MobHappy

Product Placement

The big story going around one day a few weeks ago was how an episode of CSI:NY would feature a plug for a Coldplay ringtone worked into the dialogue. I managed to see the episode recently, and thought the placement was pretty obvious and over-the-top -- which to my mind is the least successful kind of placement, because it cheapens the underlying content and, for lack of a technical term, is completely cheesy.

I then happened upon an episode of Aqua Teen Hunger Force late one night that took things a step further, but to be perfectly honest, it didn't really strike me as out of step for what's a pretty bizarre show (and didn't pop back into my mind until I saw a post on Mocoblog about it. Apparently the guys that make it sold out to Boost Mobile and created an entire episode based around the brand and its phones -- particularly their distinctive push-to-talk chirp. But it had a completely different feel to it than the CSI plug. It felt genuine, almost as if the Aqua Teen guys had just chosen to make fun of Boost for its annoying features and slightly obnoxious advertising. Plus, it helped that the show is hilarious.

Perhaps there's some deeper meaning in how mobile products are becoming so pervasive and so on, but I'm not sure that's important. Bottom line, people want to sell stuff. But in any case, it's an interesting contrast in how to, or not to, make a successful product placement.

(Picture from Aqua Teen Central)

What Have They Learned? Jamie Oliver, Round Two

Back in July, I wrote about a Jamie Oliver made-for-mobile series of recipe videos. I had two main points: first, there needed to be a mechanism for people that actually wanted to make the meals to get the recipe and ingredients; second, there was a hugely missed opportunity here for some company, like a supermarket, to sponsor the clips. It was announced today that a new set of videos will be made available on Vodafone's 3G network -- so what have they learned from the first installment?

The first series was supposed to include a facility for the recipe to be sent to the user via SMS at some point, and the producers' site hasn't changed to reflect whether or not this has actually happened. However, with the new service, the videos will cost 75p to watch, and a message with the recipe will be a further 75p. I'm glad to see the functionality is there, though I think the price is a bit high. I do, wonder, though, if consumers can just get the recipe without the video. For many people, that's the real value, not the entertainment of watching a guy cook for three minutes. Users should also be able to get the recipe first, then order the video afterwards should they need it. But, I guess then there's a chance they'd never watch the video and not spend the 75p. Typically backwards telco-think.

It still doesn't appear that this content is sponsored -- and it's still a hugely missed opportunity. As Russell's post earlier today (and Scott Shaffer's excellent comment) say, there's got to be a trade-off for mobile marketing. In exchange for placement on somebody's mobile device, the advertiser has to offer something of value -- real value -- in exchange.

Think about the people watching these videos and especially getting the recipes: clearly they're at the very least thinking of cooking something, so they're in the market for ingredients. Why not charge them to watch the video, but have a supermarket sponsor the recipe message? In exchange for an ad on their mobile device, users get the recipe and ingredients list they want. The supermarket could even tack on a coupon for the ingredients to increase the possibility users would visit their store.

Here's a perfect opportunity for permission mobile marketing, and it goes wanting.

The Right and Wrong Way to Treat Your Customers - Sony Vs TypePad

I spend quite a bit of my time these days advising companies about blogging, which is a subset of engagement marketing. Engagement Marketing is about treating your customers with respect and as equals in a conversational relationship. This is harder than it seems, especially for large corporates who tend to be wedded to the old model of interruptive advertising.

A critical element of corporate blogging is the monitoring of blogs and reacting to them, especially in a crisis. So, I can't help being struck by the contrast in the last few days between Sony, in the old-fashioned, "don't get it" corner and TypePad, who certainly do seem to get it.

In case you've been off-planet for the last week, Sony (boo, hiss) upset a lot of people by introducing DRM to its CDs. This proved wildly unpopular, for a variety of reasons - TechDirt has got a good summary of all the issues, but the bottom line is that they screwed up and were eventually forced to swap out "infected" CDs for non-DRM protected ones.

