• by Kathy Sharpe , February 2, 2009

New-media marketers need to pick up the tempo

All the readers of omma can run through their own lists of “advertising will never be the same” moments. The magnitude of the change is unquestionable. And the velocity will only increase. Does that mean companies so central to this change never need to learn to be marketers? Never need to grow brand loyalists or retain users?

The recent almost head-to-head releases of Facebook Connect and Google’s Friend Connect raises the question: Would these companies and other companies like them ever need to develop and execute a marketing plan for a new product? Could they rise to the challenge like Apple, and reap the rewards of a brand or would they follow the Microsoft model?

Marketing is in Apple’s DNA. In 1977, they ran their first TV commercial positioning the Apple as great for everyone in the family — from Mom balancing the checkbook to young gamers who can create their own versions of Pong. Over the years, Apple’s successes far outnumbered its failures and have carried the Apple brand through when products lacked the innovation of iPods and iPhones.

Microsoft, not so much. It took a long time for Bill Gates and company to get started, and the recent history need not be repeated here. Suffice it to say if you wanted to be a success when you start marketing tomorrow, Microsoft wouldn’t be your guiding star.Its difficulties should sound a warning bell as Apple’s market share grows, and Redmond’s Internet strategy deteriorates. The bell should even be heard at Google.
Google: the company that became a worldwide top 10 brand just by launching a search engine. Google: a company that is now over 11 years old and one of the wealthiest in the world. Google: The “we don’t need no stinkin’” marketing budget company that’s never used one before. Of course, it had never laid off any employees until last year either.

Successfully integrating any kind of marketing mind into the Google think tank will require the power and speed of a Vulcan mind meld. But sustaining the brand and what one assumes will be a series of products like Friend Connect will require them to go where no Googler has ever gone before. Marketing circa 2009: a concentrated strategic program using the best tools available to build and maintain consumer share and grow advertiser relationships. Stat!

Friend Connect is a me-too product; the difference will be in the sites that choose it, and the MySpace partnership will help. But if you are in the heavy social network demo, Facebook is the brand you want your name, Web site, profile or whatever associated with. They also have facebook.com as a launch platform for this and every other product coming down the pike. Google has google.com.

Facebook Connect will win the brand-name battle and unless Google is holding back on another reason to choose Friend Connect, Facebook will win the war. And quite likely, several wars to come.

Facebook’s overwhelming advantage is its platform. Facebook.com is a built-in marketing tool for Web-based products. This alone should drive up the marketing budgets of Google, Microsoft and any other company developing products that can be distributed on the Web. Facebook’s challenge differs slightly from Google’s; they are younger, so creating and sustaining a strong marketing ethic won’t be as hard. But the power of Facebook may blind them to the need. They are in a war for people’s time, just like every media company out there.

It all comes down to the brand and the consumer’s time. Time is limited. No marketing can drive up the number of hours in a 24-hour day, so Facebook must get and maintain a reliable amount of attention. Multitasking aside, you can’t write on Twitter and Facebook simultaneously; something needs to come first.

So in 2009, as marketing dollars shift across media and new media arise, I’m wondering if new marketers will be born. It will be fascinating to see if the companies that gave us a new-media world can figure out how to successfully play in it.