« The 12 Days of [Marketing] Christmas | Home | It’s about communication … or its absense … »
FUD … FOOIE … one acronym deserves another
By barney | October 8, 2007
In the marketing world - the whole arena, not just Internet - FUD is a widely used tactic.
FUD stands for Fear, Uncertainty, & Doubt.
You’ve been exposed to it all your life. You grew up with TV ads - and radio ads before and concurrent with that - and magazine & newspaper ads before and concurrent with both.
For example, consider the Dial soap commercials, "Aren’t you glad you use Dial? Don’t you wish everybody did?"
Or consider the Head and Shoulders commercials. Personal hygiene is particularly susceptible to this marketing method.
But there’s an unseemly emphasis on FUD in the Internet marketing world. The constant emphasis upon failure and attack should be demeaning, but it seems instead to have become the norm.
Why?
FOOIE!
Fear Of Online Income …
- Erasure?
- Eradication?
- Enervation?
- Enfeeblement?
- Enrichment (someone else’s, of course)?
- Enter your own E.
Get the picture? I’m certain you do … but not certain enough to stop <grin /> … besides this is my rant <chortle />.
There are a fantastic number of marketers using FUD marketing practices because of FOOIE … and because it’s so much easier to prey upon fears than it is to actually demonstrate benefit. I’m not talking about those young to the field so much as I am talking about established, recognized marketers, the known names in the industry. After all, whom else would the youngsters emulate than them?
What do they market?
- Fear.
Fear that you won’t make any money online unless you use their product du jour. - Uncertainty.
Uncertainty that you can make enough money to survive without their product du jour. - Doubt.
Doubt that you will survive online without their product du jour.
And what is that product du jour? It can be anything that they currently espouse.
Let’s see,
- 2003 was mostly mini-tutorials, if memory serves.
At least, that’s what I saw most promoted, but that might have been just the lists to which I subscribed at that time. - 2004 was the year of touting JVs (Joint Ventures).
Seems as though every third email I got was explaining the absolute need to get involved with JVs. I developed an absolute aversion to the term, I saw so many. - 2005 … I don’t really recall a particular venue for 2005.
It was mostly still promotion of JVs and tutorials that carried the year. - 2006 was bipolar and schizoid.
2006 was the year of the big launch, the year of The Death of …, and the year of multimedia.
But it was also the year of battle between multimedia and traditional presentations.
What did each of these years have in common?
FUD!
FOOIE!
In American history, during the late 1800s into the early 1900s there were two groups of folk who would currently fit the classification of Internet marketer: Robber Barons and snake oil salesmen (hey, Fuller Brush salesmen qualified <grin />).
Both groups had the same qualifications. They were defined separately mostly due to population density. The Robber Barons existed in highly populated urban areas, while the snake oil salesmen worked in the areas of the country less densely populated. But both groups were of the same mind set: get/do all the public will bear, then a bit more, all in the name of personal fortune and power.
I see little difference between those two groups and the current group of marketers involved with the Internet.
Oh, there are a few - a relative few - who actually possess, and use, ethics [that’s a whole ‘nother article], but damned few when considering the numbers.
It’s a rare situation when FUD is ethical. For example, when I was in school in the mid fifties to early sixties, FUD produced classroom training on what to do in case of a nuclear event. While the training was woefully inadequate, there is no question (?) that the ethics of that training was valid and was indeed FUD inspired.
Today, on the Web, there’s no excuse for marketing FUD, save for the desire of the progenitors to earn money at any cost. FOOIE is driving those progenitors, and any ethical consideration seems beyond them.
But that’s mostly my fault - and yours - because it is so easy to prey upon human fears and frailties. We let them get away with it. We let doubt and uncertainty in our own lives dictate out responses to offers from others that hold out hope, that seem to guarantee success, even though we know that success is going to come only from our own efforts.
You do know that, don’t you?
Of course, the other side of that FUD salesmanship is the attraction of easy success. Not only uncertain, but lazy, are we.
News Flash! If you haven’t already figured it out, success takes work!
OK, that’s another article, as well. Back to FUD.
I know someone is going to refute me by saying something along these lines,
"Hey, these guys constantly point out that we should always post the benefits of what we are selling. That’s a basic maxim of good copywriting."