Now, you could argue that they did the right thing in the end. But they've done so with startlingly bad grace, denying all along that there was a problem and never once apologising. Result: An awful lot of pissed off people, who are customers and potential customers. Moreover, it'll be incredibly difficult, if not impossible, for Sony to make moves in this direction again - so at least something good might come out of it.

A further piece of good news is that the poor folks at Kryponite bike locks might just give up their Number 1 slot as THE case study for poor new wave, crisis management.

TypePad, make blogging software - we use it at MobHappy. To be honest, it's a little (in Tom Peter's words) ho-fucking-hum but it generally does the job. However, they recently had some technical problems, resulting in less than stellar service.

Typepad should be very aware of potential bad PR, as all their customers are bloggers. And sure enough, they did the right thing very quickly.

Firstly, they wrote to everyone, acknowledging the problem. Secondly, the apologised. Thirdly, they offered compensation.

Their customers are offered a choice of compensation, depending on how they perceive they have been affected. They can choose to say "shucks, it was nothing, don't worry about it" up to claiming 45 days credit to their TypePad account.

Now, this isn't a hagiography of TypePad, by any means - they shouldn't have let their customers down in the first place. But mistakes happen, people understand this and are generally forgiving if you apologise and correct the mistake and/or offer compensation.

But there's more to it than this actually. Ironically, if you screw up and do the right thing next, you can end up better off than you were in the first place, as it's still so damn rare that people start lauding you for it. Just take a look at this, which is practically a petition to canonise Ben and Mena Trott (pictured) of TypePad, albeit mixed with a few sceptics.

So, weirdly TypePad may actually come out of all this better than if they hadn't let their customers down in the first place. This is not an isolated incidence, by any means. Looked at opportunistically and positively, any customer complaint is a chance to create a powerful word of mouth advocate, by following this simple mantra:

Sorry. We fucked up, we fess up and we'll fork out.

Though you might want to think about changing the language.

Beware though. It'll only work once.

Network vs. Content

For quite some time, I've been saying that while high-speed mobile networks are great, until customers are given a good reason to use them -- meaning interesting, compelling services and applications (and I don't mean video calls) -- they'll largely stay away. If a new network that requires a new device doesn't offer any benefits, they won't upgrade. Oliver Starr makes a similar point, saying Verizon Wireless' ads that tout "The Network" and its size and supposed strength miss the point, particularly as the carrier's recently rolled out its EV-DO consumer service:

"Face it, if our basic dissatisfaction with sound quailty, dropped calls, dead spots, insufficient network capacity, its evil twin excessive network saturation, or any other quality of service issue that could remotely be blamed on network problems, we'd have rioted and burned the central offices of ALL the operators to the ground years ago. We haven't and we keep paying our bills which tells me that although the service is far from perfect, it isn't so bad that this factor alone has EVER been the basis for choosing one carrier over another."

Well said, Oliver, and it's a sentiment I largely agree with. But, let me play devil's advocate for a moment. Supposing this is true, then why do so many stories about new mobile services and technologies on general tech sites (and even mobile ones) spawn the "why are they doing that, when phones don't even work well" comments? Are people that think like Oliver and I some silent majority?

Advertising coverage doesn't really stand to get people to spend more more money with their carrier (Verizon does have about the most expensive voice plans in the US, but that's not exactly the point). But there are really two issues at play here: first, yes, most carrier marketing sucks. Even when operators do market data services, they don't do a great job: "it's like WAP, but faster"; "it's like SMS, but with a picture"; "no, we won't tell you how much this is going to cost you".

The second issue, though, is what exactly should they advertise to get people more interested in content and data? Have they come up with anything to get the average consumer really excited? I've seen plenty of ads for Verizon's VCAST EV-DO service, but all they ever show are music videos. It's not something I really care about much, and I can't imagine too many Joe or Jane Publics out there do, either. Their kids might, but what about the other 75% of people?

