November 23, 2009
Login | Register Now

Advertising Age: Your Online Source for Marketing and Media News


More from Ad Age:
Creativity
Ad Age China
Bookstore
Jobs
Ad Age On Campus
Sign up for E-mail Newsletters

Stay on top of the news, sign up for our free newsletters


What's Next After Skittles.com?

The Social Website Is a Step in the Right Direction

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Submit to Digg Add to Google Share on StumbleUpon Submit to LinkedIn Add to Newsvine Bookmark on Del.icio.us Submit to Reddit

Quite a bit of buzz has popped up around the new Skittles.com over the weekend and today. If you haven't seen the site, it's based on leveraging different social-media sites linked together by a very simple menu navigation that floats on any of the sites. For example, the home page and "chatter" section is the brand's Twitter page, the video media page is the brand's YouTube page, the video images page is the brand's Flickr stream, and the "friends" section is the Facebook fan-page profile.

This is almost certainly inspired by Modernista's brilliant redesign from about a year ago. Does that matter? Definitely not. Modernista had it right then and now Skittles does too. Skittles has unabashedly made the bold leap into accepting they can't control the way their brand is defined in today's social web and can only try their best to participate in the conversation. They're taking the good with the bad, and I can assure you all that good is going to dramatically outweigh the bad.

If you want an easy indicator of how this site does, check out the number of Facebook friends it already has in place (an impressive 582,604 at the time of this post). Other measurements, such as the number of comments it has on its YouTube videos and images, and general comments and sentiments can also be helpful indicators, but I think the Facebook figure serves at the simplest indicator for most casual observers.

The reality is, Skittles has done this completely right. This solution was quick to produce, leverages existing communities that have great interest in the product and creates a platform that further engages the consumer. I would recommend any brand with minimal budget and the right kind of audience drop the brand sites they currently have, which I'm guessing aren't terribly effective. The problem is that such a scenario raises an interesting dilemma.

What happens if everyone shifts their current strategy and starts launching these kinds of sites? Don't worry -- it isn't going to happen anytime soon, but some trends will develop.

In a nutshell, I think the novelty will wear off for a lot of consumers. These people certainly want their social media and a big part of a brand's focus will be on creating great quality websites that encourage discussion, communication and participation. The social-media aspects will be achieved by using the web services and integration tools of sites like Facebook. Deep integration with Facebook Connect and Google Friend Connect will become more prevalent and brands with budgets will use all of these social features that Skittles has embraced.

However, while social aspects will become more prevalent, brands will keep in mind that consumers also like their sites to be nicely packaged. Moving forward, businesses will create sites with a far higher level of aesthetic value and will work to make sure they retain the ability to at least control the brand visually. They will also differentiate as they always have with great creative and fun concepts that leverage these same social communities. Sites will also be more conscious of usability and not adding complex layers that inhibit the social functions of the third party web services like Flickr, YouTube or Twitter -- which are frequently botched today.

I don't think the age of the microsite is over. The successful microsites, both low and high budget, will undoubtedly have one thing in common: a simple open infrastructure for integrating into popular web communities and leveraging their social nature.

Again, I commend Agency.com for paying attention to great ideas, Modernista for doing it first, but most importantly Skittle's brand team for having the courage to get out there and embrace the web and the new creative process so wholeheartedly. (Of course, Team Skittles could be terrified to death. But, um, congrats anyway...)

~ ~ ~
Freddie Laker is the director of digital strategy at Sapient. He has also founded the Society of Digital Agencies, a collective of notable digital agencies focused on thought leadership and positive industry change, and blogs at takemetoyourleader.com.

20 Comments
Subscribe to comments on: What's Next After Skittles.com?
  By CoryOBrien | San Francisco, CA March 3, 2009 01:13:25 pm:
I think the trend of integrating more and more social media components into corporate websites and microsites will definitely continue, and it's going to force companies to step up their presence on sites like YouTube, Flickr and Twitter to match the rest of their brand message. The look and feel of these third party sites will be almost as important as the main site, and the integration between the two will need to be smoothed and seamless.
  By nickkinports | Chicago, IL March 3, 2009 01:26:53 pm:
Bringing social tools into a website is only half the equation. Skittles got it half right. The other half depends on what Skittles provides after the social tools are implemented.

