Cablegate: the information Goldrush

There’s only one story this week and it’s Wikileaks. The ultimate media feeding-frenzy has begun. It’s going to be a bit like this: http://bit.ly/eIb7NZ (if you have a bird phobia, it’s NSFW).

But it’s going to last longer. With 250,000 missives to sift through, employees of every ‘serious’ media outlet will be gainfully employed for weeks piecing together interesting story-lines from the quirky, to the worrying to the downright outrageous.

As @richardbacon (of all people) said on Twitter last night: “some of these wikileak revelations are astonishing: http://bit.ly/e4toHn”. (great Guardian journalism by the way).

The wikileaks affair (or #cablegate as it’s known on Twitter), is a lesson in how the web has changed the information economy for good. It is the ultimate embodiment of freedom of information.

But it will also be an education in the role of the Editor. With 251,287 potential stories to publish, the media will have many difficult calls to make on which ones are the biggest news and which ones make the most compelling content (the Sun has already shown its cards, I’m surprised they missed the ‘Ghaddaffi’s Ukrainian Nurse’ opportunity: http://bit.ly/hvclv3).

It will also pit editors against citizen journalists, the ‘editorial filter’ against the ‘social filter’. With 250,000 potential scoops, anyone, from a blogger to CNN, has the opportunity to find a nugget of gold or help form opinion. Wikileaks is like a gold rush for information. Everyone will be at it. This is a time of true 'media democracy'.

And brands should take notice. Why? Well…

1. It’ll be a lesson in content: aside from which stories make headlines, it’s a great opportunity to listen online (Twitter, forums, etc) and find out what kind of story drives online buzz.

2. It just got competitive: Cablegate gives the press enough to fill their pages 100x over from here until 2011, so you need to be even more creative with your brand to get profile.

3. Milk the agenda: such a huge agenda point gives brands an opportunity so they should explore whether they can relevantly (seriously or amusingly) get involved in the debate.

4. It could happen to them: already people are asking whether wikileaks should divert its energy towards corporate as well as government targets (http://reddit.com/eczv1). Beware.

5. Learn from the zeitgeist: Cablegate will create a whole new set of cultural reference points, brands should think like pundits and commentators to remain relevant.

Royal Wedding: Boon or Bust for Brands?

So he’s done it. He’s done what millions of blokes do every year. That awkward one knee thing. Except when he does it, it becomes a cottage industry. It becomes a global talking point. It becomes a bone of contention. A Republican-Monarchist debate. A change in the national mood. And a Daily Mail wankfest.

Taking a step back (unlike the Daily Mail who’s taken 16 steps/pages forward this morning) or Paddy Power whose ad has already used the Royal Couple’s image (http://twitpic.com/37lyak), what does this mean in media and brand terms over the coming months? Is it an opportunity or is it something to be avoided? What are the things that make it a ‘boon’ or a ‘bust’ for your brand and what can you do about it?

On the ‘boon’ side, the clearest positive for brands is the mood of patriotism the wedding is likely to generate, creating a greater domestic appetite for ‘Britishness’ and a more positive ‘retail’ mood. With the world watching, British brands will also have a great shop window in which to display their innovations, creativity and quality. Media obsession will mean journalists will look for the ‘wedding angle’ in everything, creating a ‘cottage industry’ of tie-ups, media partnerships and promotions. Ultimately, there will be a whole new market created in wedding-related goods, from classic merchandise such as the ‘Mug’ to higher-quality, more subtle packages and products.

On the ‘bust’ side, the obvious watch-out is the ‘perfect storm’ of marketing and PR clutter which will spring up at key points along the next 6-8 months, interspersed with the likely fatigue and disinterest which will hit once the initial media frenzy has subsided (a cycle which will continue relentlessly). There is also a fine line to walk between taking developments into account when planning and over-commercialising what is ultimately a personal occasion – opportunism in the asence of relevance or humour will be punished. Finally, if a brand messes up, oversteps the mark or is too crass, millions of critics await on Twitter. A foot out of place will be instant news.