Yes, operators should better advertise their content if they want people to use it. But they've gotta come up with something worth advertising first. This is nothing new -- but carriers had better figure out a benefit of 3G that resonates with average end users pretty quickly.

Are Agencies Finally Getting It?

Brand Republic has an article written by Steve Hickman, of WWAV Rapp Collins Media today. WWAV are one of the big names in direct marketing in the UK scene.

The article explores "new" developments in outdoor media and that (pause for the fanfare) posters can now be made interactive by using technology. He goes on to give illustrations such as an Abbey (a bank) campaign which encouraged small business owners to sms for more information. Or even being able to click on a poster advertising a film and being able to preview the trailer and look up showing times.

Nothing against Steve, but why is the direct marketing industry so slooooow to get its head round this fairly basic concept? I remember talking to the very same WWAV 4 years ago about ideas like this - actually I was invited to present to the whole of the agency at the time. I distinctly remember a big round of applause followed by a deafening silence in the next few months as it became increasingly clear that they weren't going to take my evangelism to market.

Well, maybe I'm a crap evangelist. But about the same time, Flytxt were appointed by JC Decaux (one of the UK's largest outdoor media owners) to launch PosterTxt "the first opportunity for advertisers to plan street furniture advertising campaigns with fully integrated direct response wireless marketing components".

So, what happened to PosterTxt? I assume it quietly died as there's no mention on JC Decaux's website these days. And the only reason it could have died is lack of demand for it....mainly by agencies, who book most of the sites.

And yet 4 years later, one of the foremost publications for marketing in the UK is writing articles implying that this interactive stuff is all new.

Give it another 3 years or so and we might see this idea become mainstream. But I'm still bemused why it's taking these undoubtedly very bright people so long to get their heads round something as basic as offering a direct response channel in a direct response campaign.

Marketing Through Mini Applications

I saw an article last week talking about how British Airways was offering a London guide application for mobile phones as part of its latest campaign to get people to visit London. I downloaded the application to check it out, and the content, as you might expect, isn't great. But I really like this concept.

If nothing else, it's an attempt at mobile marketing that understands users must be offered something of value in exchange for placement on their mobile device. The application's got British Airways branding on it, but it's not obnoxious. The content (as bad as it may be) takes center stage -- and that's the way it should be. A consumer inviting a brand onto their mobile device is a pretty significant step, and mobile marketers need to respect that. If your mobile marketing campaign eschews this in favor of just cramming something down people's throats, it will fail. It's that simple. Ask yourself, what benefit does this offer my user? How does it make their life better? And is does that benefit justify intruding on their device? If you don't have good answers to those questions, you need to do some more work.

I'm sort of fascinated by this mini-app. I can't imagine it's the first one -- is anybody familiar with any others? I saw a story on Textually about an SMS style service Topshop is running in the UK, which is a similar idea but with a service angle. The common theme here is that they're offering something to users beyond some rather pointless SMS giving them 50 cents off a hamburger or letting them know t-shirts are on sale. It's all about that user benefit -- it's not something traditional advertising has to deal with, but it's paramount when it comes to mobile.

Mobile Marketing Toes A Fine Line

All About Mobile Life points out a cool marketing campaign for the movie The Ring 2 (which looks to have ended some time ago, as the movie came out on DVD in August). It's the sequel to a Japanese movie called Ringu, the plot of which is basically there's this freaky video, and anybody that sees it dies within 7 days unless they can solve its mystery.

When somebody visited the promotional Web site for the film, they could enter the e-mail address and mobile number of a friend, who then got an e-mail directing them to the site to watch the trailer. When they started watching the trailer, they'd get a call on their mobile, and when they answer, a voice whispers "seven days". Yeah, I think that would pretty much scare me into code brown.

A little digging makes me realize that yes, the campaign isn't new, but it's new to me, and All About Mobile Life raises a good point -- that while they think it's a pretty compelling idea, they'd be pretty pissed off if anybody gave their mobile number to some ad campaign. I would be, too, really, no matter how good the ad was or what I got in exchange. My number is my number, and I and I alone should decide what to do with it.

