PV Media Group

We're All Fruit

Originally published on the MediaPost Online Publishing Insider
By: Kory Kredit, VP Marketing, PV Media Group

In the movie "My Big Fat Greek Wedding" the father of the bride, Gus Portokalos, takes a moment during a pre-wedding feast to wax philosophic about the differences between the Portokalos family and the groom's family, the Millers. He explains that Portokalos means orange (like the fruit) in Greek, and the root of the word Miller means apple in Greek. The conclusion he draws from this nugget of Grecian trivia is that "We're different, but in the end, we're all fruit." Classically brilliant.

While attending the OMMA AdNets conference last week, I was reminded of the simple truth of Gus' words as I tried to discern the differences between the ad networks represented there. There were vertical networks, horizontal networks, behavioral networks, mobile networks, networks that collect and sell audience data, display networks, search networks, network exchanges and even networks that don't call themselves networks because they prefer to be known as "platforms" (as in the Disney advertising platform -- aka, an ad network). There was talk of agencies trying to become ad networks and ad networks trying to act more like agencies.

Whatever niche, category or business model a network fits into, at the end of the day, they are all very similar. They are all fruit -- in that they are all in the business of capturing online advertising dollars, directly or indirectly.

This fact was pointed out by the conference panelists, who agreed that ad networks have become a commodity. Jordan Rohan, Founder of Clearmeadow Partners, noted that when he conducted a search on Crunchbase for ad networks that have raised over $2 million since 2005, there were 27 pages of results. While that statistic highlights the oversaturation of ad networks in the market, it also points out the market demand for ad networks that led to the infusion of investment dollars in the first place.

I'm confident that a large percentage of those networks initially listed in the 27 pages of results, no longer exist, However, due to their ability to offer advertisers increased efficiency, reach and targeting, ad networks as a whole have become a significant link in the online advertising ecosystem.

After listening to a full day of panels and presentations from experts representing most every corner of the ad network industry, there were a few key points that I came away with. First, each network needs to differentiate itself in a sea of sameness among all of the other fruit, which is getting more and more difficult as competition increases and competitive advantages can disappear overnight.

Second, the industry must continue to build upon the foundation of superior technology and data gathering capabilities that set it apart from traditional media. Several panels discussed the shift from advertisers targeting content or specific publisher Web sites, to targeting specific audiences based on behavioral and demographic data. Ad networks that aren't investing in technology and audience data are going to get left in the compost bin.

The final takeaway from the conference relates to the tenuous relationship between ad networks and agencies. As advertising budgets began to shift online, agencies have had to play catch-up in the digital space. As a result, they have had to rely on ad networks to supplement their online media buys, which cuts into the media buying fees that they charge their advertisers. Many of these same agencies are moving quickly to recover lost ground, potentially cutting out ad networks and reclaiming their media buying profit margins. As this tug-of-war continues, ad networks must continue to find new ways to add value to the process or risk being replaced by a new breed of digital agencies.

We're different, but in the end, we're all fruit. The question is, can the advertiser vine that we are attached to support us all?

The Power Of One

Originally published on the MediaPost Online Publishing Insider
By: Kory Kredit, VP Marketing, PV Media Group

We live in an economy of reduced marketing budgets and increased pressure to reach our audience using fewer resources. While I would welcome a larger budget and a handful of marketing geniuses at my disposal, I was reminded over the past week of the power that one individual could have, given a compelling story and the passion to communicate it.

It’s not likely that you’ve ever heard of Brian Wurzell. He’s not an editor for an online media publication. Brian is not a marketing executive for a fortune 500 brand or a creative director at an ad agency. You won’t ever see Brian’s name featured in MediaPost’s weekly “People on the Move” list or challenging Ashton Kutcher for a popularity contest on Twitter (he currently needs 2,648,546 more followers to catch up to the cinematic genius who gave us “Dude, Where’s My Car?”). 

 Brian is a lot of things including a talented musician, a passionate leader and a man in need of a good shave, but he’s not a media powerhouse. This didn’t prevent him, however, from reaching an online audience of tens of thousands of people across the globe to rally them around a cause that touched him deeply.

On June 29, Brian found out that his friend’s 5-year-old daughter, Kate, was diagnosed with a malignant brain tumor that would require immediate surgery. The shockwaves of emotion that swept over that family, and those close to them, spurred Brian to take action to mobilize a community of online support for Kate and for his friend.

While Brian didn’t have access to a digital agency to launch a viral marketing campaign or a list of media contacts that could produce and distribute a touching human-interest piece, he did have compelling story to tell, a passion to tell it and access to the same online publishing tools that anyone with an Internet connection can use.

Over the next several days following the diagnosis Brian began sharing Kate’s story online. Brian and his wife Promise (OK – so he had some help, but work with me here) produced a short video interview with Kate’s parents and uploaded it to YouTube. They also posted some photos of Kate on their blogs along with her story. Using email, Twitter and Facebook, Brain began to reach out to friends and his network of contacts online to rally support for her. He also hosted a live streaming video prayer vigil for Kate on the day of her surgery.

