Christopher S. Penn – Marketing AI Keynote Speaker

Viral is not word of mouth

Written by

Christopher S Penn

in

,
Warning: this content is older than 365 days. It may be out of date and no longer relevant.

Viral marketing and word of mouth marketing are not the same thing. They are not interchangeable, and it’s getting kind of old seeing various media outlets and even job postings getting them mixed up. This is my interpretation of the two.

Word of mouth marketing is simply referral and recommendation. If I like a product or service, I’ll tell someone about it, or possibly a bunch of someones about it, and if it’s really good, they’ll pass it along as well. Word of mouth is one of the very best sales and marketing tools, since the credibility of the product or service is tied to the credibility of the speaker.

Viral marketing is a marketing message that is self-replicating – hence its comparison to a virus. An example is when a service like Hotmail, Yahoo, Blackberry, or any of the free providers adds a “Get your account at xxx”. Every message, every contact point contains a call to action designed to enhance the spread of the message – regardless of whether the speaker endorses the message or not. You may use Yahoo mail, but you may not necessarily endorse it or recommend it to friends. Nonetheless, when you use it, you are automatically transmitting the virus to others.

Viral must sound more hip and more cool to marketers than word of mouth, but when you step back and look at it, viral is non-consentual. Whether or not you endorse the message, it’s embedded in your communications. Word of mouth is by far more powerful because endorsement is implicit in the message transmission.

Also, last I checked, viral things generally involved stuff like colds, flu, sexually transmitted diseases, and hard drive crashes involving non-recoverable data. These are not things that I as a marketer want associated with my product or service. “Get a student loan, it’s just like the clap!” No thanks.

Word of mouth.

Word.

Comments

18 responses to “Viral is not word of mouth”

  1. Bill Deys Avatar
    Bill Deys

    Love it, totally agree! I think they understand it as viral being the new word of mouth and it is in a way but they are far from the same thing!

    Reply
  2. Bill Deys Avatar
    Bill Deys

    Love it, totally agree! I think they understand it as viral being the new word of mouth and it is in a way but they are far from the same thing!

    Reply
  3. Justin Kownacki Avatar
    Justin Kownacki

    Yes, but word of mouth is indiscriminate: is it positive or negative? Right now, Britney Spears is receiving a lot of (negative) word of mouth re: being bald and possibly insane. Meanwhile, “viral” is neutral by nature; it doesn’t matter if that feedback is positive or negative, because it’s all about exposure.

    Granted, I’d rather have POSITIVE word of mouth over a successful neutral viral campaign any day of the week. But then again, I’m not shaving my head (yet).

    Reply
  4. Justin Kownacki Avatar
    Justin Kownacki

    Yes, but word of mouth is indiscriminate: is it positive or negative? Right now, Britney Spears is receiving a lot of (negative) word of mouth re: being bald and possibly insane. Meanwhile, “viral” is neutral by nature; it doesn’t matter if that feedback is positive or negative, because it’s all about exposure.

    Granted, I’d rather have POSITIVE word of mouth over a successful neutral viral campaign any day of the week. But then again, I’m not shaving my head (yet).

    Reply
  5. Ryan Thomas Avatar
    Ryan Thomas

    Christopher S. Penn,

    I was sent your article by a friend as a word of mouth recommendation. He thinks you’re worth reading so I wanted to take him up his suggestion. I respect your view on the confusion but wanted to clarify a few key points.

    In the interest of maintaining a fair and clear view point, I do not work in advertising though I do follow the subject very closely.

    That being said, the traditional execution of word of mouth follows a classic line.

    • Product or Service is used
    • Product or Service meets or exceeds expiations
    • Consumer refers this service
    • Process repeats itself

    Word of mouth operates on what is traditional known as the long tail. This process takes time to build an aggregate effect. The value of this process is two fold, in the short term it means more people engaging a product or service based on trusted recommendations there by increasing sales. This is a notoriously delicate stage as it requires a proactive choice by consumers at each stage. Now should the product catch on, the real value of word of mouth presents itself. It becomes a widely held certainty, it becomes a brand. The benefits of the product become intrinsically tied to product as core beliefs.

    For examples of this look no further then the common held status of BMW, Mercedes and other European automotive makers. Advertising reinforces it, but it’s the mavens whose considerable financial success that make it stick.

    Here is a little test you can try to see word of mouth making the jump to a core brand belief. To start think about any five star restaurant. If enough people recommend it, and your meal is awful would you second guess yourself or your friends. I’ll safely bet that you’ll give a lot more leeway to an establishment that comes highly recommended then one you’re trying for the first time with no recommendation. People will second guess the majority when a word of mouth has mutated into a brand.

