Archive for December, 2009
Top Twitter Trending Topics of 2009: #iranelection, Michael Jackson
Posted by Rob Fields in Digital Marketing, Social Media on December 17th, 2009

Over at the Twitter blog, it’s Chief Scientist on Wednesday released a list of the top trending topics on the site in 2009. He writes:
Twitter’s Trending Topics helped us understand what was happening around the world showing us that people everywhere can be united in concern around important events; excited about a new movie; or geek-out about a major new technology.
And further:
Among all the keywords, hashtags, and phrases that proliferated throughout the year, one topic surfaced repeatedly. Twitter users found the Iranian elections the most engaging topic of the year. The terms #iranelection, Iran and Tehran were all in the top-21 of Trending Topics, and #iranelection finished in a close second behind the regular weekly favorite #musicmonday.
Hat tip to Digital Media Wire.
Get on the road to the REGGIES!
Posted by Rob Fields in PMA Events, REGGIES on December 14th, 2009

Yes, it’s awards season again. The 27th running of the REGGIES will be on March 24, 2010. Good news is that you’ve still got a few weeks to get your campaigns considered. Was your campaign wildly creative, exceptionally integrated and–most importantly–did it make the cash register ring? If so, you need to enter it and see how it stacks up against the best of the best.
There are two deadlines: An early deadline is January 13, 2010 at 2pm EST and a late deadline of January 20 at 2pm EST (additional entry fees apply).
More info on the REGGIES is available here.
The Strategic Case for Customer Intelligence
Posted by Rob Fields in Consumer Insights, CRM/Customer Intelligence on December 9th, 2009
At last week’s Digital Marketing Summit, Forrester’s Dave Frankland (right) led a discussion about
customer intelligence, that area many of us have been calling database marketing or CRM. So, it’s great to see him follow up that appearance with a column in this week’s Ad Age on the same topic.
He writes:
But while some claim that the age of the left-brain marketer has arrived, too often we see customer data buried in the direct-marketing department, manipulated and modeled by propeller-heads to create a campaign file. And yet, in a small number of firms, we find customer intelligence elevated into a strategic command center for the business. In these firms, customer knowledge drives decisions across the enterprise — from marketing planning and strategy to product development, and from risk analysis and staffing to business operations and corporate strategy. And most of these firms point to a broad range of benefits, including improvements in customer acquisition, retention and satisfaction to increased revenue, profitability and customer lifetime value.
What defines these leading firms? They treat customer data as a strategic asset, put the customer at the center of all decision making and use data-driven insight to tailor all customer communications. It sounds simple, but can you name five companies that do it? Our research shows that fewer than 15% of firms have a strategic customer-intelligence operation. These firms leverage customer intelligence broadly throughout the organization, they value customer knowledge as a corporate asset and they frequently have an evangelist in the C-suite. They continually demonstrate that customer intelligence drives overall business growth.
For those of you who missed the Summit, Dave has graciously made his slides available:
You can read his full AdAge article here.
Canadian Company Fined For Misleading Promotional Contests
Posted by Rob Newman in contests, Marketing Law, Promotion tactics on December 8th, 2009
Canada’s Competition Bureau recently announced that Manitoba-based Elkhorn Ranch & Resort Ltd. agreed to pay $170,000 to settle charges that it conducted misleading promotional contests. The company used the contests to promote its time share business and consumers were solicited for participation by phone, at trade shows, and at time share presentations.
The Competition Bureau found that Elkhorn Ranch & Resort failed to fairly disclose the accurate odds of winning, failed to ensure that winners were selected on a random basis, failed to disclose the number and value of prizes, and failed to disclose the end dates and drawing dates. Additionally, the Competition Bureau concluded that the company overstated the value of the grand prize in its contests.
For example, the company advertised that the grand prize was a new SUV, when the prize was actually a one or two-year lease on an SUV for which the contestant was required to pay a security deposit and pledge to return the SUV in “immaculate condition.” In addition, certain participants were contacted and told that they had won a prize, and although the advertising indicated that there was no obligation to do anything in order to claim a prize, the participants had to attend a sales presentation in order to find out the prize they won.
