Every year, on a cold mid-winter Sunday evening, two titans prepare to do battle.
Both sides have been planning, strategizing, and discussing it for months – but when game-day comes? Anything can happen.
I’m talking, of course, about the Super Bowl.
But I’m not talking about the teams on the field. See, for me, the big event on Super Bowl Sunday isn’t the football game. It’s the interaction that happens between brands and consumers.
The Brave New World of Super Bowl Advertising
More than ever, consumers aren’t just interested in watching ads. They want to engage with them on social media to participate in broader conversations around them. Which means, on the one hand, brands have a golden opportunity to get more value out of their advertising and extend engagement far beyond that single Sunday night.
On the other hand, it also means that these brands have to make sure that the ad itself is really good, outrageously entertaining, culturally sensitive, and 100% relevant.
No pressure, right?
In celebration of advertising’s biggest night of the year, let’s take a look at some of 2016’s contenders – from the long-standing superstars to the first-time advertisers. What kind of emotional response are these ads trying to create in their viewers? What strategies are they using to accomplish this? And most importantly, based on the social media conversations around them – do they actually work? Let’s find out.
Since August 2015, we have been eagerly collecting conversation about the U.S. presidential primary candidates, their parties, and the issues surrounding their campaigns.
Today we’re excited to present our social media polling of the 2016 presidential primaries. Using over 2.5 million comments for analysis, we’ve determined the party leaders of the primary according to social, and the biggest issues being talked about in this election cycle.
Marketers have been encouraging user-generated content through large-scale campaigns on social media for years. They usually promote a new product, or a well-established brand, but rarely do they encourage online reviews.
The comments and images we gather through our social media monitoring platform are user-generated opinions published on multiple sites. From social media, to eCommerce reviews, blogs, and forums, customers willingly share their opinions of products and brands without solicitation.
It’s frustrating, but not surprising, to see that brands are ignoring a vital resource for collecting consumer preference data. Up until recently, focus groups were one of the few ways brands could directly engage with their customers about their products. But now, social and eCommerce sites are a breeding ground for unsolicitied product reviews and opinions.
There is some suspicion surrounding the reliability of social conversation. How can a 140-character tweet tell you exactly why your product is better than your competitors’? How do you know if a few complaints about your product is something to worry about?
These are important questions. Let’s illustrate exactly what brands can discover by “listening” to what their customers say online.
“Making a Murderer” is a Netflix original documentary that explores whether Steven Avery was wrongly imprisoned for murdering photographer Teresa Halbach in 2005. Just 2 years earlier, Avery was exonerated from another crime after serving 18 years in prison.
We’ve been tracking conversation about the show on Twitter since its release on December 18th, 2015. To do this, we collected all mentions of “Making a Murderer” and the popular hashtag #MakingAMurderer.
Ignorant, is what you would think if someone told you that negative product reviews could be beneficial to your brand. But give us a moment to explain, and you could be seeing a +186% conversion rate resulting from how you deal with negative customer product reviews.
In recent times, Twitter, Pinterest, and Facebook have all made it easier to measure your social activity with analytics metrics dashboards.
As individuals, we can use these analytics dashboards to measure the actual impressions of our own pins, but we are unable to collect engagement data from every individual who uses or mentions a campaign hashtag in Pinterest. This means that, while you can measure your brand’s engagement data, you’re in the dark about the influence of your campaign.
To get a true representation of potential impression numbers, you need more than just the number of pins mentioning a hashtag x the number of followers of the publisher.
CPG companies face increasing pressure to deliver an experience for their products that go well beyond usability. To create an emotional tie between a brand and its consumers, businesses first need to consider the status of their customer’s brand loyalty.
Since Twitter launched in 2007, one of its early standout features was the 140 character limit on Tweets. The enforced brevity of publishing content within this limit meant that users had to get creative about how they wanted to phrase something.
An early Twitter user, Chris Messina, sent out the following Tweet in August 2007:
how do you feel about using # (pound) for groups. As in #barcamp [msg]?
His use of the hashtag to track conversation, and tag topics of interest, allowed Tweeters to talk to thousands of people at once, without needing to mention each user by name.
The hashtag is now used widely throughout social media for topic tagging and trend identification. Brands use it to track marketing campaigns, from which we collect conversation to analyze how products are being talked about by consumers.