As a result of these efforts, Kate’s story has been spread across the globe touching tens of thousands of people from Dr. Phil, who posted the video on his blog, to a talented singer/song writer Audrey Assad who wrote a song for Kate and countless others reaching from Australia to Amarillo, TX, from Kenya to Queen Creek, AZ.

In the six days since the video was posted on YouTube, it has been viewed over 42,000 times. The live streaming prayer vigil, which has continued to play on a recorded loop, has now been viewed almost 35,000 times. Audrey’s song for Kate has been listened to more than 6,100 times. As the message spreads, people have begun to flood to Kate’s blog to follow her story and offer their messages of support and encouragement.

All of this happened because one person was able to leverage a collection of online publishing tools and social media platforms to communicate a story they were passionate about.

What is the story you are trying to tell? Is it compelling? Interesting? While the stories we craft for our companies most certainly will not be as gripping as this one, Brian was able to illustrate how one person with limited resources can reach an audience if there is a story worth telling along with the willingness and resourcefulness to use new tools and mediums to communicate the message.

In the days to come, as you are crafting your story, take a moment out of your busy workday, away from your marketing meetings and creative brainstorming sessions to think of Kate as well. The challenges we are faced with in a down economy quickly fade away when compared to the difficult road that lies ahead for this precious little girl.

Evolutionary Or Revolutionary?

Originally published on the MediaPost Online Publishing Insider
By: Kory Kredit, VP Marketing, PV Media Group

Technically speaking, the difference between evolutionary and revolutionary is just one single letter. When speaking of technology, however, the implications of each word are worlds apart. While an evolutionary product is a step forward from where you currently stand, a revolutionary product forges an entirely new path. It is different, bold, and risky -- and also has the potential to be highly rewarding.

There are, of course, inherent risks involved in taking the evolutionary approach as well. An evolutionary product can often be duplicated by a competitor or even surpassed by the next step in the evolutionary time line. When you produce the 7-minute abs workout, for example, the 6-minute abs workout is just around the corner, as Ben Stiller pointed out in "There's Something About Mary."

When Microsoft recently launched Bing, its new search -- I mean, decision -- engine, it was a step forward, but far from revolutionary. In a recent MediaPost Search Insider article, Gord Hotchkiss took a deeper look into Bing's evolutionary advances, but also lamented that there was nothing truly revolutionary about it. Alternatively, Google took a revolutionary leap with the announcement of its new Wave technology. While Microsoft was hard at work plotting the next step in the evolution of search, Google chose to throw away the drawing board instead of simply going back to it. Rather than reinvent search, the company took a bold new path to revolutionizing the way we communicate online.

As I pondered these product launches from Google and Microsoft and their respective approaches, I applied the same filter to the online advertising arena. While the evolution in online advertising continues, we seem to be falling short when it comes to revolutionary ideas.

The display ad unit has evolved in size options, creative content and targeting capabilities. We've continued to see the emergence of unique variations on the display ad unit, like the advertising embedded photos from Pixazza, the social media ad unit that Digg recently announced, and a new entry from Premium Access Media (full disclsoure: this is a PV Media Group company) called the Anchor Ad, among others. While the evolution of online advertising is significant, has there been anything truly revolutionary in our industry over the past year? Two years? Three years? Looking back, the last really revolutionary advertising vehicle online was the launch of paid search, and that hasn't changed dramatically since its inception.

For online advertising to continue to grow and potentially overtake traditional media as the medium of choice for both brand and direct response advertisers, do we need another revolutionary idea -- or can we continue to move forward along the evolutionary time line? Is there a new social media advertising model out there just waiting to burst on the scene? Will video sites like Hulu and YouTube be able to create a new standard to successfully monetize both professional and user-generated video content? Is there another team of geniuses like Google's Lars and Jens Rasmussen hidden away in a back office somewhere, developing the next "wave" of online advertising solutions that will lead our industry into the Web 3.0 world?

If I had the answers to these questions I most likely wouldn't be spending my time writing a column that referenced the cinematic genius of Ben Stiller in "There's Something About Mary," which is why I prefer to turn the tables and solicit your expert opinions. Where do you think we are headed? What's the next big idea that is waiting to be discovered online advertising?

A Peek Into The Phoenix Suns' Online Expertise

Originally published on the MediaPost Online Publishing Insider
By: Kory Kredit, VP Marketing, PV Media Group

Growing up as a basketball fan in a couple of small towns in Iowa back in the '70s and '80s, my access to news and information about my favorite teams and players was limited to a handful of box scores in the local paper, a periodic feature story in Sports Illustrated and an occasional game on NBC. It was kind of like trying to suck a chocolate Frosty out of that tiny straw at Wendy's. What little you were able to siphon out of that yellow cup of frozen goodness was extremely tasty, but not nearly satisfying enough -- always leaving you wanting more.
 
