What does your written message say to your audience?

I'm traveling for work this week, bouncing from hotel to hotel. The places I'm staying at are pretty middle-of-the-road: not fancy, but not too bad, either. As a result, my expectations are modest: I'm looking for a quiet place, a wireless connection, and a reasonable amount of cleanliness and comfort. The hotel I stayed at last night, located in Lawrenceburg, Indiana, did pretty well on most counts, but there's one place where a little change would have gone a long way toward making me feel more welcome. It's a small thing, but reflective of a common mistake that businesses make when communicating with their customers.

On the top of the TV, there was a laminated TV station listing, along with two notes:

PAY-PER-VIEW IS NOT AVAILABLE
Channel line up subject to change without notice

That's it. No "thank you for staying with us"; no "please call the front desk with any questions." Just one big, capitalized "NOT" followed by a cold, hard "without notice." They're basically taking something most guests probably have no interest in--pay-per-view movies--and calling attention to its absence, turning it from something people don't want into something they feel like they're missing out on.

When I saw this, I immediately thought of a Seth Godin post from January that discussed a sign in a florist's shop with similarly unwelcoming language. Godin said this about word choice:

If it's in print, it matters even more. Things in print have a tone and a finality that add an impact that you need to care about.

So, after the lawyers are done, let the marketers make sure it sounds like you. Your signs, your contacts, your fine print... your words don't just sit there, they shout.

Stuff like this is easy to avoid if you remember the true function of the written word. Whether it's an advertisement, a sign, or a note left on the TV, your written message to your audience acts as your surrogate. It's there when you can't be there. So why write in a language you'd never use when speaking face-to-face?

The problem is that we often ask too much of the written word, hoping it will replace conversations instead of starting new, better ones. We use language designed to shut down conflict instead of inviting feedback.

Once you realize that your words should be consistent with the larger conversation you want to have with your audience, it's easy to fix language that needs improvement. The hotel I stayed at, for example, has several options for editing its message, depending on what kind of conversation they hope to engender. They could:

• Be more courteous: This one's simple. Instead of accentuating the negative by screaming "PAY-PER-VIEW IS NOT AVAILABLE," why not say "We apologize, but pay-per-view is not available"?
• Explain: Is there a reason why "PAY-PER-VIEW IS NOT AVAILABLE"? If you can offer a quick explanation, do so. Maybe "We're sorry, but in order to keep rates low our channel selection is limited to basic cable." This isn't perfect, but at least it reminds the customer that they're getting a lower price by sacrificing a luxury. Instead, in not acknowledging the reason why pay-per-view isn't available, they're leaving the impression that they're just choosing to make it unavailable.
• Offer an alternative: Could the hotel make a DVD player available in each room, or make portable players and movies available for checkout at the front desk? How about passes to a local movie theatre for those who really want to see a movie? Even though those solutions are a little inconvenient for their customer, it's better than offering no alternative.
• Add by subtracting: Why is the second phrase, "Channel line up subject to change without notice," even necessary? Why not delete it altogether?
• Stop talking like a lawyer. I have to agree with Godin on this one. "Channel line up subject to change without notice"? Really? Are they afraid someone is going to sue them for breach of contract or emotional distress?
• Fix the problem. Instead of showcasing the fact that you're unwilling or unable to update the list of TV stations, why not just commit to changing it when needed?
• Change the conversation. People who stay in hotels usually aren't in town for the hotel stay itself (especially when it's a modest hotel). Why not acknowledge that--and offer a warm welcome at the same time? "Pay per view isn't available at our hotel, because we encourage you to spend time at all of our great restaurants, shops, and attractions. Please ask the front desk for a visitor's guide, and enjoy your stay."
  

All things considered, minor issues like this aren't deal breakers--but only because the bar is set so low. The right language, on the other hand, can make you stand out and make enough of a difference to make you a preferred choice. Regardless of what business you're in, it's important that your surrogate voice be consistent with the voice you use when you're face-to-face with your customers. Because if you don't make them feel 100% welcome, someone else will.

Bonus coverage: if you want to read about some REALLY bad hotel stays, check out the 10 Worst Hotel Reviews of All Time (hat tip: Woot.com).

A Whopper of a recall rate

Today's "3 Minute Ad Age" reports that the Burger King "Whopper Freakout" campaign has generated the highest recall rate in the six years that IAG Research has been tracking viewer response to TV ads.


The "Whopper Freakout" spots certainly are memorable, but the long-form video has one major flaw: if someone orders a Whopper and you give them a sandwich from Wendy's, it only makes sense that they're going to get a little angry--and not because he or she is a Whopper purist. If you give me something from altogether different fast food chain, it says something pretty bad about your quality control. I'd be freaking out, too, wondering what other surprises might be waiting for me in my fries or my drink.

WOM growing, but Trout has his doubts

Good overview of the state of word of mouth advertising in yesterday's Seattle Post-Intelligencer:

Word of mouth, sometimes referred to as buzz marketing or viral marketing, was the fastest-growing slice of the $254 billion marketing industry last year, and is expected to account for more than $1 billion of ad spending in 2007 [sic], according to a report by PQ Media of Stamford, Conn., an alternative media researcher. That number is forecast to reach $3.7 billion by 2011, fueled in part by the eruption of blogs and the increasing popularity of social networking sites such as Facebook.

Industry guru Jack Trout is a little less than impressed, however:

"Word of mouth has always been nirvana -- obviously, having a third party say you're terrific is better than saying you're terrific yourself. ... But my sense is that it's still a work in progress."

Trout furnished a pair of recent high-profile flops to illustrate his skepticism. One was Pontiac's decision to give away its new G6 model on "Oprah," an effort that generated significant awareness, but "didn't sell a damn thing."

The story also included a surprise for anyone who's followed the debate about advertising's declining levels of credibility in the eyes of today's skeptical consumer: while they appear to be significantly less credible than word-of-mouth, newspaper ads scored much better on the trustworthiness scale than I would have guessed:

A recent survey by A.C. Nielsen found that 78 percent of respondents viewed recommendations from other consumers as trustworthy. That compares with 63 percent for newspaper ads, the second most-trusted medium…

I myself am one of those skeptical consumers, so I have doubts about Nielsen's numbers. But I'm sure the Post-Intelligencer was happy to print them.

Book of the Month: Buzzmarketing

SBB's first book of the month is Buzzmarketing: Get People to Talk About Your Stuff, by Mark Hughes. Mark was one of the guys who convinced the town of Halfway, Orgeon to change its name to Half.com, Oregon. But my favorite idea from Buzzmarketing is one that he didn't sell: a thought-bubble-shaped blimp that would have floated over Mount Rushmore.