Ashton Kutcher and Demi Moore are leveraging social media to create awareness of their anti-human trafficking / sex slavery platform through the Demi and Ashton Foundation (DNA). While this may be (very) old news, a recent Twitter fight between the Village Voice and Ashton Kutcher has been an impetus for recent change. 

Here’s the backstory: the Village Voice is a New York based publication that recently criticized the famous couple for reporting outrageously embellished statistics about the number of underage sex slaves in the United States. The DNA Foundation maintains that between 100,000 and 300,000 girls in the US are lost to prostitution each year – but the Village Voice argued that this statistic is grossly inflated. After challenging that statistic, the Village Voice went on to criticize the recent campaign, “Real Men Don’t Buy Girls” (PSAs here), by saying that “Real Men Get Their Facts Straight.”
 
In response, Ashton Kutcher took to Twitter, publically scolding the Village Voice for its article.  Kutcher sent several tweets to @villagevoice, including “REAL MEN DON’T BUY GIRLS and REAL NEWS PUBLICATIONS DON’T SELL THEM” and “BTW I only PLAYED stupid on TV.” In addition to tweets directed towards the Village Voice, the celebrity has been posting facts about sex slavery, including “In the US, children as young as FIVE YEARS OLD have been sold for sex.”
 
Through Kutcher’s tweets, he revealed that the Village Voice is affiliated with Backpage.com, which advertises “adult escort services” – classified ads that facilitate the sale of human beings. (Remember when Craigslist faced similar issues?)
 
The Village Voice fired back, posting numerous criticisms and retweeting negative tweets from followers. For days, the publication has been attacking Kutcher and anyone who opposes it. One of the Village Voice’s tweets: “A PR person just unfollowed us for our “ugliness.” Not sure we’re going to be able to top that triumph this weekend.” (I’m not sure, but I think that the Village Voice just alienated one of the largest Twitter populations with this tweet…)
 
As a result of this Twitter war, some of the Village Voice’s advertisers (most notably, American Airlines) have already responded to Kutcher’s tweets and have removed their advertising on the site (CSR prompted by social media!). Regardless of whose statistics are correct and whose are not, a Twitter conversation has resulted in awareness of the problem and immediate action to support a good cause. And really, isn’t that the point?

Last week I was one of the 17,000 lucky geeks to attend SXSWi in Austin, Texas.  I’ll be blogging my observations from the event in a multi-part series on the JackBlog, and I hope you follow along.  Today’s topic: Influencers.  Who really is one, who isn’t, and how to tell the difference.

       VS

Influencers got a lot of attention again this year, but the definition of who is and isn’t an influencer is seems to be changing a bit as social media overtakes other channels in its importance to our daily lives.  One hotly contested ‘throwdown’ session about what defines an influencer pitted tweeters and online favorites Charlie Sheen against Ashton Kutcher.  When influence was defined by meaningful action from followers, tiger’s blood did not win the day.  While Adonis DNA supports the entertainment news industry and gives outlets like TMZ something to talk about, a loud voice doesn’t translate into influence.

Read More

I love it when big name brands incorporate ideas from other brands and create a mashed-up brand experience.Walmart’s recent facebook promotion is reminiscent of Uniqlo’s twitter discounts, combined with a Groupon feel. Check out the Walmart, facebook, Uniqlo, Twitter, Groupon story. 

Last week I posted a few initial thoughts on MITX’s inaugural FutureM. The dust now settled, I find myself recovering from what seems like the myopia of an infatuated pre-pubescent lover: mobile technology and social media aren’t the end-all of the future of marketing. They’re just one of many arrows in the quiver marketers must use to target audiences’ hearts and minds. That is, they’re just just one component of a broader engagement strategy. What follows are a few other insights I drew from the experience.

1. In a sea of technology, “humanity” is needed more than ever. Whether it’s user interface design, an engaging social content strategy, or messaging imbued with authenticity, ‘humanness’ (thanks, Chris Brogan) is more important than ever. In a world where people are inundated with incessant messaging from a million different companies through a million different channels, a ‘human touch’ and, more importantly, a human voice is often the competitive differentiator (even if it is through a digital channel). While the focus was on emerging technologies, the reason was clear: the eyes and ears (and, hence, minds and hearts) of audiences are moving toward them. The mission of marketers, however, is still the same: engage people (to sell stuff). And people prefer ‘humanness’ to impersonal messaging.
2. Myriad metrics have fostered both insights and short-sightedness. The multi-angled measurability of traffic through digital media has provided ways for marketers to keep an increasingly accurate track of how users interact with content. Undoubtedly, this provides insight into what online consumers want. But, among some panelists, I noticed push-back. Some might dismiss this as marketers’ harkening back to a less accountable age. Deeper thought, however, revealed an intuitive insight: relationships take time to build. The availability of metrics in real-time have fostered desire for immediate gratification. But selling and relationship-building (among people and between brands and people) often take longer than a financial quarter. Reporting short-term ROI versus tracking longer-term brand building is something marketers seem only to have scratched the surface of — and only a few do well. 
3. Many content strategies need a modern makeover. A content strategy for the modern marketer involves more than just story-telling and selling, which (unsurprisingly) are still critical parts of the schema. Among the additional tactics, Holland-Mark’s Mike Troiano noted, is to become a conduit for relevant but externally-created content (from thought leaders/influencers, consumers and even competitors). Tapping into externally-created content (even if it’s from competitors) will demonstrate to consumers that your brand cares about providing a complete picture of the conditions surrounding an experience, regardless of where it comes from. Naturally, though, this also involves listening to your audiences and competitors, as well as curating content from external sources.

NOTE: Stay posted for details on a Jack Morton Twitter chat on mobile technologies’ effects on brand experiences! We’re excited to have you join this conversation (#jackmobile)!