I’m certainly not the first to write that privacy will be a trend in 2011. In the last months of 2010 it was almost impossible to avoid the huge upswing in conversations about Internet-related privacy as we recovered from the uproar over Facebook’s maddeningly complex privacy policy — which is now some 5,000 words long —  and  looked on as Julian Assange shook American diplomacy with Wikileaks revelations. Internet privacy has long been a discussion, but as the golden year of social media, 2010 seemed to be the year we consumers really realized all the ways in which we are gathered, tracked and, yes, catered to through our many connections on the Internet.

For some, that was a little freaky — as in, Ack! Does Amazon know that my Kindle went to Starbucks in Highland Village and lingered on page 152 of Pride and Prejudice for three hours … or does it know that I, Susan Pagani, went to Starbucks etc., etc.?

And there’s the rub: Considering how confounding privacy policies can be, how much do we understand about the privacy we have or don’t have? How much privacy do consumers really want?

As a writer at Go East — working on a myriad of consumer products sold on the Internet — a sometimes journalist, and a consumer, I find myself waffling on the latter question.

In a thoughtful blog post on the Stanford Center for Internet and Society website, Ryan Calo, Director of the Consumer Privacy Project, draws a parallel between Wikileaks and consumer privacy.  He writes, among other things, that consumer candor — like diplomatic — is based on trust, on the “well-earned comfort with revealing to a business who you are and what you want.”

“Companies do not earn trust by using every interaction with a consumer to profile them, much less by storing that information in a database that can, and often does, leak out.”

Put that way, it does make me anxious. However, it seems to me that lack of understanding feeds lack of trust. So, the 2011 privacy trend will likely have to include the creation of strong, transparent privacy policies that are easier to understand and opt in or out of  — policies that will provide greater protection for the consumers who want it and better results for those who choose to opt into profiling.

Yet, on the opt-in side, the communications writer in me finds the potential power of well-aimed online advertising well-nigh irresistible.

I enjoyed a humorous, yet pointed blog post by Robert Wright on the New York Times website, in which he posited that if Google, Bing and other search engines can figure out how to use consumers’ personal information to better target their needs and wants — as he says, targeting the individual, not the audience bucket — they could actually save journalism. If targeted ads actually worked, consumers would click and buy, more companies would advertise, online news would finally have a revenue source, journalists would be paid a livable wage and their research and interviews would be funded — a supportable outcome as each year more folding newspapers continue to go the way of the curlew. Win, win, win!

For that — and the assurance of neither being bombarded with useless ads nor having my identity stolen or misappropriated — I might give up a little privacy. How about you?

Like

Unlike

The New York Times recently ran an interesting — and kind of funny — article about consumer “wrap rage.“ Apparently, Amazon has spent two years trying to get the folks who sell products on its site NOT to use clamshell packaging.

What is wrap rage? Anyone who has suffered the humiliation, frustration and, yes, uncontrollable anger, that comes with trying to open a plastic-clamshell encased product knows wrap rage. A person shouldn’t have to wield a knife to gain access to a product they have lawfully purchased.

Amazon.com users agree; packaging is the number one source of angry customer feedback. So the company has asked its partners to rethink their packaging and offer a frustration-free option for consumers.

The article reads a bit like a case study on why companies should solicit feedback and how they can put the resulting data to work for them. In this case, consumers weren’t shooting down stars over service or quality, just the packaging — that’s both good to know and fixable … with the help of a good designer.

Frustration-free packaging (Photo courtesy of Amazon)

Of the companies that took Amazon’s plea seriously, many  found that their new packaging cost them less, was more environmentally friendly and, perhaps more to the immediate point, on average reduced negative feedback by a whopping 73 percent.

And, in a time when consumers increasingly look to each other for purchasing advice, that’s some powerful PR.

Like

Unlike

Naming is a complex business, perhaps that’s why the blogosphere is chockablock with sound advice and clever anecdotes on how to come up with one. At Go East, we find the Do Nots are just as edifying — and sometimes more surprising — than the Dos.

Here are a few favorites.

Do NOT:
1. Go for bland

There are plenty of highly successful companies with straight-up functional names out there, but if you are just starting out — especially in a category with a lot of competition — the more memorable and engaging the name, the more differentiating. And the easier to find.

