“Framing” is the way you position an issue, ideally in terms that are easy to grasp. Alan Grayson is one of the few on the left (Van Jones is another) who are really good at framing. Look how he describes the impact of Walmart’s low wages as an attack on taxpayers, on Cenk Uygur’s national TV show—something people on the right can relate to. (The full transcript is at that link.)

As you pointed out, the average associate at Walmart makes less than $9 an hour. I don’t know how anybody these days can afford their rent, afford their food, afford their health coverage, afford their transportation costs just to get to work, when they’re making only $9 an hour or less.

And who ends up paying for it? It’s the taxpayer…The taxpayer pays the earned income credit. The taxpayer pays for Medicaid. The taxpayer pays for the unemployment insurance when they cut their hours down. And the taxpayers pay for other forms of public assistance like food stamps. I think that the taxpayer is getting fed up paying for all these things when, in fact, Walmart could give every single employee it’s got, even the CEO, a 30% raise, and Walmart would still be profitable… I don’t think that Walmart should, in effect, be the largest recipient of public assistance in the country. In state after state after state, Walmart employees represent the largest group of Medicaid recipients, the largest group of food stamp recipients, and the taxpayers shouldn’t have to bear that burden. It should be Walmart. So we’re going to take that burden and put it where it belongs, on Walmart.

Consider framing for wide appeal when you develop your organizing messages. If you plan carefully, framing can play a major role in the debate. I credit a lot of the success of Save the Mountain, the environmental group I started in 1999 that beat back a terrible development project in just 13 months, to the careful attention I paid to framing, starting with the very first press release and continuing through the whole campaign.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Thanks, I’m guessing, to the no-junk-mail opt-out list, it had been quite a few years since I’d heard from Publishers Clearing House.

Front of the envelope from Publishers Clearing House

Front of the envelope from Publishers Clearing House

Yup—Publishers Clearing House. The infamous magazine subscription discounter that used to clutter up my mailbox with screamy hype implying very strongly that I’d won some enormous fortune, if only I followed all the (seemed like) 39 steps to claim it.

The same Publishers Clearing House that once sent a mailer to Dance Spree, a community arts group, boldly announcing, “D. Spree, You May Already Have Won a Million Dollars” in a mailmerge whose dot matrix fonts didn’t match the rest of the offset-printed letter.

On a whim, I decided to open the envelope—not with any intention of entering the latest Publishers Clearing House sweepstakes, but to see if the business world’s shift over the last dozen years or so in the direction of switching off the hype in favor of softer and more ethical marketing approaches—a shift that I like to think I had at least something to do with—had made any impact on Publishers Clearing House, King of the Old-Style Hype.

The quick answer is no. What I received was a smoother, more sophisticated version of the same junk that Publishers Clearing House has been sending for decades.

Here’s some of what I noticed.

  • Very high environmental footprint. Not only did the fat envelope contain 42 separate pieces of paper, but several of them are on shiny paper stock that may not have come from trees, contain decals, etc. In other words, the packet will be difficult to recycle.
  • Improvements in printing technology are noticeable. The customized portions were done on a very high-quality digital printer that looks almost as good as offset. No more hideous dot-matrix mailmerge—except that on the mailing address “label” (you’ll understand the quote marks in a moment), there’s some all-caps text meant to simulate a hand-typed look, reading “THIS IS THE BULLETIN WE ALERTED YOU TO LOOK FOR”
Rear of the envelope from Publishers Clearing House
Rear of the envelope from Publishers Clearing House

 

  • Disguises and subterfuge. If you give it a casual look, you might think the envelope had three added-on labels (one of them crooked and another upside down), two checkmarks, a note, and a circle in pen, the aforementioned hand-typed-look message, and both black and red rubber stamp imprints. But actually, as far as I can tell, all the various items on the envelope designed to create a feeling that a human being prepared it individually are actually printed on. You’ll also see phrases scattered throughout the mailing, like “prize patrol,” once again designed to convey the impression that a human being is out there, trying to match you up with your winnings. Most people won’t be looking so carefully, of course—but we are not stupid, and I’m betting only a very tiny percentage will think any part of this is actually hand-prepared.

To be continued tomorrow (including a deeper look at the psychology they’re using, and why I discount it).

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Yesterday, I blogged about the combination of vision, engineering, and marketing that made Apple and some other companies so successful. And for years, I’ve been a champion of putting reasons in your marketing.

This TED talk by Simon Sinek goes a step farther. Again using Apple as an example, he says it’s not enough merely to include the because; you want to lead with it. If you put your reasons why—your higher purpose—right at the top you immediately attract the people who are falling-all-over-themselves-eager to be part of your dream and your mission. This, he says, is why we don’t buy MP3 players or tablets from companies like Dell, but we salivate at Apple’s every product release—because Apple leads (and has led, since at least the original Macintosh introduction in 1984) with the deeper why.