In five – what brands might do:

1. Know your place – brands need to know whether they have a right to talk wedding and if they do, what is the narrative for their involvement, their context and the tone to adopt;

2. Know the media cycle – the build up will be so significant that the ‘wedding trajectory’ must be fed into planning, if only to avoid key dates and potential media obscurity;

3. Be respectful or be funny – brands with a more relevant link should be subtle and luxury in feel, those who don’t should use humour (but not cruel humour);

4. Brit abroad – British brands can capitalise on the wedding abroad, where people will also be celebratory and interested but less informed, simply by dialing up their Britishness;

5. Be flexible – allow some flexibility to respond to the media agenda and think with a journalist's mindset about how your brand can enhance or bring credibility to an editorial environment.

An apology and an excuse

So I’ve been away from the blogosphere for most of October and half of November.

Apologies to my 2 readers.

What started with 2½ weeks in Portugal and California ended in a need to cram two weeks work into the ensuing two weeks with already busy clients and a realisation that re-entering the digital world after a 2 week hiatus is harder than expected. Ignorance of the news agenda and of what was doing the rounds online meant I lost my inspiration to write anything interesting. I now understand what they mean by writer’s block...

So after 2 inspirational weeks in the home of Port wine and the home of entertainment and some amazing client projects, I have many things to write about but unfortunately my mission is to stick to the news agenda. And there is only one thing on it this week. Royal. Wedding.

Forgive me for any rustiness.

Britain: 3rd World and Proud

The big news this week has been the Pope’s visit, albeit more in cynical anticipation than anything else (excuse to post this: http://twitpic.com/2op1lp). Joking aside, most interesting was the description of the UK as a ‘3rd world country’ by one of His Holiness’ aides. The term 3rd world has its origins in the cold war and was a term that emerged to describe all those countries which aligned neither to the West or the USSR.

My thought for the week is that we are a 3rd world country (in its true sense), but that this is a great thing for us, British brands and British businesses. Here's why:

As a nation, we are a beautiful melting pot of tradition and futurism. We are both contemporary and traditional, creative and formal, soft and hard.

Critically, though, we are less 'attached' than we have ever been. Despite talk of ‘special relationships’, signs are that we are seeking renewed relations with new world powers (China and India) but not at the expense of existing friendships in the US and Europe. As the New World Order sets in, our world-leading creativity and our balance between our heritage and our future positions us perfectly to take advantage. Being 3rd World means that we are unattached, flexible and well positioned for an era of ‘soft power’ (read Monocle’s September issue: monocle.com). At the moment, I’d take 3rd world over 1st or 2nd.

In five – what being 3rd world means for (British) brands:

1. Contemporise your heritage: understand what it is about your brand’s heritage which has potential to be reinvented for contemporary audiences.

2. Embrace subtlety: the New World Order is about soft power and cultural influence so understand how your brand can ‘nudge’ not push.

3. Surprise us: a benefit of being ‘unaligned’ is that it allows you the freedom to choose an innovative path – explore new channels and techniques with abandon.

4. Explore Britishness: look at how Britishness is being redefined through TV, Film, music, fashion, art and design and work out where your brand fits culturally.

5. Draw on other cultures: Britain has a rich history of association with New World economies – be inclusive of diaspora communities and draw on cultural influence in your marketing.

Twitter: the dirty underbelly of influence

So. As part of my mission to explore stuff through the medium of one slide, I wanted to write about how Twitter is changing the face of ‘influence’ and what brands can do to capitalise.


12 months or so spent on Twitter (properly, not fannying around being a spectator: @macka7) and you will discover a fascinating window into the world of influence. Columnists swap and test ideas. Celebrity mates have hungover chats about the night before. Sports stars let slip (KP, of course). Food critics swap notes. Pundit feuds play out (Bacon vs Young, Balding vs Gill). It is the dirty underbelly of influence and it’s at everyone’s fingertips, not just the PRs.

