BELIEVING ISN’T SEEING

We like to think that we're creatures of free will. We also like to think that having more choice is better.

Freedom. Selection. Decisions. We want to own all of these things; we want the power they provide us.

Or do we? Some intriguing research suggests not. Sheena Iyegur, a professor at Columbia Business School, recently conducted a round of experiments on the subject of consumer choice. Her team presented two types of nail polish to a group of women. The brand labels were removed from the bottles. The first reaction? Indignation - the women were convinced that both brands were exactly the same color, and that the researchers were asking a trick question.

Next, the labels were re-attached and presented to the same group ("adorable" and "ballet shoes" were the brands, in case you want to try this at home). Interestingly, the researchers weren't accused of trying to fool the ladies. Instead, the test subjects picked their favorite, with the results being half "adorable" and half "ballet shoes".

The most interesting part was the last. The bottles were taken away, and presented again for choice. The women all picked the same brands. However, the researchers had switched the labels, so what the subjects chose were not the bottles they had selected in the previous round.

So the conclusion to draw from this experiment (and others like it) is that for all our talk about freedom to choose, at the end of the day we don't really want a choice. We do like outside forces to guide us, thank you very much. That's why brands have so much power over our decision-making process; consumers often allow them to do the deciding. If a label seems more familiar, comforting or inviting and attractive, it likely has the edge over any rival. Even if we know by our eyes and brain that the choices being presented aren't much different (or quite the same, as in the nail polish experiment).

Among her other credentials, Professor Iyegur was uniquely qualified to conduct this research: she is 100% blind!

Here’s a short video from BigThink with the professor talking about how too many dating choices is making us shallower.

GOOGLE GETS PETTY (AND PISSY)

A brand’s identity is much more than the image it creates in its advertising, or the buzz swirling around its products. It’s also in its collective behavior - the way it approaches its business partners and rivals, the media and the rest of the world.

On that basis, it seems Google might be taking a sharp turn towards the nasty. The firm that famously exhorted its employees, “don’t be evil”, may be abandoning that friendly approach. Earlier this month, the company jumped on its soapbox to denounce Microsoft for copying Google results in its own search engine, Bing.

The reaction to this from some in the tech community wasn’t what Google expected. There was a surprising amount of backlash critical of the search giant for picking a fight.

The criticism was justified. Leaving aside its nice-guy motto and philosophy, Google is clear and away the top search destination on the internet; as #1, it should also be clear and away from petty sniping with a distant rival. Like its foray into mobile operating systems, MP3 players and… well, anything else that isn’t a buggy PC operating system, Microsoft is a pale competitor to anyone. On top of that, their traditionally aggressive business practices and competition-choking moves have not made it a popular firm among most of humanity.

So why bother bashing them at all? The number one company should be above that, first of all, and secondly, attacking Microsoft is a simple shot at an easy target. Both make Google look petty and pissy; is that the image one of the top world-beating companies, and one of the most recognized brands, should be projecting?

I’m not condoning plagiarism here. Readers of this blog know my feelings on that subject. Plagiarizers should be called out… but only that. Attacks and denouncements on the part of the plagiarized serve only to make the offended party seem undignified and small-minded. It’s much better to fly above the controversy than slop around in the mud.

Here’s what Gord Hotchkiss of Search Insider had to say about Google last, in his post A ‘Page’ From Google’s PR Book.

Clamor for mobile marketing begins - from Mobile Marketer

Six weeks into 2011 and it is very clear that the high-stakes sprint to do all things mobile is off and running in an immense way.

If 2010 was a marathon, a long endurance race with only a few winners making it to the finish line, this year’s starting block includes marketers of every size and liquidity – aggregators, developers, networks, agencies, location-services and chancers – all clamoring to get to the front of the line.

My question is this: What took you all so long?

The short answer is a combination of marketers’ aversion to risk and a bit of follow-the-herd mentality thrown in.

While the traders over on Wall Street took risks aplenty with our money, marketers, it seems, were waiting for others to take the first few giant steps.

The long answer, below, is, well, long.

Adding new dimensions to mobile
Last year clearly demonstrated that mobile marketing was no longer a one-horse or single-dimensional player. It began to, and now is, playing a significant role in many multichannel campaigns, fundamentally reshaping the dynamics of interactive marketing in the process.

Here are some recent numbers if you do not believe me:

- Mobile marketing spend will top $1 billion in 2011, according to Forrester Research

- Nearly half of smartphone users say they have already, or soon will, use their phones to do mobile shopping. Fifty-three percent also use, or intend to use, their smartphones for mobile banking, per ABI Research

- There will be an estimated 1.8 billion Internet-enabled mobile phones in use around the world by 2013, and 91 percent of all U.S. consumers already own and use a mobile device, according to Modus Associates

To continue reading, click here.

BACK TO THE FUTURE IN 30 SECONDS

After all the hoo-hah with the Super Bowl ads last week, how about a bit of nostalgia-themed advertising banter to kick off this week instead?

The retread and nostalgia business is clearly thriving. Movie franchises such as Superman and James Bond are well into their latest reboots; customers plop themselves onto the vinyl banquettes of faux-1950s diner chains for a patty melt. Everything was better, fresher and sweeter years ago… or at least we trick ourselves into thinking so.

So maybe it’s time for the ad business to hit that trend. This has been happening in the UK recently, where brands are making throwback TV spots that reference famous ads from years past, and attracting good buzz from doing so. Can the rest of the world be far behind?

American advertisers have dipped their toes very carefully in the water. Two Super Bowls ago, Coke did a parody/update of its classic Mean Joe Greene ad. The old fogies in the audience will remember the spot featured the gruff Pittsburgh Steelers lineman hobbling away from a tough game, being offered a cold bottle of the soda from a young fan, rejecting the offer… then finally accepting it and tossing the kid his game jersey as a thank-you. The updated version featured current Steeler Troy Polamalu, with the twist of an obnoxious adult fan grabbing the kid’s Coke Zero before Polamalu can accept it… and getting convincingly tackled by the football player for his effort. The ending has Polamalu claiming the drink, then ripping the would-be-thief’s shirt off and throwing it to the kid for a souvenir.

Like most Super Bowl ads, though, that was essentially made as a one-off, something to provide a surprise and a chuckle. Perhaps that’s the fate of nostalgia ads in the US – expensive single commercials that mine a classic only as a source of parody.

It’s a shame to limit them so narrowly. The little kids who laughed at TV ads in the 1980s and 1990s are now an attractive demographic group with significant spending power, so a well-made, at least semi-reverential spot could stir their emotions and score fresh brand awareness.

It could even make a lot of that demographic, myself included, feel young again - even if only for half a minute. Now that’s a jersey worth tossing their way.