Another of his examples is Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech; King, he notes, did not say, “I have a plan.”

However, King’s speech actually had a bit of a slow build. The first 351 words (of 881, total) are about the plight of black people in this country from the Emancipation Proclamation to the day 100 years later when he gave his speech. Only then, more than a third of the way into his speech, does he move into his vision of the race-neutral future.

Still, I think Sinek is right—but I think it also has to hit on the benefits to the individual, unless you’re speaking only to the driven. I’ve often used this technique in my copywriting without consciously thinking about it. From now on, I will do it consciously.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Remember those old ’30s movies where some cigar-chomping newspaper editor screams into the phone, “Get Me ‘Rewrite!'”

Today, I followed a link to a webpage that made ME want to scream, “Get Me ‘Rewrite!'”

Try to digest these three paragraphs (the first two are next to each other; the third is a few paragraphs down) and tell me what you think they mean:

The Danotek high-speed PMG system’s attractiveness to investors is based on a uniquely efficient stator-rotor configuration, as well as its existing relationships with wind industry manufacturers and developers such as Clipper Windpower and DeWind.

The BWP low-speed PMG system’s attractiveness is based on an innovative PMG concept that gets away from expensive rare earth metals and creates efficiencies that BWP says can make wind power competitive with traditional sources of electricity generation without the need for incentives…

One of the most distinguishing characteristics of the BWP PMG design is that its magnets are part of an axial flux air core machine which operates at relatively low temperatures and are made with a rare earth metal called neodymium. More commonly, PMG magnets are part of iron core radial flux machines like Danotek’s, operate at relatively high temperatures and require a rare earth metal called dysprosium.

OK, what is the writer trying to say? He talks about “stator-rotor configuration” and “axial flux air core machine” as if we automatically know what these things are. He says this new technology is a move away from rare-earth metals, except that it actually isn’t; it just uses a different kind. I don’t believe in dumbing things down, but I do think a reasonably intelligent person ought to be able to understand the gist of a piece of writing.

The “translator” acquaintance who posted the original link summarized it as “they can do unsubsidised wind for cheaper than coal.” (Thank you, Ian Gordon.) I guess we can extrapolate that from “make wind power competitive with traditional sources of electricity generation without the need for incentives.”

So why didn’t they say so in the first place?

The purpose of written communication, IMHO, is to communicate. While I’m not a techie or an engineer, I am reasonably familiar with the concepts of alternative energy; I’ve been reading about it for more than 30 years after all. And this one left me scratching my head.

In fairness, this appeared on a green technology trade journal website, where, presumably, many of their readers will be familiar with at least some of the jargon. But I think this one is over the top. Someone just beginning to research the field ought to be able to read the article and have some idea of what it’s about. Without Ian’s help (or five or six readings), I would have very little clue. Someone new to the field would be lost entirely.

Get me “Rewrite.”

(If you’re struggling to create a piece of writing that’s understandable without talking down to your reader, I’d be glad to help. I do that for a living, at reasonable prices. Contact me here.)

 

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Note From Shel Horowitz, Owner of this Blog:

I’m posting this not because I agree with everything Jim says, but because I don’t. I’m not going to tell you which parts I agree with and which I’d argue with, at least not yet. I’d like you to have your say first, and when I return from vacation (this post is being scheduled ahead), I might choose to add to the dialogue.

I proudly call myself a marketer. The problem with doing that is that a lot of people think that marketer=scumbag. I get it. Consumers have been burned before and they blame the marketing most of the time.

But that doesn’t make it right.

There’s a big difference between good marketers and bad marketers. Good marketers want to get your attention and make you aware of their wares, whatever that might be. Bad marketers want to deceive you into buying something that you don’t need for profit.

Good marketing is good business. Too often business owners don’t want to do effective marketing because they don’t want to be lumped in with the scammers out there. Here’s a few examples.

In the online world there are people called information marketers. They sell things like membership program and eBooks, and “systems”. These often come as something like a 22-disc DVD set, or online training program. To sell these products, they use tactics like long-page sales letters. You’ve seen those pages before perhaps? Is the page that is one big single column and you have to scroll 20 times to get to the buy button at the bottom. The page is filled with testimonials and bullet points about why the product/service is so awesome, etc… Then it’s got a ton of bonus items.

Here’s the secret to those pages. Know why you see them so often? Because they work… really, really well. As a matter of fact, pages like that are often the top converting page on the Internet today. And in the Internet business, conversion is job #1. If you don’t convert well, you’re losing the battle.

