WhipperSnaPR

Last night, as Josh and I were on our way to a pig vs. pig tasting event at Garden of Eden, Josh asked how much our tickets were.

“Twenty-five dollars, each,” I replied. “And, that includes the wine!”

“Great!” he said. “So, if we drink enough wine tonight, we’ll actually profit!

Ok, Josh. But where and how will you spend your extra, yet already consumed, wine? And he claims to be the logistic and numbers half of our “couple” brain.

A few months ago when I was doing a big seeding push for Beacon Street Girls, I was very interested in mommy blogs. Specifically, I was looking for moms with tween age daughters. But, I couldn’t help but explore Dooce when I discovered it. Now, it is one of my favorite reads!

The blog is written by Heather, a stay at home mother of the cutest 2 year old, Leta. She writes about random things in her life, which could be rather boring, but Heather has the most perfect sense of irony, sarcasm and humor.

I don’t have an ounce of anything in common with her or the subject matter. I have told Josh, though, that if I should ever find myself with child (this is definitely not something on our life radar), I want to be a hybrid of Heather and my own mother. My sister, Katie, is expecting a baby in September; I told her this blog should be her parenting manual. In short, I’m a fan of this woman’s policies on life and parenting.

So, because I’m pretty much a lurker on her site, I was hesitant to blog about my fandom. But, yesterday, she wrote about something relateable: word of mouth marketing! So, as the timing is as appropriate as it will ever be, I will take this opportunity to introduce Dooce to all of you.

As far as her word of mouth marketing skills go, I don’t think Heather is as bad as she implies. Sure, it isn’t the most positive product review… and it may not be the most family appropriate… but it isn’t necessarily bad. For example, I’ve never used Cetaphil, but the next time I’m wandering through CVS and I see the Cetaphil bottle, I’ll remember the post. Dooce, has given Cetaphil context for me. That, in my opinion, is a good thing.

Anyway, outside of Heather’s interesting perspective on the consistency of face wash, here’s a selection of favorites from the more recent Dooce posts:

• Having given birth to a force of nature and the follow-up, Because I’m always looking for ways to make my father proud
• You should definitely take this seriously
• Sick Days
• Masthead tutorial, sort of: I have big aspirations to try this someday, but I doubt it would ever look as cool

This morning, I was at a BIMA roundtable event spearheaded by Dave Balter, founder of BzzAgent. It was titled, “Bringing Word of Mouth into your Marketing Mix.” Most of the content of Dave’s presentation and the succeeding discussion was a nice review for me, but it also sparked a few thoughts that dug a little deeper.

Finding a balance between traditional marketing and the new forms of “grassroots” marketing can be difficult. But, before that can be accomplished, I think the industry must first find a balance between the many segments of this new avenue of communication.

(Maybe, even before that, we should decide on an umbrella name for grassroots, word of mouth, collaborative marketing, viral marketing, etc. I like customer,constituent or audience engagement)

Dave summed up his presentation into 5 key points of word of mouth marketing:

1. Don’t use entertainment as a substitute for the brand
2. Consumers will do what they want with your brand
3. Buzz does not always equal word of mouth
4. Don’t lie, cheat, steal or deceive
5. The only for successful word of mouth marketing is a great product

Dave caught my attention right off the bat. He began by explaining that viral and word of mouth are not the same. He explained that viral marketing substitutes the brand for entertainment and, therefore, breaks the number one rule of word of mouth marketing.

He used the Paris Hilton commercial for Carl’s Jr. as an example:

It was extremely viral and it is easy to see why. I counted 333,702 views on YouTube from the first search page alone. I’m sure the clip was viewed just as many times on any number of websites, communities and blogs. But, as Dave pointed out, there was a problem: during the time this ad aired, sales dropped 3%. Why? The Carl’s Jr. Brand was compromised. They focused all of their energy on creating a viral campaign rather than a word of mouth campaign.

I’m not going to dispute Dave’s claim here. In fact, I’ll support him. The commercial, although eye catching, does not include any call to action. If their goal was increased brand exposure, they got it; but, this ad may be giving the brand a new identity. If they were aiming to build a stronger brand or increase sales, they failed.I have to ask, though: can’t word of mouth and viral marketing function successfully together? In fact, if executed successfully, wouldn’t they compliment each other? Wouldn’t one serve as an accelerator for the other, and visa versa? Shouldn’t the two be symbiotic?

If you compromise your brand in order to create a viral conversation, then chances are you won’t reach any goals tied to that brand. And, to many companies, the brand is everything. But, not all viral campaigns have to substitute brand for entertainment. A great viral campaign would find a way to make the brand entertaining in a way that the audience will be laughing with you… not at you. Once you’ve found a way to creatively develop the right balance between brand and entertainment, you will need word of mouth conversations before your campaign will ever go viral.

I’m not quite sure how to conclude this drivel. It reality, I may never reach a conclusion. I have a feeling that by the time we as an industry find the right balance, the medium du jour will have morphed into something even more exciting, confusing and frustrating.

I thought I’d dig a little deeper than the New York Times on the Delta Zeta issue and came up with a couple of really interesting items.

First, Misblog has been following the issue and has great commentary and a nice background on it.

I also really enjoyed this editorial in The DePauw about how the media has handled the story. I’m, glad the editors at DePauw’s campus newspaper saw this as an opportunity to not only tackle the issue of diversity on college campuses, but also the standards and practices of today’s journalists.

I am a Delta Zeta and my time as an active member is a big part of what defined my college years. That said, I was never one to quietly sit back and let the sorority machine run its course. In college, I was also a student government and political science geek; that means I studied Robert’s Rules of Order and memorized my sorority’s constitution. I was probably one of the least favorite members in the eyes our adviser. I fought her on the validity of several “rules” and questioned her authority to set such “rules.” I was quite the vigilante.

