My
12 year old wasn't watching the England Portugal debacle on Euro
2004. Because the computer is out of direct sightline of the TV.
He was however totally involved in the game. Every few seconds
he would dart forward from his chair and check the TV screen. Then
it was back to MSN to message his mates. There were 5 of them.
Most were able to watch and "commentate on the game" - one was
posting from a laptop. What struck me was that they prioritised
interacting with one another
over
just
sitting
and
concentrating
on the match.
Now
apart from making me feel old - what's wrong with being a spectator
anyway? this ought to send a shiver down
the spine of anyone involved in mass communications. Because
until now the commercial opportunity has been defined by aiming
messages
at audiences glued to the screen. What if the audience doesn't
want to sit still and follow the programming stream. What if
they are more interested in one another's views than that of
the tele
pundits? How are we supposed to get advertising messages through now?
What
most communications patently fails to take into account is how human
interaction filters and fixes memory. It was the philosopher John
Locke who described the human mind as a blank on which knowledge
was placed. Three and a half centuries later this is still the prevailing
model of how we retain information. Somebody shoves it in and it
sticks.
In How Customers Think Zaltman provides a case study practical
of how plastic memories can be. Take two people who have shared an
experience
which was a positive one say a great night out. Then get one of them
to challenge whether it really was such a good night out. You can
track the shift in perceptions to the point where the memory has
been entirely changed and the night perceived to be something of
a disaster. What
is even more interesting is that it is possible to identify different
kinds of memories. When I was working on the binge drinking project
at the end of 2003 Gill Ereaut found me a remarkable paper by David
Giles (Sage 1999) about retrospective accounts of drunken behaviour.
Using discourse analysis - it is possible to distinguish between
people's actual memories of a night of revelry and shared memories
which came when their mates told them how outrageously they had behaved.
Fundamental to binge drinking is the reconstruction and celebration
of the binge the morning after the night before. The binge is in
part a social construct.
The
verbal construction of memories should therefore be a priority for
creative
development research. Last month I was sitting in a Japanese
restaurant in Soho listening to 2 Chinese girls switching from Cantonese
to English when one wanted to extol the virtues of her new mobile
phone. Now I wasn't able able to follow the Cantonese part of the
conversation. But the decision to use English, the subject matter
and phrasing used is all accessible using straightforwad research
techniques. There is more to this than "viral". All this references
is one person passing on information to another.The value of viral
marketing can only be realised when you understand the social context
in which the information is being transmitted and you understand
how best to code and sequence the brand message so it fufils it's
social purpose and can be passed easily. But viral also needs to
take into account how the message is modulated through transmission.
There's a major study on viral marketing out in the market now which
has no qualitative component at all - so isn't worth the paper it
is written on. Curiously enough I developed a research proposal
myself a few weeks ago to look at exactly this area using discourse
analysis.
So here's
the first takeout to help you to help others to create more than
they consume. It ain't in the ad or the mailpack. The valuable part
is
created in transit. All you gotta do is identify it and make it work
for you! And um what kind of tracking study do you need to measure
this? Well not one that begins What brands have you seen advertised
recently??
|