I've been reading the reactions to Pepsi's recent influencer outreach program, PR for The Pepsi Cooler. Have been thinking about it in the perspective of other outreach campaigns, like Nikon, Vista, HP.
Seems like the lesson here - whether intentional or not - is "influencer, persuade thyself." You don't make a meaningful dent in a $39 billion business by sending some aluminum out to 25 well-networked people. What you do achieve is a discussion that starts to bounce around the echo chamber. That's not necessarily a bad thing.
"There is only one thing in life worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." - Oscar Wilde
So what's NOT being talked about here? Coca-Cola. RC Cola. Jones. Red Bull. Et al.
Look at this spike in Google search traffic for "pepsi new logo" since the first delivery date. You think the program's working?
Hi Peter, so sorry to be late to respond here. Thank you so much for linking to my blog post regarding the Pepsi 25, it's much appreciated. It's been a few weeks now and I am curious as to why we haven't heard a recap from Pepsi (or something similar). I know they were analyzing the campaign, so I'd be interested as to whether or not they felt it met their goals/objectives and if it was successful.
Posted by: Beth Harte | 18 November 2008 at 12:31 AM
Well connected influencers vs. a groundswell of moderately connected average Joes and Janes? I'll take Joe and Jane most days, especially if the product in question is mostly an offline product.
Posted by: Allan | 10 November 2008 at 12:02 AM
Thanks for the post Peter. It seems that we get so wrapped up in how all important social media campaigns can be, that it takes some insight to bring things back down to the basics... i love the oscar wilde quote and the perspective you brought along with it. Powerful yet realistic.
Posted by: Dan P | 04 November 2008 at 10:36 AM
If I didn't read some of the 25 bloggers' blogs or were on Twitter, I wouldn't have even heard of the promotion.
Pepsi would've been better off if they sent these packages to actual advocates for their product, which would've gone a lot further for the life of the promotion as they'd be more likely to spread the word (perhaps further than the echo chamber would) since they're a part of the company's community already.
Posted by: Sonny Gill | 01 November 2008 at 11:29 PM
@Tom don't get me wrong - I think there are some interesting ways to think about the program, but I don't think what we've seen so far has been anything great.
And I think that the blogosphere is adding a lot of value to the discussion that other companies should learn from. Like the ones not being talked about!
Posted by: Peter Kim | 01 November 2008 at 09:31 PM
Perhaps. But until they bring back the 12 pack, I'm not listening.
Posted by: Troy Worman | 31 October 2008 at 07:35 PM
Peter:
OK, it is not a bad thing, and it is possible that it will be a great thing.
And it is better to try - it just strikes me as a very odd way to try to be relevant. (Does anyone who isn't on Twitter or reading AdAge even know about this?)
I am a cynical one though.
TO'B
Posted by: Tom O'Brien | 31 October 2008 at 01:48 PM
@Tom - is a program targeting the echo chamber such a bad thing? Agreed, moving the mass market is difficult. Mack Collier and Beth Harte have written some of the best commentary on how Pepsi could do so:
http://moblogsmoproblems.blogspot.com/2008/10/i-have-three-packages-to-give-you-over.html
http://www.theharteofmarketing.com/2008/10/social-media-inside-the-echo-chamber.html
As you know, making a difference in the marketplace - especially in a mature market without something unique to offer - is nearly impossible. And one social media director plus one very large PR agency could never scale to connect with enough consumers to make a difference.
On the other hand, a program intended to turn the gears of mass media has a shorter road to "success." Bloggers influence trade press, to influence mainstream press, and that reach eventually trickles-down to influence consumers and shareholders. (that's a non-political use of "trickle-down" by the way.)
Influence doesn't always go down the pyramid - sometimes it goes up. Hence the title of this post...
Posted by: Peter Kim | 31 October 2008 at 12:45 PM
Well, I have to say that I know and like many of the people involved with this program. However, what the h*ck does it have to do with fans of PepsiCo? This seems like a purpose designed program to drive the "echosphere".
Will it make any difference? Looks to me like PepsiCo (and their agents) were able to get 25 influential bloggers to talk about them. Good for them. New Coke could EASILY have done the same thing - would it have made any difference in the marketplace? I don't think so.
What it really proves is that BIG BRANDS can get the social media superstars to write about them. Nothing else.
I disagree with @Peter above, everybody is NOT talking about them. Social media insiders are talking about them. Reminds me of the Bill Gates/Seinfeld ads. Never entered the public consciousness. Made a huge splash in the echosphere.
This is not like Dell, because it is not driven by their conumers or customers.
Tom O'Brien
Posted by: Tom O'Brien | 31 October 2008 at 12:23 PM
that is exactly what i had said from the beginning. pepsi was looking for buzz, not influence in the market. they are a fairly old marketing dog, they would know by now that they cannot buy people just by sending them cool gifts...hopefully they learned that lesson before. they were looking for buzz, they got it in the right place - the social media and marketing crowd
Posted by: Esteban Kolsky | 31 October 2008 at 12:10 PM
Depends. As you say, now Pepsi has everyone's attention, and we know they are testing the social media waters. Their FOLLOW THROUGH will greatly determine how successful this ultimately ends up being. They have gotten a TON of useful feedback about this 'promotion'. If they act on that feedback and let it shape their 'outreach' moving forward, then it could be a big plus for the brand.
But on the other hand, if they ignore most of the feedback, and give the impression that 'we're not listening', then it could explode in their face. Not all attention is good attention, few knew what Dell's policy toward responding to bloggers was circa 2005.
Posted by: mack collier | 31 October 2008 at 12:02 PM
Thanks Todd. Sorry about that, it's http://trends.google.com/trends?q=pepsi+new+logo&ctab=0&geo=all&date=mtd&sort=0
I'd blame Typepad's flaky performance over the past week, but as publisher mea culpa.
Posted by: Peter Kim | 31 October 2008 at 09:23 AM
Good summation. But FYI that Google link is broken.
Posted by: Todd Defren | 31 October 2008 at 09:15 AM