    Viral is a new bastard son of Web 2.0 and your right to hold it in contempt yet I want you to hold it in contempt for the right reasons. The path of viral is much different then the above example:

    • Product or service hitches a ride on cutting edge contemporary culture
    • Turns of phrase or ideas are internalized by consumer public
    • Consumers share the phrase or ideas that resonate with them
    • Viral catches on, rapidly shared and linked across platforms
    • Process repeats itself until meme is exhausted

    To highlight the differences in this process, let’s look at Unilever and Ogilvy’s “Dove: Campaign for Real Beauty”. Assume you are patient zero, after witness the transformation of an average girl into a billboard super model you send the link to 5 friends and talk about it at your next cocktail party. You feel strongly that women are under extreme pressure to meet unreasonable expectations; to you the idea is worth sharing. Strange, you have never tried Dove and the same ratty bar of Irish Spring goes from your groin to the top of your head and you don’t even own shampoo. You’re not the target market Dove wants but with luck you’ll share that idea with someone who is.

    In this way viral makes a key jump. Its value in the face of traditional word of mouth is simple; you’re not required to purchase the product to help build the ultimate goal of a strong brand association. By cutting out the slow step of you actually trying the product, marketers are speeding up one of the most sought after evolutions’ a product or service can make.

    Why hold it in contempt? Well if you do or don’t is the clients of marketers that should be wary. Word of mouth is the stainable environmental stewardship of advertising, grow it nurture an excellent product and it will grow and build market share in a stable and homogeneous way. Viral is slash and burn by comparison, millions of impressions and brand associations as fast as possible. Do I blame the advertisers for this fundamental shift? Not at all, campaign reviews and the cut throat need for value ad place upon your average marketing shop forces them to push harder and get it done cheaper.

    The strange thing is if done right both processes arrive at the same branded destination, the danger is a miss step in word of mouth can be repaired. Viral gone wrong is a house of cards that can cause irreparable harm to a product.

    I can see where to the average HR person or to anyone for that matter these words would become muddied together. You can Astro-turf a website with viral goals in mind or word of mouth goals, which damages everyone’s reputation. Also the aggregate effects of both bare a striking resemblance.

    What needs to be kept in mind in distinguishing the two is simple:

    • Word of Mouth is about quality product
    • Viral is about quality ideas

    There is much more I wanted to say but I feel I have gone far too long already. Best of luck with your blog and I will continue reading in the future.

    Good luck on your long tail,
    Ryan Thomas

    Reply
  6. Ryan Thomas Avatar
    Ryan Thomas

    Christopher S. Penn,

    I was sent your article by a friend as a word of mouth recommendation. He thinks you’re worth reading so I wanted to take him up his suggestion. I respect your view on the confusion but wanted to clarify a few key points.

    In the interest of maintaining a fair and clear view point, I do not work in advertising though I do follow the subject very closely.

    That being said, the traditional execution of word of mouth follows a classic line.

    • Product or Service is used
    • Product or Service meets or exceeds expiations
    • Consumer refers this service
    • Process repeats itself

    Word of mouth operates on what is traditional known as the long tail. This process takes time to build an aggregate effect. The value of this process is two fold, in the short term it means more people engaging a product or service based on trusted recommendations there by increasing sales. This is a notoriously delicate stage as it requires a proactive choice by consumers at each stage. Now should the product catch on, the real value of word of mouth presents itself. It becomes a widely held certainty, it becomes a brand. The benefits of the product become intrinsically tied to product as core beliefs.

    For examples of this look no further then the common held status of BMW, Mercedes and other European automotive makers. Advertising reinforces it, but it’s the mavens whose considerable financial success that make it stick.

    Here is a little test you can try to see word of mouth making the jump to a core brand belief. To start think about any five star restaurant. If enough people recommend it, and your meal is awful would you second guess yourself or your friends. I’ll safely bet that you’ll give a lot more leeway to an establishment that comes highly recommended then one you’re trying for the first time with no recommendation. People will second guess the majority when a word of mouth has mutated into a brand.

    Viral is a new bastard son of Web 2.0 and your right to hold it in contempt yet I want you to hold it in contempt for the right reasons. The path of viral is much different then the above example:

    • Product or service hitches a ride on cutting edge contemporary culture
    • Turns of phrase or ideas are internalized by consumer public
    • Consumers share the phrase or ideas that resonate with them
    • Viral catches on, rapidly shared and linked across platforms
    • Process repeats itself until meme is exhausted

    To highlight the differences in this process, let’s look at Unilever and Ogilvy’s “Dove: Campaign for Real Beauty”. Assume you are patient zero, after witness the transformation of an average girl into a billboard super model you send the link to 5 friends and talk about it at your next cocktail party. You feel strongly that women are under extreme pressure to meet unreasonable expectations; to you the idea is worth sharing. Strange, you have never tried Dove and the same ratty bar of Irish Spring goes from your groin to the top of your head and you don’t even own shampoo. You’re not the target market Dove wants but with luck you’ll share that idea with someone who is.

