What’s the difference between content marketing and native advertising?

imageyourstory1.jpg

Here’s the difference between content marketing and native advertising at a basic scientific level.

Native advertising makes customers look you up.

Content marketing can ‘convert’ the customers who look you up.

That’s as basic as it gets. First up, this article applies to you, if:

  1. You have product/service that can make a unique claim.
  2. You are a B2C company.

Your ad agency tells you that 30 crores/year is a good budget to get your brand noticed. They would be absolutely right. You have one crore in hand. Naturally, you are worried.

  1. What if my campaign gets missed?
  2. What if the consumer doesn’t see what I want to show?
  3. What if all the money gets spent and nothing happens?

Rule no. 1: Just because advertising is expensive, doesn’t mean that content marketing is going to come any cheap

Here are five great examples of content marketing that will tell you why it doesn’t come cheap.

  1. The Lego movie – obviously!
  2. Steve Jobs launching his products: biggest example of content marketing.
  3. Microsoft stories: have you visited the most persuasive story telling site in modern business history?
  4. Closer home – remember Kolaveri D? Catchy content that bulldozed language barriers.
  5. Visit Amul India’s Facebook page for a free MBA on content marketing. Yes, they do native advertising too, but Amul’s content gets shared willingly, at zero cost. Their books compiling decades of content are collector’s items.

Rule no. 2: In content marketing, you own the media. If you’re lucky, other established media will give your content free mileage

So you have one crore in funds and you have set up all your owned content pages; such as your Facebook page, YouTube channel, Blogs, Twitter, LinkedIn, Slideshare channel and even an Instagram account. You also have a media relations team that constantly tells you what kind of content you need to create and where you need to pitch it.

Can you ‘put out’ content in the above mediums that will have ‘shock’, ‘interest’, ‘remark’ value? For content that is so remarkable will mediums with greater media outreach like television and print and online media write about your content free of charge? Will it be shared by people willingly?

You don’t buy any external media; but you spend on strengthening your proprietary pages and channels. Simply put, you may not have enough audience to drive your content program. Therefore, you advertise on social media platforms and work to drive traffic, engagement and conversion into your platform.

Key point – don’t fire on all platforms. Choose what works for you and then build that one.

Rule no. 3: Content marketing and native advertising, both are exact sciences.

There’s a cause–effect relationship between what you do and the outcome you generate. A good campaign takes this into account. Kim Kardashian knows this; and she’s is a great content marketer. If you shock people, they will talk about you.

Pope Francis blessed thousands of Harley riders and their bikes as part of a four-day Roman holiday celebrating the company’s 110th anniversary. Harley Davidson, which claims to spend only 15% on traditional media advertising, spends 85% on creating experiences for its customers. When you create ‘communities’ united by experiences, people will talk about you!

You focus on building relationships and appeal directly to the old brain. That’s plain science.

Rule no. 4: It’s always ‘us’ versus ‘them’

You may use technology to standardise a product/service but your customer communication has to be one on one. It has to focus on human beings connecting with other human beings.

Hence, while it is important to be very focused on what you are, it’s equally important to clarify ‘what you’re not’.

Hence, never put out puzzles and ‘low IQ’ contests (what is the colour of a tomato?) on your Facebook page just to have people respond to your post. The people who know what your brand represents, and are choosing to like your page, will disrespect the content you put out and go elsewhere.

Rule no. 5: Nobody is interested. You can keep shouting!

You can’t make people listen! No one’s life changes because you don’t put out your ad. People are really good at ignoring what does not apply to them.

You may be able to figure out who’s likely to listen. Whose life is likely to change because you put out your ad. Your aim is not to entertain people, but to market your product to them in an ‘eyeball-grabbing’ and memorable way.

Content will make its way to an interested audience, provided it has ‘glue-power’.

Shock, connect (hummable tunes), innovation, community value are forms of ‘glue-power.’

In native advertising, which is extremely powerful, provided you have the budget to do it effectively, you are paying someone else to distribute your content. It works just fine, and is extremely valuable, provided it also sticks to the principles of ‘glue-power.’

Both content marketing and native advertising have their own place in the life cycle of a customer-centric organisation. Content marketing also brings in the ‘early adopters,’ who are targeted initially by companies before they launch their native advertising. They subsequently become influencers.

 

originally published on yourstory.com

What’s the difference between content marketing and native advertising?

Advertisements

DR.DAVID CHRISTIAN,  SCIENTIFIC MODESTY & SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST

photo

DR.DAVID CHRISTIAN,  SCIENTIFIC MODESTY & SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST

Can we bring the study of evolution to schools? Can children be taught that we are one big evolutionary entity? Can we instill the spirit of enquiry and keep young minds away from mischief?

A meeting in the midst of books was in order as I had the privilege to get some of Dr.David Christians’ time and views.

