Maybe Viral Marketing ain't so Viral

by mtippett | July 19, 2007 at 09:10 am | 343 views | add comment | 0 recommendations

This story will spread like wildfire!

a long-taken-for-granted central principle of viral marketing -- that large-scale changes in behavior can begin like disease epidemics, with just a few highly connected people -- is facing its toughest challenge yet. At the center of a growing fray is an unlikely figure: an Australian-born sociology professor at Columbia University named Duncan Watts, who comes armed with mathematical models that, he believes, unsettle much of what you think you know about viral marketing.

Forget about reaching those who have influence. Instead Watts argues:

it's best to skip the idea of targeting that treasured select group of plugged-in folks and instead think about that group's polar opposite: a large number of easily influenced people. He calls this big-seed marketing.

He also alludes to a technical reality. He says:

"Most of what's happening is happening in the network," Mr. Watts said. "If the network is conducive to contagion, then it doesn't matter where you put a match to it. Ordinary people can do much better than you think."

We've certainly seen this with RSS. RSS has a magnifying effect on the opinions of people like Dave Winer. Is it that Dave is influential or does the network simply favor him? Is there a difference?

Watts also articulates something that seems obvious but often gets overlooked by people who should know better:

though everyone acknowledges consumers are in control, marketers still believe they're running the show, right down to trying to plan for virality as any creative told to "just go make a viral video" will lament. Virality is an outcome, not a channel to be planned.