The world of influence has changed. Everyone and his or her dog (or mouse?) is now an Editor and everyone is their own Publicist. The decisions and thinking that used to happen behind closed doors are now played out in public. The editorial filter has given way to the social filter – many of us get our news first from our social network not from the front page of a tabloid or broadsheet. The result is organised chaos. News is shared before it is published and only the stories which most resonate with people emerge from the clutter (check out trendsmap.com for news in your area).

In five – the opportunity for brands:

1. Be ahead of the curve: listen to and chat with the right online influencers and you’ll be part of the editorial process before it begins.

2. Be where the buzz is: with the right set of ‘followees’ you can learn what’s hot, what’s not and be part of new trends before anyone else.

3. Be an Editor: turn your brand into a media channel, gathering, editing and distributing relevant content to your employees, followers & fans.

4. Be an influencer: information is power, power is influence so (sparingly) use your privileged brand and industry knowledge to drive your followers’ agenda.

5. Bypass the newsroom: with good contacts and smart news angles, it's possible to seed and soft-sell stories without a more formal approach to media.

My new look: Slide Issue

For no good reason other than the fact that I seem to (very sadly) spend my working life summarising and recommending stuff in powerpoint, I’ve decided to try to look at one issue or topic every week in a slide, a para or 2 of explanation and 5 things that I think brands can learn. Saves me time, gets to the point quicker and (if anyone out there actually reads this) saves you time. Everyone’s a bloody winner.

I'm calling it 'Slide Issue' and it will basically resemble the inside of my brain…

Super-injunctions, the end of privacy and learning with Wayne.

Tiger Woods. John Terry. Peter Crouch. Wayne Rooney. The ‘Pakistan Four’. The scandals keep on coming. Something is clearly in the air. Indeed with news of other ‘super-injunctions’ in the balance, we can expect more revelations.

And it’s not going to stop. The blogosphere’s ability to evade the law and spread news and gossip and ISP reluctance to act as ‘internet police’ means that we can only expect more. More speculation. More privacy invasion. More ruined reputations.

Indeed, the more they try to hide the more relentlessly they will be pursued by the media, by the blogosphere and by the twitterverse. And this isn’t just true for errant sportsmen, or politicians (Mr Coulson, Mr Hague?) or any other individual for that matter – it’s also true for businesses and brands.

Brands who try to hide stuff are equally vilified. Nike’s use of ‘sweatshops’ was uncovered 10 years ago and people STILL remember: http://bit.ly/RF89O. More recently Trafigura’s super-injunction against the Guardian failed to hold due to a combination of Twitter and parliament (http://bit.ly/3QQnZY). Just two examples, but two which show the hostility which the online environment can inflict on businesses who slip up.

But what can marketers learn from the experiences of our fallen sporting, political and other heroes in this new world of Blogger Activists?

Five rules spring to mind:

1. Don’t think you’re invincible: it’s getting increasingly hard to cover things up – be aware that anything you do that might be deemed ‘ethically dubious’ is more likely to be exposed than not (no one is immune).

2. Know your audience: we expect, nay, admire rock stars who sleep with 10,000 groupies and snort their bodyweight in coke every month but we expect more from our sportsmen and women (and also from our brands).

3. Be authentic: obviously, if this means sleeping with prostitutes and poisoning Africans you should first put your house in order, but brands, businesses (and individuals) who know and live their values are more likely to endure.

4. Be honest: years of witnessing slippery politicians and businessmen trying to hold on to their jobs with tenuous arguments has hardened people, but it has also made them very receptive to the ‘mea culpa’ and the cold, hard truth.

5. Manage expectations: don’t set yourself up for a fall by putting yourself on a pedestal Tiger-style – having flaws is not a bad thing, hiding them to make more money most definitely is.

These 5 rules will not save you if you have a habit of breaking the law or breaking your vows. They will not help you if your moral compass is off kilter. And they will not help if your company gut instinct is to first fire off a ‘Cease and Desist Order'.

But they will help you build a strong reputation and avoid the fury of an instinctively hostile and cynical new media environment.

