Watts believes there is. In the past three years, he has worked on a new form of advertising he calls Big Seed marketing (this is part of his work at Yahoo, where he is a principal research scientist). Watts developed the concept with a friend, Jonah Peretti, a veteran of the viral wars. While a student at MIT in 2001, Peretti had an email exchange with
In their hunt for a practical way to create maximum exposure for any given ad, Watts and Peretti developed a way to marry the benefits of old-school mass marketing with clever six-degrees effects. Their first test case came when the Brady Campaign, the gun-control group, asked for help with an online petition.
Watts and Peretti set up a regular mass-market ad buy, running banner ads on several prominent blogs and news sites. Like many ads these days, they added a button on the ad that allows people to forward the ad to a friend--a way of collecting eyeballs for free. Typically, people ignore this "share with your friends" pitch. But Watts and Peretti included technology called ForwardTrack, which displays the route the ad travels once you've forwarded it. This turned ad forwarding into a piece of social cartography. People would pass the ad specifically to those friends most likely to keep it moving. It became a Facebook-like contest to sign up the most friends.
The technique marries Watts's two main epiphanies: Cascades require word-of-mouth effects, so you need to build a six-degrees effect into an ad campaign; but since you can never know which person is going to spark the fire, you should aim the ad at as broad a market as possible--and not waste money chasing "important" people. And it worked. The pass-around effect doubled the number of people who saw the Brady Campaign's ad. They paid for 22,582 hits and received an additional 31,590 for free. Another campaign they ran for the Oxygen network quadrupled the audience size, adding 23,544 hits to the initial 7,064.
Neither was, technically, a viral hit. Neither passed the disease threshold, where the meme spreads exponentially and engulfs the mainstream. "But you can double your impact, which is still pretty good," Watts says.
The ultimate irony of Watts's research is that, if you really buy it, the most effective way to pitch your idea is ... mass marketing. And that is precisely what the wizards of Madison Avenue, presiding over our zillion-channel microniche market, have rejected as obsolete. "But that's the thing about magic," says Watts. "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is."
Clive Thompson is a Fast Company contributing writer. His article "Motorhead Messiah" appeared in the November 2007 issue.
Email
Digg
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Buzz Up!
LinkedIn
Recent Comments | 67 Total
February 9, 2008 at 3:12am by Achara M
Influentials as described by Watts seem to be only one-dimensional - they only need to more socially-connected than others to be thrown into the Influentials category.
Does his simulations take into account the characteristics of the Mavens (those who know alot) and Salesmen (charismatic, persuasive pple) put forth in 'The Tipping Point'? It doesn't sound like it.
His simulations would be most accurate to describe online viral effects, not the adoption of trends in products and services in the real world. When you're analyzing trends in real-life consumer behaviour you need to take into consideration the behaviour of the Keller's 'leading edge' influencers, as well as the social context, such economic health, and social and commercial patterns in that geographical location.
February 11, 2008 at 1:48am by Warner Carter
Of course this begs the question; how does one influence the influencers?
February 11, 2008 at 11:11am by Guy Hagen
There is a tremendous body of research on the subject of influence, social networks, diffusion, and infection of which Watts' work is but a well-recognized corner. There are many aspects of a network that affect the widespread adoption of something; its "stickiness" (as Watts calls it), the density of the network, the size of the network, the shape of the network, and the time period it is allowed to propogate. Is the network uniform? Then well-connected individuals may have a significant effect. Is the network clustered, with subgroups and cliques? Does the network have sparse connections and bridges between individuals and groups? Then "brokers" and "gatekeepers" - another form of influence - may have greater impact.
How one chooses to model a network is also a critical determinant. In the past, Mr. Watts has used a "small world" model for randomly generating simulated networks that is structurally very different from another popular model proposed by another physicist (Alberto-Laszlo Barabasi) based on preferential connections. This may seem academic, but if one ignores network structure, then one will always have a distorted view of influence in that network.
February 12, 2008 at 5:33am by Carol H Fusek
First, the article is worth reading, and second I think the best point made is this --"If society is ready to embrace a trend almost anyone can start one..." ...."Its less a matter of finding the perfect hippster to infect and more a matter of gauging the public's mood" Hmm So maybe this research better supports Malcolm's other point about the power of context!!
February 18, 2008 at 7:32am by Dylan Cherry
Influential or not, in the end it comes down to the product.
I would say that it would be more of a benefit for a company to spend its money making sure its product is right, rather than trying to buy influentials. After all the Hush Puppies story points to the fact that the product had been reinvented not sold on as they were. So businesses should be looking for people who can identify and reinvent or modify their product to be right and deliver the profit. The idea of networks becoming more accidental looks good because we are seeing a growth in niche markets and we are also operating in a market where the next big thing might come from a company or person not even on your radar.
