleman blog, “What’s Your Word?”, owning a word can drive a decision. Focus does an incredible job of explaining how and why brands can become unfocused and lose their edge with consumers.
Enjoy the week – if you’ve read any of the books we recommend or have others to add to the list, please leave them in the comments!
The nightmarish (or “flight-marish”) scenarios greeting travelers this summer are no secret by now. Prepare for overworked and understaffed airlines, astronomical prices, and a slew of delays, rescheduling, and last-minute cancellations. It’s a cocktail of issues bound to stress out even the most seasoned traveler. How can you possibly ease your worries?
You may say, and understandably so, you need a travel agent about as much as you need a pager. They just aren’t required to get the job done anymore. If you’ve got access to the internet, you can whisk yourself away anywhere.
So why should use a travel agent in 2022?
According to the GMA story, travel agents:
Can find discounts and upgrades using their relationships with companies
Can help travelers “navigate the constantly changing rules of post-pandemic travel”
Specialize in the type of trip you want to take (i.e., cruise, safari, beach)
Can work within your budget
Travel agents say in the story their “business is booming.”
What can radio learn from the return of the travel agent?
We’ve referred to the overwhelming paradox of choice many times in Tuesdays With Coleman. It’s great to have so many entertainment choices until it’s not. Consumers are exhausted by the options because they are all-consuming. In podcasting, which platform to use? Which category to explore? Which podcasts to try? Which premium streaming service trial to take advantage of? Which playlist? What kind of mood am I in? Which SiriusXM channel to check out? Is it over Channel 100 or under? Will I remember to cancel when I need to? Which premium TV service? What was that show mom recommended to me? Which one has the Harry Potter movies?
It’s a lot of choice, and you’re the one doing the choosing. Kind of like booking your own vacation.
To be successful, a travel agent needs to recognize and embrace their point of differentiation. Planning a vacation is stressful. A travel agent takes that away.
In research, we’re always looking for points of differentiation. What images can you own to give you an edge on the competition?
Such is one very important role of a radio personality that perhaps gets overlooked. Rather than be frightened by the fact that your listeners can leave radio to choose what music or spoken word content they want to hear, embrace the opposite.
In some ways, radio personalities are the travel agents of media. They choose your entertainment adventure. They guide you through the experience. They lean on their expertise to share facts about the music, tell you about events you’ll enjoy, and provide experiences only radio stations have access to.
Perhaps radio’s curation over customization is just what consumers need.
And just like travel agents, they’re not dead yet…and maybe even on the verge of a renaissance.
Three years before that blog, Kmart put a 30-second spot on the internet called “Ship My Pants”. And three seconds in, I was laughing. No, snorting.
Do I have the sense of humor of a 12-year-old boy? Yes. But it was hilarious. It’s still hilarious. And if you measure success strictly by analytics, it was a massive success for Kmart. The original video was viewed 10 million times on YouTube in its first 24 hours. This would have any marketer or brand manager screaming with joy and doing cartwheels, and I’m sure they were.
So, if it was such a “success,” why is Kmart still barely hanging on nearly 10 years later? There are two primary reasons.
One is the brand problem. By 2013, Kmart’s heritage brand was significantly long in the tooth. Its shoppers were old. Meanwhile, the “Ship My Pants” campaign was funny and edgy. Not exactly a brand match.
But does that mean they should have not run it? Not necessarily…but they needed to commit to it.
If Kmart really wanted to change its brand perception and become relevant to younger consumers, “Ship My Pants” could have been a great start. And then they followed it up with “Big Gas Savings,” also pretty great (and remarkably timely right now!)
The other reason “Ship My Pants” couldn’t save Kmart was, of course, the store itself. You can run the greatest, funniest, most entertaining advertising campaign the world has ever seen. If the customer experience is no good when they consume the brand, the advertising is pointless.
By 2013, Kmart stores had already looked sad and in disrepair for some time. Customers had plenty of other places they could ship their pants, and they’d likely feel better about shipping elsewhere.
Had Kmart renovated its stores and improved the customer experience before running the “Ship My Pants” campaign, who knows what could have happened.
But instead, I’m afraid Kmart may be shipped out of luck.
BRANDING, CONTENT & RESEARCH STRATEGY
Subscribe to our weekly blog delivered fresh to your inbox every Tuesday.