I leave you with this fantastic drubbing of brands who don’t quite get it (especially on points 2,3 and 5 above), as penned by the great Charlie Brooker (@charltonbrooker).

Sometimes the old (media) ones are still the best: http://bit.ly/5cqVJd.

Asil Nadir, Opal Fruits and the power of nostalgia

Perhaps it’s the recession, perhaps it's cyclical, perhaps it's happy coincidence or perhaps it’s the fact that I spent Sunday evening dancing to Nik Kershaw (http://bit.ly/aEB1ws), but I can’t be the only (just) 30-something noticing nostalgia creeping up the agenda recently?

Scargill’s back. Asil Nadir’s back on our shores – http://bit.ly/cc37pN – twenty years to ‘recuperate’? Whatever. Ken Clarke’s back in the cabinet. The A-Team’s back (albeit appallingly). And there’s that oddly stage-schooled girl on the X Factor who dresses like early Madonna. All we need is Ivor the Engine and the Clangers (here for your ‘hit’: http://bit.ly/OQqN7) and we’ll be sorted. Even the French are at it with a return to nostalgic cakes (quoting the Times P. 38 today: “The French disease is nostalgia and nowhere more so than for their cakes”). Marie Antoinette was right all along.

But we’re not just seeing it in the news. Realising the strong emotional potential of nostalgia and understanding how it can act as a ‘balm’ in hard times, brands are harking back to supposedly ‘better’ times.

Mars has brought back the ‘made to make your mouth water’ line for Starburst (now make them Opal Fruits again and while you’re at it, let’s have Marathon back). The ‘Tetley Tea Folk’ are back under the hackneyed guise of ‘by popular demand’ (http://bit.ly/aRpYWA). Virgin Atlantic, Persil, Fairy, M&S and Thinkbox have all been at it (thanks nicofell: http://bit.ly/cSHB95).

And what would a trend be without its own festival? The ‘Vintage at Goodwood’ festival a few weeks ago (http://bit.ly/aniXbN) celebrated all things British going back 5 decades, in collaboration with brands like B&Q, Bonhams, Audi, Fortnum’s, John Lewis, Tanqueray – the list is long and distinguished.

Brands with ‘nostalgic pull’ not looking to use it at a time when people are crying out for some comfort marketing are missing a trick. The key is in understanding how to create that warm feeling: lots of brands (Fairy, M&S, etc) take the easy route and simply re-introduce old ad mechanics and strap-lines. Cleverer ones (like Virgin Atlantic) hark back to a golden age in their industry in a contemporary way or celebrate the culture of a different age (as all the brands at Vintage@Goodwood have recognised).

Whatever the route, nostalgia is an emotionally effective marketing strategy and every brand should look at how to use it whilst the uncertainty of recession remains.

Charity: 'nice to do' or 'nice little earner'?

Amongst ‘Stuff Bothering Me Lately’ is the fact that brands often keep their charity partnerships in a dark, dusty backroom watched over occasionally by bearded CSR types whilst they keep their sponsorships in a shiny penthouse with panoramic views of the sea and on-tap butler service from only the best and slickest staff.

As we’ve seen from recent events (see my last post) charitable giving is all the rage. And from a brand perspective it’s just as effective at pulling in the punters as the latest and greatest sport, talent, music or cultural sponsorship. This is partially because people ‘get’ charity and fundraising much more than they used to.

I’m a 70s child. Before I was born, charity hadn’t really hit the mainstream. It was all RNLI lifeboats that did fun things when you put a coin in and life-size ‘Guidedog for the Blind’ doggy banks. Then the 80s happened and the likes of Comic Relief (how old do I feel: http://bit.ly/8pCPEd) and Children in Need hit our screens. Charitable giving grew up. And ever since then we’ve got used to hearing about poverty, need and giving. Quite simply, we’ve all grown up with charity and it’s become as much a part of our lives as sport, music and celebrity.

