What better way to walk through some of our favorite video sharing sites but to post a video blog? In this vlog I will cover Vimeo, Viddler and Flickr. Each site has cool features that you may not know about. You Tube is the most popular, but give these a try - you may be surprised!

Share with us your favorite sites for sharing video!

Video Blog: Favorite Video Sharing Sites from off madison ave on Vimeo.

Generation Virtual – AKA Generation V – is the new title given to the emerging generation of technology-savvy folks who converge online from a variety of backgrounds. According to a recent article, Generation V is becoming a force to be reckoned with, one unlike any other generation before. Instead of being divided into categories based on traditional demographics (age, race, social status and the like), Generation V is instead characterized by traits like an “increasing preference for the use of digital media channels to discover information, build knowledge and share insights,” according to the research.

This rise in a new consumer base with its own subcategories and trends is a chance for marketers to create new campaigns geared toward Generation V and the technological mediums they use. It’s a chance for online marketers to shine and also to reach across several traditional demographic groups at once as your message reaches the diverse Generation V members.

I have a bad habbit of finding a higher purpose in places where it doesn’t exist. This tends to creep people out when it feels inappropriate. I’m feeling that way again right now as I contemplate the latest financial news, and the current dark days of the U.S. dollar.

What’s nice about what is going on right now, for me, is that it doesn’t involve Internet spending this time. The bubble that burst in 2000 caused an avelance of failing businesses and unemployed database programmers. The Internet isn’t the problem this time. (In fact, the Internet may save the day for many. Because you don’t need gasoline to ship e-cards or send e-mails.)

What we have today is, admittedly, an economic challenge, but at least we have the ability to use the Internet to maintain our marketing campaigns. That wasn’t the case in 2000. Few Internet companies knew what they were doing, even the ones selling ad space. There was no Google Adwords. Search marketing was almost a side interest.

Now we have all manner of ways to continue to court customers - electronicly and inexpensively. (I mean, you know - relative to a billboard or radio ad.) And we should definitely be using them, even now as the number of leads seems to get slimmer.

Times like this take me back to what my Father - who was a Marketing VP at Motorola at the time - told me about the recession of the early 80s. In particular, he told me how Japanese businesses handled that recession: They continued their marketing campaigns, knowing that eventually the bad times would end and we would go back to the regular, steady upward trend. By maintaining their campaigns, companies like Matsushita and Sony didn’t lose market share, even though if it wasn’t a time where they were making a great deal of money. When things got better, these companies were immediately making back money from the consumers who returned to them. Other companies that didn’t have that foresight, the ones that battened down their hatches, halted their campaigns, and waiting for things to get better to start up again, were then forced to play catch-up in getting back their customers. When things started getting better, they were in no position to take advantage of it. By the time their efforts were put in place, the market had already shifted towards companies that were ready from the start.

The point here is, thanks to how (again, relatively,) inexpensive it is to continue to market your company and brand, this recession has a silver lining: This is the least expensive time to protect your market share. Even if times are bad, they always get better, and now we have the ability to make sure we’re in a position to come back just as strong when that time comes.

No matter whom you’re voting for in November, if you’re like most Americans, chances are you have gone to the Internet for something politically-based. Whether you’re researching your favorite candidate, donating money to their campaign, or simply keeping up with political news, since the 2004 elections, the amount of people going online to seek out political information has significantly increased.

According to a recent study, nearly half of all Americans used the Internet in ways related to the primary elections this spring. So, what do the folks at ClickZ take away from this? As they say – “The message for Internet-naive candidates: Get onboard and sell yourself via the Web.”

Obviously, politics is following the same trend as, well, pretty much everything else – an online presence boosts your overall brand and image. It’s almost a “duh” sort of realization. Yet, according to the article, the candidates have only spent a combined 2 percent on online advertising. Maybe, as the election heats up, candidates across all party lines will open their eyes and fully embrace the Internet’s potential, because, in this pivotal election, how can they afford not to?

The old adage that “Half of my marketing dollars are wasted, I just don’t know which half” is being attacked by Google. The formerly search-centric company seems increasingly to be focused on controlling all of the world’s advertising and bringing calm to the media placement chaos.

Their newest announcement is that they are tying TV and radio ads purchased through the Google interface into Google analytics data stream.

Here at Mighty Interactive and Off Madison Ave, we have been creating similar reports for clients for years, but doing it manually with a lot of labor. The goal is to determine which marketing tactics (TV, radio, print, outdoor, PR, search, banners, email) impact Web traffic, leads, and CPA.

