Continued from yesterday. In today's installment: audience questions on the difference between real world and virtual world marketing, and the online society's receptiveness to promotions by outside for-profit corporations.
Divo Dapto (from the audience): Hello. My question is what essentially is
the difference between the real world and virtual words, from a marketing
communications perspective?
In other words, what opportunities do virtual worlds
offer that real world does not?
Hempman Richard: In responding to that question, could I first pose a question to everyone-- and maybe also give us a little exercise? How many of you feel that you’re somehow different when acting and interacting in the skin of your avatar? If you do, stand up?
Some audience members stay seated, some stand.
Hamlet Au: I see, oh, half the audience standing I guess?
HR: So, in staying seated, do those people
feel pretty much like the same being?
Zero Grace: Yup.
SNOOPYbrown Zamboni: But I also feel different if I'm
with friends or my parents in real life. Of course i feel something different
as an avatar, though. [Grins] As avatars get more popular, I wonder what social pressure
will say about how we look and behave as avatars that connect to our real life identity.
HR: Well, someone who might buy something
different...
Ansible Berkman: Doesn't that depend on how much time you
invest in "feeling in your avatar's skin", Paul?
HR: It goes to Divo's question. Is this a different place? Because people are avatars.
Hamlet Au: I'd love to run with the question myself. The key difference is that online worlds are an immersive and interactive space, and as I mentioned earlier, involve a collaboration between creator and consumer, especially in SL, where everyone's a creator. This is hugely exciting for marketers if they understand this, because it enables them to create experiences that get people truly excited and part of their brand. IF they make it interactive, and more than that, weave it into the world itself.
So I'm not sure how much good it'll
do for marketers to have billboards or even stores like the American Apparel
one, if they're only exact analogues of real world marketing. I mean, who wants
to pretend to be shopping in a mall that looks exactly like where they just
were the other day? Marketers need to be playful, need to embrace the fantasy
aspect, need to embrace the ability to suddenly morph into a squirrel with a
jetpack or just like I did, jump on the table and start playing air guitar.
Boliver Oddfellow (from the audience): If I might make so bold, the key to reaching today's end users in this marketing space can be summed up in the words, "Don't sell me...play with me."
Tetherdown Book (from the audience): In the real world, I can't buy a stamp,
I hate shopping so much. So there is a giddy quantity to virtual consumption
which is playful.
SZ: It's true, especially with the virtual
currency, which although exchangeable can feel like funny money
Fizik Baskerville: Can I address Divo's question? The
thing is... how do we define marketing here? Most of our clients are interested in developing brand equity, not sell
directly. Therefore, the gap between
real life and virtual world marketing is really blurred.
BO: Which begs the question regarding retailers
entering this space, like American Apparel. Is taking a "if we build they will come" approach
enough, or do you have to imbue your sim with some sort of playful corporate
culture?
Jeff Wakawaka (from the audience): First, I wanted to say "Hi" to all of the
panelists and that I'm very excited I got to come see this. I've been talking about it at the office all
week and everyone now thinks I'm a freak because I nearly wet myself over a
virtual panel discussion on avatar-based marketing.
ZG: See, virtual worlds are compelling.
JW: Anyway, I know that both American Apparel
and Rivers Run Red, as well as a host of other companies (both virtual and
real) that I haven't mentioned, have created branded experiences within Second
Life. From an advertiser's perspective,
what are the type of quantitative results (specifically with regards to
engagement) that I should expect from doing something similar? And what recommendations do each of the
panelists have for balancing both an advertising client's interests with
maintaining the cultural integrity of Second Life?
AB (grinning): Fastest panelist typist wins this
question.
SZ: Last question is interesting,
because many of the groups wanting to get in from the outside aren't interested
in the 250,000 "accounts" currently in Second Life, but want to build a space
that their existing communities can come into. They don't want to disturb or in many cases even interact with an existing
culture here that's unique to SL with its country metaphor. But that is changing too. See the flight to islands. It'll be a flight
to networked spaces soon. [Ed. note: in the last year of SL's development, there's been explosive growth in privately-held islands offshore from the main continents, regions that are easier for the landowner to create and control. - WJA]
Fizik Baskerville nods.
HA: I think Second Life has long passed the days when it was a hothouse utopia where any hint of the outside world, especially the corporate for-profit world, caused a giant controversy. Now it scarce causes a ripple, and the challenge is to create cool, lasting, exciting experiences-- and the companies are competing on an equal level with the best creators in SL.
Boliver Oddfellow
BO: That is THE key. If you don’t make
your corporate presence here both interactive and immersive so that you provide
the end user with a brand positive experience, then you are truly missing the
boat.
SZ: Resistance [to corporate presence] has systematically
fallen. Been fascinating to watch. I remember the days when you couldn't get an island. Fizik here got the first, and some people
thought the sky was falling!
Continued tomorrow...
Comments