Fast-forward 30 or so years and that skinny red straw has been transformed into a raging fire hose of digital information. Thanks to team Web sites, fan blogs and social media applications we now have access to more content then we could ever consume, and I love it!
 
To get a behind-the-scenes look at what the digital revolution looked like from the inside of a  professional sports franchise, I reached out to the Phoenix Sun's Vice President of Interactive Services, Jeramie McPeek.

Jeramie began working for the Suns 17 years ago as an intern while he was a journalism major at Arizona State University. After graduating in 1995 he was hired full-time and worked in the team's publications department, overseeing the team's monthly magazine, Fast Break.
 
Kory: How Did the Suns initially begin to leverage the Internet as a communication tool?

Jeramie: The NBA launched NBA.com and all of the team Web sites in 1995. I still remember getting the memo explaining what the league was planning to do in putting up this portal on the Internet Super Highway, and I had no idea what they were talking about.... I quickly fell in love with it, though, and thought it was really fun and cool to see the stories that I had written for the magazine also go up on the Web site.
 
Around 2000, I made the proposal to kill the Fast Break magazine and focus our efforts on Suns.com. We were spending around $200,000/year on the magazine and our season ticket holders would get it six weeks after we had written the articles. The content was outdated as soon as they got it. Our executive staff loved the idea and that was the turning point for us in terms of putting all of our efforts towards our digital products.
 
Early on the team Web sites consisted of the rosters and the team box scores. It took the teams quite a while to figure out how they could use it and it took the league a while to figure out how much they wanted to allow teams to do. I think we were the first team to really take advantage of our website and put a lot of effort towards it in the late '90s. We now have an interactive services department and an ecommerce / emarketing department that manages all of our digital media.
 
Kory: How has social media changed the dynamics of what you do online, and how you communicate with your fan base?

Jeramie: The change has been pretty dramatic. Back when MySpace started to get popular, there were a few teams in pro sports that got on MySpace and YouTube initially. My thought at the time was that Suns.com was our bread and butter. That's where we want everything. We don't want to dilute that and start to put out content on these other places because it takes away our page views & impressions from our Web site.
 
Some time in late 2006 or early 2007 I started to realize that you have to go fishing where the fish are. We've got all of these fans that are out there on MySpace and YouTube, at the time, who might never come to our Web site, but they consider themselves Suns fans so we started to change the way we thought about things.
 
We thought that maybe we needed to go where the fans were and connect with those people to build that relationship and hopefully be able to draw them back to Suns.com for certain great pieces of content that we have.
 
There was no reason that we couldn't put out content on some of those sites to communicate with those fans to engage them and grow that fan base. Ever since then we've been expanding what we do and now we're everywhere from iTunes  to YouTube to MySpace, Facebook, Twitter  and Flickr. We're trying to reach fans wherever they are. We also built our own official social network during that time period. We launched PlanetOrange.net in the fall of 2007, where fans can create their own profiles, blog, upload photos and video and make comments on all of the content as well.
 
One of my favorite stories is about a group of about 10 Suns fans from Australia and New Zealand. None of them knew each other until they got on PlanetOrange.net and connected and became friends on the site. They planned a trip from down under to come overseas and follow the Suns on a road trip for five games from Toronto to New York to Boston and Atlanta and ended up in Phoenix. That was an exciting thing to see that these fans met on our site, became friends and are such huge Suns fans that they decided to follow the team around the world. They blogged about it and uploaded photos on PlanetOrange.net documenting the trip.
 
Kory: Is there one medium that has been more effective that the other?

Jeramie: YouTube has been really effective for us. Our largest fan base is on Facebook with a little over 42,000 fans on our Facebook page. Twitter has quickly become the one network where we seem to have the most influence in the social media space and the most engagement with fans. I think that is because it is instant. We can send out updates, notes or quotes from our players and we get such an immediate response from fans replying or retweeting or asking questions. We've only been on it for six months now, but it's been the one that I think has had the biggest impact for us up to this point.  
 
Kory: What is the most innovative thing you've done online?

Jeramie: Our virtual locker room, SunsLockerRoom.com, that we launched two seasons ago might have been the most innovative thing we've done. We worked on that for a period of about six months and got all 14 of our players, our coaches, alumni, dancers, mascot all on green screen for video shoots for our expansive virtual locker room where our fans could click around the locker room to go into the training room, the players lounge, the coaches office, even the shower. We actually won an Emmy award for that site.
 
Kory: Has there been any resistance to the type of access that you provide online from players or management?

Jeramie: Not really. We've been really fortunate that we've had such great buy-in from upper management. They really see the big picture and understand the value of what we do. They let us go into closed-door practices and the draft day war room. During the playoffs we've traveled with the team and shot video on the team plane. Everything that is closed to the media, we've been given access to.
 
Kory: How do you deal with filtering content that might not be appropriate or does not support your brand?

