1000 Heads

Helping brands’ stories travel further and faster
  • Mail
  • Twitter
  • Flickr
  • foursquare
  • linkedIn
  • instagram

Posts Tagged ‘IAB’

Privacy law should be seen as a spur to innovation, not a hindrance

Wednesday, June 27th, 2012

At the recent Data Guidance conference on Digital Advertising and Privacy 2012, discussion turned to implementation of the new EU cookies directive.

The crux of this rule change is simple. If you want to leverage a user’s data as they browse the web, in almost all circumstances, you must gain their consent to do so. In most countries across Europe this consent can be implied, from the user having seen a warning or clicking on a link. In certain countries however, notably the Netherlands, the law is even stronger and requires the website to gain explicit consent from the user.

While the introduction of any new regulation is generally seen as a threat, in my opinion the best way to approach these new rules is as an opportunity, specifically to enhance your brand’s reputation through openness.

Moreover it’s a fascinating creative challenge in trying to express such a dry warning in a way that encourages people to read it. Let’s take a look at some examples; which websites are doing this well?

Direct Gov

Personally, I am a big fan of the new government website www.gov.uk. Not only from the point of view of the culture change it represents, but also because of the way it explains its use of user data. Every time you are about to store a cookie a warning appears underneath the button you are about to click. The policy is also well written, could easily be understood by a non-technical person, and crucially distinguishes the different types of cookie and why they use your data.

BT

BT provides a tool in the bottom right of the page, from there you can use the slider shown above to decide how much information you want to give away. Sliding the BT tool to the left also tells you some of the types of cookies that are exempt from the rules.

The key aspect of these examples is that they are giving the user choice in which types of cookie they accept. I also think they achieve a good balance between being noticeable without being annoying.

Naturally, many have already taken a different position to me and see these rules as overbearing and anti-business. The clear message from the majority of panelists at the DAP 2012 was that the law is here, enforcement is beginning and it is already achieving useful outcomes such as:

  • Getting people talking about how companies use their data and the trade-off between privacy and free access to services
  • Increasing public awareness of behavioural advertising
  • Enabling businesses to justify cleaning up the way their websites work and to concentrate on the necessary use of user data

If you want to find out more and manage which companies use your data for advertising purposes, check out the IAB’s site youronlinechoices.com.

How are you getting along complying with the cookie legislation? Is it a threat or an opportunity?

The IAB: Rules Rules Rules

Thursday, August 25th, 2011

As part of our active membership of the Internet Advertising Bureau (IAB) Social Media Council, it’s our duty to discuss, debate and disclose details and information about the issues facing the industry today.

Effective immediately, we’ll be contributing a monthly column to the IAB UK Social blog pages and that kicks off today with this blog post covering off the ASA’s new remit, Tiger Woods’ sponsorship with Nike and acceptance of modern day commercially arranged endorsements.

Get involved.

How will the ASA’s extended remit affect word of mouth?

Friday, September 3rd, 2010

The ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) have been discussing extending the remit of the CAP code (UK Code of Non-Broadcast Advertising, Sales Promotion and Direct Marketing) for several months now, and this week the extent of the new digital coverage was announced.

Intended to prevent misleading marketing, ensure social responsibility and protect children, from next year the code will also apply online to:

  • Advertisers’ own marketing communications on their own websites; and
  • Marketing communications in other non-paid-for space under their control, such as social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter.

The new code goes on to clarify what this means for user generated content. UGC will fall under the code as ‘marketing communications’ if it qualifies for the following criteria:

  • Did the website owner originally solicit the submission of UGC from private individuals, then adopt and incorporate it within their own marketing communications?
  • Did a private individual provide the website owner, on an unsolicited basis, with material which the website owner subsequently adopted and incorporated within their own marketing communications?
  • Does the content of the material and the form in which it is re-used by the marketer itself constitute an advertisement or marketing communication by the marketer?

The extension has been welcomed by the likes of the IAB (who have produced a useful set of FAQs on the extension) and DMA, and rightly so. The code is only there to prevent unethical activity and keep the distinction between marketing and consumer content clear, which is a principle at the very heart of word of mouth. As soon as peer to peer opinion gets ‘owned’, dictated or spun by brands, it loses the independent, trusted power that makes WOM such an effective force.

Here at 1000heads we provide people with opportunities to experience brands, which are inherently conversational – but we never dictate what consumers should say or censor that content. And we believe WOM should remain where it had most clout – out there on individuals’ own on and offline spaces, not editorialised on a branded silo. You can see our full ethics commitment here.

But what do you think? Do you believe this is just the start of increased regulatory control over UGC and social spaces? Will we see marketers held accountable soon or will it prove too tricky to enforce?

As President of WOMMA UK, with a close partnership with Reed Smith’s advertising compliance legal team ReACTS, and a member of the DMA Social Media Council, I’ll be keeping a close eye on how things develop, so let us know if you have any questions, suggestions or thoughts.

How will the ASA's extended remit affect word of mouth?

Friday, September 3rd, 2010

The ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) have been discussing extending the remit of the CAP code (UK Code of Non-Broadcast Advertising, Sales Promotion and Direct Marketing) for several months now, and this week the extent of the new digital coverage was announced.

Intended to prevent misleading marketing, ensure social responsibility and protect children, from next year the code will also apply online to:

  • Advertisers’ own marketing communications on their own websites; and
  • Marketing communications in other non-paid-for space under their control, such as social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter.

The new code goes on to clarify what this means for user generated content. UGC will fall under the code as ‘marketing communications’ if it qualifies for the following criteria:

  • Did the website owner originally solicit the submission of UGC from private individuals, then adopt and incorporate it within their own marketing communications?
  • Did a private individual provide the website owner, on an unsolicited basis, with material which the website owner subsequently adopted and incorporated within their own marketing communications?
  • Does the content of the material and the form in which it is re-used by the marketer itself constitute an advertisement or marketing communication by the marketer?

The extension has been welcomed by the likes of the IAB (who have produced a useful set of FAQs on the extension) and DMA, and rightly so. The code is only there to prevent unethical activity and keep the distinction between marketing and consumer content clear, which is a principle at the very heart of word of mouth. As soon as peer to peer opinion gets ‘owned’, dictated or spun by brands, it loses the independent, trusted power that makes WOM such an effective force.

Here at 1000heads we provide people with opportunities to experience brands, which are inherently conversational – but we never dictate what consumers should say or censor that content. And we believe WOM should remain where it had most clout – out there on individuals’ own on and offline spaces, not editorialised on a branded silo. You can see our full ethics commitment here.

But what do you think? Do you believe this is just the start of increased regulatory control over UGC and social spaces? Will we see marketers held accountable soon or will it prove too tricky to enforce?

As President of WOMMA UK, with a close partnership with Reed Smith’s advertising compliance legal team ReACTS, and a member of the DMA Social Media Council, I’ll be keeping a close eye on how things develop, so let us know if you have any questions, suggestions or thoughts.

The word of mouth industry

Thursday, July 8th, 2010

As we’re celebrating the industry in this, our first week of birthday fun, we thought we’d better talk a bit about our view of said industry.

Word of mouth is an approach that crosses disciplinary boundaries and embraces all different specialisms. It doesn’t sit in social media, or digital, or even marketing, but reaches across all business departments – retail, R&D, packaging, customer service, HR – to bring joined-up consumer insight and people-focused strategy to the company as a whole.

We therefore feel very strongly that agencies and practitioners involved in word of mouth must work together, rather than compete, to mutually advance the industry. There’s plenty of room for all kinds of specialisms, tools and platforms, and they all need to come on board to make word of mouth work in an integrated way.

Of course, that’s not as easy as it sounds, but it’s our starting point with every client and campaign.

It’s why Molly is President of WOM UK and on the DMA Social Media Council, Jacqui is on the WOMMA Measurement and Metrics Board, and James and Tim sit on the IAB. It’s why we write a monthly column in AdMap and articles for a load of different sector publications and attend many other events and workshops (see Meet us @ on the sidebar for upcoming stuff) to keep ourselves accessible and curious and challenged.

It’s why we’ve also started publishing case studies about the work we do. Some of these, such as our Nokia E72 deck, V&A showreel and Nokia Nav video, simply tell the story of the campaign and why it worked. However, we’re also developing a ‘How to’ series demonstrating how to achieve specific business objectives using word of mouth techniques.

Here’s our first, about the campaign we did for Tourism New South Wales.

It’s a conversation starter. Let us know what you think and point us towards your own. We want to move the industry conversation forwards from why WOM is important to how it works best.

Join the debate…

Should social media be paid for? IAB and WOM UK say yes…

Tuesday, December 8th, 2009

Last night’s joint IAB and WOM UK debate, ‘Should social media be paid for?‘, was intended to be taken with a big pinch of salt. The two teams purposefully dug their heels in, ramped up the drama and pushed their views to the extreme to make the assembled crowd really question the possibilities and limits of paid advertising in the social space – but some genuinely interesting issues surfaced amongst the bombast.

On the ‘for’ side, Kate Box, Head of Social Media Sales at Microsoft Advertising, and Steve Filler, Commercial Director for Unruly Media, made the case that consumers don’t mind whether content is paid for. Brands need to act like brands, and they claimed that visibly advertising is more honest; paid advertising in the social space gets results, and is essential for the survival of the industry.

In the ‘against’ corner, I joined Ciarán Norris, Head of Social Marketing at Mindshare, to assert that paid media is, and should remain, by definition separate to earned or social media. Although paid can inspire social interaction, the independent social space is all about relationships, flourishing on a currency of status, passion, expertise and networking, and those can’t be bought. Interactive, digital, online PR and the like all have their place – but they’re not truly social media.

The votes came down on the side of ‘for’, but the atmosphere was lighthearted as both sides acknowledged that valuing one did not exclude the importance of the other, and that a mix of paid stimulation and inspired independent WOM and listening is best. For an idea of how an integrated view can look, it’s worth reading Neilsen’s Pete Blackshaw‘s recent post on Maximizing Super Bowl Advertising ROI in a Paid Vs. Earned Media Environment.

Some genuinely interesting grey areas also emerged. Where does inspiration end and payment begin, when brands are providing trials and freebies? Doesn’t the industry need to firm up its definitions so that brands don’t just think they’re ‘earning social’ by throwing a few interactive ads online? And isn’t it essential that brands don’t see social media attention as ‘free’ – more that they must pay for it in man hours for listening, responding and creativity, rather than cash?

If you couldn’t make it to the sold-out event, let us know your thoughts and questions below. We’re also looking to continue the series, so speak up about what you’d like to see debated next.