Is there a Brand Ambassador at Skittles who will champion the brand and talk to consumers through the shiny new website and be empowered to take action on consumers' behalf? Will Skittles be monitoring the community for actionable ideas and then ACTING on them? Will there be giveaways, contests, and other valuable content distributed through social media outlets?

The answers to these questions will come in time, but it should be understood that where the brand stands today could drastically change tomorrow if Agency.com and their client slack off or fail to stay relevant to their target audience.

http://www.twitter.com/admaven

http://admaven.blogspot.com
  By Jeff | Chicago, IL March 3, 2009 01:39:26 pm:
Does "Facebook Friends" translate into # of purchases for a brand? Is any consumer more inclined to purchase the product because of this new site?

At POP in the grocery store, does the consumer remember the Skittles website and that they are a Facebook friend so they want to be loyal to the brand and it's the trigger for purchase?
  By patrickfurey | murphy, TX March 3, 2009 02:26:21 pm:
step in the right direction? how about stumble in a clueless fog!
  By Freddie | Hollywood, FL March 3, 2009 04:22:00 pm:
**************************

I'm not claiming that becoming a fan of a brand in Facebook translates to sales, but it will give you an idea if people are coming to the site an choosing to engage at a deeper level as these types of behaviors are the only call to actions the visitor has.

The brand (or the agency) must be vigilant in participating in the these different communities they're aggregating. I do believe, without restriction, that consumers that engage brands and participate in healthy dialog with their peers are far more likely to remember a brand favorably then by interacting with a standard web game. The majority of people find another person's opinion more valuable then a statement coming from a brand. It's a trust thing (with the exceptions of some trusted brands whose word is like gospel).

As usual, that's my two cents. Take it for what it's worth.

-Freddie
  By gunther | Los Angeles, CA March 3, 2009 05:14:48 pm:
Freddie, well said, you make some great points, and it seems the Skittles site - as a community platform - will facilitate ongoing conversations with its brand advocates.
  By MATSNL65 | LOS ANGELES, CA March 3, 2009 06:57:51 pm:
Freddy's piece tells me the balancing act that branding strategies and their agencies are attempting to maintain with the unchartered waters of "social media." These communities do not see themselves as "customers" in the least. Skittles threw a successful party online. Everyone was there. Even more are talking about it. Those who planned the party are all talking. The host is entertaining... we never knew the host could throw parties like this. But parties end. People go on with their lives.

Is the conversations that brands want to have really about always about the big party? Campaigns are like parties. They are planned and scheduled. They have a list of people they want to reach. They have themes. They can be memorable. But campaigns are not conversations.

The real paradigm shift here with the Skittles.com is the future of the campaign in the context of the social web. With the increased spending on interactive that has come from the recession, many more brands and their agencies will be focusing on their digital brand reach. Will they take several years to realize that it takes more than a campaign lifecycle or thousands of campaigns to rethink and simply develop that very human trait of having meaningful conversations?

http://www.twitter.com/MATSNL65
  By robgonda | Hollywood, FL March 3, 2009 09:53:30 pm:
so they saved money on production cost ... how would you say it translated into ongoing maintenance cost?
  By Ramon | Miami, FL March 4, 2009 12:39:46 am:
Freddie, although I agree with the majority of your article, I cant agree that Skittles has done it right by being unoriginal and completely stealing the brilliant idea by Modernista's corporate site. This argument was brought up in our office and some people disagreed with me because the majority of the users that will see the site will not have known about Modernista's site since they are not in the industry. But does that make it right? I don't think so. What is next? Subservient meat?
  By Freddie | Hollywood, FL March 4, 2009 05:09:15 am:
Ramon - I'm with you on the originality factor. I just didn't want to waste the whole article arguing this point. It's not what it's about for me. I agree they nicked Modernista's idea, but this is the first time a major brand has so blatantly embraced social media and it thrills me.
  By Louislaurent | Des Moines, IA March 4, 2009 04:05:03 pm:
Loved the site. Like the article. Don't like the product. That's the problem. If you are attracting people who have no more use for your product that I have for Skittles, it's all nice, maybe you win an award, stroke your ego, but nothing positive happens.
  By lenkendall | Chicago, IL March 4, 2009 04:25:47 pm:
Making light of the conversation around Skittles (versus the campaign itself)

http://digg.com/tech_news/Overheard_Conversation_between_Motrin_Tablet_and_anSkittle
  By Freddie | Hollywood, FL March 4, 2009 08:09:11 pm:
I've spent the good portion of my recent career working on brands like Guinness, Coca-Cola, vitaminwater, Slim Jim, Burn, Fanta, PowerAde, Mentos, Wrigley, etc...