Does marketing with long sales pages letters make them scammy? Not at all. It’s a tactic, and yes, some of the people who sell those types of products are out to rip you off. However, most of them have really good products to sell you. The problem is that because of the tactic they use, they get lumped in with a certain mindset of consumers who will never buy from them.

What about those annoying late-night infomercials you see online? You know what I’m talking about. The late Billy Mays selling OxyClean or Vince selling a Slapchop. Ever notice the “but wait, there’s more” at the end of every tv spot where you get a “bonus” item for ordering now? Again, it seems kind of marketing wrong, right? Actually, it’s there because it works, really, really well.

The point is this. As a business owner, it is your job to drive more sales, leads or publicity to your business. Bottom line. Good business is good marketing. Don’t leave marketing tactics on the table because you’re worried about how you’ll look. At the end of the day, you’re going to need to find a way to improve your business and beat your competition. It might be time to start looking around at new ways to do that.

For over 15-years, Jim Kukral has helped small businesses and large companies like Fedex, Sherwin Williams, Ernst & Young and Progressive Auto Insurance understand how find success on the Web. Jim is the author of the book, “Attention! This Book Will Make You Money”, as well as a professional speaker, blogger and Web business consultant. Find out more by visiting www.JimKukral.com. You can also follow Jim on Twitter @JimKukral.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

From a Starbucks press release–the second sentence in the first paragraph, and within the quote, I’ve linked to the full press release:

With the goal of prioritization and agreement on criteria for a comprehensive recyclable cup solution, discussions will address obstacles and opportunities.

Who writes this crap? I’m sorry, but that’s not English. Will someone please tell Starbucks that the purpose of a press release is to communicate, not to obfuscate? Especially when there actually is real news buried under the blather: First, that the chain is committing to 100% recyclable cups within three years, and second, that systems theorist Peter Senge will moderate a summit on the topic.

So why not say so without making people dig for it? If it had been my assignment to write this press release, you can bet it would have gotten right to the point and been understandable by ordinary people.

Starbucks of course is not the only offender. But a press release like this is useless. You want to tell the story, not hide it.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Watch this ad from Honda about how to be a doer for the environment, and tell me what you think.

Here’s what I think:

I love the message of the ad, that not only gives us specific, easy things we can do to be more environmentally responsible drivers (only the beginning of what’s possible), but also positions Honda as a leader. But I think for a general audience the ad is a disaster, because it doesn’t give one important snippet of crucial context before slowly beginning the sloooow narrative.
I was halfway through before I realized the voiceover was Garrison Keillor (or a very close sound-alike). If people “get” that more quickly, then they will forgive taking 30 seconds or so to even start talking about the issue, because that’s his style. But I didn’t realize that at first, and if I hadn’t been told ahead of time what the ad was about, I would have been gone. So this could be a whole lot more effective if
1) There’s a splash page at the beginning that has a caption like “Garrison Keillor’s Eco-Driving Tips”
2) It aired in places where Keillor is a known quantity

BTW, if you want easy tips to be more eco-friendly in AND out of your car, I recommend my just-published e-book, Painless Green: 110 Tips to Help the Environment, Lower Your Carbon Footprint, Cut Your Budget, and Improve Your Quality of Life-With No Negative Impact on Your Lifestyle. It’s cheap, and the tips are very easy to implement. Yes, there’s a section on transportation.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

I just made up the word “jrip” and the phrase “jargon jrip.” It’s like drip (as in seriously uncool person, common in the late 1950s/early 1960s)–except it begins with a j to go with jargon.

And I made it in response to these couple of lines that showed up in my e-mail (name withheld to protect the guilty):

an Internet-wide shared-user system for user-centric demographic/privacy control, personalization, advertising and content payment aggregation.

Now, I’m a professional writer; I work with words every day. I know what every one of those words means individually, but they make absolutely no sense when strung together. I have no idea from that phrase what this person is talking about. Other parts of the press release and announcement tell me that he wants to establish a new social network that includes an e-commerce component. But the difficult phrase was in the first sentence! I don’t think most people will get far enough to figure it out.

It’s technobabble like this that gives corporate communications in general, and corporate-speak press releases in particular, a bad name. As a copywriter, I make it my business to try to eliminate that kind of press release from the business toolkit, and replace it with press releases that actually communicate both facts and emotion, yet stay out of the hype zone. When I see this sort of crap, it reminds me that we have a loooong way to go.

Clear writing communicates; jargon blocks communication. Down with jargon! Don’t be a jargon jrip!

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Fascinating article in the San Francisco Chronicle: “Sex Doesn’t Sell.”

This is, of course, complete heresy to marketers.

Two things I want to comment on there: first, this quote:

According to some studies, the “sex sells” adage in misleading if not wrong. Several studies have found ads laced with sexual imagery of women targeted to women actually turn women off to the product. And it’s not a new conclusion about sex and advertising, either.

