Everyone agrees that CSR efforts are extremely important for big-name corporate clients, right?

No, seriously: we don’t know the answer to that question, and it all comes back to the biggest challenge in the industry: drawing a solid line between point A and point $.

First: The results from data king Nielsen’s latest Global Survey on Corporate Social Responsibility have already inspired headlines about CSR cementing its place as a crucial element of the big name PR equation.

Its basic finding: 50% of consumers surveyed in 58 countries say they’re willing to pay more for goods and services from companies that have “implemented programs to give back to society.” That number increased in ¾ of the countries surveyed, rising 5% in total since 2011. And the “yes” votes were highest in the crucial under-30 demo.

No surprises there. The only finding that we didn’t expect is the 12-point increase in pro-CSR sentiment among the 40-45 demo. Seems like CSR’s value has become clearer to all parties, no?

Maybe.

Read more

Recent research suggests that 80% of reach from marketing campaigns now comes from amplification through advocacy. This means that whether or not satisfied customers are inspired to take that extra step and share their positive feelings about a brand can truly make or break a marketing effort.

In other words, brands that don’t generate substantial advocacy may end up paying more to market less efficiently than those that successfully make advocacy a priority.

This is at the heart of a new study conducted by Social@Ogilvy, which analyzed 7 million brand social mentions across 4 countries (Brazil, China, UK, US) and 22 brands to analyze the key drivers of advocacy. Partnering with Social@Ogilvy for the study were CIC, Salesforce Marketing Cloud, and Visible Technologies.

What the study found is that despite the enormous potential value, “brands are failing at driving satisfied customers to share in social media,” said Irfan Kamal, global head of Data+Analytics and Products at Social@Ogilvy. “Our study suggests that the vast majority of satisfied customers are not publicly advocating for brands on social platforms. Brands have not provided the technology, incentives or content that both inspire and enable customers to speak out positively. To help close the gap, brands must help facilitate advocacy volume, reward passion and amplify reach.” Read more

For about 70 cents, you can buy a soda (regular or diet)…

No industry relies more heavily on the public’s good will than the non-profit sector, which ostensibly exists for the sole purpose of serving the greater good. For this reason, inflammatory reports about how some of America’s biggest charities spend their money present professional and ethical challenges for crisis comms experts.

50 foundations around the country desperately need some good PR right now after a joint project by the Tampa Bay Times, CNN, and The Center for Investigative Reporting named them among the worst in the country for doing little beyond “turn[ing] donations into profit.”

The saddest part about this story is the fact that most of the groups on the list claim to support children, veterans, cancer victims, and public servants like cops and state troopers. We’d like to think that Americans will be quick to punish any charity suspected of exploiting sick kids.

Read more

Think all moms can be lumped into a “mommy category” when it comes to marketing demographics? Think that young mothers are too busy balancing home-life, career and baby to interact with people (and brands) on social media? On both counts, you’d better think again.

New research done by Weber Shandwick shows that “Millennial Moms” (mothers born between 1978 and 1994) are both highly connected and highly influential on social media, and yet marketers have thus far failed to fully tap into this potentially potent demographic.

These women, who account for 22 percent of North American mothers, use an average of 3.4 social media accounts, compared to 2.6 by other moms. They also spend 17.4 hours per week on social networks, which is four more than mothers of other generations, the study says.

Millennial Moms are also more likely to share information about goods and services, and do so both digitally and offline. Nearly three-quarters (74 percent) of Millennial Moms say they are sought out more often than other friends for advice on a wide range of topics. They are also more likely than the average mom to provide recommendations online. In an average month, Millennial Moms “like” or recommend products or services online 10.4 times, while the average mom only does so 7.7 times.

“Because Millennial moms are digital natives and grew up with the Internet more so than older generations, they have become accustomed to sharing more,” said Liz Rizzo, SVP at Weber and a lead developer on the research. And yet, despite their potential power, Rizzo also pointed out that this group of women — of which there are 9 million in North America — feels “overlooked by marketers.” Read more

“Social listening” — the practice of brands tuning in to what customers are saying to them and about them on social media — is a hot topic, and we’ve talked a lot about the increasing importance of brand responsiveness. While many companies are working to increase and improve their ability to address consumer questions, comments, and concerns via networks like Twitter, some brands are already way ahead of the pack when it comes to engaging their digital followers, and have made great strides of late.