And the old hackneyed charity tactics are long gone. New technology abounds. The Cricket Foundation’s Chance to Shine uses online technology as well as any brand (http://bit.ly/ds1MjL). De Paul’s ‘iHobo’ app explores technology as a means of educating people about homelessness (http://www.ihobo.org/). Some brands, like Ralph Lauren, tap into the creative industries for charity (http://artstars.polojeans.com/). Some become official partners (http://www.sportrelief.com/about/partners/sainsburys).

The possibilities are endless. But the critical thing is that for a brand, charity can be as much about hard commercial benefit as it is about creative engagement and fluffy feel-good.

A cleverly designed charity association can drive hard sales – just ask Sainsbury’s how its sales look on Red Nose Day or Pampers how its UNICEF campaign (http://bit.ly/cTI4He) has driven brand preference.

If you’re looking to boost your brand and business, charity could be the solution you’re looking for. And if you already have a charity association, dust it off and have a have a think about how it might work harder for you.

It probably deserves more respect.

Blair, Hope and Charity

I’ve decided to do another blog this week because a) my last one was crap (I’m learning, alright?) and b) this happened: http://bit.ly/aLtZEx. And this: http://bit.ly/byi9qh. And, of course, this: http://bit.ly/d3u4dU.

Firstly: every Billionaire, Sportsman and ex-Statesman worth his salt is giving their money away! Is there something they know that we don’t? Is the day of reckoning but days away? Have the Sun Valley club decided that poor is the new rich? Or have they all gone so far up Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (http://bit.ly/fAla) that not even a football club can satisfy their cravings?

Secondly: the contrasting reactions to all of this is striking. The majority (led of course by the Daily Wail: http://bit.ly/9vrRWM) had something bad to say about Tony Blair’s donation. Most people were happy about the Dispossessed Campaign and Ellison’s decision.

Many would argue that only Tony Blair (allegedly) started an illegal war. I’m not going to go into that – or indeed whether we should question the donations of Ellison, Gates, Buffet and Dispossessed donors because of the odd skeleton in their closet. The question of whether to turn down a personal or corporate donation because of previous shady practise is a WHOLE other post.

The point I want to make here is that the media are great at painting the blacks and the whites but rarely the greys – and this is never more true than with the way they have dealt with Blair’s donation.

The motivations behind charity donations are not black and white – they are grey and complex.

Of course pure altruism is a part of it – the pure, unadulterated pleasure of knowing that your money is doing some actual good. But there are also shadier motives. Alleviation of guilt is one. Who doesn’t feel a bit guilty sitting on the sofa eating Kettle chips whilst watching Kenyan kids rooting through a rubbish dump? Boasting is another. How many of us has worn a ‘Live Strong’ or ‘Making Poverty History’ bracelet? Or felt smug at 'out-giving' someone on a Justgiving page or charity auction?

Indeed, whole movements have been set up on the premise that altruism is not enough to get people to raise money: RED (http://www.joinred.com/splash.htm) presupposes people a) want stuff and b) want to show people they’ve done good. Comic Relief (http://www.comicrelief.com) and Warchild (http://www.warchild.org.uk/) give people entertainment in return for money. All charities use celebrities to get people's attention.

I could go on but the fact is that charity donation is never as simple or as cynical as this: http://bit.ly/cA2Yxq (what an ironically brazen and opportunistic piece of PR this is, by the way).

Whether you *dredges up his A-Level political theory* subscribe to the Hobbesian/Daily Mail (everyone is inherently evil, dammit, EVIL!) or the Lockeian point of view (everyone is reasonable and LOVELY!), you have to recognize that there are bits of good and bad in all of us.

So rather than pick apart peoples’ motives why can’t we simply rejoice in the good that leads people to donate? Let's prove we are all inherently good by celebrating the good news.

And recognising that a lot of Veterans will be better off for Blair's actions.

Naomi, Brazilian porn and knowing your place.

Seeing Naomi sitting in her little ‘high fashion’ bubble at the Hague a couple of weeks ago and reading this – quite absurd – claim from her PR (http://bit.ly/cSEWTe) got me thinking about what happens when people – and brands – become separated from what they do best (in Naomi’s case, throwing stuff about).

