Without Content, Copy is Just a Bunch of Words

When Gertrude Stein was asked what she thought of Oakland, California, she answered: “There is no there there.” Without content, the same could be said about copy.

For anything that anyone reads in any form to be meaningful, it needs to be about something.

In the interactive space, that something is what the content strategist initially researches, defines, and then passes on to the copywriter. Afterwards, the copywriter turns that information into whatever kind of presentation is needed, as defined by the client’s needs. The copywriter works within the limitations of the platform, technology, time and resources available as well as shapes the copy to fit SEO considerations and character limits, as defined by the content strategist.

Belief in the Muse

What a copywriter most values is time spent with ideas percolating, giving a chance for creative inspiration to strike. In most projects, the quintessential percolation happens in collaboration with the team, working most closely with the visual designers.

It All Begins with Branding

There are various kinds of copy that can emerge, depending upon the project. However, every project requires one thing from copy first and foremost: branding. The copywriter needs to capture the “character” of the product or service being written about – its mood, style, voice and tone. To do that most effectively, the copywriter receives help from the business strategist and content strategist and knows, in advance of any writing, the bio of a company, its goals and competitors. Also, the copywriter works closely with the visual design and user experience (UX) teams to understand how the look, style and usability of the site will contribute to defining the brand.

Types of Copy

Below is a list of different types of copy that the copywriter is most often called upon to write in the interactive space. Often these different kinds of copy can exist within one document, but some of them are reserved for games or technical.

  • CTA: The most frequent objective for copy is to get the user to ACT.
  • Instructional: From how to use your Zephyr TV remote to how to open a box or make a cake, copy tells the user how to achieve a goal.
  • Informational: Whether used to drop a casual fact or to relate something pertinent to a user’s understanding, informational copy educates (e.g., “SLO is the happiest city in the U.S.”).
  • Navigational: Essential for a user to get around a site or use an app, navigational copy is omnipresent.
  • Tech translation: Turning technical language into laymen’s language is one of the main requirements for a copywriter when addressing consumers about the electronic devices they just purchased or when talking to any user who wants to make sense of how something technical works.
  • Nomenclature: What something is called reflects the brand. It also affects the usability of a site.
  • Myth: The story is what brings a product or service to life. Although not always needed to be blatantly present, in the best copywriting it will still exist as a silent hero. It doesn’t need to be fully fleshed. It simply tells the user the who, what, where, when and why in a subtle way that captivates their imagination. And brings the product or service to mind in a compelling way when the user is out in the real world.
  • Playful interaction: When a site talks back to you, you know it’s alive (e.g., the taunts a player gets when he doesn’t figure out the game on preparetodie.com).
  • Conceptual: A picture is worth a thousand words. To collaborate with the visual designer and find an image that tells the whole story all by itself or with just a word or two – that’s as close to perfection as a copywriter can fly. In other words, in the interactive space, the very best storytelling is wordless. And that is copywriting too.

With Content, Copy Creates World Peace

Well, maybe that’s going a little far…but did I mention that copy is supposed to get the reader’s attention?

Posted by Brooke Wolff on 5/31/11 7:30 AM

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn ShareThis
|
VN:F [1.9.8_1114]

rating average:

(2 votes)

Social Does Not Equal Collaboration

For the enterprise IT-focused digital marketer, the penetration of “consumer-ish” behavior into the enterprise poses special challenges. Your audience now expects content to be portable and to arrive in mashable, shareable, and tablet swipe-able formats. Your beloved white papers don’t always render well on those mobile devices through which, increasingly, the enterprise buyer learns about and evaluates software, hardware or services.

The struggle to be relevant and consumer-ish produces mixed results, from kludgy messaging (“Prosumers”!) to interfaces cluttered with social icons and cooler-than-thou but ultimately irrelevant flash and flash-y screen takeovers. At worst, the would-be consumer-ish enterprise IT company website or mobile app resembles that ‘80s hairstyling icon, the mullet: a weird hybrid of “business in front, party in the back.”

