Comments on: Cause-Me-to-Wretch Marketing: How Not to Change the World http://blog.mediasauce.com/2009/05/11/cause-me-to-wretch-marketing-how-not-to-change-the-world/ Understand. Mon, 14 Dec 2009 21:36:46 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.1 hourly 1 By: Cause-Me-to-Wretch Marketing: How Not to Change the World « Rally the Cause http://blog.mediasauce.com/2009/05/11/cause-me-to-wretch-marketing-how-not-to-change-the-world/comment-page-1/#comment-4959 Cause-Me-to-Wretch Marketing: How Not to Change the World « Rally the Cause Sun, 05 Jul 2009 15:03:35 +0000 http://blog.mediasauce.com/?p=1723#comment-4959 [...] Cause-Me-to-Wretch Marketing: How Not to Change the World 2009 July 5 by scottyhendo This post was originally posted on http://blog.mediasauce.com on 5/11/2009. Comments can be viewed here. [...] [...] Cause-Me-to-Wretch Marketing: How Not to Change the World 2009 July 5 by scottyhendo This post was originally posted on http://blog.mediasauce.com on 5/11/2009. Comments can be viewed here. [...]

]]> By: Keeping Cause Marketers Honest | FollowGreen.com http://blog.mediasauce.com/2009/05/11/cause-me-to-wretch-marketing-how-not-to-change-the-world/comment-page-1/#comment-4710 Keeping Cause Marketers Honest | FollowGreen.com Thu, 14 May 2009 18:58:57 +0000 http://blog.mediasauce.com/?p=1723#comment-4710 [...] of sorts, intent on keeping cause marketers honest about their initiatives, Scott is not afraid to call out the culprits who employ it as a flavor-of-the-month tactic. Fundraising expert and cause innovator, Scott parlays [...] [...] of sorts, intent on keeping cause marketers honest about their initiatives, Scott is not afraid to call out the culprits who employ it as a flavor-of-the-month tactic. Fundraising expert and cause innovator, Scott parlays [...]

]]> By: Ed Nicholson http://blog.mediasauce.com/2009/05/11/cause-me-to-wretch-marketing-how-not-to-change-the-world/comment-page-1/#comment-4705 Ed Nicholson Thu, 14 May 2009 03:30:39 +0000 http://blog.mediasauce.com/?p=1723#comment-4705 Interesting post, Scott. Since I have a dog in the hunt, I won't weigh in on any other brand's efforts. However, I do think the next couple of years are going to be interesting. As many traditional marketing techniques lose effectiveness in a new media environment, I predict we'll see a lot more money moving into cause marketing campaigns. Some will fail miserably as people learn to recognize authenticity. And (acknowledging my bias), I have to disagree with the anti-corporate sentiment expressed above. I'm sorry, but I just can't see a world in which a multitude of nonprofits thrive solely on individual donations with no corporate support. I _really_ like Ben's comment: "Why, brands, you’re just going to have to earn relevance, and like wisdom, there are no shortcuts for getting it. You build it with honest effort over time." Such effort not only build credibility for the brand, it has the capacity to change corporate culture. Interesting post, Scott. Since I have a dog in the hunt, I won’t weigh in on any other brand’s efforts.
However, I do think the next couple of years are going to be interesting. As many traditional marketing techniques lose effectiveness in a new media environment, I predict we’ll see a lot more money moving into cause marketing campaigns. Some will fail miserably as people learn to recognize authenticity.
And (acknowledging my bias), I have to disagree with the anti-corporate sentiment expressed above. I’m sorry, but I just can’t see a world in which a multitude of nonprofits thrive solely on individual donations with no corporate support.
I _really_ like Ben’s comment: “Why, brands, you’re just going to have to earn relevance, and like wisdom, there are no shortcuts for getting it. You build it with honest effort over time.”
Such effort not only build credibility for the brand, it has the capacity to change corporate culture.

]]> By: Ben Kunz http://blog.mediasauce.com/2009/05/11/cause-me-to-wretch-marketing-how-not-to-change-the-world/comment-page-1/#comment-4696 Ben Kunz Tue, 12 May 2009 02:28:43 +0000 http://blog.mediasauce.com/?p=1723#comment-4696 Scotty, what can I say? You are right. It seems brands are realizing the way into social media is to provide meaning. They have three choices: 1. "Buy" meaning by paying bloggers to write about your brand. 2. Convey meaning by giving something to a third-party charity. 3. Become meaningful by making your brand relevant to the conversation. The first is a cheap shortcut. The second is a nice fake, but fails the real test. The third? Why, brands, you're just going to have to earn relevance, and like wisdom, there are no shortcuts for getting it. You build it with honest effort over time. Scotty, what can I say? You are right. It seems brands are realizing the way into social media is to provide meaning. They have three choices:

1. “Buy” meaning by paying bloggers to write about your brand.

2. Convey meaning by giving something to a third-party charity.

3. Become meaningful by making your brand relevant to the conversation.

The first is a cheap shortcut. The second is a nice fake, but fails the real test. The third? Why, brands, you’re just going to have to earn relevance, and like wisdom, there are no shortcuts for getting it. You build it with honest effort over time.

]]> By: Scott Henderson on Cause Marketing « Cause Related Marketing http://blog.mediasauce.com/2009/05/11/cause-me-to-wretch-marketing-how-not-to-change-the-world/comment-page-1/#comment-4695 Scott Henderson on Cause Marketing « Cause Related Marketing Tue, 12 May 2009 00:32:36 +0000 http://blog.mediasauce.com/?p=1723#comment-4695 [...] He says that the most successful brands will put the cause first. [...] [...] He says that the most successful brands will put the cause first. [...]

]]> By: Peter Korchnak http://blog.mediasauce.com/2009/05/11/cause-me-to-wretch-marketing-how-not-to-change-the-world/comment-page-1/#comment-4694 Peter Korchnak Mon, 11 May 2009 23:12:51 +0000 http://blog.mediasauce.com/?p=1723#comment-4694 Scott, the cause-marketing-with-social-media bubble is just another aspect of the social media shiny object syndrome. Everyone wants to play with the new toy though it's not necessarily for everyone. Wretched campaigns will flop, sweet campaigns will raise money, and in the process we'll all learn how not to do it and how to do it right. Here's to a productive conversation. Scott, the cause-marketing-with-social-media bubble is just another aspect of the social media shiny object syndrome. Everyone wants to play with the new toy though it’s not necessarily for everyone.

Wretched campaigns will flop, sweet campaigns will raise money, and in the process we’ll all learn how not to do it and how to do it right. Here’s to a productive conversation.

]]> By: Scott Henderson http://blog.mediasauce.com/2009/05/11/cause-me-to-wretch-marketing-how-not-to-change-the-world/comment-page-1/#comment-4692 Scott Henderson Mon, 11 May 2009 22:45:43 +0000 http://blog.mediasauce.com/?p=1723#comment-4692 @johnhaydon and @gennefer - You raise very good points about authenticity and intent. @ssmirnov - We agree that it needs to be an equitable benefit to the non-profit and company. The point of my litmus test is in how the campaign is being positioned, not who benefits from it. Credit is not something to be claimed, it is something to be given. The two examples you shared are good examples to follow. @sagemcgreen - I'm willing to have an opinion on the matter and start the debate because it's something needing to be discussed. Non-profits and corporations coming together with individuals is one of the most effective ways to enact social change. Corporations are not inherently evil. Non-profits are not inherently righteous. They are both flawed because they are both human systems. You and I are both greedy and selfless at the same time. We're not on the verge of utopia, so let's face this reality: Human problems can only be solved by humans. We'll just disagree on Tyson and their efforts. @donschindler You're right - learning is very messy and the feedback will be lightning quick. @johnhaydon and @gennefer – You raise very good points about authenticity and intent.

@ssmirnov – We agree that it needs to be an equitable benefit to the non-profit and company. The point of my litmus test is in how the campaign is being positioned, not who benefits from it. Credit is not something to be claimed, it is something to be given. The two examples you shared are good examples to follow.

@sagemcgreen – I’m willing to have an opinion on the matter and start the debate because it’s something needing to be discussed. Non-profits and corporations coming together with individuals is one of the most effective ways to enact social change.

Corporations are not inherently evil. Non-profits are not inherently righteous. They are both flawed because they are both human systems. You and I are both greedy and selfless at the same time. We’re not on the verge of utopia, so let’s face this reality: Human problems can only be solved by humans.

We’ll just disagree on Tyson and their efforts.

@donschindler You’re right – learning is very messy and the feedback will be lightning quick.

]]> By: Don Schindler http://blog.mediasauce.com/2009/05/11/cause-me-to-wretch-marketing-how-not-to-change-the-world/comment-page-1/#comment-4690 Don Schindler Mon, 11 May 2009 17:06:14 +0000 http://blog.mediasauce.com/?p=1723#comment-4690 Scott, You always sound so smart in your blog posts. I love them. Here's my take on this whole thing. Let idiot marketers be idiot marketers right now. Through the Darwinian forces, they will weed themselves out. Their social media campaigns will fail. They will generate negative public relations. They will eventually have to go into some other type of work. Personally, I believe, that this is a crucial time for marketers. You MUST think twice about BSing. The feedback is immediate. This is not your grandpa's marketing. You must be honest and sincere or you will be found out. Personally, I hate auto-forms and auto-spread the word tools. You want to make it easy but not too easy. Any fool can click but you definitely don't want fools to be supporting you. Cause Marketing should not be a buzz word and should not be a buzz word. Just like social media marketing. You are not manipulating others - you are helping them find what they need. Scott, You always sound so smart in your blog posts. I love them.

Here’s my take on this whole thing. Let idiot marketers be idiot marketers right now. Through the Darwinian forces, they will weed themselves out. Their social media campaigns will fail. They will generate negative public relations. They will eventually have to go into some other type of work.

Personally, I believe, that this is a crucial time for marketers. You MUST think twice about BSing. The feedback is immediate.

This is not your grandpa’s marketing. You must be honest and sincere or you will be found out.

Personally, I hate auto-forms and auto-spread the word tools. You want to make it easy but not too easy. Any fool can click but you definitely don’t want fools to be supporting you.

Cause Marketing should not be a buzz word and should not be a buzz word. Just like social media marketing. You are not manipulating others – you are helping them find what they need.

]]> By: sage mcgreen http://blog.mediasauce.com/2009/05/11/cause-me-to-wretch-marketing-how-not-to-change-the-world/comment-page-1/#comment-4689 sage mcgreen Mon, 11 May 2009 16:39:24 +0000 http://blog.mediasauce.com/?p=1723#comment-4689 Ironic that some corporate causes are wretched, while others are worthy. I think the Tyson Hunger Pledge Hype is nauseating. What? Some marketing campaigns are illusions to influence buyers and others have heart felt messages for GOOD? Really? Who decides the good, the bad, and the ugly? Tyson gets the *bad chicken trying to be good* button in my opinion. We are at the threshold of a MACRO-shift. The increase in non-profit organizations is evidence of human transformation, social values can and will transcend greed. Profit will never have a working equilibrium with the Planet. I do applaud you for thinking outside the corporate branded box. Just say NO to the logo! Ironic that some corporate causes are wretched, while others are worthy. I think the Tyson Hunger Pledge Hype is nauseating.

What? Some marketing campaigns are illusions to influence buyers and others have heart felt messages for GOOD? Really? Who decides the good, the bad, and the ugly? Tyson gets the *bad chicken trying to be good* button in my opinion.

We are at the threshold of a MACRO-shift. The increase in non-profit organizations is evidence of human transformation, social values can and will transcend greed. Profit will never have a working equilibrium with the Planet. I do applaud you for thinking outside the corporate branded box. Just say NO to the logo!

]]> By: Stephanie Smirnov (@ssmirnov) http://blog.mediasauce.com/2009/05/11/cause-me-to-wretch-marketing-how-not-to-change-the-world/comment-page-1/#comment-4688 Stephanie Smirnov (@ssmirnov) Mon, 11 May 2009 15:54:23 +0000 http://blog.mediasauce.com/?p=1723#comment-4688 Great, provocative post, Scott. You're quite right to point out the cause marketing bubble we're in. Nearly every marketer on our client roster is engaged in (or wants to be engaged in) cause marketing. Those of us whose job it is to help advise marketers active in the cause space have our hands full because as you say, some cause marketing is being done poorly, for the wrong reasons, or both. I have to poke at your litmus test, though. You ask, "Is the brand’s marketing more important, equal to, or less important than the cause you’re supporting?" I disagree that the third is the only acceptable scenario. I've always subscribed to the notion that cause marketing is an alliance for mutual benefit: the charity partner gets money/donors/issue awareness while the marketer builds brand equity and drives sales. Everybody wins. I think the ideal role of the brand in the cause marketing framework is to be the catalyst that empowers consumers to make a difference that perhaps they couldn't have made on their own, by making them part of a bigger mission -- whether by facilitating transactional donation (think of the Pampers/UNICEF "one pack=one vaccine" campaign)or inspiring community action (Boost Mobile's Rock Corps program is a great example). If the brand is not going to get credit, we're no longer talking about cause marketing -- we're talking about philanthropy. Great, provocative post, Scott. You’re quite right to point out the cause marketing bubble we’re in. Nearly every marketer on our client roster is engaged in (or wants to be engaged in) cause marketing. Those of us whose job it is to help advise marketers active in the cause space have our hands full because as you say, some cause marketing is being done poorly, for the wrong reasons, or both. I have to poke at your litmus test, though. You ask, “Is the brand’s marketing more important, equal to, or less important than the cause you’re supporting?” I disagree that the third is the only acceptable scenario. I’ve always subscribed to the notion that cause marketing is an alliance for mutual benefit: the charity partner gets money/donors/issue awareness while the marketer builds brand equity and drives sales. Everybody wins. I think the ideal role of the brand in the cause marketing framework is to be the catalyst that empowers consumers to make a difference that perhaps they couldn’t have made on their own, by making them part of a bigger mission — whether by facilitating transactional donation (think of the Pampers/UNICEF “one pack=one vaccine” campaign)or inspiring community action (Boost Mobile’s Rock Corps program is a great example). If the brand is not going to get credit, we’re no longer talking about cause marketing — we’re talking about philanthropy.

]]>