LinkedIn no longer plays embedded videos. YouTube, Wistia, Vimeo et al get the same static-thumbnail treatment they receive on Facebook; not video, but a hyperlinked picture. The 'Video' button on the LinkedIn post dialog is just a file-upload.
Late last fall, I wrote about Facebook's technical lock-out of embedded videos (https://www.vid.one/blog/facebook-locks-out-video). In earlier drafts of that post, I speculated that we would see a video-hosting company offer Facebook-native upload as a response.
Yeah, that didn't take long.
"That's why, if you upgrade your membership, you can now publish videos natively to Facebook and YouTube, right from Vimeo."
In English - put your videos on Vimeo, and Vimeo will put them on Facebook & YouTube for you.
It's a sensible move, and one I expect Wistia, Vidyard and others to follow. It's unavoidable; they can't remain the hub for their customer's video content and leave the massive audiences of Facebook & YouTube out. But it changes their business.
The technical premise of video hosting was video management and delivery on the Internet; the Web, mainly, but in apps and other platforms as well. It's the same basic premise that YouTube aimed at @11 years ago.
But where YouTube - thanks in no small part to the backing of YouTube's owner, Google - achieved breakout consumer success for a decade, the smaller hosting companies grew mainly as services for 'prosumers' (Vimeo's filmmakers), business and marketing. They could add value, though, because they provided end-to-end service; the video you watch on my website thanks to Wistia, is logged & managed by Wistia.
Now the platforms with a critical mass of viewers (Facebook, Google/YouTube - we'll see about Amazon) are calling the shots. It's not enough for Vimeo to offer a fantastic video management / video viewing experience on open Web sites. Too many people spend too much time on those platforms; Vimeo's customers can't skip them just for technical loyalty to open standards.
This move by Vimeo really puts Vimeo in a different business. Yes, they can push the video file to YouTube and Facebook - it's actually not particularly difficult. They're no longer in control of the end-to-end delivery, though. Will Facebook or YouTube push full stats back into Vimeo? Haven't looked, but I'd be surprised. Who controls the embed codes? YouTube and Facebook. Who can push ads or control placement? YouTube and Facebook. And so on; as I said, they're moving into a different business.
I'm not interesting in being the last guy clutching my Betamax; markets and standards move on, and winners take scale. It's not all bad, it's not all good, it just happens. I get that. But it's worth noting that such a thing has happened.
A journalist enquired about millennials & email; the research turned up a few surprises!
Why is it important to market to them with email?
Millennials are multi-channel, but email is a frequent and long-term choice. Forbes says "If brands want to use email effectively, they must make sure the content is both helpful and relevant."
What advice do you have for email marketing to them?
Use visuals, like video & GIFs! A recent Harris poll showed millennials have a 2-to-1 preference for visual communications, compared to Boomers. 70% of poll respondents said they use visuals in their own communication.
Done personally and well, yes; done frequently and poorly, worse than no. While millennials are more excited to check their email (Adobe Slide 19), one-third say they are most annoyed by irrelevant email.
2018 kayak & lifejacket sales will skyrocket as marketing departments paddle through floods of hype about AI in marketing.
A few large companies with coherent data strategies will have a few ah-hah moments of AI-guided success; the smart ones won't say a word about it.
The real AI-in-marketing action in 2018 will be lab work; wise CMOs will watch, listen, research and learn, but hold off on large investments.
What impact do you think AI will have on marketing in the longer term (5-10 years)?
Dominant players will become still more dominant; absent civil or legislative backlash, data-begets-data and AI cost/scale advantages will transform marketing (back) into a service companies buy, rather than a function they perform - from Mad Max back to Mad Men.
OC (Outside China) Facebook, Google and Amazon will split most consumers; Microsoft will mount a serious challenge to Amazon in B2B marketing as LinkedIn blue fades into Azure.
If adolescence doesn't blossom Siri to She, Apple will niche out; persona will become the new design. Attention and permission will become dual-mediated; my (personal AI) assistant will talk with your (marketing AI) assistant.
What kinds of skills and insight/intelligence will marketing professionals need in the future to work with AI?
Marketing pros and orgs will require a dual-minded balance of IQ and EQ. AI will ratchet up the pace of the pace of change again; it will feel like the singularity. But people - not algorithms - will still be the key decision point, and "feel" will still drive their decision; design, media and messaging out of sync with the consumer's point of view will fail.
Effective marketing organizations will figure out the balance of process and culture to pair soft and hard skills. Above all, the ability to learn, and to integrate new knowledge and existing skills, will be vital both personally and professionally.
Some years ago I spent a bunch of cycles tinkering with US map visuals, trying different methods to represent population more accurately. It irked me - and still irks me - to see important measures like votes distorted and mis-represented by organizations whose job it is to convey accurate representation. Even FiveThirtyEight.com - by far the most accurate-numbers news source I know - still has a damn red-state-blue-state GEOGRAPHY map on their home page.
Painting the Montana and Wyoming land mass red, or those of Oregon and Washington blue, is a visual distortion equivalent to giving them 2x-8x their actual number of people (or electoral votes). Likewise, coloring in Massachusetts whatever you shade you like understates their numbers at least 2x.
