Social Media for Good VII

On January 24 Twitter launched Vine, a platform for 6 second looping videos. Right now they are mobile-only. The free app can be downloaded at the App Store.

The New York Humane Society was one of the first users. They tweeted a video of Parker the cat.

The good news is that Parker found a home as a direct result of the video. NYHS was smart enough to tweet again, the image I captured, announcing that Parker had found his new home.

Good job!

Social Media for Good IV

You may have heard that the Obama campaign is transforming the campaign organization into a movement for grassroots action.  It has its own Executive Director and an introductory video by the First Lady.

Will people who signed up for a political campaign now sign up to be active in their own local areas? For what causes or  issues?

It remains to be seen. What is interesting from a marketing standpoint is the desire not to abandon an existing community. It's what, for example, the March of Dimes was able to do.

It will be interesting to watch.

Charity:Water - A Case Study in Venture Philanthropy

I first heard of Charity:Water when a student sent me a Mother’s Day card representing a $20 donation in my name. I responded with a $20 donation of my own and was intrigued by the young organization’s use of email and video--and the very personal involvement of founder Scott Harrison--to cement donor relationships. This was about 2007, well before most other charities understood the power of digital media.

The business model of Charity:Water is also exemplary. They call it the 100% model; 100% of what they raise from public donations goes directly to water well projects. There are few non-profits with the kind of charismatic leader who can raise all the funds necessary to run the charity. The Clinton Global Initiative is one other that I know of and it makes the point about a well-placed leader. In recent years Charity:Water has been using GPS to locate projects on Google maps and to provide proof of successful completion to donors. Overall, it is a model of how to run a charitable organization in the Internet age. One thing you quickly notice is that they encourage supporters to raise money for them and that’s where a lot of social media comes in.

This is why we featured them as an Internet marketing “best practices” case study in the first chapter of the Internet marketing text. The organization has lessons, not just for other non-profits, but also for commercial organizations that wish to remain close to their customers.

GPS is useful but Charity:Water has just taken another big step. According to an article by the AP, “Harrison, a former New York promoter for nightclubs and fashion events, didn’t want to guess at how many water projects were actually working. He wanted to give donors more assurance, knowing as many as a third of hand pumps built by various governments or groups stop functioning later. His solution: why not create sensors to monitor the water flow at each well? But raising millions for a new innovation could prove impossible.” That, perhaps, is the drawback of the 100% model; if a large operational investment is needed it could strain the fund-raising ability of even a charismatic leader.

Enter Google. In December it announced a new charitable grants program to fund organizations that are using technology in innovative ways. It’s first 7 grants are fascinating—from DNA barcoding of endangered species to educational programs for under-represented students and for math and science education. All have a major technology component.

Matt Bannick, managing partner of the (Pierre) Omidyar Network says this represents a new approach to philanthropy. He describes the new approach: 

“Seeking out ideas to fund, rather than existing projects, turns traditional notions of philanthropy on its head,” Bannick said.

“Rather than looking for organizations that could do this specific work that we’re hoping to get accomplished, let’s look for fabulous entrepreneurs … that have a new and innovative idea that we can get behind,” he said.

These are two developments to follow with interest. Charity:Water continues to innovate in ways that bond with its donors. Entrepreneurial high tech firms like Google are looking for ways to use technology for social good. The approach of taking a risk by funding innovative uses of technology by leading-edge non-profits is the idea behind “venture technology.” Will we see more—and even more effective—ways to use technology in the future? Hopefully we will!

Creating Brand Personality: the Mars Curiosity Rover

mars-jpl-nasa-gov.jpg

Originally published Nov. 6, 2012
 
I’ve been following NASA’s Mars Curiosity Rover @MarsCuriosity on Twitter for several months—along with over 1.2 million others. That’s a hefty following, whether for a government agency or for a robot millions of miles away!

It’s fascinating on several dimensions. What Curiosity is doing is interesting, even to the non-scientist.  As a marketer I’m intrigued by the way in which the NASA communications people have established and consistently executed a delightful brand personality.  A little digging shows it to be no accident.

The social media team is led by Veronica McGregor who has been Tweeting  for NASA  since the Mars Phoenix in 2008. Most NASA missions have a Twitter feed, so there is considerable institutional knowledge. One thing the rover teams learned early on was that first person was more engaging than third. It’s also easier to humanize the vehicle and give it a personality. The Mars has frequently been described as “sassy.” McGregor told Forbes:

“Back when Twitter was new, we tried tweeting both ways – in the first and third person. We always got more feedback when we were in first person. It’s also an advantage given the 140 character limit – ‘I am’ is a lot shorter than ‘The spacecraft is.’”
“It’s easier to anthropomorphize rovers,” added Smith. “The cameras make it look like she has eyes. So it’s tempting to think of the rover as a bodacious chick on the surface of another planet with a rock vaporizing laser on her head.

The rover started Tweeting on November 19, 2008 with a naming contest announced by Pixar robot WALL-E. Curiosity was suggested by a Kansas 6th grader, won the online voting, and was announced by NASA in March 2009. All pretty standard stuff–effective in generating awareness of the mission but time consuming. Curiosity’s Facebook page was started in mid-2010; the actual Mars landing was August 2011. So, as usual, this is no social media fluke. It took time, lots of effort, and a real understanding of social media and the various target audiences who might be interested.

How do the three women on the team do it? Have they made any mistakes in execution? This Bloomberg video is less than 3 minutes and gives a lot of insight into those questions.

What constitutes a good brand personality? Brand consultancy Amicus identifies key dimensions:

1. Demonstrates a Brand’s Passion and Expertise … Defining the Brand’s Ultimate Purpose and Differentiating It from the Competitive Set.
2. Creates an Affinity with Targeted Customer Segments … Touching and Energizing their Motivations.
3. Projects the Brand’s Core Values and Beliefs … Describing How Customer’s can Expect to be Treated.
4. Communicates an Over-Arching Tone, Style, and Attitude about the Brand’s Experience and Customer Interactions.

They go on to say, “Personality gives a brand dimension and depth. It can breathe life into inanimate images. It can be the cornerstone for service delivery … and connecting emotionally with customers.” The personality must carry through at all touchpoints to be effective.

The @MarsCuriosity team makes it look easy—which of course it is not. We can all learn a lot from them!