Here’s another way to approach the problem. Your enterprise IT audiences aren’t “social.” They’re collaborative.

The differences between digital social activity and digital enterprise collaboration—defined here as the right people receiving, sharing and acting upon the right information to get things done efficiently—are profound, and have major implications for digital marketers.

Social vs. Collaborative

Social communications like tweets or Facebook updates are not task-driven. For most people, social is a time-filler, a way to dispense what Donald Rumsfeld’s Pentagon subordinates referred to as his “snowflakes”: shared thoughts of the moment, unconnected to any specific action or deliverable. Collaboration is about getting stuff done. The Salesforce.com-Toyota offering announced on May 23rd, “Toyota Friend,” a collaborative in that it will enable drivers to connect with Toyota dealers and get diagnostics on their hybrid and electric cars.

Even when there is a task involved—Groupon originally focused on enabling groups of friends to get volume discounts—the stakes are low for social activity. If I don’t get 60% off of my next teeth whitening, or ascend the throne as King of my local yogurt shop, the world won’t end–Rapture or no. Compare that to the consequences for the rep or VAR who fails to act on qualified leads before his competitor does.

Finally, even when there’s a task and some urgency attached to the social communication, the shared information isn’t structured and rule-bound. Research in Motion (RIM) matters to enterprise collaboration, and hugely, because the BlackBerry’s architecture was designed with enterprise security, permissions and provisioning rules foremost in mind.

Focus on the Process

For the enterprise IT audience, the best way to make digital experiences and messages resonate is to focus on the relevant business processes that underlie collaboration. Define your marketing personas in terms of how your audience gets stuff done, what information they use and who they work with, and then crystallize how your company’s solution is relevant to those processes.

As a best practice, you and your digital agency should do your homework on these three areas at the outset of any digital marketing initiative:

  1. MAP YOUR AUDIENCE TO THEIR BUSINESS PROCESSES: What needs to get done by your target audience? What are the roles, responsibilities, permissions?
  2.  

  3. IDENTIFY THE DATA THEY USE TO GET THINGS DONE: How is their crucial information structured, where does it reside, what’s required in real-time? What is the minimum data set that can be provisioned instantly to enable the desired workflow?
  4.  

  5. REDUCE, REDUCE, REDUCE: Avoid “marketecture.” Pare rigorously to make your messaging, content types and user flows resonate within your audience’s defined business process.

Posted by Tom McLaughlin on 5/24/11 12:24 PM

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn ShareThis
|
VN:F [1.9.8_1114]

rating average:

(3 votes)

Calling all Cal Poly graphic swashbucklers and design freaks!

LEVEL is now accepting entries for the annual Cal Poly Design Competition. This is an opportunity for all current Cal Poly students to submit their best graphic design work in the print and interactive categories for a chance to win some pretty sweet prizes and get lots of recognition. Some of the previous winners [and losers] have even gone on to work at LEVEL! Deadline to enter is Tuesday, May 31st!

Entering or not, be sure to check out the Cal Poly Design Competition site. The site was created by 11 LEVEL designers (try saying that 10 times, really fast) who were given creative freedom to design their own “Undersea Fantasy.” Which is your favorite design?

If you have any questions about the competition please contact me, Danielle Douglass.

Good luck!

Posted by Danielle Douglass on 5/23/11 8:50 AM

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn ShareThis
|
VN:F [1.9.8_1114]

rating average:

(3 votes)

Threading the needle

Photograph: Susana Bates/Reuters

Analysts are questioning Microsoft’s $8.5 billion purchase of Skype this past week for good reason. Skype isn’t turning a net profit and Microsoft wasn’t truly in a competitive bid. This sets up the question as to what synergies can be created between these two firms that drives such a valuation. We’ve all heard about Skype’s role as a key technology across many Microsoft technologies such as Xbox and Outlook, but I think there is one focal area that takes the lead over all others – mobility.