Jeramie: On PlanetOrange.net, since that is our official social network and it is one of our sites, we do watch that one a little more carefully. We want fans to be able to express their opinions and feelings, but we ask that it be done respectfully.
 
As far as Twitter, we can't control what people are saying there obviously. Although, we did launch a site back in April called SunsTwackle.com. We partnered with Octagon digital to build a Twitter site, which aggregates and displays all Twitter messages related to the Suns. It's also got some great filtering that keeps out people talking about the actual sun in the sky. That site is pulling in all kinds of positive and negative tweets about the Suns. We do have the ability to remove tweets there or block a user if something is really out of line. We try to let the fans talk about and discuss the team honestly and share their opinions as long as they don't get inappropriate with their language.
 
Kory: How do you leverage your digital media outlets to drive revenue?

Jeramie: We've done a fantastic job selling our digital properties, Suns.com, PlanetOrange.net, SunsLockerRoom.com. All of those sites have dozens of sponsors integrated throughout them.
 
The majority of those inventory items are sold as part of a larger package with the Suns that a marketing partner comes in and buys. They get TV spots, signage in the arena, have a promotion on court and then they also have some kind of promotion online that could be banner ads, pre-roll spots before the behind-the-scenes videos or sponsoring our online take show. We have flash intros that incorporate sponsors and our virtual locker room had 12 or 13 marketing partners throughout the locker room. There was a Gatorade cooler sitting on the counter next to a player's locker. There was a Verizon BlackBerry Storm sitting on Alvin Gentry's desk where you could click and read Alvin's latest tweets, and a Subway sandwich on a table in his office. The majority of these online sponsorships did bring in incremental revenue or were part of a larger package, but the online piece was a key element of that package.
 
In terms of social media, that's an area where we are still trying to wrap our arms around and figure out the best way to monetize our social media efforts without annoying our fans or ruining their experience engaging with us.
 
Our other big channel of revenue is ticket sales. We try to utilize all of our digital platforms as best we can to create revenue streams for the organization, while at the same time focusing on the fans and giving them the behind-the-scenes and exclusive access and coverage they want for our team.
 
*******
 
It's clear that Jeramie and the Phoenix Suns have grown into a leading edge digital media powerhouse capable of turning on a fire hose of online content for hungry Suns fans across the globe. Speaking of hunger, I could really go for a Frosty right now. Who's with me?

The Kiss Hello

Originally published on the MediaPost Online Publishing Insider
By: Kory Kredit

How social do we really want to get? It's a question I've been wrestling with as it relates to our company Web site and one that Jerry Seinfeld wrestled with as well. In a "Seinfeld" episode titled "The Kiss Hello," Kramer decides to post the photos and names of every tenant in the building to foster a friendlier living environment. Rather than passing anonymous neighbors in the hallway and giving the obligatory head nod, tenants would be able to greet each other by name and even offer a warm embrace. The social experiment goes too far for Jerry's liking when he is greeted by a kiss on the cheek from every female in the building, and a solid lip lock from Kramer himself.

Whether you're Cosmo Kramer in an apartment complex, or a consumer brand launching a Web site like  Skittles.com, sometimes you can be too social. I'm all for engaging customers in the social media space, but I'd just as soon kiss Kramer myself as use Twitter or Facebook as a company home page. That said, when assessing one of our company Web sites recently, it was evident that it needed an overhaul that includes some social elements. The site's shelf life as an effective communication tool was expiring and it needed more than just a fresh coat of JavaScript.

As I've begun working with our team to layo ut the new structure of the site, I've had to wrestle with the question: how social should it be? Gone are the days of a company site that's simply a static media kit filled with overhyped marketing copy written by marketing people like me. The five-page online brochure has given way to the Skittles Web site that turns over the marketing message to anyone with a Twitter account and the ability to fit "Skittles" into a semi-coherent 140 character tweet. For example, @mattfurukawa just tweeted that he is "at dinner with two awesome people, my pastor and skittles." While the "skittles" Matt is referring to could be a spiritual mentor -- which is great for Matt -- it doesn't really do much for the brand message of the sugar candy version of Skittles.

So, should our new site become a full-blown social media hub, or a more traditional corporate Web site with social media elements? As I look to invite our customers into an online conversation, is it really beneficial to make that the central theme of the Web site?

For inspiration, I took at look at a recent blog post on Webdesigner Depot titled "50 Excellent Corporate Website Designs". Of the 50 Web sites featured on the blog, here is the breakdown of the integration of social media into the design (includes Twitter, company blog, Facebook, etc.):

    Social media content integrated into the home page: 15

    Includes a link to social media content on home page: 25

    No social media content whatsoever: 10    

The most common social media integration was a blog feed on the home page with a small number of sites adding a twitter feed. Ironically, the site named "PimpMyTwitter" has no Twitter content and doesn't even list the Twitter address (although I am giving them extra credit for their company name). While company blogs, Twitter feeds and links to Facebook and LinkedIn pages were common, it was somewhat surprising that 10 of these newly designed Web sites (20%) had no social media content at all. The selection of these sites obviously isn't a scientifically accurate cross-section, but does provide a good selection of well-designed corporate Web sites.  