This illustrates the biggest problem with mobile marketing, or at least most implementations of it. It's got to be permission-based, regardless of if that fits with the campaign or not. If it doesn't fit, change the campaign. While I think the use of people's numbers here is pretty borderline in terms of what's acceptable, I'm not the one with the brand on the line. Anecdotal experience tells me, at least here in the US, mobile spam still isn't a very big issue for people -- and that's the way it should stay. It's one thing when your Hotmail account gets bombarded with messages for sketchy porn sites and herbal Viagra. But it will be another when well-known, supposedly reputable brands begin sending unsolicited messages to mobile phones. The reaction will be far, far worse.

i-don't Quite Get It

Both Tom Hume and James Enck have posted pictures and post about some of O2's i-mode ads in London. The "i arrive soon" in James' example seems kinda silly, but the one Tom saw (similar to the one pictured here) is a bit more troubling: "i am faster than wap". As Tom points out, why would O2 want to associate i-mode with WAP? They've gone to great lengths with their Active portal to distance it from WAP, so why call it up with i-mode? What made WAP suck wasn't just that it was slow.

The feeling I get from both of the ads is that O2 is overestimating the power of the i-mode brand. I doubt a lot of average people in Britain (or whatever smaller set of those O2 is targeting) know what i-mode is. And they still won't have any idea after seeing this, unless they remember to visit the i-am-i-mode.co.uk site tucked down there in the corner. If they do visit that site, they're told what i-mode is and why it's so great -- but why not show people? The general impression of mobile data services (no thanks to early WAP efforts) is that they're clunky, hard to use, and pretty pointless. If i-mode is so much better, make people see that and believe it. Don't just take their email and mobile number so you can send them a reminder message to come back to the site later.

If i-mode is supposed to be so revolutionary for mobile data, use marketing that expresses that, rather than some oh-they're-not-showing-anything-so-its-mysterious-and-ergo-must-be-cool-stuff. I also saw this one on the above-mentioned site. Unless they're planning on having Ian Broudie be the spokesman, isn't it a few years too late to try to follow the Japan Is Cool wave of things like Muji and Uniqlo?

(Photo from Dan Taylor on Flickr)

The Death Knell for Telephone Marketing

One of the recurring themes at MobHappy is the slow death of traditional interruptive marketing, where people are forced, by various means, to stop what they are doing to listen to a marketing message.

Of all the techniques practiced, there can be few more interruptive marketing methods than telephone marketing - where someone phones you while you're having supper to woodenly read you a script about one of their double glazing "consultants" being in your area and would just love to visit and tell you all about their products.

So it's hardly surprising to anyone that the UK's Telephone Preference Society (TPS) has reached the 10 million mark (via Brand Republic, free reg required). The TPS, despite its euphemistic name, simply allows people to opt out of all telephone marketing calls.

To put this into perspective, there are about 22 million households in the UK, which means that nearly half of them have expressed this preference now. I will qualify that slightly by saying that you can also opt out mobile numbers and I don't have any information on the split, though I will ask and write an update if the info is available. Gut feel says it'll be a fairly small number though.
UPDATE: It is actually only 3.3% of the file, so the argument holds. Phew!

A further interesting little nugget in the same article is that a recent Mori poll found that awareness of the TPS had risen to nearly 50%. Spelling this out, it means that practically everyone who knows about it, registers.

This is clearly a big worry for outbound call centres, who were recently outraged when BT started to actively promote their Privacy Service, which includes a big plug for the TPS. Registration has indeed increased following BT's initiative, which seems to be supporting the theory that everyone who finds out about it, joins.

A nice bit of additional irony to consider is that the TPS is paid for by the direct marketing industry themselves - there's no government subsidy or anything. Therefore, the industry is facing rapidly increasing costs in the face of a rapidly decreasing pool of customers it can piss off approach - and I assume rapidly decreasing profits. There must come a point (maybe two years away) when the economics dictate that this is a dead industry.

