We hear a lot about doing things 'virally', but its not always the case that 'viral' is the best way to go. A clear example of this is some work we had been doing recently for Yahoo! Mail, where they wanted to directly attract their users who were already using their new webmail client ... with umm ... some viral content. News-flash: viral sweeps across unchartered user spaces of its own accord. Yahoo! Mail users on the other hand live, well .. on Yahoo!

Viral

There are clear times for using viral type content - mainly for raising awareness on a grand scale.

Virals are great because the brand or marketing crew don't have the labour intensive job of pushing the content around to the many places where users will see it (that on the other hand is what happens with say, traditional marketing that is placed outdoor, in magazines, on radio stations etc). True virals that spread all on their own, need only initial seeding, and the viewers do the rest. Whats even better is that these virals (which may be video clips, email chains, slogans etc) cross the boundaries and spread across a diverse landscape of viewing destinations and when they inspire imitation - media types. A viral that starts out on a forum, or in an email or on TV will probably see its way to YouTube or BoreMe, may find its way to video phones and may also be talked about (extended coverage) in print newspaper and on the radio.

But we know that already.

Targeted

There are times where you know where your core audience is, and what you need to say to them, and how to say it. So don't try and give yourself a hard time and seed something virally. Thats a joke.

Targeted marketing is perfect for quick executions, communicating distinct messages and inspiring a response from the crowd.

And thats not to say that the two types of communication can be used together, which is what we will be doing with Yahoo! Music with an initial viral video before launch, that whets the appetite, sparks an interest and begins to grow awareness of the campaign, followed by another 80% of marketing that will target many distinct groups that make up the Yahoo! Music audience and only includes one more viral element aimed specifically at the Facebook community.

Ben raised a few interesting discussion points -

One of the things that makes a viral so appealing is that it is not seemingly coming from the brand, but from a friend or community right? So, in targeted messaging do you not lose the credibilty that a viral may hold in this instance? Do you envisage using 'viral targeting' so that people receive something that is seemingly not from Yahoo!

Yes I know exactly what you mean. But lets be clear that viral and targeted are firstly two different a distinct methods of spreading a message. Viral also refers (as a more umbrella understanding of the word) to the content and tone.

With that said - targeted marketing may also take a form that is more personal (set by tone) and personal (set by reducing branding, and changing the author of the piece). The second may set off alarm bells in being inauthentic and manipulative of the audience's trust. I would argue that you might do the same when you commission or invite a guest speaker or writer to create something that embodies the truth of what you wish to communicate. I'd also say that lower budgets compromise this by relying on a few talented creatives in an agency to carry out the same work - that is up for consideration.

Either way, I believe that targeted communication can also be personal and unbranded.

An example of this are blogs setup by people in a company where they voice their own insights and opinions that sometimes may be at odds with the company - as Dan Wieden said - 'hiring people with their own voice and unique perspective'. Microsoft allowed one such controversial employee to keep his blog and his job, and today in a changing world of transparency its become quite common place.

You might then argue that a blog, though personal in tone and usually smaller in scale, is also just another broadcast form and un-targeted. I'd argue that if the blog's author interacts with the readers through comments and quote referrals, then he is doing a fine job of keeping it personal through action and engaging a more down to earth relationship with his audience. Secondly blogs become a lot more targeted when they embody a strong theme or topic that connects with a specific audience segment - and hopefully that audience is as passionate and enthusiastic. Now thats personal and targeted and worth talking about.

My two cents. I think personal, unbranded and targeted can still work.

What do you think?