BzzAgent's Boston Coffee Party

I was posting the below paragraph in a comments section on Brand Autopsy, and I figured it was meaty enough to be a post here. Shame on Brand Autopsy for skewering viral marketing company BzzAgent for it's recent troubles with one Black and Decker/Folgers coffee campaign gone awry. Place the blame where it belongs. With the product manufacturer. I am growing weary of traditional marketers lashing out at the word-of-mouth armies simply because their products didn't hold up in real world testing, and that old school ad agencies are having their lunch money taken by small viral upstarts.

The thing I love most about word of mouth marketing, and in particular companies like BzzAgent, is that it brings some accountability to the manufacturer of the product. Anyone can take some glossy photos of a crappy coffee maker and launch a 10 million dollar ad campaign that shows up on every street corner. But a company like BzzAgent (although they clearly take the fall in some cases) does a great service to consumers by getting real products out to real people for real honest feedback. Don't blame the viral marketing company because the BzzAgents staged their own mini Boston Coffee Party. Blame Black and Decker for producing an inferior product and Folgers for blindly getting behind it. In the interest of full disclosure, I recently became a BzzAgent and look forward to participating in some campaigns and providing honest feedback on the products I get a chance to test and use. Beware traditional marketers. Beware product manufacturers. This will be the future of advertising and marketing, and I look forward to the day when companies like BzzAgent begin to influence a change in the level of quality we see in our every day consumer products.

Comments

[Andrew]

John...I do agree that BzzAgent needs to bear a bit of the responsibility, but I really feel that they should shoulder the minority share. In my opinion the company that delivers the message to the masses is doing just that - delivering the message. In this case BzzAgent is outside of the scope of the traditional messenger role and therefore needs to have a bit of confidence in the product rather than just print up the ads like a regular agency might, hence your point. However, at the end of the day...I guess I am just pleased a bit to see backlash like this, as misdirected as it might be in my opinion. For too long, manufacturers have pumped out crappy products in shiny boxes and had no real public accountability. Now with the web and with companies like BzzAgent, things are shifting a bit. I do agree that from a client perspective, BzzAgent should try to push that positive buzz...but from the agent prospective I am not soured. That is why I joined, to call the crap crap and to spread the word about the good. Keep up the kick ass work on Brand Autopsy. Read it every day.

[johnmoore (from Brand Autopsy)]

Andrew … shouldn’t BzzAgent bear some responsibility for aligning themselves with an inferior product?

Any client that BzzAgent works with, they essentially ‘endorse’ and ‘vouch’ for the product. As a BzzAgent myself, I must trust BzzAgent to send me products that (a) work, (b) are remarkable, and (c) help me be the first on my block to be ‘in-the ‘know.’

Ultimately, the goal of BzzAgent is to develop POSITIVE BUZZ for their client’s products and not negative buzz (as with their Home Café campaign). However, I lose trust with BzzAgent when they align themselves with products that don’t work and are not remarkable.

I think BzzAgent should bear some responsibility for sending BzzAgents a ‘faulty’ or downright poor quality Black&Decker brewer with the Home Café campaign.

By the way, thanks for adding your voice to the conversation and for the link love.