In this blog, I’ve been on ajourney, exploring how human beings got the gift of language. Consciousness has played a major role in human beings acquiring the gift of language. But by and large, we do not understand consciousness, yet.

Somewhere, since the beginning of time, 13.7 billion years ago, to the cognitive revolution roughly 70000 years ago, we got both consciousness and language- we don’t know the order.This is nothing short of a miracle- and our ability to communicate with each other has saved our species- and may save humanity itself in future.

The clue to ending the violence and unrest in the world, may just lie in a greater appreciation of where we have come from. Young minds in schools all over the world, can be instilled with the spirit of enquiry. A mind once opened by possibilities, is more likely to see all of humanity as one great evolutionary entity. There is nothing so dangerous as uninspired young minds- they set out to mischief & violence.

Dr. David Christian shared that most of our understanding of the world today is owed to scientific modesty- our scientists admit what they do not know- and keep looking for answers. Reproducing here a part of our discussions.

Would there be big history if there was no consciousness?

Neuroscientists around the world have been looking at consciousness, and have been advancing evidence-based theories about it- there’s a lot of good work being done. Consciousness is one of the three big questions we are grappling with today.

Consciousness is a complex arrangement within the brain- and it’s only fair that from time to time, we talk about collective consciousness, as opposed to individual consciousness.

Is consciousness fundamental?

Referencing the now famous discussion between Nagasena and Milinda, a lot of our answers may lie in the theory of emergence. The property of a system is said to be emergent if it is in some sense more than the “sum” of the properties of the systems’ parts. An emergent property is said to be dependent on some more basic properties (and their relationships and configuration), so that it can have no separate existence.

The Homo sapiens drove the most resilient species to extinction, the Homo erectus. What role did our consciousness play in that?

We certainly know that language played a role. But unless we have hardcore scientific evidence, any discussion on consciousness would only make for interesting theory. What science needs is evidence- not theory. For eg; there is scientific evidence that energy congeals to form matter- the very basis of big history; but none yet to show that energy could congeal to form consciousness.

Would you rather the earth was hit by another asteroid and wiped out Homo sapiens? Or will it be violence?

65 mn years ago, that’s how the dinosaurs bid adieu; thanks to an asteroid. Our history, at least over the last 200 years has seen a lot of violence. It is encouraging that; there is evidence that violence is declining around the world. However, to keep violence at bay, we need to inspire our young minds with the spirit of inquiry- there is nothing so dangerous as unemployed youth.

Finally, Dr Christian had a question for me-  if you never talked to one other human being in your whole life, would you be the same person?

No. Even though our experience of the world is uniquely ours, it is influenced by the collective; because consciousness is a social phenomenon and there is such a thing as a shared experiences and collective consciousness. In any group situation, revolutions around the world and

Two recent interviews of Dr. David Christian attached.

May 22, The Edge.org: “We Need a Modern Origin Story: A Big History”, electronic publication & video interview, The Edge.Org, http://edge.org/conversation/david_christian-we-need-a-modern-origin-story-a-big-history

May 23, the Australian Financial Review: “Lunch with the AFR: David Christian, Bill Gates and their Big Adventure”, http://www.afr.com/lifestyle/food-and-wine/lunch-with-the-afr-david-christian-bill-gates-and-their-big-history-adventure-20150522-13c9da.

About Dr.David Christian.

Dr. Christian is credited with coining the term Big History and he serves as president of the International Big History Association. His course entitled Big History caught the attention of philanthropist Bill Gates who is personally funding Christian’s efforts to develop a program to bring the course to high school students worldwide.

5 arguments: The X factor in entrepreneurship is courage

Reproducing here my column from your story.com

yourstory.jpg.001

Entrepreneurs rarely bear grudges. Not for them, the expensive pursuits of the ego. Often, investors are dismissive of very raw ideas, and they don’t mince words. Entrepreneurs’ ideas get rejected  all the time — but it goes down only so far. The same investor is more than welcome to see logic in the business in 12 months’ time, and offer series A funding. The entrepreneur is only too happy to let bygones be bygones, forgive wholeheartedly and absorb the funding.

The ability to forgive anyone and everyone is the first argument that the X-factor in entrepreneurship is courage. Only the truly courageous can forgive and move on!

We all know we make our world more significant by the courage of our questions. Courage is the mental or moral strength to venture, persevere, and withstand danger, fear or difficulty.

Let’s look at four more arguments.  (Please note that some of it is deliberately exaggerated for a hearty laugh.)