According to Socialbakers, which has been measuring brand responsiveness on Twitter since the fourth quarter of 2012, companies in the finance, airline, and telecom industries dominate the Twitterverse with respect to effective and quick responses (we wonder if this has anything to do with the fact that these industries often make us want to tear our hair out, and therefore have much to gain by providing excellent customer care). While the latest stats prove that these businesses continue to lead the charge, some under-performing industries like retail have recently shown notable improvement.

In fact, every industry studied has shown at least some improvement in their Twitter response rates, demonstrating that brands are recognizing the importance of social media interactions.

Read more

We told you on Monday about the FDA‘s investigation into foods with added caffeine, the organization’s  main concern being that the current proliferation of caffeinated foods on the market (drinks, energy shots, candy, snack mixes, etc.), may be causing people, especially children, to consume unhealthy and potentially unsafe amounts of the stimulant.

Wrigley‘s newly released Alert Energy caffeinated gum, which contains roughly 40mg of caffeine per piece, found itself in the hot seat in light of the new FDA probe. The company initially insisted that its product was intended for (and marketed to) adults, saying, “Millions of Americans consume caffeine responsibly and in moderation as part of their daily routines,” but after discussing the issue with the regulatory body, Wrigley has changed its tune.

“After discussions with the FDA, we have a greater appreciation for its concern about the proliferation of caffeine in the nation’s food supply,” Wrigley North America President Casey Keller said in a statement to the AP. “There is a need for changes in the regulatory framework to better guide the consumers and the industry about the appropriate level and use of caffeinated products.” Read more

According to a new Accenture Interactive report, Turbulence for the CMO, four in ten top marketing executives feel they are unprepared to meet their objectives due to a lack of funding and inefficient business practices. In light of these challenges, 70 percent of the executives polled believe that corporate marketing will undergo a dramatic shift within the next five years, and that in order to keep up with changing expectations and an increasingly complicated customer environment, their organizations must focus on digital marketing and analytics.

“Marketing executives are growing increasingly concerned that tight budgets and the lack of a clear strategy for implementing digital technologies are hurting their company’s ability to compete in the digital age,” said Brian Whipple, global managing director of Accenture Interactive. “There is a clear performance gap between the demands of the marketplace and the ability of marketing organizations to apply the digital technology talent required to be more effective.”

This shift in focus is translating into changes in two major areas: increased investment in digital capabilities, and improved collaboration between in-house and agency marketing and communications efforts. Here’s how the results of the survey break down regarding those two major categories:

Increased Investment in Digital Capabilities:

• 66 percent of marketing executives said they will allocate at least one quarter of their budget to digital marketing next year.
• 23 percent said that more than half of their spending will be dedicated to digital marketing.
• 48 percent said they would spend more on managing customer data.
• 40 percent will increase spending on web analytics.
• 39 percent will spend more on marketing analytics.
• Half of the executives polled said they plan to initiate an internal reorganization to become more digitally focused, while over half said they plan to hire more people with the necessary digital skills.

Improved Internal and Agency Collaboration:

• 55 percent of marketing executives said they were satisfied with the level of collaboration with their outside agencies. However, the rest of the results indicate a less positive experience.
• Only 36 percent said that their agencies execute flawlessly.
• 36 percent said that the agencies are not able to deliver what they promised.
• Only 44 percent said that agency partners help marketing executives transform their marketing organization.

This indicates that greater collaboration between in-house and agency efforts may help smooth the transition to digitally-focused marketing. Read more

Once upon a time, when a person needed a morning jump-start or a midday pick-me-up, they reached for a cup of coffee. These days, though, coffee has some serious competition; weary folks can now choose from an array of amped-up foodstuffs, including gum, concentrated energy shots, candy, and even caffeinated Cracker Jacks.

Michael Taylor, the FDA‘s deputy commissioner of foods, said that the only time the FDA explicitly approved the practice of adding caffeine to a food or drink was in the 1950s when it allowed the stimulant to be included in cola. The current prevalence of caffeine-filled foods is “beyond anything FDA envisioned,” Taylor said. “It is disturbing…We’re concerned about whether they have been adequately evaluated.”