So, I was not surprised to hear that recently the Delta Zeta national officers have gotten themselves into a nice little PR pickle. The background:

On February 25, 2007, The New York Times printed a story titled, “Evictions at Sorority Raise Issue of Bias.” It opens with…

“When a psychology professor at DePauw University here surveyed students. they described one sorority as a group of “daddy’s little princesses” and another as “offbeat hippies.” The sister of Delta Zeta were seen as “socially awkward. … Delta Zeta’s national officers interviewed 35 DePauw members in November, quizzing them about their dedication to recruitment. They judged 23 of the women insufficiently committed and later told them to vacate the sorority house. The 23 members included every woman who was overweight. They also included the only black, Korean and Vietnamese members. The dozen students allowed to stay were slender and popular with fraternity men — conventionally pretty women the sorority hoped could attract new recruits. Six of the 12 were so infuriated they quit.”

The article continues on quoting infuriated members and using words like disrespect, insensitivity and discrimination. It was followed by a letter to the editor on February 27 by several DePauw students. One of them, Megan Bowker, wrote, “DePauw’s campus had always been ablee to pride itself on having a house where any type of girl could belong. When Delta Zeta’s national officers decided to change the image of the DePauw chapter, they changed our campus dynamic.“

This story, of course, got a lot of attention in college newspapers across the country. Everybody loves a good sorority scandal and, at least at my school, the DZs are not known for their compassion. All the while, most stories claimed that the national president of Delta Zeta or any other national officer declined to comment.

On February 28, 2007, Delta Zeta issued a press release/statement. The headline read, “Statement From the Members of The Delta Zeta Chapter of DePauw University.” My favorite part is the first sentence: “As the active members of Delta Zeta at DePauw University, we feel as though we, the National Organization, and the Delta Zeta chapter at DePauw University have been misrepresented.” I’ll get to my thoughts on this momentarily.

Finally, on March 6, 2007, I received an email from the national office. It reads, in part, “Our members are angry and saddened that our Sorority has been so mischaracterized in the media. As Delta Zetas, we know the true story. You are encouraged to speak out for Delta Zeta on your campus, in your school newspaper, and to the local media.”

Delta Zeta has found itself in crisis management mode and they’ve done very poorly so far. I won’t get into how they got themselves into the mess; what I want to focus on is how they are reacting to the news and managing the media coverage.

1. They should have never declined to comment to The New York Times! Are they crazy! Weeks after the article was printed, they are complaining that nobody is listening to their side of the story. But, when somebody was willing to listen they didn’t want to talk.
2. Who wrote this statement?!?! First of all, don’t try to deceive your readers. Yes, I understand the difference between the active members of Delta Zeta of Depauw University and those that have been forced into alumni status, but don’t try to make it seem this statement is coming from the remaining 6 members of the Depauw chapter. Did they even get a chance to review this statement or comment? This statement reflects the feelings of the national leadership, it should say that. Second - Nobody cares how you feel! You do not release an official statement about how you feel you are being bullied…. never. Finally, don’t try to push the blame on to the “campus climate of DePauw University.” Keep digging your hole ladies, you’re doing a fine job.
3. The email to all members of Delta Zeta doesn’t provide any background; maybe I’m too far out of the loop, but I had to google the story. Furthermore, the message puts far too much faith in Delta Zeta members. “As Delta Zetas, we know the true story.” Umm… not if you won’t tell us! If you’re expecting me to infer your noble intentions based on my own memories as an active sorority member, your wrong. I loved being an active member, but I don’t doubt in the slightest that the national organization is capable of something this appalling.

Finally, I’d like to send some sisterly love to all of the members of the Delta Zeta chapter at Depauw University. I don’t know you; I don’t even know if we would be friends if we had the chance, but I feel for you. Remember, you will always be sisters despite what status the national organization gives you. Cherish that and stick together. As a member of Delta Zeta I am deeply sorry you have to endure the consequences of the poor judgment of our leaders. I think it would do a little good right now for all members of Delta Zeta to reflect on our creed:

To the world,
I promise temperance and insight and courage,
To crusade for justice,
To seek the truth and defend it always:
To those whom my life may touch in slight measure,
May I give graciously of what is mine;
To my friends,
Understanding and appreciation;
To those closer ones,
Love that is ever steadfast;
To my mind,
Growth;
To myself,
Faith
That I may walk truly
In the light of the Flame.

My love for wine began almost 4 years ago while I was visiting a friend in Tucson, AZ. We took a day trip to a few southern Arizona vineyards. Who knew Arizona had a wine region!?

My first love was very innocent … The 2003 Sonoita Vineyards Angel Wings, a crisp and citrus-flavored white made from mission grapes. While I was at Sonoita I also tasted the 1989 Pinot Noir, the oldest wine I’ve ever tasted.

My taste, curiosity and affection for wine quickly evolved from there. I learned that I prefer reds over whites and there’s more to red wine than a Yellow Tail Shiraz. I’ve never met a blend I didn’t like and my all-time favorite is the Mak Snowy River, a Cabernet-Shiraz blend… delicious!

Why am I telling the world this? Well, my involvement for wine has moved to a new level and I want the world to know! Now, I’m doing some freelance work for a new Boston-based magazine that’s all about wine! The Second Glass is everything the Wine Spectator is not. We’re fun-loving, free-spirited and tight-budgeted…Read this to get a nice picture of who we are and what we want to be.

So, as I’m embracing this new world of fun, I’m discovering many great things about the Boston wine scene. First of all, Bostonians like their wine! And, many of them are interested in cheap and convenient ways to try more, experiment and learn. If you are one of them, join in the conversation on Yelp.

I hope I have much more to say about this very, very soon!