True, as stated. But how are the benefits presented? Are they presented as, "This will help you succeed?" Or are they presented as, "This will keep you from failing?" I cannot speak to your experiences, but most of what I see promotes, not success, but prevention of failure.
See, if I tell you how to succeed, that’s what I’ve done. But if I tell you how not to fail, I have not necessarily told you how to succeed. Call that hair-splitting, if you like, but it’s a mighty big hair. Following is an example of the thought processes here. (Mind you, I’m not what you would call a copywriter, not by any stretch of the imagination, but technical writing is not so far distant as you might imagine <chuckle />.)
Bread is the newest thing on the dietary horizon. Bread can feed millions.
How do you make bread?
Add flour, yeast, warm water (or other liquid), sugar, oil or shortening, salt. Mix thoroughly. Knead. Let rise. Repeat last two steps. Bake.
That is not how to make bread. It’s a sales letter on making bread.
It makes no mention of quantities, times, temperatures, or supporting tools. After all, if I told you how to actually make bread, I couldn’t sell you my method for doing it, could I?
But I could be a bit more specific, a bit more helpful, without compromising my method, couldn’t I?
Bread is the newest thing on the dietary horizon. Bread can feed millions.
How do you make bread?
Let’s say you want to start out small, feed only a few people, maybe three or four for a couple of meals.
Use 8 cups of flour, two tablespoons of yeast, warm water (about 180-190 F), 3 tablespoons sugar, 1/4 cup oil or melted [link to ebook on how to melt shortening, how hot it should be] shortening, 1 teaspoon salt. Add half the flour and all the other ingredients. Mix [show link to tutorial on mixing] well. Gradually add the rest of the flour until the mixture is smooth and elastic. Knead [show link to article on how to knead]. Let mixture rest and rise [link to ebook series or extended tutorial on rising, how it works, what it does, why to do it]. Repeat last two steps [link to article on number of risings for different flours/breads]. Grease two 9"x5" loaf pans [link to source(s) of implements]. Split dough mixture into two equal pieces. Place one in each pan. Place in 375F oven. Bake for 35-40 minutes. Remove from oven. Remove from baking pans immediately. Allow to cool 15-20 minutes before slicing.
That’s how to make bread. It’s also a sales letter on making bread.
Is it TMI (Too Much Information)? Not if your product(s) can enhances that process. And it provides possible income enhancements via the links to other products and instructional sources, either as affiliate or personal upsell products.
Your tutorial on making bread will offer many variations on the same theme, many affiliate product links, many upsell links, that do not exist in the sales letter.
Now, let’s look at an alternative sales letter.
Bread is the newest thing on the dietary horizon. Bread can feed millions.
Isn’t that just what you need when friends or family show up unannounced at dinner time? Or when you need to provide sustenance for a party of unknown numbers of people? Or maybe to feed the kids and their unexpected friends after school? Buy my tutorial on bread, and you can counter all these situations. Never worry about feeding people again.
See the difference in these three sales letters? The conceptual difference?
The first one gives a bare bones description of the process, without providing any information of other requirements, e.g., measuring implements, baking implements, etc. So you have benefits, so to speak, but no idea how to accomplish them. You’re buying blind. And you have no idea what else might be required.
The second one actually defines the basic process, with further links to supplemental explanations and equipment. It lets me know the basic process, to the point that I can actually apply it, but points out extras that I’ll probably want in order to be successful. So there is a basic process definition, a requirements definition, as well as your product offer. When’s the last time you saw that on the web?
The third one uses FUD - gently, semi-subtly, but still FUD. And it makes a false claim into the process. It implies instant resolution to a problem, when the resolution will in fact take three or four hours.
Now, I’m not talking about what is and is not good copywriting, as in what works best to sell.
I am talking about what is and is not good copywriting, as in what is ethical - and fantastically productive.
Believe it or not, you can be ethical and still sell product. You just have to work a bit harder. Adjust your thinking to what the consumer needs or wants from you, not how best to coerce the consumer. Then provide enough information to satisfy such needs or wants, even though it means giving away part of your product. (New freebie concept, maybe?)
Don’t coerce me … don’t sell me … provide a benefit that works for me, show me how it works, and I’ll be a customer for life … or at least until you get greedy <smirk />.
[Posted 2007-02-15, Moved 2007-10–8]
- 30[%] -
Topics: Marketing |
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.