So if you run an outbound call centre, you really should change your model pretty quick now. The writing is on the wall - people don't like your service and feel so strongly about it that they'll overcome their natural inertia and do something about it.

For other traditional marketers, it's also a clear indication of the way the winds are blowing in modern marketing. People don't want to be interrupted anymore and your only hope is engagement marketing - a term you're going to hear a lot more in the future.

Advertisers Still Clutching At Mobile Straws

Via Tom Hume is a review of the recent Mobile Content World conference on Mo:Life. Tom points out two juicy bits from the lengthy review, which has a pretty comprehensive explanation of how the advertising industry, by and large, doesn't get mobile at all.

To sum up Jason Wilson's three main points: the ad industry doesn't get it; they don't know what to do; this upsets them. "The naff and/or derivative nature of much of what was forwarded as innovative mobile campaigns underscores the structural problem the advertising industry is still encountering vis-à-vis media which don’t allow them to simply pump ads through to the audience," he adds.

Viral Mobile Marketing - German Style

There's an election coming up in Germany, in case you hadn't been following European politics. And one of the promotional tools has to go down as one of the oddest I've seen - certainly since a "Win a Trip to our Abattoir" on a can of pork luncheon meat (honestly!).

MobHappy reader, Irakli, sends in a story where the Chairman of one of the parties, Edmund Stoiber, will call 1,000 "selected" people on their mobiles, urging them go out and vote. Well, actually, it'll be a recorded message of the great man sent to 1,000 people's mobile phones.

This would be mildly annoying if you were one of the recipients - being phoned by a computer is pretty intrusive to most people, no?

But the reaction the party is expecting is that people are going to be so delighted that they'll volunteer their friends', colleagues' and family members' mobile numbers, so that they can get the same call from dear old Edmund too. And this will snowball into hundreds of thousands of calls.

I think someone needs to go back to viral marketing school. Or maybe it's a cultural thing and Germans will be ecstatic to hear from Edmund and be only too pleased to involve their friends.

But I can't see it myself.

Image from Wikipedia. Edmund Stoiber is not the one on the left of the picture.

I'm No Expert, But...

...your marketing stinks. Maybe mobile can make it better.

I'm not one to question the work of the marketing whizzes at Procter & Gamble (for a variety of reasons), but I'm going to anyway. I've been seeing the ads for some wonderful new foaming dish soap they've got, and being blessed with an old house that's sans dishwasher, I'm always open to the latest and greatest in grease removal. The TV ads feature the URL for a web site for coupons, so I thought I'd check it out and use the $1 to try the new soap.

I surf on over, and find the relevant page, expecting to get a coupon to print out or something, maybe have to supply an email address. No -- they want address, birthday, gender and for me to sign up for their spam, er, newsletter. The kicker? "Please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery... We are excited about your request to try this sample, and want to get your feedback on how you used this sample. By selecting this sample, you are agreeing to be contacted at least once about the current sample."

So, I wait 4-6 weeks to try it to save a buck, and you're going to contact me too? No thanks. You're lucky I still bought the soap (though I'm happy to admit it does work as well as advertised). Again, I'm no expert, but this seems pretty pointless. Somebody sees a TV ad, thinks, hey, that sounds good, I'll try it, then you want them to wait 4-6 weeks, a period after which they may or may not decide that they really do want to buy your product. Couldn't that cycle be shortened?

It seems like mobile could fit in here somewhere to make things better -- maybe have people text a shortcode to receive a text message coupon back. With that coupon, you could ask people if they want to opt in for more offers, rather than making it a condition of accepting the coupon. Instant response, the opportunity for a further relationship, and it's all opt in. Any thoughts?

Free Mobile Porn

Sadly, not for you -- unless you happen to be in Bengbu, China. Some vendors there are using free pornographic video clips to entice people to buy phones, using them to demonstrate the video playback capabilities of devices, then loading them on the phone after purchase. The police there haven't figured out how to crack down on it yet, though they could take a page out of Malaysian cops' books and do random spot checks of people's phones.

