Please re read what the author says about the stickiness factor.
Please define the stickiness factor. Do you think the author's description is convincing?
Is there anything in your knowledge or experience that supports or detracts from the author's concept of the stickiness factor?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Yutt
Stickiness Factor
Stickiness factor is one of three epidemic factors. It is about providing messages that impact to consumer in somehow. The messages can be any kinds that can make consumer remember easy and powerful. The messages might be harmful to consumer, but they are easy to remember that we always see in advertising.
I think author provided stickiness factor to suport his idea as "the specific quality that a massage needs to be successful is quality of stickiness." I can understand his insistance. But I think his examples in his articles is just sucessful case studies and he just adjusted this case study to stickiness factor. from this reason,I think this stickiness factor is not enough to convince readers.
Bringing back the second chapter, the law of the few, Malcom Gladwell considers the nature of messenger whose idiosyncrasy engenders plural attention. In third chapter, the author takes one step further and put the content of message under his critical microscope and argues if nature of messenger does matter, the content of message matters too.
Making a cross section from content of message, in general, Gladewell exposes the interiority of each message as intrinsic value by which audience, readers, spectators, and consumers are filled and convinced with.
The authenticity of a message props up on walls of audience persuasion. The gap between audience and message content cannot be closed unless the gap is bridged. Gladewell coins this bridge under term of “Stickiness”:
“The specific quality that a message needs to be successful is the quality of “stickiness” …it is so memorable, in fact, that it can create change, that it can spur someone to action.”(P.93)
The substance, stickiness, relies on novelties, ideas, and fresh narrations out of hands of mainstream orthodoxy of contemporary promotions saturating all forms of media and spending million dollars for the success of their conventional methods to absorb conventional wisdom. Indeed, Gladwell argues stickiness as key point of any epidemic message by which audience are stopped and act on it stemmed from smaller, subtler, and easier ways. (P.93).
Stickiness embodies how simple and small changes in presentation process of narration, promotion, and pedagogy system engender deep and more effective results for audience, spectators, and readers and this is what direct marketers do: direct marketers are the real students of stickiness. (P95)
It is by numerous anecdotes posed by Gladwell we can overlook the truth of this argument: when direct marketer Lester Wunderman slyly hints to the ascendancy of direct marketing (by a very simple idea in which viewer become as a part of an interactive advertising) whilst he conquers over his conventional rival who seizes cliché norms of conservative advertisement such as humor, splashy graphics, and celebrity endorsers. The” treasure hunt” as a gold box provokes viewer to look for the ads in TV Guide and Parade (Wundermann and his rival program) for the hope of investigating the content of the box as well as playing a game. Indeed, viewers become a participant.
Another achievement of an epidemic idea and message based on power of stickiness was Sesame Street: the exact sample of bright idea, which conducts audience to grasp the content of program: education and attention among children. These two ideas structure a mutual effective narration which proves that” they (children) looked at what for them were the Most informative parts of the program.”(P.101/102)
Regarding to precise acknowledgements of sesame street team they had a mechanism to identify the fittest and decide what should survive. The length of program, children’s attention to program, and degree of difficulty to grasp the theme are part of their schedule. “This was the legacy of Sesame Street if you paid careful attention to the structure and format of your material, you could dramatically enhance stickiness.” (P.110)
In “Blue Clues” The strength of stickiness seems more tangible as the producers eliminate obstacles and limitation, which was obvious in Sesame Street. The sesame street was programmed for both children and adult as some of the themes stemmed from Samuel Beckett parody” waiting for Elmo” which was not understood by preschoolers. The Blue clue took one step further and tied the content of program to rigorous stickiness for perception of viewers.
In all of these samples we can trace the profound counterintuitive in the definition of stickiness. Wunderman’s Gold Box, the inherent quality of ideas in Sesame Street, and easy perceptive of blue clue’s theme. The lesson of stickiness is the same: “here is a simple way to package information that, under the right circumstances, can make it irresistible.” (p.131/132)
Star wars meets Sesame Street?
please check this critical issue:
http://www.x-entertainment.com/messages/270.html
I think the stickiness factor is the key element makes people irresistible to accept information or continue to do something. Once a company can make their products have any stickiness factor, then they won’t need to worry about the sales of it. However, it seems impossible for most companies to know the stickiness factor by doing any research before designing a new product. Even for the Apple Computer Inc., they didn’t know that their iPod has the stickiness factor which can make it the most popular mp3 player in the world.
When Star Wars meets Sesame Street:
What does this tell us about the popularity of Sesame Street at the time? That George Lucas would use it as a vehicle to promote their franchise-- obviously Sesame Street was a big deal at the time.
It looks terrible now, but did this episode look bad to people who watched it a generation ago? What is popular, cool etc changes.
Post a Comment