For brands, as with people like Naomi and her PRs, this frequently leads to misinterpretation, ridicule and reputational breakdown. Marketing is littered with examples of brands flopping around like fishes out of water, gasping for more familiar air. Whether it’s Habitat entering the Iran Elections on Twitter (http://bit.ly/hxmnO), Dr Pepper exploring Brazilian porn (http://bit.ly/cRv66d), Louis Vuitton doing its bit for genocide (http://bit.ly/5dRUq) or Nestlé (allegedly) killing monkeys (http://bit.ly/9fg6I2), brands who try to operate outside their comfort zone often come a-cropper.

Ultimately, it’s about understanding the environment you’re in and adjusting your language, message and behaviour accordingly (the ABC of social etiquette). Habitat needed to better understand ‘twittiquette’. Dr Pepper needed to understand Facebook’s dirty mind. LV and Nestlé should know that responding in legalese is the best way to put a charity’s back up. And Naomi should know that talking about ‘inconvenience’ in the context of a genocide trial is hardly a wise move.

When brands get it right (usually thanks to some rigorous planning or at least taking a step back and having a proper think), the benefits can far outstrip the potential risks. Jimmy Choo (http://bit.ly/9pgsuy) and Debenhams’ (http://bit.ly/bLRnR) forays into new technology were exponential successes, for example. From IAMS Pet Insurance and Mars ice cream to Caterpillar shoes and watches and BMW espresso machines, those that succeed are those who have a good sense of their place in the world and a solid understanding of what they can offer by extending themselves.

Those that don’t face likely ridicule and reputational damage. Next time, Naomi, be better prepared. And drop (kick) your PRs.

Luxury brands, social networking and knowing who your friends are.

The best thing I’ve received all week is Google’s deck on ‘Real Life Social Networks’. Here if you want to see it in all its 224-slide glory (http://bit.ly/b6A03x - thanks @dorando) but I’ll do a synopsis.

The basic premise of the presentation is that the way we structure our social life on the web is totally different to (and nowhere near as complex as) how we do so offline. Online we have an amorphous group of ‘Friends’ or ‘Followers’ who we have picked up along our offline and online travels. Offline we have a series of different groups of friends (research says 6 is the average) who we have met throughout life (and through lifestages) and who we most often keep separate.

Our dialogue with each of these groups is totally different in tone and nature. It varies from the formal to the friendly to the downright childish (well, at least that’s what I’m like with my schoolfriends…). Bringing them together as one (at a wedding for example) can be stressful and slightly scary. And yet online (through facebook, twitter, linkedin and others) we usually talk to them as one.

This is a big dilemma for brands and nowhere more so than in luxury (my focus for this week). Luxury brands face many online dilemmas (transparency vs control, how luxury lives online, etc), but one of the most critical is how best to engage online customers in meaningful dialogue.

Some brands (remaining nameless) are hopeless at this but many are successful. Some go corporate (http://www.facebook.com/Tiffany?ref=ts), some take the formality of the POS experience online (www.faberge.com) and some create a much more informal environment (http://twitter.com/JimmyChooLtd).

Wherever they choose to sit on the ‘cordial-chumminess’ continuum, the brands who will succeed will be the ones who understand that the customers they are targeting online are as segmented and as complex as the ones they see day-in, day-out in-store. Ultimately they will need to create an environment and develop a dialogue which appeals to all but retains the ‘charisma', 'premiumness' and 'personal touch' of the in-store experience.

Plan B, Madness and the Power of Partnership

A trip on Tuesday night to Warchild’s Pub Landlord Jukebox at the Royal Festival Hall got me thinking about the power of collaborations and how they can help brands cut through the morass of functional and sales-oriented marketing. The delight of the audience when Plan B took the stage to sing ‘Our House’ with Madness and Al Murray (http://bit.ly/aHBx26) really brought home the power of partnership.

The Grammys and the Oscars have recognized for years that unlikely combinations of stars and musicians make for very compelling viewing – Britney-Madonna? Eminem-Elton John? Stars know instinctively that borrowing the equity of similar or perhaps more contemporary contemporaries can build their own credibility and power.