For our Web site, I am choosing to start out with a middle-of-the-road approach to adding social media. The site will include links to our social media connection points (blog, Twitter, Flickr, Facebook, YouTube, social media press releases) and possibly pull in our blog feed into the home page. I'm not willing to go as far as opening up the unfiltered social media fire hose like Skittles, but it is a step in the right direction to move our Web site forward with more a Web 2.0-like approach. For our company, this is a good middle ground between the anonymous head nod of the static marketing brochure site and the kiss hello approach that is too social. Think of it as the bro hug of social media integration.

What Is 'Better'?

Originally published in MediaPost's Online Publishing Insider

By Kory Kredit

As marketers, we are continually working to position our product or service as something "better": better than it was before, better than our competitor, something that will provide a better quality of life. How each of us defines better, however, depends on the context and the audience.

If you are a part of Twitter nation, you may subscribe to the "less is more" theory. Better means 140 characters as opposed to a lengthy email. Alternately, to an email marketer, bigger might be better (at least that is what I'm led to believe if I scan the subject lines in my junk mail folder).

If you're an AIG executive, bigger bonuses are definitely better. As a taxpayer, my definition of better would involve less money out of my pocket that gets funneled to failing financial institutions.

According to Steve Austin, the cost of building a better, stronger, faster man has a six-million-dollar price tag. Alex Rodriguez tried to achieve the same results with a little cash under the table and the helpful assistance of his cousin at the other end of a needle.

Who's right? Is better defined as bigger or smaller? Larger government stimulus payouts or a smaller tax bill? It all depends on whom you ask. The same is true in online advertising. We all want it to be better, but there are apparently many different paths to Internet advertising nirvana. How do we find the greener grass in this digital pasture?  Let's look at a handful of ideas that have generated recent headlines.

Size Matters

According to the Online Publishers Association (OPA), the key is bigger ads. In a recent announcement, OPA proposed three new larger ad units. The theory is that one big ad will replace several smaller ads, increasing revenue potential through higher CPMs, and improving the user experience with a less cluttered page.

While there are valid reasons for these larger formats, we'll have to give this idea some time to see how it works in reality. However, I have a difficult time believing that publishers will not give in to the temptation to simply add the larger formats to their pages in addition to their existing ads, in an effort to generate incremental revenue. I'm also not aware of any uproar from consumers pleading with us, "Please give us bigger ads!"

Create Better Creative

Randall Rothenberg, President & CEO of the Internet Advertising Bureau (IAB), is on a crusade to improve the creative element in our industry. Rothenberg blogged his "Manifesto on Interactive Advertising Creativity" prior to the 2009 IAB Annual Leadership Meeting, trying to ignite a conversation about the need for agencies, advertisers and publishers to increase their focus on creativity in the online advertising space.

 This culture of creativity seems to have been lost in translation, somewhere between the teams of creative geniuses who collaborate on a 30-second TV spot and the single graphic designer churning out a 768x90 banner ad. Rothenberg's closing statement from his manifesto challenges our industry to get back to its roots: "Let's return to a time when advertising and media conversation was owned by the creatives, the editors, and the impresarios -- when it was dominated by debates about the craft of persuasion, about what moves people. After all, isn't that the reason we're in this business?"

Premium Pricing

Much has been written and discussed about the falling value of display ad pricing and how to build a foundation for premium pricing models. From the commoditization of ad inventory to the failing economy, there is no shortage of theories for the decline. Some would say that online publishers need to regain control of their ad inventory so they have more control over pricing. Others would point to the overemphasis on direct-response metrics that devalues the significance of brand advertising. There is also the simple law of supply and demand coming into play. The overabundance of inventory, combined with shrinking advertising budgets, are major factors in this conversation.

User Experience

Let's not forget about the other side of this equation: the consumer. We all have our opinions and theories on how to improve online advertising to increase revenues for our industry, but who is speaking up for the consumer? As we look for new ways to monetize digital real estate, is there sufficient focus on the user experience?

So, how do we make Internet advertising better? Do we need bigger ads? Better creative? Different pricing models? What is your definition of better -- and how do we get there?

Q&A with Guy Kawasaki

Originally Published in MediaPost's Online Publishing Insider
By: Kory Kredit

"I'm kind of a big deal." Those are the immortal words of the legendary Ron Burgundy as he introduces himself to lovely Veronica Corningstone in the movie  "Anchorman" (One of my all-time favorite films). As an accomplished newscaster, pseudo-celebrity and owner of many leather-bound books, Mr. Burgundy carries himself with an air of confidence and arrogance that allows him to approach anyone he chooses with an expectation of their immediate acknowledgment of his awesomeness.