Microsoft announced Windows Phone  7 Series at Mobile World Congress in February 2010 with the goal of re-invigorating their position in the smart phone space, one they pretty much created but have since lost. In a recent opportunity to meet Robbie Bach, Retired President of MS Entertainment & Devices, he emphasized the point that they learned that MS had made a key mistake in the past by allowing handset manufacturers and carriers to manipulate the user experience on the phones with little to no restrictions (which can be likened to the approach Android is taking today). Now Microsoft is tightening controls and limiting what modifications, if any can be made. With this new strategy and reach into both enterprise and consumer markets on a global scale, what was missing until last week?

Microsoft did not have a unique value proposition. Nothing to disrupt the space. Apple has the tightest user experience and ubiquity across devices. Android is in just about everything now. In order to thread the needle between these two heavyweights, Microsoft needs something that changes the current market trajectory which looks to be building towards a duopoly a few years out.

Let’s look at the dynamics on the buy side of the industry, specifically the carriers, as an example of what could happen next. With AT&T’s recent proposed acquisition of T-mobile, Sprint is concerned with extinction due to its relatively low market share. Until now, no carrier has been a big advocate of changing their lucrative business model by allowing highly integrated VoIP calling that negates the use of their airwaves for voice transmission. Why would Sprint or another carrier consider disrupting the industry with a low cost VoiP solution that uses MS Windows 7 and Skype? The simple reason is that that Microsoft can create cross subsidies with search advertising through Bing. Suddenly, the carrier doesn’t lose financially. The consumer wins as well with lower subscription costs. Thus, the industry is disrupted with a network effect between search advertising and VoiP.

Microsoft captures market share, perhaps just enough to be worth $8.5 billion.

Posted by John Schneider on 5/16/11 10:38 AM

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn ShareThis
|
VN:F [1.9.8_1114]

rating average:

(3 votes)

Observations from Google I/O 2011

Google I/O 2011 keynote screen

I had the opportunity to attend the Google I/O Developer Conference in San Francisco this week to check out the latest and greatest Google has to offer. Here are a few of my observations.

Mobile Will Be Huge

Duh, right? Isn’t it already? Yes, but some companies still seem to be in the “I need a better website” mindset. What they should really be saying is “I need a better interactive and social marketing solution that works across all connected devices my audience interacts with”. Hey, we can help with both, but would rather work on the latter. The adoption rate of Android is impressive. Add this to the world-wide numbers for all smartphones and you begin to see where we’re headed.

Also, Google understands the hotly contested Android fragmentation problem and is making strides to address the issue with carriers and manufacturers.

Google Supports Developers

There will always be people with a bone to pick when brands and products reach that pervasive level that results in the “fanboy” customer or developer. But, regardless of what you personally think of Google, there’s no question that they have embraced the developer community and continue to empower developers with new, innovative, and open technologies. Not many other large corporations can claim that. Case in point, their announcement of an Android Open Accessory standard based on the Arduino open-source hardware platform.

HTML5 is Gaining Momentum Fast

Browser support was the first step. All the major browser vendors are now supporting it to some degree and continue to release better support in subsequent version releases. Google is a major player in the effort to spread HTML5 awareness – demonstrating the capabilities, preaching the benefits, and proposing new standards. Check out this video from one of the sessions. It’s not even a standard yet, but HTML5 may have the quickest adoption rate of any browser-dependent web technology in recent years.

Tablets are Cool, But People Look Stupid Taking Pictures With Them

A random observation, but when people hold up a 10” slab of silicon and glass in the 10-2 position to take a picture, it’s pretty funny. :-) There’s got to be a better way. Personally, I’d rather use my phone or a standalone camera and have the pictures automatically pushed to my other devices or the cloud.

Posted by Rob Patti on 5/13/11 1:30 PM

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn ShareThis
|
VN:F [1.9.8_1114]

rating average:

(4 votes)