But the principles of the ‘smart collaboration’ and the cut-through these achieve apply equally to brands, whether it’s Nike working with its athletes (I hardly need to post a link here), Hermes teaming up with Bugatti to make this: http://bit.ly/3102YC, Panerai making a watch in honour of its internet fanbase (http://bit.ly/dyk40e) or Garmin teaming up with City AM to get the City (of London) running: http://bit.ly/cO088s.

Ultimately collaborations create buzz, capture imaginations and get the blogosphere and the media talking.

The best example out there of a brand which uses collaborations to create news has to be BMW. From working with Sennheiser to make branded earphones (http://bit.ly/d7hAON) and Embraer and Dassault for aircraft interiors to partnering with Jeff Koons on an ‘Art Car’ (http://bit.ly/aLqpU9) or Sirena to make espresso machines, the brand totally understands that working with others that have either similar or wildly different attitudes not only bursts them out of category to appeal to new audiences but also generates huge amounts of online and offline news.

Partnerships and collaborations are the ultimate in news and the key to unlocking online marketing potential and buzz: brands who recognize this are the ones who will win the ‘share of voice’ war both online and offline.

Taking inspiration from sport content

Amazing to think that 2-3 weeks ago we were all in a frenzy about the World Cup. Or at least the media were. Such is our (and their) appetite for the fresh, shiny and new, the biggest tournament on the planet is media-forgotten as everyone searches for newer, better stuff to watch. Or content as we call it.

People tune in to great sport for various reasons: aside from obviously to follow their team, they want to witness great skill, seminal moments, controversy, surprise, passion and iconic people doing what they do best. Great sports content does this well. Take Sky's new 'unpredictability of sport' campaign. Great skill? Check. Big moments? Check. Controversy, Surprise? In spades. Passion? It's inherent. Passionate? Iconic? It's Cantona FFS.

In the course of a project I've been doing for a sports equipment brand, we've been coaxing them into doing something a little more innovative and eyecatching. As inspiration, we used these. Whether it's Rooney having his way with a Coke can (http://bit.ly/d4la9F), American footballers showing their astounding skills (who cares if it might be 'airbrushed', that's surely part of the debate: http://bit.ly/aTDeiC) or a Djokovic tennis experiment (http://yhoo.it/bV9Y8T) good, magnetic content is based on 6 solid principles: Skill, Seminal moments, Controversy, Surprise, Passion and Iconic people.

Whether you're trying to build up brand equity in sport, film (http://bit.ly/crG0N2), music (http://bit.ly/9TTWfl) or any other area, don't leave your home (or branded content) without them.

An introduction

When anyone else other than me starts reading this stuff, they're going to need a bit of background so my first post is an introduction to me, what I do, what I think and what I'm going to be sharing over the coming weeks, months and (who knows) years.

As briefly as possible: I'm a multi-disciplinary planner with 10 years experience, now focussed on 4 categories: sport, luxury, food & drink and charity. Eclectic, but my view is that you do your best work when your interest is genuine.

As a planner I know 3 things:

1) the traditional marketing model is dead: everything's crossing over, everything's a hybrid. Gone are the days of the strategist without creative nous, the adman with no grasp of PR and discrete PR, ad, CRM campaigns . Every line is blurred.

2) it all starts and ends with content: you can talk the talk as much as you like but if you don't give it some substance with some great content (genuine news, video, photography, etc) your campaign is dead in the water.

3) innovate or die: sit still and you're screwed, online you either innovate or your brand dies a sad lonely death. Brands need to stay at the cutting edge and understand how their audiences are engaging with new technologies (yes luxury guys, you too).

I'm blogging because every week I discover stuff that makes me a better marketer and I want to share it more widely. I already share it through Twitter (@Macka7) and LinkedIn (http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/adam-mack/4/a85/2ab) but this will hopefully provide more insight.

My only hope is that it opens some 'old school' eyes to the potential of the cutting edge.