According to “Protecting Your Brand Online,” a Hitwise report, 86 percent of all searches are for names and brands. If your product or company name is too generic, your audience is going to have a tough time sorting through the mess it turns up in a Google search — and they may not find you.

The same goes for true yet tried words. Google “innovative” and you’ll see what I mean.

2. Invent meaningless names

On the flip side, it doesn’t always pay to go with a wholly invented name. Last year, Microsoft took a beating from pretty much everybody for naming its new search engine Bing, which everyone agreed meant nothing to anyone. Why is that bad? Because endowing a name with meaning can cost millions of dollars. To boot, ruthless bloggers pointed out, the name could be an acronym for “But it’s not Google!”

Microsoft marketing execs told the New York Times they hoped the name would evoke the sound associated with Aha! moments and that it would encourage people to “verb it up” ala Google … so Bing it!

3. Name by committee

As Phil Davis of Entrepreneur.com points out, you can only pick one name, so you risk alienating the very people you are trying to involve. And, in the process of trying to find something crowd pleasing, you are likely to land on a very bland sort of name that suffers from problem number one. Davis recommends only involving a small number of people who can put the company first and their egos second — we’d add collaborative people who are comfortable with change.

4. Worry too much about the URL

We’ve all heard someone say they chose their company name because “the domain name was available,” but are URLs as important today? Given the statistics above, it seems like consumers are less likely to try to type your company name and www. into a browser window, and more likely to look for it in a search engine.

In that case, it might be more important to choose a memorable name that is relevant to your brand and easy to spell — and to ensure that you have awesome search engine optimization.

5. Neglect to review meaning

Everyone knows about the Chevrolet Nova: allegedly the similarity of “Nova” to No Va, Spanish for “no go,” caused the car to sell poorly in Spanish-speaking countries, so the company was forced to rename it.

This is actually a myth; the car apparently sold well in Venezuela and Mexico. Yet it is still a good reminder that those pitfalls exist and that it is important to have someone review your name choice for foreign and other contextual language issues.

Like all things creative, naming can be a highly subjective endeavor, so what sounds bland or meaningless to one ear may ring evocative in another. And that’s why, of all these NO NOs, I will always come back to number three. With a strong team, you can set personal preferences aside, work through that subjectivity, and choose a name that is right for your organization, company or product.

Like

Unlike

I have been enjoying the recent spate of Snickers billboards, which seem to be multiplying like rabbits. As in the message above, the ads smoosh together Snickers-related words with other words and phrases to form a non-word and, often, a clever pun. I find the ads funny, memorable and recognizable, but colleagues and friends have wondered aloud if they are too arbitrary: do these words convey real meaning?  They don’t necessarily make one hungry for a Snickers bar, so is it enough that they are memorable — are they relevant?

An article by Stuart Elliot, published in the New York Times earlier this year, talks about how the ads have invented a new language, Snacklish, which not only keeps the ads light, something consumers apparently crave in the current economic crisis, but also mimics the phone vernacular of its target audience, men ages 18 to 34. Elliot writes:

The Snickers language will resonate with ‘‘young adults who are texting each other,’’ said [Walker vice president for integrated marketing communications at the Mars Snackfood U.S. division of Mars in Hackettstown, New Jersey.] ‘‘making up their own words, their own shorthand.’’

So the ads are relevant: they may not make the audience drool for nougat, but they build brand loyalty and recognition, and that’s what’s important here. We all know Snickers is packed with roasted peanuts, creamy nougat, rich caramel, and milk chocolate; they no longer need to hammer that home at every consumer touch point.

This is an awesome example of how a brand with huge recognition can move beyond features and benefits to do bold –and successful — things with advertising.

Thanks to AdMe.Ru for the photo.

Like

Unlike

Too often, it happens that guidelines for copywriting are buried deep in the brand guidelines and given only a few paragraphs generally relating to the treatment of the brand’s name and products in content. This is good information, but it doesn’t help the people who talk and write about the brand every day  — internally or externally — understand how to bring it to life in words.

In some cases, it’s not that the organization hasn’t thought through its copy tone, it’s just that no one has taken the time to communicate those thoughts broadly.