As a marketing guy for an ad network, I'm certainly no "big deal" and would have about as much of a chance to successfully approach and interview someone like Guy Kawasaki as any one of you might have to become Commerce Secretary of the United States -- although I understand they are still accepting applications. However, as a columnist for MediaPost's Online Publishing Insider, I am VERY loosely associated with the press, which has provided me opportunities to speak with industry experts and thought leaders who most likely would not have given me the time of day under normal circumstances. (Disclosure: My company, PV Media Group, sells advertising for Kawasaki's company, Alltop.com, but it's a safe bet that, if not for this column, he would just as soon have kicked me off the bridge like Ron's dog Baxter as he would have carved out 30 minutes of his day for me.)

While I'm no Ron Burgundy (although I do own one leather-bound book), I put on my press hat last week to conduct an interview with Kawasaki, Alltop.com 's co-founder  and managing director of Garage Technology Ventures. Previously, he was an Apple Fellow at Apple Computer, Inc. Guy has written nine books including his most recent, "Reality Check."

Kory: What was the market opportunity that you identified that led you to create Alltop.com?

Guy: I had another Web site called Truemors where people could upload true rumors.  It was placed on an aggregation page called PopURLs.com. We noticed that PopURLs was sending us as much traffic as Google search, so I got curious about what PopURLs was and talked to PopURLs founder Thomas Marban and asked if he was going to do anything besides tech and business. He said 'no,' so I decided I was going to do all the rest. We saw what PopURLs was and decided to put it on steroids.

Kory: Is there anything that would stop anyone else from recreating a model similar to Alltop?

Guy: Nothing. Theoretically someone could grab our OPML files and recreate Alltop. I've come to believe in my career that there aren't really too many companies that are defensible for technology reasons. What makes Twitter defensible? Is Digg defensible? What is defensible about Digg is that they have reached critical mass. So, it's kind of a catch-22, if you reach critical mass you're defensible, if you're defensible you reach critical mass. I think it is not a chicken and the egg thing, it's a matter of reaching critical mass. So, what will make us defensible -- and I don't think we're defensible yet -- is, when generally speaking someone asks 'how do I find a good food blog?' because when they search on Google they get 38 million matches. Instead, someone suggest that they go to food.Alltop.com. That's when I win.

The problem is people will write that down as if achieving critical mass is a strategy, but that's not a strategy, that is the end goal.

Kory: If critical mass is the key, how are you currently driving traffic to Alltop.com?

Guy: Twitter is very good for us and sends us a lot of traffic (more on that later in the interview. You can also read an article he wrote on that topic here ). We are also very high on Google searches, typically ranking on the first page for any topic. Many of the blogs that we aggregate will write about being listed on the Alltop site, which creates a lot of high-quality links and traffic back to our site.

Kory: The way people consume content online is evolving from a more traditional publisher-controlled model to a user-controlled model via social media tools/RSS feeds/aggregation sites. With that evolution, how do you think publishers/brands must adapt to remain relevant, position themselves as a trusted source of information, and drive traffic to their sites?

Guy: If I knew that, I could solve the newspaper industry crisis. That's a real concern. My fear is that with all of this user-generated content/citizen journalism stuff, how do you do the deep background research, nine months of investigative reporting about the addictive qualities of cigarettes, or others stories like that?  Who does that if the newspapers go away? Because the odds of somebody tweeting that they just saw a memo from a tobacco company that says they are addicting people to cigarettes on purpose is not very likely.

It may be that the model eventually is that foundations have to support investigative reporting. That would be an interesting model. Let's say that the MacArthur Foundation, in addition to doing genius awards, now funds journalism, too. That would be cool.

Kory: Now that you've solved the newspaper crisis, let's circle back something you mentioned previously, which is your use of Twitter. I heard you say in a recent interview that Twitter was more critical to you than your cell phone. Why is that?

Guy: There are substitutes for my cell phone. There are landlines or email that my wife can use to contact me. There are no substitutes for Twitter. In Twitter, I have 63,000 close friends, I can reach millions of people and there is no other marketing tool that is free and can do that. The only equivalent is maybe a Super Bowl commercial, but that isn't free. I would die without Twitter. And I don't mean because I need friends and I need to have social relationships. Twitter to me is a weapon.

Kory: How do you think publishers/news outlets should be using this weapon for themselves?

Guy: At the very least they should be auto-tweeting their news feeds. So one tactic is pushing their own stuff out, and the other tactic is to monitor it to keep up with current events. I also think that you can foster loyalty. If I were a newspaper and I'd just published my quarterly venture capital roundup, I would be searching for the string 'venture capital.' Every time I found that string, I would send that person a tweet that said, 'my newspaper just published our Q1 venture capital roundup and you would probably be interested in it because I see you tweeting about venture capital.' Who is going to resist clicking on that link? The person that gets that message is going to be flattered that my newspaper even found him, is going click on it, read the report and retweet it. And this can all be accomplished with one $10/hour intern. We're not talking about a $5 million acquisition.