Seemingly all things you'd never imagine people talking about, but amazingly they are. They're mentioning it in passing and sometimes as the focus of conversations in all kinds of places across the web. You'd be truly suprised.

The Skittles.com site isn't a campaign for me. It's not about getting people talking. (Although it has in our marketing community without a doubt.) Skittles.com is a brand site. The campaigns that skittles.com does through out the year should be what generate buzz and when they do create buzz that buzz will be captured and shared at the main brand site.

Check out their fan site on Facebook. They didn't get over half a million fans after this site was created. They existed long before (which probably caused their enthusiasm in this idea).

I don't think anyone is expecting skittles magazine to come out anytime soon dedicated to fanaticism about the product, but the reality is skittles amuse people enough everyday to cause them to talk about it even what might be viewed as inane ways. Trust me, I've seen it about far more meaningless and less inspiring products.

This site, used properly, in conjunction with great campaign work will be a big hit for them.

Feel free to email me or call me anytime. I'm happy to talk about it at length.
  By craigcooper | craigcooper.com, NY March 5, 2009 11:49:39 am:
Hooray for the coders.

It's an achievement for them.

But is there really a big idea here or just a technological gimmick?

In 40 years will this still be as fresh and smart as the vintage VW Beetle TV ads (Funeral comes to mind)are today?

I doubt it.

Too much hoo-hah in the digital world is about technology and not about human insight.
  By swinkler | Chicago, IL March 5, 2009 04:36:31 pm:
I think there's a bigger picture argument that this brings up but I don't see a lot of people talking about which is this:

What is a brand site? And do most brands really need them?

I've elaborated a bit here and would love to hear what others have to say.
  By swinkler | Chicago, IL March 5, 2009 04:38:15 pm:
And by "here" (previous post), I guess I meant here: http://swinkler.tumblr.com/. Darn HTML.
  By GABRIEL | gabrielbear.com, KY March 5, 2009 07:13:23 pm:
Loyalty is generally a function of perceived value in the relationship. Skittles added a perceived value (metricked through fb, etc) which is not about extending their reach to people who do not like the product, but is rather about re-enforcing people's choice to stay with the "flock" of skittles consumers.
For a while the term as i recall it was "brand immersion." now its made more palatable/poppy with brand lifestyle.
If the technology is fast enough, deep enough, converged enough, "skittles people" will, consciously or not, tell skittles where they are going, and then skittles can lead them there.
  By BL | NEW YORK, NY March 5, 2009 07:17:05 pm:
The problem with the Skittles site is that along the way they forgot that Skittles is a freaking candy. Something you eat, for fun. And a lot of the people who might eat Skittles are kids, who are not allowed anywhere on the site.

This is just a hodgepodge of trendy technology, not a radical new idea. Well, actually, not a new idea at all. The idea was Modernista's. The buzz is much ado about nothing.
  By John | Greensboro, NC March 6, 2009 10:53:26 am:
For years I've participated in debates between agencies and brands about the role/need/function/ROI of their website. The most vexing question was always why we should try to create some kind of attractive new destination that realistically only provides the content that they already get in other places.
This new Skittles approach is a brilliant solution to that fundamental issue. By making their site link to the places people are used to going to and not trying to create some parallel universe they have demonstrated an elegant option that is based on user needs and habits rather than a brand's. And any time you can make your user experience follow user needs you'll win.
Let's give credit to Modernista for seeing this possibility first. But the copycat debate is silly. This isn't some idea that Modernista can own exclusively. (That's like saying Coke ran TV ads first so Pepsi can't). Because this new model is based on how we all use the internet, in some variation or another, this is how we are all going to be doing things in the very near future.
  By amoncada | Providence, RI March 6, 2009 03:38:15 pm:
So, with all the buzz about #skittles - it begs the question: http://isinterwebthefuture.com?
:

Note: Comments submitted to AdAge.com are posted automatically and will include the user name with which you registered. Ad Age reserves the right to delete comments that are insulting or personal in nature. Comments may be used in the print edition at editorial discretion. Comments are restricted to 500 words or less.




Stay on top of the news and stay ahead of the game—sign up for e-mail newsletters now!



Advertising Age: Your Online Source for Marketing and Media News