Argument 2: Perseverance

Entrepreneurs often forget which pocket they placed their visiting card in! (There are normally two suits, the college convocation suit and the wedding suit). Rummaging and fumbling, they mutter breathlessly about a project that has currently immersed them in its vice-like grip. It is a moment’s work for them to have rattled off 100 words in 30 seconds that make sense to them and them alone. Scan a networking dinner, and you will spot startups a mile away — because they don’t care how much food they spill, on themselves, or on the floor, as long as they get to meet ‘that VC guy’ whose wallet shines with possibility. And this goes on, dinner after dinner, rejection after rejection. There is no diminishing the enthusiasm of the startup that has a business idea to sell!  From an unrefined amoeba of an idea, to a full-blown revenue model, the startup stumbles in and out of half-meetings and networking dinners till he secures his first angel investment.

Argument 3: Danger is real, but fear is a choice.

The home rent is not paid. The better half is hopping mad and does not understand your passion. You have no idea where you will be in three months’ time. Better still, unless asked, these questions don’t even arise in your mind.

Somewhere inside, you know that, sooner or later, your work will do the talking. This belief is all-consuming and everything else can wait. The degree of self-belief, by itself, is often the defining factor in the varying levels of success between any two entrepreneurs.

Argument 4: Adaptability

Customer interfaces bring out the best in entrepreneurs. If a situation calls for it, they can instantly profess to have an interest in classical music – give them 24 hours, and before the next meeting, they have read up about Pdt. Bhimsen Joshi and Lalgudi Jayaraman, both! Interest areas can be newts, astrophilia or even Karl Marx! So long as the discussion can be put off till the next Google search (answer nature’s call if need be), love for unknown things can be professed to advance a conversation.

Argument 5: Venturing

All an entrepreneur needs to be told is: “Why don’t you go and meet this guy? He can really help you.” The dinner plate is down, and quicker than Edward Cullen in ‘Twilight’ saga, the entrepreneur will be out of the room,  looking up the  six degrees of separation between him and “the man who can help” on LinkedIn.

The best part is the awkwardness of wanting people’s time and attention without really knowing them or needing an introduction, does not cross the mind at all. Venturing wherever needed, taking charge and not worrying about upsetting people comes with the startup welcome kit. All in a day’s work.

Summing up

On a serious note, courage evolved through time when our ancestors wanted to overcome the climatic challenges to live. Courage evolved when there was something they wanted to call their own, and had the gumption to fight to claim it and preserve it. Courage evolved when human consciousness allowed for slightly more complex thought.

Forgiveness, perseverance, belief, adaptability and venturing are five manifestations of courage itself. Interestingly, courage is what we look for, even in leaders, in our spouses, our partners and our friends. Courage, by virtue of what it means, is closely related to “massive determined action.” This is the X-factor of all entrepreneurship.

Heres the link.
http://yourstory.com/2015/05/x-factor-in-entrepreneurship/

Develop a Google clone: That’s what our consciousness should do.

AAEAAQAAAAAAAAOMAAAAJDU0ZTM0NjU1LTFmNzMtNGQ5OS1hOTMwLTQ1MDA1NGViZDgxNA

Most of us know that there is a lot of hoax on the internet – for instance Margaret Hello is Graham Bell’s girlfriend, and that’s why we say ‘hello’ when we pick up the phone.

Hypothetically, if we were to slowly re-write history, then in another 500 years, Google could potentially be representing new truths, which the next generation will not know better but to believe.

So, if I were to claim that it was not Alexander Graham Bell, but John Telephone who invented the said machine, and fed enough of it into Google, as arguments, in 500 years, there would be enough evidence that someone named John Telephone contested the invention.

Imagine the magnitude of hoaxes that vested interests could perpetrate! In 500 years, we can safely assume that library reading will at best be an esoteric, rare pursuit. So, our consciousness will be influenced, by what the internet says and that’s pretty much what Google throws up!

Google seems to have an incredible consciousness. It is predictive, intuitive and it knows a lot. It is incredibly useful. Yes, it can’t move physically, but it can track our movements- what is google maps all about?

So human beings have created another consciousness outside of ourselves, called Google, which will not be able to control, the expediency of vested interests that may rewrite history itself- and the impact of which cannot be fully grasped by one human generation.

We will need an Google clone to document things-just to keep things sacrosanct. Let’s try and create consciousness again and call this clone AlterEgo-Google. Lets start with a chemistry laboratory.

For the sake of argument, let us say that the chemical formula of consciousness is Tri-oxyTetra-carboTrihydoDiNitroPorphyrin evolutionase (crazy enough?)

This compound developed about 800 million years ago, when the first trace of multi cellular organisms appeared- at the hypothetical beginning of consciousness. So if it’s a compound, I should be able to see it. Makes sense! I distinctly remember reading that a quantum microscope had been able to see an “excited hydrogen atom.” (on google)

So lets mass produce consciousness. I’m told we cannot, because consciousness is a form of energy and permeates all living beings- it can neither be  created or destroyed. So chemistry lab needs to be revisited later.

Human consciousness is more complex than the world wide web, and is the only thing that probably knows more than Google itself. Tempered by morality, societal expectations and ethical considerations, humans have not killed each other, but have rather been vested in each other’s progress.