February 18, 2008 at 4:01pm by Jeff Schmidt
I think Carol really hit the main take-away of this excellent article.
The right idea/product etc... at the wrong time goes nowhere.
February 23, 2008 at 3:57pm by pd_wpa21
Dylan, Carol, and Guy all make good points... Based on my experience in the nonprofit world, Context is King when it comes to social marketing and outreach. In practical terms, let's say I have a $5,000 budget to market a press release and report for a nonprofit organization. What is my strategy? I identify as many context-relevant membership organizations and other broadcast-potential organizations that are *most likely" interested in our topic... and the plan will be to utilize their broadcast and outreach power to spread the word about our research, poll, etc.. I consider these organizations (and most likely their Org Leadership, Communications Directors/VPs) as the influentials necessary to give my report street cred, so to speak, and extended shelf-life.. I hope that makes sense. I'd like to see the evidence that would say $5,000 spent on direct mail or random phone calls will produce the same number of sticky connections as tapping into the context-based influentials. Based on my experience, it is more cost-effective to do the latter than the former. I'm sure there are merits to Dunccan Watts' research- he is one of the most important social science scholars in America today- but I'd love to see these simulations translated into real world situations and stories.
February 25, 2008 at 9:02am by Jon Reisfeld
This article is well-written and provocative. The subject matter will challenge your preconceptions. It's just the kind of mental fodder we all need to stay sharp.
March 14, 2008 at 10:24am by miro slodki
everyone has valid points
because they are all interrelated factors
if the network structure is configured in a certain way - then naturally the flow will have to follow the structure to certain degrees - therefore if there are choke points to overcome - ..well the rest is obvious.
the key points being made are that the circumstances have to permit the propagation - otherwise it takes a lot more resources to force a beachhead.
if the idea has merit and is presented in a memorable fashion - that induces the 'infected'
to pass along the idea - then it propagates
if the idea requires several exposures - the chances of propagation drop
if the idea is supported with 'mass' awareness/buzz then the idea can propagate for a period of time without the daisy chain
if the idea happens upon an early more conducive/receptive starting points that perchance has a wide following etc...then like a rock skipping on water - the propagation will spread farther/faster
if ...if.... if
at the end of this you still need the compelling 'infectious' idea/product/service
there are no free rides
there is no democracy of infections - the 'best' does not win unless it crosses over to mass media which gives everyone the chance to be exposed
cheers
Miro
BTW loved the article Clive - eagerly looking forward to more
http://miroslodki.wordpress.com
March 26, 2008 at 3:16pm by Benjamin Welch
This data is fascinating and well worth using. But this is only a piece of the overall puzzle. Both "Influentials" and "Accidental Influentials" exist and both have to be taken into account. No two campaigns should be exactly the same. And good old fashioned intuition is fantastic as well and adds passion and creativity to the process. But trusting your intuition to the point of ignoring all other factors is self-righteous and stupid. The same goes for data and statistics. The key is looking at all of them and using all the data available. People at the extreme ends of this debate will never do as well as the ones that take valuable data from both sides instead of arguing who was more right. The truth is in what works. So both sides have some truth. And I intend to use both to my advantage.
July 4, 2009 at 6:32pm by Michael Melen
Malcolm Gladwell doesn't mean to destroy the commonly accepted marketing theories. There would be nothing to do the 'tipping' if there was no advertising. - Michael Melen
July 13, 2009 at 5:07pm by Omer Altay
As warner said, how does one influence the influencers?
MMO Games
July 15, 2009 at 2:34pm by Alex Melen
I think the 'Tipping Point' is still completely valid!
--
Free Web Hosting
July 21, 2009 at 5:41pm by John Dugong
Omer Altay, Malcolm Gladwell points to many ways to influence the 'influencers'. Mainly, you can buy them out. - medical billing services
July 24, 2009 at 12:55pm by Joe Rand
The tipping point arguement is valid imo. I dont think it has any flaws.
Web Design Mumbai
July 29, 2009 at 2:04pm by John Bruno
This book help somebody can understand more about the market now and can predict the future, I like it.
A1Article
July 29, 2009 at 10:00pm by stan brett
Haha very interesting. I think it's still valid.
Free iPod | Free iPod Touch
July 30, 2009 at 3:52am by li love
Beauty Design Education health Gift Premium Logistics Travel financial investment wedding home Photography Business Centre SEO game Feng Shui others hot word 天天資訊百科 天天資訊
.