I've had smart people say "Oh, but I know that Wyoming doesn't have that many people." Bah. Baloney. One, nobody does that math in their head except Josh on the West Wing (and he's a fictional character like Wyoming's extra electors.) Two, that's a rational response - your limbic system already went into a panic over all the red (or all the blue) that's on the screen lying to you about the race.
Thanks to Vox for a great video on the issue.
These issues are too important for such poor communication; a journalist making the same distortions with numbers would be called on the carpet. Visuals are processed 60,000 times faster than words - people get them first & faster, and if they read at all, will likely be interpreting what they read based on what they've already concluded from the visuals.
See earlier blog post. Pity nothing's changed.
A customer wrote me late last night to say "hey, I cancelled and you're still charging me." I looked up the records...nope...sent him the screen shot and asked him to send transaction details so I could investigate. He wrote back to say "Ooops, no, it wasn't you." We both agreed that keeping track of these seemingly miniscule subscriptions is a real challenge for small-to-medium businesses.
OK - fast forward about 12 hours. I got a call out of the blue from Adobe.
"We understand you're not happy with your Team subscription."
Was that driven by the support interaction? The original blog post below? "Reputation management" monitoring? All of the above? Doesn't matter, really. My hat's off to Adobe for acting, regardless of what triggered the action. They could have taken the neener-neener contract defense, and as I said...my fault for not monitoring dates/terms.
Adobe did the right thing for us. I also think they did the right thing for Adobe. Elephants have long memories; I still avoid one of the major US air carriers because of a cranky flight attendant @25 years ago. But I'll happily trumpet my pleasure at Adobe's approach (elephant joke there...) and continue doing business with them. I like the products, yeah, but liking the company is much better karma all around.
Adobe gets that "...as a service" ends with "service." Kudos.
I saw a headline recently that basically said Adobe revenue has gone up with their shift to a subscription model. I think Creative Cloud is fantastic - as a friend of mine said, $10K in software for $50/month. No objection to the software.
Just keep an eye on that renewal date, kids, because the renewal and rollover doesn't just apply to the month. If you're planning to keep using Creative Cloud, and you renew in Month 13, you've just signed up for another year. Want to drop a seat? You'll pay a 50%-of-time-left penalty to do that.
I have no objection to subscription businesses - we run one.
I have no objection to annual contracts either.
But I think companies should state renewal terms explicitly, not with sneaky "it's in the terms" implicit references. The monthly price was in the email - the actual commitment for the year wasn't.
My fault, my bad, fine, we'll pay the seats. We'll cancel when it makes mathematical sense.
Really, this is an email and attention problem. Did I read the renewal email, follow the links and review the contract? No. Should I have? Yes. Will I watch the renewal dates in the future? Yes. Will I automatically re-subscribe with the same email address? Hmm. Well, that's an email and attention problem. Maybe I should create an email alias called "Adobe2015Subscription" and sign that guy up for the year. Just to help me remember about those renewal terms, of course.
Support transcript - start time 10:15 end time 11:45!
Anonymous One: Hello! Welcome to Adobe support.
Anonymous One: Please allow me 1-2 minute(s) to review your account details.
Me: We don't use the extras in the Team subscription, and until I hire a replacement...we're down to just one license.
Me: So it would make more sense to cancel & just set up an Individual subscription for my continued use for now.
Me: How does the timing of that work - should I wait until this month is elapsed, then cancel / re-enroll ?
Me: does cancelled = refunded ?
Anonymous One: So do you want to cancel the one unassigned license ?
Me: I don't understand - we're not committed to 2 seats until July...?
Me: OK - let's restate that in English. How do I cancel this team subscription entirely?
Anonymous One: Please stay connected while I transfer the chat to the concern team, Thanks for choosing Adobe.
info: Please wait while I transfer the chat to the appropriate group.
info: Your chat transcript will be sent to matthew@sayitvisually.com at the end of your chat.
info: We are still assisting other customers, thank you for your patience. You can also try our community forums, available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
info: You are now chatting with Anonymous Two.
Me: Did you read the transcript or are we starting over ?
Anonymous Two: I have received your query. Please allow me a moment to verify your account and to review the details of your request.
Anonymous Two: I can see you are looking to cancel the team membership.
Me: Yes. We're down to 1 seat for at least 90 days, and don't use the extra team functions.
Me: We've had this team plan for well over a year. When did we agree to an annual renew with a cancellation fee?
Me: That's a really offensive and stupid lock-in policy. Good way to lose customers.
Me: I don't agree, but that will make an interesting anti-Adobe blog post.
Me: So state the price for cancellation for the record, please.
Anonymous Two: All the details of the membership is very clear, I have shared the commitment terms as well for the membership.
Me: I'd asked for the cancellation fee (price) - DO NOT cancel at this time.
Anonymous Two: In order to remove both the license the fee is $629.91+tax.
Me: And to remove one, half of that?
Anonymous Two: Are we connected?
Me: OK. Your renewal mail mentions the monthly rate but doesn't state that the 1-year lock-in and cancellation fees renew/apply. DO NOT cancel this subscription.