Perhaps my dour outlook on mobile porn was off-base -- or maybe it's just that the business model's being approached incorrectly :)

Top 10 Business Uses of SMS -- How Dull

The Pondering Primate pointed out a press release from an SMS gateway provider that lists the top ten ways businesses in the UK are using text messages:

1. Recruitment agencies: people looking for temporary work can now register to receive SMS alerts about potential work from recruitment agencies. By sending a broadcast SMS to suitable candidates recruitment agencies can save considerable time and money.

2. Entertainment information services: SMS is being used to deliver an variety of entertainment information services such as ringtones, logos, jokes, competitions and horoscopes to customers. This generates significant revenue for many organisations.

3. Clubs and bars: many clubs and bars are using SMS to notify customers, who have opted in, about special drinks promotions and events for when they are in the area.

4. Internet service providers and hosting companies: SMS is being used to notify engineers when systems go down or if suspicious criminal activity is occurring across a network, meaning that problems can be dealt with quickly and efficiently.

5. Couriers: courier companies are using SMS to provide information to their couriers as to where to collect and deliver mail. Additionally it is being used to alert customers when items, such as concert tickets, are being delivered, so that they can ensure they are around for the delivery or can reschedule for a more convenient time.

6. Schools, colleges and universities: students and parents can now be alerted by SMS if buildings are closed due to bad weather, etc. This saves them having to wait for updates on local radio or having to call to find out if buildings are open, etc.

7. Hair salons, dentists and surgeries: individual patients can now receive automatic text reminders telling them the time and date of appointments. Patients can also postpone and reschedule appointments via SMS meaning that appointments are less likely to be missed.

8. Mechanics and body shops: mechanics are using SMS to notify customers when their cars are ready. This can save both the garages and customers time, because as soon as a job is logged as completed the customer can be automatically alerted, whether they are at home or at work, etc.

9. Charities: charities are using SMS in a variety of ways ranging from using it to alert people about fundraising activities or as a means to collect donations with enabling people being to make a pledge via a text shortcode with the donation being taken from their next bill.

10. Insurance companies: mobile users can now receive quotes and cover confirmation from insurance companies via SMS, which has helped to enhance customer service as users can have access to information 24 hours a day.

Okay, it's great that companies are adopting SMS, but is anybody doing anything interesting? The vast majority of these are simply voice call or e-mail substitutes. Feel free to share any good ones you're aware of in the comments.

Billboard Barcodes

We've written before about Shotcode and Semacode and other mobile codereaders, but over in Japan -- where QR codes are  commonplace, as shown by a recent announcement from Amazon -- i-mode Business Strategy reports (via Tom Hume) that NTT DoCoMo is working on a cameraphone ad server that would let people snap a picture of a printed ad or billboard, then get sent to a web site or be sent more information from the advertiser.

It's not a new idea: barcodes are already used for this, even going back as far as the CueCat, which failed spectacularly. Although DoCoMo's new technology does require some handset software, it's different because it doesn't require ads to be changed in any way, and will also work with existing advertising. This makes much more sense to me than trying to advertise via bluespamming; this seems like an easy way to offer potential customers a way to reach out to advertisers, rather than just throwing a product or message in their face.

Turning Bluetooth On Doesn't Constitute Opting In

Justin Pearse over at NMA reports on the division in the UK marketing industry over Bluetooth, with no clear mandate on the legality of sending unsolicited marketing messages using the technology. Evidently the "Electronic Communications Regulations" say explicit consumer consent is needed for marketing messages, and that's a chicken-or-egg problem for marketers that don't have any other point of contact with consumers than their Bluetooth bots.

Accordingly, many people using Bluetooth marketing have decided to interpret a phone with Bluetooth set to discoverable as opting in to their messages, which seems a bit like a spammer justifying what they do by saying they only send messages to people with email addresses. One marketing agency person says "Operators need to advise people how to put Bluetooth protection on." I'm not sure exactly how he means that, but it sure sounds like he's saying that it's the receiver's responsibility to do something to prevent being hit with the messages. Again, seems an awful lot like spammers.