    In this way viral makes a key jump. Its value in the face of traditional word of mouth is simple; you’re not required to purchase the product to help build the ultimate goal of a strong brand association. By cutting out the slow step of you actually trying the product, marketers are speeding up one of the most sought after evolutions’ a product or service can make.

    Why hold it in contempt? Well if you do or don’t is the clients of marketers that should be wary. Word of mouth is the stainable environmental stewardship of advertising, grow it nurture an excellent product and it will grow and build market share in a stable and homogeneous way. Viral is slash and burn by comparison, millions of impressions and brand associations as fast as possible. Do I blame the advertisers for this fundamental shift? Not at all, campaign reviews and the cut throat need for value ad place upon your average marketing shop forces them to push harder and get it done cheaper.

    The strange thing is if done right both processes arrive at the same branded destination, the danger is a miss step in word of mouth can be repaired. Viral gone wrong is a house of cards that can cause irreparable harm to a product.

    I can see where to the average HR person or to anyone for that matter these words would become muddied together. You can Astro-turf a website with viral goals in mind or word of mouth goals, which damages everyone’s reputation. Also the aggregate effects of both bare a striking resemblance.

    What needs to be kept in mind in distinguishing the two is simple:

    • Word of Mouth is about quality product
    • Viral is about quality ideas

    There is much more I wanted to say but I feel I have gone far too long already. Best of luck with your blog and I will continue reading in the future.

    Good luck on your long tail,
    Ryan Thomas

    Reply
  7. Ryan Thomas Avatar
    Ryan Thomas

    I just noticed a few grammar missteps. I hope your blog has an edit feature.

    Reply
  8. Ryan Thomas Avatar
    Ryan Thomas

    I just noticed a few grammar missteps. I hope your blog has an edit feature.

    Reply
  9. John Wall Avatar
    John Wall

    I’d go further to say that word of mouth is not marketing – it’s the byproduct of having a superior (or inferior) product. Viral is communication that spreads rapidly, but often at the cost of the message.

    Two other minor points – from my understanding of Chris Anderson’s long tail that has nothing to do with word of mouth, and viral marketing as a concept has been around longer than web 2.0

    Reply
  10. John Wall Avatar
    John Wall

    I’d go further to say that word of mouth is not marketing – it’s the byproduct of having a superior (or inferior) product. Viral is communication that spreads rapidly, but often at the cost of the message.

    Two other minor points – from my understanding of Chris Anderson’s long tail that has nothing to do with word of mouth, and viral marketing as a concept has been around longer than web 2.0

    Reply
  11. Justin Kownacki Avatar
    Justin Kownacki

    It’s possible the “long tail” comment was meant to confer luck in Chris’s blog picking up more viewers for older articles over the long haul. I’d second that. There’s nothing more frustrating than publishing great content early in a site’s popularity cycle and then realizing most new veiwers / readers will never see it unless they dig.

    Reply
  12. Justin Kownacki Avatar
    Justin Kownacki

    It’s possible the “long tail” comment was meant to confer luck in Chris’s blog picking up more viewers for older articles over the long haul. I’d second that. There’s nothing more frustrating than publishing great content early in a site’s popularity cycle and then realizing most new veiwers / readers will never see it unless they dig.

    Reply
  13. Ryan Thomas Avatar
    Ryan Thomas

    Justin & John,

    Sorry about that! The long tail has been around for quite a while. Somewhere that must have got confused in my grammar train wreck.

    You are both correct, I was wishing luck on the long tail for Chris, but I was also likening the slow growth of word of mouth to a long tail effect.

    Reply
  14. Ryan Thomas Avatar
    Ryan Thomas

    Justin & John,

    Sorry about that! The long tail has been around for quite a while. Somewhere that must have got confused in my grammar train wreck.

    You are both correct, I was wishing luck on the long tail for Chris, but I was also likening the slow growth of word of mouth to a long tail effect.

    Reply
  15. Christopher S. Penn Avatar
    Christopher S. Penn

    Wow. You guys are a lot more insightful than I am.

    Reply
  16. Christopher S. Penn Avatar
    Christopher S. Penn

    Wow. You guys are a lot more insightful than I am.

    Reply
  17. Ryan Thomas Avatar
    Ryan Thomas

    Christopher,

    It’s worth mentioning that your Linkedin makes me feel like a waste of skin so your a step up there.

    Now I’m off to go beg and steal my way into a job whose primary responsibility is snorting pop-rocks off of washed up 80’s mascots.

    We all gotta dream.

    Reply
  18. Ryan Thomas Avatar
    Ryan Thomas

    Christopher,

    It’s worth mentioning that your Linkedin makes me feel like a waste of skin so your a step up there.

    Now I’m off to go beg and steal my way into a job whose primary responsibility is snorting pop-rocks off of washed up 80’s mascots.

    We all gotta dream.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More posts

Pin It on Pinterest

Shares
Share This