Viral Marketing Is NOT The Same As Word Of Mouth

[thejenn]

Authored by: Jennifer Laycock

Full Text: http://www.searchengineguide.com/jen...me-as-word.php

A Snippet:

I can't tell you how many times I've heard an old school marketer say viral marketing is just the fancy new name for word of mouth marketing. In their mind, the two work exactly the same way. The only difference is that word of mouth marketing takes place offline and viral marketing takes place online. They're wrong.

[David Tandet]

When a consumer feels he or she has a personal stake in what's being marketed, the passion flows. Are the tools to launch a viral marketing campaign the same when you're starting out as when you're a major player? Could be. It's fascinating to watch how Saatchi & Saatchi CEO Kevin Roberts' viral marketing promotions progress. Besides using viral (in addition to traditional ad techniques) for their clients like Toyota and other biggies, he's actually made his "Lovemarks" ad system and himself each its own brand. With his own blog, http://krconnect.blogspot.com/, name your Lovemark contests and such, he's one of the large company guys that's successfully connected with the man on the street. Consumers fall over themselves to write in about their personal lovemark experiences. Viral is effective, economic, and here to stay, for big and small marketers alike.

[Logan]

I agree David, a personal stake carries a long way. Regarding the article, a lot of good info to help define a campaign, but I think the word of mouth vs viral debate is getting tied up in verbiage. By commonly accepted definitions, viral is any marketing that propagates itself. Going by the word of mouth examples provided within the article, they are by nature viral in nature because they do propagate regardless of the number of iterations. To me, word of mouth is a type of viral marketing ... as are Internet tactics also another type. Guess I'm an old schooler with the way I see this one. Regardless of what you call it, I don't think that it matters much though as more a function of what you call it and definitions.

Can anyone else provide some real life examples like the Kevin Roberts example ... how about ones that aren't from a major player? I can't think of any right now, curious if others can. Or is there a difference when it comes to being a major player or not? I'm thinking that does play a role.

[David Tandet]

To me, word of mouth is a type of viral marketing ... as are Internet tactics also another type. Guess I'm an old schooler with the way I see this one. Regardless of what you call it, I don't think that it matters much though as more a function of what you call it and definitions.In a way, Logan, I totally agree with everything you're saying. But I think there IS a difference.

What caught my attention was thejenn's line in the full text that "Viral marketing is word of mouth marketing on crack." When you think about the stepped up possibilites for interpersonal contact that the internet provides - at least as long as there's net neutrality - it's kind of mind blowing how you can apply it to marketing.

I mean - would we be that amazed if the head of a Fortune 500 company dropped in on our conversation right now and posted a comment? Heck, it's probably happened in the Forum already. And something like that could just not take place before the internet. The closest you had a few years ago was maybe a TV hookup where one in a milion who called in at the end could get her voice heard.

I guess it's the available tools at this moment that put a successful viral marketing campaign on a totally different level. But, true enough, a good viral campaign will include elements that are 100% old fashioned word of mouth.

And I'm with you on hearing from folks with more examples . . .

[Logan]

Here is one example that was recently brought up -

Xbox viral marketing campaign

I guess it's the available tools at this moment that put a successful viral marketing campaign on a totally different level.

I agree, and as said before I'm not sure it matters much as it is more a matter of semantics. But for the sake of arguement, doesn't this apply to other marketing tactics as well - not just word of mouth vs viral ... but also

Viral marketing is word of mouth marketing on crack.
Ebay is classified advertising on crack.
Search marketing is yellow page advertising on crack.
Email marketing is direct mail advertising on crack.
Social networks are tradeshow marketing on crack.
Podcasting is radio/tv advertising on crack.

Okay, maybe some are a stretch - but I think you get the point. The difference isn't the marketing tactic, but the impact of the internet. Doesn't mean word of mouth is not a type of viral marketing though. Just the medium has changed -

[Games4Business]

Viral Marketing, used in the correct way is word of mouth.. people that play games or look at videos, pass them on to their friends (this is word of mouth), regardless of whether or not they have a tell a friend option. Something funny that is not intended to be viral, normally ends up virally distributed.

[jr429]

Interesting, but not sure I agree with that article, viral = word of mouth IMO, only the mouth has changed...

[dkprosperity]

The OP lays out a series of very subtle distinctions, none of which individually separate WOM from Viral...

Added together, however, it's a fairly compelling argument.

I tend to think they're far more similar than different. At what point do we allow the delivery method to change the definition of a concept?

[Logan]

I tend to agree. I think it is more about semantics than the core of the process. The way I look at it is "viral", "word of mouth", "classifieds", "yellow pages", etc are mediums for the marketing message to be carried. So in a way, my yellow page ad could be considered word of mouth in a stretch of a way because my word and payment was passed from me to the sales rep to the print to a potential consumer. So i tend to consider the "medium" and not so much the semantics such as viral vs word of mouth.

To me viral has taken on a connotation associated with the internet, while I know there has been many powerful non internet viral marketing campaigns. On the other hand word of mouth I associate with offline, although I also know word of mouth is rampant on the Internet. Looking how you can spread word of mouth on the Internet, and viral offline and vice versa would be a good mindset regardless of semantics

[David Jackson]

Why do people take a simple concept, and make it needlessly complicated?

David Jackson