Some agencies are trying to figure out a better way, using clearly defined Bluetooth "zones", like a corner of a club or a floor mat. I'm not sure those will work too well, after all, how do you make sure a Bluetooth signal doesn't spill over the mat, but it's a start -- and far more responsible. Email marketing has been made ever the more difficult because of spam, and spamming mobiles -- whether from a legitimate business over Bluetooth or a shady ringtone seller via SMS -- will only dent mobile marketing's prospects in general.

It's unclear how long it's going to take people to understand that interruption marketing isn't too effective anymore, regardless of how new and technologically advanced the medium is which it's delivered is. Consumers the world over use different means to avoid these messages, whether it's skipping ads on a TiVo, blocking pop-ups and stripping out ads in Firefox, or using spam blockers. It's unclear what part of that makes some marketers think intruding on peoples' mobiles will be well-received, even if their Bluetooth is on.

Spammers' Response Rates

Have you ever wondered what spammers' response rates were?

Maybe you assumed that a very, very, very tiny proportion of people responded to spam and were thus responsible for keeping the spammers in profits and free to carry on annoying the rest of us.

According to emarketer, a new survey by Mirapoint (yep, there is a vested interest) by Radicati Group, reveals that a massive 11% of users purchase products and services from spam e-mails - even though 9% of them have lost money to e-mail scammers in the past.

It gets worse.

39% of people admit to clicking on embedded links within spam - thereby alerting the spammer that they're a "live one". And 54% of these guys (surprise, surprise) receive more spam as a consequence.

So we can't really pretend that it's a small minority of the terminally stupid who do this kind of things. It's likely to be your colleague at work or even your partner. Or even YOU.

So the message to anyone reading this is PLEASE STOP IT. Find reputable merchants, porn sites or mortgage providers and give them your business.

And stop supporting spamming before it moves over to the mobile channel too.

Taking Things A Step Further

Justin Pearse over at New Media Age reports on the UK's first made-for-mobile TV series, a collection of 100 three-minute recipes from popular English chef Jamie Oliver. It's less of a TV series and more of a mobile video cookbook, but interesting nonetheless.

My first thought on reading about it was that this is a pretty cool idea -- they're taking a popular chef with a strong brand and a track record of big-selling cookbooks, and taking it mobile. It makes sense to me as a useful resource, particularly for people wanting to find something to cook on their way home from work, and also by making it video, give people some help with the actual cooking bit. While the content may not be earth-shattering, I think it will work.

My second thought  was how much better this would be if it was taken a step further than just as a video, and added something as simple as an SMS shopping list to make it more useful, and more interactive in the sense that it would offer encouragement to the viewer to actually cook the food. I was glad to see, then, when I went over to producers' site (watch out for the Flash and noise) such a facility is being added.

The NMA also highlights that the show is launching without a sponsor, a bit of a surprise given Oliver's long-standing association with a British supermarket. Having a grocer sponsor the show -- rather than charging users to watch it -- would seem a natural fit. Somebody watches the video, then gets the shopping list courtesy of XYZ Supermarket. Plenty of supermarkets already have online recipes, so the mobile version seems a logical extension, and it's surprising that the company Oliver endorses wouldn't want to jump on it. Of course, given that company's apparent view that you need to ask permission to link to its site, it doesn't appear to be too hip to this whole new media thing.

So there are two basic thrusts here: first, smart companies will be aware when mobile fits into their marketing plans, rather then just finding simple uses like text and win or mobile fulfillment. Second, just putting content on a mobile might be marginally cool, and that might be enough to generate a "wow factor" for a pop of initial usage. But to get people to keep coming back to advanced content -- particularly if you're making them pay for it -- there's got to be something more on the table. Make things interactive, make things better; don't settle on the lowest common denominator, take that extra step.