Content marketing tools and training.
Since I’ve noticed a fair amount of interest in blogging publicity strategies, 
here’s a couple more to study.
First up is The $39 Experiment: Asking Random Companies for Stuff. Started by a guy named Tom Locke, the site is about Tom using 100 stamps to send 100 letters (total cost, $39) asking major corporations for free stuff. His letters are humorously patronizing, and it’s worth a visit just to read some of his faux allegiance to consumer products.
One of the key elements of writing to sell is testing various elements of a promotion to see if you can improve your conversion rate — the number of visitors who become paying clients or customers. Changing a headline, elements of body copy, or even link architecture can often produce drastic differences in your conversions and therefore your return on investment. We’ll be discussing testing quite a bit in the future here at Copyblogger.
There are plenty of ways to filter and qualify raw traffic in order to make a concentrated sales effort. But the beginning point of all web conversion analysis is your basic traffic and referral logs.
That’s right. Viral Copy is currently the top bestseller at Amazon.
OK, not exactly, but let me explain.
Those of you that read my free viral marketing report may have noticed that the first page has a “permitted distribution” statement. I basically tell people that they are free to give the report away, as long as it stays in original form, and I also tell people that they can bundle the report with another product they are selling. This is a tactic Mark Joyner developed over ten years ago.
One of my favorite episodes of South Park is when crass little Eric Cartman puts on a police officer’s uniform. He trolls around on his Big Wheel, screaming “Respect my authori-tie!” before bashing people with his baton.
In his quest for authority, Cartman knew what he was doing by putting on that uniform. And given that he was on the giving and receiving end of electric shocks in The South Park Movie, he probably would have loved to participate in the following rather disturbing study.
You see a newspaper ad saying the psychology department at Yale is running a little “experiment on memory.” Paid volunteers are needed for the hour-long study, so you figure what the heck. Upon arrival at the lab, you meet two men — a research scientist in a lab coat, and another volunteer just like yourself. The researcher proceeds to explain the study to you both.
He tells you that the study is about the effects of punishment on memory. The task of the other volunteer will be to learn a series of word pairings (he’s called the “Learner”). Your job as the “Teacher” will be to test the Learner’s memory of the word pairs, and administer electric shocks for each wrong answer. And also for every wrong answer, the voltage goes up.
You’re not sure about this whole thing, but it must be OK, right? The testing begins, and when the other volunteer misses a question, you pull a lever that delivers a mild shock. Over time, though, the shock levels increase, and the Learner is grunting audibly. At 120 volts, he states that the shocks are really starting to hurt. At 150 volts, he tries to quit.
The researcher tells you to keep going, and that the electricity will cause “no permanent tissue damage” to the Learner. At 165 volts, the Learner screams. You continue questioning and delivering punishment for incorrect answers. At 300 volts, the Learner refuses to respond any longer, as the shocks are impairing his mental capacities. The researcher tells you to treat non-responses as incorrect answers. The Learner is screeching, kicking and pleading for mercy with every subsequent shock, all the way up to 450 volts when the researcher finally stops you.
This couldn’t possibly have really happened, right? Well, actually, it did, in 1963 at Yale, during a series of experiments by Stanley Milgram.
But here’s the real scoop about the Milgram experiment: there were no actual electric shocks; the Learner was an actor; and the study had nothing to do with memory. What Milgram wanted to know was how far the Teachers would go when told to continue to deliver those shocks, since they thought they really were.
About two-thirds (65%) of the subject administered every single shock up to 450 volts, no matter how much the Learner begged for mercy. However, without the researcher’s encouragement to continue, the study found that the test subjects would have stopped giving punishment quite early on. A 2002 meta-analysis of the original data confirms the validity of the findings.
The results shocked the Yale psychology department, and have become a part of modern lore. Every aspect of the experiment had been carefully vetted to pull test subjects from a standard cross section of ages, occupations, and education levels. In other words, these were not sadistic savages, they were people just like you and me. What could possibly lead to this behavior?
Milgram says it’s our deep-seated sense of duty to authority. We’re trained from childhood to respect authority, and the obedience that comes with it stays with us throughout our lives, even when we feel something may not be quite right.
Our deference to authority is driven mostly by perception. That’s why a lab coat, police officer’s uniform or $4,000 bespoke suit alone can facillitate influence over or control of others. We even act differently toward other people depending on our perception of their authority level, sometimes even adopting their mannerisms and speech patterns.Another study mentioned in Influence: Science and Practice
The most important aspect of the data demonstrating the power of authority is that context matters more than actual content. In other words, if a person is perceived as an authority figure, what they say is taken at face value and accepted as fact more readily. It helps someone bypass otherwise common objections. Building authority is therefore crucial to building a business, especially if you are selling services or knowledge products.
Good blogging creates authority, plain and simple. Writing consistently about your area of expertise makes you an authority figure within your industry and niche. You will enjoy a definitive advantage over competitors who do not blog, and likely even over those who have been blogging for shorter time periods.
Professionals and other business people have long been writing for trade publications and newspaper columns to build authority, coupled with networking in the community and at trade shows and conferences, all in an attempt to build word-of-mouth referral business. With blogging, you’re building authority and networking all at once, and on a global scale if your business model benefits from that kind of reach.
The goal is not to be on the A-List as determined by the Technorati Top 100 Blogs. Your goal is to be on the A-List for your niche, geographic region or industry. Hopefully you’re well on the way with your own blog.
Subscribe to Copyblogger today!
The 78th annual film industry publicity stunt Oscars are now in the bag, ably hosted by Jon Stewart, with a whole host of Daily Show-esque comedic interludes voiced by (who else?) Stephen Colbert. The big news, however, was the upset victory of the racially-charged Crash over front-running gay cowboy flick Brokeback Mountain.
In a field loaded with controversial subject matter, spawned from a year of lackluster overall box office returns, Brokeback Mountain was the heavy favorite for Best Picture, after sweeping the preliminary “feeder” awards. But Crash, a gritty movie that takes place in 36 hours of intersecting stories, prejudices, and redemptions in Los Angeles, scored the big prize instead.
Understanding human nature is crucial to great marketing, and many believe that the key to success is to cater to selfishness. You hear quite a bit about needing to relentlessly focus on “what’s in it for them” in your marketing activities (especially around here).
But I’ve always tended to believe that human nature is not the root problem. Rather, it’s the competition, materialism, scarcity, and cynicism that can result from simply living life that hardens people. And the mass media machine sure hasn’t helped.
The early blogosphere has been built on principles of openness, transparency, and cooperation. People linked freely to one another; sharing conversations and readers. Now, many worry that the spirit of cooperation is doomed. As social media comes to look more like society at large, how can that spirit possibly remain?
Simple. Successful people have conducted business with that spirit long before Al Gore invented the Internet. A strategy of “give, give, give to get” will always work if you maintain it religiously.
New research published last week in the journal Science shows that the somewhat utopian ideals of the blogospere and social media may not be off base. Human nature isn’t the problem; it’s getting back to human nature that’s the challenge.
Psychology researcher Felix Warneken has found that the capacity for altruism (helping someone when there’s nothing to gain) is innate in humans, and emerges in babies at 18 months or even younger. Of course, there’s always something to gain from altruism — it makes us feel good. And you’ll recall that another powerful human psychological trait (reciprocation) rarely allows good deeds to go unrewarded.
Here are some of the key findings of Warneken’s study:
Here’s what I took away from this new study:
Subscribe to Copyblogger today!