As Rob Mitchell posits in an article on Brandchannel.com, it’s possible copywriting is generally overlooked because all of us use words on a regular basis — we speak, write e-mails and publish reports — and feel fairly confident with the medium, while designing is viewed as a highly specialized skill.

Yet, as Mitchell points out, poor writing and inconsistent use of voice and messaging can undermine a brand as surely as misuse of the logo. “If a company’s staff doesn’t speak, write or behave in line with what the customer has been led to expect,” Mitchell writes, ” then he will feel let down.”

Let down and possibly confused. Conversely, consistently good copy is critical to an audience’s ability to recognize a brand in the marketplace.

The challenge, when there are a large numbers of potential writers involved, is teaching staff and consultants to not only recognize when the copy tone is on brand, but also to create copy that represents the strengths of  the brand and resonates with its audiences.

And that’s where guidelines are helpful. In the end, copywriting guidelines create efficiencies and protect the brand, but they also free the writer up to be more creative. In a way, working within guidelines is almost like writing to a stringent poetry form: Rather than trying to redefine the audience, messages and tone, writers can focus on using the existing parameters to create the most engaging, relevant and effective copy possible.

Here are a few additions an organization should consider making to its guidelines to foster more consistent and engaging copywriting.

Writing well

Guidelines should include a brief section on writing well; the basics of business writing, such as: 

• Avoid over-using big words, complex sentences, clutter, jargon and the passive voice
• Strive for honesty, clarity and simplicity — less is more

In his article, Mitchell talks a lot about how, in the absence of guidelines or a real understanding of a brand, writers will fall back on jargon — meaningless phrases that, while comforting in their familiarity to some, may alienate others outside the “lingo.”

I would add that jargon can also clutter up your messaging, leaving audiences with a muddled perspective on your brand.

If possible, include examples of good and bad writing in your copywriting guidelines, e.g. using a long word where a short one will do — as in “numerous” vs. “many” — or the passive voice: Files will be organized vs. James will organize the files.

Core audiences

Defining your core audience with as much specific information as possible helps writers understand who they are talking to and craft messages and tone appropriately.

For example, it is immensely helpful to know the audience’s pain points, enthusiasms, sales cycles and how they interact with the product, etc.    

Copy tone  

Copy tone is complex.

On the one hand, it refers literally to the manner of expression: Confident and informed, warm and inviting, serious and reserved, enthusiastic and urgent, witty and informal. The tone of your copy should, of course, resonate with your core audiences. 

On the other hand, copy tone can also refer to personality.

Capturing the personality of your brand  in writing can mean expression, vocabulary, rhythm and punctuation — and it can be great fun.  Unfortunately, copy that takes on too strong a personality risks offending elements of your audience; one reader’s witty is another’s snotty.

Capturing that fine line is tricky.  If the goal of the guidelines is to simplify writing for anyone — consultants and the folks in your organization —  it’s probably best to focus on tone (expression) and audience.

Again, the best way to communicate your brand’s tone of voice within the guidelines is through examples:

Hot!Hot!Hot!  vs. Limited time offer

Key messages

Key messages are the most important aspects of the brand’s product offering and services summarized in a concise phrase or sentence. They communicate what differentiates your brand, what you want the consumer to remember.

In the brand guidelines, key messages help copywriters, and designers, understand the communication priorities of the brand so that they can write about it comfortably and honestly — to Mitchell’s point, there’s no need for jargon. They also ensure that writers consistently communicate the brand’s strengths to your core audiences, which in turn helps build audience recognition and opinion.

Key messages should not necessarily be pulled directly from the guidelines, but used as a basis for all communications — how the actual words are crafted will vary from tactic to tactic, audience to audience.

Like

Unlike

These are the People Against Dirty advocates. They are my people.

When the Cooper Mini “Let’s Motor” campaign came out, I was charmed and inspired. I actually collected pieces of it. I feel the same about Method’s green campaign People Against Dirty. In fact, I have in front of me an ingenious direct mail piece pilfered from a coworker’s desk.

The piece combines relevant yet humorous photography and copy — lots of copy, relatively. Specifically, I enjoy the way the campaign defines traditional cleaning chemicals as “dirty” then spins into double entendre. 

(more…)

Like

Unlike