So the AlterEgo-Google will surely be created, but not by scientists and researchers. But by brilliant programmers and then run by equally brilliant businessmen; it will present a search alternative to Google.

Alternatives have always been important, even from an evolutionary perspective. The theory of natural selection its billion-year old infinite wisdom, has made several adjustments with our species, the brains and the bodies, primarily making us clued into surviving. Anarchy works only in favour of the anarchist- so we need to create some more consciousness outside of us. Isnt our consciousness telling us that we must allow Google and Alter-Ego Google to battle it out, hopefully on the battleground of facts, and may the best man win!

Google lovers, all of us, definitely need an Alter-Ego Google, just to keep facts under check, if not for anything else. The starting point for this could be questions such as was there another universe before ours? If the universe began 13.7 billion years ago, when there was no time and space, can we say conclusively, that this is the first cycle? Were there cycles before ours?

Let human consciousness first answer these questions. And then put it up on Alter-Ego Google.

Are we using 13.7 billion ears of evolution to make our lives easier or more expendable than ever before? Let the collective consciousness decide.

A THEORY FOR CONSCIOUSNESS: IS IT OUR SIXTH SENSE?

consciousness

I’m writing this article- you’re reading it. Thanks to something called consciousness.

Some postulate that consciousness is fundamental, like gravity. (credit: David Chalmers)

In that case, is consciousness older than language? Lets examine what experts have said.

No discussion on consciousness, can be complete without a mention of Julian Jaynes, who said that that the human brain, until very recently (~3000 years ago) was truly split into very distinct hemispheres: the left half allowed a person to function in day-to-day routine matters; the right side came into play under stress, providing guidance through hallucinated voices, usually those of authority figures, alive or dead leaders, or gods.

People were not self-conscious, and operated almost as automatons in responding to the hallucinated voices. This phenomenon provided social stability, order, and safety in ancient societies.

Many experts argue against this today.

For instance, did homo habilis, who created tools, gesture to a fellow homo habilis to pass it to him?

And if yes, did that act demand consciousness? Possibly.

Considering that consciousness goes to sleep when we go to sleep, and awakens when we get up, isn’t consciousness much older than 3000 years? Walker and Stickold (2004) postulated that there is strong evidence that that sleep enhances or assists learning. Hence, sleep was an important part of evolution itself.

In that case, what went to sleep, when early homo went to sleep? Surely, it was their consciousness that went to sleep (even if it was not as evolved as we understand it today)

Earlier in this blog, we have surmised that somewhere between 90000 years ago and 40000 years ago, speech made its first appearance. Modern language is a much more evolved phenomenon, while sound and sign language could date 4mn years ago.

We needed consciousness to speak and gesture coherently.

Much of archaeological evidence has emerged after Jaynes published his theory. Hence, probably in relative terms, we can describe consciousness more accurately today. Chances are, logically, that more evidence will create better understanding in the future.

Our brains have a lot of similarities with those of our ancestors going back 40,000 years. It seems highly probable that consciousness co-evolved with brains as a successful survival strategy.

For instance, consciousness and communication would’ve been be critical to helping groups of homo sapiens to coordinate and survive great climactic changes.

My theory of consciousness is, that as each sense evolved, sight, touch, smell, hearing and speech, consciousness evolved in tandem with it, gradually, as a combination of all of the above. Consciousness is the glue that connects the meaning of all the other senses.

I also believe that consciousness evolves at a faster pace than the other senses. Ironically, it’s the other senses, that are helping consciousness evolve faster.

We adapt, accept and conceive things that do not exist, not because of sight, smell, taste, touch or speech alone, but thanks to our imagination.

I am sure everyone would agree that imagination definitely falls into the realm of what we call “conscious understanding of current surroundings and future possibilities.”

So I argue, further that consciousness, like energy, cannot be seen. This is logical. Borrowing some lines from David Christians brilliant Ted talk, “history of the world in 18 minutes”, we know that

  1. The universe began 13.7 billions ago. There was no time and no space.
  2. First energy congealed to form matter.
  3. Floating hydrogen and helium atoms, compacted by gravity, gave us stars.
  4. The solar system was formed 4.5 billion years ago. The universe gained chemical complexity. Then there were planets, with water in it.
  5. We definitely have carbon, and other exotic combinations between elements, to thank for all the living beings we have today.

So far, so good. Energy was the starting point. So is consciousness, like energy, also 13.7 billion years old?

Unlikely. Consciousness has been described as the state of being awake and aware of what is happening around you, and of having a sense of self.

This could be more easily applied to living beings- and perhaps modern day machines too?

So perhaps, we need to put a date to the first “conscious” act. Is “motion” the first conscious act? Moving towards something- food for instance?

If yes, then consciousness is definitely much older than we think it is today.

More thoughts soon!