Todd Wasserman assembles the top 10 digital ad developments that defined 2010. On his list (published at Mashable): iAds; location-based advertising by Foursquare, Facebook and others; Promoted Tweets; group buying alerts offered by Groupon and others; and Isaiah Mustafa’s personalize videos distributed by Twitter @Replies.
His list also includes two forms of advertising that have fun with internet pages that are otherwise annoying: CAPTCHA prove-you’re-a-human pages and error pages that result from typo entry into a search box, like Burger King did with Digg.
Congrats to Rob Shore, Chris Kobran, Dan Contento, Eric Hoppe, Veronica Tegen, Courtney Guertin and the rest of the crew at Digg that put that together!
From Devin Friedman’s recent article in GQ, Viral Me:
“There’s a second theory that makes DailyBooth a kind of elegant, perfectly simple social-media product. It’s closely related to the friction concept, only this one violates one of the laws of thermodynamics: You have to get more out of a system than you put into it. ‘In the best products, you put minimal amounts in,’ [DailyBooth's Brian Pokorny] says, ‘and you get a lot back out. Like Twitter. You follow ten people. You maybe tweet once in a while. And you get all this news content and information. You don’t have to do very much, and you get a lot back. Facebook? The same thing. You connect to your friends and, boom, you’re flooded with all this stuff. Maybe you put in one thing, and all day long you get all this stuff to look at. DailyBooth, the same thing. You take one picture and you get ten comments back for one post.’”
My other favorite quote, in reference to the founder of Y Combinator start-up Rapportive:
“To people like Rahul, an open society isn’t one where people have access to the real you. It is simply providing access to the identity you very carefully construct for human consumption.”
Two months after launching its iPhone app, Instagram has achieved a million users. From the NYT’s Bits Blog:
“The company began offering its simple photo service in mid-October that allows people to share images from a mobile phone and then add unique and fun filters. Since then, Instagram has quickly become the talk of the tech community as people have flocked to the service even with stiff competition from a number of well-financed competitors, including PicPlz, Flickr and Path.”
That’s a steep ramp by any standard. According to the Business Insider, “it took Foursquare roughly a year to hit a million users, and Twitter two years.”
How did they do it? Slideshare’s Rashmi Sinha suggests that Instagram had an easier task — fulfilling an existing demand, taking and sharing photos — whereas Foursquare and Twitter forced people to adopt a new behavior.
Online agency Digital Surgeons created an infographic to compare the Facebook and Twitter audiences. Two items in particular grabbed my attention.
One, while the Facebook and Twitter brands have similar awareness (88% and 87%, respectively), Facebook has nearly five times Twitter’s monthly audience, and its much-bigger audience is 50% more likely to engage with the service every day. That’s clearly a win for Facebook. Nearly everyone knows about both services, but Facebook has convinced many more of us to participate and participate regularly.
Two — this point goes to Twitter — third-party brands are finding better engagement with Twitter followers than Facebook followers. While it appears harder to get a Twitter user to follow a brand (40% of Facebook users do so, and only 25% of Twitter users do the same), the value of a Twitter follower is greater: 67% of brand followers in Twitter say they plan to purchase a product from that brand, to Facebook’s 51%. This is good for Twitter in two ways. First, if it’s harder to convince a Twitter user to follow a brand, brands are likely to pay Twitter a premium (over what they’d pay Facebook) to help them build a following. Second, a brand follower in Twitter is inherently more valuable, since there’s a higher likelihood that he or she will convert to paying customer, and that will ultimately push Twitter’s ad rates above Facebook’s.
(More at GigaOM.)
Today’s NY Times Magazine featured the Best Ideas of a Decade. Under the heading “The Most ‘Off” Picks” they listed foreheads bought and sold as ad space:
“2005: Can Work Only Once? ‘Forehead Billboards.’ A 21-year-old named Andrew Fischer auctioned off the space on his forehead for $37,375 on eBay, thereafter attaching a small temporary tattoo advertising an over-the-counter sleep remedy. The company, SnoreStop, calculates that it received nearly $1 million worth of publicity. And a woman named Kari Smith leased her forehead for a permanent tattooed ad for the online gambling and entertainment venture GoldenPalace.com.”
Thirty-seven thousand dollars for a temporary tattoo? I’d call that a good deal for Andrew Fisher, and it sounds like the campaign did quite well for his client. Kari Smith, however, sold her forehead — permanently — for only $10,000. Oy.
My favorite variation on this theme is Chanel’s temporary creme tattoos.
From TechCrunch last week:
“Over the weekend, the Wall Street Journal ran an article pointing out how Google is increasingly favoring its own properties, in search results over natural results to outside sites which previously commanded the top spots. This practice is especially noticeable with Google Places and local results, but there are other examples as well from product and mortgage search to health search.”
Related: Facebook Execs Fear Google Will Prioritize Google Social Pages.
(Thanks for sending, Chip!)
According to research by Harris Interactive, 8-24 year olds have the greatest affinity to food and snack brands. Six of the most popular brands among kids are edible: M&Ms, Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups, Oreo’s, Subway, Hershey’s Milk Chocolate, and Doritos.
No wonder we’re all getting a little chunky these days.
Via 5 Blogs Before Lunch.