In addition to the $170,000 penalty, Elkhorn Ranch & Resort is required to publish corrective notices in newspapers and on its website and maintain a Corporate Compliance Program. The order also lays out specific requirements with which Elkhorn Ranch & Resort must comply. These requirements serve as useful reminders of some of the key aspects of contest and sweepstakes rules that can help ensure that promotional contests and sweepstakes are run legally and fairly. Specifically, the Consent Agreement requires that Elkhorn Ranch & Resort: i) fairly and adequately disclose age and income requirements; ii) award all contest prizes offered; iii) determine winners on the basis of skill or as the result of a random draw; iv) provide a fixed closing date; v) have contest rules accompany entry materials at all points of entry; and vi) indicate the true value and benefits of the prizes.
These materials have been prepared by Winston & Strawn for informational purposes only. These materials do not constitute legal advice and cannot be relied upon by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code.
Plaintiff Goes To The Mattresses By Filing A Lawsuit Against Mafia Wars Producer and Facebook
Posted by Jason Gordon in advertising law, Marketing Law, Social Media, video games on December 2nd, 2009
While I cannot say that I’m an avid player of Farmville or Mafia Wars, I have noticed that several of my Facebook friends spend hours at work playing these games. What do my friends receive by selling their brothers to a mob family for $1M in Mafia Wars? How do my friends get Farmville badges or ribbons? It appears that the obtaining ribbons and selling your brother comes with a price.
Facebook and Zynga, Inc, producer of “Mafia Wars” and “Farmville,” were sued in Federal court last week for false and deceptive advertising in violation of the California Unfair Competition Law §17200.
The class-action complaint alleges that Facebook and Zynga engaged in a fraudulent scheme to lure users to sign up for services and goods. Although consumers are allowed to play Zynga’s games free of charge, the complaint alleges that the games are designed to allow players to earn “virtual currency,” to purchase online goods, unlock new levels of the game, or otherwise make the games more enjoyable. Although “virtual currency” can be obtained by playing these games, Zynga also allegedly permits consumers to purchase “virtual currency” by participating in “special offers” made available to users.
For example, one offer allows consumers to participate in an IQ test. To take the test, a consumer must provide his or her cell phone number, and they are allegedly told that the results of the test will be send to them via text message. However, the advertisement allegedly subscribes users to an SMS service that bills consumers on a monthly basis on their cellular phone bill. According to the complaint, users must allegedly go through several steps to unsubscribe for the service and obtain a refund. In this case, the plaintiff was allegedly charged nearly $200 for “a risk-free Green Tea Purity Trial” consisting of a package of 30 green tea pills and three tea bags while playing the game YoVille!
Interestingly, Zynga’s CEO was quoted publicly as stating that “[I] did every horrible thing in the book to just get revenues right away…[by giving my] users poker chips if they downloaded this wiki toolbar…[and] we did anything possible just to get revenues so that we could grow and be a real business.” Facebook’s new policies prohibit online advertisements embedded within computer games that are otherwise permissible on Facebook.
Despite the CEO’s statements and the plaintiff’s misfortunes, Facebook may be able to obtain safe harbor protections under the Communications Decency Act (“CDA”). Facebook may be able to argue that because it did not create the allegedly deceptive ads, it may be deemed an interactive computer service shielded by the CDA safe harbor provision, which states that “no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.” 47 U.S.C. § 230(c)(1). Facebook’s defense may likely succeed, because Facebook simply permitted the games to appear on its website without engaging in additional activity. Zynga may also claim this defense alleging that they simply provided the forum for the ads to appear. Zynga’s defense would likely turn on whether Zynga created the content, or if it merely provided the forum. Notwithstanding, even if Zynga provided the forum, we would think that the FTC would take a long hard look at someone who knowingly provided the forum for allegedly false and deceptive ads on their video games.
These materials have been prepared by Winston & Strawn for informational purposes only. These materials do not constitute legal advice and cannot be relied upon by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code.