Final Notes:
While my interview skills leave quite a bit to be desired, I was able to unearth a few nuggets of wisdom and insight from Guy -- including how he drives traffic to his Web site by utilizing Twitter and Google, and how to solve the newspaper industry crisis. It's still not up to the standards one would come to expect from the Action News team, but acceptable for a marketing guy masquerading as a member of the press. You stay classy, MediaPost subscribers!

Mostly Dead

Published in Media Post's Online Publishing Insider

By: Kory Kredit

"It just so happens that your friend here is only mostly dead. There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead." Those are the infamous words of wisdom  uttered by Miracle Max (played by Billy Crystal) from the movie "The Princess Bride," after Max finished examining a seemingly lifeless hero named Westley.

Aside from my fascination with classic movies and TV from the '80s, there is a point to this retro flashback. There has been much written about the demise of the display ad. If you look at the numerous columns and blogs written on this subject over the past year you might be inclined to believe that display ads are either dead, mostly dead or at the very least badly broken.

Do a Google search on "Display ads are dead" and you'll find plenty of articles from every major online publication relating to the death of display ads as we know them. Even my fellow Online Publishing Insider columnist, David Koretz, recently wrote a column entitled  "Display Advertising Needs To Die."

However, as Miracle Max points out, if you're mostly dead, you're also slightly alive. While there is no shortage of opinions expressing doom and gloom about the life span of the display ad, there are just as many in the industry that would argue the opposite point of view. Some would even argue that it is not the display ad vehicle that is broken, but rather the methods of targeting and tracking that are in need of an overhaul.

Whether display is mostly dead or not is clearly still up for debate. What isn't up for debate is that the Internet landscape is constantly evolving, and that evolution encompasses the advertising model that sustains it. So, rather than debate the current state of display advertising, why not consider where it is headed? If advertising dollars continue to flow from traditional advertising into the online space, what additional or innovative advertising solutions will our industry have to offer other than paid search, which will continue to be the industry's cornerstone for the foreseeable future?

Does the future lie with some new advertising model? Better ways of targeting and tracking? Let's take a brief look at some of the options that have emerged:

Social Media Ads & Widgets
The popularity and growth going on in the social media space has advertisers, publishers and networks scrambling to figure out ways to leverage and monetize this new form of online networking and collaboration. There are several solutions that incorporate social media technology into display ads, widgets or integrated content solutions from companies like Pluck and Gigya or the "SnaggableAd" from Clearspring and PointRoll. The social media avalanche has even prompted one network, Federated Media Publishing, to abandon its display ad focus to focus on what they refer to as "conversational marketing."

It is too early yet to know if any of the these solutions are the answer, but it is clear that developing a solution for monetizing social media will be critical this year and could be a game-changer both for advertisers and publishers.

Mobile Ads
It seems that every year in recent memory has been predicted to be the "Year of Mobile." 2009 may finally be that year. The iPhone and other touch-screen handheld phones, along with high speed networks, have opened up opportunities for advertising in ways that simply didn't exist a year ago, as people use their mobile phones more and more to consume digital content and information. This could be the year to finally explore the potential of mobile before the gold rush truly arrives and the barrier to entry increases.

In-Game and In-Application Ads
While advertisers and publishers have gone to sometimes excruciating lengths (i.e.,  ESPN's prestitial home page takeover ad ) to monetize every pixel, click, view and digital movement, online activity only represents one segment of time spent on a computer. While in-game advertising has established itself as a viable alternative for advertisers looking for new ways to reach their customers, the development of ad-supported software applications is coming soon. This may open up new recurring revenue streams for software publishers, which is welcome news for companies like Microsoft, but doesn't really benefit Web site publishers looking for better ad solutions.

Alternative Forms of Targeting & Tracking
The methods and metrics that we use to target and track the success of display ads may also be part of the problem. "While display ads are effective tools for brand advertisers, they can also become an important tool in the arsenal of direct response advertisers as well," says Chad Little, CEO of FetchBack. The challenge is to educate advertisers on the importance of tracking the impact of an ad beyond the click. Atlas Engagement Mapping is an example of a solution that can provide a more in-depth view of the true impact of a display ad.

I don't believe that display ads are dead. I certainly don't want them to die, since they are partially responsible for paying my salary (though I'm not affiliated with any of the companies I've mentioned). That being said, I welcome the innovative ideas and fresh perspectives that are needed to help display ads evolve and take advantage of the new technologies and usage trends that continue to shape our online interaction and activity. If the industry doesn't evolve, however, display ads could be on the path to becoming "all dead" -- and not even Miracle Max could breathe life back into it then.

Ch-Ch-Changes

by Kory Kredit, VP of Marketing, PV Media Group -- Published on MediaPost's Online Publishing Insider

As 2008 mercifully draws to a close, we begin to look forward to a new beginning in 2009 -- or at least we can fool ourselves into thinking things will be different as a result of flipping the page on the calendar.