We believe that your Web traffic is an analog for your overall campaign effectiveness, since consumers increasingly go to the Web for more information before taking action. This is especially true for companies that are not well-known consumer brands. For example, assuming that TV ad viewers will go to Pepsi.com after seeing a Pepsi spot is a bit of a reach, but for many of our clients we very much believe that the Web site serves as a vetting mechanism and serves as the bridge between interest and action.

So, Web behavior is an appropriate measure of marketing success, the ability to know exactly what marketing tactics you have in the field at any time, and the corresponding Web behavior patterns, is exceedingly nifty. When you add a radio buy to a media mix and don’t see a jump in Web traffic, you start to question the value of radio for that client.

If Google can eventually create a tool for this type of reporting that extends beyond ads placed through their systems, we’ll be first in line to try it. Until then (or until we start to buy more TV and radio through Google), we’ll keep on making our own spreadsheets and doing our own analysis.

Either way, it’s nice to see the monolith confirm our methodology, even if it’s three years after we started doing it.

In a recent client meeting, we were asked the question of whether we should bid on the company’s brand terms in a paid search campaign.  As one might expect, the clickthrough and conversion rates for brand terms were higher than some of the non-branded phrases, but there was a concern over the opportunity cost of spending ad dollars on keyword phrases associated with the brand in lieu of other relevant phrases that could possibly generate new customers.  For a variety of reasons, we will continue to run the brand terms in this particular campaign.  However, this isn’t always the case - we have several campaigns for which we do not utilize branded keywords.

I don’t really think there is a blanket policy for this decision, nor should there be.  Each campaign is different, and as much as we hate saying this - “it really depends.”  Here’s a list of things to consider when making this important judgment call that can greatly impact paid search campaign budgets and performance.

Why Not?

“I Shouldn’t Have To”
“We’ll Rely on Natural Results”
“We’re Probably Getting Those Clicks Without PPC”

Many marketers and business people feel that bidding on brand terms is not necessary due to the fact that, well, this is their brand.  Anyone searching for their company name is likely to click on a natural listing anyway.  The thought is, “we’re going to get those clicks anyway”.  Careful review of search volume vs. search analytics (or traffic and activity for specific keywords) will tell you whether this is true.  Find out how many people are searching for a keyword term on a daily basis vs. how many are actually coming to your site for that term and you should be able to get a decent understanding of your clickthrough rate on the search results page.

Why You Should

Poor Natural Placement
As is the case with many online marketing companies, we promote a number of sites that we didn’t build.  While we have a team of excellent developers in-house and some fantastic Web development partners, we can’t control the build process.  Thus, control on how easily the site can be optimized is lost as well.  For some sites, natural placement is not that easy.  There could be some design issues like flash, frames or complicated/dynamic URL structure.  Or there could be just some less than stellar optimization tactics.  Whatever the reason, some sites just don’t rank well in natural search results initially.  In these cases it is imperative to bid on the brand until natural results mature.

Protect Your Brand from Competitors & Affiliates
It’s your brand and if your identity has even a modicum of popularity, you should obviously protect it.  Sometimes you’ll find that others bid on your term only to place their ad in paid search results.  Google’s trademark policy disallows any other advertiser from giving the perception that they represent your company.  Thus, they can try and bid on your brand phrases, but they can’t use those terms in their ad.  If someone is using your brand name in their paid search advertisements, go here.  If you find that others are bidding on various derivations of your brand terms, whether they are competitors or affiliates, make sure you are on top.

Better Clickthrough Rates with SEO & Paid Together
We’ve run several campaigns in which we own the top natural result and the top paid search result.  In every case, whether it’s a branded or non-branded phrase, clickthrough rates for each are much higher than they would be if the placements were not run in tandem.  These placements seem to have an overwhelming effect on search behavior, and their synergy conveys absolute relevance to a search topic.  Our friends at iCrossing conducted a study on this behavior last year.

Use Broad Match as a “Catch All”
Opportunities arise unexpectedly, news is released, things happen.  One strategy to ensure your PPC ad appears any time anything remotely related to your brand is searched is to run your brand name in broad match.  Broad match allows you to appear for a host of keyword combinations just as long as they include one or two words.  For example, using the term “proctor and gamble” in broad match will allow your ad to appear for other phrases that include “proctor and gamble” such as “proctor and gamble products”, “proctor and gamble coupons”, “proctor and gamble careers”, “proctor and gamble detergent” or even “proctor and gamble recall”.  Owning placement for every combination of brand keywords allows you to have greater control over your brand message no matter what situation may arise.