But the obvious response would be, if you’re marketing to heterosexual women, should you perhaps be using sexy men? And certainly there are plenty of companies that do just that.

Also, remember the old AIDA formula: Attraction, Interest, Desire, Action. In other words, it isn’t enough to attract their attention–which sex does, for sure. They have to move through tthe ladder and take action. I remember one of the worst ads I’ve ever seen. It actually used the headline “Sex. Now That I have Your Attention…” and proceeded to promote a car dealership without even referring to the headline again. It was an all-text ad, no graphics, in our local newspaper. And I made a resolve right there that if this company was going to so insult my intelligence, I wasn’t going to even give them a shot at my business. I’ve bought three or four cars since then, at least, and not once have I ever bothered to visit that dealer.

Yet Madison Avenue, going back decades, seems to do quite well using sex to sell everything from household cleansers to cars to alcohol–but the ads are constructed in such a way that the prospect almost feels like he or she is in bed with someone gorgeous.

The other part I found umm, revealing was this wonderfully snide reader comment:

Two words that prove sex doesn’t sell: Sarah Palin. Other than being a GMILF and former beauty queen who has mastered the art of the saucy wink, she brings nothing substantial to the GOP ticket and has done more to undermine McCain’s credibility with independents and undecideds.

.

Generally, in marketing, we learn to harness both the prospect’s emotion and intellect. Perhaps the problem with using misplaced sex in advertising is that it only hooks the emotions and leaves intellect out of it entirely. In my award-winning sixth book, Principled Profit: Marketing That Puts People First, I walk through some of the ways to build the necessary long-term trust to not only follow AIDA all the way down to the second A, but to add more steps: repeating and referring others.

(Thanks to Chris McDonald, who pointed me to this article).

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

I’ve long been an advocate of writing marketing copy that uses both emotional and rational appeals.

Here’s a specific example: my all-time favorite of the hundreds of press releases I’ve written. I did it back in 1999 when a client hired me to write a press release for a new book on electronic privacy.

Most PR books would tell you to do a press release with a headlne like “Electronic Privacy Expert Releases New Book.” But I say they are wrong! Over 1000 books were released in the US alone every single day of 2007. There’s no news in that headline. So this is what I did instead.

Below is exactly what I produced, except that I’ve changed the author’s name/identifying data/book titles and removed contact info. (Note that had this been a more recent book, I would have brought identity theft into the mix.)

It’s 10 O’Clock—Do You Know Where Your Credit History Is?

ST. PAUL, MN: It’s 10 O’clock—Do you know where your credit history is? How about your employment records? Your confidential medical information?

How would you feel if you found out this sensitive and should-be-private material is “vacationing” in computer databanks around the world—accessible to corporate interests who can afford to track down and purchase it, but not necessarily open to your own inspection?

According to electronic privacy journalist and technology consultant Mortimer Gaines, this scenario is all-too-common. In a groundbreaking but highly readable new book, Information Attack: Privacy at Risk, Gaines explores the twin issues of privacy in an ever-more-wired world, and citizen access to crucial information that governments or corporate conglomerates might prefer to keep hidden.

Gaines, author of over 20 previous books including the acclaimed Internet Guide series (Windows Press, 1993-94), is not a rabid privacy nut. He recognizes that consumers often gain value by sharing personal information, in order to take advantage of express car rentals or frequent flier programs, for instance. But Gaines suggests the transaction should be voluntary, freely given in exchange for a clear benefit.

When, for example, America Online mines data from its customer records and combines it with outside market research to create—and sell—precise demographics with specific identifying information (p. 143), Gaines feels the transaction exploits the consumer, who sacrifices privacy and gets nothing in return. Gaines is equally cogent on issues of citizen access to government and corporate records.

Information Attack: Privacy at Risk, ISBN 0-00000-00-X, includes detailed references to specific websites, a comprehensive index, and a six-page bibliography. The 336-page 6×9″ trade paperback is available directly from the publisher for $25 plus shipping at (phone), https://www.domain.com, or at your favorite bookstore.

Journalists: to obtain a review copy and/or interview the author, please contact (e-mail and phone).

Notice how I started in the realm of emotion, then transitioned to credentials and facts.

In his blog today, master copywriter Clayton Makepeace credits his success to his ability to create precisely that union of right- and left-brained processing–that inexorably leads to action.

Clayton’s better at this than I am, and the post includes a fabulous example. Of course, Clayton also charges orders of magnitude more than I do. He does direct-mail copywriting and has made himself and his clients very wealthy. I suspect he’d not want to get involved with anything as humble and affordable as a press release. But he’s one of a very few copywriters who has a whole lot to teach me, and whose posts I read regularly. Because reading his stuff makes me a better copywriter–and could have the same effect on you.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail