In response to Professor Johnson's post about Bon Iver's online marketing strategy

I recently started listening to Bon Iver thanks to online radio services such as last.fm and with the enormous increase in social media usage, it would be foolish not to make use of the vast marketing channels social media offers to just about anyone who is looking to promote a product or service.

It's no wonder Bon Iver was able to reach so many people through the internet; however, rather than attributing his fame and success to social media, it's also worth considering the thousands of aspiring artists on the internet who are unsuccessful in marketing themselves -not for lack of trying, but for lack of talent. Much of Bon Iver's success is due to their talent and yes, some to their ability to reach the masses to the internet.

To me, one of the most important ways social networking helps artists market themselves is by allowing direct and personal connections with fans. And as if that was not enough, as the article mentioned, social media allows independent artists to reach niches of people who do not care for mainstream pop music. I do think that as much as this is an advantage to new artists, it's also a disadvantage since just about anyone who is musically talented has the potential to build a following and become a successful recording artist. It takes an artist like Justin Vernon to differentiate himself enough from anyone else to take advantage of this exposure and become a successful recording artist.

We've so far talked about what a powerful marketing tool the internet is but nothing is perfect. Besides market saturation, can anyone think of any other disadvantages to social media advertising?

In response to Chris's post: Steve Jobs's Surprise Appearance

I heard about Steve Jobs making an appearance at the iPad keynote as well! I also heard that his appearance caused Apple's stock to rise the very next day. I think this shows what a valuable asset Steve Jobs is to Apple. He is the very reason Apple is so successful today and without him many argue that the company would have not been able to survive.

Jobs and Jonathan Ive, the Senior Vice President of Industrial Design are Apple's biggest core competencies, through synergistic collaboration, they've been able to design and market high quality, premium products that have lead the way in the consumer electronics market.

Jobs was diagnosed with a rare kind of pancreatic cancer and as a result has had to take time off from his job as C.E.O of Apple. While he has recovered since his operation in 2004, there has been speculation that his health has continued to deteriorate and as a result, many fear for the future of Apple without Jobs.

Because Steve Jobs has incorporated his presence into Apple keynotes, in a way, he has become a spokesperson for Apple products. When Jobs is unable to attend a keynote, it creates negative speculation in the media, which then hurts consumer and investor confidence in Apple. So while Steve Jobs might never be able to keep his health status private, it becomes more obvious that there is something wrong when he is missing from a keynote.

So, for Apple, having Steve Jobs as leader and spoke person is a double-edged sword. While it can strengthen Apple's image, it can also cause damage when it becomes apparent that for health reasons, he is unable to attend Apple events.

In response to Jackie's blog regarding Amazon

I'm glad you brought Amazon into the conversation. I, myself am a huge fan and will shop at Amazon over any other store 95% of the time. Their prices are competitive and they have great customer service.

Quite frankly, at the rate they are growing, I wouldn't be surprised if they began to offer their Prime service for free or at a lower rate. One of Amazon's core competencies is their ability to keep a large enough stocked inventory that will fulfill customer's orders at anytime. Their Prime service only enhances this core competency making their products available to customers at a reasonable time frame.

I think that one of Amazon's biggest weaknesses is the inability to deliver products almost instantly. The few times I have chosen to purchase an item locally over Amazon is when I needed said item right away. While two days is nothing considering how far the inventory travels to reach customers, the reality is that most people want instant-gratification and two days is still too long.

Amazon know this. They realize that by not being able to offer true instant-gratification to shoppers, they are losing out on many sales. This is why they offer same-day shipping to some of the bigger cities in the U.S. and I imagine that it is only a matter of time before either Amazon itself or their shipping carriers are able to offer faster shipping to more locations as a way to compete with physical stores.

If this is the case, I imagine Walmart, Target and many other retail stores will see themselves in a world of trouble since Amazon already offers very competitive prices.

Is anyone familiar with other aspects of Amazon as a company? I'd be interested to know about the culture and how that affects their sales, structure and bottom line.

In response to Christina Sarette's Blog: New Technology?

I remember when Facebook was a target for bloggers and news organizations who criticized its controversial advertising strategies and privacy settings. At first glance, like them, I felt it was a violation of privacy, how dare they use my personal information to target ads at me? and without my permission!

My opinion on Facebook ads now is very different. I welcome the ads and I don't mind that they use my information to show me ads that are more or less relevant to my interest. I see it almost as a symbiotic relationship between the user and Facebook. Facebook is allowing me to use the service for free and in return they have information that helps them to more accurately target advertisements at me. In order for a company to survive, it has to be profitable. If Facebook was ad-free, they would most likely be charging us for the service they offer. What some people need to understand is that we have control over what is displayed on our public online profiles, and if they don't want Facebook to have access to their information, then just don't use the service. We simply can't blame a company for capitalizing on available data and using it to target ads.

Of course, Facebook isn't perfect... and I do agree with some of the criticism its privacy settings have received, but their ads campaign is totally O.K. with me.

I'm interested to see what other people think about this

A New Age of Target Marketing: Powered by Online Television

I don't have a TV. I haven't had one for over two years and I don't miss it, not one bit. During the holidays, when I'm home visiting my family and I turn on my parent's TV, I really can't seem to stay engaged for more than 30 minutes (if at all). I don't like the commercials that don't pertain to my interests; I don't like that I have little choice about what I can watch at any given moment; and I don't like that the remote always seems to get lost. The conventional television experience: It's antiquated and I hate it. However, you'll find that in spite of my lack of TV, I still manage to religiously follow about 6 primetime television shows a week.

All thanks to Hulu.

If I've never been addicted to the TV, it's because I'm addicted to my computer. So when I first heard about Hulu two or three years ago, my heart skipped a beat. Before, if I wanted to watch an episode of 30 Rock or The Office, I downloaded a torrent or waited until it came out on DVD. Now, my favorite shows are right there in my browser and I can watch them, pause them, rewind them and fast-forward them whenever I want.

It's genius.

Forget about waiting until DVD release or illegally (and unrightfully so) downloading them. Now we have the option to watch our shows online, on demand and with customizable ads in between breaks. It's a win-win: I ask Hulu to hide any commercials I don't want to see, and in return marketing has information that will help to more accurately target other ads at me. It's an excellent example of a marketing-oriented strategy: They fully understand that the customer does not hate ads and in fact, welcomes them so long as they are less "in your face" and more customizable. It's target marketing on steroids.

Oh, and by the way... If you missed this year's Superbowl ads, or want to see them again, head on over to the Hulu AdZone, where you can watch and rate the latest ads.

See what I did there?

Standing Out in a Saturated Market

As an aspiring wedding photographer and independent business owner, I expect many of my posts on this marketing blog to be about the photography industry. Years ago, when I was still figuring out who I wanted to be when I grow up, I would have never imagined that I was to develop an interest in professional photography. Back then, my knowledge of professional photography was very limited. I had no idea how large the industry really was or what the different specializations are (and believe me, there are countless). I imagined a professional photographer working with celebrities in fashion and creating magazine covers; photographing sports games; and photographing nature. And while, perhaps, there were other types of photography that didn't come to mind at the time, I think I'm not too far off when I say that since then, the photography industry has... well... exploded.

Our immediate communities are now surrounded by food photographers, wedding, portrait, children, lifestyle, product, commercial, real estate, pet photographers and more. Not only that, but with the decreasing prices in technology and photography equipment as well as the thousands of photography resources online that are available, the photography industry is saturated with hundreds of thousands of people who are leaving behind their day jobs to become photographers.

So how do I stand out?

Well, I think that by narrowing down the types of photography services I offer, by establishing myself as only a wedding and maybe portrait photographer I will be more likely to successfully target a narrower market than some who choose to do it all. My target market will be brides who want their weddings photographed as well as families who are in need of portraits.

Still, to me this is not a narrow enough market. Something I think about often is: "which niche will I target when begin to market myself?" Believe it or not, within the wedding photography industry alone there are specific markets photographers aim to target. Take the wedding photographer Jasmine Star, for example. Her target market is brides in their 20s and early 30s. Her success shows me that a brand can be selective in their target market and still be extremely prosperous. Of course, there are many other aspects of the Jasmine Star brand that have made her business successful, but narrowing her market has helped her to identify which customers she wants to target and thus making it easier to find out how to target them.

While I understand that customers demand good quality services and products, I also recognize that in order to grow a successful business, we must develop a good marketing strategy based on an established target market.

If you were a marketing consultant, what other advice would you suggest to me as I attempt to build my wedding photography business and brand?

Advertising v. Marketing v. Propaganda

I've heard and often hear all three of these terms in conversations, on the radio and in my news feed. Recently I finished reading the book "Zag" by Marty Neumeier and he talks about advertising and marketing almost as if they were the same thing and, frankly, not until very recently did I really think about these two words and what their different meanings were.

I am tempted to search online for definitions that will help me understand and write this blog post. Instead I will resist this urge and try to make an educated guess as to what each of these words are; how they are similar and different.

To me, the words "advertising" and "marketing" are almost synonymous. They both relate to the promotion of a product, service, organization, etc... If they do not mean the same thing, they, at the very least are complementary. I rarely hear one without the other following.

If I had to differentiate between advertising and marketing, I'd say that advertising relates more to the visual side of promotion. When I think of advertising, I see magazine, newspaper, television ads and billboards. Marketing is more about researching customers' wants and developing a plan that will help promote a product, service or organization. This plan may or may not include advertisements.

I've left propaganda to be discussed last because I don't feel it is related to advertising or marketing. While its purpose is to promote, I believe the word "propaganda" has a political, perhaps even negative connotation attached to it. One of the first things that comes to mind upon hearing the word "propaganda" is Hitler's Germany before World War II. In my high school European History class we spent some time studying Nazi propaganda. I've heard of climate change being referred to as liberal propaganda. While I, myself, do not believe it is, this helps me understand that propaganda refers to promoting a belief or ideology that relates to a given side of the political spectrum.

In today's hyperpartisan society, how can politicians and their parties manage the fine line between advertising and propaganda?