Whether you're inspired by New Year's resolutions, the "change" mantra of our incoming president, or just simply like to mix things up regardless of the month of the year or who resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, I thought that it might be a good time to explore some new ideas related the online advertising and marketing in 2009.

I polled some colleagues (and added a few thoughts of my own) about what changes they would like to see next year -- with the exception of achieving world peace through increased ad spending -- and these are some of the ideas, musings and nuggets of wisdom that made the cut:

• Move toward standardized reporting standards so ad networks and analytics can work together to reduce discrepancies and eliminate the need for publishers to use multiple analytics tools to measure performance.

• Appoint a Trade Show, Conference and Summit Czar who can make sense of the dizzying number of events in our industry that I can no longer keep track of. The new Czar would also have the power to eliminate events that have no real merit, or are held in the Northeast in the middle of February. This person would also control the selection of speakers to insure that I wouldn't have to hear exact the same group of experts at every event I attend -- except for Gary Vaynerchuk from Winelibrary TV, who should speak at every conference (actually he might already do that).

• Get beyond shortsighted near-term ROI goals and educate advertisers on the importance of branding for long-term success and long-term ROI.

• More straight talking and risk-taking. Surviving and succeeding in a slow economy requires that we cut through the clutter to focus on the things that really matter to our business. It also provides opportunity for individuals and companies alike to stand out from the crowd by taking risks and daring to move forward when others will choose to step back, cut back and become more conservative out of fear and uncertainty over when the economy will recover.

• Have the ability to find inspiration for my monthly column at any time during the month that is not on the exact same day it has to be submitted to the editor.

• The development and adoption of more standards for the social Web. With the expansion of social media across the Web, the potential for increased fragmentation in this space accelerates. With a growing number of social tools, sites and applications built on proprietary platforms, the online community could quickly grow weary of maintaining multiple profiles, connections and conversations across each platform. If you have any ideas on this one, you can contact me on Twitter, yammer, Facebook, LinkedIn, mySpace, email (I think I have 8 of those) IM, Google Talk or iChat.

While this is far from an exhaustive list, it is a decent place to start. If you were the Czar of Online Publishing, Marketing and Advertising, what changes would you make in 2009?

What’s in A Name?

by Kory Kredit, VP of Marketing, PV Media Group -- Published on MediaPost's Online Publishing Insider

For those of you old enough to have watched the ’70’s television classic, “WKRP in Cincinnati,” you will remember the straight-laced, bumbling and insecure newsman from the lowest-rated radio station in Ohio. In one episode, he is having a discussion with a man named Steel in which Steel makes the comment that he feels a man’s name says a lot about who he is. He then asks the geeky, balding newsman what is name is. The reply: “Les. Les Nessman.”

In the same way that “Steel” was a fitting name for the steroid-enhanced deliveryman, “Les” perfectly described the diminutive and incompetent news director.

Over the past two weeks, I’ve been wrestling with the significance of names from a business perspective. While my focus has been on the name of a new vertical ad network rather than a fictional television character, the primary question is the same. What should a name communicate?

With the proliferation of ad networks and online media companies, how does a company set itself apart in a crowded marketplace? With ad:tech and OMMA AdNets approaching in a month, I thought it would be interesting to look at the names of the exhibiting companies to figure out what their names communicate, or fail to communicate, about their respective companies. I’ve selected a handful of names and separated them into the following categories:

Obvious/Descriptive (Think of this like opening a shoe store, and calling it The Shoe Store)

AdBuyer.com

Advertising.com

Permission Data

Prime Visibility

ListMarketer

Vaguely Familiar (Make up a word that sounds like a word, but isn’t really a word)

Acquisio

Alterian

Atrinsic

Etology

Infegy

Alternate Spelling (Take a word that you like, ask a 6-year-old to spell it for you, and presto — you’ve got a name!)

Wyndstorm

Xtranormal

NeuStar

Personifi

Prospectiv

??? (Quick - you’ve got five seconds, tell me what you think these mean)

Goolara

Lat49

Tinbu

Jivox

mZinga

eZanga

Bango

Rextopia

xy7

W3i

IZEA

Qoof

Naming a company is clearly an inexact science, and while a name may seem odd to some, it may someday become accepted as part of the culture like Google (not likely, though).

As a professional in the online advertising, marketing or publishing world, what do you think a company name and URL should communicate, if anything? Should it be easy to remember, easy to type in the URL, short, descriptive, clever, unique?

Does your company name make it help stand out in a crowd, or make those in the crowd scratch their heads? If you are attending either  ad:tech or  OMMA AdNets in November, take a few extra minutes to look at the names of the 300-plus exhibitors and let me know which names you think you will remember the week after the conferences are over. While you are there, make sure to look me up. I’ll be the guy wearing the Les Nessman name badge.