The governing body is especially concerned when it comes to the effects of such foods on children; while kids aren’t likely to seek out a boring cup of joe, they may be more apt to grab a bag of jolt-inducing jelly beans. The American Academy of Pediatrics has linked caffeine to harmful effects on young people’s still-developing neurological and cardiovascular systems. So, while the FDA is already investigating the safety of energy drinks and energy shots (thanks to consumer reports of illness and death), the organization has decided to go a step further and look specifically at the foods’ effects on children.

Companies that manufacture and market caffeinated foods say that their products are intended for — and marketed to — adults. Wrigley, which recently released Alert Energy Gum (40 milligrams of caffeine per piece), pointed out that packages of the gum are labeled “for adult use only.” A spokesperson for the company said, “Millions of Americans consume caffeine responsibly and in moderation as part of their daily routines.”

While that may be, critics say it’s not enough for companies to say they are marketing the products to adults, who are capable of making more informed decisions about the amount of caffeine they consume, when the foods themselves are clearly attractive (and readily available) to children. In a letter to the FDA, Michael Jacobson, director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, said of such foods: “One serving of any of these foods isn’t likely to harm anyone. The concern is that it will be increasingly easy to consume caffeine throughout the day, sometimes unwittingly, as companies add caffeine to candies, nuts, snacks and other foods.”

In acknowledgement that the consumption of one caffeinated item may not cause adverse effects, the probe will focus on the effects of added caffeine in its totality, and whether the increasing number of caffeinated products on the market might mean more adverse health effects for children.

In recent years the movie business has used social data to connect with audiences and stepped up its reliance on quantitative data to forecast box office revenues. However, if data represented a person, that individual may get a seat at L.A.’s trendiest restaurant, but would still be seated in the back room. That was the gist of a Tribeca Film Festival Industry Talks panel on Tuesday in New York.

“There are three countervailing forces at play that we need to balance, namely the artistic creative side, technological advances and commercial considerations”, said Jason Kassin, co-founder and CEO of Film Track, a rights management company.

“Navigating the world with data points is different than it was five years ago”, added Eugene Hernandez, Film Society of Lincoln Center‘s director of digital strategy. The biggest change is the use of sentiment analysis to monitor audience reactions, though the benefits appear mixed:

• Sentiment-based date is broadly used: “Big data has become socialized”, said Bill Livek, vice chairman and CEO of entertainment measurement company Rentrak. Their customers include not only big studios, but also independent studios and distributors across the country.
• Social media monitoring yields massive, but imprecise data: Sentiment analysis measures movie reviews, ratings and audience comments. As Stacy Spikes, CEO and co-founder of theatrical subscription service MoviePass noted, “Going to the movies now is a communal experience”. Nevertheless, social media data isn’t projectable, the panelists cautioned.
• Sentiment analysis can point to the right direction, according to Christina Warren, Mashable’s senior tech analyst. “But since monitoring is mostly done by machine, it’s best to use the tool to help target audiences and markets”, she explained. Livek concurred, adding, “A social media database can drive certain activities, but not content creation.”

Read more

Americans are fed up with the pervasive, persistent presence of bad advertising in their daily lives, and are sick of the constant interruptions to their web surfing, online shopping, and…um…their sex lives? 

InsightsOne, a company dedicated to predictive intelligence solutions enabled by big data, recently announced the findings of its 2013 Bad Ads Survey conducted online by Harris Interactive. The study found that 83% of respondents felt bad ads actually get in the way of their daily activities:

• Web surfing – 51%
• Online shopping – 37%
• Working – 20%
• Having Sex – 19%
• Sleeping – 13%

So what sort of ads are they talking about?

While we might expect email spam and junk mail to top consumers’ pet peeve lists, it turns out that almost as many Americans are annoyed by website ad spam (52%) as by email spam/sidebar ads (55%). Postal junk mail actually ranked fifth (37%), behind television ads (60%), email spam/sidebar ads, website ads, and ads on social media (37%).

The study also looked at which specific types of ads get under our skin the most:

•  Pop-up ads – 70%
• Lottery scams – 70%
• Male enhancement ads – 66%
• Emails from deceased African leaders who have left them money – 64%
• Ads for products and services they do not need – 58%
• Female enhancement ads – 54%

So what do these results actually mean for brands and companies? Read more