August 3, 2009 at 11:20pm by marson jackson
Of course this begs the question; how does one influence the influencers?
butterfly valves ~ online dating ~ wow gold ~ nike shoes ~ wedding dresses
August 4, 2009 at 5:32pm by Free Gamer
I agree with the really hit the main take-away of this excellent article.
--
Free MMORPG
August 5, 2009 at 9:42pm by Kevin Dowlatshahi
I can imagine him in his Australian accent. Lol.
___
I am a medical student and love to travel. I hope to visit the Eiffel Tower and Great Wall of China.
August 5, 2009 at 9:48pm by Kevin Dowlatshahi
Oh, btw, I forgot to add that I thought the article was really good. Thanks for sharing.
___
I am a medical student and love to travel. Check out these resources for info on my hopeful next trip!
Eiffel Tower | Eiffel Tower Facts | Great Wall of China | Great Wall of China Facts
August 7, 2009 at 7:10pm by Michael Pillsbury
Well if marketers spent billions a year just from a concept that Gladwell introduced in a non-science backed book of his... then there are other problems as well! - Michael Pillsbury
August 9, 2009 at 5:04pm by Cristiano Auris
I can imagine him in his Australian accent. Lol
----
sohbet
August 10, 2009 at 7:30am by Jon Phillips
This a pretty long article but well worth the read! Thanks.
Free PS3
August 10, 2009 at 11:47pm by joe johnson
this is so good to see. keep up the good work.
health insurance quotes
free investing information
home improvement tips
free weightloss blog
August 11, 2009 at 12:37am by nina nina
Any kind of person can build their own success and value. Physical appearance matters a little, I admit that. But from experience, people can always learn to improve their credibility and impression. Good luck!
cheap car insurance
August 11, 2009 at 8:45am by George Bush
I believe that is only one strategy. A similiar debate can be made about poverty, feed more people in developing countries or feed less people in developed countries? It should be power to the people. The more the merrier.
George
Generic viagra - free delivery
http://www.sildenafilcitrate.com.au/
August 11, 2009 at 11:50pm by buy wow accounts buy wow accounts
I think the existence of influential will make the word-of-mouth sounds not natural. That is why we can conclude they are wasting money. $1 billion.. You can get a lot with the amount if you focus on quality, brand image, promotion, a good SEO, and R and D.
buy wow accounts
August 12, 2009 at 7:34pm by Stacy Clark
I run a registry cleaner reviews website and I know how important viral traffic can be. It really makes the difference between a quality website and one that has no value.
August 12, 2009 at 10:14pm by Apotik Apotik
That is an incredible and unbelievable sales growth because they spend nothing for advertising. It is a great example. I wonder how they can achieve the performance. The wonder of brand?
apotik
August 13, 2009 at 9:51pm by Sealer Sealer
Duncan must not be wrong with his statement. Marketers spend too much on marketing, and even for wrong methods of marketing. The money can be allocated for other more purposeful thing.
concrete sealer |marble sealer |granite sealer
August 14, 2009 at 3:33pm by viko Johns
I greatly appreciate all the info I've read here. I will spread the word about your blog to other people. Cheers. free essay | my ip address | website screenshot | web content writing
August 16, 2009 at 7:33am by Marcel Wolfenson
Thank you for the article.” What we are really saying," he writes, "is that in a given process or system, some people matter more than others." I couldn’t agree more.
Slow Running Computer?
Showing on theatres
Myspace layouts
Best Work at Home Reviews
August 16, 2009 at 9:57pm by Sealer Sealer
The companies spend bigger than the average industry and thought that they are more powerful and successful. I personally think they should hire new Marketing Manager. lol...
Wedding Favors
August 19, 2009 at 7:25am by Locksmiths2 Locksmiths2
That is why companies need reliable research before developing the marketing strategy. Even if they were proved to beb effective in the past, there is not guarantee in the dynamic world.
Locksmiths
August 19, 2009 at 11:08am by Financialbetting Financialbetting
If companies could spend such big amount for "pointless" marketing, they could have done better with research and product innovation, lol..
Financial Spread Betting
August 21, 2009 at 6:20am by John Davidson
It was a very nice idea! Just wanna say thank you for the information you have shared. Just continue writing this kind of post. I will be your loyal reader.Thanks
August 22, 2009 at 12:56am by Photophoto Photophoto
Big amount of advertising expenditure goes for nothing every year. Companies should have focused more on effective advertising methods that are specific on their businesses. Photo My World
August 24, 2009 at 10:45am by Krishna Pandey
In mu opinion the harvard Business Review was great book. Actual i rarely see such books and i love reading them. I am planning to do my PHP from Harvard if i could be eligible and accepted.
Medost Nepali Forum